According to Globe, Menino "supports" #OccupyBoston -- even as he tries to evict them

I don't know where to begin with this article.

Mayor Thomas Menino, who has previously expressed support for the Occupy movement, tells WCVB-TV (http://bit.ly/uwJs97) that he wants to have the legal tools to have dozens of tents in Dewey Square Park removed.

The fact that they suggest Menino's supported the movement is bizarre, in the extreme. Ordering police to mass-arrest protesters isn't "supporting" them.Telling protesters that Civil Disobedience has no place in Boston isn't "supporting" the protesters. About the only thing you can say about Menino's support is at least he hasn't allowed the BPD to give any Iraqi veterans brain injuries, like in Oakland, though even in that case, veterans in Boston were injured due to needless police brutality.

Menino's been somewhat constrained from lashing out at the Occupy movement in Dewey Square by popular opinion and the movement's strength, but let's not kid ourselves here, he's been wanting to get rid of them for quite a while now.

Want to see how much Menino "supports" the protesters and movement? Just watch this segment from WCVB's "On the Record," starting at about 2:50. It's a mutual sneer-fest. He (and they) hate the Occupy movement. Menino even goes on to compare Occupy Boston to the Tea Party -- and gives praise to the Tea Party!

So, Boston Globe, this online story is officially the ranks of Fake News.

The Casino Bill's So Bad, even the Globe is Against it

Bear in mind that the Globe's been in favor of casinos for several years now, so that they're bashing this bill speaks that much more. Even for a slots bill (!!), it's a crappy, special interest bill.

Getting ahead of yourself, there, Boston Globe?

This is, well, stunning... from the cross-tabs of the Globe's latest poll (page 13).

"As you may know, the Massachusetts House and Senate have passed slightly different bills that would legalize casino gambling..."

Note: It's 6 days after the poll was finished being conducted (the 17th-23rd) and the Senate still hasn't passed a casino gambling bill. Who wants to make a bet that this sort of misleading blatantly false statement could color the poll?

Fail.

Weird Headline for Cahill Story

The Boston Globe printed an article today titled "Cahill getting his message back on track" which seems to be about how Cahill isn't getting his message back on track and how his campaign 'jumped the shark.' These are all things I agreed with, which makes their choice of headlines odd. In any event, it's still a very amusing read... if you, like me, think Cahill's something of a bad, but still amusing, joke. Let's hope his tuned-out supporters don't catch on, either.

Happy 1984, Bay State

Scary stuff,

The amendment would also clear the way for courts, the state attorney general, and even average citizens to get new tools, including an anonymous hot line, to report illegal immigrants or companies that employ them to the government.

The Local MSM's Prejudice

This blog used to cover the local MSM quite a bit. I enjoyed writing the stories and got a lot of readers and links from it. However, at a certain point I became too cynical to read the local MSM every day, so this site has focused much less on being a local media critic. Stories like this are why.

Two polls were released on the Senate race at pretty much the same time. They both had the same sample size. They were both done by well-established firms. However, they both showed widely different results. The Suffolk poll showed Scott Brown up by around 4, while the BMG/Research 2000 poll showed Coakley up by 8. Either of the polls could be right -- in fact, they both were probably right in polling who they thought would show up, it's just that they both disagreed on the specific demographics of their likely voters. Guess which poll the local MSM covered?

If anyone picked "not BMG," they win a gold star. There are probably two reasons why the local media would cover Suffolk's poll, but not BMG's. The first is the Suffolk poll is certainly more politically sexy -- it was the first to really show Scott Brown up above the margin of error. The second reason is because BMG is a blog - and, I suppose, viewed by the media as competition. All that said, if the media is to be taken seriously, it should have covered both of the polls. They were done at the same time, using live questioners and the same sample sizes; they were each at least as worthy as the other. Even if the papers wanted to lead with the Suffolk poll, the BMG poll should have featured prominently, too. Otherwise, any notion of fair play or journalistic integrity can be thrown out of the window.

Does the local media really want to be that obvious? Are they really willing to lose the tens of thousands of their readers, who also read sites like BMG? At a certain point, papers like the Globe are going to have to learn that many of the readers they've lost have come at the hands of their increasing willingness to throw their credibility out the window, when it suits their purpose.

