Those of you underprivileged souls who’ve never “experienced” a MA budget season won’t truly understand my explanation.  But, the basics you need to understand is that each legislator walks into ‘their’ meeting with Ways & Means possessed with the same thing…10 pet projects that benefit their district or worse still their “constituency.” This top 10 list represents the items necessary, or so the legislator believes, for his/her reelection.  They range from one-ofs, expenditures that are a one time thing, to long-running recurring expenditures that we taxpayers fund for years on end.

Disregard the benefit of the project, it could be a fully funded town gazebo or horse patrols for a state park, the end result is an encumbrance of money for a project dedicated for a single population.  It shifts the budgeting sessions focus from on broad ideals of how the state should spend its limited resources, to ones focused on horse-trading.  Moreover, it focuses the debate on the needs of the few at the cost (and expense) of the benefit of the many.

Now you may ask, why does this matter, this is the basis of politics.  But, I contend that we could be better, we could require our legislature to pass broad based funding mechanisms, funding government in its entirety rather than specific projects.  Such action would relieve the legislature of having to produce “district-specific” projects to get reelected, but provide detailed understanding into the costs of the state’s governance.  Ultimately, a ban on earmarks would increase legislative accountability over state finances by providing the members broad-based methods for “spending cuts” without risk of significant harm to their constituents.

Now if you’re adept at reading between the lines, you can guess that a man at a strip club for his bachelor party might have asked for trouble at the end of the night!  Or, that a white judge might find credibility issues with individuals with rap sheets and be biased in favor of police:

Cooperman said the inconsistent testimony, courtroom demeanor and rap sheets of the prosecution witnesses _ mainly Bell’s friends _ “had the effect of eviscerating” their credibility.

I’m sure that no malfeasance occurred and that the officers opted for a trial without a jury had nothing to do with the judge, but it raises serious questions.  I’m sure that the decedant’s friends were not the most believable witnesses but what effect does firing 50 bullets have on one’s credibility.  At some point, the court must look past the shooters were cops and focus on the fact that one officer dropped 31 shots on Mr. Bell.

The most disturbing fact of this case to me, however, is the fact that his bank notified the IRS to get him caught. He didn’t get caught driving around the “strip” to get a girl but rather his bank “noticed something suspicious,” because he transferred more than $10k from an account, and contacted the IRS. Now, don’t get me wrong, Spitzer hiring hookers is wrong, but you should have the right to spend you money how ever you see fit. If you earned it, you have the right to spend it where and when you want.

The case raises a serious question about the privacy an individual possess. Does one have the right to possess an unfettered bank account. If such suspicion exists that warrants investigation, shouldn’t the FBI or IRS initiate the investigation. Why are the banks and the internet providers the ones beginning the investigation into private individuals.

No Country for Old Men
Like many others, I found this movie to be good but not great. It is less then I have come to expect from the Cohen Bros., but then again what can compete with Fargo. I liked the feeling of desolation and desperation that they created in the depths of Texas; the feeling of a life without meaning until a bag of money appears. I didn’t expect the ending

Gone Baby, Gone
Absolute drivel! I saw the movie several months ago and found it lacking any redeeming quality. In watching a suspense drama, I expect the movie to be suspenseful and dramatic but not so with Ben Affleck’s latest load of crap. A person with half a brain can figure out what will happen halfway through the movie and can predict the ending in its entirety.

Now I tell you this because I went to NH to perform field work; the time honored tradition/mantra of doors and phones, phones and doors. And that I like the work makes the disaster that was Obama NH all the more difficult to fathom. When you ask people to donate their time you need to make good use of their time. You need to be prepared for them, with a plan and resources in place to make sure that they feel properly utilized. This was not the case. To say that Obama NH was disorganized gives the impression that they made an attempt at organization. It was unorganized chaos.

Now, I expect chaos, it comes with the territory of a campaign but a complete lack of organization stretches credulity.

As for his “defeat,” the pundits all talk about how Barack lost to Hillary and she’s “the new come back kid.” Nothing could be farther from the truth. In reading the poll numbers it was clear the most accurate prediction of the Democrats race came on December 27th-30th. But the actuals numbers were what we should have expected, Barack trailed Hillary by only a small margin due mostly to the differences in their field organizations.

People want to talk about how Hillary cried, or how Barack patronized her during the debate but reality is far simpler – HRC’s crack squad of field organizers on the ground early in NH, out-organized Barack’s disjointed ragtag group of college kids. Organization wins you elections and this sentiment couldn’t have been clear than January 8th in New Hampshire.

Just to get it out there early, I’m with Obama. Barely a year removed from Deval Patrick’s historic and triumphant victory, I’m back on the campaign trail – not in the same manner but – stumping for my boy the best way I know how…”doors and phones, phones and doors.” This means hustling up to New Hampshire or to a phone bank in the Boston area to get out the vote.

Now, I’m not at the same degree of involvement with Barack as Deval but that’s more a personal, lifestyle choice than anything else (WSJ). Regardless, I’m gearing up to spend a few more weekends and weeknights manning the phones and knocking on doors to the get the vote out.

As for why I support Barack, the answer is not so simple. First, DLP backed him which carries weight with me and by supporting Obama I help my guy. By coming out for Obama, DLP asked his machine, of which I’m a cog, to get behind the Obama wagon and push, so here I am.

But, its more than just Deval’s endorsement. Listen to Barack speak and you understand that he gets the income inequality that is tearing this nation apart. He gets that there is a rich/poor, have/have not dichotomy that threatens our nation and polarized our political landscape. He sees the need for economic oversight and creating tax equality.

Are there things about Barack I don’t like? Of course but a perfect candidate doesn’t exist. Barack is good, smart, and comes down on the right correct side of most issues for me.

My kids! The children that never grow up