Talk:Richard J. Daley

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Old talk[edit]

The stuff towards the end is still really bothersome. RJD's reputation has not risen "considerably" after his death... he is still remembered by many in Chicago as a racist, autocratic thug. --Anon. --- When was he elected mayor and how long did he stay in office? --rmhermen

This article is pretty good, if not definitive. I'll be adding to it from time to time. I covered duh mare regularly for a couple of years in the 60s during my stint in Chicago journalism. Ortolan88

Glad you liked it. I wasn't going for definitive, just basic information. Look forward to seeing your improvements and expansions. shsilver


This article devolves into POV towards the end. It's kind of a mess, if anyone wants to tackle it.

Moncrief


Yes, i agree. Statments such as Yes, Daley presided over a wasteful machine, but few cities truly are governed efficiently. In reality, cities are jungles of interest groups, ignorance, and chronic poverty, need to be fixed. Green Mountain 21:42, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I was the person who wrote most of the stuff about the virtues of a machine and the difficulties in governing a city efficiently. I admit I got carried away there. If anyone wants sections which I deleted to be restored please do so.

Machines have been reassessed in the last twenty-five years though. I was trying to point out why machines are seen as less undesireable than the feasible alternatives. New York City and Philadelphia got reform, but they never got good government.

User:Dinopup

Good article. However I believe there were two other aldermen that opposed the Daley machine. Bill Singer of the 44th (and later 43rd) ward on the Northside and Dick Simpson also of the 44th.-- acsmith

I was there[edit]

I don't know who took the following out of the article:

Any Democratic vote fraud in Cook County was easily matched statewide by Republican practices downstate, which included voting by telephone, and bulk voting by political leaders.

I was there, I was covering Mayor Daley as a reporter, I was covering elections, these things actually happened under the leadership of the crooked Republican Paul Powell, whose political approach was summed up in his constant sponsorship of "fetcher" bills, threats to regulate some industry or other which would then bring in bribes to kill the legislation. His motto was "I smell the meat a'cooking!" There were many news stories about Republican fraud, some written by me. I intend to return this information, in some form, to the article, but I'll hold off to hear objections. This was the balance in Illinois politics in the 1960s and it is important for the information to be there because of all the uproar about Daley stealing the Presidential election for Kennedy. They all stole elections. Ortolan88 05:15, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I note that "I was there" is likely to garner a diversion to the "No original research" policy. , WP:NOR. You gotta back it up with some substantial documentation, especially when the topic is political. -- Pinktulip 00:10, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, Paul Powell was actually a Democrat, though not a Daley Democrat. See Paul_Powell_(politician). JMRyan (talk) 03:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I took the statement out because it was not germane to Chicago municipal elections and was POV. The Daley cult of personality is, unfortunately, alive and well in modern times, and this sort of "well, THEY were doing it too" stuff does not in any way validate the corrupt, undemocratic behavior of Daley and the Cook County Democrats. Yes, the downstate Republicans were bastards and a half. Yeah, they all did it. That excuses nothing.

I in no way doubt your experience with Powell and others. However, that information belongs in a wiki about statewide corruption. It can be argued, of course, that Daley WAS in effect a de facto statewide office holder... cf his alleged meddling with the 1960 presidential election, dismissal of Adlai Stevenson, and so on. By the time Daley had consolidated his power as mayor, though, the Republicans in Chicago were decimated and have not recovered as a credible political force (in the city, mind you... the statewide Republicans have also hosed their chances at political office in the foreseeable future, but I'd argue that it's their own damn fault, and is certainly a much more recent occurrence), the idiocy with the "Fast Eddie" Vrytolak party switch in the 80's aside.

So my argument against talking about Republican corruption during the Daley Sr. Administration (as it it currently phrased! see below) boils down to a single point. Downstate Republican corruption during the Daley administration is no excuse for upstate Democratic corruption. Insinuating that it does violates NPOV, as they are two different issues. I'd be happy to see a factual, NPOV article that talks about what sons of bitches the downstate GOPers were (and are), but it does not belong in an article about a Chicago mayor.

