Senator Scott Brown

[r_starr]

For the first time in my adult life, I'm proud of Massachusetts.

[Gecko]

I think its a testament to the weakness in how the Democrats have been doing business in Massachusetts. It's not so much that Brown won, though he did put on an amazing campaign but Coakley just tried to phone it in and failed. Brown has what 2 years? and then he'll face another Kennedy

[bobdea]

I think its a testament to the weakness in how the Democrats have been doing business in Massachusetts. It's not so much that Brown won, though he did put on an amazing campaign but Coakley just tried to phone it in and failed. Brown has what 2 years? and then he'll face another Kennedy

yup, this is how I see it.

really pathetic that MA dems could not find anyone who could beat this guy. his biggest claim to fame is his wife is on the news. kinda like John Kerry failing to beat dubya.

r_starr

what part are you proud of? the lack of true conservatism? the open embrace of bigotry?

this dude is basically a clone of mitt romney.

why is the GOP so excited about this? After the fact that this may **** the health bill it's not exactly like their problems are solved. he really is not good for the party if they want to move forward. with his queer hating record he is just one more person that helps the GOP distance themselves from the next generation of voters.

the best part is his lack of judgement or class. but that's common in the GOP, this guy went off the deep end over ****ing facebook comments by high school kids.

class A douche. it's ****ing facebook

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/02/10/senator_causes_stir_by_reading_profanity/

[Ronin42]

Now the Govt will be almost a stalemake with each side negating the other. The good news is that at least they cont do more damage, or at least not quickly.

[James Ong]

While they retool health care, here's some entertainment,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2scxJNXjMI

[r_starr]

"For the first time in my adult life, I'm proud of Massachusetts." Hopefully everyone got that as a paraphrase & parody of Michelle Obama's comment. I've spent some time in MA, love the state, love the people.

Certainly Coakley ran a weak race. But in MA registered Democrats outnumber Republicans 3 to 1 and in the presidential election Obama carried the state by 26 points so with all things being equal you'd think the dems would of won even with Coakley running a poor campaign. Unless there are other reasons. There seems to be a trend here with Democrats losing New Jersey and Virginia too. Thanks for the feedback.

[carvedog]

Don't know much about Coakley's politics, but she came across just a little more exciting than mouse turds. The Schilling thing while not indicative of everything, was just bad, bad, bad in terms of not knowing what the hell is going on in the world. One of the most important sporting events for Boston and Mass in the last 100 years and she doesn't even know about it? FTW?

HOw about Brown pimping his daughters out at the first possible opportunity?

[bobdea]

"For the first time in my adult life, I'm proud of Massachusetts." Hopefully everyone got that as a paraphrase & parody of Michelle Obama's comment. I've spent some time in MA, love the state, love the people.

Certainly Coakley ran a weak race. But in MA registered Democrats outnumber Republicans 3 to 1 and in the presidential election Obama carried the state by 26 points so with all things being equal you'd think the dems would of won even with Coakley running a poor campaign. Unless there are other reasons. There seems to be a trend here with Democrats losing New Jersey and Virginia too. Thanks for the feedback.

I don't understand why people are trying to attribute any right leaning trend to MA with this, it's not really there. we do have more registered dems but many of them will vote republican at the drop of a hat. look at from 1961 to current for our governors, more republicans than democrats. If anything the GOP has really taken a beating in MA in recent years even if you include scott brown. this however does serve as a painful wakeup call dems. but bill weld and mitt romney should of been as well and seemed to not of changed anything. if there is a trend it's nothing more recent than 1991 as far as MA goes.

the bottom line is MA is not as liberal as people like to think.

as far as carvedog's comments go. yeah, kinda retarded on her part. but what's really sad is that it even matters to anyone.

seriously though. all you people that were scared of obamacare better be very scared now because sctott brown supports romneycare

for the uneducated it's where you're forced to buy into a plan or take a private plan that's payed for by the state if you're poor enough. the thing is there's no real price control and you're forced to buy causeing insane prices that you HAVE to swallow. basically being forced by the state to take it in the ass from the private sector with no oversight. scott brown calls it it a triumph of the free market, he's a moron, does not understand what a free market is I guess. I'm not a huge fan of the bill they are trying to push through now but it's better and cheaper than romneycare. this is why scott got so much insurance company money. for them romneycare is the best possible market.

more than once I have heard major republicans from actual red states refer to the MA plan as the direction the federal government ought to go in but it's the least sustainable way to go. now they can with brownie on board. this is very very bad for the country be you right wing or left.

