Joe Kennedy: The Forgotten Tea Party Senate Candidate in Massachusetts
Tea party groups across the land have been handed a giant dilemma by the race in Massachusetts to succeed the late Ted Kennedy in the U.S. Senate. The irony is that the interest in the race is at least in part based on an issue that Kennedy was obsessed with: creating a socialized health care system.
The reason this problem exists for tea party members is that with a non-Democrat in the seat, Senator Harry Reid would not have the 60-vote filibuster-proof majority he is enjoying right now. Unfortunately, there are some problems with the Republican candidate Scott Brown — such as the fact he voted for RomneyCare.
RomneyCare is socialized medicine for Massachusetts. Worse, Brown is certainly not the kind of limited-government, fiscally conservative candidate about which tea party members are so keen. Rather, he is a typical big-government Republican.
The tea party movement nationwide is obsessed with ObamaCare and wishes to do everything it can to stop it. This is where they come into a bit of a problem. There is a tea party candidate running as an independent. He is confusingly and ironically named Kennedy (Joe), although he is not related to the clan at all. He is a conservative who believes in limited government — the type of candidate that most tea party types across the land profess to want to see elected. (Here is a good examination of how they differ on the important issues of the day.)
Needless to say, people in the Northeast, presumably like everywhere else in the U.S., do not like being told what to do. However, there are some in the movement who are basically ordering conservatives in Massachusetts to vote for Brown despite his shortcomings. There are others who respectfully disagree and consider that voting for Brown is not a good idea.
Those of us in the Northeast are used to this type of browbeating from the Republican Party when it comes to voting for such formidable RINOs as Maine’s Susan Collins or, worse yet, Olympia Snowe. We are told that we must vote for them in order to preserve a Republican vote in the Senate. This is despite the fact that they vote infrequently with the Republicans and are far more likely to side with the Democrats. Needless to say, Republicans, though interestingly not the RNC, are urging all right-of-center types to vote for Brown.
Since you ask, Andrew, I would clearly, without hesitation, vote for Scott Brown.
Not necessarily, as you say, because (paraphrasing) “Republicans want to have a seat in the Senate,” but rather to break the 60-vote power of the opposition.
A “small” but vital distinction.
I’m a libertarian, but in this case I think I would pull the lever for Brown.
Maybe Brown is a “statist,” but honestly, I wouldn’t put him in the camp of Specter, Snowe, or Collins. They are all centrists of an extreme authoritarian bent.
I get a subtle feeling Brown sees healthcare reform along a federalist position. I believe the “it will infringe with Massachusetts and it’s not right for the country” meme just provides cover for it.
So there’s hoping.
Given though that there’s really no supposedly limited government party in Massachusetts to punish, it seems the guy that would kill nationalized health care is the way to go. The libertarian won’t win. Even if Brown supports universal health care in *his own* state, it’s an enormous improvement if we don’t have it in every state. Most importantly, it’s moving in the right direction.
If this was a state which had a prior history of electing limited-government types, I would say punish that party for straying and vote for the libertarian. Since it is not, it is quite a welcome development.
Politics is the process of choosing the least harmful candidate with the best prospects for winning. It is NOT a process of ideological purity triumphing over perceived injustice.
For those reasons alone anyone who supports limited government should vote for Brown in Massachusetts. Joe Kennedy should throw his support that way, too.
Never forget that as a Tea Party supporter you are nothing more than a “teabagger” to a Democrat.
Vote accordingly.
Interesting article, Thanks.
“Is possibly having the one vote to defeat ObamaCare (in its current form) more important than the long-term viability of the movement as a whole?”
The other guy can’t win in this nationally consequential election. Whats the point of being Martyrs when you have a chance to achieve a main Objective. As we are so disenfranchised by our own government, I think its worth alot for any chance to stop ObamaCare, which is also the TP’s goal. So it seems like they are not off-principle here.
I have taken to the pessimistic approach on ObamaCare. I think it has to be stopped in its tracks. I have low expectations it could ever be repealed and am not super-confident that the High-Court-of-All-Thats-Just will strike it down. Besides, even if it is struck down, I imagine they will try a “hot swap” for some other bohemoth – people already having paid in, markets changed, prices adjusted… seems politically difficult to end all that and go back, and, also, much damage will have already been done. I could be wrong (Hope I’m wrong).
Another good reason to make this race as close as possible is to put more heebie-jeebies into the Democrats. Its possible that it could affect their votes.
And, another reason is that, believe it or not, Brown IS riding “the wave” as evidenced by Monday’s $million haul-in; so they really are the same thing.
I also wonder: if a “movement’s long-term viability” is/can be significantly affected by one senate race… well what kind of movement is that? As I understand it, this “movement’s” core is the country’s core; the People speaking out against what they perceive as Tyranny. It can’t really ever die. It will rise up whenever the Establishment ‘treads upon’ too much – God willing.
In the long-term, I think most people just want to go about their business and leave governing to the egomaniacs among us. I believe most want, and see no need, for a permanent revolt culture, unlike some other “movements” I know.
We should not have been relegated to having to shout over our own representatives in town-halls just to remind them that we exist. This cannot go on like this.
As a Tea Party particpant here in Oklahoma from early on. I can clearly say that we should be voting for the most conservative candidate we can elect. In Masshole that would be Brown.
The question, and decision are not even close.
A R(even a RINO, or worse a olympia snow) in Teddys seat. Vrs a feel good vote of 2-5 % for a supposed better choice? Are you nuts? A choice with no chance to win is no choice at all. If the Tea Party goes the way of the Libertarian party and just runs “educational” candidates with ZERO chance of winning then the Tea Party will have the same influence that the Libertarian party has.
What was the name of Ross Perot’s new party? It was called “United We Stand” or something like that? Mr. Dodge, you have an enormous assumption that the tea party movement will last longer than Perot’s party. What’s the average lifetime of other political movements, Mr. Dodge? How can there be a long term downside to something when the tea party movement probably has no long term viability no matter what?
I am also surprised to hear you’ve been brow beaten. What leaders of the national tea party movement have brow beaten you, Mr. Dodge? Name names, Sir, so we can replace them with leaders more to your liking.
I would not like to see the tea party movement hijacked by the anti-Republican libertarians.
“Is possibly having the one vote to defeat ObamaCare (in its current form) more important than the long-term viability of the movement as a whole?”
The answer to this chicken little question is, of course, HELL YES!
First, we can all safely assume that Croky [sarc] will always vote with the Dems on just about any issue. Yes on Obummercare, yes on crap and tax, yes on any envirowhacko idea out there, and so on and so forth.
Second, we can hope that Brown will vote against Obummercare in the current configuration. Later on he might vote for some healthcare reforms, but so might other Republicans, depending on what was on the table.
Third, much as anyone might like and prefer Kennedy, he doesn’t have a chance.
Draw your own conclusions.
[Update]
I would rather see libertarians vote in Republican primaries and help Republicans like me elect more conservative Republicans.
We here in Massachusetts, not “Massachusettes”, have the opportunity to elect someone other than a democrat for the first time in a very long time. While I appreciate the Tea Party movement they need to put their/our support behind Brown. These chances do not come along often. Yes he is more liberal than most conservatives would like but we are talking about having a chance in the bluest state in the union. Joe Kennedy made his points and except for foreign policy I agree with most of what he say’s. He doesn’t stand a snowballs chance in Hawaii. Step aside and let’s take “Teddy’s” seat from these thieves.
