Posted on 10/07/2012 5:05:13 AM PDT by raccoonradio
Howie Carr thread for the week starting with his Sunday Boston Herald column
Whitey lets nature do his dirty work
Bulger’s best shot is witnesses dying from old age
By Howie Carr | Sunday, October 7, 2012 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Columnists
The feds have it wrong. Whitey Bulger isn’t trying to stall his trial until he dies.
He’s trying to stall it until all the witnesses against him die.
“Won’t work,” said one of his former colleagues. “Too many witnesses.”
But they’re very old, most of them. The Winter Hill Gang is now the Over the Hill Gang. And sure enough, one of the ex-cons the feds were hoping would testify against him has just passed on.
Tommy Ryan was 81, a mere whippersnapper among the bookies the G-men are planning to use on the witness stand next year against the 83-year-old serial killer now incarcerated at the Plymouth County Correctional Facility.
Ryan, of Winthrop, died late last month. He was for many years the biggest bookie in Cambridge, operating out of his barroom, Joey Mac’s Lounge on Warren Street, just off Cambridge Street.
Ryan was just paying “rent” to the boys at the garage. But he was big enough that when the feds put together their Winter Hill Gang organizational chart back in 2008 for the Zip Connolly murder trial in Florida, they put Ryan on it.
Sure, it was near the bottom, and maybe it was just because they had his mugshot, but still, Ryan made the chart. He was an ex-Marine, just like the boss, Howie Winter, 83, who is currently under state indictment.
On Friday a federal judge again refused to give Whitey’s lawyer, J.W. Carney, more time to prepare for trial, not to mention funerals. Jury selection is still scheduled to begin March 4. It will take place at the Moakley Courthouse, although a better location might be Marian Manor, or even a hospice with easy access to defibrillators and oxygen.
Forget St. Petersburg, Fla. Starting late next winter, the Bulger courtroom is going to be God’s waiting room.
Ryan’s last stretch came in 1996, when he was found guilty on criminal contempt charges. He’d refused to testify in front of a grand jury investigating organized crime in Boston. A lot of the senior-citizen bookies on Whitey’s witness list did 18 months for refusing to testify. It was a very popular decision, until Whitey Bulger and his pal Stevie Flemmi were outed as rats in 1997.
After that, it seemed rather pointless, going to the can for refusing to rat out a rat. Everybody started testifying. No hard feelings. Even Stevie Flemmi is going to take a turn on the witness stand against his old partner. Stevie’s 78, and he’ll probably make it to March. His father lived to almost 100.
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1061165846
It will be illustrative to see how many hits this column gets. Pun intended.
Actually, there should be the same number of looks by FReepers, but the subject of Whitey Bulger is getting as old as many of these witnesses.
But a different subject is what we need. I can’t stand to read commentary of the endless polling going on. November 6th can’t get here soon enough.
He ran MA so long anyway, there can be no question of ebnough experience.
Wed column ping
Fake Indian has a lot more ghosts in the cupboard
By Howie Carr | Wednesday, October 10, 2012 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Columnists
Photo by Patrick Whittemore
Hey, Scott Brown, it’s time to start pulling back a little on the fake-Indian attacks on the fake Indian.
By now, everybody understands that Granny Warren is a fraud. The best argument the moonbats can come up with is that if she thinks she’s an Indian, who are we to say she’s not an Indian?
Does this “evolving paradigm” also apply to Irish and Italian guys so fed up with being passed over for promotions that they are now allowed to “check the box” as blacks or Mexicans? No, I didn’t think so.
But she’s not going to suddenly break down and confess, any more than Jerry Sandusky did in court yesterday. This is how she’s lived her life (at least since age 38), as a lie. As somebody pointed out a couple of weeks ago, this woman is the Jackie Robinson of fake affirmative action, a trailblazer in phoniness. She deserves a plaque somewhere, probably in the lobby of the MSNBC studios.
So let’s move on to fresher issues. After all, there’s plenty of other stuff to throw at her.
Let’s start with in-state tuition for illegal aliens. Brown beat her to the punch, getting that out on the table in Lowell, just in case she tried to run away from it. Remember, the illegals who do work have to do so under the table, so they’re not reporting any income taxes. That means they, or their kids, are going to be eligible for the scholarships your kids might otherwise get.
Your kids will have to work two jobs to pay their tuitions, and the illegals’. The illegals who just drifted into the country last week will get a free ride.
Let Granny explain why this is muy bueno. It’s so unpopular not even the 80 Democrats in the Legislature will touch it with a 10-foot pole.
Speaking of higher ed, keep blasting Granny and her husband on their $750,000 combined salaries at Harvard Law, for one or two courses each. No wonder the parents of college students are getting “hammered.”
When was the last time you got a $50,000 loan, interest-free? From Harvard?
Then there’s Occupy Wall Street. Scott’s brought up it, but only in passing. A year ago, Granny was bragging how she provided the “intellectual foundations” of OWS. I’m not sure there’s audio of that idiotic comment, but if there is, it’d make a great TV spot.
Then there’s her house-flipping in Oklahoma City back in the ’90s. That story hasn’t gotten nearly the ink it deserves. Scott, find some of her foreclosure victims. Fly them here to Massachusetts, like Teddy did with Mitt’s laid-off workers from Indiana in 1994.
Drivers’ licenses for illegal aliens. Another crackpot PC idea. Go to Milford, Scott, and hold a press conference explaining to Granny what a disaster that would be. It’ll take her two days just to find Milford on a map.
