Posted on 04/12/2010 4:29:27 AM PDT by GQuagmire
U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, whose stunning victory in January was fueled in part by Tea Party anger, has snubbed the fiery grassroots group and declined its invitation to join Sarah Palin Wednesday at a massive rally on Boston Common, the Herald has learned.
Brown’s decision to skip the first big rally in Boston by the group whose members are credited with helping him win election has some experts saying he’s tossed the Tea Party overboard, as he prepares for re-election in 2012.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonherald.com ...
Scott Brown is weak TEA personified.
I’d call it doing his darn job - riding herd on the psychos of DC! Sarah’s not running for an election and the tea parties don’t need his voice to get their message across.
To expect either Palin or the partiers to demand fawning attention just for the sake of self enamoration is contrary to the basic concept of getting things done for the right reasons.
New England is the most class ridden area of the country...Out west it is what you can do ..not your class status..
While I am somewhat pleased that Brown won the seat (just to spite the enemyP, I am glad he did so without a contribution from me. He will always disappoint, I predict.
YGTBSM?
Maybe his son has a little league game that day or maybe he has a job he has to go to?
Disagree and I live here.
I learned a new word (for me - the usage is actually quite old) this weekend that seems to apply here: bluestocking. Eleanor Roosevelt was one, in her day. I think it fits.
Exactly. They are all about class status, and the MSM defines what is high-class for them, and what is not.
Most New Englanders are truly sheep, exceedingly anxious to conform to percieved class-status rules, terrified of being seen as lower class. Petrified of being shamed or shunned by their group.
It’s worth a sociological study, which will never happen.
I think folks need to be careful how to interpret things of this sort... SB may not be fully aligned with TeaParty sentiments and that’s OK. Just know that what he is facing up there is a little like walking on egg shells... I mean c’mon, a Repub winning the Kennedy seat. He may be more like RINO than Conservative, but his election has broken the Kennedy/ Progressive monopoly hold up there. Lighten up and enjoy the Party and leave SB to strategies as he sees fit.
People forget back in December Scott Brown would have 15 people at his rallys by his hard work and basically running his own campaign by mid January his rallys shutdown the city of Worcester on the the same day 0bama was in Boston.
The reality is he has less tenure in the Senate than Al Franken.He’ll have only two years of a six year seat before he has to run again.He dosen’t need to be pigen holed as a far right winger in ads that his opponnets who are already lined up (like Rachel Maddow) to be photo shopped.
He will be running as a republican from Ma. not Utah.
Scott Brown is about winning the war not the battle.
“Ya’ dance with the one ya’ brung.”
At time like this, it doesn’t hurt to return to a basic question: would we rather have Scott Brown or someone who’d vote like Ted Kennedy? But, also, I’ve never been too impressed with Sabato’s commentary. Maybe we’ll have to Brown and the voters of Massachusetts sort this out. And Brown’s alliance with Romney is probably also a reason he might not want to appear with a potential Romney rival for the 2012 nomination.
Brown can be taken out in 2012 just like he was elected...
(Brown can be taken out in 2012 just like he was elected...)
Good... then why don’t you start the replace Scott Brown with Rachel Maddow campaign.
“okay, so some paper says Brown is snubbing Teaparty therefore it must be so and we have to agree this is a snub.”
Exactly, seem folks here don’t understand how the left loathes us, that includes the media and any chance they get to divide us they use...let’s wait and see what folks who are our own have to say about it.
2012 is a long way away.
Speaking for myself, I'd prefer to have someone who I agree with 80% of the time, than someone who I disagree with 100% of the time. I think that Reagan said that originally. He was a pretty sharp operator.
However, there are FReepers who - if "their" candidate is anything to the left of the Right Rev. John Birch - refuse to vote "for the RINO".
Foolish, but wholly their prerogative.
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.