Mind you, I'm not against putting it back in, in a way that is focused to municipal Chicago or a statewide beef that Daley had direct involvement in. Or, we can both talk about corruption in state and city elections, since it was the culture of much of 20th century Chicago and Illinois politics, but it will be matched with info about abuses by the Democratic machine. Like you say, everyone was doing it.

Maybe I should start a wiki account. Till then, Anon.

Can someone explain to me how the following three passages fit together, please?

"Daley was the prototypical "machine" politician, and his Chicago Democratic Machine, based on control of thousands of patronage positions, has been considered by some to have been instrumental in helping to elect John F. Kennedy in 1960. A limited recount at the time showed that while Daley's machine stole massive numbers of votes from state's attorney Benjamin Adamowski, whom Daley was determined to defeat, there were only a small number of questionable votes for Kennedy. This is one reason why Republican candidate Richard Nixon chose not to pursue a recount; also it was alleged that downstate Illinois Republican organizers had stolen votes for Nixon."

"It was often alleged that his administration used questionable tactics to acquire votes, with the ironic phrase "vote early and vote often" frequently used to describe to his method of delivering votes. Indeed, in 1960, Daley "delivered" Chicago to John F. Kennedy by stuffing ballot boxes; in several cases, some Chicago precincts had more ballots cast than eligible voters. Daley's conduct in this regard gave Chicago a reputation for political skulduggery that it held for years after Daley's passing."

"A few wards were tied to the local mafia or crime syndicate, but Daley's own ward was clean and his personal honesty was never questioned successfully."

As far as I can see, each of these contradicts the other two, but I may well be misunderstanding. If I am, I'd suggest clarifying them; if I'm not then at least some of the article needs to be rewritten. Donald Ian Rankin 22:55, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was there and titles after death[edit]

I marked as needing citation the section claiming he was called Papa Bear, or Boss Daley. No long time Chicagoan would ever call Daley Papa Bear and DEFINITELY NOT Boss Daley. Papa Bear was a cute name used for someone at the Chicago Bears by people who were afraid of him or trying to smooch his buttocks. "Boss" (not "The Boss") was the title of Mike Royko's book about Daley and the only time Daley was called Boss was in reference to that book. Boss was waaaaaayyyyy too meek a title for Daley. If anyone had referred to Daley as Boss, the others in the conversation would have corrected the reference to King, Emperor, kingmaker, or he who crowned American presidents, and laughed at Boss. Anyone who would ever have called Daley Boss Daley would have been considered a fugitive from a Dukes of Hazard episode and sent back to Wilson and Broadway. I was 6 when Daley took office and 27 when he died. Police, Fire, and any working man called him Senior, or The Old Man (when mixing him into a conversation about Richard M Daley), or Richard J. Tgdf (talk) 02:10, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A thought.[edit]

A substantial portion of this entire biographical article is devoted specifically to acts of chicanery on the part of R.J. or people working for him. Can an interested party balance it somewhat? I read this bio and am left thinking that most of what the man contributed during his long political career are various methods on how to stay in office. He *was*, by reputation, a bit of a crook and heavy-handed, but this article glosses over substantial portions of even just his career in politics as a whole, not to mention his family life or other relevant details. I tagged a few items that definitely need attention, and leave it to others who have a greater interest in American politics.

→ P.MacUidhir (t) (c) - "Proud to be Chicago-born and Chicago-bred" 05:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pádraic_MacUidhir: I agree with your assessment; this article has large holes in Daley's life story. Other parts of the article are anecdotal; while these stories are interesting, some of them seem to drift across the POV line and/or lack verifiability. There must surely exist a wealth of factual information on this interesting and important politician that can be tapped to make a better article. — JonRoma 09:33, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Structure[edit]

I added some structure to the article so that "machine" verbiage is segreated off on its own. That should allow editors and readers to focus on it or ignore it as they wish. -- Pinktulip 01:12, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

De Facto Segregation[edit]

I recently added on to a comment that the reason Chicago did not end up like Detroit and Cleveland was because Mayor Daley encouraged middle-class Whites to remain in the city by preserving de facto segregation. Less than five minutes later, the statement was edited out. For whatever your opinions may be on the issue, the fact is Mayor Daley learned a few lessions from the Chicago Race Riots of 1919, and knew that if integration came about, an even greater race riot would've occured, resulting in a war zone not unlike Newark and Detroit. With that said, if we are to condemn de facto segregation, we should condemn those who live in such neighborhoods. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.49.80.58 (talk • contribs) .

