Those are Jon Keller’s words for Deval Patrick’s performance to the media with regard to CaddyGate, DrapeGate, and let’s not forget FirstLadyGate.
Actually, I think they apply pretty well to the local press’s performance, including Keller.
Harping on the Governor’s choice of car or drapes, or even whether he’s decided to consolidate some roles and have someone be a chief of staff for the first lady, doesn’t help any child get a better education; doesn’t help the uninsured get health care; doesn’t help close a $1 billion deficit bequeathed on us by the previous administration; doesn’t keep kids safe on the street; doesn’t help, period.
All of the local media geniuses who have smelled blood on the caddy stuff need to get a clue, and start focusing on things that matter. This is page B3 stuff at best. Media outlets aren’t struggling just because of their business model; they’re struggling because they’ve abdicated their vitality and relevance, and become just as focused on gossipy crap like the DeVille, or whether Scott Brown has a potty-mouth, or whatever. “Political News” on local TV has largely become Reality TV. The Chief Executive has become the Chief Celebrity — ooh, will he shave his head? And let’s just put on the table the obvious racial subtext to all of this: Deval as Pimp. Some folks got that point loud and clear.
How, for instance, can this possibly be getting bigger play than the continued incompetence of the state DNA lab? More than whether people forced to buy health care will actually get prescription drugs? More than the continuing unfunny joke that is the MBTA’s customer service? Hey, at least someone at the Washington Post didn’t forget how to do a story on something that mattered. Wouldn’t that be great? You just know that Frank Phillips is tracking down his own Pulitzer-level story right now, right?
If Governor Patrick has acted “contemptuous” throughout this saga, it’s because the local press richly deserves it. Sorry, but someone needed to say it.
UPDATE: Massachusetts Liberal has more.
FURTHER UPDATE: Really, I thought I’d seen the nadir of local journalism, but this is really it. The absolute cherry on the top of a turd sundae. Great work everyone. [Note by David: the genius responsible for the “cherry on the turd sundae” of which Charley so colorfully speaks appears to be Ron Agrella, the boston.com features editor. 617-929-8544, ragrella@boston.com. Be sure to pass along your views.]
one of only 3 States in Anerica with a declining population?
Could a repressive, corrupt “one party” political system be a major reason? Hmmmmmm???? Perhaps Mr. Keller is “right on” about the sorry state of this State. One need only view the “sea of U-Hauls” on Rt 95 south fleeing this terrible place.
The other states with declining population are New York and Rhode Island. You cannot blame the decline in these states on one-party rule.
<
p>
So how are we more similar to these states and less similar to states like Nevada, Texas, Florida with higher rates of population growth?
<
p>
If Massachusetts were a state with lots of land near the Mexican border, our growth rate would go through the roof.
<
p>
In bizarro Massachusetts (let’s call it Texas — if you want to hold the corruption level about the same if not raise it a bit), immigrants would come to take low-paying jobs creating cheap housing that would be affordable to new college grads starting families. Bizarro Massachusetts is made comparatively attractive by low mortgage rates, unenforced immigration controls, the availability of land to build more and more subdivisions, affordable fuel prices, and globalized economies where production or skill centers can be located far from management.
<
p>
If you believe in free markets, in the long run, a decline in population in Massachusetts is not necessarily a bad thing. It could certainly take the pressure of housing prices, which would make it more affordable to people starting families.
<
p>
And you haven’t proven that countries/regions with shrinking populations are doomed to becoming poorer — look at Northern Europe, or Japan, though eclipsed by growing powers the future is by no means dire for them.
RI Governor Rep Senate 33 Dem 5 Rep House 60 Dem 15 Rep
<
p>
NY Governor Dem Assembly (house) 107 Dem 42 Rep 2 empty Senate 39 Dem 42 Rep
<
p>
MA ( as reference Governor Dem House 141 Dem 19 Rep Senate 35 Dem 5 Rep
<
p>
* source Wikipedia
<
p>
RI is almost (from a party imbalance standpoint)a carbon copy of Mass ( at least when we had a Rep Governor)
<
p>
NY with the exception of its Republican Senate ( due to conservative upstate NY) is predominantly a Democtratic State.
<
p>
The commonalities seen in all 3 States are a “lopsided” political landscape, stiffling fees fines, taxes and general cost of living.
<
p>
Is it any wonder that people are fleeing these failed “socialistic” , corrupt “utopias” as fast as they can ?
Socialist Utopias?
<
p>
MA has lower income taxes than most states.
<
p>
MA has pursued more deregulation of utilities and such than most states.
<
p>
Where’s the socialism?
…another people’s republic of cambridge reference. How droll. Last I checked Cambridge wasn’t a sovereign nation operating outside the state infrastrucure…..oh wait, I’ve gotta go. It’s my turn to pick the hydroponic herbs for tonight’s macro biotic vegan state sponsored communal meal where everyone in cambridge sings the praises of their constitutionally guranteed housing and health care. Socialism Rocks!!!!
lastest thread on marriage between brother/mother, etc.
Here it comes.
when one’s family makes the papers.
….stop bringing it.
I’ve little interest in being subject to more of your ideological grievances. If people are indeed fleeing the state, I think we could do much better than a half hearted 1% decline. I have to assume you are still here, in which case I would urge you not to fight the demographic trend.
<
p>
On the other hand, out of some interest in understanding how others view the state of the world, I ask you to clarify.
<
p>
Are you making a claim that one party dominance is bad, or one party Democratic dominance is bad? Please state your claim more clearly if you get tired of ranting against the deletirious effects of socialistic rule.
<
p>
I’ve tried to answer previously (and in vain, since you ignore my explanation) why I believe demographics affects politics, not the other way around. I note that the states with the greatest number of Republicans in office are states like Idaho, Wyoming, Utah — states large in area, with little existing infrastructure commitments and comparatively lesser population densities, with cheaper costs of living and a high growth rate. Are these states growing BECAUSE they elected Republicans, or did they elect Republicans BECAUSE they are growing? My money is that the second solution is closer to the truth.
<
p>
So, making the claim that electing more Republicans to office will magically solve our problems is nothing but cargo-cult politics and does not deserve serious consideration. Having more Republicans in office would be healthy, but the way they get elected is by adopting policies that would help residents of this high-density, aging-infrastructure, expensive state.
presentation of unemotional facts with “ranting” as I think you call it?
I merely presented the “statistics” of the 3 States in the Union with the highest rate of decline in population and sought to identify the “common denominators”. There’s nothing “ranting” about it at all. If indeed, there’s any “ranting” going on here, may I sugesst that you read your own post which seems to be extremely “emotional” and perhaps “ranting”???
<
p>
Facts unto themselves when found to contradict the “liberal agenda” are always annoying , aren’t they? May I suggest that you make an effort to place more value on “facts” and their effect on reality than how you “feel” about things…a common and classic liberal flaw especially amoungst females ….. methinks thou art a female..(based on the thought process)I’m right , of course.
Before proceeding, we should accept it as a given that it is at least hypothetically possible to offer the fact for consideration — without inveighing against the merits or deficiencies of socialist utopias — that of the only 3 states with a negative growth rate in population, these have Democratic majorities.
<
p>
The implicit claim is interesting, but remains murky: either you claim that one party rule is inherently corrupt and drives people away, or more narrowly, that Democratic rule is inherently corrupt and drives people away. These claims should in fact be broken down further: either one party rule or Democratic rule is inherently corrupt, and it is necessary as well that corruption causes population loss.
<
p>
I do not question that some net 1% of the population seem to be searching for the exits over a period of 10 years. As much as I believe people should be flocking in droves to our state of Massachusetts for legalized gay marriage and subsidized Venezualan heating oil, you may rest assured I recognize that my own feelings are as irrelevant as your own political baggage.
<
p>
To recap, I’ve recognized the evidence and have asked you to make your explicit claim.
<
p>
If you are unable to clarify your claim, sadly, we have no opportunity for further intercourse other than to exchange pointed barbs about each others motives and political agenda. You may feel free to speculate on my gender, if I can take the liberty to speculate on whether your penis is actually as large as I hope it is. Winning an argument makes me uncontrollably horny.
This is the same shoddy thinking of the person who sees three people of a certain ethnicity get arrested, and concludes that members of that race are thereby prone to be criminals.
<
p>
There are states in the union with Democratic majorities that don’t have declining populations. That means your hypothesis is easily proven wrong. But I suspect you knew that all along, and are just trying to win people to your side without having to tell them what you really stand for.
No more deliveries of troll-chow!
We have enough!
Who didn’t give two shakes about job creation or job training or housing development or any of the things that this state was once known for.
it somehow never gets mentioned that during all those Republican Governor years , the State Legislature ( the real power) was over 80% Democrat…Besides how can a Republican Governor possibly do anything anyways if he can’t sustain a Veto? Romney , for example, was unable to sustain a SINGLE veto in his tenure as Governor. No wonder the guy left.
Be the state’s No #1 salesman, work with the Legislature etc
<
p>
there are plenty of things you can do as Chief Executive w/o the Legislature, especially on the economic development side, just didn’t get done.
was very much like trying to extract aggreement on a point which differs in any way with the myopic and predjudiced views of this board…impossible
One, Weld had enough Republicans in the state senate to sustain a veto, at least for a while. If memory serves, Weld worked fairly well with the legislature, as did Celluci.
<
p>
Two, there are a number of conservative Democrats in the state legislature who could have helped Romney sustain a veto. But Romney ran away from the legislature instead of trying to work with it.
<
p>
Three, Romney’s debacle in the 2004 legislative election, in which Romney made a big push to get more Republicans elected to the state legislature, and ended up with a net gain of minus-three (or five) despite having spent millions of dollars. The voters obviously didn’t like his candidates.
<
p>
And four, you can’t beat somebody with nobody. In the 2006 legislative elections, Republicans didn’t even contest races in 2/3 of the legislative districts. Two-thirds. How can Republicans expect to win in districts in which they don’t even field candidates?
<
p>
As I’ve said here before, in Massachusetts, elections are usually won in the primaries, not in the general election. If conservatives want to have more influence in the legislature, they should aim for the primaries and ignore whether the primary candidate has a (D) after his/her name instead of an (R).
The roots of Mass Democratic ‘power politics” go way back to and beyond the famous Boston Mayor Curly era who incidently was once re-elected while he was actually in prison.
Power politics as authored by Curly was pretty simple.. Never award a city job to anyone that didn’t have a least 10 relatives that could vote.
This State is riddled with corruption, nepotism ( just look at the Turnpike Authority for example where you can make $65,000 a year collecting dollar bills ( plus all you can steal)), overpaid police ( where else can a patrolman make $225 grand a year?), an all powerful teacher’s union, career politicians whose scandals and indictments are legendary, an eletist acadamia that heads up the State’s colleges and universities while enjoying fantastic compensation pagages/perks ,visa vi, Billy Bulger with his 1/4 million dollar a year “pension”. A veritable army of state employees for whom life is one paid State “holiday” after another.
Perhaps the great Michael “tank helment head”Dukakis pin- pointed the essence of Mass “power politics” when he was asked as “Governor and Chief Executive Officer of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts ( a
$ 26 Billion “corporation” if you would), “How many people are employed by the State”. He paused, then calmly replied ” I honestly don’t know”..
Can you imagine a CEO running a multi-billion dollar corporation that doesn’t know how many people are on the payroll?. The more the merrier one would guess especially when votes are involved that insure the staus quo ad infinitum.
<
p>
Such is and has been the State of Massachuseets…. a State where soooooooo many are “at the trough” that they would be crazy to ‘kill the goose” and vote in real change… wouldn’t they? Will Deville bring change? You must be joking. Governor “feel good” will eventually tire of the hassle of the public eye and settle in to his ordained role as “rubber stamp” for the all powerful “mono-party” legislature
<
p>
So Raj…. do the Republicans, conservatives or any other party for that matter have a chance? I think not.
As to the decline in population? Those who aren’t or don’t have access to “the trough” ( and more importantly, get tired of paying for it) simply vote with their feet…they leave.
<
p>
.
But I have to say that, when I saw the byline, I almost reflexively skipped right over it.
You might want to take a moment rethink your behavior on this board, Ronco.
No one is taking you seriously, and the knives are out for you.
<
p>
Mine included.
…or maybe you’ve never lived in other parts of the country.
<
p>
Example: Ohio. I have roots there and still follow politics there a little. The Republican governor Bob Taft pleaded guilty to corruption. (His old relative “Mr. Republican” Robert A Taft, he of the American Firsters must be turning over in his grave. Then again, probably not.) Charles Keating, of Keating Five fame (remember him? of course you do), was from a powerful Cincinnati Republican political family.
<
p>
And, recently, Bob Noe was convicted of seducing the Ohio Workers Compensation Board of investing in a rare coins fund that he had established and stealing from it (the fund, that is). http://blog.citizens… My first question when I read about this, what did the Ohio Workers Compensation Board think that it would be getting from investing in rare coins? More rare coins? Certainly nothing useful.
<
p>
Republicans are as corrupt as anyone, and corruption runs all up and down government at every level and in every state. Get over it. Corruption even occurs between government and private business. I’m sure that that is shocking to you, but it’s true. Indeed, corruption occurs in private business–remember the lysine price fixing scandal involving (shudder!) Archer Daniels Midland and other companies a few years ago? I’m sure that you do.
<
p>
You still haven’t addressed the point, so I’ll put it more succinctly. If conservatives want to win elections in Massachusetts, they should try to run in Democratic primaries. Is that plain enough for you? If not, you’re as dumb as I suspect you are.
were not allowed on this board? Oh ya ,I forgot this is a “liberal board” where “double standard” is an integral part of the culture. So I can see how you can name call without fear of reprisal or censorship from your “thought master” .
Actually I get a kick out of watching you elitist, self styled “intellectuals” fume and bellow with rage when confronted by dreaded “truth” and “fact” based comments. It’s actually quite comical to watch adults turn into vindictive, snarling children.
<
p>
Fear not though, I won’t be here much longer as I’m really getting boored now. There really aren’t that many members here and at that, the majority of posts come from a small hard core group of arrogant bigots that appear to have way too much time on their hands. .
The threats like “we’ve got our knives out for you” are particularly hilarious..ya, like I really care, right ?
<
p>
Also the little “scoring system” here is cute…. the little “hate tally” where the “members” get to pile on any “objectionable, non conforming posts that don’t meet with their “approval” I imagine at some point the “Grand Wizard of Correct Thought” steps forward and proclaims that the offending poster has garnered enough “hate points” to have his “cyber connection TERMINATED” much to the cheering of the “faithful”.
<
p>
This post will probably be supressed before anyone sees it but if not…This is really a sad and repressive place. Enjoy yourselves in your own little world…a very, very little world (thank God).
<
p>
the irony.
Maybe Massachusetts as flat-lined in population because it’s full. I say that half jokingly, but only New Jersey has a higher population density. With high density, you’ve naturally got high pressure on home prices.
<
p>
Combine that with the state’s taxation policy that (a) makes it hard for towns to raise revenue outside of property tax, and (b) makes it hard for towns to be very flexible with their property tax, and all of a sudden the tax on land in Boston et al is incredibly high relative to other large American cities like Chicago, Denver, and Atlanta. Again, more pressure on the cost of housing.
<
p>
I don’t know why we keep feeding you.
When I was growing up in the 1960s, a big deal was made of the fact that the “population center” (something like the center of mass) of the US was moving further towards the west (actually, further into the midwest) and south. Slightly, but ever so. The reason why should have been obvious: the east coast was settled (by Europeans) first, and, before air conditioning was introduced, the south was pretty much environmentally intolerable. The midwest was largely unsettled, until people started moving there from the east.
<
p>
As an aside, several years ago, I was wondering why the population of Germany was fairly stagnant, and I did a calculation regarding population density. I was surprised to find that the population density of the entire country of Germany is about the same as that of the state of Massachusetts. That pretty much explained the German population stagnation to me.
MA has been dominated by Democrats (or at least people calling themselves that) for a very long time. No one is leaving because of that.
<
p>
But if you think this is such a terrible place, by all means please leave.
<
p>
I also fail to see why population growth is considered to be automatically good. There is only so much room for highways and roads, so the more people come here, the more cars will be on the road and the worse the congestion will get. No thank you.
<
p>
When you look at it in Massachusetts’ case, population fluctuations haven’t hit each area of the state propotationally. The last census, we didn’t lose any seats because – while people were leaivng places like Western Mass in high volumes, Greater Boston had a large enough rate of growth that we were just able to keep all our seats.
