Supporting Scott Brown: Pragmatism or Principle?
When Aaron Hanscom, PJM’s managing editor, asked me to write a piece on the Massachusetts Senate race about 10 days ago, I begged off the assignment. At the time, Brown was considered something of a sacrificial lamb — a Republican running in the most Democratic state in the nation — and even though there was some positive buzz swirling around his candidacy, I didn’t feel like writing another piece about the moribund state of the GOP in the Northeast and why Brown was destined to lose.
Today, I’m glad I didn’t write that piece, although many others did. It just goes to show that American politics has the infinite capacity to surprise, to delight, and to overturn our silly, supercilious ideas about the predictability of free people when confronted with a choice that dramatically affects their future.
On January 5, pollster Scott Rasmussen had Democrat Martha Coakley ahead of Republican State Senator Scott Brown by 9 points. That poll raised a few eyebrows given the Democrats’ huge advantage in registration and the presumed advantages of Coakley: name recognition, awash in cash, and the intangible of running for a seat held so long by Ted Kennedy.
But something entirely unpredictable was happening that would alter the dynamic of the race and propel Brown into the competitive position he enjoys today. The people of Massachusetts began to realize that sending Scott Brown to the United States Senate is a golden opportunity to let the politicians in D.C. know that they are fed up with a stinking economy, the jobless recovery, the maniacal spending, and the obsessive concentration on a health care reform bill even liberal Massachusettians oppose.
And Coakley played her role as heir apparent to this elitist, liberal legacy perfectly. She rarely campaigned among ordinary voters. She refused to debate. And in the last week, she has all but imploded with a series of gaffes that revealed the candidate to be insensitive, clueless, and not ready for prime time.
Couple that with voters taking a good look at the dynamic Brown, and the 9-point gap in the polls on January 5 has morphed into a 4-point lead by Brown in a Suffolk University poll out Friday. Meanwhile, a PJ Media-CrossTarget poll has Brown by a whopping 15 points.
But beyond voters wanting to send a message, there is something else happening in Massachusetts. A new kind of Republican is bidding to redefine the GOP in the Northeast with a message of fiscal discipline and low taxes, but with a “socially conscious” agenda as well.
You can’t pigeonhole Scott Brown. He’s a conservative — but he’s not. He’s a squishy RINO — but he’s not. He’s pro-choice, pro-gun, pro-consumer protection, pro-free market, and pro-environment. He opposes gay marriage but supported a regional cap-and-trade scheme — a vote he now says was a mistake. He supported the Massachusetts health insurance plan promoted by Mitt Romney with its individual mandate, although he now says that they need to get costs under control.
The picture that emerges after examining this fellow’s record and his position on the issues is one of an independent thinker with conservative principles who doesn’t allow ideology to dominate his thinking or his politics. Prudent, pragmatic, reasonable, but not squishy about where he stands (see his fight to repeal the sales tax increase and his battle over gay marriage).
He appears to be thoughtful and nuanced. His abortion stance mixes classic libertarian thinking with the concerns of a parent with two daughters. He grants women the right to choose and opposes partial birth abortions, but he wants strict parental notification requirements as well.
Evidently a hard-working, quick thinking fellow, not afraid to run against the odds. Why should we ask for more?
What turned me off about the libs was their insistence that you follow in lockstep with ALL their policies. Yes, you can be with us on A only if you also are with us on B, C, D… My suggestion as a Post Liberal is that I do not want similar treatment from the other side of the aisle.
Mass- Democrat Martha Coakley has now stated that devout Catholics probably should not work/serve/volunteer in Emergency Rooms.
Separation of Church and State?
How does she feel about closing all those Jewish hospitals,
burn centers and BYU medical research centers?
My daughter has a cute T shirt that says:
” I live in my own little world,
but they know me here.”
Socialists Liberal Democrats live in their own little world and they know that we unwashed masses are dying to be part of it.
Until they can teach/preach unto us about death and taxes and living a better greener life,
they will continue to feed us with stimulus manna from Washington.
Obama be blessed.
“…American politics has the infinite capacity to surprise…”
Indeed.
See this must see video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nEoW-P81-0
I am the Ghost Of Perfection (GOP)
Someday I’m gonna be somebody.
Someday I’m gonna run the show.
Someday I’ll kiss the Northeast.
But not with Scott Brown…
“pro-choice, pro-gun, pro-consumer protection, pro-free market, and pro-environment. He opposes gay marriage”
Why squishy? That quote describes a Conservative.
Now he might be lying about his positions, given that he is a politician, he probably is. At least his positions are Conservative. Only history can tell if he is lying or not.
Well,let’s face it…this is Massachusetts we are talking about here…not Texas or South Carolina…and in that context Scott Brown is like a cool drink of water on the political scene…principle or pragmatism?…I see no conflict here,given that he will vote against ObozoCare at a minimum and very likely against Cap and Tax,should it ever come to the floor for a vote…and more importantly still,his election will put paid to the notion that a Massachusetts Senate seat is somehow ‘reserved’ for Kennedys or their ideological stooges as well as expose for good and all how small the Obozo coattails are now…which is to say non-existent.
“The Massachusetts Senate race is bringing into stark relief the choice faced by movement conservatives in 2010: pragmatism or principle?”
Prudence is a virtue. It is among the greatest of them. It should be a “conservative” principle. [It should be universal, but I know none of us are holding our breath. -Ed.]
Scozzafava was not especially conservative even among New York politicians, but she was running in a very conservative district…she wasn’t nearly as conservative as the district was able to elect, witness Hoffman’s excellent performance. If the GOP had been behind Hoffman from the start, he’d be in the House.
Brown is as good as we’ll do in MA for the foreseeable future. He should have our support.
A conservative who has a problem with that should be castigated for their stupidity.
A writer giving cover to them with the nuance of their writing, like Andrew Ian Dodge does in his post to which you linked, is doing no conservative a favor.
Any conservative having common cause with Joe Kennedy should consider this:
If every district had elected the most conservative candidate that was likely in 2008, how much better off would we be? Then consider Joe Kennedy is not even slightly likely to be elected.
Scott Brown is not conservative, but he is rational, likeable, and as his campaign has alluded to throughout the campaign, more like JFK’s politics than the Democrats of today.
That, and Martha Coakley is uninspiring,distant,weak on National Security/Foreign Policy,
and unready for a U.S. Senate seat.
Scott Brown has out-campaigned her in the local retail politicking that Tip O’Neal made
so clear,has to happen/be done.If he turns out to be more conservative than Collins and Snow of Maine, the national electorate will consider it a step in the right direction.
I’m for any guy who says “it’s the people’s seat”(not Ted Kennedy’s), who tells Obama to stay out of the state’s business and stay home, and who won’t be a rubber stamp for the Harry Reid agenda, on “healthcare” or anything else under the sun.
To quote the Professor, why should we ask for more ?
By using the word “thoughtful” it means he has a brain and should be able to engage in meaningful debate. He should be able to be persuaded to move away from the dark side of CO2 taxing and become a promoter of full-bore energy development. If he does just that one thing, he’s on the right side of the single biggest issue of our time.
Conservative voters aren’t half as ideological as the media wants to make us out to be. We come in all shapes, sizes, colors, religions and understand that good people can agree on many things to achieve success. There is no question this country is more conservative than liberal. If the media treated the facts as to both of those idelogies fairly, probably 2/3 of the country would be conservative.
Why look a gift horse in the mouth? And what a gift a Brown victory would be to all of America! It’d be much more important than the Virginia and New Jersey as this would bring immediate conservative teeth to the Senate where teeth are now missing altogether. As the Washington horror show demonstrates, every Republican vote counts!
As you point out, Brown isn’t as bad as a spineless RINO (a species that thrives in New England, but is hardly indigenous to it).
Part of Scott Brown’s appeal is that he is an independent thinker and willing to take positions that are not strictly along party lines. While Coakley was content to “phone it in”, Brown has engaged with the people and that is the change that people are looking for. And this race is a preview of coming attractions.
There are so many people like me, former Democrats, who believe we (the USA) bow to no one, who loves our military and holds them in the highest regard, who believe the far left obsession with cap and tax and the health care takeover are steps in the wrong direction. We wonder why it takes days and days to respond to the events at Fort Hood and the actions of the underpants bomber. We wonder why regardless of how many times we contact our Senators and Representatives to tell them we do not support proposed legislation, the response is almost always silence.
