Dear Deval Patrick - Please Stop Trying to Live Vicariously Through Barack Obama

Hi Governor Patrick,

I am writing you from my home computer in Brighton, MA. I heard yesterday on NPR that you're heading to South Carolina to help campaign for Obama's candidacy. Listen, I know the beginning of the year is a little slow in terms of having stuff to do but I'm pretty ticked off that you're doing this. I voted for you and I think you're doing a great job but you and John Kerry supporting Obama is not only unfair - it is tacky. The truth is that the decision of who to vote for should be made by the voters. You're really slapping the Clinton's in the face with this one. John Kerry is also slapping John Edwards in the face. With you I am more pissed though. I rode the exciting wave of your grassroots campaign. I see how the aftermath of such excitement can be dull now that you're working the daily grind and seeing the same wave (but bigger) happening makes you want to get involved but I am your supporter and I pay taxes in this state and have entrusted you to be here doing your job. I also am in support of Hillary Clinton. I think Obama is great. Once our pockets stop being robbed and our economy is back in shape in America a great uniter with an exciting and booming voice would be a thrilling president to have. Right now we need Hillary Clinton in office. That is how I feel. And right now I need you to stop wasting time and resources on helping a primary candidate because it is not in the interest of the people of Massachusetts. It is in your own interest. It is unfair and tacky.

More people should follow the ever-consistent example of Senator Edward Kennedy. He is not backing a primary candidate. People with such sway should not reveal their personal preference. It is unfair to choose between two great candidates in such a close race like this. Once a candidate has made the final cut and become a candidate for the presidency then it is ok to announce your support.

Oh yeah, and Oprah's on my shit list too.

I am not against supporting a candidate at all. In a situation like we have here it is important that influential figures who are clearly going to support a democrat are sure to stay out of it until the best man or woman wins. Both candidates are vastly popular and it is going to be close. With all these big names coming in to help Obama the contest seems to be swaying in his favor. Of course he reminds us of the American dream - his NH concession speech even gave me chills. I wish voters could focus on the issues without the popularity contest clouding their vision. I vote for competency in the times at hand to deal with the current economy and get the middle class back on track. Please come home and work out your 2008 budget and this casino crap and stop trying to ride the wave so you can do the job that your wave brought you to...

Thanks,

Renee

Casinos in Mass? Why not?

Governor Deval Patrick (D-MA) has made the decision to allow 3 casino sites in Massachusetts as a way to drive revenue in the Bay State. This decision reverses previous regulations that have prevented the construction of casinos in the state before.

Though nothing has been etched in stone, it seems that the anticipated backlash from residents has made only but a quiet murmur. One site that voices the most opposition to this decision is casinofacts.org

This site claims that the expected revenues tallied up by Patrick's financiers is missing some major figures.

The side that seems to be missing in the equation is the fact that these casinos would ultimately be costing residents more money too. In taxes, that is.

My biggest question here is: how do some people get a positive revenue when they do the math while others are seeing a negative revenue? If math is math then which camp is taking the correct values into account?

My hopes are that before this deal is signed sealed and delivered, before dotted lines are signed and checks are cut = Patrick WILL consult outside (UNBIASED) financial advisers for their separate estimates. I am hoping they will tally up the expected revenue if the 3 casinos were type 1, type 2, type 3 and all permutations/combinations of the above keeping in mind the specific areas the casinos will be built in.

Cause we all know that the almighty dollar is the bottom line here and this is hardly the BIG plan I would expect out of a grassroots mover and shaker like Patrick to make wakes in job creation sector. This is hardly about making jobs. If anything, this will only make 3 small local webs of jobs unless recruiting and moving is done. The latter is only likely if these are built on Native American Territories. These kinds of casinos may just be our worst nightmare in terms of taxes since the casinos would not be bound to pay the state any. That would mean we pick up the tab on the taxes generated by this cash cow. The dollars these casino "resorts on a plantation" can bring in... well think of how well they dry your wallet out...

Now, if we do the casino thing on our own turf - this wonderfully blue state (and I mean that dammit! I love the shade of blue here!) WILL have to spend a chunk of change setting up this protective barrier and that protective barrier so this doesn't happen and that doesn't happen. I'm not being specific because we can all probably name a million things off the top of our heads. Remember, even though these are just regulations and rules, each one comes with it's very own price tag (to the tune of lawyers fees... anything legal costs a lot of money... Legal Sea Foods had it right using "Legal" in the name of their restaurant)

I had this funny icky feeling this casino thing was a little too good to be true. Don't get me wrong, I love being able to smoke cigarettes EVERYWHERE at foxwoods... (although I should be quitting, my love-hate relationship with Phillip Morris is another story... ::sigh::)

I just hope this casino thing is done right. If not, it'll be a disaster.