<
p>
There really isn’t any room for people in the Greater Boston area, but the fact that people are still leaving Western Mass, the South Coast, etc. in large numbers (without new people moving in at the same rate) is indicative of problems in those areas. So, the problem isn’t actually the population decline – per say – but the correlation that goes with it. There’s got to be a reason WHY those people are leaving: expensive housing, better opportunities elsewhere, etc. Those, in effect, are the problem.
<
p>
Plus, it’s always nice to have a state that people actually want to live in.
I really wish my fellow Democrats would stop saying “if you think this is such a terrible place, by all means leave.”
<
p>
Why not, “If you think this is such a terrible place, by all means let’s hear your suggestions for improving it and let’s work together on those things we agree need improving.”
<
p>
I hope that when this ridiculous “solution” (just leave) is applied to America as a whole (as has many times throughout history by many on the right) you’ll recognize how absurd the suggestion sounds.
…Just to point out, that is the flip-side of the 1960s Republican/conservative mantra “America, love it or leave it” during the Vietnam War.
Would you rather go back to talking about rescinding the agreement with the Federal government that would allow the detaining of illegal aliens who committed a crime for deportation WITHOUT having them first send to MCI Concord? Or making it more difficult for employers and school districts to run CORI checks on drivers and room monitors? Or having the solution for increased local aid be giving the towns the power to tax themselves more extensively?
<
p>
Not to mention that Gov. Patrick is trying to distract us like little children by waving car keys in our faces for which he will reimburse the state $6,516 per year, or $26,064 for all four years. Add that to the $27,000 for furniture and you get $53,064. That is less than we will be paying the part-time wife’s scheduler – SEVENTY TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS – each and EVERY year, for a total of over a quarter MILLION dollars for the four years – BEFORE her health insurance, pension and other benefits are calculated!
<
p>
I really want to see that budget next week.
..with a grand a month for the guv’s new sled, he is the state’s head honcho, after all.
<
p>
I can even suck it up for some nice drapes, and a comfy chair or two.
<
p>
But 72-large a year for some datebook-carrying flack?
Now that really, really fries my nose.
<
p>
(attribtion to His Honor, the Mayor)
One outlet states Mrs Patrick will have an aide “at the cost of $72,000 per year”.
<
p>
I have yet to see an article state that the assistaint’s cash-based salaey is $72k/year or that the total cost of compensation for the assistaint (salary+benefits) will equal $72k/year.
<
p>
Anyone know?
As pointed out by someone else here, having support for the first spouse is not uncommon. Maria Shriver gets a staff costing over $500k including a $123k/year cheif of staff.
<
p>
So since Diane Patrick earns $0, that means for these particular two people on the governor’s staff it costs $72k per year, or $36k each. All this hoopla for people who have yet to really spend one day on the job yet. It reamins to be seen if that money will be well spent and an analysis of their values to the commonwealth remains to be seen.
provide context?
<
p>
You bloggers simply do not understand what real journalists do.
Why do you advocate importing the practices of a chronically dysfunctional state government, where fiscal sanity has never been a top priotity?
<
p>
And if Arnold and Maria take that kind of money from the state, considering their joint private circumstances – well, shame on them. The fact that California is as large as some European nations is only a slight mitigation.
but I did want to point out that California’s 33 million people make it larger than all but 6 of the 27 EU countries. Certainly more than “some”.
<
p>
List of European Union member states by population
the link to pages and pages of Google results for other states that provide staff to their governors’ spouses.
<
p>
No, you shouldn’t jump into a lake just because a crazy person does it.
<
p>
But if you’re in a room with 50 people all pointing at their flies, it might be time to zip it.
…any action of Masahcusetts. I am merely pointing out that othr states provide funds for what amounts to an “Office of the First Lady”. It seems to be standard practice and the cost of Diane Patrick’s “staff” is far from “outrageuos” when seen in context.
<
p>
Perhaps our First Lady’s office will be a waste of money. Perhaps not. Let’s see what type of asset First Lady Patrick is to the community before we lump her in with pike patronage and Billy Bulger no-show jobs type corruption.
<
p>
Plus, is there any indication that Ms. Shriver is not an asset to California? Perhpas (I don’t know) California get’s it’s money’s worth with that $500K investment?
…as far as I’m concerned, the only questions are (i) what do they do, and (ii) why do they do it.
<
p>
The Queen of England, and her entourage, exists primarily to foster tourism (mostly from Americans, of course) and secondarily to encourage trade in British goods and services. If the MA first lady can do half as well at those public relation tasks, the amounts that are expended on her would probably be cheap at twice the cost.
So is everyone else. What happened to the “openess and full disclosure” that Deville promised? Why wasn’t this job posted and made available to anyone in the general public? Why was it “awarded” without disclosure or open competition to his former fund raising campaign manager? What’s the old standing joke here in the “People’s Republic? Why was there no “Nationwide Search?”
Where is the outrage on this liberal board that claims to champion fairness and equal opportunity?
Especially with regard to State employment “good jobs for good pay”
This whole thing reeks of the same old political “hackery” “quid pro quo” that has been going on in this corrupt State forever. Deville is obviouly not one bit different. He surely did things like this in his “high powered” unchallenged executive past life but this guy better get used to the fact that when he blows his nose in the future it will be all over the media. I don’t think this guy is going to last 4 years. His ego is much too big to put up with the criticism he’s going to face ahead. I can’t wait for his next “screw up”.
After all he quit ever other job he’s ever had.
This hire is, once again, taken out of context.
<
p>
How many people did Romney have working for him? What did they all do? For all I know Romney may have been paying someone $72k to do his hair and makeup every day.
<
p>
How much did Romney spend on redecorating? Surely he must have changed some things after Jane Swift left?
<
p>
We don’t know because the press never questioned him or the lines in his budget.
<
p>
It’s easy to harp on something taken out of context, but without the context of the spending patterns of prior administrations, we don’t know if the mostly Republican screamers here are being honest or hypocrites.
…Romney furnished the Corner Office at his own expense, without prompting, due in no small part to the budget crisis at the time. So – while the press may have questioned him, they certainly weren’t going to print THAT story. There was no scandal, and the taint of generosity.
<
p>
Romney did take some criticism for raising the salaries of some of his top aides – and he compensated for it by not taking a paycheck himself for four years. Again, no real scandal.
<
p>
As I noted elsewhere, Deval needs to understand that he is following a pretty much unprecedented frugality. No Ed King at Dini’s during the Romney years. Even his original claim that he spurned the Governor’s car because the heater didn’t work (and I love the line that it didn’t bother Romney becasue he was a reptile!) hints at somebody who is careful to the point of being cheap.
<
p>
And Coupe DeValle has been exceptionally tin-eared about this, betraying the fact that he not only has never held public office before, he hasn’t run for it either.
Just call him D-Diddy and be done with it.
<
p>
It’s never far beneath the surface with you people.
Frank the invisible rabbit?
This may be another “naive white guy” moment for me but I don’t get what your point is here.
<
p>
Is there something particuarly “black” about Cadillacs or Coupe De Ville’s that I’ve never heard of?
Yes.
Peter, no offense, but you’ve posted at least a half-dozen “certainties” (according to you) that later turned out to be 100% false. No mea culpas either. So I’d like a citation, because I don’t believe what comes out of your mouth.
Here’s a 2003 story from downthread which talks about the raises for aides in return for no salary –
<
p>
http://www.findartic…
<
p>
About the furniture – from the Herald in 2004 –
<
p>
http://pqasb.pqarchi…
<
p>
Although he requested, he did not get, and bought his own stuff.
<
p>
And from the recent Globe story –
<
p>
<
p>
I do not think PATRICK would be covering up for Romney’s making off with the furniture in a felonious manner.
<
p>
This is a quick search.
Romney spent that money for higher salaries for his staff, the end result for taxpayers? Nada. The money was not given back, he SPENT IT!
<
p>
Romney had positions in 2003 that were $130,000 under Swift and bumped them up to $150,000. Getting the hacks the cash because you are a multi-millionaire is not something to point to as an achievement.
Net – cost the Comonwealth less.
This is what I mean, Peter, when I asked for citations. That article (or what I could read, since it pointed to a paid archive) said two things:
<
p>
1) Romney requested $25,000 to furnish his office. Sounds like a direct contradiction of your statement.
