« You Know Your Life is Surreal When... | Main | Things I've Been Meaning To Cover... »

Muffy the liberal slayer

If there's one constant in life beyond death and taxes, it's that politics in Massachusetts is never boring.

Next year there's going to be a race for governor in Massachusetts. On the Democratic side, Attorney General Tom Reilly is one of the top two likely nominees. On the Republican side, however, it's a bit muddier.

The current governor, Mitt Romney, is still pretty popular with the people, and would most likely defeat any Democrat. The Republicans have held on to the governorship for fifteen years, even while the Democrats have cinched tighter their lock on the legislature. But Romney's toying with a run for the Presidency, meaning that there just might be an open race next year.

His lieutenant governor is Kerry Murphy Healey, a short-term legislator and wife of a very, very successful businessman. She's looking at succeeding her boss, if he should not run, and Mitt is encouraging, letting her take the lead on several fronts.

One of them is the recently-discussed bill in the Massachusetts legislature to grant in-state tuition to illegal aliens. (Never mind that LEGAL aliens don't qualify for such tuition breaks, and federal law says that if a state does that, they have to offer the same tuition to any student, from anywhere). The bill was heading for a quiet death, until Mr. Reilly weighed in supporting it.

Healey took that, and ran with it. She went on a local talk-show and railed against both the measure and Reilly. It wasn't that exciting, until they started taking callers -- and Reilly was one of the first to get through.

The host, John DePetro of WRKO, did the smart thing -- he stood back and let the two of them go at it.

Now, Healey has a bit of a reputation as a lightweight. She's seen (fairly or unfairly) as a socialite, a soccer mom, a rich man's wife dabbling in politics to keep herself from getting bored. Reilly, on the other hand, is currently the highest elected Democrat in the state, and has been in public office for over 20 years. By all rights, Reilly should've mopped the floor with Muffy, sending her home with hair still wet from a swirly and absent her lunch money.

But sometimes, the baby seal comes up with a shotgun.

Healey stomped all over Reilly, refusing to let him steamroll her. He repeatedly trotted out the liberal saws about "compassion" and "fairness" and "for the children," and called her the dirtiest word in the liberal vocabulary -- "mean-spirited." He pooh-poohed the concerns about the cost of this measure (the difference between in-state and non-resident tuition is about 9K a year) and brushed aside questions about whether once this is passed, if the students would next be seeking scholarships.

Now, admittedly, Healey had a huge tactical advantage over Reilly, being in-studio while he was on the phone, but she also knew her stuff. She hammered him repeatedly, asking why the state's highest law-enforcement officer was for subsidizing illegal behavior. She told him that if he wanted to fight the immigration laws, he should take it to Washington -- and I think she even offered to buy him a ticket. And she rebutted his "lack of compassion" remark by saying her sympathies were with the taxpayers and citizens of Massachusetts, and why weren't his?

Don't take my word for it. Reilly got so thoroughly trounced, one of his biggest supporters saw no choice but to come to his defense. The Boston Glob latched on to a single sentence of the entire mauling (I can't dignify it with the term "debate," as Healey kept making valid points, while Reilly kept droning on and on his talking points), where Healey said that illegal aliens should go to private colleges instead, and commissioned a hit piece on her. They sent out their crack staff to find outraged illegal aliens to quote -- and unlike Reilly, they have no trouble tracking them down. And they dug up every piece of dirt they could to fling at her.

The fact that Massachusetts has had Republican governors since 1990 (when Mike Dukakis left office) is something that drives the Globe absolutely bonkers. So smearing Healey -- the presumptive nominee, should Mitt not run again -- is just par for the course for them. After all, this is the same paper that published flagrantly fake photos of "US servicemen raping Iraqi women."


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Muffy the liberal slayer:

» The LLama Butchers linked with Alanis Morrisette, call on line six...

» Weapons of Mass Destruction linked with The Healey Factor

» Searchlight Crusade linked with Links and Minifeatures 11 03 Thursday

Comments (18)

I'm working on my post on t... (Below threshold)

I'm working on my post on this subject. Go to the MA legislature website and read the text of the bill.

It's pretty scary what's actually written in it.

And, needless to say, it only takes about a third grade education to blow holes in Reilly's spin on it. And he wants to be governor?

Yikes.

So when Howard Dean says "h... (Below threshold)
Chris:

So when Howard Dean says "hide the salami" it's stop the presses time, but when a wealthy suburban candidate suggests illegal immigrants should go to private school, it's "a single sentence." Very consistent.

Chris, when Howard Dean say... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Chris, when Howard Dean says "hide the salami," it's a cue to laugh at him. When Healey says "go to private schools," she's saying "you ain't getting a free ride at the state schools, so look elsewhere."

Sorry to everyone else I had to spell this out for Chris...

J.

If Romney decides to stick ... (Below threshold)

If Romney decides to stick around in Mass, please send Muffy down to NC. We could use someone like her, since our "esteemed" gov Mike E wants to give illegals things that he wouldn't give to folks who have lived in NC for years legally.

