BMG endorses these candidates for election in 2010! Help them win - fill in a donation amount and click "Contribute" to be directed to BMG's Act Blue page.
So as we know, the Wonderland dog racing track closed down last week, and either 85 or 150 jobs were lost as a result. I spoke to the head of MA's Rapid Response unit, Ken Messina, on Friday, and he told me that his agency has been working directly with the displaced workers to help them find new jobs. Here's hoping they are successful.
But here's the thing. Did an event that led to the loss of 85-150 private-sector jobs really merit front-page articles in both daily newspapers? Let's look at a few news reports of similar sized, or larger, private-sector job losses over 2009-2010, including Wonderland, and see whether they made the Globe's front page (archived versions of the Herald front page are not available, as far as I can tell). These are arranged in decreasing order of jobs lost, and these are the ones I could find on a quick Google search of the Globe's archives. (If you find more reports, drop them in the comments, and I'll update the table.)
*Story was flagged in the "In the news" column which runs down the left side of the front page.
Based just on the numbers of jobs, it's hard to see why Wonderland merited the front page. The actual fact of the business closing and 85-150 people losing their jobs seems, based on past practice at the Globe, to merit a story in the business pages, with at most maybe a little blurb in the front page's "In the news" column. The Ames Envelope story is particularly interesting: 150 manufacturing jobs lost, and it appears that the story didn't even make the actual Globe, since the report is on one of the Globe's local "your town" pages.
Of the two other stories deemed front-page-worthy, Brigham's made the front page because pretty much everyone who grew up around here remembers going to Brigham's when they were kids. The Hyatt made the front page because Hyatt is an enormously wealthy multinational corporation that thought that saving a relatively very small amount of money (about $7 an hour plus modest benefits) was worth eliminating 100 jobs - and it made the outsourced workers train their replacements. That's a good story ("giant evil corporation beats up on poor women"), so one can understand the editorial decision to front-page it.
Of course, what drove the Wonderland story to the front page wasn't the number of lost jobs, nor was it factors like those that put Brigham's or the Hyatt there. It was the reaction on Beacon Hill, which seems wildly out of proportion to the actual job losses. Did we see all the big players pointing fingers to assign blame when, for instance, Pfizer cut 300 Massachusetts jobs? Did we see the House Speaker demanding an immediate $2 million in state aid for the 150 workers at Ames Envelope who lost their jobs? Did we see state reps spluttering with anger when Sovereign Bank let 265 MA workers go? Nope. (Interestingly, though, we did see the Governor wade into the Hyatt dispute. His action was criticized by Charlie Baker, but did succeed in getting Hyatt to significantly improve their offer.)
The near-hysteria that erupted on Beacon Hill, and from Beacon Hill wannabes (both Baker and Cahill blamed Governor Patrick - surprise!), upon Wonderland's demise tells you quite a lot about the mindset of Beacon Hill and of those who'd like to work there - none of it good. It's difficult to escape the conclusion that it's not about the jobs. It's about the well-connected guys who own the tracks. And that's profoundly depressing.
Thus spake Sir Charlie in a fundraising email, as reported by today's interesting Globe story about the fundraising of the various candidates for Governor.
That quote tells you a lot about Charlie Baker's strategy, which appears to be, basically, to raise as much money as he can, and spend it carpet-bombing hapless TV watchers with endless ads, presumably both positive and negative. Sure, Baker's campaign manager makes an obligatory nod to grassroots campaigning ("The campaign is using technology, similar to that employed by Patrick in 2006, which allows volunteers to organize supporters independently of campaign phone banks and headquarters and feed information to a central database, he said"), but that's clearly not the focus. Team Baker is trying to win this race the old fashioned way: by spending a fortune on pricey consultants ("Baker's biggest outlay is the more than $1 million he has devoted in 2010 to personnel, including at least $87,000 to his media consultants") and on TV ads.
