Politics Etc.

So nice for al Qaeda to get a good look at you, Mr. Addington

Classic example of a Democrat's misplaced contempt -- during a House subcommittee hearing on Thursday, Cheney chief of staff David Addington told Bay State congressman William Delahunt that he's reluctant to discuss interrogation techniques against terrorist suspects due to the possibility that al Qaeda may monitor C-SPAN.

To which Delahunt responded, "Well, I'm sure they are watching, and I'm glad they finally have a chance to see you, Mr. Addington" -- See here.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/26/david-addington-i-cant-talk-about-torture-because-al-qaeda-may-be-watching-cspan/

5 comments »

Romney explains it away

Speaking to a receptive audience of more than 100 Republican candidates and party officials at the Chatham Bars Inn in March 2004, then-Gov. Mitt Romney described good advice he'd gotten from another politician.

It came by way of Senator Bob Bennett, R-Utah, whom Romney befriended while running the 2002 Winter Olympics. 

 "Never explain," Bennett told Romney.  "When you explain, you're losing."

As an example, Romney cited the difficulties of Democratic state senate candidate Angus McQuilken, a former chief of staff running to fill the vacancy left by the departure of his boss, Cheryl Jacques. A special election was held shortly before the "Spring Training 2004" conference in Chatham organized by the state GOP.

In an attempt to show how he differed from Republican opponent Scott Brown, McQuilken had said that unlike Brown, he did not oppose state funding of sex change operations for prison inmates.

"This is what is known as a gift," Romney told the audience, setting off gales of laughter. McQuilken compounded "that gift with another gift," Romney added, "which is he always explained what he meant by that."

 McQuilken lost the special election to Brown and it was announced at the dinner where Romney spoke that McQuilken had decided against seeking a recount (the photo shows Romney with then-state representative Tom George of Yarmouth at the Chatham Bars Inn on the opening night of the conference).

Optimism ran high that evening in Chatham, but things did not go well for the state GOP in the fall. The Republicans lost ground from an already meager presence on Beacon Hill. It soon became apparent that Romney was unlikely to seek a second term. Sure enough, little more than a year after the 2004 election, Romney announced he would not run for reelection. He left office in January 2007 and began campaigning in earnest for the presidency.

And it wasn't long after Romney began running for president that he began ignoring the advice from Bennett.

Things went well for a few months, mainly due to Romney's wealth, favorable press coverage and impressive poll numbers - all of which combined to make Romney the foremost target of his GOP opponents well into the fall of 2007.

It didn't take long for his critics to seize upon Romney's Achille's heel - the considerable distance his views on abortion, gay rights, Ronald Reagan, etc., had taken since he ran for governor in 2002 and against Ted Kennedy eight years earlier. Romney's repeated attempts to explain what he meant by his earlier statements did more to compound than clarify. Anyone who doubts this, or who seeks confirmation, need only google "Romney flip flop" for abundant fodder.

Many of the same criticisms were leveled against Romney when he ran for governor against Democrat Shannon O'Brien in 2002. But by the time Romney ran for president five years later, a technological innovation was changing the way voters responded to politicians - YouTube.

Many of the same criticisms were leveled against Romney when he ran for governor against Democrat Shannon O'Brien in 2002. But by the time Romney ran for president five years later, a technological innovation was changing the way voters responded to politicians - YouTube.It's one thing to read how a politician's views have morphed over the years, it's another to see it, in a readily accessible format, especially when the earlier views are juxtaposed next to those that eventually followed. The effect can be devastating, as Romney supporters learned. Beauty killed the beast, the man said at the end of "King Kong." YouTube probably doomed whatever chances Romney had of becoming president.

In fairness to Romney, he is hardly the only person whose views have changed since 1994, particularly on abortion. Mine began shifting at some point after I witnessed the birth of my two children, and I doubt I'm alone in that regard.

Another claim made by Romney in 1994 that came back to haunt him, as stated during a debate with Kennedy and reported by the Boston Herald - "I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush." 

Just as the easiest way to anger a liberal is to praise Joe McCarthy, few things irritate conservatives more than disdain for Reagan. But hearing Romney criticized for this during the campaign, I was struck by the timing of his remark - late October, 1994.

