Columnist.
Jennifer Cramblett of Uniontown, Ohio, is the mother of an adorable 2-year-old girl named Payton, whom she and her partner call a "dream come true" and love with all their heart. "She's made us the people that we are," Cramblett says. "Never trade it for the world." If that's the case, Payton will doubtless wonder once she's old enough to Google her own name, why did Cramblett sue the Chicago-area sperm bank that enabled her to get pregnant with her wonderful daughter? Why did she demand tens of thousands of dollars as compensation for breach of warranty and for what the lawsuit calls Payton's "wrongful birth?"
If Attorney General Martha Coakley uttered the word "Republican" even once in last night's televised gubernatorial debate, I missed it. For a Democrat hoping to win the highest office in one of the nation's bluest states, it was a mystifying omission. After all, most Massachusetts voters, most of the time, would rather crawl through broken glass than vote for the candidate with the "R" after his name. The GOP's brand in this state could hardly be more toxic. That is why Charlie Baker's second campaign for governor has so clearly been built on a strategy of being the sort of Republican Massachusetts voters can feel comfortable with -- the sort of Republican who supports a socially liberal, activist government, but who promises to run it more efficiently and economically than it's been run under Deval Patrick.
The elderly are such a pain, aren't they? Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel thinks so. Half of those older than 80 have "functional limitations," the prominent health policy analyst and key ObamaCare architect writes in the October issue of The Atlantic. One in three Americans 85 and up has Alzheimer's. Old people are more likely to be disabled, or at least "faltering and declining." They lose their creative mojo. They don't "contribute to work, society, the world." Instead of being regarded as "vibrant and engaged," they grow "feeble, ineffectual, even pathetic." Especially disagreeable are old parents, who can be *so* irritating: "They set expectations, render judgments, impose their opinions, interfere, and are generally a looming presence for even adult children," Emanuel complains. By living too long, parents blow their chance to impart "the right memories" to their kids. Nothing could be worse, he insists, than being remembered not as we were in our prime, but as old and decrepit -- "stooped and sluggish, forgetful and repetitive, constantly asking, 'What did she say?'" To leave behind memories of our frailty "is the ultimate tragedy."
There is a transfixing passage in the High Holy Day liturgy, recited on Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, and Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, which depicts God sitting in judgment of mankind, reviewing each person's deeds and deciding who will live and who will die. Ominously, the ancient prayer enumerates the awful ways a life can end. "Who by water and who by fire; who by sword and who by beast; who of hunger and who of thirst; who by earthquake and who by plague…" Then comes a shift. Something else is at stake: "Who will rest and who will wander."
On Election Day, I plan to vote for Question 3, the ballot initiative to repeal the Massachusetts casino law. Not because I oppose Massachusetts casinos -- I don't -- but because I strongly oppose the law. If Question 3 passes, casinos would once again be illegal in Massachusetts. There would no longer be a need for a powerful gaming commission to pick and choose among applicants for one of the coveted licenses to operate a casino in the state. For Massachusetts residents with a yen for slots or roulette, the nearest legal options would remain in Connecticut, Rhode Island, or Maine.
Islamic State has made the beheading of victims a key element in its campaign of terror and conquest. Most conspicuous in recent weeks have been the murders of Westerners James Foley, Steven Sotloff, and David Haines, whose severed heads and decapitated bodies have been shown in threatening videos produced by the jihadists. In the years since 9/11, other Islamist terrorist groups have circulated equally ghastly beheading videos. Among the earlier victims were journalist Daniel Pearl, businessman Nicholas Berg, and construction contractors Jack Hensley and Eugene Armstrong -- all Americans beheaded by Al Qaeda. Last week, meanwhile, Australian police arrested 15 suspects allegedly linked to Islamic State; they are accused of plotting to publicly behead a victim abducted at random.
Prosecutors routinely reduce criminal charges or waive them altogether. They agree to plea bargains. They settle misdemeanor cases in exchange for compensation to the victim. Under our legal system, the government's prosecuting attorneys have extraordinary leeway in deciding whom to prosecute, and for which offenses, and what punishment to seek. So when Sam Sutter, the district attorney for Bristol County, announced last week that he would drop the criminal charges pending against two global-warming activists for illegally blocking a shipment of coal to a power plant in Somerset, Mass., he was exercising prosecutorial discretion -- something DAs do every day.
