The Times Argus has this preview of the coming Democratic primary for House of Representatives. 

Hooper eyes House race
She's expected to battle Anderson for position
May 22, 2008

By Daniel Barlow Vermont Press Bureau

MONTPELIER – There will be at least three Democrats running in this year's primary for Montpelier's two House seats.

Incumbents Rep. Warren Kitzmiller and Rep. Jon Anderson, who was appointed to fill the remainder of a term last year, face a challenge from Montpelier Mayor Mary Hooper for the city's two at-large district seats for the Vermont House.

What the story in the Times Argus fails to add is that Anderson is considered potentially vulnerable not only because of Hooper's popularity as mayor, a position to which she has won reelection without opposition, but also because in his first important vote after being appointed to the seat by Governor Douglas, Anderson voted to sustain Douglas's veto of the FY 2007 Budget Adjustment Act.

Even with the expected absence of any Republican candidate for the seat, this shapes up to be an interesting election season in Montpelier. 

Cross posted from Rational Resistance:

As a delegate to our state convention, pledged to support Obama, I’ve been getting a lot of emails from other Obama delegates who want to be delegates to the national convention. I would say it’s way more than I got in 2004. Today was a new one, however. I got my first true spam in the guise of an Obama mailing.

Here’s part of the text:

Email-Subject:   Where to find stronger  general election weapon for Obama of Democratic Party?  The latest evidence shows that Bush was the   killer of  the crisis of  second mortgage loan  true …how Bush trade out the power of control exchange rate beg for Communism China for betray benefits of American & Japanese…behind letter to Obama of Prospective President of USA!

As the office of Obama general election do not have either fax number or email address, please transmit to Obama urgent!

Zhen-man Lin

2008.05.21

The Email records for Republic-party are stated as below

:

It goes on, with the kind of illiterate text you often see in Nigeria scam messages, and links that you wouldn’t want to take the chance of clicking on.

It’s a brave new world, eh?

The State Democratic Convention is coming up this Saturday, and many GMD writers and readers will be there, either voting for delegates to the Democratic National Convention or running to be a delegate. I've had a couple of people contact me to talk about what they should be looking for, what criteria should be applied to this choice.

 My first observation is obvious: there are way more people who would be good choices than there are openings. We are voting for six Obama delegates and four Clinton delegates, out of a couple of hundred candidates. We have State Senators and Representatives; current and former elected officials; longtime Party activists and fresh-faced newcomers. I go down the list and I have a hard time picking out people who don't deserve to go.

My second observation is that I'm not actually an expert on this question. I have some ideas, but I've only been to one state convention, so I've only had to make this choice once before. So your opinion is just as valid as mine. I encourage other people to weigh in with your own ideas of what goes through your mind as you make your choices.

So here are some of my ideas: 

1. Have they earned it? There are some people who were there from the very beginning, who have worked hard for their candidate, maybe even before that candidate had declared. They've organized, raised money, talked, written, and traveled for their candidate. And all not for personal gain, but because they think that their favored candidate, whether Obama or Clinton, is the person that is most likely to make a positive difference for the country. I feel that that kind of work and commitment are worthy of recognition. In the Obama list I put Philip Baruth, Neil Jensen, and Mary Sullivan in this category, and Madeleine Kunin (and undoubtedly others) in the Clinton list.

2. What will they do for the campaign? As I look down the lists I see the names of some phenomenal organizers. These are people who get things done every time; they make the Party work, and they win campaigns. A vote for them is a vote for an aggressive, organized campaign. Obama candidate Carolyn Dwyer, who has managed two winning campaigns for Pat Leahy and one for Peter Welch, and Clinton candidate Linda Weiss, who until recently was the Party's field director and is an all-around great organizer fit in this category.

3. Who represents Vermont best? We know, or will soon know, who the nominee will be, but there are other questions to be decided at the convention. Who knows parliamentary procedure? Who is going to be an articulate and eloquent speaker for our interests? Who truly represents Vermont and Vermont values?

4. What does the choice mean for the future of the party? I feel that I'm often in a Party meeting and I'm one of the youngest people there. And in case you're wondering, I'm not that young. Our Party is full of smart, energetic, young people, and they are going to be the future. Some of the candidates for national delegate have already distinguished themselves, and others are showing promise, or may have become newly energized by this year's campaigns. When we vote for these candidates we are building the Party for the 21st Century, and there are some very attractive candidates who fill these qualifications.

As you might guess, I haven't decided who is getting all of my votes. I'm still looking forward to Saturday, and to hearing what the candidates and their supporters have to say. Meanwhile, since I'm still making up my mind, I'd like to hear what you're looking for in a national convention delegate.

You should read this long piece in today's Times Argus about the child-rape conspiracy in Vermont's Catholic Church.

The story documents the long history of child rape by Edward Paquette, in Massachusetts, Indiana, and finally Vermont, and the efforts of the Vermont hierarchy to cover up his crimes by reassigning him from parish to parish. The article establishes that Paquette became a priest in 1957 and had already had two transfers by 1963 for molesting young boys. He moved from Massachusetts to Indiana after he was arrested in Fall River, only to continue his predation of young boys there.

He finally landed in Vermont after authorities in two other states wouldn't hire him once they knew of his history, but Vermont didn't seem to care: two years in a church in Rutland until he got caught, two more in Montpelier before the same thing happened, then another transfer, to Burlington this time, before he was finally fired. In every case, the Vermont bishop expressed concern not for the victims, but for the publicity and how bad the church would look if the story got out. Here's what Marshall's letter said when he decided to fire him:

In any event, the situation had become so explosive that I had no other recourse but to ask Father Paquette to leave the parish immediately.”

 There are a number of things that this history makes clear. First, the church knew what this guy was doing, they did nothing to protect the children, and they kept moving him around rather than deal with the problem. Second, all of these facts apply not just to the recently completed trial, but to all the coming trials relating to Paquette, which means that the bad times for the Vermont diocese are not over. And third, the Vermont diocese still has not demonstrated that they are more concerned about the victims than about their own finances.

Oh yes, and they still have a school named after Marshall. The school's web page includes a list of their core values. Number One on the list: Integrity.

Maybe taking Marshall's name off the school would be a first step to showing that they mean it. 

From today's Times Argus:

BRATTLEBORO — A former Brattleboro man who said police violated his civil rights when officers knocked down his door, pulled him out of his hot tub and shocked him with Taser weapons has settled his suit against the town for $37,500.

When you read the story, the facts are shockingly bad for the government. Although they suspected the plaintiff of drunk driving, he made it into his house, so they broke into his house, dragged him out of his hot tub, shocked him, and then the case wasn't prosecuted because of how bad the police were going to look.

Is there anyone on the Brattleboro scene that will force the police to act lawfully? 

News from today's Times Argus:

 BARRE – Tess Taylor wants to be the next Harry Monti.

Taylor, who has been active in local politics since arriving in Barre in 2001, said serving in Vermont's citizen Legislature is a personal dream that was accelerated by Monti's recent retirement.

I think this is great news. Whether we're able to dump Douglas in November or not, we need a strong Democratic majority in the State House. This means not only electing new Dems, but also holding onto the seats we already have. By announcing this early, Tess is getting a head start on a win to hold onto this seat. 

Some of us around here, especially JD and me, have become regular readers of Pharyngula, a science and skeptic web page created and written by PZ Myers, a biology professor in Minnesota.

Today, PZ is covering the child rape case against the Vermont Catholic church, in which a jury just awarded the victim of the church's malfeasance almost $9,000,000.

It's a harsh penalty, but warranted by the way the church turned a blind eye to outrageously criminal behavior. I'd like to say that they'll learn a lesson from it, but the comments from Catholic officials suggest that no, they won't.

PZ's observation, which I totally agree with, is that the church still doesn't get it, as Archbishop Matano is still focusing on the tragic consequences of the monetary loss on Vermont Catholics, instead of looking at the harm that the church knowingly visited on young, vulnerable children.

Come to think of it, that's what punitive damages are for: we might not make them see things the right way, but at least we can teach them that they'd better do the right thing or it will cost them.

And with these guys, maybe that's the best we can hope for. 

Thanks to Morgan Brown for tipping us to this story. 

It feels as though we're catching our collective breath after the end of the legislative session. You can undoubtedly expect, from me and probably other FP'ers, our take on some of the highlights and lowlights of this session.

For now, though, a quick update on the long-runing taser story. This week, the Valley News has two stories on the taser beat that are worth looking at.

So you're a police officer, sworn to protect and serve. You drive up to the scene where a citizen has called for medical assistance and you find him lying under his truck, apparently having a seizure.

What do you do:

    (a) Ask medical personnel at the scene how you should help.

    (b) Find the patient's seizure medication and help him swallow it.

    (c) Drag him out from under the truck, order him to put his hands behind his back, and then give him a blast with the ol' Taser.

If you chose (c), you might have what it takes to be a Vermont State Trooper. Or at least, to be sued in federal court. 

Come to think of it, you might also consider a job with your local police. Again according to the Valley News, at least six local police departments have armed themselves with Taser brand electronic control devices, sold by Arizona-based Taser International Inc.

Here's a tip of the GMD hat to Mark Davis and the Valley News for covering this important story. Keep up the good work!

Sometimes a bad idea just keeps coming back.

For instance, early in the session the Department of Corrections tried to get the right to charge prisoners a $5.00 copay to go to the doctor.

That's right: we've got you locked up, we control where you go, who you see, what you do, and if you're unlucky enough to get sick you go to our doctor, and we're charging you for it. 

This was early times, and by January 17 the Ways & Means Committee voted to ditch the copay, but the idea got stuck back in the fee bill earlier this week.

Late this afternoon we confirmed that the copay is out, and will not be resurfacing.

Anyone who is concerned about health care, decent treatment of prisoners, or logical public policy should thank Rep. Carolyn Branagan (R, Georgia) for her help in squelching this bad idea once again.

Lawmakers give broad support to bill that would allow growing hemp

May 2, 2008

By Peter Hirschfeld Vermont Press Bureau

<!– PHOTOS AND EXTRAS –><!– END EXTRAS –> MONTPELIER – The calls came into the Statehouse at a furious pace Thursday morning, inundating the Senate Judiciary pane's voicemail with ardent support for a bill stuck in committee.

“I had 73 calls this morning,” said Sen. Dick Sears, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.