How many people remember that when Reagan publicly disclosed he was suffering from Alzheimer's, he waited until a day after the 1994 election, lest it affect the outcome if announced earlier? An election, not incidentally, that was tantamount to a fourth Reagan term, with its GOP landslide in Congress, along the lines of Bush Sr. getting elected in 1988 a fair approximation of the electorate re-electing Reagan to a third term.

My point is, Reagan did not possess nearly the stature in 1994, before an election his legacy helped decide, as he's acquired since.  And the unforgettable sight of Mikhail Gorbachev sitting next to Maggie Thatcher at Reagan's funeral probably has something to do with that.

In retrospect, Romney's bid for the presidency was probably hobbled from the start for a single reason - his Mormon faith. I remember an early poll in which a high percentage of respondents, between 15 and 20 percent, said they would not vote for Romney because of this alone. To many evangelical Christians, Mormonism isn't a faith, it's a cult. Once again, Romney felt compelled to explain, and it did little to reverse his campaign's decline. By then, his opponents had successfully tagged him as an inveterate flip-flopper, a man willing to say anything to get elected.

But I wonder if the Romney we saw on the campaign over the last year was close to the genuine article - it's the earlier versions who weren't. I'm reminded of an anecdote I read about President Bush attending a class reunion at Yale.

One of Bush's classmates had undergone a sex change operation since their days as students in New Haven (not sure if it was one of those taxpayer-funded-while-incarcerated versions). Shaking hands with Bush, the person said, you may not remember me, I used to be so-and-so, and mentioned the earlier name.

To which Bush responded - and now you've returned as yourself.

(photo credit, Pat Brooks)

11 comments »

Hillary to Obama: Who you callin' ho?!

 (photo credit, Time magazine, for photo at left, and at right, front page of today's New York Daily News ...)

4 comments »

Is it time for Bill D. to befriend Bill W.?

Is it my imagination, I wondered, or has Congressman Bill Delahunt just stumbled his way through another speech?

Granted, it wasn't as bad as the last time I heard him during the dedication ceremony of the John F. Kennedy statue in Hyannis last May.

I recorded the speeches that day for posterity and later listened again as Delahunt not only stumbled through his remarks but slurred more than a few.

Will anyone who attended soon forgot his epic faux pas when introducing Sen. Edward Kennedy as  "... the senior senator from Massachusetts, our Senator, our man of the sea here in Hyannis ... Jack ... Ted Kennedy!"

After the embarrassed laughter died down, a gracious Kennedy quipped that it could have been worse. "The last time he introduced me, he called me the 'senior citizen of Massachusetts,' " Kennedy said - though I doubt he was joking.

As someone who's written about Bay State politics for more than a decade, I've had plenty of time to observe Delahunt. Once was the time I considered myself an admirer, someone who not only liked Delahunt but respected him. But that was lifetimes ago and not just because of Cape Wind, where we hold opposing views.

You can't write about politics for long without hearing unseemly things about its participants, most often provided by their opponents. Sometimes what you hear is relevant to the jobs they hold, at least in your judgment; more often it's not.

I've heard for years that Delahunt won't shy from a cocktail or three after a hard day at the rostrum. Based on what I've seen and heard in recent months, I'm wondering if he's become less shy.

I write this without passing judgment on the man. I find it abhorrent for anyone to sneer that a person is just a drunk. Wrong - he or she may have a serious problem, but one that need not consign anyone to humiliation, prison or an early grave.

Those who've also seen Delahunt over the years know just what I'm referring to. In the heat of a campaign, with a close election bearing down, there's no one you'd rather want on your team. He's a partisan to his core and can reel off a barn-burner of a speech with the best of them.

As for the more mundane aspects of the job,  however, the endless rubber-chicken dinners for grasping groups of people who always want something - it's always something! - that's when the facade cracks and the real man shows through.

Case in point: Delahunt's remarks last month in Fall River before renewable energy entrepreneurs. At one point he mentioned that 70,000 so-called "flex vehicles" running on gasoline and ethanol are to be found in Massachusetts.

"And if you own one of these vehicles you probably aren't even aware of it because there's only one station in the state where you can go to fill up," Delahunt said (and his remarks that night were also recorded, to ensure accuracy in anything written about him).