Thanks, Jay Tea, but you di... (Below threshold)
Chris:

Thanks, Jay Tea, but you didn't have to spell anything out for me. I live in Massachusetts and I'm well aware that Healey's image is that of a wealthy suburbanite. She may overcome that, but there's no way her comment is anything but a huge faux pas. It doesn't matter if you think she won the debate (I'd be surprised if you thought anyhting else) but the comment plays into her opponent's hands. Don't forget that this is a woman whose husband had to return a tax break his company received for relocating to lower income communities when it turned out his company moved to Pride's Crossing, one of the wealthiest communities in the state.

As for your comments about the Globe, I realize you're not the only conservative on the warpath against the paper, but I have found that your remarks tend to be quite misleading. I notice that you didn't bother to report that the Globe article gave plenty of space to the points that Healey made. You highlighted them in your post as if you only knew about them from listening to the show, but the fact is you would have learned all of that stuff by reading the article.

You really reached a low with your final allegation, however, that the Globe "published flagrantly fake photos." They did no such thing. They published a photo of a city councilor standing in front of the photos, and yes, there is a big difference. A Boston City Councilor displayed the photos at a council meeting. The Globe reported on the meeting, and all through the article made it very clear that the councilor was alleging what the photos showed. The Globe used terms like "purported to show." Like it or not, it's news when a City Councilor does such a thing, and claiming the Globe published false photos is dishonesty bordering on lies.

If Fox News shows a demonstrator calling Bush a Nazi, is it accurate to say "Fox News broadcast allegations that Bush is a Nazi?"

Correction, it was a press ... (Below threshold)
Chris:

Correction, it was a press conference, not a City Council meeting. Same difference.

I know the gist of this pos... (Below threshold)
Old Soldier:

I know the gist of this post is not about the BG, and certainly not about the article on May 12, but; if the intent was honorable or other than to inflame, what contribution did the photo make to the article? To me the intent was pretty darn obvious - the reporter believed the "purported" story was probably (not possibly, but probably) true. Yet another black eye for the US Forces and, who - yup, George W. Bush.

I'm sorry, you can call your liberal dribble whatever you want, but most Americans can identify inflamatory reporting when they see it. And most Americans also understand that the MSM certainly will not let facts (or the checking and verifying of facts) get in the way of their biased story. Print and say what you want - the facts have a way of surfacing anyway.

What contribution did the p... (Below threshold)
Chris:

What contribution did the photos make to the article? Jesus, the article was ABOUT the photos. The Globe clearly made an effort to give readers an idea of what the photos showed without publishing them close up. Its pretty stupid to run an article about the photos while leaving readers wondering what the hell they were. That would only increase interest in the photos, if you think about it.

And it doesn't change the basic dishonesty of saying the Globe "published" the photos. This is the Anne Coulter approach where she claims the New York Times "said" something, when it turns out they were quoting someone in a news article.

Healey did commit a faux pa... (Below threshold)

Healey did commit a faux pas with the "private school" remark. What she should have said was that these illegals and children of illegals should find a way to come up with full tuition themselves whether private or public, and then find a way to get into a school despite their illegal status.

Interestingly, I was just d... (Below threshold)
-S-:

Interestingly, I was just doing some internet searching about The Southern Poverty Law Center and founder, Morris Dees, and pondering their various lists of just who they deem is dreadful and who isn't, with ever so brief descriptions as to why they've arrived at their damning labels about whom.

There is more than meets the eye here. Because, the very idea that people who the majority of taxpayers do not wish to fund should be funded just because the taxpayers (any opposition to public funding going to support illegal aliens and their illegal conditions, such as Healey here as to public education not being doled out to illegal aliens in the state) can be called "evil" and "hateful" for not indulging the demands...I know I'm not the only person who finds that not only illogical but downright corrupt, by those making such demands.

It's a rotten statement about our democracy that people who support our laws and concept of country can be smeared publicly by badly intended people who instead seek to malign those values. Just because you read something on a fancy website does not mean it's honorable or even true.

Because, anyone can "find" anything derogatory about anyone else if they devote enough time and resources to their smear campaign/s. There seems to be no bottom to the lowest standard going for those who seek to malign Americans and the value of citizenship. Illegal is still illegal to my view and until I'm told there are no more laws that the rest of us should honor, respect and obey, I'm still of the opinion that illegal means illegal and that means, it's against the law. And that includes illegal immigration. And as to debased morality, I include in that the organizations and individuals in the country who malign Americans who respect our laws.

The internet is rife with rumors and rumor mongers. Those "fake photos" maligning U.S. servicemen are despicable, as are the duds who promoted them.

Good luck to Healey; at this point, the opposition really is after blood, unfortunately, and wretched ruination.

