Kabul Press calls Massachusetts more corrupt than Afghanistan

My wife and I were discussing the issue of the "Government Critters" on both sides of the world, and that there really is no real difference as the Government at home and the Government here are inhabited by the same level of ineffective and overpaid staff. They aren't very effective and are highly overpaid for the work that they do. It doesn't matter if you are in Afghanistan or the USA, these fools have taken over the Government that is supposed to work for us. Instead they have made it all about themselves.

Here's a point-of-view from the AFGHN side where the local press in Kabul describes how they see the State of Massachusetts as corrupt (if not more so)than those in Afghanistan.

With DEVAL PATRICK in charge in the State of Massachusetts, I can kinda see this guy's point. Governor Patrick is the best buddy with the President, who is the epitome of ineffective, bloated, overpaid Government. They are a pair of inept frauds who scammed their way into elective office. We would be much better off with both of them out of office and going back to some other line of work.

Massachusetts Corruption Dwarfs Afghan Corruption

International corruption statistics are distorted to protect Western nations and China - Saturday 18 August 2012, by Matthew J. Nasuti - Kabul Press http://kabulpress.org/my/spip.php?article120954

Government corruption in the United States is hundreds of times more pervasive and costly than in Afghanistan. Every day American newspapers recount the scandals. One day it involves U.S. Customs officials, the next day it is the Secret Service, then the General Services Administration, then the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. Every month there are new scandals involving foreign aid and other funds administered by the U.S. Department of State, the latest involved the waste of billions of dollars in “global warming” funds squandered by Assistant Secretary of State Kerri-Ann Jones and her predecessor, Claudia A. McMurray. Despite the State Department being perhaps worst administered agency in the Federal Government, no one dares utter even a whisper of criticism at Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, so the corruption continues.

While billions of dollars in domestic spending and foreign aid are misappropriated, corruptly awarded and mismanaged each year, that corruption is easier to conceal, because the U.S. is a wealthy country with many distractions. Despite the publicity, few members of the public seem able to grasp the size and scope of the cancer of corruption and nepotism that is eating away at the country.

Internationally, government corruption is ranked under a flawed system established by such groups as “Transparency International.” They rank corruption in countries like Afghanistan and the United States based on subjective “perceptions” of corruption. Because the rankings are not based on the actual volume of corruption, this system unfairly maligns developing countries. If the system were based on the dollar amount of corruption, it would list many Western, Arab and Far East nations as the most corrupt.

Supposedly non-profit groups such as Transparency International are anything but transparent. Its co-founder, Michael Hershman, is a former official with USAID and he is also the chairman of the Fairfax Group. Fairfax makes it profits from the corruption that Transparency International “discovers.” Fairfax holds itself out as an expert consultant on foreign government corruption and as a result it has been awarded numerous U.S. government anti-corruption contracts. Transparency International’s U.S. Board of Directors and Advisory Council is filled with former government officials, lawyers for major Washington, D.C. law firms, government consultants and other representatives of organizations affiliated with the U.S. Department of State. Many of these people make money from or advance their careers by pointing the corruption finger overseas, rather than where it belongs, which is at the Federal, State and local governments in the United States.

In the United States, the systemic government corruption is not limited to the loss of public funds and cronyism, but extends to a wide range of dishonest and illegal practices which shield those with political connections. American is literally a land of two peoples; those to whom the law applies and those who are above the law. The problem is too large for a single article to examine, so just one of America’s 50 states (Massachusetts) was chosen for this article and even for that state, there is only space to summarize a tiny percentage of its public corruption.

