Hey, look what I got in the mail today! It’s a piece of junk mail from Vermonters First, the conservative superPAC bankrolled by Lenore “Miss Daisy” Broughton, and fronted by Tayt Brooks, International Man of Mystery.

It starts by reminding me of the freedom-threatening fact of Democratic dominance in state government:

As you know, Democrats currently control the Governor’s office, Treasurer’s office, Attorney General’s office, Secretary of State’s office and hold veto-proof majorities in BOTH chambers of the Legislature*. It’s no wonder they aren’t listening to the needs of average Vermonters. With so much power in the hands of one party, they are free to advance their agenda of more government control and higher taxes without regard for the devastating impact on working Vermonters.

*Addendum: Received a note from Shap Smith, pointing out that the Dems do not, in fact, have a veto-proof majority in the House. The Dems have 94 seats, six short of veto-proof.

Oh, noes! Who shall save us from this plague of big-governmentalism? And, I can’t help but add, who let these dastardly Dems get such a stranglehold on power in the first place? Oh yeah, that would be the feckless VTGOP of the post-Douglas era, a.k.a. The Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight, Or Find Any Good Candidates, Or Craft a Platform that Actually Appeals to Voters.

But never mind. The VTGOP remains feckless, not to mention just about flat broke, but our hero the International Man of Mystery is coming to the rescue!  

And, mirabile dictu, this is one piece of political mail that doesn’t include a fundraising pitch. That’s because “Vermonters First” is entirely underwritten by Miss Daisy, and her manservant doesn’t need any of your dirty money. Instead of a pitch,

Enclosed is an absentee ballot request form to make voting easy and convenient. When we stand together and vote for commonsense (sic) in Montpelier, we can pushback (sic) on the policies that hurt families and businesses and start making progress again.

And yes indeed, behind the cover letter is an absentee ballot request form, with my name, address, and town of residence already typed in. I feel just a little tiny bit creeped out by that, but never mind. Moving on, here’s where Vermonters First ties to manufacture its own equivalent of hot-button hellholes like Boston, San Francisco, and Chicago:

The super-majority in Montpelier has a plan that involves a government take-over of your healthcare. That’s right, Montpelier has selected five bureaucratic strangers to decide what coverage you and your family will receive and how you will receive it.

Ah, Montpelier, the fount of all evil. This is, by the way, the same usage employed by Bruce Lisman’s Campaign for Vermont; he doesn’t want to identify the Democrats as the bad guys because he’s positioning himself as a nonpartisan, so he uses “Montpelier” as a synonym for Big Bad Government. And here is Tayt Brooks, aping the Lisman nomenclature. Hmm.

As for those “bureaucratic strangers,” I, for one, would prefer them to the private-sector “bureaucratic strangers” who currently control our health care system and decide what coverage I and my family will receive and how I will receive it.

And the program will cost a staggering $5 BILLION paid for in the form of new taxes on all of us. Even though this new program will result in the largest tax increase in Vermont history, NO ONE will tell us how this will be paid for until after the election.

Okay, so he repeats Wendy Wilton’s $5 billion lie. $5 billion is the total cost of all health care in Vermont. The Republicans make it seem like this is a brand-new additional $5 billion on top of everything else, which is demagoguery of the rankest order.

And then, first they assert that this mythical $5 billion will be paid for by new taxes, and then they say that no one knows how it will be paid for. Bit of a contradiction?

Now, we get to the action pitch. Italicized and underlined, just in case your reading comprehension is a little lacking.

That is why we are asking you to return the enclosed absentee ballot request to your Town Clerk today so that together we can stand up to these job-killing, anti-freedom policies and get some commonsense back in Montpelier.

Well, Tayt, I might well take advantage of the absentee ballot request, but I don’t think you’re gonna like how I’ll vote. Methinks your mailing list could use some tightening.

But tell me Tayt, how should I fill out my ballot? You know, to block the job-killing, anti-freedom stuff and restore balance to Montpelier and free candy for everyone?