<
p>
2) Barbara Anderson said that Romney was entitled to new furniture because he waived his salary.
<
p>
[It’s really interesting what that salary waiver bought Mitt. People are citing that waiver for his higher staff costs, higher furniture costs, and higher transportation costs, as well as excusing him for being out of the state for 200+ days last year (as in “well, we weren’t paying him…”).]
<
p>
The date helped me though; I searched the Globe archives and found an article that contained this sentence:
<
p>
<
p>
So Peter, once again, you posted a half-truth. Although Romney replaced some furniture, he also requested $25k from the state to replace more. And that is exactly in line with what Deval Patrick spent.
<
p>
Plus, the tone of the articles was amazingly different. In that Herald article, they just about joked about Romney spending $25k on furnishings. Same goes for the Globe article. Patrick spent $27k four years later and it’s as if he broke into some taxpayer’s house to take the money.
<
p>
Why the difference?
When the Governor spends more on drapes than I do on a semester of graduate school (I don’t pay full price, but still) then that is a legitimate story. When he hires a chief of staff (does this mean there will be more staff to follow?) for his wife at nearly the median income for a family of 4 in the state, then thats a story. You list several priorities that are legitimate needs in this State. Given half a second anyone on BMG could rattle off a dozen more.
<
p>
If he bought these things when the state was flush with cash, it might not have been a big deal, but we are facing a $1 billion budget deficet, and he has still yet to show us how he will put more cops on the street and cut property taxes. If he wasn’t asking every department to identify 5%-10% to cut, then it wouldn’t matter as much that he had lavish tastes and expected the state to pay for it.
<
p>
Finally, BMG has spent plenty of bandwith on Scott Brown’s potty mouth. I don’t think you’ve got anything to gripe about there.
I posted a comment earlier, google “governor first lady staff” and you’ll get a list on states with their staffing. Much of it is a Chief of Staff or Director. Staffing is done for all, for the ones who do not have a dedicate hire the Governor’s staff does the work. The point is that there is tax funded staff that handles scheduling for the first lady. Whether you want it hidden within the Governor’s staff with one or multiple persons or a direct hire that many Governors do, it’s always done. So to complain out this make absolutely no sense. I don’t think Romney shopped at IKEA.
Here, it hasn’t been since Dukakis that anyone was hired in this fashion.
<
p>
And its not just that they hired another staff member, its the level of pay, and who they selected. Hack job for former campaign member.
<
p>
If this were Weld or Romney, you guys would be all over him.
<
p>
If you stood back and looked at the big picture, you would see this for what it is, instead you are refusing to take off your rose-colored glasses. In the last week I’ve heard from a number of people who are questioning their vote now.
<
p>
And Charlie’s attempt to accuse anyone who questions Patrick of being a racist is disgusting. It weakens the real fight against true racism.
As has already been explained, taxpayers always paid for staff for the governor’s wife. Previous governors buried the expense in their personal staff budget. That’s all.
<
p>
Don’t pant, dear, it raises your blood pressure. Sad to say, that is what drapes cost these days. Why, just last week, I was at Target looking for 12-foot neoclassical curtains for Bullfinch windows in the Isaak Mizrahi collection, and they told me they didn’t have any! Could you imagine?
<
p>
And in a world where one can easily pay $10,000 or more for a single couch, the furniture was hardly “lavish.” The prices reported in today’s Globe were right in line for decent furniture. While, as a grad student, you doubtless have humbler tastes, don’t you agree it might have raised a few eyebrows to replace the collapsing furniture in the governor’s office with beanbag chairs and crushed Dorito bags?
<
p>
<
p>
As a caveat, I wasn’t able to find typical staff salaries for gubenatorial aides. However, if you are under the impression that $72,000 is a “lavish” salary for a professional in Boston–or even a cop--you either have a delightful surprise ahead of you when you get out of grad school, or you have chosen to specialize in the cultural anthropology of the Kapauku Papuans. Goodness, the city of Somerville is looking to pay someone $50,000 to send out snow alerts.
<
p>
I do understand why it’s so important to pretend the governor’s expenditures were “lavish.” After all, “Governor Spends Average Amount for Furniture and Car!” hardly makes a good headline, now does it?
<
p>
Now, breathe into this paper bag, you’ll feel better.
Don’t get on Steverino’s bad side.
that was the snarkiest, best post I’ve ever read. I literally didn’t stop laughing the entire time. I love how truth is funnier than fiction.
$10,000 for a couch? Please. My Wrangler, brand new, cost me $15,000. Anyone who drops ten large on a couch is not spending an “average” amount. At Jordans I didn’t find anything over $3,000, very little over $2,000 and lots under $1,000.
<
p>
The whole idea of the Caddy is that it is a cut above, and not for the “average” person. No one in my family drives anything close to one. I’m working now full time in a professional job and don’t come anywhere close to $72k, and my job is more than 40 hours a week. How many hours is this hack for the first lady going to put in? Its not like scheduling the occasional speaking engagement for a woman who already works at a high powered law firm will be a strenuous job.
cost only $2,235 each, according to today’s Globe. We eagerly await your congratulations for his frugality.
<
p>
<
p>
No comment.
…Well, is anyone in your family the executive officer of an entire state? No? Then the comparison is apples and oranges. Sure, the Cadilac is not for the average person, he’s the Governor. It’s not the average job. It doesn’t have the average rsponsibilities.
<
p>
“It’s not like [being Diane Patrick’s Assistaint] will be a strenuous job?”
<
p>
Do you have insight and an actual job description you would like to share with us? You know for a fact that this person will only be scheduling occasional speaking engagements for Mrs. Patrick? These are not facetious questions; it just seems that everyone read the word “assistant” and filled in all the blanks using the image of a simple coffee go-fer. It seems that many other states have an “Office of the First Lady”; if you think $72k is too steep for the staff of the Office of the First Lady, than based on what other state spend for the equivelent office, what would you propose Massachusetts spend?
“To put this into perspective, a Chief of Staff for a Legislative Committee, responsible for arranging all hearings, vetting all bills, arranging notification for testimony, providing the Chair with research and analysis – this responsible postion is paid less than $40,000. Yet Diane Patrick needs somebody paid twice as much to verify her speaking engagement with the Urban League. “
Why didn’t anyone say that to begin with? Seems alot more useful than the hysterics of “Agghhh!, the First Lady has a $72K/year assistaint! Hacks gone wild! The sky is falling.” Someone should run down of similar positions/salaries in the State House.
<
p>
Peter, I would have given you a 6 if you could back up the claim that the assistaint’s only responsibility is going to be verifying appointments. I’m not saying I know otherwise, just would like to see the criticism backed up is all.
Where, if you happen to know, can one find salaries for other State House types? And how often does a Legislative Committee Chief of Staff work? Is it a 9-5, year round?
They are not published. You have to ask them. I happen to know more then one.
<
p>
The Legislature’s staff is one big lump sum in the budget. I would imagine Rep. DeLeo’s aide got a bump when he want from 3rd Reading to Ways & Means, but you’d have to ask Toby yourself. I was speaking of a less sexy, normal impact committee, in the range of Public Safety or Government Affairs.
<
p>
During the dark Finneran years, the Leg. aides were all paid $28,000 – no COLA, no raise, no hope. Admin. aides and Rep. Chief of Staff slightly more – say, $35,000. The Committee Chiefs vary with responsibility, but few if any are in the $72,000 range (as the Legislators themselves don’t make that much!).
<
p>
As far as your difficulty question goes – you know what I do. The new post is described as a scheduler. That, frankly, is a job for the left hand. You sort the unending stream of invites into yes, no, maybe – check with the boss – and if you can drive Outlook and know how to hotsynch, you’re set. Some are also set to scouring the MPG papers, in seach of chowder suppers and Girl Scout graduations for the Rep. to crash and make a nice appearance at. One philosophy is to put everything on the calendar, color code actual accepted invites, and then have possibilities for every moment of every day, should you feel like being Representative.
<
p>
Or so I’ve heard.
<
p>
But I’m sorry – 72 large to a political fundraiser for continuing to work her Rolodex seems, well, excessive. Especially when there’s all thos Suffolk kids just dying to get into the building.
<
p>
Oh my Lord. Really, I am having just too much fun on this thread. I think I have to run to the restroom now.
Steverino did:
<
p>
“Governor Spends Average Amount for Furniture and Car!”
