Last modified: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 12:18 AM EDT HAND: Connect the dots on the Hill See if you can connect the dots: Massachusetts House Speaker Sal DiMasi represents Boston's North End, which enjoys one of the highest concentrations of restaurants in the state. The state restaurant association opposes the legalization of casinos. DiMasi killed Gov. Deval Patrick's proposal to legalize casinos. See if you can connect the dots again: DiMasi's lieutenant, Rep. Daniel Bosley, represents North Adams, a small city tucked in the corner of the Berkshires about 135 miles from the science and technology center of Boston. Bosley rewrote Patrick's $1 billion life science bill to mandate that a $40 million life science center be built at Massachusetts College for Liberal Arts. The tiny college, with no particular expertise or graduate degrees in science, is in North Adams, Bosley's hometown. Those are just two examples of the self-interest that rules the state Legislature, but they are enough to make taxpayers wonder if this is the crew they want steering the state's economy. If the state's best interests were truly considered, one would think the new life science center would be located at Harvard, or MIT or at least UMass Amherst, not in the backyard of a representative whose chief qualification is his friendship with DiMasi. Or that an objective look at the pros and cons of casinos would be debated rather than have the idea go down to defeat by heavy-handed tactics by the speaker. There are millions and millions of dollars at stake with both issues, but decisions seem like they are being made for the most crass of political reasons. Perhaps that is why there are rumblings at the Statehouse about a move to replace DiMasi. Reps. Robert DeLeo, D-Winthrop, and John Rogers, D-Norwood, are said to be trying to line up support to become the next speaker. DiMasi claims that he is not going anywhere, but the state Republican Party is on his tail, asking for ethics investigations into phantom voting by absent representatives and allegations of improper lobbying by a friend. The speaker could regain a measure of trust from the public by allowing more open debate in the House and treating issues with the seriousness they deserve. RerunsBy now everyone in the Western world has condemned Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Sen. Barack Obama's former pastor. But, there is something unsettling in the way talk show hosts and cable commentators are taking delight in keeping the issue alive. They play the clips of Wright's controversial words over and over, smirking the whole time like it is some kind of sport. The controversy is weeks old and there is no end in sight. Many white preachers have made outrageous comments, like saying the 9-11 attacks were God's retribution for homosexuality, but those comments were forgotten within days. What has been missed in all the hoopla over Wright is that there is absolutely no evidence Obama has ever said anything approaching a hateful, anti-American, or radical comment. Yet he is paying the price while no one seems to care much that Sen. Hillary Clinton completely fabricated a story about landing at an airstrip under sniper fire or that President Bush declared five years ago that the war in Iraq was over.