Democrat Seth Moulton's defeat of US Representative John Tierney in the 6th Congressional District primary last week came right on schedule. The political newcomer, an Iraq War veteran with three Harvard degrees, was the first Massachusetts candidate in 22 years to vanquish a sitting congressman from his own party. It last happened in 1992, when upstart Marty Meehan booted incumbent Chet Atkins in the Fifth Congressional District, then went on to win the seat in November. It was 22 years before that, in the Third Congressional District primary in 1970, that Father Robert Drinan, an antiwar liberal, toppled fellow Democrat Philip Philbin, who had first been elected to Congress in 1942.
If your drinking companions are French, you toast each other with "À votre santé !" With Russians, it's "Za zdorovje!" For Spanish-speakers, "Salud!" In Hebrew, "L'chaim!" Perhaps it's just a coincidence that when drinkers almost anywhere clink glasses, they are apt to invoke good health or long life. More likely, it reflects a truth humankind discovered long ago: Drinking alcohol can be a source of not only short-term enjoyment, but of long-term health benefits too. That may ring heretical at a time when headlines routinely sound alarms about the dangers of alcohol abuse. A search of the phrase "binge drinking" in Google News turns up nearly 7,000 recent articles. Many focus on the connection between drunkenness and campus sexual assault; others dwell on the serious consequences of drinking to excess, from alcohol poisoning to liver disease.
"My policy on cake," the ebullient Tory mayor of London, Boris Johnson, once remarked, "is pro having it and pro eating it." Rand Paul, the Kentucky senator and potential GOP presidential aspirant, has hopes of embracing a similar policy on running for office. Kentuckians, to their credit, aren't buying it. Paul was elected to the US Senate in 2010, and he has said clearly that he intends to run for reelection in 2016. But almost from the moment he took office, he has also shown every sign of wanting to run for president in 2016. And that poses a problem: Kentucky law explicitly bars individuals from running in a regular election for two offices simultaneously: "No candidate's name shall appear on any voting machine or absentee ballot more than once."
You may not be 100 percent sure what you think about Vladimir Putin's maneuvers in Ukraine, Burger King's tax inversion, the indictment of Texas Governor Rick Perry, or Scotland's independence referendum. But you know exactly where you come down on the Great Airline Reclining Seat Controversy, don't you? Everyone has an opinion on the passenger in Row 12 who caused an uproar on a United flight from Newark to Denver when he used a plastic bracket called the "Knee Defender" to block the woman in front of him from reclining her seat. When a flight attendant told the man to remove the gadget -- which United, like most airlines, prohibits -- he refused. The infuriated woman in Row 11, reported the Associated Press, "then stood up, turned around, and threw a cup of water at him." Whereupon the plane was diverted to Chicago, and the two passengers were ejected.
With an all-Democratic congressional delegation, an all-Democratic roster of statewide officeholders, and the most lopsidedly Democratic state legislature in America, Massachusetts deserves its reputation as the bluest of blue states. Yet most registered voters in Massachusetts don't have a "D" after their names. Unenrolled voters -- those not affiliated with any political party -- have outnumbered Republicans and Democrats for nearly three decades. Of the state's 4.26 million voters, more than 2.2 million, or 53.1 percent, do not specify a party affiliation. Judging by results, of course, most of the state's unenrolled voters lean Democratic, even if they decline to wear the party label. But not all tilt leftward. Some -- like me -- incline distinctly the other way. And since Massachusetts permits unenrolled voters to participate in either party's primary, it's a safe bet that some of those choosing the Democratic nominee for governor in next week's election will be conservatives or libertarians apt to vote for Republicans in a general election.
In a TV interview this week, John McCain offered President Obama some sound, if difficult, advice. "Mr. President," the Arizona senator said, "don't be ashamed of re-evaluating your view of the role of the United States in the world." No one likes to admit having been wrong on a fundamental issue. For an American president, few things can be more difficult. When you are invested with tremendous power and prestige because you persuaded tens of millions of citizens to raise you to the highest office in the land, acknowledging that you blundered doesn't come easy. All the more so when the blunder goes to the very core of your strategy for leadership.
