Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

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

Did Charlie Baker just have his “Mike Dukakis moment”?

October 22, 2010 By David 21 Comments

Anyone who knows anything about recent presidential races, especially if they’re from Massachusetts, knows about the extraordinary moment when moderator Bernard Shaw asked Mike Dukakis in a televised debate:

If Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?

In answering, Dukakis showed no hint of emotion, instead rattling off statistics about the Massachusetts crime rate.  It didn’t go well from there.

So two days ago, a woman called into Howie Carr’s radio show to ask Charlie Baker what she thought about Jeff Perry and his strip search problem.  She noted that Baker had campaigned together with Perry, and she then asked

what you think about all the allegations that have come out and the victim speaking up and criticizing Perry for his actions as a police officer?

Baker’s answer is remarkably Dukakoid, in that it shows no hint of emotion, instead rattling off prepared talking points about spending and Washington.  Listen to it again.

Baker still with Perry sound clip

Baker still with Perry sound clip

No hint of compassion for the victim.  No hint of emotion or any other human attribute; rather, a robotic recitation of talking points.

What if the caller had gone Bernard Shaw on Baker and asked about Baker’s own daughter?  What if she had asked what he’d think now if it had been Baker’s own daughter who was illegally strip-searched and groped in a cranberry bog all those years ago while Perry stood by and did nothing?  Would we still have gotten the robo-candidate we heard yesterday?  Would we still have heard echoes of Mike Dukakis failing to respond with ordinary human emotion?

Hard to say.  Maybe someone will ask that question of Baker before November 2.

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

Filed Under: User Tagged With: 2010, baker, ma-gov

Comments

  1. trickle-up says

    October 22, 2010 at 11:20 am

    Mike’s “error” was lack of anger. Charlie’s is lack of compassion. These are not the same.

    <

    p>The latter is much worse in my view (indeed the former may be a strength). But Charlie’s supporters will not punish him for not caring about a rape victim.

    Log in to Reply
    • dont-get-cute says

      October 22, 2010 at 11:32 am

      Mike should have been angry at the question, and then answered it.  Baker should have taken that approach too, and answered that he’s sure Perry wasn’t aware that Flanagan was doing something wrong when he was searching the girl for drugs.

      <

      p>By the way, is Flanagan’s confession on line somewhere?  What did he confess to?  Raping her?  Or just searching her in a way that violated her civil rights?

      Log in to Reply
      • lightiris says

        October 22, 2010 at 11:41 am

        1.  Do your own research.  Google is your friend, and everything you need to know about Flanagan’s behavior is well documented.  Do your homework.

        <

        p>And this:

        <

        p>

        By the way, is Flanagan’s confession on line somewhere?  What did he confess to?  Raping her?  Or just searching her in a way that violated her civil rights?  

        <

        p>2.  Again, do your own homework.   Also, the “just” in your last sentence is positively amazing given everything that has been written about Mr. Flanagan on this very website.  Have you read anything?  

        <

        p>Let me help you out: Mr. Flanagan was “just searching her in a way” that is a sexual assault.  Perhaps you missed all the talk about “sexual assault” while you were busy not reading everything posted here about this case.  There can be no other reason for you to suggest or conclude that this was either a case of rape or a search that “just” violated her civil rights.  

        Log in to Reply
        • johnk says

          October 22, 2010 at 12:36 pm

          that we were all skeptical on the first posting about this, we asked for documentation.  David was on the forefront on this one.  I could be mistaken but he said that he’d delete the post if there wasn’t anything to support it.  So a lot of the information is linked at BMG.  

          Log in to Reply
      • medfieldbluebob says

        October 22, 2010 at 12:32 pm

        … is just  civil rights thing? This is just some typical liberal PC thing?

        <

        p>HE MOLESTED A 14 YEAR OLD GIRL WHILE ON DUTY IN A POLICE UNIFORM. AND PERRY WATCHED.