<
p>
I don’t think the state should spend anything on her office. She wasn’t elected to anything. If she wants a bill moved, who is going to have more sway – some hack with a Statehouse office or her herself, in bed with the Governor each night. If some outside group wants her, and not him, to speak at an event let her schedule it herself. We shouldn’t have to be paying for this, regardless of what other states are doing.
Kai – Even I have more respect for Gov. Patrick than that. I do not think Gov. officials make serous decisions based on pillow talk except on television.
to any great extent, but I stand by the point that she wasn’t elected to anything and we shouldn’t be paying for her to have a staff.
All other states have a staff for the first lady? Is it just this administration that you have a problem with or others. So why haven’t you address this sooner. You seem to have strong feelings about this topic. Why haven’t we heard from you before?
<
p>
Looks to me that we got a deal for the chief of staff:
<
p>
LA Times – Daniel Zingale, chief of staff to first lady Maria Shriver, received a $25,000 campaign bonus, supplementing his state salary of $123,000.
but first ladies of the US all had more substantive duties to perform than Mrs. Patrick does. Granted, most of them run along the lines of picking a theme for the White House Christmas decorations or picking the official china for the administration, but at least there is something for her to do. I don’t think the first lady of Massachusetts has anything similar.
<
p>
Its not just this administration I have a problem with. If Romney had done the same thing I would have complained about Ann. If Gabrielli had won I would complain about a staff for Hillary. I’ve got high hopes for the new governor, but he hasn’t shown me much yet.
…commercial grade, such as would be found in a hotel lobby or such. That kind of furnishing is a whole different level of quality–durability and the like–and is subject to a whole different price structure.
<
p>
Let me ask you this. Did you bitch and moan as much as you are doing now when John “I was anointed with Crisco oil” Ashcroft, the former US Attorney General under Shrub, had the federal government spend US$8000 on a drape merely to cover a boob on a metal statue so that it wouldn’t show when he was giving televised appearances in the foyer of the Department of Justice building? He did do that, you know. Or are you merely reserving your bitching and moaning for Deval Patrick?
Thank you Charley.
The whole story about drapes is, well, window dressing.
I’d like to start off by saying I’ve been a Patrick supporter from very early on, as well as a fan of BMG. I agree that the decibel level of this story is a reflection on the media’s enthusiasm for sensationalism, but that we already knew. More troublingly, and more interestingly, it showcases how green Deval and his advisers seem to be. Regardless of the legitimacy of the stories, they were nothing if not predictable. Now Patrick has spent significant political captital on this garbage, when he need that capital for what will be a very challenging budget debate, and perhaps more challenging implementation of Chapter 58. With regard to this site, the lack of criticism, constructive or otherwise, of the governor by the Editorial Board, is becoming painful. Your defense of Patrick rings more hollow each time you refuse to grant any grounds for criticism. He has made a mess of his first weeks in office, and it is not the globe, but his team which is responsible. The Globe was here long before Patrick and any governor (or other executive or legislative officer) who wants to be effective has to be ready to deal with, react to, and generally contend w/ the dreaded MSM. Perhaps like the Patrick Administration, BMG has struggled to get out of campaign…supporters of Deval no longer need to defend him rhetorically from all sides so as to keep him in front at the finish. Rather, we need to have very high expectations and hold him accountable accordingly. That includes a compentent communications staff, and not having your drapes be newsworthy.
Exactly. The bias of BMG is so obvious here it is nauseating.
<
p>
Disclaimers first. I’m a unapologetic liberal, a big Deval supporter (despite him being too conservative for my tastes) and a big fan of BMG. And I agree that much of this nonsense has been given way to much attention by the MSM.
<
p>
However, the Governor (and, more importantly, his communications staff) have reacted to this “news” incompetently, naively, defensively and foolishly. First it’s “they don’t even make Crown Vics anymore”, then “I’m way to important and busy to concern myself with trivial details like the car I drive in every day and the furnishings for the office I work in every day”, and then (worst of all) “Okay, I understand you fools obviously hink this is important so I’ll just pay for it all myself and you’ll go away.”
<
p>
I want a Governor (and a Governor’s staff) that is wiser, more thoughtful, more cautious, more articulate and more “big picture” than the “every man.” But I certainly don’t want a Governor who pulls out the checkbook to solve his communications gaffes. And I certainly don’t want a Governor who thinks paying for his own fancy drapes his “doing his part” to balance the budget.
<
p>
I’m pretty damn sure many, many people are as disgusted as I am by the Governor’s “noblesse oblige” attitude to this “little stuff.”
Big Picture Deval, when the media is busy turning him into defensive mode. He was on a roll with his proposals for changes to town-state relationships, then the Globe realized that “Deval Buys Fairly Expensive Window Drapes” could sell more newspapers.
Get a communications team that knows what they are doing.
<
p>
I don’t blame teh Governor. He’s obviously out-of-touch with the “common man” (those of us who drive 1993 Honda Civics and are more concerned about where the next mortgage payment is coming from than our drapes) but we should have known that when we elected a multi-millionaire.
<
p>
I honestly didn’t expect his staff to be so clueless though. They should have advised him to shut-up, get back to work and put the checkbook away. They have a professional obligation to quickly devise a much more effective counter-attack strategy than has been displayed so far.
<
p>
I don’t want a “BYO Governor” and I certainly don’t want him wasting his time on trivial decisions.
<
p>
But I do want one who’s wise enough to hire a staff that understands how to stay on message, apologize effectively and change the subject.
<
p>
“I apologize and here’s how it is being fixed.” is a lot different than “I am so sorry that we all have spent the kind of time we have on what we have spent time on, and I am sorry to have been responsible for that.”
um.
<
p>
When he does something?
For that matter, am I the only one still wondering about the whole Aqua Teen hunger Force thing? Are those two freed? Arrested? Have we figured out whythese people overreacted so pathetically? I don’t want a fall guy, but I want to hear something that convinces me that someone somewhere learned from that experience.
<
p>
There’s plenty of blame to go around. Yes, the press is playing the Kool Kidz game. And Deval so far is attempting to play tackle football without any pads.
to the nodding agreement of Paul Cellucci’s Republican press secretary, that the curtains were falling off the wall in the office–and that a table collapsed under the weight of a book at a press event the week before the furniture arrived.
<
p>
You heard me. A press event. Which none of its attendees reported on.
<
p>
The press knows exactly what they’re doing–playing their “outraged” readers and viewers for fools.
…the opinion-related bloviations of Jon Keller, and, quite frankly, to most of the other people in the American advertising-driven media (which includes most media, including public TV and radio).
<
p>
As far as I can tell Keller had some “x” number of minutes to fill between commercials for “this” pill and “that” nose-strip, and he had to fill them with something–anything. And this was the idiotic thing that he filled those minutes with.
<
p>
Understand: the purpose of advertising-driven media in the USofA is to provide a bit of entertainment to get people to watch the advertisements, and that’s it. The customers of advertising-driven media are not the listeners or viewers. The customers are the people who pay the bills–the advertisers. Jon Keller was the dancing monkey that the station put on to get people to stay to watch the advertising.
Just don’t blame Deval
<
p>
This is an outrage and not of the press’ making
<
p>
People are tired of this and wanted change
<
p>
Now they get the same old BS from Patrick
<
p>
Give us a break
Patrick hasn’t had much time to actually govern.
<
p>
And he’s already being defrocked as a hypocrite.
<
p>
The only thing I blame Patrick for is not recognizing that you guys were just chomping at the bit to take him down a notch.
<
p>
What a hoax.
The Governor and BMG can get all high and mighty about the media’s failure to focus on the important stuff. But the media needs to be fed. Give them some news. “I’m working really hard on a budget” is not going to make a headline or lead the nightly news. Who cares? Where are the initiatives? The innovative plans or new ideas?
<
p>
It’s not just the Caddy and the curtains. The CORI issue, the local taxation stuff, these are not the issues to lead of your days as Governor.
<
p>
Where is the strategic communications plan for the Governor? What’s the Governor’s message of the day or the week? Where are the events and announcements that support those initiatives and messages?
<
p>
Yes, this is the kind of communications discipline that Romney excelled at. It was the only thing he did well, so people caught on. Patrick’s a more substantial guy. But that does not excuse him from the need to use his pulpit to start shaping the public agenda.
<
p>
It won’t make the bad stuff go away, but it will provide some counter-prgramming. It will also give his supporters soemthing to cling to.
