Today's Herald gives Boston Mayor Tom Menino's federal funding plea a deeply disturbing cover treatment. I'm going to have nightmares for weeks.
It's odd that the guy who used his “machine” to support Hillary Clinton in the primaries would decide to head to Washington with his hand out. But it seems he's doing it as part of a group effort by America's mayors to shake down the feds.
Dot Joyce called the Hub’s catalog of projects, their cost and estimated job-creation a “laundry list” of initiatives that met the U.S. Conference of Mayors’ criteria.
Can't blame a guy for trying.
But it will be really interesting to see what Gov. Deval Patrick can get out of Obama. Since Patrick was a supporter of the now president-elect before it was cool, he's got some favors to be called in.
“Come on, friend. I put my neck out there for you. I even didn't get upset when you cribbed lines from my speeches. The least you can do is give me the money to fix up the Nantasket Beach seawall.”
In these tough times, we can leave no couch cushion unturned for a little extra revenue. Even if the owner of said couch is hurting for cash too.
is this Red Mass Group? I thought that term would be limited to the AIGs, auto companies etc.
<
p>Anyway, the feds have called for a stimulus plan that includes public works and fiscal assistance and it makes sense that mayors and governors would gear up for a response, no?
<
p>As for Menino’s support of HRC, if you “banned” him from Washington as a result of his primary support, you’d have do to the same for at least 2/3 of the Democratic Mayors — Villaraigosa in La, Newsom in SF, Nutter in Philly, etc Guess there’s always Chicago. And I assume his folks were not unwelcome during the general election in places like Manchester, NH.
<
p>BTW – the Mayors Conference did the same thing in 1993 when President Clinton proposed a much smaller stimulus, which the Congress set aside.
<
p>BTW2 – the usual disclosure, the writer served in the Flynn and Menino administrations and retains a friendship and admiration for both.
<
p>Then I guess we’ll have to cut our way out of it.
<
p>Or beg and borrow from the federal government. (They can at least run a deficit budget– we can’t.)
<
p>Revenue decisions made over the past 20 years in Massachusetts have left a structural deficit so large that our public structures i.e our public transportation system, our k-12 and higher education system, our safety net programs for the poor the elderly and the disabled, our environmental protection programs, our public safety agencies (fire and police) are near to crumbling. Check out News Roundupon ONE Massachusetts site to see stories from all around the state.)
<
p>9C cuts in FY 09 and threatened cuts in the FY 10 budget have exacerbated the crisis.
<
p>All sectors of government are feeling the effects and it is difficult to explain why state budget priorities or tax policies have a direct impact on the local and state programs we value unless one has some basic understanding of budget and tax policy in Massachusetts.
What don’t people understand—if money comes from government—it comes from taxpayers. Whatever tax is paid—it comes out of our pockets—this is not a difficult concept. Folks in Massachusetts seem to labor under some delusion that if you go to a higher echelon of government —the burden of debt is somehow shifted. The ignorance is stunning.
when people think we can stick our heads in the sand and continue with the current policies that have gotten us to where we are today. Bill Clinton left with a balanced budget, George Bush is leaving with billions of dollars in handouts to AIG, the auto industry, etc etc. Something different must be done
MCRD is right. But is the irony lost on BMG attendees? “Hey, we’re broke and we can’t raise taxes in MA. Let’s ask the Feds!” Like we’re not going to see increased taxes to pay for that handout.
<
p>And gee, Howard, if I recall, the Dems have been in control of congress since 2006. Don’t they hold the purse strings? Didn’t Congress vote to fund the $700 billion bailout?
<
p>If congress wanted to change “the current policies that have gotten us to where we are today” they can go right ahead and put forward legislation to do so. I guess they need Barack to do that.
<
p>Instead, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have proposed to run the US auto industry. Not only is this a blueprint for failure and a massive waste of money, I can’t opt out!
<
p>How much longer can libs and progressives keep blaming Bush? Can we agree on a Bush-loathing sunset date?
your Bush apology date.
Progressives are gutless. You’ll keep blaming Bush for everything from here to eternity because you’re unwilling to take responsibility.
<
p>Except if things go well, then it’s “we did it!” If things go poorly, “it’s Bush’s fault.”
<
p>I can see it now. Dateline 2015: “Speeding asteroid on collision course with Earth. Bush administration faulted.”
<
p>Move on, please.
You guys are totally blameless for whatever Bush did.
Speaking of “gutless”, why aren’t you answering the trove of wonders my diary and Bob’s link provide.
<
p>You in fact are gutless because you don’t want to face the terrible failure your politics have visited on the U.S. and the world. It’s easier to blame liberals for bringing it up than to face it or be part of correcting it. And, yes, there will be problems left over from the Bush Administration for many years. That should be unsurprising.
<
p>Spin on!
and you’re stuck in it, wanting an apology, essentially a confession of all the perceived sins, before you’ll leave the past behind, get in the present, and consider the future.