“What would you do and are you sure you would make the right decision?”
I’d do what we all should be doing. If a politician has a record to examine, any record, then examine it and base your decision not on what they say during the campaign, but what they’ve done in the past.
We have the same issue with Crist here in Florida. He’s a Republican who talks a good talk and then acts differently. He won’t be getting my vote (he didn’t get my vote when he ran for Governor) and if there’s not a better candidate (I’m still looking at Rubio) it’ll be the first election I’ve sat out in decades.
“However, there are some in the movement who are basically ordering conservatives in Massachusetts to vote for Brown despite his shortcomings.”
Mr. Dodge, if you are unable to keep your eye on the main chance, you should be ignored.
“Rather, he is a typical big-government Republican.”
He’s not running in a conservative redoubt in NY (NY23). He’s running for Massachusetts generally. Joe needs first to have good success in a far smaller district in Massachusetts as conservative as Massachusetts is generally–which it isn’t–before I’ll consider him able to win in Massachusetts generally.
Joe Kennedy in Massachusetts, name misrecognition not-withstanding, is a bridge too far.
Whether one should expend one’s vote on a third-party candidate can be a very difficult question to answer.
For many years — from the beginning of the New Deal through roughly the Carter Administration — the Republican Party was the “we can do it cheaper” party. Republican positions were identical in principle to Democrat positions; the Republicans merely wanted to be the ones in the power seats, deciding who would be hired to supervise redistributionist programs and who would receive how much in subsidies. Back then, third-party votes were our only way of indicating that we saw no reason to support either major party. And indeed, the message of the escalating vote totals for the Libertarian, Constitution, and Right to Life parties struck home in 1980, causing the GOP to present a conservative presidential nominee — you might remember him — and a broadly conservative platform.
But when there is a qualitative difference between the policies espoused by the two major parties, matters become muddled. Is it worth endangering the changes of the preferable major-party candidate to send whatever message one wants to send? If he’s not merely the “lesser of two evils,” but actually possesses character and a willingness to stand behind his positions?
Tough call. Always a tough call.
In 1980′s presidential election, I voted for Ronald Reagan, even though Libertarian nominee Ed Clark’s positions were more compatible with my views. In 1988, I voted for Libertarian Ron Paul, because George H. W. Bush struck me as a return to liberal, big-government Republicanism. In 2000 and 2004, I voted (with trepidation) for George W. Bush, not because of the centrist policies he espoused, but because of his superior strength of character. In 1992, 1996, and 2008, I couldn’t bring myself to vote; there wasn’t a candidate on any party’s slate who struck me as principled or trustworthy.
Given the developments of the past decade, and especially those of the past two years, I find myself thinking that perhaps the GOP has gotten the message once again…but I reserve the right to change my mind, according to the quality of the candidates presented. I counsel all principled Americans to do likewise.
Primary races are the place to have these debates, not in an election in which Martha Coakley is the alternative. Splitting conservative votes between two parties is the dumbest idea ever and dooms us to Democrat rule for the foreseeable future.
If Joe Kennedy wanted the seat, he should have run as a Republican in the primary. I hope candidates like him challenge Snowe and Collins during their next primaries.
I’m going to be an active voter and Rino hunter in Republican primaries.
This should not be a close call. There is a difference between a center right Republican and a far left of center Democrat. I have seen nothing that indicates that Brown is a RINO fraud like Scozzafaza or Snowe or Specter proved to be. He is a Republican. To many Libertarians and Paleo-cons decided to go home and sulk 14 months ago and that is how we got stuck with Obama. Joe Kennedy is nothing but a Judas goat urged on by the Left. We can disagree with Republicans like Brown, Romney and McCain on a host of issues. The fact is that they do not want to fundamentally change America, they like the place. If we want to ensure that standard issue Republicans support our positions on issues then we have to first support them and second keep educating the public. Politicians follow the popular will. Except in rare issues that is how we like them. The hard job remains in convincing the public that radical changes are unwise and unneeded.
Brown said he would not vote for DEMCare. Period. If he has a greater chance of winning just to stop this monster, this Tea Partier has donated to his campaign. In this particular race, this is not the time to make sure the candidate that can stop the treachery is a virgin. We can opt for pragmatism, not perfection. Since Coakley was the favored, it would be a miracle of Brown succeeded in MA. If it would take a miracle to elect a moderate like Brown, you can surely conclude the other Kennedy does not have a ghost of a chance.
This is exactly why the third party concept is so damaging to conservatives. We nee to put all our energy time and money into getting Mr Brown elected. Mr Kenedy has no prayer of getting elected so why waste you vote in this vital and crucial race. Everthing is hanging in the balance here. Get your act together Mass. and vote for Mr Brown and stop Obamacare
Oh, grow up, already. This is politics, not a contest in ideological purity. Brown has done a good job turning a sure loss in to a possible victory…and he’s now to be punished because he might not be conservative “enough”. Well, John McCain also wasn’t conservative “enough”…and now we’ve got not only President Obama, but Justice Sotomayor. Politics is the art of the possible.
AIDodge,
Nice try.
All over the country I keep hearing pundits nagging away at the ‘third party’ issue as if it was a problem, trying to MAKE it a problem.
But the tea partiers are pretty clear on the fact that a third party would cause Dems to remain in power, and are NOT going to be voting for a third party.
Not gonna happen.
The fact that Brown voted for Romneycare doesn’t change my mind about him in the slightest. Kennedy, whoever he is, is an unknown quantity. If you’re telling me I shouldn’t believe what Brown says on the grounds of that old vote, then I also shouldn’t believe what Kennedy says because… I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT HIM.
My point is, I’m a tea partier in favor of taking back the republican party. So are millions of other tea partiers. We will vote for the candidates we have, and where we see they need changing, we’ll change them. But Brown has not yet proven he needs changing. He seems fine to me. His rhetoric on conservative principles rings true. If he is a liar, we’ll deal with that later, although I don’t think he is. Right now there is a seat to flip.
nice try, but no.
“I, for one, am glad I am not in the state to vote in the upcoming special election. It’s a tough call for any right-of-center type. What would you do and are you sure you would make the right decision?”
Golly — Let me think,here. Winning-Losing. What’s the diff, really ?
No.It’s just too darn complicated. I’ll just do the thing that BEST allows the Democrats to hold ‘Teddy’s Seat’. My conscience will be clear. And my political cupboard will be bare,and my bitter opponents will be laughing at my ineptitude, but again : Winning– Losing. What’s the diff ?
It’s the PURITY that really matters.
Hey, thanks for the informative info I wouldn’t have found otherwise, here on the Left Coast!
http://thepeoplescube.com/QuoteQuiz/index.php
GUESS WHICH COLLECTIVIST SAID IT…
… and find out on which side of the gulag fence you’ll be tomorrow.
(Warning: some questions are more equal than others, and some answers will make you want to slap yourself upside the head with a shovel).
