Tag Archives: Elizabeth Warren

McGovern, Warren, more than 130 Members of Congress Urge Secretary DeVos to Reinstate Student Loan Protections

McGovern Profile Photo 1ab(1)
Congressman Jim McGovern


Lawmakers urge Secretary DeVos to Reverse her Decision to Scrap Obama-Era Student Loan Servicing Reforms

On April 4, DeVos Rescinded Policy Memos that Included Consumer Protections for Borrowers

“Your decision to rescind these memos … will put millions of borrowers and taxpayers at risk.”

Today Congressman Jim McGovern joined Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and a group of more than more than 130 Members of Congress in sending a letter today to Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos urging her to reverse a decision to rescind Obama-era memos on student loan servicing reforms.

The reforms had included new consumer protections for borrowers and improvements to the quality of federal loan servicing. In addition to Senator Warren, the letter was led by Reps. Bobby Scott (D-VA) and Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR), and Senator Patty Murray (D-WA).

“Your decision to rescind these memos — including the guidance making servicers’ past performance and record of compliance with the law the most important non-cost factor in the evaluation — will put millions of borrowers and taxpayers at risk,” wrote McGovern and more than 130 Members of Congress. “Without accounting for past performance, federal contracts will be open to bidders that have previously violated state or federal consumer protection laws, mistreated members of our military, and consistently ignored the needs of their borrowers.”

On April 11, 2017, the U.S. Department of Education announced Secretary DeVos was rescinding three critical policy memos intended to reform the student loan servicing process meant to better assist borrowers in managing their loans, hold servicers accountable, and set financial incentives that will best support the interest of students.

The memos were issued by the Obama Administration following a request from Senate Democrats for common-sense improvements to the student loan servicing process. House Democrats also requested the Department continue to improve the student loan collection and servicing processes for struggling borrowers. After DeVos’ latest action, it is unclear how the Department intends to move forward with the current contracts for student loan servicing which are worth more than $840 million per year.

“With one in four student loan borrowers in default or delinquent on their federal student loans, it is the responsibility of the Department to address the student debt crisis and ensure that all service providers in the student loan program are doing everything they can to put students and families first ahead of the profits of student loan companies,” McGovern and his fellow lawmakers wrote.

Joining McGovern and Warren from the Massachusetts delegation on the letter were Senator Ed Markey and Representatives Michael E. Capuano, Katherine Clark, William R. Keating, Stephen F. Lynch, Seth Moulton, and Niki Tsongas.

The letter was signed by a total of 111 House Democrats. In addition to Representatives Scott and Bonamici, the letter was signed by Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), Jim Langevin (D-RI), Theodore E. Deutch (D-FL), John Sarbanes (D-MD), Eliot L. Engel (D-NY), Danny K. Davis (D-IL), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Donald M. Payne, Jr. (D-NJ), Alma S. Adams (D-NC), Marcia L. Fudge (D-OH), Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ), Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL), Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), Ron Kind (D-WI), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Jackie Speier (D-CA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), John Garamendi (D-CA), Daniel W. Lipinski (D-IL), Jared Polis (D-CO), Derek Kilmer (D-WA), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), Dwight Evans (D-PA), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Gwen S. Moore (D-WI), Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Salud Carbajal (D-CA), Frederica Wilson (D-FL), Betty McCollum (D-MN), Gregory W. Meeks (D-NY), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Val Butler Demings (D-FL), Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO), Peter Welch (D-VT), Seth Moulton (D-MA), Doris Matsui (D-CA), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Susan A. Davis (D-CA), Mark Takano (D-CA), Mark Desaulnier (D-CA), Bill Foster (D-IL), Tim Ryan (D-OH), Adam B. Schiff (D-CA), Brian Higgins (D-NY), Eric Swalwell (D-CA), John Yarmuth (D-KY), Donald S. Beyer, Jr. (D-VA), Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY), Suzan Delbene (D-WA), Joe Courtney (D-CT), Juan Vargas (D-CA), Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-MN), Joaquin Castro (D-TX), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Anthony G. Brown (D-MD), Madeleine Z. Bordallo (D-GU), David Scott (D-GA), Katherine Clark (D-MA), John Lewis (D-GA), Bobby L. Rush (D-IL), Nita Lowey (D-NY), Denny Heck (D-WA), Grace F. Napolitano (D-CA), Dina Titus (D-NV), Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ), Brenda L. Lawrence (D-MI), Mike Doyle (D-PA), Kathy Castor (D-FL), Robin L. Kelly (D-IL), Cheri Bustos (D-IL), Kurt Schrader (D-OR), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ), José E. Serrano (D-NY), Judy Chu (D-CA), Peter J. Visclosky (D-IN), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Peter Defazio (D-OR), Rick Larsen (D-WA), Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Colleen Hanabusa (D-HI), A. Donald McEachin (D-VA), Rosa L. Delauro (D-CT), Diana Degette (D-CO), Daniel T. Kildee (D-MI), Al Green (D-TX), Donald Norcross (D-NJ), Ruben J. Kihuen (D-NV), James P. McGovern (D-MA), Gene Green (D-TX), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), William R. Keating (D-MA), Stephen F. Lynch (D-MA), Filemon Vela (D-TX), Mike Thompson (D-CA), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Rick Nolan (D-MN), John K. Delaney (D-MD), G. K. Butterfield (D-NC), Jerry McNerney (D-CA), Niki Tsongas (D-MA), Sean Patrick Maloney (D-NY), Michael E. Capuano (D-MA), André Carson (D-IN), Kathleen M. Rice (D-NY), and Ruben Gallego (D-AZ)

The letter was signed by a total of 25 Senators. In addition to Senators Murray and Warren, the letter was signed by Durbin (D-IL), Brown (D-OH), Leahy (D-VT), Sanders (I-VT), Harris (D-CA), Feinstein (D-CA), Baldwin (D-WI), Franken (D-MN), Murphy (D-CT), Blumenthal (D-CT), Reed (D-RI), Whitehouse (D-RI), Wyden (D-OR), Merkley (D-OR), Markey (D-MA), Cortez Masto (D-NV), Udall (D-NM), Hirono (D-HI), Menendez (D-NJ), Booker (D-NJ), Schatz (D-HI), Kaine (D-VA), and Cantwell (D-WA).

The text of the letter is below:

April 26, 2017

The Honorable Betsy DeVos
Secretary of Education
U.S. Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20202

Dear Secretary DeVos,

We are very concerned by your April 11th decision to rescind policy directives that would have protected student loan borrowers. This sudden and unwarranted action raises significant questions about how the U.S. Department of Education (“Department”) plans to proceed with the procurement of new federal student loan servicing contracts (“recompete”) and whether you will manage federal loan servicing activities in a manner that holds federal student loan servicers more accountable, helps millions of borrowers avoid the terrible consequences of default and delinquency, and ultimately protects the rights of students and families.

More than 42 million Americans collectively owe nearly $1.3 trillion dollars in federal student loan debt, and student loan servicers act as these borrowers’ primary point of contact for managing their loans. Whether borrowers are struggling to repay their loans, seeking actionable information about how to lower their payments, or just need help finding the repayment or forgiveness plan that best meets their needs, student loan servicers play a significant role in borrowers’ daily lives and act as official representatives of the federal government.

After years of pervasive and widespread failures in student loan servicing, many borrowers are simply fed up with delays, errors, and mismanagement of their loans. Serious issues with servicing operations and oversight have been repeatedly identified by an avalanche of complaints from borrowers, countless investigations of and settlements with servicers for alleged violations of consumer protection laws, and numerous reports from the Government Accountability Office and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

Given the strong consensus on the policies needed to dramatically improve customer service for federal student loan borrowers, the Department took steps to overhaul student loan servicing. Under the previous Administration, the Department issued several memos for the recompete to establish rules to prevent predatory, abusive, and unfair behavior by servicers, and to write new consumer rights and protections into the next round of servicing contracts. Your decision to rescind these memos — including the guidance making servicers’ past performance and record of compliance with the law the most important non-cost factor in the evaluation — will put millions of borrowers and taxpayers at risk. Without accounting for past performance, federal contracts will be open to bidders that have previously violated state or federal consumer protection laws, mistreated members of our military, and consistently ignored the needs of their borrowers.

