CLT
UPDATE
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Finneran's Fury proves power corrupts
absolutely
In what critics are calling an act of political retribution, House leaders adjourned for the summer Thursday without restoring funding to courthouses in districts that are home to foes of Speaker Thomas Finneran's legislative pay bill....
The move, which could force the courthouses to close, is an act of political revenge by a frustrated Finneran, angry that he couldn't pull together the two-thirds votes needed to override Romney's veto of the pay raise bill, according to critics.
"It certainly sends a message to legislators that if you want benefits for your district, you'd better toe the line," said Pam Wilmot of Common Cause of Massachusetts, which opposed the legislative pay bill. "This sends the message that 'I lost this one, but I am not happy and your goodies are on the line.'"
Wilmot credited Linsky, part of an alliance of moderate House Democrats, with helping to kill the bill.
Associated Press
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Critics charge Finneran with "payback"
against foes of pay raise bill
The speaker told high-ranking House officials he wanted to "send a message" to upstart lawmakers who, hours earlier, thwarted his prize pay raise and forced him to publicly concede defeat, sources said.
The courts are in districts represented by Finneran pay-raise foes Rep. David Linsky (D-Natick) and Rep. Bradford R. Hill (R-Ipswich.) ...
An uproar broke out on the House floor, as liberal lawmakers shouted to be recognized and Linsky demanded a roll-call vote on adjournment - which prevailed with an unusually large bloc of 64 lawmakers voting "no."
The Boston Herald
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Raises payback: Courthouse woes for Finneran foes
The two endangered courts, in Natick and Ipswich, are in districts represented by House lawmakers who have been thorns in the speaker's side in recent weeks. Lawmakers suggested that Finneran was paying back his foes by declining to protect their courthouses before lawmakers adjourned late Thursday night.
"It's a mean prison guard who shoots one prisoner to send a message to all the rest," said House minority leader Bradley H. Jones Jr., a North Reading Republican.
Natick's state representative is David P. Linsky, a Democrat who emerged as a key member of the coalition that forced Finneran to back down on a demand to get more flexibility to grant pay raises to the speaker's lieutenants. Ipswich is represented by Bradford R. Hill, a Republican who took to the House floor several times in recent days to criticize Finneran's handling of the override of budget vetoes....
"This was a message," said Representative Michael E. Festa, a Melrose Democrat who worked against Finneran on the pay bill. "All the circumstantial evidence suggests that this was punishment, a response over the pay raise measure. It's very frustrating and unprofessional."
The Boston Globe
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Speaker's foes lose late vote on court funding
Raise opponents targeted, some say
Finneran couldn't get the votes he needed on the pay-raise veto, and withdrew his proposal on Thursday. But in a small-minded act of revenge, he made sure [Rep. David] Linsky paid for his dissent. He let the House override Romney's vetoes of funding for six of the district courthouses the governor had hoped to close.
But Finneran left two courthouses out in the cold, denying them a vote on overriding the vetoes. One was in Ipswich, represented by a Republican who had bucked the speaker on the pay-raise bill. The other was in Natick.
We have mixed feelings about the Natick court, which is underutilized and arguably a facility the state can do without. A far stronger case can be made to reform the Boston Municipal Court, a patronage haven Romney had sought to rein in. But this fight was about power -- Finneran's power -- not management or cost-effectiveness.
Thumbing his nose at Romney, Finneran pushed an expansion of the Boston Municipal Court. Then, to teach the upstart Linsky a lesson, he killed the Natick District Court.
Finneran announced this week that he plans to seek re-election to the House and to the speaker's chair. He said Thursday he plans to bring back the pay-raise measure in 2005, leaving no doubt that he'll use that issue to test members' loyalty between now and then.
Whatever happens to the Natick Court, Linsky deserves thanks for standing up to Finneran's abuse of power. Unless more members acquire that kind of courage, the reign of King Finneran, which has already set a record for longevity in the speaker's chair, will go on forever.
A MetroWest Daily News editorial
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Finneran's revenge
Natick District Court Clerk Magistrate Brian Kearney said he's surprised the House did not take up the Natick veto. But he's hopeful Linsky can find a way to save the court.
"Representative Linsky said he's still working on it," Kearney said. "It still could be premature (to have this discussion). I hope it is."