As an immigrant to this cou... (Below threshold)
Faith+1:

As an immigrant to this country who went through the process, legally, to become a citizen, who chose to serve this country, in part, as a Thank You! for the opportunity to live here I have the following opinion about ILLEGAL aliens.

They are entitled to a just and fair process of deportation and NOTHING else.

They are an insult and disgrace to the rest of us who struggled to FOLLOW the law and obtain our citizenship, our rights and our priveleges of citizenship.

To give ILLEGAL aliens all the benefits of citizenship without their embracing citizenship and this country then you render the term "American citizen" a useless one.

I know some American citizens, especially those from the extreme left already feel that way--funny how they don't leave the country they despise. I came to America BECAUSE it wasn't a socialist or communist country. I don't want to see it turn into one. I had the "privlege of being born in a truly Facist country which "progressed" to a socialist one. Both are simply different forms of governments designed to subjugate the masses under the control of the few. The Facists tends to be a single dictator while the socialist/communist tends to center around self-appointed "enlightened" people with an Emperor's Clothes air of superiority.

If people have a problem with the complexity of obtaining visas, green cards and citizenships then they should campaign to have those laws changed--not advocate the breaking of those laws. I agree the laws need to be changed and I am active in LEGAL methods of trying to change them.

I will not support any candidate of any party that votes to allow illegal aliens the same benfits as citizens. I find the concept disgusting and cannot fathom how anyone can even contemplate it unless they simply have no clue what citizenship really means.

Next month I celebrate the 22nd anniversary of my citizenship in this country. I value that day more so than my own birthday. Being born allowed me to be alive. Getting my citizenship allowed me to live.

The problem is Healey didn'... (Below threshold)
ICallMasICM:

The problem is Healey didn't get out some crayons to draw a picture explaining the difference between 'public' and 'private' to libs.

Chris - The point about the... (Below threshold)
plum:

Chris - The point about the earlier Globe story was that they ran with the article *after* they knew the story was false and the photos were from a Hungarian porn site. They never issued a correction but instead apologized for the graphic nature of the photographs.

So, Chris - why should the ... (Below threshold)
Mikey:

So, Chris - why should the taxpayers be subsidizing illegal immigrants?

"So, Chris - why should the... (Below threshold)
Chris:

"So, Chris - why should the taxpayers be subsidizing illegal immigrants?"

I don't recall saying that they should. My whole post was about the political wisdom of Kerry Healey's remarks, and about Jay Tea's dishonesty in his portrayal of the Globe. (And as a side note, the Globe published an apology for the graphic nature of the photos, as well as several letters condemening Turner.)

I've actually got mixed feelings about immigration. I think it's important to control our borders, and we are under no obligation to let anyone in we don't want to let in. By the same token, the fact that someone has broken our immigration laws doesn't necessarily mean they have lost all of their rights. For example, I'm not a lawyer, but I believe even a non-citizen has a right to be Mirandized when arrested. And to the extent that children are involved, it would be nice if we could help them become integrated into our society as productive citizens, even if their parents are here illegally. There's inconsistencies in my attitude, but like I said, I'm torn. It's easy to look at things in black and white, but when kids are involved I have a hard time just saying "screw 'em."

Here's an indefensible exam... (Below threshold)

Here's an indefensible example: Boston Globe's Yvonne Abraham makes fun of Minuteman Project.

She provided this quote: "They are outsiders, and we don't want them here," said David Van Deusen of Moretown, Vt., who helped to organize the protest. "We don't want their racist policies in Vermont."

She didn't identify who Dan Deusen is. For that, do what I did, or just visit the link. And, write to their ombudsman and let him know you're watching.

And, here's how to stop in-state tuition for illegal aliens.

If you really want to do something about this, go to their rallies or call in to shows and ask politicians that question, or keep sending emails to papers demanding that they ask that question.

And, can this site finally ... (Below threshold)
moi:

And, can this site finally get rid of those nofollow tags? They weren't there before, then they were, then they weren't, and now they're back.

Chris said, "By the same to... (Below threshold)
Faith+1:

Chris said, "By the same token, the fact that someone has broken our immigration laws doesn't necessarily mean they have lost all of their rights. For example, I'm not a lawyer, but I believe even a non-citizen has a right to be Mirandized when arrested. And to the extent that children are involved, it would be nice if we could help them become integrated into our society as productive citizens, even if their parents are here illegally."

I would agree they shouldn't lose their rights--as I said, Mirandize them as they are process for deportation. However, there is a long road between finding a law breaker and treating them according to the law and granting them privleges that should be reserved for citizens.

The very concept that if my child born in the US as a citizen would be charged out of state fees to go to school in Mass. while a child born out of the COUNTRY would get in state tuition is so ridiculous on its face I cannot fathom how even one person supports it.

Unless it amounts to nothing more than a blatant political attempt to attract a voter base for a political party. Hmmm, Cuo bono? Which party benefits from this approach? Hmmmm.

Dunno, I have serious problems with a political that needs to rely on non-citizens and convicted felons to get elected.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy