The Astroprison Chronicles

A political development today in Massachusetts may possibly be the first duck in the row of events that will lead to a change in the Obama administration.

This morning, Bay State residents were surprised to learn that Lt. Governor Tim (“Crash”) Murray is stepping down. He will reportedly take on the job as President of the Worcester (MA) Chamber of Commerce. The position pays $200,000 a year, and a vote by the Worcester C of C to approve this is expected to take place this afternoon.

While the $200K is a pay hike, there may be more to this than meets the eye.

In Murray’s role as Lt. Governor, he’d be the designated successor if Governor Deval Patrick were to unexpectedly depart before his term is up. But Murray has been a target of controversy due in part to his apparent need for speed but also due to his longtime friendship with embattled former Chelsea Housing Authority head Michael E. McLaughlin.

Murray had already announced that he has no intent to run for governor in the 2014 elections, but why the sudden departure? Are we to assume that Worcester’s C of C is that badly in need of leadership? Did Murray’s auto insurance premiums go up that much, and now he needs the raise? All of these are possible answers.

Here’s another possibility: Anyone who has been watching Deval Patrick for the past six years knows that the man has been yearning to be the Attorney General of the United States. Patrick spent the first two years of his first term working hard to get Barack Obama elected, going so far as to be a trial-run test-subject of sorts for many of what would soon after become Obama’s speeches and campaign slogans. Shortly after Eric Holder got the AG job, Patrick slipped into a highly visible funk and was well on his way to losing re-election in 2010 because he simply didn’t seem to care about the job any longer. That seemed to turn around, as I recall, after a behind closed doors meeting between Patrick and Obama.

Flash forward to the present: Eric Holder has been taking a lot of heat of late, and we’re starting to hear the first whispers that he may not be with the Obama administration much longer. With recent reports of the FBI monitoring the communication of reporters (among other Obama administration scandals that have suddenly sprung up), Holder may be turning into an anchor around Obama’s neck. That won’t last long, and that anchor will sink alone.

So how does the Murray resignation play into this? With about 18 months to go until the next Massachusetts gubernatorial election, potential candidates will be announcing soon (likely right after next month’s special election for the open US Senate seat). Murray might be good for his word not to run, but he could always change his mind. More likely, an unpopular and only marginally competent Murray in the corner office at Beacon Hill could damage the chances of a Democrat winning the election. Patrick’s election, after all, broke a long streak of Republican governors elected in one of the most deeply blue states in the country.

The Massachusetts constitution does not grant to the governor the authority to appoint a replacement for a vacant Lt. Governor. Next in line is Secretary of State Bill Galvin…a competent, uncontroversial career politician who is well liked by both sides. Conveniently, he’s also a Democrat, and more conveniently he’s served as acting governor during both the Mitt Romney and Jane Swift years. There’s been talk of him running for Governor in the past, but he’s never made the leap. If, for some reason, Deval Patrick step down in the near future that would give Galvin about a year and a half as acting governor, enough to plant him firmly in the public eye as the state’s chief exec as well as giving him a credible claim to being experienced in the role.

So, to recap: with Murray moving back to Worcester and the solid Democratic replacement in the wings, things are positioned for a smooth transition should Deval Patrick’s phone ring with the caller ID showing a 202 area code.

Me? I have mixed emotions. I can’t wait to see Deval Patrick get out of Massachusetts government, but he’s on the short list of people I’d name as “possibly a worse AG than Eric Holder.”

Now I know how Georgians felt in 1976 when Governor Jimmy Carter was elected President.

The past week or so has been difficult on the Obama administration.

We learned that details of Benghazi were covered up so that they would not, before the election, break the narrative that the Obama administration has beaten Al Queda.

We learned that the IRS investigation into conservative groups also was known at high levels, and likewise hidden so that it would not make a mess before the election.

We learned that the government spied on reporters.

Since the 2008 election, some have predicted that the Obama years would turn out to be a repeat of the Carter years.

It’s worse.

