|
|||
|
Bill Boyarsky on the Inimitable Willie BrownPosted on Mar 31, 2008
More than a quarter of a century before Barack Obama made his name with a speech at the Democratic National Convention, another African-American politician, Willie L. Brown Jr. of San Francisco, did the same—but under much different circumstances. Brown, who was speaker of the California state Assembly for 14½ years and mayor of San Francisco for eight, has told his life’s story in “Basic Brown: My Life and Times” (Simon & Schuster). It is an enlightening, amusing memoir of an intelligent, witty politician whose career has encompassed the grit of the California capital, the intricate—and on one occasion murderous—politics of San Francisco City Hall, and, throughout, the African-American drive for political equality. Most political memoirs are ponderous efforts by a ghostwriter to ensure the autobiographer’s place in history. There is a lot of that in this book as Brown describes his climb from Texas poverty to political power. Too much of it is self-congratulatory. His ego runs wild when he talks about his expensive wardrobe, his charm with women and his political skill. But Brown is saved by his sense of humor, and his memoir, told through San Francisco writer P.J. Corkery, captures his cynical wit and gift of anecdote. There are moving portions of the book. Brown was in San Francisco City Hall the day his friend Mayor George Moscone was shot to death by Dan White, who was angry because the mayor had decided against reappointing him to the Board of Supervisors. Brown’s description of the event captures the frenzy and sadness of the moment. Moments after White killed Moscone, he assassinated Harvey Milk, a county supervisor and a highly respected, even beloved, leader of the gay community. White thought that Milk, Moscone, Brown and others were engaged in a cabal against him. Brown provides excellent examples of his arm-twisting tactics and trickiness. On many occasions he used them for a good cause, as when he convinced the Legislature to pass a bill decriminalizing sexual acts between consenting adults. Before the law was enacted, Brown, an attorney, had defended many gay and straight San Franciscans who had been arrested for engaging in consensual sex. Most relevant today are Brown’s thoughts about African-Americans succeeding in a white political world. He provides context to Obama’s effort to deal with the issue as the Illinois senator runs for the Democratic presidential nomination. A lot of politicians and reporters bridled when Brown brought up race when he was in power. What’s he got to complain about? they asked. Race didn’t seem central to his political persona. He was so smart and charming that whites, blacks, Latinos, almost everybody in power, sought him out as a social companion. Among his San Francisco pals were white San Franciscans Wilkes Bashford, his clothier, and Herb Caen, the journalist who made Brown one of the sparkling characters in the ever-popular daily San Francisco Chronicle column that painted a glowing picture of a city Caen called “Baghdad by the Bay (this was long before the Iraq war). The first three people to urge Brown to run for California speaker were two blacks and a white, soon joined by two more whites, another black and two Latinos. Like Obama, Brown was elected in a racially diverse but majority white area. Both needed the support of white voters to win. While campaigning and in office, both took up issues that were important to everybody, regardless of race. But despite his campaigning, Brown found he was pigeonholed when he was elected to the state Assembly. “Once a black person gets into the legislature, the council, the senate, the cabinet, the white power brokers assume that the black member is there just as a spokesperson for the black community,” Brown said. “I’ve had to work hard, have had to show exhaustive and unerring command of subject matter ranging from timber to triage, from education to the environment, just to be taken seriously on these subjects because at first, other politicians figured I was only interested in one thing: being a spokesman for the black community on issues of concern to the black world. ... You have to fight against that limitation. ...” A broad issue propelled Brown to national attention during the 1972 Democratic national convention. The issue was the Vietnam War, opposed by a coalition that cut across racial lines strongly reflected by the 271-member California delegation. Roughly half were women, more than 50 were of college age, and 51 were black. They ranged from farmworkers to celebrities. Sen. George McGovern, the anti-war insurgent, had the nomination pretty well sewed up by the time the national convention convened in Miami Beach. But the forces of former Vice President Hubert Humphrey, who had narrowly lost to Richard Nixon four years before, would not quit. Humphrey was the candidate of the party Establishment even though he was reviled by those opposed to the war. At the convention, Humphrey supporters opposed the seating of the California delegation, contending it did not represent the state party. “Although we had right and California law on our side, an intense, convoluted, passionate