Well, this is timed perfectly to blow up in Billy's brother's face come election day.
Shouldn't the feds be investigating this?
Outrageous.
This has not been a good few weeks for Patrick Lynch: first Harsch files the ethics complaint for taking $$$ from dupont lobbyists and lawyers, then he's named in the Celona investigation, and now comes this...
great work, patrick. you have successfully climbed to the top of the corruption totum pole
>>great work, patrick. you have successfully climbed to the top of the corruption totum pole
Just another chip off of the 'ole Democratic family block!
"Shouldn't the feds be investigating this?"
Shouldn't the feds be investigating ALL of the democrats in this state? Celona is just the TIP of the iceberg.
We should call in the U.N. to Rhode Island to help monitor our dictators to make sure they don't oppress the peasants too badly.
Except the UN would undoubtedly become involved in just as many scandals...maybe something like "Oil for Del's Lemonade"
Hmm. Good point.
Maybe we can just petition the federal government to overthrow the RI government like they did in Iraq.
>>Maybe we can just petition the federal government to overthrow the RI government like they did in Iraq.
RIgime Change!
Come to think of it ...
If this turns out to be true, various possibilities occur:
1) If not declared on taxes, there is the possibility of federal and state tax evasion charges for Motley Rice (and its partners?);
2) With or without the tax implications, potential disciplinary proceedings - possibly leading to disbarment - for the attorneys involved.
3) To the extent there were multiple parties involved, a possible RICO action against them.
Are you listening Mr. Harsch?
Tom W,
Yes, mimimally there would appear to be a conflict of interest on behalf of the attorneys.
TomW,
Good points all. I am more than sure Harsch is listening.
I wonder if the folks at Mealys have been in touch with the Harsch campaign on any of this just like the AP was on the original duPont story. methinks it's rather likely
Wow,
put this before the voters and it may just cause a fire storm like the last "ethics issue" did. Even paid for shills like Dan Yorke and Arlene Violet don't talk about it.
You know, if you can find yet another "ethics issue stretch", like this one, Bill Harsch may break 30. That would be exciting.
Lastly, talking about this and not talking about the no-bid contracts that go straight to Jeff Grybowski's old firm somewhat makes a few folks look petty.
Lord know you are all intelligent enough to do better. If I was Patricia Morgan, you would have actual candidates in the Assembly races who had a chance. But I'm not. Therefore, most of those races are dead and you have decided to "get Harsch" with your time. It makes me feel bad, it truly does.
I couldn't disagree with Bobby Oliveira more.
Patrick Lynch is the least popular incumbent in Rhode Island. From the Station Fire, and his stance on 2nd Ammendment rights, to his inability to address rising electricity and cable rates and his close ties with proven cases of corruption (celona, blue cross, beacon mutual), Lynch is not going into November on a wave of popularity.
As for Yorke and Violet: Yorke is close with the Lynch brothers and has been relatively soft when it comes to Patrick. Arlene on the other hand is critical of just about everyone and everthing, and not surprisingly I HAVE heard her be very scathing towards AG Lynch.
This is only July, and looking back on the Jeff Pine campaign, I see many similarities with Harsch's campaign. My prediction is that by mid-September, Harsch will be neck and neck with Lynch
Anthony,
Is there anything more amusing than one paid shill referring to others as same? lol
You are right on about Yorke and the Lynch boys. Dan is pathetically softball not only with the Lynch boys but with most Democrats around here. I'm still shocked over his lack of commentary on Montalbano's pay-off from the town of West Warwick and Joe's forgetfullness to disclose to the ethics commission three years running. How many shows did Dan do on Carcieri's half a Patriots football game in the Fleet box scrum with the same ethics commission? Dan is a paper tiger who talks big but only with safe targets.
Arlene is angry with everyone because her show is in the toilet. What disappoints about Arlene is how she picks and chooses issues when telling it like it is. Her casino advocacy has become embarrassing in its' level of half truths and misrepresentations. She also lost total credibility in trying to prop up and legitimize the candidacy of Dennis The Clown Michaud.
Arlene is a mere shell of her former tell it like it is self. She cannot retire soon enough for my liking.
Bobby Oliviera,
Methinks you doth protest too much.
Bobby something for you to ponder ~ Patrick Lynch IS the Pat Morgan of the Rhode Island Democratic party.
The one difference between them is Pat Morgan isn't dirty.
Anthony,
Mr. Corrente has his hands full investigating all the criminal activity Lynch either won't touch or is implicated (CVS lobbyist who worked under Joe Walsh) in. Interesting how the name Joe Walsh keeps coming up. Celona names Joe Walsh as the lobbyist who set up his meetings with CVS.
Can we all agree CVS is a first rate company yet got themselves tangled up in this corrption web? Well guess who else Joe Walsh was (still is?) a lobbyist for?
Beacon Mutual.
Can we all agree Beacon Mutual's management was sleazy and second rate?
Keep your eye on the Beacon Mutual investigation. This is an election year and the AG is in dire need of a high profile corruption case he can vet. If funny biz went on between a first rate company like CVS and certain Assembly members just imagine what went on between the slimey crowd running Beacon and members of the Assembly.
PS - my bad! The first post I wrote was supposed to be addressed to Andrew not Anthony. Sorry for the mix-up.
Thank you for posting this, Andrew.
Justice as administered by the present AG has been notably arbitrary.
Lynch has concentrated on those matters that get him a splashy headline while being lukewarm (Celona, voter fraud, contaminated properties in Tiverton) or absent altogether (utility rate increases, Beacon Mutual, predator registration & more) on a host of other problems requiring the AG's full attention or leadership.
The many troubling aspects of the Dupont settlement have been well articulated here. I would only add that it's the seemingly smaller item of the million dollars to Brown U that is particularly telling. He clearly saw himself on a stage at Brown University receiving major kudos from officials and an appreciative audience.
Dear Andrew,
I could also predict that Charlie Fogarty will win by 20 over the "most unpopular incumbent running statewide", at least that is what the polls say, but I wouldn't be right either.