That’s why I am encouraging you to vote for:

Buddy Barnett for State Senator

Huh? That’s it? One little vote for “Buddy” is going to break the dictatorial rule of “Montpelier” and prevent me from getting a $5 billion tax increase? That Buddy must be quite a guy.

The I.M.O.M. closes the letter with a final exhortation to “bring balance back to the healthcare debate,” followed by Tayt’s alleged signature. Looks more like “Tze Brunch” to me, but what do I know.

And finally, a P.S., just in case the message about one-party rule was just too damn subtle.

P.S. Democrats in Vermont currently control the Governor’s office, Attorney General’s office, Secretary of State’s office and hold veto-proof majorities in BOTH chambers of the Legislature*.

Yeah, I think you said that already.

*And again I point out that the Dems do not have a veto-proof majority in the House. They have 94 seats. It takes 100 to be veto-proof.

They are free to advance their agenda without regard for the devastating impact on working Vermonters. Please return the enclosed absentee ballot request to your Town Clerk today so that together we can stand up to these job-killing, anti-freedom policies and get some commonsense (sic0 back in Montpelier.

Yeah, you already said that too. Y’know, for an organization that wants to bring “balance” back to Vermont politics, its message is remarkably free of the least little hint of what its own viewpoint is, or what policies it would promote. So we’re supposed to restore balance without knowing who wants to be given a seat on the other side of the teeter-totter and what their intentions are?  

The Republicans’ “hopeful” for Attorney General, Jack “Six Teats” McMullen, has finally hit the airwaves with his first TV ad.

(Since his fundraising performance has been too meager to support a significant TV buy, this apparently means that Jack has finally dipped into his very deep pockets and begun to underwrite his own campaign. After earlier insisting that he wouldn’t. Promises, promises.)

The ad serves to reintroduce McMullen to the voters of Vermont. It’s the kind of biographical message that you’d usually expect in the early stages of a race, not at the beginning of the homestretch. And especially not in a race against a tenured incumbent. But still, a decent effort.

But as I listened, something began to strike me oddly: The voice of the narrator.

First thing: it’s too aggressive in a chummy sort of way, like a salesman who stands just a little too close while delivering his pitch. Makes me just a bit uncomfortable.

And then, second and more subtle: The rhythms and cadences are just slightly off. By the end of the ad, I thought: “This sounds like a pre-recorded voice.” Like the Time Lady, or the automated 411 service.

I listened again, and the impression grew stronger. I don’t think this was a real live person reading the script; I think it was a cut-and-paste job using pre-recorded elements.

If true, astoundingly cheap for a statewide major-party candidacy.

I’ve got to hand it to John McClaughry, Vermont’s own free-market ideologue who will ever be known to your correspondent as El Jefe General. Ten years ago, at a convention devoted to spreading the glories of neo-libertarianism to Latin America, McClaughry infamously donned the caudillo equivalent of blackface — khakis, army boots, wide red sash, a chestful of medals, and a fake mustache — and addressed the assembly as El Jefe General Saturino Borhorquez, dictator of an imaginary banana republic who had decided to embrace free-market reforms. After, of course, taking power in a coup and locking his country’s former leaders in a bank vault. Because nothing fosters freedom like a dictatorial regime.

This address was dubbed “good satirical fun” in the conference summary, which is how conservatives usually explain outbreaks of borderline racism. (See: Rush Limbaugh, “entertainer.”) Imagine a similar performance at a conference on free-market ideology in Africa: McClaughry in loincloth and beads, portraying the Great Chief Ongabonga.

On second thought, best not to imagine it.

Well, turns out El Jefe General’s address was not only “good satirical fun,” it was also prophetic. Because the right-wing president of Honduras, Porfirio Lobo Sosa, is touting a deal with some American investors to set up an independent statelet with its own laws, regulations and tax structure. Free-market, of course; there would be no taxes on income, sales, or capital gains.

“Once we provide a sound legal system within which to do business, the whole job creation machine – the miracle of capitalism – will get going,” Michael Strong,  CEO of the MKG Group, which will build the city and set its laws, told FoxNews.com.

