I believe in the value of experience. The Republican Party has invested massive resources to create a “politicians are bad” mentality to excuse their own officeholders incompetence and disregard for public service. This has seeped into much of the left wing of the Democratic Party, which now believes that anybody tainted by extended public service is suspect. I would not want a novice to operate on me, build a bridge in my community, or work on my car. Nor do I want someone to learn “on the job” as they manage my state. Reilly knows the working of this state intimately, and can get results usingthe route available to elected officials.
I believe that hard choices say a lot about a candidate. There is no public offices more rife with tough choices than attorney general. The AG often defends the state when it does something wrong, and state employees when they do something wrong. A good attorney general enforces the law, rather than interpreting it. On a range of issues, such as the 1903 marriage law as it affects the rights of out-of-state same-sex couples to wed, Tom Reilly enforced the law rather than “interpreting” it that is to say, legislating it in a politically advantageous direction. The Supreme Judicial Court was in agreement. Reilly has the chops to be a millionaire lawyer, but he has always chosen to serve the public.
I believe in moderation to serve all citizens. Despite the media caricature, Howard Dean was a moderate on fiscal issues, and downright conservative on others (like gun control). Legislating from an extreme brings out the worst in opponents and supporters. Governing for all citizens, not just the ideological activists who like you the most, is the sign of a leader.
Reilly also brings things to the table that Dean doesnt. Unlike Dean, Reilly knows what a middle-class existence is like in 2006 he hasnt sealed himself off from everyday folks trying to make a living. I wonder what my grandfather would think if he knew that Democrats were rallying for multi-millionaires in favor of someone who lives in Watertown. The Democratic Party was built by people like my grandfather, people who had to brown-bag their lunch, and liked their leaders to have that same sensibility.
As Ive argued in the past, Reilly also stands out in listening to the voters. No excuses, modifiers, or as Ive said in the past, “yeah buts”. I think rolling back the income tax is a bad idea. I think shredding the integrity of the ballot upon which that decision was made is an infinitely worse one.
Reilly doesnt have the lump-in-your-throat charisma that Howard Dean has. He doesnt have that facility of speaking in burning sentences. But theyre both no-nonsense guys. One of my favorite lines in Deans stump speech was this: “The biggest lie spoken by politicians on platforms like this is, ‘Elect me, and I’ll solve all your problems.’ ”
Howard didn’t give me an easy way out or engage in meaningless promises. Neither does Reilly appeal to easy solutions and empty bromides. He will not make your problems disappear in a haze of hope, but he will bring the value of experience from making hard choices to a government for the people. Howard Dean had my vote. Tom Reilly has it tomorrow. I hope he has yours, too.
Sabutai, you are one hell of a writer! I’m proud to support your candidate!
I agree with a lot of what you say here. I hope and expect that after tomorrow night, you will hold the nominee (and his opponent) to the sterling standards you’ve outlined above.
<
p>
And if he’s the nominee, I hope you’ll entertain the idea that Patrick does pretty well by them, too.
You write well. However, I respectfully disagree on the basis of your points.
<
p>
While experience is definitely a plus, it is not the be-all of a candidacy. Deval Patrick (my candidate) does have executive office experience and he does not have the biggest knock against Tom Reilly – excessive Beacon Hill ties. Citizens of the Commonwealth have elected Republicans as Governor not solely because of superior candidate (Celluci anyone?) and certainly not because of ideological alignment. Its unhealthy for the Legislature and the Executive Branch to be too closely aligned. Reilly’s insider nature is not a simple positive.
<
p>
One of the reasons I will not be voting for Mr. Reilly is that he has at times failed to make the ‘hard choices.’ While he has done the right thing many times, the most difficult problems have left him at times hesitant or unwilling to make those tough choices. He has been too often willing to do the politically expedient route. The 1913 law you reference is one time the expedient and the (unfortunately) legally correct route were correct. Gay marriage is an obvious example. AG Reilly said
Link
<
p>
This is only one example of course – the Church scandal, the Big Dig, etc it seems that Mr Reilly has at times pandered to either the powers that be or the populace. While I believe Mr Reilly is a good man and has not done poorly as AG, I do not see a particularly great well of courage of convictions.
<
p>
As for moderation… I’m tired of it. I will support the candidate who holds positions most closely aligned with my own, who I believe will do the best job and who can win. There is no sense in any other approach (unless your candidate can not win – not the case in this election). I don’t think anyone can honestly say if two individuals with equal credentials were running and one held your exact positions, and the other held more moderate versions of your positions, that you would vote for the moderate. The only reason to vote for a moderate is your own moderate views; such a vote is born from ideological alignment, not inherently from the moderation of positions.
<
p>
I disagree with your choice, but I thank you for presenting your reasoning so clearly and with obvious feeling. If by some chance Tom Reilly wins tomorrow, he will certainly have my support against LG Healey.