Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Massachusetts’

Published on Jun 11, 2012 by    

Facebook it: https://my.barackobama.com/mittromneyplanvid Tweet it:  https://my.barackobama.com/mittromneyplantwvid Tumblr: https://my.barackobama.com/mittromneyplantbrvid
Mitt Romney’s Economic Plan? He wants to cut jobs for firefighters, police, and teachers. It’s the same thing he did in Massachusetts. The plan didn’t work then and it won’t work now.

Read Full Post »

02/ 9/12 07:46 AM ET  Associated Press AP via: Huff Post

BROOKLINE, Mass. — Joseph Kennedy III has moved to a different Boston suburb ahead of an expected congressional bid to replace retiring U.S. Rep. Barney Frank.

Brookline’s town clerk says the 31-year-old Kennedy came to town hall Tuesday and registered to vote as a Democrat, listing a Brookline address. He’d been living in Cambridge, which is in a different district.

Kennedy is the son of former U.S. Rep. Joseph Kennedy II and a grandson of the late Robert F. Kennedy. The family has deep ties to the Boston suburb.

Kennedy announced last month he was forming an exploratory committee to look at a possible run for the seat.

A spokesman says Kennedy is taking time to listen to families in the district.

At least two other Democrats and two Republicans are considering runs.

SOURCE

Read Full Post »

Obama’s Big Wake Up Call

By William Greider, The Nation. Posted January 20, 2010.

The Dems’ loss in Massachusetts put on display the monumental miscalculations by which Obama has governed. Now it’s time for him to change.

Barack Obama went to Boston to rally voters and got a pie in the face. He lost his innocence as the valiant young president and also lost his sixty-vote majority in the Senate. Now we will find out what the man is made of — either a true political leader or just another show horse. Dozens of explanations are being offered for why the Dems were humiliated in Massachusetts. Democrats incline to grab easy answers. The president, if he is tough enough, will instead face the hard message of this political fiasco.

The special election displayed monumental miscalculations by which Obama has governed, both in priorities and political-legislative strategies. It may seem perverse and unfair, but the president’s various actions for reform generated a vaguely poisonous identity. Amid the general suffering, Obama is widely seen as collaborating with two popular villains — the me-first bankers and over-educated policy technocrats of the permanent governing elite. Obama made nice with the bankers and loaded up his administration with Harvard policy wonks who really don’t know the country. These malignant associations gain traction because people see there are grains of truth in observable reality.

On Sunday, I listened on the radio to Obama’s soaring speech at Northeastern University and remembered again why his oratory first took the nation to the mountaintop. His attack lines lashing bankers and insurance companies were fluid and tough, shouted repetitively over the rising cheers. His diction was loosely colloquial. He dropped the hard g’s to get down with the folks. Too little, too late, I figured. He is still masterful, but this is performance, not substance. People grasp the difference between the two. This gulf will imprison Obama as a stereotype for weakness, a joke on late-night TV, if he doesn’t change.

The humiliation, I decided, could become a good thing for this presidency if it forces Obama to rethink his political strategy and rearrange his governing order. For all his brains and talent, for all the brainy people around him, the Obama White House seems tone-deaf and blind on many aspects of the popular reality. Too full of itself to listen closely. Too condescending to recognize the rage and fear are about more than right-wing frothers.

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, the Democratic candidate, concedes defeat Tuesday night in the election to fill the U.S. Senate seat left vacant by the death of Sen. Edward Kennedy. - AP / Steven Senne

Robert Scheer | TruthDig | Jan 20, 2010

The president got creamed in Massachusetts. No amount of blaming this disastrous outcome on the weaknesses of the local Democratic candidate or her Republican opponent’s strengths can gainsay that fact. Obama’s opportunistic search for win-win solutions to our health care concerns and our larger economic problems is leading to a lose-lose outcome for the president and the country.

The two issues that mattered on Election Day were the economy, which Obama has sold out to Wall Street—as quite a few disgruntled voters pointed out—and his plea to save health care reform, which the voters who had backed him for the presidency with a huge majority now spurned. It is significant that it was the voters of Massachusetts who have now derailed the Democrats’ efforts to revamp the country’s health care system by denying them the necessary 60th vote in the Senate, for these voters know the subject well.