Most notably, your decision to rescind uniform servicing standards—for activities such as the way loan payments are applied, how accounts are transferred between servicers, and the loan forgiveness and repayment information that must be provided to borrowers—signals an unwillingness to support and safeguard the best interest of borrowers. These consumer protections were carefully crafted based upon President Obama’s Memorandum on the Student Aid Bill of Rights and the joint servicing principles that the Department wrote in consultation with the Treasury Department and the CFPB to reform and simplify student loan servicing, improve borrower outcomes, and reduce student loan defaults. The standards also would have helped borrowers receive consistent, adequate, and timely communications from servicers and allowed for much greater transparency on the performance of the entire the federal student loan program.

Contrary to the rationale you provided for withdrawing these policies, which was “to negate any impediment, ambiguity or inconsistency,” the policy directives were quite specific, unambiguous, and consistent with previously-established principles for student loan servicing reform and repeated bipartisan requests from Members of Congress to reform student loan servicing in a manner that puts the interests of students and families first.

During your confirmation process, you stated that the Department “should do everything possible to ensure that our students are getting excellent servicing of their student loans,” and your April 11th memo committed to ensuring “that borrowers are being treated fairly and equitably.” Despite these commitments, you have not presented a strategy for ensuring borrowers are being treated fairly and equitably by servicers and you have not provided a plan for how you intend to move forward with this highly consequential recompete process.

With one in four student loan borrowers in default or delinquent on their federal student loans, it is the responsibility of the Department to address the student debt crisis and ensure that all service providers in the student loan program are doing everything they can to put students and families first ahead of the profits of student loan companies. We ask that you immediately reverse your decision and reinstate the previous memos and directives to Federal Student Aid. Finally, we request that the Department quickly clarify how the initial decision to rescind the memos was made and whether the current recompete will result in the development of a single servicing platform for borrowers, greater transparency and accountability from servicers, and high-quality student loan servicing that conforms to the joint servicing principles by the Departments of Education, Treasury, and the CFPB.

What I learned at the state Democratic conference …

By Edith Morgan

The Democratic Issues Conference was held Saturday, in Springfield, on September 19, on a mild but dry and eventually beautiful day.

Massachusetts Democrats met at the MassMutual Center in downtown Springfield to reaffirm their values, touch bases with members throughout the State, get some training, and hear from one another how things were going everywhere, and to lay plans for the future.
I attended this conference as an elected delegate from Worcester Ward 3 –  a conference that I have attended many times I the past, and which always gives me some interesting insights and renews my knowledge about the Massachusetts Democratic Party.
Of course, on display outside the Center were the usual signholders, touting their candidates, as well as collectors of signatures for various causes,  and distributors of pamphlets about a variety of ideas, from pleas for humane treatment of chickens and other food animals to analyses of the contrast between capitalism and democratic socialism , and the inevitable pleas to end “Citizens United”, with large signs reminding Democrats that..” corporations are not people”, and that” Money is not speech.”
Once inside the spacious Center, we received our credentials, which identified us by name, and also gave us the section were assigned to ..  once the convention began.
In the free time left over before the beginning of the formal part of the day, we visited the exhibit hall where rows upon rows of tables displayed materials and information about all the candidates, the organizations working toward democratic goals, or supporting various candidates, manned tables full of literature, buttons, pencils, as well as fee candies, stickers, and various other mementoes pushing their particular ideas. I have a drawer-full of pins, pencils, stickers, etc.. I have collected over the years, so I went around, and picked up various mementoes and flyers from groups that I support, signed my name onto athose mailing lists whose information I wanted to pursue further, and dropped everything I got into a very sturdy bag which was given to each of us free…
Once were  all assembled in the great hall, and the usual opening ceremonies were completed, there began a series of speakers.  I haven’t space enough to summarize what they all said, but all reiterated in one way or another what Democratic goals and achievements were. (The party platform had been sent to all the delegates by mail several days before, and I had refreshed my memory about the particular during the week.
For me the highlights were the appearance of Senator Elizabeth Warren, who brought us all to our feet, and fired up the assembled thousands for the job ahead.; and the speech by one of my favorite Democrats,  Howard Dean, who outlined his reasons for working in support of Hilary Clinton.  Supporters of Bernie  Sanders and O’Malley also gave impassioned representations on behalf of their candidates.

