Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Brown advocates a big tent GOP

By John Amick

Fresh off an election victory in Massachusetts, Republican Senator-elect Scott Brown advocated a big tent outlook for the GOP when asked whether his party should move in a more moderate direction.

"They can do whatever they want," Brown said of other Republicans, on ABC's "This Week." "I just know that I'm a Scott Brown Republican. What does that mean? That means I'm going to go down there and be accountable, accessible, open, and honest, and I'm going to bring good government and fairness back to the equation."

Brown said his win in a solidly-Democratic state, along with the interest in the Q&A session President Obama and House Republicans had on Friday, is proof that voters want more transparency and less backroom dealing.

"What it means is that now there will be full and fair debate," Brown said of his 41st Republican vote in the Senate that erased a Democratic supermajority. "And there will be no more behind-closed-doors actions."

Brown, a socially moderate Republican in an age where the national party is nearly unified on opposition to abortion rights and same-sex marriage, said states should be allowed to make their own decisions on marriage rights. He said while he is pro-choice, he is against partial- birth abortions, federal funding of abortions and believes in strong parental consent notification laws.

"I feel this issue is best handled between a woman and her doctor and her family," he said.

Brown said he supports the idea of a bipartisan budget commission to make deficit recommendations to Congress, a move Senate Republicans largely objected to in a vote earlier in the week. He said he supports Obama's stated intention to go around the Senate vote and set up a commission by executive order.

Despite the similarities in the Massachusetts state health plan, which Brown supported when passed in 2006, and the U.S. Senate's current health reform plan, Brown said he advocates a restart for the plan.

"I think it was on its last legs before I even got elected, because the Democrats even were upset at the backroom deals, for example, in Nebraska," he said, saying the Massachusetts plan was a "free market" plan as opposed to the Senate's "one-size-fits-all government plan."

Of Obama's State of the Union speech, Brown said he was encouraged by the president's proposal to freeze some discretionary spending, as well as the president's escalation of war in Afghanistan, his interest in fostering nuclear power and pointing out Iran is a "very serious issue."

Brown said he would have supported the renomination of Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke, and he would advocate the continued term of Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner if Obama feels comfortable with him.

On the repeal of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that excludes open homosexuals from serving in the U.S. military, Brown said he would have to "wait to speak to the generals on the ground" before voicing support.

Brown also said he believes former Alaska governor Sarah Palin is qualified for the presidency, pointing to her experience as a mayor and governor. As for his own presidential prospects in 2012?

"I don't even have a business card," Brown answered. "I haven't even been sworn in. I don't have any exploratory committees started. I don't have anything ... it's overwhelming, and it's extremely humbling."

By washingtonpost.com editors  |  January 31, 2010; 12:49 PM ET
Categories:  44 The Obama Presidency  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama courtside for Georgetown vs. Duke
Next: Obama adm. pushes jobs bill; GOP: Shelve health plan

Comments

Scott Brown did not say he advocated a "Big Tent GOP" - that was the twist that the author put on his statements. The reason the GOP has failed is they already have too many "Big Tent" members, who share more of the Democrat ideology than they do the basic tenets of the GOP: fiscal restraint; limited, non-intrusive government; strong defense and national pride; free enterprise; strict interpretation of the Constitution; and equal opportunity for all.

The problem with the country today is the divisiveness created by the Progressive Party, which has largely usurped the Democratic party as we once knew it. That is why the Democrats couldn't pass the health reform bill (even though they could have done so without any Republicans at all) - they couldn't reach agreement between the Progressives and the moderate Democrats.

Are you aware that Obama is a member of the New Progressive party? Do you know tha,t of the 20 Democratic committees in Congress, Progressives occupy 11 of those? Wake up, America! If voters don't start informing themselves about the history, values, and goals of the Progressives, this country is doomed to follow in the footsteps of the Roman Empire. We're already well on our way...

Posted by: L80bug | February 1, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

Scott Brown will not even be reelected Senator in 2012, never mind President. LOL too funny.

His honeymoon with the voters ends as soon as he has to start casting votes.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | February 1, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

I believe there are plenty of republicans just like Scott Brown. They're just not coming out of closet and they are sticking to phonny values of their party.

Posted by: BOBSTERII | February 1, 2010 12:18 AM | Report abuse

"No Teleprompter Needed Nor Required: The President Puts The GOP Senate and Congress To Shame, For [Lies] about the Nation's Debts and the Deficit, which His Administration had Nothing To Do With....

Great Stuff !!"

WAY TO GO OMAARSBLADE!!!!!

What incredible delusional twaddle. Speaking of "spin" machines, this one is on full bore tilt-a-whirl, centrifugal force!!


Posted by: OregonStorm | January 31, 2010 10:27 PM | Report abuse

Exactly what everyone has been saying. Scott Brown won in Massachusetts simply because he wasn't Martha Coakley (Democrat).

It was a matter of backlash and since I see Nasty Pelosi has not backed off her ugly position of attempting to shoehorn the health (un-care) bill through, she will be doing a fine job of whipping up even more backlash. Most of these Democrats can not believe what is happening and are still in denial for the most part. Good, let them stay that way, their stubborn arrogance will be their downfall.

Posted by: OregonStorm | January 31, 2010 10:19 PM | Report abuse

"Now the media will spin it about abortion and gay rights,"

If Brown wasn't pro-choice he could not have won statewide election in Massachusetts. He simply took abortion out of the equation.

If you think otherwise you're pretty ignorant.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 31, 2010 10:16 PM | Report abuse

People often differ on social issues; however, you're either conservative or you're not conservative. Many, many Americans can relate to Scott Brown.

Posted by: ohioan | January 31, 2010 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Brown won the Senate seat for one reason, and only one reason,He Wasn't A democrat!
A System That Only Provides Two Choices,and the Choice That Is In Power Disapoints You,You Choose The Other Selection!
If there were only two cola's available, Coke or Pepsi,What Would You Do If You Got Tired Of One Brand?
Rocket Science!

Posted by: sdavis4 | January 31, 2010 10:04 PM | Report abuse

While the win in Mass was significant, real conservatives will come to loath him as another RINO.

We need no more Democrat-look-alikes in the form of RINO's.

I am tired of all politicians and feel we the people should do something to fix our problem with them. Term limits perhaps. But to have a person in congress for 40 or 50 years is just wrong.

Posted by: GregBoo | January 31, 2010 9:56 PM | Report abuse

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/president-republicans-how-can-we-solv
________________

No Teleprompter Needed Nor Required: The President Puts The GOP Senate and Congress To Shame, For [Lies] about the Nation's Debts and the Deficit, which His Administration had Nothing To Do With....

Great Stuff !!


While speaking today at the House Republicans' retreat in Baltimore, President Obama explained something to his questioners I wasn't sure he actually understood until now: That he wasn't going to accept Republican bills or amendments that simply didn't work, just so he could claim bipartisanship.

Whew! It's about time.

