Pags hammers Coakley, Capuano on health care

Pags has it all wrong. (5.67 / 3)

First of, strategically saying you would vote for HCR with the abortion restriction as passed by the house takes away all negotiating power to re-write the House restriction.

Second, because many Senators did not take Pags stupid position, it meant that Reid had to rewrite the abortion provision to secure the votes he needs. As a result the provision is being worked over and will be better for pro-choice advocates than the Stupak amendment would have left us.

And so, now we aren't going to be left with the bad choice Pags was advocating we accept.

All around, this is mind numbingly stupid from Pags.

---

by: potroast @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:07:02 AM CST

Maybe Pages should just pay for the votes? (4.00 / 1)

It might be more cost effective?  Those who only sit in front of their tv set will vote for the candidate that seems" awfully nice" as my cab driver said.  
So obvious that this is a political ploy trying to play on ignorance of the process.
Wonder what else he has up his sleeve (or coming out of pocket)- pretty good to be in arguable 2nd place without initial name recognition.  

---

by: Bostonboomer @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:07:43 AM CST

True, but (6.00 / 1)

I think in a special primary election of this sort the people who he's targeting aren't the ones who will be voting.  

---

by: DoubleMan @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:24:48 AM CST

[ Parent ]

A Radio Ad... (5.80 / 5)

...aired this morning in which Pagliuca essentially said "The politics of Washington are too important to leave to the politics of Washington."

Imagine the blowback if it were suggested that the fates of workers, consumers, and stockholders were too important to leave in the hands of venture capitalists.

Eschewing obfuscation since 1955.

---

by: shiltone @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:14:58 AM CST

I hate robocalls (6.00 / 1)

with a passion. Irrationally, unreasonably, implacably. Can't help it. It's chemical.

If I get one from a campaign I've signed up with, that's totally different. I'm on board--I've opted in--and its an efficient way to give me the news. I remember a couple of these when I was a Patrick delegate. Totally cool.

But if someone is wooing me, and I get some clueless one-way script blovating at me, then you've probably lost my vote. I don't care if it's Bill Robo Clinton.

There must be some pretty solid research showing that robocalling is cost effective, or why would campaigns do such an obnoxious thing? But I've never seen any such anywhere.

Sorry, I feel better now.

---

by: Trickle up @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:50:46 AM CST

"a false choice", "a red herring"? (4.00 / 1)

Coakley called Pags criticism of her pledge to oppose a national health care overhaul if it restricts insurance coverage of abortion "a false choice", "a red herring"?  

Can she make that claim after having said she would have voted against health care reform in the house becuase of the Stupak amendment?

That was her position right? So how is it a false choice and a red herring?

www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:51:36 AM CST

Because that same language won't be in the final bill. (0.00 / 0)

Which is only true because enough Senators aren't as wiling to toss away abortion rights as Pags is.

---

by: potroast @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:53:09 AM CST

[ Parent ]

i think you're letting Martha off the hook (0.00 / 0)

on a position she took.  

www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:54:38 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, we are ... (0.00 / 0)

It was a dumb statement at the time for Coakley and she's trying to massage it to Capuano's actual stance.  

Listening to Charlie Baker talk about fiscal responsibility is like getting lectured on abstinence from Paris Hilton - Tim Murray

---

by: johnk @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:59:06 AM CST

[ Parent ]

false choices... (4.00 / 1)

Coakley called Pags criticism of her pledge to oppose a national health care overhaul if it restricts insurance coverage of abortion "a false choice", "a red herring"?  

While I would, most likely, have voted for Stupak-Pitts (for a variety of reasons...) I wouldn't have done it without serious contemplation.   One such point of contemplation would be to ask myself if 'reform' that might move backwards with respect to abortion is actually 'reform'?   If the answer to that question is 'no, reform that moves backwards isn't reform", then I'd make the argument that Martha Coakley has made: it's a false choice.  I can see very clearly where she would think that and it comports with her actions and previous statements without hindrance or contradiction of any kind.  

