For John, BLUF: It is hard to comprehend how the Patrick Administration doesn't know who has what appointment. How can they properly manage patronage and no-show jobs if they don't keep track of these things? Nothing to see here; just move along.
NOTE For Gerry: No, this isn't politics, but rather an issue of competence. However, if I say it's typical of the corrupt ways on Beacon Hill then it is political, isn't it? But not local politics.
Adults can differ on whether UN Amb Susan Rice was deliberately wrong when she won't on Sunday talk shows after the 9/11 attack in Benghazi.♠ Two plus months later the facts are still murky. My question is, how can the Patrick Administration not know who hired disgraced Highway Safety Director Sheila Burgess ? I wonder if I could just walk into the office, sit down and begin work as Ms Burgess' replacement.
Melchizedek? The High Priest of Salem. He came out of nowhere and took a tithe from Abraham.
Regards — Cliff
♠ I am one who thinks Amb Rice was set up by the Administration and thus was not lying to the Great American Public. That puts me opposed Senators McCain, Graham and Ayotte. Worse it puts me in company with people who are pushing some outlandish ideas regarding the situation.
7 comments:
Careful--you start quoting Lutherans and all sorts of heresies are doubtless soon to follow. ;-)
I admit to picking the link with malice of forthought, with a particular Blogger in mind. :-)
Regards — Cliff
I was reading Althouse,
"John Kerry is the real choice for Secretary of State. Rice was always expendable. She was the capsule into which the Benghazi scandal was enclosed for burial. Once we're tired of Rice — she's been battered and beaten and those who've done the beating have been accused of black-woman-battering — we'll automatically already be tired of talking about the Benghazi scandal, which never even broke!"
It isn't about attacking Rice, it is about whoever changed the talking points.
I guess we will never know, because the White House is good at tiring the American Public.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2012/11/20/ehack/2PshtBYNkjOSrmtWiJSXgJ/story.html
"Yet even if she had a spotless driving record before her appointment, Burgess was not qualified for the job. Her professional background shows no experience in public safety, transportation, or government administration. But Burgess, a former aide to the late Representative Joseph Moakley, was rich in experience when it came to raising funds through her consulting firm. Her client list includes Democratic politicians, including Representative James McGovern, Lieutenant Governor Tim Murray, and Senator John Kerry. In 2007, McGovern recommended Burgess for a position somewhere in state government."
I really want to meet someone that can say with a straight face that only MA Dems give out patronage jobs.
I won't trifle with this subject by bothering to prove my point.
Nothing to see here; just move along.
No one is stating that Republicans don't, but we do live in a one party state. So Democrats are all we have to be critical of.
Jack
What is the "Scottish Verdict"? Not Proven? On the other hand, we have the Probation Department.
The Republicans just don't have the juice.
Three House Speakers in a row gone?
I wish we have the power to do patronage, not that we should, but it would then mean that the voters had righted the ship of state.
Regards — Cliff
Post a Comment