An item over at the differently-winged Hub Politics reports that, in 1998 when he ran for Congress, Chris Gabrieli said he wanted to “pass a law allowing people to put a small portion of their payroll taxes into personal savings accounts, instead of into the pool that pays Social Security benefits.” Or so he told the Watertown TAB & Press, anyway.
The Watertown TAB & Press? In 1998? On social security, an issue that to my knowledge has not even come close to surfacing in this campaign? I find it hard to believe that Matt and Aaron Margolis, intrepid fellows though they may be, have been reading through the archives of 8-year-old Watertown newspapers looking for juicy tidbits on Chris Gabrieli on issues that no one is talking about. They do have day jobs (I think).
Much more likely, IMHO, is that the Healey campaign is feeding the Margolis boys tasty tidbits like that one from their opposition research file.
Innnnnnteresting!
UPDATE: See the comment below from the Watertown TAB & Press’s editor in chief, who reports that archives from 1998 are not easily available.
Gabrieli makes Joe Lieberman seem like a left-wing Democrat!
Im editor in chief of the Watertown TAB & Press and I can tell you that finding that quote would not have been easy. In 1998 Gabrieli was running for the 8th district seat so thats why we would have covered him. But our papers from that era are not available on any publicly searchable database. Probably the only microfilm copies of those issues are at the Watertown library and our office.
‘Hard to Find’ and ‘Inaccurate’ are not the same. We are the party of the elephant, who never forgets.
<
p>
So, Mr. Editor, please clarify – are you ticked off at the superiority of our oppo research, or are you claiming it’s wrong?
<
p>
BTW – I still have some great research on Jemmy Madison, if anybody’s interested….
Any Deval-o-philes out there still think Healy is attacking Gabrieli to actually help him?
Probably what’s happened is this: the Healey campaign, having realized that their psyche-out attempt with the ad has backfired because people have figured it out, is now feeding anti-Gabrieli info to a blog that everyone will quickly realize the bloggers didn’t dig out themselves since it’s not readily available. So everyone will know that the info actually came from the Healey campaign. At that point, most will think, “hmm, I guess Healey really is scared of Gabrieli,” and will vote for Gabrieli.
<
p>
But don’t you see – that’s exactly what she wants you to think! See, why else would she have made it so painfully obvious that the bloggers couldn’t possibly have dug out the information themselves? Surely there was a Boston Globe article or something that reported the same information!
<
p>
By the way, I’m kidding. I have no idea what she’s doing, and at this point, I think neither does she.
is the Healey campaign paying you? You seem to be doing an awful lot of her heavy lifting.
My cover is blown!
what is she paying you? If I were you I would hold out for a spot on the SJC.
Gabrieli knows that Reilly’s best voting bloc are senior citizens. Senior citizens don’t read blogs. However, Gabrieli is busy trying to get Republicans in unenrolled clothing to pull a Democratic ballot and help him on Tuesday.
<
p>
The Gabrieli forces, who have all of Chris’ clippings, drop this one on the blog.
<
p>
Kerry gets the blame.
<
p>
Chris contines to bask in the “I’m getting attacked by the Republicans” light, sending the message of how he is feared by the Republicans. Meanwhile, the Republicans in unenrolled clothing are motivated by his anti-government stance. The anti-government stance counters his government stem-cell giveaway.
<
p>
Niccolo de Bernardo dei Machiavelli would be proud.
I hope that you had your tongue firmly inserted within your cheek when you wrote this post.
No. Wait. It was the Lieberman campaign, looking to distract MA campaign contributors away from Lamont. Or is the Laffey people from Rhode Island, now that they are free agents? NO! It was Grace Ross, trying to portray Democrats as tools of the Republican Right! NO! It was Mihos, because that yellowed copy of the Watertown paper was sold at a Christie’s Market!
<
p>
Come on, Herakles. Lighten up!! Have some fun with this one!!
<
p>
If we can’t find humor in a Republican blog, we have no business in politics.
it was YOU. Je t’accuse!
…but I wouldn’t post it on a Friday morning.
<
p>
Timing is everything.
It was Barbara Johnson. And even she has no idea why she did it.
Nuts, but more personality than the other four candidates put together.
She’s gone and she ain’t coming back
In contrast to the ham-handed negative TV spot, which one could rationalize as intended to help, this seems more subtle and likely intended to harm.
<
p>
(Kudos to Dave for sussing this one out.)
