A few thoughts about Republican Scott Brown's U.S. Senate win in Massachusetts last night:
● Leavenworth Street mainly was on MSNBC and FOX last night. If you were there, how many times did you hear "Cornhusker Kickback"? A dozen? More? This whole scandal still has legs and they are all running back to Ben Nelson.
● Not sure if the Chris Matthewses of the Democrat world represent the majority, but if so, WOW are they in massive denial about the implications of the Brown victory. This was a referendum on the Obama policies, plain and simple. Oh sure Coakley had a number of screw-ups, but if this had been 2008, those wouldn't have mattered.
When Matthews was presented with the statement from Sen. Jim Webb that the Senate should delay any more on Health Care Re-form until Brown is seated, Matthews and his fellow heads on MSNBC just continued their conversation on just HOW Reid and Pelosi could still slam it through.
(By the way, Matthews used to work for legendary House Speaker Tip O'Neill, so you can bet the idea of a GOP win in Massachusetts just galls him to no end.)
Their implication was that the Health Care bill is just like the Civil rights bill that LBJ slammed through, and the ends justified the means. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The American people don't want it -- this version anyway, and moreover they're pissed about the WAY this has all happened. Obama campaigned on an "open process" for such bills and instead it has been one backroom deal after another. Think the people are angry now? Just see how they'll react if the Dems try to jam this one up them with an even slimier jar of Vaseline.
● We saw a comment from the state's (unofficial) #2 Democrat, Jane Kleeb, on Mark Fahleson's site that she thinks the Brown victory is just a "throw ALL the bums out statement". Wrong again, Janie! Mark made the factual retort that this follows up a race in Virginia that was another defeat of an Obama surrogate. The people are angry at the Obama Democrats' plans. Health Care, National Security, Taxes, Stimuli, you name it. If the Dems can't see that the message is STOP, they will continue to get clobbered.
● On that note, we remember Don Walton's LJS article yesterday that said, "The 2nd District scrap between Republican Rep. Lee Terry and Democratic challenger Tom White is almost certain to be the most competitive 2010 race in Nebraska." Really? Compared to what? If Tom White still plans to run as Tommy Obama, in this atmosphere, he will be lucky to get Michael Scott numbers. Don't be surprised to see the DCCC's money plan shift.
● Like it or not, Brown's win is an opportunity for Ben Nelson. If he follows the Jim Webb lead and suggests that everyone slow down, he has the chance to at least stop the bleeding in Nebraska. He can either go with the Rahm Emanuel / Chris Matthews plan of smashing everything through, or he can openly recognize the Massachusetts vote -- and the feeling nationwide -- that this thing has been done the wrong way. If he said, "let's start with getting rid of the pre-existing conditions denial, and allow cross-state purchasing, and get the Republicans involved, and end the back-room deals" he could quickly be seen as a hero.
**Update - How much of that do you think Nelson accomplished in his statement?**
It's going to take a big gesture like that to tourniquet things for the Dems.
However, instead expect them to just blame Coakely and ram it through.
***
National Review Online, on how Nelson has damaged his party.
He has done two pieces of serious damage to his party and one piece of minor damage...***
The latest in the series..."Hitler finds out Scott Brown won".
Posts
24 comments:
So, the State Party is spending Tommie's money on Bennie. The National Party just spent his money on Coakley. The DCCC is desperately going to need to spend Tommie's money in the West, the South and the Northeast.
Boy, I hope all those Lobbyists at his event in Lincoln this month understand where they're putting their money.
McCaskill gets it (even though I hate that term):
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) has joined Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) in warning leaders not to try to push a revised health care reform bill through the Senate before newly elected Republican Scott Brown arrives.
McCaskill said Wednesday morning that the agenda is moving "going too far, too fast" and that it would be a "huge mistake" for Democrats to force a vote on a new bill in the Senate before the new senator from Massachusetts is seated.
"As I said to somebody last night:, everybody needs to get the Washington wax out of their ears and listen and pay attention that people out there believe that we are going too far, too fast."
Ms. Kleeb ought to be thrilled at last night's outcome. EBN has no political future in NE which means her surrogate (hubby) can be the NE Dem senate candidate in 2012. Just don't act surprised when he gets crushed again even with the help of your very own employer ACORN/SEIU.
Jane Kleeb is the #2 State Dem? They are in worse shape than I thought. I would have put my money on Kyle Michaelis or Kenny "Das Boat" Rogert.
Already talk of Brown running for Pres. I guess he could...his credentials are almost identical to Obama's...
State Legislator...check...
Short term U.S. Senator...check...
Community Organizer...?
I did think it was rather cheesy and embarrassing to his daughters when Brown announced them as being "available."
Brown will be seated and "Obama/NelsonCare" will still be rammed down our throats. There is a mad man at the wheel determined to drive us off the mountain ledge.
I love it when Republicans gives advice to Democrats and Democrats give advice to Republicans. It's so sincere.
...and yet Democrat Claire McCaskill TOOK our advice!
(Possibly unbeknownst to her...We'll be emailing her the bill...)
Did you know you cant get to this web page via Explorer on the capitols network! Hmmmm but you can get to NNN and AirAmerica, and drudge and some others. BUT NOT LEAVENWORTH.
Yeah...
I wish it was a conspiracy.
With the new format, for some reason it F's up with IE. Some readers have said they can't access it at all. In other cases you can see the main page, but not the right side bar at all.
This is a Blogspot issue, and I'm trying to see what I can do.
In the mean time, try to use Chrome, Firefox or Safari...
