Mediaboss Marketing

It's hard to imagine the MBTA of the 1980s as described by Fred Salvucci.

"The service was really customer-oriented," said Salvucci, who served as secretary of transportation in both Dukakis administrations. "The infrastructure was in very good shape because we put a lot of money into rebuilding. It was in great shape."

Salvucci says ridership opinion surveys were at 92% favorable by the late 1980s. And the policies of growth and investment were slated to continue.So what happened?

"What happened is the new governor," Salvucci said, referring to Michael Dukakis' successor, Bill Weld. "He zeroed out the investment program for the MBTA in the budget."

Weld, a popular two-term governor through the 1990s, now lives in Canton.

"I get to work every day by going to the Readville station near Hyde Park and hopping on the Fairmont line and 18 minutes to South Station," Weld said.

The former Republican governor, who ran for vice president on Gary Johnson's Libertarian ticket in 2016, says he always regarded the essential aspect of the MBTA as a workforce issue.

"You know, I don't remember cutting the budget a huge amount," Weld said. "I do remember the deferred maintenance was a problem that persisted even when I was an office."

"The tricky thing with infrastructure is you can screw it up and it won't be visible for 10 or 15 years," Salvucci said.

Salvucci is also critical of Weld's push for privatization, including, he says, firing all the top-level managers.

"I still think that privatization is the way to make things more efficient," Weld said.

Significant investment may have stopped in the 90s, but no governor or legislature since then has been able to make the kind of investment so desperately needed to update the century-old system.

"Nobody holds accountable the guy who was there in 1995. It's whoever the poor sap is that's stuck with vehicles that don't work today," Salvucci said.

Continue reading here:
What Led to MBTA's Decline? Weld Defends Against Criticism of Administration - NBC10 Boston

After the Cook County GOP put up one of its biggest slates in years for positions in the November election, seven candidates have either been knocked off the ballot or withdrew on their own.

These candidates didnt run in the June primary, but were submitted by the party to fill ballot vacancies. The failure of those hopefuls to make the ballot including for assessor, Cook County Board and the Board of Review mean the Democratic nominees will largely go unchallenged. Higher-profile candidates such as former Chicago Ald. Bob Fioretti and former county Commissioner Tony Peraica are still in the running.

Among those kicked off by the countys electoral board: Todd Thielmann, who until recently worked for Tammy Wendt, a Democratic commissioner on the Board of Review. Wendt and Thielmann are cousins she eventually fired him after the countys board of ethics sued and fined her for violating the countys ban on nepotism. Wendt herself lost her Democratic primary bid for reelection to Chicago 12th Ward Ald. George Cardenas.

Thielmann did not want to stay out of the property tax world, however. He submitted petitions to run as a Republican for assessor, but faced multiple objections to his candidacy, in part, because he chose a Democratic ballot when he voted in the primary in June.

While most candidates are removed from the ballot for having improperly filed petitions, or not enough signatures, some are disqualified for switching parties: State law bars a person who voted on the ballot of an established political party on primary day from running as a candidate of a different established political party for the election immediately following.

During a lottery Wednesday to determine ballot order in the November election, Janeen Bass of the Cook County Clerk's office, at right, shows she pulled a Democratic Party label, meaning those candidates will appear first on the ballot. At left is Cook County Clerk attorney James Nally. (Antonio Perez / Chicago Tribune)

A Cook County clerk voting history report for Thielmann submitted as an exhibit in the challenges to his candidacy shows he voted as a Republican in every primary election between 2012 and 2018, but pulled Democratic ballots in 2020 and 2022. Thielmann also failed to appear in person or by counsel to contest the objection, and was removed by the electoral board in a ruling Thursday.

That leaves incumbent Democratic Assessor Fritz Kaegi and Libertarian candidate Nico Tsatsoulis on the November ballot, unless Thielmann appeals.

Three GOP candidates for the Cook County Board were either booted or opted out, according to electoral board filings: Jennifer Wallace (5th District) and Ramona Bonilla-Anaiel (8th District) were both removed, and Natalian Bolton (7th District) withdrew. Jeff Fiedler, the executive director of the Chicago Republican Party, says Bonilla-Anaiels campaign is considering an appeal.

Democratic primary candidate Samantha Steele is running uncontested for a seat on the Board of Review after a potential Republican challenger, Mary Herrold, withdrew her candidacy, according to electoral board records. Herrold had faced an objection alleging she didnt have a sufficient number of signatures to qualify for the ballot, but the decision was considered moot because Herrold had already withdrawn.

