-
Dick Morris’ Bad Entitlements Advice
April 1, 2013 | 41 comments
-
Will Welker Walk?
March 11, 2013 | 273 comments
-
Not Yet Elite, But Pretty Neat
February 5, 2013 | 8 comments
-
The Harbaugh Bowl
January 22, 2013 | 33 comments
-
Tom Terrific
January 14, 2013 | 55 comments
Political Hay
Hit Me With Your Best Scott
Disappointments and opportunities a year after the Scott Brown special election.
Some called it the “Scott Heard ‘Round the World.” A year ago today, Scott Brown stunned the bipartisan political establishment when he won election to the U.S. Senate seat Ted Kennedy had held for 47 years. Although the Revolutionary War rhetoric was obvious hyperbole, the excitement wasn’t entirely unjustified: this was the Democrats’ biggest electoral defeat of the Obama era.
Not the first, mind you. Chris Christie had already been elected in New Jersey, Bob McDonnell in Virginia. It also ended up being far from the last Democratic setback of 2010. But the health care bill was then hurtling through Congress, where the party of Obama enjoyed three-fifths majorities in both houses and enough votes to extinguish Republican filibusters in the Senate.
The Brown upset threatened to put the brakes on that agenda. Brown restored the Republicans’ filibuster power by giving them a 41st vote against health care and other Democratic legislation. More importantly, he proved that such legislation could be politically ruinous in Massachusetts — a very liberal state that already had a version of Obamacare and where the Kennedys had been clamoring for national health care throughout the postwar era. It was the Tea Party’s first real triumph.
What a difference a year makes. The Democrats were briefly scared by Brown’s election — remember Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) telling his colleagues to slow down? — but decided to forge ahead. The Democratic leadership determined the health care bill was something worth losing their majority over; a critical mass of swing-state Democrats came to a similar conclusion about their congressional seats. The reconciliation process made Brown’s 41st vote in the Senate a mere formality.
Brown has since lost some of his luster. National Democrats no longer fear him. Instead they are said to be busily seeking a challenger who can reclaim the Senate seat in November 2012, someone with better political skills than the hapless Martha Coakley, a Bay State Democrat who couldn’t tell a Red Sox pitcher from a Yankee if he came up and waved a bloody sock in her face.
The Tea Party has tired of Brown’s weak tea as well. The Massachusetts Republican voted for the Obama administration’s Wall Street “reform” package. In the lame-duck session of the last Congress alone, he sided with the White House on the START treaty, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and the tax cut compromise. Only on the DREAM Act amnesty did he hold firm.
“I think that there will be a primary challenge,” Christen Varley, president of the Greater Boston Tea party, predicted to the Boston Globe. “There’s enough of an underground movement in the Tea Party movement as seeing him as not being conservative enough. There probably will be multiple people who attempt to run against him.” No names have emerged and multiple challengers would probably work to Brown’s advantage. But he won’t necessarily be able to count on the national Tea Party fervor to carry him across the finish line a second time.
Last year, many Massachusetts Republicans — inspired by Brown’s example — decided to run for office. A number of them ran surprisingly competitive races against Democrats who had never had to work for reelection before. Outside of candidates for the state legislature and the governor’s council, however, all of them lost. Only a handful had anything approximating conservative support from out of state. None of them had the element of surprise over the public-sector unions and party machines that fuel the Democrats’ get-out-the-vote efforts.
Things have gotten so grim for Massachusetts Republicans that even a former aide to Gov. Deval Patrick took to the pages of the Boston Herald to lament the state party’s decline. But many of Brown’s problems are also the national GOP’s: the party is most effective at running against Washington and galvanizing independents when out of power.
In 1994, Perot voters cast their ballots for the first Republican House in 40 years and against the Clinton regime’s witches’ brew of tax hikes, Hillarycare, and midnight basketball. But in 1992, after the dismal Bush years, they voted for Ross Perot. Six years after the Bushes returned — and after twelve years of a Republican Congress — independents were ready to vote to empower even Obama, Pelosi, and Reid.
Driving around in his pickup truck and talking about “the people’s seat,” Brown could appeal simultaneously to conservatives who wanted a reliable anti-Obama vote and independents who hoped the new senator would heed Rodney King’s famous plea. Congressional Republicans must now do the same with Americans who want to get rid of Obamacare and those who want the federal government’s hands off their Medicare.
