Left In Lowell

Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs

 
2013 Candidate Questionnaire Responses!
 

October 11, 2007

Hell Continues to Freeze Over

by at 11:28 am.

My god, even the Herald. I guess Ogo even outconservatived the conservative papers.

Or rather, outincoheranced them.

As a commenter said, however, of course the Herald, like the Sun, had to qualify their endorsement (can you imagine the angst at these two editorial boards?). “OK, so there will be votes on the war and troops. There will be resolutions, and Tsongas will vote for them. But foreign policy isn’t made on the floor of the U.S. House - for which we are increasingly grateful,” they wrote.

But even the often-reactionary Herald took Niki Tsongas’ points on immigration over Ogo’s shrill and unintelligible mixed signals (his arbitrary definition of what path to citizenship is “amnesty”): “You can rail against all the illegal immigrants who are here, but if you don’t do something it’s de facto amnesty,” she said. “It solves nothing.”

Touché, Herald, touché.

[Via the ever-alert BMG.]

53 Responses to “Hell Continues to Freeze Over”

  1. Shawn Says:

    Yeah, that one is sad.. but in the two key cities of this election, Haverhill and Lawrence, the local paper (The Eagle Tribune) has endorsed Ogonowski.

  2. waittilnextyr Says:

    Emily to the rescue!

    WASHINGTON — A Democratic group is pouring $125,000 into the 5th District for radio ads supporting Niki Tsongas, six days before the special election to replace Marty Meehan.

    The robust investment by Emily’s List, a Washington-based group that supports Democratic women candidates, marks the largest payment by an outside group since the race began last spring.

    “It was as much radio as we could buy between now and the election,” said Maren Hesla, director of the group’s program on political expenditures.

    The move reflects Democratic concerns that the contest has become uncomfortably close between Tsongas and Republican Jim Ogonowski, an underfunded candidate who has run an effective ground campaign to cast himself as a politically independent operator.

  3. Lynne Says:

    Ug. Emily’s List is annoying. I wish honestly they’d stay out of this. There are much better women’s groups out there.

    But Emily’s is the big one. Can’t say no, shouldn’t say yes…I wish their membership would show a little skepticism and stop sending them money.

  4. Shawn Says:

    Yeah, is this how every race in the country is going to be run from now on.. both sides work hard to meet with voters and make their case, then some national PAC comes in and throws what looks like a half a million for one candidate?

    We might as well just give up on elections and just have the PACs choose the representatives.

    I’m glad to see you’re being consistent, Lynne. You didn’t like them during the primary, and don’t endorse them now even when they’re helping your candidate. That’s class.

  5. Thom B Says:

    The Herald endorsed Tsongas over Ogo? I checked the story on the Herald, checked it on another site then checked to make sure my contacts were actually in. I work not to far from the Herald and am surprised I didn’t feel the earth shaking.

  6. Lynne Says:

    LMAO Thom.

    Shawn: heh…please tell that to your fellow conservatives who are attacking me in other threads. :) But yeah, just because we’re on the same side now doesn’t mean I am happy they’re in this. (Like I said, there are far better, more honest women political groups out there.)

    Emily’s List is just too much of a ‘kingmaker’ organization for me. It’s sort of like the DLC in its ignorance about what people really want or need in an election. Washington tone deafness. And yet, people still give them credibility and legitimacy.

    Or, on the other side, like the dumbass media who keeps giving Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin a platform

  7. Shawn Says:

    Hey, I give credit where its due, and give the hits when they are. Its all good.

    Ann Coulter is one I just cannot stand as well.. but I have to admit I like Rush, and this guy on 96.9 in the morning ain’t bad (at least until Howie gets there)

  8. joe Says:

    So now it doesn’t matter if people on the floor of the House argue against the war and pass resolutions to end it?

    That’s not what the Herald was saying six months ago, or two years ago. Back then, having a debate about the war helped our enemies.

    I guess all the cable providers in Iraq stopped carrying CSPAN last month.

  9. Mr. Lynne Says:

    In all seriousness Shawn. If you get a chance, check out Confessions of a Former Dittohead. I’m not sure it will change your mind about Rush, but it is educational in achieving a better understanding of what you are getting with him. It is also a cheap and very entertaining read.

