Anatomy of a Chicago election – Feb, 2011

Thesis: In a calculated attempt to throw the election to Rahm Emanuel, Carol Moseley Braun was chosen to be the so-called “consensus Black candidate” for Mayor of Chicago.

Disclaimer: Since I wasn’t a fly on the wall (nor did I engage in illegal wiretapping), I couldn’t prove my thesis in a court of law. What I’m about to offer is my best attempt to deduce the realities behind this election.

As for the two leading Black candidates:

Danny Davis has been serving in the US House of Reps since 1997. James Meeks has been in the Illinois state senate for 8 years, his term ending in 2012.

Either of these two gentlemen would have had a better chance than Carol Moseley Braun – that is, if they had really been serious about running for Mayor in the first place. Which, I’m convinced, they weren’t. The biggest reason? Neither really wanted to give up their relatively safe positions only to be raked over the coals as mayor. They both, correctly I believe, see that Chicago is in such fiscally bad shape, nothing they would do could pluck this city from the jaws of disaster.

That’s how bad it is. So, you might ask, why would Rahm Emanuel want the job? Answer: To line his pockets before Chicago totally tanks.

Davis and Meeks aren’t stupid. They know Chicago is teetering on the brink of disaster and they don’t want a Black mayor to be the fall guy. They’re perfectly willing to wait for a Black to try to dethrone Rahm, while allowing him (as his reward for service to Obama) to line his pockets as the house of cards comes tumbling down. In that sense, they’re good Democrats trying to please their Commander in Chief.

That’s why they settled on Moseley Braun.

What about Carol?

CMB tried to act all indignant when challenged to produce her income tax records. She had to know well in advance that she would be challenged, along with the other candidates, to produce these documents. But she said, no – basically because she didn’t feel like it. But…the very next day, she produces them. Are we to believe that she hadn’t thought this out? That she didn’t think she’d be asked, though she had been in a previous election? She knew she’d be asked. And she intentionally gave a “flippant” answer [“Because I don’t want to”], knowing she would reverse herself almost immediately.

What people would walk away with, upon analyzing her forms: Carol, who wants to run this city, doesn’t have her own personal finances in order. In fact, one could call her situation a “train wreck.”

She also said she was committed to transparency in government and that her decision to release her tax forms was not a “flip flop.” Like anybody could believe either statement. Which is exactly the point. Nobody could believe those words, which is exactly why she said them. To sink her own candidacy. She doesn’t really want to be mayor.

As if that weren’t convincing enough, she falsely accused fellow candidate Watkins (whose campaign hadn’t gained much traction at all) in these words at a public candidate forum:

“Patricia, the reason you didn’t know where I was the last 20 years is because you were strung out on crack.”

The net effect of her antics is to undermine her credibility with Black voters. If enough of them stay home and don’t vote, Rahm Emanuel will emerge with enough votes (50% + 1) to win the election outright, without forcing a runoff. Of course, there's another possibility: If enough Blacks are disgusted with Carol, they'll vote for Rahm since they think that's what Obama wants.

In summary

Danny Davis and Reverend Meeks purposely participated in a scheme to back the weakest “major” Black candidate, complete with that candidate’s complicity, in order to throw the election to Rahm Emanuel. And they are confident that Emanuel not only won’t be able to save Chicago from (literally) decades of mismanagement, but he doesn’t even want to.

Patricia Van Pelt-Watkins for Mayor

I personally believe Watkins is sincere, though I was a bit crestfallen to see her campaign literature identify her as a Democrat. I’m sure her campaign thinks that was a wise move. Wiser, though, would have been to present her as an Independent since, before too long, Chicagoans will be so sick of the Democratic Party stranglehold on this city, they will be willing to embrace Independent candidates. However, in order for that to work, all 50 aldermanic incumbents will have to be challenged by a coordinated coalition of independents.

I’m also disappointed in Watkins not challenging Chicago’s rampant corruption by saying:

“If elected, I will use my training as a certified public accountant to get to the bottom of previously hidden fiscal chicanery. And I will call in auditors from the state and federal governments in order to finally clear the air of any and all financial mismanagement – legal as well as illegal.”

Watkins could have blasted Gideon’s trumpet on this issue, yet she chose not to. My best guess? Simply that she wants to live. [These boys play rough – believe it!]

Perhaps her current campaign is in preparation for a run against Mayor Emanuel in the next election. Maybe at that time, the media won’t be so obviously dismissive of her campaign by means, among others, of not even including her name on opinion polls. It’s been too obvious that all major media have bought into anointing Rahm, shamelessly I might add.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“Whenever oddities or outright strangeness pops up in a campaign, look for underlying strategies” – Steve.

