Thursday, September 18, 2025

Flashback 1987: Lawson Y's residents face ouster in closing

"Sollie 17," by Nancy and Edward Kienholz (National Portrait Gallery)

   
The old Lawson YMCA — now Lawson House — was on the radio Wednesday — for receiving a historic preservation award. That is good news, and better that the building is now 409 units of low cost housing, what it was at the start.
     I have two central Lawson Y memories, neither of them very good. The first was sitting in the very good barbecue chicken joint that used to be across Dearborn, enjoying dinner with my significant other, when a man leapt from the roof and hit the sidewalk on Chicago Avenue. We didn't see him fall, but saw the crowd gather, and left our meal to join them. That was a mistake, and we returned to our dinner with considerably less appetite.
     The second was sitting with Percy Davis in his little room, discussing his life options, leading to this story. The YMCA official who predicted it would be sold in two years was off by 35 years — the YMCA of Metropolitan Chicago finally sold it in 2024, not for millions, but for $1.


     Percy Davis isn't the kind of person the Young Men's Christian Association wants around anymore.
     The 81-year-old former employee at the First National Bank of Chicago has lived in the Lawson Y at Chicago and Dearborn for 37 years. Now retired, Percy passes his time reading, studying Spanish and attending the senior evening club that is held every night at Lawson.
     But sometime in the next two years, Davis and the rest of the people who live in the 595-room Lawson YMCA can expect to be out of a home. Lawson is up for sale.
Lawson YMCA (Chicago Historical Society)
     The 22-story building is just one of the dozens of YMCA residential facilities that are being closed across the country as the Y phases out low-cost urban housing in favor of providing recreation to families.
     Since 1983, 66 YMCA facilities, representing 7,500 beds, have been closed nationwide. The Chicago YMCA, which has seven residential buildings housing more than 2,000 people, has in recent years closed facilities at South Wabash, Division Street and Hyde Park.
     "It's happening in every major city all across the country," said John W. Casey, president of the YMCA of Metropolitan Chicago. "They've all gone through that same transition over time. Buildings have deteriorated and the capital hasn't been there to keep it up."
     The YMCA is asking $12 million for Lawson, and though it has been on the market for more than three years, Casey is confident the building will be sold within a year or two.
     "I'd be surprised if it takes two years," Casey said.
     The YMCA gives two basic reasons for closing down its residential facilities. One, it needs the money for new projects (the YMCA is breaking ground this fall for a new $8.5 million building in Woodlawn). And two, it is turning its focus away from urban centers and more toward "neighborhoods."
     "Our mission is youth and family in the city, and most of the people at Lawson are over 50 years of age," Casey said. "The question is, do you reinvest money you don't have in Lawson, or convert the value of the Lawson asset into other projects?"
     Casey said that, in the long run, the Near North area will get by fine without Lawson.
     "The YMCA understands this city can only exist in the 21st century if it has strong neighborhoods," he said. "I think the central area is going to take care of itself."
      Others are not so sure. Chicago is losing low-cost, single-room-occupancy housing at the rate of more than 1,000 units a year, and the closing of Lawson will only contribute to that decline.
     "This kind of closing is a disaster," said Dr. Ron Vander Kooi, president of the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless. "It's part of a pattern of Ys closing."
     Vander Kooi said the closing would mean a sharp reduction in the standard of living for most of Lawson's residents, despite the YMCA's efforts to relocate them.
     "A few will find comparable housing," he said. "Most of them will have to pay much more for similar housing and at least a few will become homeless."
     The churches in the area, which use Lawson to house the homeless people who frequently turn up at their doors, say Lawson will be missed.
     "From our viewpoint, one of the problems you get in an area like this is finding housing for people who have no place to go," said Bishop Timothy Lyne, pastor at Holy Name Cathedral, across the street from Lawson. "Lawson is a resource for taking care of problem people. The people in the neighborhood need it."
     The YMCA administration says it will make every effort to relocate residents.
     "They're of great concern to us," Casey said. "We're going to make a considerable effort to help each and every one of those people who need our assistance. We're not going to come in the middle of the night and board up that building and sell it off. The transition will be done in a timely and humane fashion."
     Some Lawson employees point to the long time Lawson has been on the market, hopeful that no one will buy it.
     "We live this day-in, day-out," said Hal Meyer, who is in charge of programming at Lawson. "They've said it was sold several times, but the day comes to fork over the money, and it doesn't happen."
                    — Originally published in the Sun-Times, July 12, 1987

