By Dan Kennedy • The press, politics, technology, culture and other passions
Ryan Cloutier, writing in Blast Magazine, interviews Kylie Heintz of a high-tech company called Barracuda Networks, who explains that Boston Mayor Tom Menino would be sleeping a lot more soundly these days if his tech people had installed an archival system instead of a back-up system.
No, they’re not the same thing.
Mickey Kaus is excited about an opinion piece in the Star Tribune suggesting that U.S. Sen. Al Franken’s narrow victory over Norm Coleman may have been the result of Acorn voter-registration fraud.
For a long time now, the Acorn-obsessed right has struggled to explain how voter-registration fraud becomes ballot fraud. Well, here’s a golden opportunity. I’ve sent the following e-mail to Katherine Kersten, who wrote the Star Tribune piece in question:
Dear Ms. Kersten —
I would like to ask you a question about your commentary regarding Acorn and the Minnesota Senate race.
As has been reported pretty extensively, the Acorn voter-registration fraud consisted of field workers making up names so that they could get paid more. Your argument is based on the notion that some small percentage of those fraudulent names might have been used by real people who showed up at the polls on election day and cast ballots for Al Franken. You tell us that “Minnesota’s laws on proof of voter eligibility are notoriously loose.” I’ll take your word on that.
But what you don’t tell us is how it is even remotely conceivable that a field worker would write down a fake name — say, Peter Smith of 34 Jones Ave., St. Paul — and then some ineligible voter claiming to be Peter Smith of 34 Jones Ave., St. Paul, would then show up on election day and request a ballot. To me, at least, it makes no logical sense.
Could you help me out?
I plan to post your response on my blog, Media Nation.
Thank you,
Dan Kennedy
I’ll post Kersten’s response as soon as she sends it.
Please do not post any comments to this item. I’ve asked a question, and I want to wait for Kersten to reply.
I’ve been following the Boston City Hall e-mail story with interest since it broke several weeks ago. But today was the first time I really thought it might develop into something much bigger. The reason: Michael Kineavy, the mayoral aide whose deleted e-mails are being sought, reportedly said he doesn’t remember getting a new computer this past April, right after the Boston Globe submitted a public-records request. Globe reporters Donovan Slack and Hiawatha Bray write:
City corporation counsel William F. Sinnott said in an interview yesterday that he had been relying on what Kineavy had told him and that Kineavy, the mayor’s chief policy aide and key political strategist, still does not remember getting a new computer.
Is this possible? Even if you’re not a geek like me (I got my university-issued MacBook in the spring of 2008, thank you very much), you can’t not remember whatever inconvenience you went through setting up the new machine. This was less than six months ago. Is it possible that Kineavy doesn’t remember transferring his files? Doesn’t remember why the printer suddenly stopped working? Doesn’t remember that the button used to be over here, but now it’s there? I mean, come on.
What’s so intriguing is that Kineavy was in touch with City Councilor Chuck Turner and former state senator Dianne Wilkerson, both of whom face federal corruption charges. Kineavy may yet turn out to be a straight shooter. But it’s hard to imagine anyone would forget his office computer had been replaced.
More: I swear I did not read the Outraged Liberal before writing this.
I am genuinely puzzled by a statement from U.S. Rep. Michael Capuano’s Senate campaign, reported in the Boston Globe. Capuano’s campaign treasurer, Bruce Percelay, was asked to comment on the fundraising advantage state Attorney General Martha Coakley has built. The Globe’s Matt Viser writes:
“Our hats go off to our competitors who were able to raise that much money,” said Bruce A. Percelay, treasurer for the Capuano campaign. He added that Coakley’s campaign had “a significant jump on us” because she declared earlier, while Capuano “made a conscious decision not to begin any fund-raising until Joe Kennedy made his decision.”
“If it temporarily puts us a little behind the starting line, then it was a small price to pay for doing the right thing,” Percelay said.