-Ed.
SS, very astute wrap-up of last night. Obama thinks you are an idiot, though. He's doubling down (I hate that term) on Obamacare even though it's dead. I guess the next question is how the voters will react if Obama continues to push for Obamacare even though there is no chance in hell it will pass. Will they view this as wasting time and money or will they be more tolerant when they know it has no chance of ever becoming law? In any event, Senator-elect Brown (R, MA), was unabashedly for waterboarding, allowing uninsured people to die, and allowing banks to keep their obscene profits and he still won. There's a lesson in there for Republicans.
What did the Benator accomplish with his statement?
Well, let's start with "... he does not support rushing to reconciliation process to get a vote through before Brown is sworn into office."
What, in our previous experience with E. Ben, would lead us to believe that he has any intention of honoring such a commitment? Just one more "The check's in the mail" from a lame-duck politician.
I could go on ... but I won't.
Or Opera web browser...works great!
DO YOU HEAR US NOW BEN NELSON?
Is that a "terroist bump" I see Brown giving on your picture, Sweeper? FAUX news said it was when POTUS did it. Don't give any more ammo to MSNBC. Inside word is that Brown posed for Cosmo, and Barney Frank wants to pose for AARP.
I disagree that this vote last night was mostly about health care. That state already has universal health care, why would the voters vote against Coaxley because of that? I think this boiled down to others issues.
It's not "terrorist bump" it's "Terrorist FIST Bump". (Sheesh.)
And it's not the "inside word" that Brown was in Cosmo. He was. (Again, use the Google machine.)
Barney Frank used to make intelligent (if not misguided) arguments. He has now become a clown-like caricature of himself. Don't even suggest that he "pose" for anything. (Shudder.)
I would hope his towel stays on otherwise we might see the original Barney.........Frankfooter. I apologize, I just couldn't resist.
You guys do realize that you helped elect a pro-choice guy right?
Where is Julie's outrage of Fahleson betraying her by making calls to help elect Cosmo-Brown?
I guess allowing your national party to pay for an insurance policy that pays for abortions and then allow your state party chair to help elect a guy who is pro-choice, well...what does that say about your party? That you use the issue of life when it is easy for you to get votes?
The Repubs in our state have ideological arrogance and that is one of the many lessons out of the MA election to watch for...we need more balance in our government.
And Sweeper, still waiting for you to have the courage to say your name(s)...
Jane,
Why so many attacks today? Is somebody upset that they didn't get their way and that their party on all levels took MA voters for granted just assuming they'd vote for your party of wrong ideas?
And please stop telling us how Nebraskans feel and think. You & your husband combined have lived in this state less time that my 5th grade little girl. But I guess I'd put as much stock in her opinion on politics as yours. Carry on.
OK Janie, I'll say it!!!
There.
Did you hear me?
(Damn non-audio keyboard!)
Well maybe next time...
Besides, I already tweeted you my name, a-member?
;-)
National Right to Life's state affiliate, Massachusetts Citizens for Life, supported Scott Brown as a confirmed vote against the abortion funding HC bill. He also supports the partial birth abortion ban, parental notification and informed consent. Coakley is an avowed pro-abortion advocate. In a race like this it is not unusual for a pro-life PAC to get behind someone like Brown
But Scott brown isn't against abortion, he is just against the abortion language in the Senate bill. You guys elected a pro-death for fetuses candidate, and are happy about it!?!? Must be getting a little desperate
Let's keep it less personal.
-Ed.
Everybody is aware that Massachusetts has still has 11 Democratic Congressional Delegates, right? In addition, Coakley was arrogant and it cost her the election. Plain and simple. As a registered Democrat, I likely wouldn't have voted for her (Nor Brown).
Also, could everyone just take a deep breath and realize that the "super-majority" only existed nominally. For Christ's sake, Arlen Specter is factored in that number. Along with another half a dozen or so moderate to conservative senators. Not to mention Sen. Byrd hasn't been to active in the Senate for nearly a year because of health issues. Plus the two independents that caucus with the Democrats. Republicans have, until presently, also been a more cohesive and unified party. Democrats have been more of a coalition. It's just a fact.
Ergo, in all likelihood, the Senate never had a filibuster-proof majority.
Whether it is right or wrong is not the issue here, though I would argue that is one thing we could all agree on. Votes are bought in Washington. Pork barreling happens.
The only reason Sen. Nelson has been taking this much heat is because the so called "Cornhusker Kickback" is on a bill that people have actually taken an interest in. (Which I view as a positive. The electorate is either the success or failure of a democracy. So an educated population is needed. The only problem is that the populace is not educated enough.) I don't suppose anyone knows that in 2001 Trent Lott 460,000,000 million dollars to a defense bill to build an Amphibious Assault Ship that was neither requested by the DoD nor the House. The shipyard that this AAS was built in "is literally within view of his backyard in Pascagoula." (http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reports_pigbook2001)
I'm also very concerned, and frankly a little disgusted, by how quickly the people of Nebraska have turned on Sen. Nelson. While both parties have spouted failed promises of bipartisanship, neither seem willing to budge from their ideological pedestals. However, Sen. Nelson has voted with Republicans more than any other Democrat in the Senate (50% of the time). I would be surprised if he votes with Republicans more than anyone in the House. I am unaware of any Republican that can make the same claim. (Though I admit, it is quite plausible)
It also seems that the whole problem boils down to whether people believe in having a trustee style of representation or a delegate style of representation.
Just food for thought.
Post a Comment