We’ll have to see how Tuesday turns out, but it may be the case that the people of MA rose up and reminded the candidates that they expect to have their interests represented. Phoning it in just isn’t good enough any more and blind party loyalty is on its way outv too.
Brown just highlights the point that principles without pragmatism are impotent. Right now, my principles are telling me to throw everything it takes at the destruction of health care. If that means a not-quite-conservative Republican, then so be it. What will it benefit us if we stand on principles and health care gets passed?
Standing up for your principles means sometimes being willing to get dirty to see them enacted. If you’re not willing to do that, then clearly your principles mean little to you.
Wonderful man. He will be a great speaking member of the US Senate, when he is elected. This is no shrinking violet. Nice to hear that the voters in Massachusetts are waking up to the mess the Democrat administration and Congress have put us in. Word is the people are ignoring the Acorn vote stealers and setting up poll watchers to challenge fraud and illegal folk attempting to load up the Democrat votes. Good for the patriots. Keep ‘em flying!
We should elect the most conservative candidate we can. In Mass. that would be Brown this cycle. Another commenter on another article stated it best. In Virginia Brown is a RINO and we should find a more conservative candidate. But in Mass. Brown is the conservative.
The thing to note is that even RINOS are of help as long as we do not let them infest and run the party. They vote for our leadership in a majority. And it is that leadership which sets the legislative agenda.
Having said that, I must disagree that we “Must have” the Olympia Snow types. We could blow off the NE and still have a huge maybe 60 vote majority in the Senate. There are 20 some Senators from States which vote R who have a D in front of their name. Replace those with R’s and whether a Snow is elected is of small consequence.
Truthfully the battle for more conservative candidates should be in the primaries. And the primaries should be closed so that we are not forced to run a RINO like McLaim. Maybe if such keeps occurring conservatives should run a third party candidate.
Likewise we should quit sending our funds to the RNC and instead directly to conservative candidates. As long as the RNC keeps an Arlen Spector in place when a more conservative candidate could win that seat.
All politics is local. A RINO in Texas may be a conservative in Taxachusetts.
Marching in lockstep with one’s party was never the intent of the founders when it came to the elected representatives. The job of the representative is to voice what the majority from his state wants, and toward that end it sounds like he’s doing just that. Republicans and Democrats alike need to take note, as the mood of the country appears to be changing, as evidenced by numerous satisfaction / confidence polls. I for one do not believe that there is a ‘one-size-fits-all’ candidate suitable for universal application across the country, regardless of party.
When Schumer called Brown a “far-right tea-bagger Republican”
Brown’s response was – “Chuck has a way of saying things that I don’t think he really understands or means, and it’s unfortunate, “I’m not into name-calling. … so shame on Chuck.”
Brown totally gets it. He understands how sick and tired citizens are of watching politics as usual. He acts like an adult.
“The old way of doing things won’t work anymore.” He has my vote for this reason alone!
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/Browns_response_Old_way.html
I will take a fiscal-security conservative any day of the week. Obama and the democrats only care about unions, government workers and anyone with deep pockets.
The tea party movement is a revolt against spending. He is the right guy at the right time.
Brown is as good as we’ll do in MA for the foreseeable future. He should have our support. A conservative who has a problem with that should be castigated for their stupidity. A writer giving cover to them with the nuance of their writing, like Andrew Ian Dodge does in his post to which you linked, is doing no conservative a favor.
An A+ for Tom Perkins. I wholeheartedly agree with each of these statements. I was surprised and disappointed that Dodge supported the idiocy of Arkady at Right Condition by stating that he respectfully opposes the election of Brown. Arkady does nothing of the sort. He is in fact an hysteric who should be shunned by conservatives. Arkady ridiculously claims that the election of Brown would be a fatal mistake . When I tried to engage Arkady over this hysterical claim he banned me.
Thanks for the video link, Dave II (#4)
Rick Moran, get out of your little Washington DC fishbowl; given Scott Brown’s support nationwide, Conservatives have no problem with him. However, the establishment Republican elitists think more like Democrats instead of Republicans. That’s your problem Rick.
We’ve heard that if Brown wins, there will be delays in his taking office. Delays that will give Obama time to put his plans through.
Is this legal? What can be done about it?
The idea that he can make a deal with the unions to exempt them from taxes is wrong!! This is America, not some backwater banana republic!
The whole healthcare plan needs to be stopped.
We need to start backing Independents with good conservative agendas. The same old party line doesn’t cut it anymore. Obama is out to ruin America and he seems to have a pretty good foothold.
What’s all this talk about Kennedy’s “ass?” What’s Mary Jo got to do with this?
On this special case, I agree with Rick and Tom Perkins. Hell, I’m a cheapskate and even I sent Brown some money. This attractive candidate against the know-nothing unattractive candidate for “Teddy’s seat?” The Aimerault Lady? It doesn’t and won’t get any better than this. But don’t think I’m a sucker for the RINO Express, even for the office of president.
So let’s contrast with Romney. Romney helped the libs plan and implement the going-broke Mass health plan. Brown only voted for it. And there is no way I would have been cheering for Scozz. Republican party leaders, don’t make me vote None of the Above in 2012.
In many ways, this Massachusetts special election is a trip back into time when politics was a lot more sane and evenhanded: when was the last time the more devoutly Christian candidate was the Democrat and not the Republican? Or when you had each the candidates openly agree with some of the President’s policies and not with others, rather than simply echoing their respective party line? Even though I personally strongly support Obama’s health care plan (and think anyone who doesn’t is an uninformed idiot) and that Brown opposes it, I’m wondering if it might be better in the long run for both parties that he wins: that might cause a good ripple effect through the Republican party that hopefully ended this always brain dead RINO and CINO BS.
People on the hard right are friggin willful morons, no exceptions, and have been nothing but enormous PITA’s the past several years. You can’t have an intelligent debate with someone who gets almost all of his/her info from stupid and often malicious sources, and who sees nothing wrong in equating some bit of random nonsensical rubbish from a personal blog site to a New York Times article. Yeah, the mainstream media has major problems, but compared to even the “best” of the right wing media, like Fox News, The Weekly Standard, The Washington Times, and so on, it’s like comparing the National Geographic to the Weekly World News. Their relentless, ignorant antagonism towards science and political adversaries has had nothing be a bad effect on an already weakened corporate mainstream media eager to not offend any sizable demographic: I’ve been seeing more and more rubbish showing up on Google news searches, and too often emanating from some would-be rabble rousing mainstream columnist who should have known better. I’ve been periodically checking in on the Wikipedia articles related to Global Warming since that East Anglia email hack: that has provoked this curious large battle between the right wing barbarians at the gate, armed with multiple, multiple sock puppets, and the defending editors trying to prevent the articles from being trashed. One of the problems for the defenders is that the barbarians can call upon many poorly researched mainstream media articles to attack with — mainstream media sources are often if not usually the primary sources for Wikipedia articles — forcing the defenders to basically disallow them in order to force only the use of only peer reviewed scientific journals. It’s a bizarre battle driven only by, again, willfully ignorant right wingers.
Brown is obviously no brainiac, but he’s also obviously no useless right winger, and actually seems like a decent enough person (I know someone who knows his daughter), and if elected, chances are that he’s going to have more than a few WTF! moments when he gets more detailed info on what’s really going on, and has been going on, with the health care system, the Iraq-Afghanistan situation, and the financial industry. For starters.
Tarbender:
“Word is the people are ignoring the Acorn vote stealers and setting up poll watchers to challenge fraud and illegal folk attempting to load up the Democrat votes.”
I surely hope this is true. With the big push coming in this weekend from the big O, the boys from SEIU, black panthers and the like will probably be out in force. And the dead voters will be voting early and often in this election. Brown will win this race if it is a “legal” race.
This Chicago consevartive hopes and prays for a BIG Brown win in MA.
Go Scott Go!
And the Big O coming to help may actually backfire….like his Olympics appearance.
BTW, here is another t–d Coakie has dropped:
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/01/coakley-ignorant-of-religious-exemption.html
#28 Now this is really hilarious. The Dems are trying to tell conservative voters to stay away from the election because Brown is really a librul not a conservative. But BC comes to the opposite conclusion. As a stone Lib moonbat, BC comes to the conclusion that he can now support Brown.