  10. Ryan Says:

    I’m beginning to think Immigration is the new Abortion for conservatives. It’s the policy they know will get a rise out of their base every election cycle, making it very, very important to not do ANYTHING about it after their elected. After all, if they did, they could risk losing immigration as an issue. And if you can’t get Republicans to get angry at brown people every two years, how would they win anything at all?

    The Kennedy-McCain bill was far from perfect, but it managed to be a bipartisan solution to most immigration problems, while trying to avoid new ones. So what does the Republican Party do? Go on the attack, scream and cry… that they were about to lose their biggest meal ticket every election cycle. Republicans: the party that stands for nothing, even the things they pretend to stand for.

  11. Mr. Lynne Says:

    Its the current ‘thing to get mad at’. Previously it was abortion, courts, guns, taxes, etc. They always need the ‘thing to get mad at’ to rile up the authoritarian follower base. Either that or the ‘thing to be afraid of’.

    Not that there are no things to get mad at or things to be afraid of (although the GOP is pretty good at manufacturing either out of whole-cloth), but the telling characteristic is the use of the issue to ‘whip up’ controversy and inflame emotions.

  12. Ryan Says:

    omg, Lynne, I just clicked on that Ann Coulter link..

    Seriously, why do people keep putting her on tv? It’s insane.

  13. joe Says:

    All I know is, if somebody tries to deport the guy who makes the pad thai at the Southeast Asia, I’m lying down in front of the police van.

  14. K-R-S Says:

    Ann Coulter needs a mood stabilizer…

  15. grizzled veteran Says:

    Dear Shawn:

    You state “…but in the two key cities of this election, Haverhill and Lawrence…” Jim Ogonowski received the endorsement of the Lawrence Eagle Tribune.

    Hmmm. The two key cities, Lawrence and Haverhill, that Niki Tsongas won in the primary despite endorsements in the Eagle Tribune for Eileen Donoghue?

    We’re getting desparate. Of course, Shawn and I probably agree on one thing, in a special election no one wins who doesn’t turn out the votes. This one of far from over. Get those Tsongas volunteers out there!

  16. Prince Charming Says:

    KRS: her mood will be stable when the Democrats are in control of both the Congress and the White House.

  17. waittilnextyr Says:

    In the stretch run, there are concerted efforts to win this “prize” (or is it really a difficult task, that will require a lot of hard work, with frustrating opposition and intractable problems). Ogonowski’s clan is rallying a 5-day effort, and on the other side it is not only the Emily’s list push, but frequent TV ads and rallying of support by the Governor and Senators. Is this a sign that the race is close, or is it just that no one wants to leave anything in reserve, as Kerry did in 2004?

  18. Shawn Says:

    How about yesterday’s email blast from the Merrimack Valley Labor Council:
    “Niki Tsongas’s (sic) campaign is not doing so well. We have the opportunity to turn this around…”

    Yeah, both sides still have a lot of work to do…

  19. joe Says:

    waitillnextyr,

    Another possibility is that the national and state parties are using this Congressional election as a dry run and warm-up for their ‘08 campaigns.

  20. Right in Lowell Says:

    “Shawn: heh…please tell that to your fellow conservatives who are attacking me in other threads. But yeah, just because we’re on the same side now doesn’t mean I am happy they’re in this. (Like I said, there are far better, more honest women political groups out there.)”

    I’ll stop attacking you when you admit Tsongas is as much a tool of the Washington as you accuse Ogonowski of being. Till then, you’ll continued to be called out for partisan politics.

  21. Lynne Says:

    RiL: I’m done addressing you until you actually have something useful or relevant to say. It appears to me you are more interested in crying for attention by flinging anything you can think of instead of having an actual conversation.

    If indeed attention is what you crave, I believe there are other blogs, more in line with your methods of carrying on a discussion than this one, where you can get it. Try here.

    Oh and FYI - this is a partisan website. Duh. I mean, it’s in the goddamn name for heaven’s sake. Or did you not notice?

  22. grizzled veteran Says:

    Did anyone hear Jim Ogonowski on WCAP this morning? The conduct of John McDonough and Tom Boyle was completely nauseating, biased and unprofessional. Unlike interviews with candidates they oppose philosophically, they didn’t ask one critical question, health insurance never came up, and they had the very objective following inquiry:

    JM: ‘When you are elected to Congress and you go down to Washington, will you call us Thursday mornings?’