After the formal speeches and awards were completed, five resolutions were passed unanimously (the texts had been passed out among us earlier. And then we proceeded to the “Breakout sessions”, eleven educational 45-minute presentations designed to give delegates facts, techniques, ideas for better getting their message out to the public. and then we all drove home hopefully better informed and fired up to be ful participants in the democratic process.

Barack Obama’s odyssey continues

Great analysis from The Guardian. – R.T.

By Jonathon Freedland, The Guardian

Barack Obama with his family
Barack Obama, accompanied by his wife Michelle and daughters Sasha and Malia, appears on stage in Chicago, Illinois. Photograph: Jewel Samad/AFP

The improbable journey goes on. What Barack Obama always regarded as the unlikeliest of political odysseys will now be allowed to run its full measure. By a clearer margin than many of his supporters had dared hope, the people of the United States voted to let their 44th president finish what he had started.

As election night brought the familiar, intense focus on this or that county in Ohio or Florida, it was easy to lose sight of the scale of Obama’s achievement. Of course becoming America’s first black president four years ago was an unrepeatable feat, but winning four more years made history, too. Obama is only the fourth Democrat since 1900 to win two full terms in the White House. Only Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt and Bill Clinton have matched his achievement.

And he did it in the hardest of circumstances. The experts long believed that to win re-election with unemployment at or above 8% was to defy political gravity: no one had done it since 1940. Yet that was the jobless number Obama confronted from the day he took office until two months ago. His approval ratings had struggled to break 50%. He had been on the receiving end of a four-year assault from the American right – the alternative universe embodied by Fox News, which tore itself apart on air as pundit Karl Rove refused to accept the cold, hard facts set out by Fox’s own number-crunchers – which sought to “other” the US president, to paint him as Barack Hussein Obama, the Kenyan Marxist Muslim bent on destroying America. Despite all that he won and won convincingly, ahead in the popular vote and taking all but one of the nine key battleground states, with as-yet-undeclared Florida likely to be added to his tally – with no need of recounts and not a hanging chad in sight.

It was a monumental achievement, one the renewed president recognised with a magnificent speech. In Chicago before a crowd both relieved and delighted, he spoke with a force, clarity and determination that had scarcely been glimpsed in the 2012 campaign. The rhetoric was soaring – “for the United States of America the best is yet to come” – and moving but it was also rooted in the concrete. He set out the goals of his second term: “Reducing our deficit. Reforming our tax code. Fixing our immigration system. Freeing ourselves from foreign oil.”

But he also spoke of a danger that had barely featured on the campaign trail, warning of “the destructive power of a warming planet”. For his supporters, including those frustrated by the timidity of much of his first term – and the lethargy of his appearance in the first TV debate – this was the Obama they had been waiting for.

It brought hope flickering back to life inside Democrats who wonder if, having made history, Obama might now defy it, reversing the usual order and achieving more in his second term than in his first. His healthcare reform, which would have been repealed by a President Romney, will now be implemented, which represents a legacy in itself. If he can somehow negotiate the looming fiscal cliff, bringing tax revenues and spending into balance, that too will endear him to posterity. …

To read more, click on the link below ….



Obama’s win matched by advances for progressive Democrats

The longer-term significance of the 2012 election is the growing strength and confidence of the Democratic party’s liberal wing

By Michael Cohen, The Guardian

Elizabeth Warren in Cambridge.
Elizabeth Warren in Cambridge, Massachusetts: one of several new liberal Democratic senators. Photograph: Josh Reynolds/AP

Last night was a great one for the Democratic party. A president re-elected and a Senate majority expanded, even if the House remains in Republican hands.

