Call this what it is: cynical, insider politics as usual. On his way out the door, Romney is engineering a political coup worthy of any old-time political boss. And he is doing it with more hypocrisy than most.
Romney ran for governor pledging to drive William M. Bulger out as president of UMass on the grounds that the former Senate president was too political. The governor accomplished his goal in 2003. Today, Romney and Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, the Republican who is seeking to succeed Romney, tout Bulger's ouster as a major accomplishment. During this week's gubernatorial debate, Healey said, ``I have to say our record as reformers is strong. We removed Billy Bulger from the University of Massachusetts."
However, replacing one circle of political loyalists with another is not reform.
Romney wants to reward Tocco with the UMass chairmanship for one reason: politics. As chairman of the Board of Higher Education, Tocco supported Romney's mission to depose Bulger, and he helped Romney defeat a UMass plan to take over Southern New England Law School in Dartmouth.
And that's just a blurb. From a UMASS student to our Governor, don't let the door hit your you-know-what on the way out. Mitt Romney won't be missed; when he's gone the four-year hangover will finally be over.
Posts
13 comments:
What's with all the negativity. It's as bad as the official state Democratic website. They have seven posts on their website and six are attacking Kealy. You just want to attack Mitt. Why don't you spend your time outlining the wonderful programs Deval will put in place. Give some specifics, or don't you have any.
What's with all the negativity? Mitt Romney screwed over UMASS; the people he put in power, all cronies, will be there for five years. It isn't bad enough that he put 5 new board members totally based on the fact that they wouldn't support a public law school, he wants one of them to be the chair.
What about some specifics? Well, the first - in terms of UMASS - would be a friggin public law school. It'd be cheap, it's already there and in a few years we could be pumping out quality law school education dedicated to the public sector - where the paychecks aren't all that steep so people couldn't afford 100k in college debt.
If that isn't enough specifics for you, create your own blog and advocate for your position there. This is my blog and on here I've always pointed out hypocrisy.
Ryan, are you serious? I'm a UMass student as well, and I have no idea what you're talking about. He put cronies in power?? He (with a little help from AG Reilly) REMOVED the ultimate crony Billy Bulger from the top position at UMass!!
Yes, he just put 5 people onto the Board of Trustees. Read Joan Vennochi's column on it that I linked in this very blog entry. I discussed it earlier too.
They are almost solely put on this board to make sure UMASS Dartmouth doesn't get the Southern New England Law School: each member that Mitt Romney chose not to remove was in favor of the proposal. The only Trustee who Romney renewed was one of the few against the merger to begin with.
Furthermore, the new trustees are all political appointees - not there on the merits. They're longtime friends of the Republicans - just like appointees to other boards Romney has some control over. Romney's greasy fingers have been put all over this state in devastating and enduring ways.
To clarify, what he did was little better than putting Bulger in power in the first place. Just because someone did one thing right doesn't mean they'll do most things right. Romney could care less about UMASS and his appointees aren't going to be friends of the school you and I go to. Bulger was a political battle for Romney, not one Romney chose out of some moral high ground. His decision was right then, but for the wrong reasons. Joan Vennochi's recent column clarifies exactly why what Romney has done now is just plain old wrong.
Forgive me if I don't consider Joan Vennochi the be-all end-all of sources. And so what if he appointed trustees who don't support the law school? That's part of winning, you get to appoint people who share your views. If Patrick wins, he'll appoint people who share his views, that's the way it works.
As for Bulger, I could care less what Romney's motive was, it was the right thing to do.
That's a very cynical view, the same kind that got Brownie in charge of FEMA. Elected officials should appoint people who are the most qualified for the positions - Romney's selections were cronies and friends.
I'd be making the same critiques if it were Deval doing the appointing. However, he says he's going to be nominating the best and the brightest to these positions and I absolutely agree with him.
Mitt Romney wants to destroy the UMASS system - that much is obvious. He has a disdain for the system as a whole. That's not okay, especially on his way out the door.
Aaron, you are anything but a progressive. I'm sorry, but you just aren't. You don't belong on Lefty Bloggers. I'm not trying to snuff out your speech, free speech is great, you should just either stop saying you're someone who you aren't or finally accept the reality that maybe you're a little different than you think you are.
Needless to say, we've reached an impasse. You think its okay that to the victors go the spoils, I think the best and brightest should be in positions of importance. We fundamentally disagree on this issue and I have no desire trying to convince you otherwise. If you haven't seen the light by now, you probably never will.
Ryan, you seem to be picking on Mitt for one little thing that you disagree with. Just as you said we shouldn't pick on Deval about his stance on immigration (not important to you), don't pick on Mitt for a few political appointments. Maybe he realizes we have too many lawyers now. And leftist blogs shouldn't only be for leftists, healthy discussion is the way to enlightenment.
Undocumented immigrants in the state public system: 400 students.
Students in the state public system: more than 50,000 (could be more than 100,000, I can't remember exactly off the top of my head)...
So I'm not picking on Mitt Romney for one issue. I've picked on Mitt Romney for a lot of issues. He's a horrible governor and was right to have not run for reelection; he wasn't going to win.
