Note: For those who can’t get enough of political money stuff, the campaign finance reports for 2012 are now available online thanks to Your Secretary of State Jim Condos. They’re all PDF’s, so not searchable. But they’re there for your browsing pleasure.

Today was the final deadline before Election Day for campaign finance reports. And as befits such an august occasion, Vermont’s political media was on hand in force at the Secretary of State’s office. Oh, the assembled brain power sent bursts of blue lightning around the room, I tell you. Anne Galloway of VTDigger, Stuart Ledbetter of Channel 5, Dave Gram of the AP, Peter Hirschfeld of the Vermont Press Bureau, John Dillon of VPR, Nancy Remsen of the Freeploid, and a yong woman sitting behind me whose name I failed to get. And who else… oh yeah, Paul Heintz of Seven Days.

And me.

Well, let’s get to the numbers, shall we? Take it from the top:

Super PACs: As I reported earlier, Lenore Broughton has bankrolled Vermonters First to the tune of nearly $650,000. And VF Treasurer, spokesperson, and Keeper Of The Vault, Tayt Brooks (International Man of Mystery) has spent a big chunk of that money, mainly on TV and Internet ads. One item of note: $17,500 to Public Opinion Strategies, a Republican polling and research firm. Methinks the Tayter is looking to target his money on the races he can make a difference in. Bad news for Randy Brock, that.

Meanwhile, the liberal group Priorities PAC reported almost identical fundraising and spending in the past month — about $15K each — leaving it with about 10K in the bank. Lisa Steele has kicked in $20,000 of Priorities’ loot. Other donors include outgoing state Senator Hinda Miller ($1,000), State Senator Bill Carris ($1,000) and David Coates ($2,000). Priorities has spent most of its funds on TV ads; $1,810 at WCAX, and nearly $12,000 for Comcast cable.

Governor: As I reported earlier, Peter Shumlin eased off the throttle a bit, raising “only” $172,000, while spending less than $33,000. He goes into the last three weeks of the campaign with over a million dollars in the bank. Compare that to Randy Brock, who took in a paltry $45,000 this period while spending $177,000. He has about a hundred thousand dollars in cash on hand — one-tenth as much as Shumlin. And it’d be even worse if he hadn’t loaned his own campaign $300,000. He’ll have to open his wallet wide if he wants to stay competitive in the homestretch.

(Bear in mind that many campaign expenditures may have already been made for things that will happen in the next three weeks, so the “cash on hand” figures may be a bit misleading.)

I’ll also take a moment here to point out that Vermont’s Costliest Consultant, Darcie Johnston, took almost $11,000 of Randy’s money in the past month for her role in piloting the Brock campaign into the nearest iceberg. If she had any shame whatsoever, she’d take a voluntary pay cut. Here’s a suggestion: after the election, she should refund a portion of her salary based on the margin of Brock’s defeat. If he loses by 20 points, she gives him a 20% refund. Fair?

After the jump: Good news for Beth Pearce (and she’ll need it), a cash crunch in the Auditor’s race, and more.

Lieutenant Governor. Incumbent Phil Scott raised $53,000 this period, for a campaign total of $139,000. He’s spent a total of $117,000, leaving him with a modest cash hoard. But still more than challenger Cass Gekas, who raised a bit under $12,000 this time for a campaign-to-date total of $39,000. And she’s already spent over $30,000, so not much left for a last-minute push.

Treasurer. The wise guys still call incumbent Beth Pearce a political newbie, but she sure knows how to push the fundraising buttons. She’s taken in more cash than any statewide candidate not running for Governor. She garnered a truly impressive $53,400 this time around, for a campaign total of $183,000. She’s spent $138,000 so far, so she’s still got a nice kitty for those last-minute ad buys.

And she’ll need it, with Vermonters First trying to paint a target on her back. Indeed, if it wasn’t for Lenore Broughton, Republican challenger Wendy Wilton would be falling far short of the mark. She raised less than $25,000 in this period for a campaign total of $74,000. She’s already spent $70,000, leaving her with only about $4,000 in the bank. That’s a sad commentary on the fundraising prowess of the Republican hierarchy, considering that they touted her as an especially strong member of their ticket.

But the VTGOP’s shortcomings hardly matter for Wilton. Her campaign depends entirely on Broughton’s largesse. And if you think that’s a healthy state of affairs, then I’d like to interest you in the purchase of a slightly-used golden dome.