As the ad with the Bugs Bunny voice says: “Hehehe. What an ignoramus.”
http://bshor.wordpress.com/2010/01/15/scott-brown-is-a-more-liberal-republican-than-dede-scozzafava/
As a strong propronent of the big tent philosophy I do wish Mr Moran would not put so much effort into overly empasizing the divisions therein. Don’t we already have David Frum et al for that? Pragmatists and purists alike have a common enemy, who are making serious and debilitating headway into “fundamentally transforming” our nation beyond recognition. We have more important matters to attend to than poking sticks in the eyes of unserious purists who can’t or won’t grasp that perfect is the enemy of good enough for now.
The immutably entrenched two-party system simply does not allow for purity so concerning ourselves with them is time wasted. I actually prefer they sit out because anyone dumb enough to believe in the possibility of a perfect candidate is too dumb to vote anyway, a slight notch below their orphan step-cousins single issue voters. Pragmatism allows for the most perfect available not the perfect. Every district in the nation has a version of the former, none have the latter, or ever will.
I’m from Massachusetts. I can define Scott as fiscally conservative and socially libertarian. And he has the pulse of his constituency he knows he can’t win if crosses the line into social conservatism.
This is Massachusetts the home of loony left Harvard. We are lucky
to have Scott, you can’t expect more. If you do you will give the loony left a free reign for ever.
Isn’t it funny watching BC accuse everyone on the hard right of being “friggin willful morons,” accuse anyone who opposes Obamacare of being “an uninformed idiot,” and then whine about the alleged malice of the right and complain that he can’t get an intelligent conversation.
Just another hypocrite, aren’t you, BC?
All hail Archbishop Moran, high muckety muck in the Orthodox Magisterium of Right Thinkers.
Russell Kirk:
“Being neither a religion nor an ideology, the body of opinion termed conservatism possesses no Holy Writ and no Das Kapital to provide dogmata. So far as it is possible to determine what conservatives believe, the first principles of the conservative persuasion are derived from what leading conservative writers and public men have professed during the past two centuries.”
“Perhaps it would be well, most of the time, to use this word “conservative” as an adjective chiefly. For there exists no Model Conservative, and conservatism is the negation of ideology: it is a state of mind, a type of character, a way of looking at the civil social order.
The attitude we call conservatism is sustained by a body of sentiments, rather than by a system of ideological dogmata. It is almost true that a conservative may be defined as a person who thinks himself such. The conservative movement or body of opinion can accommodate a considerable diversity of views on a good many subjects, there being no Test Act or Thirty-Nine Articles of the conservative creed.
“In essence, the conservative person is simply one who finds the permanent things more pleasing than Chaos and Old Night. (Yet conservatives know, with Burke, that healthy change is the means of our preservation.) A people’s historic continuity of experience, says the conservative, offers a guide to policy far better than the abstract designs of coffee-house philosophers.”
Archbishop Moran’s church offers a catechism straight from “Alice in Wonderland”:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master – that’s all.”"
RINO? RINO??!!
The Orthodox Magisterium of Right Thinkers has called George W. Bush a RINO! His grandfather, Prescott Bush, was a Republican Senator from Connecticut. His father was President. He served two terms as the Republican governor of the Republic of Texas. And now the nattering nabobs of the new media deign pronounce “anathema” on him. He IS the Republican Party.
I am not a member of Archbishop Moran’s church. Too easy to be an apostate and a blasphemer.
To Fred Beloit: Since you live on the fringe far right, everything else looks leftist to you, including the middle.
#32 Thanks Frank: “I actually prefer they sit out because anyone dumb enough to believe in the possibility of a perfect candidate is too dumb to vote anyway, a slight notch below their orphan step-cousins single issue voters.”
So, Frank, you claim the discussion is over the perfect conservative vs a partly perfect conservative. Anyone who thinks otherwise is dumb. But that is false. I don’t even think I could define perfect conservative. What you are really saying is we should vote for those who have no conservative values at all simply because they have an R after their name. (See that, Frank? Anybody can oversimplify an issue into the realm of absurdity.).
#36 That’s lame, BC, just lame. No counterpoint, no argument, just insult. Lame. You must be pretty young.
Thoughtful and interesting discussion but clearly written by one who has not lived in Massachusetts.
Do you know what it feels like to live for decades in MA as a thinking, passionate conservative with no hope of having your views represented in any form whatsoever? Of hearing the plea “Call your Senator!” and knowing that your Senator was the one who authored the heinous bill in question so why call?
And of a shining, glimmering ray of hope dawning … days before the national media shines its beam on the story. Knowing in your heart that the unthinkable is about to become reality.
The absolutely unimaginable … the seat of the late Kennedy … is going to fall to the opposition.
Do the finer points of conservatism need to be quibbled over in this race? No. Earthquakes don’t quibble. They demolish.
And the Democratic edifice in MA is crumbling before our eyes.
Who is complaining?
Rick, I think you make two excellent points.
Is there room for Brown? I don’t see how anyone but a fool could vote for the other candidate.
She is running for the senate and doesn’t want to shake hands with…um… people ! What is she, the Howie Mandel of national politics?
If she wins, can we create a TV game show where she, Joe Biden and Harry Reid are asked questions about a variety of topics and we measure the gaffe-implosion meter after each answer? Nah, would have to be produced in Japan, they are more into laughing at clumsy people injuring themselves in humiliating circumstances.
Is there room for Scott Brown? Given this choice, is there room for serious debate? This ought to be a rhetorical question.
Your second question, more implied than expressed…is there room for a candidate…anywhere…who doesn’t take his positions from a force feeding tube? Is there room for GDI’s in either of the two parties.
The Democrats have clearly shown that Joe Lieberman doesn’t have a welcome mat at his doorstep or a seat at the table.
A guy who takes issue by issue and decides his conscience need not apply, but if you toe the party line, …here comes another verse just like the other verse. We will repeat the cycle, over and over..ad infinitum.
There is no room for GDI’s on a widespread scale. EVERY key vote these days is split right down party lines. And the geniuses reading the tea leaves keep calling it a mandate on THEIR side of the fence when the last bunch of bums are thrown out and the new bums are brought in.
Charles Krauthammer in a recent article said that this country has its roots firmly planted between the 40 yard lines. Yet we elect and are led by narcissists who live under the goalposts. Statistics show that a large number of our countrymen self-identify as individuals, not as strict party adherents. HUGE numbers. So why do we have two parties that recoil at the notion of independent thought?
Simple. They care more about the advancement of the party, than the advancement of the people in many instances. We are not likely to see a center/independent thinking party with a huge tent, not to burst your bubble about our ability to surprise. We are stuck voting for one or the other.
Scott Brown may find room today…but tomorrow is another day.
“I can define Scott as fiscally conservative and socially libertarian.”
What is either fiscally conservative and socially libertarian about voting for Romneycare? That program is neither. Romneycare is in fact socialist and no libertarian in his right mind would vote for that monstrosity.
Brown is pro-environment? Sounds like Teddy Roosevelt, Goldwater, Nixon, Reagan to me. All were conservationists. Brown is pro-choice? Sounds like a solid conservative position to me. Goldwater was pro-choice. Let’s keep big government out of the nation’s bedrooms.
Whether it’s the Bush/Delay/Lott government of the early ’00s; or the Pelosi/Reid/Obama government of today, having one party in control of everything is bad. If nothing else, Brown getting elected will end the Dem supermajority in the Senate.
Does Brown pass the “Reagan Test”? Does he give me 80&? Fiscal conservative, pro-gun, anti-Obamacare, national defense, Crap and Tax a bad idea, illegal immigration, pretty good so far. Abortion, pro-choice not so good, but against partial birth and for parental notificationso that gets me 2 out of 3. Romneycare, not much, but that is one of the powers left to the various States by the Constitution and Mass. doing it is up to the people of Mass. Just don’t tell me I have to pay for it, which seems to me a Conservative position. So he looks pretty good to me. Like Rudy, not total agreementbut on the whole, pretty close. To me, a rino is not someone who disagees with me on something, but pokes a stick in my eye while doing it. You hear me, Arlen?
‘
I say “Stop the Madness. Vote for Brown.”
Somebody, somewhere, needs to put the brakes on all this so that we can assess the outcomes and take more deliberative actions–or not.
One month after the September 11th attacks, Scott Brown was one of only three Massachusetts State Representatives to vote against a bill to provide financial assistance to Red Cross workers who had volunteered with 9/11 recovery efforts.
But he’s so cuuuuuuute.
I don’t think it is a concern about the advancement of the party. I’d say they don’t care enough about the advancement of the party to compromise at all. This man might win the election and be a hero to the Repubs, but if he does, then the Conservatives with a capital “C” will savage him as a RINO and do their best to throw him out of the party.