I can see you working. You find frustration everwhere you look so you try to make this race fit the profile of a previously successful race. No crime in that, I've done it too.
However, in this case, there is no historic, social, political, and/or "coincidence" paralell between the two races.
Let me say it again: If Patrick Lynch were to be struck by lightning, decided to become a prophet, and moved to Kashmir to setup shop, we could run the two dead guys who signed Michaud's paperwork as a write-in ticket, using actual real time photos in the campaign literature, and still beat Mr. Harsch comfortably.
I am struck by your comments regarding Mr. Yorke, who refers to many of my friends as "anti-christs" and Ms. Violet, an insider in the Moderate GOP wing. Appearently, neither one makes anybody happy.
"I am struck by your comments regarding Mr. Yorke, who refers to many of my friends as "anti-christs"..."
I assume that's because you're friendly with the scum that's destroying this state from the inside.
Dear Greg,
That's an awfully broad brush you paint with. Please notice that the electorate tends to ignore artists using such unwieldly strokes.
Yeah, well, the electorate in Rhode Island is also full of the dead, the illegal aliens, the old and the uneducated. And strangely enough, they all seem to vote to protect the union interests.
No wonder why the Democrats are so solidly against a law that would require voters to provide proof of identity the same way voters in countries like, oh MEXICO have to...
It seems that Bobby O's best defense of Patrick Lynch is that he doesn't think Harsch can win.
Bobby, casting your personal dislike for Bill Harsch aside, can you concede that Lynch falls under the banner of "corrupt politician" more so than "noble Democrat"?
Can you also concede that Harsch won the most votes an Independent candidate has ever received in Rhode Island, and was the 2nd non-Democratic vote-getter in the 2002 elections?
Can you admit that Patrick Lynch is nothing more than a shill for Joe Walsh and the self-serving influences in the Democratic party? That his first priority is for his pursuit of higher office? That he has ignored serious crimes and turned his head to the actions of the politically connected? That he has confounded RI's open meeting laws, dropped the ball on CVS, Beacon Mutual, Billy Irons, the Station Fire, and the Newport Pub Crawl Death?
Can you just admit that he is the PROBLEM, and not the solution when it comes to Rhode Island's culture of corruption?
Dear JohnB,
There is not one scintilla of evidence that Mr. Lynch is corrupt. There are many scintillae that indicate you and he do not share the same priorities.
Mr. Harsch did do a very nice job in his first run. Unfortunately for him, people know him now. He is another member of the RIGOP who should have learned his craft at perhaps the municipal level.
Since the wishes of Joe Walsh and the "wishes of the Party" are sometimes at cross-purposes, Mr. Lynch cannot be as you suggest. If his first priority were higher office, then some of his decisions would have been different. For instance, he would have stepped in and not allowed my OMA complaint versus the Governor to be successful.
Do I think he picks and chooses like any AG does? Yes I do. Do I think it's for the black helicopter tainted reasons you seem to suggest? No I don't.
Our Open Meeting's Laws, and the processes under which complaints are handled, are in better shape now than when he entered office. CVS and Billy Irons, really the same issue, belong to somebody else due to the scope. While there's a lot of bad decision making going on at Beacon Mutual, other than Ms. Orefice's attempted shakedown before "signing", she obviously didn't write it, her letter, nothing illegal has happened. Sometimes unethical, often greedy, but nothing illegal.
I lost a friend in the Station Fire and feel that pain often. However, under existing statute, there really are few other ways to proceed.
The Newport Pub Crawl Death is a different matter entirely. The AG knows that every time he sees me, I just might bring it up hoping he makes a different decision. By the way, I was doing this long before the few times I've mourned with the family. If you sign up for Knowing Newport on Yahoo, you can read what I said on that sad event's first anniversary.
Our "culture" of corruption is more romantic myth than fact. It can be successfully argued that there were more unethical acts committed per capita in Montana in the last 5 years. Instead of concentrating on myth, or in the Governor's case self-engrandisement, your side should get to work on providing solutions, obviously from a Conservative point of view, that do not rely on union bashing or division in general as a foundation. Then, provided you keep silly people from running for offices that are obviously over their collective heads, you might win a few races.
"There is not one scintilla of evidence that Mr. Lynch is corrupt."
Did you even read the above posting?
"Our "culture" of corruption is more romantic myth than fact."
Now you've just exposed yourself to be totally out of touch with the problems in RI
"your side should get to work on providing solutions"
Like Harsch's proposed sex-offender ammendments? or his PUC Plan? Where's Patrick's solutions? Where's the Dems' solutions?
Well, solutions like Shelly's "Out of Iraq now!" plan, of course. Rhetoric without substance. Objectives with no courses of action. Talking points without real desire to correct problems.
>>Our "culture" of corruption is more romantic myth than fact. It can be successfully argued that there were more unethical acts committed per capita in Montana in the last 5 years.
I suppose that’s why, when speaking at Brown U a few years ago and asked about corruption in RI, former Clinton aide Dick Morris stated something along the lines of: “Rhode Island is among a handful of inherently corrupt states.” Since Dick Morris was Clinton’s “Karl Rove” – charged with studying the political realities and dynamics around country – methinks that this says much about the slimy culture that seventy years of Democratic control has wrought.
It can also be argued that New Jersey, Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana have had “more unethical acts committed per capita” and so RI is not quite as corrupt as those states. Big deal. Enron was not quite as corrupt as the Mafia, either – so that makes Enron OK?
>>Instead of concentrating on myth, or in the Governor's case self-engrandisement, your side should get to work on providing solutions, obviously from a Conservative point of view, that do not rely on union bashing or division in general as a foundation.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! The entire political methodology of the Democratic Party is founded upon promoting and exacerbating divisiveness: minority groups against the rest of us; resentment against a purposely undefined group of “the rich”; scaring seniors that they’re Social Security or Medicare is going to be eliminated.
Further, pointing out that public sector union compensation is way out of whack is not “union bashing” … did it ever occur to you that private-sector union members are just as victimized by grossly excessive public-sector compensation? (In fact, private sector union members are now essentially second-class citizens within organized labor. Like Blacks, the Democratic Party pays lip service to them at election time, but little else.)