<
p>
But who says it isn’t from Reilly or Patrick? It’s much more deft than anything Healey has done so far.
<
p>
If it is from Healey, then whatever she is doing, she isn’t doing it very well overall. May she continue to misjudge the situation!
It seems unlikely (though remotely possible) that the Hub Politics folks dug this up themselves. But that doesn’t mean Healey did it. We’ve got a high profile campaign for Governor, and at this point, at least several hundred thousand people are paying attention, if not a few million. That probably includes thousands of people who lived in Watertown during the 1998 8th Congressional District primary campaign – some of home probably do use the Internet and read blogs. The chances that one of these people remembered that old newspaper item is not so tiny. And if someone knew exactly what to look for, and wanted to, they’d be able to find it.
<
p>
Could it be Healey, or someone who works for her? Perhaps. It could just as easily be Joe Random Republican, or perhaps someone who supports Reilly or Patrick or Mihos, or just someone who sees Gabrieli all over the news and remembers something interesting.
<
p>
Do we have any evidence linking it to Healey?
<
p>
Perhaps we could ask right there on their blog? 🙂
It does present an interesting little diversion for us bloggers. Elevates the sport.
<
p>
Correct me if I’m wrong. If I’m really looking to take out Gabrieli in the primary, wouldn’t I drop this on the morning before or the day of the last debate? Put it in the blog, let the press get wind of it, get everyone upset. Reilly picks up on it (assuming it’s not a Reilly leak) and raises it in the Q&A. Gabrieli, knowing the storm is forming, tries to go on the offensive before the question gets raised. Patrick ignores the whole thing.
<
p>
Today. Eh. Bad day for the news cycle. It gets in the Saturday paper, if it’s picked up right away.
when a candidate’s support for a policy that encourages personal savings is deterimental to his campaign.
Doesn’t the 12% capital gains tax encourage savings? It sure as hell deters me from selling.
More personal savings. Good.
Removing the money from Social Security. Bad.
<
p>
Charter schools. Good.
For-profit charter school corporations. Bad.
She’s getting her info from the Illuminati
We need to quit playing the “Who does Healey want to run against?” game. It seems obvious to me that what’s going on is the Healey folks are trying to make sure the winner of the Democratic primary comes out a winner by as small a margin as possible — the last thing she wants to face is someone who won the nomination handily (whether it’s Patrick, Gabrieli, or Reilly). So, if it looks like Patrick might be opening up a lead, then it’s time to help Gabrieli. If it looks like Gabrieli might be gaining traction, then help Patrick. Tomorrow, it will be something to help Reilly, so it doesn’t break into solely a Patrick/Gabrieli race. The name of the game is holding the winner under 40% by whatever means necessary. Doesn’t this explain everything?
Kerry Healey isn’t the only person running against Gabrieli. Does it even occur to anyone that Tom or Deval wouldn’t mind slowing his momentum at this juncture?
Couldn’t someone have Lexis-ed Gabrieli’s 1998 run, looking for oppo? Could only the Healey campaign have done so?
<
p>
In any event, who cares? I hope the eventual Dem winner drops some awesome oppo on us. RED MEAT … mmmm, delicious.
but not much from small, local papers.
<
p>
which is why I did a search on the aforementioned quote on Nexis. I found nothing.
<
p>
Great digging, David.
I am with Charley on this one. No offense David but on this post I just don’t see the point. There are only a handful of conservative/Republican blogs in this state. I fully expect that the Healey campaign recognizes the reach of Hub Politics (much like John Walsh has realized the reach of BMG) and probably did feed the brothers the info. Why wouldn’t you expect the close knit Republicans who have few allies in this state to make sure they can create as much of an echo chamber as possible. Hub Politics will be parroting the Healey line starting Sept 20 they might as well be receiving talking points from the campaign to at least make sure the message is coherent.
The Margolis brothers? Intrepid? Bwah hah hah hah. They’re a press release recycling machine/useful idiot for conservatives, which likely explains the source of their information. I’m surprised they didn’t manage to work the word “appeaser” or the phrase “cut and run” into that post. Here, I’ll do it: Is Gabrieli going to cut and run from privatizing Social Security, or will he appease the far left in Massachusetts? See how easy it is?
If I wanted to get this out, I wouldn’t put it on that other blog. I would put it on BMG with a headline similar to the one above.
<
p>
Did anyone notice this before BMG posted it?