Auditor. Neither Vince Illuzzi nor Doug Hoffer set the world on fire this time. Illuzzi raised $10,600 this period, for a campaign total of $75,000. And he’s already spent $70,000 of that. Hoffer, meanwhile, raised a bit less than $15,000, for a campaign total of $47,000. He’s spent $34,000 so far, which means he has more cash on hand than Vince.

But again, that hardly seems relevant since Vermonters First has poured a lot of money into advertisements on Vince’s behalf.

Attorney General. If Bill Sorrell had a credible opponent, he might be in real trouble. He spent a lot of money fending off the primary challenge of TJ Donovan, and has failed to replenish his campaign fund since August 28. In the past month he raised $12,000 and spent nearly $20,000. For the campaign to date, fundraising totals $131,000 — and expenditures total $140,000. Yikes.

Then there’s ol’ Six Teats, Jack McMullen. His fundraising continued to flounder, but he finally opened his own checkbook to the tune of $144,000 in loans to his campaign. But he’s already spent pretty much all that cash; he reported expenditures of $150,000 in the past month. Even with his massive personal loan, I estimate his cash-on-hand to be about $23,000. Which is more than Sorrell, certainly; but will it be enough to erase his longstanding reputation as a political joke? I don’t think so.

Secretary of State. Poor Jim Condos. None of the assembled scribes even bothered to ask for his report. But I don’t think he minds, considering that he’s the nominee of all three major parties plus at least one of the minor ones. As I’ve said before, it’s Jim’s world. We’re all just living in it.

Finally, just for shin splints and giggles, I asked for the Democrats’ and Republicans’ finance reports.

The VTGOP continues its financial funk. It took in $3,500 in donations last month. That’s $1500 from FairPoint Communications, and $2,000 from a Lavern Gaynor of Naples, Florida. Not a sou from a Vermonter, sad to say. The party didn’t spend any money last month. For the campaign to date, the VTGOP has raised almost $54,000 and spent $49,000. Buddy, can you spare a dime for a formerly proud party that’s down on its luck?

The VT Dems raised $7500 this time (including $1500 from FairPoint, clearly playing both sides of the street) for a campaign total of $128,000. The Dems have spent $132,000, but somehow I don’t think they’re too worried about covering their costs.

Especially when their Governor has a million buckaroonies in his pocket, and no real need for any of it.

There you go. The next campaign finance deadline is November 15, safely after the election. I will be looking forward to that date, if only to find out exactly how much money Lenore Broughton will have spent on her attempt to single-handedly buy an elective office or two.  

Governor Shumlin’s fundraising pace slowed last month. He “only” raised $173,000 since September 15.

And he spent a mere $32,664. Not even trying, really.

Throughout the campaign, Shumlin has fundraised at warp speed, and spent on impulse power*. The result: He’s got a million bucks in the bank.

*The Odum Memorial Sci-Fi Reference.

Let me repeat that: Three weeks before Election Day, Governor Shumlin has a warchest of over a million dollars. Randy Brock, by contrast, has a measly $100,000 to play with.

Yeah, it’s over.  

Well, now I understand why Randy Brock hinted at a disappointing fundraising total last week. Because the real news is disastrously bad.

During the past month, Brock raised $45,000 — a slower pace than in recent months. And in the same period, he spent $177,000.

For the entire campaign to date, Brock has spent $585,000, and raised $689,000. But the latter figure includes his $300,000 loan to himself. Without that loan, the Brock campaign would already be about $200K in the hole.

And now he needs a strong push to the finish.

Anyone still doubt that this campaign is over?  

Well, jack “Six Teats” McMullen has finally committed himself to his campaign for Attorney General in the only way a businessman respects.

With his own money.

His October 15 campaign finance report shows total donations of slightly less than $15,000.

And personal loans of $144,000. Yep, One Gross Thousand Dollars. Bringing his total of self-loans to $153,000.

And he spent every bit of that money plus a bit more in the past month: reported expenditures totaling $150,000. The vast majority of that was for TV ad buys.

Since his campaign is attracting a mere handful of actual donations (mostly from out-of-state rich folks), I see more loans in Six Teats’ future.  

Oh boy. Vermonters First has submitted its final pre-election campaign finance report, and it’s a doozy.