The MetroWest Daily News
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Natick court on the brink
The balance of power shifted ever so slightly at the State House as Speaker Tom Finneran ascended to the House rostrum Thursday to announce he was abandoning his attempt to win unprecedented authority to grant leadership pay raises without public input....
The coalition between reformist Democrats and House Republicans could be wielded against future Finneran follies, assuming Republicans now get it that sticking with their party's governor is the right thing to do, and the Democrats remain unmoved in the face of promises of pork.
A Boston Herald editorial
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Power shift at State House
Tommy Taxes, the House speaker and full-time legend in his own mind, is taking the heat.
I know this because yesterday morning he called me a "moron." He also called me a fraud, but then he always calls me a fraud....
In the lulls between his gusts and gales of self-congratulatory hot air, I bounced my idea off him: Run for governor, Mister Speaker. After all, you are such an electoral dynamo. You can beat Mitt, easy.
The Boston Herald
Friday, July 18, 2003
Tommy Taxes run for gov? Brilliant idea
by Howie Carr
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Give him more power, Finneran pledged, and he will
not abuse it (at least until next year). Enough of his colleagues
declined to join his "staff," become kowtowing rubber-stamps
for Finneran's ambition. They denied him absolute power on Thursday at
least until January of 2005.
If they still need a reason then to deny him more
power despite his high-minded rhetoric and promises, Finneran the
Vindictive just handed it to them.
How obsessed is the Speaker-for-Life with the
defeat of his Pay-Raise Power-Grab, how ruthless can he be?
He actually cut off his nose to spite his face just
to strike back, hurt his enemies at any cost, "send a
message." But unintentionally he sent two messages, mixed
messages.
Put aside for now the merits of court budgets.
By killing the funding for the Natick District
Court as retribution against state Rep. David Linsky, Finneran
defunded the patronage job of Mr. former-state Rep. Maryanne Lewis --
who was rewarded it as a consolation prize when his wife, Finneran
Favorite Maryanne Lewis, was given her walking papers by disgusted
constituents in the 2000 Democratic primary election for her seat.
For her unswerving but terminal loyalty to His
Lordship her husband was suddenly promoted, rewarded with a $20,000
pay raise.
On Oct. 17, 2002 the Boston Globe reported ["Swift picks insiders for court posts"]:
Yesterday, Swift nominated Brian J. Kearney, husband of recently defeated Representative Maryanne Lewis, for clerk-magistrate of Natick District Court...
He came under fire in 1998 when the Globe reported his wife, a Dedham Democrat who was assistant majority leader, lobbied MBTA officials to help promote Kearney, then a T police sergeant, to lieutenant, even though he had not taken the necessary exam.
After Kearney's promotion fell through and he was forced to resign due to chronic illness, he landed the assistant clerk's position at the BMC, a court widely criticized as a haven for patronage hires.
The clerk's position at Natick District Court would result in a more than $20,000 raise for Kearney, who now earns $68,281 a year at the BMC. He would be paid $88,677 at the new job.
[See the CLT Update for Oct. 17, 2002. "Mister Rep. Lewis lands plum court
job"]
The MetroWest Daily News today reported:
Natick District Court Clerk Magistrate Brian Kearney said he's surprised the House did not take up the Natick veto. But he's hopeful Linsky can find a way to save the court.
"Representative Linsky said he's still working on it," Kearney said.
"It still could be premature (to have this discussion). I hope it
is."
I'll bet he was surprised -- more likely shocked
-- that Finneran decided a Former-Favorite is disposable baggage.
Finneran lusts for more ever-power but this week was
denied his obsession. Now he lashes out in blind fury, proving that
power corrupts and he is not to be trusted with more ... for absolute
power corrupts absolutely, and he's already almost there.
|
|
|
Chip
Ford |
Associated Press
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Critics charge Finneran with "payback"
against foes of pay raise bill
By Steve Leblanc
In what critics are calling an act of political retribution, House leaders adjourned for the summer Thursday without restoring funding to courthouses in districts that are home to foes of Speaker Thomas Finneran's legislative pay bill.
The action came at the very end of a two-week debate on Gov. Mitt Romney's $201 million in vetoes. Among those vetoes was funding for eight court houses that Romney wanted to shut down.
After restoring funding for six of the eight court houses, and with 15 minutes left before a midnight deadline, Rep. David Flynn, D-Bridgewater a Finneran loyalist moved to adjourn the House.