Governor Patrick, by contrast, is going back to what worked so well in 2006: Patrick "is investing heavily in a ground game to reach voters." According to Doug Rubin:
"We believe investing in the field and these one-on-one conversations we have in person are what really helps fuel the race," said Doug Rubin, Patrick's chief strategist.
Good field work, Rubin said, cuts through the confusing clutter of television and radio ads and automated phone calls that proliferate at the end of campaigns.
Also of interest are the raw dollar numbers, helpfully assembled in a Globe graphic:
At the end of the day, this seems to be basically a good-news story for Patrick, with a caveat. The good news is that Baker has spent a crapload of money, and hasn't got much movement in the polls to show for it: he remains down 6-8 points, where he's been for months. Another piece of good news is that Tim Cahill's $3 million war chest remains largely intact, which means that he seems likely to remain a factor, which, as recent polling showed pretty convincingly, is good for Patrick. The caveat, of course, is that Patrick will need to sustain the increased pace of fundraising he's shown in recent weeks (in which he's outraised Baker). The burn rate will be high down the stretch, and Patrick doesn't need to match Baker ad for ad, but he does need to make the air war respectable.
Basically, I think recent events - including Scott Brown's win - prove that, in general, a good grassroots ground game is essential, and beats a top-down air assault if it's part of a well-run campaign. But it doesn't happen by itself. It's not too early to think about what your role will be once the campaign kicks into high gear!
(Not voting for this guy. For anything. Ever. - promoted by Charley on the MTA)
At long last, the Boston Globe is starting to look into the background of Guy Glodis. Today's article by Frank Phillips, entitled Glodis left loan source off his state ethics filing, expands upon the questionable loan that I talked about in my Guy Glodis Top 10 List. I give the Globe free license to use any of the other information in my post to expose Guy Glodis for what he really is.
Can anyone seriously believe that Guy Glodis, with this shady background, is qualified to be State Auditor? I'm sure that Mary Connaughton is licking her chops at the chance to go up against Guy Glodis and his hideous record.
Disclosure: I support Suzanne Bump for Auditor, the one progressive candidate who can beat Guy Glodis and Mary Connaughton.
Wonderland Park, the former greyhound racing facility in Revere, abruptly closed yesterday and laid off 85 employees....
Same story, same day, different newspapers, wildly different numbers. For God's sake, which is it? Did 150 people get laid off, or did 85 people get laid off? They can't both be right.
This has been a major recurring problem throughout this whole dog racing/slot machines/casinos debate: how many jobs are we really talking about? How many will be lost if the tracks close? How many will be gained if we allow slots? If we build a big casino? The pro-gambling crowd's favorite casino number - 15,000 new jobs - has been pretty much demolished by people who looked at it carefully. We saw the same kind of fuzzy math when the dog racing ballot question was on the agenda - numbers offered by the tracks were much, much higher than numbers offered by other sources, including government agencies like the census.
It would be really helpful in debating this kind of issue if people wouldn't bandy about numbers that are anything but reality-based. But in light of the wild disagreement about a fact as seemingly straightforward as how many people got laid off yesterday when Wonderland closed, I'm not holding my breath.
(Very good news for (almost) everyone in Massachusetts! - promoted by David)
Employment numbers were released this morning and Massachusetts continues to add jobs in every month in 2010. Overall jobs in the state grew by 13,200, which include a reduction in government jobs due to the continued reduction in temporary census positions. There was a significant jump in private sector jobs, 19,200, the largest job gain in 20 years.
The private sector added 19,200 jobs, the largest monthly job gain in the private sector over the past twenty years. This marks the sixth straight month for job gains in the Commonwealth, adding 60,200 jobs since December.
Hmmmmm. It's getting more and more difficult to take other candidates seriously when they repeat how Massachusetts is losing jobs.
(The amount of money this country pays for mercenaries in Iraq and Afghanistan really is shocking. - promoted by Bob Neer)
Many of you have probably seen our campaign's TV ad calling for the immediate beginning of withdrawal from Afghanistan. And I'm still the only candidate for Congress in the 10th District who thinks we need to end the war now so we can invest more in job creation and economic recovery here at home.