Lenore Broughton, who had previously underwritten VF to the tune of $100,000, has added another $548,000 to the kitty.

Yes, that’s five hundred forty-eight thousand dollars.

For a to-date total of $648,000.

Also, VF did manage to broaden its donor base. It got a total of three — count ’em, three — gifts from people not named Lenore Broughton. They add up to $900. So it’s still pretty much Miss Daisy Against The World.

On the expenditure side, VF reported total spending of $463,000 for this period and $561,000 overall. So if they’re going to maintain their pace through Election Day, Miss Daisy may well crack the million-dollar mark all by herself.

Which, needless to say, would be absolutely unprecedented in Vermont politics.

Can we dispense with the myth that Lenore Broughton is just a simple individual who wants to do her part as a citizen? In reality, she’s trying to stage a one-person leveraged buyout of Vermont politics.  

(I’ll have more later on mid-October campaign finance reports.)

Anne Galloway and VTDigger, for another big step toward success. Perhaps because the Freeploid and Herald/T-A are now behind paywalls, Digger’s readership has doubled in the past year. From the look of the homepage, I’d say ad revenues have improved significantly. And Digger’s nonprofit overseer, the Vermont Journalism Trust, is investing back in the product. Over the weekend Digger announced the hiring of four new employees, including two reporters. Anne Galloway has put a ton of effort into Digger, and the work is paying off for all Vermonters in the development of a new, trustworthy — and free — online news source. This is especially crucial, given the ever-increaseing financial pressures on other media sources. (They do, of course, accept donations. I’m a donor; if you value Digger’s work, please consider doing the same.)

Republican gubernatorial candidate Randy Brock, for effectively undercutting his own message. Recently, two noted pundits pronounced his campaign DOA (cough, ahem, only two and a half months after this observer did the same, on July 16. Guess I haven’t earned my Pundit Card yet). In response, Brock told reporters that his internal polling showed the race is still winnable. And then he stomped all over his message by hinting that today’s campaign finance report will, again, be disappointing. Which means that, unless he makes another six-figure loan to his own campaign, he won’t have the resources he needs to make the race competitive. Sigh.

State Sen. Ann Cummings, for having the (entirely metaphorical) stones to announce a run for Senate President Pro Tem, challenging incumbent John H.A. Campbell. “I’ve been there for 16 years,” the Washington County Democrat told Seven Days, “and I think the last two were just — we didn’t use our time well.” Nice understatement there. Campbell mustered all his (cough) diplomatic skill in attributing Cummings’ challenge to “personal issues” between the two, and hinting that Cummings had sometimes fallen short in performing her own duties.

And thumbs up to old H.A. himself, for gaining the support of the two eldest Dicks in the Senate, Sears and Mazza. The Pro Tem battle will be a real test for the Old Boys’ Caucus. Here’s hoping they fail. We’ve got way too many Old Boys in positions of power, thank you very much.

The Shumlin Administration, for a trifecta of bad news on its health-care reform plan. First, the Green Mountain Care Board voted to exclude dental care. Second, Jeb Spaulding announced that the administration won’t unveil financing plans for a single-payer system until 2015. And third, the news that next year’s transition to a health-care exchange may result in massive cost increases for low-income Vermonters, and that the administration and Legislature are still trying to figure out what to do about it. Shumlin deserves all the credit in the world for tackling health care, which is obviously a huge, complicated and difficult task. But if he faced a credible challenge in this campaign, these setbacks would spell real political trouble.

After the jump: Phil Scott, Franklin reactionaries, Jeff Danziger, Tayt Brooks, and more!

Lieutenant Governor Phil Scott, for completing his eight-day, 568-mile bicycle tour of Vermont’s 14 counties. It was another feel-good event for the Mr. Happy Face of Vermont politics, best known for doing other people’s jobs for a day. (Which is oddly appropriate, for a guy whose “real” job involves… erhm… doing nothing much). I don’t want to downplay the good stuff that he’s done, notably the upcoming “Wheels for Warmth” tire-resale drive. But I do look forward to the day when Scott actually has to run a political campaign, get serous about the issues, and maybe even take some unpopular stands.

