Tag: Massachusetts

Massholes Prepares to Elect a Masshole; Texans Reject An Idiot; Reich Has No Shame

A few more notes on the upcoming election.

First, the Massachusetts gubernatorial race is a tight one between Martha Coakley and Charlie Baker. I’ve mentioned Coakley before. I don’t generally like the term fascist but … gee, what do you say about a person who persecutes innocent people based on discredited testimony and junk science but thinks cops who rape toddlers with curling irons should be let out on their own recognizance? What do you say about someone who embraces trafficking hysteria and makes such appalling arguments for the destruction of civil liberties that she is routinely laughed out of court by hard-bitten conservative justices? If Massachusetts elects a power-hungry power worshipper like Coakley, they deserve what they’re going to get.

I’m starting to believe that the Wendy Davis campaign is a false flag operation by pro-life activists. How else to explain how it has become such a hilarious implosion. Last week, she accused her disabled opponent of not caring about disabled people. When criticized, she had a “some of my best friends are in wheelchairs” press conference. This week, she’s decided she can win because of dildos and interracial marriage.

I guess it makes as much sense as thinking you’re going to ride pro-choice sentiment into Austin.

That post criticizes Greg Abbott for not saying whether he would support a ban on interracial marriage and for arguing in the courts in favor of Texas’ restrictive laws on sex toys. What the author doesn’t seem to realize is that Abbott is talking about his role as attorney general. As attorney general, he won’t deal with an interracial marriage case because the Courts have already struck down anti-miscegenation laws unanimously. I seriously doubt that Abbott, who is married to a woman of another race, would support restoring the interracial marriage ban.

As for the dildos case … again, Abbott was acting as attorney general. As attorney general, he has to represent the state and defend those laws, whatever he thinks of them. I have argued in this space before that I don’t think the executive should defend laws that are blatantly unconstitutional, such as a ban on free speech. But (1) that decision is left to the President (or the governor, in this case). The attorney general pushes the President’s position, no matter what he thinks of it or he resigns; (2) Texas’ dildo laws, while stupid, aren’t exactly the suspension of habeas corpus.

Wheelchairs, mixed races and dildos. The Davis campaign think they are onto a winner. I think their offices need to be checked for nitrous oxide leaks.

Finally, I won’t post the video, but I will link you to Hot Air’s post on a Move On video, featuring Robert Reich, the Littlest Communist in Washington. Reich argues that Republicans are going to use a little known procedure called reconciliation to advance … well, the usual Left Wing mythical playbook: tax cuts for the rich, the end of healthcare, fossil fuel interests, deregulation and OMG, it will be the END OF THE FUCKING WORLD!

Those of you with memories longer than an episode of The Big Bang Theory will recognize this “little-know procedure” as the way Obamacare was passed. The hypocrisy of Move On, their belief that voters are stupid, their condescension … well, it would be surprising if it were someone other than MoveOn.

Right now, the Republicans hold a lead in the polls and look likely to take the Senate. Democrats, who two years ago mocked Republicans for claiming the polls were skewed, are claiming the polls are skewed. Maybe they are, but there is one indicator that tells me that the Democrat are about to lose the Senate and possibly the White House in 2016.

Tone.

When I started blogging, way back in 2004, I noticed a pattern. If someone disagreed with me forcefully but respectfully, it was usually a conservative. If someone called me a fag, accused me wanting to suck George Bush’s dick, asked me how much money I was getting from the NRA and hoped I got beaten up in a dark alley, it was almost always a liberal (usually for something I’d written at Moorewatch).

That script flipped in 2006 and especially in 2008 after Obama’s election. Disagreements from liberals were … well, never respectful but better than they had been in 2004. It was disagreement from conservative that got nasty (although never as nasty as the liberals were in 2004). It was perfect illustration of Jane’s Law:

The devotees of the party in power are smug and arrogant. The devotees of the party out of power are insane.

It’s changing again. It has been for the last year, maybe longer. If I have the temerity to dispute liberal talking points on a liberal board, I get pilloried, called names and sometimes banned. Liberal tweeters are on a hair-trigger for screaming and blocking those who disagree with them. Meanwhile, the commentary on conservative boards has been growing steadily more constructive and upbeat.

The liberals are scared. They think they are going to lose power and, even worse, those evil evil Republicans are going to get it. Actually, it might be even worse: a Republican party with libertarian tendencies, if you can imagine such a thing. Talking to liberals, you would be forgiven if you didn’t realize that Republicans — a few, at least — are the one driving the bus on criminal justice reform, police demilitarization, civil liberties and the end of crony capitalism. No, it’s all about teh gays (which no Republicans care about any more) and teh guns and teh abortions.

We have a few weeks before the election and politics can change very fast. But from where I’m standing, it looks like a good year for the GOP.

I just hope they don’t fuck it up again.

The New Rules

I don’t know if you remember the shenanigans that went on with Massachusetts’ senate seat in 2009. To recall:

The Massachusetts governor had once held the ability to appoint replacement senators. This power was taken away by the Democratic legislature in 2004 because they feared, were John Kerry elected, that then Governor Romney would appoint a Republican to replace him.

However, by 2009, Ted Kennedy was growing increasingly ill. And the Democrats quickly realized the folly of writing legislation predicated on John Kerry being elected anywhere outside the state of Massachusetts. So they rapidly restored the power to appoint a replacement, conditional on the replacement agreeing not to run in the subsequent special election (the one they were grooming the execrable Martha Coakley for). This blew up in their faces when Scott Brown won the election.

So now there are rumors that Barack Obama will appoint John Kerry as his next Secretary of State. I’m not sure what the world has done to the President to deserve this sort of treatment. Maybe his strategy is that if foreign leaders have to talk to Kerry for very long, they’ll do anything to make it stop. But this creates the possibility of another special election in Massachusetts early this year. And there is a good chance that Scott Brown could run for that and win.

Can you guess what the Democrats are trying to do now?

Power-hungry Bay State Democrats — eyeing another potential Senate opening if U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry joins the Obama Cabinet— are quietly discussing reinstating a 2004 law that would let Gov. Deval Patrick appoint a permanent replacement to help keep the seat under party control until at least 2014.

“I think that would be preferable. It would certainly save the taxpayers money if they don’t have to pay for another election,” said Phil Johnston, former chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party.

“I think people are campaigned out. I think the governor is very popular and most voters would be happy to support his choice until the next general election,” Johnston added.

They’re not even trying to hide it any more. And I expect the people of Massachusetts, who would happily vote a sign-post into office it were a Democrat, to go along with it.

The Democratic Party is constantly styling themselves as the Defenders of Democracy. Their opposition to voter ID, their support for letting felons vote, their shenanigans in 2000, their hypocritical complaints about gerrymandering … all of these are supposedly because they love democracy and want the people enfranchised. This, yet again, puts the lie to that boast. In the end, they’re still just politicians.

The Elizabeth Warren debacle in MA.

In Massachusetts, where Elizabeth Warren is yet again running against Scott Brown for the seat vacated when Ted Kennedy was called to the matt to explain the Mary Jo Kopechne incident along with a slew of other such abhorrent things, there is a big brouhaha going on that seem to put the whole affirmative action movement into perspective. The gist of this unfolding scandal is that before Warren, and I should add her husband in a two-for deal, was hired by Harvard, she identified herself as a double minority – a female and a Native-American – but that distinction quickly vanished once she was part of the Harvard staff. The left has focused, as expected, on the angle that the issue is whether she had the right to claim that status or not.

At issue is that Warren is reputed to be, depending on how you break it down, 1/32 American Indian. Keep in mind that while some point out that this claim is based on a number that assumes that the ancestor she claims this minority status from had to be 100% Native, or the possibility that the Native-American was a second wife, a practice that was common back then, this is still not the focus discussion, even when this is exactly what the left hopes to make it. That argument they can win or use to distract from the bigger issue.

But Warren being Native-American or Native-American enough, is not what is at issue here: what is, is the thing that paints the whole Affirmative Action movement in a dark light, and that is the fact that Warren identified herself as Native-American while that served her career advancement purpose, but quickly dropped that once she got the Harvard hire. The story has morphed from the ludicrous “it was done by others, and not me” line off defense her campaign first tried to hide behind, to the even more insane and disgusting “I used it to make friends” meme, with the usual suspects in the LSM and academia working double time to make the absolutely unbelievable and stupid case that universities, the most diversity driven cesspools of affirmative action, in this classic affirmative action case did none of that, and that she was hired because she was just that awesome. That claim by Harvard and the many others is easily debunked by just looking at the facts.

What we have here is a case of a true believer, a collectivist twit of the highest order, gaming the affirmative action system, and who cares if she was doing it within the boundaries of what was allowed or not, and then pretending that the system isn’t a huge scam. That’s the big story. Warren got tenure at Harvard because she was a double whammy for their affirmative action compliance program, a woman and a Native-American collectivist to boot, and there is no argument the left can make to deny that. Then, when she had arrived, she conveniently dropped her Native-American bonafides because she didn’t need them out there anymore. After all, someone could then use those to point out she was an affirmative action hire. Of course, the admission that the system is rigged and totally abused isn’t something the left wants highlighted. I expect that amongst the intelligentsia in leftist politics and the LSM some will keep pretending, to the bitter end, that the mean right is just picking on this innocent woman – War on women! – while others, once the heat gets too close for comfort and endangers the whole AA scam by making people question how often this practice happens, will throw her under the bus, pretending to be offended that she gamed the system, as if the system isn’t constantly gamed and totally arbitrary, anyway.

We shouldn’t let the left’s credentialed elite get away with this and hammer home how stupid and worthless the whole AA scheme really is. Even in blue MA, I think, the revelation that the elite are abusing the system that’s supposed to provide social justice, thus providing nothing of the sort, will have consequences. If it causes this pseudo-marxist’s campaign to implode that’s good, but if it finally provides enough people with the knowledge of how insanely stupid and illogic the vile AA scheme is, and then undermines it’s credibility and helps us do away with the whole leftist scheme, it is even better. I wonder how many better qualified people, some even other Native-Americans got shafted because of Warren. No wonder Native-Americans are pissed at her while the LSM and the left, if you will pardon the expression, are circling the wagons.

Bye Bye Barn

I’m sure all of us here at RTFLC need a group hug to deal with this:

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, a prominent 16-term liberal Democrat from Massachusetts and arch-enemy of political conservatives nationwide, will announce Monday he does not intend to seek re-election in 2012, according to a statement from his office.

Frank, 71, will hold a news conference in his district to discuss the decision at 1 p.m. ET.

The reasons for Frank’s largely unexpected decision to retire from Congress were not immediately clear, though some analysts speculated they may be tied to changed boundaries for his 4th Congressional District after Massachusetts’ recent redistricting process.

Translation: he didn’t want to fight for a district that wasn’t gerrymandered.

There are some nice things I could say about Frank. Uh … he has fought against the stupid internet gambling ban. Um … help me out here guys.

Measles in Mass

Ulp:

Measles continues to spread in Massachusetts, with two new cases confirmed this week, including one involving a 23-month-old boy from Boston who had received his first measles vaccination last year, according to the Boston Public Health Commission. The other was a teenage boy from outside the city who was treated at a Boston health care facility.

That brings the state total to 17 this year — and counting. In each of the previous four years, Massachusetts has had one to three cases. The surge has been occurring nationwide as well, with federal health officials announcing Tuesday that measles cases have been on their fastest pace since 1996. So far this year, 118 infections have been reported in 23 states, compared with 50 in a typical year.

And we’re lucky that most parents have not bought into the whole anti-vax nonsense:

France reported 10,000 cases — and six deaths — during the first four months of the year, most likely due to low vaccination rates. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention attributes the rise in measles cases in this country to the surge in cases globally, most notably in France, India, and the Philippines.

Vaccinations are one of the greatest scientific breakthroughs in human history. Measles alone used to strike about half a million Americans per year. At that rate today, we’d be seeing a few billion dollars and a couple of thousand lives gobbled by the virus every year. And that’s just measles. I won’t say anything about whooping cough, the resurgence of which has killed children too young to be vaccinated. Even if vaccines caused autism — which they don’t — they would still be worth the risk.

The efficacy of any vaccine is dependent on having herd immunity: having enough people vaccinated to deny the virus the reservoirs it needs to break out. For that, you need to vaccinate almost everyone who isn’t immuno-compromised. You can maybe make some religious exemptions. But you simply don’t have room for people who refuse to vaccinate because they believe the tissue of lies that was Andrew Wakefield’s discredited study.

For people to turn their backs on this miracle is maddening. It’s like they’re going back to living in caves. Only they’ll take a few innocent people with them.

The Puritans Strike Back

And once again, I am eternally grateful that that fucktard fascist Martha Coakley did not get elected to the Senate:

Attorney General Martha Coakley, leading legislators and district attorneys have decided that what Massachusetts really needs is an all-out offensive against prostitution.

They are proposing a new crime: “human trafficking for sexual servitude,” which would allow convicted pimps, madams, or anyone else facilitating the exchange of sex for money to be imprisoned for up to 20 years on the first offense, with a mandatory 10 years in the pen if convicted a second time.

The 20-year sentence would also apply to anyone who recruits someone to engage in a “sexually-explicit performance.” If you’re planning a batchelor party, better do it soon, since this law would empower Coakley to shut down the “gentlemen’s clubs” and hire-a-stripper operations.

The proposed law considers prostitutes the “victims” of prostitution, so it doubles the sentence for their customers. “Whoever pays, agrees to pay, or offers to pay another person” for sex can be sentenced to up to 2 1/2 years in jail and a $5,000 fine, “whether such sexual conduct occurs or not.”

The anti-prostitution weenies have found a way of prettying up their sexual hangup. They’re not against sex, they say, they’re against “trafficking”. But they have now defined trafficking so broadly that women consenting to have sex for money are considered victims of some global conspiracy. And those who facilitate this business could be in jail longer than murderers. They site bogus statistics to convince us that hundreds of thousands of underage women are in sexual slavery in this country, despite their manifest failure to uncover these supposed massive trafficking rings. And now they’ve decided that it’s a good use of resources to jail whores, pimps and johns.

This will not work. Prostitution is universal, even in countries where it is punishable by death. You simply can not control consensual acts between adults. Massachusetts should be decriminalizing prostitution, not doubling down on a failed and corrupting policy.

(The article also address efforts to stop people snacking and the Mass cops taking a cue from our President and refusing to comply with the more liberal laws on pot possession. But that’s small potatoes compared to tossing someone in the clink with violent thugs because he paid for or was paid for a blowjob. That’s an entire extra level of stupid.)

(H/T: Maggie McNeill, bringing the facts, as always.)