PDA

View Full Version : Scott Brown -- Tea Bagging to 2012



lofter1
January 20th, 2010, 09:52 AM
Hmmm ... Junior Senator, Young, Good Looking. Well Spoken. Claims Change.

A tea bagger's delight.

The new star in the otherwise dim GOP constellation ...

Scott Brown Defeats Martha Coakley (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/19/massachusetts-senate-race_1_n_429033.html)

G.O.P. Senate Victory Stuns Democrats (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/21/us/politics/21elect.html?hp)

dtolman
January 20th, 2010, 10:59 AM
It takes a real effort to lose a seat you've held for half a century, in one of the most "liberal" states in the nation.

Good work Massachusetts Democratic Party. *golf clap*

ablarc
January 20th, 2010, 11:11 AM
The real loser was Obama; he's on his way to losing health care reform and the 2012 election.

Actually, because of that, the true losers are the American People.

The next president: Sarah Palin?

Does any country have an open immigration policy for Americans?

lofter1
January 20th, 2010, 11:46 AM
What country wants a bunch of under-educated high-wage-yearning know-it-alls?

(not meant personally towards you, ablarc)

lofter1
January 20th, 2010, 11:47 AM
The next president: Sarah Palin?


Methinks Mr. Brown has just moved to the top of the heap.

Daquan13
January 20th, 2010, 12:04 PM
I didn't want HIM to win.

Ninjahedge
January 20th, 2010, 01:09 PM
The dems screwed up with their candidate. She is a real lifetime politician and completely distanced from the "common man". Too many political blunders.

It is a shame that the Republicans are willing to hold party unity over the wellbeing of the people. I guess their "supporters" are a bit more consolidated in their wishes and directives than the Dems are...


Did I say directives? I am sorry, we all know that lobbiests do not tell our guys what to do!!!!! :rolleyes:

MidtownGuy
January 20th, 2010, 02:30 PM
The real loser was Obama; he's on his way to losing health care reform and the 2012 election.


Obama is looking more like an inept jackass every day. What a disaster. Like I said before: entire first year wasted chasing republicans around in circles. 10 months ago, people were talking about the destruction of the Republican party. Now instead, Obama has destroyed the Democrats. That takes a real idiot and a total pansy.

Ninjahedge
January 20th, 2010, 02:50 PM
Obama is the Antichrist.

Waa waa waa. :rolleyes:

stache
January 20th, 2010, 03:15 PM
'pansy'?

MidtownGuy
January 20th, 2010, 03:44 PM
yes, pansy.

And no, NH, not the antichrist:rolleyes::cool: but totally inept.
If you think it was the "candidate" Coakley who caused this you are wrong. It is a message to all Democrats. Progressives will not vote for you anymore if you act like Republican Lite. We are sick of it.
What a bullshit artist this guy turned out to be.

MidtownGuy
January 20th, 2010, 03:50 PM
Waa waa waa.
Charming. Didn't they give you your milk and cookie break yet? Next time you express your feelings on something you feel strongly about , I'll be sure to supply an equally idiotic chorus for you.

dtolman
January 20th, 2010, 04:07 PM
It is a message to all Democrats. Progressives will not vote for you anymore if you act like Republican Lite.

Really? The 20-30 percent of the population who might identify as "progressive" gave that message by being the only ones to vote in mass for the Democratic candidate?

The real message here is that whatever message the Democratic party has, the Independents are running away from it - right to the Republican party... whose only message I can discern is "Democrat bad. Republican good. No like health care reform."

That, and the Democratic Part of Massachusetts probably would've done better with Ted Kennedy's stuffed corpse and an old tape recording of him, than Coakley as a candidate. Seriously. What the hell were they thinking there?

ablarc
January 20th, 2010, 04:12 PM
What country wants a bunch of under-educated high-wage-yearning know-it-alls?
(not meant personally towards you, ablarc)

And who might those be?

Oh, OK ... you mean Sarah Palin.

So, what does that have to do with me?

MidtownGuy
January 20th, 2010, 04:12 PM
"If you want to win you actually can't move to the middle and become a Republican," former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said on MSNBC Tuesday night. "You have to stand up and stand for the things that you got elected on and the Democratic Party believes in. We haven't seen that on the health care bill and I think that's part of the problem."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/20/white-house-recognizes-wa_n_429818.html

BrooklynRider
January 20th, 2010, 05:03 PM
I think the biggest message in all of this is that (1) people are making more informed decisions and (2) Independents have emerged at THE political power to contend with in coming years.

