Showing posts with label University of Illinois at Chicago. Show all posts
Showing posts with label University of Illinois at Chicago. Show all posts

Monday, February 19, 2018

Sports fans say they want escape from life's tensions, but mostly only want their own attitudes reinforced

I found myself enjoying some baseball this weekend, in the form of the college baseball tourney recently renamed for one-time Chicago Cubs star Andre Dawson.

The new namesake of HBCU tourney
That tournament played this weekend in the much milder weather of New Orleans gave the University of Illinois at Chicago Flames a chance to start out their season away from the Saturday afternoon snowfall we had in Chicago. But the rest of the schools participating were southern in nature, and most were the HBCUs of the country.

THAT’S AS IN Historically Black Colleges and Universities – the schools that date back to when black people were excluded from traditional higher education, so a class of colleges sprung up to create opportunities.

Those colleges aren’t exclusively black enrollment anymore, but there are some people who feel more comfortable trying to get a higher education in an environment where they’re not the minority. This weekend, places like Alabama State, Alcorn State, Grambling, Southern, Prairie View A&M and Arkansas-Pine Bluff got to show their stuff on the baseball diamond.

I’m sure there are going to be some people who will be offended that such a tournament is taking place. The Major League Baseball website is filled with nameless comments calling the tourney "a joke" and emphasizing they'd never heard of it before. But then again, they’re the ones whose idea of integration is that everybody act as though they were white.

They are the first to scream “racist!” (or their favorite taunt, “reverse racism!”) whenever something comes along that forces them to admit racial bias still exists. They don’t want to be called out on their own Archie Bunker-like tendencies.
Helping to advise new HBCU tourney

IT WAS NICE to see that Major League Baseball is giving this particular tournament some support and publicity. What with Dawson (who played college ball at the historically-black Florida A&M University) giving his name, and one-time Chicago White Sox manager Jerry Manuel serving as a consultant.

For what it was worth, it was nice to be able to ignore the Saturday snowfall that reminded us winter ain’t through by any means to see baseball being played – with the Flames overcoming a 4-3 deficit in the 9th inning to ultimately win the ballgame 9-5.

Which makes me feel sorry for those people who are going to want to think I wasted my Saturday afternoon away by watching some lower class of baseball. One they probably think is not worthy of any public attention.
Wrong sport? Or knucklehDeaded fans?

Probably the same kind of people who get upset whenever anybody points out the declining number of black ballplayers currently on Major League rosters. They’ll argue black people just don’t play baseball that much, and we shouldn’t think it an issue.

LIKELY, THEY BELIEVE the lasting lesson of 2014 and the Little League World Series that the Jackie Robinson West team from Chicago is that a majority-black ball club can only win if it cheats.

Yet this kind of attitude isn’t limited to baseball and springtime. Take hockey, where also on Saturday several Chicago Blackhawks fans were ejected from the United Center for their racially-tainted taunts of visiting team players.

Specifically, of Devante Smith-Pelly, a forward for the Washington Capitals who is one of the few black players in the National Hockey League.

When he was sent to the penalty box during the game, Blackhawks fans taunted him with a reminder that they thought he was playing the wrong sport.

FOUR FANS WERE kicked out of the stadium and the Blackhawks issued an apology, yet the Internet is filled with rants (anonymous, of course) contending that people were too sensitive about the slur (which was “basketball, basketball, basketball).

Black Lives matter activists “can call for the deaths and killings of police officers and that’s considered free speech?... Enough of this out-of-control absurd political correctness,” one Chicago Tribune commenter wrote.
Now playing for Toronto, Granderson was on hand to root for alma mater Flames

Of course, the very phrase “political correctness” has become a way of judging one’s racial attitudes – the ones who toss it out usually are upset that they’re being called out for their own bouts of verbal nastiness. As though their free speech right entitles them to the last word on EVERYTHING!

The sad part is that it means we can’t get away from this racial nonsense even at the ballpark or the stadium. Even though the ironic part is that many sports fans claim they follow ballgames as a form of escape – what they really seem to want is to have their own close-minded thoughts reaffirmed.

  -30-

Wednesday, September 14, 2016

Navy Pier losing its carnival-like atmosphere to become a luxury hotel

I enjoy Chicago, take a certain amount of pride in being able to say I was born here and have lived the bulk of my life here. I also think this city is a wonderful place that everybody in the world ought to come to enjoy at least once in their lifetime.
 
The carnival-like atmosphere at Navy Pier could become a part of the past. Image provided by Chicago Postcard Museum

Yet I have to confess to always feeling a little tinge of embarrassment whenever I read something reminding me that Navy Pier is the Number One tourist attraction not only for Chicago, but for the state of Illinois.