Similarly, pointing out that public school teachers - in spite of their six-figure compensation for a part-time job (and it IS six-figures when one factors in salaries / benefits and pensions) – are doing a LOUSY job is not “union bashing,” it is citing facts. RI schools fare poorly in comparison to US averages, and in turn US school fare poorly in comparison to other countries.
That the Democratic Party serves as sycophant and protector to the teacher unions’ maintenance of (at best) mediocrity is one of the moral tragedies of our time – for the Democratic Party is an accomplice in condemning entire generations of children to standards of living far less than what they could enjoy if a quality education was available to them.
JohnB,
A corrupt politician IS a noble Democrat here in Rhode Island. lol
Bobby,
I've never heard Dan Yorke refer to your numerous friends as anti-Christs. Pigs yes but not anti-Christs.
With regard to your assertion about Patrick Lynch not being dirty just look around Bob. It be the Feds who've had to pick up the ball on the numerous scandals around here because of complete inaction by the AG. Corruption does not always denote an envelope stuffed with cash. Playing a human firewall for corrupt Democrats as you sit as Attorney General is corruption.
As usual, let me take these one at a time:
JohnB,
"different priorities" have been proven. Corrupt has not. Then again, since it's not true, it won't be.
I would also suggest that I talk to more voters on a daily basis than just about anybody here across all party and economic lines. I'm in touch. Once again, their priorities, and mine, don't match yours. You need to do some more selling and maybe you can close the gap.
Harsch's plans are in some cases unworkable, in some cases violate the Constitution. Every year, my side puts forward their ideas by passing laws. You may hate some of the laws, you may scoff at others but there they are.
Greg,
It's fine that you post that but where were your matching posts on "mission accomplished" or "bring it" or "Clean Skies Initiative." I don't have an issue with you being critical, it's healthy, just be even.
Tom W,
Dick Morriss, much like his old boss, remember the incident with the hooker and the cell phone, likes to slant to his audience. No corruption is acceptable but we're low on the scale. If you'd like to make further gains, you have to remove one of the causes, a part-time Legislature, first.
Simply stated, youre view of unions is filled with hatred and jealousy. Makes you kinda easy to beat when necessary.
Tim,
I think you and I have a different vision of what the State AG should handle. Please remember that I was on Beacon Hill for Harshbarger v. Flaherty. It may give me a different perception.
"Harsch's plans are in some cases unworkable, in some cases violate the Constitution."
How are they unworkable?
How do they violate the consitution?
And since you're so in touch, you'd probably know that Patrick Lynch has the highest unfavorables in the state, right?
Get it through your head, BobbyO. The RI Republican scene is NOT the same as the national scene. In RI, it's the DEMOCRATS that have ruled, overspent, and have been ineffective
But I'm getting off topic, please answer in what ways Harsch's plans are unworkable or unconstitutional
"No corruption is acceptable but we're low on the scale. If you'd like to make further gains, you have to remove one of the causes, a part-time Legislature, first."
Oh yeah, that's how we solve the problems. Make the part-time scumbags FULLTIME scumbags. That will diminish their greed and wanton pursuit of absolute power.
Bobby, you're so far in you can't even see LIGHT anymore let alone common sense.
>>Dick Morriss, much like his old boss, remember the incident with the hooker and the cell phone, likes to slant to his audience. No corruption is acceptable but we're low on the scale. If you'd like to make further gains, you have to remove one of the causes, a part-time Legislature, first. Simply stated, youre view of unions is filled with hatred and jealousy. Makes you kinda easy to beat when necessary.
Mr. Oliviera:
If Dick Morris intended to “slant to his audience” why (when speaking at Brown University) would he say something that could only be considered insulting to Rhode Islanders and to Democrats? Sounds to me like he was calling it as he saw it.
On what basis do you say the RI is “low on the scale” of corruption? In the early 1990’s ABC Primetime aired a story on how corrupt RI is … why would they bother if that weren’t our national reputation?
Celona; Irons; Cianci; DiPrete; Bevilacqua; Fay. Do any of these names ring a bell with you?
As for “hate” why is it that people on the left reflexively accuse anyone who disagrees with their agenda as engaging in “hate?”
That said, there are certain things I hate about PUBLIC SECTOR unions (as opposed to private sector unions).
I hate how the extravagant compensation packages in the public sector have resulted in a punitive tax climate that drives away business (and thus opportunity) for those of us who labor in the private sector.
I hate seeing how much of my income is going to pay for those extravagant packages, resulting in a lower standard of living for me and my family.
And yeah, I’m jealous of the pensions – I’m trying to save to fund my own retirement, and resent the fact that my annual property taxes alone equal about four IRA contributions that I can’t make, jsut so that teachers can retire at age 50 with 75-80 percent of their final salary … plus a 3% increase every year.
I’ve no problem with funding my own retirement; but I deeply resent having to fund theirs as well.
Even worse, they get “first dibs” on my money before I get to put anything away.
I guess in your eyes that makes ME the greedy one.
Dear JohnB,
Since Mr. Harsch is such a waste of time, let's just address 2:
His "strike force" will never be funded as proposed. On top of that, it may violate SOP. These two problems make it unworkable. Funny how those folks from the fringe right, like Don Carcieri, cried for SOP and now violate it every chance they get.
The "employer address" requirement in his sex offender proposal is not only unconstitutional, from the employer side, but it may be dangerous. This will have the direct result of offenders not being able to work. People who can't work become homeless. Studies indicate that homeless sex offenders tend to reoffend more often.
Again, I could offer more, but he's a waste of everyone's time. Isn't there a School Committee or City Council candidate near you who's conservative enough for you to support? That person, running because they wish to make a difference, will be much more worthy of your assitance than Mr. Harsch, running because his ego forces him to, will ever be.
Dear Greg,
You need to do more homework. A full-time Legislature would solve a lot of problems we have now. The day of the "I Hate Government" person will end on November 7th after a very short amount of time and very little accomplishment, unless you're a millionaire. We ran things, with the help of southern racists, for 60 years. You inherited our racists, made them your racists, and your reign will end in 12 (perhaps 18 in the House).