Massachusetts already has universal health coverage. Despite Kennedy's championing of the issue, the issue was resolved in that state. Kennedy was running with it on a national level. This health care bill does little for Massachusetts, but it does create costs, mandates, and corporate giveaways that go against the interests of that state. The best way to kill the bill? Vote for Brown.

I don't find him as extreme as others propose he will be. I watched his victory speech and he used the term "liberal" once, when talking about the message sent to "liberals in Washington." That was the only partisan note in that speech. The rest of it was about being an independent voice for Massachusetts that will answer to neither party.

The Independents surged in this election. People are sick of the two party system. Scott did not run on a hugely partisan theme and he won't be able to vote the way right-wingers do. He also is not going there with a mandate to be an obstructionist.

Progressives were marginalized by this administration early on (remember they were referred to as people sitting in their pajamas at their computers eating Cheetohs?). Progressives made it clear that they were not to be taken for granted. They made it clear that they were not showing up at the polls, not giving contributions, and not working for the candidate. For them, it wasn't just about healthcare. Healthcare was just the latest in a long line of issues: war, civil rights, domestic spying, gitmo, financial reform and on and on.

I'm a progressive and there is no way I'll vote for a Democrat or Republican in 2010. I am particularly pleased to see that Kirsten Gillibrand's approval ratings are falling. On the other hand, Harold Ford, Jr. - the carpetbagger - is no answer to that. I'm hoping we get a strong third-party challenge. I think it could succeed this cycle.

I'm pleased with the result of this election. It shakes things up. With 41 votes, moderate Republicans may begin to negotiate more. They have the space to do it.

I look forward to more shake ups in 2010.

dtolman
January 20th, 2010, 05:15 PM
Ironically, the real message here is that you can read whatever you want into this election. Because of the media's MASSIVE FAIL here.

I went to look into exit polls to see what the key issues were... and from what I've been reading, there were NO exit polls done, except (maybe) by the campaigns themselves - and they ain't talking.

So its all a crap shoot trying to figure out party turnout, key issues, etc etc. We can all make up whatever we want about the election. Maybe Massachusetts voters were sending a message about Schilling and the Yankee's to Washington. Or about the Tropicana repackaging debacle (I bet Coakley was for it).

Daquan13
January 20th, 2010, 05:55 PM
The dems screwed up with their candidate. She is a real lifetime politician and completely distanced from the "common man". Too many political blunders.

It is a shame that the Republicans are willing to hold party unity over the wellbeing of the people. I guess their "supporters" are a bit more consolidated in their wishes and directives than the Dems are...


Did I say directives? I am sorry, we all know that lobbiests do not tell our guys what to do!!!!! :rolleyes:



Sort of like what happened with Sara Palin.

lofter1
January 20th, 2010, 08:21 PM
It's such a pathetic situation, ya just gotta laugh ...

Hitler Finds Out Scott Brown Won Massachusetts Senate Seat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4aQCiRjvZY&)

lofter1
January 20th, 2010, 08:51 PM
Is Scott Brown (http://www.cosmopolitan.com/celebrity/news/scott-brown-nude-in-cosmo) related to Helen Gurley-Brown (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Gurley_Brown)?

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Scott-Brown-sexiest-man.jpg

195Broadway
January 21st, 2010, 12:44 AM
the Democratic Part of Massachusetts probably would've done better with Ted Kennedy's stuffed corpse and an old tape recording of him, than Coakley as a candidate. Seriously. What the hell were they thinking there?

http://steynian.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/weekend_at_teddys.jpg

lofter1
January 21st, 2010, 01:04 AM
What was there about her that would lead one to believe she would fail?


Coakley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Coakley) was elected Massachusetts Attorney General in the 2006 general election as a Democrat, defeating Republican Larry Frisoli with 73% of the vote. She was sworn in on January 17, 2007. Coakley is the first woman to serve as Attorney General in Massachusetts.

lofter1
January 21st, 2010, 01:07 AM
Glenn Beck proclaims himself the "Official Conservative Buzz Kill" and trashes Scott Brown:

GLENN BECK SLAMS MA SENATOR SCOTT (http://videos.mediaite.com/video/Glenn-Beck-Slams-MA-Senator-Sco)

OmegaNYC
January 21st, 2010, 03:22 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8a/Scott_P._Brown.jpg/250px-Scott_P._Brown.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Sarah_Palin_portrait.jpg/250px-Sarah_Palin_portrait.jpg

http://therapist4me.com/Barbie%20and%20Ken%20as%20James%20Bond.jpg


You heard it here, folks. The GOP is set for 2012.

