Rumor has it that Kerry Healey is seeking the governorship only to use it as a stepping stone to a Supreme Court nomination once Mitt Romney is elected President. Sources have told DemsForHealey that given the deep experience she has as a criminologist, the fact that she worked three jobs and the obvious contrast between her and Harriet Miers, she is an ideal candidate.
This rumor will obviously backfire on the Democratic party as it proves that if she is qualified for a Supreme Court seat, surely she is qualified to act as a check on the legislature by helplessly trying to enact her many tax reliefs plans and overide education line items.
Please share widely!
I mean…wha?
<
p>
First of all Weld was never “almost governor of New York” — he was an also-ran who lsot to the guy who’s going to get pasted by Spitzer. Nor was he “almost ambassador to Mexico” — he was the only one who thought he’d win a stare-down with Jesse Helms. I always thought the best proof of Weld’s idiocy is that he turned down the ambassadorship to India, which in many ways is a more complex and interesting job.
<
p>
The fact that some Democrats in your head are saying that Healey will end up on the Supreme Court doesn’t “prove” anything. First of all, Romney is not going to beat Giuliani and McCain, much less Clinton. Secondly, there are Republican judges lined up several deep with higher profiles than an also-ran from Massachusetts. Thirdly, getting a low-level nobody from the presiden’ts home state past a Democratic Senate will not happen either.
<
p>
The best thing this “rumor” proves is that Massachusetts voters are so used to being abandoned by their elected Republican officials that they’ve come to expect it. Who does that reflect poorly on again?
but am not certain, that this whole “Dems for Healey” thing (including this post) is satire. But you’ll have to ask Jim.
<
p>
(There’s no way Healey’s getting a Supreme Court post – she’s not even a lawyer, and though that’s not technically required, as a political matter it is necessary.)
If I’m wrong Jim, I apologize. The bad weather makes me cranky and impairs my snark-dar (?).
<
p>
Plus I think we all know Healey could serve President Romney best as his Secretary of Fabulous Hair.
<
p>
This line sums the point of my post pretty well!
Jim,
<
p>
I am not sure that I agree with your analysis that this kind of rumor would backfire on the Dems. I am not saying that the rumor is true, and I am not justifyiing the spread of misinformation.
<
p>
But the past Republican Governors have all been pretty blatant about using the position as a stepping stone.
<
p>
They get up to the hill, they realize that the Governorship is not a very powerful position (especially with a Dem legislature) and then they get bored and move on to other things.
<
p>
I think Romney’s performance in this regard is hurting Healey. Romney’s numbers are low in part because the average person knows that he has neglected his duties and responsibilities here to campaign for Pres. And the fact that he has insulted the state more than once on the campaign trail isn’t helping him or Healey either.
I don’t think that the intelligent voter feels abandoned at all. Nor do I believe for a moment that Republicans are running for the Governorship merely to use it as a launching pad for higher office.
<
p>
Most of us can understand the frustration that a Governer must experience, having to work with such a legislature as we have here in Massachusetts.
<
p>
What the voters here don’t seem to grasp, is that merely putting a Republican in the corner office is not a sufficient check on a deeply entrenched, irreponsible House and Senate, which the electorate doesn’t really trust, but continues, out of habit and tradition, to vote back in.
<
p>
If Massachusetts ever adopts a true two-party system, then a Governor of the minority party might actually feel like he or she is able to affect some positive change, and will hang around for a second term.
Who is “the intelligent voter”? You and the other two Republicans in MA?
<
p>
“Nor do I believe for a moment that Republicans are running for the Governorship merely to use it as a launching pad for higher office.”
<
p>
Well, that’s inarguable. I mean, it’s not as if our last several governors have used up our offices and then run for the hills and left us cleaning up their mess while they run around the country to attack us. I mean, it may seem that way, but only in Reality, not in Intellgent Voter Land.
<
p>
“Most of us can understand the frustration that a Governer must experience, having to work with such a legislature as we have here in Massachusetts”
<
p>
Well, most of us is probably an exxageration, considering that the Legislature isn’t imposed on us by fiat from Neptune, but instead elected by “most of us.”
<
p>
“What the voters here don’t seem to grasp, is that merely putting a Republican in the corner office is not a sufficient check on a deeply entrenched, irreponsible House and Senate, which the electorate doesn’t really trust, but continues, out of habit and tradition, to vote back in. “
<
p>
Actually, what you don’t seem to grasp is that unlike most states, MA has a strong governor system. Dubya couldn’t do too much damage during his tenure since the TX gov has very little actual power. Here, the governor appoints all of teh judges and has a tremendous amount of independent power, which means that we’re still in trouble for years in areas where we can’t get rid of his corrupt patronage appointments. We’ll be suffering the afteraffects of having such an out of touch hardright governor who doesn’t represent us, could care less about the state, and is using our policies as a political football to impress South Carolina, for years. Which is why believing that it’s okay to elect some figurehead because the Lege can stop him from doing any damage is dead wrong, they can’t stop him.
