VoxOp

“The MBTA has a good track record of providing reliable and safe service, so it definitely deserves a raise. Right? Okay, maybe the opposite of that: it needs to raise fares in order to provide the safe and reliable service it should have been giving us all along.

The proposed fare raises include $47 (from $40) for a monthly bus pass, and $69 (from $59) for a monthly LinkPass. That’s a 1 percent fare hike for the LinkPass, which we expect to be accompanied by 17 percent better service, including being able to get a seat at least once a week and not having five D trains pass us by before a C comes along. This is just what commuters need! Continuing its tradition of reliable service, the MBTA news site has no mention of these fare increases. Perfect. Just perfect.’’
ALL BOSTON BLOG
allbostonblog.com

“MBTA commuters are about to get stuck. Hard. But in exchange for forking over more cash for the same crummy service (and avoiding the threat of even worse service) riders need to demand one major concession in return.

Smilin’ Dan Grabauskas has got to go. After all, the entire Turnpike Authority is heading out to pasture as part of the deal to avoid a massive toll increase. Shouldn’t T riders expect some similar quid pro quo in exchange for higher costs? What about the concept of accountability?’’
OUTRAGED LIBERAL
baystateliberal.blogspot.com

STATE FIGHTS MARRIAGE LAW

“We’re going to keep seeing what we have been seeing - state-by-state scraps on the marriage question - for the next few years. But each time a state settles the question for itself, the immediate next question falls straight in the federal government’s lap, and there is simply put no way the federal government can avoid answering for much longer. In a few years time, the state-by-state battles will necessarily fall away as the ball winds up in the federal court. It looks like Massachusetts . . . has already fired off the opening salvo.’’
BRAD
thecrossedpond.com

“Strike another blow against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). This time it comes in the form of a lawsuit filed on behalf of the State of Massachusetts by Attorney General Martha Coakley, who is suing the federal government. The reason? Coakley believes (and we agree) that DOMA interferes with the right of Massachusetts to define marriage as it sees fit.

This lawsuit joins two other high profile cases taking the federal government to task over the Defense of Marriage Act.

It’s hard to say how each of these three cases will pan out. But one thing is crystal clear: the energy behind repealing DOMA has never been greater. That’s a buzz that MA Attorney General Martha Coakley had to be aware of when she submitted her lawsuit this morning. Her lawsuit only adds to the momentum to do away with DOMA.’’
MICHAEL JONES
gayrights.change.org

DOMA “was signed into law by then-President William Jefferson Clinton . . . Now I don’t think that the gay ‘special rights’ activists of Massachusetts really want to oppose their beloved former President, BUT - they are.

DOMA basically says that marriage is a union between a man and a woman; and same sex marriages performed in states where the definition is otherwise do not have to be recognized in states which have a differing definition of marriage. This has the libtards of the Prissy State up in arms.’’
GRIBBIT
younggunconservative.com