He also said that he had, in fact, integrated many Republican ideas in the healthcare bill, and proceeded to list them. In fact, he did a great job. He was calm, engaging and evenhanded. And I don't even care if no Republican votes will change as a result - the rest of America saw it, live on TV and then on the news all night.

He was truly excellent.

And in perhaps his best moment, he called Republicans out on blaming him for the deficit:

THE PRESIDENT: Jeb, with all due respect, I've just got to take this last question as an example of how it's very hard to have the kind of bipartisan work that we're going to do, because the whole question was structured as a talking point for running a campaign.

Now, look, let's talk about the budget once again, because I'll go through it with you line by line. The fact of the matter is, is that when we came into office, the deficit was $1.3 trillion. -- $1.3 [trillion.] So when you say that suddenly I've got a monthly budget that is higher than the -- a monthly deficit that's higher than the annual deficit left by the Republicans, that's factually just not true, and you know it's not true.

And what is true is that we came in already with a $1.3 trillion deficit before I had passed any law. What is true is we came in with $8 trillion worth of debt over the next decade -- had nothing to do with anything that we had done. It had to do with the fact that in 2000 when there was a budget surplus of $200 billion, you had a Republican administration and a Republican Congress, and we had two tax cuts that weren't paid for.

You had a prescription drug plan -- the biggest entitlement plan, by the way, in several decades -- that was passed without it being paid for. You had two wars that were done through supplementals. And then you had $3 trillion projected because of the lost revenue of this recession. That's $8 trillion.

Now, we increased it by a trillion dollars because of the spending that we had to make on the stimulus. I am happy to have any independent fact-checker out there take a look at your presentation versus mine in terms of the accuracy of what I just said.

Posted by: omaarsblade | January 31, 2010 9:44 PM | Report abuse

1. TARP: Most Of The TARP Funds have been Paid Back.

2. The 2001-2006 Big Spending, Majority Ruling Republican Senate & Congress Expanded "Big Government" Under George W. Bush, Left this Nation in Debt and this Cannot be Avoided Nor Denied.


3. It Took 8 Years of Big Spending & Bush's Unpaid For Entitlement Programs & His Tax Cuts For The Rich, to get to this Point, it will take More than 1 Year to get this Nation Back On it's Feet.

You Low Life Hate Mongers are saying President Obama is the Messiah and can Walk on Water as well Turn Waters Into Wine.

Reality: It will take TIME..

YOU DING DONGS !!!

4. Two Un-Paid For Wars in 8 Years.

5. Bush and His 2001-2006 Majority Senate-Congress, Borrowing Billions from Communist-Socialist China and China Owning [Government Bonds] under George W. Bush & his 2001-2006 Majority Ruling Senate-Congress.

6. Republicans are Great at Spending, Borrowing and leaving their Un-Paid For Bills for Democrats To Clean Up, Just like Reagan & Bush Sr. Left their Debts to Clinton and his Administration to Clean Up, Just like Bush-Cheney Left their Un-Paid For Debts and Un-Paid For Entitlement Programs and their Un-Paid For Wars.

[Dumb A!!es]

Posted by: omaarsblade | January 31, 2010 9:43 PM | Report abuse

The Mass. Senate Election will hopefully get the President to open his World. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: You NOW have an opportunity to end the Recession by encouraging the Banks to make Prudent CRE Loans. The Banks are now unfettered to make Safe Loans. In Large American Cities there are thousands of Major Projects with Entitlements. CRE PRODUCES THE GREATEST NUMBER OF JOBS than any other segment of the Economy. Glass mfg, Steel Industry, truckers, architects, brokers, agents, construction workers, electricians, plumbers, office furniture manufacturers....WE COULD HAVE 6% UNEMPLOYMENT WITHIN 4 MONTHS....THERE ARE 140 SHOVEL READY, ENTITLED, PROJECTS OF 70 OR MORE UNITS READY TO GO IN LOS ANGELES alone!! People will be WORKING FOR 2 YEARS BEFORE THE BUILDINGS ARE COMPLETE; and by then, the Recession will be over and Tenants will Flood the Market to Purchase Modern “green” units. This same scenario is found in Boston, Philadelphia, Houston, Ft. Worth, Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Kansas City, Tampa, Providence, Hartford, St. Paul—all across America.

Posted by: MSFT-PELOSI | January 31, 2010 9:34 PM | Report abuse

This guy's a Republican? He ain't so bad (for a Republican). More Republicans like him may not be a bad thing, for the GOP and for the country.

Posted by: DavidH3 | January 31, 2010 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Election of Scott Brown in MA really proves beyond any shadow of doubt as to the core failure of USA in todays World where the Conservative parties in Europe, Canada, Japan, etc. are to the FAR LEFT of the Democrats in US.

To see the above point, lets see the FACTS:

1- Republicans have been and are utter complete lunatics. To see what Lunatics Republicans are consider some of their positions & beliefs, Republicans were and are for:

The Iraq War that has wasted, to date, $2Trilion dollar of our money set aside how many innocent people it has killed.
They are for the Gargantuan US Military budget, so Gargantuan that it is larger than the Military budget of all other
countries on planet earth combined while US economy is not even 15% of world economy anymore, so Gargantuan that US has 300,000+ troops in Europe, defending Europe from a non-existent enemy and a Europe that is much richer than US as evident by Euro being much more valuable than US Dollar and all Europeans having (Universal Nationalized) health care.

But Republicans are:

Against European or Canadian style Universal nationalized health care for American people, calling it "Socialism"!
U can read full article here:
http://anoox.com/blog/Real_News.38034

Posted by: RealNews1 | January 31, 2010 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Brown ran and won on the platform that Obamacare is a big special interest giveaway -- and he won. Now the media will spin it about abortion and gay rights, but Brown ran against democrats in Boston and D.C. and the people of MASS voted for him to vote against democrats.

Spin, spin, but you won't win!

Posted by: Cornell1984 | January 31, 2010 8:48 PM | Report abuse

As someone who voted for Scott Brown, I hope he can maintain his independence in Washington. The Republicans need more mainstream candidates like Brown to broaden their tent and get elected in places like Massachusetts - attracting the unenrolled (independent) voters like myself and even some moderate Democrats who also supported Brown.
The last moderate Republican elected to the US senate from my state prior to Brown was the wonderful Edward W. Brooke. I'd be thrilled if Brown could be the kind of senator Brooke was.
So far Brown is making all the right moves. This past week he reached out to a group of black ministers in Roxbury and Boston's longtime Mayor Tom Menino. This weekend he held a victory tour and traveled across the state to thank voters for their support. He also conducted himself well in the Barbara Walters interview for "This Week" and even was the subject of some good natured ribbing on "Saturday Night Live."
Brown's election is a positive sign. We need two healthy parties in my state, not just the one party rule of the Democrats who have grown arrogant and complacant and in some cases, corrupt.

Posted by: pjsilva | January 31, 2010 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Brown talks openly about his history, like any normal American does.

Obama can't.

Why?

Posted by: dottydo | January 31, 2010 8:31 PM | Report abuse

He says "his win in a solidly-Democratic state....is proof that voters want more transparency and less backroom dealing." I would say his win in a solidly-Democratic state is proof that voters want a liberal Democrat and less republikaner in congress.

