than all the Dinopukes in the Congress and the ‘Clown Car’ put together !
Fred Rich LaRiccia
SomervilleTomsays
No wonder Wall Street is so terrified of her.
scott12masssays
If she does nothing else she widens the discussion of ideas in an articulate manner, and that is always a good thing.
Mark L. Bailsays
Edgar. I know a lot of politicians. Many I call friends. But the times I’ve seen Elizabeth Warren I was impressed with how genuine she is. A regular politician would have milked the Draft Elizabeth Warren thing. She didn’t. Elected officials like her don’t come along very often.
jconwaysays
Including an old buddy who was a big Scott Brown supporter, but he said he will vote for her in the next election since her office came through for firefighters when they needed equipment funding, and another friend who is socially conservative but loves her focus on punishing the banks for their immorality and misdeeds, not to mention her opposition to payday lending. She will build interesting coalitions, and is well suited to our interesting times, where support for traditional capitalism is at an all time low.
dasox1says
It’s not surprising, given her popularity, when Democrats sound like her. After all, she was given a leadership post in the Senate to help frame the party’s message. It’s working from HRC on down. But, the Republicans sound like her too. Mike Huckabee was on MSNBC this morning, and he sounded like her. I don’t think the Republicans intellectually understand how to enact policies that would help the middle class and working poor, but they are smart enough to know what resonates–and, it’s EW’s message.
jconwaysays
Huckabee and Santorum seem to be competing for the same bloc of voters with the same ideology Pat Buchanan once espoused. Economically populist and socially conservative. Pro-labor, pro-social security, and anti-free trade economics coupled with strong anti-gay, anti-feminist, and anti-immigrant rhetoric. The former makes them interesting since both parties once had a populist wing, as recently as 2005 when CAFTA could barely get through a Republican Congress.
I would argue we won’t get many of the key economic reforms we need without some conservatives finding Jesus against unfettered capitalism. It’s why establishment conservatives absolutely hate them.
edgarthearmeniansays
who blindly voted for Brown. In many ways I am not conservative, especially in wanting to give a fair shake to the working guy. Elizabeth Warren understands people who actually work for a living.
jconwaysays
Brown did a lot of stuff too many politicians forget to do these days-he went to wakes, shook hands at Rotary clubs and VFW halls, and even dropped in unannounced to firehouses just to say hi and ask what the fellas needed from Washington. It was that latter action that got my friend in the Cambridge Fire Dept to vote for Brown, but when those promises went unanswered they called Warren’s staff and got the equipment they needed.
Mark L. Bailsays
same way with teachers. He was supportive as long as it didn’t cost money. You can be the nicest guy in the world, but if your agenda is to cut taxes and services, it isn’t going to matter much.
jconwaysays
In another era, he likely could’ve been another Senator Pothole from a blue state. But, with the tea party getting earmarks banned, it was a lot less likely he could buy loyalty that way these days. Unlike New York, we got stuck with this mediocrity for just two years and saw a real Democrat replace him instead of a Wall Street stooge like Schumer.
merrimackguysays
but
“understands people who actually work for a living” is one of the most abused statements in politics.
Didn’t Brown? He came from very little and had a crappy family as well. At least Warren had a decent family to grow up in.
Does Hillary Clinton? She came from money and attended elite colleges before starting her work career.
Does Jeb Bush? I don’t know. No one would say that Ted Kennedy didn’t understand working people despite growing up with wealth. I don’t know how this statement can be objectively applied except in the most obvious examples.
It’s just a label applied to Democrats to imply that Republicans don’t understand people who actually work for a living.
edgarthearmeniansays
But as JConway points out in his reference to firefighters who needed support and equipment, actions reinforce the words. The statement is abused only when it is hot air for political benefit.
merrimackguysays
Why is a Cambridge firehouse looking to DC for equipment?
jconwaysays
My buddy is actively involved in the union, he was referring to Brown coming by his house and a few others in the area during the 2010 campaign and periodically during his only term, promising he would be in their corner, and then he voted against getting them equipment in appropriations. It’s why the union endorsed Warren in force in 2012.
Three years down the road, he’s moved to another state, and Brown is still a target.
Can’t we go back to wanking about the Olympics? I think a there’s at least one or two stones unturned out there.
SomervilleTomsays
I agree that Scott Brown is yesterday’s news. Seems like it took more than three years to get the GOP to let go of their hysteria about Ted Kennedy.
Maybe we can all both attempt to be patient with our other-winged friends and also keep our focus on current candidates.
SomervilleTomsays
So long as the funding for is for actual fire equipment (as opposed to, for example, some sort of weaponized “anti-terror” military creation), I think Fire Departments should get as much funding as is available through whatever funding sources are available.
I don’t know of any fire departments in Massachusetts that are over-funded and bloated with excess gear that they’re unable to use. Seems like we’ve confirmed that local (property tax) funding for Springfield is already at catastrophically low levels.
So yes, I think it’s a very good idea that the feds funded the Springfield FD.
merrimackguysays
You wouldn’t want the feds to have a municipal sidewalks grant.
The state should be the first line of help.
Just personal philosophy, and especially when there is a deficit and many other needs.
SomervilleTomsays
I agree.
I think the dilemma happens when “should be” is different from “is”. When the local property tax base has evaporated (or been consumed), and the state refuses or is unable to step in as the first line of help, then I find it appropriate and necessary for state officials to request help from the feds. Governor Baker did the right thing by asking for federal disaster aid this winter. In my view, the successful request for the Springfield FD is the same.
In my view, preserving the ability for firefighters to effectively respond to emergencies trumps philosophical concerns about the federal deficit.
jconwaysays
I couldn’t help but get a dig in at Scott, but it’s old news and not worth mentioning so I’ll retract it.
As for the funding, this should show everyone why we need to fix our revenue problem in the state. Local aid, municipal services, all of those areas shouldn’t have to rely on federal funding. One area that definitely needs more is public education, which sends a paltry 10% of the budget for most districts. But that’s a discussion for a different thread. Good points all.
merrimackguysays
I know the most about Lawrence, but I am confident Springfield has a similar problem.
In Lawrence: Tax Revenue- (City +School expenses) = -75%. The rest the state kicks in. The expectation for most other municipalities is for that the above equation is zero or positive.
Today Lawrence is “better.” Why? Indirect state assistance (in about 10 ways) allows Lawrence to spend less and/or have improved services.
In my world slipping in Federal dollars isn’t free money. My town of Andover gets various chunks of Federal money. Why? Because they put in a grant proposal. At one point the Federal government was a great source of money. Now it’s a diminished pie.
I think that Federal money helps put off hard decisions that need to be made about Gateway cities here in MA. The state should make them a priority and it does not.
jconwaysays
I think that Federal money helps put off hard decisions that need to be made about Gateway cities here in MA. The state should make them a priority and it does not.
More band aids will be needed to stop the bleeding, but we also need to bind up the wound, and that won’t happen if the state continues to ignore those critical parts of the Commonwealth. I like that you and nopolitician bring that perspective here, especially since your experience is two very different parts of the state with similar problems. Obviously the folks in charge aren’t even sure what to do, but solutions you are interested in will grab my attention.
merrimackguysays
I’m not sure why, except that he has long time allies there and everyone of all parties gets along. I think he’s trying to learn something.
Here’s one view on Gateway cities.
What do we really lack in MA, especially in the eastern third? Affordable housing. Where is the affordable housing? In the mid-sized cities. Why don’t people want to live there? They’re not safe and the schools aren’t good compared to towns.
So if you fixed the schools, not an easy task, but you could make them better, and satisfactory for the average non-IEP, English speaking two parent household. Presto- housing prices start going up and we can start to change the revenue/expense equation.
Ditto for crime. Lawrence is the center of the NE drug trade, with deals going down up and down the interstate. Breaking it up at the source reduces crime elsewhere. Also focused task forces have shown great effectiveness there. Maybe a better use of state resources. Again, improve crime and housing goes up.
Just a start, but I think a better state policy/funding stream would reap rewards.
jconwaysays
The housing stock is good too. It’s just a question of fixing the schools and making the communities more livable, almost all of them are on the commuter rail so they bedroom community potential is there, it’s just fixing those two major quality of life issues. I know Lowell has had some success moving above the Lawrence-Springfield-Fitchburg tier, but it also seems that schools and crime remain a big sticking point for those communities.
Getting the 1,000 cops Deval promised, steering the best teachers towards those districts with incentives, and using extra funds to help fill any resource gaps would probably go along way toward both issues. While obviously I would want to disrupt the dealer network, there should be some kind of employment program maybe matched with a non-profit to provide alternatives to the foot soldiers in these gangs to choose a different life. At least having discussions like these with the stakeholders and policymakers would be a great start, I could see Baker showing up and just listening and seeing what policies come to mind. It’s an area he could theoretically run with.
merrimackguysays
Lowell has these things going for it:
UMass Lowell
Long time businesses and community support from those businesses.
Great location
A very high end section of town (like real mansions)
The immigrant population is a high percentage Asian.
So it’s a hard one to copy. They still have crime, but it doesn’t appear to be a situation where people feel unsafe.
Haverhill has done some good work with converting mills into housing for young professionals, and then adding night life. We all know that walking home after drinking is the way to go.
Creative thinking could go a long ways in this state. Lawrence has gotten a NECC campus and that’s helped one portion. I would also be an advocate of special zoning, though not sure what form that would take.
Faster commuter rail to Boston might be a big plus for all these cities, to get back on our MBTA horse.
than all the Dinopukes in the Congress and the ‘Clown Car’ put together !
Fred Rich LaRiccia
No wonder Wall Street is so terrified of her.
If she does nothing else she widens the discussion of ideas in an articulate manner, and that is always a good thing.
Edgar. I know a lot of politicians. Many I call friends. But the times I’ve seen Elizabeth Warren I was impressed with how genuine she is. A regular politician would have milked the Draft Elizabeth Warren thing. She didn’t. Elected officials like her don’t come along very often.
Including an old buddy who was a big Scott Brown supporter, but he said he will vote for her in the next election since her office came through for firefighters when they needed equipment funding, and another friend who is socially conservative but loves her focus on punishing the banks for their immorality and misdeeds, not to mention her opposition to payday lending. She will build interesting coalitions, and is well suited to our interesting times, where support for traditional capitalism is at an all time low.
It’s not surprising, given her popularity, when Democrats sound like her. After all, she was given a leadership post in the Senate to help frame the party’s message. It’s working from HRC on down. But, the Republicans sound like her too. Mike Huckabee was on MSNBC this morning, and he sounded like her. I don’t think the Republicans intellectually understand how to enact policies that would help the middle class and working poor, but they are smart enough to know what resonates–and, it’s EW’s message.
Huckabee and Santorum seem to be competing for the same bloc of voters with the same ideology Pat Buchanan once espoused. Economically populist and socially conservative. Pro-labor, pro-social security, and anti-free trade economics coupled with strong anti-gay, anti-feminist, and anti-immigrant rhetoric. The former makes them interesting since both parties once had a populist wing, as recently as 2005 when CAFTA could barely get through a Republican Congress.
I would argue we won’t get many of the key economic reforms we need without some conservatives finding Jesus against unfettered capitalism. It’s why establishment conservatives absolutely hate them.
who blindly voted for Brown. In many ways I am not conservative, especially in wanting to give a fair shake to the working guy. Elizabeth Warren understands people who actually work for a living.
Brown did a lot of stuff too many politicians forget to do these days-he went to wakes, shook hands at Rotary clubs and VFW halls, and even dropped in unannounced to firehouses just to say hi and ask what the fellas needed from Washington. It was that latter action that got my friend in the Cambridge Fire Dept to vote for Brown, but when those promises went unanswered they called Warren’s staff and got the equipment they needed.
same way with teachers. He was supportive as long as it didn’t cost money. You can be the nicest guy in the world, but if your agenda is to cut taxes and services, it isn’t going to matter much.
In another era, he likely could’ve been another Senator Pothole from a blue state. But, with the tea party getting earmarks banned, it was a lot less likely he could buy loyalty that way these days. Unlike New York, we got stuck with this mediocrity for just two years and saw a real Democrat replace him instead of a Wall Street stooge like Schumer.
but
“understands people who actually work for a living” is one of the most abused statements in politics.
Didn’t Brown? He came from very little and had a crappy family as well. At least Warren had a decent family to grow up in.
Does Hillary Clinton? She came from money and attended elite colleges before starting her work career.
Does Jeb Bush? I don’t know. No one would say that Ted Kennedy didn’t understand working people despite growing up with wealth. I don’t know how this statement can be objectively applied except in the most obvious examples.
It’s just a label applied to Democrats to imply that Republicans don’t understand people who actually work for a living.
But as JConway points out in his reference to firefighters who needed support and equipment, actions reinforce the words. The statement is abused only when it is hot air for political benefit.
Why is a Cambridge firehouse looking to DC for equipment?
My buddy is actively involved in the union, he was referring to Brown coming by his house and a few others in the area during the 2010 campaign and periodically during his only term, promising he would be in their corner, and then he voted against getting them equipment in appropriations. It’s why the union endorsed Warren in force in 2012.
She also got Springfield FD a 728,000 federal grant for equipment. She puts the money where her mouth is, unlike the truck driving phony “from” New Hampshire.
Had to get that alliteration in there.
Three years down the road, he’s moved to another state, and Brown is still a target.
Can’t we go back to wanking about the Olympics? I think a there’s at least one or two stones unturned out there.
I agree that Scott Brown is yesterday’s news. Seems like it took more than three years to get the GOP to let go of their hysteria about Ted Kennedy.
Maybe we can all both attempt to be patient with our other-winged friends and also keep our focus on current candidates.
So long as the funding for is for actual fire equipment (as opposed to, for example, some sort of weaponized “anti-terror” military creation), I think Fire Departments should get as much funding as is available through whatever funding sources are available.
