“So stick to being a Massachusetts liberal and stay out of Kansas politics.”
Right, of course. Because I want long term politicians removed from power, I’m a Massachusetts liberal. As if there are no conservatives in Massachusetts. I don’t vote for liberals. I don’t vote for democrats. And I don’t for liberal republicans just because the democrat is worse. I’m not a tool of the republican party that blindly votes for ‘r’s because I recognize that’s how we end up with people like Ted Stevens (senator since 1967) who was so selfish, power hungry and vindictive, he wouldn’t retire, and was defeated; Frank Murkowski (who appointed his daughter when he was elected governor); Jim Jeffords, who became an independent to remove the senate majority from republicans; John Warner, who refused to endorse Oliver North in 1994 and has endorsed the incumbent DEMOCRAT this year; Richard Lugar, who has endorsed the DEMOCRAT in Georgia this year; Arlen Specter, who became a democrat when he knew he couldn’t again win the republican nomination; John McCain (I don’t even need to list all of his treacheries); Mitch McConnell, we’ve witnessed his vitriol against conservatives this year; and most recently, Thad Cochran.
Here is Scott Brown’s voting record. If I wouldn’t vote for such a record if he was a democrat why would I vote for him just because he calls himself a republican?? Just to artificially increase Mitch McConnell’s caucus number?? He’ll be the next Jim Jeffords.
Brown - 2010 - 64% (Average) - 62% (CFG) - 74% (ACU) - 57% (FreedomWorks)
Brown - 2011 - 48% (Average) - 49% (CFG) - 50% (ACU) - 44% (FreedomWorks)
Brown - 2012 - 34% (Average) - 51% (CFG) - 36% (ACU) - 15% (FreedomWorks)
But yeah I’m a Massachusetts liberal. Click on the Elections tab and view the hundreds of stories I’ve posted in the past two years chronicling and making people aware of the treasonous acts of those in power, and yes, making people aware of those that have some opposition.
I’d like to get people used to the idea of voting against their incumbent senators. Lindsey Graham thought he should get 80% of the vote, like Tim Scott. He got 56%. McConnell and Cornyn got barely 60% after spending millions. Cochran had to cheat to get barely 50%.
Every senator in every election should be challenged. Rotation in office is one of the keys to liberty. See my book at the website in my tagline. If you’re interested, message me your address and I’ll send you a copy.
The problem here is your no. #1 issue ISN'T getting the best CONSERVATIVE elected, its opposing any and all incumbents, regardless of whether their opponent would be WORSE in that seat.
You are blinded by "every incumbent MUST go" mentality to the point where it doesn't matter if the challenger will move to the Senate seat to the left, you're willing to do so just to "send a message" to the Republican leadership. Replace a staunch opponent of gay marriage and illegal aliens with some pampered politician's kid whose family has been a cheerleader for the left on both issues? That was fine and dandy with you.
If your "principles" are against any and all incumbents, that's your business, but FR is a site dedicating to support the best CONSERVATIVE candidate, rather than your goal of supporting the CHALLENGER candidate in any and all circumstances.
Liz Cheney didn't get my support over Mike Enzi merely because she's not the incumbent Senator. She had to demonstrate she'd be more conservative than him, and the facts showed otherwise. Ditto with "Obama's conservative cousin" taking on the already solidly conservative Ted Cruz ally Pat Roberts. The same would be true if George P. Bush decided to challenge Ted Cruz in the primary or Walter Jones decided to oppose Richard Burr. They can claim to be "Tea Party" and say they oppose the "establishment" all they want. That won't change the fact that they're as establishment as it gets and electing them would move to the US Senate to the LEFT.
Scott Brown was no Ted Cruz for sure, but MA is not Texas and Liz Warren is an out and out Marxist,
If you (or anyone else) think(s) that Brown is the same as Warren then you obviously haven't listened to Warren.