fight tussled for days in Miami, and got wrapped up in arguments over the seating of other delegations,” Brown recalled. “It was a mess and touch and go for days.” At a crucial point, Brown rose on the convention floor. “Seat my delegation,” he said. Referring to past convention credential fights in which he had supported Southern civil rights insurgents, Brown said, “I did it for you in Mississippi in ‘64, in Georgia in ‘68. It’s now California in ‘72. I desire no less. Give me back my delegation.” The Californians were seated, as were the other McGovern delegations. The speech was one of the convention’s highlights, and Brown emerged not as a black politician but as one of the anti-war movement’s most commanding advocates. In his speech to the 2004 Democratic convention, Obama’s themes also cut across racial lines: “There is not a liberal America and a conservative America—there is the United States of America. There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America—there’s the United States of America. ... We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes. ...” The speech put him on the national political stage. Yet in becoming candidates of all the people, African-American leaders still feel a special obligation to their communities. This, by the way, is not exclusive to politicians. When I was at the Los Angeles Times, my African-American, Latino and Asian-American colleagues also felt an obligation to their communities—not to slant the news, but to make sure their people were adequately and fairly covered. It was a reaction justified, I thought, by many decades of coverage that ignored minority communities and then often reported on them superficially. Black politicians, Brown writes, must understand that “in terms of electing political leaders, black people were and are much more concerned about your ability to speak upon behalf of black people than they are about your ability to speak up on other issues. What you must show, one way or another, is that you are absent a fear of white people, that you really are unstymied by the white world.” The person considered the most unstymied is a black minister. “That’s one of the reasons, I suspect, why black preachers often have been afforded the mantle of political leadership even if they weren’t always good at politics,” Brown writes. “Black preachers were viewed as not subject to being influenced or compromised. The perception was that whitey couldn’t get to them. The black communities financially supported the black preachers, their upkeep provided by love offerings, pastoral aid, housing, and cars. So black people felt their clergy couldn’t be touched by the white world. A minister was seen as a legitimate spokesperson for black people—and that more than anything else determines whether or not you’ll get black support.” Such a minister is deeply intertwined in every aspect of congregation and community, a connection that helps explain the relationship between Obama and his former minister, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. As Obama said in his speech on race, “Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity [his church] embodies the black community in its entirety—the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity’s services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America. ... I can no more disown him [Wright] than I can disown the black community.” Some reviewers were captivated by Brown’s rollicking view of political life. I was more interested in the dark side, vividly illustrated in his chapter on “Black Politics and Racism Today.” As mayor, Brown named a lot of blacks as supervisors, commissioners and department heads. “On the day I left, within the hour I left—my successors began a consistent systematic dismantling of that,” he said. “The lesson for African Americans, I guess, is that you have to fight every day to maintain the progress you have made. And if you’re a black politician you’d better expect to face the charge every day of being above yourself. God forbid you should appoint blacks or friends to high office. Loyalty is something that is allowed only to the country club set. Well, this isn’t racism of an old-fashioned sort, but in America today we are in kind of denial about race in public life.” I read these words to Brown when I interviewed him before an audience at an author’s program at the Los Angeles Central Public Library. I said he sounded angry. No, he said, not angry. Bitter? I asked. He didn’t answer. He didn’t have to. The answer is in his book when he recalled something he said to someone from the Los Angeles Times: “It’s tough being black, mister.” Advertisement Previous item: Fred Branfman on Tom Brokaw's 'Boom!' Next item: Steve Wasserman on Fidel Castro CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
By The Gay Species, May 2, 2008 at 8:26 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Willie Brown is in the flesh the maxim:
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
As a native Californian, his strong arm tactics in the Assembly were nothing compared to his nepotism as mayor dictator. Unfortunately, his mentor Herb Caen could not (perhaps would not) call his protege to task.
