Our star legislator, Steven D'Amico, seems to have lost his self-centered and personal battle with his leadership, other members of the General Assembly and the Governor.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1182077
In an Article in the June 30th edition of the Boston Herald, Rep D’Amico criticized the Governor for green lighting the renewal of a tax credit that is meant as an incentive to draw filmmakers to Massachusetts. Amid the ongoing fiscal crisis, legislators wanted to cap star salaries that could count toward the credit at $2 million per actor.
“This is money for nothing,” said Rep D’Amico. “Mel Gibson doesn’t need our tax dollars.”
Senate President Therese Murray, whose Plymouth district could be home to a new studio, also supported maintaining the full tax credit for movies.
As you heard before from Mr. D’Amico, our "tax credit foe" and “any and all tax advocate”, has been working hard to keep Mel Gibson and all his actor friends from visiting Massachusetts. Mr. D’Amico has time and again criticized businessmen, businesses and any other entity that did not fall into his personal little box of worthwhile endeavors or beliefs. Last July, D'Amico said it was simply a scam by "Hollywood hucksters" to ensure that existing film production credits are already in place. So, I guess the Governor and Senate Leader Murray are part of this scam. They must be part of those that “kowtow to rich celebrities”, as he once stated.
Is Mr. D’Amico working to secure future bacon for Seekonk and the rest of his district? Or is he trying to show us how he can be a Maverick to all the Hollywood hucksters?
We need a Rep. who is smart enough to know when and where to pick his fights and who is willing to work to make allies and bring back promised monies.
Well Mr. Rep, if this is money for nothing, than making friends on Beacon Hill will not be free.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
ANNUAL BREAKFAST A SUCCESS
The Seekonk Republican Town Committee's Annual Breakfast held
at the brand new 1149 East Restaurant June 20, 2009 was a smashing success!
The Hospitality of the Owner Thomas Wright and the Function Supervisor Amanda Marcello was far exceeding expectations of the committee. While still in construction mode, they were able to get one room completed for the event. They gave tours of the restaurant to most of the participants and invited us all back for a VIP night coming July 2, 2009.
After coffee and juice, a fine selection of breads and fruits were offered. Next, the chef's made a cavalcade of Omelets to order. The line beamed of curiosity as the ingredients were displayed about the stations. The waiters and waitresses were right there being as cordial as you would expect.
The speakers were top notch and full of energy. A line up that brought great in site to the happenings on Beacon Hill and what it means to be a Republican in Massachusetts. You could have not asked more a broad perspective of the issues that affect Massachusetts families today.
I would like to thank all those who came. It was a great turnout with local and state officials attending. And we hope to being seeing you for the 2010 election year for an even greater event!
at the brand new 1149 East Restaurant June 20, 2009 was a smashing success!
The Hospitality of the Owner Thomas Wright and the Function Supervisor Amanda Marcello was far exceeding expectations of the committee. While still in construction mode, they were able to get one room completed for the event. They gave tours of the restaurant to most of the participants and invited us all back for a VIP night coming July 2, 2009.
After coffee and juice, a fine selection of breads and fruits were offered. Next, the chef's made a cavalcade of Omelets to order. The line beamed of curiosity as the ingredients were displayed about the stations. The waiters and waitresses were right there being as cordial as you would expect.
The speakers were top notch and full of energy. A line up that brought great in site to the happenings on Beacon Hill and what it means to be a Republican in Massachusetts. You could have not asked more a broad perspective of the issues that affect Massachusetts families today.
I would like to thank all those who came. It was a great turnout with local and state officials attending. And we hope to being seeing you for the 2010 election year for an even greater event!
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Jim Hand bows to D’Amico
Regarding Jim Hand’s article, Making a Case For Beacon Hill reform, there seems to be a biased reporter who applauds like a kid at a circus when Rep. Steven D’Amico does his tightrope act.