That’s what they did to John McCain.
I am convinced we’d have a different President today, if the Conservatives had cared enough about the overall picture (the advancement of the party, if you will) to praise the candidate who agreed with them most of the time, instead of ripping him up as much as they did the opposition.
An American presidential election cannot be won without the middle. The Conservatives need the RINOs, if they are going to get anything at all.
The sad part is that the present Democratic administration is as clueless about governance as the Conservatives are about wining elections.
BC, I wish I was as intelligent as you are. If I was I could tell the difference between $200-$400 billion deficits and $one trillion plus deficits, and why the smaller number is bad and the larger number is good.
If I was as smart as you are, and boy, are you smart, I would know and appreciate the stimulus package and what it has done for the country. It’s really kicked in hasn’t it? Unemployment still hasn’t approached 8%, right? Just like Hussien Obama promised, right? I mean, smart people like yourself know that when government takes money from the people the people are better off, and when it’s printed like there’s no tomorrow that’s even better.
But nothing’s better then when both approaches are combined, WOW, are we lucky to have smart guys like you around!!!
But the smartest thing of all is to support Cap and Trade. You know, turn the economy over to the people who so skillfully managed the auto Clunker program, who intelligently managed Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac & want to expand it’s efforts, who want to read Miranda rights to mass terrorist murderers, whoops, sorry I used that word, terrorist, I know how it upsets you smart people.
But you get the idea, you’re smart.
Be patient with the rest of us BC.
Its imperitive that cons reverse course and follow their hearts and get on board with the liberal wing of their party if they want to once again aspire to leadership. Pro guns is acceptable, but Scott Brown, and most of northeast liberal leaning republicans know that being pro choice and pro environment and pro health care reform is the right thing to do. They also know that by losing the fringe, religious ten percent and gaining the middle left ten percent they have every chance of bringing the independents in…which, when you look at the 08 results (11% gap), could spell victory in 2012. Besides, Con leadership is in dire straights right now, there is nobody there. So its good that they start identifying leadership qualities now…after all, the national races start in a year !! Ignore the progresive conservatives and independents at your peril….
Mr. Moran,
you cite Dede Scazzafava as an example of how conservatives allegedly demand ideological purity? That is ridiculous, unworthy revisionism. I challenge you to cite one position of hers which was remotely right of center. Her collapse as a candidate was due not to a lack of purity but rather a lack of any similarity at all.
Brown is identifiably conservative on some issues. I suggest that conservative voters are more than willing to take half a loaf. Brown is at least that and certainly not a Scazzafava-style empty Wonder Bread bag.
The reasonableness of the comments hera give me hope, both for my party and my country. After my college daze flirtations with the left, I came away with a deep and abiding mistrust of romantic revolutionaries and fanatic idealogues. In my own peoples republic of California I am trying to support ‘the most conservative candidate available’, even though I will probably have to vote for someone other than my first choice when November roles around. Still, I would hope that the election of Barack Obama would convince every conservative, libertarian our even meraly moderately intelligent voter that sitting on the side lines waithing for your ideal of a political saviour, asking your self ‘how bad can the alternative really be?, is a fools bet.
The problem with moderate and lib Republicans is not so much that they are moderate and lib, but that so many of them of late have been all too willing to stab conservatives in the back and extort special treatment for themselves when the Party needs them the most. Brown would get my vote this time, but if he spends the next few years f***ing us in the a**, then to hell with him and he doesn’t deserve re-election.
Diving into the liberal punch bowl because everyone else is doing it ISN’T leadership, Poor Citizen. And before you suggest that Northeast republicans “know” that being pro-murder, pro-government-messing-up-health-care, and pro-killing-the-economy-without-scientific-reason is right, maybe you should make a case for it.
I guess with you and BC, the problem isn’t that you don’t know anything. It’s that you know so much that isn’t so.
There is room for Brown in the GOP in the Senate.
BUT, there should be no Browns in the leadership.
Let’s face it, he is getting a tremendous push (from me too) because he, based on his words, will be the 41st vote to hold the filibuster of government takeover of healthcare.
However, if the GOP has leaders like Scott, the growth of government will invariably continue. Maybe at a slower rate, but it will come.
Let us not only allow Brown’s prudence to win, but our own prudence to not take this too seriously outside of the Northeast and the fact of the 41st.
The Big Tent is all well and good if moderates and libs were willing to stay in the tent, but history shows that they are not willing. Whenever you need them, they are all too eager to run out of the Big Tent into the Dem’s tent. But if they want to stay in the Big Tent, which is a conservative tent, then, by all means, stay.
@32. Frank: – … I do wish Mr Moran would not put so much effort into overly empasizing the divisions therein.
Regrettably, like so many other writers who can’t seem to find anything PRO-ACTIVE to write about, emphasizing and/or exaggerating the divide – any divide – seems to be Moran’s favorite (only?) trick.
Contrary to Moran’s silly thesis here, Pragmatism can be a Principle – certainly in politics if nowhere else and absolutely in this case if never before. You’d think a political writer might recognize that.
By fooling ourselves into believing that a “bigger” tent is automatically a stronger tent, and thus compromising away the very core of our Constitutional principles for decades, we’ve stupidly allowed leftist policy to infect this Republic so completely that we can no longer afford the distraction of thinking ‘strategically’: that is, deferring to what some insist on labeling “principle”, and arguing the finer points of implementing conservative doctrine.
Stopping the Socialist agenda in any way possible is the ONLY game left. If socialized medicine gets a bigger foothold in America, that battle – and indeed the war – to preserve this Republic are over. Make no mistake. It’s the linchpin that will hold Socialism in place until the U.S.A finally implodes like the Soviet Union did. Much worse than the ill-conceived and radically abused Commerce Clause, government-run health care provides just the faux ‘justification’ needed to legislate any facet of life seen fit by the elite to control. It will likewise provide an untouchable platform from which to redistribute the nation’s wealth forevermore. As such, it will kill the very thing that made America the unprecedented, historically exceptional nation it is. When socialized medicine is rammed down America’s throat by the likes of Pelosi, Reid and BHO, you can kiss what’s left of this Republic good-bye.
If Brown’s election does indeed stop socialized medicine in its tracks (PLEASE stop calling it health care “reform”, people – it’s not), he and those who are supporting him will have succeeded in delaying the Socialists’ battle plan at least until November, and from there on, indefinitely. That is now a given. Either that, or his election forces them to act so recklessly that even The Left Wing Media can no longer cover for their abuses and usurpations.
For Brown’s part, he gives a good, if not necessarily unshakable indication that he can learn. He can see what a sham RomneyCare turned out to be (anyone can) and he recognizes the error in his previous energy policy vote. If we can just GET THE HELL OFF OF the irrelevant ‘abortion’ and ‘gay marriage’ distractions for one or two election cycles – guess what – we might actually turn this Nation BACK in the direction of the Republican Form of Government guaranteed by our Constitution.
If the ideology driving Brown’s personal agenda really is as simple as “it’s the People’s seat”, then he stands several orders of magnitude above most politicians today. While that remains to be seen, the fact is that with what’s at stake right now, we can MORE than afford to support him. In fact, there’s no other choice.
FDR’s socially suicidal policies were stopped in their tracks and rolled back because of their unconstitutional nature. Things are no different today, but – as it did then – it’ll take the full force of the Will of the People. Right now, that Will – a mix of Principle AND Pragmatism – is finally making itself felt once again in Mass.
The People have had enough.
Y’know, if a Massachusettes, er, a Massachusetts taxpayer wanted to donate money to the Red Cross, I’m sure they could find the website. Why should the government forcibly extract money to give to the Red Cross? Oh, sure, it was for a “good cause” but that’s the heart of liberal stupidity. If it’s a “good cause” then the government ought to play Robin Hood and take the taxpayer’s money and give it to the good cause. After skimming a little off the top and getting a few concessions.
Voting against this sort of thing is what fiscal conservatives do.
#48 Poor Folk say: “…but Scott Brown, and most of northeast liberal leaning republicans know that being pro choice and pro environment and pro health care reform is the right thing to do.”
Really hate to burst your bubble, Poor, but Brown is primarily conservative and says he will vote against the sick care destruction bill offered to us by Pelosi, Reid, and Obama. That is what his popularity is based on, and of course the fact that he is the only attractive and plain-spoken candidate in the race with a record of honorable public service.