Any “mayor” who needs a “mansion” on a former military post, holding-up the Bay Bridge reconstruction for ten years, makes “power” seem disposable. Thankfully, he’s a sine qua non.
Report thisBy BobZ, April 13, 2008 at 5:18 pm Link to this comment
Agree. Brown was a horrible mayor and basically accompished zippo in his tenure at City Hall. What was a joke the other day was to see him running around with the Olympic torch. Fortunately there weren’t many people who actually saw him run since Newsom redirected the run at the behest of the Chinese. What a sham.
Report thisBy jimmyjam, April 11, 2008 at 2:14 pm Link to this comment
don’t care if its a man or a woman, I just dont want Barrack Obama. I do question his patriotism, first it was the lapel pin, then it was his judgement about Rev Wright. and the no hand over his heart, his excuse for that one was he was singing, If you are not smart enough to put your hand over your heart and sing at the same time,, well it might be a problem. But now that all these little things have been noticed, do you see all the flags behind him, he is just a Barrack Clinton, an off-white man that has forgotten about his race whichever one it is this week. He doesn’t care about the poor, or the downtrodden, all he wants is to be the first off-white man in the off-white house. He cant even confront his own issues ,he blames every one else, and what will he do about Jimmy Carter, meeting with terrorist my oh my..
Report thisBy HopeSpringsATurtle, April 8, 2008 at 1:45 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
As a native San Franciscan I can tell you Willie Brown is mostly a political snake. He took so much money from any stripe of lobbyist, that one was never sure where he would focus his considerable power. He did do many good things—and many bad things for SF and California. But truth is, Willie is out for Willie. At bottom, he served his own self-interest and not much else.
Report thisBy Warren Jones, April 6, 2008 at 7:49 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Just thought I’d drop in to say I liked your piece well enough to print it. Well done.
Report thisBy RickinSF, April 4, 2008 at 7:35 pm Link to this comment
You’re spot-on, rhizome.
I voted for Brown and cheered at his first inauguration. Four years later I busted my ass campaigning against him.
Report thisIf this is what passes for a “liberal,” we are truly and hopelessly f—ked.
By Duchamp-Villon, April 3, 2008 at 11:15 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I would wager that you would have published my comment if I joined the Willie Brown lovefest instead of throwing cold water on the party.
Report thisBy rhizome, April 3, 2008 at 10:59 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Willie Brown, the unctious bloviator, is more responsible than any single other person for the squeezing out of blacks in S.F.- I believe they now constitute 5% of the population. He was always a cheerleader for the dot com profiteers and gentrification. “If you don’t make more than $70,000 a year, maybe you don’t belong in S.F.,” he once said. He will always represent the worst sort of sleazy patronage power-play politician. A man who stuck up for blacks? Sure, keep beguiling yourself. Only someone who didn’t spend any time in S.F. during his 8 years of self-aggrandizing reign could write an article as myopic as what’s on offer here.
Report thisBy Duchamp-Villon, April 3, 2008 at 10:44 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I see that reader comments are an indication of people losing focus. Let’s get back to the, according to a sychophantic Bill Boyarsky, “inimitable Willie Brown.” This piece reminds me of a throwback to the days when Brown was selling the city down the tubes, and the only people who seemed to love him were the journalists who covered him because he gave them great quote, tantamount to other pleasurable oral acts while the city all around them suffered under his administration.
I have lived in San Francisco for thirty-two years. I’m educated and politically active. I can say unequivocably that Willie Brown was one of the most corrupt, uncaring, egomaniacal and despicable men to sit at the Mayor’s desk in this great city.
Friends of mine who worked in city government and were in positions sufficiently close to power to witness Brown’s style of governing, behind the scenes, were appalled and sickened by what Brown was doing at the time. It was well known that everything was for sale, as long as Willie got his piece. And Willie was slick, numerous investigations and scandals never touched him because he knew how to remain just beyond the reach of authority.
All of this talk about race and the difficulty of being a black man coming from the likes of Willie Brown is so incredibly offensive to someone who lived through Willie day after corruption filled day. I challange anyone to tell me what Willie Brown ever did for poor and working black people in this city. I don’t believe Willie Brown ever set foot in Hunters Point the entire time he was a mayor. Willie knew where his bread was buttered, and he had it down. He hustled black people by claiming to be fighting the good fight on their behalf, but there was no one more white than Willie Brown. You think Willie hung out with black people in his off time? Look again. Poor, working class black people had nothing to offer Willie. Why be concerned with Hunters Point or Sunnydale or the Western Addition when you could be at black tie balls, dressed in expensive threads and moving where the real power resided.
The only good thing that came from Willie Brown being Mayor for eight excruciating years was the return to district elections and a resurgence of progressive politics. The voters were so disgusted with the excesses of the Brown administrations, the utter corruption, that we returned to district elections and elected a progressive board of supervisors who broke the stranglehold that Brown and his cronies had on the city. We had to hit a bottom before we could start working our way out of the hole, and no one could take you there faster than Willie Brown.
You can still see Willie eating lunch at Le Central on Bush Street, sitting at his power table in the window. Every time I pass him I have a strong urge to walk in, grab him, haul him out to the sidewalk and give him the beating of his life. But, of course, that would never happen. It’s much better to see Willie out of power, no longer the player. He’s a vile, vicious man who cares deeply about one thing and one thing only, and that is Willie Brown. Not a quality you want in someone who occupies a position where he could make a major impact for the good in people’s lives. But Willie doesn’t care about bettering other people’s lives, never did. It was always Willie, only Willie, and it still is only Willie until he performs a great civic service and just dies so we won’t have to listen to the unending paeans and poems from writers who have been totally hustled and hoodwinked by this man.
Report thisBy Jerome r. Waldie, April 3, 2008 at 4:01 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
When Willie arrived in the Assembly, I was the Majority Leader. Jess Unruh was the Speaker. It was not very long before a distinct evaluation of Willie was made by the then Assembly leadership as to what was there about this guy that was so appealing. That question was soon answered. He was probably the sharpest mind in the Assembly at the time. And, he was also one of the most charming. That long ago assessment of this extraordinarily appealing politician has seemed to have been as accurate then, as it is now, some decades later. Jerry Waldie
Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, April 3, 2008 at 2:48 am Link to this comment
Talk about one “comatose woman” that is HARD to ‘just scroll past’ her blithering blather….... Carla
Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, April 3, 2008 at 2:46 am Link to this comment
“what would you ever find to say were Obama and wife purely white…”
Well, they aren’t and perhaps only you and cyrena haven’t realized it yet, BB.
The issues ARE what the issues are and they WILL slant things. After all, isn’t that what black American voters want?
If not, they would still be rushing to vote for some white person. “WE wanna BLACK prezeedent!!!” Work the rest out for yo’self, duh…....
Would Obama be good for America? Well, if he wins, I would damn well hope so!!!!
Report thisBy Chester Aaron, April 2, 2008 at 6:29 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Earlier comment returned. Why? Because I slammed Brown? About 45 years ago I testified in Sacramento before Brown’s Committee. Reason: seeking State Licensure for x-ray technicians dispensing radiation. My personal argument: technicians over-radiating Black patients in US Hospitals. My statistics and evidence supported by many, including Ralph Nader in testimony before U.S. Senate. Brown scorned my (our) plea and my report on over-radiation of Black patients. Brown refused to oppose the AMA, which scorned the data. I commented that Brown is just another opportunistic politician. Was that comment returned because of that scorn for one of your heroes?