[carvedog]

as far as carvedog's comments go. yeah, kinda retarded on her part. but what's really sad is that it even matters to anyone.

Maybe it is sad, but I don't trust those who have no interest - even peripherally - with things I think are pretty cool.

I am not a big baseball fan and you can't pay to watch a whole game during the regular season. The playoffs however are a different story. And to not know about such an amazing series, the comeback, Schillings pivotal role in it - everything, belies a huge ignorance of what is important to the constituency that she was never in touch with.

Just like me not knowing how to relate to people who don't like winter, I can't relate to those who have no interest or knowledge of sports.

[SteveInOregon]

For the first time in my adult life, I'm proud of Massachusetts.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DITTOS

[scrapster]

I agree with Bobdea. The Republicans did a great job of capitalizing on three dud Democratic candidates in a row in VA, NJ and MA. A pretty remarkable convergence of bad luck for one party--but it happened. They were all pretty damn awful. I'm originally from NJ and no one liked Corzine. In Mass, I've not met one person who cared for Coakley, even though they supported her. I even know someone who works for Coakley in the Attorney General's office who refused to vote for her in the primary.

Scott Brown looked good on camera, campaigned well and didn't have much of any record to weigh him down--because he never accomplished much in the state senate. Strangely enough, he was kind of like Obama with a pickup truck, but without the intellectual firepower. He probably wont survive long as a senator from Mass when they find out he's basically Jesse Helms with a lobstah bib. But mark my words, he may very well be on the Republican presidential ticket in a few years. Charisma goes a long way.

As for the party breakdown of Mass voters--independents are actually the largest category--and we've elected a number of Republican governors. Strangley enough, the cities and most rural areas usually go blue, and the vast, blah, middle class suburbs trend conservative... (I call it the the "I've got mine!--'F' all of you!" attitude.)

[Jack M]

"A string of bad luck"? I think that's way over-simplifying. I think it's a referendum against socialism and the super-majority. No party should ever have one. That form of "democracy" is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

They're all idiots anyway...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/25/cbsnews_investigates/main6140406.shtml

[BobD]

I think it's a good reminder that nothing much has changed since the time that, the vast majority of Americans believed Saddam Hussein was involved in 911, because of a right wing media campaign, and a few lying politicians.

Most people are just listening to sound bites about death panels, and taking away medicare from old people. It's still the case that if you shout a lie loud enough, people will believe it.

BobD

[bobdea]

"A string of bad luck"? I think that's way over-simplifying. I think it's a referendum against socialism and the super-majority. No party should ever have one. That form of "democracy" is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

They're all idiots anyway...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/25/cbsnews_investigates/main6140406.shtml

referendum against socialism? so you think the majority of people in the US want to see social security, medicare and the highway system abolished and replaced with a private system?

part of your statement I agree with though, no string of bad luck, string of weak democrats that ran poor campaigns corzine is the best example. corzine pulled some dirty tricks while running but he was pulling dirty tricks on one of the most corrupt people in jersey, not smart. that can earn you cement boots nevermind losing a election. chris christy is known for alleged fraud, being a Alberto Gonzales henchman, being associated with the mafia and much much more.

a real class act, again pathetic that the dems could not beat the round man.

[Jack M]

I think it's a good reminder that nothing much has changed since the time that, the vast majority of Americans believed Saddam Hussein was involved in 911,

I don't know anyone who ever believed that, and I don't recall that ever being alleged. Hardly the "vast majority".

[BobD]

I don't know anyone who ever believed that, and I don't recall that ever being alleged. Hardly the "vast majority".

All the polls in 2003. I think the figure went up as high as 70%. It only really started to drop after the 911 Commission reported, and the publicity surrounding Dick Cheney being chastised by the committee chairman for perpetuating the fallacy.

BobD

[Galen]

I don't know anyone who ever believed that, and I don't recall that ever being alleged. Hardly the "vast majority".