IT JUST SEEMS a little silly, to me, that people who have taken the time and effort to make the journey to Chicago wind up wasting their time checking out the pier, or at least what has become of the pier in the past three decades.

The giant Ferris wheel gave the place a carnival-like atmosphere. And I realize the historic implication of a Ferris wheel in Chicago being reminiscent of the worlds’ fairs that were held in our city.

But if you think about it, you can ride a Ferris wheel anywhere. Admittedly, you won’t get a great view of Lake Michigan at the top of a wheel at some rural county carnival. But a wheel is a wheel.

Even more silly, to me, was that Bubba Gump Shrimp Co. restaurant located at the pier. Created to feed off the popularity of the 1994 film “Forrest Gump, it also is something that seems so absurd. With all the quality dining one could find in Chicago, people would be expected to choose a brand that has 43 locations across the United States, along with Mexico, Great Britain, Malaysia, Japan, the Philippines, Indonesia and Hong Kong.

Navy Pier a long ways from when it was purely a boat-docking facility
IT COMES ACROSS as being a real-life take on the gag from that episode of “The Simpsons” where the family goes to Japan and winds up eating at the “Americatown” restaurant, where mom Marge gets excited about seeing the Japanese take on the club sandwich!

In short, Navy Pier isn’t a place I go to very often (and not just because I’m a cheap grouch!). So I have to admit to feeling a jolt of excitement when I learned this week of the City Council contemplating an overhaul of the place that was erected a century ago as a pier for those ships sailing into Chicago off Lake Michigan.

Which makes the pier’s incarnation of recent years seem so ridiculously absurd. I doubt that those sailors who arrived in Chicago at the pier some 90 years ago, or those people who came to the pier to fish a half-century ago, ever would have envisioned a place that had lots of shops where one could buy various incarnations of a “I (heart) Chicago” coffee mug.

The council’s zoning committee gave its approval this week to a plan calling for a seven-story hotel to be built on the pier, along with amenities such as a winter ice-skating rink, a sloped-roof welcome pavilion (which likely would continue to have all those gift shops selling tacky trinkets) and some short-term boat docking facilities.
The days of academia are long-gone from the pier. Photograph provided by Chuckman Chicago Nostalgia
IT IS, AFTER all, a pier. Which means boats. The people who conceived of the need for a pier sticking out one mile into Lake Michigan didn’t do so because they wanted a unique site for a carnival ride.

Although I also realize that ships transporting goods don’t arrive at Navy Pier anymore. What little shipping still arrives in Chicago sails into the piers down around Lake Calumet.

So I realize that the pier has to evolve, or else become pointless and rot away. Which is the fate it nearly suffered by the late 1970s.

I can remember the days just before the remodeling of the 1990s when the structure was largely vacant and it was obvious that the facility had a very practical purpose for briefly storing goods brought in from ships.

I CAN REMEMBER making the walk to the pier offices at the far east end of the facility, having to go through all the vacant space and feeling like it was such a waste. The ghosts of college students past from the pier’s UI-Chicago days and those from the days when World War I-era draft dodgers were incarcerated there were all over the place.

Plus, I’m also old enough to remember the “Chicagofest” festivities held at the pier that then-Mayor Jane Byrne always liked to think were the biggest part of her legacy to the city. Closing my eyes could bring to mind memories of seeing Muddy Waters perform there, along with the Turtles (remember “Happy Together?!?”).

Losing some of the sillier touristy aspects of what has become Navy Pier will be a plus – particularly if it provides a facility that can enhance Chicago as a whole.

That used to be a long walk, particularly when made on a cold December day. Photograph provided by Chuckman Chicago Nostalgia
Although I suspect I still won’t become a Navy Pier regular, because I think that whatever hotel winds up being built at the site will be one I won’t stay at because it will wind up far beyond my own income level.

  -30-

Thursday, August 25, 2016

Could Trump solve Chicago’s problems within a week? Only in his mind!

It seems that Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s failed attempt to hold a campaign rally last spring at the University of Illinois at Chicago made a bigger impression on him than we would have envisioned.
 
Has Trump ever really been in Chi outside his tower?
But in true Trump fashion, the event has become a distorted twist of fantasy that makes no sense on just about any level.

FOR MEMORIES OF that time came up during television interviews on the national cable news channels as Trump and his allies tried to seriously twist the happenings of that Friday night into something it was not.

The reality was that the would-be rally Trump wanted to hold on the Near West Side campus wound up being cancelled because the unruly crowds of spectators got out of hand – although Chicago Police have since said they never advised Trump to cancel the event outright.