Like Brown, the new Republican majority will face choices. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), whose Tea Party is of the bold and caffeinated variety, is set to unveil $500 billion in spending cuts from this year’s budget. Good luck getting others to identify $50 billion over ten years.
It was always unrealistic to compare Brown and new Republican compatriots to the events of Lexington and Concord or the shot heard ‘round the world. One could nevertheless hope that they opt to go out with a bang rather than a whimper.
About the Author
W. James Antle, III, author of the new book Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped?, is editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation and a senior editor of The American Spectator. You can follow him on Twitter @jimantle.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (82) | Leave a comment
More Articles by W. James Antle, III
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/01/19/hit-me-with-your-best-scott
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- The Continuing Crisis
- The End of the Castros?
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.19.11 @ 6:17AM
Scott Brown has proven to be an acolyte of big government who apparently put one over on the Tea Party.
Scott Brown has voted for and enthusiastically endorsed gender and racial quotas that were built into the financial regulations bill.
Technically, that's just another disaster waiting to happen because banks are going to be forced to hire second rate candidates based on their race or gender.
In essence, Scott Brown is not as far left as Ted Kennedy. Unlike Kennedy I don't think he would betray his country.
But he certainly betrayed many voters who hoped he would stop the march of big government.
Bob K.| 1.19.11 @ 8:13AM
Why is anybody surprised by this?
It reminds me of the old joke where an extremely disliked and unpopular thug, bully, thief, bum and charlatan died. The minister at the grave ceremonies was unable to get anyone to say anything good about him despite all of his pleas. Finally someone raised their hand and volunteered that the deceased's "brother was even worse!"
Brown is from Massachusetts.
He is doing what he said he would do!
The alternative was a democrat who "was even worse!"
Browned-Out| 1.21.11 @ 7:24AM
I agree with Bob K on his points, however, process is often iterative and the notion of electing an R in MA provided hope to the overall process that hit a milestone in Nov 10 which needs to crest in 12.
Bruce| 1.19.11 @ 1:51PM
Does anyone seriously believe that Scott was in fact a "conservative?" REALLLY? Froma state like Massataxets?
Is he less liberal than Kennedy was - of course - almost ANYONE would be save Bernie Sanders. But really now ... why is anyone the least bit surprised?
Alan Brooks| 1.19.11 @ 6:04PM
"an acolyte of big government who apparently put one over on the Tea Party."
oh you don't say! how COULD he have twicked you like dat; fooey and fiddlesticks.
What is the world coming to dat a Republican politician would twick people, it is unheard of, and not vewy nice, either.
Golly gee willikers, Homer Price. The donut machine keeps crankin 'em out.
Bob K.| 1.19.11 @ 8:51PM
Alan,
Anybody is better than your "hero of Chappaquiddick!"
Winghunter| 1.19.11 @ 6:21AM
Another candidate unvetted by the Tea Party whose voting record mirrors any Libtard with the typical 2 brain cells and a bagful of treason.
You better believe this is his only term.
Tex Expatriate| 1.19.11 @ 12:51PM
Right-o. If the Dems don't pick him off, the Tea Party will. He'll be supported by the queasy Republicans, though, despite his treacherous votes.
Alan Brooks| 1.19.11 @ 6:08PM
Or maybe Scott will have a child out of wedlock, and his wife will die of cancer.
Or he will say he is going on a camping trip, when he is actually in South America with a ho.
It's the In Thing to do!
Bruce| 1.19.11 @ 6:57PM
You really are a slimy piece of shite, Brooks. Why you are allowed to continue to post here is a mystery.
Martin Treptow| 1.19.11 @ 7:43PM
Mr. Brooks,
That your thoughts would veer from a discussion about Scott Brown to the sexual escapades of Messrs Edwards and Sanford reveals much about you. I'm guessing tighty-whities, Parliament Ultral Light Menthols and a subscription to "Throb".
What do I win?
Troll.
Fail.
Cheers!
Alan Brooks| 1.19.11 @ 8:13PM
"What do I win?"
You win a RINO, who will take the oath of office January 20th, 2017.
Alan Brooks| 1.19.11 @ 8:19PM
... it is you injured innocents at AS:
"How could Scott be a RINO!"
You dumb chumps, you goddamned suckers. Fool you once, shame on RINOs; fool you twice, shame on you."
That's what hurts you, knowing you are congenital suckers.
