Today’s post is dedicated to the memory of the Rev. Jesse Jackson, a great American. I didn’t always agree with him. But he had enormous influence on American politics and was a grand inspiration for many of us. I voted for him for President in the 1984 California Democratic primary, and actually heard him speak when he visited San Francisco State University to give an electrifying speech. Thank you, Rev. Jackson. Rest in peace.
Yesterday, I wrote about Mindy Pechenuk and Seneca Scott. Now, it’s Brenda Grisham’s and Barbara Lee’s turn, with a guest appearance by Loren Taylor.
Brenda Grisham. Ms. Grisham is best known to most Oaklanders as the co-leader (with Carl Chan) of the Recall Pamela Price campaign, which won in a landslide. I volunteered for that effort, and came away with lots of admiration for her. Oakland-born, she tragically lost her son, Christopher, who was shot to death in 2011, when the two of them were going for church. Since then, Grisham has dedicated her efforts to combating gun violence and comforting victims of crime and their families.
From everything I know about her, Grisham is a one-in-a-million human being. Decent, kind and civic-minded, she’s a strong advocate for a strong police department. She’s the recipient of numerous awards for her public-spirited contributions to the community. She’s also active on social media, more than the other candidates.
Beyond my respect for Grisham, I do wonder if she’s got the chops to be Oakland’s mayor. City revenue and economic stability, public safety, affordable housing, homeless solutions and education, she says, are her primary interests. This is a rather anodyne list; everyone who runs for mayor says the same thing. She promised Steve Tavares, in an interview, she would “listen to the people” in crafting her agenda, adding that “You have to have a plan” for governing. But at this point, it’s not clear to me what Grisham’s plan is, or how she would achieve it. The Tavares interview, I regret to say, was fairly disastrous; Grisham simply wasn’t ready for a prepared media interlocutor. Granted, the interview was six months ago, but is she any more prepared now than she was then?
Tavares pointed out the obvious: Grisham will be a target of “the Pamela Price people, the progressives, and the unions.” I love her “whatever” attitude in response. This kindly, good-hearted woman cannot be smeared by negative voices, and the more they try to impugn her, the more they’ll drive decent voters to her side.
But can she work with a City Council that’s considerably more progressive than she is? Can she overcome the hurdles the unions will throw in her path, including more money than she’ll ever be able to raise on her own? Can she get better name recognition with a lazy media that’s likely to focus more on Seneca Smith’s eccentricity than Grisham’s decency? These questions are unanswered. I doubt that Grisham can win the primary, but if she does, I’ll volunteer for the campaign.
Barbara Lee. What can I say about Lee that hasn’t been said a thousand times? She was groomed for her job in Congress by her late boss, Ron Dellums. She served nearly 30 years before retiring to become Oakland’s mayor. She took a Rose Garden strategy during the campaign, as if she were entitled to the job. And why wouldn’t she? In Oakland, she walks on water. She’s been a creature of the unions for decades, paid off by them to deliver the goods, and re-elected time after time by an electorate that wasn’t very smart, but sure was loyal.
And now she’s running for re-election. There’s no question she’ll win easily. She’s got the corrupt unions, with all their endless cash, behind her. She’s got most of the people of color. She’s got the Chablis-and-brie liberals of the hills. She’s got the young skateboarders, pot smokers and students. The media is very kind to her. She’s managed to convince voters that she has successfully turned Oakland around. That’s a lie, of course, but she’ll get away with it.
Still, Lee can’t quite shed her radical, Black Panther roots. For all the lip service she gives to cops, she’s done nothing to stop the hatchet job the City Council inflicts on them. Just the other day she announced what is a de facto cessation of anti-homeless encampment efforts, meaning that you might as well get used to the tents and garbage because Mayor Lee isn’t about to clean them up. Lee still plies the racist waters with her blather about equity, which means redistributing wealth from productive citizens to those who contribute little or nothing to society. She says she’s not pro-criminal, but she in fact is. She’s always had a grudge towards White people; it’s in her DNA. At the age of nearly 80, it’s far too late for Lee to change her spots. If the people of Oakland could perceive that it’s Lee and politicians like her that have thrown Oakland into the gutter, they wouldn’t re-elect her. But they will, and so Oakland will get the leadership it deserves, which is to say, none.
Loren Taylor. He’s not officially running, which, to me, is a surprise. After all, he came within a hair’s breadth of beating Sheng Thao in 2022. Loren is handsome, articulate, smart, appealing on many levels. So why isn’t he running? Possibility 1: he’s already lost twice for mayor and may simply have read the room. Possibility 2: he’s in the private sector now and likes being able to make some money. Possibility 3: He knows Lee is unbeatable, so why bother? And possibility 4: Maybe he’ll change his mind. At any rate, Loren’s viability as a candidate is undermined by a contradiction. At heart he dislikes progressives because he knows they’re ranting lunatics. But, as a Black man, he’s torn, both morally and politically. The rationalist in him would love to be able to slam the Carroll Fife-Pamela Price-Cat Brooks racist cult and reveal it as the sham and scam it is. But, being Black, he just can’t bring himself to do it. Loren’s big fear is being called an Uncle Tom, or an Oreo cookie, which would happen if he dared to take on the Black-woke political establishment. The unions in particular would assail him. So he won’t. If he did, I think the voters would fall in love with him, but as long as he’s too chicken to tell us the truth, his trustworthiness is compromised.
Steve Heimoff