<
p>The dam broke, and the town got flooded. I want to rebuild the town right away. You’re calling for an investigation first to ascribe blame. No rebuilding until we get confessions from all responsible!
<
p>Sure, plenty of mistakes were made. Of course, you pin everything on GWB. No one else had a hand in anything. Like the Fannie and Freddie meltdowns … of course, 100% Bush’s fault.
<
p>But the Democrats are now in charge. I want to be part of the change to solve today’s problems. You want to wait until every Republican falls on their sword. There’s not enough contrition in the world to satisfy you.
<
p>You’re like the bitter ex-spouse who can’t get on with their life, instead focusing on blaming the other person.
<
p>Documentation of Bush’s perceived ills will remain, if not an obsession, your sole hobby for years to come. You already remind me of the old guy at Quincy Market who walks around with the tattered sign “Who Killed the West End?”
<
p>Move on please.
I wouldn’t know.
If there were nothing wrong with conservative policies, why did the last 8 years turn out so badly? If the last eight years turned out so badly, why should we trust conservative policies ever again?
<
p>People who whine about “not defending the past” give a clear indication that they are not thoughtful people who can learn from their mistakes. They are not intellectually honest. They don’t belong in relationships because you cannot stay in an intimate relationship unless you are capable of apologizing for the hurt you will inevitably cause and learn something from doing so. Everyone causes hurt. It’s inevitable. Not knowing how to fix it causes the destruction. “Not defending the past” for many men is a long, lonely road of broken relationships.
<
p>But let me point out, the Democrats and the incoming Administration seem quite willing to set about fixing things. And not a moment too soon. Shockingly, the Republicans seem to be stuck at polishing their one-liners.
(1) There were plenty of things wrong with Bush’s policies with which, despite my voting for him, I vehemently disagree. There were other things that I supported and applaud.
<
p>(2) I see you think everything that is wrong right now is the fault of conservative policies, so much so you ask why we should ever “trust conservative policies ever again.” So I guess there’s nothing — zero, absolute zero — that you’d list as a positive Bush accomplishment. If asked, you’ll feign serious contemplation, stroke your chin a bit, then confirm, “nope, I can’t think of anything.”
<
p>Hey, even I thought Bill Clinton did some things right. Can you think of a single thing George Bush did right? Let us know if you can think of one. Are you intellectually honest?
<
p>(3) My experience with open discussion on progressive blogs has been mixed, with many threads eventually devolving into personal attacks or name-calling. Your prior post falls into that category; I’m sorry now I used “bitter spouse” as you thought I was writing from experience (see (4) below.)
<
p>Don’t take my declining to “argue the past” as anything but my not wanting to debate with someone who believes everything that’s wrong right now was caused by conservative policies. Like sunspot activity causes either the National or American League to win the World Series.
<
p>I have “defended the past” plenty of times, on BMG. Just not with you. Maybe someday. But not until you can tell me a single thing you though Bush did right.
<
p>(4) You make a wrong assumption about my marital history (happily in my first one) on the basis of my “bitter spouse” comment. But I commend you for not jumping to the conclusion I used to live in the West End.
<
p>(5) Making the wrong assumption in (4) above, you level a personal attack. I forget what this technique is called in debating, but if I got a dollar for every time some progressive blogger broke down and called me names, I’d retire. You did it yourself:
Ouch, I must be some wicked loser unable to remain in a loving relationship.
idiotic. He’s the friggin president.
Everyone is blaming Bush, of course, he checked out long ago.
<
p>So the Dems have been “in control” of Congress for two years, what about the 6 befroe then. Don’t you think enough damage was done?
<
p>Look, the sooner they are all gone the better, this country is in desperate straits, no?
But at some point you’ll need to quit blaming Bush (for KBusch that day will NEVER come. He’ll NEVER move on.)
<
p>Come January 21st, Obama’s in the driver’s seat, with both the House and Senate in Democrat hands. Voters will not want to hear “but it’s Bush’s fault” any longer … maybe there’s a 3 or 6 month honeymoon.
<
p>After that, they’ll want forward motion. They won’t take excuses.
<
p>Either step up to the plate, or shut up.
… out of office yet. Can calls to stop denouncing the worst presidency in history please wait at least until the guy is has been out of office for six months? Really, to be fair, we should stop blaming Bush for current conditions when the current conditions are not ascribable to his administration and policies. It’d be foolish to think his administrations actions over the last 8 years won’t influence our future for quite a while. For as long as that future is fraught with problems caused by or exacerbated by his administration, it is entirely ok to denounce him for it.
As long as you believe Bush is to blame for EVERYTHING, then I agree with you here:
<
p>
<
p>But not everything is Bush’s fault. The sub-prime/Alt-A mortgage meltdown and the auto industry problems are 2 issues which span many years, 3 presidents, and both Democratic and Republican congresses.
<
p>But, sure, blame Bush through 2020. That way Obama’s policies cannot be judged.
Republicans certainly blamed Clinton long after then end of his term.