Melvin| 1.19.11 @ 6:30AM
Vetted or not, Scott Brown said multiple times during the special election that he wasn't necessarily going to vote along Republican Party lines.
We also have to keep in perspective that Scott Brown is and always will be an attorney. Like it or not America, lawyers thinking processes are very much different that you and I on the street. Hence is current voting record.
Scott Brown is voting with his head and not his heart. I'm not saying that is good or bad, I'm just saying that Scott Brown does not vote with emotion, and the guy isn't dumb he wants to be reelected so his record is going to reflect that.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.19.11 @ 6:55AM
People who vote with their head do not vote for laws that promote blatant discrimination in the workplace. That is not a product of the heart either.
It's simply a mind set called Big Gov.
CalMark| 1.19.11 @ 2:10PM
Scott Brown is a liar and an opportunist.
He specifically promised a conservative family-rights group he would NOT vote to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"--and then he did.
Brown said he "wouldn't always" vote with the GOP caucus, but that's not so much the problem. The problem is that when the chips are down, Scott Brown almost NEVER votes with the GOP.
Send him home in '12--he's just another sleazy opportunist.
Jane| 1.19.11 @ 7:16PM
That's precisely the problem...he's voting with his head....calculating whatever move he must make next to save his job and maintain his existence with the other D.C. elitist (both left and right). What Tea Party people want are representative who vote with their heart...a heart pure and true to what will put our Nation back on track. The patriots of old that helped form the greatest Nation on earth had this type of heart....would we have been so lucky if Scott Brown had such heart.
Clint| 1.19.11 @ 6:32AM
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Now Inside & Outside Congress.
Jim DeMint, Dr.Rand Paul and The New Tea Party Senate Caucus Meet January 27th.
We Rise Up In Rebellion.
Carpe Diem.
RCV| 1.19.11 @ 12:24PM
Can they find a room big enough for the three of them?
Clint| 1.19.11 @ 1:12PM
Uh Oh !
Obama PropagandaBoy RCV is reduced to parroting his Huffpo Homies.
Can Obama PropagandaBoy RCV find a room big enough for his trash talkin' mouth?
Occam's Tool| 1.19.11 @ 4:50PM
C'mon, RCV, the Republicans have shifted to the right considerably---there will be a good sized caucus for the Tea Party.
That being said, it would be nice if some posters would try to emulate the Incredible Hulk less---"Hulk Smash" is not an effective argument. (Watch for it RCV---"Ring, Ring" followed by Israel Firster blah de blah.)
RCV| 1.19.11 @ 10:46PM
Timmie was specifically referring to the Senate Tea Party "caucus" which is, in fact, three I believe, Occam.
As for Tim, I expect nothing more intellectual from him than name-calling. The guy I feel sorry for his Senator DeMint, stuck with an infantile anti-Semite for a cheerleader.
Clint| 1.20.11 @ 1:55AM
Negative Attention Craving ObamaBoy RCV attempts to Play The Anti-Semite Card on Tea Party Rebel Clint.
The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates.
Rise Up In Rebellion.
Carpe Diem.
Occam's Tool| 1.19.11 @ 4:50PM
C'mon, RCV, the Republicans have shifted to the right considerably---there will be a good sized caucus for the Tea Party.
That being said, it would be nice if some posters would try to emulate the Incredible Hulk less---"Hulk Smash" is not an effective argument. (Watch for it RCV---"Ring, Ring" followed by Israel Firster blah de blah.)
Clint| 1.20.11 @ 1:59AM
That being said ObamaBoy RCV & Tool Job hold hands and go off to The Israel Firster Club House to have a drink together & plot strategy against The Tea Party's America Firsters.
Deborah D | 1.19.11 @ 7:11AM
Scott Brown was a disappoint to say the least. I realize that he's from a liberal state, but didn't they basically give him the green light to do a few conservative things? I couldn't believe he voted for the financial reform bill (along with the usual suspects: Collins and Snowe of Maine). Do these dopes read anything they sign?
Jeremy Stevens| 1.19.11 @ 7:56AM
Scott's latest bit of nonsense is to buy into the Dem's strategy of bipartisan seating during the State of the Union speech to mask the enormity of their November losses. "I'll sit wherever they tell me to," quipped the obviously-not-all-that-bright RINO, prompting all kinds of jokes from those of us who were hopeful enough - and, as it turns out, dumb enough - to stand in the snow holding signs for this fraud. "It's just an itty-bitty letter after my name." Enjoy it, Scotty boy. Methinks you'll have plenty of time to ride around Wrentham in your pickup come 2012.