Timothy Murray Scandal: The current state government in Massachusetts is called the Patrick/Murray Administration after Governor Duval Patrick and Lieutenant Governor Timothy Murray. On November 2, 2011, at 5:26 a.m. Murray was driving his State-owned Crown Victoria automobile in Sterling, Massachusetts, when he crashed the vehicle, completely destroying it. Murray told the police that he was driving at the legal speed limit of 55 miles per hour and lost control of the vehicle. He claimed to be on official business inspecting (in the dark) storm damage in the area. The police determined that he was driving at 108 miles per hour and fell asleep at the wheel. Every statement made to police by Murray was false. Despite that and Murray’s lack of remorse, local prosecutors refused to prosecute him for his false statements or for reckless endangerment. As a reward, Governor Patrick gave Murray a new $40,000.00 State automobile to replace the one he destroyed. Murray had previously been cited in 1992 and 2006 for speeding. Attempts by the Boston Herald to further investigate this scandal have been blocked by lawyers in the Governor’s Office, including E. Abim Thomas, who claims that the records are exempt from public release. ,br />
Chelsea Housing Authority Scandal: Massachusetts has 242 public housing authorities and some of the top jobs within these agencies have historically been patronage appointments, a system prone to abuse. For most of the past year, the Chelsea (Boston) Housing has been rocked by sandals. On June 15th of this year investigators questioned Lieutenant Governor Murray about allegations that Chelsea officials were illegally fundraising for him. Murray has refused to brief the people of Massachusetts regarding any of these allegations. Since then there have been no public updates. The concern is that this criminal investigation, like so many others, has been quietly dropped.

MBTA Scandal: On August 6, 2012, the Boston Globe reported that there were only two bidders on a $1 billion State MBTA transportation contract. Initially, 25 companies expressed an interest in bidding but except for the favored contractors (Mass Bay) and a little known French company, all the rest of the bidders ultimately declined to bid. The reason that 23 companies withdrew from the process is that there is a wide-spread belief that State officials had rigged the bidding in favor of Mass Bay. Governor Patrick has done nothing to dispel this apparently accurate assessment. Due to the lack of competition and in order to try and restore public confidence, Governor Patrick should withdraw bidding authority from MBTA General Manager Jonathan R. Davis, assign the bid evaluation to an independent panel and order that panel to rebid the work. This of course will never happen because the Governor seems quite content with the present corruption.

Deerfield River Levee Scandal: In the Fall of 2011, a group of wealthy agri-businesses in Deerfield, Massachusetts created several kilometers of sand levees along the Deerfield River in an attempt to prevent future flooding of their low-lying farm fields. The 10-15 foot levees, in some places push into tree-lines and right up to the river’s edge. The legal issue is that State law prohibits any construction work within 200 feet of a river without a permit, which the farmers failed to apply for. The Massachusetts River Protection Act is very clear and it mandates that the levees be removed. According to informed sources, inspectors for the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) recommended in 2011 that enforcement action be commenced against the violators. A letter was sent on December 15, 2011 to Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley from Cynthia M. Pepyne of the Northwestern District Attorney’s Office requesting a State review of these potential environmental violations. To-date however nothing has happened. The reason is that the agri-businesses involved have close political ties to the Patrick-Murray Administration and party loyalty matters more to these State officials than the environment or the law. It is not clear who within Ms. Coakley’s office or the DEP quashed the enforcement action. The case is presently sitting on the desk of Brian Harrington, Assistant Administrator for DEP’s Western Region. It has been sidelined with the support of DEP attorney Kathleen Delaplain, but the real decision authorities may have been DEP Director Kenneth L. Kimmell and Western Regional Administrator Michael Gorski. In contacts with these officials, they claim that the enforcement action is still under “active consideration” but it is impossible to obtain the truth from any of these individuals.