On the whole however, the things that are in the bill that are real reform like coverage extensions, public option, exchanges and extensive changes to care-denial practices like 'pre-existing conditions' are, to my way of thinking, direct attacks on the present health care funding mechanisms.  As such, these attacks are the first step in a long process of breaking the backs of insurance companies.   Regardless of the abortion provisions, the reconciled bill that Barack Obama signs will be the stake through the heart of for-profit health care.  It only remains to survive the chaos that will ensue upon their death and emerge on the other side.  How long this will take remains to be seen.

Interestingly, both pro-choice and (most) pro-life advocates will, decidedly, get much much more of what they want absent for-profit health-care: As I may have mentioned elsewhere, an insurance industry willing to let people suffer and die in order to secure profits, would abort every third child, regardless of medical reasons, if there was a profit in it.  Seen in this light, there's not possible excuse for the pro-lifers to stand with insurance companies.    When we return actual health, and not profit, to the center of care we'll be in a place radically different from where we are now.

---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert

---

by: petr @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:16:40 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Martha Coakley: it's a false choice. (4.00 / 1)

Martha Coakley: it's a false choice.  I can see very clearly where she would think that and it comports with her actions and previous statements without hindrance or contradiction of any kind.

Only if she ignores the position she took November 9, where she declared she would have voted against the bill in the house becuase of the Stupak amendment.  

If it's a false choice, its a false choice she chose to make in order to distinguish her priorities with regard to abortion services and health care reform, and/or to distinguish her candidacy from Mike Capuano's.  

A clear vision perhaps but you offer no substantive language to describe your/her vision or the logic that supports it. A lot of words certainly but no specifics on what you see so clearly.


www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:49:38 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Cap's response, not so good. (6.00 / 1)

Why attack KB Toys, just slam him on Health Care Reform.  It's like he's trying to run away from the health care topic.  Just slam the buffoon back on health care and it's done.

Listening to Charlie Baker talk about fiscal responsibility is like getting lectured on abstinence from Paris Hilton - Tim Murray

---

by: johnk @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:55:48 AM CST

I agree (0.00 / 0)

Debate the actual topic, not the populist argument on another topic.  What Cap wanted to argue is that Pags may be good at making money but at a great cost to others. And a person who would make those choices in business doesn't have the character, the ethical bearing to be a Senator.  

www.bit.ly/7Wousr - "Must include a public option"
www.bit.ly/7yaoMv - Coakley shifts, backs abortion curb
www.bit.ly/5f8CVb - John Kerry reporting for duty!
www.bit.ly/6rJnZU - Questions for Martha Coakley on Civil Rights  

---

by: NeilSagan @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:03:45 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I read the article today (6.00 / 1)

and I seem to remember Pagliuca being quoted in regards to KB toys. Quick search and it appears as though Viser might be incomplete with the facts.  AP Reporter Glen Johnson, printed in the Globe:

In another deal, Bain Capital joined with management employees in 2000 to take over KB Toys, a leading mall-based toy retailer that employed about 450 alone at its headquarters in Pittsfield. Reports indicate Bain invested only $18 million cash of the $305 million purchase price.

Two years later, KB executed a so-called recapitalization plan in which it took on $66 million in additional debt while using its free cash to pay $85 million to Bain and $36 million to senior managers who approved the deal. As with Ampad, Pagliuca said he again received a sum proportional to his investment.

In January 2004, KB filed for bankruptcy. KB Toys has since gone through a second bankruptcy and complete liquidation.

"I don't feel good about it, but the way this works, these deals have risks," Pagliuca told AP. "For the really successful ones, you have unsuccessful ones."

Maybe he wasn't on the board, but it sounds to me like he profited from Bain's dealings at KB toys, a Pittsfield company that Bain ran into the ground. Pagliuca = Layoffs.

---

by: kaj314 @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:04:49 AM CST

David maybe not so oops after all....post update in order? (0.00 / 0)

From you quote:

I'm certainly not going to take any lectures from someone who ... made a fortune in part by gutting KB Toys

AP Story quote:

Reports indicate Bain invested only $18 million cash of the $305 million purchase price.

Two years later, KB executed a so-called recapitalization plan in which it took on $66 million in additional debt while using its free cash to pay $85 million to Bain and $36 million to senior managers who approved the deal. As with Ampad, Pagliuca said he again received a sum proportional to his investment.

By his own admission, it sure sounds like he made money gutting KB Toys.