Other Republican hopefuls for Board of Review seats, Robert Cruz and Tim De Young, also withdrew their candidacies. That means all three Democrats Steele, Cardenas and incumbent Commissioner Larry Rogers Jr. are running unopposed.

Steele has another potential complication off her plate: a pay dispute with her campaign strategist has been resolved. The two sides reached an amicable and confidential settlement last month where neither were held at fault, according to a Steele spokeswoman and Rebecca Williams, the strategist who filed suit. In a statement, Steele said, After earning the privilege to serve as the Democratic nominee in this race, I am excited to move forward and put my energy toward engaging voters around creating a fair, transparent and accessible Board of Review for everyone.

Voters have consistently elected folks based on their commitment to reform the property tax assessment and appeals system and there is a tremendous amount of work to do, Williams said.

Fioretti, a former Democrat, and Libertarian Thea Tsatsos will challenge incumbent Toni Preckwinkle for board president in the Nov. 8 election. Peraica is running for county clerk against incumbent Karen Yarbrough and Libertarian Joseph Schreiner. No Republicans currently hold countywide office in Cook County and only two party members sit on the county board.

Note: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated an eighth Republican candidate had withdrawn or been removed from the ballot. Evan Kasal remains on the ballot as the GOP candidate for the Cook County Boards 2nd District.

aquig@chicagotribune.com

Originally posted here:
7 GOP candidates in Cook County are off the November ballot - Chicago Tribune

In this week's The Reason Roundtable, editors Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, and Nick Gillespie examine the current state of the GOP in the wake of last week's primary elections and continue to reprehend the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) after it announced lackluster reforms.

1:35: GOP as the "Party of Trump"

12:39: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and the "Stop WOKE Act"

24:30 : Weekly Listener Question:

What is the smallest size in which a free market can work? Are three people enough or do you need country-sized populations to reap the benefits? We love free trade, but what about when we trade with slavers and criminal regimes? Why would it not be better to close trade to them and just keep most of our trade internal or with our free-ish pals? Is America's market not big enough to reap the benefits of free trade internally even if nobody could/would send us imports? Would we not just creatively find replacements for all the products that we used to import?

38:20: CDC announces reorganization

Mentioned in this podcast:

"Morris P. Fiorina: Why 'Electoral Chaos' Is Here To Stay," by Nick Gillespie

"Federal Judge Blocks Florida Law Banning 'Woke' Workplace Training," by Scott Shackford

"Make the CDC an Infectious Disease Epidemic Fighter Again," by Ronald Bailey

"Every Day Is 'Buy Nothing Day' in North Koreaand Look Where That's Gotten Them," Nick Gillespie

"'Game of Thrones' Economics: Auburn University's Matthew McCaffrey says it's not all Fantasy'," by Tracy Oppenheimer

"Grover Cleveland, The Last Libertarian President," by Paul Whitfield

Send your questions to roundtable@reason.com. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

Today's sponsor:

Audio production by Ian Keyser

Assistant production by Hunt Beaty

Music: "Angeline," by The Brothers Steve

Here is the original post:
Podcast: The Party of Trump Rages On - Reason

Arkansas' Republican gubernatorial nominee Sarah Huckabee Sanders raised about $321,000 in contributions in July as Democratic gubernatorial nominee Chris Jones collected about $245,000 in contributions, according to their latest campaign finance reports.

Jones and a spokesman for Sanders on Tuesday also exchanged jabs.

Along with Libertarian candidate Ricky Dale Harrington Jr. of Pine Bluff, Jones and Sanders are vying in the Nov. 8 general election to succeed term-limited Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson. Their campaign finance reports for July were posted on the secretary of state's website Monday night.

For the general election, Sanders reported raising $321,781.74 in contributions and spending $339,503.27 in July. That boosted the amount that she has reported raising to $7.06 million and spending to $752,485.40 for the general election, leaving a balance of $6.3 million on July 31.

For the May 24 primary election, Sanders reported raising $13.1 million and spending that much, including a $4.2 million transfer to her general election campaign. Sanders, of Little Rock, is a former White House press secretary for President Trump and the daughter of former Gov. Mike Huckabee.

For the general election, Jones reported raising $245,789.96 and spending $295,667.74 in July. That increased the amount that he has reported raising to $662,972.75 and spending to $544,141.69 for the general election, leaving a balance of $118,831.06 on July 31.