Rahm Emanuel, Mossad agent?

QUESTION # 1: Is Rahm Emanuel a Mossad agent?

QUESTION #2: Does that matter, one way or the other?

Disclaimer:  I don’t have any proof that Mr. Emanuel is a Mossad agent, certainly not anything that would stand up in a court of law. In the following posting, I merely present factors which should be considered by anybody thinking of supporting Rahm for Mayor of Chicago. And some of these factors would still be worth considering even if Rahm wasn’t even remotely connected to the Mossad.

I personally believe he is…

I personally believe Rahm is a Mossad agent. There! I want to put that upfront, first and foremost. Why do I feel this way? There’s an old saying: “Just follow the money.”

Follow the money:

Some way, somehow Rahm has been blessed with the Midas Touch. He is a legendary fundraiser, who has profoundly influenced the fortunes of Mayor Daley [when Rahm was all of 30 years old], Bill Clinton, and the Democratic Party. I believe his connections to wealthy Jews have helped him far more in this capacity than any acquired learning or natural flair. These wealthy Jewish donors see him, accurately and in appreciable numbers, as “their man” – or, more accurately, as “Israel’s man.”

There isn’t anything inherently evil in being sympathetic to or enamored of another country. It is, however, a conflict of interest to pretend to be serving the interests of the United States as one serves his “real” object of loyalty. There are people who claim that Rahm is a dual Israeli-American citizen; others deny this. I don’t believe he is, at least not in terms of formal documentation. However, it’s best to keep in mind that every Jew is automatically an Israeli citizen should he ever wish to formally make application.

Back to “follow the money”: $16.2 million:

How did [Zionist] Rahm “earn” $16.2 million in two-and-a-half years while “working” as an investment banker for [Jewish] Wasserstein Perella & Co? This, while he had no experience whatsoever in that field and had no MBA.

I’m amazed that no one questions this in the midst of a hotly-contested election for Chicago mayor. I’ll come right out and say it: “There’s no honest way anyone can earn that kind of money in such a brief period of time without training and experience.” But…none of Rahm’s opponents bothers to point out this obvious fact.

Rahm’s deep connection to Israel:

QUOTE*:

His father, Benjamin M. Emanuel, is a Jerusalem-born pediatrician who was once a member of the Irgun…

The surname Emanuel (עמנואל), adopted by the family in honor of his father's brother Emanuel Auerbach, killed in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.

He and his brothers attended summer camp in Israel, including just after the 1967 Six Day War.

During the 1991 Gulf War, Emanuel volunteered with the Israel Defense Forces as a civilian helping to maintain equipment.

:UNQUOTE*.

My response to these quotes:

·         Concerning Irgun: “Critics of the Irgun has seen it as a terrorist organization. It was legally classified as such by the new State of Israel in 1948” – according to the Wikipedia article on Irgun.

·         Concerning “the surname Emanuel”: The more likely reason for changing the family name was to get rid of the (hated) Germanic surname “Auerbach” and re-establish the family with a Jewish surname – “Emanuel” being Hebrew for “God is with us.” I don’t believe for a moment that a family from a highly patriarchal culture changes its surname to honor a brother, while forsaking the surname of the father of that brother.

·         Concerning attending “summer camp in Israel”: What better way to indoctrinate the young?

·         Concerning Rahm’s volunteer service with the IDF: There’s a lot wrong with that fish story. It’s incredible that Rahm would not try to help Israel by using his already-established knack for fundraising. Rahm’s services to the IDF would not have been needed during the 1991 Gulf War, since Israel wasn’t under attack at that time. However, Israel (as always) would surely have appreciated any funds Rahm could have raised on its behalf. Then there’s the issue of Rahm working to “maintain equipment.” Since Rahm was missing part of the middle finger of his right hand (and he is right-handed), it seems improbable that he would have been terribly efficient as a mechanic. Most likely? Rahm went to Israel in 1991 to receive a briefing and necessary training for his new role as Mossad’s leading agent in the United States.

Chicago: Geo-Political Considerations

Not many people fully appreciate Chicago’s importance in the larger scheme of things. We’re more apt to hear stories about Wall Street than LaSalle Street. In fact, much of what makes Chicago tick is skillfully and intentionally kept out of the news. Let’s take a look at the sleeping giant that is Chicago:

Chicago is a power center located in Illinois, the fifth-most populous state in the Union. Moreover, Chicago as a financial and economic power doesn’t really have much competition. This can be more fully appreciated by taking a map of the United States and drawing a circle, using Chicago as the center, with a radius of 500 miles. Go ahead, take a good, long, hard look. Within that circle (with a diameter of 1,000 miles!), Chicago stands alone in terms of financial and economic influence. No other city even comes close.