Rep. Stephen Tobin, D-Quincy, another member of Finneran's leadership team, gaveled the session to a close on a voice vote. That prompted a call for a roll call vote. Moments later, the House voted 87-64 to adjourn without funding the remaining two court houses.
One of the courthouses is in Natick, the home of Rep. David Linsky, a key Democratic opponent of the pay raise bill, which would give Finneran and Senate President Robert Travaglini largely unfettered power to hand out pay hikes to loyal lieutenants.
The other courthouse is in Ipswich, represented by Republican Bradford Hill, who also voted against the pay raise bill.
The move, which could force the courthouses to close, is an act of political revenge by a frustrated Finneran, angry that he couldn't pull together the two-thirds votes needed to override Romney's veto of the pay raise bill, according to critics.
"It certainly sends a message to legislators that if you want benefits for your district, you'd better toe the line," said Pam Wilmot of Common Cause of Massachusetts, which opposed the legislative pay bill. "This sends the message that 'I lost this one, but I am not happy and your goodies are on the line.'"
Wilmot credited Linsky, part of an alliance of moderate House Democrats, with helping to kill the bill.
Members of Finneran's leadership team denied any nefarious motives. They said it was getting late. Any blame for courthouse closings should go to Romney.
"I don't have any knowledge of any ulterior motives," said Tobin. "It was pretty clear that the members had been working very hard. When the dean of the House (Flynn) stood up with a motion to adjourn, I didn't see anything improper. There's nothing sinister."
Linsky said he's disappointed that the House voted to expand the size of the district served by the Natick court while ducking a chance to restore more than $300,000 in funding. He said the move could create a "legal crisis" where the cases could be required to be heard in a court that has no funding.
Linsky said there are still options to keep the court open. The trial court could come up with other funds, the state could pass a supplemental budget or the House could come back in September and override the veto then.
He declined to say whether he thought the move was an act of political vengeance.
"No one has told me that. I think that is just speculation and I am not prepared to agree with that," he said. "I approach every issue individually on its merits and I expect that other legislators would do the same."
Another frequent critic of Finneran, state Rep. Byron Rushing, D-Boston, said there's a number of ways for Finneran to prove the move was an oversight and not retribution.
"This can be solved very quickly by the speaker this week if he wants," Rushing said. "If he doesn't fix it, then the people who are saying this is retribution are saying the truth. That's the only way you'll know."
Return to
top
The Boston Herald
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Raises payback: Courthouse woes for Finneran foes
by Elisabeth J. Beardsley
House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran exacted a dose of midnight vengeance on his pay-raise foes - killing two courts in their districts, a move that could inconvenience thousands of their constituents.
Late Thursday night, as the House burned through veto overrides, the last items to come to the floor were Gov. Mitt Romney's drastic cuts to district courthouses he wants to close.
But in a highly unusual move, Finneran brought up only six of the eight vetoes - leaving the Natick and Ipswich courts to face shutdown by the end of September, after losing three-quarters of their funding.
The speaker told high-ranking House officials he wanted to "send a message" to upstart lawmakers who, hours earlier, thwarted his prize pay raise and forced him to publicly concede defeat, sources said.
The courts are in districts represented by Finneran pay-raise foes Rep. David Linsky (D-Natick) and Rep. Bradford R. Hill (R-Ipswich.)
With 15 minutes left on the clock before lawmakers would have to vote to stay past midnight, Rep. David L. Flynn (D-Bridgewater) abruptly moved to adjourn without taking up the last two court vetoes - a strategy that was worked out earlier in a leadership meeting, sources said.
An uproar broke out on the House floor, as liberal lawmakers shouted to be recognized and Linsky demanded a roll-call vote on adjournment - which prevailed with an unusually large bloc of 64 lawmakers voting "no."
Linsky, who was a vocal critic of Finneran's pay-raise bill, said yesterday he confronted Finneran after the session, but the speaker didn't offer any explanation - just a promise to meet next week.
Less than an hour before yanking most of the Natick court's money, the House had voted to double its jurisdiction.
"Those seem to be contrary positions, and I'm very disappointed in it," Linsky said. "It is a potential legal crisis."
Finneran spokesman Charles Rasmussen refused to comment. Hill did not return calls.
House Republican Leader Brad H. Jones, who angered Finneran by defecting to Romney on the pay raise, expressed disappointment.