Its imperitive that cons reverse course and follow their hearts and get on board with the liberal wing of their party ….SNIP
ROTFLMAO, YOU CAN’T BE SERIOUS. That is why the “cons” as you call them lost in ’06, and ’08. They were reperesenting the base. I love how liberals know what is best for Conservatives!!
So to be successful the Conservatives must be more like liberals (progressives actually)?
One word, wingnuts:
Snowe
Former Marine, why do you think he wants us to stay squishy. It’s the only way we can lose to the current crap of Democrats.
Never take a liberal’s advice as to what Republicans should do.
From now until November we can be sure that the hard-core totalitarians will do whatever they can to divide the opposition to the socialism regime that they are trying to build in America.
The totalitarians have powerful friends, with a lot of money (the saudis, Soros, etc.)and I wouldn’t be surprised if they would finance a “third party” to be sure that the opposition loses every single election.
Instead of allowing the subversives to debate what the Republicans should do, we should be asking the democrats if THEIR tent is big enough or if they only accept and support communists, jihadists, baby-murderers, and people whose only goal is to destroy the family and the society.
At the present time, the “democratic” tent is quite small, good only for nihilists and subversives.
I see no reason to believe that a new Republican government would be any better than the failed Bush/Rove/DeLay version or the apparently developing Obama failure. (My hopes that Obama will learn Clintonesque competence and centrism decline every day. My hopes that the GOP will recommit itself to competent governance decline every day.)
Therefore, I will vote for divided government. Right now that means Scott Brown.
“What is either fiscally conservative and socially libertarian about voting for Romneycare?”
Would it have passed in a worse form without his vote and input? Given the 3 to 1 tilt in MA politics, and the mandates already passed, it may well have seemed like the best he could do. Do you think he will vote for the Obama bill?
What other parts of Obama’s agenda do you think he will vote for?
Let me start by saying that I am a fiscal conservative, social conservative, and a defense hawk. I also live in upstate NY, the state where conservatives are few and far between. Ideally, I would support a strong Reagan-conservative. Alas, life is not always ideal. If I have to choose between a Scott Brown (with whom I share many beliefs) or all a Martha Jokely, who will join the super majority, its a no-brainer.
Will conservative Republicans be abe to attract independents in the Northeast? Sure, if they are the right candidates. America is still a center-right country-voters will instinctively choose a limited government candidate. If we follow the Dem-lite version in the Scozzafava mold, we’ll be in the wilderness forever. We also need to take a look at our candidates one at a time. Scott Brown is not a Scozzafava or a Snowe-job. He’s mostly right on the issues, and no matter how much I would like to see it, Bay Staters won’t elect a Jim DeMint. If Brown turns out to be more of a leftist once elected, he’ll be a one termer. But, I don’t think that will be the case. There’s another point to consider here: the rank and file in Congress are only as good as their leadership (McConnell?!).
This year has the makings of a great year for Republicans and conservatives. As long as we don’t screw it up.
1,736 women were raped in Massachusetts in 2008.
Scott Brown wants hospitals to turn then all away.
The women of Massachusetts deserve better.
While everyone’s debating this, Scott Brown is less 48 hrs from election day and he needs us to help him win. Sign up to volunteer and make calls. That’s what it’s about today. We can do more navel gazing on Wednesday.
There can never be a perfect candidate ever but in this case Scott Brown is as close as one could come! Remember this is Massachusetts a state that has offered some of the worst liberals ever to serve in the Senate or House of Representatives and I need not mention names.
I personally am looking forward to watching the results on Tuesday night and will be even more excited in November where here in my state two congressman have already given up after years in their positions, I believe the democrats can see plainly that they are a lost cause and have tried too much and will pay for it dearly, so they just said to hell with it!
“Scott Brown wants hospitals to turn then all away.”
Scott Brown doesn’t want conscientious objectors to be coerced as a condition of employment to participate in abortions, a very different thing.
“1,736 women were raped in Massachusetts in 2008.”
Well there is the baby molestor–with a hot curling iron yet–whose family was a big campaign contributor to Coakley. She didn’t want to prosecute even though the conviction was a certainty.
And there is the certainly innocent person she did want kept in prison for child molestation, when the testimony coached into the child by the prosecution was that a 4″ butcher blade was lodged into the child’s anus, and yet there was no evidence of blood or a wound. That person wasn’t a campaign contributor to Coakley, I’ll wager.
She’s that blatantly bad.
“The women of Massachusetts deserve better.”
Than Coakley, absolutely,
#66
I am absolutely sure that you, like all the other orcs of the totalitarians brigade, DON’T spend a second of your life teaching martial arts and self defense and training women to use a gun to defend themselves.
Therefore, you should shut up.
And women do deserve better than scum like the liberals who use them for political propaganda after ABANDONING them to crime.
And women deserve better than scum like the liberals who try to brainwash them into thinking that murdering babies is the solution of problems.
“1,736 women were raped in Massachusetts in 2008.
Scott Brown wants hospitals to turn then all away.”
Yeah, I’m sure Daily Kos is running with that one. Of course there’s no truth in it- but the Demon Rats will shy away from no trick no matter how low, dirty, dishonest or illegal to get that 60th vote for serfdom.
66….
I do not believe your comment is 100% correct..
“As Coakley’s own Web site says, after Brown’s amendment was rejected, he voted “in favor” of the bill to require emergency rooms to provide rape victims with emergency contraceptives, and the whole debate seems to be more nuanced than the mailer suggests.
The Dem mailer could be related to the fact that internal Dem polling reportedly shows Coakley under-performing with less-affluent women.”
The dems put out the message of 05 and not requiring health care workers to tell women about contraception. Not that he has since seen things differently and understand better. But still Coakley sends the mailer out…and it’s blowing up in her face.
“
Praetorian,
Sir, why waste your time writing non-sense distortions? Its really rather revolting to state such garbage. That would be tantamount to a Brown supporter saying something like:
A politically connected cop raped a baby with a hot curling iron.
Matha Coakley refused to prosecute him (although a different prosecutor did go after him, and he’s now serving 2 life sentences)
Matha Coakley, therefore, supports child rape. The children of Massachusetts deserve better.
(See how revolting it is to stoop into the gutter to score poltical points?)
@ 66
Nonsense. If you don’t like the man, a least try to come up with a rational reason instead of a wild accusation.
And before some scum sucker asks, yes.
Here are links:
http://michaelgraham.com/archives/coakley-reward-the-innocent-punish-the-guilty/
http://blogs.waaf.com/thehillman/2010/01/14/martha-and-scott-was-it-rape-rape/
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/01/the-details-coakley-amirault-woodward-and-souza.html
Maybe by now I’m piling on…
But then it ain’t beanbag. Martha’s a bad person.
@73. Todd Burgler:
The difference Mr. Burgler, is that it is true a cop who was politically connected to Coakley raped a child with a curling iron, and Coakley wouldn’t prosecute him.
Praetorian lied. You admit there’s a difference between truth and lies, don’t you?
Ifthose in the right limit their support to only perfect conservatives, then they are perfect fools.
Poor Citizen – don’t tell us who and how to vote. We don’t need nor want your advice. As i say to the stray dog wandering around my house – “GO HOME”.
47. johnt: I love the way you think!
I know the northeast, I’m originally from the northeast, and I thank God when candidates like Rudy Giuliani and Scott Brown come along. Give us more like them, GOP, and this small government, low taxation, strong national defense conservative will happily stand with and for them.
If Scott Brown had a secret illegitimate black daughter, would that affect how you vote?
57. JMH:
Voting against this sort of thing is what fiscal conservatives do.
Well, then, what do fiscal conservatives vote FOR?
Never mind, I already know:
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/john-farrell/2009/03/05/republican-hypocrisy-on-earmarks-ask-senators-cochran-wicker-and-vitter.html
I just clicked on a site to be a Poll-watcher for Scott Brown. It was infested with a trojan horse so i couldn’t even see the site. luckily my virus protection software is working!! Reason for making this statement? they are doing their best to keep poll watchers away because THEY PLAN ON DOING FRAUD AND CORRUPTION ON TUESDAY!!
Principle or pragmatism? What a stupid question. Of course we should be principled. Disagree? Then say it directly: “We shouldn’t be principled. We should compromise whenever it’s more convenient.” Yeah, thought you might balk at that. “Pragmatism” is just a rationalization of cowardly behavior. You either live a principled life or a selfish one. The decision is stark; so is reality. The liberals are successful precisely because they ARE principled – they just have the wrong principles. Republicans (notice I did not say conservatives) are unsuccessful because they are cowards. They were successful under Lincoln. They were successful under Reagan. Neither man took the easy road; they stood on principle.