The federal proposal is based on their own state’s model requiring people to obtain health insurance without the state doing anything to effectively control costs through an alternative to the private insurance corporations. Lacking a public option, the cost of health care in Massachusetts, already the highest in the nation at the time of the plan’s implementation, has spiraled upward. Services have been curtailed, and many, particularly younger people, feel they are being forced to sacrifice to pay for a system that doesn’t work.

SOURCE

Read Full Post »

Michael Collins | opednews.com | January 20, 2010 The article excerpted below is the first and may end up being the best analysis of the Massachusetts disaster, the loss of the late Senator Edward Kennedy’s seat in the United States Senate. The “all knowing” pundits have already tagged this as some sort of revolt against President Obama’s health care legislation or a sea change in United States politics. But there are a few facts that point to the likely cause of the defeat. Financial commentator Numerian laid it out out very clearly at the start of his analysis:

An interesting observation was made today by the pollster for Martha Coakley, the hapless Democratic candidate for the Massachusetts senate seat held almost forever by Ted Kennedy. It appears polls are showing that the voters, especially independents who would normally vote Democratic in a liberal blue state like Massachusetts, have instead run to support the Republican candidate as the agent of change. Wasn’t that supposed to be Barack Obama’s signature tune?

Massachusetts voters have given up on President Obama as an agent for anything but the status quo, and this is most evident in his willingness to dole out trillions of dollars in direct and indirect support to the banks. The Massachusetts polls show this issue to be foremost on the minds of the voters.” Numerian

That’s pretty clear isn’t it. Massachusetts voters are not concerned about health care reform. They already have a program equal to or more comprehensive than the current legislation. There is no Teabagger movement emerging there. However, the information from polling and the general concern across the country about give aways to bankers while the rest of us get nothing stands out as the cause of voter disaffection and abandonment of the Democratic candidate.

SOURCE

Read Full Post »

Massachusetts Senate Race Results: Scott Brown Defeats Martha Coakley

GLEN JOHNSON and LIZ SIDOTI | 01/19/10 10:50 PM | AP

BOSTON — In an epic upset in liberal Massachusetts, Republican Scott Brown rode a wave of voter anger to win the U.S. Senate seat held by the late Edward M. Kennedy for nearly half a century, leaving President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul in doubt and marring the end of his first year in office.

Addressing an exuberant victory celebration Tuesday night, Brown declared he was “ready to go to Washington without delay” as the crowd chanted, “Seat him now.” Democrats indicated they would, deflating a budding controversy over whether they would try to block Brown long enough to complete congressional passage of the health care plan he has promised to oppose.

“The people of Massachusetts have spoken. We welcome Scott Brown to the Senate and will move to seat him as soon as the proper paperwork has been received,” said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin said he would notify the Senate on Wednesday that Brown had been elected.

The loss by the once-favored Democrat Martha Coakley in the Democratic stronghold was a stunning embarrassment for the White House after Obama rushed to Boston on Sunday to try to save the foundering candidate. Her defeat on Tuesday signaled big political problems for the president’s party this fall when House, Senate and gubernatorial candidates are on the ballot nationwide.

Brown’s victory was the third major loss for Democrats in statewide elections since Obama became president. Republicans won governors’ seats in Virginia and New Jersey in November.

“I have no interest in sugarcoating what happened in Massachusetts,” said Sen. Robert Menendez, the head of the Senate Democrats’ campaign committee. “There is a lot of anxiety in the country right now. Americans are understandably impatient.”

Brown will become the 41st Republican in the 100-member Senate, which could allow the GOP to block the president’s health care legislation. Democrats needed Coakley to win for a 60th vote to thwart Republican filibusters. The trouble may go deeper: Democratic lawmakers could read the results as a vote against Obama’s broader agenda, weakening their support for the president. And the results could scare some Democrats from seeking office this fall.

The Republican will finish Kennedy’s unexpired term, facing re-election in 2012.

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Massachusetts could elect senator who supports waterboarding

RAW STORY- By John Byrne
Monday, January 18th, 2010 — 9:16 am

The Republican state senator vying to fill the Senate seat recently vacated by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) says he doesn’t believe waterboarding — where a suspect is effectively temporarily drowned — is torture.

State senator Scott Brown’s candidacy has taken Massachusetts by storm and political analysts by surprise. Until recently, Democratic state attorney Martha Coakley was considered a shoe-in for the position. But Massachusetts independents have apparently grown so frustrated with Democrats in Congress, and so tepid on Coakley’s candidacy, that they may send a Republican to the Senate who seems to contravene many of the state’s apparently liberal ideals.