Posted by: fudador | January 31, 2010 8:29 PM | Report abuse

As a Pro-Choice Republican from Virginia - I am elated with this guy! The Bible Thumping members of my party pi$$ me off due to their INEXCUSABLE exercise in determining what other members of our society should do with their lives. Unfortunately, these stamp lickers are usually unemployed and have the most time to volunteer within the party. They should focus on their own backward family. And the catholic hypocrats.. don't get me started..

Try that talk with me and I will annihilate you verbally and physically.

What are the TRUE COSTS of bringing in an unwanted child to the taxpayers is all that matters. The most productive members of my party believe Palin should remain a house wife. She's unwanted and only serves to fuel left wing socialists teenagers and MSNBC.

Posted by: genbarlow | January 31, 2010 8:16 PM | Report abuse

No one fears palin excet Todd. Can you imagine the wrath he must face if his sled dogs make in the house? Or if he comes in with oil on his Bruno Mali shoes from workin' on the snow machine?


LOVE that the tea baggers and the radical right spent so much time and effort to elect a man who is essentially a Democrat. Would not be surprised to see a party switch from him as Democrats gain ground this Spring and Summer as the economy recovers and unemployment eases. Nothing succeeds like success, and the Obama-Democratic agenda is doing just exactly that. As people see the improvments it will remind them anew that republcons have this nasty habt of lying like cheap rugs.

Posted by: John1263 | January 31, 2010 8:16 PM | Report abuse

So....either he is actually a Democrat and will switch to his actual party soon, or he is in a heap of trouble in the microscoping tent gop of the 21st century...

wonder how those tinfoil hat wearin' tea baggers are feeling now that they spent all that moeny to get this guy in office just because he had an R behind his name? Isn't he EXACTLY the kind of "RINO" they are pledging to purge from The Base?

Love that it is the republicons base -- translate into Arabic, and you understand modern day republicon party tactics.

Posted by: John1263 | January 31, 2010 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Brown is the type of Republican I would vote for. Too bad the GOP will not back him in 2012, he certainly will not pass the "purity test". The Dems better figure out this is the candidate they need.

Posted by: rcc_2000 | January 31, 2010 8:10 PM | Report abuse

TeaPartyPatriot wrote:
"The loony-left d-crat socialists and their media stooges will promote ANYBODY AND ANYTHING to run for president as a Repub in 2012, so long as it isn't the person they absolutely, positively fear the most: future President Palin. Sorry, loonies, but Sarah and REAL AMERICANS will prevail, and we'll finally drive a stake through the heart of socialism and left-wing extremism."
______________________________

And I thought Lion7 took the prize . . .

Hey, TPP. Please, PLEASE let's have Palin run in 2012. Please! It would be a dream come true for everyone to the left of Attila the Hun and with an IQ over room temperature. Run, Sarah, run!!!! Can you figure out why we DO want her to run, TPP??

Posted by: post_reader_in_wv | January 31, 2010 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Wait until Brown is sitting with other Republican Senators, especially the extreme radical Christianists from the South. I bet his exposure to those Whackos has been limited. When that Masschussetts boy hears the hosssheit coming out of their mouths, his jaw will hit the floor and he'll be talking about caucusing with like-minded Democrats toot sweet!

Posted by: thebobbob | January 31, 2010 7:52 PM | Report abuse

Senator Brown's positions will likely raise a difficult dilemma for Republicans this November as they seek to take back the House and gain more seats in the U.S. Senate. The split between the Tea Party and the traditional Republican Party establishment is likely to erupt into a fractious primary process as tensions build between sticking to principle or moderating the Party to gain more independent voters. Senator Brown's moderate position will only highlight the necessity to move toward the center, unless the Democrats are unable to retain its liberal base and Democrats lose their energy and drive from 2008. Nevertheless the loss of health care and losing its filibuster proof majority in the U.S. Senate is likely to spark renewed interest in regaining the momentum.

Posted by: TabLUnoLCSWfromUtah | January 31, 2010 7:44 PM | Report abuse

The tea-baggers are going to need someone else to fill their dreams.

When asked what he thought of the tea-party movement, Brown replied:

"I am not quite sure what you are talking about, what are they trying to do?"

~ (The Huffington Post, Jan. 14, 2010)

Posted by: WhatHeSaid | January 31, 2010 7:37 PM | Report abuse

For a minute there I thought he was going to be the Republican Grayson, but anyone that thinks Palin is qualified to be president is insane...

Posted by: datdamwuf2 | January 31, 2010 7:23 PM | Report abuse

As a Democrat I am praying the Republicans run palin in 2012 -- that would be GREAT news!!!!

Posted by: postreader118 | January 31, 2010 7:20 PM | Report abuse

The goobers cling to Sarah Palin the same way a drowning man clings to a straw. He knows it won't save him but what else has he got?

Too bad for the goobers that 70% of Americans say that Mooselini is NOT qualified to be President.

(To give you a hint of how bad that is, 67% of Americans say that Hillary Clinton IS qualified to be President.)

Posted by: WhatHeSaid | January 31, 2010 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Why is it that teabaggers, when confronted with an opposing point of view, react to that opposition by claiming someone is scared or afraid? It's like 8 years of bowing, scraping and reaching around during Bush/Cheney has left them incapable of any reaction other than fear and they have to project that on others.

Posted by: washpost18 | January 31, 2010 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Surprised about Brown's position and disappointed

Posted by: kmelchiorre | January 31, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Yeah the left really fears Palin. They fear that she might not run. A Scott Brown could probably win a national election but he would never win a GOP presidential primary. Palin may well win a GOP primary but she’s dead in the water outside the primary. I wonder what the GOP will do? Can they control their own mob? It will be interesting to watch.

Posted by: visigothic | January 31, 2010 6:50 PM | Report abuse

I had a typo (couple)in my last comment but this one will be perfect - WOMEN ARE TAXPAYERS ALSO!!!!!!! Abortions are medical procedures that should be handled by medical professionals not politicians.

Posted by: gayliberalconservative | January 31, 2010 6:49 PM | Report abuse

The loony-left d-crat socialists and their media stooges will promote ANYBODY AND ANYTHING to run for president as a Repub in 2012, so long as it isn't the person they absolutely, positively fear the most: future President Palin. Sorry, loonies, but Sarah and REAL AMERICANS will prevail, and we'll finally drive a stake through the heart of socialism and left-wing extremism.

Posted by: TeaPartyPatriot | January 31, 2010 6:41 PM | Report abuse

"Pro Choiceis fair and right as long as we do not have to pay for it. Whoever wants to take advantage of that option should be allowed to do so, BUT THHESE WOMEN MUST FOOT THEIR OWN BILL, and not think we the taxpayers are going to pay for their mistakes. The only exception to the rule should be that having a child would endanger the mother's life. Otherwise, it should be the the responsibility of the pregnant mother to be. We have enough safeguards in this country that noone who does not want a child, but wants sex can prevent unwanted pregnancy, and that applies , Mr Obama to your PETS AS WELL, LILLEGALS!!!!!!!!!!! Posted by: LOONYBIN2000"

Just for a moment consider this. Project rachel says that where they can counsel women seeking abortions, they can persuade the greatest majority of them not to go through with it.