Yep, just like the American economy will perk up as soon as we release the Krak — er, the job creators from the triple shackles of taxation, regulation, and wealth redistribution. Never mind that we’ve been trying this since 1981 and it hasn’t worked yet; we just need to do MORE of what hasn’t worked. If we keep failing long and hard enough, we can’t help but succeed!

After the jump: a few storm clouds on this sunny horizon.

MKG will invest $15 million to begin building basic infrastructure for the first model city near Puerto Castilla on the Caribbean coast, said Juan Hernandez, president of the Honduran Congress.

… “First, we will build the critical infrastructure — roads, water, power, sewers,” Strong said. “In collaboration with the [Honduran] government, we will then create the city’s government system and the security, and 3 to 6 months after that we will build the first factories.”

The Fox News account, natch, puts a happy face on the proposal. The Guardian takes a more skeptical view.

Critics say it will allow a foreign elite to set up a low-tax, sympathetically regulated enclave where they can skirt labour standards and environmental rules.

“This would violate the rights of every citizen because it means the cession of part of our territory to a city that would have its own police, its own juridical power, and its own tax system,” said Sandra Marybel Sanchez, who joined a group of protesters who tried to lodge an appeal at the supreme court.

Ismael Moreno, a correspondent for the leftwing Nicaraguan magazine Envio, compared the charter cities to the banana enclaves, which were run on behalf of a foreign elite.

And if the ethics of this plan don’t bother you, he Guardian also raises some purely practical concerns:

…the initial investments seemed small compared to the scale of the ambition.

Yeah, $15 million doesn’t go very far when you’re talking about infrastructure, housing, and factories.

The plan appears to have been thrown together in the space of less than a year, partly to boost the economy and partly to make Honduras more attractive to foreign investors who fear crime (Honduras has the world’s highest murder rate) and political instability (Lobo was elected following a coup d’etat in 2009.)

Mmm, yes, mmm, rampant crime and political instability. Yeah, that’s where I want to invest my money!

This may well turn out to be another Fordlandia — an uber-capitalist dream that proves unworkable in the cold light of reality — but I must congratulate El Jefe General on his foresight, and apologize that I ever doubted the wisdom of the Big Black Fake Mustache.  

Oh well. H. Brooke “I am NOT a birther!” Paige has had his day in court, and has been swatted down in quite emphatic fashion.

Paige, losing candidate in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate, sought to remove President Obama from the Vermont ballot. Paige did not allege that Obama was foreign-born; rather, he promulgated an arcane interpretation of the phrase “natural born citizen” that would have required the President’s father to have been a citizen at the time of Obama’s birth, thus disqualifying Obama from the Presidency and rendering the last four years, oh, I don’t know, a figment of our collective imagination.

Well, Washington County Judge Robert Bent laid the wood to Paige* in dismissing the suit:

*Paywall warning: link is to the Freeploid.

The court has been presented with a radically insufficient basis on which to issue a temporary or even a preliminary injunction.

… The myriad versions of the claim that President Obama is ineligible for office because he is not a ‘natural born citizen’ have been litigated throughout the country exhaustively. They have never succeeded, usually on standing or jurisdictional bases.

Paige told the Freeploid that “he was undeterred by the decision,” whatever that means. (I’m sure he will enlighten us in the Comments below.)  

It has been said that donkeys are undeterred by a thwack upside the head with a 2×4.  

Can you feel the Brockmentum? Yep, Randy Brock is hitting the airwaves with three new TV ads, sure to light a fire under his so-far dormant campaign, and —

Wait, what’s that?

Oh. There’s a big fat typgraphical error in the middle of the first ad.

Wups. Those costly out-of-state consultants are really paying off.

The ad, which was posted online by Paul Heintz at Seven Days, features the Governor’s rendition of “Here Comes the Sun” with a series of captions underneath him listing all of Vermont’s alleged problems.

45TH IN BUSINESS FRIENDLINESS

4TH WORST STATE IN WHICH TO RETIRE

HIGHEST TAX RATE IN THE COUNTRY

OUR CHILDREN HAVING TO MOVE AWAY

and then, as Shumlin sings “It’s all right”…

IT’ ALRIGHT?

