Posted on 01/09/2010 7:15:13 PM PST by arkadyka
Are you positively giddy over the prospect of Scott Brown winning in the upcoming Massachusetts special election? Are you currently supporting Scott Brown through time, money or both? Do you believe that limited government policy over the past thirty years failed, leading us to ever growing government? Are you partial to the Tea Party movement? If you have answered yes to all these questions then allow me to prove to you that your support for Scott Brown is a contradiction to everything you believe in and will hurt this country more than any rubber stamp liberal.
Living in Massachusetts the excitement over a Republican taking the mysterious Kennedy seat has generated what appears to be a political frenzy last witnessed only during the Obama campaign. Many advocates of small government and individualism have thrown their support to Brown including prominent talk show hosts like Michael Graham and Jay Severin, multiple prominent conservative websites like HotAir, RedState and PatriotRoom who not only endorsed Brown but are pleading with people to send donations. Local tea party activists are phone banking and blasting mass messages to anyone willing to listen. Organizations like the Tea Party Express (a GOP front group) and OneNation PAC (limited government) have also formally endorsed the candidate. Facebook, twitter and social media sites are on fire with Brown fever.
(Excerpt) Read more at rightcondition.com ...
Yah, no sh’t. Any R in that district is better than a D
Purist here as well but this seems like the right choice in this case for now.
It appears you two choices of who to vote for at this point.
Look at this way; would our nation be better off right with McCain/Palin in office, instead of the Marxist messiah?
Ideological purity is what you seek after in primaries. After that; you have a choice of a D or an R normally.
The Tea Party Express Endorsed Scott Brown
Michele Malkin, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity,
Rush, etc. have all spoke up for Brown.
Martha Croakley promises to vote for it.
Case closed.
Fight the SEIU & Demcare corruption: Support Scott Brown for Senate
By Michelle Malkin • January 3, 2010 09:48 PM
Last month, I noted how Massachusetts Senate GOP candidate Scott Brown called out rival Democrat candidate Martha Coakley’s SEIU thug pals.
The Purple Shirts continue to “pull out all the stops” to install Coakley in Teddy Kennedy’s seat. The special election will be held January 19.
SEIU endorsed her in October, poured $214,000 into a radio ad buy for her in December, and are pouring all available “resources and clout” into her bid. As she prattles on about “economic justice,” Coakley now boasts a total campaign treasury of more than $5 million:
Attorney General Martha Coakley raised more than $1 million over the past six weeks for her US Senate campaign, bringing her total haul for the race to $5.2 million, her campaign reported yesterday. The campaign of her rival, state Senator Scott Brown, said it raised $700,000 during the same period, much of it on the Internet, for a total of $1.2 million.
Coakley, who faced three opponents in the Democratic primary, started the special election campaign with less than $500,000 in her campaign account, compared with about $300,000 for Brown, a Republican of Wrentham.
Coakley raised the $1 million between Nov. 20 and Dec. 31. The campaign did not release donor lists, say how much money the campaign spent over that period, or reveal how much it has in the bank to begin the new year. Those details must be included in information that has to be submitted next week to the Federal Election Commission.
Where’s the GOP establishment? As Ed Morrissey reported last week: AWOL.
Yes, once again, it’s up to grass-roots conservatives and independents to help a GOP candidate fight the Big Labor-backed corruptocrat. Demcare hangs in the balance. Yet, Brown received a measly $50,000 from the national GOP and NRSC compared to the nearly $1 million that radical leftist Dede Scozzafava raked in.
Sean Trende crunches the numbers and will be “stunned if Brown wins.” But Patrick Ruffini sees “evidence Scott Brown is within single digits.” And William Jacobson reports on the grass-roots conservative groundswell for underdog Brown:
Three things have happened in the last three weeks to make this election competitive:
1. Coakley’s “read my lips” moment: During the campaign, Coakley promised as a matter of “principle” not to support the Senate health bill if it contained restrictions on abortion. This promise was a prime fundraising tool. Just days after the primary, Coakley went back on this promise, and now is in the Harry Reid/Ben Nelson camp, to the anger of the left-wing base.
2. Obamacare is sinking in popularity: Harry Reid and the Democrats in the Senate demonstrated, in the weeks leading up to Christmas eve, the absolute moral corruption in Washington, D.C., by legally bribing Senators to vote for the health care bill. By supporting these efforts, Coakley has shown herself to be just more of the same (and her own maneuvers around the campaign finance laws drive that point home). At a time when the country is facing monumental deficits and national debt, Coakley handed Brown the central issue in the campaign – Democratic efforts to force through a health care bill which is unpopular and economically ruinous. Had Coakley stood by her “principles” she would not be in this position.
3. Brown has gone viral: Largely shunned by the Republican establishment, Brown has utilized an online strategy which has ignited a grassroots campaign to get Brown elected. Do a Google search of blogs, and you will see that Brown is the talk of the internet, and most posts about Coakley are negative. While the mainstream media still holds great sway, Brown is seen as rising and Coakley as more of the same. Brown is winning the online battle.
Moe Lane at RedState underscores that most of Coakley’s cash was spent securing the Dem nomination:
You see, most of that money Coakley raised got spent fighting for the nomination. William Jacobson’s all over this topic: while he and I both think that she’s got more money in the bank right now than Brown, it’s not the 5-to-1 advantage she’s hyping. At best, it’s 3-to-2. She’s also facing the problem that her public retreat on abortion language in the bill is going to depress enthusiasm in the progressive netroots; and that Republican activists at least have noted that flipping Massachusetts could – could! – possibly derail the health care rationing bill, and are contributing accordingly…
Pro-lifers in Massachusetts are also rallying around Brown.
LifeNews reports:
In a state known for its left-leaning and pro-abortion politics, Brown has an uphill battle but he enjoys the support of Massachusetts Citizens for Life. Jack Rowe, chairman of the MCFL PAC, emailed LifeNews.com today to say that he is seeing movement in Brown’s direction. “People are terribly upset about health care and asking what to do. Here is the very exciting part. We in Massachusetts can actually save the whole country from this awful health care. Our PAC has been supporting Scott Brown because he will be a pro-life vote in the Senate.
Scott Brown will also vote against the health care bill. After the compromise bill comes out of conference, it must be approved again by each house. Brown will vote against the bill. That means there will not be 60 votes in the Senate. That means the bill will be defeated.” That’s a lofty goal but Rowe is encouraging pro-life advocates in Massachusetts to get involved in the special election. “Can we do it? We certainly can! Turn-out will be very small,” he said — adding that the pr-life movement could change the dynamics of the race of it gets mobilized.
You can do your part right now. Brown’s campaign site is here. His donation page is here. There’s a grass-roots “moneybomb” fundraiser for Brown on January 11.
Fight the SEIU and Demcare corruption. Help do the job the national GOP fund-raising organizations won’t do. With two weeks until the special election date in Massachusetts, there isn’t a moment to waste.
Posted in: Health care, SEIU
St. Senator & Lt. Col. Scott Brown
Why I’m Running...
America is a great country but we also have some challenges that we need to solve if we’re going to remain the world’s superpower. The most important of our challenges is getting the U.S. economy moving again.
People are hurting as they struggle to make ends meet. They’re worried about their future, and that of their children and grandchildren. I want to ensure that we leave them an America that is financially stronger and independent: minus a national debt that we can never repay.
Economy
I am a free enterprise advocate who believes that lower taxes can encourage economic growth.
Raising taxes stifles growth, weakens the economy and puts more people out of work. Our economy works best when individuals have more of their income to spend, and businesses have money to invest and add jobs. I have been a fiscal watchdog in the state legislature fighting bigger government, higher taxes and wasteful spending.
Energy and Environment
I support common-sense environment policy that will help to reduce pollution and preserve our precious open spaces. I realize that without action now, future generations will be left to clean up the mess we leave.
In order to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, I support reasonable and appropriate development of alternative energy sources such as wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal and improved hydroelectric facilities. I oppose a national cap and trade program because of the higher costs that families and businesses would incur.
Education
I am passionate about improving the quality of our public schools. Accountability and high standards are paramount. I support choice through charter schools, as well as the MCAS exam as a graduation requirement.
I have worked to ensure that all children have access to a quality education. I am a strong advocate for the METCO program, which provides lower income students with broader educational opportunities.
Immigration
I recognize that our strength as a nation is built on the immigrant experience in America. I welcome legal immigration to this country. However, we are also a nation of laws and government should not adopt policies that encourage illegal immigration.
Providing driver’s licenses and in-state tuition to illegal immigrant families will act as a magnet in drawing more people here in violation of the law and it will impose new costs on taxpayers.
I oppose amnesty, and I believe we ought to strengthen our border enforcement and institute an employment verification system with penalties for companies that hire illegal immigrants.
Veterans
As a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army National Guard, I am uniquely aware of the importance and sacrifice of our men and women serving in the military.
I have been a vigorous supporter of legislation providing benefits to returning service members, as well as, benefits for the families of those killed in action.