Brown's Bad for Boston

Freshman Boston City Councilor Ayanna Pressley - and former Kerry staffer - makes an excellent point for all the residents living in and near Boston -- a point that could be extended for anyone living in Springfield, Worcester, New Bedford, Lowell or pretty much any city across Massachusetts. From Ayanna's email:

Electing Scott Brown would be bad news for Boston. He will work against the very programs that serve as the lifelines for those struggling to survive these challenging times. He will work to slash federal funding to UMass Boston and other public colleges and universities around the state. He will oppose health care reform that would ensure better coverage for our seniors and families. He will fight against what you and I care about, those issues and ideals I actively championed during my campaign. He would make things tougher for my constituents and shatter the dream that was the great cause of Senator Kennedy's life.

In the Globe, Again

They quoted me on their VoxOp for my comments on CLT. Welcome, Globe readers.

The Media's Digging its Own Grave

The important thing for people to remember is that, when the old dogs (like the Globe) start to die off, they dug their own graves. Bloggers didn't and don't want to see these institutions go, we've even tried to warn them before, but newspapers just don't want to listen. Joan Vennochi is just the most recent example.

Here's what I had to say over at Blue Mass Group, starting with a quote from Christopher.

There seems to be a disconnect that leads to the media actually acting contrary to their own self-interest, assuming that interest is selling papers/getting ratings.

Dinosauritus. They had a system that worked for generations. Owning a newspaper was like owning gold, it was gauranteed profits, year in and year out, no matter recession or boom years or something in between.

They were the only game in town and, after newspapers eating each other year after year, there was very little competition. Therefore, they could not only have those gauranteed profits, but cut, cut, cut the newsroom to get even bigger profits -- there was little competition in town for people to turn to when the quality dropped.

This new-fangled thing came along called the internet and not only challenged their volume of readers, but worse yet, hit them on their bottom line through operations like Craigslist, instantly wiping away 20% of their bottom line.

The thing is, they could have been the Craigslist, they could have been the blogosphere, but the dinosaurs at top liked their business model and didn't think anything could challenge it until it was very quickly gone. With 20% of their profits wiped out, they were subject to the whims of the economy at precisely the time the economy went caplut -- and after years and years of cutting content to increase profits, losing readers.

Did I mention the gigantic debt most papers took on as they gobbled each other up? The NYT bought the Globe for a billion dollars in the 90s -- and is having trouble giving it away at $20 million now. That debt adds up -- and a lot of newspapers just don't have the money to pay it. They bought newspapers at overvalued prices and the profit margins of the paper just couldn't afford the debt -- that's precisely what happened with the Chicago Tribune and others. The NYT denies that's what's happening with them, but the fact remains they took on (foolish) debt they couldn't afford to pay off.

I had a commenter in my previous blog boasting that I'm "NOT a journalist." I see that as a good thing -- it gives people like me much needed perspective that those in the industry lack. The industry's behavior has literally been bred - they weren't willing to be innovative when innovation would have saved their industry and now, instead of trying to do something, most are filling the part of Joan Vennochi, simply looking for scapegoats.

That's right, the papers still view blogs as the enemy. They fail to see that we're actually rooting for them to succeed. Our criticism is meant as constructive, but they view it as an attack. Most of us may not be professional journalists, but professional journalism (as we know it) has been the problem, not the answer. Ultimately, why journalists should be listening to the blogosphere is because we're the ones who pay the most attention to the news, as its reported. In other words, journalists should be listening to bloggers closely because we're their biggest costumers. If even we're not buying, who else will?

Quoted in the Globe

It's from today's VoxOp, where they search the interwebs to find their favorite, opinion-gamut spanning quotations on relevant topics of the day. Here's where they plucked it from and here's what they quoted.

“DeLeo has not one, but two racetracks in his district - horse and dog. Is he suddenly going to backtrack on those two, powerful interests within his district? Don’t bet on it. DeLeo’s recent statements are just to shape the debate and help get the ball rolling.’’
RYAN ryanstake.net

Thanks to the Globe for the free press.