    JO: ‘Well I haven’t spent time in Washington so I don’t know what I’ll be doing Thursday mornings.’

    JM: ‘I think you’ll probably be free between 7 and 8 am…’

    If you heard any of the WCAP interviews with more progressive candidates like Jackie Doherty, Kevin Broderick and others; the questions were nasty, one-sided and took on the feel of heckling. I’m sick of the dinosaurs at WCAP. They are prehistoric, intellectually lazy and their show should be called “The Time Machine.”

    George Anthes was out this morning, but he has much higher standards. For City Council, he has decided to support his plumber and dentist. He also attended Jim Ogonowski’s fundraiser the day Bill Clinton came to town (after railing against his Auditorium visit for the week)and mentioned he had Ogi’s sign on his front lawn. He doesn’t like Sunrise on WUML and programming at LTC because they are in competition with WCAP. How dare them! Right here in America! George also said Niki Tsongas was the equivalent of Neville Chamberlain and George Bush was Winston Churchill.

    I think its time for a campaign for balance on WCAP, diversity and democracy. I hear the new owners have bigger and better community plans, but if not, I think it’s time to encourage an advertising boycott and demand equal treatment and access.

    Let’s lose the dinosaurs and move this radio station from the 15th to 21st century.

  23. Muronao Says:

    “Till then, you’ll continued to be called out for partisan politics.”

    Speaking of tools…*rolls eyes*

  24. Thom B Says:

    “Oh and FYI - this is a partisan website. Duh. I mean, it’s in the goddamn name for heaven’s sake. Or did you not notice?”

    Gee I kinda noticed that myself. You even have the word progressive in there. Maybe instead of white on blue text you could make it flashing red text with some kind of siren sound file.

  25. Mimi Says:

    Grizzled Veteran:

    Thanks for invoking WCAP in this discussion; you realize that you have unleashed another round of bashing this blog (although we do remain nameless) on the airwaves. :-) By the way, my former substitute teacher’s name is Tom Byrne, not Boyle.

    And I agree with you, during the interview of candidates which has been ongoing for the past few weeks, School Committeewoman Jackie Doherty, City Councilors Rodney Elliott and Kevin Broderick were interrogated while others were thrown softballs.

  26. Shawn Says:

    I wonder about that (partisan website) Lynne.

    Are you saying that you’re partisan, thus you disregard other’s calls for you to see their views?

    Not an attack, just understanding.

    I like the blogosphere for the interaction (and hate the trolls myself as well).

    But I too wonder whether retreating behind “this is a partisan site” diminishes your opinion to the greater community.

    If you niche yourself, don’t you just let the rest of society accept that you’re in that niche and allow them to disregard you?

  27. Mr. Lynne Says:

    I’m a partisan because I’ve considered views and have made a decision on where to stand. That being said, I am always open to argument… its just that many of the arguments along partisan lines are arguments I’ve had with myself and others for a long time now, and as such, I expect the likelihood of seeing an argument that could change my mind on some issues is unlikely, but a possibility I suppose.

  28. Lynne Says:

    Shawn: Well, I regularly work to elect candidates in my party, as has Mimi…I’m very partisan, and if I don’t disclose that I’m being dishonest. I’m a Democrat, and I want Democrats to win. (Of course, local elections are a little different, being less partisan by nature.) But even locally, people know whom I am not supporting and who I am.

    That said, yes, of course this blog is about discourse (well, when it’s really discourse). You never want to be in an echo chamber - it’s not good for your own political health, and having to defend your views with actual real world knowledge and facts helps you hone your views and keep them honest, and who knows…maybe even occasionally change your mind. (As my husband says, I’ve spent a long time thinking about those views from every avenue I can find and so my conclusions are hard to shake, mainly because I came by them by hard thinking.)

    Actually, you can say I worked real hard for my views…coming from a very conservative family. I didn’t just take what I was taught at face value, but made my own way through the philosophies that I espouse with real thought (at least I think so - peer pressure to be conservative where I come from was quite hefty). :)

  29. Right in Lowell Says:

    Ignore me all you want. When you’re inconsistent with what you say, you leave yourself open to criticism. That’s exactly what you accuse Ogonowski of doing, not answering questions.

