Well, well Mr. Patrick, I was beginning to wonder if you had it in you. It seems either you or someone in your campaign realizes that the landscape of American politics is strewn with the political carcasses of “nice guy” politicians who inevitably finish second. But you surprised the tame Massachusetts Pols and Pundits by taking a nice breakfast shot at your opponnents -and with Mr. Reilly sitting right there, chewing his oats and smiling like a lamb. Too bad Mr. Gabrielli left the hall early or you could have put it to his face also – but then again we know his timing is usually off anyways.
Idealists like yourself usually get waylayed late in the primaries and especially during the general election. Its nice to see that your tough because thats what our party needs and has been missing for these many years. Justice Holmes once ended a famous Supreme Court decision by lamenting that ” three generations of imbeciles is enough” – well over 16 years of Republican Governors is more than enough for Massachuetts and we need a tough Democratic candidate to do the job.
Remember two primary principle of politics – the candidates first job is to get elected and an elected politician’s first responsibilty to the people is to be competent. Fight tough and hard and when you get into office always be an active and effective force for what you believe in – because its who you are and what you believe in that got you into office in the first place.
This is serious business and lots of citizens have been hurt by the Romney administration’s lack of interest in anything but their own selfish interests. As you know, students are being cheated out of their right to a decent education in no small part due to indifference from the Governor’s office, our streets and bridges are literally falling apart around us, taxes are cut for the rich while homeowners and towns throughout the Commonwealth are left to squabble over the consequences of depleted funding. Mr. Romney has used the Commonwealth as a prop for his own self-serving narrow interests and Ms. Healy plans to do the same. This needs to stop and the Democratic Party and the Commonwealth needs a tough and competent leader to bring our Government back to the people.
So don’t pay attention to the namby pambys who, in the coming days, will urge you to show how timid and polite you can be and ask that you not disturb the clubby Democratic Party feathers lest its cause excessive angina in the Commonwealth. Let your jab at yesterdays breakfast be a mere wake up call for what is coming. I think your going to win this thing but even if you didn’t you would not regret that but what you would regret is not going down fighting – that would stick in your craw and give you an indigestion you don’t deserve.
For what its worth, remember Jack Kennedy was no sweetie pie either – and if you didn’t like what he dished out to you he would introduce you to his brother Bobby who generally began his political discourses with a swift kick to the opponents groin – and that was just to establish the paramaters of the discourse. Don’t shy away from the fight and definitely don’t ever let your opposition talk you out of fighting – tough fighting for your principles is what American politics is all about.
Today’s Herald article about yesterday’s speech says, “[I]t was a surprise to Democratic insiders that Patrick threw the first punch.” The so-called “first punch” was Patrick’s line in his speech, We dont need a bureaucrat or a technocrat, with money or insider connections. We need a Democrat with the right convictions. The first punch? Patrick didn’t even mention any names. Have they seen Gabrieli’s most recent ad. Have they been paying attention to what Reilly has been saying over the past year? Finally, Patrick is fighting back.
<
p>
is accurate. That would be playing the campaign game, and I think Patrick doesn’t play games. He was offering his opinion (which BTW is shared by many). The media is going to be in a frenzy of misquotes and misrepresentations for the rest of the political season. They want to stir the pot with “fighting” characterizations like “first punch”. Why should we let them frame this race and buy into it? IMHO, Deval is continuing to speak the truth.
Wrong choice of words on my part… maybe “pushing back” would have been better? Or “finally correctly pointing out the distinctions” between him and his opponents? After all, it is a campaign… and there are other candidates running…
We know what we can expect from the media. I think “correctly pointing out distinctions” is a great phrase. It is so easy to fall into the frames that are given to us. I’ve spent years sifting through headlines watching the Repuglicanization of news. I was just pointing out the methods.
Gabrieli’s latest ad is issue focused – i.e. on tax policy. He does not misstate anyone’s position on the topic. It is a comparison ad that accurately states everyone position on the issue. Not even Phil Johnston and his ad squad could classify this one as negative. By the way, this is not Patrick’s first jab at Gabrieli. He used the word “tacky” in Springfield a few weeks ago when talking about Gabrieli’s strategy and use of $. Let’s also not forget that he – aka Mr. Inclusive and No Ordinary Leader – also tried everything he could to keep Gabrieli off the ballot in June. That effort wad preceded by that nasty email message/ad he sent to supporters in the lead up to the convention.
<
p>
A couple of questions on Deval Patrick’s quote yesterday need to be raised (We dont need a bureaucrat or a technocrat, with money or insider connections. We need a Democrat with the right convictions.).
<
p>
1) Does Deval not also have money and lots of it? Enough with complaints on $. The use of money is nothing new in politics.
<
p>
2) Insider Connections – Patrick is more of an insider than Gabrieli. Maybe you have not noticed, but a quick check of their resumes shows that Patrick has been on the public payroll much more than Gabrieli who is primarily the product of private sector work – very successful work I might add. In addition to his intelligence, charm, and ambition, Mr. Patrick has been significantly aided by the tailwind of government programs since his youth.
<
p>
Deval has been endorsed by much of the MA delegation and many former pols who are on the far left of the party.
<
p>
Who is the real insider now Deval? Please.
<
p>
3) What are his convictions? His ads look and sound great, but I have heard variations of this feedback repeatedly:
<
p>
“What will he actually do to solve problems”
<
p>
“There are no specifics in his ads.”