Wednesday, September 17, 2025

Stopping by the local Charlie Kirk vigil


     Kitty and I, we have our routine. She appears with the dawn at my bedside and makes a plaintive noise. This is my signal to stand up, throw on jeans and grab her leash for our amble around the neighborhood.
     About 4 p.m. she's back, a patter of paws on the wide red pine floorboards of my office. She'll sit patiently, waiting, then clear her throat, and we'll hit the pavement again.
     The final walk is always my doing. I'll realize it's after 9 p.m. and summon her from her bed in the living room. We often visit the Northbrook Village Green, where we circle the fountain, ball field, playground and charming gazebo, she exploring smells, me reflecting on the sweetness of our lives. Really, toss in a few wandering peacocks and it could hardly be more idyllic.
     Sunday, just before 7 p.m., Kitty and I broke custom, with an unusual pre-dinner walk over to the park. An editor had mentioned the candlelight vigil for slain MAGA icon Charlie Kirk, and I decided to slide by for a look-see.
     "We'll be back," I told my wife, busy in the kitchen preparing eggplant lasagna.
     Why take the dog? Honestly, I pictured a dozen people shielding candles in homemade foil holders, shooting me hard looks as I padded past. Kitty was my cover — "Hey, I'm not spying, just walking the dog!"
     That was a silly expectation. Nobody in the crowd noticed me.
     As I walked up, they were singing "The Star-Spangled Banner." I took off my hat, placed it over my heart and joined in. We're on the same page, so far. Why not look for commonalities as well as divisions?
     There were, by my estimate, about 300 people, some carrying American flags — several literally wrapped in the flag. Lots of kids.
     Northbrook has plenty of Donald Trump fans because it's an affluent, predominantly white community, and part of the Trump appeal is to well-off white folks chafing under the difficulty of their lives: the insult of hearing snatches of Spanish spoken in public; the pain of their children being exposed to ideas other than their own; the discomfort of worrying whether the person in the third stall might have been born a different gender.
     See, that's why I could never join the MAGA world — because I have no sense of grievance. Just the opposite. I'm grateful. I live in a good place. I have a good job, paid well for doing exactly what I want. Blaming others for my woes feels small, particularly since most of my problems are self-generated — little anxieties that stick in my craw until I can manage to hock them out.
     It gets worse. I care about those who struggle, and accept people different than myself. Alternate ways of thinking and modes of existence are not pressing existential threats to my own. Gay marriages don't wreck my marriage. I don't look at others in a bathroom long enough to suss out their birth gender. Edgy books didn't ruin my kids. Immigrants don't threaten my livelihood. As my pal Lin Brehmer used to say, "It's great to be alive."
     But my essential optimism also makes me a poor fit for the left. While I value knowing the full, uncensored history of this country, I'm still a patriot. I love the flag. I've shot guns with my kids for fun. I never bought the one-strike-and-you're-out cancellation business. I can't understand questioning an Abe Lincoln statue because of something he said on the stump in Jonesboro in 1858. Identity might be a full-time job for many folks, but it's not an actual profession.

To continue reading, click here. 

Tuesday, September 16, 2025

Flashback 1997: Shrewd Edgar shows quitting is underrated

     I liked Jim Edgar and even voted for him. A Republican before that meant pledging fealty to a liar, bully, fraud and traitor. When I heard he had died Sunday, I looked back at what I'd written about him and found this.

"Some people in politics stay too long." 
             — Jim Edgar
     A class act, that Edgar. Sure, he was on the wrong side of patronage, and slightly stained by the MSI mess. But all told, a first-rate politician; at least he didn't end up in prison, and not every Illinois governor can say that.
     Myself, I was pulling for him to run for the Senate against Carol Moseley-Braun, whose performance wavers between the twin poles of disappointment and disappearance. Edgar would have easily blown Moseley-Braun out of the water — reduced her to a few floating scraps of debris and an oil slick.