Department of Revenue Scandal: An investigation in early 2012 revealed that the Massachusetts Department of Revenue has a new tactic that it is using against the poor. It is called the “desk audit.” For wealthy and corporate taxpayers, the Department will conduct field audits in which revenue agents travel to the home or place of business of the wealthy to review the taxpayer’s records. However, for indigent taxpayers, the Department misuses a device called the desk audit and it orders the taxpayer to copy all of his or her records for one or multiple years and mail all of them to the desk auditor. If the taxpayer cannot afford to do this, the Department labels them as “refusing to comply with the law” and rejects all their deductions, imposing large penalties on them. If the indigent taxpayer tries to appeal this unjust assessment, he or she is hit with the one-two punch by the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board (ATB). The ATB has ignored rulings from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and decided that it will not waive filing fees for the poor. As a result of this misconduct, some indigent taxpayers are barred from appealing State abuses. Even if the indigent could somehow obtain the required filing fees, the ATB requires that all hearings be held in Boston, a long trip for the elderly and in some cases an impossible trip for the poor. The ATB refuses to travel around the State in order to hear cases locally, however, the ATB will travel the circuit for wealthy parties who are contesting property tax assessments. It will hold court for property tax cases for the rich in such upscale western towns as Northampton, but it will not accommodate the poor by holding income tax hearings in Springfield or Greenfield. One of these indigent taxpayer cases is currently being prosecuted by Department of Revenue attorney John DeLosa. Commissioner of Revenue Amy Pitter and ATB Chairman Thomas W. Hammond, Jr. apparently are quite comfortable with these abuses, as they have done nothing to correct them. USDA - Massachusetts Scandal: There is an investigation currently underway by U.S. Attorney Carmen M. Ortiz and the FBI into the corrupt awarding of U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Bill funds in Massachusetts. The case has been briefed to top officials in Tom Vilsack’s office. Mr. Vilsack is the Secretary of Agriculture for the United States. The evidence is that USDA officials in Massachusetts have been awarding grants primarily to friends, family members and to a small group of wealthy farmers with close ties to the Patrick/Murray Administration. The grants are under two programs called the Emergency Conservation Program (ECP) and the Environmental Quality Improvement Program (EQIP). The public has not heard about this case and it will not be hearing about this case for a while because, unfortunately, the U.S. Attorney’s investigation appears to be on hold until after the November election, so as not to embarrass President Obama. Corruption at the Federal, State and local levels within the United States varies from agency to agency, from State to State and from town to town. Overall, the sheer magnitude of abuses outstrips anything present in Afghanistan. The American metrics far outpace Afghanistan on the dollar number of funds misappropriated, number of instances of corruption and number of people and companies who are immune from and above the law. This is not to condone the level of corruption within Afghanistan, which is believed to be considerable and unacceptable. Hypocracy has always been a staple of international diplomacy and therefore Afghanistan will have to live with the condescending arrogance of American diplomats who see corruption everywhere but in their own back yard

The Scott Brown effect & " All Politics is local "

Things are moving in the right direction politically here in the bluest of blue states. Voters are finally seeing that having one party dominate the political landscape is NOT best for the taxpayers or citizens.

Case in point, US Senator Scott Brown from Massachusetts. He was known in his district as a State Rep. and a State Senator but not much well known statewide. He put his message out to the voters and was elected to the Senate seat that Ted Kennedy had held for over 48 years. The voters were starting to see that they needed someone who would speak for them and not just lock step to what the Democratic majority wanted.

2nd case in point is much more local, as there was an election to fill a vacant state rep's seat in my home district. The seat had been held by a democrat for over 30 years. A son of a well known political family ran with backing from the Unions.

HE LOST even though he out spent his opponent, a not as well known citizen who decided that we needed someone who could make a difference. The Unions bet heavy that they would get their candidate in but lost as voters saw that having another rubber stamp in place for the Unions was not in the best interest of the district.

IF we can get the voters to see this with the nationwide elections next November, there is a better chance for our country to move forward. If we stay as it is now, with an ineffective President and a do-nothing Senate controlled by the Democrats, we will be stuck in place. We need to elect people who will work to really make a change, not just lecture us and call us "lazy" like the President does.

It can happen and it did happen here in Massachusetts. Let's make it happen for the rest of the country too. Former Speaker of the House Tip O'Neil said, " All Politics is local." He was right.