Wherever the Government provides the money, it always gets to make conditions to paying it.

Were the Government to permit require that any controversial, experimental, or questionable procedure or line of treatment is to be undertaken with Federal monies as part of the compensation, the patient may be required to accept appropriate counseling to insure informed consent, (note NO mention of abortion in particular) said counseling, especially if done by non-judgmental organizations, perhaps including Project Rachel might prevent many of those abortions, where with Government funds absolutely forbidden, the abortions would have happened because the mother never got the other side of the story to consider. NOTHING in the criminalization of abortion will be likely to prevent a single abortion based on the possibility of criminal punishment, either of the provider or of the patient, as the history of illegal abortion amptly demonstrates.

Putting a Government Funding mandate on abortion would, apparently reduce the number of abortions significantly.

You are not morally responsible for things outside your control. You ARE morally responsible for things you could have controlled but refused to do.

Refusing to arrange for some Government control of abortion in ways that actually reduce abortion might, therefore be morally wrong, where criminalizing abortion would be morally indifferent because it would be completely ineffective.

In simple terms, letting there be the availability of Government funds in some abortions will reduce the number of abortions. Preventing any Government funding of any abortions will not prevent a single abortion.

Saving some lives is morally preferable to refusing to save any lives.

QED

Posted by: ceflynline | January 31, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

Wow...reading these comments confirm to me why "our" founding fathers were in support og freedom of religion and seperation of church and astate. To comdemn a woman for her choice of abortion is leaning towards one of the bibl's greatest quotes-thou shalt not judge. But when you do not live in a glass house, your comments are worthless. Instead of trying to scare people into your beliefs by threatening how they would explain their actions is crazy. One minute he is a just God but when its not pertaining to you then he is vengeful? That is not the God of Moses (who committed murder) or David(act of conspiracy to commit murder of Uriah).

Posted by: gayliberalconservative | January 31, 2010 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Palin, qualified for the presidency??? I guess if we took the bar back down to Bush Jr standards, she might make it. But, that's something I have no desire to see duplicated, ever. I'd vote for a dumb Quayle first.

Posted by: juggernautenterprises | January 31, 2010 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Get your free Scott Brown for President bumper sticker @ ScottBrownForPresident.com while supplies last.

Posted by: 1millionbumperstickers | January 31, 2010 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Get you free Scott Brown for President bumper sticker @ http://ScottBrownForPresident.com while supplies last.

Posted by: 1millionbumperstickers | January 31, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Scott Brown is the exact kind of Republican that this socially moderate/liberal and fiscal conservative Independent would vote for if he ran nationally.

Posted by: NoVAredsox

==============================

Ted Turner has a better chance of being nominated by the GOP to run for POTUS.

Posted by: James10 | January 31, 2010 6:19 PM | Report abuse

IT SOUNDS LIKE SCOTT BROWN is JUST MORE LIBERAL SCUM LIKE ALL of THE GODLESS DEMOCRAT APES!!! HE WILL BE A CURSE on REAL AMERICA BY ONLY PARADING as A REPUBLICAN. HIS VALUES ARE THE VALUES of SATAN.

Posted by: LION7

===========

Oddly, when you compare the values of Satan in the Blue States against the Christian values of the Blue states, you find that

In Satan's states:

Crime rates are lower
Teen Pregnancy rates are lower
Poverty rates are lower
Divorce Rates are lower

The one area where the Red States excel is in the hypocrite rate.

Posted by: James10 | January 31, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Lion7 wrote:
"IT SOUNDS LIKE SCOTT BROWN is JUST MORE LIBERAL SCUM LIKE ALL of THE GODLESS DEMOCRAT APES!!! HE WILL BE A CURSE on REAL AMERICA BY ONLY PARADING as A REPUBLICAN. HIS VALUES ARE THE VALUES of SATAN."
__________________________

Satire, right, Lion? No????

Oh, I get it: Lion7 is just a troll and poseur, an agent-provocateur who's just imitating a wingnut and trying to push our buttons. No????

Well, then, there you have it, boys and girls! Penetrating, brilliant analysis by Lion7. Maybe we should have a "do-over" for the Massachusetts special election. After all, the Repubs and tea-baggers managed to elect a hypocritical liberal scum with Satanic values who will be a curse on REAL America. Don'tcha HATE it when that happens??

Posted by: post_reader_in_wv | January 31, 2010 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Talk is cheap Brown. Obama sold a bill of goods he cannot deliver. Obama needs to focus on the economy. Brown needs to focus on the needs of his largely democratic constituents. He'll probably vote like Snowe or any of the few remaining moderate Repubs

Posted by: jabreal00 | January 31, 2010 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like he wants to get re-elected.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | January 31, 2010 6:09 PM | Report abuse


GOD has nothing to do with women becoming pregnant - it is sheer neglegence on the part of the offender to not protect themselves if they really have to have sex.

DONT COMPARE RELIGION WITH SEX - IT LIKE COMARING APPLES AND PEARS. IF YOU PLAY - YOU PAY

Posted by: LOONYBIN2000 | January 31, 2010 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Maybe McCain will pick Brown for a running mate next time around.
Sterling Greenwood/Aspen

Posted by: AspenFreePress | January 31, 2010 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Pro Choiceis fair and right as long as we do not have to pay for it.

Whoever wants to take advantage of that option should be allowed to do so, BUT THHESE WOMEN MUST FOOT THEIR OWN BILL, and not think we the taxpayers are going to pay for their mistakes.

The only exception to the rule should be that having a child would endanger the mother's life.

Otherwise, it should be the the responsibility of the pregnant mother to be. We have enough safeguards in this country that noone who does not want a child, but wants sex can prevent unwanted pregnancy, and that applies , Mr Obama to your PETS AS WELL, LILLEGALS!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: LOONYBIN2000 | January 31, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

He sounds like Barack Obama before swearing in as president.

Conservative was supposed to mean they supported the Bible. Liberals meant they used their own logic. God's wisdom far outshines man's. If Republicans cannot respect God's ways, and the people want God's ways, God will support those who want Him with a surprise candidate.

Abortion was never to be a decision a woman would have to make. That is why God is against sex outside of marriage and adultery. My personal experience is that a choice for an abortion is usually not the woman's choice; it is the man's choice or it is a fear of embarrassment for her parents etc. In my experiences, the things we feared did not materialize and the child that would have been burdensome and a shame actually became a blessing, lightened a heavy burden and became the center and focus of great joy.

Refusing to abort a baby even because of rape can turn that bad situation into a blessing. James Robertson on Life Today was born of a rape and is a great evangelist and blessing for nations of Africa and the world. Jehovah's strong power is that he can turn mourning into joy. We are commanded to live by faith, not by fear. Abortion is about fear.

http://www.divine-way.com
God has solutions to world problems we created by ignoring His wisdom.