Jim Edgar
     That's the downside of Edgar's noble act. He gets to walk off stage, tall, dignified, at the top of his game, and we're left scrabbling around in the mud with the usual crew of politicians, who wouldn't abandon their stations at the public trough if the Lord God Almighty sent them a private invitation to do so.
     It's still too early to tell whether Edgar is really retiring, or just making a brief tactical retreat. I don't want to praise him for abandoning public life so he can sit on the front porch of his Downstate log mansion, teaching the grandkids to whittle train whistles, only to have him show up a few months after leaving office as a lobbyist for North Korea.
     Instead, I'd like to applaud the one undeniable aspect of Edgar's announcement. Whatever he ends up doing, he certainly won't be governor anymore. He exercised one of the most underrated and unfairly maligned options in life: he quit.
     Quitting gets a bad rap. All those slogans pinned up in high school football locker rooms, all those little fatherly speeches, have created the general impression that quitting is bad.
     In reality, quitting is an art.
     True, like art, many people do it badly. Ross Perot was a bad quitter. Stirred the pot and then bolted just when it got hot. Shannon Faulkner, too, and for the same reason; having gone through all of that legal mess to join the Citadel, she should have died standing up rather than quit after a couple of days.
     But that's my judgment. Faulkner might look back at quitting the Citadel as the smartest thing she ever did. Quitting should be a private matter — something you do for yourself and not for anybody else (except in the case of Moseley-Braun. Her quitting would be an act of public beneficence).
     Edgar isn't quitting office for the good of the state. Whatever his motive, he's doing it for himself. Which is as it should be. You've only got one life — nobody comes to you on your deathbed and says, "Hey, you stayed in that position you hated for a long, long time. Here's a few extra years as a bonus. Now go do what you really want."
     When should you quit? When you can't stand where you are anymore. That sounds simple, but most people can't figure it out, and they stay in places — jobs, marriages, cities  —they hate, for too long, because they're afraid of setting themselves free from the stone, even as it drags them down.
     How many offices are overrun by the zombies from "Night of the Living Dead," stumbling around, their arms stiffly in front of them, their faces flat masks of belligerent defeat?
     Why haven't those people quit if they dislike where they are so much? Well, first, quitting takes courage. Jobs are hard to come by, and so people cling to them, even when they shouldn't. Even though I have yet to hear of anybody who quit a job and then starved to death. ("EMACIATED CORPSE FOUND HUDDLED AT DOOR OF FORMER EMPLOYER: `HE QUIT,' SAYS EX-BOSS")
     Wasn't that the lesson of Vietnam? Know when to cut your losses and run?
     As so often with pundits, I'm bad at taking my own advice. I should resign here and now, but that seems a big step just to give a column a snappy finish.
     The times I have quit, however, were usually wonderful. In college, I recall, I foolishly assumed that breezing through introductory economics meant I should take a more advanced course.
     Big mistake. After sitting through every class, paying close attention, I realized — the night before the midterm  —that I had absolutely no idea what was going on.
     So instead of taking the midterm and flunking, I went to the registrar's and dropped the course.
     Quitting violated every instinct of nose-down, reflexive struggle that I had ever been taught. And it felt great.
       — Originally published in the Sun-Times Aug. 24, 1997

Monday, September 15, 2025

Punch, Judy and Charlie Kirk in the social media battle royal

Sketches from a Punch and Judy show, by George Cruikshank (British Museum)