Fabrizio
January 21st, 2010, 05:13 AM
^ Way too many injections in that guy's face.

Ninjahedge
January 21st, 2010, 08:10 AM
Charming. Didn't they give you your milk and cookie break yet?

Nope.


Next time you express your feelings on something you feel strongly about , I'll be sure to supply an equally idiotic chorus for you.

Again, nope.

You are not a negotiator. You like to fight over everything. You have argued with many people here, on a relatively innocuous board, to the point of people storming off.

So when you KEEP WHINING, thus the "Waa", that Obama can't seem to get 500+ people to all agree on the same thing, something radically different than what is currently there, and proceed to call him a FAILURE because he cannot, in one year, get everybody to do what you thought he would be able to, it is just plain silly and open for ridicule.

the key here is to get things done, not to get people to hear a message. You yell and fight for things like that in todays government and all you get it an equally staunch opposition that resorts to God to validate their opposition.

YOU DO NOT GET ANY REFORM BY YELLING AT THE OPPOSITION.

So, in response to the anger and distaste of the Republican Party shoving things through congress as a solid unit, and special interests buying off the Dem votes needed to do so, your argument is that the dems should do something similar and, as I have said, instead of trying to vote the way their electorate would like, vote the way the national party swings?

It will get things done, but it will only swing the pendulum further and NOT come to anything that will not be fo0ught hard by the other side when their turn comes again.


Us vs Them.


Pity.

Ninjahedge
January 21st, 2010, 08:15 AM
What was there about her that would lead one to believe she would fail?

That is pretty easy when only 150 show up to vote for that.....

stache
January 21st, 2010, 09:36 AM
http://therapist4me.com/Barbie%20and%20Ken%20as%20James%20Bond.jpg


You heard it here, folks. The GOP is set for 2012.

Is that a home detention device on her leg? :p

MidtownGuy
January 21st, 2010, 11:11 AM
Ninjahedge
You are not a negotiator. You like to fight over everything. You have argued with many people here,http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4027/4293382548_d6ab2b581e_o.png
OK ninge, When I start reading and THIS comes out of YOU, I have to chuckle. You have argued with as many people, about as many things, as any member on this forum. One visit to the smoking thread (or dozens of others) will show the kind of "negotiating" you favor. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: By the way, there's really only 2 or three people here with whom I have "argued" much...and you're one of them. Surprise surprise.
Get real.

Disagreement is fine when you are the one doing it, apparently.

Waaa waa waaa, I'm ninjahedge...no smoking anywhere!!! not when the owner wants it, not when the customer wants it...never!!!! Muhu hu wa wa! I'm a NEGOTIATOR!


YOU DO NOT GET ANY REFORM BY YELLING AT THE OPPOSITION.You're right. (even a broken clock...)
You destroy them. You don't kiss their ass and appoint them to key positions.:p

Ninjahedge
January 21st, 2010, 11:41 AM
OK ninge, When I start reading and THIS comes out of YOU, I have to chuckle. You have argued with as many people, about as many things, as any member on this forum.

So? Does that make you and less a mediator? Are either of us president?

I know my faults and I acknowledge when someone is handling a situation the best it can be. I am not HAPPY with the results, but I am not hanging Obama in effagy because he has not gotten Public Health Care...


One visit to the smoking thread (or dozens of others) will show the kind of "negotiating" you favor. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: By the way, there's really only 2 or three people here with whom I have "argued" much...and you're one of them. Surprise surprise.

Yadda yadda yadda. So in order to prove that negotiating and trying to please the other side you go to show how wrong I was in arguing my points?

Not smart.

What you are saying is taking a strong stance on things to the alienation of others, right or wrong, is not appreciated and can often lead to conflicts that are not resolved.

So why should the President do that? You yourself said it was wrong and sited me as an example.


Get real.

Got it, slept with it, left it at the doorstep. Reality is all a matter of perception, but you were just casting aspersions on my credibility, so I can't really read too much into that.

You are mediating again. Sorta... :rolleyes:


Disagreement is fine when you are the one doing it, apparently.

No, the president should do it. Look how much agreement I have been able to foster here!

My god, if he followed everything you suggested and did it in the same way we are doing it here there would be world peace, solar power and universal healthcare by March!


Waaa waa waaa,

You quoted me? wow.


I'm ninjahedge

No, you aren't. Don't try.