Headlines:
Unusually cold winter causes liberals to keep hands in OWN pockets
Obama’s DHS: Detroit attack ‘wardrobe malfunction’
Striving for the perfect in politics can be the enemy of the good. There are no guarantees in this cruel world and one often has to be content on making their decision based on the existing evidence. The betting person is wise to place their bets on Scott Brown. He is as hard right as a viable candidate can be in Massachusetts—and win. The state is not Texas.
There are times when exercising the option of voting for a third party candidate makes sense. I have no regrets supporting Doug Hoffman in the New York 23rd district race. But this is an entirely different set of circumstances. Martha Coakley is the big threat. It is therefore unbelievably stupid to waste a vote on a third party candidate. Al Franken won in Minnesota because some third party nut ball siphoned thousands of votes away from Norm Coleman. Do we really want to go through that nonsense again?
There are others who respectfully disagree and consider that voting for Brown is not a good idea.
He doesn’t say it’s not a good idea. He says it’s a fatal mistake. I’m delighted that you’ve given me the opportunity to expose this crank, Arkady, and disabuse your readers of the notion that he is one who respectfully disagrees. He’s a Charles Johnson wannabe.
I went to his site and commented that whatever issues he might have with Brown, it was idiotic to elect a 60th Democrat in preference to a RINO. (A vote for Kennedy might as well be a vote for Coakley). Rather than engage me in argument he made an ad hominen attack (which was later deleted) and then had me banned from his site.
After thousands of comments over the last 6 years this is the first time I have been banned. In part I blame myself for thinking there was any point in responding to someone who would refer to the election of a Republican (even a RINO, if indeed Brown is a RINO) as a fatal mistake.
Joe Kennedy’s participation in the Massachusetts Senate election serves no purpose except to make it more likely that the Democrats will retain their filibuster proof majority. Democrats will remain in power so long as conservatives insist on the perfect when the choice is between not so bad and bad.
The best is the enemy of the good.
If there weren’t an automatic 60 votes, none of this nonsense would be going on (thanks to Republican stupids in MN), and even the Maine Repubs have been holding strong.
If I were Obama, my heartiest wish at this point would be that the Tea Party people would manage to cost the Republicans the opportunity to elect someone in MA – the fact that this is at all in the realm of possibility shows how weak the Dems are overall.
The weakness must be exploited at all costs; we can sort out the rest when the senate is no longer automatic.
So everyone should sit this one out because a less-than perfect candidate might be elected–that or they should vote for the Libertarian, thus guaranteeing a Democrat winner. What’s more, we should follow the same strategy in upcoming elections.
I’d rather a representative that’s mostly on my team than one that can’t even get to the game.
Joseph Kennedy, who is running as an independent under the Tea Party Banner, could be the spoiler for conservatives come Tuesday. This is the nightmare scenario that conservatives fear most and what Leftists relish. This race is not like Hoffman VS. Dede Scozzafava. Brown is a solid conservative, who has to walk a tight rope over the Big Dig Democrats of Massachusetts if he is to win. Brown made a great showing in the debate and convinced many doubters that he is for real.
Brown has an excellent chance to win if the conservatives come out in force and if he can sway the independent vote. Kennedy also did well in the debate. He should make a fine candidate for conservatives/libertarians in the future. Now, that he has received some name recognition, Joe Kennedy, no relation to Camelot Kennedys’, Joseph should step aside so that he does not dilute the vote for Brown.
If you agree, send a kind message to Joe Kennedy asking him to gracefully withdraw and throw his support in for Scott Brown.
http://joekennedyforsenate.com/
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in the state finds Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley attracting 49% of the vote while her Republican rival, state Senator Scott Brown, picks up 47%.
Three percent (3%) say they’ll vote for independent candidate Joe Kennedy, and two percent (2%) are undecided. The independent is no relation to the late Edward M. Kennedy, whose Senate seat the candidates are battling to fill in next Tuesday’s election.
I believe that if the Tea Partiers cost the Republicans elections, they will see their support seriously erode. There is too much hanging on these elections for people to try a third party experiment. In fact, the effects on the 2012 election could be disastrous.
The conventional wisdom is that this is no time to make symbolic statements with throwaway votes. I have to agree with the “wisdom”.
I agree with your desire to see a true conservative in the Mass. seat, but the reality of this situation, I believe, does not allow for that. With only one week to the election, a push to try to elect Joe Kennedy would only serve to put Coakley in the seat. Scott Brown has the momentum at this point, and, if he did win, he would at least serve to slow down the ObamaCare express to possibly allow for more conservative victories in the November elections. I know it’s the lesser of two evils, and that stinks, but sometimes that is the reality we have to deal with.
I just sent $$ to the Brown campaign. Now this! Can I get my $ back? Seriously though, Coakley is a slam dunk to vote for Obamacare. Brown is less likely to vote for it, and Kennedy is a long shot to win. It’s okay Scott, you can keep the money.
I have great esteem for you, Andrew Ian, but with all due respect, this is not a tough call for right of center types. Politics is the art of the possible. A win, or even a close call, for Brown would throw things into disarray for the left nationwide. Brown’s not a Libertarian’s conservative, but he is a HUGE step up from Kennedy and from what Coakley will be.
Joe Kennedy is a joke, never had a chance, never will have a chance, and is ONLY there on the stage because he serves the purposes of the left. He’s not a conservative, either, he’s just a different type of radical, and an isolationist who substitutes know-nothingism for actual policy opinions. To even consider not getting out there and voting for Scott Brown is an absolute case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Andrew, Very good points but one point I did not see you mention was—third parties don’t win. I live in California and would love to have a Scott Brown to vote for. I have looked into Mr. Kennedy and I so like what he says and stands for but unfortunately, he can’t win so if you vote for him then you guarantee a win for the dems. So what needs to happen and all of the Tea Party believers need to takeover the Republican Party or we will forever be losers.
Do you think Brown realizes what a failure healthcare is in MA?
So the question I have is—vote to unseat the 60th vote or give them the 60th vote for sure by voting for the third party?
Another “I have a problem, I need your help, but there isn’t anything you can do that will work, we are doomed.” article that wraps up with an amateurish question, “What would you do and are you sure you would make the right decision?”
Someday, somehow, somewhere those who dwell in the halls on the mountain of tea party perfection are going to have come off of oxygen long enough to descend down into the mud, and muck, and grime of the real world and… help the trench workers punch the Democrats where it hurts the most.
What would I do? Instead of waiting for perfection to float down out of the clouds I’m going to do my best to help Brown smack Obamacare down because I know that would help drain the swamp; which is a sure winner.
Repeat after me: “The perfect is the enemy of the good.” A vote for Kennedy is a vote for Coakley. Brown could at least help eliminate some of the worst aspects of Obamacare, and he’d be available to help stymy the coming disasters – another “stimulus” bill, cap-and-trade, etc.
“Is possibly having the one vote to defeat ObamaCare (in its current form) more important than the long-term viability of the movement as a whole?”
YES YES YES YES!!!!!!!!!
What future will the current Tea Party ultimately have when the govt starts heavily regulating, then completely taking over our health system (this is a virtual inevitability)? Tea Party types will eventually start saying things like “we can reform the govt run health care system better than the liberals.” The question of whether even to *have* a govt run health care system (as opposed to a market system) will have passed into history. This is what conservatives in Britain are reduced to. And look what’s happening to that society. Statist and declining because the govt controls so much of the lives of the citizens.