It was Trump himself who didn’t have the backbone to face off against people inclined to be critical of him. It is to be expected considering that most Trump rallies are programmed to devolve in the true faithful harassing, intimidating and even beating on the candidate’s critics.

Which is what made the comments by Trump’s former campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, during an interview with CNN all the more laughable.

HE TRIED TO describe that Chicago appearance as one in which Trump tried to speak out to African-American voters, only to be rebuffed by them.

As Lewandowski said, Trump, “went to the heart of Chicago to go and give a speech to the University of Chicago in a campus, which is predominantly African-America, to make that argument. And you know what happened? The campus was overrun, and it was not a safe environment.”

It seems to me that Trump, if he really believes this, didn’t have a clue what was going on – and not just because he wasn’t anywhere near the Hyde Park neighborhood that actually has the University of Chicago.

Or that the University of Illinois at Chicago is in a neighborhood bordering on upscale that has more white people living in it than any other type.

PERHAPS TRUMP THOUGHT he was at Chicago State University? Then again, probably all Chicago college campuses look alike to Trump because they’re not a part of Trump University.

The reality is that Trump wasn’t anywhere near the “ghetto” that he envisions all of Chicago is. Perhaps he has spent too much time watching reruns of “Good Times” and comedian Jimmie Walker’s humor-tinged vision of life at the old Cabrini-Green.

But if that wasn’t ridiculous enough, Trump himself had to open his mouth during a Fox News Channel interview, saying he had met with high-ranking Chicago Police Department officials who he says told him they could “stop much of this horror show that’s going on” if they were let loose to actually enforce the law.

As Trump then put it, the officer said, “I’d be able to stop it in one week.”

GEE, ONLY ONE week to resolve the problems confronting Chicago? It’s just too bad that the likely solution suggested by this mythical cop is use of more force that would actually enhance the real problem law enforcement has in dealing with people.

Plus, there’s also the fact that Chicago Police officials on Wednesday insisted that no department officials ever met with Trump. Which leads me to believe this may have been a lone cop who was present at the University of Illinois at Chicago that night who was just shooting his mouth off.

Similar to how Trump often engages in that phenomenon known as “diarrhea of the mouth.” Saying whatever thoughts come to mind without regard to whether they make any sense.

Which is why those people who get all worked up over the violence level of Chicago (personally, I remember the late 1980s when it was much worse) are living in the ultimate fantasyland if they think a vote for Trump means a thing!

  -30-

Saturday, March 12, 2016

EXTRA: In defense of Chicago. We told Trump where he could stuff it!

I’ve had a chance to sleep on it, so to speak, with regards to the behavior of those people who felt compelled to silence Donald Trump when he tried to speak Friday night at a campaign rally at the University of Illinois campus here.

Chicago's way of telling Trump, "You're Fired!"
Because as we all know by now, those people got so unruly that the Trump people wound up cancelling the event – offering up some vague talk about doing the event somewhere else at another time.

THAT HAS CAUSED an all-too-predictable outburst from people determined to think Trump was disrespected by Chicago. That somehow, we singled him out for undue abuse. Trump himself is going about using the word “thugs” to describe our city’s behavior.

I have an uncle in Minnesota who actually is one of the nicest people I’ve ever met, but who felt compelled to turn to Facebook to use the word “hypocritical” and say we had a “disgusting exhibition of stifling the ‘Democratic’ process.”

I realize my uncle has the same right to expression as anyone else. But my gut feeling in this case is to say to my Aunt Christy, “Tell Uncle Jim to lighten up a bit.”

Because after taking a few hours to mill over the events of Friday, I can’t help but think we in Chicago came up with the appropriate response to the nonsense talk that Trump has been spewing across the country and likely thought he could do once again in our fair city.

IF IT TURNS out that Chicago gets a reputation for being the place that stood up to Trump and told him to “stuff it,” then it makes me all the more pleased to be a Chicagoan.

Yes, I realize Trump can go ahead and act like a goof when he campaigns, deliberately making his political appeal to the share of our society that expresses intolerance for anyone or anything that isn’t exactly like themselves.

Of course, then they argue that those people not like themselves are obligated to show them the highest of respect. It’s the ultimate hypocrisy of those people who complain about “reverse racism” or “political correctness run amok.”

As it turns out, four men and a woman now face criminal charges for their behavior. Which in a group of that size, strikes me as being the proverbial needle in a haystack. A fairly insignificant number of people.

THIS WAS NOT some sort of massive riot in which people were killed or maimed – which is exactly the image I’m sure the Trump types will try to create in their own minds, then force into our thought process.

Which is part of why I can be sympathetic to those protesters who felt compelled to show up at the college campus Friday night.

But there’s also the fact that Trump’s campaign strategy likes to create the impression that there’s a hostile opposition, and many Trump rallies in other parts of the country usually have as their highlight the fact that security publicly removes people from the crowd.

In some cases, the Trump types have even taken punches at those people as they’re removed.

WHICH MEANS THE only real difference here is that Trump was denied the moment of picking out who got removed. That, and the fact that the Trump types didn’t get to hit anybody – because if they had, it’s likely the masses would have fought back and we’d have got the sight of Trump types having the caca kicked out of them!

As for Trump, it really is common sense that if you’re going to spew so much nonsense that targets so many people, that those people are going to want to retort in an equal fashion. Unless your idea of expression is that Trump gets to insult – and others just have to swallow it.

We got to see that the Trump types really are an overly-vocal minority. Consider the recent Chicago Tribune poll that showed Trump winning the Illinois Republican primary next week – but only having 32 percent support and some ridiculously-high disapproval ratings. In a one-on-one, he loses big time!

All I know is that if the Trump types ever do try to re-schedule the Chicago rally (as they hinted they might), it is likely to be an event so overly staged as to bear resemblance to a Nuremberg rally of old. Which some might think an overly-appropriate image to have?

  -30-

Saturday, December 13, 2014

Will South vs. West sides equal NYC?

The great divide amongst Chicago’s African-American population is the rivalry that exists between residents of South Side neighborhoods, and those who live on the West Side of the city.


Sout’ vs. West. I have heard countless diatribes from black people who live in those parts of Chicago who will insist that their part of the city is the reality that tells you what Chicago is truly all about.

IT IS A dispute that can get more intense than the South vs. North arguments that crop up during baseball season. It also is one that has developed its character into the debate over where a future library and museum for President Barack Obama should be located.

Two of the four sites under consideration are in Chicago, although I wonder if the inability of the city to get behind one site is what will make the New York City proposal the ultimate winner.

Will the South and West side interests wind up dumping all over each other and make it easier for Columbia University to achieve its desire of housing the Obama presidential legacy for decades to come?

Now I know some people are convinced there’s no way Obama, an adopted Chicagoan, and first lady Michelle, a South Shore neighborhood native, could possibly consider a place other than Chicago for his legacy. I’d like to believe that’s true.

BUT THERE ARE those who would like the appeal of New York, and would argue the fact that Obama actually attended Columbia (he transferred from Occidental College in Los Angeles to earn his bachelor’s degree) ought to put that school on top of the heap.

Considering that the Obamas have already indicated they’re not going to hustle back to Chicago immediately once his presidential term ends in January 2017, our city may well be just the place they came from.

For the record, it was the University of Chicago and the University of Illinois at Chicago that put together the competing bids that were submitted Thursday, and that will be studied between now and mid-January, when the Obamas have indicated a site will be chosen.

Illinois-Chicago says a museum sponsored with their assistance could be at either Roosevelt Road and Kostner Avenue or Harrison and Halsted streets. A CTA “el” stop on Kostner closed decades ago could be reopened, IF the Roosevelt site is chosen.

WHILE CHICAGO (AS in the university) says a museum could go near the South Shore Cultural Center, near Washington Park on King Drive or on Stony Island Avenue in Jackson Park.

Chicago’s sites would be near (as in a short drive away) the University of Chicago campus, where Obama once served as an instructor in the law school. It would be a boost to the neighborhoods surrounding Hyde Park, and theoretically would make the university less of a racial island on the black South Side.

While Illinois-Chicago’s sites could help bolster the North Lawndale neighborhood that many outsiders still think of as incurable ghetto. College officials also stress the fact that, as a public university, they are more likely to get the kinds of students who don’t fit into some academic and cultural elite.

As though implying that Flames students are less elitist than the Maroons who hang out around the Midway!

IT’S AS THOUGH people will be asked to recognize Chicago South or Chicago West as being what the Obama legacy is all about. It could make some think that New York is less of a hassle than the Second City. The ultimate neutral site!

Although I honestly think that if it didn’t wind up in Chicago, the best spot for an Obama museum and library might well be the future president’s birthplace in Honolulu, Hawaii.

The University of Hawaii (of which his parents were alumni) could literally wind up having a beachfront site that might make it a place people make the extra trip to attend.

It certainly would be a more appealing destination than Grand Rapids, Mich., which houses the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum.

  -30-

Monday, January 27, 2014

Is Emanuel provoking an Obama library fight? Or averting a city civil war?

I can see where Mayor Rahm Emanuel is coming from in wanting to get all the interests involved with a future presidential library and museum for Barack Obama to get united behind a single site.