It’s a truism in Realpolitiks: “If you can control the heartland, you can control the nation.” In this sense, Chicago is critically important.

And yet the local media in Chicago (and even the national press) doesn’t question the dubious circumstances and timing of Mayor Daley’s retirement (I believe he was forced to retire to make room for Rahm). No one questions how Rahm miraculously manages to be the only white candidate in this racially polarized city. And the two Hispanic candidates will most likely split that bloc of voters and the only leading Black candidate (Carol Moseley Braun) has been recently (and conveniently!) tainted by disclosures about her personal finances.

And none of the candidates for Mayor, including Rahm Emanuel, says anything about investigating city government’s financial irregularities or mob influence. The mob is pointedly not mentioned by anybody – by neither candidates nor media. Instead of focusing on the issues (on which Rahm is notably silent, speaking only in sweeping generalities), local media focuses on Rahm’s legal challengers trying to force him off the ballot based on doubts concerning his legal residency. On that issue, I tried to post this on Yahoo! – unsuccessfully (yes, Yahoo! does censor):

QUOTE:

The [Illinois] Appellate Court tried (or did it, really?) to keep Rahm off the ballot. With 2 of the 3 judges being Democrats, maybe - just maybe - the Dem who (apparently) sided with the Pubber to keep Rahm off the ballot was just engaging in a little theater. Justice Shlevin Louis Marie Hall (Dem.) knew, if the case went to the state Supreme Court, the 4-3 Democrat majority there would reinstate Rahm.

So why the theatrics, Justice Hall? To build sympathy for Rahm? To fire up his base? To keep him in the headlines as a (gag) underdog? To make his residency an issue, so he wouldn’t have to speak on any real issues?

Good job, Hall! Way to go.

Oh…don’t think too much of the Supreme Court voting unanimously to reinstate Rahm. Why not? To split 4-3 would make it seem “political” – which the court would never dream of doing…righhtttt. All in the spirit of bipartisanship, yea!

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“If you think this cheap manipulation in service of Rahm was a slick piece of work, you ain’t seen nothing yet.”

:UNQUOTE.

Miscellaneous Considerations

How is it that Rahm Emanuel and Barack Obama, both of whom came from Chicago, managed to come out of thin air to storm the national stage? Obama’s narrative maintains he was a community organizer fresh out of law school. And yet, during his presidential campaign, I never saw one single human interest story in the news featuring an interview with anyone who actually saw Obama do this. Oh, to be sure, he might have staged a grand appearance once in a while, just to reinforce any future propaganda effort, but the lack of coverage on this aspect of his career is truly striking.

Rahm and Barack both succeeded in having the media play an embarrassingly supportive, non-questioning role in advancing their careers.

During his two years as Obama’s Chief of Staff, absolutely nothing was done concerning the Palestinian question – which is just the way Israel wants it. [Good job, Rahm, keeping the US President in line.]

And lastly, it’s amazing that Rahm Emanuel had emerged to play such a pivotal role in the Democratic Party’s resurgence in the 2006 election cycle. All of these accomplishments can be attributed far more to Rahm Emanuel’s connections to wealthy Zionist donors than to any native genius on his part. Though, it must be admitted, he has played his role well. Since Israel has only six million Jewish inhabitants, and the international Jewish community is so small, it’s absolutely critical for them to utilize every resource at their disposal. And they have utilized Rahm to an exquisite degree – for which service he has been handsomely rewarded.

And should he become Chicago’s next mayor, his rewards will grow by leaps and bounds – though won’t necessarily be publicly noticeable. Go figure.

END NOTE: I couldn’t resist laughing aloud at a headline in one of Chicago’s papers, announcing that Rahm Emanuel had been declared ineligible to be on the ballot. This ruling was from the Appellate Court. The headline? “Rahm Bomb.” One of the greatest Jewish scholars of the Middle Ages was Maimonides – also known as “Rambam,” which is pronounced exactly the same as “Rahm Bomb.”

I doubt this connection was intended by whomever wrote that headline. But who knows? Perhaps Rahm Emanuel will become as equally revered as that ancient Jewish scholar. The universe can have a wicked sense of humor.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“If Hollywood were to invent a script similar to the life of the real life Rahm Emanuel, nobody would believe it. Simply too far-fetched.”