...no smoking anywhere!!! not when the owner wants it, not when the customer wants it...never!!!! Muhu hu wa wa! I'm a NEGOTIATOR!

And, ladies and gentlemen, we have officially LEFT THE TOPIC!

BTW, it helps, in an argument, to not make your own points of contension that have nothing to do with the original supposition/assertment.

When did I say I was a "Negotiator"?


You're right. (even a broken clock...)
You destroy them. You don't kiss their ass and appoint them to key positions.:p

No, you don't. You do not go head on. We have found that out in war as well as politics that all you get from a direct confrontation is a lot of unhappy people. Even the victor pays a price, and rarely do you get a clean, and quick, victory.

MidtownGuy
January 21st, 2010, 12:02 PM
Oh goody...you've proven how to negotiate by even arguing with "waa waa waa". You quoted "get real" and crafted a response to such a thing? Truly a piece of work. Nice negotiating!

I hope you feel better now.:rolleyes:

None of this changes the fact that Obama has wasted his entire first year by trying to play nice with the people who want to destroy him. That isn't being a negotiator, it's being naive, ineffectual, and doomed to fail. There is an old saying, ninge, and maybe you've heard it...you can't please all the people all the time, and if you try, no one will be pleased in the end. Negotiating has it's place, but there comes a time to LEAD. He hasn't done it. On health care reform in particular, Obama hasn't.

I speak up when I see my President doing things I don't like. That's what we do here in America. Tnat's what we do on this forum. WE OPINE. If you don't like my opinion, I don't give a damn. I'll still say it...and thank goodness because otherwise we have no dialogue, and no democracy. So, I get it that you don't agree, but the "waa waa waa" bullsh*t is unecessary and sets the tone for the kind of arguing you complained about.

Another expression you may be familiar with: IT TAKES TWO TO TANGO. You don't want arguments from me, then it's real simple: don't instigate them. Otherwise, shut up and don't complain.

MidtownGuy
January 21st, 2010, 12:10 PM
"The Democrats didn't lose the Massachusetts Senate race this Tuesday. They lost it over twelve long and agonizing months ago, well before anyone even knew there would be a Massachusetts Senate race in January of 2010.

To put a rough date on it, this race was lost for the Democrats sometime between the 2008 election and the inauguration, whenever it was that the Obama administration made the fateful decision not to challenge Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, AIG and the rest of the white collar criminals that drove the U.S. economy into the ground, and chose instead to appoint Wall Street's most prominent boosters and apologists to his economic advisory team. It was compounded when the White House and the Democratic Congressional leadership spearheaded a healthcare reform strategy rooted in the false notions that the opponents of reform are operating in good faith..."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-greenwald/shoot-anything-that-moves_b_431318.html

---------------
There's negotiating, and then there is actually joining with the enemy. I know the difference...do you?

lofter1
January 21st, 2010, 12:26 PM
That is pretty easy when only 150 show up to vote for that.....

Over 2,000,000 voters came out for that 2006 MA election (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_general_election,_2006).

Last Tuesday's election (http://www.boston.com/news/special/politics/2010/senate/results.html) drew ~ 2,200,000 voters.

Coakley lost to Brown by ~ 110,000 votes.

Ninjahedge
January 21st, 2010, 12:33 PM
Pretty close!

I was being sarcastic Loft! ;)

Question, are there any stats on how many voted for that office? 2M voters does not mean they all voted for everything.... (not saying it would drop to 150, but just curious).

lofter1
January 21st, 2010, 12:43 PM
You want stats? That's why I included the links :cool:

Here's what you'll find there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_general_election,_2006) ...

2006:

Democratic - Martha Coakley: 1,542,319
Republican - Larry Frisoli: 569,822

Ninjahedge
January 21st, 2010, 03:05 PM
So was Frisoli wearing a Yankees cap or something?

(You know how important a devotion to a sports franchise is when running for office!!! :rolleyes:)

ablarc
January 21st, 2010, 05:08 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8a/Scott_P._Brown.jpg/250px-Scott_P._Brown.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Sarah_Palin_portrait.jpg/250px-Sarah_Palin_portrait.jpg

http://therapist4me.com/Barbie%20and%20Ken%20as%20James%20Bond.jpg


You heard it here, folks. The GOP is set for 2012.


^ Way too many injections in that guy's face.
Mostly, he needs to hang on to his hair. He's clearly losing it fast.

Can he hold on to most of it for three years?



Rogaine.

Ninjahedge
January 21st, 2010, 07:49 PM
Astroturf.