But not now of course. I don’t mean be principled NOW. Right now we need as many R’s in Congress as possible. Let’s get those “Jumpin’ Jim” Jeffords and Snowes and McCainiacs in there. THEN we’ll start being principled. Tomorrow. After we’ve had our coffee.
STOP Taxation Without Representation! STOP Communism in Amerika!
Scott Brown is one rain drop in the the hurricane that is racing toward land in Massachusetts and will engulf the entire United States.
Call it what you will, tea party or block party, it is goind to be a house cleaning party all across America! Let the rain begin!
Politicians (read, liars, cheats and cons), union thugs, despicable community organizers your days are numbered! The Anti-communists are finally fed up!
You can’t be anti-warmist and win in MA. You’d have better luck being anti-Catholic. AGW is a dominant religion in the northeast.
For me, Brown is plenty conservative enough. There are enough Democrats in the Senate who will vote against cap & trade. What we REALLY need is a fiscal conservative. For my money, Brown fills the bill.
wonder how this piece would have read different 10 days earlier?
dynamic politics in the u.s. who woulda thunk it?
“You can’t pigeonhole Scott Brown. He’s a conservative — but he’s not. He’s a squishy RINO — but he’s not. He’s pro-choice, pro-gun, pro-consumer protection, pro-free market, and pro-environment. He opposes gay marriage but supported a regional cap-and-trade scheme — a vote he now says was a mistake. He supported the Massachusetts health insurance plan promoted by Mitt Romney with its individual mandate, although he now says that they need to get costs under control.”
So, he voted for c’n't and admits its a mistake?
Good!
Romneycare can’t get its cost under control and he comes out against Obamacare?
Good!
Pro-choice? That needs to be kicked back to the States. Not a deal-breaker as every other GOP member can’t get that one through their skulls, either… a general complaint I have against both parties.
Pro-gun? Yes! Damned straight. Hope he goes after the BATF.
Pro-consumer protection? Eh, a State’s concern, we have tons of regulations to protect consumers at the federal level.
Pro-free market? Good! We could use some of that Upon the Hill.
Pro-environment? Admits c’n't is a mistake, well damn, it sounds like he has some sense in his head! Just what we need Upon the Hill.
So what is the problem from conservatives with this guy?
I could use a small government conservative, yes… but anything to stop up the guts of Congress is a help. I would prefer an Immodium-D sort of candidate, but Kaopectate is all thats offered so we can start with that.
No 59 and Fish no 78
Look, Im just an independant responding to the article. Republican Neo Cons and Righty Cons need not be split if they just “tweek” thier policies a bit…not much. Pro choice is optional, but pro human rights is a must, they must support the closure of gitmo and closing down on Iraq. Too many have sacrificed for freedom. Pro environment is a gimmee, just need to stress it a bit more, pro health care reform is also a must, specially for brown. If right wing candidates do that (or by getting some ex democrats like Reagan) then you should win easily. I think people inheritantly trust the right much more than the left because the left does not budge on government solutions..whereas, Repulicans will buy off on government when it really is the only alternative..if you look at no child left behind (I think it was a Kennedy/Hatch bill), this type of legislation was good. Good for America and good for children and communities. So I hope that clears things up a bit better for you.
I think the lessons of NY-23 have been learned and most have returned to the ..in it to win it…thought track. Dont you agree?
I just got home for a VERY satisfying time holding Brown signs outside a Martha Jokeley appearence in Melrose, MA. I’ve been ignoring Brown’s uptick in the polls this week; this is the People’s Republic of Massachusetts, after all, and ACORN knows less than nothing about stealing elections compared to the MA Democrats. I’m here to report that the Jokeley supporters are running scared, favoring us with those angry, twisted, frowny faces I’ve gotten to love so much. The first cadre of Teamster goons was sent over to our corner 5 minutes after we arrived, but left after seeing that the local cop wasn’t about to put with any crap from them, as well as the constant questions about which flavor Kool Aid was being served inside. They were even more upset by the cars passing silently by them in the square, only to erupt in a horn-honking din when they got to the Brown side! I’m beginning to believe.
You folks around the rest of the country are kinda quaint in your beliefs about Massachusetts politics. Ol’ BC is a perfect example of the Mass Moonbat, raging against any questioning cradle-to-grave socialism and insulting the intelligence of any disagreeing with he/she/it. To tar Romney and Brown about “Romneycare” is ludicrous; the Mass Legislature is 80-20 Dhimmicrat! No Romney veto would have been anything but a gesture, and I give him credit for cutting the best deal possible (though he also knew he’d be long gone when the bills came due). By law, no hospital in MA is allowed to refuse care for any reason, and I hope you all realize that this fight is not about healthcare, but insurance. The people in power here all claim to care so much about healthcare for the “disadvantaged”; why does Boston Medical Center, located on the edge of the worst neighborhoods in the city and serving a patient mix of about 60% Medicaid and 20% “free care” (homeless and illegals), have to file suit against the state to get their promised Medicaid money?
And know this: gay marriage, left to the vote of the people of the Commonwealth, would NEVER have passed. It was instead imposed upon us by our unelected Supreme Judicial Court and its South African-born chief justice (wife of NY Times toady Anthony Lewis). So don’t blame us.
But while we’re assigning blame for the damage to the Republican “brand” here, let’s assign it where it belongs: George W. Bush. Dubya kept the country safe, and for that we can’t thank his administration enough. But having a conversation about abortion or gay marriage didn’t turn nearly as may off the GOP as Bush’s spending like a drunken sailor. Socially conservative and fiscally reckless is the worst of all possible worlds. It’s the economy, stupid!
But a sea change is coming here, and Scott Brown is just the first step. Our less than useless governor Deval Patrick (David Axelrod’s test case for the Obambi campaign) has 30% approvals. The most popular Dhimmicrat currently holding statewide office is running for governor as an independent, and is appreciably to the right of the average MA Dem. He also just chose a former Republican former state rep as his running mate. The Republican running is outraising Patrick 3-1 so far, with a running mate who’s a total anathema to you “cons” here: a fiscally conservative gay!
So cut Brown some slack. I think he’ll be just fine, an independent thinker not beholden to any faction. And if he’s not, he’ll only serve the two years remaining on the Hyannisport Orca’s term.
To paraphrase the Gipper, it’s morning in Massachusetts!
Instead of all this blathering why didn’t Moran interview the man? What was the main point of this foolish article?
UPDATES!!!
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: Felix Browne
January 16, 2010 617-335-8333
Regarding Coakley’s lying ad:
MEDIA ADVISORY FOR TODAY
Dan Winslow, counsel for the Scott Brown for U.S. Senate campaign, will hold a media availability to announce the filing of a criminal complaint against the Massachusetts Democratic Party regarding a recent mailing paid for and sent by the Massachusetts Democratic Party. Winslow will make a statement and take reporters’ questions at MassGOP Headquarters in Boston TODAY at 4:00 PM.
Massachusetts GOP Headquarters
85 Merrimac Street, 4th Floor
Boston
and
Brown holding a massive rally tomorrow (at the same hour that Obama will be at Northeastern campaigning for Coakley):
http://brownforussenate.com/the-peoples-rally
This pickup truck thing is just plain silly, both for Brown to use it, and now Moran. 200,000 miles is not that much, and it is only 7 years old. Kelley puts the value at $8,000 retail. More than I paid for my current “new” car and much newer than my old truck, a 1983 Ford.
I’m not at all envious, in fact I’m quite content. What I do have an issue with is those disconnected ivory-tower types who think that not having a late model BMW is being humble.
There is nothing conservative about being pro-abortion, any more than it is conservative to be pro-slavery. Fiscal conservatives need to have it drilled into their heads that the Republican Party was founded on social conservatism, not fiscal conservatism. Fiscal conservatives are welcome, but must know their place. That said, Brown is acceptable for now, since he will not vote to make the situation worse. Furthermore, the biggest life issue right now is making sure Nazi-care doesn’t pass, lest the elderly and disabled be targeted for extermination by denying them the ability to procure health care at any price.
89. Brutus. Excellent post, thank you. One point, “total anathema”, Unless the term “gay” has morphed to mean “total left-wing whackjob”, I would prefer withholding judgement until I learned more about him. I know nothing else about the gentleman and would allow him or others to make his case. My wife’s cousin is Steve Gunderson, former Rep. from Wis. While I both agreed and disagreed with him, it was always based on policy and just policy.