" ... you probably aren't even aware of it ..."? In other words, if I'm driving one of the few cars in Massachusetts that runs on goat piss, I'm oblivious about driving to the only gas station in the state that sells goat piss ... ?

On the contrary, Congressman - I am more likely to be all too aware of driving that type of vehicle, an awareness that "probably" coincided with my purchase of it. 

It's not just the occasional gaffes - heck, we all make mistakes and mine have been duly chronicled, most often by me. It's also Delahunt's molasses-in-January speaking style, the faux-dramatic pauses for effect, those boyo tributes to political coat-catchers, his keen and abiding affection for cliche.

When speaking on a subject he abhors but must feign enthusiasm - offshore renewable energy comes to mind - Delahunt lards his remarks with baggage to run out the clock. Hardly a paragraph passes without the superfluous "if you will" or "in terms of," the lawyer's tic of "per se," and my favorite, references to his hometown as "Quincy, Massachusetts," lest anyone in the audience confuse it with Quincy, Madagascar. 

Fortunately for Delahunt, he is not confronting this issue, if he ever does or ever needs to, by virtue of a judge's order. But all too often that's what it takes, or an equally compelling mandate from the homefront, for a person with a drinking problem to get help.

 I write this not just as a journalist; more importantly, I'm a constituent, as are my wife and two children. All of us, and every other person in the 10th District stretching from the Cape and islands to Quincy, Massachusetts, are deserving of a representative in Congress who is lucid, engaged and eager to jump in the game - instead of one just showing up.

(photo credit, The Huffington Post)

8 comments »

Meet John Kerry, soon to be former senator

A suggestion to any Democrats still grieving John Kerry's narrow loss to George W. Bush in 2004 - watch the YouTube videos of University of Florida police who tasered a student yesterday asking awkward questions of an elected official - and Kerry's feeble bleating in response.

How many other people were reminded of Mick Jagger reacting along the same lines after Hells Angels hired by the Rolling Stones for security at Altamont in December 1969 killed a concert-goer in view of the stage.

The analogy is not a casual one. Altamont, a fitting epitaph for the '60s and its wrenching violence, drugs and madness, took place only 18 months prior to Kerry becoming a public figure when he testified before Congress in April 1971, a veteran clad in camouflage protesting the Vietnam War.

"How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake," Kerry asked, a question that has hung over every American military intervention since.  Thirteen years later, I voted for Kerry when he first ran for Senate, my vote based almost entirely on that question.

This isn't the first time Kerry has backed down when confronted with a defining moment. In the 2004 campaign when Swift Boat veterans accused Kerry of inflating his war record, he chose to go windsurfing before belatedly trying to refute the claims. 

When it comes to the Cape Wind project, proposed for the waters of Nantucket Sound where Kerry so enjoys recreation, Kerry remains virtually the only person in the state he represents without an opinion on the matter. He's still awaiting that final environmental report from the federal government. And once it's released, mark my words, Kerry will still find a way to play Hamlet, lest he incur the wrath of Ted Kennedy's Claudius.

Many Vietnam veterans remain angry at Kerry for maligning them as babykillers when he testified before Congress in 1971. Last year Kerry succeeded in alienating yet another generation of soldiers by "joking" that they were too dumb to avoid military service in Iraq. The uproar prompted Kerry to announce he was not running for president in 2008. By then only two people in America thought he had a prayer of winning - Kerry and the second of the two very wealthy women he's married. 

With his latest example of shrinkage, Kerry has made himself more vulnerable than ever as he runs for re-election next year. Kerry could once count on solid backing from soldiers and veterans - his "band of brothers" - if only because he'd actually served in Vietnam, in marked contrast to the stateside National Guard stints and deferments of Bush the younger, Quayle, Cheney, etc.

Kerry could also once count on support from college students, who tend to vote overwhelmingly Democratic anyway and saw in him an iconic figure of distant dissent. No longer - Kerry's lost them both, and with them any chance of genuine influence in politics.

If the man had a clue he'd announce within months he's not seeking re-election and spare us his windy exhortations on this and that. But he won't because Kerry is clueless, as this latest episode further confirms.

My advice to Bay State Republicans as they gear up to challenge him - put up a fight and maybe this former warrior will show up.

