I see that Mr. Jeremy Dodge has got himself a lawyer. Or, should I say, the lawyer has gotten himself a Jeremy Dodge?

Yes, Dodge has hired Brady Toensing, second-generation ideological ambulance chaser, to represent him in his Real Estate Deal 2.0 with Governor Shumlin. And Toensing, a purely political attorney by trade, has subcontracted the actual real estate portion of the work to one Joy Karnes Limoge of Williston.

Her specialty is property law, but her passion is Republican politics. As Peter Hirschfeld reports (behind the Mitchell Family Paywall), Limoge was near the top of Randy Brock’s disastrous gubernatorial campaign:

Limoge was a key supporter of Brock, who in his concession speech last year included her name first on the short list of people to whom he offered special thanks for their roles in his campaign.

Limoge’s political proclivities are providential, considering that Master Toensing was last seen in these parts repping for Brian Dubie’s failed 2010 gubernatorial bid. Nice package: top figures from both of Shumlin’s rivals coming together on a case that could cause no end of headaches for the governor.

And WCAX, ever insightful, suspects the worst. Its story is headlined “Is Governor’s Controversial Land Deal Turning Political?”

Coming up after the break: “Does Bear Shit In Woods?” Plus, Dan Dowling with your forecast.

As well-trained advocates, Limoge and Toensing manage to keep a straight face while insisting that their motives are pure as the driven snow. Toensing calls it an “opportunity to assist a fellow Vermonter.” (Maybe Legal Aid can put him on speed dial, since he’s so darn charitable.) And Limoge, speaking with Hirschfeld, went straight for the tear ducts:

“Poor Jerry Dodge,” Limoge said. “He’s a hardworking, poor Vermonter, and he’s coming up against one of the most powerful men in the state with the means to hire one of the best lawyers in the state. He needs legal representation to get himself through this.”

Pardon me, my Weaselometer just hit Defcon One.

After the jump: a stroll through our Toensing Family Memory Book.

Brady Toensing is the junior partner in the DC law firm diGenova and Toensing, water-carriers for conservative causes since the Reagan years. The senior Toensing is Brady’s mother Victoria, a constant presence on shouty cable-news shows. The other partner is Joe diGenova, Victoria’s second husband, who is also willing to yell Republican talking points whenever a camera is pointed in his direction.  

You’ll find a nice summary of family activities on a GMD diary posted way back in 2006, when Master Brady was distinguishing himself as an attack dog for Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie’s re-election campaign against Democrat Matt Dunne. Some guy named “odum” did some digging in the diGenova/Toensing walk-in skeleton closet; follow the link for details, but suffice it to say that Victoria Toensing and Joe diGenova spent the 1990s as part of the anti-Clinton Republican attack machine, and the 2000s as leading Bush Administration apologists on cable news. Most recently, Ma ‘n Pa have been trying to mountainize the Benghazi molehill on Fox News.

The allegedly nice-guy Brian Dubie apparently looooves Brady Toensing, having hired him for at least two campaign stints plus a post-election turn repping Dubie in Bill Sorrell’s campaign-finance lawsuit.

I do hope that Toensing and Limoge spare a scruple or two for Jeremy Dodge, whose best interests are probably served by a quick settlement with Shumlin. Wouldn’t it be a shame if his lawyers did their best to drag the case on and on, spending more time on press releases than on legal briefs, simply to serve their own political interests?

Yeah, that’d be a shame.

(I am, however, looking forward to the gubernatorial deposition. Always a good optic for a politician.)

And, you know, this is exactly what Governor Shumlin left himself open for — the political exploitation of an easily avoidable situation. He knew the original Dodge deal was iffy*, and if he has any political instincts whatsoever he had to know it could blow up on him.

*Evidence? The absence of a lawyer on Dodge’s side; Dodge’s obvious lack of education and legal smarts; and the fact that, although Shumlin and Dodge agreed to the sale in late September, it wasn’t formally registered until November 7 — the day after Election Day. Sorry, I can’t believe that was a coincidence.

Not that it’s likely to make much difference in his near-term electoral prospects. But the entry of Toensing the Younger is one more sign that the Governor (and by extension the Democrats) will pay a price for his acquisitional own goal.  

And another wave of layoffs hits IBM’s domestic operations. And, again, IBM is being completely tight-lipped about the cutbacks. All we know is that dozens of Vermonters (at least) have lost their jobs at Essex Junction. Alliance@IBM, a union group, estimates this week’s layoffs at over 1600 nationwide, and it expects the total to go higher.

This is said to be part of a global reorganization and/or a response to a disappointing earnings report. But really, it’s one more step in IBM’s steady abandonment of America. According to Alliance@IBM, the corporation employed more than 134,000 people in the US in 2005; by the end of 2012, that number had fallen to 91,000. And obviously, it’s still trending downward. (IBM won’t give any layoff or employment figures nationally or for any individual location for what it calls “competitive reasons,” but you know what the truth is: they’re trying like hell to avoid bad publicity.

So, nobody outside of IBM knows how many people are employed at Essex Junction, and nobody outside of IBM knows how many are losing their jobs this week. Is this what it means to be a good corporate citizen? In his written response, Governor Shumlin seems to be discreetly backing away from Our Valued Corporate Partner:

Vermont’s partnership with IBM is very important, but our state is not immune to the forces that are driving this decision in the larger organization.

In other words, “Don’t put your eggs in a Big Blue basket.” And “Don’t blame me if IBM walks away.”

IBM spokesflack Jeff Couture was shoveling the rhetorical manure as fast as he could:

Change is constant in the technology industry, and transformation is an essential feature of our business model. Consequently, some level of workforce remix is a constant requirement for our business.

Nice and neat. Antiseptic, almost. Just a simple “workforce remix.”

After the jump: the human dimension.

And now, let us sashay over to the Alliance@IBM website and witness the human cost of these corporate buzzwords. (All these were posted Tuesday or Wednesday by laid-off IBM workers in Vermont.)

RA’d this am @ BTV. 34 years…. Mixed emotions – relief, humiliation, anger…wanted to leave on my own terms but I guess I’ll take their blood money. Company is F’d any way. … Re-evaluating my IBM stock holdings. Good luck and good riddance! –Anonymous

I was RA’d today from STG Burlington with 31 years of service. –Vermonter

Today, IBM Essex Junction, VT. 93 layoff from Engineering department.. I am lucky one of them.. Bye Bye.. IBM.. Hope my manager will be in 3rd Qtrs.. lay off .. –Tintin

Let go today after 26 years of service. 80% of my dept gone, as well as 80% of sister dept. These cuts were in Essex Junction, Fishkill, and Austin. –Anonymous

Invited to leave this morning. 28 yrs engineer at IBM. And now for something completely different… –anonBTV

Hearing from a friend who works in the Essex Jct. VT, plant that dozens of engineers have been told they no longer have jobs. –Anon-Essex VT

STG Vermont affected today. Standard 30 day notice, 1 week pay per 6 months up to 6 months pay. –Hit Today

Adding insult to injury, the laid-off workers won’t get any pension accrual for their last six months on the job. That’s because IBM now pays into its pension once per year (on December 31, natch) rather than monthly. Slick.

Earl Mongeon summed it up best, in remarks to VTDigger. He’s a 35-year IBMer and an Alliance@IBM organizer:

“It’s like the bully at the schoolyard,” Mongeon said. “He comes one day and takes your lunch money, he comes the next day and takes your lunch, he comes the next and takes something else.”

… “There’s really not a future for people who want to build a career there,” he said.

Damn straight.  

The good news is that four U.S. nuclear reactors have retired so far in 2013.  The latest is at San Onofre, California.

The bad news is that even after permanent shutdown, retired nukes leave a very long and dirty trail.  

It will be many decades after shutdown before they can be buried and uneasily forgotten; and long after then, it will be millennia before the byproducts of their brief curtsey on the energy stage no longer pose a threat to all living things.

But this is still 2013, and far more of these infernal engines continue to tick away, answering  the call of a bottom line so compelling that it will not hear the awful truth:  that nuclear isn’t clean, isn’t safe, isn’t cheap; and, if recent events are anything to go by, certainly isn’t reliable.