        <

        p>”JUST” “JUST” “JUST”???????????? DIDN’T KNOW??????

        <

        p>It’s OK If Your A Republican?

        <

        p>This is your Charlie Baker moment.

        <

        p>No compassion. Just win the election and cut spending for things like … victims support, or rape counseling, or child services. Cuz ya know it’s just bleeding heart civil rights crap.

        <

        p>Don’t get cute, just get out.

        <

        p>

        Log in to Reply
        • dont-get-cute says

          October 22, 2010 at 2:46 pm

          And Perry thought he was searching her for drugs.

          <

          p>I’m not a victorian prissy who thinks a strip search of a person suspected of hiding drugs in their underwear is rape, or violates anyone’s rights, no matter what sex or how old they are.  Assuming the strip search is done by uniformed police officers, of course (that’s what makes it OK).  It’s just a strip search.  Maybe there are new rules now that mean you have arrest the suspect and bring them in, and then search them by an officer of the same sex, but those hardly change anything, I’m not sure I would prefer that to just being strip searched on the scene.  I’m also not a Republican, or a fan of Perry, I’m just against victorian prissiness and criminal rights.

          Log in to Reply
          • bob-neer says

            October 22, 2010 at 3:04 pm

            And was sentenced to jail. Globe:

            <

            p>

            the officer who searched the girls pleaded guilty to indecent assault and other charges and was sentenced to four years in prison. Perry was named as a defendant in civil cases brought by the girls’ parents, which were settled out of court.

            Log in to Reply
            • dont-get-cute says

              October 22, 2010 at 3:36 pm

              This is what I wonder: did he admit that he made her lift her shirt and that he stuck his hand down her pants, but also claim he was only searching her, or did he admit to indecent assault?  In other words, are those the same things?  Did the judge just turn his admission of sticking his hand in her pants into an admission of indecent assault?

              <

              p>And actually, if he did admit to indecent assault, it is hard to believe that if he knew he was doing something wrong, he would do it in front of his supervisor.

              Log in to Reply
              • lightiris says

                October 22, 2010 at 3:39 pm

                He sexually assaulted a 14-year-old girl under the pretense of searching her for drugs.   He had done this before, but had gotten away with it.   He is a child molester.  What part of that don’t you understand?  Are you lucid?  

                Log in to Reply
          • lightiris says

            October 22, 2010 at 3:36 pm

            I’m not a victorian prissy who thinks a strip search of a person suspected of hiding drugs in their underwear is rape, or violates anyone’s rights, no matter what sex or how old they are.  

            <

            p>Are you unclear what constitutes rape?  No one else here is.  This isn’t about modesty.  What is wrong with you??

            <

            p>I’m glad you’re on record for strip searching children, though.  Blurring the lines between legal search and sexual assault doesn’t seem to bother you, but it does bother rational people.  I think that kinda puts you somewhere in the deviant column.  

            <

            p>You are indeed a “victorian prissy” when it comes to drugs and what constitutes a reasonable approach to someone who might have some in his/her possession.  

            <

            p>

            Assuming the strip search is done by uniformed police officers, of course (that’s what makes it OK).  It’s just a strip search.

             

            <

            p>Okay, so as long as someone is wearing a uniform, no matter what evidence they have, they can do a strip search–of anybody, no matter the age or sex, just so long as they wear some sort of badge or uniform.  Citizens have no rights to privacy of person–got it.  Do you think we should all strip to get on an airplane, too?  

            <

            p>

             Maybe there are new rules now that mean you have arrest the suspect and bring them in, and then search them by an officer of the same sex, but those hardly change anything, I’m not sure I would prefer that to just being strip searched on the scene.

            <

            p>Yeah, most people would rather be strip searched in public before they are arrested.   Why bother with rights at all?  Just throw out all the “rules” and let “uniformed police officers” strip people at will.  Cool.

            <

            p>

             I’m also not a Republican, or a fan of Perry, I’m just against victorian prissiness and criminal rights.

            <

            p>Your willingness to embrace the notion that people in “authority” should be able to force people to remove their clothing in public is bizarre, to put it mildly.  Get some help.  

            Log in to Reply
          • medfieldbluebob says

            October 22, 2010 at 3:53 pm

            Assuming the strip search is done by uniformed police officers, of course (that’s what makes it OK)

            <

            p>He was in uniform. So was Perry.  That makes it OK? The uniform?

            <

            p>A 14 year old girl? Are you kidding me?

            <

            p>First of all, what police department allows any male officer to strip search a female, of any age? And a 14 year old?

            <

            p>That’s prissiness?  That’s some deluded overemphasis on civil rights?

            <

            p>STRIP SEARCHING 14 YEAR OLDS?

            <

            p>

            It’s just a strip search

            <

            p>JUST A STRIP SEARCH?

            <

            p>The officer is in jail. Perry needs to join him.

            <

            p>May there be an officer like Perry and his buddy in your future.

            Log in to Reply
            • david says

              October 22, 2010 at 4:14 pm

              Log in to Reply
              • medfieldbluebob says

                October 22, 2010 at 5:12 pm

                Log in to Reply
    • jim-gosger says

      October 22, 2010 at 12:29 pm

      I agree.  But independents will.  This points to Baker’s main problem as a candidate.  He doesn’t connect with voters.  He answers this as if it’s a distraction keeping him off message, rather than as a human being.  This is Charlie in his Pacifica, not Scott in his truck.  You can bet Brown would not have answered this question in this way.

      Log in to Reply
  2. pogo says

    October 22, 2010 at 12:56 pm

    “As the father of four daughters, I wouldn’t be there.” Cahill said of the rally

    Log in to Reply
  3. smashrgrl says

    October 22, 2010 at 2:33 pm

    fiscal discipline is more important than not covering up the molestation of a 14-year old girl. Absolutely appalling.

    Log in to Reply
    • shillelaghlaw says

      October 22, 2010 at 2:38 pm

      It isn’t even about fiscal discipline with Republicans. It’s about electing someone who will vote for John Boehner for speaker.  

      Log in to Reply
      • eaboclipper says

        October 22, 2010 at 2:47 pm

        I’d rather Cantor or Pence.

        Log in to Reply
        • david says

          October 22, 2010 at 3:11 pm

          Log in to Reply
    • johnk says

      October 22, 2010 at 3:00 pm

      show me when they ever had fiscal discipline.  Reagan? Bush?  Who????  Please, enough with this hogwash.

      Log in to Reply
      • shillelaghlaw says

        October 22, 2010 at 3:26 pm

        Maybe Gerald Ford? I think Calvin Coolidge was tight with a buck…

        Log in to Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Recommended Posts

  • There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This Timing (3)
  • Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid Primaries (2)
  • Promises made, promises kept (2)
  • IRA passes 51- 50! (1)
  • Real “Center” is Economically Nationalist/Culturally Moderate (1)

Recent User Posts

Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid Primaries

August 12, 2022 By jconway 1 Comment

There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This Timing

August 10, 2022 By terrymcginty 8 Comments

Site issue: Unable to reply to comments

August 10, 2022 By SomervilleTom 2 Comments

Why do PUKES oppose $35 insulin for diabetics with private insurance?

August 8, 2022 By fredrichlariccia 3 Comments

Promises made, promises kept

August 8, 2022 By fredrichlariccia Leave a Comment

Schedule F

August 7, 2022 By johntmay 4 Comments

Recent Comments

  • SomervilleTom on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesI appreciate you writing this diary. This primary seems…
  • fredrichlariccia on There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This TimingKLEPTOCRAT GRIFTERINO is not the VICTIM; he's the PERPET…
  • Christopher on There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This TimingRepublicans: How dare Merrick Garland politicize the DOJ…
  • fredrichlariccia on There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This TimingThe Court has just given Trump until 3 pm tomorrow to ap…
  • fredrichlariccia on There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This TimingAG Garland just announced the search warrant has been un…
  • johntmay on There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This TimingI would not be surprised at all to learn that Trump deli…
  • fredrichlariccia on There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This TimingCould it also mean that KARM-A-LAGO might want to divert…