What kind of journalism is this? How can Jim Hand just sit back and let D’Amico come up with juvenile excuses without being challenged? Tilting at Windmills? What is that? D’Amico was “worried about the speaker taking things personally”? Where is his integrity as to doing what he believes is right? What about his constituency who question why they have been constantly told “I will not be able to do anything for my district”? Will Mr. D’Amico continue to make excuses for his votes that fall in line with his party? They are his votes, aren’t they?
Well, Mr. Hand, what has he done? D’Amico voted to approve a 1.25% sales tax as well as a 2% meals tax. He requires the taxpayers to sacrifice while he keeps his 5% raise and his son gets a free ride to Brown. He votes to keep two Boston Hack Holidays (Evacuation and Bunker Hill days) instead of voting for a Tax Holiday for constitutes.
D’Amico is nothing more than a clown. He can stand up at a Board of Selectman or Town meeting and think that what he sells is as beautiful as a bouquet of balloons. He honks his horn and squeezes his nose while spewing gumbo rhetoric. He stands up, does his act on the floor of the town meeting and exits before any respectable taxpayer or reporter could ask some real questions. Which brings me to Mr. Hand…he is like a young boy awestruck by D’Amico’s Jelly Fish act. One moment the spine is there..the next it has vanished.
What kind of journalism is this? How can Jim Hand just sit back and let D’Amico come up with juvenile excuses without being challenged? Tilting at Windmills? What is that? D’Amico was “worried about the speaker taking things personally”? Where is his integrity as to doing what he believes is right? What about his constituency who question why they have been constantly told “I will not be able to do anything for my district”? Will Mr. D’Amico continue to make excuses for his votes that fall in line with his party? They are his votes, aren’t they?
Well, Mr. Hand, what has he done? D’Amico voted to approve a 1.25% sales tax as well as a 2% meals tax. He requires the taxpayers to sacrifice while he keeps his 5% raise and his son gets a free ride to Brown. He votes to keep two Boston Hack Holidays (Evacuation and Bunker Hill days) instead of voting for a Tax Holiday for constitutes.
D’Amico is nothing more than a clown. He can stand up at a Board of Selectman or Town meeting and think that what he sells is as beautiful as a bouquet of balloons. He honks his horn and squeezes his nose while spewing gumbo rhetoric. He stands up, does his act on the floor of the town meeting and exits before any respectable taxpayer or reporter could ask some real questions. Which brings me to Mr. Hand…he is like a young boy awestruck by D’Amico’s Jelly Fish act. One moment the spine is there..the next it has vanished.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
We will not Forget
The Sun Chronicle Editorial team is disappointed in Steven D'Amico for voting against a bill that would have eliminated "hack" holidays in Suffolk County.
http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2009/06/08/opinion/5081086.txt
While Mr. D'Amico continues his tite rope act with the leadership, the Seekonk Republican Committee will not forget this and many future votes that do nothing more than tow the line of those who fills his pockets.
http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2009/06/08/opinion/5081086.txt
While Mr. D'Amico continues his tite rope act with the leadership, the Seekonk Republican Committee will not forget this and many future votes that do nothing more than tow the line of those who fills his pockets.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Hypocrite
What a phony:
Mr. D'amico is such a bag of hot air. As one can see from his voting record he has no regard for anyone other than himself. After lying to the town meetings of Seekonk and Rehoboth, about how we all must sacrifice, his hypocrisy surfaces once again. He could have been the deciding vote to do away with 2 holidays that are questionable and save many dollars. He voted to keep them. This comes the day after him whining in the Sun Chronicle about his vote for the Leader of the House Sal Dimasi, now he is trying to alienate himself from the way he voted. He blamed the Republicans for the fiscal mess ( Republicans have not controlled govt in Mass since 1946) and now the speaker for him voting for him. It is never his fault! Should he blame the new speaker for his vote to keep 2 useless holidays? All his votes to raise our taxes to bail out Boston, helps the people of his representation how? It s very funny in the article in the chronicle they sympathize with him, they should have just advised him to vote the right way and change his pooh pooh undies later. What an embarresment, what a weak individual, and you wonder why we are in the trouble were in. Vote him out, he is a disgrace.