Yes, that’s I, T, apostrophe, and no S.

Jeebus. I could almost start to feel sorry for ol’ Randy.  

Addendum: The Brock ad has been written up by Seven Days, VTDigger, and the Vermont Press Bureau. Not one has mentioned the typo.

Did they all just miss it? Or is the Brock campaign so forlorn that the press corps has decided not to kick a man while he’s down?  

(crossposted at Daily Kos.)

As the Mitt Romney campaign careens through a truly horrific week, featuring one self-inflicted wound after another followed by feeble attempts to explain or deny, sometimes both, the punditocracy has looked on in a state of despair (conservative), wonder (centrist), and amusement (liberal). Plus an undercurrent of surprise, that Mitt Romney has suddenly turned into a truly terrible candidate.

Well, I’m not surprised. When I look back at Romney’s political career, I see a consistently lousy candidate, capable of winning only when the circumstances are stacked overwhelmingly in his favor.

His first foray was 1994’s attempt to out-liberal Teddy Kennedy. Yep, Mitt’s masterstroke was to try to position himself to the left of the most famous liberal in the U.S. Senate. Didn’t go too well, and it left behind a barrel of embarrassing video that would forever after cement his reputation as a waffler with no real convictions.

His image as a canny pol derives entirely from his run as Governor of Massachusetts, a notable achievement for any Republican. But wait; his candidacy and Governorship coincide with the darkest hours of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, which was caught in a seemingly bottomless well of corruption, incompetence and cronyism. Plus, lest we forget, Romney didn’t take the office away from the Democrats — he succeeded three consecutive Republican Governors.

Mitt followed Republicans Bill Weld and Paul Cellucci*, two men who were given a lot of credit for electoral success in the bluest of states — but who, in the long run, were proven to be political ciphers. (Weld, you may recall, was thumped by John Kerry in a 1996 bid for U.S. Senate, and his brief pursuit of the New York governorship in 2006 was a complete disaster.)

*Plus the brief interim administration of Lt. Gov. Jane Swift, who took office when Cellucci left to become Ambassador to Canada, and who was shafted by the Massachusetts Repulicans in favor of the opportunistic Mittster.

Back to Mitt. His 2002 gubernatorial campaign was substantially underwritten by himself; he was responsible for more than $6 million of his total campaign kitty of less than $10 million. And he beat a weak Democxratic candidate by five percentage points.

He racked up some early success as Governor, most notably including the Health Care Reform He Dare Not Name. But as time went on, the charm of the Mittster wore thin; by the end of his term, his approval rating was pathetically low, and he left the state Republican Party in tatters. His designated successor, Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey (owner of the $3.9 million Vermont hideaway where Romney recently did some debate prep) was walloped by Democrat Deval Patrick by 20 percentage points.

And then, in 2008, he ran for President. He established himself as a serious contender by spending a boatload of his own money — $45 million in all, nearly half of his 2008 campaign total. Even so, he was outvoted in in Iowa by genial ultraconservative Mike Huckabee, and in New Hampshire by John McCain, a man greatly esteemed in Washington circles but who (like George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole before him) failed to warm the cockles of Republican hearts.

Huckabee got the cockles but not enough of them; Romney failed to out-cockle the cockle-free McCain, and lost the race for the nomination in spite of a substantial monetary advantage. Journalist Evan Thomas, looking back on the race, wrote that Romney “came off as a phony, even when he was perfectly sincere.”

Hmm. Sound familiar?

Romney’s second-place finish in 2008 gave him the early edge for 2012, which he tried to cement by spending basically the ensuing four years running for President. He failed. Throughout 2011 and early 2012, Romney was beset by an onslaught of truly uninspired and truly ridiculous candidates. Putative technocrats Jon Huntsman and Tim Pawlenty failed to generate any enthusiasm whatsoever, leaving Romney to face a clown-car of a field — Rick Perry, Ron Paul, Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum.