Yesterday, I read something in the Washington Post (full story here) that made me more determined than ever to fight on this issue. While people here in America are suffering, we're creating the worst kind of jobs and supporting corruption in Afghanistan:
As you no doubt recall, Charlie Baker showed up and spoke at a fundraiser for congressional candidate and kooky lawn-sign enthusiast Bill Hudak about a month ago. We first told you about it here; other media types soon followed.
All of this has become quite uncomfortable for poor Charlie, who would be so happy if he could continue along talking his socially liberal, fiscally conservative game, while playing just enough footsie with the right-wing base of his party to keep them, if not exactly happy, at least from bolting in favor of Tim Cahill or from staying home in November. Things got so bad that Baker, when asked if he had shown up at the fundraiser, actually denied it, before subsequently having to admit that yeah, actually, he was there. Photos don't lie.
All of which led Globie Scot Lehigh (the guy to whom Baker denied being at the fundraiser) to try to get some follow-up on the whole mess. And what he got was shockingly lame, to the point where Lehigh is now openly questioning the content of Charlie Baker's character.
I thought that you would have the grit and the guts to stand up for civility and sanity in the public dialogue. And not to pussyfoot around with insidious kooks.
I'd still like to think so. And yet this episode has made me wonder. So if I've misjudged your character, Charlie, and am expecting too much of you, you have my apology.
Goodness, what could have led Lehigh - a guy who is predisposed to like a lot of what Baker is campaigning on, such as reducing the influence of public employee unions - to such strong statements? More on the flip.
(Great question. One possible starting point: the SJC's opinion in Callahan v. City of Malden, which generally held that PLAs are not OK in run-of-the-mill construction projects, but are OK in big complicated ones. Specifically,
a PLA will not be upheld unless (1) a project is of such size, duration, timing, and complexity that the goals of the competitive bidding statute cannot otherwise be achieved and (2) the record demonstrates that the awarding authority undertook a careful, reasoned process to conclude that the adoption of a PLA furthered the statutory goals.
- promoted by David)
My recent post about Charlie Baker and unions brought out a lot of debate, and even venom, about Project Labor Agreements ("PLA's"), but, in my mind, not much useful information. Every time a debate starts about PLA's, you'll get the usual arguments from folks citing to the Beacon Hill Institute or to the AFL-CIO Building Trades Council - no surprise which side either of those folks are on. They have their agendas which, I think, blind them to what makes good public policy. Nothing wrong with advocates doing that -- but it really doesn't help the rest of us figure out what makes good public policy.
Given that Charlie Baker is making PLA's a big campaign issue, maybe it's time to have an intelligent discussion about PLA's, without the hyerbole from the advocates.
I was one of the lucky ones that got in to the governor debate that was hosted by MassINC yesterday. The crowd was huge and growing when i got there and by the time a friend of mine arrived after it started, they were already at capacity. I am guessing that many more caught the news clips, but not the full debate.
(Bumped for the update - audio added at the end of the post. - promoted by David)
Jeff Perry admitted a while back on Howie Carr's radio show that he visited convicted child molester Scott Flanagan in prison. Audio here (at 9:14):
CARR: So you did visit Flanagan in the can, then...
PERRY: I did. I wanted to be able to confront him and, you know, and to hear from him what really happened. And he did confess to me, you know, after, of course.
OK, that's a (faintly) plausible explanation, if an odd one. But on his radio show yesterday, apparently, Carr repeatedly asked Perry whether, after Flanagan was released from prison, Perry hired Flanagan to work in his convenience store in Sandwich. I didn't hear it, and the audio isn't online yet. But numerous reports of the conversationreflect that Perry danced around the question, and finally said that he didn't remember. Here's one blogger's recollection of the conversation (typos corrected):
Perry was on Howie Carr's program at 6:30 last night, and Howie asked Perry the same question six times:
"Is it true you hired ex-con Flanagan to work for you at your Sandwich store after he got out of jail?"