  * All quoted material is from the Wikipedia article on Rahm Emanuel

Dr. Watkins for Mayor of Chicago: A Declaration of Independence

On January 15, 2011, I sent the following email to the (hopefully) next mayor of Chicago:

QUOTE:

I am a “white” resident of Chicago who will be voting for Dr. Van Pelt Watkins on Feb. 22. Chicago will be lucky to have such a fine person as mayor.

For what it’s worth, I wish to offer a few tips which your campaign might find useful. Also, for what it’s worth, I have been a state civil service worker at Northeastern Illinois University for 29 years. I’m about as ordinary and powerless a citizen as can be imagined. However, I do have one minor claim to fame: I was the only candidate in the history of this country to run for US president (in 2008) on the basis of a legally-enforceable contract. If I had been elected, if I had violated any of the 47 campaign promises listed in my written & signed Electoral Contract, I would have forfeited my office.

That leads me to my first tip for your campaign:

Dr. Watkins might consider offering such a contract herself, a sample of which follows:

QUOTE:

Electoral Contract specific to Chicago’s Mayor

This link leads to my blog on which I detail what a US president’s electoral contract [my own contract, back in 2008] could look like:

http://ind4prez2012.blogspot.com/2010/09/written-political-contracts.html

The enforcement mechanism, in this case, is quite simple: If I were to violate any of my written campaign promises yet fail to resign the presidency, the Congress could impeach me. However, there is another way which could be included in Dr. Watkins’ contract, since there’s no way to impeach Chicago’s mayor:

“If an opinion poll of registered Chicago voters conducted by the respected polling firm of _____ would ever show 50% saying I should resign as mayor, I would have to either resign immediately or forfeit a ‘bond’ in the amount of ____ held in trust by ____.” [NOTE: Any such poll would have to be paid for the mayor’s detractors.]

Other possible mayoral campaign promises:

ONE: If elected, I would have no part in raising taxes or fees for four years.

TWO:  If elected, I would have no part in granting public money (not even by means of bond issues) for the benefit of privately owned corporations, especially sports franchises, especially in regard to construction of new ball parks.

THREE:  Discretionary money in TIF accounts, controlled by the mayor, would be spent as follows: 50% for school improvement (not for any salary increases), 30% for (other) infrastructure improvements, and 20% to hire more police officers.

FOUR: If the day comes when the city council consists of at least 50% independent aldermen not aligned with any political party, I would seek majority approval by such Council for legislation, that being sufficient for enactment. Also, I would step aside and allow the Council to select its own presiding officer and, in all respects, operate independently of the mayor.

:UNQUOTE.

Other suggestions

Dr. Watkins should emphasize that she is an independent who believes Chicagoans have suffered under one-party, strongman mayor rule for too long. Single party rule dominated by a strongman is typical of stagnant third world countries. And this is not fitting for a leading world-class city like Chicago.

On the other hand, this is not a suggestion that competition in the form of a revived GOP is welcome. What is really needed, here and nationwide, is an end to the Two Party System’s dominance. When elected officials are beholden to a political party, they lose their connection to the people they’re supposed to service.

As mayor, Dr. Watkins would invite City Council members to sever their allegiance to the Democratic Party and declare as independents. Either that, or face challenges from independents who will start to look increasingly attractive to a party-weary public.

It’s time for Chicagoans to declare their independence by voting for independents.

With people like Rahm Emanuel, we don’t know what favors he’ll be expected to grant in exchange for campaign contributions. With the other candidates, they will behave as good servants, doing what’s best for the Democratic Party without any care for the ordinary citizens of Chicago.

As Mayor, Dr. Watkins could lead for renegotiation of the city’s parking meter deal by threatening to lead meter boycotts on certain selected days, saying, “On these dates, I urge all citizens to take public transportation instead of feeding bloated parking meters. We will continue this boycott until this blatantly unfair contract is renegotiated.”

I hope you will consider these possibilities as foci for your campaign.

Sincerely,

Steven Searle

Candidate for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

:UNQUOTE.

Post Script

I’m going to send another email to the Watkins campaign, suggesting that she add one more facet to her campaign: Advertise heavily that she, if elected, will aggressively investigate Chicago’s more hidden aspects of corruption. She can do this by means of her executive authority as mayor, and by inviting the feds to come in and pour over the books. She can order all agency heads to fully cooperate in this investigation. If this trail of investigation leads to where I strongly suspect, Mayor Richard M. Daley might end up doing the perp walk after all.

In any event, such revelations will be to the good of all of Chicago’s citizens.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors Party

" #1: Anybody but Rahm; #2: Anybody but a Dem/Pub; #3: Watkins is actually a very good option."