We shouldn't be condemning anyone here; Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia and not a platform for expressing a point of view. Perhaps the person who reverted your comment may care to comment him/herself, but a plausible reason your comment was edited out is that it represented speculation, rather than being a documented fact or a quote from published material on Daley. I have no doubt that some historian who's written a biographical work on the Daley era might advance the very assessment you did. In this event a quote from such works would be entirely appropriate for inclusion in the article, as would quotes from material advancing contrary views on the Daley era. The idea is to present the various perspectives without espousing any of them.
Also, please sign your comments to this and other talk pages by typing ~~~~ at the end of your posts. Thanks. — JonRoma 05:05, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

God Bless the talk page where you can sometimes learn more than on the main page. (I didn't write De Facto Segregation)Tgdf (talk) 02:12, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gestapo quote[edit]

The supposed lipreading is both POV and and urban legend. At a press conference Daley explicitly denied making any obscene comments, according to Chicago Sun-Times, September 10, 1968, page 7. So that's solid evidence that require better evidence to refute it. Now ask what proof there is to the contary--the source used -- a popular column written over 30 years later that makes no pretense to scholarship. Encyclopedias need proof, not myths invented as POV. [my proof is this: "Daley vehemently denied using such a slur during the exchange. See the Chicago Sun-Times, September 10, 1968, 7." from Battleground Chicago: The Police and the 1968 Democratic National Convention by Frank Kusch - (Praeger, 2004) page 184. Rjensen 18:34, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you, but RJD's denial is not irrefutable proof that he did not utter the phrase attributed to him. The incident was not only captured on film (video/TV/etc, albeit without sound), but has been confirmed by people in the audience who heard him. It has been recounted in almost every biography of RJD, including Mike Royko's "Boss" and Taylor/Cohen's "American Pharaoh". Daley's specific denial should be mentioned and referenced, but that does not change the fact that:
  • He said it.
  • He said it on national television, without sound, but the content is plainly obvious.
  • Other audience members heard him say it.
  • Finally, whether true or not, it is a sufficiently notable charge to be discussed, and rebutted if need be, in an encyclopedic entry on RJD.
Cheers, Skinwalker 19:20, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with Skinwalker. It's appropriate to include the incident and the quote, given that there is ample support that it happended with the obscenity and antisemitic wording as described. As I have it currently worded, it is presented as "some have claimed to have observed Daley shouting...", which provides more than enough wiggle room. Daley's denial should be noted, but his statemnt is no less self-serving and POV than any other source, regardless of Daley's contempraneous vehemence. I will say that we should find a primary source from 1968 to document the quote (or at least that some obscene statement was uttered). While I can't find access to the Chicago Sun-Times (insert a link if you have one), the fact that he was denying something just days after he did or did not say indicates that there were those who believed at the time that he said it.
The only questions we have now is how to word the issue and provide sources to support / rebut it. Whether or not to include the subject is abundantly clear in the affirmative. Alansohn 19:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
the only "source" is rumor. Everyone saw Daley shout at Ribicoff. I did read the NY Times account and followup and it never mentions obscenity, Note that the legend depends on lipreaders --but ZERO lipreaders have come forward to translate for us. The legend says that "many" lipreaders read it, but no one has every found a single one. Isn't that odd? There is film-- there are lipreaders today who can see the film. But they all remain silent. With an actual denial it's time for the proponents to come up with a primary source, either from 1968 or someone recently who can read lips. Rjensen 20:26, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As for primary sources; Nicholas Von Hoffman reported in Washington POST Sept 10, 1968 page A1 that when a reporter asked Daley is he used "MotherF..." Daley said no. "Don't say that. I never use that kind of language in my life." An alderman who has been sitting next to Daley said he did not use the F word, and never used it. Likewise the NY Times Sept 10 1968 reported Daley said he never used language like that. In fact no reporter ever said he heard Daley used the F-word at any time. Rjensen 20:44, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, there are multiple primary sources that heard Daley. Please look up Boss, by Mike Royko, and American Pharaoh, by Taylor and Cohen. These biographies discuss the incident at length. The incident needs to be in the article, as it reflects upon Daley's attitude towards minorities and those who dared to question his policies. We can and should cite and discuss Daley's denial in the article, but this bit about finding a lipreading source is a bit silly and obstructive. As someone noted above, the Daley cult of personality is alive and well, and whitewashing this incident would be typical of the revisionist history that his son and other henchmen have tried to put forward. We absolutely should not take RJD's denial as the gospel truth, as to do so would violate POV. Cheers, Skinwalker 23:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In Boss (p 189) Royko says that an underground Washington newspaper said that a lip reader had determined what Daley said. Royko then cites three witnesses that he did not say any such thing, and one who said Daley's lips "definitely formed the word 'fuck.' Royko quotes a Jewish delegate who said that other delegates were shouting antisemitic remarks but he did not hear Daley do so. In the standard scholarly biography American Pharaoh: Mayor Richard J. Daley: His Battle for Chicago and the Nation by Adam Cohen, Elizabeth Taylor p 478 says some witnesses said he said "fucker" and others said Daley said "faker." This book mentions no anti-semitic remarks whatever. Thus the urban legend comes from an underground newspaper quoting an unnamed lip reader, while Royko found no one who would corroborate any of the story except the possible use of the f-word. The standard biography does NOT repeat the urban legend, which originated with Daley-haters who were not at the scene. Rjensen 23:52, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it funny how articles on Republicans document in great detail any potential wrongdoing or embarassing things they may have said, and yet one of the most corrupt and controversial Democratic leaders of all-time gets a sugar-coated encyclopedic entry written by apologists? Oh wait, it's not funny. It's sickening. Taste The Difference 00:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No kidding. Daley was a corrupt, vote-stealing tool. Welcome to wikipedia, the perpetuation of lies by committee. BonniePrinceCharlie 16:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it isn't funny because the people who laugh about this are usually the people who don't understand.