The Good People of Franklin, for continuing the senseless battle over prayer at Town Meeting. The town plans to appeal its defeat in court, and plaintiff Marilyn Hackett is facing intimidation and harassment for seeking to end the prayer. And the really strange thing about it is, if you believe the Freeplod’s story in the Friday edition, it has nothing to do with religion. It’s just something they’ve always done, and they don’t like change. “We’ve always done that,” “Tradition is tradition,” and other deep thoughts. Well, progress is progress, too. And the absence of what the invoking pastor calls “a simple invocation, it takes 20 seconds,” isn’t going to change the fundamental character of the town. At all. What really changes the community is the smoldering anger and bitterness of too many townspeople.

Washington County Judge Geoffrey Crawford, for rejecting the Republican Governors Association’s effort to launch a fishing expedition. (The ruling was issued on September 30, but hadn’t been reported as far as I can tell until a Vermont Press Bureau story published on October 8.) The RGA is defending itself against charges that it illegally colluded with Brian Dubie’s 2010 campaign for Governor. It sought to depose Shumlin aide Alex MacLean in an effort to find evidence of similar collusion on the Democratic side. The judge said the RGA was “building a case out of straw,” and seeking “to act as a private attorney general, combing through the records of its ideological opponents for evidence they too broke the law.” Sounds about right.

Well-meaning animal-rights activists, for their opposition to Green Mountain College’s plan to slaughter two oxen and process the meat for use in the college cafeteria. The beasts in question, Bill and Lou, have been campus fixtures for years, but they can no longer work as a team because of injury. Since the College teaches sustainable farm practices and the slaughter of aging work animals is a normal part of farm life, the decision makes perfect sense. But GMC is being called “cruel” for turning down an offer to house the oxen at a nearby animal sanctuary. Lord knows, there are plenty of battles to be fought on the animal-rights front; this one shouldn’t be anywhere near the top of the list.

Jeff Danziger, political cartoonist extraordinaire, for nailing it again with his Sunday effort in the Herald/T-A. Not available online anywhere I can see, but here’s the gist of it. The Dalai Lama and Governor Shumlin are sharing a cup of tea, sitting cross-legged at a low table.

The Dalai Lama: “The Buddha tells us the truth of love is seen in the trust for wisdom to visit in our hearts and find the gift of life in the blessings of friends who give us of themselves without fear or favor when we know that what is given in spirit of love is the reality of man’s true wealth.”

Shumlin: “The Buddha got land deals?”

Tayt Brooks, International man of Mystery, and the Super PAC Vermonters First, for staining the Internet with some truly ugly advertisements for Wendy Wilton and Vince Illuzzi. The ads featured a riot of colors and type fonts, plus really unflattering photos of the two candidates. That would have earned a Thumbs Down; what elevated it to Poke In The Eye status was the fact that, after GMD put its spotlight on the ads, it turned out the ads were illegal as well. They violated a state law banning the use of the state seal in advertisements of any sort. The Tayter quickly tucked his tail between his legs and pulled the offending ads. That should come as a big relief to Vince Illuzzi, who looked disconcertingly skeletal in the VF ad. (Unfortunately, he couldn’t complain about it or provide a replacement photo, because that would have been illegal coordination, wouldn’t it now?)

That’s it for this week, boys and girls. I welcome your own Thumbs Up and Down in the comments below.  

I’ve had a lot of fun at the expense of Angry Jack Lindley, the chair of the Vermont Republican Party. And I’m sure I will continue to do so. But I have some sympathy for old A.J., and I certainly wouldn’t want to be in his shoes.

The last time Lindley was chair of the VTGOP in the late 70s and early 80s, it was a proud institution that still held the Governorship and two of Vermont’s three seats in Congress. Then, in early 2012, he was pulled out of pasture and put in charge of a party with no resources and an acute charisma shortage (see: Brock, Randy, and McMullen, Jack).

And out of a sense of partisan duty, he basically agrees to become captain of the Titanic when it’s a half-mile from the iceberg. The bad decisions had already been made by his predecessors, and his hands will be on the tiller when the ship inevitably sinks. No wonder the guy goes nutzoid once in a while.

Not to mention that while his party crawls across the desert, it is surrounded by securely fenced oases. The $5,000,000 in Romney Bucks parked in the VTGOP account; the bulging purse of Lenore Broughton, tightly shut to Angry Jack but wide open to the superPAC Vermonters First. As for the loyal Vermont conservatives who used to bankroll the party, where have they gone? I don’t know, thanks to the unconscionably primitive state of Vermont campaign finance reporting.  