(photo credit, Granitegrok.com)

130 comments »

Every day is September 12

Amazing photo, isn't it?

I took it from a chartered flight in July 1993, a bachelor party for my future brother-in-law who's now a brother to me.

We flew due west from Plymouth to the Hudson River on a clear day in summer, then south to Manhattan, not far from the flight path taken by Flight 11, the first of the planes to strike on another crystalline morning eight years later.

Flying over the Hudson River with the New York skyline to our left, I remember thinking how odd it was that we could come so close to the skyscrapers, and that a bomber plane had slammed into the Empire State Building toward the end of World War II. That was my first reaction on Sept. 11, 2001, as I awakened my 2-year-old son and my wife called up to say that a plane had hit the World Trade Center. Must be another military plane, I thought. Turns out it was.

After passing Lower Manhattan, the skyscrapers looming above us and looking close enough to touch, we circled twice around the Statue of Liberty. I took the photo shown here during one of those circuits. From this perspective, we could see what the doomed souls on Flight 175 later saw in the last seconds of their lives. Minutes earlier, as we flew over the George Washington Bridge and approached Manhattan, we saw what those on Flight 11 last witnessed before barbarians snuffed out their lives.   

I keep this photo on the wall of my office, not far from photos of my family and other relatives and cherished friends and wonderful places I've had the good fortune to visit. I keep this photo as a reminder that the more we lull ourselves into complacency about the threat posed by militant Islam, the more likely the wolves will strike again.

 As they say in AA, the further you get from your last drink, the closer you are to the next.

2 comments »

Junk democracy in action

That Middleboro residents voted in favor of a casino in their town comes as no surprise. What's appalling is the way it was decided.

Yesterday's vote was held after a three-hour outdoor meeting  in 90-degree heat. With parents not allowed to bring their children. With no one allowed to vote by absentee ballot. Any resident wanting to take part in the most important decision in town history had to wait hours in sweltering heat before even getting a chance to vote. Didn't we do away with this sort of thing in the Deep South decades ago?

According to the news reports last night on channels 4, 5 and 7, many elderly residents wanted to attend but were scared off by the specter of sitting through hours of debate in stifling humidity. The voting mechanism approved by town officials effectively excluded many seniors from taking part. 

The same goes for parents -- several were quoted expressing dismay that children were prohibited from the meeting, which kept many other residents from taking part. Oddly, none of coverage I saw yesterday and today cited the rationale for the ban on children.

My wife suggested it probably had to do with "safety," an all-purpose rationale for so many things dealing with children. But "safety" from what -- sunstroke? It's almost as though the casino has already opened. Kids aren't allowed in them either.

This is not to say the plan to bring a casino to Middleboro is valid or flawed; I've got mixed feelings about it. But it was only months ago the idea was first proposed, and already an agreement is in place. What's the hurry? The wording of the 23-page proposal wasn't even publicly released until Tuesday -- all of four days before the vote.

After the results were announced, a casino supporter lauded the outcome as an example of "democracy in action." An opponent's take was more accurate -- it was more like "a shotgun wedding." The whole thing appeared rushed and more than a little desperate.

It's not as though local officials had no other way to go. A day-long special election would have been a better route, after several debates and public forums in the days or weeks before it. All informational events preceding the election could have been broadcast over local cable, allowing those who couldn't attend the sessions to follow along at home, at times of their own choosing.

As for the vote itself, a special election could have been held, as they often are for overrides or to fill unexpected vacancies, with polls open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Residents could have voted in minutes, not hours, and at their own convenience.

Just as the outcome of this alleged exercise in democracy comes as no surprise, so won't the inevitable -- and justified -- legal challenge to the way it was conducted.  

24 comments »

Waiting until the threat is imminent

Deja vu all over again in the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre.

Campus police and school administrators neglected to shut down the campus after the first two murders. On the face of it, a criminally stupid decision since the whereabouts of the gunman were not known. Then again, despite the obvious carnage that had occurred, there appeared no threat of further violence to warrant such a drastic decision as cancelling classes.

Before the rampage, the gunman had been involuntarily committed to a mental institution as a threat to himself and others. But apparently the threat was not of the "imminent" variety, and the future mass murderer was released.