     Punch and Judy is a traditional British puppet show, once found in 19th century seaside resorts. A tribute to chaos, with the anarchic Mr. Punch and his long-suffering wife Judy going at each other with bats. There was a policeman, and a baby, invariably ejected from the little curtained booth as the children in the audience shriek with delight. Plus, for exotic danger, a crocodile.
     Eventually, modern sensibilities caught up with Punch and Judy — all that violence — and they were toned down and largely disappeared, except for a festival or two.
     I'd like to offer Punch and Judy as a useful frame for understanding social media. We somehow still consider social media as news and debate. 
British Museum
     But it's neither. News is supposed to involve information that is reliably true. And debate involves parties bringing facts to the table to argue points in good faith.
     What we've got instead in social media is algorithm-fueled chaos, where malice and outrage top reason and accuracy, a battle royal, war of all against all.
     Or rather, the traditional political parties, Democrats and Republicans degraded into Mr. Blue and Mrs. Red, pounding the tar out of each other, using words as sticks, while the rest of us sit, cross-legged at their feet, whooping in delight and shock.
     This was very clear during the latest social media frenzy over the assassination of Charlie Kirk, and out of the billions of words expended over the past five days, I want to focus on the way my fellow liberals flooded social media with remarks Kirk made over the years.
     The unsaid implication being, I guess, that as a person who said this kind of thing, he somehow deserved death, which he certainly did not.
     I agree with policy analyst and media pundit Malcolm Nance, who immediately labeled the murder terrorism, adding, "No one had the right to take a life because you have a political disagreement in this country." Later, he tweeted that Kirk "was a vile, unapologetic racist & White supremacist. But he had a RIGHT to speak all the racist White supremacist twaddle he wanted without getting shot."
     This truth flew past a lot of Democrats, who preferred to focus on two statements of Kirk's, presented as particularly significant.
     First, regarding gun deaths:

To continue reading, click here.

Photo courtesy of Howard Tullman



Sunday, September 14, 2025

Flashback 2000: Born to be killers

  

     
     This is a relic from another era, when I'd pair with a photographer — in this case, my favorite shooter, Robert A. Davis — and do a deep dive into an overlooked urban problem. It's very long — 2800 words, almost four times a regular column. So I hope it'll hold your attention.

