Portrait of Scott Brown
This Tuesday, a Republican — Massachusetts State Senator Scott Brown — might actually get elected to the U.S. Senate seat that Ted Kennedy held for 47 years. So, who is Scott Brown? For openers:
The Wall Street Mafia loves him. Brown is against Obama’s proposed tax on large banks, a tax that might actually give taxpayers some of their money back. You know, the hundreds of billions of dollars they gave to Wall Street without getting anything in return.
That gang of robber barons known as the Club For Growth is using some of its billions to purchase a Senate seat for Brown.
And FreedomWorks is back with a vengeance. Who could forget last summer’s orchestrated choreographed “demonstrations” against health care reform — courtesy of FreedomWorks. Our favorite rightwing Astroturf group is now organizing a huge Get-Out-The-Vote drive for Scott Brown.
In October 2001, State Senator Scott Brown voted to DENY financial aid to Red Cross workers who had volunteered to help 9/11 recovery efforts.
And last but not least, Brown even outflames the Afterbirthers. Not only was Obama born in Kenya, but he was probably born out of wedlock.
The Republican Party sure knows how to pick a candidate.
Labels: Club For Growth, FreedomWorks, Obama born out of wedlock, Scott Brown, Scott Brown Red Cross 9/11
posted by Tom Harper @ 6:20 PM
14 Comments:
Oh, but Brown mingles with the public well, looks good in a suit (or evidently, without one) and can be counted on to vote in lockstep with whatever Mitch McConnell says.
Meanwhile, by all accounts, including those of a bunch of mortified Dems, Martha Coakley has run a lame campaign.
Let's hope memories of Kennedy, Obama's endorsement and personal appearance, and Brown's whack-job positions will combine to get Bay State voters to elect Brown private citizen, and send Coakley to the Senate.
These fools have no shame. The Right should be crucifying this guy for that vote, but then, they're just a tad inconsistent with their hyperbole and mud-slinging.
And you'd think Limbaugh would be all over this shit too. I mean, he did give Dumbya the same grief he gave Obama about politicizing relief efforts to Haiti. What? He didn't? Oh. Never mind.
I agree with S.W., from what I have been reading about Coakley is she had a divine right attitude to being elected, whereas Brown, with all the soft money you mentioned, has been running hard from the outset.
I Coakley does win it will be a by a nose.
She ran a Creigh Deeds campaign, and I swear, if I see another dem run a Deeds campaign...well, I'll really be pissed, let's just say that.
My take, from my place yesterday -
The Republic Fascist (Racist) Party candidate in the special election to fill the late Edward (Ted) Kennedy’s Senate seat feigned ignorance yesterday as to the status of Obama’s parent’s “wedlock” at his birth, the implication of course not his birth but the status of his parent’s “wedlock” at conception. Allow me to share a thought – as products of mid-fifties promiscuous pregnancies and sixties serial southern California divorce, Dawn and I are of a Unique Generation. As is our President. With points for mixed ancestries.
Unlike rich, white Republic Fascist (Racist) Party candidates, our parents didn’t do us any favors, there’s no silver spoon stickin’ out of our asses. Bastard
I'm cautiously optimistic. There has been a Noticeable uptick in dem interest, and in Massachusetts, you don't have to get a hell of a lot of dems on board to win.
Coakley deserves to lose, but Brown sure as hell does not deserve to win. What a mess.
I have been making calls today for OFA for her. Nearly everyone I spoke with, said they are voting for Coakley. She ran a campaign thinking it was all set for her to just be crowned queen of the seat IMO.
It's just too bad she didn't get on the ball sooner with half the stuff I myself have been able to find out about this guy with a few ninja googling strokes. Voting against the 9-11 workers getting aid because it was too expensive, this was at the same time he was giving tax breaks to his golfing business buddies.
Last week saying he did not know what the tea parties were and then about a week before that he spoke at a fund raiser by, I'll let you all guess. Wants a constitutional ban on marriage equality. The guy is a winger that is trying not to be to get in then he will change like Joe Liebertoad did.
Don't forget Brown and his tirade at the high school because kids were being mean to his kid and the whole Cosmo naked shoot, even though he is one of those God fearing "good Christian" family values types.
I remember seeing something else last week about him trying to insert an amendment to allow medical personnel to refuse to provide contraception if they had a religious objection in a bill the MA Senate was considering. When a reporter called him on it, he went all girly and hid behind his daughters skirts denying having said anything. I swear these idiots don't remember google or you tube. This guy is a skeezy bastard trying to show he is a moderate when he is nothing of the kind.He believes that contraception is an abortion. We don't need any more of those in the senate to take away what little reproductive rights we women still have.
SW: I guess mingling with the public, looking good in a suit and marching in lockstep is all it takes these days. And in Massachusetts, of all places.
I haven't really followed this whole race closely, but the consensus seems to be that Coakley was too complacent and didn't bother campaigning; she pretty much just waited to be coronated. And that usually backfires.
Carlos: That's about as shameless as anyone can get, denying aid to Red Cross volunteers right after 9/11. You're right, I'm surprised the Right didn't dump all over him with "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists."
Holte: Yup, she seems to feel entitled to this senate seat. She'll be a slamdunk, so why bother campaigning? Now she's finding out the answer.
Bee: I remember that governor's race in Virginia, but I didn't remember that name until I googled it. That's exactly the kind of campaign Coakley has been running. It never works; complacency is the death knell.
Ten Bears: Good post. I've tried commenting at your blog, but can't seem to figure it out. When I click on "leave a comment," there doesn't seem to be any place to type one in. But I do visit your site regularly.
JR: You're right, neither of them deserve to win. But it doesn't bode well for the Democrats that such a liberal state might send a Republican to the Senate.
Jess: Thanks for the info. I didn't even know half of that stuff. "Contraception is abortion" -- WTF? He'd be right at home in the Deep South or rural Midwest. I can't believe he actually stands a chance in Massachusetts.
JR wrote: "Coakley deserves to lose, but Brown sure as hell does not deserve to win. What a mess."
That's it in a nutshell. Now, where did put the aspirin?
Brown seems like an apt description for such a shitty candidate. Still, most fault must lie with the Democratic party for failing to pick a candidate who could hold on to a seat that they've had for the last fifty years.
I don't know, SW, but when you find it, be a dear and pass the bottle around, would ya?
SW, Bee: Save some of that aspirin for me.
Lew: You're right, as shitty as Brown is, the Democrats had to be working at it to lose this race. This is a new record for the party that's already famous for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
On this whole election in Mass, while I am no friend of Mr.Brown this is really the fault of the Dems. This race was theirs to lose and now they have to pay for it with this clown. My hope and guess is that he gets his one turn in there and gets booted when the next round of elections come around. Times are so bad that people aren't thinking straight hence this guys win.
And as far as this being some sort of referendum on healthcare, doesn't Mass already have universal care? Were they really worried about a national one? My anger still sits with the Democrats on this one.
Ricardo: I agree, the Democrats single-handedly fought their way into this mess. Or snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, whatever you want to call it.
And yes, Massachusetts has very good health insurance coverage, so the election (contrary to what the media keeps saying) was not "a referendum on health care reform."
Post a Comment
<< Home