Lakeville Republican Keiko Orrall won after being outspent
State House News Service
Posted Nov 22, 2011

LAKEVILLE — Lakeville Republican Keiko Orrall bucked a campaign finance trend by defeating an opponent who outspent her during the run up to a special election in September.

Orrall’s win flipped the 12th Bristol seat from Democratic control for the first time in more than 30 years. In addition to New Bedford and Lakeville, the district includes parts Taunton, Middleboro and Freetown.

Campaign finance statistics released Monday show Middleboro Democrat Roger Brunelle, a commercial and industrial painter and 19-year member of a painters union, outspent Orrall, $39,727 to $26,179 and also benefited from $11,475 in independent expenditures from the Massachusetts Teachers Association and $6,301 from 1199 SEIU. Brunelle also received support from Lt. Gov. Tim Murray.

Orrall’s campaign contributions included $8,636 from the Marlborough Republican City Committee and $3,241 from the Republican State Committee.

Orrall won the seat given up by Stephen Canessa, a New Bedford Democrat who left to take a post at Southcoast Health Systems. Voters in Lakeville turned out in greater numbers than nearby New Bedford precincts, choosing Orrall by a three-to-one margin.

Not getting the message.....

I know the feeling.....I live in Massachusetts....the bluest of BLUE states....our VOTERS didn't get the message either.....UGH!

Massachusetts remains Blue...

It was not to be that the citizens of Massachusetts would turn over the DEMS.....I can say that I am truly disappointed in the electorate....

Tim Cahill cost Charlie Baker a chance at being Governor. There's no other way to put it.

The Alcohol tax was repealed but the sales tax lives on....

What will it take to get the people of Massachusetts to understand that the POLS up on Beacon Hill think that the taxes we pay are their own personal piggy bank??

I hope that the National swing to the right will be enough to make sure that some sanity is interjected into the fight to bring Government back to the middle....

Like I had said before, the new POLS we would elect can't be any worse than those who are in there now....

The image above is centered left for the specific purpose of showing we stay left here when common sense would tell most to GO RIGHT.....


Republicans’ revolution fades in Massachusetts
By Noah Bierman, Globe Staff November 3, 2010 - Boston Globe

So much for the Scott Brown revolution, at least in his home state.

He was a national inspiration and a local hero — an against-the-odds winner from Wrentham — who inspired Republicans up and down the ticket to challenge the state’s powerful Democratic establishment. He campaigned throughout the state last weekend, telling sign-holding Republicans at rallies that he was getting “flashbacks’’ to his own improbable US Senate victory.

Yet 10 months after that seismic result, Massachusetts turned decidedly blue again. All statewide elected offices, including a closely fought governor’s race, and the entire 10-member US House delegation remained in Democratic hands, despite a national tide that left Republicans celebrating large gains last night.

“I don’t know how they view this as anything but a total disaster,’’ said Peter Ubertaccio, a political science professor at Stonehill College in Easton. “I just don’t know what a political party does if all indicators across the nation, across the state, all point to a Republican year and they can’t win any races of note.’’

To make a significant statement that Massachusetts has become a true two-party state, the GOP would have had to claim the governor’s office, at least one US House seat, perhaps a constitutional office or two, and at least a dozen new seats in the state Legislature.

The party didn’t come close.

Democratic Governor Deval Patrick, despite a poor economy, dispatched a GOP candidate, Charles D. Baker, whose arrival in the race last year had been heralded as a coup for the party. Baker had been the darling of Beacon Hill when he served as the sharp aide for two Republican governors in the 1990s and then went on to private sector success running Harvard Pilgrim Health Care.

The Republicans’ top nemesis in Congress, US Representative Barney Frank, won easily. And, in the race for the state’s only open US House seat, Democrat William R. Keating bested Republican Jeffrey D. Perry in a district that Brown had won by 20 percent.

The party’s only major victory came in the state Legislature, where Republicans appeared to have increased their membership to 34. They currently hold 20 of the 200 House and Senate seats.