EMANUEL: Averting a fight? Or creating civil war?
It would be easy for the half-dozen or so interests who want to promote their specific site getting so wrapped up in themselves that one of the out-of-town interests that wants to host the Obama presidential library winds up outshining Chicago.
 
OBAMA: Does Rahm still have clout?
SOME MIGHT THINK that the idea of locating an Obama library as part of Columbia University in New York is too much of a stretch. Or the idea of putting it in Honolulu where Obama actually grew up (and where he appears to think of himself as a native – even though he has lived the bulk of his life in Chicago).

Some will snicker at the thought of either location topping Chicago to become the site of an Obama museum. What would it say if one-time Obama chief of staff Emanuel couldn’t bring the library/museum to his home city.

But if Chicago can’t get its act together, I could easily see this devolving into a 21st Century civil war of political proportions. An Obama tribute (which is what these presidential libraries really are – the papers and other documents related to a presidency could easily be a part of the National Archives in Washington) could wind up showing the multiple factions that exist within our city.

Which is why Emanuel in recent days has made it clear he wants the city to have a lone entry in consideration for a site for an Obama library. A Chicago united could be an overwhelming force that puts the Noo Yawkers or the Hawaiian types in their place in terms of thinking they have any claim to the Obama legacy.


Could Obama library become the equal ...
THEN AGAIN, THE reality is that the groups that lose out in terms of having THEIR preference for an Obama library site could remain bitter.

Emanuel is putting himself at risk of developing even more enemies from the groups that don’t get their way on this issue. Because this is going to trigger the egos to run amok in our city.

There are those with the University of Chicago who think that since Obama once was on the faculty of the law school and because he still owns the neighborhood home that a library/museum near the Hyde Park neighborhood campus makes all too much sense.


... of a Maroons/Lions brawl?
And yes, it is likely that the intense fund-raising efforts of the university and its allies will dry up if city officials wind up thinking that some other site is better.

I CAN’T SEE Maroon-types getting all excited about a presidential library being built near the University of Illinois-Chicago (which actually houses the collection of papers associated with long-time Mayor Richard J. Daley) or Chicago State University campuses – both of which are amongst proposals being considered.

Although the Illinois Senate’s former president, Emil Jones, who now is affiliated with Chicago State, is saying that NOT putting the library in an African-American oriented neighborhood where it might spur some tourist traffic is disrespectful to black people and to an Obama legacy.

Which might be taken more seriously, if not for the fact that some of the people who feel this way were among the same ones who back in 2007 were spewing the trash talk that Obama (because of his white mother and a life lived outside of inner-city Chicago) wasn’t really “black enough” to represent them.

There also are those who think that a library/museum on land that once was Michael Reese Hospital might be the best site, since it is the closest proposal to downtown Chicago.

OR PERHAPS BUILT somewhere in proximity to the proposed Pullman National Park – which itself could become a reality in the next couple of years. There are those Metra Electric line commuter trains that stop right at the site on 111th Street.

Does this site make too much sense for politics?
My own personal favorite involves the Chicago Lakeside proposal at the old U.S. Steel Southworks plant between the South Chicago and South Shore neighborhoods – the latter of which being the place where first lady Michelle Obama was raised.

It involves plans for building luxury housing and retail – a whole community of sorts – right on Lake Michigan. The developers have said they’re leaving the northernmost tip of the site open – so it can be offered as an Obama library site.

I once had the chance to stand on the spot being talked about. It would be literally a lakefront-based museum where people could look to the north and see the Chicago skyline from a very unique perspective.

IT HAS ITS potential – which may well be why it won’t go anywhere politically. Things that make sense rarely advance without difficulty.

This is the political brawl that Emanuel has now placed himself right in the middle of. It will be interesting to see which site his influence winds up guiding the process toward.

And how many political feelings get bruised along the way!

  -30-

Monday, December 2, 2013

Will Obama ever again actually reside in Kenwood-based house on So. Side?

I must confess – I always get amused whenever interests in Chicago try to stake a claim to their particular site as the “Future Home of the Barack Obama Presidential Library and Museum.”

Will the first family's decision really be in the hands of Sasha? Photographs provided by the White House
 
It’s not even a done deal that Obama himself will ever live in this city again. If that is the case, who’s to say that the future Obama Library will wind up here.

PERHAPS WE SHOULD be giving some serious consideration to the fact that the University of Hawaii is eager to have the library on its grounds – considering that the president himself was born, and largely raised, in Honolulu.

Maybe we shouldn’t take such a parochial attitude and assume that such a facility has to be built somewhere in Chicago. Heck, we can’t even agree where in the city ought to be thought of as the primary site.