Archive

@bluemassgroup on Twitter

#mapoli

headlineoptics Headline Optics @headlineoptics ·
35m

Man sentenced to prison for role in Massachusetts drug trafficking organization run in public … https://www.masspolicyreport.com/2022/08/14/man-sentenced-to-prison-for-role-in-massachusetts-drug-trafficking-organization-run-in-public/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter @masspolicy #MApoli #Massachusetts

Reply on Twitter 1558690386695966721 Retweet on Twitter 1558690386695966721 Like on Twitter 1558690386695966721 Twitter 1558690386695966721
headlineoptics Headline Optics @headlineoptics ·
1h

State Senator talks about new gambling law in Mass. | Sports | http://eagletribune.com https://www.masspolicyreport.com/2022/08/14/state-senator-talks-about-new-gambling-law-in-mass-sports-eagletribune-com/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter @masspolicy #MApoli #Massachusetts

Reply on Twitter 1558677805608579074 Retweet on Twitter 1558677805608579074 Like on Twitter 1558677805608579074 Twitter 1558677805608579074
headlineoptics Headline Optics @headlineoptics ·
2h

The Column: Signs of the times? – Lowell Sun https://www.masspolicyreport.com/2022/08/14/the-column-signs-of-the-times-lowell-sun/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter @masspolicy #MApoli #Massachusetts

Reply on Twitter 1558673528496332803 Retweet on Twitter 1558673528496332803 Like on Twitter 1558673528496332803 Twitter 1558673528496332803
rwwatchma Trump's election fraud hoax undermines democracy @rwwatchma ·
2h

Arizona Speaker of the House Republican Rusty Bowers on Trumpism:

"The rule by thuggery and intimidation. They found a niche, they found a way, and it's fear. People can use fear, demagogues like to use fear as a weapon. And they weaponize everything."

#mapoli #nhpolitics

Aaron Rupar @atrupar

Rusty Bowers on Trumpism: "The rule by thuggery and intimidation. They found a niche, they found a way, and it's fear. People can use fear, demagogues like to use fear as a weapon. And they weaponize everything."

Reply on Twitter 1558672251893022720 Retweet on Twitter 1558672251893022720 Like on Twitter 1558672251893022720 1 Twitter 1558672251893022720
stevenl57 Steve Leibowitz @stevenl57 ·
2h

So there was a tweet from Senator Warren that the #MBTA mess is on the Governor. She's not wrong, but it is incomplete. You can debate the pie slice, but you cannot exclude the Legislature on this, where the culture of kicking cans down the road, prevails. #mapoli

Reply on Twitter 1558670098029846530 Retweet on Twitter 1558670098029846530 Like on Twitter 1558670098029846530 Twitter 1558670098029846530
lowellcouncilor Darius Mitchell_ Massachusetts Governor 2022 🇺🇸 @lowellcouncilor ·
2h

JOE BIDEN, KAMALA HARRIS, THE CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS HAS SHOWN ZERO PASSION OR EMOTIONAL CONNECTION FOR BLACK AMERICA 🇺🇸! IT’S OLD! THEY ARE OLD!!

THE PARTY OF SLAVERY! THAT’S WHAT WE ARE WITNESSING!

#MAPOLI #BOSPOLI #NHPOLITICS

Reply on Twitter 1558662516443680769 Retweet on Twitter 1558662516443680769 1 Like on Twitter 1558662516443680769 2 Twitter 1558662516443680769
Load More

From our sponsors




Google Calendar







Search

Archives

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter




Copyright © 2022 Owned and operated by BMG Media Empire LLC. Read the terms of use. Some rights reserved.