Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Talk About Sore Losers!

Note to anyone who supported Tom Reilly: it's now past the general election, well past time to... I wish I could put this kindly... shut up. Creating division within the party is not helping. I'm glad Reilly's trying to take Becthel & friends to task, but does the one good thing he's done post mordem election have to include cheap shots at Deval supporters?

Any time a BMG diary includes something like.
This is my first post, so for full disclosure everyone should know that I supported Tom during the primary and I believe that of all the candidates for Governor(Democrat, Republican, Independent) Tom was and still is the best choice.
Nothing good will come of it. And nothing did. In a post supposively about Reilly's new Big Dig lawsuit, "redwhiteandblue" went on the attack... not against Bechtel or machine politicians who lied about the Big Dig... but against Deval.
I wish DP's followers were a little more aware of Deval's faults--newsflash:he's not perfect

Newsflash: who said he was? Certainly not the man himself, who on more than one occasion has said he will make mistakes.

There's a real disconnect from psuede-liberals and DINO-wannabe Democrats. They think that because people like me like Deval Patrick, we're suddenly giving him a pass. They think, interestingly, we think he's perfect. They can't absorb the fact that we like him because he is admittedly imperfect. We find it refreshing. When one of the left's biggest complaints about President Bush is that he won't admit to his mistakes and apologize, do people really think we're suddenly going to support someone who won't admit to mistakes and apologize?

Redwhiteandblue got really bad in the comments. He attacked Deval because 'the transition team is important.' Pray, tell, what has Deval fudged about the transition team? Certainly, it can't be the fact that Deval's taking on regular people and fielding advice from EVERYONE, not just the HMOs and political establishment. Certainly isn't not that he's spent more time reaching out and including everyone than any Bay State Governor of this generation. So, pray tell, what's he screwed up?

The circular logic is amazing... and senseless. Like this juicy bit,

Yes the campaign is over and debating each individual issue will distract us from the present. I can not agree with you that forgetting Deval's or any other elected official's past is acceptable.... If Deval Patrick starts giving out state contracts to Coke we need to ask was this done in the best interest in the state or to reward his old friends. Certainly we questioned Dick Cheney's ties to Halliburton and Enron.
Sadly, Redwhiteandblue didn't catch his own, glaring error. Dick Cheney was a sitting Vice President when Halliburton got its perks. Deval's not sitting anywhere yet, other than his own posh pad in Milton. His only trips to the Corner Office has been a supervised visit with the Mittster, as a big photo-op for Mr. Nice "Mitt" Romney.

Saying Deval Patrick shouldn't be criticized for Governor - yet, when he hasn't been sworn in - yet - isn't hypocritical. To criticize him for something he'd have no control over would be.

So, for Tom Reilly's sore losers (and the likes of Hub Politics), it's time to learn a basic lesson:

You don't forget where a politician came from. But you don't criticize them before making mistakes after being elected. If there's a perceived conflict of interest beforehand, by all means don't vote for the person. It's a choice I've made at least on one occasion this past election. However, Deval Patrick was elected. Until he makes United Airlines the official airline of Massachusetts and bans ExxonMobile, Gulf, BP and every other company other than Texaco, please feel free to gain a firm, tenable grip on reality and stop foaming at the mouth like a sore loser who got spanked by 30 points before halftime even started.

Update: [sarcasm on] I'm so glad no staunch Deval supporters have ever criticized the guy - I mean, he's so perfect that he'll never do anything wrong! [/sarcasm off]


Anonymous said...

Red White and Blue here to respond:

I want to respond to all your points:

1. You said that it was not worth mentioning I supported Tom during the primary, if I recall on BMG during the election, posts would frequently include such disclaimers so everyone knew a bit about each others allegiances. There is no way this is an issue.

2. You said I went on the attack. This is wrong. In my first post I barely mentioned Deval. It was not even close to being a significant part of the post. I only mentioned that I did not believe this piece of news being pro-tom Reilly would get significant coverage on a blog that I personally believe consistently put Deval over Gabrielli and especially Reilly. I said Deval is not perfect because I believe that too often Deval's supporters would accept anything as fact only because it came from Deval.

2. When I was pressed on the one line about this issue, I expanded just to answer a question from the blog administrator, not to spark a huge argument and it was not done because I am a sore-loser, I do not need to go on the internet to find "closure" from the campaign.

Please don’t overreact to one small part.

3. I never said Deval does not think he is perfect. If Deval acted like Bush in the way you say, he'd be toast, especially in Massachusetts.

4. You said "He attacked Deval because 'the transition team is important.'"

Damn right it’s important, and for your information saying something is important is not attacking it.

My statement was that we can not give Deval or anyone a free pass during the transition period, THIS WAS IN RESPONSE TO SOMEONE WHO SAID WE SHOULD WAIT A FEW MONTHS AND THEN PASS JUDGEMENT...essentially saying lets forget about what he does now and check back in a few months to see if he did anything wrong. Isn't the point of demanding accountability to prevent anything from going wrong?

5. I also said that I don't see any glaring problems with Deval's transition operation. I made no accusations of significant wrongdoing by Deval or any other elected official.

