To: massmike
The article didn’t list his political persuasion. Thus, I assume he is a Democrat.
To: patrick10801
This being Boston, I’d say that’s a pretty safe assumption.
4 posted on
10/13/2012 6:41:13 PM PDT by
Wingy
(Don't blame me. I voted for the chick. I hope to do so again.)
To: patrick10801
The article didn’t list his political persuasion. Thus, I assume he is a Democrat.C'mon. He's a political appointee for the City of Boston. Boston last elected a Republican mayor in 1926 (and that was a fluke even then). This is one instance where I think party affiliation is superfluous. Of course he's a Democrat.
6 posted on
10/13/2012 6:41:48 PM PDT by
Alter Kaker
(Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
To: patrick10801
From another
article:
"He has been employed by the city since September of 1984, according to officials."
Natch: lib-dem pervert/deviant.
7 posted on
10/13/2012 6:44:20 PM PDT by
Carriage Hill
(The 0bummer Penguin: I played this country like a harp from hell.)
To: patrick10801
The article didn’t list his political persuasion. Thus, I assume he is a Democrat.You're right patrick - if he was a Republican it'd be mentioned in the headline and again in the first sentence. Newspapers whore for democrats...
14 posted on
10/13/2012 8:56:17 PM PDT by
GOPJ
(You only establish a feel for the line by having crossed it. - - Freeper One Name)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson