Posted on 02/25/2010 5:01:50 AM PST by suspects
A question for my fellow right-wing nuts angry at “Sellout” Scott Brown:
What part of “independent” don’t you understand?
U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, like state Sen. Scott Brown, is not a conservative Republican and, as far as I know, never claimed to be. During his brilliant campaign for U.S. Senate the only ads that mentioned the word “Republican” were run by Martha Coakley.
You remember: [cue ominous music] Republican Scott Brown - so Republican that when he goes out for a beer, he doesn’t go to bars, but to pubs. As in Re-“pub”-lican.
Those kinds of ads, like most of Coakley’s campaign, were dumb and didn’t work. Nobody bought into Brown as a hard-core conservative Republican - or even a soft-core one, for that matter.
And if you did, you weren’t paying attention. When a reporter asked candidate Brown to “set the record straight” about whether he was a conservative, moderate or liberal Republican, he answered “I am a Scott Brown Republican, and I always have been . . . I have always been independent.”
In his TV ads he openly appealed to “independent-minded Massachusetts voters.”
During his campaign, Brown specifically pledged to consider any legislation, from Democrats or Republicans, that he thought would help Massachusetts.
That’s the guy we tea partiers voted for, and that’s the guy we got. How does that make him “Benedict” Brown?
Oh, sure, the $15 billion “jobs” bill itself is a joke. Offering $1,000 tax credits for companies to hire the unemployed to $30,000 salaries is economic nonsense. And I’m not sure I buy Brown’s claims...
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonherald.com ...
Graham is spot-on. We knew he was not conservative. It was simply that he was less liberal than the rest of the field.
He didn’t surprise me. I wished he had, but his vote didn’t surprise me in the least. We cannot depend on him.
As an elected representative, Scott Brown answers only to his constituents, as it should be. I won’t agree with every vote he makes, but I will afford the man respect if he votes as his constituents wish.
Good point.
Brown was elected to OPPOSE the Democrats
on their spending insanity. He did not.
He voted for a $15 billion bill with tax cuts and credits, as opposed to the House’s $154 billion bill.
He voted for the bill because it would help reduce taxes so business’ back home in Mass would start to hire again.
He voted for a much smaller bill that’s in his constituents best interest as a whole.
Sounds to me like he’s doing his job...
The Senate-passed jobs bill is going to balloon once the House gets done with it. Then the two versions will have to be reconciled.
It will be interesting to see how Brown votes on the bloated final version.
Sorry Michael—I disagree with you on this one. Brown flunked his first big vote, which he should have known would be as symbolic as his election, by siding with the Rats.
He already said he would vote against it if it’s laden with pork and payouts.
Thanks, I see the house did pass their version.
At $154 billion, there’s got to be loads of port in there.
We just need to use him like he used us. He is political fodder...let’s get what we can out of him and then discard him like typical politco trash.
Gack! port = pork
(maybe the port is what they’re drinking!)
Well, it sounds like his constituents are extremely pissed at him...
Scott Brown explains Jobs Bill vote to Howie Carr, Boston radio (17 min audio)
Brown vote draws anger, shrugs
ScottBrownForPresident.com domain name for sale (Browniacs Jumping Ship)
It is Massachusetts and after a few years on his record, Brown will probably look more like a McCain than like a Reagan, but either is better than a Kennedy!
Graham and WTKK (Severin, McPhee) are Brown apologists.
Screw them.
No one had visions of him being a Jim DeMint type. But I don’t recall Brown saying, “Send me to Washington so I can cast my first vote with Harry Reid and SPEND BILLIONS more.”
“Oh, sure, the $15 billion “jobs” bill itself is a joke. Offering $1,000 tax credits for companies to hire the unemployed to $30,000 salaries is economic nonsense. And I’m not sure I buy Brown’s claims that he truly believes it will help the Massachusetts economy...It may be fuzzy math, but it’s brilliant politics.”
All this vote did was add to the problem, putting rocks in the pocket of an already sinking swimmer, it was NOT brilliant no matter who did it! This is not a matter of anything but facts, 2+2=4 not 22.
I agree with you completely.
Sorry to state the obvious, but if you don't live in Massachusetts, you are entitled to an opinion but that's about it. His constituents will decide whether he "flunked" or not.
If he supports amnesty though, it's on!
I just emailed Graham and pointed out that Brown has called himself a “fiscal conservative,” making Graham’s thesis invalid. (He asks “When did he ever call himself a “conservative.”)
Graham emailed me back with his straw man argument: “Brown is “Conservative” for Massachusetts. What did you expect Ron Paul...”
So all the Senators who voted Nay (i.e. RINO McCain and Dem Ben Nelson) are Ron Paulnuts? Graham’s thesis and argument does not hold water. He is a fraud like Brown.
I'm surprised Graham didn't justify his thesis on the ground that Brown didn't call himself a conservative Republican (which is what Graham's thesis is based on).
Another approach, one that is most common among the party faithful, is to redefine "fiscal conservative" as "borrowing and wasting 15 billion when the other guy wanted to waste more."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.