Blogs shouldn't only be for leftists, of course. However, the "lefty blogs" network is specifically for lefty blogs.
Joe,
I've criticized the State Legislature left and right over UMASS. You're right - they're every bit as much to blame as Mitt Romney. Furthermore, I've made exactly the same point when I read blogs that did blame him too much. The same goes for Mitt; you certainly can't give him all the credit for fixing the budget, the dems in the legislature were pretty fiscally conservative too, especially under Finneran. The Democratic Party as a whole has become far more fiscally conservative than decades - which, for me, is a *very good thing* because I would never spend money I don't have.
However, the point here isn't the money situation: it's the fact that Mitt Romney's appointments were politically motivated, not quality motivated. They've hurt UMASS Dartmouth.
You're right, I wouldn't give anyone blind faith. However, I highly doubt you'll see appointments as politically movitated under a Patrick administration. IF there is, you have my word I'll go after those appointments with the same fervor.
I think we need to give some credit to Romney here. The fact that he actually knows someone who lives in MA to appoint is stunning and outstanding. Or is it some crony he met in South Carolina who's now going to have to move here?
You're really being unfair, Ryan. Why are you blaming Mitt for being an incompetent and a hypocrite and screwing up the state while using it as a steeping stone to his Presidential career? Like just because he's the Governor, he's responsible for who he appoints? Just because Mass, unlike most states, has a strong Governor system where the governor has all kinds of power that supercedes that of the Legislature, so this idea that the Legislature can undo anything he does is a canard? Um, he's a Republican. Work and responsiblities are for...other people. Face up to the fact that Umass doesn't matter at a school, it only works as a political football. Now Mitt can go to Mississippi and brag about how he's standing in the way of the people of Mass and their college educations, plus he's preventing a bunch of new lawyers from suing bad corporate citizens like himself and his potential donors--isn't that what's important?
This is ridiculous. Stop acting like the poor persecuted man has any resposibility to the state he's driven into the ground, you big meanie! He never pretended to care about anything other than empty PR, manipulating images to score cheap political points, he neevr claimed to want to do anything for our state except get out of here after messing things up as much as possible, so chill out. Getting so upset about the atate university is really getting in the way time you should be spending being afraid of immigrants. The UMASS system is just some little thing to nitpick about, is it really a big issue, does it really affect our state or future? The brown skinned hoardes menacing our shores are something we should all be vitally concerned abou,t with Halloween coming up they may just sneak in wearing Snoopy masks. Eternal vigilance.
aaron, can you give any examples of substantive improvement since Bulger left? No one wanted Bulger to continue, and everyone was thrilled when he left, but since there's been no real change in direction, it's a distinction without a difference. As if Bush were impeached but replaced by Cheney (that example doesn't work for you, I imagine, substitute politicians you dislike like Reich, Dean, patrick, whomever).
There was an opportunity for change here, but Romney isn't interested in improvement, unless you count replacing someone else's corrupt cronies with his own brand spanking new corrupt cronies. Not an inspiring message, except apparently to you. When it comes to goals and ideology, Bulger and Romney are basically united, much like the new appointees, much like the old school conservative quasi Republican Democrats who have run this state forever. It's just a bunch of corrupt politicians fighting over power and influence while we pay the price. Look at the Chancellors who are in power, take Lombardi, with his record of union busting and racism in Florida, and tell me these are the choices of a man who's against cronyism and supports "the right thing to do." OTOH, like you say, it's "all about winning" so who cares, right?
Your arguments are circular and basically seem to boil down to I'll twist myself into pretzels justifying Mitt's actions regardless of how inconsistent my argument is. Bulger was bad, but Bulger clones not called Bulger? Awesome, to the victors go the spoils. Romney wants Bulger? I take it back, I LOVE Bulger.
BTW, Anon #1, you win the oblivious irony award. Everyone who's against negativity must support Healy's sleazy negative campaign, anyone who wants substance is attracted by her campaign slogan, Soft-on-Crime Deval will send rapists and illegal immigrants to kill you with your own tax money. It's so blatently obvious, you go with these brilliant repostes.
No you're right, it's sad that all these campaigns evolve to the lowest common denomianator. Healy ads should be about her ideas not running down Deval. But here's your chance to change things, what does Deval want to do for us. Not just "find the best and brightest".
supports gay marriage? death penalty? electronic bracelets for sex offenders? lower corporate income tax ?
Healy ads should be about her ideas not running down Deval
You consider lowering corporate income tax to be doing something "for us"?
Yeah, except we know what her ideas are, mostly the same ones that have run us into the ground for the past 4 years. Cut taxes, starve local government, fly to fundraisers in South Carolina. Anything that's been tried and failed since '94? Her ideas.
You consider lowering corporate income tax to be doing something "for us"? Mr. Welch, I've always wanted to ask you this, how much is your golden parachute, again? This may come as a shock to you, Jack, but some of us are more concerned with things like education, health care and the environment, things that actually affect us and our lives. Well, okay, lowering corporate income tax will affcet our lives as well as yours, but it will make ours wqorse, and some of us think we count just as much as you!
Post a Comment