The post-presidential future of Obama came in recent days when the president let it be known we shouldn’t assume he will be back in his home near the Hyde Park neighborhood right after the 2017 inauguration.

Obama and first lady Michelle may not be using Air Force One for their final flight home to Midway Airport. We don’t know where he’ll wind up.

IT SEEMS THE complicating factor is the younger daughter, Sasha, who was 7 when her family moved to Washington and started living the sheltered existence that the White House affords its residents.

The Obamas might not need final flight home
When her father ceases to be “Mr. President” and once again becomes “Dad,” she will be in her second year of high school. The first parents are concerned that having to suddenly transfer to a new school outside of Washington would be an uprooting that could cause harm.

The hints from the president are that he and Michelle may remain in the District of Columbia (Democrats generally live in D.C., while Republicans seem to prefer the D.C. suburbs in Virginia) until she’s finished with high school and ready to venture off on her own to college somewhere.

That leads to some jokes about how Sasha Obama runs the family, while others wonder if Obama just can’t let go of the Washington trappings.

SURPRISINGLY, I HAVEN’T heard many (only a few) wisecracks about how Obama doesn’t want to be put in a position where he’d have to defend himself for not returning Sasha to a spot in the Chicago Public Schools, or some sort of criticism if she wound up in the Laboratory Schools (private entities) of the University of Chicago.

Now, this could be a whole lot of talk about nothing. It may wind up that this is merely a three-year delay in Barack and Michelle returning to Chicago.

Although after more than a decade away, it may turn out that they’re not going to want to return to the streets of Hyde Park. There are times when life has to move forward, and going back (no matter how pleasant the memories) is just a mistake.

A part of me has always wondered if Obama might be thinking of a Hawaii retirement for himself and Michelle in their golden years. He gets to return home, and Michelle – the ultimate in a modern-day South Side girl – gets an exotic retirement.

DEFINITELY A LONG ways away from her early years in the South Shore neighborhood.

Could this be the future presidential library's site?
So for those people who want to bicker about whether a future presidential library is going to be built at the one-time Michael Reese Hospital site, or near the possible future Pullman National Park; on Lake Michigan at 79th Street as part of the fantasized-about Chicago Lakeside development on the old U.S. Steel/South Works plant or as part of the campuses either at the University of Illinois at Chicago or at the University of Chicago – keep this is mind.

He may already have put his Chicago time in the rear view mirror of life.

  -30-

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Will anyone look at suburb corruption?

A part of me wonders if municipal officials in the Chicago suburbs will do their best Dick Daley impersonation when it comes to Dick Simpson.
SIMPSON: Still on the outside

Simpson is the former alderman (from the 44th Ward that back in the 1970s was up around the Lincoln Park neighborhood) with a liberal sensibility who used to get his microphone turned off during City Council debate whenever Richard J. Daley got tired of hearing him speak.

NOW, SIMPSON IS in charge of the political science department at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and his department came out with a study that documents acts of corruption in the 263 municipalities that comprise the Chicago suburbs.

Potential conflicts of interest in more than 60 municipalities and more than 100 people who either are village officials or police officers.

Will those village presidents and police chiefs who rule like potentates within their municipal boundaries decide they don’t want to hear about it, and find a symbolic way of “turning off” Simpson’s “microphone?”

It wouldn’t surprise me if we get a few reactions the equivalent of “Mind your own business!,” before the issue fades away.

BECAUSE THOSE OFFICIALS take advantage of the fact that nobody outside of their respective towns cares about what happens there. So they do what they want.

They also take advantage of the fact that even many of the people who live within their respective villages don’t pay much attention to what their local government does. In fact, I have known suburban residents who reside in those towns because they don’t want to have to care about a local government. They want to pretend it doesn't really exist, except for when they have to buy a village sticker (or stickers) to put on their cars every year.

Such conditions make it possible for local government officials to think they can do what they want. Particularly if, like in many suburbs, there usually are few people interested in holding those elective offices.

Too many suburban government officials get to run unopposed. In some cases, village presidents get to hand-pick their trustees by appointment because not enough people could be found to actually run for election to fill the posts.

SO A PART of me is rooting for Simpson, whose study calls for an inspector general to be created specifically to investigate suburban government entities.

Although I’m sure what will make it possible to ignore this request is the fact that he doesn’t specify who would create this position – or who would pay for it. I’m pretty sure everyone is going to claim they can’t afford to do it, and that it should fall under someone else’s jurisdiction.

While $1 million might not be much to some larger-scale governmental units, that would be a big expense for some suburban governments. And I doubt that state government (which might be the most sensible entity to have such a position) will want to take on any extra expense.