Japanese citizens have learned that the hard way.

Now some are finding that all those claims that health impacts from the Fukushima accident would be minimal were just as false as early press releases from TEPCO and their own government that  minimized the danger and advised many to “shelter in place,” when they should have been evacuated.

This past week, it was reported that there are twelve confirmed and fifteen suspected cases of thyroid cancers already in the aftermath of the 2011 accident.   This number was recorded from among 174,000 individuals aged 18 or younger.

The official take on this news was myopic denial:

Researchers at Fukushima Medical University, which has been taking the leading role in the study, have so far said they do not believe that the most recent cases are related to the nuclear crisis. They point out that thyroid cancer cases were not found among children hit by the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident until four to five years later.

Yes, we all know how reliable those Soviet era records from Chernobyl were.

Some countries, like Germany, and even Canada, are beginning to get the message, though.  

As in the U.S., one of the advantages the nuclear energy industry enjoys in Canada is a liability limit that essentially indemnifies the industry against the crushing cost of major accidents.  Now Canada is rethinking that policy and preparing to increase the industry’s liability there.  This should prove very interesting because the relatively low cost of insuring nukes has been one of the traditional supports that has served to artificially decrease the cost of nuclear power.

If “cheap” is removed from the industry’s talking points, how well will “safe” hold-up with customers in the aftermath of Fukushima?

We can only hope that nuclear is poised to go out with a whimper rather than a bang.

For Immediate Release

Contact: Kelly Mangan

Phone: 802-324-6560

Email: kellyVFFC@gmail.com

Event: Press Conference

Location: Vermont Workers Center (294 N. Winooski Ave, Burlington, VT)

Date: June 13, 2013

Time: 12pm

VERMONT FAIR FOOD CAMPAIGN PUBLISHES STUDY OF FOOD CHAIN WORKERS, THEIR WORKING CONDITIONS IN VERMONT FOOD INDUSTRY

The Vermont Fair Food Campaign is publishing a study on the conditions of food workers in Vermont, and will hold a press conference on June 13 at 12pm to announce our findings.

The food industry in Vermont accounts for 15% of our state economy, employs more than 57,000 people, and generates about $202 million in state and local revenue. It’s a growing industry, but those who do the work of producing, manufacturing, processing, distributing, and selling our food do not see the benefits of this growth.

The Vermont Fair Food Campaign spent a year surveying food workers. We found that many of them receive low pay, few benefits, no paid sick leave, and have little job security. If their employers offer health insurance, they often can’t afford it. Many struggle with inconsistent hours and schedules, which makes it difficult for workers to predict if they’ll be able to pay their bills from week to week. About 16% of workers expressed concerns about health and safety issues at work, and 23% had been injured on the job. And finally, our survey found a lot of fear among food workers who wanted to speak up about workplace conditions, but were scared of losing their jobs if they did.

This needs to change. It’s impossible to build a healthy and stable food movement on top of substandard wages and poor working conditions. If we are really serious about creating a sustainable food system in Vermont, then we must start by creating sustainable jobs.  

The Vermont Fair Food Campaign is a movement of food workers and community allies fighting for livable wages, paid sick leave, dignity, respect, and voice for food chain workers across our state.

###

The public face of the existentially challenged Vermont Health CO-OP is CEO Christine Oliver, a former top official in the Shumlin and Douglas Administrations. But the motive force behind the company is Board Chair Mitch Fleischer. It was he, Oliver says, who had the idea to form a CO-OP under the terms of the Affordable Care Act. She outlined his crucial role at a recent media briefing:

The CO-OP is not even an potion for Vermonters without Mitch Fleischer. When the application was before the [federal government], he was the linchpin; he could bring a lot of things the CO-OP would need to be successful.

She portrayed her business partner as sort of a cross between Martin Luther King and Thomas Edison: a public-spirited entrepreneur bringing his talents to bear for the betterment of the community.

But that’s not the only way to describe Fleischer’s motivations. There’s this, from Anne Galloway of VTDigger:

In the spring of 2011, Fleischer, who has worked as an insurance broker for 30 years, was critical of the Shumlin administration’s plans to limit all insurance products for small businesses to insurers on the state exchange. The federal law also cut brokers, who made about $17 million a year on commissions, out of the system.

That fall, Fleischer made plans to create the CO-OP as a way to salvage business for his company.

And that, boys and girls, is a whole nother hovercraft full of eels. It’s a picture — not of an entrepreneur doing public service in the private sector — but of a desperate businessman latching onto a new opportunity in the ACA’s generous startup funding for state health CO-OPs.

Next step: the nascent VHC, with Fleischer as board chair, signs a no-bid contract with Fleischer’s brokerage firm to provide education, outreach, and large group sales. A contract that could net as much as a million bucks a year.

Nice work if you can get it.  

Fleischer’s potential conflict of interest was noted by Susan Donegan, Commissioner of Financial Regulation, in her rejection of VHC’s bid for a certificate of public good. Fleischer and Oliver insist that there is no conflict, because VHC has high ethical standards and the contract was thoroughly vetted by the feds.

I don’t know if there was an actual conflict of interest or not, but it damn sure smells funny. Especially when you read this comment by Fleischer at that media briefing:

[State regulators] never asked me about the Fleischer-Jacobs contract, they never asked me about my board pay, they never asked me about conflict of interest. …I would have walked away from the board. If that was an impediment to our getting the license, I would have walked away.

Fleischer would have walked away — from the board. Not from the lucrative contract.

I think that reveals Mitch Fleischer’s true priorities. If push came to shove, he’d be more concerned with the Fleischer-Jacobs contract than with continuing to serve as “the linchpin” of the Vermont Health CO-OP.

That makes me question his motivations in starting the CO-OP and tapping into $33 million in federal loans. And I’m not the only one. Falko Schilling of VPIRG, in this week’s Seven Days:

“When we plan to transition to single-payer health care in 2017, it almost feels like the introduction of this new cooperative is betting against that,” he says. “While it has promise, I don’t think they are really on board with the larger goal that a lot of people in the state are trying to move forward.”

Which makes a lot of sense, in view of Fleischer’s professional interests. The CO-OP would, at the very least, give his brokerage a big infusion of business. At most, it might make the health care exchange more palatable to Vermonters and slow the momentum toward implementation of single-payer.

In the same article, single-payer advocate Dr. Deb Richter questioned “whether [the CO-OP] was really needed, or is it just sort of going after a pot of money the feds were throwing our way?”

There’s no way to know for sure. And there are a lot of good people working at the Vermont Health CO-OP. But the whiff of mixed motives, the hint of conflict of interest, that hovers around its “linchpin,” is one reason why I’m ambivalent about the CO-OP’s future. And why, if push comes to shove, I give somewhat more credence to Donegan’s view of the company than to Fleischer’s.  

Ah. So. After a couple weeks of wretched publicity, Governor Shumlin has executed a political maneuver not normally present in his bag of tricks: the quick turnabout. After repeatedly insisting that his purchase of the Dodge homestead was a done deal, his attorney is now saying that Shumlin is open to voiding the transaction.

In fact, M. Jerome Diamond insists that Shumlin felt that way all along – he was just saying the exact opposite. And Mr. Diamond had a ready explanation, (Freeploid paywall alert) if not a believable one, for this odd behavior:

Diamond, whom Shumlin had hired in recent weeks after the land deal became a hot-button issue, said nullifying the deal had always been an option Shumlin was willing to consider, but he hadn’t wanted to say so publicly because he didn’t want to negotiate in the media.

Bwahahahaha. Sorry, M. Jerome, not buyin’ it. If Shumlin didn’t want to negotiate in the media, he should have said so, rather than blatantly misrepresenting his stance. No, the more likely scenario is that attorney sat down with client and told him that the facts in the case might not be in his favor, and even if they were, a courtroom victory over Jeremy Dodge could poison Shumlin’s image. In short, a trial would be a lose-lose situation for the Governor.

So the best option was a graceful exit. With Shumlin, of course, insisting that he be fully reimbursed in any settlement. After all, charity stops at the wallet’s opening. (Must be one of those childhood lessons learned by Little Petey the Price-Gouger.)