"It raises a real question for these district courts about the future of the justice to be dispensed," said Jones (R-North Reading).
Court overseers said the two courthouses will limp along for now, and that if the money isn't restored, the head of the Trial Court has new powers to transfer money from other courts.
"Of course, doing so would severely affect the other district courts," said Bruce Brock, a spokesman for the Trial Court.
Return to
top
The Boston Globe
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Speaker's foes lose late vote on court funding
Raise opponents targeted, some say
By Rick Klein, Globe Staff
The House has voted to save six district courthouses that Governor Mitt Romney wanted to close, but left two others without funding, both of them in districts represented by foes of House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran.
The two endangered courts, in Natick and Ipswich, are in districts represented by House lawmakers who have been thorns in the speaker's side in recent weeks. Lawmakers suggested that Finneran was paying back his foes by declining to protect their courthouses before lawmakers adjourned late Thursday night.
"It's a mean prison guard who shoots one prisoner to send a message to all the rest," said House minority leader Bradley H. Jones Jr., a North Reading Republican.
Natick's state representative is David P. Linsky, a Democrat who emerged as a key member of the coalition that forced Finneran to back down on a demand to get more flexibility to grant pay raises to the speaker's lieutenants. Ipswich is represented by Bradford R. Hill, a Republican who took to the House floor several times in recent days to criticize Finneran's handling of the override of budget vetoes.
In all, the majority-Democrat House voted to restore $155 million in spending that Romney had vetoed. Late Thursday, the lawmakers turned their attention to Romney's vetoes of money for the eight district courts he wants to close.
In a series of quick votes, the House easily approved nearly $1 million to fully fund the district courts in Orange, Ware, Clinton, Winchendon, and Uxbridge. Funding for the Charlestown court had been addressed earlier in the week, and most House members thought that Natick and Ipswich would be taken care of Thursday night.
But at 11:45 p.m., Representative David L. Flynn of Bridgewater, a Finneran ally and the honorary dean of the House, moved to adjourn, even though the session was scheduled to continue until midnight.
One of Finneran's floor division chairmen, Representative A. Stephen Tobin of Quincy, was presiding over the House and gaveled through the adjournment. Outraged House members demanded a roll call, but they were defeated 87-64, with Finneran and nearly every member of his leadership team voting to call it a night.
Tobin said that House leaders had no ulterior motives in ending the session when they did. The House had been taking votes for nearly 13 hours at that point, and with Representative Christopher J. Donelan, Democrat of Orange, having just made his first speech in the chamber, Flynn's motion seemed appropriate, Tobin said.
"It was a long day, and we had done a ton of overrides. When the dean of the House got up and asked to adjourn, it just seemed like an appropriate time," Tobin said. Funding for the Natick and Ipswich courts "was not a question we were thinking about," he said.
Flynn and Finneran did not return calls seeking comment yesterday. But for many House members, no further explanation was necessary.
"This was a message," said Representative Michael E. Festa, a Melrose Democrat who worked against Finneran on the pay bill. "All the circumstantial evidence suggests that this was punishment, a response over the pay raise measure. It's very frustrating and unprofessional."
The Natick court serves Natick, Sherborn, Sudbury, and Wayland, the last two towns having been recently added in by the Legislature. The Ipswich court handles cases from Ipswich, Hamilton, Topsfield, and Wenham. Both courthouses are now on track to run out of money by September, unless action is taken.
On Thursday, the Legislature wrapped up sessions for the summer, and the House and Senate are scheduled to resume business in mid-September, around the time funds would probably run out in Natick and Ipswich.
In the meantime, the state's chief justice for administration and management is authorized to transfer money to them as she sees fit, provided that House and Senate budget writers approve. Another option for the Legislature would be to approve a supplemental budget this summer, during informal legislative sessions, when only noncontroversial matters are supposed to be considered.
Tobin said he is confident that money will be pumped into the courthouses in time to avoid shutting them down. "It's not like it still can't be done," he said.
Some of the courts that saw their budgets restored are treasured by Finneran's top associates. The Charlestown court is in the district of his Judiciary Committee chairman, Representative Eugene L. O'Flaherty of Chelsea. The Ware court is run by two of Finneran's former top lieutenants: former majority leader William P. Nagle is its clerk-magistrate, and former House Insurance Committee chairwoman Nancy Flavin is his assistant.