The absolute worst he’ll be is another Susan Collins. I’ll take that from MA anytime.
And yes, we must nominate and support the most conservative candidate who can win. Scott Brown is as far to the right as we can get in MA, we can’t expect Jim DeMint!
My guess is that he ends up being ideologically in the same boat as John McCain – certainly right-of-center but not a party line vote.
Here we go. I knew it was only a matter of time before these stories started. What’s not to understand? Brown is about as conservative as you can expect from a socialist state like Mass. Conservatives are rallying behind him because his stated positions will help stop the insanity that is Little Barry Bam Bam’s agenda plus will send a huge middle finger to the Dems. What is so hard to grasp? We still want the most conservative candidates we can get in the Republican party. That hasn’t changed with Brown. We still want conservatives who will vote conservative on issues. We evaluated the race and the candidate and many of us said “this is a guy we can get behind.” Unlike liberals, we can use our analytical skills and make rational, informed decisions. It’s not like we fell for a bunch of “hope,” “change,” and “yes we can” empty rhetoric like a bunch of mindless sheep.
I think he could be a raging communist and in this case people would vote for him.What matters only to millions of us is,he opposes this 2-3 thousand page fiasco.Not even those who wrote it have a clue whats in it or what its about.This isnt at all about if he is another Arlen Spector.Its all about one vote,a NO vote.All of these guys need to go back and come up with a real bill thats bipartisan.Get rid of that interstate competition ban and you will see HC costs come down.Add the other things Republicans want tort reform ect,and things dems want.Things like no dumping if your sick,pre-existing conditions ect.However get rid of that mandated to buy insurance crap.They need to bring a 300 page bill everyone understands and try small changes first.
Scott Brown by most accounts is a moderate Republican.
For Independents and Republicans alike the guy seems to be what MA needs.
Who knows, maybe the wind farm will come to fruition not near Martha’s Vineyard but AT the Kennedy compound!
Regarding Coakley, I loved a recent video bit of her explaining the ‘Scott Brown moles..’ and then goes onto say, ‘..though I’m not privy to the details’.
Then why did she make the comment?? For she couldn’t think of any intelligent, lucid explanation for her tanking. A maroon in the highest order.
Politicians are bad enough. One so apparently obtuse, devoid of any analytical attributes is downright scary.
If Brown wins, it shouldn’t be taken as a blow to the more conservative elements of the GOP or even conservative independents. The very conservative Jim Demint summed up his vision of a robust and effective big tent last May in the WSJ.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124121871475178899.html
..anyone who stands shoulder to shoulder with you on the common, musket at the ready, and willing to face down the advancing redcoats, is more than good enough of an ally.
God bless Scott Brown and the United States of America.
I responded to several Andrew Ian Dodge tweets with the following (keeping the whole tweet under 140 chars while RT his):
“In the REAL world there are two candidates: Brown and Coakley.”
“Grownups know the perfect is the enemy of the good.”
‘Nuff said.
If we as conservatives sit around waiting for the ‘perfect’ candidate to materialize, we will be waiting for a very long time. As we wait, the leftist machine will keep on rolling right over us, destroying ever more of our liberties and way of life with each passing day.. Right now, the focus -must- be on defeating Obama’s agenda starting with this disaster of a healthcare bill. Scott Brown will do that for us. NOW.
Mr. Moran wrote “It appears from the record that Brown has an open mind, does his homework, and is a true independent thinker.
That’s good enough for me for the simple reason that a person who possesses those qualities cannot, by nature, support the transparently, brazenly dishonest agenda of this administration.
As for Andrew Ian Dodge’s assessment of the situation, considering his shoddy fact-checking in the linked article (his assertion that Scott Brown said he wasn’t familiar with the Tea Party movement was in fact wholly fabricated by the Boston Globe), I wouldn’t give anything else he wrote in the article much credence.
Finally, I’ve seen several references to Brown’s role in Romneycare, but no mention of the fact that unlike the Federal government, individual states do have both the authority and the right to enact that type of legislation (for better or worse). There’s a big difference between unpopular legislation (Romneycare) and unconstitutional legislation (Obamacare).
-Cnation
“…I think the lessons of NY-23 have been learned and most have returned to the ..in it to win it…thought track. Dont you agree?…”
OK let’s look at NY-23. Hoffman entered the race only a month before the election, not only got no support from the GOP until the last week, but saw the GOP spend $1 million on his nominally GOP opponent, saw that candidate endorse his Dem opponent, has zero charisma, had never run for any kind of office before, didnt run a great campaign, was tagged as “not living in the district” although he had lived in that area his whole life … and still lost by only 3000 votes.
The lesson of NY-23 is to do the same thing again with better prep. Hoffman didnt lose because of any of his positions.
@93, myth buster:
“Fiscal conservatives need to have it drilled into their heads that the Republican Party was founded on social conservatism,”
Not even slightly true. The Republican party was founded on the overthrow of the southern oligarchy which had had the upper hand in the Congress and then later only the Senate since the Founding. There was nothing of social conservatism in it, in fact, at the time, the phrase as we use it today had no meaning.
To the extent the Burkean sort of conservatism is involved, the Republicans were intent on the overthrow of the old order–it was a corrupt, foul thing, the South, and needed to be overthrown–and while the constitution was not violated in its overthrow (except by the South), the Republicans were not conservatives in the Burkean sense either.
The Democrats, the party of slavery, they were the conservatives then, sadly enough. They were a mouldered branch, then as now, best cut away.
#96 Tyk: I agree. Is it so hard to grasp that one candidate may be better than the other but that the one you pick may not be ideal? I think the problem with Moran, at least in past articles, is that he advocates the RINO position by default.
JMH, AMEN! And it took some stones to vote against that a month after September 11th, too! He stuck to his guns, a trait I admire very much.
I’ll take Brown’s voting record over Coakley’s any day. If Martha won’t go after a man who raped a baby with a hot curling iron, I have ZERO confidence in her ablility or even her desire to keep us safe from terrorism.
97. Would that the Democratic party looked like Scott Brown and Joe Lieberman rather than the madmen and Pelosi who are in charge now.
Will Mitt Romney Stump for Brown to Counter Obama’s Visit? http://mittromneycentral.com/2010/01/15/will-mitt-romney-stump-for-scott-brown-in-last-days-of-senate-race/
Palin hater Moran is riding his hobby horse again.
107. Mythbuster. Agreed. I have always respected Lieberman. Seldom agree with him, but he is honest and open in his convictions and you can believe he believes what he says.
The point the author makes here about Brown being a viable conservative candidate within a liberal state is exactly the point I tried again and again to make about Rudy Giuliani. Had Giuliani presented himself as a strident pro-lifer and adhered to all the other litmus-test views so beloved of social conservatives, he never could have been elected Mayor of New York City, period. But he was elected and he did a magnificent job. But that just wasn’t good enough for the social cons who seem to believe they own the GOP: they villified him in the 2008 primaries. Rudy is no RINO. Scott Brown isn’t, either.
@92 myth buster. You really should get out more. The modern conservative movement didn’t have anything to do with abortion or social issues. It began in the 50′s, with Bill Buckley and was based upon small government, fiscal discipline, state’s rights and anti-communism. The social issues so dear to your little heart didn’t even begin to emerge until Roe v. Wade and the gay movement. Ronald Reagan, as Governor of California, signed one of the most lenient abortion laws in the country and he opposed the anti-gay Briggs Amendment.
Strident “pro-lifers” like yourself keep sounding your one single tedious note, while laughably trying to drum true conservatives and Libertarians out of the movement.
Know your own place, chump.
#93 Big Red-Richie Tisei is exactly what I described; a fiscal conservative in favor of lower taxes and limited government. He’s not caught up in any “gay” agenda. He’s been the voice of the Republicans in the legislature for the past 2 years as the Seante minority leader, and he’s a real thorn in the side of the Dhimmicrats for not being what they think a gay man should be. He’s also the highest ranking Republican in the state.
Just so you all know what goes on here, my moonbat city of Melrose has had THREE gay Republican mayors, one of whom just celebrated his 100th birthday. And if Richie joins Charlie Baker in taking over the Corner Office in the State House, we’ll all be better for it!
It’s 12:30 Sunday morning, and I’m guilty of some premature celebrating with my friend Sam Adams…
#102 – Ditto!!!