Six times Perry would not answer, saying he couldn't remember (hiring the man who went to prison instead of him).
A constituent called in and said, "Perry, you are either stupid or a liar, and I know you're not stupid."
He couldn't remember? Really? I'm starting to get awfully worried about Perry's memory.
Like I said, this story isn't over yet. I'll update if and when Howie posts the audio.
UPDATE: OK, the audio is up - you can hear the whole interview here. Short summary: Carr did indeed ask Perry several times whether Perry had ever hired Flanagan to work in his convenience store. Perry specifically said that he did not hire him in Florida, which is where Perry was when Flanagan was released, but he was fairly vague about whether he had hired him at one of his Massachusetts businesses such as the convenience store in Sandwich. He claims to be checking payroll records.
And yes, there was a caller who told Perry that he was either stupid or a liar. Here's some relevant audio from the show (I've pasted two parts together - there's a short gap between the two segments at about 1:30).
You may have noticed that a few new ads are appearing on the site - a new tall one in the left-hand sidebar, a new long one in the footer, and a new square(ish) one after the first post on the front page and at the end of posts on their own pages. Now, we don't like ads any more than you do. But the fact is that ads are one of the few ways we have of bringing in money, and we do need money to maintain and (hopefully) improve the site, as well as to help justify the many hours we spend working on it. So I hope you'll tolerate the ads ... in fact, I hope you'll click through them when they look mildly interesting to you! Click-throughs help us look more appealing to advertisers, which helps us sell more and better ads, which helps us make the site better, which helps everyone.
As always, thank you so much for your support of BMG!
Today's Globe (front page, below the fold) shows that MA-10 congressional candidate Jeff Perry's record at the Wareham Police Department wasn't so great after all. The testimony, taken during the trial arising out of his subordinate's illegal strip-searches of teenaged girls, is pretty devastating. And this is based only on a partial transcript - there is almost certainly more to come.
Congressional candidate Jeffrey D. Perry, a former officer in the Wareham Police Department, was reprimanded by supervisors for being untruthful and was passed over for promotion because of it, according to sworn testimony of the police chief at the time.
The chief, Thomas A. Joyce, testified in civil lawsuits that he gave Perry a written reprimand after Perry broke a radar gun and failed to tell the "whole truth" about how it happened. Joyce also said that Perry played what was called "the old red light game," in which Perry purposely tripped a red light to catch drivers going through it, "creating motor vehicle violations," according to the testimony, which was obtained by the Globe.
When Perry was in line to be promoted from patrol officer to sergeant in 1989 or 1990, Joyce chose someone lower on the list who had more experience and whom Joyce said he trusted more. "Perry had not been 100 percent truthful to me in the past," Joyce testified.
In addition, during a background check before Perry was hired by Wareham police, his former boss said Perry told "a lot of bull tales" and should not be trusted with a gun, Joyce testified.
This, despite Perry's repeated assertions that he "left the department in good standing." That may be technically true. But that he received a written reprimand for dishonesty; that he was passed over for a promotion for that same reason; that he apparently has a history of toying with the truth; oddly, Perry hadn't mentioned any of that before.
Of course, this is not the first time that Perry's increasingly unreliable memory has been at variance with reality. And this story isn't over, folks - not by a long shot. The Globe today reports that it "obtained a partial transcript" of Chief Joyce's deposition. Sooner or later, though, all the transcripts will come out. For the sake of the Mass. GOP, I hope it's sooner, so that they can toss Perry under the bus and line up behind Joe Malone, who, though not without his problems, has been vetted more thoroughly than Perry apparently had.
but inspired by true emotion, I actually wrote an email to the White House tonight:
Dear Mr. President:
I was brought to tears by the national news this evening. I am fortunate enough to not to have been directly affected by 9/11/01. But we were all attacked. And yet I do not find the symbol of the crescent and the star fearful or offensive. We need your leadership to help people understand that opposing this mosque is exactly the wrong lesson to learn from 9/11. ABC News carried a montage of folks opposing the mosque simply because it is Muslim, and I did not recognize the country that was portrayed there. Please use your gifts to inspire people to stand up for our better selves.