Return to
top
The MetroWest Daily News
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Editorial
Finneran's revenge
House Speaker Tom Finneran lost a battle this week, but not without exacting some revenge on representatives who dared disagree with him.
At a time when the state was in deep fiscal crisis, Finneran had made a priority of a bill aimed mostly at enhancing his own power. The legislation would have added two House committees and given the speaker a freer hand to reward loyalist committee chairs with salary increases.
Finneran has never hesitated to use the power of his office to intimidate members into putting his priorities ahead of theirs, and after Gov. Mitt Romney vetoed his pay-raise bill, the speaker started twisting arms to get the two-thirds majority he needed to override the veto.
But Romney convinced House Republicans, who had earlier supported Finneran's bill, to stand with him on the veto. And a few House Democrats with the guts to stand up to Finneran held firm as well, risking the speaker's wrath. Among these was Rep. David Linsky, D-Natick, who also had a strong interest in overriding another Romney veto, which threatened to force the closing of Natick District Court.
Finneran couldn't get the votes he needed on the pay-raise veto, and withdrew his proposal on Thursday. But in a small-minded act of revenge, he made sure Linsky paid for his dissent. He let the House override Romney's vetoes of funding for six of the district courthouses the governor had hoped to close.
But Finneran left two courthouses out in the cold, denying them a vote on overriding the vetoes. One was in Ipswich, represented by a Republican who had bucked the speaker on the pay-raise bill. The other was in Natick.
We have mixed feelings about the Natick court, which is underutilized and arguably a facility the state can do without. A far stronger case can be made to reform the Boston Municipal Court, a patronage haven Romney had sought to rein in. But this fight was about power -- Finneran's power -- not management or cost-effectiveness.
Thumbing his nose at Romney, Finneran pushed an expansion of the Boston Municipal Court. Then, to teach the upstart Linsky a lesson, he killed the Natick District Court.
Finneran announced this week that he plans to seek re-election to the House and to the speaker's chair. He said Thursday he plans to bring back the pay-raise measure in 2005, leaving no doubt that he'll use that issue to test members' loyalty between now and then.
Whatever happens to the Natick Court, Linsky deserves thanks for standing up to Finneran's abuse of power. Unless more members acquire that kind of courage, the reign of King Finneran, which has already set a record for longevity in the speaker's chair, will go on forever.
Return to
top
The MetroWest Daily News
Saturday, July 19, 2003
Natick court on the brink
By Jon Brodkin, Staff Writer
If Natick District Court closes, some employees could lose their jobs, Framingham's court would become more overburdened and Natick would lose a vital part of its community, court proponents said yesterday.
If the state House of Representatives does not override Gov. Mitt Romney's veto that cut the court's budget to $101,000, the court has only enough money to last through September, said Rep. David Linsky, D-Natick.
"It's in grave danger, but I'm exploring every possible lead to keep it going," Linsky said.
If the court closes, Natick's workload would likely be shifted to Framingham District Court, which "is already a completely overworked court," said Natick-based lawyer Michael Romanow.
Romanow predicted the court closing would make his job harder, because legal procedures he can get taken care of in an hour or two in Natick might take him most of the day in Framingham.
"Natick is not as busy as Framingham, but Natick runs really efficiently," he said. "You go in there, you file your paperwork, you get your judgments efficiently. The court personnel are great."
Some of those employees, especially the newly hired, could be in danger of losing their jobs, Linsky said.
Romney vetoed most of the funding for eight courthouses he wants to close, and on Thursday the House voted to restore funding for six of those courthouses. The failure to act on Natick's court has been described as a political attack on Linsky, who has criticized House leaders.
Natick District Court Clerk Magistrate Brian Kearney said he's surprised the House did not take up the Natick veto. But he's hopeful Linsky can find a way to save the court.
"Representative Linsky said he's still working on it," Kearney said. "It still could be premature (to have this discussion). I hope it is."
Many of the court employees belong to a union. The union representative could not be reached for comment.
The town could take a hit financially if the court closes because the state pays Natick about $160,000 in rent annually. But a closing would have a negative effect in more than a financial sense, said Steven Greenberg, executive director of Natick Center Associates, a public-private group devoted to downtown revitalization.
"The court is another way of defining us as an important place," Greenberg said. "It says your town is important."
Linsky said there are still three possibilities for keeping the court open past September. The Legislature could pass a supplemental budget restoring funding. The state could make a transfer from within the court system. Or legislators could take up Romney's court veto when they return to formal session in September, he said.