     The dogs are taken from airless garages, from abandoned apartments, from dark basements. Already a crowd is gathering. The dogs have heavy chains on their necks and deep, untreated gashes on their legs and faces.
      A circle forms — lots of children. Bets are taken. The dogs are kicked or "bumped" — slammed together to get them going. Usually that's all it takes. The dogs bite and rip each other, snarling, spattering blood. The crowd cheers, shouts encouragement. Sometimes the dogs are separated by a pry bar, to prolong the fight. Eventually one is the victor and the other, if it is lucky, dead. Money changes hands.
     It happens every day in Chicago, and also frequently in the suburbs and Downstate. What started out as a recreation and gambling sport among gang members has spread to the larger community, with even young children raising stray dogs and fighting them in such numbers that officials call it "an epidemic."
      "It's definitely getting worse," said Catherine Hedges, shelter supervisor of Chicago's Fury Friends Foundation. "I see abuse from dog fighting on an almost daily basis. Nearly every day a volunteer comes back from walking a pit bull to say somebody approached them and said: `How much do you want for that dog?' They think he would make a good fighter. They don't want the dog as a pet. They don't want to take it to the park and play. They want it as a fighter."
      Staging dog fights is a felony, but cases are difficult to prove. Dogs can't testify, and police officers, already overburdened by the relentless crush of crime against humans, do not put a high priority on trying to solve them.
     Except one: Sgt. Steve Brownstein, a 46-year-old officer who wages a one-man crusade against the abuse of animals, particularly dogs, particularly dogs that are forced to fight and kill each other.
     Brownstein has seized 700 animals since May 1999, and made 200 arrests. Operating out of the public housing unit at 51st and Wentworth, he strolls through the projects, chatting with residents, about rumors of dogfights and animal hidden in basements. Holding a flashlight, he crunches through the gloomy rubble of abandoned apartments, looking for chained dogs guarding drug stashes.
      He has seen a lot.
     "They beat these animals," he said. "They feed them hot peppers. Feed them gunpowder. Lock them in small closets. They do everything they can to make these animals vicious and mean."
     Brownstein said trainers will starve dogs, then throw a piece of meat between them and have the dogs kill each other for it. They'll put heavy weights on the animals to build up their strength. When there is a dogfight, if the wounded dog does not die, they will throw it alive on a garbage dump or leave it in a vacant lot or apartment to die a slow death.
     "The more fortunate dogs are the ones that die during the fight instead of after the fight," he said.
     People will set dogs on fire when they lose a fight, or something worse. "I've had dog fighters tell me, including teenagers, they're angry at a dog if it loses a fight, they want it to suffer, that's why they leave it locked in a closet to die a slow death of its injuries."
     Brownstein has seen children snap the necks of puppies, and it is the dehumanizing effect that such violence has on children that worries him most. He remembers one 12-year-old boy, "Speedy," who he first met when he impounded the boy's dog for fighting, and next heard of after the boy had raped a 7-year-old girl. The two events are not unconnected in Brownstein's view.
     "I think that when a child enjoys the suffering of an animal, has no empathy and compassion, it becomes very easy for that same child to grow into a teenager and adult who can inflict pain upon fellow humans and still have no empathy or compassion."
     Despite his humanitarian zeal, Brownstein has made a lot of enemies. Top police brass work to undermine him and some of his fellow officers call him "Dogman" and "Gomer Pyle," for his awkward, flapping manner.
     Unsurprisingly, those whose dogs he has seized are his fiercest critics, picketing Brownstein and peppering him with official complaints.
     "He's gone crazy," said dog trainer Walter Ward, who had his dogs seized this summer by Brownstein. "He does good, but he does a lot of wrong. . . . Someone has to stop him."
     Even Brownstein's allies admit that he is a man on a mission.
     "He's a driven individual, and at times that can be his undoing," said Dr. Gene Mueller, president of the Chicago Anti-Cruelty Society, which just named Brownstein its Humanitarian of the Year. "He's drowning in these reports (of abuse). How can we expect him to follow up on them all? It's impossible. People say this is all Steve Brownstein, but it's so much larger, and has to be tackled. He needs more assistance, more resources."
     Dogfighting is a Class 4 felony that could, in theory, bring three years in prison. Even witnessing a dogfight is a misdemeanor. But felony dog fighting prosecutions are rare: there have been just nine in Cook County in the past two years.
     "It's so common. You continually hear calls about dog fighting on the radio. But the attitude is: `They're expendable; who cares?' " said a police officer in the Deering police district on the South Side. "The state's attorney will not approve felony charges for dog fighting."
     The state's attorney's office said it is aware of the problem and doing all it can.
     "The people doing it are becoming more bold," said John Gorman, a spokesman for the Cook County state's attorney's office. "It is moving out of the basements and into the parking lots and empty lots. More dogs are being killed and maimed, and when these cases are brought to us, we prosecute them as best we can."
     Still, many police officers are not aware of the felony dogfighting law, even though it has been on the books for more than a decade, said Mueller, the former head of the city's Animal Care and Control Department.
     "There have been less than a handful of prosecuted cases," said Mueller. "Because animal welfare laws are contained within agricultural law — an archaic, infrequently used part of the code — the police officer on the street, the reviewing desk sergeant, the state's attorney at the district, didn't recognize the criminal code."
     It is not that police are unsympathetic. Many officers in inner-city neighborhoods have stories of grim encounters with dogs abused by gangs.
     "Before I was a lieutenant, I worked on a tactical team and went on narcotics raids," said Lt. Nick Rotti of the Calumet district on the Far South Side. "We'd come across dogs . . . it's heartbreaking to see the things that are done to them. I've seen dogs on raids, they leave them chained in these abandoned buildings or basements where they hide their drug stash. I've actually seen the skeleton of a dog chained to a pole in a basement. The dog just starved to death. They left it there to lie dead."
     The bigger problem, police say, is building a felony case.
     "You have to keep in mind, without admissions and without facts to support it, it's very difficult to get that felony upgrade," said Pat Camden, a spokesman for the police department. "When the facts support a felony, the state's attorney's office has been more than cooperative."
     A lack of statistics on dog fighting is one sign of how recently officials have come to understand the severity of the problem. Only last year did the city began keeping track of emergency calls regarding animals. So far this year, 1,764 complaints of animal abuse have come into 911 — triple the rate of last year — with another 2,061 complaints of "inhuman treatment" of animals to 311.