I live in Boston and there is a huge buzz about the possibility of Brown actually winning this election. I and others like me are imploring our friends and co-workers to vote for Brown. A friend of mine said that EVERY conservative he knows is urging others to vote for Brown.
If there is a *chance* to vote down this crushing health care bill, it must be seized. If it can’t be voted down, the next possible step would be to somehow get it overturned in the future (presumably shortly after Obama is out of office and cannot issue a veto). This is unlikely though. The longer the health care bill sticks around, the more likely it will be with us forever.
Stopping this bill should be the raison d’etra of the Tea Party right now. Otherwise, the govt will eventually get its tentacles so far into our individual lives that America will never be able to get out of its grasp. Just like what’s happeneing to declining Europe right now.
I urge any of you Massachusetts voters out there to vote for Brown – even if he’s not the ideal candidate. I urge you other non-MA residents to urge any MA friends or relatives to get out and vote next Tuesday. Or even donate to Scott Brown if you can. And let’s not forget that this health bill isn’t the only Obama-Reid-Pelosi piece of legislation out there. There’s still Cap & Trade, immigration, card check, etc… that these people will try to push through before November’s elections. Those must be stopped too.
Getting that 41st vote in the Senate would be a huge victory for the ultimate health of this nation in general and for the Tea Party in particular. Even if it means a short term set back for the Tea Party.
For most policy questions, the worst Republican is better than the best Democrat — “fiscally conservative” Dems be damned.
Written in the finest tradition of Libertarianism, they would rather lose an election and be the smartest person in the room.
Joe should drop out.
Dodge appears not to understand that the Tea Party movement is a genuine grass roots movement and not some off-shoot political entity of the Republican Party. It has organizers but no leaders.
Is this the best Pajamas Media can do to comment on the MA Senate race? I might as well go over to Huffington Post (which has largely been silent on the race) to read something as divisive and conflicted as this tripe!
To answer some questions the author poses:
“Do conservatives of all factions want to invest their political capital for a candidate that is not really conservative anyway?”
You best take the medicine that WORKS, than swallow the one that tastes good but kills you in the end! The choice could not be more clear!
“Is possibly having the one vote to defeat ObamaCare (in its current form) more important than the long-term viability of the movement as a whole?”
Damn straight!! And the “long-term viability of the movement as a whole” is NOT threatened one iota by a vote for Brown. In fact, it will be STRENGTHENED by the shear simple FACT of the Dems losing “Kennedy’s seat”.
The effect will be to ENERGIZE and EMPOWER the movement, EVEN IF the candidate is not a died-in-the-wool Tea Party conservative.
In fact, I would submit that it has done that already! The “gamble” is only in the mind of this author who clearly doesn’t seem to mind seeing Coakley win next Tuesday.
This article is funny stuff. Totally unrealistic, given what’s at stake right now. If socialized medicine gets a foot in the door, you can kiss what’s left of this Republic good-bye.
My observation to date is that the overarching goal of The Tea Party movement (it is far from a viable political party at this point) is to push government to re-focus on the U.S. Constitution, not to form a ‘third party’, per se. The wisdom in deferring to a strict constructionist view of the Constitution also recognizes that a third party approach to fixing government will take a lot longer (if it ever works at all) than eliminating RINO behavior among those in the GOP.
The Tea Party movement is not going away. If anything, when the second (and third?) wave of the current recession hits, and the Democrats’ suicidal economic policies are revealed as the theft and ineptitude they are, it will likely grow. The GOP recently realized this when they were forced to put some energy behind Brown at the behest of the conservative grassroots. Two weeks ago they didn’t want to hear about him or his candidacy. But grassroots support for that candidacy – which is grounded in having had ENOUGH of the whining, lackluster, George-W-Bush-Michael-Steele-style non-leadership of the GOP – has focused national attention on Brown.
This is the way a Republic functions, if it functions at all. When the ruling class strays from the interests of the People, it’s the responsibility of the People to set them straight. After Brown’s elected, if he exhibits what Dodge believes is ‘RINO’ behavior, it will once again be the People’s responsibility to set HIM straight. It can’t work any other way.
The fact that Brown’s campaign has a serious chance at all is due solely to the People’s actions – not his, not the Dems’ and not the GOP’s. He knows this. I don’t entertain illusions that he’ll feel obligated to conform to a conservative, Constitutional constructionist agenda. But I do believe he’ll have to spend a lot of energy, time and money covering his own ass if he doesn’t.
This is how we get back the Republican Form of Government guaranteed by our Constitution: support electable candidates and then exert constant pressure to make sure they know they have to earn that support every day of their incumbency. You don’t rebuild a Republic by splitting it into multiple political factions, you do it by finding and electing individuals who demonstrate that they understand what elected office means (e.g., “it’s the People’s seat”) and then HOLDING them to that understanding at every turn. We have the corrupt, broken government we deserve because, as a People, we’ve been utterly lax in the latter of these two responsibilities. That has to change or the Republic is toast.
Ditto on what Joe at #28 and Skip at #29 said.
“….as divisive and conflicted as this tripe!”
It is a perfectly logical question that deserves to be answered without insults to the author. The emails I have been seeing to tea party grassroots members have been the height of arrogance. Using words like “must” and “have” rather than making the substantive case for voting Brown. Dave II’s comments radiate the same type of arrogance.
I perfectly understand the movement and realise that there are people able to question options when they occur and there are those who knee-jerk back to the same old method for forcing people on the right to vote Republican for a RINO (we hear it in Maine all the time). “But you have to!” Voting for candidates like Brown got the Republicans into the mess they are now in and voting for him won’t help matters (except maybe in the short term).
Many here seem to be ignoring the fact the Dems have said they won’t seat him until after the Obamacare vote. Fox News has reported the Republicans are very worried about this.
Personally, as I said on my blog, I would probably vote Brown given the chance. However to deny that there should be thought about it and there is a dilemma is foolish.
We at Libertysoup.org call this the “Rotating Politician Charade”. Republicans love to dispense $$$ favors too. It will always be up to us… “the funding source” to impose fiscal DISCIPLINE! If you agree… please download a copy of “The USER’S GUIDE TO FREEDOM: on how to DOWNSIZE government instead of prosperity” at http://www.libertysoup.org. The 535 Project (pg 20 of the Guide) clearly explains HOW to impose fiscal discipline on all law makers now & in the future. You will like it! m
If the Republican wins you will claim, “It’s a sea change! Tea party values ascend!”
If he loses, “The fix was in! Hey, it’s Mass, what do you expect?”
You have no standing.
It’s always possible that conservatives will regret supporting Scott Brown. Did somebody promise you a rose garden—a life without risk? There are no sure things in this world. We have to go with the odds. At this point in time, however, a betting man or woman in Las Vegas will place their bets on Brown.
Andy,
There is not one chance that Scott Brown is going to win this election or that a Republicna is going to win a critical senator when Harry Reid has to pass Obamacare…If anyone thinks that, they are sooooo naive. The radicals will never give up power. they will committ electoral fraud and dead members of the Kennedy caln are going to be voting in MA!
Guys, radicals have taken over, they will not give up power peacefully!
Really? You REALLY don’t know how to vote here?
A vote for anyone but Brown is almost certainly a vote for Obamacare, because it means a Coakley win.
