File this column under the category “Where The Hell Does Rock Get His Information”? I know that such a category exists because an erected (yes!) official told me so years ago. Truth be told, it is really the category called “Deny-ability”.
Look, I didn't speak to either NYC council member Darlene Mealy (41st Council District) , or to congresswoman Yvette Clarke (11th Congressional District) before writing this column. And in fact, I didn't really care to: since I am not sure either one would have given me the real scoop here. So I am out here flying on my own with no bungee chord; who knows how far, and where I will land. You the reader can make your own mind up as to the veracity of this column.
I recently wrote another column stating that if Junior Boyland (55th AD/Brooklyn), was to go down for the count -given his recent indictment- that I felt Darlene Mealy will become the next assembly member from that district. Let me give you my rationale.
Darlene ran for the female leadership of said district last year, and handily defeated a spirited challenger Latrice Walker – who was enthusiastically backed by most of the other electeds in Brooklyn (especially Yvette Clarke). I reasoned that Darlene probably controls significant members of the county committee there, and in the event of a special election would easily obtain the nomination of the Democrats; and as such her chances of winning will be about 99.9 per cent. I also considered that she had a healthy relationship with Dems county leader Vito Lopez, and that in itself was worth its weight in gold: as these things go.
In my analysis, I also made another calculation that some have now said was totally inaccurate. I thought Darlene Mealy was term-limited after this 2010-2013 city-council term; thus the incentive to go up to Albany (Assembly). An elected official informed me that Mealy -and all those elected before 2010 / who had not already served two terms in office- were grandfathered in to three four-year terms (max). Further, I was informed that all other city-council members elected after 2009, will get only two four-year terms in office and then term-limited.
Truth be told: I didn't get that memo; or maybe I just didn't understand it too well. I remember the recent ballot-initiative, but somehow I confused the outcome: I thought they were all gone after 2013. So much for my wishful thinking: or was it my wishing and hoping? LOL.
Anyway, my column generated some strange responses by phone and e-mail. So I followed up on some of the stuff uncovered and came up with this: there is a plan afoot to run Darlene Mealy against Yvette Clarke next year. There is a plan to challenge for the 11th congressional district. So there you have it. I believe it's real: sue me if you want to do that.
Now, I am sure the usual suspects will come out saying that “Rock” is bullshitting as usual; and that I write this column for sensationalism. Or even that I fabricated all this. Fine. Let me however give you some background to this information and conclusion.
First, I got this info from very credible sources: unfortunately they requested that I not identify them. Secondly; I was told a couple years ago, that former NYC council woman Una Clarke had been running around saying that she expects her daughter (Yvette) to get a Jewish-backed challenge in 2008 or 2010. I remember filing that info in a corner of the scrambled eggs I have for a brain. Believe me when I tell you that I have paid attention to the things Una have said over the years.
Thirdly; I was told by a high-powered political operative some time ago, that Yvette will be challenged soon: and that some Caucasians will be behind the challenge. Fourthly; I have known since after she won her primary election in 2006, that there were folks in the district who felt she could be beaten; since David Yassky came so close to defeating her; and the feeling was that Yassky's strong vote will not go for Yvette. Fifth; when Chris Owens refused to challenge her in 2008, some desperate folks even came asking me to do a sacrificial run against her. I refused to be drawn in to other people's fights. I have my own friggin political problems: thank you very much. Plus, I knew it was some sort of “test” run some people were looking at. I said to my self: “Nope; not this kid”.
I was approached because I didn't endorse Yvette in 2006; and many felt that since I had already taken a beating for that -from my indigenous community (Caribbean-American folks)- I had nothing more to lose. They didn't factor in my insanity (yes!) I guess: I chose to keep that. Let me be clear here: I have never ever seriously considered a run for Congress. A run for cover: definitely. A run for Congress: nope. Not this kid. I know I am qualified to serve there, but I also know my chances of ever getting there are slimmer than someone with acute anorexia.
Some have said that there are resolutions Yvette signed on to (or voted for) in the city council that make some Jewish folks suspicious of her. You readers can do your research since I didn't -and I don't really care too much about this. That was long ago and far away. Yvette should be judged by her time in Congress since January 2007: at least that's my feeling here.
