This has been a big week in the news.  From Deval, the Democratic sweep of Congress, and the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld, to a death-sentence for Saddam, a possible vote on a gay marriage referendum here in Massachusetts today while the Rev. Ted Haggard begins his "spiritual restoration," the Britney-KFed and Reece-Ryan splits, and, of course, the final decision on the T fare hikes, this is probably the newsworthiest week of 2006, so far.


All the sudden race seems to be all the media can talk about in regard to Deval, though it was all but off-limits all through the campaign.  The sudden spotlight on Deval's race has to do with the national media deciding to highlight the sad fact that he is only the second black governor in this nation's history.  I didn't know it was that bad until the press kept hammering it home.  Of course it's appalling.  But that's not why I voted for Deval.

I don't think his race was exactly irrelevant here in Massachusetts, either, but again it was something no one would talk about, for fear, I can only assume, of alienating potential voters. Potential white voters, I guess it would have to be.  I mean, it was pretty uncharacteristic of the campaigning Deval to hear explicit mention of race, wasn't it?  It was alluded to and insinuated into the campaign, but as a legitimate issue in need of serious discussion, race and institutional racism, which I assure you are very much alive and well in Massachusetts, were skirted at every possible juncture. 

If Deval himself was "blacker," or had run a "blacker" campaign—fear of his “blackness” is what Healey was trying to force into white voters' consciousness with her rape ads—what do you think would have been the outcome?  He would likely still have won, but by a slimmer margin.  He didn't play into Healey's race-baiting, and that turned out to be the best thing for his campaign.  But the undercurrents of racial fear and loathing Healey tried to exploit do deserve real and systematic examination.  Just because we voted in a black governor doesn't mean that all the sudden everything's hunky-dory when it comes to race in Massachusetts. 

I do hope Deval will be a blacker governor than he was a gubernatorial candidate.  I mean, reading over some other (white) Boston bloggers' experiences at their polling places, I was like, wow, in my neighborhood, there were no signs indicating where the polling place was (not on the street, or on the building, or even at the door of the polling place), nor any campaign signs or campaign workers handing out literature in front of the polling place.  Nothing.  There were no other voters there when I showed up. And I didn't even get an "I voted" sticker on my way out. 

I live in a very diverse low-to-middle income area of Dot.  Healey's people didn't even bother canvassing here.  They knew it was a lost cause.  Deval's people distributed flyers in the neighborhood.  But the fact is, this is an area that's been abandoned by one party and is taken for granted by the other—folks here either don't vote or vote Democrat.  But this is the area that is suffering from the biggest problem the Healey people kept banging on about—violent crime—because of one of the issues the Patrick campaign highlighted—failing schools.  We deserve much better than we're currently getting.

Was race a factor in the polling problems in places like Roxbury Tuesday?  There are a lot of folks who think so, which itself tells you something.  They deserve an honest and open inquiry, and we should all welcome the frank public discussion of race in Boston that would surely come with it.


As we've been hearing from the talking heads, the voters have sent a clear message on Republican rule.  Now it's up to the Dems to walk the walk.  But it won't be easy to reverse the damage of the past six years, and there will be pressures to proceed with caution.  I mean, no sooner had Dems swept to power than pundits were on to '08.

The sticky situation in Iraq will not be tidily resolved any time soon.  No question, the Democrats will be cautious, with an eye to '08 themselves.  Any move they make—from doing nothing to moving for a rapid withdrawal—will result in more chaos in Iraq, and they'll be blamed.  Since that's the case, why not take a stand?  But it's not going to happen.  My prediction is, there will be a rhetorical shift with the new leadership, but not much real change before '08.

What the Democrats can do, and are duty bound to, is launch all the inquiries into this administration, its ethics, its ties to Halliburton, and so on, that the GOP has blocked over the past six years.  House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi has "taken impeachment off the table," but nothing should be taken off the table.  The American people deserve an inquiry into this administration's actions.  If after inquiries there are grounds for impeachment, then Congress has a duty to proceed.  To do otherwise would be to ignore their Consitutional responsibilities, and would be a disservice to voters who just gave them the go-ahead.

By the way, I think Rumsfeld's resignation is Bush tossing Democrats a bone, and hoping it will keep them from probing any deeper, or going any further up the chain of command, but, again, Democrats are duty-bound to do so.


Too bad Bostonians' could not get motivated to fight the MBTA's fare increases.  It's not that $1.75 for a one-way trip by T that it would take you half the time to walk is unreasonable, it's just that, like WMD in Iraq, the justifications for the fare hike were basically bunk.  

But take a look around next time you're on the T at how battered and beaten-down your average fellow T-rider is, and you'll understand that actually the MBTA is showing you all a good deal of mercy.  They could easily have raised fares by twice what they have decided to, and instead of the faint whimper of protest the current increase elicited, all they would have gotten from riders is a low whine.  You're pathetic, and Dan Grabauskas knows it.  Be grateful he doesn't take advantage of the fact.

But should some of you grow some balls by noon today, TRU will be at the big meeting to protest the increases.  Props to Lee Matsueda and ACE/TRU for keeping the faith through this entire process.  If you want to join the protest, they're meeting at 12 noon in front of the Transportation Building, 10 Park Plaza (near the corner of Stuart and Boylston streets).  There will be a rally between 12 noon and 12:45, and then malcontents will make their way to the board meeting on the 3rd floor to give testimony at 1.

Personally, I've saved over $350, and 115 hours in commute time (for real), since switching from the T to my bike in April.  And I can say with confidence that I have not missed my morning commute by T, or sharing it with all the other sad-sack commuters resigned to their sad fate.

Cheers!