Even if Obamacare can’t be stopped with a Brown win, the mere fact that “Joe Kennedy’s seat” went (R) would be a HUGE wake up call to Democrats that they’d best start moderating some of their far left policies, and quick.
For that alone, a Brown win is absolutely critical. “Getting within striking distance” doesn’t count, because a month after the election, no one remembers the loser.
Why not vote for Scott Brown ’cause he’s reasonable and articulate and will break Harry’s idiotic majority ?
Or because he just uttered that fabulous response in response to David Gergen’s idiotic question, question to the effect…
“Does Brown have the audacity to counter the lifelong agenda of the Kennedy seat?”
to which Scott Brown replied:
“It’s not Kennedy’s seat, it’s the people’s seat.”
Coakley apparently believes that there aren’t any Taliban in Afghanistan. Maybe she should tell that to the CIA agents who were last week slaughtered by the Taliban-sponsored Jordanian doctor.
On “healthcare”, Coakley will be a rubber stamp for the Kennedy agenda. Just what Harry & the Senate leadership like, robots who will rubber stamp their agenda.
Andrew-
Glad to I was able to get you to respond. Didn’t mean to insult you personally (and I don’t think I did)…just your “dilemma”…
And even though I didn’t use the words “must” and “have”, I’m clearly not alone here in thinking the “dilemma” is only in YOUR mind.
That the Dems threaten not to seat Brown right away is all the MORE reason to vote for him. The double-standard and outcry will only serve to show the vast majority of voters what is truly at stake.
And finally… I believe a “RINO” (in which there is plenty of debate in wether Brown truly is one) in Massachusetts is still a FAR cry better than a rubber-stamp liberal anywhere else in the country. Seems to me those Maine RINOS are sticking with the herd at the present, right?
Funny…are you going to be this “conflicted” if ROMNEY runs in 2012???
as an independent conservative and if I lived in Mass I would have no problem voting for Scott Brown. while Kennedy (I) positions on certain issues are attractive, they are quite Utopian. I mean come on, do you really think a jr. senator from Mass is going to be able to “dismantle the dept. of Education” or “end federal income tax?” these positions that he takes are more suited for somebody running for President not Senator of mass.
JML
I tend to agree with most of the realists on the right in this thread. There are some great Republicans on both coasts like Brown, Collins, Snowe, Govonor Arnie and so many others in the middle like Hagel and Huckabee waiting to take their rightful place to “start winning again”. Tea partiers would be wise to “get on board” and join progressives or they will find themselves in the “frigid fringe”. All they have to do is just accept a few changes to their platform i.e. health care reform then they will really become part of the “big picture”. If Brown wins..he will wisely move quickly to the left to represent the “sensible center” of the Republican party which is currently absent from their party. Good Luck to him !!
Who is ‘Joe Kennedy’?
He is ‘Vice President’ of State Street Corp, a $2-3 billion TARP recipient. Isn’t it nice of State Street to put him on a leave of absense or whatever so he can oppose the Democratic nominee?
Who else is ‘Joe Kennedy’? He is He Who Cannot Be Googled. Just try finding out anything about a Massachusetts politician named ‘Joe Kennedy’. What search terms would you use? Yes, he is invisible. Nobody can find out anything about him. That makes him perfect for what he is doing to the race.
In the recent New Jersey governor race we just has an conversative spouting ‘Independant’ named Chris Daggett who was actually Jon Corzine’s appointed environmental commissioner. He literally worked for Corzine yet were asked to believe he was an Independant conservative. He nearly kept Chris Christie from his victory.
‘Joe Kennedy’ may be a ringer.
I am in Massachusetts and I am voting for Brown, though I’ll be knocking on wood with crossed fingers as I do it. I’d much rather vote for someone who truly understands the proper limits of government, but Brown will have to do for now. Here’s why:
1. The alternative, Martha “no bad guys left in Afghanistan” Coakley, is a disaster. Just more of the same.
2. It’s an opportunity — finally!! — to drive a stake into the heart of the whole Kennedy thing in this state. I’ve become so sick of the pious bleating of that clan and their ever accommodating toadies over the years that I’ve often felt as though my pancreas would explode. That whole thing goes down with the Martha ship, I think. Well, I hope, anyway. (Yes, I understand Tea Party Joe is no relation.)
3. Brown has a real chance of winning. After years and years and years of casting hopeless votes in this state, it’s just too refreshing to have the opportunity to cast a vote that has a real chance of bringing about some — dare I say it — hope and change. The real, truly progressive Revolution started in this very place, with the modest petitions of British citizens who had had it with a distant, ham-fisted, and ravenous central government. Sweet to be able to offer my own modest petition, in the form of a vote for Brown, in the quest for renewal.
Exactly what “C in Mass” said, #54.
Really, it’s time to end the mentality of a Kennedy monopoly, whose last major scion was a raucous, self-serving, philandering guy.
and worse.
Time to end the sycophantic homage paid that “family”.
What if Ms. Palin had a common sense phone call with Kennedy to convey the importance of this race for the Tea Party and the Country?
I don’t see why all stops shouldn’t be pulled. We have to assume the other side is doing just that.
Rangel just said no bill for a month, which likely means closer to two, and I imagine then may need another senate vote. I’ve seen all the signs I need to see that this is our one chance that does not rely on it falling apart on its own – something the people have control over or at least a say in.
Now or never.
Job # elect Republicans ie. Brown. Job #2 impose fiscal DISCIPLINE on ALL politicians. Republicans can’t resist dispensing $$$ favors either. It will always be up to us… “the funding source” to impose fiscal DISCIPLINE! If you agree… please download a copy of “The USER’S GUIDE TO FREEDOM: on how to DOWNSIZE government instead of prosperity” at http://www.libertysoup.org. The 535 Project (pg 20 of the Guide) clearly explains HOW to impose fiscal discipline on all law makers now & in the future. You will like it!
I wrote much the same article last night with more of a focus on the dilemma for the tea party groups and the tension it is producing. It’s on National Broadside.
Dave
The Tea Party should back Conservative candidates & not run as a 3rd party; this will elect Coakly. The Tea Party people need to put their energy behind Scott Brown.
38. Gallifet:
Joe should drop out.
Jan 13, 2010 – 7:22 am
Joe should endorse Brown, and urge his supporters to do so.
Any politician from Massachusetts should be suspect.
America is so young !
It has been common tactic of the commies in Europe to finance and organize “third” candidates in every election where they risked to lose.
DIVIDE ET IMPERA
divide and conquer (improper translation, the Latin says divide and COMMAND)
Hi Folks,
Here’s what we should be doing.
1) Work through all levels of the GOP, from the Precincts up, to get the most Conservative (Tea Party definition) candidates to run
2) In primaries, support and vote for the best candidate
3) In general elections, support and vote for the best candidate that can reasonably win and strongly discourage Conservative Independent runs that will split our vote.
4) Rinse and repeat until most or all candidates are good Tea Party Conservatives.
For this situation, that means Joe should drop out and run in the next primary.
Meanwhile, the people should be getting involved, starting at the precinct level, to help ensure good Conservatives like Joe have a chance in the GOP in the future.
Taking over the GOP from within is the right way to go. Splitting the Conservative vote with Independent runs is a path to utter failure.
