Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Martha Coakley gets MY vote!

By

Despite extreme pressure from a powerful, well connected authority figure, one whose style is autocratic and demanding to the point of being a true bully in my eyes, and risking much to protect those who looked to her for protection – Martha Coakley stood up to enormous pressure.  I won’t go so far as to say those who have earned the enmity or stood up against the mistaken ideas of that particular public figure automatically get my vote – but it sure helps.  

After choosing a presidential primary candidate based solely on his public positions and fine-sounding words [John Edwards – GROAN]…so-called “litmus tests” or “which candidate agrees with more of my positions” doesn’t matter to me much – if at all.  Words are not the same as future actions.  Talk is cheap.  So I won’t bother to list the positions on which Martha Coakley and I agree – or disagree.  There are some of each, I assure you.

In so far as possible, what I care about is what the candidate is like under pressure, and where their “disposable time” has gone.  How I have seen that candidate treat ordinary people in their lives and communities before entering the senate race matters to me, too.  It is impossible to see into a heart of another, but my impressions as to honesty, self-discipline, compassion, and moral courage matter a great deal, at least to me.

Also, I am a loyal type.  When I pledge to a candidate in a primary, it takes a major, major disappointment in that candidate for me to change to another primary candidate.  I I admit I will take my time as to the Auditor’s and Treasurer’s races.  Because once I sign on, I am on.

Thanks for running, Martha, and giving me a candidate I can fully trust and believe in.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. will leave us wanting when our civil and Constitutional rights are on the line unless the issue relates to children, old people, reproductive rights or lgbt issues.  When it comes to rolling back fourth amendment or sixth amendment rights, suspending habeas corpus, or indefinite detention, national security letter, sneak and peakm she will vote in favor of government authority to “keep us safe” and abandon our hard fought civil and Constitutional rights. imo.  

      • When addressing threats to our national security, we must balance our ideals of liberty and due process. As Middlesex District Attorney, I worked with the Muslim community in Massachusetts after September 11th to make sure that their civil liberties were protected. As President of the Massachusetts District Attorney’s Association, I declared unequivocally that hate crimes against Muslims spurred by the attacks would not be tolerated. As Attorney General, my staff and I met regularly with Muslim leaders from across the Commonwealth to keep communication open and foster mutual trust.

        I opposed post-September 11th security measures that infringed on civil liberties. As Attorney General, I testified before the Massachusetts Legislature’s Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs against the federal REAL ID, the proposed national identification card.

        We must balance keeping America safe with protecting individual civil rights and civil liberties. The post-September 11th PATRIOT Act was an attempt to protect Americans from terrorists, but it sacrificed some of our most treasured civil liberties. President Obama recently called for the reauthorization of three key provisions of the Act, but it still impacts privacy and civil liberties. We must resist security measures that only appear to advance public safety aims, but in actuality, lack the capability of keeping us safe.

        My experiences as Middlesex District Attorney and Attorney General have provided me a first-hand understanding of the tools members of law enforcement need to keep Massachusetts and our nation safe. Only by working together can we fulfill America’s promise as a moral leader in the world and as a safe and secure nation that is a true sanctuary for all those within its borders. This stance reflects the importance of providing law enforcement with the latitude it needs to fight terrorism, while also remaining cognizant of the risks posed by such legislation. In the Senate, I will work to ensure that any proposed security legislation or PATRIOT Act reauthorization has a meaningful impact on our national security and minimal infringement on the privacy and freedom of our citizens.

        • This doesn’t address her position on sixth Amendment rights of confrontation (Melendez-Diaz which thankfully she lost), her position on banning the free speech of a paroled convict for ten years (1st Amendment Cheryl Lefave), or her position on over zealous prosecutions – going for second degree murder when no intent was in evidence – or requiring former suspects who were exhonerated by the facts to perform community service as terms for of dismissal of their charges – the two enterprising men from Arlington who were accused of planting hoax devices and which wer enothing more than an advertising campaign.

          <

          p>Will Martha be addressing those questions?  

  2. Although we have arrived at different candidates by different methods in this race, I applaud an endorsement that is wholly positive about a candidate and isn’t based on denigrating others.  

    <

    p>While the Attorney General is not my first choice, I think she would make a good Senator and definitely has my vote should she win the primary.  

  3. Swing by from Cambridge and please be here for Martha in Framingham tomorrow. Martha will have lunch tomorrow (Thursday, December 3, high noon until 1 p.m.) in our Framingham’s Aegean Greek restaurant along Route 30 (West of the Burger King, diagonally across the Post Office and Bickford’s).

    • I am taking election day off, though.  So on election day, I will “go where they want me to go” or stand sentinel at my own precinct where I am quite well known.

  4. Although I am supporting Mike, and I never liked John Edwards, I agree with this statement completely:

    <

    p>

    After choosing a presidential primary candidate based solely on his public positions and fine-sounding words [John Edwards – GROAN]…so-called “litmus tests” or “which candidate agrees with more of my positions” doesn’t matter to me much – if at all.  Words are not the same as future actions.  Talk is cheap.  So I won’t bother to list the positions on which Martha Coakley and I agree – or disagree.  There are some of each, I assure you.

  5. …I am with Deb and Martha Coakley on this one. Very well written post. Let’s roll on Tuesday.

  6. I have had the pleasure of meeting many people who have known her over the years and on the strength of their experiences, have come out to campaign for her.  Those many people are a tremendous testament to Coakley’s character and to the strong and positive relationships Coakley has built all around the state.  

Archives