Surely not even EBIII is on board with Representative O’Flaherty’s proposal to transfer the Chelsea District Court from the District Court to the Boston Municipal Court. The Globe suggests Rep. O’Flaherty is seeking to make the move over the objection of the Trial Court’s Chief Justice for Administration and Management, Robert A. Mulligan, in order to help his friend and ally, clerk magistrate Kevin Murphy. Chief Justice Lynda M. Connolly, the head of the District Court, had disciplined Murphy after evidence went missing in Chelsea, and the move would take Murphy out of Judge Connolly’s power.
Representative O’Flaherty’s explanation of his plan is that it’s nonsense to claim that the “whole reason is to be protective of Kevin Murphy.” (Is that an admission that helping Murphy was part of the reason)? He claims that the main reason for the move is efficiency: Chelsea’s district court should be managed by the same administrators who administer the other equivalent courts in Suffolk County. Really? If efficiency were the goal, then surely the answer would be to rationalize the structure of the courts by folding the BMC into the District Court, so that we have a single statewide district court, as we have a single statewide superior court. What purpose is served by having one district court for the entire commonwealth, and a separate court in Boston? I hate to say it, but this is something Mitt Romney was right about. He proposed merging the courts when he was governor, but the legislature shot the proposal down.
and that a proposal of a Demcorat was not in the best interests of the people of the Commonwealth.
At least here in BMG land.
you’d think you had never spent any time at this site. It’s as if you *want* us to be marching in lockstep with the Dems. It must annoy you no end that we don’t.
And you see that I was crediting Romney for the good idea, right? I mean, sheesh!
and I’ll probably stop reading for a while. It’s gotten way too predictable. I thought I would learn something but it’s not really information now, just a lot of slanted opnion.
I think that’s as the campaigns have ramped up the tone has entirely gone in one direction. There used to be links and reasoned arguments. Now it’s just Dems = good, Republicans = bad.
n/t
The Warren/Native American thing is a great example. You make a claim. I say it’s false, and I supply a bunch of links proving it. The next day, you make the same claim. I again say you’re wrong and link back to what I posted yesterday. The next day, there’s that same claim again. By this point, I am bored and irritated with your claim, and don’t bother linking, instead just saying that you are stubbornly refusing to acknowledge reality. And then you complain that we’re slanted, mean, and unlinky.
His story for stepping down from leadership as chairman of the Judiciary Committee was absurd. He says it’s because a newspaper article hurt his feelings? O’Flaherty has been one of the most unrepentant hacks that there is, since when does he care what the newspapers have to say?
It’s almost like he’s now trying to lower his profile, and perhaps create some space between himself and leadership. And leadership tried to give him a courthouse, apparently. Nice going away present.
No doubt responding to the colossal influence of BMG, Representative O’Flaherty has withdrawn his proposal to move the Chelsea District Court to the BMC.
Sorry I didn’t see your post directed to me.
I just want to answer you and then I’ll stop posting.
The reason I never answered you was because (correct me if I’m wrong) your comment (with link) was along the lines of the Globe says Harvard said that ethnicity had nothing to do with Warren’s hiring. I don’t disagree with that statement “the Globe says Harvard said”
To that I don’t disagree. Of course they say that.
You say (and have links) that Warren was at times identified as white. I don’t disagree.
I say (and I can provide links) is that she identified herself (in the law directory) as Native American, Penn at times identified her at times as Native American, and Harvard at times identifed her as Native American.
I only point out a couple of facts like she appears on the surface to be a hire very unlike (based on lesser qualifications) any other professor at Harvard Law.
And I do think the story goes on. The Globe retraction. The Fordham Law Review article quoting Harvard. Who knows what turns up next?
Brown can win this one on the issues but these stories around Warren hurt her with some voters, and in a close race it could be important.