Doctor Right| 1.19.11 @ 8:13AM
Let's be honest: Scott Brown's election was more of an in-your-face, middle-finger to the Kennedy clan and the Democrats than it was an embrace of Tea Party Conservatism.
Tread carefully with this one. Brown's just the type of guy to slap a little "i" after his name if he feels threatened, and pick-up the votes of the so-called "independents" (ie, clueless voters who don't pay attention until election day) to get himself another 6 years.
We KNEW he wasn't a Conservative...But we understood the symbolism, too.
Get him re-elected, and give him a worthless committee to chair where he can't stir the pot with half-baked, quasi-lib schemes.
John Navratil| 1.19.11 @ 8:44AM
Dr. Right,
You've read the scorecards and as a plan it could be worse, but this is the kind of thinking which gives us RINOs. We knew Scott Brown wasn't particularly conservative and he has voted as expected. I have to agree that I would prefer a Scott Brown I know to an undependable RINO or an unreconstructed Kennedy liberal.
However, if conservatives are to be elected, conservative candidates need to be run. No one ever held a Senate seat without a name on the ballot.
Dioctor Right| 1.19.11 @ 3:34PM
Look, if the good people of the Commonwealth put-up a Conservative, Tea Party candidate against Brown in the primary, then more power to 'em!
But this isn't Delaware. Unlike Mike castle, Brown is an incumbent Senator who ALREADY won by attracting lots of so-called "moderates" (some of whom were Democrats who were sick of the Kennedys and their arrogance) and RINOs.
And don't forget, unlike in 2010 (and preventing a 1995-type implosion), the GOP will likely capture the Senate and maybe the White House in 2012.
That would give the GOP complete control of the Federal Gov't. RINO's like Brown are less likely to vote against their Party if huge majorities exists - there's nothing in it for them - so he's not as dangerous as he is now, with Democrats still controlling the Senate.
And as a reality check, as much as I'd like it, we'll NEVER have a Senate populated completely by hardcore, Conservative Republicans. Yes, we need to get as many of them as possible to minimize the damage that one or two can do, but it will never be 100%.
CalMark| 1.19.11 @ 8:33PM
We need a bunch of hard-nosed conservatives whose toughness is from the DeLay mold, to whip the RINOs into obedience.
Kinda like Nancy Pelosi and the Blue Dogs.
Hey, they make use of Useful Idiots--why shouldn't we?
JohnPatrick| 1.20.11 @ 1:31PM
Right & Navratil: I too concur Brown is mostly RINO and has served out his usefulness. How to unseat him with a more conservative candidate - or how to get him to move right are questionable. maybe the right (no pun intended) candidate will surface, as did he.
Dustoff| 1.19.11 @ 11:29AM
I agree Doc. We have to remember the state he's from and the type of people he works for.
Ted| 1.19.11 @ 1:26PM
Dr. Right,
I am not so sure about the plan... The reason being that this is what people once said about Jim Jeffords of Vermont. We knew he wasn't a conservative, and they gave him relatively worthless committees to chair, and he still caused much mischief. Just like the Maine Ladies.
Bob Grant| 1.19.11 @ 1:51PM
Absolutely.
I agree he should be supported but put in his place within the republican party.
The biggest fear I have about him is his enjoyment of being in the spotlight. He just loves it when the mainstream media and hollywood court him. Just look at the long list of so-called republicans corrupted by the adoration by the mainstream media.
My prediction is the mainstream media will be standoffish toward him, hoping a true liberal re-takes the seat in 2012. However if he wins, he becomes THE go to guy to create divisiveness within the party as they know his tenor as senator will be more established/long term.
Louis Jenkins| 1.19.11 @ 8:19AM
Brown has been a big disappointment, but what else can we expect. Did he really pull the wool over our eyes? NO! He was a brighter light in the storm of liberalism. Best to look for more Conservative challengers next time around, but please Mass., don't roll over and play dead. That's what liberals hope will happen.
Old Soldier| 1.19.11 @ 8:20AM
Don't be too hard on Scott Brown and don't get your hopes up for a more conservative challenger.
MA is lost. Just about every conservative like me left the Bay State long ago. I would gladly move back to New Hampshire but never Taxachusetts. Never.
