State Representative Lew Evangelidis deserves to be applauded for taking the initiative and putting himself on the line when he filed a letter with Deval Patrick Thursday requesting the Governor look into the constitutionality of waiving the usual 90-days after a law is passed in order to immediately fill the vacant U.S. Senate position. The Telegram & Gazette (9/24/09) tells the story in a front-page article written by John J. Monahan. Earlier in the week House and Senate Republicans raised the issue of the legality of appointing an interim senator without waiting the specified time period, especially in light of the fact that the House had not garnered the two-thirds needed to enact the emergency provision that had been tacked onto the bill. Because the majority vote was lacking, the Senate did not take up the issue.
Of course we know the rest of the story, how MassGOP, in light of the House rejection of the emergency clause, tried to block the appointment on Friday by challenging the Governor's authority in declaring this an emergency situation. Their request was denied by Judge Thomas Connolly who wrote that the Republicans could not cite any prior cases supporting their claim. Nevertheless, MassGOP and the Republicans did the right thing in pursuing the postponement of the swearing in of Paul Kirk for 90 days, something which appears to be the normal custom in the passage of new laws but was deliberately skirted in order to provide that much sought-after 60th vote for health care reform.
Other State Representatives who signed the letter with Lew Evangelidis should also be commended and thanked: Karyn Polito, Daniel Webster of Hanson and Jeff Perry from Sandwich.
Telegram & Gazette, Thursday, September 24, 2009, "Eyes on Kirk to fill seat" by John J. Monahan, p.A 1. No online article found.
Telegram & Gazette, Saturday, September 26, 2009, "Paul Kirk sworn in as senator" by Jessica Leving, p.A1
http://www.telegram.com/article/20090926/NEWS/909260331/1052
The Boston Globe, Saturday, September 26, 2009, "Judge rejects GOP request to block Senate appointment" by John R. Ellement and Andrew Ryan. p.B3
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/09/26/judge_rejects_gop_request_to_block_kirk_appointment/
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
" a pathetic distraction'" ~ Michael Steele
It appears we have sunk lower in our discourse than I could possibly have fancied, and as a musician and lover of the arts, I have a healthy and very active imagination. I'm not simply referring to a lack of civility and respect in our discussions, as demonstrated by Representative Joe Wilson of South Carolina, I'm talking about something much deeper and insidious, perhaps even planned. On "The Nightly News" on NBC this past Tuesday, former President Jimmy Carter said he thinks racism could be the impetus driving some individuals to protest against President Obama's policies, in particular, his health care bill. Robert Gibbs, White House Spokesman, disassociated and distanced the Obama administration from Carter's outlandish view and for that I am thankful.
Is shouting no longer enough? Must we label people who disagree with us racists? Or perhaps this is another example of that subtle manipulation written about in the previous blog posting (9/15/09)? What if President Carter has an idea to plant doubt in the minds of some White folks who may not be quite secure with themselves in terms of how they feel and relate to African-Americans? What if the same people begin to perceive themselves as possibly having some racially motivated reasons behind their disagreement with the President? Although having perfectly valid arguments, these self-questioners might stop objecting, so as to avoid the appearance of bias.
Again my musicial background comes into play and as I listened to the segment about President Carter on Wednesday's "NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, " I came to the sudden realization that I'd heard this song before -- during the lead-up to the vote on gay marriage. Shortly before the Massachusetts Legislature was to act on this issue, supporters turned it into a civil rights matter and started a campaign in which they portrayed anyone against legalizing gay marriage as a bigot. What happened, as a result of their push, is that thoughtful dissenters stopped voicing their discontent out of fear of being branded a homophobe. Could this be the same tactic now deliberately being used by the Democrats over health care? Can you picture this? By Jimmy Carter's reasoning, shall we say, that anyone who is against President Obama's health care plan is a racist, not a thoughtful citizen who cares deeply about his country and is worried that enacting this pushed through piece of legislation would be a tremendous, costly mistake?
The ultimate irresponsible comment was made by Georgia Representative Hank Johnson before the vote taken Tuesday to formally reprimand Joe Wilson. Rep. Johnson is quoted in the Political Notebook section of The Boston Globe (9/17/09, p.A11). "'I guess we'll probably have folks putting on white hoods again. That's the logical conclusion if this kind of attitude is not rebuked." Lest I leave you with that horrible thought, consider what Michael Steele said (as quoted in the same article) as he brings the voice of reason into the debate. "'This isn't about race. It is about policy. This is a pathetic distraction by Democrats to shift attention away from the President's wildly unpopular government-run health care plan that the American people simply oppose. . . Characterizing Americans' disapproval of President Obama's policies as being based on race is an outrage and a troubling sign about the lengths Democrats will go to disparage all who disagree with them.'"
The Washington Post, Wednesday, September 16, 2009, "Carter Cites 'Racism Inclination in Animosity Toward Obama," by Garance Franke-Ruta, online edition
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/09/15/carter_cites_racism_inclinatio.html
The Washington Post, Wednesday, September 16, 2009, "9/12: Race, the Tea Party Protesters and a Battle of Interpretations" by Garance Franke-Ruta, online edition
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/09/13/912_the_battle_of_interpretati.html?wprss=44
The Boston Globe, Thursday, September 17, 2009, "Carter roils lawmakers by calling Obama critics racist" Political Notebook, p.A11. No link found. After you read the article, flip to page 14 and check out the editorial cartoon. The Boston Globe appears to be aligned with President Carter.
Is shouting no longer enough? Must we label people who disagree with us racists? Or perhaps this is another example of that subtle manipulation written about in the previous blog posting (9/15/09)? What if President Carter has an idea to plant doubt in the minds of some White folks who may not be quite secure with themselves in terms of how they feel and relate to African-Americans? What if the same people begin to perceive themselves as possibly having some racially motivated reasons behind their disagreement with the President? Although having perfectly valid arguments, these self-questioners might stop objecting, so as to avoid the appearance of bias.
Again my musicial background comes into play and as I listened to the segment about President Carter on Wednesday's "NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, " I came to the sudden realization that I'd heard this song before -- during the lead-up to the vote on gay marriage. Shortly before the Massachusetts Legislature was to act on this issue, supporters turned it into a civil rights matter and started a campaign in which they portrayed anyone against legalizing gay marriage as a bigot. What happened, as a result of their push, is that thoughtful dissenters stopped voicing their discontent out of fear of being branded a homophobe. Could this be the same tactic now deliberately being used by the Democrats over health care? Can you picture this? By Jimmy Carter's reasoning, shall we say, that anyone who is against President Obama's health care plan is a racist, not a thoughtful citizen who cares deeply about his country and is worried that enacting this pushed through piece of legislation would be a tremendous, costly mistake?
The ultimate irresponsible comment was made by Georgia Representative Hank Johnson before the vote taken Tuesday to formally reprimand Joe Wilson. Rep. Johnson is quoted in the Political Notebook section of The Boston Globe (9/17/09, p.A11). "'I guess we'll probably have folks putting on white hoods again. That's the logical conclusion if this kind of attitude is not rebuked." Lest I leave you with that horrible thought, consider what Michael Steele said (as quoted in the same article) as he brings the voice of reason into the debate. "'This isn't about race. It is about policy. This is a pathetic distraction by Democrats to shift attention away from the President's wildly unpopular government-run health care plan that the American people simply oppose. . . Characterizing Americans' disapproval of President Obama's policies as being based on race is an outrage and a troubling sign about the lengths Democrats will go to disparage all who disagree with them.'"
The Washington Post, Wednesday, September 16, 2009, "Carter Cites 'Racism Inclination in Animosity Toward Obama," by Garance Franke-Ruta, online edition
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/09/15/carter_cites_racism_inclinatio.html
The Washington Post, Wednesday, September 16, 2009, "9/12: Race, the Tea Party Protesters and a Battle of Interpretations" by Garance Franke-Ruta, online edition
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/09/13/912_the_battle_of_interpretati.html?wprss=44
The Boston Globe, Thursday, September 17, 2009, "Carter roils lawmakers by calling Obama critics racist" Political Notebook, p.A11. No link found. After you read the article, flip to page 14 and check out the editorial cartoon. The Boston Globe appears to be aligned with President Carter.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Subtle Manipulation. . . or Not So Subtle?
Scott Brown is going for the vacant Senate seat and last Saturday publicly stated his intentions to do so. The Boston Sunday Globe covered his announcement, but considering the placement of the article, it appears folks at The Globe are disappointed no Kennedy is running. Above the piece about State Senator Scott Brown is a story about Ted Kennedy Jr. who has not entered the race but is promoting his father's book, True Compass, reviewed in the same publication on pageK6. The Globe focus in terms of the Senate race is clearly on the Kennedy son and the author laments her plight of not having him as a contender for the Seat. Jenna Russell wistfully writes, "For a time, his story seemed destined to unfold in politics." (p.B6)
Coverage on Kennedy begins at the top of page B1 and continues on p. B6 with over half a page more text and pictures. On the front page of the Metro section where the write-up begins, directly above the article about Scott Brown, Ted Kennedy Jr. is pictured wiping a tear from his face as he spoke at his father's memorial service. Instead of publishing a photograph of the person who is putting himself on the line in this election, The Globe included a picture on that same page of someone who is not even involved. I will grant that on p.B4, under the fold, State Senator Brown is shown announcing his candidacy.
WGBH's "Greater Boston" Friday evening program, "Beat the Press" offers analysis of how events of the week were discussed and publicized. On that show (9/11/09) it was brought out that "the media wants a Kennedy to run." How can and do television, newspapers, talk show radio and the internet influence our thinking and in turn, our votes? We need to take care to sort through the mounds of information that are out there in order to get to the kernel of truth in order to make informed decisions.
Boston Sunday Globe, September 13, 2009, "Brown to make US Senate bid" by Peter Schworm, p.B1
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/09/13/scott_brown_to_run_for_us_senate/
Boston Sunday Globe, September 13, 2009, "The Kennedy Mantle/ Son shuns spotlight, but not duty" by Jenna Russell, p.B1
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/09/13/ted_kennedy_jr_shuns_spotlight_but_not_duty_to_fathers_memory/
Boston Sunday Globe, September 13, 2009, "Something to prove" by Matthew V. Storin, p.K6
http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles/2009/09/13/ted_kennedys_memoir_recounts_his_achievements/
Coverage on Kennedy begins at the top of page B1 and continues on p. B6 with over half a page more text and pictures. On the front page of the Metro section where the write-up begins, directly above the article about Scott Brown, Ted Kennedy Jr. is pictured wiping a tear from his face as he spoke at his father's memorial service. Instead of publishing a photograph of the person who is putting himself on the line in this election, The Globe included a picture on that same page of someone who is not even involved. I will grant that on p.B4, under the fold, State Senator Brown is shown announcing his candidacy.
WGBH's "Greater Boston" Friday evening program, "Beat the Press" offers analysis of how events of the week were discussed and publicized. On that show (9/11/09) it was brought out that "the media wants a Kennedy to run." How can and do television, newspapers, talk show radio and the internet influence our thinking and in turn, our votes? We need to take care to sort through the mounds of information that are out there in order to get to the kernel of truth in order to make informed decisions.
Boston Sunday Globe, September 13, 2009, "Brown to make US Senate bid" by Peter Schworm, p.B1
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/09/13/scott_brown_to_run_for_us_senate/
Boston Sunday Globe, September 13, 2009, "The Kennedy Mantle/ Son shuns spotlight, but not duty" by Jenna Russell, p.B1
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/09/13/ted_kennedy_jr_shuns_spotlight_but_not_duty_to_fathers_memory/
Boston Sunday Globe, September 13, 2009, "Something to prove" by Matthew V. Storin, p.K6
http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles/2009/09/13/ted_kennedys_memoir_recounts_his_achievements/
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
A hearing on the Democrats' proposal to change the law, handing power to the governor to choose an interim replacement for the vacant Senate seat, is scheduled for tomorrow at 1:00pm in Gardner Auditorium at the State House. Jennifer Nassour, Chair of the Massachusetts Republican Party, is organizing a protest to take place at the same time, same location. She asks those interested in participating to arrive at 11:30am.
Below is a portion of an unpublished letter Marshall Horwitz submitted to the Telegram & Gazette in December, 2008. Dr. Horwitz wrote this letter in support of State Representative Lew Evangelidis, who at the time, was running for House Minority Leader. In his letter, Marshall points out the need for a two-party system in Massachusetts. Could he have been any more clairvoyant?
With Joe Kennedy out of the running for his uncle's seat, the dynamics of the race change, however one-party dominance remains, allowing the Democrats on Beacon Hill to do nearly whatever they wish. Attend the hearing of the Joint Committee on Election Laws tomorrow.
Dr. Horwitz writes:
The most glaring need for a visible minority opposition can be seen in the events surrounding the 2004 and 2008 presidential election. In 2004, with Sen. John Kerry likely to become President, the state legislature stripped then Governor Romney of his authority to appoint an interim replacement for Senator Kerry’s seat. The Democratically controlled legislature sounded the populist clarion that so much power concentrated in the hands of the governor would deny the people of the Commonwealth the right to chose Senator Kerry’s successor. So a special election would be called. This charade, of course, was done to preclude Governor Romney his option to choose a member of the Republican Party, which he surely would have done. Just a few months ago, with Senator Kerry a potential nominee for the position of Secretary of State, the legislature floated the idea of returning the very same power removed from Governor Romney to Governor Patrick. There can only be one of two reasons for such a reversal of thought. Either the legislature has decided that the voters are not now qualified to make an intelligent decision in a special election, or since Governor Patrick would certainly choose a member of his party to replace Senator Kerry, it would be advantageous to avoid an election where even the remotest chance of a win by a Republican could exist. Clearly the latter is a far more logical explanation. The unchecked legislature once again carries on its own little fiefdom with no regard or respect for the people.
Just a few days ago, Senator Kennedy surrendered his post as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. His ill heath makes it a possibility he might not complete his term which expires in 2012. Certainly the issue of his replacement could come up. And if it does, the strong money is on the legislature launching a pre-emptive strike and passing a bill allowing Governor Patrick to choose an interim senator.
The Boston Globe, Tuesday, September 8, 2009, "Kennedy says no, and race is on" by Frank Phillips, p.A1
Below is a portion of an unpublished letter Marshall Horwitz submitted to the Telegram & Gazette in December, 2008. Dr. Horwitz wrote this letter in support of State Representative Lew Evangelidis, who at the time, was running for House Minority Leader. In his letter, Marshall points out the need for a two-party system in Massachusetts. Could he have been any more clairvoyant?
With Joe Kennedy out of the running for his uncle's seat, the dynamics of the race change, however one-party dominance remains, allowing the Democrats on Beacon Hill to do nearly whatever they wish. Attend the hearing of the Joint Committee on Election Laws tomorrow.
Dr. Horwitz writes:
The most glaring need for a visible minority opposition can be seen in the events surrounding the 2004 and 2008 presidential election. In 2004, with Sen. John Kerry likely to become President, the state legislature stripped then Governor Romney of his authority to appoint an interim replacement for Senator Kerry’s seat. The Democratically controlled legislature sounded the populist clarion that so much power concentrated in the hands of the governor would deny the people of the Commonwealth the right to chose Senator Kerry’s successor. So a special election would be called. This charade, of course, was done to preclude Governor Romney his option to choose a member of the Republican Party, which he surely would have done. Just a few months ago, with Senator Kerry a potential nominee for the position of Secretary of State, the legislature floated the idea of returning the very same power removed from Governor Romney to Governor Patrick. There can only be one of two reasons for such a reversal of thought. Either the legislature has decided that the voters are not now qualified to make an intelligent decision in a special election, or since Governor Patrick would certainly choose a member of his party to replace Senator Kerry, it would be advantageous to avoid an election where even the remotest chance of a win by a Republican could exist. Clearly the latter is a far more logical explanation. The unchecked legislature once again carries on its own little fiefdom with no regard or respect for the people.
Just a few days ago, Senator Kennedy surrendered his post as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. His ill heath makes it a possibility he might not complete his term which expires in 2012. Certainly the issue of his replacement could come up. And if it does, the strong money is on the legislature launching a pre-emptive strike and passing a bill allowing Governor Patrick to choose an interim senator.
The Boston Globe, Tuesday, September 8, 2009, "Kennedy says no, and race is on" by Frank Phillips, p.A1
Saturday, September 5, 2009
Once more Charlie Baker is in the news and again he talks common sense. After being criticized this past Thursday by Deval Patrick's spokesperson, Steve Crawford, for being silent on the issue of appointing an interim for the vacant Senate seat, Charlie Baker was vindicated by an article published in today's Telegram & Gazette, showing the current Governor's office was mistaken with their information. Glen Johnson of the Associated Press revisited an August 28th interview with Charlie Baker in which Mr. Baker offered his opinion about the controversy swirling around Kennedy's proposal to change the law. "'We have news coming out of (the Department of Revenue) that tax collections aren't living up to expectations. We have cities and towns with desperate budget situations with a myriad of proposals before the governor to more effectively manage their affairs. And we have senior-driver legislation that's been stalled for the better part of a year. Those feel like every bit as important an issue that probably deserves expedited attention, yet compared to this Senate discussion, they seem like an afterthought.'" (T & G, 9/5/09, p.A10) From that quotation it is reasonable to conclude that Mr. Baker has a handle on The Big Picture, a quality that defines a responsible and judicious chief executive.
Take a moment on this lazy Labor Day weekend to read Glen Johnson's full report in the T & G.
Telegram & Gazette, Saturday, September 5, 2009, "Succession talk spills into gov.'s race" by Glen Johnson of the Associated Press, p.A10
http://www.telegram.com/article/20090905/NEWS/909050519/1052
Take a moment on this lazy Labor Day weekend to read Glen Johnson's full report in the T & G.
Telegram & Gazette, Saturday, September 5, 2009, "Succession talk spills into gov.'s race" by Glen Johnson of the Associated Press, p.A10
http://www.telegram.com/article/20090905/NEWS/909050519/1052
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Representative Evangelidis To Host "Jordan Levy Show" Today
Tune in to AM 580, WTAG, to listen to State Representative Lew Evangelidis host "The Jordan Levy Show" today from 3:00 until 6:00 pm. Call in with a question at 508/755-0058.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