Instructors at Virginia Tech were alarmed by the graphic violence in Cho's writings, but his prose could hardly be considered an imminent threat. School administrators decided against removing him from the school. After all, the campus had a well-trained, well-armed police force whose officers would respond quickly in the unlikely event of a rampage.

Many of Cho's classmates, wary of his anti-social behavior, stopped going to classes to avoid him. This, however, was another example of a perceived threat not rising to the clear, always recognizable standard of imminence. Hence, nothing more needed to be done.

Cho is alleged to have harrassed female students, but this was perceived as not constituting an imminent threat. Beyond a warning for Cho to keep his distance from the women, further action was not warranted.

More than a decade after the Brady Bill mandated background checks for gun buyers, Cho bought two handguns in less time than it would take Jiffy Lube to change the oil in his car.  Yet again, Cho's actions fell considerably short of constituting an imminent threat. 

Intervention -- forceful, even -- at any of the moments mentioned above may have eventually saved dozens of lives, but it surely would have also created another set of problems -- claims of racism, swift litigation, indignant intervention by the ACLU and NRA, a steep financial settlement for the aggrieved. 

No, better to fall back on the conventional wisdom of recent years that it is preferable to wait until a threat is imminent, a staggering body count to follow the only indisputable arbiter, than to do much of anything at all  -- pre-emptively.

15 comments »

Yes, Emma, you can be president

One day in February, my daughter returned from kindergarten full of questions after that day's lesson on the presidents.

With pride in her curiosity, I answered as many as I could, then asked her one -- would she like to be president someday?

No, Emma said dejectedly. Only boys can be president.

Words to make a father consider moving heaven and earth to help elect Hillary Clinton.

When I was a boy, it never crossed my mind -- never -- that I could not be president because of my sex. Just the opposite -- being male meant my prospects for such attainment were infinitely greater than those of my classmates wearing skirts.

That my 6-year-old daughter believes such a limitation exists is understandable. Looking at a photo array of our 43 presidents, she sees an unbroken line of dozens of men stretching back more than two centuries, an anachronistic lack of diversity no longer allowed by legal mandate or politically correct coda.

But in the last several months, and in recent days, two people rose to higher office who would surely have been held back when I was Emma's age -- Deval Patrick and Therese Murray.

I distinctly recall the morning in April 1975, the same month then-President Gerald Ford visited Lexington and Concord for the ongoing Bicentennial observances, when one of the Boston papers carried a jaw-dropping, front-page photo of a black man under attack by a white mob in City Hall Plaza. One of the assailants was literally skewering the victim with the staff of a flagpole, oblivious to the literal and symbolic obscenity of his actions.

Several years later, in July 1980, a 14-year-old black youth was shot and killed by Boston police after a late-night chase. Levi Hart had apparently stolen a car and tried to flee on foot when the vehicle spun out of control and stalled near Kenmore Square, where I had moved from an apartment a month earlier.

As I recall, police claimed that Hart, unarmed and weighing about 100 pounds, was running from two officers, their weapons drawn, when he inexplicably turned to confront them.  A struggle ensued and Hart ended up getting shot. And, as I recall, the bullet that killed him entered the back of his head.

Safe to say I still have doubts about the official version. Then again, 14-year-old black boys are so often leaden of foot, especially compared to burly Boston cops.

Back when I was a few years  older than Emma, my mother wondered aloud about running for the Legislature. She was motivated by disdain for the incumbent, a back-bencher she dismissed as "a pol."

What's a pol, I asked.  A worthless politician, she said, or words to that effect, a seat-warmer ("a what ...?) Someone elected merely to collect a paycheck, and whatever other goodies may flow his way.

I liked the word immediately and have held it tight ever since.

She never did run for office and didn't tell me why, but I think I know. It would have been a hopeless flight of fancy for a divorced mother in a heavily Catholic state nearly 40 years ago. My mom knew more about the day to day concerns of her potential constituents than the pol representing them ever could (see how handy that word is?), but no matter -- she'd been born at the wrong time, with the wrong anatomy. Let's hear from the next male candidate, shall we?