<
p>
“If Massachusetts ever adopts a true two-party system, then a Governor of the minority party might actually feel like he or she is able to affect some positive change, and will hang around for a second term. “
<
p>
Thanks for the warning! Everybody hear that? We need to remain a one party system so we can finally get rid of these losers once and for all and clean up the mess, got it? God, you don’t really think we want one of you to “affect your version of positve change” do you? I ean, we appreciate how you’ve increased crime, driven up taxes, lost jobs, but what with katrina and Iraq and on and on we’ve seen what else you can do as a destructive force and we’ll pass, thanks.
I don’t give this alleged rumor for due to one teensy weensy little fact:
<
p>
KERRY HEALEY DOES NOT HAVE A LAW DEGREE!!!!
<
p>
She has a Ph.D. in criminology — it ain’t a J.D., and her degree doesn’t qualify anyone to sit for the Bar in any state in this country. I don’t know what idiot started this rumor, but its fundamental lack of grounding in logic is proof enough that it should be ignored.
<
p>
Whatever one may think of Harriet Miers, the facts are that she DOES have a law degree, she IS a member of the Bar of the State of Texas, and she HAS worked as a lawyer for a number of years and has developed some depth of legal knowledge and a very good national reputation among her peers as a litigator.
<
p>
There is no formal constitution requirement for being appointed to a judgeship. However, as a practical matter, no one can get through the U.S. Senate judiciary screening process for federal district court, let alone the Supreme Court, without being a member of the bar. It doesn’t matter the chair of the Judiciary is a Dem or a Rep — the committee is constituted almost entirely of lawyers who unanimously care deeply about appointing other lawyers to the bench. No attorney has been appointed to the Supreme Court in modern times without at least 20 years of practice under his or her belt.
<
p>
Ergo, this rumor is complete, utter .
It would be very foolish to pay this rumor any credence or discussion. That I’m writing a second sentence on the subject makes me ashamed of myself, but not as ashamed as I am that I must go on to a third. Honestly, it’s doubtful that even Healey would be so cynical as to run a gubernatorial campaign with the sole ambition of later–after an improbable victory–“step-stoning” to the Supreme Court.
The rumor we are hearing out here is that the current LG plans to use the office as a stepping stone to the Donald. There are a couple of openings in the Trump empire – sending thank-you notes after firing people was too kind, and therefore undermined Martha Stewart’s chance to continue with “The Apprentice”. The short-fingered vulgarian recently told another right-hand woman, “You’re fired!” So Mitt’s gender balance pal (who he affectionately refers to as Sherry) would be perfectly positioned to jump into the world of mirrored walls, gilding, conspicuous consumption and casino income.
Satiremeters and snarkmeters are failing at records rates across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, as evidenced by the responses to this post. Must be a bad batch of 9-volts or something. A recall is in order.
is actually the long-long twin sister of Rita Cosby, the slag-voice MSNBC anchor who manages to shred steel every time she utters a polysyllabic word. Seems Kerry is angling to dethrone la doyenne so that Kerry can command the attention of dozens of housecoat- and underwear-clad viewers south of the muffin-biscuit line on a nightly basis.
<
p>
Separated at birth? You decide:
<
p>
after looking at that picture of Healey and her weird eyeballage (left eye noticeably lower than right), I think she’s the separated-at-birth sister of Shannen Doherty.
I really, truly did not expect to click to read the comments, and find a whole bunch of commenters taking this seriously! First I laughed, then I read the comments and didn’t know what to say. Well done!
Jim’s stuff has gotten very good, very quickly. Somewhere Jonathan Swift is smiling.
I will say, after reading the first couple of comments I was getting worried.
…it has to be funny.
I should have realized that you would not find the notion of Kerry Healey on the Supreme court funny.
The Globe wanted Romney. They simultaneously attacked her and propped up Romney. The Republicans let her clean up Cellucci’s fiscal mess and then threw her over a cliff.
So, this weekend I was listening to Healey speak and she said something about supporting the ban on the Herstal 5-7 “Cop-killer” gun.
<
p>
I was surprised because she hasn’t had any sort of stance on any gun control issues – just the death penalty for people that use them! So, I called her campaign and the guy on the line confirmed that she was in support on banning the “cop killer” in Mass.
<
p>
Any thoughts on her new foray into supporting gun control?