6. You comment on my "circular logic" well I hope the following clears it up for you.

Here is what I was saying:
-I know the campaign is over.
-I know there is no point in going over past campaign debates
-We can not forget an elected officials past just because Election Day has passed.
-The coke example was a hypothetical situation for when Deval becomes governor.
-It was designed to show that necessity be aware of how a politicians decision may be conditioned by his/her past. Not because I predict Deval doing anything wrong.


My point is, in order to understand why Governor-Elect or Governor patrick makes a decision at any time during his current or future service, we must be aware of his past and what in his past made him reach his conclusions.


Also please note: I am aware that Dick Cheney is the sitting vice president, and I know Deval is not in office yet, but my point was WHEN HE GETS IN OFIICE we must remember his past and we must do the same during the transition. NOT SAYING HE HAS DONE ANYTHING BAD.

I hope that clears things up.

To get the information that I put in my original post before I was dragged into this hypothetical discussion, go to this link:


Ryan Adams said...

The election is well over. There was, quite simply, no need to rehash the points you did over and over and over again.

Attorney General Tom Reilly started a suit. That was the relevant information. To go on a random tirade on Deval Patrick like you did on that thread (starting in the diary, then into the comments) was completely irrelevant and unnecessary. It has nothing to do with the lawsuit.

I hate to have picked on you - don't take it personally. You were just the straw that broke the camel's back, especially since your diary was frontpaged.

Aaron said...

Can you please stop with the "Note to:" and "Memo to:" it's so patronizing. Yeah, thanks...I know he lost.

As for sore loserdom: First of all, it's easy when you didn;t actually do anything on the campaign except write blogs, and it's even easier when your guy wins in a landslide in both the priamry and general. So talk to me when you've spent 18 hours a day 7 days a week eating breathing sleeping and drinking a candidate for a year, pouring your heart and soul into making sure he wins, making thousands upon thousands of phone calls, knocking on thousands of doors, doing nothing all day and night but whatever you can to make sure your guy wins, and then after all your hard work, after all the miles you put in across the state, after all the countless hours of working to elect your candidate, watch as he fails to get one of every four votes. Then tell me if you don't have a little bit of sourness in you.

Anonymous said...

red white and blue again,

first of all i don't take any of this personally, its just the internet and this not the school playground.

I want to respond though:
"To go on a random tirade on Deval Patrick like you did"

i went on no tirade at all. i admit i made one comment about deval on the orignial post but only as a side remark. not a serious accusation.

i only entered into the long conversation when i was asked to expand. Then i felt compelled to defend my point and to demand that my point not be misunderstood.

not a big deal

Joe said...

You would have felt worse if Reilly had won the primary and lost in the general. I have no doubt that's what would have happend, much like there was no doubt Deval was going to win. If Deval winning makes you sour grapes, imagine how you'd be if it was Healey that beat Reilly instead.

Come on, Aaron, be happy. Crack open a Busch light and celebrate. Your guy might now have won, but *your guy* did.

Aaron said...

My sour grapes are not b/c Deval won in the general, but b/c he won the Primary.

It's ok, you can't win them all. I just don't like being told how to respond to losing by people who did not invest in their candidate what I invested in mine, and who did not have to go through the agony of defeat.

I don't agree that TR would not have beaten Healey, but it's really not worth getting into that.

I don't understand the last sentence of your comment, can you clarify? Thanks.

Joe said...

tom lost but deval won. tom is your guy, deval is *your guy*

Ryan Adams said...

First of all, Aaron, I never belittled the effort you put into the campaign. A small blog entry on this site takes me upwards of an hour. I've had singular blogs that have taken 3 or 4 hours to write. Furthermore, my blog extends way beyond writing: a lot of the cartoons I've made have taken more than an hour to make. The average video I made (which more than a thousand people watched "I want to be a Republican" on youtube alone) takes 4 hours. The longer ones take much longer.

Furthermore, I not only organized at the campus level - but also worked on the phones and grassroots level as well. Not as much as the netroots, but that's what comes naturally to me.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not trying to belittle the effort you put in. I KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO LOSE. But, after a week or so, you have to get over it and stop complaining about it - especially when WE, the Democratic Party, WON.

Quite frankly, I'm just sick of it all. I don't see any Chris Gabrieli people still talking about how Chris lost the primary - or take periodic shots (whether they were large shots or small) at Deval.

Furthermore, you don't see me writing Joe Lieberman rants a month after the fact - which is EXACTLY what it is like for you as a Reilly supporter. I was fuming people in Connecticut couldn't see who Joe really is - and you're darn right I complained once or twice right after the fact. However, I'm not going on and on and on about it like a drama queen going for the Tony.

Anonymous said...

I find it funny because Reilly's supporters seem to have this religious like devotion to him, then they turn around and act like Deval's supporters are an army of zombies or something. Physician, heal thyself. Most of teh Reilly supporters I know voted for Healey or Mihos anyway, so these attacks hardly come as a surprise. God knows if Reilly had won and we acted like such sore losers they'd be having apoplexy however.

About Ryan's Take