Every one of them was a complete joke of a candidate, and yet Romney consistently struggled to dispatch them. Republican operatives and political pundits constantly begged for someone — anyone — to enter the race: Chris Christie, Mitch Daniels, John Kasich, Jeb Bush, Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, etc., etc. They all stayed on the sidelines, as Mitt stumbled his way to victory over a bunch of tomato cans.

Throughout the spring and summer, as the economy continued to sputter, Mitt had plenty of time to make a case against President Obama. He couldn’t. The polls didn’t budge. Consistently, during primary season until now, Mitt Romney has shown a propensity for missteps, misstatements, and unconvincing rhetoric. And now his campaign has hit the rocks.

Color me unsurprised. This past week was of a piece with the rest of Mitt Romney’s political career. It’s just that now,he’s all by himself in the glare of the klieg lights, fully revealing his fundamental flaws for all to see.  

There’s apparently been another injection of cash into the coffers of Vermonters First, the superPAC headed by former Douglas Administration functionary Tayt Brooks. Presumably, although he ain’t saying, from VF sugar momma Lenore Broughton.

The news, courtesy of busy bee Paul Heintz, is that VF has dumped at least $80K or so into the bulging wallets of Vermont’s broadcasters — particularly WCAX, the station dubbed WGOP by the late great Peter Freyne. Don’t know if it’s a ratings thing, a tribute to Freyne bête noire Marselis Parsons, or a nod to the stewardship of former Douglas Administration functionary Anson Tebbetts, but VF is spending more on Channel 3 than on Channels 5, 22, and 44 combined.

This new buy comes shortly after the end of the mid-September campaign finance reporting deadline; VF’s report showed that it had received $100K from Broughton, and had pretty much spent it all. So now it’s got more money, but we won’t find out how much until mid-October.

And the International Man of Mystery sure as hell isn’t going to spill any beans before then. If his conversion with Heintz is anything to go by, ol’ Tayt seems to enjoy playing secret agent with his superPAC, treating every bit of its business like it’s Top Secret Eyes Only Ultra-Classified Burn After Reading.

(Then again, maybe the I.M.O.M. is just extra testy with Heintz, who is, after all, the man who trapped Brooksie in a blatant lie in the “My Dinner With Randy” affair.)  

Here’s what Heintz gleaned in his most recent chat with I.M.O.M.  

Brooks “would not confirm the total cost of his next two-week [ad] campaign.”  He wouldn’t identify the quantity of new money received, nor would he identify the donor/s. He refused to say whether VF would simply air more of its first three ads: pro-Wooz — er, Wendy Wilton, pro-Vince Illuzzi, and anti-Shummycare — or if it has fresh material up its sleeve.

He also refused to verify the authenticity of a junk-mail solicitation sent under the VF banner this week. Nor would he say if there are other mailings in the works, or how much VF had spent with the Post Office (which truly appreciates the cash).

That’s a hell of a lot of mystery over a little month-old homegrown superPAC. Of course, Our I.M.O.M. must be feeling a bit full of himself these days; after all, he did manage to mine the deep pockets of a wealthy ultraconservative to lift himself out of the political hinterlands and into the heart of the 2012 campaign.

The VF logo, by the way — assuming that the mailing obtained by Heintz is authentic — features a red maple leaf, presumably symbolizing the decline and death of the Green Mountain State under the oppressive Shumlin regime, and the tagline “Restoring Balance.” Which refers to I.M.O.M.’s persistent bleat about liberal dominance of Vermont’s political scene.

I would remind him, as I have done before, that the current “imbalance” is a result of one thing, and one thing only: the Democrats putting forth a more appealing platform and better candidates than the Republicans. Only two years after the seemingly endless Douglas Era, the VTGOP is nearly bankrupt, it has a far-right agenda that’s out of step with Vermont, it’s put forth a spectacularly underwhelming statewide ticket, and it fielded a sadly incomplete roster of hopefuls for the State House and Senate.

If you seek an explanation for the Republican Party’s dire straits, Mr. Brooks, I suggest that you and your colleagues stop whining, remove your blinkers, and take a long hard look in the mirror.  

Look out, kids, Mom’s blowing a gasket.