     "We've done community education, tried to help people see the relationship between animal abuse and interpersonal violence," said Ted O'Keefe, director 311 City Services. "We've come to an awareness that this is a problem, not just in terms of animals, but a problem that can have an impact on our children as well."
     Indeed, concern for dog fighting is growing not out of heightened sympathy for the dogs, but from a recognition that violence against animals can lead directly to violence against humans.
     "This is a child welfare issue," said Brownstein. "I do hear, from people, that this is about animals. `People are shooting each other and this is about dogs.' My response is that in addition to the fact that this is extremely cruel to the animals, it is a fact that when children and teenagers become desensitized and sometimes actually enjoy the sufferings of animals it then becomes a small step for them to commit violence toward their fellow human beings."
     Mueller said he did not fully understand the impact of dog fighting on children until a chilling encounter as principal for a day at a West Side magnet school.
     "I was in a fourth grade classroom — 10-year-olds, 11-year-olds — and the subject came up," he said. "I said, `Let's talk about dog fighting. Who has seen dog fighting?' Every hand shot up. I said, `I don't mean Molly slipping out of the yard.' Every hand. It was unanimous. The kids said it happens all the time, in the alleys."
     Mueller remembers in particular four boys in the class.
     "These four little boys — 10-year-old boys — said that this was so exciting, that there was nothing as exciting in their neighborhood. This is not a violent video game. These children are seeing in first person this incredible cruelty. . . . This is not the cause of violence, but we have this terrible, unrecognized poison in many neighborhoods in Chicago that our children are being exposed to."
     Worse than a child witnessing a strange dog in a fight, Mueller said, is when it is a dog that the child has learned to love, usually while the adults are waiting for it to grow old enough to fight.
     "Pit bulls are used for currency — someone will give a pit bull puppy instead of $20," said Mueller. "They'll raise the puppy. Build trust, and over the course of a year, the dog grows and gets bigger. Then the person in charge of the family — the dad, the cousin — says, `We're going to fight it.' They take it out in the alley to fight. You can imagine these children having this animal they may have developed love and empathy for, out in the alley. All the other neighbors are there. They're cheering. They're screaming. The whole neighborhood. One of the animals loses, which itself is a terrible tragedy. But then there are these 10-year-old kids."
     Dog fighting is a particular problem in the city, but it is certainly not limited to urban areas. Earlier this year, Brownstein consulted Elgin police on dog fighting after officers began receiving complaints.
     "I don't think there is any part of the state that doesn't have some form of dog fighting," said Officer Chuck Thomas, a 16-year veteran of Joliet Township Animal Control. "What police run into most are the backyard fights. But there's also big money in it. It's organized. There are professional fighting rings all over. It's very, very hard (to crack down on)."
     Compounding the problem is the difficulty of locating, never mind gathering evidence on, a dog fight, fleeting encounters which are either hidden from view or easily dispersed at the glimpse of a squad car.
     Just last week, Chicago police Officer Lyteshia Gunn, responding to a report of a dog fight in the 10100 block of South Lafayette, saw a group of neighbors gathered around two teenage boys, each holding a pit bull on a leash.
     By the time she pulled over and got out of her car, the group had scattered. Soon Brownstein and half a dozen other officers were on the scene, which was spread over a block. At the center were two bloodied pit bulls.
     "How long have you had these dogs for?" Brownstein asked some men nearby. "You know there was a fight going on."
     Nobody was telling. The matter took almost a half hour to sort out. Two men were handcuffed and put in a squad car, and two teens, 13 and 14, claiming ownership of the dogs, were also arrested.
     "I don't know nothing about no dog fight," said one of the boys, who said his dog had no name. "I just call it `girl."' Asked about the wounds and the fresh blood glistening on the dog's legs, the boy said: "That ain't blood."
     Several officers stood watching Brownstein conduct the investigation.
     "We get calls on this constantly. It's a daily thing," said Chicago police officer Larry Dotson. "By the time we arrive, unfortunately, the dogs are already gone. Or they'll leave the loser, maimed, as we arrive."
     At least one of Brownstein's superiors described Brownstein as a "loose cannon." But his most vocal critics tend to be the people he has arrested.
     One of them, Doris Blumenberg, of the 10800 block of South Parnell, said Brownstein kicked open a door in a business where she works and seized six dogs without cause.
     "There are so many complaints on this man, it's incredible," she said. "How long has he been doing this? . . . He only takes blacks' and Hispanics' dogs."
     Blumenberg claims she is not a trainer and was not responsible for the dogs. But in court she pleaded guilty of cruelty to animals. And her neighbor said she has personally seen her hauling dead dogs out to the garbage.
     "She was fighting these dogs," said Bernadette Lewis, 31. "She was supposedly training them, but she would leave the dogs in the basement, all the windows boarded up, no air, no food, no water. They were just in there dying. They were eating each other, and all the dead dogs she would put them in garbage bags put them in garbage cans at the side of my house and leave them there for weeks at a time."
     The stench was almost unbearable, Lewis said.
     "It's a money thing," she said. "They bet. We saw it plenty of times. These dogs, all they want is for someone to love 'em and care for 'em. They're not asking to be abused. They don't want nobody to abuse them. It's a shame. It really is a shame."
     While Brownstein's obsessive manner turns some off, others see beyond to what he is trying to do.
     "His social skills aren't the best," said Hedges, from the Fury Friends Foundation. "But he is doing the right thing. He definitely is not crazy, definitely not a menace. Everyone thinks he's the bad guy, but he's risking his life to try to end the No. 1 form of abuse toward these animals. The police department should be supporting him."
     Indeed, the police department stands behind Brownstein. Recently, after several months of working alone, he was assigned a new partner.
     "Obviously, we don't think he's crazy," said Camden. "We think he's very dedicated to what he's doing and takes a personal interest."
     "This is not something that exists solely in Steve Brownstein's head; I wish it was," said Mueller, who calls dogfighting "an epidemic." "The terrible reality, I can tell you, after being at Animal Control for many years, is this is a pervasive poison in almost all the wards in the the city of Chicago. This is not a black issue, not a white issue, not a Hispanic issue. All types, all creeds, are fighting animals out there. They do it for gambling. They do it for fun. It's a terrible problem."
     — Originally published in the Sun-Times, Nov. 5, 2000


Saturday, September 13, 2025

Giorgio Armani and me


 

     I was never a Giorgio Armani kind of guy. First off, I wasn't rich. Second, I wasn't thin — a chunky endomorph in an Armani suit was a contradiction in terms.
     Third I had no taste. I liked corduroy. I wore beige khaki pants and baggy blue Oxford shirts with solid knit neckties loosened to sternum-level. On fancy occasions, I tightened the knot.
     Armani might have been my polar opposite. He defined the greed-is-good 1980s —  unstructured suit jackets of lush fabrics over elegant t-shirts. Money was almost meaningless to me — I cashed my paycheck and keep the currency in a fishbowl on my dresser, digging my hand in and taking some when I was low. Money bought stuff; it wasn't the barometer of my personal worth. That was what writing was for.
     That doesn't mean I didn't benefit from Armani. I did. He enriched my life in a way I hadn't thought about lately until the designer died in Milan Sept. 4, age 91.
     Once, in the late 1980s, I was grinding through my career as a night-shift nobody on the City Desk of the Chicago Sun-Times. I forget what got stuck in my craw — no doubt some passing spat with a long gone editor, stepping on my neck. They all were, in my estimation. "Not having a column," I used to say. "Is like being drowned."
      Not in hazy, abstract way, I'd continue, if anyone were listening. But like someone holding my head underwater and killing me.
   So I went to Marshall Field's — I did that a lot in those days, going to Field's State Street store to waste time, cool down, usually by walking through their furniture department, looking at the gorgeous Chippendale breakfronts and deep leather chairs. Going to Marshal Field's was free, and anonymous, and restorative. Somebody was buying this shit. Somebody was enjoying life. Maybe I would too, someday.
     I don't think I was alone — I recall my friend Cate being somehow involved, a memory she confirms, along its vague parameters.
     We went to the men's section, where I bought this Armani tie. Deep red. With this little yellow and black arrows. I think it cost $70, almost 40 years ago. A fabulous sum, no doubt smoothed by Cate's presence, goading me on: of course I must have that tie. I deserve it. She probably picked it out for me, or at least endorsed my selection.
     Need it I did, and every time I put it on, some of the cachet and power and mystery of Armani was transferred to me, by osmosis. I made its tiny little knot so many times that eventually the red silk wore away and the white lining showed through — not something that happens often with neckties, so either I wore it an awful lot, or it wasn't as high quality as it pretended to be.
     Even unwearable — even if it wasn't worn through, the knot was the size of a cherry, and as out-of-date as spats — I kept the tie. As a talisman. I liked seeing it, hanging there, deep red with that little arrow motif. I had class, to paraphrase Terry Malloy, I was a contender. I was somebody.
     That's a lot to get from a single necktie. Thanks for the assist, Cate. And thanks for the tie, Giorgio. Rest in peace.

