Still waiting to get my mug (496 fans and trying to be the 500th) and can’t help but think that Martha Coakley made a mistake by making a statement that should have sounded more like an AG and not like one of Mayor’s Menino’s pals.
Not sure why she would say anything. If I was advising her I would be telling her to say something:
When Secretary Galvin has completed his inquiry I will review his findings and make a determination if further action is necessary. We must restore trust in blah, blah, blah rhetoric, transparency, blah, blah..
Instead she said this (From the Herald):
Particularly understanding this is the middle of a campaign, we get lots of complaints from folks who are adversaries who have a particular agenda,” Coakley said, referring to the request by Menino’s challengers for a criminal probe of potentially hundreds of public e-mails deleted by Menino policy chief Michael Kineavy.
Is she aware that is was the Boston Globe that started this probe? Has she heard Bill Sinnott answer questions three different ways?
Just think she could have kept her powder dry and at least appear like she is doing her job as our AG. This smacks of U.S. Senate Politics and not her job as our AG.
If it turns out that Menino, or his aides, were involved in a cover-up, she has lost herself this election. Way to be.
<
p>(Not to mention the fact that her probable opponent actually has legislative experience.)
What characteristics would you want to see in a candidate for Senator if s/he did not have legislative experience?