Ann Romney says fellow Republicans who’ve criticized her husband need to “stop it” and realize “how lucky” the party is to have Mitt Romney as its nominee.

Hoo boy. During a campaign stop in Iowa yesterday, Ann Romney allowed s to how she’s getting just a little tired of all the carping and whining from the Great Unwashed. Don’t we realize what a blessing it is, that one of the uber-elite has deigned to endow us with his leadership?

She’s particularly teed off at the complaints within conservative ranks.

“Stop it. This is hard. You want to try it? Get in the ring,” she said. “This is hard and, you know, it’s an important thing that we’re doing right now and it’s an important election and it is time for all Americans to realize how significant this election is and how lucky we are to have someone with Mitt’s qualifications and experience and know-how to be able to have the opportunity to run this country.”

Awwww. This is hard! And while some of THEM may be used to long days of manual labor for a pittance, this is not the Romney way.

After the jump: more troubles of the rich and famous.

And the “little people”? They’re no better.

“We call the rope line now the advice line,” she said, laughing,

No gratitude at all. These pig farmers don’t know their place. And finally, a pearl of wisdom from Ann Romney’s lips to God’s ears.

“The real measure of a person is not how much money we make, but how we live our lives,” she said.

Mmm-hmm. A fortune built by plundering other companies and killing jobs. Cayman Islands tax shelters. Mansions galore. “A couple of Cadillacs.” $374,000 is “not a lot” of money. Mansions everywhere. Oversized garage with a car elevator. Seamus on the roof. No tax returns for you!

That’s how the Romneys live their lives. And, so Ann Romney tells us, that’s how they should be measured.  

In the middle of each month I, like a migratory bird, find myself drawn the Secretary of State’s office to pick up the latest round of campaign finance reports. And every time, I can’t help but notice that one of the lowest fundraising totals belongs to one Doug Hoffer, Dem/Prog candidate for Auditor. And I ask myself, a little louder each time, why? Especially when I see impressive totals for almost every other Dem.

He’s supremely qualified for the job.  He’s done his duty for the party (parties) by assuming the thankless task of opposing an incumbent last time around. That sort of party service usually counts for a lot. Why are so few folks cutting checks to Hoffer for Auditor?

On deadline day this week, I briefly compared and contrasted Doug with Beth Pearce, appointed incumbent Treasurer. Both are very wonky folks, extremely well qualified. Both have much more experience in their fields of expertise than in politics. Doug, in fact, has a significant leg up on Beth in that department, since he ran a statewide campaign in 2010. Indeed, the big unknown about Beth’s candidacy was whether she’d be able to campaign effectively, since she’d never done it before.

But while Doug’s fundraising has lagged behind almost everyone, Beth has been taking in a truly impressive haul for a first-timer. In fact, she’s raised more money than any non-gubernatorial, non-Congressional candidate of either party — and that includes Bill Sorrell, who had to wage a desperate primary campaign while Beth’s been sailing along with a sizable edge over her Republican challenger Woozy Winks. Er, Wendy Wilton.

So, why are liberal wallets open to Beth, and closed to Doug? Particularly mainstream Democratic wallets, since that’s where most of the liberal money is?

I have a few ideas, and none of them are very flattering to the Democratic establishment.  

— Gold ol’ Vince. Vince Illuzzi’s been around a long time, he’s done some good stuff, so let’s give him a sinecure. This is one of my least favorite things about Vermont: our tendency to value familiarity over talent or qualifications. It’s also a specific weakness of the labor movement; its worst moments have been characterized by cronyism. (And I’m a huge supporter of organized labor, and believe that its decline is one of the root causes of our society’s economic imbalance.)

Vince makes a rather weak argument as to why he’s more qualified than Doug: basically, he’s been around state government for a long time and knows his way around. Well, Doug’s been around too, and he’s done a hell of a lot of fiduciary oversight of state government. Which is precisely what the Auditor is supposed to do. Also, I don’t know about you, but I’d rather have an outsider in this particular job than the consummate insider.

Maybe Vince should get a nice plaque or a gold watch, but should we really treat the Auditor’s office as a reward for being a good guy?