<
p>
If the budget is what is occupying him, he should have already begun the unveiling process. For example, preview an educational intiative that will be in the budget. A public safety intiative tomorrow. Fire these news hits off with precision leading up to the final unveiling next week.
<
p>
That’s how it’s done folks. Stop whining.
I agree with you. Whirlpool isn’t the only one whose job it is to manage a spin cycle.
<
p>
Reagan did it with his silly midnight swearing-in as California’s governor. Spitzer is doing it now; he addresses the New York State Senate like they’re the French at Agincourt.
<
p>
And it’s not just about feeding the press; it’s about taming them. There are snakes in the corps who have been out to get Patrick ever since he launched his “straight to the people” campaign, denizens of the same reptile park that brought us Al Gore, Internet inventor. Hell hath no fury like Andrea Estes scorned.
I am a big fan of Deval’s and root for him to do well, but I’m worried he’s stumbling out of the gate. Early Clinton syndrome, to a degree.
<
p>
He needed to hit the ground running with the specifics people thought he lacked in the campaign. And he needed to build some good press before his budget cuts are announced.
<
p>
He looks and sounds like a novice, I’m sorry to say. Maybe he’ll hit a home run with the budget, but does anyone think he’s got a magic formula for doing more with less? If you don’t like the news now, how will it be when budget cuts are announced?
<
p>
The knock against him in the campaign was that he was building unrealistic expectations, using symbolism, but no specific backup for how he was going to do it.
<
p>
Now many here are knocking the press for holding him to unrealistic expectations, focusing on symbolic issues and not covering specific and serious topics.
<
p>
He’s not done, but he needs to do better. It’ll be great to read Philips story someday about how far Patrick has come since his early days when he bungled his way through the Cadillac and Curtains days.
<
p>
Why not? Because Republicans don’t agree with his position on those issues? He got nearly 60% of the vote, he doesn’t need to govern to appease the Republicans in this state.
<
p>
In my opinion Patrick is right on the CORI issue — a crime, or even being accused of a crime should not be a life sentence with respect to employment. CORI data should be segregated to relevant information to relevant parties.
<
p>
In my opinion Patrick is right on extending the option of towns to diversify their revenue streams. We’ve seen property taxes going through the roof when state aid is frozen, and a reliance on state aid by cities that have low property values even though those cities house a lot of commercial activity (including restaurants). Patrick ran on that plank, why shouldn’t he try and implement it?
Being Governor is apparently like being in prison. The trick is to kick someone’s ass on the first day.
Excellent point. And not far from the truth, I think.
Yes, and Clinton was right (initially) on gays in the military. The lead-off issues can define you. The point here is all about sequencing and emphasis. Though CORI and local-option taxes are legit issues, they are, at the core, about criminals and taxes. Many Patrick voters were excited by his big message, but few were motivated by his stance on CORI and new opportunties for taxation, I suspect. And the great middle that went along with the tide? If this how he wants to lead off, they might get disillusioned — and fast.
did not put “gays in the military” first on his agenda. The Republicans did.
<
p>
You might want to think about that for a minute.
you air a plan before you have all your kinks left out and then everyone gets so outraged at all the minute details that, by the time the public weighs it, all the truly revolutionary ideas in it are – poof – gone. That’s why I’m a big fan, when it comes to stuff like budgets, to come up with something concrete than you can defend vigorously – before you let all the flood gates open.
<
p>
It may be that we can only have a Deval Patrick or a Mitt Romney. Do we want someone to spend their time on substantative issues – or real window dressing, PR of the first order? I’m going to take the person who actually wants to role up his sleeves.
<
p>
The media was clearly getting pissed off, and now they smell blood in the water. However, it wasn’t Deval Patrick that’s the problem – it’s the media. How we fix those craptastic “journalists” I don’t know… but I’m very open to ideas.
Looks like the Gov’s people have figured out how to use the impending budget to take the initiative and re-focus the media. Patrick just unveiled the property tax relief plan that will be in his budget bill. What’s the leading political story right now on the radio, boston.com, etc.? Hint: It ain’t the Caddy. Or the curtains.
Let’s grant everyone’s point that the media’s nose for the news is easily led astray by the faintest aroma of scandal.
<
p>
Now let’s consider that a wealthy former corporate attorney had the stones to be running as a populist in the first place. Meaning what? That he likes people? That out of a profound commitment to economic and social justice he feels that the work of government should be oriented specifically toward the least wealthy among us? So far, it looks a lot closer to the former. Hence moves like the five-city inauguration, the velvet rope, the elevator, et cetera. All symbols, no substance. But they’re important symbols nonetheless, because the governed have a right to expect access to the people doing the governing.
<
p>
But once that access is granted, what do the governed find? A man who seems to have no natural sympathy for the sort of people who view a $10,000+ expenditure on drapes and chairs not merely as a waste of public funds (though it clearly is) but as proof-positive of a decidedly anti-populist cast of mind. “How can I get my work done surrounded by Ikea?” he must be asking himself. “How can I ask other heads of state to sit on anything less than a $1500 wingback? And what about my wife? Is she supposed to teach herself how to use a Palm Pilot?” The answers are, respectively: you’ll deal; so will your office guests; and she can do what she wants… with her own money.
<
p>
How can he give a rat’s ass about such considerations? (For those who suggest, probably correctly, that Patrick had no direct input into the decorating choices, I propose that a truly populist governor might have added to the bottom of all job postings: “If you’re the kind of person who thinks my administration needs to spend a lot of money on office decor, then this isn’t the job for you.”) Someone who sneezes at thousands of dollars in frills is not likely to begin the policy process by asking himself what its material effects will be on the working class. But then who cares about material effects? That’s just food, clothing, shelter, and other baubles that we here in the “new” economy needn’t trifle with. We can just dress ourselves in civic engagement, go to bed every night in a house made of access, and nourish ourselves with heaping spoonful after heaping spoonful of populism.
<
p>
Jeremy
as well as your ability to ask how a black man who grew up in the Chicago projects can consider himself a populist.
I can share the secret of my ability to ask how a black man who grew up in the projects can consider himself a populist. I’m able to consider… wait for it… the possibility… are you sitting down?… that somebody can forget his upbringing. (Yes! Even a black man.)
<
p>
All the more so when economic growth and personal wealth are proffered as the best measures of success, which they indubitably are. After all, he didn’t take a law job with the Poor People’s Human Rights Campaign. Or ACORN. He took one with Coke. Why? To ensure that the rights of one of the planet’s giant companies are safeguarded. That, and he wanted to get rich.
if it could be true, it must be true.
<
p>
You seem to have enormous trouble distinguishing between your imagination and reality.
<
p>
That, and a smelly hat, will get you a quarter outside the B of A in Harvard Square.
why don’t you begin from observed reality – his career as a corporate attorney, his expensive tastes – and work your way up to your contention that his populist instinct remains as finely honed as you claim it was is in youth?
You’re just losing.
<
p>
Otherwise you would not have found it necessary to Photoshop out of Patrick’s resume his little stint as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, his assistance drafting South Africa’s civil rights laws, his largest-in-history investigation of the arson of black churches, and his oversight of the race discrimination settlement at Texaco.
<
p>
“Expensive tastes?” By your criteria, we’d certainly have to dismiss the populism of a privileged child of a rich ambassador or a man who rides around in a top hat with a cigarette holder.
….that is fueling the whole “scandal” –
<
p>
A man who seems to have no natural sympathy for the sort of people who view a $10,000+ expenditure on drapes and chairs not merely as a waste of public funds (though it clearly is) but as proof-positive of a decidedly anti-populist cast of mind.
<
p>
I disagree with your assertion that any of these expenditures are wasteful when viewed objectively:
<
p>
1. The drapes: They are not for Patrick’s vacation home. They are for the Governor’s Office at the State House. This is where Patrick and all subsequent governors will meet and entertain other state executives, elected federal officials, the occasional head of state, constituents, etc. This office should not evoke Versailles but should be reasonably well appointed. The amount spent on the drapes was appropirate and they should last, if properly cared for for a very long time.
<
p>
2. The furniture for the office: same as the comment above.
<
p>
3. The car: I don’t buy into the concept, first off, that a cadillac is synonymous with excess or wealth but Patrick has agreed to reimburse the Commonwealth so the point is now moot.