Terry Murray, 57, was first elected to the state Senate in 1992, a month after my mother, another divorced parent and realtor, died of colon cancer at 56. They never met, not that I'm aware of, but I'm sure they would have liked each other.

One of the things I most look forward to in 2007, a year that reminds me of 1989, when earlier barriers were falling and I met Emma's future mother, is the chance for my daughter to meet Gov. Patrick and Senate President Murray. Just before then, I'll ask each of the two leaders for a small favor.

When you shake my daughter's hand, please whisper in her ear -- yes, Emma, you can be president.

8 comments »

Another potential opening

"Rare opening means big field, costly race" read the headline out front in Wednesday's Boston Globe for a story about Congressman Marty Meehan chosen as the next chancellor at the University of Massachusetts Lowell, creating a rare opening in the state's congressional delegation.

Another opening looms, albeit one that won't become more apparent for a few years. But if this plays out as I expect, the 10th Congressional district that includes the Cape and islands (shown in the map at right) will be substantially redrawn -- in a way that could help Massachusetts Republicans regain a presence in the  state's congressional delegation. 

The reasons for this aren't complicated. Over the last three decades, the population of four counties on the eastern end of the state -- Barnstable, Dukes, Nantucket and Plymouth -- have surged while those in counties around the Berkshires have dropped or remained static.

After the 1990 census, the Legislature redrew congressional boundaries to reflect these demographic changes and the loss of one of the state's 11 seats in Congress. An earlier incarnation of the 1oth District  (shown in the map at lower right) included all of Cape Cod and islands, the South Shore extending north to Cohasset (home to then-incumbent Gerry Studds), and south from Wareham along the South Coast to include New Bedford.

When the plan was enacted in July 1992, it didn't take long for the media to size up who'd been marginalized as a result. Under the front-page headline "Studds, Atkins biggest victims," the Boston Globe reported that "Studds lost his critical base of New Bedford in the 10th District, while picking up foreign territory -- and potentially two new and powerful Democratic primary opponents in the city of Quincy," a reference to then-Norfolk County District Attorney Bill Delahunt and State Senator Paul Harold (and, in the headline, to former congressman Chet Atkins).

After losing a core constituency among fishermen in New Bedford, followed by the loss of a committee chairmanship with the Republican takeover of Congress two years later, Studds saw the writing on the wall and decided against seeking re-election in 1996, paving the way for one of those two potential rivals eyed by the Globe to succeed him.

More than a decade later, Delahunt finds himself in a situation comparable to that of his predecessor. By law, each of the state's congressional districts must have roughly 636,000 residents each, to spread representation equally across the state. Assuming the state retains all 10 of its seats in Congress after the 2010 census -- a big assumption -- the population center of gravity for the 1oth District will almost surely have shifted to southern Plymouth County, Cape Cod and the islands  -- and away from Delahunt's urban base of Quincy on the other end of the district.

This is not to suggest that Delahunt will be redistricted out of a job after the next census; it is to suggest that the Cape and islands won't remain in the same district as Quincy. And where Quincy ends up, so will Delahunt.

 It would come as no surprise to me for state legislators to conclude that Quincy possesses more in common with other municipalities closer to Boston than it does with Wellfleet and Chatham, and for another assumption to take hold -- that South Coast residents share more concerns with residents of Cape Cod (wind farms and barges spilling oil come to mind) than they do with inhabitants of the 4th District represented by Barney Frank, which meanders in a classic gerrymander from the South Coast to Newton.

Why does this bode well for the state GOP? Republicans comprise about 12-13 percent of registered voters statewide; in Barnstable County, it's closer to 20 percent. When Mitt Romney was elected governor in 2002, he defeated Democrat Shannon O'Brien by seven points statewide, 51 to 41 percent; on the Cape and islands, the margin was more than double that -- 55 to 39 percent.

Commonwealth magazine demographer Robert David Sullivan has dubbed the large swath extending from the South Shore to the mid-Cape as "Cranberry Country" notable politically for two reasons -- it is "the most independent and the most Republican region in the state."

 With Democrats holding all six of the state's constitutional offices, the entire congressional delegation and a 6-1 advantage in the Legislature -- a level of diversity usually limited to authoritarian regimes -- a potential opening in Cranberry Country may lead Bay State Republicans out of the wilderness.

2 comments »