Sherab, you got any proof he is funded by the Dems? Making these sort of accusations is a common way of hurting third party candidates. You could be right as its Mass, but proof would be a good thing.
In Illinois, Congressman Mark Kirk is running for the seat once held by Barack Obama, and now occupied by Roland Burris (appointed by the disgraced former Gov. Rod Blagojevich). Kirk has a 56% lifetime conservative rating by the American Conservative Union.
In the primary, next month, I will vote for the most conservative of his opponents. But next November, I will hold my nose and vote for Kirk. Why? Because he will be infinitely more preferable than anyone the DEMs … who are the enemy, in my estimation … will run for this office.
To my conservative friends in Massachussetts, I say, “Vote for Brown.”
I historically voted Republican. I became very disappointed over the course of the last few years. My frustration with that Party can be demonstrated by a statement from a family member who worked for the Republican Party — “We already have a plan in place to get back the power.” Maybe it was an honest mistake in how he said it, but it seemed to me that the Party was indeed more concerned about the power rather than priniciples. And when the Party put up RINO McCain as their candidate for president, it was pretty much confirmed.
So will I vote Republican as one who has been active in TEA since the first rally? Maybe, if the candidate can demonstrate a degree of original thought apart from the Party’s official line. Would I vote for a RINO like Snowe just to keep the power balance or even to (possibly) steal a Democrat’s seat?
NO, NO, NO! Vote for a RINO and at best you DELAY Obamacare. I am tired of voting for the stallers and compromisers and disappointments that fill the ranks of the Republicans. I want to hold my head up and say that I voted for a GOOD guy not AGAINST the BAD guy. I will not vote FOR those who will only slow the poisoning of this country INSTEAD of stopping it!
What really facinates me is that people seem to be so eager to “kill hte messenger”. I for one am glad that someone has shown the pros and cons of a particular candidate. The Tea Party movement develpoed over the fact that we felt like we were beign spoonfed candidates adn that weren’t as informed as we needed to be.
So now we are. And if Scott Brown is the “guy” why is it so important to stifle debate about another candidate. I like having options and I want to know how people have dealt with previous issues like health care. I want to know if Brown agreed with RomenyCare, I think we all need to know where he stands on the issues. We don’t get a “do over” here.
So thank you Andrew for keeping me informed!
#64
The intent of my post was NOT to offend this or that “third party” candidate, but to remind all of us that the battle against the totalitarians cannot be won, and will be lost, if we keep falling into basic tactical TRAPS.
The totalitarians MUST meet a united opposition.
Their only way to win is to divide the American People.
I have said the SAME when the GOP presented McCain as candidate: it was a divisive candidate for the anti-subversive forces, it DID divide us, and the communists have a president in the White House.
I do have a lot of evidence that a divided front loses always.
#66
And what if by your actions you DON’T stop NOR slow the subversion ?
Just a question.
The last time, the divided front gave us a communist at the White House, what are we waiting for to unite in the defense of Freedom ? To be in a gulag ?
And don’t have doubts, if the subversive CAN, they will put all the dissenters in a gulag.
Or in front of a death panel.
Idea for a bumper sticker. “Abort Obamacare”. I tried calling Joe Kennedy’s office, the voice mail was full, so I emailed and asked him to step down and support Mr. Brown. Here’s the email address. joe@joekennedyforsenate.com
Every experience carries its lesson;
If Scott Brown wins due to Tea Party
support, expect him to address, or at
least listen respectfully to, Tea Party
concerns.
Let him be a Big Government Republican,
if he will accept that in order to tax
and spend, he has to encourage economic
growth.
It wouldn’t be a tough call for this right-of-center type. I weary of watching those conservatives for whom it would be a tough call continually shooting themselves in the foot. That’s their privilege, of course, but they always end up shooting my foot as well. Vote Brown. Anything else is self-indulgent, juvenile folly. We could afford to take a hit to make a point in the NY-23 House race. This is the Senate and it’s Massachusetts-at-large for Pete’s sake, a whole other ball game calling for a distinctly different playbook. The benefits, including the psychological advantage, of putting a Republican in the Kennedy legacy seat far outweigh the drawbacks of Brown’s “ideological impurities.” Let’s not be chumps yet again.
First thing I’d like to say is that stopping the menace that is Obama-Care is crucial! It is well worth overlooking Brown’s shortcomings if his election can put a halt to it. And let’s face it, there is no way that we’re going to do better in that state.
As for Romney-care, it is a single state’s experiment and not a national mandate. A much stronger case can be made that it is permissible for a state to introduce a mandate that the Feds are not allowed. I don’t consider the principal behind Romney-care to be all that offensive. It’s implementation got completely screwed up by the libs in MA. The idea of requiring people to purchase a high-deductible, catastrophic coverage plan is viable. It’s viability comes from the unstoppable requirement that we have placed on our decision not to refuse care to anyone who requests it. Unfortunately, the MA mandate does not require a high-deductible, catastrophic plan but instead requires everyone pay for coverage that shouldn’t be required with low co-pays and not simply life-saving, catastrophic coverage.
@68…
You seem to defeat your own point. The RNC put up McCain, making the RNC communist (by your logic), and yet they are supposed to be the best chance against Obamacare, a communistic program? Doesn’t seem to be a very convincing argument to unite behind republicans in order to defeat democrats. At best the GOP is inept; at worst, they are in cahoots with the Democrats.
I didn’t say I could PREVENT Obamacare. Whether Obamacare is stopped or slowed is irrelevent as the result is the same: Obamacare becomes law. And my point was, that playing by the same rules as we have done for years (vote for the lesser of two evils, meaning, for conservatives, the republican), we are going to pass Obamacare in some form at some time.
I voted FOR Chuck Baldwin in the last presidential election. He, of course and predictably so, did not win. But I voted for HIM, not for anyone else. McCain would NOT represent me, so why vote for him? Isn’t that the antithesis of election?
Seems to me that the TEA movement is morphing into a “business-as-usual” group.
Sorry, in my previous post I made a mistake in the second paragraph.
“Whether Obamacare is stopped or slowed is irrelevent as the result is the same….”
This is of course a self-contradictory statement. My point was to say that regardless of which of the two major parties get in, especially if we elect RINOs like Snowe, Obamacare will only be slowed, not stopped. So whether it comes in 1 month or 1 year, it still comes eventually. We need people who genuinely want to DESTROY this legislation elected, not just stand in the way or amend it (aka “putting lipstick on a pig”).
Why do you want Martha Coakley to win and Obamacare to pass?
The Tea Party movement will lose all credibility if it wastes people’s time with 3rd party candidates who have no chance of winning, thus leading to an even bigger Dem majority. Wake up.
It is exactly the kind of attitude expressed by Mr. dodge in this article that will KILL any chances the Republicans have this year to turn this Obama Mess around.
Purity of thought does not get Repubs elected in liberal states. For ANY Republican to get elected in Liberal Leftist Massachusetts is a major uphill battle. By necessity the Repub that makes it will be more left than a Repub in Texas, for instance.
Brown needs the support of every tea party member to have a chance.
I’d vote for Brown, and I didn’t vote for McCain.
Kennedy would endorse Brown on Sunday to stay relevant. It’s better to be the king maker than be the spoiler.
unfortunately, Kennedy will upset the race in Mass., and Coakley could win.