I can already envision the suburban-based legislators lining up to find more practical ways to spend $1 million. Practical being anything that doesn’t focus too much attention on their hometowns, which they’d like to think are bastions of purity compared to that albatross of Chicago.

YET IT DOESN’T surprise me that Chicago gets all the attention when it comes to corruption stories, which usually get covered for their titillating factors rather than the elements that deprive the citizenry of good government.

Too many people were intrigued by former Gov. Rod Blagojevich because of his funky hair and foul mouth on tape than they were the elements of what he actually did while in office.

City officials can get a national reputation. Whereas not even the most well-known of suburban officials have anyone who has ever heard of them outside of maybe a 10-mile radius of their home towns!

So picking out an indictment against a city official can get a prosecutor some news attention. While going after a suburban official? It’s like, What’s the point?!?

IF ONLY WE could see their actions for what they are. I think we’d soon realize that some of the most honest and sincere political people in our area are on the City Council. Along with some of the most incompetent. Most boring.

And a few who are truly corrupt.

Just like any government body, regardless of location.

  -30-

Thursday, June 23, 2011

EXTRA: What will the world’s leaders think of the Near West Side of Chicago?

It seems that the University of Illinois at Chicago could be the actual site of the NATO and/or G-8 gatherings that will take place next May in Chicago.

Crain’s Chicago Business used its website to report Thursday how city officials think hosting the events at the city’s major public university will erase any potential conflicts with the National Restaurant Show – which is scheduled to take place at the same time.

THAT CONVENTION, BY the way, already has the McCormick Place convention center. So we won’t get the sight of world leaders navigating the streets of the South Side.

Instead, we may get the sight of those leaders hanging around the UI-C Pavilion, among other buildings, as they try to resolve the world’s problems.

I’m just wondering what they’ll think (and how much explanation it will take) of meeting in a place that hosts sports teams that go by the nickname of “Flames.”

  -30-

Friday, April 18, 2008

Obama should not be trashed for associating with a 'Weatherman'

If a certain segment of society in this country gets its way, Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama will be tainted by the fact he lives in the same South Side neighborhood as Bill Ayers.

To listen to the questioning that came up during this week’s presidential debate in Philadelphia, it becomes obvious that some people paid no attention during history class and have little to no clue as to what the social turmoil of the 1960s was all about.

TOO MANY PEOPLE seem to want to put that era into some sort of 1980s context by which the spirit of Ronald Reagan would have us believe that any association with the less conservative elements of our society during that era taints one for life.

Even when one takes into account that Obama was only a child at the time (he turned 10 in 1971), some people would have us believe the fact that he knows people who were not “hawks” when it came to the Vietnam War is enough reason to hold him suspect.

Obama got hit with questions about his support for Ayers, even though as best as I can tell, they have only met because they literally both live in the Hyde Park neighborhood, just a few blocks from each other.

Of course, nearly 30,000 people live in that neighborhood on the Lake Michigan shorefront. Do we hold them all suspect?

Barack Obama was all of 7 years old when Bill Ayers was posed by the Chicago Police Department for this "mug shot" in 1968.

NOW FOR THE bulk of his adult life, Ayers has devoted himself to academia. He currently is on the education faculty (a “distinguished professor of education” is his exact title) at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

But Ayers suffers from Jane Fonda Syndrome.

The social conservative elements of this country do not want us to forget the fact that Ayers (along with his partner Bernardine Dohrn) were a part of The Weatherman – that ‘60s collective of largely privileged white youths who believed they were waging war against the corrupt establishment that had the United States in a war in Vietnam.

Now admittedly, the Weatherman (named for a line in the old Bob Dylan song, “Subterranean Homesick Blues”), were considered by many people to be a bit extreme – even for those who fondly remember their liberal activities of that era. That’s what messing around with explosives will get for you – a reputation as a kook.

CONSERVATIVES ALSO TAKE into account the fact that Ayers, on many occasions, has said he is not apologetic for his belief that the United States should never have got involved in a war in Vietnam.

To listen to questions concerning Ayers during the debate (and the way Hillary Clinton piled on during her responses to Obama’s answers), Obama is friends with a man who is the moral equivalent of the people in the Middle East who commit acts of violence in the name of Allah.

They would have you believe that Obama is friends with a man who attacked the Pentagon and other public facilities and who also planted bombs that killed people. They also would want you to think this is the man who, on Sept. 11, 2001, while airplanes crashed into the World Trade Center and Pentagon, told the New York Times “I don’t regret setting bombs,” and “I feel we didn’t do enough” to undermine the U.S. military.