<
p>
4. The assistant to the first lady: As has been pointed out previously, this duty was always performed, it was just absorbed into the budget for the Governor’s office and not discretely disclosed. One could make the argument that Patrick has done the Commonwealth a service by making this expense more transparent. Further, a State’s First Lady has obligations and coordination of these duties is not an improper expenditure and we are happy to pay for such things both with federal dollars and in most other states. This is a non issue, especially if the Governor’s overall budget is not out of line with best practices.
<
p>
You raise a very telling point. One reason that we may not have transparency in government is that a lot of the things that are standardly done — even for good reason — can lead to the sort of resentment-fueled media bonfires beloved of Jeff Jacoby, the Boston Herald (is that a newspaper?), and bimbo/himbo news anchors.
<
p>
After a century of being babied, we have to be careful not to go on a whining fit when we learn how things have been done all these years.
people who complain about the cost of the toilet on the Space Shuttle, without stopping to consider that is rather difficult to find a commode at Home Depot that vaccums your buttocks to the seat.
<
p>
Though, if they had one, I might buy it for Andrea Estes.
of physical laws pertain to the Governor’s Office? Because I think I can appreciate the need for a step up from an off-the-shelf American Standard when we’re talking about outer space. But on Beacon Hill?
…to be confusing the Governors Office with Patrick’s office. Does Patrick’s office need to be appointed in the way that it has been? NO. Does the Governor of the Commonwealth of MA’s office need to be thusly appointed? I say, yes. I am comforable with this expenditure. Annually, no. Every new governor, maybe but it would depend. Every 10 years or so, definitely. A little pomp to go with the circumstance is not bad.
You reserve your right to raise hell the next time someone who isn’t your guy is elected.
….actually that is the complete opposite of what I said. And how are you so sure it’ll be a guy?
1. The drapes: They are not for Patrick’s vacation home. They are for the Governor’s Office at the State House. This is where Patrick and all subsequent governors will meet and entertain other state executives, elected federal officials, the occasional head of state, constituents, etc. This office should not evoke Versailles but should be reasonably well appointed. The amount spent on the drapes was appropirate and they should last, if properly cared for for a very long time.
<
p>
2. The furniture for the office: same as the comment above.
<
p>
I realize now that the main point of contention is over the definition of the term “reasonably well appointed.” Cracks about orange milk crates and bean bags aside, no one is seriously suggesting that the next step down from the luxe drapery is dorm-room chic.
<
p>
But can you really imagine a conversation wherein a member of the roster of Important Guests (which, incredibly, you seem to believe will include constituents) comments to Patrick that he has outfitted his office in a manner unbecoming a governor? Or that his guests will conduct whatever presumably serious business they’ve come to discuss with the Governor in a way that reflects the homely surroundings in which that discussion has taken place? No, and doubtful, I’d say.
<
p>
And in the event that someone does have the gall to tell Patrick that his digs are looking kind of dingy, can you imagine the Governor having the strength of character, and the courage of his populist convictions, to reply that, “Maybe they do, but what in the hell does that have to do with the topic at hand”? No again, unfortunately.
<
p>
Patrick has agreed to reimburse the Commonwealth so the point is now moot.
<
p>
The point is not moot. It took him days to clue in to the fact that his tooling around in a Caddy wasn’t jibing with his Axelrod-crafted campaign message. And we’re seeing this mea culpa only because he got caught.
<
p>
The question of the $500-something a month may be moot. The question of whether or not we have a governor who will, in the future, make a show of reflectiveness only after he’s been caught, remains quite germane.
<
p>
As has been pointed out previously, this duty was always performed, it was just absorbed into the budget for the Governor’s office and not discretely disclosed… This is a non issue, especially if the Governor’s overall budget is not out of line with best practices.
<
p>
But I thought Patrick was Captain Change, Mr. No-More-Business-As-Usual. Such a radical reformer, you would think, would start from square one, rather than basing his behavior on “best practices.”
<
p>
One could make the argument that Patrick has done the Commonwealth a service by making this expense more transparent.
<
p>
Could? One would have to if one thought that appearances mattered more than facts. Transparency is a question of appearance. The fact is, the governor’s wife is unelected, and any functions she performs – or “obligations,” as you would have it – are irrelevant to policy and governing. But they do make for a good display, don’t they? They are, in other words, just for show. But then that brings us back to appearances, the only yardstick by which Patrick worshipers seem willing to use.
<
p>
We are not “happy” about it. That’s why this shitstorm is swirling, no?
<
p>
Jeremy
<
p>
Can you estimate how much you think the new drapes should have cost? Would you be willing to put your money where your mouth is and provide the drapes for that price (including installation)?
<
p>
Have you ever redecorated you house? My wife has, and she won’t tell me how much she spent on drapes in a couple of the rooms, except to say that they were in the 4-figure range. Even if they cost $1,000, that’s for a lot less drape than the ones hanging in the state house.
<
p>
$12,000 sounds like a lot, but without context, the number is worthless. I doubt there is a person here who even knows how many windows were outfitted. Without basic information like that, how can anyone proclaim judgment?
One of the more curious complaints in the academy is that there aren’t enough conservatives, that conservatives are underrepresented with respect to their numbers in the population. Ironically, this complaint is a sort of identity politics and looks an awful lot like a request for affirmative action from the opponents of affirmative action.
<
p>
But conservatives are not an ethnic group, sexual minority, or biological category. Nor are populists. There are rich populists and poor populists, just as there are rich and poor paleoconservatives, libertarians, and communitarian liberals.
That, actually, is a serious question. Can the Patrick Admistration use the Governor’s office to attract businesses to our Commonwealth if the office looks cheap? We already have evidence that it looked dilapidated. Are you suggesting that material conditions would be materially affected by this trifling expenditure?
<
p>
We cannot trade these symbols in for jobs.
Can the Patrick Admistration use the Governor’s office to attract businesses to our Commonwealth if the office looks cheap?
<
p>
Once again, “cheap” is here being marshaled as the only alternative to extravagant. So my guess, as an economic development analyst, is that yes, Patrick could somehow overcome his less pricey furniture handicap, and use all of the other business incentives at his disposal, to bring companies to the Commonwealth. Among the petty factors on which businesses have based their location decisions – and there are plenty – the look of the governor’s office is nowhere to be found.
<
p>
Jeremy
<
p>
you are demanding we accept your assert that the costs of the furniture were “extravagent.”
<
p>
Prove it.
I have the feeling that my posting a lot of links to chairs that cost less than $1,500 and drapes that cost less than $10,000 is going to be met with more insistence that, to paraphrase one poster, a little pomp with the circumstance is okay.
<
p>
So I’ll put off replying to your challenge for now, you can call me a loser, and I’ll get back to work.
with not knowing how much things cost.
<
p>
There is something wrong with using ignorance as a benchmark for judgment.
Regarding the car, Jane Swift, as lieutenant governor, drove a Chevy Tahoe, and then two years later, a Ford Expedition.
<
p>
Mitt Romney, in addition to his Crown Victoria, drove a Ford Excursion.
<
p>
Do you raise objections then? If not, why? Or do you consider a huge expensive SUV to be a lesser vehicle than a cadillac?
<
p>
Your criticism of the inauguration is curious; do you think that the state would have been better served by a small, closed affair held in Boston?
<
p>
Do you even know what furniture costs? I’m not talking about Bob’s Discount Furniture, I’m talking about furniture for the state house. $1,500 on a chair is not at all excessive — at a discount furniture place prices start at $1000. Should the governor be shopping at Goodwill? And finally, were you curious as to how much Romney spent on his furniture? If not, why?
I think the cost of Romney’s furniture is irrelevant because it was reported that he bought his own. And took it with him. And that’s why Patrick has to buy stuff. Can anyone confirm?
<
p>
Not taking a salary.
Buying your own office furniture.
Or
Staffer for the wife.
Expensive drapes.
<
p>
I’m just saying. There are ways to do this press management thing a little better. Even if we’re dealing with petty issues. Does their handling of this give you any confidence Patrick’s press folks will be able to handle the media when it comes to “important” stuff?
Deval’s press people are terrible. They were terrible during the campaign, and they’re even worse now. I’ve met some of them, and they’re nice people, but they are really very bad at their jobs.
And as I noted elsewhere – it isn’t like Grace Ross was elected and had no resources to furnish a room with 20 foot windows in a historic building. Deval has the wherewithal, and chose to bill the state, belatedly emulating Romney.
