GUEST: Are Christie and Baraka telling it like it is? What does that mean? And who are they really?
Baraka: Telling it like it is? What did his epiphany mean for Newark?
Christie: Telling it like it is? Is he still the decider?
By Mr. Outside
This analysis of the–perhaps dangerous–political chess game between Newark Mayor Ras Baraka and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was written by a Newark teacher who prefers to be known as “Mr. Outside.” It was submitted as a comment to my blog but I thought it should be seen by a wider audience. I use pseudonymous submissions at my discretion and when they are as good as this one.
Telling it like it is, huh? Ok. If that’s what we’re going to be doing, then let’s do that.
Baraka ran a campaign singularly focused on local control of Newark’s public schools. Nothing else. He didn’t run a campaign focused on job creation, reducing the city’s deficit, growing the city’s infrastructure– none of that boiler plate stuff. He focused almost exclusively on local control of the schools.
He managed somehow to lose sight of the many other issues the city facing; issues that resulted in more out-of-town oversight: a) the state taking over the city’s ball of yarn finances, and b) the justice department monitoring the city’s police force. I support Baraka. Always have. And I am supporting Baraka now. Not the office of the Mayor–but Ras Baraka. I am supporting him when I tell it like it is in the following lines. The man occupying the office of the Mayor of Newark did not anticipate the weight of managing a city like Newark– which is competing with Hoboken, Jersey City and New York City. He didn’t anticipate how far removed from grass roots politics, he would be when it came to wheeling and dealing with forces like Prudential, like “big-charter,” with federal agencies and yes, even foreign governments. It’s different as a councilman. He at once, has the burden of playing nicely in the sandbox with those whose moral, philosophical, cultural and social codes have long since been compromised, and appealing to the constituency that elected him. Ras Baraka could probably rise to the occasion. But the Mayor of Newark simply cannot. The seat of that office is an ivory tower. A prison. As the Mayor he is a pawn, to Bill Wolf’s point, who got played.
I read that NJ Spotlight article. I was disappointed at its conclusion. The Mayor has allowed himself to be deluded into thinking that he arrived at some epiphany; that it became clear for him what he ought to do when Christie declared himself the decider. Somehow, Baraka thought, or continues to think, Christie backed himself into a corner. No. Christie simply affirmed his and Baraka’s position and the nature of their relationship. The Mayor of Newark is not in control. Everyone else but the GUEST: Are Christie and Baraka telling it like it is? What does that mean? And who are they really? | Bob Braun's Ledger:
