Opera singer, blogger, lawyer. You can reach me by email at david [at] bluemassgroup [dot] com.

Person #2: 4106 Posts

Recommended: 502 times

Posts   |   Comments

  1. "who won’t take the electorates no for an answer" (1 Reply)

    This is where I think you’re way off base, and it taints the rest of your argument. The electorate has said not a thing, yet, about the Olympics – indeed, that’s the very point being raised by those of us who’d like to see some sort of ballot question on the issue. So Falchuk didn’t win the race for Governor. Big deal. He’s not running for Governor at the moment, and if he were, I wouldn’t endorse him. My point is that by positioning the fledgling UIP behind an Olympics ballot question, he is likely to raise the profile of that party way beyond what it otherwise would be – and, simultaneously, advance a cause (a ballot question for the Olympics) that a lot of people think is a good idea (around 75% in the last poll, if memory serves).

    I think you’re conflating “getting in bed” with Falchuk with thinking that he is onto something on this issue. They’re not the same.

  2. "what is your gambit here?" (1 Reply)

    I really don’t understand the bulk of your comment. I’m not making a gambit, as far as I can tell. Falchuk is, or at least will be once he commits a lot of his own money to this cause, which he seems likely to do.

    As for your analogies to Lively and Howell, well, if Lively were to take the tack you describe, it would fail because there is no discernible public support for his position. So, not brilliant. Howell’s strategy was closer, but she didn’t have the financial resources that Falchuk has, and she miscalculated by going all-in on income tax repeal instead of reduction. So, also not brilliant. Moreover, neither of them was simultaneously engaged in an effort to stake out a position for a new political party. And I do think it’s quite clever of Falchuk to wrap the Nolympics flag around UIP, for the reasons described in my post.

    You can of course disagree with my characterization of what Falchuk is up to as “brilliant,” but do try not to attribute malicious motives to everyone who might disagree with your own take on things.

  3. If you'd like to subscribe to the site, (0 Replies)

    all the info you need is at this link. Or, if you prefer to just send us money, you can use the Paypal button in this post (scroll to the bottom).

    Thanks for coming!

  4. Good grief. (1 Reply)

    You think you can do without your constitutional rights, as long as it’s just for a couple of weeks?

    Of course, people in other countries don’t have them at all, or have very different versions, and most of them “live to tell about it.” So it’s not as though human life is dependent on the American version. Still, it would be nice to think that, as Americans, we get the benefit of the document that is supposedly our national charter, even when it’s not convenient for Boston 2024.

  5. Letter from a Birmingham jail (1 Reply)

    is always worth reading. This passage struck me this year:

    I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direct action;” who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

  6. This is the key point, IMHO: (1 Reply)

    Blocking 93 is not like a sit-in at a lunch counter or a being chained to an engine of war or nuclear pollution. It is not as if highway traffic has a clear connection — or any connection to the Ferguson shooting.

  7. Good find - (2 Replies)

    do you have a link or a cite? I’d love to dig it out of the Globe archives.

  8. Also nearby (0 Replies)

    is the proposed site of the Wynn Casino. We could take a field trip!

  9. Including Eric Fehrnstrom (0 Replies)

    remember the big pension kiss-off he tried to give Fehrnstrom on his way out the door? LOL

  10. Wow, that is some seriously dubious analysis (2 Replies)

    from our friends at the Division of Banks. Yet another lawsuit looms….

  11. There's a special rule (2 Replies)

    re appointments with the last 15 days (I think) of an administration. Don’t know the statute citation offhand.

  12. Fixed! (0 Replies)

    Thanks for the heads-up!

  13. Yes, this post is potentially a copyright problem. (0 Replies)

    Posting an entire article and offering no additional commentary can run afoul of the fair use doctrine which permits us to post excerpts. So I must request that you either edit the post accordingly or take it down.


  14. Not really fair. (0 Replies)

    For the appeals court to have issued the order they did, they must have been persuaded that there is a serious question as to the criminality of what went on here. And, as you’ll recall, the trial judge issued repeated admonitions regarding what was criminal and what wasn’t. Obviously he ultimately went along with convicting O’Brien et al, but it’s never been a straightforward case.