Charlie Baker is a scripted and robotic empty suit
Apologies to his misguided supporters
By Sam Adams, Boston Patriot.
OK, I have given this some thought. I even let it ruminate in my mind over the weekend before sending this note to all of you fine people right now. But you know what, sometimes you just have to call it like you see it. So with that being said, I would like to publicly say "Sorry" to all of the Charlie Baker supporters out there.
No, I am not sorry for criticizing Charlie for announcing his candidacy and then immediately taking off for vacation. I am not sorry for calling him an out of touch empty suit, or for saying he is indeed very much like his former employer and hero, the turncoat Bill Weld. I am not even sorry for pointing out the fact that Charlie Baker is so scripted and robotic that he can't even honestly answer the most basic of questions without feeling like he needs to confer with a campaign aid. No, I am not sorry for any of those things. What I am sorry for is the fact that those of you who support Charlie Baker are painfully misguided. You have been led to believe that he, and others like him are the "next best hope" for Massachusetts. But what those that are trumpeting this party line are intentionally not telling you is that that he actually embodies eveything that is wrong with the Republican party in this state.
Seriously, I have tried to be fair about this but to be perfectly honest, the more I see of this guy, the LESS I like him. I am STILL waiting to hear a good reason why I should support him other than the fact that the MA GOP "powers that be" are clearly in his camp. Last I checked, that sorry organization has done about as much to bury the Republican party in this state as the Democrats have.
That being said, I strongly believe the following issue needs to be addressed.
Some of you may or may not have caught this but Dave Wedge's article in the Boston Herald on 9/11 was more than just a little troubling. If you missed the article, let me quote:
"GOP gubernatorial candidate Charles Baker runs a charity that's funded ultraliberal outfits which have fought for tuition breaks and driver's licenses for illegals, accused American soldiers of torture and blamed Israel for "genocide" in Palestine, a Herald review found..... The Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Foundation, of which Baker is chairman, has given $30,000 to the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition since 2002, records show. The agency is a driving force on Beacon Hill for immigration reform, including pushing a controversial bid to allow illegal aliens to pay the same tuition rates as Massachusetts residents at state colleges.
Gov. Deval Patrick has been a strong proponent of reduced tuition for illegals, calling it 'a matter of simple justice.' MIRA also has backed failed bids to allow illegal immigrants to obtain Massachusetts driver's licenses and state-issued IDs. The Baker-run charity donated $10,000 to MIRA in 2005, at the height of a bitter Beacon Hill battle over immigrant licenses."
Wedge's article goes on to say:
"In 2006, Baker's charity gave $5,000 to Physicians for Human Rights, a Cambridge-based group that authored a study purportedly documenting "systematic use of torture by the United States during its interrogations of detainees at U.S. detention facilities, including Guantanamo Bay, Iraq and Afghanistan."
Wedge's description of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition is spot on. For those of you unfamiliar with Physicians for Humans Rights, let me fill you in a bit. Physicians for Human Rights is blame America first organization that hasn't met a left wing cause, politician or historical revisionist/conspiracy theory that it hasn't adopted. They claim that Israel is an 'apartheid regime' and they have made numerous absurd charges against the CIA in the wake of 9/11 and the legitimate associated security concerns of this country.
Don't believe me? Go see for yourself here.
Now would someone please tell me what Charlie Baker's excuse is for this? Really, I would love to hear it. The way I see it, at worst this man knowingly approved money to be donated to some offensive and despicable groups (And that is without even following the next step in the money trail which Wedge explores further in his article.
And at best, if all you can say in his defense is that he was ignorant and didn't know, well, to this particular citizen patriot, that is pretty sorry as well.