Everywhere I've gone in the country I've met fellow MA refugees. NC, NJ, NV, CA (although they are fleeing that mess too), PA. Most are fiscally conservative types who resent the liberals that chased us out of our home state.
idalily| 1.19.11 @ 2:43PM
+1. Why anybody was optimistic enough about Scott Brown to later be disappointed is strange to me. I always knew what he was. I donated to his campaign anyway because Obamacare was on the table and he'd pledged to vote against it. But I never expected a conservative. In MA? Please. They passed up Beilat for Barney Frank. They are a lost cause. I just better not have to spend one tax dime bailing them out.
Curly Smith| 1.19.11 @ 8:23AM
I have a question... is Massachusetts really a liberal state, as is always claimed, or is it simply that the political class is liberal? If Scott Brown won running a conservative campaign then that suggests that the voters aren't enamored of the Big Diggers; rather, it suggest that they largely haven't had any real electoral choice. They could vote for the liberal Democrat or for the liberal Republican but they couldn't vote for a conservative. Massachusetts has been governed by the corrupt ruling class for generations. Scott Brown has shown that a Conservative can win, now Massachusetts just needs to replace him with a real Conservative.
Bruce| 1.19.11 @ 9:36AM
Curly;
In answer to your question; YES, MA is really a liberal state. I spent two separate tours of duty at Fort Devens. I couldn't have a rational political discussion with any of the locals. And when they elect supposed "Republicans", something happens to the elected person's mind (Mitt Romney and Scott Brown are two good examples.)
Old Soldier| 1.19.11 @ 1:22PM
Yep. Worcester County - the strip down the middle of the state - is relatively conservative. The eastern and western ends of the state are off the charts leftist.
Hear what happen to the big state sponsored green energy project they built at Devens? Moving to China. Pretty funny.
Curly Smith| 1.19.11 @ 3:16PM
In that case it would behoove Texas, and the other less economically distressed States, to institute citizenship requirements. We should require those fleeing the bastions of liberal nirvana to leave their economy-destroying and job-killing principles behind.
Old Soldier| 1.19.11 @ 4:06PM
I'm sure you know or at least know where to find liberals in Texas (Austin). MA is the reverse - maybe 60 / 40 lib to conservative. I know plenty of liberals who love Boston or NYC and would never leave.
So my non-scientific guestimate is that more than half the working age people leaving MA and NY are fiscal conservatives.
I've seen the libs who move and bring their bad ideas - but there are more of us who leave to breathe the fresh air of liberty.
Stormzeye| 1.19.11 @ 11:36AM
Curly, I was born and spent most of my life in Boston. I'm now a proud Floridian. There is no more liberal state than Massachusetts. Even California has a death penalty. Never expect a Massachusetts Republican to be conservative, ever. Even Henry Cabot Lodge and Daniel Webster would have been appalled at being called conservative. Calvin Coolidge was the closest thing Massachusetts ever produced to being a conservative. New England almost seceded from the union prior to the War of 1812 because they didn't want their trade with England disrupted. During slavery they made a lot of money transporting Africans to the West Indies while at the same time starting the abolitionist movement. The liberal tradition, with Emerson, Thoreau, and countless other intellectuals will always be the rock upon which Massachusetts' culture rests. It used to be "classical liberalism" which is today called "libertarianism" but through the influence of the Irish experience and their sense of victimhood at the hands of the English (transferred to the Boston Brahmins) and European class warfare, you ended up with a line of "progressives" such as James Michael Curley, Tip O'Neil, Teddy Kennedy and other non-Irish who took to the class warfare such as Dukakis, Deval Patrick, Barney Frank, etc. I could go on but I'm starting to get depressed.
Luke| 1.19.11 @ 4:56PM
Um, Scott Brown ran as a social moderate, as someone that wouldnt be beholden to parties and labels, someone who would work with both sides and would put the people of Mass first.
The 'Tea Party" doesnt have a platform. It means different things to different people, and for many people it has nothing to do with social issues or foreign policy. People in other parts of the country just assume that all "Tea Partiers" are like them, but in Mass they dont care about issues like DADT and START.