He’s Nixon.

So the government of Syria says that the recent Israeli attack was <a href=”http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/05/world/meast/syria-violence/index.html?hpt=wo_t2” target=”war”>an act of war.</a>

Dudes…your country has been in an unbroken state of war with Israel since May 14, 1948. You manage to beat even the Koreans for the longest stretch of an unresolved conflict. Yes, you may be in a state of cease-fire right now, but that’s all.

Saying that this act is a declaration of war is like announcing that because of the attack, May 6 falls on a Monday this year.

Yes Mikey, and You’re One of Them.

You have elected an idiot to the US Senate.

When even The Boston Globe acknowledges that a Democratic politician has failed right out of the gate, it’s a sign that you’re off to a very rough start. And yet, given the previous press conferences she’s held, no one should have been suprised.

I can’t help but get the feeling that she is completely clueless regarding the issues she faces.

And, if other reports are true, in 60 days she may be the state’s senior senator.

We are so hosed.

…we seem to have elected a guy to Congress who has no known qualifications other than he’s the grandnephew of a very popular deceased former President.

I sure hope he actually knows where the US Capitol is and what goes on there, because we have no evidence to support either contention.

As I write this, the final results of the presidential election are close and undecided. It could go either way.

There is the possibility that the results will be the opposite of 2000: then the Republicans won the electoral vote but the Democrats won the popular vote. This year, it could be the other way around.

In 2000, many Democrats rejected the final decision, and we were subjected to (at least until 9/11 provided some unity) cries and shouts to “Re-defeat George Bush” and “He’s not my President!”

If Obama should win the electoral vote but lose the popular tonight, will we see the same from Republicans?

Indeed, should we?

My worst case scenario? Obama wins the electorate, Romney wins the popular, but twelve years further along into the political divisions and caustic opposition, this time the “losers” decide to take action.

And, unlike 2000, this time the “losers’ would be better armed.

My advice? Buy ammo. Now.

The Washington Post has grudgingly admitted that a major news story has been ignored by virtually all of the mainstream media.

We still don’t understand what happened in Washington DC  as attacks were taking place in Benghazi on September 11 of this year, and we don’t know who was making the decisions.

I lived through the Watergate scandal, and this is worse than Watergate. Why?

Nobody died in the Watergate.

Here’s the detail that keeps troubling me:  Shortly after the attacks, President Obama made a curiously ambiguous speech. He claims that in that speech, he called the Benghazi attacks “terrorist.” However, for about two weeks after the media and most of the public interpreted his remarks as meaning the incident was a spontaneous crowd reaction to a YouTube video.

We are supposed to believe that “the world’s greatest orator” couldn’t clearly state what he meant, and that for two weeks after he chose not to speak out and correct the misconception that followed.

There’s little way to sensibly resolve this contradiction, unless one assumes that the confusion wasn’t a bug…it was a feature.

Obama clearly knew it was an attack, he had live video coming in that showed the events. He chose to cloud the issue in an ambiguous way, probably hoping that the truth would not come out until after the election. He left himself just enough room to be able to claim he told the truth from the start. However, his failure to correct the media and public’s “misconception” shows that he probably had hopes we’d never know the truth.

His actions support this theory: during the two weeks after the attack, he went so far as to say it might be a good idea if we restricted the freedom of speech in cases where some people might get their feelings hurt.

Now we know the truth, and it wasn’t the story he was pushing. It was an attack, there was advance warning, and there was sufficient intelligence through the attack to have allowed a rescue attempt. We also know that while the President didn’t have the balls to authorize a rescue or other military intervention, he certainly found the courage to fire a military commander who attempted to do his duty.

It is troubling to think that he may have backed down out of fear of a “Black Hawk Down” scenario spoiling his chances at reelection.

This is very possibly the most shameful thing that Barack Obama has done since January 20, 2009. He has, in fact, violated his oath of office.  He does not deserve to be re-elected, and if by some misfortune that should happen in four days then surely he should be impeached.