What
You're Missing in our subscriber-only CounterPunch newsletter
THE INSIDE HISTORY OF THE
ISRAEL LOBBY
Former top
CIA analysts Kathleen and Bill Christison give CounterPunchers
the real scoop on the Israel lobby and precisely how powerful
it is. Read
how US presidents from Wilson, through FDR to Truman were manipulated
by the Zionist lobby; how Israel bent LBJ, Reagan and Clinton
to its purpose; how Bush's White House has been the West Wing
of the Israeli government; how Washington's revolving doors send
full-time Israel lobbyists from think-tanks to the National Security
Council and the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans. For all who want a
true measure of the Lobby's power, the Christisons' 8-page dossier,
exclusive to CounterPunch newsletter subscribers, is a MUST read. CounterPunch
Online is read by millions of viewers each month! But remember,
we are funded solely by the subscribers to the print edition
of CounterPunch. Please support this
website by buying a subscription to our newsletter, which contains
fresh material you won't find anywhere else, or by making a donation
for the online edition. Remember contributions are tax-deductible.Click
here to make a donation. If you find our site useful please:Subscribe
Now!
It is a rare moment when a beleaguered
city gets an opportunity to elect a statesman. Ron Dellums, a
practical visionary, is one of the most respected Congresspersons
in the world. Remembered for his role in helping to end apartheid
in South Africa, for stopping production of the heinous MX missile,
he is returning home to Oakland, a city he served for over thirty
years. Parishioners are singing an African-American spiritual,
"Let Not This Harpist Pass."
The former Congressman is running
for mayor of Oakland at a time when the people of Oakland are
desperate for a change in leadership. The Board of Education
has lost control of its own schools. Under Ignacio De La Fuente
(Dellums' main adversary), Oakland has one of the highest murder
rates of any city in the U.S., triple the national average. The
Oakland City Council cannot even protect the safety of its own
citizens. Fifty-four residents have been murdered in four months.
Yet, in a moment of political cowardice, the City Council refused
to declare a state of emergency.
The significance of Oakland's
mayoral election goes far beyond
the city itself. Election of Dellums could change the ugly tone
of politics in the Bay Area. It could even set a national example.
Like the election of progressive Dennis Kucinich in Cleveland
in 1976, the Oakland election is a test of urban populism, the
growing movement for public empowerment.
Nevertheless, the election
of Ron Dellums, whose programs offer hope for change, is by no
means certain. De La Fuente, backed by developers and the press,
has already built a political machine.
Hostile to Dellums, opposed
to any talk of empowerment, the press may well determine the
outcome of Oakland's mayoral race.
In the Bay Area, the San Francisco Chronicle, Oakland
Tribune and East Bay Express (alternative in name
only) are waging a caricature campaign against the former Congressman.
The Oakland Tribune describes Dellums as a kind of outsider
who lacks practical skills to run a city. "Being mayor isn't
like being a congressman. Oakland needs a mayor who can solve
problems," writes the Tribune in its endorsement
of Ignacio De La Fuente. (De La Fuente is one of the architects
of the infamous Raiders deal, a financial fiasco that cost Oakland
$200 million dollars). In a cover story full of sneers and caricatures,
the East Bay Express Portrays Dellums as a mere dreamer
with his head in the clouds. Dave Newhouse, Oakland Tribune
sports writer, says Dellums "rode into Oakland on a white
horse." In a column reprinted and distributed en masse throughout
Oakland, the S.F. Chronicle claims that Dellums is not
grounded in city affairs. He's too grandiose, too idealistic,
too big for Oakland.
Too Big
for Oakland
It is the Chronicle
position that, because Dellums served Oakland for 27 years in
Congress, he is now incapable of running a city in distress.
He wants fundamental change, and a mayor is supposed to tinker,
not alter the status quo.
Here is the Chronicle
argument: "There is a world of difference between legislating
on the Hill...and trying as a mayor to persuade developers and
businesses who have many options to bring their jobs and projects
to a distressed city.There are myriad jobs for which Ron Dellums
would be eminently more qualified than Ignacio De La Fuente:
college president, secretary of state, Washington lobbyist-to
name three. Mayor of Oakland is not one of them."
There is a kind of hypocrisy
in the way the Chronicle turns Dellums' virtues, his brilliant
record of service, against him. The attempt to disqualify a Congressman
is especially galling in a state where third-rate actors (Reagan
and Schwartenegger) become Governors. Is Hollywood better preparation
for the nuts-and-bolts of public service than Congress? And if
there really is a "world of difference" between Congress
and municipal leadership, why are so many former mayors, with
press encouragement, working in Congress? It works both ways.
