Commonwealth Future PAC which we know as a front group hiding the Republican Governors Association (RGA) PAC money has just sunk to a new low. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen something this disgusting. But this is all Charlie Baker, he owns them. Baker had the opportunity to stop the group, but didn’t. Their actions and Baker’s tacit approval with his silence is offensive.
Coakley has come out and said that Baker should disavow the ad.
While Coakley attacked Republicans for politicizing child abuse and vowed not to do so herself, she also argued that spending cuts led to an increase in social workers’ caseloads at the child protection agency in the 1990s, when Baker served as budget director in two Republican administrations.
Baker said he was proud of his record in state government on behalf of children.
I’m sure he does.
Baker should do more, he should get out of bed with the Koch Brothers, Sheldon Adelson and Swiftboaters Bob Perry and Harold Simmons. Time to hold Charlie accountable for his nonactions.
I just saw him on WCVB saying he did not like the tone of the ad, etc.
If he does more, asks that it e pulled, etc., that can be called coordination.
and can do so publicly.
It’s not going to change how you vote.
No it can’t.
Looks like Ms. Coakley can dish it out but can’t take it. I don’t recall much outcry but the anti-Baker PAC attacks a few weeks back which were equally distorting.
So you are just going to shout “hypocrisy” in every comment? Do you know how tiresome and pointless that is?
You’re right, of course. I should stop pointing out obvious hypocrisy as it rubs a nerve with, well, people who are hypocrites. Let’s try “intolerance.” Do you have that one in your bag? BTW, isn’t golf one of those “evil 1%” leisure pursuits? You wouldn’t want to be accused of that…
Screaming hypocrite all the time is a totally ineffectual form of criticism. When you resort to it so often, you make it very clear that you are not capable of making any other intelligent form of criticism. If you want to post a detailed criticism the anti-Baker ads, by all means do so, but it seems that you are too lazy to do that.
I see. And who put you in charge? You know, it’s hard for common folk to keep up with a deep thinker like you. Particularly one who does seem a bit wound tight. Is this a normal pre-election thing or are you uptight at the prospect of Baker winning next month?
Everyone knows that Coakley will do everything to protect children . . . including going after people who didn’t even harm children.
But you knew that, didn’t you.
who tried to condition the release of an obviously innocent woman on the agreement that the defendants’ attorney, who had represented them through the entire miscarriage of justice, drop the case, leaving his client, an innocent man, in prison– that is, tried to force an innocent person to surrender his constitutional right to counsel.
It was also MC that threatened Gov Swift with an attack from the right if she approved the parole of people known to be innocent.
But you that, didn’t you.
I see nothing “idiotic” about this ad. Instead, I see an ad that spotlights the difference between posturing and action. The public passion of Ms. Coakley to “protect children” is legendary. The reality of what OUR party did these to children is shameful. This ad shines a spotlight on that dissonance.
Mr. Baker did not sign last year’s budget. He did not sign the budget the year before that. In fact, Deval Patrick — a loyal DEMOCRAT, signed the last EIGHT budgets. We DEMOCRATS had a iron-clad lock on both houses of the state legislature during that time.
We did nothing about this problem.
I think we should hold OURSELVES accountable for perpetuating horrors like we enabled in DCF before we get too high-and-mighty about political advertising.
I just want the state government to be the best it can be and “best” means doing what it is supposed to do.
It’s not about cutting something to do a tax cut. It’s about cutting something that makes no sense to use that money to hire front line people who could actually make a difference.
Here’s my issue with something like the Probation Department scandal. People mess up and go to jail. They get out on probation. Their probation officer is a part of what integrates them back into society and hopefully they will not end up back in jail.
But our “good government” legislature didn’t see it that way. In fact, they clearly didn’t care at all. I think it’s the same with these children. The major tragedies make the news but how many smaller ones go unnoticed? Why isn’t DCF a top priority?
Jesse Jackson used to say something about “education prevents incarceration” or something like that. That’s the economic argument. What are the negative consequences of bad DCF? What are the future costs?
The primary reason I am more of a non-Republican than a true-blue Democrat is that I don’t think that Democrats are very credible in the “good government” department, which to my mind wrecks their credibility when they come talking about how more tax revenue is needed.
In my view, if you are the party that advocates bigger government, doing more stuff for more people at more cost, then you have to be vigilant and ruthless when it comes to fraud, waste and abuse in government. But liberals tend to do a cold, rational analysis that somehow discounts how things are perceived.
Now and then some enterprising conservative finds some abuse of some program– EBT cards are being spent on something that is not groceries, and is grossly inappropriate. Police this waste! Liberals will, correctly from a purely mathematical and wonkish point of view, dismiss the issue because the waste costs $1, and policing the waste would cost $10, and it isn’t worth it. But they ignore the fact that the $1 undermines the long-term political credibility of the program.
The old welfare system had all kinds of small-time abuse, which conservatives gleefully pointed out for years. But when Democrats had the Congress, they were not interested. The result was political support for the program eventually eroded to the point where it could be almost completely scrapped in 1994.
Liberalism requires political support for an expansive, more activist government, which in turn requires vigilant self-policing when it comes to stuff like the DCF. The government of the Commonwealth does not do this.
…on what “our party” did to children?
I must have clicked “post a comment.”
Surely you are aware of the shameful abuses perpetuated by the DCF on our watch.
In fact I thought recalled quite a bit of consternation and a shake-up.
I saw consternation and shakeup long after the damage had been done and shortly after the abuses were published in the media.
It is their job to run ads promoting GOP gubernatorial candidates and attacking Dem gubernatorial candidates. I don’t think anyone would fault them for that.