Dear Tom W,
Those pensions were gained through honest collective bargaining. Perhaps if you had such a collective unit representing you, you'd have one. I don't. I understand that compensation packages need to be looked at as a whole, not a part.
My retirement too, through hard work and sweat, is well on its way to being funded. I don't think that makes either of us greedy. Your IRA contributions, my inability to make evn more out of the gold move I made in 2002 are the same thing. If you want decent government, you have to pay. That is unless you're a millionaire while we're at war.
Any gripe you or I may have is somewhat insignificant when placed next to the gripe of a soldier who doesn't have proper armour so some CEO can add a patio room.
Lastly, those folks who fought the fire a few nights ago ago, like their sisters and brothers on 9-11, are all members of public sector unions. I had no idea you such animosity for our police and fire personnel.
Dear Bobby O,
Have you noticed that you're all alone in your attempts to discredit Mr. Harsch?
As someone who is very concerned about the issue of sexual predators, I applaud Mr. Harsch's plan, and as an Independent voter will be proud to vote for him in November despite the fact that I disagree largely with national republican politics. Your blind following of Rhode Island's Democratic leaders is one of the main reasons why I choose not to identify myself with one party.
It must be exhausting trying to defend someone like Patrick Lynch solely by attacking his opponent simply because he carries a (D) next to his name.
Bobby,
1. Explain how a full-time Legislature would solve a lot of problems we have now. In long form. So it makes sense. Not in your usual "I'm smarter than you" tone and unspecific statements. I've rarely found people who can't get their heads out of the bottle to be smarter than me, so let's call off you 'holier-than-thou' attitude, eh?
2. We can have great pride in our police and fire personnel AND not want to fund their retirement at the expense of our own. Once again, you try to 'zero sum' an argument.
Wonderful observations, Tom! You should send that in as a letter to the editor to some of the local papers!
"Those pensions were gained through 'honest collective bargaining'." Ha, ha, ha, ha (still laughing), ha, ha ...
I think Bobby may not be familar with the term "oxymoronic." There is very little that is honest about corrupt monopolies (public sector unions) "negotiating" with people that stand to personally benefit from the decisions that they make, either by the promise (or threat) of "help" at election time, by being given union low-work "jobs", or by themselves or their family members directly benefiting financially.
>>Those pensions were gained through honest collective bargaining. Perhaps if you had such a collective unit representing you, you'd have one. I don't. I understand that compensation packages need to be looked at as a whole, not a part.
Will beat me to some of the responses I was going to make. In theory there is “collective bargaining” in the public sector. But it is not the reality. Take teachers. In Rhode Island (naturally) it has been held that a teacher can sit on a school committee in the town in which they live, so long as they don’t teach there. But when they “negotiate” they know full well that the contract they “negotiate” will later be used as a benchmark when the contract under which they work comes up for negotiation. Further, there is no way in he** that they’re going to negotiate teacher accountability, lest it be introduced into the district in which they teach. The result is in RI is predicable: the public schools are terrible (even in the so-called “good” districts of East Greenwich, etc.) and teacher compensation is through the roof.
Add in the cash and non-cash “campaign support” offered by the unions. Add in using the General Assembly to game the system (e.g., public school teachers getting “primary day” off – and I wouldn’t be surprised to learn they get paid for it, to boot). Add in the fact that government doesn’t need to compete by providing necessary or desirable services, or quality services because by definition it needn’t worry about “going out of business.”
>>Perhaps if you had such a collective unit representing you, you'd have one.
While unions make out like bandits in the public sector, in the private sector they take credit that they don’t deserve. The “union premium” is a myth, at least in competitive environments. This is because in such environments unionization is accompanied by job-loss: the members who retain their jobs make more, but the ones who lose theirs make “0.” So on average it is (at best) a wash on average, and more likely a “loss” for the “working families” overall. Airlines (after deregulation when competition was introduced); steel (competition from overseas) and automobiles (overseas and domestic competition) are perfect examples. Now that the Japanese are competing – both with imports and union-free plants here in the U.S. – the UAW’s membership has been cut by one-half. So the remaining members still make their rich compensation packages, and the other half is flipping burgers. As for airlines and steel, many are gone … and the survivors are eliminating “union wages and benefits” through bankruptcy.
Ultimately the market determines wages – not management or labor. All a union can distort the market, for a while. Increase the cost of labor beyond market realities, and you decrease the demand. Economics 101.
Finally, I also resent your taking what I said and twisting it to allege that I was impugning police and fire personnel. I recently gave a talk on why property taxes are so high. During that talk I said that: “public sector compensation should be benchmarked against private sector compensation for equivalent levels of skill and duties – one should neither benefit or be penalized for working in the public or private sector – with one exception, police and fire personnel deserve a premium in recognition of the dangers they face in their line of work.” I stand by that statement.
Click here for the new Anchor Rising & Ocean State Current page
About Community Crier
About Engaged Citizen
Administrator
Well, this is timed perfectly to blow up in Billy's brother's face come election day.
Posted by: Greg at July 28, 2006 9:43 AMShouldn't the feds be investigating this?
Posted by: Anthony at July 28, 2006 9:44 AMOutrageous.
This has not been a good few weeks for Patrick Lynch: first Harsch files the ethics complaint for taking $$$ from dupont lobbyists and lawyers, then he's named in the Celona investigation, and now comes this...
great work, patrick. you have successfully climbed to the top of the corruption totum pole
Posted by: johnb at July 28, 2006 10:27 AM>>great work, patrick. you have successfully climbed to the top of the corruption totum pole
Just another chip off of the 'ole Democratic family block!
Posted by: Tom W at July 28, 2006 10:29 AM"Shouldn't the feds be investigating this?"
Shouldn't the feds be investigating ALL of the democrats in this state? Celona is just the TIP of the iceberg.
We should call in the U.N. to Rhode Island to help monitor our dictators to make sure they don't oppress the peasants too badly.
