MCAS Short Answer Section
1. Read the following passage
Scot Lehigh writes in today’s Globe:
Here’s what the far-sighted among you should be hoping for at tomorrow’s convention: candidates who refuse to tell you exactly what you want to hear; prospective governors and lieutenant governors who realize that a strong state economy is fundamental to everything else and who thus appreciate the importance of a competitive business climate; hopefuls who understand that our state lives on its brains, and who therefore are committed to educational standards, quality, and choice; and leaders who recognize that demands for new spending must be tempered by the need for fiscal prudence.
2. Discuss.
Please share widely!
Did I pass?
How about the far left progressives for Deval. They circled around him yet knew little about the man. They just knew his resume, and my God, it could not have been scripted better. (Except for the Coke hush money pay-off, the Ameriquest thing, the huge huge mortgages, the history of working for big corporations to grease the skids in washington on diversity issues)
<
p>
Tommorrow is the final act of the far left’s only real real power anywhere in this country. The Massachusetts State Democratic Party. Yet this group does not want to hear facts, they want to embrace the latest flavor of the week, Deval, and they all better be on the same page, or else. Just like the far ight.
<
p>
Nothing against Deval here. Much like the Boston feeling of “it is not Boston College i hate, it is their alumni.”
The “far left” are no where near Deval’s base of support because of his resume, out of a complete (though not fully unfounded) distrust of corporations. I personally was very much against the idea of trusting a former Coke executive (see killercoke.org) at all until I learned of the reasons why he left the company (over being stifled in efforts to get the company to investigate these problems and deal with them) and went back to public service, and beyond that he’s proven himself moderate progressive and a strong and charismatic leader, in the mold of the great moderates of the left center and right (Obama, Clinton, and McCain come to mind). The other two candidates don’t have those strengths and will be unlikely to win the general election or effectively govern this state: Gabreilli could do an OK job in both categories and would probably be a great at day-to-day governance, but seems to have none of the real leadership skills neccesary for great government – while Reilly seems to have no leadership ability whatsover and has bought into the same Randian “small government” dialogue that has been destroying this country for over 25 years and is the most direct cause of the disaster that was Katrina.
I don’t see anything that makesme refer to him as a leader, never mind a “stong and charismatic” one.
He has always worked for someone. No way to judge his eadership capabilities.
<
p>
Oh, and people don’t like outsiders telling them who to vote for. Obama is great to energize Deval’s troops and raise money. Bt his wings need to be clipped alittle.
Alex, dumping on Reilly does not have anything to do with Deval’s shortcomings. You dom’t believe I am a Reilly supporter, do you?
Personally, I think it does have some to do with it: being not Reilly are big strengths for both Deval and Chris. I’m not implying you’re a Reilly supporter, but I think his many faults outweigh Deval’s, while Deval’s positives definitely outweigh his own shortcomings and Gabrieli’s strengths.
<
p>
As to your other reply, Deval doews have a chance at winning, and I believe is the only Democrat with a strong chance at winning in November. As far as leadership, I’m basing that mostly on his inspirational rhetoric and organizational skills more than anything in his resume, though heading the Civil Rights division, or helping post-apartheid South Africa to create the most progressive civil rights laws in the world, demonstrate a governance ability and leadership skills at getting things done.
Unfortunately, or fortunately, most people see him as self made, middle class, HONEST, he is what he is, person.
<
p>
Deval and Gabrielli are big unknowns to too many people. When the mudslinging really starts post-primary, Reilly will escape the brunt of it because we have all heard it before. (he donât own a house)while Deval would be answering questions about Ameriquest, his Hush Money from Coke, his big mortgages, the supersized McMansion he is building in the Berkshires (or some place like that).
<
p>
Gabrielli will be exposed by Republicans as a fraud when it comes to his new ideas and all. Such as could spending his money on some after school program doesn’t transcend to realistic state govt. programs.
<
p>
Healy will run circles around Gabrielli in a debate. Probably will against Reilly to some degree, but he is a trial attorney. Deval will be best debater against Healy. But it wonât matter if people have already made up their minds.
Alex writes: “The same Randian ‘small government’ dialogue that has been destroying this country for over 25 years and is the most direct cause of the disaster that was Katrina.”
<
p>
Um, gotcha.
<
p>
MCAS Question #2: What caused Katrina?
<
p>
a. Small gov’t (Alex)
b. Nobody cares about a chocolate city (Nagin)
c. An Inconvenient Truth (Al Gore)
d. The levees were built (over many years) from wrong materials – like sand, cheap clay (Popular Mechanics)
<
p>
(d) is correct, but (d) is caused by (a) which is really “bad government” more than anything. (though c has had some effect too)
<
p>
also, more responsive federal and state governments could have prevented the artermath of the hurricane becoming as bad as a disaster as it did. so perhaps i should have said “the most direct example is the way Hurricane Katrina becoming as much of a disaster as it did” (or something like that…) as a result of the uncompassionate “government is the problem” ideology that runs this country.
<
p>
I wasn’t born yet, but history indicates that the left may have gone too far by the late 70s and needed a wild push to the far right, but the debate has been stuck there, and the moderates and the center-left have conceded far too much. Effective governance is a neccessity of modern life, and we can’t let trying to find that progressive balance (moving forward good governance, structural and social security, without hurting economic strengths and equality) be considered some kind of “far left” idea, because it’s not: it’s common sense, and could be the democrats biggest strength if they embrace it.
We may be in danger of agreement.
<
p>
“Bad government” – lack of execution – was indeed one reason those levees were crappy (can’t absolve the contractors themselves).
<
p>
However, you originally said “Small government.”
<
p>
In fact, the New Orleans system involved was not small – there was LOTS of government. Having too many folks involved – fed, state, local – meant accountability for none.
<
p>
The right simplifies good gov’t as “small” on any domestic spending (of course when it comes to military, then Big! More! Even weapons systems officers don’t want!)
<
p>
The left simplifies good gov’t as “big” – more spending on K-12, more “resources” for crime, more required training for cops, more regulation on workplace, etc.
<
p>
I suspect we agree that progressives should fight for good, not big. That means decrying the simpletons on both sides of the aisle.
yeah, “small gov’t” in quotes refers to the right’s assumption that it’s equivilent with “good”, when I think it’s very much gone to far… so i think we do agree
<
p>
<
p>
just cause there’s lots of government doesn’t mean any of them are “big” in the sense of “able” or “good”. “small” government leads to starved government which is weak and potentially disasterous. the size doesn’t matter (big or small) if it doesn’t work.