Now that this subject has become the designated Silly Summer Controversy for the dog days of August (beating out a late surge by Jet Blue man, with Fox's help), it is worth adding a dose of reality: "The 'Ground Zero Mosque' that we have been and will be hearing so much about is not exactly a mosque, nor is it at Ground Zero. Here's why: you can't see Ground Zero -- the former site of the World Trade Center -- from the future site of the Cordoba House."
In addition, the building planned for 45 Park Place is a cultural center with a prayer room -- not a single-purpose house of worship for Muslims, which is probably what we should reserve the word "mosque" for. As Haberman also explains, "That it may even be called a mosque is debatable. It is designed as a multi-use complex with a space set aside for prayer -- no minarets, no muezzin calls to prayer blaring onto Park Place."
Sledge offers the following video record of his trip from the actual Ground Zero to the former Burlington coat shop, first sped up to 4X speed then slowed down to 1X:
Looks like Californians will have to wait a few more months to hop on board the gay marriage bandwagon. Here is the text of the order, from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Appellants' motion for a stay of the district court's order of August 4, 2010 pending appeal is GRANTED. The court sua sponte orders that this appeal be expedited pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 2. The provisions of Ninth Circuit Rule 31-2.2(a) (pertaining to grants of time extensions) shall not apply to this appeal. This appeal shall be calendared during the week of December 6, 2010, at The James R. Browning Courthouse in San Francisco, California.
The previously established briefing schedule is vacated. The opening brief is now due September 17, 2010. The answering brief is due October 18, 2010. The reply brief is due November 1, 2010. In addition to any issues appellants wish to raise on appeal, appellants are directed to include in their opening brief a discussion of why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of Article III standing. See Arizonans For Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 66 (1997).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Interesting that the Court, on its own initiative, ordered the issue of standing to be briefed - clearly, the Court is concerned about it. Also, it's good news that the briefing is expedited. Still, it's too bad that the stay was granted at all.
Well, looks like Charlie Baker doesn't think Bill Hudak is such a bad guy after all. On WRKO this morning, Tom Finneran asked Baker about the Hudak brouhaha (failing to mention, unfortunately, Hudak's penchant for creative lawn signage). Baker hemmed and hawed a bit, about how he goes to lots of fundraisers and all, but finally announced that he was "hoping" for a lot of "change" in both the state and federal legislatures, and that this "change" would be "a good thing, not a bad thing." He never comes right out and says he endorses Hudak, but the context was pretty clearly Hudak's run for Congress, so it's hard to see how Baker, having said what he said, would nonetheless not want to see Bill Hudak unseat John Tierney.
Here's the audio (full interview is here). You be the judge.
(A good find! While perusing the BakerForGov Flickr page, I was amused to discover that the Baker campaign has posted evidence of its attendance at the Hudak fundraiser on its own page! Funny stuff. - promoted by David)
The Globe is reporting that a photo of a person wearing a T-shirt comparing President Obama to Hitler was approved and added to Baker's official Flickr photo sharing account.
photo of the woman wearing the T-shirt -- which has pictures of Obama and Hitler and a swastika -- is further indication that Baker is courting his party's fringe elements. The wording on the shirt says: ''HITLER gave good speeches and had his own symbol too.'' Next to Obama's photo is the president's campaign logo.
See for yourself.
At this point the Globe only had comments from Gorka who said that they have removed the offensive photo and he continued to take swipes at the Patrick campaign. You know what, forget Gorka, who gives a crap about Gorka. Charlie Baker needs to address this and his speech at Hudak's event.