Mr. D'amico is such a bag of hot air. As one can see from his voting record he has no regard for anyone other than himself. After lying to the town meetings of Seekonk and Rehoboth, about how we all must sacrifice, his hypocrisy surfaces once again. He could have been the deciding vote to do away with 2 holidays that are questionable and save many dollars. He voted to keep them. This comes the day after him whining in the Sun Chronicle about his vote for the Leader of the House Sal Dimasi, now he is trying to alienate himself from the way he voted. He blamed the Republicans for the fiscal mess ( Republicans have not controlled govt in Mass since 1946) and now the speaker for him voting for him. It is never his fault! Should he blame the new speaker for his vote to keep 2 useless holidays? All his votes to raise our taxes to bail out Boston, helps the people of his representation how? It s very funny in the article in the chronicle they sympathize with him, they should have just advised him to vote the right way and change his pooh pooh undies later. What an embarresment, what a weak individual, and you wonder why we are in the trouble were in. Vote him out, he is a disgrace.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
One Party Government Responsible for Abuse of Power, Corruption
House Minority Leader Bradley H. Jones, Jr. released the following statement today in reaction to the announcement of the indictment of former Speaker Sal DiMasi.
Situations like these are one of the many direct results of the one party government that has ruled our state for far too long. When one party controls the Legislature by such a vast majority, the door is left wide open for corruption, abuse of power and scandal.
I am disappointed the dark shadow continues to hover over Beacon Hill due to ethical improprieties and illegal behavior. I am hopeful this matter will be resolved expeditiously so that we can focus on important issues of public policy, specifically the dire economic times we are facing.
Situations like these are one of the many direct results of the one party government that has ruled our state for far too long. When one party controls the Legislature by such a vast majority, the door is left wide open for corruption, abuse of power and scandal.
I am disappointed the dark shadow continues to hover over Beacon Hill due to ethical improprieties and illegal behavior. I am hopeful this matter will be resolved expeditiously so that we can focus on important issues of public policy, specifically the dire economic times we are facing.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Unafraid In Greenwich Connecticut (Open Letter to Barak Obama)
Clifford S. Asness
Managing and Founding Principal
AQR Capital Management, LLC
The President has just harshly castigated hedge fund managers for being unwilling to take his administration’s bid for their Chrysler bonds. He called them “speculators” who were “refusing to sacrifice like everyone else” and who wanted “to hold out for the prospect of an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout.”
The responses of hedge fund managers have been, appropriately, outrage, but generally have been anonymous for fear of going on the record against a powerful President (an exception, though still in the form of a “group letter”, was the superb note from “The Committee of Chrysler Non-TARP Lenders” some of the points of which I echo here, and a relatively few firms, like Oppenheimer, that have publicly defended themselves). Furthermore, one by one the managers and banks are said to be caving to the President’s wishes out of justifiable fear.
I run an approximately twenty billion dollar money management firm that offers hedge funds as well as public mutual funds and unhedged traditional investments. My company is not involved in the Chrysler situation, but I am still aghast at the President's comments (of course these are my own views not those of my company). Furthermore, for some reason I was not born with the common sense to keep it to myself, though my title should more accurately be called "Not Afraid Enough" as I am indeed fearful writing this... It’s really a bad idea to speak out. Angering the President is a mistake and, my views will annoy half my clients. I hope my clients will understand that I’m entitled to my voice and to speak it loudly, just as they are in this great country. I hope they will also like that I do not think I have the right to intentionally “sacrifice” their money without their permission.
Here's a shock. When hedge funds, pension funds, mutual funds, and individuals, including very sweet grandmothers, lend their money they expect to get it back. However, they know, or should know, they take the risk of not being paid back. But if such a bad event happens it usually does not result in a complete loss. A firm in bankruptcy still has assets. It’s not always a pretty process. Bankruptcy court is about figuring out how to most fairly divvy up the remaining assets based on who is owed what and whose contracts come first. The process already has built-in partial protections for employees and pensions, and can set lenders' contracts aside in order to help the company survive, all of which are the rules of the game lenders know before they lend. But, without this recovery process nobody would lend to risky borrowers. Essentially, lenders accept less than shareholders (means bonds return less than stocks) in good times only because they get more than shareholders in bad times.