I'll return the favor: Here's an excellent Globe piece on Foxwoods that I've yet to cover on this blog. It really questions the intelligence of expanding when one of the world's largest casinos, just to our south, is threatening banks that it won't be able to make its debt payments. There's a lot of politicians looking for a quick fix, but is this really the time to be entertaining the question of building resort casinos? Read the article and let me know what you think in the comments.

Not Quite Buying DeLeo on Casinos

The Globe and others are reporting on DeLeo's recent public statements, saying he's in favor of a bill legalizing casinos in Massachusetts. This differs from his past stance because he was previously in favor of allowing casinos only if slots were allowed at the tracks. Color me a skeptic.

DeLeo has not one, but two race tracks in his district - horse and dog. Is he suddenly going to backtrack on those two, powerful interests within his district? Don't bet on it.

This is mere speculation on my part, though an educated guess: DeLeo's recent statements are just to shape the debate and help get the ball rolling, adding pressure on the opposition, pushing the "inevitability" meme yet again. It's a psychological boost for the industry and those in the legislature that want to feed billions to that industry, but not much beyond that.

DeLeo will not willfully allow slots to be passed in Massachusetts, but not at the tracks. Either he thinks he can use his public statements as momentum to pass casinos and tack racinos on as an amendment, or he thinks he'll be able to pass them in a separate bill, using complaints across the state house over the 5 year waiting period before a casino could be built as a means to push racinos through after. After all, a racino could be ready before the trees next bud. Maybe he'll even use that very line (anyone in need of a writer?). Bottom line: the DeLeo/Pacheco/Flynn quest toward Racino, Massachusetts hasn't evaporated. So long as those tracks are open, it never will.

The Globe's Horrific Drivel on Cyclists

Will someone please explain to me why this vapid, POS anti-cycling article made the print on the Globe's Op-Ed page today? Taking the entire piece to actually say anything concrete about what we should do differently about cycling in this state, here's what it comes up with:

You know that deep happiness when the car that swerved in front of you on Route 128 gets a ticket a mile later? That’s the secret. That’s how you make a driver Be Kind and Share the Road. No billboards, no campaigns are necessary. Just tickets. Beautiful, green, made-from-100-percent-consumer-waste tickets.

First, what's the point? Cyclists can be annoying at times, but they're really just a scape goat. More cyclists reduce traffic, they don't make traffic worse. More cars make traffic worse.

Why is the Globe printing this drivel? Was there some kind of shortage of submitted opinion pieces? Shouldn't the Globe be using this space to print articles that feature, oh, say, some facts? That's perhaps the most frustrating thing about this utterly meaningless article -- it doesn't look at the issue in anyway that offers analysis, insight or anything tangible. It may as well be a 600 word essay titled "I hate cyclists," featuring only the words "Cyclists suck," repeated over and over again.

If anyone wants any insight from this article, it's trying to wrap your head around why the author, Monique Doyle Spencer, is so prejudiced. Is it, perhaps, because she's in her dinosaur-juice vehicle stuck in traffic, while bikes actually move somewhere during rush hour? And if that's frustrating to her, why not take the T? Or, heaven forbid, ride a bike? Something tells me the endorphins she'd get from the exercise may just calm her inane histrionics down.

Meanwhile, why does the Globe feel so compelled to pit commuters against each other? Why is the reporting on cycling as a commuter option so prejudiced? Don't people have better things to do with their time, other than griping about the very same issues with non-car-riding commuters that people are perfectly willing to ignore when it comes to driving -- traffic, accidents and annoying drivers? We give a free pass for everything that's wrong with commuting in an automobile, from maintenance costs to deaths, while fixating on only the bad stuff when it comes to anything but driving. It's insanity and it needs to stop.

Baker's "Turnaround"

I forgot a lot of the details, which the Globe summed up nicely. Weird stuff -- and not terribly inspiring. Looks like Harvard Pilgram definitely would have died if the state didn't essentially take it into receivership -- Charley Baker didn't just come riding in and heroically save the day. All sorts of book-cooking to fudge the numbers *just* the right way didn't hurt, either. It could have all blown up in his face.

Also, what do people think about this?