Yes, we all know that Capuano waited until Kennedy decided not to run for his uncle’s seat. No news there. What puzzles me is that the Capuano campaign wants everyone to know that.
Does the congressman want us to think he really does believe the Kennedys have a hereditary right to the seat? Does he honestly expect us to think Coakley disrespected the sainted memory of Ted Kennedy by jumping into the race while various and sundry Kennedys were pondering whether to run?
The outpouring of public affection for Ted Kennedy was genuine. In general, though, I think voters would like to see the Kennedys take their place in line like everyone else. You may have noticed that public reaction to Gov. Deval Patrick’s appointment of Kennedy coatholder Paul Kirk as interim senator wasn’t exactly enthusiastic.
Regardless of Coakley’s merits as a potential senator, I think her decision to jump in and not wait for the Kennedys can only help. As for Capuano, I would like to hear him explain directly why he apparently believes that Joe Kennedy would make a better senator than he would.
I don’t want to make it look like I’m in the tank for fellow Northeastern professor Michael Dukakis. So I’ll leave it at this: Paul Kirk will probably do a fine job as interim senator. But Gov. Deval Patrick could have made a better pick by choosing former governor Dukakis.
Joan Vennochi and Margery Eagan have more to say. And the Herald’s Jessica Van Sack and Hillary Chabot note some conflicts Kirk will need to avoid.
Last night I talked with old friend Jon Keller, of WBZ-TV (Channel 4), about President Obama’s latest media blitz aimed at bolstering his health-care-reform plan.
Two quick comments on the growing controversy over the missing City Hall e-mails:
Whoa. Though it’s certainly true that the e-mails — public records — may prove to be no big deal, it’s also true that they may be related to the criminal probe of former state senator Dianne Wilkerson. Coakley’s going to have to do better than that.
Shenna Bellows, executive director of the Maine Civil Liberties Union, worries that President Obama’s latest effort to pander to conservative critics of his health-care-reform plan will make it harder for women to obtain abortions.
Obama has promised that the legislation he ultimately backs will be abortion-neutral. Federal law already prohibits government funding for abortions except in cases of rape, incest or if the woman’s life is in danger. And regardless of what abortion-rights advocates might wish, it makes sense for Obama not to open up another front in the health-care fight. Among other things, it would be huge if the Catholic bishops could be induced into endorsing health-care reform — and very possible as long as the status quo on abortion is maintained.
But abortion rights certainly should not be cut back. The problem is, Bellows argues (citing a New York Times report), the president’s plan could lead some private insurers to drop abortion coverage that they now provide.
Ironically enough, the possible restriction on abortion rights would be the direct consequence of a public option. One more reason, perhaps, to drop something that, whatever its objective merits, has become little more than a contentious sideshow.
Andy Card decides not to run for governor senator. Although I find myself agreeing with Howie Carr — it would be better for the future of the Republican Party if Scott Brown can use the Senate race to build his name recognition.
Ed Markey’s not running, either. No surprise there — he’s got too much seniority in the House.
Not that Gov. Deval Patrick is looking to Media Nation for advice. But if there’s one way to break the impasse over an interim senator to replace the late Ted Kennedy until the Jan. 19 special election, it’s this: Patrick should announce his choice now.
It seems pretty clear that the state Legislature in 2004 did the right thing in taking away the governor’s right to name a successor and the wrong thing in not allowing for an interim. Once you get past the partisan squabbling over who’s the bigger hypocrite, the only real issue is whether Patrick might appoint someone who’d then have a leg up in the special election.
Kennedy, in his letter to Patrick, released shortly before his death, asked that the interim be someone who would promise not to run. Patrick has said that would be his goal. All that’s missing is a name. As I and others have said, former governor Michael Dukakis would be a fine choice, but I’m sure he’s not the only possibility.
With the health-care debate reaching a critical moment in Washington, Massachusetts deserves to have full representation.