I would have no problem supporting Brown in Massachusetts however in Ketucky,Tennessee,down south sure as hell would not support him. Look Snowe,Collins are always going to break conservatives hearts now and then but come on look where they run better a RINo than a out out left winger in those northeastern states. However jackasses like David Frum think republicans need to run those type of candidates everywhere and that’s B.S. Coakley may when but what a piss poor candidate. She seems clueless.
I don’t think that there’s a litmus test, I believe that the Tea Party is saying to vote for the Conservative when you can, and GOP when you can’t, and pray for the best outcome.I believe that some sort of “litmus” test was started on one of the blog sites but went south not long after.But this was just my observation and I may be wrong.
Social conservatives need to remember in the 1994 Republican Contract with America no social issues were listed. Social issues for the most part belong at the state level not the Federal level. Am sick and tired of the 100% purist that put social issues ahead of everything. Give me a fiscal, national defense, small government conservative and I will vote for them.
A conservative who does well in Middle America is unlikely to get elected in New England. That said I live in Middle America and would vote for Scott Brown. You know where he stands and that’s important to me, but then I also supported Rudy who I thought would make the best candidate for the GOP and still think he would have.
Given the choice between Brown and Coakley, even as a diehard conservative, I would certainly vote for Brown myself despite disagreements, and will be rooting for him Tuesday.
However, I could not send money to a man who supports abortion, and would not in the future, either. And I will remember his past support for a “cap-and-trade” tax scheme when evaluating his intelligence and understanding of economic and environmental issues – noting that no matter how good he can sound, he isn’t all that bright.
Of course, Brown’s limited straying from the conservative reservation, serious as the issues are, do not make him a Dede Scozzafava, the sort of pure RINO that certain squishy-spined wannabe pundits would have us hold our noses and support.
And his national profile grew overnight because of his vow to be the vote which breaks ObamaCare, just the sort of vote we all know we could never count on a Dede or Lincoln Chaffee to cast. So none of those squishes should take his popularity among conservatives nationally as any vindication of their apostasy. Capisci?
The bit about Scuzzleboggart is pure revisionist history, Rick.
Scuzzlebubba was not “considered to the right of most New York Republicans.” She was replacing a reliable conservative in a conservative district and she was to the left of her democratic opponent.
Brown is replacing the Liberal Lion of the Senate.
Get your facts straight and then return with the “feckless conservatives” meme.
Every journey starts with the first step.
#65 Here is what sheer political desperation looks like:
“Praetorian:
1,736 women were raped in Massachusetts in 2008.
Scott Brown wants hospitals to turn then all away.
The women of Massachusetts deserve better.
Jan 16, 2010 – 11:20 am”
Just lie, lie, and lie again. Good luck with this BS charge. Because the blog world exists, lies like this, that used to sometimes be effective, no longer work.
The time to settle ideological scores is in the primaries.
Elect the most conservative candidate possible for the area. If Brown were more conservative, he wouldn’t be running in a dead heat with Coakley. This is the same principle as managing your money: buy things that are durable and nice, but don’t spend beyond your means. In MA, we have a very limited amount of political capital, so a relatively independent conservative is the best we can do.
Finally, at this point, tossing Brown because he meets 90% of what we want and not 100% is asinine and will only make us look bad. We can stop socialised medicine in its tracks. If we don’t do that because Brown is mildly pro-choice, then we’re morons who deserve to hand our country over to the dictators in Washington.
79. skeeziks.
“If Scott Brown had a secret illegitimate black daughter, would that affect how you vote?”
Well, well. The Pee Wee moho – kochevnik – Shawn Ondeen Whatever Twilight Zone Dummy has a new gig as skeeziks The One Line Wonder.
One can see the same old creature wallowing the Modern Liberal Cesspool, and attempting to give all the wonders and benefits of living in Paradise by being… skeeziks.
“Black daughter”? Did Brown adopt? He is white isn’t he? By all appearances then, the child must be half white. Just like Mr. President. Why the emphasis on black?
Once again the Modern Liberal race game enters, using a hypothetical “secret illegitimate black daughter” as a Modern Liberal useful tool. The “secret illegitimate black daughter” is only an object, to be used by The Pee Wee moho – kochevnik – Shawn Ondeen Whatever Twilight Zone skeeziks Dummy to discredit an unworthy non-cesspooler. How wonderful! I bet you love black people too! With friends like you, who needs Woodrow Wilson?
And isn’t illegitimacy cool? Especially if blacks are involved. Maybe your new pamphlet, “I Look White But I’m Really Black will explain, and maybe, just maybe, will out sell Onan The Wannabe Jihadist. Or even that wonderful scroll, The Youngsters of moho.
The funhouse mirror loves you. Really loves you.
Come on now, would Van Jones approve of this racial tweaking? Whatever.
Brutus, thanks for the info. Tisel does seem to be someone to look into. We need all allies in this fight and as long as he gives more than he takes away (the Reagan Test) he’s cool with me.
BTW, Ol’ Sam Adams was a distant cousin of mine. We could use more like him today.
Thanks Goy, you apparently get it. Fred B, I’m not so sure. Yeah Fred it’s easy to reduce an argument to the absurd – - when you you substitute your own misinterpretation for the original point.
“you claim the discussion is over the perfect conservative vs a partly perfect conservative.”
No, my first point is that Morans need to overemphasize divisions within the conservative movement is not helpful. To that end I’m saying when you do not have an ideal candidate to vote for, you should vote for the one who shares more of your conservative views than the others. In other words when you don’t have butter, use margarine.
“Anyone who thinks otherwise is dumb. But that is false.”
That reference was those who believe there is such a thing as a perfect candidate. I’ll stand by it.
“What you are really saying is we should vote for those who have no conservative values at all simply because they have an R after their name.”
Said nothing of the sort and made no mention of party afilliation at all. What I am “really saying” is making perfect the enemy of the good is not pragmatic and is dumb. One furthers the cause, the other kills it. Like you I don’t think I could describe the perfect conservative either but you bet your ass pragmatism would be one of their principles.
Rick Moran, the conservative who can barely abide conservatives tells us that Scott Brown is “nuanced” and that’s a good thing. Actually it’s the worst thing about Brown, but he’s relatively conservative despite the nuance and that’s why it is so vital that the kneejerk Democrat voters of Massachusetts take off their ideological blinders for once and vote against their liberal overlords/oppressors.
Praetorian at #65 is spreading the lies and misrepresentations of the latest (desperate) Coakley political ad.
Revoltin’, both the ad and its propagators.
123. Mr Lucky:
Snare!
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/03/21/the_anatomy_of_a_smear_campaign/
Chump de chump . . . chump de chump
Yes.
And as far as women’s rights, yes. They deserve the right to bear arms and shoot rapists.
I’m not in favor of making women who are raped go through with a pregnancy, but let’s try a little thought exercise.
Let’s say I hit you in the face. Nice, good, solid cock. Even loosen a tooth or two a bit.
Does that give you the right to non-fatally stab the guy to your right?
That A harms B does not give B the right, in and of itself to harm C.
So, even in the case of rape, you have to ask if it’s just to kill the fetus for the sake of the mother.
What, then, did the fetus do to deserve it? It’s true, in this case – unlike most – that the fetus did not come into being because of the mother’s irresponsibility. And that may be a deciding factor – she didn’t put the human fetus in harm’s way to begin with, unlike the woman who has an “unplanned” pregnancy. But it’s also true that the fetus is innocent. We do not visit the crimes of the father on the son.
JMH:
One month after the September 11th attacks, Scott Brown was one of only three Massachusetts State Representatives to vote against a bill to provide financial assistance to Red Cross workers who had volunteered with 9/11 recovery efforts.
But he’s so cuuuuuuute.
JMH….look at Martha Coakley’s record. Remind me to vote for Scott Brown tomorrow.
Amos, why would you urge Republican legislators to make common cause with stalker rapists? If those obsessed individuals were assured that their fixations would be governmentally forced to carry any rape-caused pregnancy to term, they’d be checking garbage cans to learn menstrual cycles so as to perpetrate their assault at the most fertilely propitious moment. Then, even if arrested, charged and convicted, they would still possess something that could never be taken away from them; enduring genetic connections to their targets.
And that’s not even getting into the issue of the criminally illegitimate wielding of coercively absolute parental authority in the perpetration of the statutory rape involved in father-daughter incest, and the genetic disasters that many of their issue turn out to be.