Posted by: MarieDevine | January 31, 2010 5:59 PM | Report abuse

The Teabaggers have been screaming since the election about how it showed total repudiation of Obama's moderate positions. And now, they find out Brown's a RINO!

What a Hoot!!

Posted by: gkam | January 31, 2010 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Well, Brown's charming if not touched a tad. Let's see, he's going to bring fairness in gov't back plus stop backroom dealing plus he thinks Palin is qualified to be President. If the Democrats are smart, they will introduce him to the elves who can then take him downstairs and show him the room where the rainbow ends and let him scoop a few handfuls of gold coins. And the Republicans harp on the messianic complex of Obama--please, Brown probably wears Superman and assorted other super heroes undies. The bad news: he's messianically inclined. The good news: he is messianically inclined so you won't have to rationalize with him or buy him off. Just give him a title and invite him to sleep over at the White House and you will have pealed away at least one Republican vote for any number of things.

Posted by: medogsbstfrnd | January 31, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Paul Kirk you vile impostor, vacate Senator Scott Brown's senate seat immediately and return to Massachusetts at once.

Posted by: screwjob2 | January 31, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

A Republican with a functional IQ. It's been awhile...but, still, a Republican.

Posted by: Farnaz1Mansouri1 | January 31, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

LOL!! The Republicans have a pro-choice, pro gay rights Senator. I thought the pure Republicans wouldn't allow that to happen. He has not even been sworn in yet and he upsetting the conservative base. Go ahead Republicans keep picking them like Brown, the Democrats appreciate his vote. LOL!!!

Posted by: merrylees | January 31, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Lucky for him he made it under the bar before the GOP convention enacted their Wehrmacht Oath. I believe under their new regs he'd be waterboarded for these opinions.

Posted by: washpost18 | January 31, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Pointless. He's still a male Sara Palin and given enough time, will fall of his horse and land on his head.

Just another goofball with a sultry family. Something big will emerge. His wifey being "the girl with the curious hands" is only the beginning.

Posted by: captainkona
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If you had half a brain, you might, just might get promoted to a half Wit

Posted by: frankn1 | January 31, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Great to see a moderate come out from either party.

Hopefully he can help prevent the Massachusetts health care monstrosity from coming to the whole country. It's raising prices there like mad. We need something like the Singapore plan to make our care cost less, or something like the Innovator's Prescription.

Posted by: staticvars | January 31, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

"...said states should be allowed to make their own decisions on marriage rights."

With all due respect, that's NOT what I would call "supporting" marriage equality for gay people.

Has the Senator really thought this through?

Does he actually believe that a married couple's status should change depending on which state they happen to live in or are passing through?

Would HE be ok with his marriage depending on which state he happened to be passing through?

Imagine, those of you who like this Federalist "compromise": Whether your spouse is considered your spouse, say, at the time of your death, would depend on whether you had a heart attack on the Metro at Dupont Circle near where you work or in Falls Church, VA, where you live.

Would this REALLY be acceptable to anyone for their own life circumstances?

Something tells me not one non-gay person reading my post would tolerate such a situation if it applied to them.

Why should it be acceptable to gay people?

Posted by: ricklinguist | January 31, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Brown will vote Democratic most of the time or he will lose his seat in 2012. He won mainly because of Democratic anger and a terrible campaign by Martha Cokely. If he is perceived in Massachusetts as blocking progress he will serve only one short term.

Posted by: lscheue464 | January 31, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: thardman | January 31, 2010 4:41

Between the President and the Senator-elect, maybe a little Centrism can be a new political anchor point to end th bipartisanism gridlock!
--------------------------

Centrism is the cowardice that put us here in the first place. Centrists not having the guts to take a principled stand on an issue is why we got an extra four years of BushCo, Tardman.

Posted by: captainkona | January 31, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

OMG, a smart, articulate, common-sense politician speaking succinctly.

Posted by: logicprevails | January 31, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Pointless. He's still a male Sara Palin and given enough time, will fall of his horse and land on his head.

Just another goofball with a sultry family. Something big will emerge. His wifey being "the girl with the curious hands" is only the beginning.

Posted by: captainkona

Sure beats having a failed community organizer.

OBAMA=AFFIRMATIVE ACTION+AMERICAN IDOL

"VOTE DEMOCRAT, IT'S EASIER THAN WORKING!"

Posted by: cschotta1 | January 31, 2010 4:56 PM | Report abuse

At least he understands that some issues have absolutely nothing to do with the people who are so vocal about them.

Posted by: ravensfan20008 | January 31, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Pointless. He's still a male Sara Palin and given enough time, will fall of his horse and land on his head.

Just another goofball with a sultry family. Something big will emerge. His wifey being "the girl with the curious hands" is only the beginning.

Posted by: captainkona | January 31, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Despite my initial reservations, I have to confess that I like Brown and feel that he is a good blend of values, moderation, fiscal conservatism and common sense. It confirms in mind that we badly need a new party in this country where those principles are valued, because neither the Democrats or the GOP represent those.
The only negative I feel about him is his view of Sarah Palin. Any rational person who thinks that that woman is qualified to lead this country is an idiot, and I have severe reservations about anyone in a position of power capable of showing such a severe lack of judgement.

Posted by: DavidPun | January 31, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

If republicans are trying to change Scott Brown's views, deffinetely 2010 year elections, will not be their lucky year.

Posted by: BOBSTERII | January 31, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse


Yay! Another elected official declaring the Radical Center!

http://www.radicalcenter.org/

Between the President and the Senator-elect, maybe a little Centrism can be a new political anchor point to end th bipartisanism gridlock!

Posted by: thardman | January 31, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

"The new Senator-elect says these things NOW.
Just wait until AFTER GOP Republican "Indoctrination" turns him to the *Dark Side*..."
Posted by: Bigrcube | January 31, 2010 2:56 PM
==
If Senator-elect Brown actually *thinks* he can vote each time the way *he* wants to, he's so naive.
Should he try this, he'll soon find he won't be able to get someone's name on a new rural post office building or a salute to the exploits of some local sports champion through Congress and voted.
I wish him well and will watch as he has a lot to learn about the legislative process.

Posted by: Judy-in-TX | January 31, 2010 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Oh oh, the leaders of the American Taliban wing of the gop aren't going to like Scott's comments.He'll have to learn how to march in lockstep like the other gop politicians.Rush and Hannity will have to berate him until he changes his views.There is no room for dissent in the gop.Moderates aren't allowed.Bad problem for the gop.Scott is off the reservation.Maybe Cheney could have him waterboarded until Scott changes his ways.

Posted by: paprikaofm | January 31, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Time will tell;and i already wonder that if he sticks with this philosophy the
GOP is going to get some surprises. For us, as voters, this could be very positive. He does not sound extreme and those seem to be the only ones who are interested in bipartisan efforts to get anything done. Best of luck to him--i hope he uses good judgment. We need to get extreme nuts out of office.