The above is how it works in America, or how it’s supposed to work. The President and his team sought to avoid having Chrysler go through this process, proposing their own plan for re-organizing the company and partially paying off Chrysler’s creditors. Some bond holders thought this plan unfair. Specifically, they thought it unfairly favored the United Auto Workers, and unfairly paid bondholders less than they would get in bankruptcy court. So, they said no to the plan and decided, as is their right, to take their chances in the bankruptcy process. But, as his quotes above show, the President thought they were being unpatriotic or worse.
Let’s be clear, it is the job and obligation of all investment managers, including hedge fund managers, to get their clients the most return they can. They are allowed to be charitable with their own money, and many are spectacularly so, but if they give away their clients’ money to share in the “sacrifice”, they are stealing. Clients of hedge funds include, among others, pension funds of all kinds of workers, unionized and not. The managers have a fiduciary obligation to look after their clients’ money as best they can, not to support the President, nor to oppose him, nor otherwise advance their personal political views. That’s how the system works. If you hired an investment professional and he could preserve more of your money in a financial disaster, but instead he decided to spend it on the UAW so you could “share in the sacrifice”, you would not be happy.
Let’s quickly review a few side issues.
The President's attempted diktat takes money from bondholders and gives it to a labor union that delivers money and votes for him. Why is he not calling on his party to "sacrifice" some campaign contributions, and votes, for the greater good? Shaking down lenders for the benefit of political donors is recycled corruption and abuse of power.
Let’s also mention only in passing the irony of this same President begging hedge funds to borrow more to purchase other troubled securities. That he expects them to do so when he has already shown what happens if they ask for their money to be repaid fairly would be amusing if not so dangerous. That hedge funds might not participate in these programs because of fear of getting sucked into some toxic demagoguery that ends in arbitrary punishment for trying to work with the Treasury is distressing. Some useful programs, like those designed to help finance consumer loans, won't work because of this irresponsible hectoring.
Last but not least, the President screaming that the hedge funds are looking for an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout is the big lie writ large. Find me a hedge fund that has been bailed out. Find me a hedge fund, even a failed one, that has asked for one. In fact, it was only because hedge funds have not taken government funds that they could stand up to this bullying. The TARP recipients had no choice but to go along. The hedge funds were singled out only because they are unpopular, not because they behaved any differently from any other ethical manager of other people's money. The President’s comments here are backwards and libelous. Yet, somehow I don’t think the hedge funds will be following ACORN’s lead and trucking in a bunch of paid professional protestors soon. Hedge funds really need a community organizer.
This is America. We have a free enterprise system that has worked spectacularly for us for two hundred plus years. When it fails it fixes itself. Most importantly, it is not an owned lackey of the oval office to be scolded for disobedience by the President.
I am ready for my “personalized” tax rate now.
Businessinsider.com
Managing and Founding Principal
AQR Capital Management, LLC
The President has just harshly castigated hedge fund managers for being unwilling to take his administration’s bid for their Chrysler bonds. He called them “speculators” who were “refusing to sacrifice like everyone else” and who wanted “to hold out for the prospect of an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout.”
The responses of hedge fund managers have been, appropriately, outrage, but generally have been anonymous for fear of going on the record against a powerful President (an exception, though still in the form of a “group letter”, was the superb note from “The Committee of Chrysler Non-TARP Lenders” some of the points of which I echo here, and a relatively few firms, like Oppenheimer, that have publicly defended themselves). Furthermore, one by one the managers and banks are said to be caving to the President’s wishes out of justifiable fear.