I don’t know of any fire departments in Massachusetts that are over-funded and bloated with excess gear that they’re unable to use. Seems like we’ve confirmed that local (property tax) funding for Springfield is already at catastrophically low levels.
So yes, I think it’s a very good idea that the feds funded the Springfield FD.
You wouldn’t want the feds to have a municipal sidewalks grant.
The state should be the first line of help.
Just personal philosophy, and especially when there is a deficit and many other needs.
I agree.
I think the dilemma happens when “should be” is different from “is”. When the local property tax base has evaporated (or been consumed), and the state refuses or is unable to step in as the first line of help, then I find it appropriate and necessary for state officials to request help from the feds. Governor Baker did the right thing by asking for federal disaster aid this winter. In my view, the successful request for the Springfield FD is the same.
In my view, preserving the ability for firefighters to effectively respond to emergencies trumps philosophical concerns about the federal deficit.
I couldn’t help but get a dig in at Scott, but it’s old news and not worth mentioning so I’ll retract it.
As for the funding, this should show everyone why we need to fix our revenue problem in the state. Local aid, municipal services, all of those areas shouldn’t have to rely on federal funding. One area that definitely needs more is public education, which sends a paltry 10% of the budget for most districts. But that’s a discussion for a different thread. Good points all.
I know the most about Lawrence, but I am confident Springfield has a similar problem.
In Lawrence: Tax Revenue- (City +School expenses) = -75%. The rest the state kicks in. The expectation for most other municipalities is for that the above equation is zero or positive.
Today Lawrence is “better.” Why? Indirect state assistance (in about 10 ways) allows Lawrence to spend less and/or have improved services.
In my world slipping in Federal dollars isn’t free money. My town of Andover gets various chunks of Federal money. Why? Because they put in a grant proposal. At one point the Federal government was a great source of money. Now it’s a diminished pie.
I think that Federal money helps put off hard decisions that need to be made about Gateway cities here in MA. The state should make them a priority and it does not.
More band aids will be needed to stop the bleeding, but we also need to bind up the wound, and that won’t happen if the state continues to ignore those critical parts of the Commonwealth. I like that you and nopolitician bring that perspective here, especially since your experience is two very different parts of the state with similar problems. Obviously the folks in charge aren’t even sure what to do, but solutions you are interested in will grab my attention.
I’m not sure why, except that he has long time allies there and everyone of all parties gets along. I think he’s trying to learn something.
Here’s one view on Gateway cities.
What do we really lack in MA, especially in the eastern third? Affordable housing. Where is the affordable housing? In the mid-sized cities. Why don’t people want to live there? They’re not safe and the schools aren’t good compared to towns.
So if you fixed the schools, not an easy task, but you could make them better, and satisfactory for the average non-IEP, English speaking two parent household. Presto- housing prices start going up and we can start to change the revenue/expense equation.
Ditto for crime. Lawrence is the center of the NE drug trade, with deals going down up and down the interstate. Breaking it up at the source reduces crime elsewhere. Also focused task forces have shown great effectiveness there. Maybe a better use of state resources. Again, improve crime and housing goes up.
Just a start, but I think a better state policy/funding stream would reap rewards.
The housing stock is good too. It’s just a question of fixing the schools and making the communities more livable, almost all of them are on the commuter rail so they bedroom community potential is there, it’s just fixing those two major quality of life issues. I know Lowell has had some success moving above the Lawrence-Springfield-Fitchburg tier, but it also seems that schools and crime remain a big sticking point for those communities.
Getting the 1,000 cops Deval promised, steering the best teachers towards those districts with incentives, and using extra funds to help fill any resource gaps would probably go along way toward both issues. While obviously I would want to disrupt the dealer network, there should be some kind of employment program maybe matched with a non-profit to provide alternatives to the foot soldiers in these gangs to choose a different life. At least having discussions like these with the stakeholders and policymakers would be a great start, I could see Baker showing up and just listening and seeing what policies come to mind. It’s an area he could theoretically run with.
Lowell has these things going for it:
UMass Lowell
Long time businesses and community support from those businesses.
Great location
A very high end section of town (like real mansions)
The immigrant population is a high percentage Asian.
So it’s a hard one to copy. They still have crime, but it doesn’t appear to be a situation where people feel unsafe.
Haverhill has done some good work with converting mills into housing for young professionals, and then adding night life. We all know that walking home after drinking is the way to go.
Creative thinking could go a long ways in this state. Lawrence has gotten a NECC campus and that’s helped one portion. I would also be an advocate of special zoning, though not sure what form that would take.
Faster commuter rail to Boston might be a big plus for all these cities, to get back on our MBTA horse.
I want her to run for the White House!