TREPYE
January 22nd, 2010, 04:25 PM
January 21, 2010
Editorial
The Massachusetts Election

If anyone should have seen it coming in Massachusetts, it is President Obama — the long-shot candidate who rode to electoral victory on a wave of popular impatience and an ability to identify and address voters’ core anxieties.
There are many theories about the import of Scott Brown’s upset victory (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/21/us/politics/21elect.html?hpw) in the race for Edward Kennedy’s former Senate seat. To our minds, it is not remotely a verdict on Mr. Obama’s presidency, nor does it amount to a national referendum on health care reform — even though it has upended the effort to pass a reform bill, which Mr. Obama made the centerpiece of his first year.
Mr. Obama has done many important things on the environment, and in foreign affairs, and in preventing the nation’s banking system from collapsing in the face of a financial crisis he inherited. But he seems to have lost touch with two core issues for Americans: their jobs and their homes.
Mr. Obama’s challenge is that most Americans are not seeing a recovery. They are seeing 10 percent unemployment and a continuing crisis in the housing market. They have watched as the federal government rescued banks, financial firms and auto companies, but they themselves feel adrift, still awaiting the kind of decisive leadership on jobs and housing — in terms of both style and substance — that Mr. Obama promised in 2008.
Mr. Obama was right to press for health care reform. But he spent too much time talking to reluctant Democrats and Republicans who never had the slightest intention of supporting him. He sat on the sidelines while the Republicans bombarded Americans with false but effective talk of death panels and a government takeover of their doctors’ offices. And he did not make the case strongly enough that the health care system and the economy are deeply interconnected or explain why Americans should care about this huge issue in the midst of a recession: If they lose their jobs, they lose their health insurance.
Mr. Obama has not said or done the right thing often enough when it comes to job creation and housing. He appointed an economics team that was entwined with the people and policies that nearly destroyed the economy. He made compromises that resulted in a stimulus bill that wasn’t big enough or properly targeted. Even now, despite a new, rather awkward populist tone, serious relief for homeowners is lacking and financial regulatory reform is in danger of being hijacked by banking lobbyists and partisan politics.
The victory by Mr. Brown, a Republican, should be setting off alarms in the White House. Most immediately, it jeopardizes passage of the reform that the nation desperately needs. The Democrats could try to get the House to pass the Senate’s bill, although their chances seem dim, or as Mr. Obama seemed to suggest on Wednesday, they could seek a stripped-down measure that could win bipartisan support. They certainly should not try to ram a combined House-Senate bill through the Senate before Mr. Brown is sworn in.
The Democrats had an exceptionally weak candidate in Massachusetts, but the results call into question their tactical political competence. The party now has less than 10 months to get it right before the midterm elections, when they are in danger of losing more seats in the House and the Senate. It is indisputable that the Republicans have settled on a tactic of obstruction, disinformation and fear-mongering, but it is equally indisputable that the Democrats have not countered it well.
Mr. Obama has three years to show the kind of vision and leadership on the economy that got him elected — not just because his chances of a second term are at stake, but because the nation needs to get a handle on joblessness and mortgages or the nascent economic recovery could turn into a lost decade or a double-dip recession, or both.
The president is fighting hard for a consumer financial protection agency, in part because he sees it as one element of financial reform that people will understand. What Mr. Obama has to understand is that the agency is unlikely to be as effective as he intends unless other parts of financial reform — regulating derivatives and limiting “too big too fail” banks — also are robust. And homeowners need mortgage relief — not just lower interest rates, but the ability to renegotiate and restructure their loan balances.
We admire Mr. Obama’s intelligence and the careful way he makes decisions. It is reported that he seeks out dissenting views doggedly. He tells Americans the truth. We don’t want Mr. Obama to turn into a hot populist, but he can be too cool and often waits too long to react at big moments. If White House reporters are still making jokes two years from now about checking the president’s pulse, the nation will be in big trouble.


Copyright 2010 (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html) The New York Times Company (http://www.nytco.com/)

TREPYE
January 22nd, 2010, 04:26 PM
An exectionally weak {democrartic] candidate is right...

Ninjahedge
January 25th, 2010, 10:05 AM
When someone is out of a job, they also appreciate free health care, but they usually do not fully appreciate it until they get sick and the bills start coming in.

The key is to try and connect people between finances and Health Care in relation to unemployment. Make it something you do not have to worry about if you lose your job.....

Right now people just have the connection to Government Run or Welfare both of which are negative when you have never had to rely on it in the past (the feeling of "taking my money" is prevalent).

But back to center. Hopefully this guy IS centered and not ready to follow in lock-step with the rest of the Republican party. Hopefully we get a joining of moderates from both parties enough to make a third, but I seriously doubt that happening any time soon.

Fabrizio
January 27th, 2010, 01:03 AM
Bringing Sexy Back


By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: January 26, 2010 - NYTimes

The handsome, athletic pol with the comely wife and two lovely daughters who precipitously rose from the State Legislature to pull us all together. The fresh face and disarming underdog America’s been waiting for, someone who suffered through his parents’ divorce, watched his mom go on welfare and survived some wayward youthful behavior to become disciplined and successful — a lawyer, a lawmaker and a devoted family guy who does dog duty.

Someone who’s always game for a game of pickup basketball, loves talking sports and even boasts beefcake photos. A pro-choice phenom propelled into higher office by conservatives, independents and Democrats, a surprise winner with a magical aura. The New One is the shimmering vessel that we are pouring all our hopes and dreams into after the grave disappointment of the Last One, Barack Obama.

The only question left is: Why isn’t Scott Brown delivering the State of the Union? He’s the Epic One we want to hear from. All that inexperience can really be put to good use here. Obama’s Oneness has been one-upped. Why settle for a faux populist when we can have a real one? Why settle for gloomy populism when we can have sunny populism? Why settle for Ivy League cool when we can have Cosmo hot? Why settle for a professor who favors banks, pharmaceutical companies and profligate Democrats when we can have an Everyman who favors banks, pharmaceutical companies and profligate Republicans? Why settle for a 48-year-old, 6-foot-1, organic arugula when we can have a 50-year-old, 6-foot-2, double waffle with bacon?

Everyone in Washington now wants to touch the hem of President-elect Brown — known in the British press as “the former nude centrefold” — who has single-handedly revived the moribund Republican Party. It uncannily recalls the way they once jostled to piggyback on the powerful allure of One-Term Obama. The capital is abuzz. What did Scott say about that? Has anybody checked with Scott? Let’s not make a move without consulting Scott!

One of the most famous political figures of the age, John McCain, was thrilled (and no doubt envious) that a newbie unknown a week ago made robo-calls for him in his tightening Arizona re-election race. Before the Senate rejected a debt-reduction commission on Tuesday, reporters pressed for Brown’s hypothetical intentions: Would he have voted yes if he had been seated? (Yes, his spokesman told The Politico’s David Rogers.)

The Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, has even christened Brown “41,” usurping Poppy Bush’s nickname. That’s because Brown, the only Republican in the Massachusetts Congressional delegation, gives his party the needed 41st vote to filibuster unmolested. Even some in the Obama White House secretly wonder if the wonder from Wrentham, Mass., is The One. Could he be a more authentic version of their guy, who also swept in as a long-shot outsider only 14 months ago?

Obama is coming across as plastic and hidden, rather than warm and accessibly all-American. (Brown has even been known to do his daughter’s laundry when she gets too busy.) Whereas Obama had to force himself to nibble French fries and drink beer (instead of his organic Black Forest Berry Honest Tea) during the Pennsylvania primary, Brown truly loves diners, Pepsi, Waffle Houses and the unwashed masses.

David Axelrod, Obama’s senior strategist, praised Brown for his “spectacular” campaign. And Obama aligned himself with the new symbolic force, telling ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that “the same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office. People are angry and they’re frustrated.” Even though Brown opposes Obama’s plan to tax big banks, the president tried to wrap himself in Brown populism: “And here in Washington — from their perspective — the only thing that happens is that we bail out the banks.”

Stephanopoulos pointed out the obvious difference between Barry and Scotty, telling the president with the populist mask: “But you’re in charge now.”

At the moment, President-elect Brown is a new blank slate in an old pickup truck. As the president scrambles to freeze some spending and unfreeze his persona, Obama strategists hope that, in some weird way, Brown will help revive the president’s fortunes.

They say that if Brown turns out to be as independent as Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, he can help the president bypass the conservative troglodytes on the Hill and pull Obama out of his slump. It won’t be long before we see the New One and the Old One playing two-on-two — Brown with his basketball- and “American Idol”-star daughter, Ayla, and Obama, perhaps, with his 6-foot-5 body man Reggie Love — on the White House court.

Just a couple of messiahs shooting some hoops and swapping man-of-the-people stories.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/27/opinion/27dowd.html

MidtownGuy
January 27th, 2010, 12:06 PM
Where did I put my barf bucket:eek:

This guy will be more annoying than sarah p.