The too-big-for-Oakland argument
is disingenuous. Chronicle editors know very well that
congressional experience can actually benefit Oakland.
Oakland has ties to China. It hosts an international Port. It
depends on international business, philanthropy, and federal
funding. Why should Oakland deprive itself of Dellums' skills,
experience, and contacts? There is no wall between local and
national politics.
Nor is Dellums an outsider
from Mars. He attended Oakland Tech and McClymonds High schools
when he was a youth. Working at Hunters Point Bay View Community
Center, he gained invaluable experience mentoring at-risk kids
in the hood, an experience that enables him to understand the
roots of crime. Dellums served on the Berkeley City Council for
four years. He knows about zoning regulations, city finances,
community planning agencies, potholes, and day-to-day issues
that arise in local government. It was because of his down-to-earth
achievements in local politics that Bay Area voters sent Dellums
to Congress.
Another argument, that Dellums is too idealistic, comes in the
form of ridicule. The Chronicle rejects the very idea
of a model city with a trade center and multi-cultural complex.
The editors write:
"Dellums is pushing a
utopian vision in which developers are so desperate to do business
in Oakland that the city could easily extract concessions for
the social good. If only that were so. He also offers the promise
of bringing universal health care for his 'model city,' as if
philanthropists and the private sector will flock to fulfill
his vision."
How defeatist and cynical!
Why shouldn't the people of Oakland extract concessions from
corporations that make billions from our Port, our climate, and
vibrant labor force? And why shouldn't corporations take social
responsibility for the privileges and consequences of their projects?
And what is wrong with health care for the poor?
While the Chronicle
seems to say that Dellums is overqualified-he could become a
Secretary of State, not mayor of Oakland-the Chronicle
is really saying something else: that Oakland is under-qualified.
Oakland is not mature enough for trade centers and big ideas.
In the Chronicle picture, Oakland is a beggar, totally
dependent on the good will of developers. The entire approach
denigrates the people across the Bay.
Oakland is a predominantly
Black-Latino city, and there is a taint of racism in the white
press, that lectures Oakland about the futility of change. "How
come trade-centers and international multi-cultural complexes
are all right for Seattle, not Oakland?" one voter asked.
It is the role of an effective
mayor to leverage the power of the people to improve the quality
of life. Oakland has vast resources. It hosts the fourth largest
Port in the U.S. (It is only because of a lack of courage and
political will on the City Council that the wealthy Port pays
no taxes.) World commerce depends on Oakland's unique waterway.
Dellums intends to change the submissive relationship. He wants
partnership with business, not serfdom.
The Chronicle does not
restrict its antipathy to progressive change to anti-Dellums
articles. Its recent endorsement of Jerry Brown for Attorney
General of California applauds Brown for his "maturity."
In an article full of ugly, unintended irony, the Chronicle
praises Brown for selling out.
Years ago, Brown was a genuine
environmentalist. He described redwood trees as cathedrals. At
times he moved among the poor, and he became famous for his opposition
to big-money politics. Then Brown changed. He went from a scathing
critic of political bribery to a political hack, a mayor who
sold Oakland to developers.
How does the Chronicle
interpret his transformation? Here is what the Chronicle
writes about Brown's turn-around: Brown "has tempered his
once-excessive brashness and idealism with a cut-to-the-chase
sensibility.'I'm excited to be the mature voice in Sacramento.'
said Brown, now 68 years old. Some longtime Jerry Brown watchers
might be apprehensive about a man who was a Jesuit seminarian
in his youth-then studied Zen Buddhism and tended to the sick
with Mother Theresa during a sabbatical from politics..."
For me this passage, which
includes a slur on Jesuits and Buddhism, is disgusting. What
is so sinful about tending to the sick? Why is a relationship
with Mother Theresa politically immature? The Chronicle
argument is unmistakable: Brown no longer cares about the poor.
He repents his past. So now he is safe. NOW we can vote for him.
Unlike Brown, however, Dellums has not repented.
The view that massive poverty
in is inevitable, that power relations between the poor and powerful
cannot be altered, that the status quo is preferable to fundamental
change -these are the reactionary motifs of Chronicle
electoral coverage in 2006.
CounterPunch
Speakers Bureau Sick of sit-on-the-Fence speakers, tongue-tied and timid?
CounterPunch Editors Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St Clair
are available to speak forcefully on ALL the burning issues,
as are other CounterPunchers seasoned in stump oratory. Call
CounterPunch Speakers Bureau, 1-800-840-3683. Or email beckyg@counterpunch.org.