2003

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm

2007

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Poll_41_of_Americans_believe_Saddam_0624.html

And a likely 2012 Republican presidential candidate in 2009

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/01/10/palin_thought_saddam_was_behind_911.html

[BobD]

And a likely 2012 Republican presidential candidate in 2009

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/01/10/palin_thought_saddam_was_behind_911.html

:lol::lol::lol:

It's all those magazine articles, and books she reads. Trouble is, they are all written by Dick Cheney. I'm sure she watches a lot of current affairs TV programs too - on Fox News.

BobD

[Galen]

:lol::lol::lol:

It's all those magazine articles, and books she reads. Trouble is, they are all written by Dick Cheney. I'm sure she watches a lot of current affairs TV programs too - on Fox News.

BobD

With the latest ruling by the SCOTUS I'm not laughing at her anymore. I can see both domestic and foreign corporations pouring vast sums of money into her campaign as she is, like GWB, the perfect corporate tool: Driven by success at any cost, and not too bright.

[Jack M]

2003

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm

2007

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Poll_41_of_Americans_believe_Saddam_0624.html

And a likely 2012 Republican presidential candidate in 2009

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/01/10/palin_thought_saddam_was_behind_911.html

Well I stand corrected then! But such belief wasn't a far stretch at that time. Now that I think more about it, I think I suspected it was possible, but I didn't consider it fact. But lets not forget all the Iraq WMD warnings from Clinton himself and his whole administration. The case for attacking Iraq was coming from all sides, and congress voted for it in large majority... before they voted against it of course.

[BobD]

Well I stand corrected then! But such belief wasn't a far stretch at that time. Now that I think more about it, I think I suspected it was possible, but I didn't consider it fact. But lets not forget all the Iraq WMD warnings from Clinton himself and his whole administration. The case for attacking Iraq was coming from all sides, and congress voted for it in large majority... before they voted against it of course.

The issue isn't about the wmds. It about whether the public will believe a lie. I'm sure that plenty of people really believe that there would be death panels, and no Medicare for seniors. After all, legitimately elected politicians are saying these lies, or at minimum, fueling them. The problem is that false sound bites are more powerful than the truth.

BobD

[Ronin42]

+ 1 for the voice of reason

[skatha]

"A string of bad luck"? I think that's way over-simplifying. I think it's a referendum against socialism and the super-majority. No party should ever have one. That form of "democracy" is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

They're all idiots anyway...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/25/cbsnews_investigates/main6140406.shtml

The election in 2008 was a referendum against a party whose president called the Constitution a "G-damn piece of paper", whose legislation trashed the 4th and 14th Amendments to the Bill of Rights, whose irresponsible spending took the federal debt to $10.6 trillion. That wasn't good enough for the members of that party so, when the newly and legally elected president wanted reform healthcare, the propaganda started. I got an panicked email from my mom last summer about "death panels". I listened to seniors, who, after base manipulation, wanted the "government" out of their government provided healthcare. Very sad. Brown posed nude for Cosmo and shopped his daughters off during his acceptance speech. He was a pro-choice Repub endorsed by "right to life" groups because of his opposition to healthcare reform, despite he fact that Senate version is modelled after the Mass. plan initially proposed by Mitt Romney and voted for by State Sen. Scott Brown.

I can tell you, as a doctor, the only "death panels" in America are commercial insurers when the deny coverage to their clients. The rest of the world knows we let 45,000 Americans die every year for lack of insurance. Do we have any "moral authority" with them?

[LeeW]

It shouldn't be the president (former and current) at fault exclusively. It's those senators and house of representatives. They usually are there at the Capitol for their own self-interest, not for the People.

Destory Power, Not The People -- The Crass

[boarderboy]

I can tell you, as a doctor, the only "death panels" in America are commercial insurers when the deny coverage to their clients. The rest of the world knows we let 45,000 Americans die every year for lack of insurance. Do we have any "moral authority" with them?

during a "rushed, non-invasive" heart procedure (in/out of hospital in no more than 23 hours to avoid insurance approval hassles) and who'll bear the financial scars of usurious "deductibles, co-pays, and denied claims" for life,

I couldn't agree more.

Hence, I've let the Dems know that I've done the once unthinkable,

(1) After more than 40 years as a committed Yellow Dog, I've finally concluded the Donkeys will never develop anything resembling a spine, so I've changed my registration to independent. (My money and effort will now go to orgs such as MoveOn)

(2) If the President doesn't bludgeon gutless House/Senate Democrats into passing comprehensive health care reform by November, I'll perform my second inconceivable act. I simply won't vote.

F em!

BB