Posted by: Greg at July 28, 2006 10:55 AMExcept the UN would undoubtedly become involved in just as many scandals...maybe something like "Oil for Del's Lemonade"
Posted by: Anthony at July 28, 2006 11:52 AMHmm. Good point.
Maybe we can just petition the federal government to overthrow the RI government like they did in Iraq.
Posted by: Greg at July 28, 2006 12:12 PM>>Maybe we can just petition the federal government to overthrow the RI government like they did in Iraq.
RIgime Change!
Posted by: Tom W at July 28, 2006 12:57 PMCome to think of it ...
If this turns out to be true, various possibilities occur:
1) If not declared on taxes, there is the possibility of federal and state tax evasion charges for Motley Rice (and its partners?);
2) With or without the tax implications, potential disciplinary proceedings - possibly leading to disbarment - for the attorneys involved.
3) To the extent there were multiple parties involved, a possible RICO action against them.
Are you listening Mr. Harsch?
Posted by: Tom W at July 28, 2006 1:32 PMTom W,
Posted by: Anthony at July 28, 2006 5:38 PMYes, mimimally there would appear to be a conflict of interest on behalf of the attorneys.
TomW,
Good points all. I am more than sure Harsch is listening.
I wonder if the folks at Mealys have been in touch with the Harsch campaign on any of this just like the AP was on the original duPont story. methinks it's rather likely
Posted by: johnb at July 28, 2006 7:56 PMWow,
put this before the voters and it may just cause a fire storm like the last "ethics issue" did. Even paid for shills like Dan Yorke and Arlene Violet don't talk about it.
You know, if you can find yet another "ethics issue stretch", like this one, Bill Harsch may break 30. That would be exciting.
Lastly, talking about this and not talking about the no-bid contracts that go straight to Jeff Grybowski's old firm somewhat makes a few folks look petty.
Lord know you are all intelligent enough to do better. If I was Patricia Morgan, you would have actual candidates in the Assembly races who had a chance. But I'm not. Therefore, most of those races are dead and you have decided to "get Harsch" with your time. It makes me feel bad, it truly does.
Posted by: Bobby Oliveira at July 28, 2006 10:34 PMI couldn't disagree with Bobby Oliveira more.
Patrick Lynch is the least popular incumbent in Rhode Island. From the Station Fire, and his stance on 2nd Ammendment rights, to his inability to address rising electricity and cable rates and his close ties with proven cases of corruption (celona, blue cross, beacon mutual), Lynch is not going into November on a wave of popularity.
As for Yorke and Violet: Yorke is close with the Lynch brothers and has been relatively soft when it comes to Patrick. Arlene on the other hand is critical of just about everyone and everthing, and not surprisingly I HAVE heard her be very scathing towards AG Lynch.
This is only July, and looking back on the Jeff Pine campaign, I see many similarities with Harsch's campaign. My prediction is that by mid-September, Harsch will be neck and neck with Lynch
Posted by: andrew at July 28, 2006 11:34 PMAnthony,
Is there anything more amusing than one paid shill referring to others as same? lol
You are right on about Yorke and the Lynch boys. Dan is pathetically softball not only with the Lynch boys but with most Democrats around here. I'm still shocked over his lack of commentary on Montalbano's pay-off from the town of West Warwick and Joe's forgetfullness to disclose to the ethics commission three years running. How many shows did Dan do on Carcieri's half a Patriots football game in the Fleet box scrum with the same ethics commission? Dan is a paper tiger who talks big but only with safe targets.
Arlene is angry with everyone because her show is in the toilet. What disappoints about Arlene is how she picks and chooses issues when telling it like it is. Her casino advocacy has become embarrassing in its' level of half truths and misrepresentations. She also lost total credibility in trying to prop up and legitimize the candidacy of Dennis The Clown Michaud.
Arlene is a mere shell of her former tell it like it is self. She cannot retire soon enough for my liking.
Bobby Oliviera,
Methinks you doth protest too much.
Posted by: Tim at July 29, 2006 8:20 AMBobby something for you to ponder ~ Patrick Lynch IS the Pat Morgan of the Rhode Island Democratic party.
The one difference between them is Pat Morgan isn't dirty.
Anthony,
Mr. Corrente has his hands full investigating all the criminal activity Lynch either won't touch or is implicated (CVS lobbyist who worked under Joe Walsh) in. Interesting how the name Joe Walsh keeps coming up. Celona names Joe Walsh as the lobbyist who set up his meetings with CVS.
Can we all agree CVS is a first rate company yet got themselves tangled up in this corrption web? Well guess who else Joe Walsh was (still is?) a lobbyist for?
Beacon Mutual.
Can we all agree Beacon Mutual's management was sleazy and second rate?
Keep your eye on the Beacon Mutual investigation. This is an election year and the AG is in dire need of a high profile corruption case he can vet. If funny biz went on between a first rate company like CVS and certain Assembly members just imagine what went on between the slimey crowd running Beacon and members of the Assembly.
Posted by: Tim at July 29, 2006 8:45 AMPS - my bad! The first post I wrote was supposed to be addressed to Andrew not Anthony. Sorry for the mix-up.
Thank you for posting this, Andrew.
Justice as administered by the present AG has been notably arbitrary.
Lynch has concentrated on those matters that get him a splashy headline while being lukewarm (Celona, voter fraud, contaminated properties in Tiverton) or absent altogether (utility rate increases, Beacon Mutual, predator registration & more) on a host of other problems requiring the AG's full attention or leadership.
The many troubling aspects of the Dupont settlement have been well articulated here. I would only add that it's the seemingly smaller item of the million dollars to Brown U that is particularly telling. He clearly saw himself on a stage at Brown University receiving major kudos from officials and an appreciative audience.
Posted by: SusanD at July 29, 2006 4:05 PMDear Andrew,
I could also predict that Charlie Fogarty will win by 20 over the "most unpopular incumbent running statewide", at least that is what the polls say, but I wouldn't be right either.
I can see you working. You find frustration everwhere you look so you try to make this race fit the profile of a previously successful race. No crime in that, I've done it too.