Judy Meredith, a longtime human services lobbyist, described Baker at the time as “the most charming slash and burn artist that this human resources advocate has ever seen.’’ In a recent interview, she said Baker sent her a thank you note after reading the quote in the newspaper.

It's absolutely bizarre. Who does that? That's the kind of petty, overly dramatic bullshit I'd expect to see in an episode of Smallville, coming from the Luther mansion, not the person sitting in the Corner Office.

Fighting Over Rail Scraps

One of the most significant hurdles in getting off fossil fuels is in creating an infrastructure that would allow us to do so. New England, as a region, has a solid first plan.

Described as the first regionwide passenger rail agenda, the New England system would speed up trains, increase service, and open new commuter lines throughout the region - as well as provide high-speed routes linking New England to Quebec with 110 mile-per-hour trains.

The plan is more like a wish list, one that has a price tag many times more than what the federal government is actually awarding in stimulus grants. It's an ambitious plan, along with ambitious plans from other states, but the fact that it's Massachusetts working with all the other states in the region makes it significant. Heck, it even connects New England to Montreal, should things swing the right way.

Effecting Massachusetts, the plan's priorities will

[Raise] speeds and running more trains between Springfield and New Haven, where the state of Connecticut hopes to introduce commuter rail; raising speeds and expanding the number of trains on the Downeaster; inaugurating passenger rail between Boston and Concord, N.H.; increasing capacity on the Northeast Corridor in Rhode Island... The Vermont plan would return passenger trains to Northampton, Mass., after an absence of several decades.

Several of the proposals are intended to establish connections between train lines and airports in Providence, Hartford, and Manchester, which the federal guidelines say is a plus in deciding grant awards.

Of the plan's six main priorities, at least five of them will be helpful to some Massachusetts citizens. Particularly compelling is the connection from Boston to Concord as well as increasing capacity in Rhode Island, which should speed up the Boston-NY route. I'm not sure where the trains in Northampton would go, but there could be a lot of good with getting even at least some access to that region.

But what's beyond obvious is that the stimulus's spending left for mass transit was pitiful. Of course, that's not news. We had hundreds of billions in ineffective tax cuts, but only left a measly $8 billion for trains. It's sad.

Of course, the article states

The Obama administration has promised that the $8 billion in the stimulus is just a “down payment’’ on a national high-speed rail network.

but I'll believe it when I see it. This generation's most daunting task, the New Deal we need to have, is getting off oil and bringing this country's non-car public infrastructure into the 21st Century... and we're barely doing anything about it. At some point very soon, hopefully within a year, Congress must act on that New Deal and create a huge Mass Transit bill -- one that leaves in the order of hundreds of billions for public spending on mass transit projects. We could spend half a billion dollars and it wouldn't be enough -- but at least that would be an honest start, making this country's economy permanently stronger and more resilient.

Curious Choice by Globe

The President had a prime-time speech on health care, perhaps the most important issue facing this country, and that gets second billing to the President's relatively brief comments at the presser about the Gates situation in Cambridge. If you just looked at the Globe's front-page briefly today, you'd think the press conference was about "Gatesgate" (and they can't even manage to get that story right, making the same mistake Maddow did the night before).

Question for the Globe: Were these three minutes and thirty three seconds really more important than the rest of the entire press conference or the issue of health care? No doubt, there's a local interest to the Gates story. However, contrary to whatever the gatekeeper editors at the Globe think, there's an even bigger local interest in health care.

What kind of a local interest? We're getting new windows put in my house today. The window guy just lost his home recently, one that he built himself. Why? He got sick. It put him out of work for a while. There were also fewer jobs. Deductibles and co-pays added up. He had health insurance and still went bankrupt. Now he's better -- and lost his home. There's literally hundreds or thousands of people like him in Massachusetts today, just in the past few years, due to our country's sorry state in health care and economy. The Globe chose not to cover that kind of local interest.

David, along with others, almost blames Obama for this hiccup. Obama chose to answer the Gates question. He could have - and probably should have - skipped the question, since it didn't reinforce the night's health care message. However, the Globe (and other media outlets) have decided to play race over health care. They've decided to ignore the more important story over the sensational one -- that will no doubt be well handled by Gates and Harvard Law. It was the media's choice to pounce on that 3 minutes and 33 seconds, not Obama's.