<
p>
“What does you can hear the justice in his voice mean?”
<
p>
“Great style, not much substance.” I think we might need to run those old “where’s the beef?” burger ads in response to Patrick’s ads which severely lack substance and specifics. People know where Gabrieli stands and more about what he would do if elected as our Gov.
<
p>
4) Last note on convictions
<
p>
Gabrieli’s record on giving his time and $ to causes that are important to MA dwarfs Patrick’s. Win or lose on the 19th, I have no doubt that Gabrieli will continue to work on behalf of the people of MA by donating his time and money (e.g. stem cells, education, etc.)
<
p>
I am voting for Gabrieli for a number of reasons. To sum it up, I would say the following:
<
p>
Gabrieli has the broadest appeal across the political spectrum. His positions on education, immigration, Stem Cells, Capewind, and taxes play well to Independents and the majority of Democrats. Due to the resources at his disposal, he is best positioned to deliver his message in overwhelming fashion and respond to attacks.
<
p>
Patrick’s attacks on him not only ring hollow, but are also hypocritical and self-serving. On the other hand, based upon his track-record Gabrieli is truly devoted to a better Massachusetts.
<
p>
“There are no specifics in his ads.”
<
p>
Not true.
<
p>
Setting aside the wisdom of wonking out in a 30-second ad for a moment, the latest ad mentions three policy positions that he took: pro-Cape Wind, pro-stem cell, and pro- early childhood education.
<
p>
There are tons of specifics on his website, and if you get a chance to talk to him personally, he’ll talk to you about anything at length.
<
p>
Insider/outsider … snore. I guess I agree.
How about there are relatively fewer specifics in Patrck’s ads? Gabrieli’s positions on the issues and what he proposes to specifically do about them have been much more clearly articulated to date – in ads, speeches, and on their respective websites. You don’t have to agree with me on that and we can agree to disagree, but that is clear in the feedback we have been receiving and that is what I am reporting.
<
p>
As for the insider/outsider argument, please don’t yawn at me, yawn at Deval next time you see or speak to him if you are bored with the topic. He is the one who brought it up yesterday and I simply called him on it as it pertains to Gabrieli. I can’t disagree with Patrick on this one as it pertains to Mr. Reilly. Reilly for his part is not running away from it as he knows he can’t. He is touting his experience which is likely the right move in his position. My instinct on why Patrick brought this up is that he and others likely see being perceived as the outsider as advantageous this year. They are likely correct on this one if that is their thought. Reilly clearly has the biggest hurdle if this is the case. To offset that, he will need to not only demonstrate that his experience distinguishes him from Gabrieli and Patrick in a way that really helps the voters, he will also need to show effectiveness and independence – not an easy feat in this environment and given recent events (e.g. Big Dig tragedy).
<
p>
Please, Gabrieli does misrepresent Patrick’s position on the income tax to the extent that he says too little. It is a passive agressive form of attack. Gabrieli could have just talked about his own tax policy, but he didn’t.
The Gabrieli ad directly quotes Patrick’s position on taxes as it was presented by Deval in one of their debates earlier in the year. What is missing from Gabrieli’s ad that misrepresents Mr. Patrick’s position on this issue? Do you – unlike your candidate – have some specifics to offer in rebuttal? Keep in mind that this was a 30 second ad, so the objective was to accurately compare and contrast the respective positions on taxes as succinctly as possible. Given time constraints, after summarizing the other candidates’ positions, Gabrieli provides top-line specifics/distinctions on his position and then directs you to his more detailed position outline on this topic.
<
p>
If this is an attack ad – which I don’t think it is; even Phil Johnston agrees with me that it isn’t – then this is about as light an attack ad as I have ever seen. It is issue oriented and not personal in nature.
<
p>
Calling someone a “technocrat” whose campaign is based on money and calling their strategy/use of $ “tacky”? Now that’s a lot closer to an attack – and a personal one at that. To date Gabrieli has been the most positive & issue-oriented of the three candidates in this race.
<
p>
If Deval’s harmless little jab was an attack, Chris Gabrieli attempting to slam Deval (and all other Democrats) on TV is most certainly an attack ad. The difference? Deval never named names and didn’t put it on an add that will reach millions of voters. Oh, and he didn’t undermine the entire party he claims to belong in the process (political advertising rule #1: don’t blame democrats when we’re running against republicans).
<
p>
Fine, Chris Gabrieli is going to use his 7.7 million and counting to buy the election and play politics. He’s allowed to do that. But to try to say Gabrieli is doing anything other than playing (negative) politics is misleading at best, blatantly lying at first.
But unfortunately for you the facts get in the way of your position. Not even Phil Johnston and his ad squad classifed this one as negative – and he was asked about it. John Keller and others have labeled the ad accurate, so how is accurately comparing and contrasting positions “attempting to slam Deval (and all other Democrats)”?
Did he and the “ad squad” pass on the new Reilly ads? Any idea how they define a negative ad or an attack ad? Is it defined as an ad attacking your opponent or is attacking your opponent’s position also included?
Gabrieli essentially trashed the Democratic party in that ad.
a little too sensitive Ryepower12 if you think that’s trashing. Check out the new Reilly ads. Those would be more accurately classified as attack ads.