However, in this case, there is no historic, social, political, and/or "coincidence" paralell between the two races.
Let me say it again: If Patrick Lynch were to be struck by lightning, decided to become a prophet, and moved to Kashmir to setup shop, we could run the two dead guys who signed Michaud's paperwork as a write-in ticket, using actual real time photos in the campaign literature, and still beat Mr. Harsch comfortably.
I am struck by your comments regarding Mr. Yorke, who refers to many of my friends as "anti-christs" and Ms. Violet, an insider in the Moderate GOP wing. Appearently, neither one makes anybody happy.
Posted by: Bobby Oliveira at July 30, 2006 9:03 AM"I am struck by your comments regarding Mr. Yorke, who refers to many of my friends as "anti-christs"..."
I assume that's because you're friendly with the scum that's destroying this state from the inside.
Posted by: Greg at July 30, 2006 1:11 PMDear Greg,
That's an awfully broad brush you paint with. Please notice that the electorate tends to ignore artists using such unwieldly strokes.
Posted by: Bobby Oliveira at July 30, 2006 7:12 PMYeah, well, the electorate in Rhode Island is also full of the dead, the illegal aliens, the old and the uneducated. And strangely enough, they all seem to vote to protect the union interests.
No wonder why the Democrats are so solidly against a law that would require voters to provide proof of identity the same way voters in countries like, oh MEXICO have to...
Posted by: Greg at July 31, 2006 6:58 AMIt seems that Bobby O's best defense of Patrick Lynch is that he doesn't think Harsch can win.
Bobby, casting your personal dislike for Bill Harsch aside, can you concede that Lynch falls under the banner of "corrupt politician" more so than "noble Democrat"?
Can you also concede that Harsch won the most votes an Independent candidate has ever received in Rhode Island, and was the 2nd non-Democratic vote-getter in the 2002 elections?
Can you admit that Patrick Lynch is nothing more than a shill for Joe Walsh and the self-serving influences in the Democratic party? That his first priority is for his pursuit of higher office? That he has ignored serious crimes and turned his head to the actions of the politically connected? That he has confounded RI's open meeting laws, dropped the ball on CVS, Beacon Mutual, Billy Irons, the Station Fire, and the Newport Pub Crawl Death?
Can you just admit that he is the PROBLEM, and not the solution when it comes to Rhode Island's culture of corruption?
Posted by: johnb at July 31, 2006 8:53 AMDear JohnB,
There is not one scintilla of evidence that Mr. Lynch is corrupt. There are many scintillae that indicate you and he do not share the same priorities.
Mr. Harsch did do a very nice job in his first run. Unfortunately for him, people know him now. He is another member of the RIGOP who should have learned his craft at perhaps the municipal level.
Since the wishes of Joe Walsh and the "wishes of the Party" are sometimes at cross-purposes, Mr. Lynch cannot be as you suggest. If his first priority were higher office, then some of his decisions would have been different. For instance, he would have stepped in and not allowed my OMA complaint versus the Governor to be successful.
Do I think he picks and chooses like any AG does? Yes I do. Do I think it's for the black helicopter tainted reasons you seem to suggest? No I don't.
Our Open Meeting's Laws, and the processes under which complaints are handled, are in better shape now than when he entered office. CVS and Billy Irons, really the same issue, belong to somebody else due to the scope. While there's a lot of bad decision making going on at Beacon Mutual, other than Ms. Orefice's attempted shakedown before "signing", she obviously didn't write it, her letter, nothing illegal has happened. Sometimes unethical, often greedy, but nothing illegal.
I lost a friend in the Station Fire and feel that pain often. However, under existing statute, there really are few other ways to proceed.
The Newport Pub Crawl Death is a different matter entirely. The AG knows that every time he sees me, I just might bring it up hoping he makes a different decision. By the way, I was doing this long before the few times I've mourned with the family. If you sign up for Knowing Newport on Yahoo, you can read what I said on that sad event's first anniversary.
Our "culture" of corruption is more romantic myth than fact. It can be successfully argued that there were more unethical acts committed per capita in Montana in the last 5 years. Instead of concentrating on myth, or in the Governor's case self-engrandisement, your side should get to work on providing solutions, obviously from a Conservative point of view, that do not rely on union bashing or division in general as a foundation. Then, provided you keep silly people from running for offices that are obviously over their collective heads, you might win a few races.
Posted by: Bobby Oliveira at July 31, 2006 9:23 AM"There is not one scintilla of evidence that Mr. Lynch is corrupt."
Did you even read the above posting?
"Our "culture" of corruption is more romantic myth than fact."
Now you've just exposed yourself to be totally out of touch with the problems in RI
"your side should get to work on providing solutions"
Like Harsch's proposed sex-offender ammendments? or his PUC Plan? Where's Patrick's solutions? Where's the Dems' solutions?
Posted by: johnb at July 31, 2006 10:54 AMWell, solutions like Shelly's "Out of Iraq now!" plan, of course. Rhetoric without substance. Objectives with no courses of action. Talking points without real desire to correct problems.
Posted by: Greg at July 31, 2006 12:05 PM>>Our "culture" of corruption is more romantic myth than fact. It can be successfully argued that there were more unethical acts committed per capita in Montana in the last 5 years.
I suppose that’s why, when speaking at Brown U a few years ago and asked about corruption in RI, former Clinton aide Dick Morris stated something along the lines of: “Rhode Island is among a handful of inherently corrupt states.” Since Dick Morris was Clinton’s “Karl Rove” – charged with studying the political realities and dynamics around country – methinks that this says much about the slimy culture that seventy years of Democratic control has wrought.
It can also be argued that New Jersey, Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana have had “more unethical acts committed per capita” and so RI is not quite as corrupt as those states. Big deal. Enron was not quite as corrupt as the Mafia, either – so that makes Enron OK?