Report thisBy cyrena, April 1, 2008 at 9:52 pm Link to this comment
Ah gee Bill Blackolive,
Why’d ya have to go and ask? You know the answer to this: .What would Chalmers ever find to say if Barack and Michelle Obama were purely white/Caucasian.
Answer…NOTHING!!!
Well, at least not about THEM. (he’d just be going on and on and babbling about all other sorts of irrelevant shit). The deal is, Chalmers has some very serious issues.
Anyway, I would suggest just ignoring him, but that doesnt help. Or, put it this way, it wont make him go away. Engaging him is oftentimes worse though. Consequently, as Obama has long about said about the disaster that has been created in Iraq, There are NO good options. There are only bad options and worse options.
Think of Chalmers and his posts in those respects, and that will at least put things to rest. At least you can always just scroll past the blithering blather.
(ps, he DOES claim to have had at least a couple of wives…even claims one of them was ‘colored’).
So..go figure. My guess is he doesn’t have them any longer. I can’t imagine ANY non-comatose woman being able to hang around for more than 24 hours.
Report thisBy cyrena, April 1, 2008 at 9:41 pm Link to this comment
As usual, Bill Boyarsky provides an excellent journalistic contribution here.
When time permits, I’d very much like to read the former Mayor’s book. I’m sure it will be worth the purchase.
As a Californian, I’ve always liked Mr. Brown. I haven’t always agreed with him, but I’ve always respected and appreciated his opinions.
Report thisBy Bill Blackolive, April 1, 2008 at 7:19 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Chalmers, what would you ever find to say were Obama and wife purely white but doing exactly as they now do. Wives speak of their hubsbands as is their right, and I guess you never had any wife.
Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, March 31, 2008 at 8:36 pm Link to this comment
QUOTE: Black politicians, Brown writes, must understand that “in terms of electing political leaders, black people were and are much more concerned about your ability to speak upon behalf of black people than they are about your ability to speak up on other issues. What you must show, one way or another, is that you are absent a fear of white people, that you really are unstymied by the white world.”
AND QUOTE:
....(PART 1).......
Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, March 31, 2008 at 8:36 pm Link to this comment
...PART 2…....
Report thisBy JimBob, March 31, 2008 at 6:35 pm Link to this comment
We’re in denial about the basis for racism which, if perhaps we can own it and face up to the truth of it, will allow all humans, of every color and race, to live together more peacefully. That truth is that we, like other “pack animals,” are most comfortable when surrounded by people who look, sound and act like us. We can overcome that basic instinct, just as we can learn not to freak out at 40,000 feet in an airplane or maneuvering down a crowded freeway with death or serious injury hovering mere inches away from our bumper. But first we have to acknowledge that, just as we’re more relaxed on the ground or strolling through a park, we are in fact conditioned to want to see ourselves in those around us. Too many millennia of human development, in which small differences in physiognomy signaled danger from groups with threatening agendas, have passed for us to simply wave away our gut reaction to “the Other” because we’ve arrived at the intellectual conclusion that “all men are created equal.” Obviously, this doesn’t mean we should all clan up into homogeneous groups and build walls to keep out “exotics.” But if we’re going to derive the benefits that accrue to heterogeneity we need to admit that on a reptilian level, it goes against the grain. Once we do that, we can develop the means to accommodate and mitigate natural reflexes. But as long as we are in denial about our fundamental nature, as long as we tell ourselves that it’s just plain morally wrong to feel as we do, we won’t find a true and lasting solution to the question of how we can all live together in acceptance and peace.
Report thisBy RickinSF, March 31, 2008 at 1:35 pm Link to this comment
I sympathize with Schwarzenegger’s pimp.
Two very attractive Democrats are up for the presidential nomination and it’s April already and Brown still doesn’t know which host to latch onto, er, I mean, candidate to support.
Report this