So, assuming that the Governor’s cupidity doesn’t prevent him from ending this sorry episode, what’s the big takeaway?

After the jump: the big… er… takeaways.

Well, there’s the fresh dents in his image. The Dodge transaction confirms a widely held perception that the Governor is a millionaire with a chronic empathy shortage who’s tone-deaf to the troubles of less fortunate Vermonters.

But equally important, if not more so, for his political future: this is just the latest episode in a very bad 2013 for Shumlin. (“Very bad” in relative terms, of course; he remains a very powerful chief executive with huge legislative majorities and a feeble opposition.) This year, he’s suffered one setback after another that strike at the very core of his appeal as a politician: that he’s a savvy operator and a can-do executive.

Start with his budget address in January, when he laid out some bold new initiatives that came as a complete surprise to Legislative Democrats. Presumably he thought that the Dems would follow where he led – or that he could persuade them through his raw political charisma. But the Dems were blindsided, and they didn’t appreciate it.

And then, during the 2013 session,  Shumlin utterly failed to make a persuasive case for his plans. He kept on repeating the same old discredited talking points, long after it was clear that nobody was buying what he was selling. And he stonewalled Legislative efforts to meet him halfway.

And in the end, while there was significant movement on some issues, the 2013 session was a messy squander of an historic opportunity. If the Governor and Democratic lawmakers had been on the same page, they could have accomplished far more. And in my mind, Shumlin gets most of the blame because of his stubborn refusal to budge.

The Dodge deal is just the cherry on this shit sundae. And one more sign that Peter Shumlin may not be the political or managerial genius he clearly thinks he is. Whether or not I’ve agreed with the Governor, I’ve always had respect for his smarts. But in recent months, we’ve seen plenty of  evidence that his strengths might not be all that strong*. Which is bad news for his own political future, and bad news for the Democrats’ hopes of extending their hegemony. Methinks it’s time for the Shumlin Machine to head to the garage for a tuneup. Or a rebuild.  

*You know, all this trouble started after the departure of Alex MacLean, Shumlin’s top aide and political right hand. Maybe, just maybe, she was the real genius of the clan.  

The disagreement between the Vermont Health CO-OP and the state Department of Financial Regulation is a classic Rashomon story: two diametrically opposed interpretations of the same situation. In denying VHC a Certificate of Public Good, DFR Commissioner Susan Donegan found flaws in VHC’s business plan and management structure, a possible conflict of interest at the very top of the company, and an unacceptably high risk of failure. VHC officials assert that Donegan is wrong on all counts, and that, after months and months of consistent communication between company and regulator, the rejection came as a total shock.

It’s hard to believe that the two parties are looking at the same sequence of events – events in which they participated (indeed, cooperated) from start to finish. And honestly, I don’t know enough to say who’s right and who’s wrong. But for me, the bottom line is this:

I don’t think it makes much difference either way.

The Vermont Health CO-OP sounds like a wonderful thing – a member-owned insurance carrier based right here in the Green Mountain State.  It appeals to many of our most dearly cherished self-images.  CO-OP CEO Christine Oliver and Board Chair Mitch Fleischer point out that many other states already have health CO-OPs, established through the Affordable Care Act. And, as a hotbed of co-operative enterprises, Vermont is the best possible place for a company like theirs. (Photo: Oliver and Fleischer at a press briefing last week.)

Except for one thing: In the Affordable Care Act, CO-OPs are part of the endgame. Health care reform is going no farther anytime soon. But in Vermont, we’re on the move to single-payer health care in 2017. If we get to single-payer, VHC likely dissolves. If single-payer craps out, VHC will be a very unsatisfying consolation prize. In fact, given the projected onset of single-payer, one could argue that VHC is an unnecessary risk of federal (read: taxpayer) funds. (The government has agreed to loan VHC a total of $33 million for startup costs and operating reserves. According to Oliver and Fleischer, if VHC goes bust before repaying the loans, the feds are on the hook.)

And while the prospect of a health insurance CO-OP* sounds warm and fuzzy and Vermonty, some of our leading health care reform advocates are decidedly lukewarm on the concept.

*It’s correctly spelled as CO-OP rather than “co-op” because it’s an acronym for “Consumer Operated and Oriented Plans.” These are a product of the Affordable Care Act, specifically defined within that law. This was one of many points of dispute between VHC and DFR: Donegan sees VHC as much more like a traditional mutual insurance company than what we think of as a cooperative. Oliver and Fleischer insist that VHC would behave like a cooperative, with policyholders having a voice in the company’s operation.  

Dr. Deb Richter, family physician and leader of the single-payer fight, told Seven Days:

This is just one more insurance scheme as far as I’m concerned. Not necessary, a lot of fuss, and a waste of time and money.

And Peter Sterling of the Vermont Campaign for Health Care Security told me:

For consumers, [Donegan’s rejection] is not a bad thing. There will be a lot of products on the market. With just MVP and Blue Cross offering products, it’s probably better for consumers.

From his personal experience as a health-care advocate, Sterling has seen plenty of folks who are overwhelmed by health insurance options. He believes that the exchange will ensure a decent array of insurance options while minimizing confusion.

Governor Shumlin doesn’t appear terribly anxious to get in the trenches, either. Last week, Oliver and Fleischer said that Shumlin would help them get a rehearing. And I speculated that Donegan might find herself bigfooted by the Guv. But Shumlin’s more recent statements are much more equivocal. The tanned and rested Peter Hirschfeld reports from behind the Mitchell Family Paywall:

Shumlin Tuesday said the decision on the CO-OP’s future is Donegan’s alone to make, and that he will not encourage her to reconsider the ruling.

“My job as governor is to meet with people when they’re happy or unhappy with state government, and that’s what I did,” Shumlin said. “But this is a regulatory matter, and I don’t get involved in regulatory decisions. And it would be totally inappropriate if I did.”

Sounds like Shumlin’s face-to-face with the VHC principals was a mere formality. And that quote sounds like a kiss-off.

Oliver and Fleischer certainly shouldn’t pin their hopes on a last-minute gubernatorial stay of execution. And Donegan still insists she won’t reopen the case. Which would leave VHC with two unpalatable options: a longshot appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court, or a complete reworking of their business plan and a restart of the DFR application process.

Either option would almost certainly prevent VHC from entering the health care exchange in its first year. And that’s the best opportunity for a brand-new carrier to grab market share. As Fleischer pointed out in last week’s briefing, the launch of the exchange effectively wipes the slate clean, which would give VHC a level playing field (pardon mixed metaphor) with its well-established competition. By 2015, MVP and Blue Cross will have a big headstart – and many consumers will be satisfied with their carriers and not looking to switch.

The situation led Seven Days to describe VHC as “on life support.”  And to me, that’s not a big deal. Because VHC is, at best, tangential to the ultimate goal of single-payer health care.  

From the Department of Things No One Disagrees With, perennial political question mark, Bruce Lisman, has once again emerged from his burrow to announce importantly that government in Vermont should strive for more transparency.

What made this nonplussing pronouncement that much more underwhelming was the fact that it appeared in the Free Press directly above the announcement of Secretary of State Jim Condos’ second “Transparency Tour” since his election in 2010.  Transparency has, in fact, been a central theme in his tenure as Sec. of State.

I had the opportunity to attend one of his public events on the first “Transparency Tour.”  St. Albans had been experiencing some controversies, and Sec. Condos came here to answer questions and teach a “refresher course” in basic rules of open meetings.  It was a great presentation and I learned much in that one evening.

Since he took office, Sec. Condos has been working tirelessly, and as quickly as budget constraints will allow, to update the interfaces for public access to things like campaign and election data.  I have found that he and his staff make themselves extremely available for questions and do a pretty impressive job of providing information despite the challenges inherent in trying to upgrade systems during a belt-tightening phase.

In his Free Press cameo appearance, Mr. Lisman states in the broadest terms what everyone agrees should be the goals for open government.

There are no specific new suggestions as to how this goal of greater transparency (which is undisputed) should be achieved, just restatement of the obvious and the suggestion that yet another layer of government be added, “a transparency authority,” which according to Mr. Lisman, should include representatives of the Ethan Allen Institute and the Public Assets Institute.