If and when the Globe goes under, it's going to go because it became a newspaper of the high-end condos and retailers - and not of the middle-class workers who struggle every day. While the Globe publishes stories that belittle second-hand stores in JP, they ignore the thousands of people who are crying out for major reforms in health care -- and the President who's actually working on their behalf. Sadly, the Globe's forgotten who their readers are -- which, in the newspaper biz, is worse than being obsolete. The dead trees could live on if what was printed on them actually interested readers.

Wrong 'Tude on Renewables

Attacking renewable energy because, um, it's not an instant fix or something, this op-ed, written by Eleanor Tillinghast, is a lame excuse at NIMBYism, but let's analyze it anyway, so people can get past the malarky. The main gist of the peice is coming from an "environmental" group in the Berkshires that doesn't want wind turbines in the Berkshires. The mountains are pretty, after all.

Here's what she has to say.

Governor Deval Patrick’s goal of 2,000 megawatts of wind power by 2020 will achieve very little at great cost, according to the state’s own data.... The governor has a study estimating that more than half his goal could be met in the Berkshires with 710 industrial wind turbines on public and private land. Those would replace just 5.3 percent of the state’s electricity consumption.

Just? 5.3%, for the math impaired, is 1 in 20. That's pretty damn good. Why should that number be attacked?

For those modest benefits, we would pay about $2.7 billion in federal, state, and local subsidies over 20 years.

It's expensive. And coal factories aren't? Even accepting that $2.7 billion figure, it's a pittance compared to either the long term costs of fossil fuels or the costs (long or short) of nuclear power plants.

It gets worse.

If we subsidized all electricity use in Massachusetts at that rate, we would spend $54 billion during that time on subsidies.

Major straw man alert. Who the hell is suggesting we do anything of the sort? If people read nothing but this sentence, they could tell this piece is not for real.

Now that Tillinghast is done with her straw men, she finally gets to an "alternative" proposal. The problem? It's by no means an alternative. She suggests we go after conservation as the big way to save the world. She's right that conservation is probably the most important aspect in tackling Global Warming -- and the most cost efficient -- but we can't conserve our way to the promised land. Conservation isn't an alternative, it's one piece of the puzzle. So are wind turbines.

We need to retire our state's oldest and worst coal plants, and we need to replace them with renewable sources. We need to be respectful in the way we build wind turbines and place solar panels, but there's a difference between respect and Not In My Backyard. In this case, we can build the Turbines this state desperately needs, throughout the state, while ensuring they don't detract from, but add to, our state's natural beauty. Tillinghast is terrified, but she should be far more terrified at the alternative. If society doesn't start building wind turbines all across the country, including the Berkshires, the world will become such a horrible place that Wind Turbines at the Berkshires will become a moot point.

One Problem with the HMO Industry

One problem with the health insurance industry (among many) is the fact that what costs them a little money may actually save society a great deal of money, but what does an HMO care about beyond its bottom line?

Take today's Globe story on the state's expansion of required mental health coverage, for example. The general consensus is the new law will add a little less than 1% to the costs of health care in the state -- but in return, for example, drug addicts will be able to get necessary treatment of their diseases. Over 15 million people are addicted to alcohol in America alone - translating to around 5% of the population. In Massachusetts, that's over 300,000 people.

Imagine their economic impact on this state if they received treatment that could help them cope with their disease? Whereas it doesn't make economic sense for Blue Cross to pay for all the treatment necessary to help someone get off the drug, or get over their depression, etc., it would make perfect economic sense for the federal government to pay for it under a health plan. Those people could return to work and start participating in the economy beyond the shadows.

Treating patients with mental health disorders or diseases is a huge net plus for society, but will never be so for HMOs. They'll continue to resist it, as they will even under the new policy.

There remains one piece of unfinished business. When the state last attempted to overhaul mental health services nine years ago, regulators left untouched the broad range of treatment that falls somewhere between overnight hospital stays and trips to the psychiatrist. That includes such services as residential treatment programs, home-based care, and day treatment programs. In that void, advocates say, patients have often had to battle, frequently failing, to get needed help.

“People with mental illness often have more difficulty navigating the speed bumps that health plans put in place,’’ said Dr. Gregory Harris, a Brookline psychiatrist and chairman of the managed-care committee of the Massachusetts Psychiatric Society.

It's going to take a firm stand to make sure the HMOs don't screw us over in the long run, but why should we have to do it? The sooner we can get a public option and/or single payer, the better, because then we can start to decide health care based not on the bottom line, but on what's best for doctors, patients and society.

Painful Because it's True

A heart-rending column today by Yvonne Abrams. The following quote is the point she tries to make, but it's actually the least significant part of her words -- how she got there is far more important. So, please read it. She's absolutely right about what will happen should we legalize slots.

Like scratch tickets, slots are gaming’s crack. Just like the instant games that bring in 70 percent of the state lottery’s take, they’re the province of poorer players. The part of Sydney where I grew up has the lowest average household incomes in the city and the highest average rates of spending on slot machines.

I get the argument that the state needs money. I understand firsthand the value of the jobs that would be created. I know that people should be able to spend their money as they please.

But let’s not kid ourselves that we’re creating a new Monte Carlo here. The state, which is supposed to protect its citizens, is going to encourage some of them to harm themselves. And when those people put down money they can’t afford, we’ll take the cash and look away.

Deval's Economic Development

Good news.

Governor Deval Patrick’s administration will spend hundreds of millions of dollars this summer building roads and highway ramps for at least five struggling private developments - from the former Naval air station in Weymouth to Somerville’s Assembly Square - in hopes of jump-starting construction and the local economy.

The money, a combination of federal stimulus money and state funds, will not go directly to the private developers, but rather for public works that Patrick aides said they expect will make it easier for companies to arrange financing in otherwise tight credit markets. That, in turn, would kick off construction of the planned office parks, shopping centers, housing, and hotels that will create new jobs.

The better news is just where these projects are proposed -- these are places ripe for job growth, many of which have a particular need for good jobs.

Although more projects may be chosen later, the ones already approved include not only SouthField in Weymouth and Assembly Square, but a new business park in Fall River that will recruit biotech companies, the Westwood Station project, and Waterfront Square at Revere Beach.

I'm particularly excited about the Fall River and Revere projects. Revere's project will be right across the street from Wonderland. There's a Blue Line station right there and plenty of further development opportunity, quite likely in Wonderland itself (it is closing, after all), which may be spurned on by these investments. Fall River is just an economically depressed city - the family median income is around $25k. It needs those jobs desperately. The thing about Fall River (and New Bedford) that makes it a great place for entrepreneurs is that the property there is dirt cheap - way cheaper than the rest of the Massachusetts, cheaper than the Tri City area in NC that's been siphoning off some biotech jobs. It's also close enough to the Boston area that it still has access to recruiting the top talent in the US for biotech or other high-tech jobs, not to mention a great university next door (UMASS Dartmouth), as well as plenty of Universities in Rhode Island, in and near Providence.

Here's hoping two years from now we can see tangible results from these major economic developments. It's just a start, but it's an illustration of the fact that Deval Patrick and his administration are serious about making sure the economic success that Boston's enjoyed over the years will finally be distributed throughout the state, in all our gateway and former mill cities that have been struggling for decades.

Going Global

• Fake News Alert: Globe can't get past Gov's finances in article about Governor House Hunting. Shocker. The guy hasn't considered his Milton home home since he built the Richmond estate. Swapping the Milton digs for a comfortable condo within walking distance of the State House is a no brainer -- and not a real money-saving move. Luxury condos in Boston by the Commons don't go cheap.
• How does Globe come by the following sentence in Menino charter school article?
  

  Mayor Thomas M. Menino, who for years has expressed deep reservations about one of the most fundamental innovations in public education, abruptly shifted course yesterday and said he wants to turn the city's poorly performing schools into new charter schools.

  What makes Globe writer Michael Levenson or his editors experts in "innovations in public education?" Stick to the facts -- Menino's robbing Flaherty's chief education proposal.
  

• Times taking bids for Globe. I hereby offer my official bid of $.01. Any higher takers?