However, conservatives did run --- in 2010. Sean Bielat, Karyn Polito, Jeff Perry, Bill Hudak, Bill Gunn, Marty Lamb... They all got wiped out. That must have been one big conspiracy by the ruling class.
manny sabisch| 1.19.11 @ 9:16AM
Good news and bad news here. Sen. Brown fails to recognize that the conservative values he ran on and for which he was elected provide him ample opportunity to be an imaginative, creative and independent voice for MA voters. Unfortunately he attributes his liberal partisan support to his idea of "independence." (I'm my "own man" style.) We elected him because we believed that his conservative ideals would bring about "independent conservative ideas," not progressive liberal ones like he's supported. Now the good news! How MA votes in Washington is the equivalent of a carbuncle on an ant's arse!
idalily| 1.19.11 @ 2:47PM
He did not get elected based on conservative values. He got elected because Coakley ran a dismal campaign and didn't know baseball. And because he's hot. Women, sadly, often vote based on that alone.
I Survived Arlen Specter| 1.19.11 @ 9:27AM
Being from PA I can tell you Arlen Specter did not leave The U.S. Senate. He took off a few decades of age, moved to Massachusetts, & changed his name to Scott Brown. Same political mentality, different name. His re-election will mean absolutely nothing to those fed up with RINOism (the Stupid Party variation of modern liberalism). He didn't get a cent from me the first time he ran & he won't get a cent this time around either. RINOism is the political variation of selling one's soul to the devil. Be honest Senator Brown & switch to the Democrat Party. Better to be honest than a phony opportunist.
Anthony| 1.19.11 @ 9:29AM
Scott Brown is a victim of Obamacare; he has developed Potomic Fever and treatment is not forthcoming. He apparently likes the title of senator and loves the trappings of Washington.
Perhaps he sat with rapture as he listened to the departing Arlen Specter, who told of " joining" the senate those many years ago.
Perhaps Brown sat in awe of how a loathesome figure such as Specter could have such a terrific run.
Perhaps Brown said to himself, "this could be me in 30 years, if I play my cards right, conservative to moderate to liberal to conservative again", a pols winning ticket,".
As has been said, the senate is a very exclusive club, however, it appears membership dues are extremely high, one's soul must be sold in order to remain a member in good standing.
mames| 1.19.11 @ 9:40AM
The best we could hope for in the depraved state of Taxachussetts. This is the state that gave us the Kennedys and Kerrys, over and over and over again. Scott is a RINO but better than a sharp stick in the ass.
Proud Queer Conservative| 1.19.11 @ 10:00AM
I donated to the Brown campaign, and I'm proud as hell that he voted to repeal that ridiculous, Bill Clinton disaster-of-a-policy known as DADT. And, guess what, the ban was lifted and the sky didn't fall down. Let the fur fly...
KeninTyler| 1.19.11 @ 10:11AM
The repeal of DADT is neither the problem nor the real issue. And the sky will fall when the "unintended consequences" rear their ugly spectres somewhere downstream.
Ted| 1.19.11 @ 1:30PM
The law underlying the policy was repealed pending certification, and the policy will be repealed once certification is made. As that has yet to happen, it's a bit early to say the sky hasn't fallen as there are no consequences (intended or unintended) to evaluate.
It will come down to what the new regulations are and what new policies are implemented. We in the military will do what we always do: make the best of things and muddle through.
Bruce| 1.19.11 @ 7:03PM
How good of you. However - the policy has yet to be implemented. Already, it has become well known in military circles that a large (very large) number of officers, non-coms, and enlisted have no plans to re-enlist - or simply retire from the service. Speaks volumes as to how much of an input the ranks had in the decision of nitwits like ADM Mullen and the Chiefs of the service (except for the Marines, God Bless'em) to go along with this nonsense.
Jim| 1.19.11 @ 10:09AM
As someone who once tried to run in MA, I can tell you that 1) yes MA is THAT liberal. The chance to get a real conservative elected is as likely as getting a gun control candidate to run and win in East Texas. 2) Yep, he has more than once made me very angry with his votes and I have no doubt that he will not shift to a conservative voting record. 3) However if he was a red meat conservative he would lose his seat--especially in a presidential election year. 4) There is one vote that matters more than any other and he casts that one correctly, so I can forgive, even if I have to hold my nose, the others--that is how to organize the Senate. Believe me, being in the majority changes everything. McConnell would bring the repeal of Obamacare to the floor, Reid will not. It is as simple as that, folks. If you want DeMint and Paul to have committee chairmanships then Scott BRown is the price we have to pay. Don't kid yourselves otherwise.