For the May 24 primary election, Jones reported raising $1.9 million and spending that much, including a transfer of $69,431 to his general election campaign. He is a former executive director of the Arkansas Regional Innovation Hub.

Sanders said Tuesday in a written statement that "I continue to be humbled by the incredible support from Arkansans in all 75 counties, as well as Americans from all 50 states.

"Through bold conservative reforms, including lower taxes, investing in our kids' education, and reducing violent crime, we will create opportunity for all and take this state to the top," she said.

Jones said Tuesday in a written statement that "our campaign for Governor is making an impact."

"We're showing up in every corner of this state, talking face to face, and walking a mile in the shoes of everyday Arkansans," he said in a written statement. "That's why we're seeing strong fundraising numbers. Meanwhile, we see some stagnation in Sarah Huckabee Sanders's report as her campaign limits its time in Arkansas. Voters here in Arkansas expect candidates for the state's top office to work hard to earn their vote."

In response, Sanders spokesman Judd Deere said in a written statement that "Sarah Huckabee Sanders has completely shattered the record for the most money ever raised by a candidate for governor in Arkansas history and has a 50:1 cash on hand advantage for the general election.

"Arkansans reject Biden and the Democrats' failed policies and are ready for Sarah to lead our state to greater freedom, opportunity, and prosperity," he said.

In July, Harrington reported raising $2,322 and spending $46.27 for the general election. That increased his total amount raised to $31,704.72, and total expenses to $17,124.05, leaving a balance of $14,580.67 on July 31.

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR

For the general election, Republican nominee Leslie Rutledge of Maumelle reported raising $11,138.66 and spending $29,940.07 in July.

That increased her total amount raised to $533,393.06 and total expenses to $85,638.52 for the general election, leaving a balance of $447,754.54 on July 31. In June, she reported transferring $42,126 from her primary campaign to her general election campaign.

Rutledge has served as the state's attorney general since 2015.

For the general election, Democratic nominee Kelly Krout of Lowell reported receiving $26,163.10 in contributions and spending $14,074.11 in July. That increased her contributions raised to $184,329.86, total loans to $100, and total expenses to $151,028.28 for the primary and general election campaigns, leaving a balance of $33,401.58 on July 31, according to her report.

Libertarian candidate Frank Gilbert of Little Rock reported raising $272.17 and spending $22.17 in July. That increased the total that he reported raising to $2,973.17 and total expenses to $793.81, leaving a balance of $2,179.36 on July 31.

ATTORNEY GENERAL

For the general election, Republican nominee Tim Griffin of Little Rock raised $22,957 and spent $33,663.56 in July, according to his report.

His contributions received totaled $1.4 million and expenses totaled $98,371.82 for the general election, leaving a balance of $1.3 million as of July 31, according to his report. In June, he reported transferring $783,818 from his primary campaign to his general election campaign.

Griffin has served as the state's lieutenant governor since 2015, and served as the state's 2nd district congressman from 2011-2015.

For the general election, Democratic nominee Jess Gibson of Little Rock reported raising $34,216.95 in contributions, loaning his campaign $8,750 and spending $22,126.12 in July. That increased his total contributions raised to $316,074.63, total loans to $42,500 and total expenses to $306,024.54 for the primary and general election campaigns, leaving a balance of $52,675.09 on July 31.

SECRETARY OF STATE

For the general election, Republican incumbent and nominee John Thurston of East End raised $8,950 in contributions, loaned his campaign $94.99, and spent $4,501.54 in July, according to his report.

That increased his total contributions received to $21,746.50, total loans to $1,139.98, and total expenses to $8,076.54 for the general election, leaving a balance of $14,809.94, according to his report.

For the general election, Democratic nominee Anna Beth Gorman of North Little Rock reported raising $15,770.99 and spending $20,575.80 in July. That increased the total amount raised to $169,660.87 and total expenses to $146,853.43 for the primary and general election campaigns, leaving a balance of $22,712.95, according to her report.

TREASURER

Republican nominee state Rep. Mark Lowery of Maumelle reported raising $3,500 in contributions and spending $2,617.96 in July for the general election. That boosted his total contributions received to $92,989.32 and total expenses to $43,398.75 for the primary and general elections, leaving a balance of $49,590.57 on July 31, according to his report.