At a press conference in early January, for example, Brown said that the US should continue to employ waterboarding against terrorist suspects, a technique considered torture for which the US executed Japanese soldiers during World War II.

Speaking of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, the Nigerian attempted “Christmas bomber,” Brown said that the would-be terrorist should be subject to “our rules of engagement and laws of war,’’ and not be tried in civilian courts.

Noted the Boston Globe, “Brown asserted that waterboarding does not constitute torture, but he did not specifically say Abdulmutallab should be subjected to waterboarding.

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Kerry: ‘The only thing Republicans say yes to are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, tea partiers, and Fox News.’

Think Progress- By Faiz Shakir at 8:15 am

Campaigning for Massachusetts Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley on Friday, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) took a shot [at] the “party of no.” Kerry argued that while Democrats in Congress and the Obama administration focused on governing for the past year, “the Republicans did nothing but say no.” After ticking off a list of items the Republicans have opposed, Kerry concluded:

They made a calculated political decision that they would say no to governance, create anger, and then let the anger fall on those who are struggling to make the choices and these tough decisions. And now, they have the gall to want to receive a bonus for doing it.

Well my friends, the only things the Republicans say yes to are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, tea partiers, and Fox News.

Watch it:

Read Full Post »

What the Kennedy Who Lived on Had to Offer

Huffington Post    By- Alec Baldwin

Posted: August 28, 2009 10:29 AM

How unusual to mark the death of a Kennedy man in old age and from ordinary circumstances like illness. No tragic accidents. No political homicides. No footage to watch, obsessively, for decades to come, wondering what brought that moment on.

Senator Edward M. Kennedy lived on beyond his legendary brothers and faced the task that both John and Robert were denied: living. Living on to face the ebb and flow of an over forty year political career in the US Senate. Living on to represent the state of Massachusetts, the voters of which returned him to that job over and over again. Living on to craft a place of true effectiveness within the numbingly ineffective culture of the US Capitol. Living on to also serve as the titular head of a large (in modern terms, enormous) family. The other Kennedy men died young and two are enshrined in a place in the American soul that few humans can ever know. Ted lived on. To care. To serve. To love his country, his countrymen and his family.

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

.
THERE. WE SAID IT. ANYBODY GOT ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY?

TEDDYkennedyVWad Copyright 2009 Cosanostradamus blog me no blogs

THE LAST OF THE 1960’s KENNEDY BROTHERS IS DEAD. LET THE CHARACTER ASSASSINATION BEGIN!

YOUTUBE: ANOTHER KENNEDY FUNERAL
“Robert Kennedy Funeral- Eulogy delivered by Senator Edward Kennedy”
“Some men see things as they are and say, ‘Why?’ I dream things that never were and say, ‘Why not?’

“Teddy Was A Murderer. Teddy Was Fat. Teddy Was A Drunk. Teddy Divorced His Wife.”

Worst of all, Teddy Kennedy was a liberal. And a damned effective one, too; a rarity in our conservatively-gridlocked government. Out of sheer Irish stubbornness, Teddy persevered. He never wanted to be a politician. He was never quite ready to go all the way. But he could not let the murder of his two older brothers stand. He could not let the assassins win. He may have been reluctant to pick up the banner and lead the charge, but he did pick it up and he did fight on. And for that we all owe him and his entire family our gratitude.

In our corporate medieval State, only the rich may hold high office. Those who are not extremely wealthy, or in their employ, are not even entitled to an opinion. We technoserfs do have the enhanced ability to communicate and express our opinions to each other, but no one in power will ever hear us: Except those who choose to take up our cause, out of enlightened self-interest, a guilty conscience, noblesse oblige, actual concern or whatever: It hardly matters why. There are so damned few millionaires and billionaires who are even aware much less concerned about the problems of the peasantry that we peasants can not afford to be too critical of them when they do work for us, the plebian majority, and not for their own ilk, the aristocratic minority.

So, even if all the worst things that the corporate technobility and their lackeys can say about such rare champions of the commoners should turn out to be true, all that really matters is that they fought for our side. They were among the very few who were willing to give us peons even a small voice in our own affairs. Without these few knights errant, we would have absolutely no say, and no stake in the grand illusion once known as the American Dream. And now that Teddy Kennedy is dead, we all have that much less influence on our own “democratic” government. So, yes, we have reason to mourn. Our healthcare may have just died with him.

(continues)
.
(more…)

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: