He doesn't stand a chance of winning the rigged events we call elections around here, but he's a fire-and-brimstone preacher dispensing damnation to all who deserve it!!
"Baker, Coakley ramp up governor’s race; Top contenders hitting the campaign trail hard" by Joshua Miller | Globe Staff September 15, 2014
Democrat Martha Coakley stood in a union office in Dorchester between two high-profile Democratic US senators Sunday and trumpeted her support for an earned-sick time state ballot initiative. Coakley portrayed herself as the gubernatorial candidate who would look out for the interests of women, working people, and economic fairness far better than her Republican rival, who opposes the initiative.
The same afternoon, Republican Charlie Baker stood behind a bar in South Boston and served up beer, surrounded by patrons watching the Patriots game. During the campaign stop, he portrayed himself as the gubernatorial candidate who would better look out for the interests of taxpayers and those who care about effective, efficient state government than his Democratic rival.
At the start of the first full week of the general election campaign, the top contenders in the gubernatorial race worked to hone their messages, looking for an edge in a contest that polls have found to be close....
--more--"
Related:
Gubernatorial hopefuls work Sunday crowds
Extremism won’t make one governor
Charlie Baker needs an intervention on women
Coakley holds slim edge over Baker
The good, the bad, the ugly of political ads
Click.
"Gubernatorial candidates Charlie Baker and Martha Coakley were neck and neck in fund-raising for the first two weeks of September, according to figures released by the campaigns on Tuesday, but the Republican still enjoys a huge, nearly 11-to-1 cash advantage over the Democratic nominee. As she looks to close the gap with Baker in the seven weeks until Election Day, Coakley is stepping up her fund-raising efforts, while relying on heavy support from outside groups."
That's one in favor of Coakley. The poorer the candidate the more the e$tabli$hment has rejected them.
Click.
"Massachusetts health insurers said Monday that Partners HealthCare’s planned acquisition of three hospitals would raise costs for consumers across the state and called on a Superior Court judge to achieve stricter price controls and other limits on Partners before allowing the expansion to go through. In their first public comments on the case, filed with Attorney General Martha Coakley’s office, the insurers stopped short of asking the court to block the mergers, as other groups and individuals have. But without major modifications to a settlement between Partners and Coakley, the insurers said, it would hamper their ability to contain rising premiums and add to the “dysfunction’’ of health care pricing. The Massachusetts Association of Health Plans represents 17 health plans but not the state’s largest health insurer, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts. Blue Cross, which accounts for about half of Partners’ commercial business, is not opposing the settlement."
Also see:
Partners HealthCare gets bad rap in health debate
Coakley’s office changes course on Partners comments
Martha Coakley criticized for ambiguous answers
Her Base is showing fissures?
Grossman!
Isn't there anyone to vote for?
"Former business executive Evan Falchuk, an independent candidate, said a candidate who is serious about education, health care, or services for seniors and veterans cannot rule out tax increases in the event of a fiscal crisis. “Any leader or candidate who tries to skirt this fact is just not being candid with voters. Period,” he wrote.
Falchuk said he would cut corporate tax breaks and lower taxes for small businesses while increasing taxes on certain luxury items like yachts and high-end cars and installing tolls at state border crossings, to pay for road and bridge repair.
He's going nowhere, and thanks for slowing traffic and killing tourism you tyrannical....
He also said he would push for a constitutional amendment to allow for a graduated income tax, which would raise rates for the wealthy and cut them for middle- and lower-income earners.
“A tax code fundamentally based on ideas from the early 20th century does not fit the realities of a 21st century economy,” he wrote.
Government wastes enough loot as it is. Maybe I'm stupid, maybe it's principal, but the looting government that gives money to the well-connected and pays for their feathered nests and pampered political lifestyles doesn't need more money.
Venture capitalist Jeff McCormick, another independent candidate, said he would not raise taxes in a budgetary emergency. “Raising taxes in times of fiscal crisis is a dangerous way to manage a budget,” he wrote.
Like Baker, he said he would eliminate the state tax on business inventory. He also said he would raise the personal exemption from $4,400 to $5,000 for individuals, double historic tax credits to encourage redevelopment, and raise income limits to allow more seniors to qualify for state relief from their property taxes.
A third independent candidate, Scott Lively, an antigay pastor, said he would all but rule out tax hikes. “I can’t conceive of any situation outside of the most extreme emergency that would justify tax increases in Massachusetts,” he wrote.
He said he would remove tolls, end tax breaks for corporations and for the film industry, and roll the income tax rate back to 5 percent. He did, however, propose one tax increase, on genetically modified foods.
Why not roll another $80 million at the ric.... wait, what was that last one?
Found muh guy.
--more--"
Oh, it's only the "the political losers’ bracket. It is as if the Red Sox, after clinching the 2004 American League title, found themselves playing the equally hapless Chicago Cubs in the World Series" -- which almost happened in 2003.
That analogy doesn't make sense.
The winner's circle:
"Growing wealth gap pinching states’ budgets; Rich can often avoid taxes, says study from S&P" by Josh Boak | Associated Press September 15, 2014
WASHINGTON — Income inequality is taking a toll on state governments.
How can that be in this age of golden recovery?
The widening gap between the wealthiest Americans and everyone else has been matched by a slowdown in state tax revenue, according to a report being released Monday by Standard & Poor’s.
After I have been told the tax collections were better and better each quarter, year, etc. That means there never was recovery, just a colossal stealing of wealth sent upward.
Even as income for the affluent has accelerated, it has barely kept pace with inflation for most other people. That trend can mean a double-whammy for states: The wealthy often manage to shield much of their income from taxes. And they tend to spend less of it than others do, thereby limiting sales tax revenue.
Shield it? It is SHOVELED TO THEM by the STATE!
As the growth of tax revenue has slowed, states have faced tensions over whether to raise taxes or cut spending to balance their budgets.
‘‘Rising income inequality is not just a social issue,’’ said Gabriel Petek, the S&P credit analyst who wrote the report. ‘‘It presents a very significant set of challenges for the policy makers.’’
Stagnant pay for most people has compounded the pressure on states to preserve funding for education, highways, and social programs such as Medicaid. Their investments in education and infrastructure have also fueled economic growth. Yet they’re at risk without a strong flow of tax revenue.
The prospect of having to raise taxes to balance a state budget is a politically delicate one. The allure of low taxes has been used by states to spur job creation, by attracting factories, businesses, and corporate headquarters.
‘‘If you’ve got political pressure to spend more money and pressure against raising taxes, then you’re in a pickle,’’ said David Brunori, a public policy professor at George Washington University.’’
Income inequality isn’t the only factor slowing state tax revenue. Online retailers account for a rising chunk of consumer spending. Yet they often manage to avoid sales taxes. Consumers are spending more on untaxed services, too.
Oh, that is what this agenda-pu$hing propaganda is for. Tax the Internet is the $olution because no one is going to the mall!
S&P’s analysis builds on a previous report this year in which it said the widening gap between the wealthiest and everyone else has slowed the US economy’s recovery from the Great Recession.
****************
By contrast, the top 1 percent has thrived. The combination of an increasingly global economy, greater productivity from technology, and outsize investment returns has shifted a rising share of money to the wealthy.
Minute by minute, day by day, month by month, the gap widens.
***************
The most affluent Americans typically receive most of their income from profits on stocks and other investments, rather than from wages.
Or tax handouts.
This means that swings in financial markets can cause state revenue to gyrate from year to year.
Some states — including Arizona, Florida, Nevada, Texas, and Washington — rely primarily on sales taxes. They are more dependent on consumer spending and don’t benefit much from the gains that have flowed mainly to the wealthiest Americans....
Research by Lucy Dadayan, a senior policy analyst at the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, notes that income tax collections have become more volatile from year to year, making it harder for states to plan budgets, provide services, and launch programs. She endorses an overhaul of state tax codes to produce a more balanced revenue flow.
Sorry, but I di$tru$t anything with the name Rockefeller attached.
But S&P says its findings suggest that the wealth gap derives from many factors and that state tax code revisions don’t fully address the consequences.
So keep the corporate tax $ub$idies coming!
--more--"
The losers:
‘‘In the setting of rising income inequality, the move toward more progressive tax rates may help states generate faster tax revenue growth than would flatter tax regimes. It’s a conversation whose time has come. The problems that we’ve got, both with wealth inequality and our regressive tax system, are worth addressing.’’
Related: Child poverty continues to climb in Mass.
Governor Patrick should elevate his game
What game? Everywhere you look his legacy is failure -- unless getting more loot to the wealthy and political cla$$ he belongs is success.
Sorry, but I'm tired of talk.
NEXT DAY UPDATES:
"The Fed heeded state officials and decided to consider adding some municipal bonds to the list of assets banks can count as high-quality holdings. Yellen said the states ‘‘seemed quite worried’’ that municipal bonds were not included. They are concerned that banks could avoid muni bonds as a result, potentially raising borrowing costs for local governments. Hundreds of US banks received federal bailouts during the crisis. Among them were the largest financial firms, including JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo. The banking industry has been recovering since then, with overall profits rising."
Actually, they are setting records, but when you are a banker's mouthpiece that is what you say.
Also see: Charlie Baker calls for Roger Goodell to quit
Tackling the most important issue of our times. What does he want, the guy's head on a platter?
Charlie Baker snags support of Jack Connors
Not surprising since they are birds of a feather....
N.J. reported to sell investment
And what more can be added to the current governor's failed legacy?
"Patrick ousts two, with the motive partly personal" by Michael Levenson | Globe staff September 22, 2014
It was one of the most brutal hits of the 2006 governor’s race: A month before the election, the Boston Herald reported that Deval Patrick’s brother-in-law was a convicted rapist who had failed to register as a sex offender.
Patrick, who had been battling accusations that he was soft on crime, was infuriated. He accused his Republican opponent of playing “dirty politics” by planting the story in the press. Then Patrick won the election, and the story became a forgotten footnote in the annals of bare-knuckled politics.
But not for Patrick. On Monday, Patrick, still seething over the story eight years later, explained his recent decision to remove the top two officials at the state Sex Offender Registry Board, saying they improperly tried to force his brother-in-law to register as a sex offender.
He's leaving office by defending his rapist brother? What a way to go out.
In his first public comments on the shakeup at the agency, Patrick blamed the officials, his own appointees, for a number of other problems, including failing to update regulations and fostering an unproductive work environment. But he made it clear, as he prepares to leave office, that he is still nursing wounds from his first political campaign.
Petty Patrick!
Blaming the Herald and the Republican Party for the revelation, Patrick said the disclosure that his brother-in-law had been convicted of raping his wife, Patrick’s sister, more than a decade earlier in California “nearly destroyed their lives.”
“So it was time for them to go,” Patrick said Monday, referring to the removal of board chairwoman Saundra Edwards and executive director Jeanne Holmes.
Thank God it is also your time to go. This sickening servant to the perverted powerful and his aquiescence in it is disgusting.
It was an unusually blunt acknowledgment: Politicians are usually loath to admit a personal stake in public policy decisions.
In October 2006, as Patrick appeared poised to complete his rise from obscure Justice Department lawyer to the governorship, the Herald reported that his brother-in-law, Bernard Sigh, had been convicted in 1993 of raping Patrick’s sister, Rhonda, in San Diego. Sigh pleaded guilty, served a short prison sentence, and reconciled with his wife. The couple subsequently moved to Milton.
The story did little to derail the massive grass-roots effort to elect Patrick, but the case lived on. In 2007, the Sex Offender Registry Board reviewed whether Sigh needed to register as a sex offender in Massachusetts.
A hearing officer, Attilio Paglia, determined that Sigh was not obligated to register, ruling that he posed no danger to the public, according to court records.
But Edwards, Holmes, and other top officials at the board pressured Paglia to reverse his decision, according to the governor and to a lawsuit Paglia filed in December 2008, alleging improper interference in the case and others.
In his lawsuit, Paglia alleged that board officials sent him a revised ruling that concluded that Sigh was obligated to register and asked Paglia to sign it.
Paglia refused and then began to receive “unprecedented criticisms” of other pending decisions he had drafted as well as poor performance reviews, according to his lawsuit. He left work on a medical leave in June 2008, citing emotional distress and anxiety, and resigned six months later.
Paglia settled his lawsuit for $60,000 this April, a month before the case was set to go to trial. He now works as an aide to Bruce E. Tarr, the Republican leader of the state Senate. Paglia declined to comment on Monday and referred questions to his attorney, John G. Swomley.
Swomley said he was frustrated the governor did not act more quickly to remove Edwards and Holmes and said more needs to be done to restore integrity at the board.
“The system was rigged,” he said. “When they didn’t like the decisions that would come down, they would order them changed.”
That's politics.
Edwards and Holmes could not be reached for comment Monday.
Attorney General Martha Coakley’s office, which defended Edwards and Holmes against Paglia’s lawsuit, released a statement Monday saying “this was a complicated case in which valid arguments came to light on both sides, and that is why a settlement was agreed upon short of trial.”
The decision to remove the officials, the statement said, was “made solely by the [Patrick] administration.”
Republican Charlie Baker, who faces Coakley in the campaign to succeed Patrick as governor, said through a spokesman that he believes the Sex Offender Registry Board “is crucial to public safety, and would hope any changes to personnel are only made in the best interest of the public.”
From this failure on all fronts administration?
Think of it: DCF, state drug labs, meningitis murder, failed websites, Bridgewater, borrowed a billion to throw at pharmaceuticals. And those are only the ones I can remember off the top of my head.
Patrick did not explain why he waited until last week to act, but said it took months to find replacements for Edwards and Holmes.
Like 96 months?
Last week, he named Anne Conners, an investigator at the state Department of Early Education and Care, to replace Edwards, who was ousted last Wednesday. He appointed Kevin Hayden, the board’s general counsel, to replace Holmes, who was placed on paid administrative leave last Wednesday.
Patrick said the alleged pressure in his brother-in-law’s case was not the only reason he removed Edwards and Holmes.
He also pointed to a December 2013 ruling by the Supreme Judicial Court, which found that the board had not updated its regulations since 2002, even though the scientific understanding of sex offenders and their likelihood to reoffend has expanded considerably since then.
Patrick first announced the shakeup while he was on a trade mission in Europe last week, and he did not explain his reasoning at the time. On Monday, he defended his decision not to explain the ousters in a more timely fashion.
Globe has given no coverage to his trade mi$$ion that I have seen, but I will be poring back through last week's papers so I will do a double and triple check.
“Not every execution needs to be in public,” he told reporters. “If they did something dastardly, yeah. But this was an accumulated loss of confidence.”
Considering the recent ISIS choppings that is a weird choice of words, as well as the lame-ass comment that follows.
--more--"