    I asked, and am still waiting for an answer as to why Ogonowski is a tool for the national Republican party but Tsongas (with all her national friends) isn’t. Is that so hard to answer?

  30. Tim Little Says:

    I thought this quote from Paul Krugman’s book The Conscience of a Liberal was somewhat apropos:

    “For now, in other words, being an active liberal means being a progressive. And being a progressive means being partisan. But the end goal isn’t one-party rule. It’s the re-establishment of a truly vital, competitive democracy. For in the end, democracy is what being liberal is all about.”

    Interesting interview, btw:
    http://www.alternet.org/workplace/64931/

  31. Dan M Says:

    Can anyone fill me in on the poll that has OGo down by only 10%? Am i right to say that there was one ONE poll done? I haven’t been keeping up with the info, so I am sorry, I just find it strange that the race would be that close…

  32. Lynne Says:

    Actually, there’s a second WBZ poll just released last night, with about the same margin, so Ogo has not moved much at all.

    That, coupled with a very heavy grassroots campaign that I know Tsgonas has, I think makes her pretty certain to win. That said, no one should relax and not go and phone bank at Tsongas HQ. :)

  33. joe Says:

    Ogonowski is a tool of the national party, and Tsongas is not, because Ogo has changed his positions, emphasis, and rhetoric to better match the party line, and Tsongas has not.

  34. Shawn Says:

    “For in the end, democracy is what being liberal is all about.”

    Sorry, I don’t buy that one.

    Its the liberals who try to impose more and more regulation to limit freedoms.. and who was it that didn’t want democracy when it came to the gay marriage issue last year?

    Democracy is not the goal, its a stable, secure and economically sound republic that we strive for.

  35. Mr. Lynne Says:

    Liberal ideals of tolerance and is an indispensable component of freedom. The very notion that certain freedoms should be protected against the tyranny of the majority is a blueprint for a liberal way of thinking about rights.

  36. Shawn Says:

    That wasn’t what Tim was saying.

    I don’t see the point of protecting from the “tyranny of the majority” as a liberal pov, but as an American one (designed into the system that we all support).

  37. Shawn Says:

    GV:
    Personally I agree with Anthes on the radio issue.

    I don’t think private enterprise should have to compete against government entities.

    Why should the state be running a radio station (beyond the of education)? There should be no syndicated shows, no advertising, no broadcast of third party entertainment/sports.

    By using tax dollars, they undercut the local competition and damage the economy.

    Why does the university run a program to test baseballs for professional sports (which has endless money of its own)? Let a private lab actually make some money in this state, rather than giving the job to the state and eliminating more private jobs and industry.

    The same is true of libraries.. why do they offer new release movies and music.. in direct competition with local businesses? How does a video store compete?

    The purpose of the library was supposed to be education and learning..(democracy cannot exist with an uneducated population said Franklin). Its become a rec center and center of free services… at the taxpayers expense and at the cost of private jobs and economy.

    And back to the university again.. where in the constitution does it say it is the role of government to actually organize, fund and control the debates for elections? It made me uncomforatable to see the spouse of one candidate’s campaign manager hosting the debates in this race.

    It seemed to go off fairly.. but it set a precedent for the future where this could be corrupted.

    And the fact is.. it should have been left to private industry to do it.

  38. joe Says:

    You lost on gay marriage, Shawn. You got routed.

    Among our elected representatives, your side couldn’t manage even 25% of the vote. To put that another way, among a collection of people who stand out for their eagerness to kowtow to the prevailing political winds, you couldn’t even manage to lose by 3:1.

    We had a democratic process on gay marriage. And the antis couldn’t even clear the laughably low bar set to get a petition onto the ballot.

  39. Mr. Lynne Says:

    Actually it was Paul Krugman saying it.

    Tolerating dissent is a liberal value. Giving everyone access to the conversation is a liberal value. Sunlight in government is a liberal value. Not allowing the leveraging of power distort any of the above is a liberal value. Contrast these values with a state that is selective of what is broadcast to our armed forces and limits their access to speak their mind wants to let business dictate access to airwaves and the internet, seeks to hide any document it can behind whatever secrecy act it can drum up, and lets K street write legislation.