KeninTyler| 1.19.11 @ 10:15AM
As a conservative who supported Brown financially from out of state, I feel I got the only support he promised when he voted against Obamacare. Had the proper legislative process been followed and his vote kept it from passing, he would be our hero today despite his other leftie leanings.
frank drackman | 1.19.11 @ 11:18AM
Scott Brown's been all downhill since election night when he told the audience his daughter was "Available".
You remember, the one who sorta looks like Chloe Kardashian.
Al Adab| 1.19.11 @ 11:28AM
Brown clearly highlights the dilemma Conservatives have battled for the last fifty years. In a place like Mass. an accomodationist Republican is about as close to a Conservative as the Movement is ever likely to get. Does the Movement therefore support that Republican, nominate a Conservative Chimers, or just give up on the state?
Who is the most Conservative electable candidate? was the question Buckley often posed. The problem we see is that led us to Dole, McCain and others unacceptable to The Movement (and voters) while being nonetheless Republicans. If we are ever able to reconcile the dilemma we might again achieve electoral success. Republicans and Conservatives are not synonymous and only when Conservatives prevail has the GOP found success.
idalily| 1.19.11 @ 2:56PM
We have been losing the battle you refer to by being passive. By allowing progressives to drive the narrative. By accepting earmarks for our own states without a murmur of protest. By not standing up and fighting hard (is that inflammatory rhetoric?) against deficits, earmarks, and profligacy. By tucking our tails for far too long and allowing our side to be smearing with epithets like "sexist", racist", and "evil." By not fighting hard on the battleground of ideas and principles, which is where we can WIN. Other than Reagan, we've been in a coma for decades. We're just now coming out of it, but we can't afford to go back to sleep. Ever.
Steve in Pittsburgh| 1.19.11 @ 12:14PM
I should not have expected much, just like with CA.
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.19.11 @ 12:25PM
Folks,
In the final analysis, Scott Brown must represent the IDIOT majority in Massachusetts.
I contributed to his campaign knowing that.
Occam's Tool| 1.19.11 @ 4:52PM
He's an idiot---he's just better than the rabid idiot opposing him.
By the way, I like the beaches in 'Bama, TX, and CA a helluva lot more than Cape Cod. Feet freeze in August.
Clint| 1.19.11 @ 1:21PM
Olympia Snowe in slacks opportunist Brown voted for The New Start Treaty and for repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in the Senate -- this after he voted for Wall Street Regulation Reform over the summer and The Obama Stimulus Bill back in February.
"Shelby Blakely, a spokeswoman for the Tea Party Patriots, which provides support for more than 1,000 community-based Tea Party groups nationwide, was also less than enthusiastic about Brown. “I just don’t see the Tea Party getting energized for him,’’ she said. “I don’t see them using their own money and own time as they did before.’’
Diana Reimer, cofounder of the Philadelphia Tea Party Patriots, drove to Massachusetts a year ago and spent a week campaigning for Brown. In 2012, she said, she’ll be more focused on conservative candidates in Pennsylvania — and not getting a “half-conservative’’ like Brown put back into office.
“Would I do it again for Scott Brown?’’ she said. “Probably not.’’
disdained constituent| 1.19.11 @ 2:41PM
I can't wait to send a check to a real conservative challenger to Scott Brown.
idalily| 1.19.11 @ 3:02PM
And that conservative will lose. This is MA we're talking about. A conservative will lose every time. That blue state will only start to shift purple when it is utterly destroyed and in financial collapse. Look at MI. NY. CA. They are there, too, on the verge of destruction. After the collapse, they will change for awhile out of desperation. Will it last? Who knows? I just hope they don't expect my ID tax dollars to bail them out. Not one dime.
tatosian| 1.19.11 @ 3:38PM
According to the Hill, McConnel escorted 4 Tea Party backed Republicans on a whirlwind tour of our war zones.
Why'd they go?
Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah immediately set to work organizing the Tea Party Caucus but those four (Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) go on a taxpayer funded junket?
Their first act is spending taxpayer dollars?
Apparently the Republican "go along to get along" disease strikes as soon as one gets off the plane in DC.
Any chance the Tea party will run a tea Party candidate with no Republican affiliations some time in the very near future?
Any chance at all?