Listening to Charlie Baker talk about fiscal responsibility is like getting lectured on abstinence from Paris Hilton - Tim Murray

---

by: johnk @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:32:33 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Dare I say it, the Herald actually has a factual even handed article on this ... (0.00 / 0)

Seems as the Globe likes to skew their stories a bit towards a certain candidate?
Herald.

Listening to Charlie Baker talk about fiscal responsibility is like getting lectured on abstinence from Paris Hilton - Tim Murray

---

by: johnk @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:47:09 AM CST

[ Parent ]

BMG Post (0.00 / 0)

last week

Listening to Charlie Baker talk about fiscal responsibility is like getting lectured on abstinence from Paris Hilton - Tim Murray

---

by: johnk @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:52:34 AM CST

[ Parent ]

funny (0.00 / 0)

When I was fact checking I ran into the Herald article first and I said to myself:

Please don't make me quote a Herald article for a fact check.

But it does appear as though the Herald and an AP reporter are being more fair and balanced then Viser or the political editors at the Boston Globe. It is clear that Pagliuca profited from the gutting of a Massachusetts based company.

I also have a hard time believing that throughout all of the buyouts and companies Bain has taken over their isn't one example of a company with thousands of employees that benefits (Health Care?) were either cut or limited based on profits and losses. Who is doing research these days?

I also agree, the post should be updated.  

---

by: kaj314 @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:58:14 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Just a question (6.00 / 1)

Does anyone on this board have progressive friends who are supporting, or considering supporting Pagliuca?

My friends seem to be evenly split between Coakley and Capuano, with a few supporting Khazei.  I get the general sense that's how the posters on this board break down, too.

I just don't think he is doing as well as the polls may indicate among the serious, liberal voters who will be voting on Dec. 8.    

---

by: DoubleMan @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:07:43 AM CST

1/3, 1/3, 1/3, 0 (0.00 / 0)

Coakley 1/3
Capuano 1/3
Khazei 1/3
Pagliuca 0

And, I hate to say it, but it breaks down like this, in order of decision making:
1. Progressive, realpolitik friends: Caps
2. Progressive or cynical or optimistic change-rs: Khaz
3. Women, particularly those over 40, law-and-order Dems: Coaks

Of all the folks I'm active with in my Town, it can almost always be broken down that way, in that order.  I don't know a single person who's ever handed out lit, worked on a campaign, been active in local politics, or otherwise is "political" who's going to vote for Pags.  Not one.

---

by: stomv @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:33:44 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Khaz has the optimists and the cynics? (6.00 / 1)

Wow...quite the campaign.

I know a fair number of people who are still undecided, and generally have a sense of politics.

~~~~
Believe it or not, I have even more to say...

---

by: sabutai @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 11:02:11 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Speaking of being "a bit loose with the facts" (6.00 / 1)

Since Matt Visor's piece doesn't offer the full text of either of Mike Capuano's "two written statements", we have no way of determining the accuracy of Mr. Visor's charge.

Did Mike Capuano claim that Mr. Pagliuca was a Bain director "involved in the KB buyout", or that Mr. Pagliuca served on KB's board of directors? We can't know without seeing the written statements that Mr. Visor challenges.

What is published is Mike Capuano's statement that part of Steve Pagliuca's fortune came from gutting KB Toys. Mr. Pagliuca certainly was a director at Bain -- and not just a director, but a Managing Director, at least according to Forbes.

As a Managing Director of the private equity firm that did do the KB Toys buyout, it's a bit ingenious to claim that Mr. Pagliuca "wasn't involved" -- being "involved" is pretty much what the "Managing" part of the "Managing Director" title is intended to convey. He most certainly was a Managing Director of Bain, and he most certainly did profit from the deal.

Was Mr. Pagliuca aware of the deal? Did he take any steps to block or slow down the buyout? Did he, as Managing Director, make any effort to avoid Bain's gutting of the company? Or did he -- more likely -- wash his hands of the blood and enjoy the resulting compensation?

It appears to me that a fair number of people are being a "bit loose with the facts", and I see no evidence that Mike Capuano is among them.

"If the Republicans will stop lying about the Democrats, the Democrats will stop telling the truth about the Republicans" -- Adlai Stevenson

---

by: BrooklineTom @ Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:21:10 AM CST