Posted by: happy2bhere | January 31, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse


Scott Brown is a blue dog democrat... suckers!!!!

Posted by: demtse | January 31, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

So far, like Massachusetts, I like him.

The honeymoon period has begun, and I'm quite sure the good people of Massachusetts will be paying close attention to Mr Brown's politics in real time.

I'm also aware that the Democratic Party, both locally and nationally, will be working overtime to field a real candidate in the next election. It is illuminating (and educational) to get spanked, especially where you don't believe it can happen.

Posted by: OldUncleTom | January 31, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Gatsby10
Brown talks a good game now. Wait until he's sworn in. The GOP leaders will descend on him like a plague of locusts. The RNC will threaten to not give hime a cent for his reelection campaign, and to support another GOP candidate.
Posted by: Gatsby10
Money talks, B.S. walks. It won't take long before Brown is coopted into the GOP fold. Sarc on / Especially, since he would never pass a "purity" test... Sarc/off

RESPOND:
Gatsby, unfortunately you're right! Such sceanrio could happen if he doesn't keep himself clean cut. Otherwise, he could remind republican party of "Arlen Specter", who switched to democrats after being 30 years as republican. Either way, I am sure that Scott Brown would win the re-election, because it is Massachusetts and they just love him and they will load him with money; REMEMBER THAT.

Posted by: BOBSTERII | January 31, 2010 3:54 PM | Report abuse

like your line of thinking. I believe all those that are mentally and/or physically challenged should be shot straight away. You may disagree, but who are you to force your point of view on me?

Great point, except a fetus isn't a person it's a fetus. A fetus is a tus. Keep your fetus fetish to yourself.

Posted by: mikelemm | January 31, 2010 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Greetings republican bloggers!!!!

Surprised that Scott Brown is a pro choice?

Well, with two "available daughters", you would be too! Your problem is only your republican party, which year after year and decade after decade yapps about abortion rights but never even attempted to overturn Roe vs Wade, the abortion right. Scott Brown probably realised that and said "screw it"!!! Pro Choice is the right decision, not always but most of the time, unlike when so called "Pro Life" is wrong from the real start and contradicts with war mongering republican party values and we all know that war doesn't save anybody's life. How brave from Scott Brown.

Posted by: BOBSTERII | January 31, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Brown talks a good game now. Wait until he's sworn in. The GOP leaders will descend on him like a plague of locusts. The RNC will threaten to not give hime a cent for his reelection campaign, and to support another GOP candidate.

Money talks, B.S. walks. It won't take long before Brown is coopted into the GOP fold. Sarc on / Especially, since he would never pass a "purity" test... Sarc/off

Posted by: Gatsby10 | January 31, 2010 3:23 PM
__________________________________________

Soiunds like you're scared of a moderate Repub. Makes it harder to demonize Repubs when they're like BLue Dog Dems politically. Brown will get PLENTY o'cash from party coffers. He's right in Chairman Michael Steele's wheelhouse politically. Plus, replacing Brown with a Dem doesn't help the GOP at all and their chances of getting someone to his right are nil and nil. Dems will be gunning for him in 2012, so he can't afford to be stigmatized as Mitch McConnell's tool.

I think I'll cut a check for Brown's reelection campaign. Obama stiffed me on Inaug tix, so their appeals for cash will draw a chilly reaction.

Posted by: gbooksdc | January 31, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

This guy might be republican, but I feel that there was no better person to take a seat after great Ted Kennedy. I already like him and I wish a good luck to him.

Posted by: BOBSTERII | January 31, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Dear fellow catholics this means you can't call yourself a catholic and vote for this kind of person.

Posted by: agapn9 | January 31, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

What the goobers have not yet realized is that a New England Republican is, politically, to the left of a 'blue dog' Democrat.

(Heh-heh-heh...)

Posted by: WhatHeSaid | January 31, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

Oh, my!

Is it possible? Am I dreaming?

Can there really be a Republican who thinks for himself?

Is there really a Santa Clause?


Posted by: amelia45 | January 31, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

I am disappointed in Senator Brown's support of Infanticide. Our nation's biggest problem is really the one in which we are most silent upon: the genocide of 1.5 million unborn infants per year. 50 MILLION SINCE ROVE VS WADE.

This has got to stop. Our doctors are killing more people than they are saving.

And yet, we want to expand healthcare.

Posted by: RealTexan1 | January 31, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

The new Senator-elect says these things NOW. Just wait until AFTER GOP Republican "Indoctrination" turns him to the *Dark Side*......

He's suspect in thinking Sarah Palin is qualified for anything other than dog-catcher. Now THAT would be REAL animal cruelty, huh?!

Posted by: Bigrcube

=============================================================
Wolf shooter is more like it, from a helicopter.

Posted by: jameschirico | January 31, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Brown talks a good game now. Wait until he's sworn in. The GOP leaders will descend on him like a plague of locusts. The RNC will threaten to not give hime a cent for his reelection campaign, and to support another GOP candidate.

Money talks, B.S. walks. It won't take long before Brown is coopted into the GOP fold. Sarc on / Especially, since he would never pass a "purity" test... Sarc/off

Posted by: Gatsby10 | January 31, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Oh, dear. So Mr. Brown is pro-choice,in favor of gay marriage, and voted for health-reform in Massachusetts that is virtually identical to that being proposed by the Democrats for the rest of the country.

What will the aptly-named Republican "base" do with their RINO now?

(Heh-heh-heh...)

Posted by: WhatHeSaid | January 31, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

An Olympia Snowe Republican. I can live with that.

Posted by: tvanzandt | January 31, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Someone wrote:
"Gotta love these people that insist that we all report to THEIR ALMIGHTY. These people don't realize that not all believe in this BIGFOOT guy called the ALMIGHTY. For all I care the ALMIGHTY could be Curly, Larry or MOE.

But this person does have one point, if they don't want to have an abortion DON'T- simple as that.
But who are you to force your point of view onto me??? "

I like your line of thinking. I believe all those that are mentally and/or physically challenged should be shot straight away. You may disagree, but who are you to force your point of view on me?
I also think all illegals in this country, along with all their offspring, should be shot on sight. You may disagree, but again, who are you to force your point of view on me?
Are you starting to see just how inane this line of thought is?
It doesn't take believing in imaginary sky daddies to know that Murder is wrong. Why is that so hard for some people to understand?

Posted by: brattykathyi1 | January 31, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

the white house is running out of lies
and numbers games,
unemployment is going UP
GDP numbers are a hoax!

Democrats are going to lose
lose lose...
the democrats are a party of denial.

Posted by: simonsays1 | January 31, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Brown won for two reasons.
1) He isn't a fanatic member of the neo-fascist American Taliban pretending to be a Republican.
2) He isn't a member of the far left Marxist party of Pelosi & Co pretending to be a Democrat.
Its really that simple. A great model for anyone wanting to get elected to follow.