Republicans are usually criticized in great detail because usually (ie. Robber Barrons) they commit wrongdoing to line their OWN pockets with money.

On the other hand, Democrats usually commit embarassing veniality (ie. Bill Clinton) and sometimes corruption and vote stealing to do good for the common man.

When Jane Byrne became mayor of Chicago, my mother thought that was the high point of civilization. 6 months later my mother was calling Byrne a bitch along with everyone else. I mentioned to my mother that she should know that ALL politicians are lying, vote stealing, money grubbers. It's the job. But some of those lying, vote stealing, money grubbers are stealing for me and some are stealing for Wall Street. I need them more than I need Wall Street.Tgdf (talk) 02:24, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Leader of democrats / catholic democrats[edit]

Just to address the reason why I reverted out the following wording: "He played a major role in the history of the Democratic Party as a leader of Catholic Democrats, especially with his support of fellow Catholic John F. Kennedy in 1960 and of Hubert Humphrey in 1968." As written, this would indicate he was a leader of Catholic democrats but not non-Catholic democrats, which is incorrect. Also, by including the "fellow Catholic" descriptor for JFK, the wording implies that either: 1) the primary reason Daley suppported Kennedy is because he was Catholic; or 2) that the most important thing to know about Kennedy is that he was Catholic. These are both also misleading. So I have reverted the changes. Fairsing 04:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better rethink that. The Kennedy family systematically reached out to Catholic Irish leaders of whom Daley was prominent. See leamer, "Kennedy Men"; Leamer pp 313, 434; Cohen and Taylor. American Pharaoh: p. 250; Timothy J. Meagher. The Columbia Guide to Irish American History (2005) p.150Rjensen 05:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What you say might be true. However, it seems to me that the issue is too complex to explain in one sentence. Steve Dufour 12:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is Ricard J Daley's favorites —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.131.38.70 (talk) 05:28, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They Claimed Daley Said "Fuck You, You Jew Son Of A Bitch. Go Home You Lousy Motherfucker, Go Home"[edit]