<
p>
He COULD have said, “While the last few occupants have paid for the furnishings of the corner office themselves, I will refurbish the office and make a GIFT of them to the Commonwealth, so we have no more collapsing tables at press events for new Governors (per Steverino).”
<
p>
Apparently, that never even crossed his mind. And if he does it now, well, it’s a Republican idea! (He still in the market for those?)
Don’t you think it’s a bad precedent to expect these politicians to buy their own office furnature, etc.? Personally, I don’t think the “I’ll-work-for-free” Romney mentality worked so well for us last time. Ultimately, we got what we paid for: the governor who wasn’t paid never really showed up for work either.
The point is, it never crossed Deval’s mind that the adulation he felt on the campaign trail wasn’t neverending. And it betrays a real learning curve.
Pity your psychic powers failed in predicting the warmth of our reception in Iraq.
Pay no attention to that man behind the drapes…
see above. n/t.
a subject about which you are understandably so touchy.
“it never crossed Deval’s mind that the adulation he felt on the campaign trail wasn’t neverending”
<
p>
My eyes are rolling in their sockets. Your grammar teacher is rolling in the grave.
…It would have been nice if Mitty had actually done something nice for Massachusetts, other than buy his own furniture. It appears that the only thing that he did to Massachusetts was to help remove the last vestiges of a festering sore–the Republican Party of Massachusetts–from the body politic.
<
p>
I’m sure that you remember the Republican Party of Massachusetts. The party of John Volpe, Frank Sargent, Edward Brooke (the first black man to be freely elected to the US Senate since Reconstruction). Yes, that Republican party.
<
p>
It is truly sad what the Republican Party has come to in this state. And Mitty helped to deliver the Dolchstoss to it. But, they asked for it. They should have been careful for what they asked.
Just to clarify, Peter Porcupine’s assertion that Romney bought his own furniture was a half-truth. Romney bought some furniture, and then in 2004 he got $25,000 to refurnish his office. (Documented elsewhere in this post).
<
p>
Don’t repeat PP’s “factoid”, because although it is technically true, when people repeat it to attack Patrick it is being used as a lie.
And thank you as well for supplying so many suggested answers. Next time kindly add letters or numbers next to my options so I can get through the multiple choice quiz more quickly.
<
p>
Or just wait for me to respond.
<
p>
Do you raise objections then? If not, why? Or do you consider a huge expensive SUV to be a lesser vehicle than a cadillac?
<
p>
On Romney and Swift, I have found (and find, in the case of the former) pretty much everything about their politics and governing styles to be antithetical to even the most generous definition of populism or democracy. I have to admit that my criticisms then were not as picayune as all this, but then again neither one could credibly lay claim to the support of a large segment of the grassroots.
<
p>
But Patrick can claim such support, based largely on the rhetoric put forth during his campaign, and aided in no small part by the message factory here at BMG. So while his predecessors didn’t have any public good will to squander, Patrick most certainly does. And that’s exactly what he seems to be doing.
<
p>
Your criticism of the inauguration is curious; do you think that the state would have been better served by a small, closed affair held in Boston?
<
p>
I wrote of the inauguration: “All symbols, no substance.”
<
p>
What is substantial about speeches and parties?
<
p>
I continued: “But they’re important symbols nonetheless, because the governed have a right to expect access to the people doing the governing.”
<
p>
Which is just what I feel. And no, I certainly don’t think a Boston-only affair would have been better. But I’m not going to be convinced that making a big show of a multicity event is any substitute for the day-to-day act of governing.
Can you clarify? Are you arguing that since Deval Patrick had large public support, this means that you feel as though he deserves to be criticized using different standards?
<
p>
That doesn’t even begin to make sense.
<
p>
You also seem to be saying that Patrick is squandering goodwill by squandering goodwill, that he deserves to be criticized because he has failed to respond to criticism.
<
p>
Again, circular.
This drivel isn’t up to your usual standards.
<
p>
The idea that it’s the MSM media’s job to improve government or “keep kids safe on the street” is nonsensical and smells of desperation. Your “shouldn’t we be more concerned about the children” tone is insulting to those of us who already do.
<
p>
Should we assume that the contemptous attitude your post takes towards the BMG readers here is because we richly deserve it?
It’s not up to my usual standards for drivel? You know, TLL, I’m a work in progress, etc. …
<
p>
Seriously, I’ll take the seriousness of tone at BMG up against just about any MSM outlet. I think these issues are trivial — maybe not quite a “non-story”, but trivial nonetheless. The question of whether Deval Patrick needs to do a better job handling the press is so “meta” that I can’t be made to give a damn, really.
Check this out.
<
p>
I think this is getting a little embarrassing for our paper of record. Hey Marty, have you seen what the Time and the Post are reporting on? I think they might be ahead of you in the Pulitzer race.
<
p>
Good Grief.
Is there any way of finding out whose brilliant idea that slideshow was?
Ron Agrella, boston.com features editor. 617-929-8544. ragrella@boston.com.
<
p>
Let him hear it.
It was a cordial conversation (tried to keep it in check) and I basically conveyed my disappointment that the Globe has gone from reporting the story to basically making fun of Patrick. I told him that I’d expect that from other outlets, maybe even some conservative blogs but not the paper of record.
<
p>
He told me that Boston.com makes its own editorial decisions on some projects and that this was one of them. I told him I thought that was pretty thin because most people — and the Globe itself — see Boston.com as the Boston Globe’s news site. He granted me that some people might see it the way that I did, but he didn’t seem inclined to do anything about it.
<
p>
Think I’m going to call Marty Baron’s office…
…and now it’s a web site with an attached newspaper.
<
p>
That said, the language is disgusting, and places the capstone on my disdain for this news outlet.
The Wall Street Journal is going the same way, becoming a web site with an attached fish wrap/bird cage liner part.
Read:
<
p>
Ron Agrella, Boston.com Features Editor
Credits: Cadillac.com, http://www.car-nection.com, NPR and other Web sources.
Music: “Cadillac Car”, from the motion picture soundtrack from “Dreamgirls”
If you’re gonna deride Caddy drivers, you’re gonna have to face up to Grandma & Gramps. Cadillc is the fave of the blie hair set in southern climes. Got a problem with that?
<
p>
And for all you hyperventilating Repubs (who pretend not to have bluehairs safely sequestered down in the Sunshine State), your own Preznit rides a Caddy.
I have always felt that Keller is very overrated as a commentator.
He’s better when he sticks to politics but he can’t seem to maintain that focus and wanders off to topics that he should avoid because he is just, well frankly, whiney and annoying. For instance, movie reviews? brady’s baby? …come on. The list can go on. Why doesn’t he realize that his political insights give him little credibilty for the entire realm of pop culture.
…and listen to Keller, and you’ll discover that when takes off the phoney walrus mustache, the fright-wig, and the latex makeup, just who Gene Shalit really is.
…if it resonates with the public. Which this does. Shooting the messenger rarely helps.
…the trouble and get Dick Cheney on it.
…just shooting at him in general. I find his tone (literally) and his cadence to be akin to the on-air style of Gene Shalit or Rona Barrett, more suitable for “Entertainment Tonight” or “Access Hollywood” than straight news reporting.
<
p>
When my wife heard Keller on the news the other night she said “I bet he used to get beat up all of the time in high school”.
<
p>
I’ve heard a couple of people say this particular “news story” really “resonates” or has “got legs”…with stories like this it usually seems to indicate it’s on its last leg and will be dropped as soon as Barack Obama gets caught sneaking a cigarette or something equally as childish.
I’m sorry but this is so great . . .
<
p>
1.) We got a bunch of Liberals that are in full blown CYA mode. Trying to make excuses for the Rookie Governors spending spree.
<
p>
2.) Still another bunch of liberals trying to tear down their local news rag (The Boston Globe) for reporting on the whole mess.
<
p>
3.) And guys like Charlie on the MTA have to lower themselves to making “save the children” speeches for the gov’s defense. EVERYONE KNOWS THESE SPEECHES ARE AN ACT OF DESPERATION.
<
p>
These guys are going to try to downplay the Gov’s latest train wreck…but just remember this….this is the same bunch that wanted to ban Snickers for Gay Bashing last week. NOTHING SHOULD BE TOO PETY FOR THIS CROWD.