Posted by: brattykathyi1 | January 31, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Judging by what is going on in TN, Brown could easily take over the Tea Party from the Palin/Armey types. Our country would be much better for it as he seems intelligent enough to compromise to get conservative fiscal ideas into bills. Tort reform and re-import of drugs would be a great start. No wonder Obama wanted him seated before passing the health care bill with open coverage.

Posted by: jameschirico | January 31, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Ooooh ? is there an Election comming up ? LOL

Posted by: msgilfoy | January 31, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

The new Senator-elect says these things NOW. Just wait until AFTER GOP Republican "Indoctrination" turns him to the *Dark Side*......

He's suspect in thinking Sarah Palin is qualified for anything other than dog-catcher. Now THAT would be REAL animal cruelty, huh?!

Posted by: Bigrcube | January 31, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Abortion is the Murder of a Human Being.

These women should Take Responsibility for their bodies and not get pregnant.

I'd hate to be one of these women and have to try and explain to the Almighty my murdering an unborn child. I don't think they can."
===========================
Then I suggest you let the "almighty" do the judging and stay out of it.

Posted by: EnemyOfTheState | January 31, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse
_______________________________

Gotta love these people that insist that we all report to THEIR ALMIGHTY. These people don't realize that not all believe in this BIGFOOT guy called the ALMIGHTY. For all I care the ALMIGHTY could be Curly, Larry or MOE.

But this person does have one point, if they don't want to have an abortion DON'T- simple as that.
But who are you to force your point of view onto me???
You want to punish - then punish the MEN as well. After all most woman are getting abortions because DEAD BEAT MEN are beating on them, or run away like little babies because they don't want to pay for that baby. Men in our society think nothing of no caring for their children, in fact will spend every dime they have to DENY paternity.
What does that ALMIGHTY BIGFOOT say about that?

Posted by: kare1 | January 31, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

oops! Typo correction.

He thinks Sarah Palin is qualified to be pres??????????

He is as crazy as She is.

Posted by: torro67 | January 31, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Well, maybe there is hope for America. It will only be with a rational, PATRIOTIC, Republican Party--one populated by the
Republicans like the California Governor and those who are speaking as maturely as Senator-elect Scott. Let's hope talk and action are the same.

Posted by: SaintJoseph | January 31, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

We need more politicians of the Scott Brown mold. The country needs to rid itself of the extremist on both sides of the aisle who make it difficult for any legislation to pass that benefits Americans.

Posted by: mocoresider09 | January 31, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

He thinks Sarah Palin is qualified to be pres??????????

He is as crazy as he is.

Posted by: torro67 | January 31, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Finally, a Republican who represents the majority of Republican Voters.

We need more Congressional representatives like Brown, who focus on the important issues and stays out of Americans' personal lives.

When a candidate runs for office in or from my state, their views on choice are a strong deciding factor when I vote. I would rather write in a nobody than see another oppressive Republican like Cuccinelli (VA Attorney General) in office.

Posted by: asmith1 | January 31, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Please Scott Brown run in 2012

And please choose Mcdonnell as your running mate.....

Posted by: danson1 | January 31, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Scott Brown is all the proof you need that the Tea Party and Republicans will sell their sole for a seat in the Senate.

Posted by: zackool | January 31, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Scott Brown is a good man. Libertarian on social issue, strongly for killing the Islamist terrorists that have declared war on decent Americans and the Jews, strongly for a government fiscal policy that is free market based. I say Palin/Brown for the 2012 ticket will defeat the Hillary after she ousts The One in the Dem primary

Posted by: gagalbert | January 31, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

It will interesting to see just how he plans to bring "good government and fairness back into the equation." Is he going to do this all by himself? If so, he is in for a few shocks and unpleasant surprises. I thought he was fairly sound until he said that he thought Palin was qualified to be President. Now it appears as if he´s trying to cover all the bases.
In the end, what makes him so very, very special....other than being a good looking guy?

Posted by: Aquarius1 | January 31, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

It will interesting to see just how he plans to bring "good government and fairness back into the equation." Is he going to do this all by himself? If so, he is in for a few shocks and unpleasant surprises. I thought he was fairly sound until he said that he thought Palin was qualified to be President. Now it appears as if he´s trying to cover all the bases.
In the end, what makes him so very, very special....other than being a good looking guy?

Posted by: Aquarius1 | January 31, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Your understanding of conservatives today may be a bit topsy-turvy....

I am pro-life AND I support Scott Brown. Why? Because right now we have bigger fish to fry than whether abortion is legal or gays can marry. YOu are assuming that all conservatives put social issues first, and you couldn't be more wrong.

Most evangelicals put social issues first. If they didn't, they'd probably be liberals.

All conservatives, in fact MOST conservatives, are NOT evangelicals.

A more accurate statement by you might be that 'evangelicals who support Scott Brown are hypocrites'....

Posted by: boosterprez
==========================
Have you read the GOP platform?

Posted by: EnemyOfTheState | January 31, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

I would fully expect that the Bishop of Massachussets will call for Brown's defeat, and would deny him communion based upon his pro-choice stance. How republicans and christians could possibly support Brown reeks with hypocricy, given the national republican party's previous stance on abortion and gay rights. I suspect that we will see a purified conservative mount a challenge to Brown in 2012. Or is it just about power and not about beliefs to the conservative religious right? So much for standing on principle.

Posted by: insider9909
________________

Your understanding of conservatives today may be a bit topsy-turvy....

I am pro-life AND I support Scott Brown. Why? Because right now we have bigger fish to fry than whether abortion is legal or gays can marry. YOu are assuming that all conservatives put social issues first, and you couldn't be more wrong.

Most evangelicals put social issues first. If they didn't, they'd probably be liberals.

All conservatives, in fact MOST conservatives, are NOT evangelicals.

A more accurate statement by you might be that 'evangelicals who support Scott Brown are hypocrites'....

Posted by: boosterprez | January 31, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

How much you want to bet that as we speak, the GOP is preparing it's "you did it first" defense for nominating an inexperienced Senator for President.

From now on, whenever a right-winger raises that objection about Obama, the reply should be, "Does that go for Scott Brown, too?"

Posted by: st50taw | January 31, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

I imagine more than a few conservatives are upset at the thought of another RINO achieving national prominence. On the other hand, nothing says "winner" like actually winning something, so I suspect he gets a pass on purity.

Posted by: EnemyOfTheState | January 31, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

If senator-elect Brown thinks Ms. Palin would have made a qualified US President, he should campaign with her in the next election. She was a constant embarassment to John McCain.

If Mr. Brown is "pro-choice" and also voted for the Massachusetts health plan, he might be a Democrat who does not want to admit it.

Could he sit on the Senate floor in the middle of the isle and help find a compromise between fanatics of both sides of the isle?
We certainly hope so. To achieve Peace in the world, we first need Peace in Washington D.C.

Posted by: dalailama1 | January 31, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Scott Brown says he won't have an opinion on Don't Ask - Don't Tell until he's talked to the generals on the ground.

What a brave, thoughtful, and independent guy.