You will not see us out with the “tea party” people. That does not mean we do not support them however else we can.
We are looking for conservative candidates, not necessarily Republican candidates.
Unfortunately Mass poses a special challenge, and unfortunately we need to have the Republican win..hoping he will do what is right.
I am Australian, an outsider so why am I willing to make a comment? First of all, this whole article is self-defeating, and I fear that if people paid attention then Coakley would gain ground again and win. If that happened then the US Senate would remain a rubber stamp without the ability to filibuster. Is that such a good idea?
My second reason for making a comment is based upon the fact that we have universal health of sorts. I think it is horrible, and ever since it was introduced I thought that it was a bad idea.
Now in Australia this was not an issue of Federal vs. States rights as it is in the USA. As such I do not think that this is reason to vote against Brown and charge that he is a RINO when he has expressed conservative values and his record in the Mass Senate shows him as a conservative.
It was perfectly legitimate to introduce and even vote for Romneycare based upon the fact that only the states should be addressing the health issue in this way. It is not legitimate to vote for the Abominablecare because that is against the Constitution of the USA since it infringes state rights. It should never be about being on the side of history, because it is an area where the federal government does not have power to legislate.
On this point I do believe that the author of the article has blurred the two lines, confusing a vote for Romneycare which is legitimate with a vote for something that is not legitimate in the first place.
Now I think that everyone should be able to agree that reforms are necessary. A vote for Brown will ensure that the original reforms that were proposed by Republicans will get a chance to be heard again.
From what I read about Kennedy’s responses in the debates is that he is a little too wet behind the ears to be considered a good candidate for the Senate. His downfall happened to be his backing of the Ron Paul ideas on international relations. As an outsider I do not necessarily support everything that has been done by the USA but if the USA was to walk out of Afghanistan, Iraq etc. then it would be dropping the ball, and leave other nations up the creek in a canoe without a paddle. That would do more to harm the reputation of the USA than going into Iraq in the first place.
The only thing that the good people of Massachusetts should be weighing up is whether or not they want a candidate who will only offer more of the same that they have seen over the past year. A vote for Coakley is a vote for big government, high deficit spending, and a healthcare system that you do not want. A vote against Coakley could at least put brakes on the attitude of elitism that has invaded D.C. over the past year – an attitude that is out of hand.
Brown offers the best option of moving away from that attitude and making Massachusetts relevant again.
A true RINO is someone like Crist who has supported everything done by the O Administration including Crap and Tax and the Porkulus.
Australia has similar problems when the ALP are in power. They want to spend, spend, spend. The Liberal Party get into power, clean up the mess, the people forget what the ALP did and voila they are in power again.
People should vote for Brown to bring an end to the Obots having so much power in the Congress. A vote for Kennedy is a wasted vote.
81. Aussie:
Thank you for doing such an excellent job of presenting to us Americans what our Constitution says. I wish that even 25% of us were as well versed on it as you are!
Please join the campaign to get Joe Kennedy to drop out of the race. E-mail, write or call!
Let’s be brutally frank. The MA legislature was going to pass socialized health care no matter what Romney did. That is a fact. What he tried to do was reign in the most outlandish, asinine and ridiculous parts of the plans presented so that there would be something people could deal with. Of course he doesn’t get credit for that, or his experience turning around failing companies or the fact that he’s been faithfully married to the same woman for decades and has a real family with problems and concerns just like most people or that he knows what the words service, integrity and honor mean.
No we’d rather have a president who has NO business experience, NO idea of what the American people think or want, who hates the military, loves our enemies and despises service, integrity and honor and surrounds himself with anarchist, marxists, fascists, and hedonists. I’m sure thanks to Mr. McCain and religious bigot Huckabee that’s going to work out really well for us. But hey, I’m not bitter.
Is this clown on Martha’s payroll. I noitice when looking for him on Google her name comes up, top of the list, for donations. Did she not get enough begging in washington the other night ? Not to mention the thug she has to keep honest reporters off her back. More Demo mob tactics. Let’s change the game and get back to what made this copuntry the country it is. CONSERVATIVE unless you like throwing money, hard earned at least by me, down the Demo’s RAT HOLE.
I fail to see how this Libertarian candidate is a “tea party” candidate since his views on national security are frighteninly similar to Obama’s. Per the debate, Joe gives two examples of big government: entitlement programs and the military. He goes on to say blame America for being the target of terrorist attacks by naively stating that because we are in certain countries, young people growing up in those countries see American soldiers walking around with guns and of course they hate us, so they naturally grow up to want to do us harm. Therefore, we must leave those countries so everyone will like us. Then no one will want to hurt us. The guy’s thought process, if you can call it that, is beyond absurd, childish and dangerous. He needs to get out of the race for every reason imaginable.
Would Kennedy let Meehan knock him over?
If you in the US had a preferential voting system (such as we in Australia enjoy), then people could vote 1 for Kennedy and 2 for Brown and know that if their first choice received insufficient votes then their next choice would benefit therefrom.
“If you in the US had a preferential voting system (such as we in Australia enjoy), then people could vote 1 for Kennedy and 2 for Brown and know that if their first choice received insufficient votes then their next choice would benefit therefrom.”
Yeah, and if a frog had wings …
Don’t get me wrong, I like Australia and all, but I can’t imagine the chaos that would ensue if we had to endure primary, secondary, and tertiary candidates. The mainstream media might get confused which one to pick and lie for.
I was thinking about this whole Scott Brown issue last night when I read that he voted for “Romneycare”. So I did some Googling and went to ‘the source’ of the people complaining about it. And they’re all CRAZY. If you Google Conservative complaints about Brown you will quickly fall into a quagmire of idiotic paranoid lunacy about FEMA camps, Bush faking 9/11 to enrich his buddies, eradicating all taxation … serious fringe wacko stuff.
On the plus side I always wondered where the left get those crazy caricatures they’re always throwing out, and now I know who to blame: Ron Paul fans. Seriously, I have respect for non-insane libertarians, people who understand that it’s a guiding ideology and not dogma. But it really illustrates why America is a predominantly Conservative country: you have the crazy left and the crazy right and the Conservatives in between.
Vote Scott Brown. It’s the best choice. If you’re so blinded by your ideology that you’d let a Democrat win that seat just so you can make a point, you sir are no better than a Democrat.
“59. Sebastian Shaw:
The Tea Party should back Conservative candidates & not run as a 3rd party; this will elect Coakly. The Tea Party people need to put their energy behind Scott Brown.”
And that, with exceptions which prove it, should be the rule. NY23 was just such an exception. Most of our fights should be in the primaries. And of course, we need to close our primaries to those not registered in our party.
Here is a video of Brown admitting he voted Romneycare. He also distanced himself from the tea party movement.
5. Fantom:
As a Tea Party particpant here in Oklahoma from early on. I can clearly say that we should be voting for the most conservative candidate we can elect. In Masshole that would be Brown.
So, is that how they think in Oklahomo?
What’s so bad about Obamacare? About time we caught up with the rest of the world where health care is cheaper and everyone is covered. Brown was right the first time in supporting the health care program in Massachusetts, as the people of Massachusetts well know. He’s going to lose badly because his election endangers universal health care.
