Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Liberal blogosphere enters Massachusetts race, still as wrong as ever.

Blogging during the earlier hours of the Massachusetts Senate election was lonely and frustrating, however, Liberal bloggers are beginning to write about the important race, leaving me confused and begging for the hours of lonesomeness, because the thought of more liberal induced dribbles called "articles", is sickening to the sane American.
Brown has been caught in a vice. His support from teabaggers was critical to becoming competitive -- his moneybomb on Monday was the first real moneybomb conservative activists have ever pulled off (the Paulites are libertarians). This has definite parallels to OH-02 in 2006, when we raised big money for Paul Hackett. While we narrowly lost that race (like Brown hopefully does), it was a big step ahead for us as a movement, teaching us how to effectively rally around a movement candidate. Well, Brown is the conservative movement's Hackett.

"His support from teabaggers was critical to becoming competitive". Nice to know our Liberal counterparts want a "civil debate", however, the point is idiotic at the least, because Scott Brown had the united support of Republican voters across Massachusetts (except in the Township of Heath) against his Republican opponent during the Senate primaries, and Scott Brown did not seek the support of "tea partiers", Conservative bloggers sought the support of "tea partiers" for Scott Brown's campaign.
On the other hand, that conservative support has come at a cost. Among other things, Brown has had to promise to be the 41st vote against health care reform. The teabaggers demand ideological purity, and he's had to deliver. Not that it's been tough, given that he's voted with his party's leadership in the state legislature 96 percent of the time. That was okay when Democrats didn't know he existed and he could try to slip in under the radar. Now that this race is a national sensation, the spotlight is trained squarely on his record.

Scott Brown has been opposing Democratic legislation on health care, since his campaign was announced. "The teabaggers demand ideological purity, and he's had to deliver", considering his positions on the issues, has been the same since his campaign was launched several months ago, nothing has been altered to "appease the teabaggers". Also, Senator Kirk has voted with the Democratic caucus 100% of the time since his appointment, and the other eleven Democratic members of the Massachusetts delegation have voted with the Democratic caucus 97% or more of the time, meaning Scott Brown would be the long voice of dissent in the Massachusetts delegation.
The teabaggers are still engaged, of course. Heck, they're whipped up into an even frothier frost. They smell blood and the opportunity to deliver a major and genuine rebuke to the Democratic Party and Obama. The liberal bent that makes Massachusetts such a difficult victory for them is also the reason a victory there would be so momentous. They want this victory bad, enough so that they've momentarily forgotten how much they actually hate Massachusetts.

"The teabaggers are still engaged, of course". No, once Democrat operatives attacked Conservative reporters, we decided to give up on Massachusetts. The mindset of liberalism, how sad.
Democrats, on the other hand, were saddled with a candidate who thought she could nap her way to the Senate. Not even Teddy disrespected his state's voters so brazenly. He worked his ass off for votes, no matter how secure he seemed. It was the reason he was able to overcome scandal and become politically invincible. Coakley's sloth will cost the party and allies money better spent for this fall (if not the seat).

While, I agree with most of this paragraph, "he was able to overcome scandal", is incorrect, because he left a woman to die in a river, that is not a "scandal", it's murder though.

But at least she, the party machine, organized labor, and other allies are now engaged. The math is in their favor -- educate voters about Brown's politics and turn out a decent portion of the progressive base, and all the teabaggers in Massachusetts won't be enough to overcome their minority status. The only reason they are in this game is because of the quirks and unpredictability of the special election electorate.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/1/13/824680/-MA-Sen:-No-longer-stealth


"But at least she, the party machine, organized labor, and other allies are not engaged". Nice to know Democrats the the representatives of the "people". "The math is in their favor -- educate voters about Brown's politics and turn out a decent portion of the progressive base, and all the teabaggers in Massachusetts won't be enough to overcome their minority status". Excuse me, the people in Massachusetts know where Scott Brown stands, that is the reason his campaign is succeeding.

I miss the earlier hours of the Scott Brown campaign, because I could focus on the positives of the Brown campaign, instead of the idiots in the Liberal blogosphere, who manage to insult millions of Americans, accuse Scott Brown of bending over backwards for the Conservative purists, being a political hack - when the entire Democratic delegation is more so hacks, and insult the intelligence of the Massachusetts electorate, in a article of just five paragraphs.

To the voters of Massachusetts, just one candidate can be Independent in thought, that is Scott Brown, because the rest of the Massachusetts delegation to the United States House of Representatives and Senate, are Liberal purists, ignoring the voice of Massachusetts.

www.brownforussenate.com

Bookmark our site!
Subscribe


1 comment:

Southern Man said...

I have almost come to the conclusion that it is pointless to argue with liberals. It's like trying to convince a pit-bull he's a cat and has been a cat all along. It just doesn't work out so well. Thankfully the zealots in either party do not account for a majority otherwise we would be so screwed.