And don’t worry about voters forgetting about the fake-Indian issue. I’ll auction off my Granny-autographed copy of “Pow Wow Chow” on the radio this afternoon.
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1061166539
Looking forward to tonight's debate...
Fri column ping
Joe Biden makes case for ... term limits
By Howie Carr | Friday, October 12, 2012 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Columnists
Photo by AP
Hey Joe Biden, what’s so funny?
The only real takeaway from this debate is we really need term limits for politicians. Joe Biden was first elected to the Senate in 1972 at age 30. Somewhere around 1992, he should have had to go out and get a real job.
Nothing like having to answer to a boss to make you a little more humble. What’s up with the smirking? It seemed like Clint Eastwood was back up on stage, this time in character from “Gran Torino.”
“Get off my lawn!”
Not that it’s saying much, but Joe Biden was better than his boss, “Barack America,” as he’s been known to call Obama. But he got off to a rather poor start with his finger-pointing about Benghazi. Whose fault was this disaster? Biden’s story didn’t jibe with the latest rationalizations. He said, “We were not told that they wanted more security, we did not know they wanted more security.”
Huh? Hasn’t that statement been “inoperative,” as Ron Ziegler used to say, since at least Wednesday? That’s a poor way to start a 90-minute debate, with a big whopper.
And Martha Raddatz — maybe inviting Barack to her second wedding should have disqualified her. Why didn’t she interrupt Biden as much as she interrupted Ryan? I remember her when she was Martha Bradlee of Ch. 5. Martha Bradlee wouldn’t have let Biden get away with all that high-school Harry malarkey, to coin a phrase.
Man, Biden really is an old-line Democrat. He waved the bloody shirts, all of them. These Republicans, they want to get rid of home-mortgage deductions, and Medicare, and Social Security, and oh yeah, Roe v. Wade.
Speaking of which, his religion guides his life. That’s why he used to vote against abortion in the Senate, just like Ted Kennedy. Then the polling numbers changed, and now, well, never mind. He wouldn’t attempt to impose his beliefs on anyone else. Except, of course, about how much money “millionaires” need to live on. Then, he’s quite sure he knows how to, you know, “level the playing field.”
Rep. Paul Ryan was OK. He showed deference, never taking the bait from the garrulous old fool. He got off his one allotted zinger, answering Biden about Mitt Romney’s 47 percent crack, saying the vice president surely knows what it’s like to have something come out of your mouth not quite in the way you intended.
Biden mentioned that Ryan had his own 47 percent moment, when he said that 30 percent of the American people are “takers.” But does anyone outside of MSNBC really doubt those numbers? Mitt’s problem was his number was too high. Ryan’s was about right.
Do you want to ever watch another vice presidential debate? I’m not sure if the problem is with the debates themselves, or the fact that Joe Biden seems to be in all of them.
Enough with the undercard. Let’s get back to the main event.
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1061167091
here was Thursday’s
Liz Warren loses her way even in land of moonbats
By Howie Carr | Thursday, October 11, 2012 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Columnists
Photo by Christopher Evans
The only difference between last night’s debate and the first two was the audience. There were more moonbats. They come with the territory — public television.
It’s getting to the point where most viewers can come up with the responses before the candidates get their rebuttal time.
“I didn’t vote for your boss ... 288 combat missions ... We have a Buffett rule in this state ... He had a chance to vote for women ... $350,000 salary for one course ... millionaires and billionaires.”
At least he finally nailed her on “hammered,” when she dropped the H word and he said something like, “Drop the hammer.”
The crowd booed. Somewhere Big Bird was smiling.
But Granny last night dusted off a new favorite word — investment. This can likely be attributed to the debating tips she got from Mike Dukakis — did he phone in from his tank? The Duke always loved the word “invest” in all its variations. Usually he was talking about investing in a “national model.”
Talk about a dog whistle for hacks. They know what an investment is. It’s a tax on somebody who works to be given to somebody who doesn’t. It’s an investment “in the future.” Their future, not yours.
They don’t call the 413 area code “Happy Valley” for nothing, but despite its crunchy-granola, Vermont-y ambience, Granny still can’t seem to figure out exactly where she is. Remember, last spring she thought they had a seacoast. Last night she mentioned “out here in Massachusetts.”
Odd turn of phrase, like Obama landing in Hawaii and saying he liked returning to “Asia.” Scott Brown certainly picked up on it. In his next turn, he immediately said, “I’m from here.”
But the strangest thing Granny said was her reference to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as a “baby agency.” A baby agency? Its budget is already $550 million, 60 percent of its 958 employees make more than $100,000, and the director’s secretary makes $165,139 a year. If that’s a baby, it’s Rosemary’s baby.
How many times is she going to mention the economic plans that were graded by the Boston Globe, and guess what, she came out ahead of the Republican! Who’d-a thunk it?
You want some more stats from the Globe, Granny? On Sept. 30, you were five points ahead in a poll, and the Globe put it above the fold on page one, the lead story. Yesterday, Scott Brown was four points ahead in a poll, and the Globe used it as a news-in-brief item on page B2.
One pitch Brown threw her that she didn’t bite at: four bucks a gallon for gas. It doesn’t work in her narrative about “Big Oil.” Don’t want voters remembering that $1.84-a-gallon gas on Jan. 20, 2009.
Give Granny credit though. She supports “nuanced approaches” and “clear objectives.” She also thinks we need to “get serious.”
Why didn’t Scott Brown think of that?
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1061166810
Also, in general it seems as if she did rather better than I would have expected. Brown afraid of her?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.