But I am not here to bury Angry Jack, nor to praise him. My purpose is to assess the immediate future of the VTGOP, a party with no resources and an acute charisma shortage (see: Brock, Randy, and McMullen, Jack).  And a party that has tacked sharply to the right, despite the fact that the balance point of Vermont politics is clearly center-left.

I’ve asked the question before. Why has Randy Brock run a campaign right out of the Ethan Allen Institute playbook? Why make health care denialist Darcie Johnston the highest-paid political operative in Vermont? Why hire out-of-state campaign consultants known for their work for Tea Party candidates? Why develop policies on advice from the likes of El Jefe General John McClaughry and baby faced free-marketeer Tarren Bragdon? Why bring in Maine Governor Paul LePage for a big fundraiser, only to have his evil shadow linger over the campaign like the stench of a cheap cigar?

Why all of this, when Brock’s only real chance was to run as a tough-minded, non-ideological technocrat?

The answer, it now seems clear: Lenore Broughton.  

Well, not necessarily Miss Daisy her ownself, but what she represents. She and her ilk are the moneybags of the contemporary Republican Party, and they want the GOP to keep tacking rightward. And it’s only by sucking up to the Broughtons of the world that the VTGOP can hope to get the money it needs to stay competitive.

Problem is, that takes the party even farther away from the Vermont electorate.

Second problem is, it’s not working. Brock’s not attracting any national money. (Or pretty much any money, for that matter.) And while Broughton’s making it rain, there’s nary a drop to be found anywhere near Brock or the VTGOP.

Okay, big picture. Most of the races are all but settled. Phil Scott’s the only statewide Republican candidate who’s a strong favorite. Vince Illuzzi’s got a decent chance at Auditor, like it or not (and I don’t). The political observers tell me the Treasurer’s race is competitive; I don’t buy it. I think Beth Pearce will keep her post.

So. Here’s something I’ve pointed out before: if Scott is the sole Republican winner, then the party’s obvious leader and #1 gubernatorial hopeful will be a conspicuous  moderate. (The same holds true if Illuzzi joins Scott in the winner’s circle.) The VTGOP leaned hard to the right this year, and is likely to come out of this election at an historic low: no money, a tiny minority in the Legislature, and uncompetitive at the top of the ticket.

Meanwhile, you’ve got Vermonters First and Lenore Broughton, with much deeper pockets than the party itself, urging the party ever rightward. The Vermont Republican Party, only two years removed from the Douglas Era, will be a shell of an organization. Its top elected official (and, ahem, the electorate) will be on one side, and its deepest pockets on the other.

This looks like a tug-of-war with a feeble Republican Party pulled in both directions. That is, assuming that Phil Scott really is a moderate. So far in his political career, he’s been able to play Mr. Nice Guy without having to make the tough calls. He’s the ideal Lieutenant Governor, really; but what happens when (or if) he has to take a role of partisan leadership? Does he try to pull the party back to the center, which he knows, from his own experience, is the best location for a Republican victory? Or does he pull a Mitt Romney and become a born-again conservative?

You never know in politics. Too much success an make a party complacent — or even corrupt. The Dems could very well get fat and lazy, and create openings for the VTGOP. But the Republican hierarchy will have to get creative to take advantage of any Democratic missteps. They’ll have to be willing to jettison the Fox News/Rush Limbaugh line, abandon any hope of attracting far-right funders, and fashion a new Republican Party based on managerial efficiency rather than conservative dogma. Phil Scott will have to become a true leader, instead of a guy who organizes charity drives and does other people’s jobs for a day.

I don’t really see any of that happening. I think the party leadership is too wedded to dogma. I think they actually believe the stuff. And until I see evidence to the contrary, I don’t thin Phil Scott is capable of taking charge, fighting political battles, and leading his party out of the wilderness. He’s certainly shown no sign of it so far.

In any case, Vermont Republicans will have plenty of opportunity to assess their situation and consider the alternatives. God knows, they won’t have to worry about doing any governing anytime soon.  

Those of you with no lives may be counting the days until October 15, the final pre-election deadline for filing campaign finance reports. I’ll certainly be there for the Big Release Monday afternoon, and will be posting reports on this site.

But yesterday, Randy Brock gave reporters a bit of a preview — and it wasn’t a pretty picture. Peter Hirschfeld of the Vermont Press Bureau ()behind the Herald/T-A paywall):

Brock said the fundraising totals he’ll reveal next Monday… will show totals on par with what he’s raised in previous reports.