Friday, September 12, 2025

Charlie Kirk assassination another tear in the unraveling fabric of American life

The San Martin Palace in Buenos Aires. Once private residences, now the ceremonial headquarters of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

     Buenos Aires is a beautiful city. At least along the tree-lined boulevards of the Retiro. Domed buildings, charming streetlights, couples dancing the tango in pocket parks. "It's like the love child of New York and Paris," I told friends, after visiting.
     So it was unexpected and jarring, on a walking tour, to suddenly have the guide start talking about thousands of Argentinians dropped to their deaths from helicopters during the 1970s "dirty war," after the takeover of a military junta — about secret torture sites and desaparecidos, "the disappeared," people who vanished without a trace into the machinery of state oppression.
     You realize, once again, how fragile society can be. How quickly it can decay under a pretty surface. How easily, despite the Beaux Arts buildings and comfortable cafes, it all can go horribly wrong. How what should be the central, cherished values of any decent culture — respect for life and individual dignity, our ability to work out differences through debate and the ballot box — can quickly dissolve into horror.
     The murder of right-wing commentator Charlie Kirk is both a horror and another warning sign that our vaunted American civil society is hurtling into a ditch whose depth none can predict.
     Not just a human tragedy — Kirk, 31, was married, the father of two young children — but a gear in a larger, grinding global disaster where the clanking mechanism of democracy is seen as no longer acceptable. This assassination happened against a background of norms and laws being shredded, of American soldiers sent into cities, supposedly to combat crime. But it doesn't take a very active imagination to suspect the troops are, as Gov. JB Pritzker has said, there to acclimate Americans to the idea of armed military in our streets. Because though the Trump administration has not shown any special interest in the hard work of fighting crime, it does display a keen desire to paint its adversaries as criminals.
     Before a suspect was even in custody, the usual MAGA screamers were at it. President Donald Trump blamed those calling out his excesses for the killing.
     “For years, those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world’s worst mass murderers and criminals," Trump said. "This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now.”
     The comparison to the Nazis is used because Trump and his supporters say things reminiscent of the Nazis. The Reichstag fire was the pretext for turning Germany into a police state. Kirk's death was immediately put to similar use.
     “It’s time for the Trump administration to shut down, defund, & prosecute every single Leftist organization," close Trump ally Laura Loomer wrote. "We must shut these lunatic leftists down. Once and for all. The Left is a national security threat.”
     If not Kirk, it would be someone else. For days before Wednesday's murder, that awful video of Iryna Zarutska, a Ukrainian refugee stabbed to death on a train in North Carolina, was shown in heavy rotation on right-wing media. Not because of a sudden sympathy for immigrants, but for their eagerness to spotlight certain groups of victims and criminals, part of an endless shriek of grievance, to demonize those who disagree with them and justify their repression.
     This is a very old playbook. In the 1870s, it was called "waving the bloody shirt" — using the losses of the Civil War for an emotional appeal to gain political advantage.

To continue reading, click here.