Posted by: norriehoyt | January 31, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

I would fully expect that the Bishop of Massachussets will call for Brown's defeat, and would deny him communion based upon his pro-choice stance. How republicans and christians could possibly support Brown reeks with hypocricy, given the national republican party's previous stance on abortion and gay rights. I suspect that we will see a purified conservative mount a challenge to Brown in 2012. Or is it just about power and not about beliefs to the conservative religious right? So much for standing on principle.

Posted by: insider9909 | January 31, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Scott "The sexiest man in the Senate" Brown is already running for 2012. As soon as the people of Massachusetts find out he is a paper-thin failure, they will kick him out. You can run all you want (from your neocon positions), but you can't hide. Maybe he should be waterboarded so that we know what he really stands for.

Posted by: tdballer247 | January 31, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

I support a candidate who votes on the issues...not with the party. Brown's position on abortion mirrors the majority of this country's stance on the issue. I am sick and tired of abortion continuing to be a roadblock to everything that has to do with health care. We have settled the matter. It's between a woman, her doctor, and her belief system. Period. We don't have to keep picking this issue up.

Scott Brown also mirrors many Independent and Republican stances regarding party affiliation...there is no party that believes exactly like I do; however, I would vote in a candidate who I believe will represent the will of the people and one who has the cajones to stand up to dictators, demagogues, and ideologues.

Posted by: easttxisfreaky | January 31, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Frankly, what Senator Brown thinks about Roe V. Wade is largely irrelevent. Short of a constitutional amendment, only SCOTUS could overturn that decision. If they were to do that then it would revert to the states to make their own laws in accordance with the wishes of the citizens of that state. I think it's a good thing for as many issues as possible to be decided on a local or state basis.

Posted by: hit4cycle | January 31, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

This approach is extremely cynical and hypocritical. You say you favor choice, but not government funded abortion. That way, you get to say that you're moderate while seriously reducing choice in America. Sadly, voters seem to fall for this sort of thing all the time. Sort of like claiming fiscal responsibility while cutting taxes and increasing spending...

Posted by: poster1231 | January 31, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

tpk1 wrote:

"I'd hate to be one of these women and have to try and explain to the Almighty my murdering an unborn child. I don't think they can."

You're right. The "almighty" prefers that you wait until children are born and act "stubborn" before you stone them to death (Deuteronomy 21:18-21).

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+21%3A18-21&version=KJV

Posted by: B2O2 | January 31, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Scott Brown is perfect and should hold the Massachusetts seat for years to come, and if he decides to run against the comunity organizer in 2012, he will easily defeat the his confused leftist community organizer opponent.

Posted by: Realist20 | January 31, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Brown had better change his tone if he expects any financial support from the RNC in two years. He would not be able to pass the Republican Party purity sniff test with these types of comments.

Actually, Brown bases his political ideology according to which way he thinks the wind is blowing. But Palin at POTUS? Really?

I can only conclude that the guy's internal weather vane must be broken.

Posted by: labman57 | January 31, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Scott Brown is learning very fast how to be a "Washington" republican. Lie to win elections, then become disingenous to keep your senate seat. We all know what he said during the campaign: he supports waterboarding (like his mentor, Cheney), opposes civilian trials for terrorists, and promised to to block health care reform because "Massachusetts has addressed coverage needs" without mentioning that billions of federal dollars go into supporting the health care system there via Medicare. He is typical republican that will say anything to win an election, then say anything to remain in power. The only credit I give him is how fast he has learned to play the "Washington game".

Posted by: tdballer247 | January 31, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

This is the kind of patter that got Scott Brown elected, but I can't help but notice how he makes comments that seem disengaged with policy realities.

For instance, he says that the Massachusetts plan was "free market" whereas the national plan is "one-size-fits-all". What does that even mean? Both plans mandate that everyone get coverage; neither plan establishes any new government health insurance programs; both plans add insurance regulations that prevent things like recision; both plans subsidize working class families so they can purchase coverage. To classify them the way he did either indicates that he's basically just interested in mouthing buzz words, or else that he actually has no idea what was actually in the two bills.

It's similar to how he ran on promising not to do anything that would reduce Medicare spending. Well, that's what a bipartisan budget commission will say needs to be done. He ran on cutting taxes and still balancing the budget without touching entitlement spending -- aka, he ran against the laws of arithmetic.

In short, Scott Brown is a personally appealing guy who either has a serious taste for saying the easy thing, or else is just a lightweight. Either way, I am not encouraged.

Posted by: jeffwacker | January 31, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Brown and Palin are both big embarrassments to American politics, just as Walters is a big embarrassment to American journalism.

Posted by: TalkingHead1 | January 31, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

"

Abortion is the Murder of a Human Being.

These women should Take Responsibility for their bodies and not get pregnant.

I'd hate to be one of these women and have to try and explain to the Almighty my murdering an unborn child. I don't think they can."
===========================
Then I suggest you let the "almighty" do the judging and stay out of it.

Posted by: EnemyOfTheState | January 31, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

I love it. Our domestic Taliban thought they had another vote in Congress, but it turns out he is living in the modern era instead.

Time to go back to beating your Bronze Age religious tomes against your heads until they're bloody.

Posted by: B2O2 | January 31, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

what is an almighty?

Posted by: donaldtucker | January 31, 2010 1:38 PM | Report abuse

ApostasyUSA wrote:
I wonder what Republicans think about this:

Sen.-elect Brown says he supports abortion rights
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/31/AR2010013100755.html
+++++++++++++++++++++++

ProCounsel responded:

an excellent insight overlooked by most analysts. here is one of my previous posts on another website addressing your very issue.

The Obama Massachusetts Miracle

widely overlooked in the media is the fact that republicans all over the country poured support in for scott brown

even though brown is NOT as pro life as most would like

why???

because of the obama mass miracle-the ability to unite republicans to oppose the evil of obama

in ww2 churchill was asked how he could support russia, who he had oppsed his entire career.

churchill replied (paraphrase)

“If satan were to invade germany I would think up something nice to say about hell.”

scott brown elections KILLED obamacare which would have REQUIRED mandatory abortion coverage

and killed more babies

Posted by: ProCounsel | January 31, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

If Brown believes that Palin is qualified to be president, then he certainly is not (qualified to ever be president, that is).

Posted by: gsross | January 31, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

this guy is running for 2012 already he had better pal up with obama or he will be out in 2012 when all the dems come back to vote he sees and knows this.(dont be surprised if he runs as a dem in 2012)

Posted by: donaldtucker | January 31, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Abortion is the Murder of a Human Being.

These women should Take Responsibility for their bodies and not get pregnant.

I'd hate to be one of these women and have to try and explain to the Almighty my murdering an unborn child. I don't think they can.

Posted by: tpk1 | January 31, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

A few hundred more like Scott Brown, and I could be persuaded to return to the GOP.

Posted by: ronwriter | January 31, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Show me.

Posted by: mitlen | January 31, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Scott Brown is the exact kind of Republican that this socially moderate/liberal and fiscal conservative Independent would vote for if he ran nationally.

Posted by: NoVAredsox | January 31, 2010 1:21 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company