  40. Tim Little Says:

    Shawn:

    That sounds more like a conservative goal than a liberal one. And as Krugman astutetly points out the income inequality espoused by conservatives actually serves to undermine that very stability, security, and economic soundness.

    The problem is that neither an authoritarian nor a libertarian/anarchic model of government is a magical solution to meeting the needs of individuals within a community — from essentials such as food, clothing, shelter, medicine and education, to more idylic goals of individual freedom and happiness.

    The optimum solution, clearly, is to recognize somewhat of a balance: sometimes people are indeed best left to their own devices, but there also needs to be a mechanism for resolving conflicts between contradictory self-interests (deliberate or otherwise). And, yes, sometimes that entails limiting “personal freedom” (whatever THAT means). Democracy may not be the most straightforward path to meeting that goal, but it’s probably the least worst one. (Churchill?)

    I believe it was Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. who said that the right to swing my fist ends at the other man’s nose. And from the viewpoint of social stability it’s far better to have an ostensibly impartial authority to settle the fist/nose dispute than to simply leave us to slug it out amongst ourselves.

  41. Lynne Says:

    joe: true. And actually, despite my disagreements with the neoliberal philosophies on trade and corporate governance and health care reform, Niki’s been consistent on these issues for a very long time…she is a member of that generation of political leaders, and as much as I’d like to see those philosophies shift, you can’t say she has changed them for the sake of political expediency or by who has been a part of her campaign.

    Like I said, I disagreed with Clinton politics plenty of times. But I sure as hell would vote for him again if I could, warts and all.

    Ogo, on the other hand…totally changed the tenor of his campaign (he never mentioned immigration before July! and still doesn’t bother with posting his issues on the web in a useful fashion) because the RNC told him to. Which is typical of the right wing, especially these days, with that authoritarian top-down structure they employ.

    Shawn: lately, though, that’s been the province of progressives, fighting against abuses of power from the right side of the isle…don’t you think? And, from our point of view, espousing the idea that you should open up rights wherever possible (like with gay marriage) and civil rights shouldn’t be up for popular vote (which, by the way, they were - we voted in the guys who voted to not send the amendment to the ballot, as is their due and as is the process). That amendment, in the end, couldn’t get 25% of the lege to vote to continue it! With such a low bar, you can hardly say that it was a tyranny of any majority.

  42. Tim Little Says:

    Sorry…. One other thought:

    As communities become increasingly complex (i.e., larger), they require correspondingly more explicit guidelines to ensure everyone is operating on the same page. Just imagine what our cities would look like without traffic lights, for example. This was probably fine when there were only a handful of cars on the roads, but not so much given today’s volume of traffic. Each of us stands a greater chance of getting to our destination (wherever that is) if we agree to abide by certain ground rules along the way.

    Similarly, it’s easy enough for a hermit to simply do as he or she pleases; add another person into the equation, and each one needs to make compromises to ensure mutual satisfaction; add a third and still more mechanisms need to be put in place to guarantee mutual happiness; you can do the math to figure out how this might look when our “communities” comprise millions if not billions of people.

  43. Right in Lowell Says:

    Joe, thank you for posting a reasonable answer to the question I’ve been trying to pin Lynne down on for so long.

    I don’t necessarily agree with you, mostly because I think both candidates are being used in some part to test-drive national campaign strategy for 2008, which makes them both tools, especially when you consider how little what happens in Massachusetts reflects middle America. They’d be better off pouring their national dollars into a midwest state.

    I’ve also seen Ogonowski disagree with his party on more issues than Tsongas does with hers. Of course, that’s because he’s running in a state that’s ridiculously Democratic, but that wouldn’t make him the first politician to espouse certain beliefs during an election that they don’t really hold. That, unfortunately, is something common to both parties as well.

  44. Right in Lowell Says:

    P.S. Bravo to Niki for disavowing the remarks by Chet Atkins.

  45. Mr. Lynne Says:

    The thing thats been bothering me about the Atkins remark… what if its true? I mean, the part about shame and all is uncalled for, but the statement about Ogo’s brother’s stance on immigration. Is that relevant to Ogo’s campaign? If its true, should we be vilifying it? I think the nuance was all wrong, but if the statement is objectively true (Ogo’s family statements indicate that it may, in fact, be suspect), should we be disparaging it?