“It will continue to be a blue state until Republicans are able to make a case for the kind of changes that they campaigned on,’’ said Dennis Hale, a Boston College political scientist. “They didn’t make the sell.’’

By just fielding several credible candidates and forcing Democratic incumbents to campaign harder than usual, Republicans tried to claim a modicum of progress for the long-dormant party.

“Changing the color of Massachusetts to purple won’t happen overnight,’’ state chairman Jennifer Nassour said in a statement, emphasizing the legislative victories. “The important fact is that entrenched incumbents, who often fly beneath the radar, had to stand up to public scrutiny this election cycle.’’

But Massachusetts Democrats, with most power preserved, may now feel a renewed sense of invincibility after withstanding the Republicans’ best shot, even as the Democratic Party felt sweeping losses elsewhere in the nation.

“The campaigns run by most Republicans were beneath the dignity of a democracy, and I am delighted they were repudiated,’’ Frank said in his victory speech, sounding a defiant note after a race that forced him to campaign harder than he had in years. But Frank, and the rest of the delegation, will nonetheless lose significant clout in Washington, where Republicans gained control of the US House.

Since Brown’s upset victory over Attorney General Martha Coakley, Republicans have been dreaming big. Maybe, just maybe, Massachusetts would begin feeling like a two-party state.

National factors — a weak economy, an unpopular Democratic leadership — combined with local factors — a series of scandals on Beacon Hill and one of the largest pools of Republican candidates in decades — gave a renewed sense that the party could regain relevance.

Baker’s entry into the race last year energized many in the party. The momentum continued when US Representative William Delahunt decided to retire, leaving an open seat in a congressional district where Brown won big; and even the unexpected turned Republicans’ way when US Representative John Tierney’s wife pleaded guilty to federal tax charges.

Conservative talk radio was abuzz last week at the prospect of reshaping Massachusetts politics, continuing to remake the state that had long been associated with the Kennedy family. Yet there was also a strong sense of anxiety. What if the party fails, despite all the favorable conditions? Would treasurer Timothy P. Cahill, an independent running for governor, siphon just enough votes from Baker to preserve the slim lead Patrick held in public opinion polls?

And there were other signs that years of exile had left the GOP with a weak bench of candidates, and thus, unable to take advantage of all the opportunities. Coakley, for example, despite showing political weakness on a national stage, would have gone unopposed in the general election, if not for a last-minute write-in effort from James McKenna, a first-time candidate who qualified in the primary.

Likewise, when Tierney faced the unexpected guilty plea of his wife, Republicans had already locked in a candidate, Bill Hudak, who was best known for putting a sign on his lawn comparing President Obama with Osama bin Laden.

“They missed an opportunity to nominate someone who could have benefited from that late breaking news about Tierney and his family,’’ Ubertaccio said.

And as much as the Brown victory motivated Republicans, it also inspired some Democratic activists. Sydney Asbury, Patrick’s chief of staff, said recently that when she woke up after Coakley lost, she was determined never to feel that way again. The feeling was not just that the party had lost, but that it had not given its all, like an overconfident basketball team that rests its starting players before the final buzzer sounds, only to realize the other team never gave up.

Despite the national mood that seems to favor Republicans, the state party has tried to keep its public expectations more modest, noting that the party has been steadily losing seats in the State House for most of the last two decades.

“The revolution is occurring if the pendulum starts going in the other direction,’’ said Brad Jones, the House Republican leader.

Jones said he would be “thrilled’’ to increase its count to 17 or 20 House seats, a gain of no more than five, and that 30 seats in the 160-member chamber would constitute a “huge wave.’’

Before the results were known last night, Nassour said a defeat would require serious consideration. “We have to figure out what we did wrong,’’ she said. “Maybe we took for granted some feelings of the electorate and we just have to work harder and produce better candidates and work on our field organization and our farm team.’’

Michael Levenson of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Noah Bierman can be reached at nbierman@globe.com.