(I erroneously identified PAI as being right-leaning, and apologize for the mistake.)

These organizations already function in a watchdog role, independent of the process.   In my opinion, that’s a much better arrangement.

So long as Mr. Lisman has big bucks and coyly refuses to drop the last veil on his political bias, the media will no doubt give him ink and flatter his notions of self-importance, even when he really has nothing of substance to say.

All right.  Enough of this silence shit (as Sean Connery might have put it in The Untouchables).  Little Dems must be doing the vigil game as the Shumlin/Dodge story gets worse and worser.  

It occurs to me that since I started voting here in Vermont in ’76, I’ve voted for a shitload of Dems.  That makes me a Little Dem myself–or as Leftfield would have put it: “A Lib-er-al Fuck.”  So, I hereby declare that, as of the 2014 elections, not one single Dem will get my vote, unless, of course, there comes about some kind of just resolution to the Jeremy Dodge SCANDAL.  I voted for Diamond in 1980, and every two years I vote for Ann Cummings and a whole lot of other Dems usually, along with my Liberty Union, Prog, and Libertarian choices.  But, from now on, I’m boycotting the Vermont Democratic Party, and I will urge others to do the same, unless, as I said, miracle of miracles happens, and Shumlin owns up, gives Dodge back his place and INSTRUCTS BILL SORRELL TO WORK WITH THE VERMONT ACLU AND VERMONT LEGAL AID IN INVESTIGATING ANY AND ALL CASES OF FINANCIAL EXPLOITATION OF THE POOR, ELDERLY, AND DISABLED BY OTHER VERMONTERS OR FIRMS OR ORGANIZATIONS IN OR OUT-OF STATE.  

This will, of course, include real estate deals, but hopefully, down the line, all ABUSE of the poor, elderly, and disabled needs to be addressed.  Bill Sorrell has apparently been QUITE REMISS in his duty as Vt. AG in investigating cases of abuse of the elderly and disabled.  If Sorrell continues to refuse to do his job, he should resign, or be voted out of office in 2014.  Same with Shumlin if he continues his UNETHICAL behavior in the Jeremy Dodge CASE.  

This “the alternatives are so much worse” BULLSHIT from the Vermont Dems needs to STOP NOW!  If I have to, along with my vote for Bill Doyle every two years, I’ll vote for other goddamned Republicans, if no Prog, Liberty Union, or Libertarian candidates are running in those particular slots.  I am FED UP with the HYPOCRISY that says it is better for the Democratic Party to be THE NAZIS than the Republican Party!

I will ‘strongly urge’ and write about and talk about this message:  BOYCOTT THE VERMONT DEMOCRATIC PARTY UNTIL IT STRAIGHTENS ITSELF OUT!

As of now, consider me a LibertyUnion-Progressive-Libertarian.  

A sitting Vermont Governor, who is also a MILLIONAIRE, has committed, while in office, what seems to me, close to a criminal act of financial exploitation against a Vermont resident.  Shumlin has hired none other than M. Jerome Diamond to cover his ass for him.  Who will Jeremy Dodge get for an attorney?  The firm of Larry, Darryl, and Darryl?  This is an OUTRAGE.  Something you expect from someone like Dick Cheney or Donald Trump.  IT IS THE WAY HENRY KISSINGER TREATED THE WORLD!

So, GET REAL, Dems.  This one won’t fly.  People will remember this one next year– Governor Illuzzi, etc.

Remember Nixon digging a deeper hole for himself, and our boy Bill with Monica?  

The formula is simple:  There can be no Peace without Justice, there can be no Justice without Truth, there can be no Justice in the nation and the world without JUSTICE IN OUR OWN BACKYARDS.  Shumlin has violated Justice and Truth.  Are You Going To Let That Stand?

Have a nice day.

Peter Buknatski

Montpelier, Vt.

All right.  Enough of this silence shit (as Sean Connery might have put it in The Untouchables).  Little Dems must be doing the vigil game as the Shumlin/Dodge story gets worse and worser.  

It occurs to me that since I started voting here in Vermont in ’76, I’ve voted for a shitload of Dems.  That makes me a Little Dem myself–or as Leftfield would have put it: “A Lib-er-al Fuck.”  So, I hereby declare that, as of the 2014 elections, not one single Dem will get my vote, unless, of course, there comes about some kind of just resolution to the Jeremy Dodge SCANDAL.  I voted for Diamond in 1980, and every two years I vote for Ann Cummings and a whole lot of other Dems usually, along with my Liberty Union, Prog, and Libertarian choices.  But, from now on, I’m boycotting the Vermont Democratic Party, and I will urge others to do the same, unless, as I said, miracle of miracles happens, and Shumlin owns up, gives Dodge back his place and INSTRUCTS BILL SORRELL TO WORK WITH THE VERMONT ACLU AND VERMONT LEGAL AID IN INVESTIGATING ANY AND ALL CASES OF FINANCIAL EXPLOITATION OF THE POOR, ELDERLY, AND DISABLED BY OTHER VERMONTERS OR FIRMS OR ORGANIZATIONS IN OR OUT-OF STATE.  

This will, of course, include real estate deals, but hopefully, down the line, all ABUSE of the poor, elderly, and disabled needs to be addressed.  Bill Sorrell has apparently been QUITE REMISS in his duty as Vt. AG in investigating cases of abuse of the elderly and disabled.  If Sorrell continues to refuse to do his job, he should resign, or be voted out of office in 2014.  Same with Shumlin if he continues his UNETHICAL behavior in the Jeremy Dodge CASE.  

This “the alternatives are so much worse” BULLSHIT from the Vermont Dems needs to STOP NOW!  If I have to, along with my vote for Bill Doyle every two years, I’ll vote for other goddamned Republicans, if no Prog, Liberty Union, or Libertarian candidates are running in those particular slots.  I am FED UP with the HYPOCRISY that says it is better for the Democratic Party to be THE NAZIS than the Republican Party!

I will ‘strongly urge’ and write about and talk about this message:  BOYCOTT THE VERMONT DEMOCRATIC PARTY UNTIL IT STRAIGHTENS ITSELF OUT!

As of now, consider me a LibertyUnion-Progressive-Libertarian.  

A sitting Vermont Governor, who is also a MILLIONAIRE, has committed, while in office, what seems to me, close to a criminal act of financial exploitation against a Vermont resident.  Shumlin has hired none other than M. Jerome Diamond to cover his ass for him.  Who will Jeremy Dodge get for an attorney?  The firm of Larry, Darryl, and Darryl?  This is an OUTRAGE.  Something you expect from someone like Dick Cheney or Donald Trump.  IT IS THE WAY HENRY KISSINGER TREATED THE WORLD!

So, GET REAL, Dems.  This one won’t fly.  People will remember this one next year– Governor Illuzzi, etc.

Remember Nixon digging a deeper hole for himself, and our boy Bill with Monica?  

The formula is simple:  There can be no Peace without Justice, there can be no Justice without Truth, there can be no Justice in the nation and the world without JUSTICE IN OUR OWN BACKYARDS.  Shumlin has violated Justice and Truth.  Are You Going To Let That Stand?

Have a nice day.

UPDATE:

So…this morning’s (6/6) news (see front page, TA) has Shumlin offering the land back to Jeremy Dodge in exchange for payment of expenses he’s incurred.  Good (hmmm…).  And two Republicans calling for an investigation of the ins and outs of these kinds of real estate deals and how a low-income person’s property tax debt can be used by those folks with a predatory bent.  Good (hmmm…).  And Jerry Diamond saying that, yes, the property tax angles need to be addressed by the State Department of Taxes, and that the Attorney General’s office can offer its advice to that Department.  Good (Sorrell?…BIG hmmm…Where was he last fall?).  AND (yes, it gets better), the Dodge family seems to be delighted and willing to accept the Governor’s DEAL (again…hmmm…).

And I recommend we all now bow our heads in a moment of silent vigil.  For they have done it to us once again.  Well, at least they didn’t taser Dodge.  Or did they?  Amen.    

 

Peter Buknatski

Montpelier, Vt.