I believe we need to recognize the sacrifice of all of our servicemembers by keeping better track of returning military personnel so they get the services they deserve. That includes providing them with first-class medical care and other benefits to which they are entitled. I am known as a leader on veterans’ issues through my work on the Veterans and Federal Affairs Committee, the Hidden Wounds of War Commission, and the Governor’s Task Force on Returning Veterans.
Health Care
I believe that all Americans deserve health care coverage, but that we shouldn’t have to create a new government insurance program to provide it. I support strengthening the existing private market system. In Massachusetts, I support the 2006 healthcare law that expanded coverage, but I believe the Deval Patrick administration must do more to contain the costs of the Commonwealth Care subsidy program.
Gun issues
I support the Second Amendment and believe that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms as a basic constitutional liberty. I support safe and responsible gun ownership.
Death penalty
I believe there are some crimes that are so heinous that they deserve capital punishment. Our Government should have the ability to impose the death penalty in cases where it is justified.
Abortion
While this decision should ultimately be made by the woman in consultation with her doctor, I believe we need to reduce the number of abortions in America.
I believe government has the responsibility to regulate in this area and I support parental consent and notification requirements and I oppose partial birth abortion. I also believe there are people of good will on both sides of the issue and we ought to work together to support and promote adoption as an alternative to abortion.
Marriage
I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. States should be free to make their own laws in this area, so long as they reflect the people’s will as expressed through them directly, or as expressed through their elected representatives.
Israel
Israel has made enormous sacrifices in an attempt to secure peace – including unilateral withdrawal from Gaza. I support a two-state solution that reaffirms Israel’s right to exist and provides the Palestinians with a place of their own where both sides can live in peace and security. As our closest ally in the Middle East, Israel lives every day under the threat of terror yet shares with America a dedication to democratic ideals, a respect for faith, and a commitment to peace in the region.
Until a lasting peace is achieved, I support the security barrier erected by Israel which has proven successful in protecting Israeli civilians from terrorist attacks.
Iran
I support the bi-partisan Iran sanctions bill and believe that until Ahmadinejad gives up his nuclear ambitions he should be isolated from the rest of the world. With its reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons, Iran represents the biggest threat to Israel.
Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust denier who has threatened to wipe Israel off the map. Meeting with him confers legitimacy when the only correct response is to treat him as an outcast. A personal meeting with Ahmadinejad, as suggested by my opponent, would embolden him and be used as a propaganda tool to strengthen his position
http://www.brownforussenate.com/issues
Cap, I would vote for a Kangaroo just to see Prissy Mathews and Olbermann do caniption fits on tv.
No better time to sit out, but voting for a third party even a non-interventionist like Kennedy solidifies the message that a BIG Government guy like SCott Brown is not welcomed.
I sat out indeed, although I was mortified of Obama - still I think Obama gave us the tea party movement and we must be thankful of that.
These clowns criticizing Brown have all the tactical skills of Bob Schrum.
In Brown's case, we have to take what we can get. This isn't NY-23. Brown is the only candidate we can support now. The alternative is Coakley, an extreme leftist moron who'll just keep a chair warm for Reid.
So sick of the haters trying to pull the rug out from people.
Since when is groupthink a good idea? Plenty of people voted for Hitler - did it make it the right choice at the time?
I’ve been thinking along these EXACT lines for at least four days now, having actually seen and heard Brown on Sean Hannity’s show the other night. Completely unimpressive, inarticulate, and evasive, in my view. I was going to post something to our Tea Party website discussion board titled
something like “Is Scott Brown merely our own Ben Nelson?”
and point out just a few of the things that basic research like what you’ve done easily uncovers. I’ve seen a number of posts and startup Brown threads on our site urging people to phone bank for him, donate to him, etc.
I am going to post instead a link to your very persuasive piece, and re-confirm my position as the group’s naysayer.
We’re only about 70 strong, so our website gets about one ten thousandth of the traffic (and responses) that the great FR does, but let’s see what happens. If you want to visit it, I’ll send the address to it in private mail. FReegards, supremedoctrine
Your anti war third party loon who will receive 1% of the vote is the same as voting for the big gov. democrat who wil vote for obama care, along with everyother Obama agenda.
I guess someone to the far left of the Commie Kennedy clan who will cast the deciding vote for health care is a better choice. /sarcasm
Our nation would be worse off with McCain just like our nation was worse off with Bush and Republican Congress. That was the point of the article - yes?
From what I can gather Brown’s not perfect but he’s far to the right of the typical NE Republican (heck, I’d take him over Snowe or Collins in a heartbeat).
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.