It's written in many different resources. The 1968 convention article even has it sourced that lip readers claimed he said those exact words.75.72.35.253 (talk) 00:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Richard j daley signature 1954.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Richard j daley signature 1954.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 20 June 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Richard j daley signature 1954.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:03, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1968 and later career[edit]

At the bottom of this section (1968 and later career), there are references to some of Mayor Daley's nick names. The only 'Papa Bear' in Chicago was, and always will be, Papa Bear George S. Hallas!

I would add a common joke in Chicago was that the Chicago press would ask Mayor Daley if he ever thought of running for governor of Illinois, to which Hizzonor would reply, "Why would I want the demotion?!"

12.148.143.20 (talk) 00:31, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disorder quote[edit]

I cannot cite sources, but my understanding of the policeman-disorder quote was that Daley was referring to a specific order and said, "The policeman is not here to create this order. The policeman is here to preserve this order." I understood the meaning to be that the police did not generate the order to clear the streets and Grant Park, but instead were acting to enforce an order that had been given. In his Chicago accent where "th" becomes "d" the word "this" becomes "dis" and hence the quote "The policeman is not here to create disorder. The policeman is here to preserve disorder." I have never understood this as a "slip of the tongue", this was an issue of local pronunciation.

Danaleeling (talk) 09:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DISHONEST BIAS. IRRESPONSIBLY MISLEADING.[edit]

This page smacks of being written by Daley loyalists.

1. The page lacks a section called "controversy." That is shocking, since Daley is considered by some to be one of U. S. history's most corrupt politicians.

The very slight treatment of the 1960 Presidential election alone is shocking.

2. It is vastly commonly acknowledged by historians of the 1960 election that recount and reversal of the results of *TWO* likely result-tampered states, Illinois and Texas, would have resulted in Nixon becoming president in 1960. This is spelled out clearly and frankly in "Another Race To the Finish - The Washington Post" https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2000/11/17/another-race-to-the-finish/c810a41c-7da9-461a-927b-9da6d36a65dc/ and other sources.

Yet the coverage here, as of this date in April 2016, reads "Although often quoted as fact, this repeated claim is impossible. Kennedy won with 303 electoral college votes and needed only 269, meaning Nixon would have lost even had he won Illinois' 27 votes. Had Nixon won Illinois' 27 electoral votes, he would have had 246 electoral votes while Kennedy would have had 276"

That section is dishonestly, IRRESPONSIBLY MISLEADING. It is a blatant and almost surely willful omission of widely publicized germane facts. See the Post article linked above.

The word "controversy" appears merely once in the entire page. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

I am not a Wiki author but this is presented in a potential call to action. Corrective action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.119.141.15 (talk) 11:26, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree a little here, though not completely. I don't know that Daley was necessary one of the "most corrupt politicians" but there were certainly many concerns raised, especially his relationship to the Chicago Outfit. The fact that the Outfit is not even mentioned in the article despite the fact that it was a significant factor in Chicago politics throughout Daley's career seems very strange (i.e. very intentional). Can somebody comment on the thinking here? -- MC 141.131.2.3 (talk) 18:58, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I do find some of the text in the "Legacy" section to be biased and possibly partisan. I'm going to edit it out; feel free to continue the discussion here. Airbornemihir (talk) 20:23, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Richard J. Daley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:21, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Does not paint an accurate picture[edit]

The current article really omits a huge amount of information about the cronyism and corruption overseen by Daley. Chicago was "a city that works" because the well-connected make sure their cash cow stayed healthy -- for their benefit. It could be improved with a more complete picture of how the city was run. Freond (talk) 18:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Richard_J._Daley&oldid=1212627045"