By Clinton’s logic, the Weatherman attack on the Pentagon was identical in stature to the airplane three decades later that religious extremists piloted directly into the same building.

HERE’S A DOSE of “fact,” as it relates to those Weatherman bombs. The only people they ever managed to kill were themselves.

Property damage was what they were after, such as the “Days of Rage” protests of 1969 where members ran through the Rush Street nightclub district and shattered store windows and parked cars in a lame attempt to simulate the disruptiveness of war to the people of Chicago.

Explosives are tricky, particularly if one doesn't really know what they are doing. That's what caused a March 6, 1970 explosion at a Greenwich Village townhouse where Weatherman members were holed up. This “terrorist” group (as some on the far right are determined to label them, even though they’d dispute the same label being applied to the Ku Klux Klan) only managed to kill themselves off – no one else.

Another fact – the Weatherman attack on the Pentagon may very well be one of the most pathetic attempts by anyone to attack a military installation.

AS I UNDERSTAND it, the group placed an explosive in a men’s rest room at the Pentagon. When it went off, it caused some pipe damage and serious water overflow in part of the building. That water resulted in damage to computers that were processing information related to the Vietnam war effort.

The spin by Weatherman members was that the disrupted the Vietnam War – bringing it to a half for a couple of hours. Reality says they were more an annoyance than a threat, behaving in a manner like the kid in high school who thinks he’s cute because he lights a cherry bomb and drops it down the toilet.

Looking at it factually, it makes Clinton look ridiculous for comparing the Weatherman to Islamic radicals.

I can't help but wonder if she now seriously believes that the Pentagon was levitated (remember when Abbie Hoffman and his Yippie allies protested outside the building, then later told people they caused the building to float in the air as a sign of protest against the war?)

AND AS FAR as Ayers being the guy who badmouthed the United States on the day of the New York and Pentagon attacks? He had just published a book (semi-autobiographical, with some details changed to protect others) and was trying to promote it. The fact that a Times feature appeared on the same day, hours before the attacks, is coincidental.

His belief that he wanted to do more to oppose the military was NOT a response to the activity of Sept. 11, which is how Clinton tried to spin it during the debate.

Now for those who are going to accuse me of being an Ayers apologist, I’m not. I’ve never met the man, although I’m sure that if I were older (I was only 4 at the time of the Days of Rage), I would not have had the nerve to mess with explosives, no matter how negatively I might have perceived Vietnam (I have two uncles who served in the military – army and marine corps – and saw combat in that war. This is something we disagree on).

But I believe we need to quit thinking about the 1960s as some sort of litmus test by which everyone who opposed U.S. involvement in Vietnam or looks down on J. Edgar Hoover’s use of the FBI to harass civil rights dissidents is somehow tainted for life.

NOW IT IS true that some of The Weatherman people went on to commit crimes of violence separate from their activist protests. They have either done their prison time, or may be serving time still.

But Obama’s ties are only that he knows Ayers, who doesn’t have any criminal convictions of his own (in part because the FBI’s investigations into “radical” activity were so overzealous that all their evidence against him was ruled inadmissible in court).

Trying to tar Obama because Ayers wasn’t a “hawk” during the Vietnam War is absurd.

THIS RIDICULOUS MENTALITY belongs to the people who were behind much of the right’s disgust with the presidency of Bill Clinton (and for that matter, Hillary herself). The only people who are going to accept such a premise are the ones who would never vote for Clinton to begin with.

In short, it plays right into reinforcing the campaign of Republican opponent John McCain. It makes me wonder if those Democrats who suspect Hillary would secretly be comfortable with a McCain victory in 2008 (so she could try again in ’12) are not just being paranoid.

Actually, all she’s doing is taking down the reputation of the Clinton years among Democratic activists and ensuring that she herself could never get the party’s nomination to serve in the Oval Office.

If that’s the case, we might have to wait for Chelsea to become “of age” before we see another Clinton in the White House.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Bill Ayers’ website (http://www.billayers.org/) is devoted to his educational credentials, but does not shy away from his activist days.

Rick Ayers is disgusted with Hillary Clinton’s comments about his brother, Bill (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rick-ayers-/clintons-mccarthyism-and_b_97220.html), seeing them as evidence that Hillary will say anything to try to chip away at Barack Obama’s lead.

The Weather Underground’s “declaration of war” on Amerika (http://marathonpundit.blogspot.com/2008/03/weather-undergrounds-1970-declaration.html) can be found here.

Was President Bill Clinton wrong to give pardons to people with ties to the Weather Underground (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/17/clinton-campaign-gets-weather-underground-questions/) movement of the 1960s?