Even though the House's inaction could cause the court to close, the body did vote for another veto override that, if also passed by the Senate, would add Sudbury and Wayland to the Natick court's jurisdiction, Linsky said.
Return to
top
The Boston Herald
Saturday, July 19, 2003
A Boston Herald editorial
Power shift at State House
The balance of power shifted ever so slightly at the State House as Speaker Tom Finneran ascended to the House rostrum Thursday to announce he was abandoning his attempt to win unprecedented authority to grant leadership pay raises without public input.
"I do detect this issue has been a distraction and a cloud," Finneran said. No kidding. But the silver lining behind that cloud is that the speaker's defeat should embolden dissident House members and even Gov. Mitt Romney to be more aggressive in fighting for reform.
The coalition between reformist Democrats and House Republicans could be wielded against future Finneran follies, assuming Republicans now get it that sticking with their party's governor is the right thing to do, and the Democrats remain unmoved in the face of promises of pork.
And now that the governor has learned a thing or two about the power of his bully pulpit, he may be less willing to compromise on his priorities.
Much good can be accomplished, and much bad averted, when the facts and the public are on your side.
Return to
top
The Boston Herald
Friday, July 18, 2003
Tommy Taxes run for gov? Brilliant idea
by Howie Carr
Tommy Taxes, the House speaker and full-time legend in his own mind, is taking the heat.
I know this because yesterday morning he called me a "moron." He also called me a fraud, but then he always calls me a fraud.
The only time I get to talk to Fees Finneran is when he's on my radio station in the morning, and I have to do my spot for the show. So yesterday, I decided to make a suggestion to him.
In the lulls between his gusts and gales of self-congratulatory hot air, I bounced my idea off him: Run for governor, Mister Speaker. After all, you are such an electoral dynamo. You can beat Mitt, easy. Let's just go over the numbers from last November's election.
Mitt Romney received 1,087,903 votes.
Tommy Taxes got 7,614.
Plus, you know how formidable legislative leaders are outside the State House. Consider, among others, Tom Birmingham, George Keverian, David Bartley, Maurice Donahue. None of them even survived the primary.
Now Tommy Taxes is licking his wounds over the fact that he has lost, at least temporarily, on one override of a Romney veto. He won't be able to hand out any retroactive pay raises to his addled minions. So today he tries to drown his sorrows by doing what he seems to do every Friday - playing a round of golf, this time in Wayland.
"You haven't got the stones to run statewide," I told him. "You couldn't get elected citywide."
"I detect a tone of frustration in Howie's voice," he said, " 'cause he knows I can do his job any day of the week and he couldn't do my job for one day."
Then he started muttering under his breath, "He's a fraud."
So I mentioned the current crop of solons: "It's one thing to kick around some guy who's never had a job and lives at home with Mom when he's 35 . . ."
"Then why don't you come up and be speaker?"
Because I wouldn't fit in with your sheeple. I don't move my lips when I read.
Forget me, though, Tommy Taxes. Let's talk about your run for governor in '06. You can barnstorm the state in a golf cart, playing every course in the commonwealth. From every clubhouse you can address the hoi polloi, talking down to them about how stupid they were to vote for English-only immersion, the income-tax cut, charitable deductions, Clean Elections, the death penalty . . .
It'll go over great. After spending an hour or so telling everybody how brilliant you are, you can bend over and let the old folks and the children rub your bald head for good luck. Some will call you Cueball, others Chromedome, or Lex Luthor.
And in the Democratic primary you'll finish . . . either last or next to last, depending on whether or not Warren Tolman is in the fight and splits the Hair Club for Men vote.
Gov. Romney was asked if he'd like to see Tommy Taxes running statewide, going, as they say, "up or out."
"I think it'd be great!" he said.
We all think it'd be great. To quote the old song, How can we miss him when he won't go away?
By the way, the weather forecast today is for more rain - the second Friday in a row. Somebody upstairs seems to be giving Tommy Taxes and his golfing pals the thumbs-down even before the voters get the chance to do it themselves.
Howie Carr's radio show can be heard every weekday afternoon on WRKO-AM 680, WHYN-AM 560, WGAN-AM 560, WEIM-AM 1280, and WXTK 95.1 FM.
Return to
top
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For
more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
|