I run an approximately twenty billion dollar money management firm that offers hedge funds as well as public mutual funds and unhedged traditional investments. My company is not involved in the Chrysler situation, but I am still aghast at the President's comments (of course these are my own views not those of my company). Furthermore, for some reason I was not born with the common sense to keep it to myself, though my title should more accurately be called "Not Afraid Enough" as I am indeed fearful writing this... It’s really a bad idea to speak out. Angering the President is a mistake and, my views will annoy half my clients. I hope my clients will understand that I’m entitled to my voice and to speak it loudly, just as they are in this great country. I hope they will also like that I do not think I have the right to intentionally “sacrifice” their money without their permission.
Here's a shock. When hedge funds, pension funds, mutual funds, and individuals, including very sweet grandmothers, lend their money they expect to get it back. However, they know, or should know, they take the risk of not being paid back. But if such a bad event happens it usually does not result in a complete loss. A firm in bankruptcy still has assets. It’s not always a pretty process. Bankruptcy court is about figuring out how to most fairly divvy up the remaining assets based on who is owed what and whose contracts come first. The process already has built-in partial protections for employees and pensions, and can set lenders' contracts aside in order to help the company survive, all of which are the rules of the game lenders know before they lend. But, without this recovery process nobody would lend to risky borrowers. Essentially, lenders accept less than shareholders (means bonds return less than stocks) in good times only because they get more than shareholders in bad times.
The above is how it works in America, or how it’s supposed to work. The President and his team sought to avoid having Chrysler go through this process, proposing their own plan for re-organizing the company and partially paying off Chrysler’s creditors. Some bond holders thought this plan unfair. Specifically, they thought it unfairly favored the United Auto Workers, and unfairly paid bondholders less than they would get in bankruptcy court. So, they said no to the plan and decided, as is their right, to take their chances in the bankruptcy process. But, as his quotes above show, the President thought they were being unpatriotic or worse.
Let’s be clear, it is the job and obligation of all investment managers, including hedge fund managers, to get their clients the most return they can. They are allowed to be charitable with their own money, and many are spectacularly so, but if they give away their clients’ money to share in the “sacrifice”, they are stealing. Clients of hedge funds include, among others, pension funds of all kinds of workers, unionized and not. The managers have a fiduciary obligation to look after their clients’ money as best they can, not to support the President, nor to oppose him, nor otherwise advance their personal political views. That’s how the system works. If you hired an investment professional and he could preserve more of your money in a financial disaster, but instead he decided to spend it on the UAW so you could “share in the sacrifice”, you would not be happy.
Let’s quickly review a few side issues.
The President's attempted diktat takes money from bondholders and gives it to a labor union that delivers money and votes for him. Why is he not calling on his party to "sacrifice" some campaign contributions, and votes, for the greater good? Shaking down lenders for the benefit of political donors is recycled corruption and abuse of power.
Let’s also mention only in passing the irony of this same President begging hedge funds to borrow more to purchase other troubled securities. That he expects them to do so when he has already shown what happens if they ask for their money to be repaid fairly would be amusing if not so dangerous. That hedge funds might not participate in these programs because of fear of getting sucked into some toxic demagoguery that ends in arbitrary punishment for trying to work with the Treasury is distressing. Some useful programs, like those designed to help finance consumer loans, won't work because of this irresponsible hectoring.
Last but not least, the President screaming that the hedge funds are looking for an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout is the big lie writ large. Find me a hedge fund that has been bailed out. Find me a hedge fund, even a failed one, that has asked for one. In fact, it was only because hedge funds have not taken government funds that they could stand up to this bullying. The TARP recipients had no choice but to go along. The hedge funds were singled out only because they are unpopular, not because they behaved any differently from any other ethical manager of other people's money. The President’s comments here are backwards and libelous. Yet, somehow I don’t think the hedge funds will be following ACORN’s lead and trucking in a bunch of paid professional protestors soon. Hedge funds really need a community organizer.
This is America. We have a free enterprise system that has worked spectacularly for us for two hundred plus years. When it fails it fixes itself. Most importantly, it is not an owned lackey of the oval office to be scolded for disobedience by the President.
I am ready for my “personalized” tax rate now.
Businessinsider.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