Purple Lips| 1.19.11 @ 4:07PM
Here's the difference between the GOP and the Dems. In 2006 Rahm Emmanual recruited 40 very conservative Democrats (Pro Life, Pro Gun, fiscal conservatives, all flag wavers) and ran them in Red districts. Almost all won. Ditto for 2008. These Blue Dogs campaigned in many cases to the Right of the GOP incumbents. And they won big time. However, when it came time to vote on things like the Stimulus, ObamaCare, financial regs, etc... they all toed the line. Never did Pelosi or Obama ever worried about "independent Blue Dogs). She did the math, and accumulated the votes. She always had just enough votes to win. Ditto for Harry Reid (all of those Senate Blue Dogs easily were whipped into shape).
The GOP Congress hasn't had that kind of cohesion since Harry Truman. Party discipline for the GOP is a joke; just look at the Lame Duck session from last month.
There are a few things we have learnt about the GOP. As a party, the GOP believes in nothing except holding thier seats. They do not fear thier party's chain of command. They certainly fear what thier opponents across the aisle think of them. I fear Pelosi and Reid have more influence than Boehner or McConnell.
Luke| 1.19.11 @ 4:38PM
Hillarious comments.
No one else could have won that seat for the GOP, s if the Tea Party could have found someone. Scott Brown is acting exactly as he said he would.
He won because he has great people skills, was a tireless campaigner, an optimistic personality, convinced the voters he was a man of the people. He won for populist reasons more than ideological reasons. Conservative and moderate Republicans got wiped out in 2010. Brown didnt betray anyone. He needed a large number of Democrats to vote for him, as any Republican in Massachusetts does. And despite what the article says, he approvals are sky high.
Still has has been with the GOP on gun control, cap and trade, ObamaCare, Elena Kagan, DREAM Act and amnesty, border control, DISCLOSE Act and slinencing conservative speech, terror, GITMO and civilian trial for terrorists, the Bush tax cuts, Omnibus spending, earmarks and earmark reform.... to name some.
Getting those votes from the most liberal state in the country is a freebie. You're lucky to get anything.
Luke| 1.19.11 @ 4:41PM
Also, anyone who thinks Scott Brown will get a serious challenger is a joke, and has no clue about Massachusetts electoral politics.
Grow up.
jrjr| 1.19.11 @ 5:26PM
Did you folks think he was elected in a Red state? I had no unusual thoughts about him since I was well aware of the "free" state of Massachusetts - that is, I want it free. Do you know of anyone on the east coast north of the Mason-Dixon that can be relied upon?
PCP Smoker| 1.19.11 @ 6:43PM
Nice piece. He did his duty and now he's done. He was, and forever will be, the 41st vote against socialist healthcare. Dems in the Bay State can go back to their stupor, while the idiot GOP can go back to chasing "moderation". Thanks for the orgasm Scottie, now get the fuck out of here.
Bob Grant| 1.19.11 @ 8:49PM
I've read several posts about Scott Brown's support of the Financial Reform Bill last year. He needs to be accountable for that vote alone because of the many negative implications when implemented...
...I know this is off topic a bit but will someone from AmSpec consider writing a comprehensive article on the bill? From my understanding, it's effect will be just as encroaching and economically disastrous to the country as Obama Care.
Right to Lifer| 1.19.11 @ 10:50PM
The pro-life vote in Massachusetts provided more than the winning margin of difference for Scott Brown. We supported him becuase we knew he would vote pro-life. Since his election, he has voted 100% pro-life. We'll be supporting him again.
REB| 1.20.11 @ 12:08AM
While I agree on the pro life stance it takes more than that to be reelected,like being honest and honest and did I mention HONEST...he lied and thats not only unforgivable its down right obaminable!
Sonny| 1.20.11 @ 2:46AM
Please, Scott Brown is toast, heck, the Republicans don't even want him any more, let alone the Obamacrats in Mass..
Banjo| 1.20.11 @ 12:31PM
If anything can be said in defense of Scott it is he couldn't go too far right and hope to get reelected in two years, not in Massachusetts.
dixiedrifter| 1.22.11 @ 1:07PM
Brown has used up his political capital with Mass. Repubs, Conservatives and other independent minded voters. This guy will receive and a$$ kicking of noteworthy significance following elections for his Senate seat. He appears as another do-nothing elected hack.
Adidas | 8.11.11 @ 5:15AM
is good
العاب بنات | 4.11.12 @ 2:25PM
We KNEW he wasn't a Conservative...But we understood the symbolism, too