Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

  • Shop
  • Subscribe to BMG
  • Contact
  • Log In
  • Front Page
  • All Posts
  • About
  • Rules
  • Events
  • Register on BMG

This Only Would Matter if She Were a Republican Congresswoman…

November 14, 2006 By amicus

http://www.boston.co…

Oh nevermind.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0
0

Filed Under: User Tagged With: corruption, ssdd, wilkerson

Comments

  1. theopensociety says

    November 15, 2006 at 7:33 am

    I just do not get Dianne Wilkerson.  She seems like an incredible person except for her apparent stupidity about, or lack of attention to, money issues. Campaign finance laws should be taken seriously by all political leaders, Democrats and Republicans.  They are there for a reason;  to make sure that politicians are not unduly influenced by the people who have money to give, to the detriment of the people who have only their vote to give. 

    <

    p>
    It is a smack in the face of the people who voted for her if Rep. Wilkerson is not concerned about complying with the campaign finance laws.  She is being disrespectful to her constituents and she is being disrespectful to all the Democrats who care about campaign finance reform.  If it is determined that she, in fact, has violated the campaign finance laws again, she should not only have to pay a fine, she should suffer some negative consequences to her political career. 

    • peter-porcupine says

      November 15, 2006 at 8:43 am

      She has been convicted of tax evasion.  She was citied by a judge for violating the terms of her probation, because she wanted to atend politcal evernts at Pier 4, and it wasn’t CONVENIENT to wear her ankle bracelet!

      <

      p>
      We all could go on and on.

      <

      p>
      Why does the Democratic Party continue to enable her, and then cluck their tongues after her reelection?  Does she have to be incarcerated like Asselin to break the spell?

      • lynne says

        November 15, 2006 at 3:26 pm

        And frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if many usual Dem suspects left that line blank or voted for an opponant in the general.

        <

        p>
        People tried like gangbusters to get her out of the legislature, as far as I could tell…incumbants do have an advantage and she kept hers.

        • peter-porcupine says

          November 15, 2006 at 3:28 pm

          But I read too many defenses of her on BMG to not take that with a grain of salt.

          • lynne says

            November 16, 2006 at 1:48 pm

            She IS defensible – on the issues. She votes the way many of us would want her to. However, that doesn’t excuse her inability to deal with her financial life. I haven’t heard a good excuse for that – serious medical debt or family emergecies can tap a person out pretty bad and get you into financial trouble through no fault of your own, but I don’t think that’s her trouble. Which makes her suspect when it comes to dealing with the state’s finances…is she really an able public servant in dealing with those matters, if she can’t get her own sh*t together?

      • roboy3 says

        November 16, 2006 at 3:16 pm

        Petrof, Petrof, Petrof,

        <

        p>
        Let’s be honest here. 

        <

        p>
        If anyone “enabled” Wilkerson it was not the “Democratic Party” but the “Republican Party”. 

        <

        p>
        In a cynical move designed to split the Democratic vote and propel the weaker candidate, Republican Diaz entered the write in Democratic Primary. 

        <

        p>
        She got her wish and beat the Democrat Diaz.

        <

        p>
        Boy wasn’t that confusing.

        <

        p>
        So before you go casting dispersions on us, note who endorsed Diaz over Wilkerson.

        • ed-prisby says

          November 16, 2006 at 4:22 pm

          Wilkerson’s an embarrasment.  This is a commonwealth choc-full of people who agree with her on the issues and could manage to go a month without making the front page of the Globe for some sort of blunder. 

          <

          p>
          We deserve what we get for continually running her up there. 

        • kai says

          November 16, 2006 at 4:37 pm

          The Republican Diaz got into the Democratic primary before the Democratic Diaz did.  Was it confusing for voters?  I know it was – I talked to some coworkers from that district who are intelligent people and got the two candidates mixed up.  The GOP Diaz didn’t do it to take votes away from the Dem Diaz, though.  It was just bad luck for the Dem Diaz.

          • peter-porcupine says

            November 16, 2006 at 4:54 pm

            And frankly, I don’t consider BMG to be the Democratic Party.

            • roboy3 says

              November 17, 2006 at 9:05 am

              Petrof, Petrof, Petrof,

              <

              p>
              Ad hominems do nothing for you or this site.