Scarcely had ISIS posted its video showing the grisly beheading of American journalist James Foley than the rush to stifle it began. "Don't watch the video. Don't share it. That's not how life should be," entreated Foley's sister Kelly in a message on Twitter that was heavily retweeted. Thousands of social media users, some of them journalists, called for an #ISISMediaBlackout -- the hashtag quickly went viral -- and Twitter CEO Dick Costolo announced that the company was "actively suspending accounts as we discover them related to this graphic imagery." YouTube removed versions of the video posted on its site, invoking its policy on "gratuitous violence, hate speech, and incitement to commit violent acts."
If Hillary Clinton doesn't become the next president of the United States, perhaps she could set up as the next Oracle of Delphi. To the ancient Greeks, the oracle was an authority of immense significance, whose pronouncements carried such weight that supplicants would undertake grueling journeys to consult her before making important decisions. But the Delphic words of wisdom were often ambiguous. "Arguments over the correct interpretation of an oracle were common," one account notes, "but the oracle was always happy to give another prophecy if more gold was provided." Clinton brings to mind the famous oracle not just on account of all the gold she has been amassing since leaving the State Department last year. The former secretary of state has collected so many six-figure speaking fees, according to Bloomberg, that her income now puts her in the top .01 percent of the nation's earners. But even more striking than the riches and honors showered on Clinton by audiences eager to hear her speak are the debates over what she meant to convey and what her words portend.
When it comes to tax relief, I am a committed Friedmanite: I embrace the teaching of the late great Milton Friedman, a Nobel laureate in economics, who often declared that he was "in favor of any tax cut, under any circumstances, in any way, in any form whatsoever." Friedman's premise was that the best way to curb raging government spending was to curb the government's income, and that the best way to do that was to reduce taxes. So I suppose I should be glad that the Massachusetts Legislature has designated next Saturday and Sunday as the Commonwealth's annual sales-tax holiday. Two days of tax-free shopping, a chance to buy that new freezer or computer or necklace -- or simply to stock up on school supplies, toiletries, and batteries -- without having to pay the state's usual 6.25 percent levy on purchases: What's not to like? If experience is any guide, stores and malls will be thronged with shoppers, and $25 million that would otherwise have enriched the state Treasury will remain in the pockets of private citizens. It's all good, right?
Renaming a branch of the Boston Public Library for William Bulger, one of the more sordid Massachusetts politicians in recent decades, may not be the worst idea City Council President Bill Linehan has ever floated, though offhand I can't think of one that tops it. Linehan proposed the tribute to the former president of the Massachusetts Senate and the University of Massachusetts this week, hailing Bulger's "commitment to service, to the people of South Boston, Boston, and the commonwealth."
It was billed as a "Stop the Invasion" rally, and it drew thousands of protesters to the steps of the State House on Saturday. Outraged by Governor Deval Patrick's proposal that Massachusetts shelter some of the unaccompanied minors from Central America who have been surging across the border, the crowd chanted: "Send them home! Send them home!" Massachusetts may be a liberal Democratic stronghold, but these protesters were no fringe phenomenon. According to a new Boston Globe poll, 43 percent of Bay State voters, a plurality, say the children should be deported. Similarly, 43 percent oppose Gov. Patrick's offer to temporarily house 1,000 young migrants in a state air base. Asked whether any state funds should be spent to take care of the children, 57 percent answer no.
Perfect candor wasn't Richard Nixon's strong suit. But he spoke the gospel truth when he described himself as "an introvert in an extrovert's profession." He was one of the most successful political campaigners of the 20th century: winning election to both houses of Congress, serving two terms as Dwight Eisenhower's vice president, and twice winning the White House in his own right -- the second time by a 49-state landslide. Nixon spent decades in the public eye, and was indefatigable in pursuit of votes. Yet rarely has a politician seemed less suited for the political life. When he resigned the presidency, 40 years ago next week, everyone knew why he was ending his career in politics. But why did someone so solitary, so ill at ease with people, embark on that career in the first place?
To the Constitution's 27 amendments, Senate Democrats would like to add a 28th. The Senate Judiciary Committee last week approved a resolution to amend the Constitution by empowering Congress to regulate the amount of money that could be raised or spent in federal election campaigns, and granting state governments the same authority in state elections. The amendment -- introduced by New Mexico Senator Tom Udall and co-sponsored by most of his Democratic colleagues, including Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey of Massachusetts -- is intended to roll back not only the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, but also its landmark decision in Buckley v. Valeo, which affirmed nearly 40 years ago that political spending was expression protected by the First Amendment from arbitrary government limits.