>>Instead of concentrating on myth, or in the Governor's case self-engrandisement, your side should get to work on providing solutions, obviously from a Conservative point of view, that do not rely on union bashing or division in general as a foundation.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! The entire political methodology of the Democratic Party is founded upon promoting and exacerbating divisiveness: minority groups against the rest of us; resentment against a purposely undefined group of “the rich”; scaring seniors that they’re Social Security or Medicare is going to be eliminated.
Further, pointing out that public sector union compensation is way out of whack is not “union bashing” … did it ever occur to you that private-sector union members are just as victimized by grossly excessive public-sector compensation? (In fact, private sector union members are now essentially second-class citizens within organized labor. Like Blacks, the Democratic Party pays lip service to them at election time, but little else.)
Similarly, pointing out that public school teachers - in spite of their six-figure compensation for a part-time job (and it IS six-figures when one factors in salaries / benefits and pensions) – are doing a LOUSY job is not “union bashing,” it is citing facts. RI schools fare poorly in comparison to US averages, and in turn US school fare poorly in comparison to other countries.
That the Democratic Party serves as sycophant and protector to the teacher unions’ maintenance of (at best) mediocrity is one of the moral tragedies of our time – for the Democratic Party is an accomplice in condemning entire generations of children to standards of living far less than what they could enjoy if a quality education was available to them.
Posted by: Tom W at July 31, 2006 1:09 PMJohnB,
A corrupt politician IS a noble Democrat here in Rhode Island. lol
Bobby,
I've never heard Dan Yorke refer to your numerous friends as anti-Christs. Pigs yes but not anti-Christs.
Posted by: Tim at July 31, 2006 5:03 PMWith regard to your assertion about Patrick Lynch not being dirty just look around Bob. It be the Feds who've had to pick up the ball on the numerous scandals around here because of complete inaction by the AG. Corruption does not always denote an envelope stuffed with cash. Playing a human firewall for corrupt Democrats as you sit as Attorney General is corruption.
As usual, let me take these one at a time:
JohnB,
"different priorities" have been proven. Corrupt has not. Then again, since it's not true, it won't be.
I would also suggest that I talk to more voters on a daily basis than just about anybody here across all party and economic lines. I'm in touch. Once again, their priorities, and mine, don't match yours. You need to do some more selling and maybe you can close the gap.
Harsch's plans are in some cases unworkable, in some cases violate the Constitution. Every year, my side puts forward their ideas by passing laws. You may hate some of the laws, you may scoff at others but there they are.
Greg,
It's fine that you post that but where were your matching posts on "mission accomplished" or "bring it" or "Clean Skies Initiative." I don't have an issue with you being critical, it's healthy, just be even.
Tom W,
Dick Morriss, much like his old boss, remember the incident with the hooker and the cell phone, likes to slant to his audience. No corruption is acceptable but we're low on the scale. If you'd like to make further gains, you have to remove one of the causes, a part-time Legislature, first.
Simply stated, youre view of unions is filled with hatred and jealousy. Makes you kinda easy to beat when necessary.
Tim,
I think you and I have a different vision of what the State AG should handle. Please remember that I was on Beacon Hill for Harshbarger v. Flaherty. It may give me a different perception.
Posted by: Bobby Oliveira at August 1, 2006 12:40 PM"Harsch's plans are in some cases unworkable, in some cases violate the Constitution."
How are they unworkable?
How do they violate the consitution?
And since you're so in touch, you'd probably know that Patrick Lynch has the highest unfavorables in the state, right?
Get it through your head, BobbyO. The RI Republican scene is NOT the same as the national scene. In RI, it's the DEMOCRATS that have ruled, overspent, and have been ineffective
But I'm getting off topic, please answer in what ways Harsch's plans are unworkable or unconstitutional
Posted by: johnb at August 1, 2006 1:00 PM"No corruption is acceptable but we're low on the scale. If you'd like to make further gains, you have to remove one of the causes, a part-time Legislature, first."
Oh yeah, that's how we solve the problems. Make the part-time scumbags FULLTIME scumbags. That will diminish their greed and wanton pursuit of absolute power.
Bobby, you're so far in you can't even see LIGHT anymore let alone common sense.
Posted by: Greg at August 1, 2006 1:32 PM>>Dick Morriss, much like his old boss, remember the incident with the hooker and the cell phone, likes to slant to his audience. No corruption is acceptable but we're low on the scale. If you'd like to make further gains, you have to remove one of the causes, a part-time Legislature, first. Simply stated, youre view of unions is filled with hatred and jealousy. Makes you kinda easy to beat when necessary.
Mr. Oliviera:
If Dick Morris intended to “slant to his audience” why (when speaking at Brown University) would he say something that could only be considered insulting to Rhode Islanders and to Democrats? Sounds to me like he was calling it as he saw it.
On what basis do you say the RI is “low on the scale” of corruption? In the early 1990’s ABC Primetime aired a story on how corrupt RI is … why would they bother if that weren’t our national reputation?
Celona; Irons; Cianci; DiPrete; Bevilacqua; Fay. Do any of these names ring a bell with you?
As for “hate” why is it that people on the left reflexively accuse anyone who disagrees with their agenda as engaging in “hate?”
That said, there are certain things I hate about PUBLIC SECTOR unions (as opposed to private sector unions).
I hate how the extravagant compensation packages in the public sector have resulted in a punitive tax climate that drives away business (and thus opportunity) for those of us who labor in the private sector.
I hate seeing how much of my income is going to pay for those extravagant packages, resulting in a lower standard of living for me and my family.
And yeah, I’m jealous of the pensions – I’m trying to save to fund my own retirement, and resent the fact that my annual property taxes alone equal about four IRA contributions that I can’t make, jsut so that teachers can retire at age 50 with 75-80 percent of their final salary … plus a 3% increase every year.
I’ve no problem with funding my own retirement; but I deeply resent having to fund theirs as well.
Even worse, they get “first dibs” on my money before I get to put anything away.
I guess in your eyes that makes ME the greedy one.
Posted by: Tom W at August 1, 2006 5:19 PMDear JohnB,
Since Mr. Harsch is such a waste of time, let's just address 2:
His "strike force" will never be funded as proposed. On top of that, it may violate SOP. These two problems make it unworkable. Funny how those folks from the fringe right, like Don Carcieri, cried for SOP and now violate it every chance they get.