At a rally in Gloucester about a year ago, congressional candidate Bill Hudak trumpeted his support for Congressman Joe Wilson's disgraceful "You lie" moment during President Obama's 2009 health care address. Hudak praised Wilson because, he said, Obama is determined to cover illegal aliens under health care reform. Even though he isn't. Hudak then launched into a classic right-wing paranoid rant about illegal immigration. Good times.
A couple of amusing items in the Jeff Perry saga, to add to the not-at-all amusing ongoing contretemps over Perry's still unclear role in his subordinate officer's illegal strip-searches of teenage girls.
Dumb. Back in the 1990s, after fleeing quitting the Wareham police department, Perry was trying to make it as a businessman, or something. (This included being a coffin salesman in Florida. Seriously. His preferred phrasing: "funeral home supply" - listen in at 11:30.) So he thought, hey, I could use "more management skills." And what better way to get them than a quickie bachelor's degree from an online diploma mill?
"I found what appeared to be a legitimate correspondence class that involved reading books, sending in papers and having them graded," Perry said. "I was a victim of a scam like a lot of other people." ...
A cached version of Perry's campaign website from eight years ago states he was awarded a bachelor's degree in business administration with a minor in management and had a grade point average of 3.8 at Columbia State.
But according to 2004 testimony before the U.S. Senate from a former Columbia State employee, all students had to do to receive a bachelor's, master's or doctoral degree was pay a fee, then complete a textbook summary and write a short paper.
The degree was mailed to students in roughly a month, the employee said.
"Columbia State University had no faculty, qualified or otherwise, no curriculum, no classes, no courses, no tests, no one to grade tests, no educational facilities, no library, and no academic accreditation," testified Laurie Gerald, who pleaded guilty to mail fraud for her role in helping to operate the fake university. "There was nothing that could pass for 'academic rigor' at Columbia State University."
Now, I can understand being taken in by slick advertising, paying your money, and then getting a crappy product and an obviously worthless diploma. Happens to lots of people; they are annoyed that they've been duped, but they chalk it up to posterity and move on. But here's where this story gets a bit scary for a would-be congressman:
When state Rep. Jeffrey Perry first ran for office in 2002, the Sandwich Republican said on his website that he had earned two bachelor's degrees. But one of those academic achievements is now absent from his resume....
The 46-year-old Perry, who said yesterday he doesn't remember what year he signed up at Columbia State, also said he had no idea the school was a fraud until someone pulled him aside in 2002 after he included his Columbia State degree on his campaign website. As a small business owner, he was trying to get more management skills, he said.
In other words, Perry went through this obviously bogus course that involved summarizing a textbook and acquiring a bachelor's degree "in roughly a month," and then, instead of realizing that he'd been ripped off, he actually touted the degree on his campaign website, until someone else alerted him to the painfully obvious fact that he'd been scammed.
Is this really the guy you want representing you in Congress?
Dumber. Our friends at RMG report that Congressman Lamar Smith (R-TX) has endorsed Perry's bid for Congress, an endorsement that Perry has gleefully accepted. Lamar Smith is ... well, just check out this clip, from about a year ago, in which Smith explained why he was organizing the "Media Fairness Caucus," a Republican gang designed to combat that goofy old bugaboo, the librul media.
Wow. "Liberal media bias" is a greater threat to America than economic devastation or even a terrorist attack. That's not "radical," Congressman. That's just stupid. (You can watch the whole interview here.)
Take note, residents of MA-10: Perry is casting his lot with the 14th-Amendment-trashing (too much even for Jeff Jacoby), nutty Texas Republican wing of his party. And again I ask: is this really the guy you want representing you in Congress?
My name is Ray Medeiros and I am a candidate running for State Representative, in the 9th District, Bristol. I reside in Dartmouth with my wife, Angela, and our two young children. I am compelled to enter this race because I believe more is needed to assist the hard working people who comprise our district and I have a plan to make it happen.
As you no doubt recall, Charlie Baker showed up and spoke at a fundraiser for congressional candidate and 