              <

              p>
              I know perfectly well Samiyah did not win. Nor is it the point.  She jumped into the primary early as a means of ensuring two options, both in her favor:

              <

              p>
              1) The chance to run twice against Wilkerson if no one else entered the primary.

              <

              p>
              2) The chance to split the Democratic vote and help the weaker incumbent move on to the general.

              <

              p>
              She had nothing to lose and everything to gain by entering a primary that she did not belong in, and could not have run in had it not been a write-in contest. 

              <

              p>
              To even remotely think that I am a Wilkerson supporter or that I am NOT thoroughly embarassed to have her in the party is just another red herring.

              <

              p>
              The fact is these discourses like “why does the party support her” or “keep putting her up” are erroneous at best.  The party does not run candidates, candidates run on the party line. 

              <

              p>
              Now, do you want to talk about the party should toss her out? Fine.  I’ll join the club, I’ll donate money, I’ll make the phone calls to legilators.  Indeed, is there a recall option for legislators?  If there is, I’m sure its limited to her district so I can’t sign, but I’m willing to stand in a parking lot and ask others to sign.  Those are the pertinent things that could be discussed about Wilkerson, so enough of the sniping nonsense that doesn’t match up to political realities. 

              <

              p> 

  2. gary says

    November 15, 2006 at 9:47 am

    Take out Dianne Wilkerson from the stats and I bet the Second Suffolk district has a really low crime rate.

  3. centralmassdad says

    November 15, 2006 at 10:25 am

    at this thread and marvels at the reasons for supporting her in spite of her, um, transgressions.

  4. lightiris says

    November 15, 2006 at 2:26 pm

    got reelected; otherwise, you guys wouldn’t have the bete noir you so desperately seem to need. 

    • charley-on-the-mta says

      November 16, 2006 at 12:36 pm

      • gary says

        November 16, 2006 at 12:58 pm

        I think that was Barney’s wife on the Flintstones. (note to self: take french)

      • lynne says

        November 16, 2006 at 1:50 pm

        A pet peeve, French for “black beast.” Or else, a flourless chocolate cake. Take your pick!

        • peter-porcupine says

          November 16, 2006 at 1:53 pm

          …especially in the context of ‘flour’ making ‘bread’…

          • lynne says

            November 16, 2006 at 1:55 pm

            • danseidman says

              November 16, 2006 at 2:31 pm

              We don’ need no steenkin’ barges!

              <

              p>  – Dan

              • bob-neer says

                November 16, 2006 at 4:51 pm

                Shuts down computer.

                • amicus says

                  November 16, 2006 at 10:17 pm

                  And I, for one, can hardly wait for Wilkerson’s next ethical lapse so we can do it all over again.  Which should be when her first campaign finance violation trial (not to be confused with her second campaign finance violation trial which will result from the AG referral this week) begins in December or so?  BMG should get permission from the court to live blog the trial!

Recommended Posts

  • No posts liked yet.

Recent User Posts

Predictions Open Thread

December 22, 2022 By jconway

This is why I love Joe Biden

December 21, 2022 By fredrichlariccia

Garland’s Word

December 19, 2022 By terrymcginty

Some Parting Thoughts

December 19, 2022 By jconway

Beware the latest grift

December 16, 2022 By fredrichlariccia

Thank you, Blue Mass Group!

December 15, 2022 By methuenprogressive

Recent Comments

  • blueeyes on Beware the latest griftSo where to, then??
  • Christopher on Some Parting ThoughtsI've enjoyed our discussions as well (but we have yet to…
  • Christopher on Beware the latest griftI can't imagine anyone of our ilk not already on Twitter…
  • blueeyes on Beware the latest griftI will miss this site. Where are people going? Twitter?…
  • chrismatth on A valedictoryI joined BMG late - 13 years ago next month and three da…
  • SomervilleTom on Geopolitics of FusionEVERY un-designed, un-built, and un-tested technology is…
  • Charley on the MTA on A valedictoryThat’s a great idea, and I’ll be there on Sunday. It’s a…

Archive

@bluemassgroup on Twitter

Twitter feed is not available at the moment.

From our sponsors




Google Calendar







Search

Archives

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter




Copyright © 2025 Owned and operated by BMG Media Empire LLC. Read the terms of use. Some rights reserved.