If there are some Jewish v. Palestinian stuff that came out of the council during the time Yvette was there, then I suspect it was stuff that Charles Barron initiated. I don't recall Yvette being vociferous in defense of the Palestinian people. Or maybe I am wrong here? Maybe I wasn't paying attention? Or is this rationale for this potential challenge, some kind of smoke-screen or diversion from the real reasons? Look, many people I know (black, white, Hispanic, Asian and others) harbor sympathies for the Palestinian cause. Heck, even I do. And yet I will still defend the right of Israel to exist as a sovereign nation within secure borders. At the same time I would love for the Palestinians to get a state of their own. Maybe I am naive here.
My suspicions are that some people looked at the numbers from 2006, and in crunching them feel that Yvette can be taken out: fine. That's their prerogative: go for it. I have been wondering if all this is an attempt to get another black into the race -to split the black vote- so that David Yassky could run again. Another thing worth noting is that the black vote in NYC has been eroding since 1989. There are opportunistic political operatives who keep their eyes on these things. This congressional district has a significant non-black vote folks. It might be even higher next time around, since many many whites have moved into the 40th city council district since Una and Yvette were the representatives (1991 thru 2006). If my memory serves me right, the council district (40) is totally subsumed by the congressional district. The official census numbers -being released today- will shine light on what the behind the scenes thinking is like here. Wait and see folks: wait and see.
Then one person said to me that there is some current Jewish v. Palestinian stuff floating around Congress right now, and that some Jews just don't trust her on those issues; and also on some immigration issues too; I don't know how true all this is. I hope someone Jewish political analyst from Brooklyn (like Gatemouth) could enlighten me further on all this. If not, then so be it. It's a free country; run against her if you choose: whoever that is. There have always been folks from downtown Brooklyn (Park- Slopers especially) who wanted to separate from this “voting-rights” district. This redistricting year offers opportunities to many with old resentments (and new ambitions too).
I hope that those saying things -such as, she has already dropped the ball on some Jewish stuff in Congress- are being truthful and not just trying to soften her up, so that she will be weakened in time for a viable challenge. That's chicanery. If all this is nothing but a pack of lies, then I will be first to not only endorse Yvette for re-election, but I will also support her and work for her pro-bono. If this stuff is true then show us all the proof, etc. Let us all judge the issues fairly and squarely. This pre-election innuendo stuff is often misleading folks.
Last week Sunday -and all through the week- Darlene Mealy has been slammed around in the New York Daily News (and other local mediums too), because of some real estate dealings that some may view as troubling. I don't particularly see the stuff as really damaging to her political fortunes, but then I don't think I can be totally objective on this one -since Ms. Mealy was a former employer of mine. I did write a column on the Daily News series since I suspect a “hatchet” job behind it all. I even gave my reasoning (right or wrong).
If Darlene Mealy is angling to challenge Yvette Clarke next year, then Darlene better know that she will be bloodied and bruised. This recent Daily News hit is probably an epic of things to come. If the Clarkes were behind this recent hit, then I suspect you won't even see their fingerprints on the weapon.
The Clarkes don't play: Una is a tigress. Yvette may appear to be a pussycat but she is a veteran in politics now. The Caribbean-American community will still give Yvette most of their votes, unless she is caught with her fingers in the till (and there is no sign of that). That bloc will be potent come Election Day: they do have numbers in this district.
If Ms. Mealy challenges Yvette Clarke then she (Darlene) has very little to lose here by my estimation. She might create a few new enemies but that's the beauty of the beast. Last year, the challenge for the leadership came from a person very close to Yvette- I am told. Maybe there is bad blood between folks involved that I know nothing about. Therefore you can see that I don't have the full pulse of Brooklyn's politics on the black side of the tracks: in fact, even on the Caribbean-American side of the tracks, for that matter.
Of course we all have to wait and see where the new lines for this district will go. If two black women and one white male run for this seat, then that could be an interesting scenario: no doubt. If it is strictly between Mealy and Clarke, then Yvette is still a big favorite to retain her seat in Congress. Darlene's upset chances will be very slim (but not impossible). Darlene has this tendency of winning races where she is expected to lose. It is probably irritating to those who bet against her.
Last week an operative informed me that Darlene is slowly working herself into becoming a better public speaker; that's good. The suspicion is that someone is working with her to improve the negative perceptions of her being a political lightweight. I have cautioned you folks before: Darlene is not only ambitious, she is also street-smart. I wouldn't be surprised if she challenged Yvette Clarke next year. In fact, I will be most surprised if she doesn't.
Stay tuned-in folks: I have told you many times that Brooklyn is where the fun starts.