Democratic nominee Pam Whitaker of Little Rock raised $2,970 in contributions and spent nothing in July. That boosted her total fundraising to $7,229.49 and total expenses to $2,079.98 for the primary and general elections, leaving a balance of $5,149.51, she reported.

AUDITOR

Republican nominee Dennis Milligan of Benton reported raising no money and spending $5,266.21 for the general election in July. That increased his total contributions raised to $38,678.69 and total expenses to $5,533.01 for the general election, leaving a balance of $33,145.68 on July 31, according to his report.

In June, he reported a $34,378.69 transfer from his primary campaign to his general election campaign.

Milligan has served as state treasurer since 2015.

Democratic candidate Diamond Arnold-Johnson of Mabelvale and Libertarian candidate Simeon Snow of Rector haven't filed campaign finance reports yet, according to the secretary of state's website.

LAND COMMISSIONER

Republican nominee and incumbent Tommy Land of Heber Springs reported raising $3,950 in contributions and spending $220 in July.

That boosted his total contribution to $52,436.67, total loans to $3,000, interest earned to $351.89 and total expenses to $14,084.99 for the primary and general elections, leaving a balance of $41,703.57 as of July 31, according to his report.

Democratic nominee Darlene Goldi Gaines of Little Rock raised $2,749 and spent $763.81 in July. In total, she reported raising $9,553.92 and spending $6,357.28 for the primary and general elections, leaving a balance of $3,196.64 on July 31.

SUPREME COURT

District Judge Chris Carnahan of Conway raised $4,125 in contributions and spent $4,693.11 in July, according to his report. That increased his amount raised in contributions to $106,860, total loans to $26,798.07 and total expenses to $125,656.05, leaving a balance of $8,680.67 as of July 31, according to his report.

Supreme Court Justice Robin Wynne of Little Rock reported raising $500 in contributions and spending nothing in July. That increased the amount that he reported raising in contributions to $79,927.76, total loans to $10,000, and total expenses to $85,130, leaving a balance of $4,797.76 on July 31.

Read this article:
Sanders raises $321,000 in July for Arkansas governor's race; Jones adds $245,000 in contributions - Arkansas Online

If someone insults your mother, you clock him. As a man, at least, theres really nothing else you can do. It may not be strictly legal, but its perfectly honorable. Conversely, if you dont want to get clocked, dont insult anyones mother. Legally, he may be in the wrong. Morally, though, hes right.

Free speech has limitslegal, yes, but also moral. You cant shout fire in a crowded movie theater without legal consequences, and you cant rip on someones mom without having to square up.

Salman Rushdies novel The Satanic Verses didnt violate the legal limits of free speech. But, as even his staunchest defenders will admit, it was deliberately insulting to Islam. Though Rushdie now calls himself a hardline atheist, he was born to a Muslim family in Mumbai, a city with a large Muslim minority. He knew what he was doing. He knew that he was offending the deepest convictions of two billion Muslims around the world. He wasnt offering an intelligent critique of their faith. He was mocking it. Thats not incidental to the book. For Rushdies biggest fans (like Christopher Hitchens), its part of the appeal.

No, he didnt deserve to be stabbed last week. That should go without saying. But getting stabbed doesnt make him a hero, either. On the contrary. Rushdie is a first-rate wordsmith, but a very banal blasphemer. His treatment of Islam was shallow and flippant, and Muslims have every right to be angry with him. Were not obliged to lionize him because some have overreacted so terribly.

It feels a bit low making this argument just a few days after the attack. Id prefer not to make it at all. But as soon as the news broke, libertarian pundits began working to canonize Mr. Rushdie as a living martyr for free speech.

Over at National Review, Charles Cooke issued an ultimatum: You either support free speech or you dont. According to Cooke,

Certainly, the people who dont believe in free speech have different reasons for their opposition: They want to protect peoples feelings or to aid public virtue; they think that the religion they believe in is too important; they fear the consequences of bad people hearing bad words. But, really, who cares? The root question is whether or not we are to have a clerisy of people who, via direct violence (murder, acid) or indirect violence (government) are able to tell everyone else what they may or may not say.

If any fundamentalist Muslims happen to read Cookes blog, Im sure theyre duly chastened and wont do it again. But what about the rest of us? What are we supposed to take away from this argument? That anyone who doesnt uncritically support Rushdie is cut from the same cloth as Ayatollah Khomeini.