And by the way, guys, thanks for that additional House seat in upstate New York! The Teabagger movement, a gift that keeps on giving!
“92. skeeziks:”
Pathetically ignorant there sleeze. Here in Oklahoma we do not do homo.. sheep maybe, but not homo. So you may want to change your travel plans. No doubt this is heartbreaking info after you spent all week getting your sh!t packed in anticipation of the trip.
Hope that helps you out there pardner.
@ Andrew Ian Dodge
In the event Brown loses by a margin less than the number of persons who vote for Joe Kennedy, he and his supports should expect to have their toes broken by the doors slamming in their faces. Politics is the art of the possible.
You need to figure out what that means.
In MA it means Brown might win and Joe K. is a distracting irrelevancy.
Threatening physical violence against the supporters of Kennedy eh? Nice to see you are copying the tactics of the unions thugs rushing to MA to get people to vote Democrat.
As a former NY’r living in DownEast Maine I have had a belly full of Rinos. But compared to Allen, or Thom Andrews, etc I had no choice but to hold my nose and go with Snowe and Collins.To Steele and company, Brown was a throw-away candidate. His success thus far is due to “tea party” people and the repubs know it. A win for him would make it harder for Snowe and Collins to ignore. Brown’s passionate riposte to Mega Rino Gaggin’s adversarial thrust made me like him as a candidate and his endorsement by the Gun Owners Action League (GOAL), as mentioned on the Howie Carr show, has left me far less apprehensive. Coakly should go because she is a leftist hack who turns a blind eye to corrupt dems but eagerly persecutes garden clubs for tax fraud. I would have hoped O’s election and the current mess would have cured us of any delusions concerning “moral victories”. They are a luxury the country cannot afford. JB
@96. Andrew Ian Dodge:
Sir, that was a metaphor. Since you don’t have the wit to see Joe Kennedy can not win this race, and thus can do no good to further the Tea Parties priciples other than endorse Brown, I’m not surprised you don’t have the wit to realize the metaphor.
“The mainstream media might get confused which one to pick and lie for.”
So do you think that’s a bug or a feature?
Tom why the unkind words? Or are you having a hard time fathoming that this is merely an article exploring the problem that tea party people are gonna face. Brown is a RINO and just the type of people they want out. However voting for Brown could stop Obamacare. Hence the dilemma.
Try reading the entire piece before launching into your vitriol, it might help you get a clue before making a fool of yourself.
@Andrew Ian Dodge, #100
Please read the entire thing before responding.
“Tom why the unkind words?”
Because you are acting as if there’s really a dilemma here. I suspect your entire post is a variety of concern trolling. You are supporting putting real improvement in the sort of representation the people of Massachusetts have in the Senate at great risk.
“Or are you having a hard time fathoming that this is merely an article exploring the problem that tea party people are gonna face.”
There is no problem, except for people for whom their “perfect”–or more stupidly, better but unelectable and not perfect (that’s Joe K.)–is a fine and appropriate enemy of the still better and actually electable (that’s Brown). There is no problem here except for people for whom prudence is no virtue. Check with the Founders, did they think prudence was a virtue? And among the greatest of them?
“Brown is a RINO and just the type of people they want out.”
Will he be better than the other candidate? Yes. By far? Yes. You harp on Romneycare, and Brown’s vote for it. Was anything else going to come out of MA? Was it going to be better or worse without Brown and Romney’s influence. You aren’t responding to these other questions from other posters, I suspect because you just want to support Joe no matter what, in a tantrum. I’m never going to vote for Romney, no matter what. He was the executive and should have vetoed the MA healthcare bill. Unless you can show me Brown’s district opposed any sort of health care insurance mandate–at the time, unless you can show me Brown’s influence made the bill worse–you’ve got nothing on Brown there.
“However voting for Brown could stop Obamacare. Hence the dilemma.”
Like I said, there is no dilemma. You are concern trolling.
“Try reading the entire piece before launching into your vitriol, it might help you get a clue before making a fool of yourself.”
I did read the entire piece. You could point out why I think I didn’t.
There is no dilemma here. If you honestly think there is I guess you aren’t concern trolling, you’re the fool.
BTW… if you don’t think he is a RINO check out this analysis.
“Concern trolling” an interesting concept, quite amusing really. I guess you haven’t been getting the emails I have from tea party types who are concerned with his RINO tendencies. I just don’t get why you think this discussion is a bad one because its clear from ferocity of your attitude towards me you do. Why is it bad to question how you are voting or are suggesting others vote? Surely you should do this every time you vote.
I have made up my mind how I would vote were I in MA. I would with reservations vote Brown in the hopes he stops Obamacare.
Is Brown perfect? Not by a long shot.
Take the big cookie theory in remaking the Republican party.
One bite at a time.
Just Getting a Republican in that seat is hugely important to this country.
The alternative is far worse.
“Just Getting a Republican in that seat is hugely important to this country.”
If a candidate more conservative than the Republican can get in, then the Tea Party should push that candidate…the Republican Party has no excuse for not fronting the most conservative candidate who can win… Joe Kennedy has no chance, which is why there’s no problem, no dilemma. AID’s post amounts to a smokescreen for people who would rather be ideologically pure than effective in any degree.
Is Scott Brown a RINO? Not even slightly, because he is to be judged by his constituency. For MA he is Mr. Republican. If he’ll be voting against half of Obama’s BS, he’s a good investment.
Regarding Andrew Ian Dodge’s assertion in comment that Brown “also distanced himself from the tea party movement”, it needs to be pointed out that the Boston Globe article Dodge cites grossly misrepresented Brown’s comments.
From Plum Line:
Mr. Dodge should have followed this story back to its source rather than rely on some 3rd-party accounting, especially considering that third-party was the Globe.
Cite:
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/senate-republicans/audio-reveals-scott-brown-didnt-really-say-he-hadnt-heard-of-tea-partiers/
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/14/shocker-boston-globe-misrepresents-brown-statement-on-tea-parties/
-Cnation
The proud stupidity that runs throughout this piece a a smelly tied to the tail of a pig is truly disgusting.
There is one undeniable truth about every Senate race in the country: every one will be won by either a republican or a democrat. Prattling on about someone who isn’t even in the race in any real sense(can you say Joe Kennedy?) is just as retarded as recommending that people write in Santa Claus or the friggen Easter Bunny. Why? It’s simple. The opinions, positions, records etc. of politicians only matter if they have a snowball’s chance in hell of ever governing. That means that the ONLY thing that matters in Massachusetts is Brown and Coakley because one of them is going to win.
If you think the wrong side won the Cold War, all white people are racists, success is an injustice, etc., then you should support Coakley. If not, you should support Brown. Another way to support Coakley, however, would be to vote for any candidate other than Brown. Joe Kennedy won’t get more than 2% of the vote no matter what. That means his beliefs are perfectly irrelevant because he will never get to enact any of them into law. He might as well be running as a Nazi.
The commusists are smart enough to understand this. That is why they don’t really field candidates anymore. They simply work within the democrat party to achieve their aims. It’s a pity the Libertardians are too stupid and self absorbed to understand this.
Buyers remorse kicked in wicked early with this guy.
Hello my friend! I want to say that this article is amazing, great written and come with approximately all vital infos. I would like to see more posts like this .