  46. Right in Lowell Says:

    How on earth do you see racism in Ogonowski’s remarks? For the love of God people, we can have differing opinions on topics without being branded as racists, or elitists, or whatever tag both sides of the debate want to throw out there.

    What Atkins said was stupid, plain and simple. Besides being a ridiculous comment, it was a totally inappropriate subject for him to broach, and if John Ogonowski were alive today, I’m sure he’d be more than willing to tell Chester where to stick it.

    As I said, bravo to Niki Tsongas for having the guts to do the honorable thing.

  47. joe Says:

    R.I.L.

    The 5th is closer to the national political center than most districts in the state.

    And while the absolute numbers in the election are not going to reflect well the country as a whole, there’s the spread and swings to look at to see what works and what doesn’t.

  48. joe Says:

    Lynne, R.I.L.,

    Think of how much political hay Nikki could make if she came out as a protectionist. She isn’t. She’s leaving that lying on the table, because that’s not what she believes.

  49. Muronao Says:

    Shawn, there are many people who can’t afford to rent videos or go to the movies. The library is a center of the community and provides community services, services patrons have requested and which they feel benefit them. Why is the role of government to protect business instead of to benefit citizens? You might as well not have a library at all, it hurts book stores and the publishing industry. And if you can’t afford an estate with a lawn, no park for you either. And the airwaves belong to the public, by your logic why should they be rented to private entities at all. And debates don’t make money, private enterprises won’t do that work for free, so then what? Only candidates who can afford to pay can go? If you agree to pay a little more and give some tax breaks or some special legislation if elected, they’ll ban your opponent from the hall and you get the floor to yourself?

  50. Shawn Says:

    Muronao:

    It is the role of government to encourage business and promote economic growth. That is why we have a nearly 97% employment rate as compared to countries like France with almost 20% unemployed.

    The best “benefit” for citizens is a job in the private sector.

    A society where a huge percentage of the workforce actually works for the government is a society bent on self destruction.

    The library serves a great purpose. Historic documents, a breadth and depth of information that you would never find in a bookstore (which often only focuses on what will sell today). That was the original intent and concept of a library.

    Towns provide for open space.. in terms of park and recreation land as a way to limit growth, and to induce people to come to live there.. that’s a valid role of government. There is no economic use for a private park.. other than professional sports, and thus they do not disrupt the economy (refer to “Mr Smith Goes to Washington” for an opposing case)

    Debates do make money. The media outlets who run them sell sponsorships and/or advertising for these as “events”.

    I don’t understand your last statement.. but the fact is that non-profit groups (such as the LWV) do run debates as well, and do it very well. So again there is not taxpayer funding needed, and no taint as to why a government entity is trying to control the next election.

  51. Mr. Lynne Says:

    The mainstream wisdom would have us believe that when Comparisons to France are made the economic difference are stark and extreme. Not so much.

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/03/europe-bashing/

    But a visit to France – and/or a look at the statistics – makes it clear that the French economy gets a bum rap. I don’t want to go overboard here: France has a lot of problems. But it’s doing much better than the American caricature would have it. …

    …Also, tales of mass unemployment are greatly exaggerated. French residents in their prime working years, ages 25-54, are as likely to be employed as their American counterparts (the employment-population ratio is 80 percent for both).

  52. Mr. Lynne Says:

    “How on earth do you see racism in Ogonowski’s remarks? ”

    Thats what I meant about the “shame” part being all wrong. The part I was wondering about is the question that did his brother, in fact, have a different stance on immigration than Jim?

    It was a passing thought is all.

  53. Right in Lowell Says:

    Well, do you have the exact same stance on ALL issues as your siblings? Can’t two intelligent people view things from different sides of the spectrum?

    And if it matters, he continued his brother’s program with the Asian farmers. I don’t really think a racist does that.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

[powered by WordPress.]


If you are not on Twitter and want to follow our feed on Facebook, click "Like" for our FB page.
BadgermillCity logo

Pages:

Recent Posts

Search

Categories:

Archives:

October 2007
M T W T F S S
« Sep   Nov »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Other:

Email us!

(replace spaces, ['s, symbols)
Lynne | Mimi

Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums

Lowell Politics

Mass Bloggers

Politics Online

The Arts in Lowell

Trad Local Media

40 queries. 1.314 seconds