The previous reports, as you may recall, were consistently underwhelming, well short of the pace that Vermont Pundit Laureate Eric Davis has declared as necessary to remain competitive with Gov. Shumlin. What’s worse, his campaign is continuing to spend money faster than it’s coming in. Indeed, if you add up his recent media buys, his spending pace has quickened.

He said he’s considering another personal loan to the campaign – he contributed $300,000 of his own money in July – but that he’d prefer to “shake some trees” elsewhere.

Eeeuuuugh.  

D’ya think there are any likely trees he hasn’t shaken already? He’s gonna have to dig deep into his own pocket in order to keep his campaign going. And Shumlin hasn’t really even started advertising yet.

As for his strategery for the stretch run:

Brock said his campaign will be targeting political moderates he believes can be swayed to his side.

Hey, brilliant! Maybe he’s finally realized what I explained way back in May — he has to appeal to the center if he’s to have any hope of winning.

Too bad he’s spent the entire campaign pandering to the far right.

So I caught Annette Smith on the Mark Johnson Show yesterday, and something about it bothered me. Well, more than one thing, but one in particular.

During her appearance, the write-in candidate for Governor ticked off a long list of issues animating her campaign:

The school lunch program, the F-35’s, ridgeline wind turbines, wireless smart meters, forced vaccinations*, the Green Mountain Power merger with CVPS and the $21 million.

*What “forced vaccinations” exactly? Who’s pinning down kids and jamming needles in their arms?

She later added another one: EPA-mandated disinfection of public water supplies.

What’s the common thread that ties all these issues together? I would have said “small isolated groups of single-issue activists brandishing junk science,” but maybe that’s just me. What does Ms. Smith say?

Local control. There are increasing federal mandates, federal burdens, and a government that seems to be much more in league with the corporations than with the people.

…There is this convergence of feeling like we are just completely losing our local control to federal and state mandates, and the people are not being listened to.

If you just read the words, and don’t know it’s Annette Smith talking, what do you think?

I think “Tea Party.”  

Tea partiers are angry about the perceived loss of control over their lives and their subservience to forces larger than themselves. People who want smaller, less powerful government. People who are willing to accept any evidence, no matter how flimsy or suspect, that appears to support their cause. And unwilling to accept any evidence, no matter how credible, that undermines their cause.

I also think “demagoguery.” That may sound harsh, but during the interview Smith compared wind development to terrorism. (The quote: “When you work on the wind issue and you go into these communities, it’s like a terrorist has landed in your community.”) Untethered rhetoric, one of the characteristics of the demagogue.

Riddle me this: Would Ms. Smith be willing to accept any evidence that wind turbines aren’t so bad after all? Or would she continue to oppose them no matter what? And is there a single issue on which she believes that a small group of activists is wrong, and big government is right?

Furthermore, if you’re advocating local control and a diminishment of federal and state power, where do you draw the line? Are you against state and federal health care reform? Single payer must be a nightmare of government overreach, no? Are you against Medicare and Social Security? You don’t like the EPA mandating treatment of public water systems; do you want them regulating pollution? Are you against Act 250, which takes land-use decisions out of the hands of individuals and local governments? If you’re against state and federal mandates in education, are you against Act 60, which forces people in some communities to send a portion of their tax dollars to other school districts?

If not, there’s a fundamental contradiction in the worldview. Unless your guiding principle is “Government is bad when it does bad things, and good when it does good things.” Which isn’t a principle at all.

As a liberal, I see government as a necessary counterweight to the power of corporations and the untrammeled free market. Government certainly doesn’t work as well as it should, but cutting government power isn’t going to usher in a Golden Age of the People; it’s going to allow corporations to gain more control and let the free market run wild.

The problem isn’t that the government has too much power. The problem is that it too often fails to use its power wisely. Annette Smith’s movement is not the answer. I hope her candidacy is a failure, because I don’t want Tea Party-style politics to gain traction anywhere.  

Following up on Randy Brock’s tempest-in-a-teapot whinge about Governor Shumlin’s unscandalous attendance record, a little bird offered the tollowing suggestion:

Has anyone gone back to Randy’s tenure as Auditor and checked how much time he spent at his second home in Florida? Y’know, since he’s busy throwing stones and might just live in a glass house there.