Later, Cooke mentions the Charlie Hebdo shooting of 2015. The comparison is apt, but not for the reason he thinks. The magazines offices were targeted by radical Muslims over their crude, satirical drawings of Mohammed. Twelve people died in the attack, while eleven more were injured.

And what was the point of it all? For what cause did those twelve give their lives? The answer is, insulting Muslims. Speaking to the press after the attack, Charlie Hebdos editor said they would go on mocking the faith until Islam is just as banal as Catholicism. Thats it. But dying for a cause doesnt make it right, and Charlie Hebdo doesnt even have a cause. They give offense for the sake of being offensive. How tragic.

Likewise, the fact that someone tried to kill an author doesnt make that author's books any good. To most people, I think, that is just common sense. But apparently, Douglas Murray disagrees. He thinks we should respond to the attempt on Rushdies life by reading The Satanic Verses. The illiterate cannot be allowed to dictate the rules of literature, he writes. The enemies of free expression cannot be allowed to quash it.

Yet the point of a novel isnt free expression. Anyone can express himself by putting words on a piece of paper. Thats why teenaged girls keep diaries. Literature has to aspire to something more. And the irony is that none of the tributes to Rushdie explain what exactly makes him a great novelist. Reading them, you have no clue whether theres anything good or true or beautiful in The Satanic Verses. All you can glean is that it pissed off a bunch of Muslims in the '80s.

As it happens, the majority of Muslimshowever pissed offhave responded to The Satanic Verses quite peacefully. Yet folks like Charles Cooke and Douglas Murray dont give them credit for practicing free expression. Why? Because theyre just so earnest. Making fun of peoples religion is cool; getting offended when someone mocks your religion is square.

This is what Rushdies champions are really getting at. Whatever Cooke may say, most critics of The Satanic Verses dont think the book should be banned or its author beheaded. They are saying that human beings should be more respectful of each others convictions. Religion shouldnt be treated as something banal. Art shouldnt be flippant.

These are moral judgements; they are also literary criticisms.

And theyre perfectly fair. If Evelyn Waughs Brideshead Revisited ended with Charles Ryder still mocking the Flyte familys Catholicism, it would fail as a novelnot because Catholicism is true (though it is), but because mocking other peoples religion is childish. And its boring. It doesnt make for good art.

Rushdies defenders obviously dont care about his literary merits, though. This has nothing to do with art and everything to do with politics. They only care about free speech. They reduce The Satanic Verses to a propaganda piece. This does a disservice to Rushdies craft. It misses the whole point of literature. It also undermines the cause of free speech.

Except for libertarian ideologues, no one really believes that all expressions should be treated as equals. Most folks arent willing to divide humanity between Rushdie fanboys and Khomeini acolytes. We can condemn violent extremism without endorsing a frivolous nihilism. We can support the right to free speech while urging our countrymen to exercise that right more responsibly.

We can, and we should. Because, if we dont, this may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Cooke tells Rushdies critics they may as well join up with the Ayatollah; the trouble is, eventually they might believe him. Give people a choice between violent extremism and frivolous nihilism and most of them will choose the former. In fact, they already are.

This is the problem with libertarian conservatives. Their deepest loyalties are to legal abstractions. If someone insults your mom (or your God), they expect you to shake his hand and cry, I may not agree with what you say, but Ill defend to the death your right to say it!

Subscribe Today Get weekly emails in your inbox

That is why Russell Kirk referred to J.S. Mill, that most classic of classical liberals, as a defecated intellect. And it is why they are more dangerous than violent extremists, even violent Islamic extremists. Because when a man is willing to fight for his God (or his mom), it means he loves something more than himself. He might do terrible things in the name of that love. His heart may be in the wrong place. But at least hes got a heart. What do the classical liberals have? Theories. White papers. A brain in a vat.

I dont want the kind of freedom Rushdies supporters are offering, and neither should you. It erases any distinction between beauty and ugliness, between good and evil, between truth and lies. It is the enemy of poetry, art, music, romance, community, worshipof everything that makes us human. It is the freedom to scoff and sneer, never to love or hate. And while it may keep us safe from death, it gives us no reason to live.

Natural rights do exist. But only because so does human nature. If we ignore the latter, we are sure to lose the former. If we force men to choose between liberty and loyalty, most will choose loyalty. So, you can write endless blog posts insisting on your First Amendment right to insult other peoples mothers. But if you try to exercise that right, you are going to get clocked.

See the original post here:
Rethinking Salman Rushdie - The American Conservative