— The Progressive taint*. This is a tiresome meme in Vermont Democratic politics. There are some Dems who just can’t stand to support someone who is, or ever was, a Progressive. This year and in 2010, Doug is running as a fusion candidate, but his background is in the Progressive Party; this makes some Dems cool to him, if not overtly hostile. If there’s any truth to this notion, my message is: cut it out. Grow up, get over yourself, and support your party’s candidate.

*No, not “Tayt” — “taint.” Although the confusion would be understandable.

— Doug’s not “nice” enough. With his tough talk and clear vision of fiscal propriety, Doug has rubbed some people the wrong way. To quote Seven Days’ excellent cover story on the Auditor’s race, “Over the years, lawmakers and journalists alike have felt Hoffer’s wrath, especially when they flub the facts.” And while Vince can be a USDA-prime asshole, his outbursts are brief and transitory, while Doug has raised questions about efficiency, propriety, and the job performance of some powerful people.

Which, again, is exactly what I’d like to see in an Auditor. Well, that plus a solidly liberal worldview, which Doug also possesses. Us liberals should be all for making government as efficient as possible, in order to reinforce our political stance that government is capable of doing lots of good things and making a positive difference. An effective and liberal Auditor could be a key player in ensuring that Vermont’s Democratic administration delivers on its political message.

Which brings us to my conspiracy-theory idea…

— Doug would be too good at the job. Or, as UVM political science professor Garrison Nelson told Seven Days: “He could prove to be a real headache to Shumlin.” Especially when the state’s Joint Fiscal Office is now projecting a budget gap of $50-70 million in fiscal year 2014. Recent budgets have been squeezed pretty tight, and finding another big chunk of savings is going to be very difficult. The temptation will be there to cut some corners and fudge some stuff. (Not implying any particular perfidy on Shumlin’s part; when times are tough, many executives rely on some budgetary tricks to get by. Look at Arnold Schwarzenegger: his entire tenure as California Governor consisted of a series of financial shell games.)

At a time like that, it might be inconvenient to have a hard-core green-eyeshade guy in the politically independent post of Auditor. So, would the Governor and the Democratic Party just as soon not have to deal with a top-quality numbers guy who’s no respecter of persons? Would they prefer Vince, the political insider who can either be co-opted or dismissed as a Republican crank if he raises a fuss?

I find all of these notions troubling, and I hope they are not true. I would love to hear a better, and more flattering, explanation for Doug’s fundraising troubles. Any Democrats care to offer one?

The city of Burlington is being sued by a group of pro-life demonstrators who believe that the city’s “buffer zone” ordinance is unconstitutional. So reports Seven Days. And the lead attorney who brought the case is one Michael DePrimo of Connecticut.

So who is Michael DePrimo, and why is he bothering with a case in Vermont?

A quick Google search reveals that DePrimo is a staunch far-right Christian, a Special Assistant to Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association, one of the most notorious of the extremely political, extremely conservative Christian pressure groups. He used to be the AFA’s chief legal bulldog, until the AFA dissolved its legal team due to lack of funds. In that role, he worked “to use legal means to oppose pornography, obscenity, abortion, and gay marriage.” Since then, he’s pursued the same agenda with funding from other far-right Christian groups and “ministries.”

In case you couldn’t guess, he got his law degree from Pat Robertson’s Regent University.

(For your reading pleasure, try a 2009 op-ed entitled “How gay activists hijacked marriage,” in which, among other things, he yearns for the halcyon days when “homosexual conduct was a felony in all 50 states.” Them was good times.)

(Or maybe this 2004 beaut, “Abortion, Perversion, Apathy: Beginning of America’s End?” which puts us in line for the fate accorded Sodom and Gomorrah.)  

He’s argued legal challenges to buffer-zone laws and ordinances in other states across the country. According to a 2008 piece in the Connecticut Law Tribune, he basically spends his days trolling the online news, searching for potential clients who will give him standing to press his far-right, fundamentalist Christian view of the law and the Constitution. So now he comes to Vermont, bringing his specious legal reasoning to the belly of the Blue State beast.