Dirac Angestun Gesept

Another $12 million for ceiling repairs? Hey, it’s only money.

“A spokesman for Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff said the company stands behind its work.”

Of course they do! They just don’t want to stand under it.

Buyers get holiday from sales tax on Saturday

The money quote from this Globe article:

”Any purchase that would be worth the savings in sales tax would be a large-ticket item, and that savings is not going to factor into my buying decision,” said Regina Caggiano of Woburn. ”Large-ticket items are not impulse buys. You determine if you need it, why you want it, how much you want to spend — and then you go to New Hampshire to get it.”

So the net effect will be to depress gas sales and New Hampshire retail this weekend, I guess.

Our good old “enforce all the laws” governor seems to have missed one:

The Indian Imprisonment Act hasn’t been enforced for centuries, but “the law is the law” as Gov. Romney might say.

Sunday’s Boston Globe Magazine had a piece (not available online) debating the issue of legalized gambling, which pointed out that even penny-ante poker nights are illegal in Massachusetts (though, of course, the state Lottery continues to be promoted…).

So would that imply that it’s illegal to bet on the Super Bowl?

Is anyone going to bust a guy who not only bets on football, but does it blatantly, announcing it on the radio? Perhaps our Governor, who feels it’s his duty to “enforce all the laws”, will take a stand?

UPDATE 15:11: He’s even bragging about the wager on a state-run website.

Mitt Romney is at it again, chasing after out-of-state same-sex couples who’ve married in Massachusetts.

Of course, he hasn’t told anyone to check if his son Craig and his new wife, who don’t live in Massachusetts but got married here, violated any laws; he also hasn’t gone after some gubernatorial candidate who hadn’t been living in Mass for the required seven year period. Hmm, wonder why.

Well, I’ve done my civic duty; today, I voted in the primary election. Now I’m a registered Democrat, at least until the Cambridge Election Commission receives my little postcard asking them to change me back to unenrolled.

Last time, I was a Republican for a few days.

Massachusetts is kinda weird that way. You can be a member of a “major party” (currently Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, or Green-Rainbow; this is basically any party or political designation that’s managed to get 3% in a statewide election or has 1% of registered voters) or you can have a “political designation” (effectively a party too wimpy to get their own primary ballot; minimum requirement, 50 voters), or be one of the “unenrolled”. I believe, but am not certain, that the latter two are effectively the same status for purposes of the primary.

if you’re “unenrolled” (what in most states would be “Independent”, but at one point there was an “Independent Voters Party” designation, and there is currently an “American Independent Party” on the list; incidentally, it’s illegal to use “Independent” alone as a designation per MGL 50-1) you get to pick any “major party” ballot in the primaries. In off-years, this has no effect; in presidential primaries, this enrolls you in that party.

In Cambridge, at least, they will happily give you a postcard that you can use to change back.

Fun statistics, from the Elections Division web site, follow.

Cambridge has:

• 31,561 registered Democrats (55.52% of registered voters);
• 4,047 Republicans (7.12%);
• 296 Libertarians (0.52%);
• 574 Green-Rainbow (1.01%);
• 20,253 unenrolled (35.63%);
• 3 Conservative Party;
• 6 Natural Law Party;
• 1 Constitution Party;
• 3 Reform Party; and
• 10 members of the Socialist Party. (In Cambridge! Who’d have thunk it?)

Oh, and 58 members of the “Interdependent 3rd Party”, whatever that is. We do miss out, though, having no members of the Prohibition Party, the America First Party, or the “Timesizing Not Downsizing” party. (That last has 29 members…statewide.)

Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney was quick to say things like “[w]e must now act to preserve the voice of the people and the representatives they elect” when the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that same-sex couples had equal rights to marry.

However, Gov. Romney disagrees when it comes to the question of filling the vacant Senate seat if Kerry wins the presidency.

As the law currently stands, Romney would appoint an interim senator to replace Kerry. The appointee would not face an election until 2006, when they would be able to run as an incumbent after having been in office for almost two years; that election would be to fill out the term until January 2009. In other words, for a third of the 6-year term, the seat would be held by an unelected gubernatorial appointee. You know, like the SJC judges.

I’m absolutely certain that the crowds of pro-amendment folks who came in for the Constitutional Convention will soon be outside Mitt’s office chanting “Let The People Vote”…won’t they?

The truly ironic quote is at the bottom of the article, though:

“You really don’t want to create a monopoly that has so much power it is going to change the law in such a blatantly partisan way and at a time when people are really looking to have fairness and equality on Beacon Hill,” Romney said.

Yes, Mitt. People are looking for fairness and equality, and you’re the one trying to deny it to them.