But beyond the headlines, consider for a moment the underlying dynamics of this win: Democrats have now won the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. Among 18-29-year-old voters, the Democratic advantage actually slipped from four years ago, but Obama still won them by 23% – a huge majority among the next generation of voters. Obama increased the party’s edge with Hispanic voters, winning an extraordinary 71% of their votes. These numbers are replicated obviously among African Americans, but also Asian Americans where the party has a similar near-monopoly. Even as Obama lost white voters by 20 points (which is 8 points worse than 2008), he still won the electoral college handily.

Last night, we saw the emergence of a new Democratic governing majority – one that was hinted at in 2008 – with the potential to serve as the foundation of presidential politics for many years to come. Quite simply, Democrats have once again become the nation’s presidential party.

So what does this mean for actual governing? Here, we need to consider the other big winner from last night: liberals. …

To read more, click on the link below:


Elizabeth Warren at The Broadway in Green Island this afternoon! HOORAY! Tomorrow please vote for Elizabeth Warren, US Senate (MA)

By Rosalie Tirella

Elizabeth Warren

Hooray! Elizabeth Warren, US Senate hopeful, comes to Green Island this afternoon! This daughter of a janitor knows what it’s like to grow up blue collar! Cool to see her in blue collar environs … .

Please VOTE FOR WARREN tomorrow because she has the balls to take on all the big banks and financial institutions that screwed the taxpayers and created the Great Recession. We gave them billions of dollars via the bailout, and they have still not been made accountable! They can pull the same crap – create another Great Recession.


Because when Elizabeth Warren, as the president’s top consumer advocate, came up with the new national laws to protect the little guy and middle class, the Republicans in Congress BLOCKED ALL THE INITIATIVES. Put the kibosh on policies that would have helped most Americans.


Because the Republicans are beholden to all these institutions. Why?  Because these institutions finance their campaigns, give them billions of dollars. The Republicans are bought and paid for by these behemoths.  So of course, they will do their bidding.

Warren is a woman, which makes it tough. Scott Brown, an unimpressive former Franklin County selectman, does not have her brain power, passion and guts. But he is a guy. Instant validation! If you are a grrrl with ideas, you are judged by your smile, your tone of voice, your butt … everything but your brain power and ability to get the job done beautifully.

Massachusetts needs more women in public office. Very tough climate for the gals – even as one as qualified as Elizabeth Warren.

She is for equal pay for equal work (Scott Brown is not), she is pro-choice, she will help nominate Supreme Court Justices who will keep Roe v Wade the law of the land. She is for working families, small biz folks, and the environment.

Brown voted against all of the above.

To learn more about Elizabeth Warren, please visit her website. Click on the link below:





Massachusetts Voters’ Bill of Rights: your voting rights are protected

Print out and take this Massachusetts Voters’ Bill of Rights to the polls Tuesday, Nov. 6. … THIS IS THE LAW. (We have made bold some sentences.) – R. Tirella

Massachusetts Voters’ Bill of Rights

Your voting rights are protected. These rights are guaranteed to qualified registered voters.

You have the right to vote if you are a qualified registered voter.

You have the right to cast your ballot in a manner that ensures privacy. You have the right to vote without any person trying to influence your vote and to vote in a booth that prevents others from watching you mark your ballot.

You have the right to remain in the voting booth for five (5) minutes if there are other voters waiting and for ten (10) minutes if there are no other voters waiting.

You have the right to receive up to two (2) replacement ballots if you make a mistake and spoil your ballot.

You have the right to request assistance when voting from anyone of your choice. If you do not bring someone with you, you have the right to have two (2) poll workers assist you.

You have the right to vote if you are disabled. The polling place must be accessible, and there must be an accessible voting booth.

You have the right to vote if you cannot read or write or cannot read or write English.

You have the right to vote but must show identification if: you are a first-time voter who registered to vote by mail and did not submit identification with the voter registration form; or your name is on the inactive voter list; or your vote is being challenged; or if requested by a poll worker. Acceptable forms of identification are: Massachusetts driver’s license, other printed documentation containing your name and address such as a recent utility bill, rent receipt on landlord’s letterhead, lease, or a copy of a voter registration acknowledgment or receipt.

You have the right to vote by absentee ballot if: you will be absent from your city or town on Election Day; or if you have a physical disability that prevents your voting at the polling place; or if you cannot vote at the polls due to religious belief.

You have the right to cast a provisional ballot if you believe you are a qualified registered voter but a poll worker tells you that you are ineligible to vote. You have the right to follow up any challenge to your right to vote through the complaint process.

You have the right to vote if you are not currently incarcerated for a felony conviction and have registered as a voter after your release.

You have the right to take this Voters’ Bill of Rights or any other papers, including a sample ballot, voter guide or campaign material into the voting booth with you. Please remember to remove all papers when you leave the booth.

You have the right to vote at your polling place any time between 7am and 8pm for state and federal elections – hours may vary for local elections. If you are in line at your polling place when the polls close at 8 pm, you have the right to vote.

You have the right to bring your children into the voting booth with you.

If you feel that your right to vote has been violated in any way, call the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s Elections Division at 1-800-462-VOTE (8683). This call is free within Massachusetts.

Five things you won’t hear Scott Brown say (i.e. the truth) about his tax record

By Jason A. Stephany, MassUniting

At a noon press conference in Randolph on Tuesday, US Senator Scott Brown delivered what his office claimed would be a “major policy speech” on taxes. To the surprise of few in Massachusetts, Brown’s remarks turned out to be nothing more than the stereotypical, failed tax rhetoric of his Republican colleagues in Washington. More telling were the facts Brown failed to mention about his voting record on taxes. Here are five true statements we didn’t hear from the junior senator in Randolph:

1. “I voted to give tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas.”

Scott Brown voted to filibuster the Creating American Jobs & Ending Offshoring Act, a bill would have ended tax breaks for companies that outsource jobs or build plants and offices offshore to replace American facilities. The vote came as thousands of American workers face impending layoffs while training their replacements from China, India, and elsewhere. (US Senate roll call vote #242, 9/28/10)


2. “I gave $24 billion of your tax dollars to Big Oil.”

In the face of drastic budget cuts, Scott Brown voted three times to give more than $24 billion in taxpayer funds to the oil industry over the next decade. The top five Big Oil companies – BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell – are amongst the most profitable corporations in the world, posting $137 billion in profits in 2011 alone. (US Senate roll call votes #187 6/15/10; #72, 5/17/11; #63, 3/29/12)


3. “I’d really like to take more money out of your paycheck.”

Scott Brown voted to filibuster legislation to extend the payroll tax cut for working families – holding low and middle income workers hostage to shield the wealthiest Americans from a small surtax on income over $1 million. In effect, Brown cast a deciding vote to raise taxes on 113 million working families. In Massachusetts, the surtax would have affected just 0.6% of taxpayers with an average income of more than $2 million. (US Senate roll call vote #219, 12/1/11)

4. “I support tax breaks for millionaires…just not middle class or low-income families.”

Three times in 2010 and again in 2012, Scott Brown voted to kill measures that would extend tax cuts for the middle class. Like his vote for payroll tax hikes, Brown used the same rationale to justify his votes to raise taxes on middle and low-income families: those making $250,000 to $1 million or more each year shouldn’t have to pay their fair share like the rest of his Massachusetts constituents. (US Senate roll call votes #258 & #259, 12/4/10; #275, 12/15/10; #184, 7/25/12)


5. “I filibustered tax credits and loans that help small businesses grow and create jobs.”

Despite his claims of supporting job creators, Scott Brown repeatedly filibustered and opposed major legislation that helps small businesses grown and create jobs. Brown twice voted to filibuster the Small Business Jobs & Credit Act – a bill that connected growing small businesses to credit through community banks and offered significant tax credits to small firms that create American jobs. When his filibuster failed, Brown voted again to kill the legislation. The Massachusetts Bankers Association stated that failure to act on the bill “would be a missed opportunity that our struggling economy cannot afford.” (US Senate roll call votes #218 & #221, 7/29/10; #237, 9/14/10)


Per usual, Senator Brown took no questions from constituents or reporters, ducking out a back door immediately following his speech. But anyone who takes issue with Brown’s out-of-step voting record on taxes – or any other issue, for that matter – may contact his office at (617) 565-3170.

Konnie, Konnie, Konnie …

By Rosalie Tirella

We know Elizabeth Warren is in the midst of a Native American heritage poop-storm, but she IS the better candidate! Konnie, please reconsider! Support Liz and not US Senate incumbent Scott “Pretty-Boy” Brown!


Worcester City Councilor Konstantina Lukes has come out and endorsed Scott Brown for US Senate. We love Konnie for her independence and no-bull attitude, but she has got to know that Brown is nothing more than a (hot) empty vessel. Elizabeth Warren is the problem solver and she is so much brighter than Pretty-Boy Brown! MA needs Warren! So does America! The Dems in DC need that Democratic vote to pass legislation.

I mean … look at our senator. Sexually abused (came out with that bit of news when his book came out; of course, he broke his story on 60 Minutes), standing for nothing, voting against extending unemployment benefits over and over again. This guy will say and do anything to stay in the limelight.

Konnie, Konnie, Konnie …

(And yes! Konnie was in our SWIMSUIT ISSUE, but she wasn’t naked, naked, naked!! Is there some weird connection?)

Some thoughts …

By Rosalie Tirella

… on Worcester City Clerk David Rushford

Here’s hoping our state legislators can change the rules, if the Worcester City Council doesn’t have the cajones to take away City Clerk David Rushford’s marrying fees – thousands of dollars on top of his $130,000+ city clerk salary. (see posts below). Recently, the Globe reported that a state legislator is hoping to make it a state-wide law: CITY CLERKS IN MASS TOWNS AND CITIES CAN’T KEEP THE FEES THEY GET EVERY TIME THEY “PERFORM” A WEDDING.


The City of Boston is also on board – trying to do what Worcester City Councilors Phil Palmeiri and Konnie Lukes are hoping to do – ending this shameless municipal double-dipping ASAP.

Rushford is an utter prima donna – the king of a fiefdom that BELONGS TO THE TAXPAYERS! Rude, curt, loud-mouthed, vindictive. The folks who work for him know his temper-tantrum-prone personality.

But let’s forget Rushford’s bag-of-nails  personality – let’s just put an end to the fleecing of the taxpayers – in Worcester and Mass.

2. Mitt Romney is a lying profiteer. No more. No less. God help this country if he becomes president. The guy will say anything to get elected, twisting the truth so it resembles a pretzel and … NOT THE TRUTH.

Interesting article in the New York Times, re: how the savvy Romney has TOTALLY DISTORTED President Obama’s policies and accomplishments. This guy is a dangerous liar! This guy has no moral code. Remember last presidential cycle? Remember how Romney was disliked by ALL the other presidential candidates? This is why: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/23/opinion/krugman-the-post-truth-campaign.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

3. “Senator” Scott Brown. Imagine! If a woman politician whined to reporters that her colleagues in Washington DC were not being nice to her, playing politics with her – just the way they have been playing them with each other since this country was founded – people would laugh! They would label her a big cry baby and tell her a la President Harry Truman to get out of the kitchen if she can’t stand the heat! Instead, the pointless, Wall Street-lovin’ Brown gets a sympathetic story on why being a US Senator is hell on earth! Why a wonderful guy such as he is being roughed up by his fellow pols.

Scott is just as savvy as Romney and probably a bigger and better bull shit artist. He has no respect for the working guy/gal; he is weird, too. Coming out about being sexually molested just – let’s be honest – to get national press and sell his book.  Posing nude for a magazine – after being molested as a kid!Offering up his daughters to guys during his speech on election night!

Therapy is what Brown needs. Elizabeth Warren is what Massachusetts needs! Please check out http://elizabethwarren.com/

Warren for U.S. Senate!!