The "employer address" requirement in his sex offender proposal is not only unconstitutional, from the employer side, but it may be dangerous. This will have the direct result of offenders not being able to work. People who can't work become homeless. Studies indicate that homeless sex offenders tend to reoffend more often.
Again, I could offer more, but he's a waste of everyone's time. Isn't there a School Committee or City Council candidate near you who's conservative enough for you to support? That person, running because they wish to make a difference, will be much more worthy of your assitance than Mr. Harsch, running because his ego forces him to, will ever be.
Dear Greg,
You need to do more homework. A full-time Legislature would solve a lot of problems we have now. The day of the "I Hate Government" person will end on November 7th after a very short amount of time and very little accomplishment, unless you're a millionaire. We ran things, with the help of southern racists, for 60 years. You inherited our racists, made them your racists, and your reign will end in 12 (perhaps 18 in the House).
Dear Tom W,
Those pensions were gained through honest collective bargaining. Perhaps if you had such a collective unit representing you, you'd have one. I don't. I understand that compensation packages need to be looked at as a whole, not a part.
My retirement too, through hard work and sweat, is well on its way to being funded. I don't think that makes either of us greedy. Your IRA contributions, my inability to make evn more out of the gold move I made in 2002 are the same thing. If you want decent government, you have to pay. That is unless you're a millionaire while we're at war.
Any gripe you or I may have is somewhat insignificant when placed next to the gripe of a soldier who doesn't have proper armour so some CEO can add a patio room.
Lastly, those folks who fought the fire a few nights ago ago, like their sisters and brothers on 9-11, are all members of public sector unions. I had no idea you such animosity for our police and fire personnel.
Posted by: Bobby Oliveira at August 2, 2006 2:35 PMDear Bobby O,
Have you noticed that you're all alone in your attempts to discredit Mr. Harsch?
As someone who is very concerned about the issue of sexual predators, I applaud Mr. Harsch's plan, and as an Independent voter will be proud to vote for him in November despite the fact that I disagree largely with national republican politics. Your blind following of Rhode Island's Democratic leaders is one of the main reasons why I choose not to identify myself with one party.
It must be exhausting trying to defend someone like Patrick Lynch solely by attacking his opponent simply because he carries a (D) next to his name.
Posted by: Susanr at August 2, 2006 2:54 PMBobby,
1. Explain how a full-time Legislature would solve a lot of problems we have now. In long form. So it makes sense. Not in your usual "I'm smarter than you" tone and unspecific statements. I've rarely found people who can't get their heads out of the bottle to be smarter than me, so let's call off you 'holier-than-thou' attitude, eh?
2. We can have great pride in our police and fire personnel AND not want to fund their retirement at the expense of our own. Once again, you try to 'zero sum' an argument.
Posted by: Greg at August 2, 2006 2:57 PMWonderful observations, Tom! You should send that in as a letter to the editor to some of the local papers!
"Those pensions were gained through 'honest collective bargaining'." Ha, ha, ha, ha (still laughing), ha, ha ...
I think Bobby may not be familar with the term "oxymoronic." There is very little that is honest about corrupt monopolies (public sector unions) "negotiating" with people that stand to personally benefit from the decisions that they make, either by the promise (or threat) of "help" at election time, by being given union low-work "jobs", or by themselves or their family members directly benefiting financially.
Posted by: Will at August 3, 2006 2:03 AM>>Those pensions were gained through honest collective bargaining. Perhaps if you had such a collective unit representing you, you'd have one. I don't. I understand that compensation packages need to be looked at as a whole, not a part.
Will beat me to some of the responses I was going to make. In theory there is “collective bargaining” in the public sector. But it is not the reality. Take teachers. In Rhode Island (naturally) it has been held that a teacher can sit on a school committee in the town in which they live, so long as they don’t teach there. But when they “negotiate” they know full well that the contract they “negotiate” will later be used as a benchmark when the contract under which they work comes up for negotiation. Further, there is no way in he** that they’re going to negotiate teacher accountability, lest it be introduced into the district in which they teach. The result is in RI is predicable: the public schools are terrible (even in the so-called “good” districts of East Greenwich, etc.) and teacher compensation is through the roof.
Add in the cash and non-cash “campaign support” offered by the unions. Add in using the General Assembly to game the system (e.g., public school teachers getting “primary day” off – and I wouldn’t be surprised to learn they get paid for it, to boot). Add in the fact that government doesn’t need to compete by providing necessary or desirable services, or quality services because by definition it needn’t worry about “going out of business.”
>>Perhaps if you had such a collective unit representing you, you'd have one.
While unions make out like bandits in the public sector, in the private sector they take credit that they don’t deserve. The “union premium” is a myth, at least in competitive environments. This is because in such environments unionization is accompanied by job-loss: the members who retain their jobs make more, but the ones who lose theirs make “0.” So on average it is (at best) a wash on average, and more likely a “loss” for the “working families” overall. Airlines (after deregulation when competition was introduced); steel (competition from overseas) and automobiles (overseas and domestic competition) are perfect examples. Now that the Japanese are competing – both with imports and union-free plants here in the U.S. – the UAW’s membership has been cut by one-half. So the remaining members still make their rich compensation packages, and the other half is flipping burgers. As for airlines and steel, many are gone … and the survivors are eliminating “union wages and benefits” through bankruptcy.
Ultimately the market determines wages – not management or labor. All a union can distort the market, for a while. Increase the cost of labor beyond market realities, and you decrease the demand. Economics 101.
Finally, I also resent your taking what I said and twisting it to allege that I was impugning police and fire personnel. I recently gave a talk on why property taxes are so high. During that talk I said that: “public sector compensation should be benchmarked against private sector compensation for equivalent levels of skill and duties – one should neither benefit or be penalized for working in the public or private sector – with one exception, police and fire personnel deserve a premium in recognition of the dangers they face in their line of work.” I stand by that statement.
Posted by: Tom W at August 4, 2006 11:45 AM