I'm not actually surprised.........
Courting Chaos in Massachusetts
This is the NYT editorial exhorting Massachusetts to vote "No" (or would they prefer we vote "present", like their hero?) on Question 1.
My first thought is - "Butt out" After all, it never goes well when someone in New York tries to tell someone in Boston anything.
But this sentence is just a complete lie.
"There is no way that Massachusetts can cut that deeply, especially on short notice and especially now, as the economic downturn calls for more, not less, state spending."
How assbackwards is the NYT editorial board? Raising taxes in an economic downturn? Massachusetts most certainly can make these cuts.
Who paid for this editorial? DiMasi? Patrick?
Sure, it could be bad....but it could also be very good. This study from the Beacon Hill Institute and Suffolk University explains how it could benefit the state. But whatever it is, it will be the will of the people.
The leadership on Beacon Hill did this to themselves. There was a "temporary" hike several years ago and every effort to roll it back has been thwarted by the legislature. Nice going asshats, if you had just let us roll it back and not interfered with previous efforts, we wouldn't be this fired up. But no, you had to go against the will of the people as you have on many occasions. Not only do you ignore us, you insult us. The last time we voted and it was repealed by the rats on Beacon Hill, their explanation was that the voters didn't understand the ramifications of their vote. How insulting is that? They repealed it for our own good. Apparently they have decided to promote themselves from legislators to rulers.
Listen up!
Vote "Yes" on Question 1.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Maggie, thought you'd get a kick out of the W review. Looks like Oliver Stone is the bipartisan director non grata
You ever sit through the rough cut of your friend's independent film? Well, I have, lotsa times, God help me, so seeing Oliver Stone's W. really brought back some nauseating memories. It seems to run about eight hours and is so boring, so fatheaded, and so full of lame attempts at profundity that it's just like the rough cut of almost every terrible independent film ever made.
I know, you already told me.
Oliver Stone's still coasting on the Lefty-laurels he collected from Platoon.
They thought it depicted the stark horrors of Vietnam.
I thought it was an overblown comedy...
Bill, I've learned my lefty lesson. However, your comment on Platoon gives me the shivers. No one can understand or depict war adequately unless they serve.
I did love Natural Born Killers, though.
No one can understand or depict war adequately unless they serve.
Shivers?
*grin*
Platoon is so full of overblown stereotypes -- the Good Guys are all draftee dopers and the Bad Guys are all lifer juicers -- and nonstop gore that us VietVets refer to it as Cartoon. Stone was obviously a doper when he was over there (and, judging by his subsequent efforts, probably still is).
Combat messes your head up bad enough -- having some REMF tell the world it turns you into a soulless animal is worse.
Post a Comment