NOT Kennedy's seat.. THE PEOPLES SEAT!!

[Teresa]

During the debate between Brown and Coakley last night a question was asked of Scott Brown by the moderator.....

Paraphrased; "Senator Brown, can you sit in Ted Kennedy's seat in the US Senate and vote against the health care legislation before congress?"

Scott Brown: "It's not Ted Kennedy's seat. It's the people's seat!"

It's been reported that Scott Brown, was able to raise 1.3 million dollars in the 24 hours after the debate with Croakley...

The contributions came from at least 30 different states.

This guy has a real chance!

I hope he shakes up the establishment realll realll good! 

[Warph]

What if Scott Brown loses?  I mean, after all the hype and investment in standing behind him to win, do you think there would be some backlash?  Especially, if election rigging (vote switching) was found out to have been involved, as in NY-23.  Furthermore, you have to factor in the potential SEUI and ACORN shenanigans, not-to-mention the Governor of MA is a good friend of Obama.  And most of you probably know, Obama is "hell-bent" on socializing this nation for his offshore masters.  In other words, redistributing America's wealth to Chinese-led UN agencies and turning America in to a Police State under the guise of increase security.

So, in effect, the DNC and Obama will stop at nothing to make sure Brown loses, as logic would have it.  If Brown should happen to win, by some Miracle, then the stalling process of swearing him in comes into play so Congress can compromise on Obamacare before Brown can stop it.  As Brown said, they would try to do this and have sworn past Dem Candidates in immediately.

However, with a far-left Governor and Secretary of State in one of the most liberal states, it is going to be very difficult to stop that as well.

The SEUI, with the aid of our tax dollars is running a 670K ad for Coakly next week.  Brown has already raised more than a million$. He was able to raise 1 Million in a single day thanks to all his newly found support, even from liberals who no longer recognize their own party.  

You have to wonder if the Independent Candidate, Joe Kennedy (no relation to the Kennedy clan), wasn't a "prop" by the DNC to draw votes from Brown.  The Tea party candidate COULD draw votes away from Brown which would be disaster for the GOP.

It's already become quite a spectacle and next week will be even more dramatic.  Money shouldn't be problem for Brown as Americans are certainly putting their money into their new investment .... a candidate against big government and says he speaks for the people.  Brown better hope he doesn't have more "dirt" that will be dug up to discredit him, other than the one about him appearing naked in Cosmo 28 years ago.  It goes to show you how low a side so desperate to win will stoop, and we're not even talking about something that should really matter, like being eligible for the position.

Brown seems somewhat intelligent, but nothing to shout home about yet, just a traditional guy who wants the US to remain a Republic and a Beacon of Freedom with individual choices and the pursuit of happiness (The American Dream).  He has the tools to win, but will be how he uses them as to whether the GOP can secure a victory in MA or not.

And if Brown does win, look for a momentum change in the right direction for waking Americans up to saving their country from Socialism .. one short step away from Marxism.


****UPDATE****

How desperate and worried about Scott Brown are the Democrats? They will delay his swearing-in to pass ObamaCARE if he wins the Jan 19th election

The U.S. Senate ultimately will schedule the swearing-in of Kirk's successor, but not until the state certifies the election.

Today, a spokesman for Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin, who is overseeing the election but did not respond to a call seeking comment, said certification of the Jan. 19 election by the Governor's Council would take a while.

"Because it's a federal election," spokesman Brian McNiff said. "We'd have to wait 10 days for absentee and military ballots to come in."

Another source told the Herald that Galvin's office has said the election won't be certified until Feb. 20 – well after the president's address.

Since the U.S. Senate doesn't meet again in formal session until Jan. 20, Bay State voters will have made their decision before a vote on health-care reform could be held. But Kirk and Galvin's office said today a victorious Brown would be left in limbo.

In contrast, Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Lowell) was sworn in at the U.S. House of Representatives on Oct. 18, 2007, just two days after winning a special election to replace Martin Meehan. In that case, Tsongas made it to Capitol Hill in time to override a presidential veto of the expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

Yesterday, Brown, who has been closing the gap with Coakley in polls and fund raising, blasted the political double standard.

"This is a stunning admission by Paul Kirk and the Beacon Hill political machine," said Brown in a statement. "Paul Kirk appears to be suggesting that he, Deval Patrick, and (Senate Majority Leader) Harry Reid intend to stall the election certification until the health care bill is rammed through Congress, even if that means defying the will of the people of Massachusetts. As we've already seen from the backroom deals and kickbacks cut by the Democrats in Washington, they intend to do anything and everything to pass their controversial health care plan. But threatening to ignore the results of a free election and steal this Senate vote from the people of Massachusetts takes their schemes to a whole new level. Martha Coakley should immediately disavow this threat from one of her campaign's leading supporters."

A spokeswoman for Coakley's campaign declined to comment today.

[Warph]

The Scott Brown - Martha Coakley Debate (1 of 7)

Aggressive' Coakley aide knocks down scribe
Push comes to shove
By Laura Crimaldi and Hillary Chabot
Thursday, January 14, 2010

A heavy-hitting Democratic operative apologized yesterday for being "too aggressive" when he roughed up a Weekly Standard reporter trying to pitch questions to Attorney General Martha Coakley after a Washington fund-raiser.

A YouTube video of the sidewalk scuffle Tuesday night went viral and had Coakley yesterday blaming it all on "aggressive" GOP "stalkers."

The Brown campaign dismissed the claim as a fabrication.

Coakley, a Democrat, is in a red-hot race for U.S. Senate against Republican rival state Sen. Scott Brown; a poll this week placed the pair only 2 points apart closing in on Tuesday's special election.

Independent candidate Joseph L. Kennedy trails the two by miles in the polls.

Coakley said she is not "privy" to the facts surrounding the incident involving reporter John McCormack, who wrote about the episode outside Washington's Sonoma restaurant in an online dispatch titled: "We Report, We Get Pushed."

"I know there were people following, including two from the Brown campaign who have been very aggressive in their stalking," Coakley said. "I'm not sure what happened. I know something occurred, but I'm not privy to the facts."

Brown campaign spokesman Michael Harrington dismissed the accusation of stalkers, saying, "I think she made it up, just like her assertion there are no terrorists in Afghanistan. Knocking down reporters who ask questions is the type of arrogant behavior we've come to expect from the political machine and their candidate."

McCormack told the Herald he met Coakley Jan. 5 after a radio debate at the WTKK (96.9-FM) studios, where he asked her four questions.

"She knew that there was a reporter who asked her a question. We had met before. I asked her four questions. She saw me get knocked to the ground and kept walking," McCormack said. "I wouldn't say I was surprised. . . . She's decided she's entitled to the seat without answering questions on issues that are of national importance."

Michael Meehan, the Coakley campaign aide involved in the D.C. dust-up, told the Herald he did not push McCormack. He said he was escorting Coakley to her car and took his task too seriously.

"I was a little too aggressive in trying to help the attorney general get to her car," said Meehan, who is president of Blue Line Strategic Communications in Washington.

Meehan said he helped McCormack up after he fell over a low fence and asked him if he was OK. He also said he has since apologized. Last fall Meehan was appointed by President Obama to the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which oversees the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe.

Coakley complained she's been followed by Brown operatives.

"I do know that the Scott Brown stalkers who have followed me around and the people at that press conference . . . were incredibly aggressive about trying to get in my face," she said.

According to McCormack's account, Coakley took two questions from reporters after the event, but declined to respond to his question. As McCormack followed Coakley down the street, he said the man later identified as Meehan pushed him into a free-standing metal rail.

"I ended up on the sidewalk. I was fine. He helped me up from the ground, but kept pushing up against me, blocking my path toward Coakley down the street," he wrote.

McCormack said there is a 10-inch rip on the right leg of his suit pants and a small bruise on his right leg from the incident.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view/20100114michael_meehan_accused/srvc=home&position=also


Coakley Staffer Who Attacked Reporter Is an Obama Appointee
by Mike Flynn

Big Government contributor Dana Loesch has reported on the Coakley staffer who attacked a Weekly Standard reporter outside a Martha Coakley fundraiser on Capitol Hill. A number of outlets have identified the culprit as Michael Meehan, a long-time Democrat political operative. Mr. Meehan was dispatched to the struggling campaign by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committe (DSCC).

Mr. Meehan, however, also happens to be a recent Obama appointee. On November 19, President Obama nominated Mr. Meehan to serve on the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

From the White House press release:   Michael P. Meehan, Member, Broadcasting Board of Governors.
Michael P. Meehan currently serves as President of Blue Line Strategic Communications, Inc. and as Senior Vice President at Virilion, a digital media company. For over two decades, Meehan served in senior roles for U.S. Senators John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Maria Cantwell and former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, two presidential campaigns, two U.S. House offices and congressional campaigns in 25 states. Mr. Meehan earned a B.A. in political science from Bates College.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-announces-more-key-administration-posts-111809

The Broadcasting Board of Governors oversees federal news operations like Voice of America and Radio Free Europe.

I'm not certain attacking reporters who ask politicians challenging questions is the best qualification to provide an objective news voice to oppressed parts of the world. I would hope that our Broadcasting Board of Governors could at least agree that reporters should be free from political assaults.

Our Mr. Meehan has some explaining to do. His Senate confirmation hearing should be a hoot.

Update: A top GOP Senate Aide had this to say in response to this article: "The President should pull his nomination unless he thinks the BBG should be led by a guy now best known for suppressing the freedom of the press."
http://biggovernment.com/2010/01/13/is-coakley-staffer-who-attacked-report-an-obama-appointee/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BigGovernment+%28Big+Government%29

[Warph]

Massachusetts
"It is great that Scott Brown is in the lead, but let's remember 'the ends do justify the means' in a LIBERAL mind. If the polls are within the margin of error like they are, expect the Liberals to do what ever it takes to hold on to the 'Kennedy' seat, like trunk full of 'forgotten' votes just like in the Minnesota Coleman vs. Franken race and expect the courts to backup this fraud."

Poll shocker: Scott Brown surges ahead
in Senate race
http://www.bostonhearld.com/news/politics
By Jessica Van Sack
Friday, January 15, 2010

Riding a wave of opposition to Democratic health-care reform, GOP upstart Scott Brown is leading in the U.S. Senate race, raising the odds of a historic upset that would reverberate all the way to the White House, a new poll shows.

Although Brown's 4-point lead over Democrat Martha Coakley is within the Suffolk University/7News survey's margin of error, the underdog's position at the top of the results stunned even pollster David Paleologos.

"It's a Brown-out," said Paleologos, director of Suffolk's Political Research Center. "It's a massive change in the political landscape."

The poll shows Brown, a state senator from Wrentham, besting Coakley, the state's attorney general, by 50 percent to 46 percent, the first major survey to show Brown in the lead. Unenrolled long-shot Joseph L. Kennedy, an information technology executive with no relation to the famous family, gets 3 percent of the vote. Only 1 percent of voters were undecided.

Paleologos said bellweather models show high numbers of independent voters turning out on election day, which benefits Brown, who has 65 percent of that bloc compared to Coakley's 30 percent. Kennedy earns just 3 percent of the independent vote, and 1 percent are undecided.

Given the 4.4-point margin of error, the poll shows Coakley could win the race, Paleologos said. But if Brown's momentum holds, he is poised to succeed the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy - and to halt health-care reform, the issue the late senator dubbed "the cause of my life."

Yet even in the bluest state, it appears Kennedy's quest for universal health care has fallen out of favor, with 51 percent of voters saying they oppose the "national near-universal health-care package" and 61 percent saying they believe the government cannot afford to pay for it.

The poll, conducted Monday through Wednesday, surveyed 500 registered likely voters who knew the date of Tuesday's election. It shows Brown leading all regions of the state except Suffolk County.

"Either Brown's momentum accelerates and his lead widens, or this becomes a wake-up call for Coakley to become the 'Comeback Kid' this weekend," Paleologos said.

And with 99 percent having made up their minds, voters may be hard to persuade.

The poll surveyed a carefully partitioned electorate meant to match voter turnout: 39 percent Democrat, 15 percent Republican and 45 percent unenrolled.

Brown wins among men and is remarkably competitive among women - trailing Coakley's 50 percent with 45 percent.

While Brown has 91 percent of registered Republicans locked up, an astonishing 17 percent of Democrats report they're jumping ship for Brown as well - likely a product of Coakley's laser-focus on hard-core Dems, potentially at the exclusion of other Democrats whom she needed to win over, Paleologos said.

For Coakley, Brown's surge may be as ominous as the fact that her campaign's peril is not fully recognized, with 64 percent of voters still believing she'll win - a perception that threatens to keep her supporters home.

Brown's popularity is solid. He enjoys a 57 percent favorability rating compared to just 19 percent unfavorable. Coakley's favorability is 49 percent; her unfavorability, 41 percent.

No longer does Brown suffer from a name-recognition problem, with 95 percent of voters having heard of him statewide.

7News Political Editor Andy Hiller said, "Voters obviously think Brown is running a better campaign than Coakley. For months, it has been Coakley's race to lose, and now in the last days that's exactly what she may be doing."

Some comments:

Massachusetts
"I know how you feel. The Republicans are the ones who allowed this mess to get rolling. To be fair, there were plenty of Democrats who were complicit, but the last administration was Republican, they bear the most responsibility. But this is just wrong. Health care for all is our goal, not this. If this bill was so good, you would know what was in it. Secret deals??? Behind closed doors meetings?? Why would the unions need an exemption if it was a good bill? Why would states need to cut their own side deals if it was something that they felt was worth supporting?? Let's put a stop to this, go back to square one, actually negotiate and debate the bill in the light of day. The citizens of America want a health care bill, but even the strongest supporters know that when you have to promise Big Labor exemptions, (and union labor elected Obama), the bill can't be that good. This is a Reid/ Pelosi power grab. President Obama will recover. If Scott Brown gets elected, Obama can start over, engage the people of America without Congress inserting the pork and special compensations that have poisoned this bill. When this bill sees the light of day, all of the special favors will be brought to light and the Democratic Party will be tarnished with this giveaway forever. This is a Reid/Pelosi failure, not Obamas. I urge you, let's give Obama a chance to do it right, you know he wants to. Elect Scott Brown and the Republicans will take the bullet for killing health care, and they can be accurately portrayed as uncaring and aloof, and with President Obama and solid majorities in both houses of Congress we can slow down, do it right. Not like this, secret deals and closed door meetings, not like this. You know that this health care bill is wrong, if it was right, they wouldn't need bribes to support it. If it was right, they would make the debate public, indeed, putting it on C-Span. Let the Republicans take the bullet on this and we can start over, making the Right to Good Health something all Americans support, without bribes, threats and secrecy. So hold your nose, and Vote Scott Brown."


Arizona
"Well let's hope the voters decide this election rather than the special interest groups, ACORN, thugs or whatever!"

Maine
"Did anyone read how Coakley let a child molester "rapist" go free with no bail, years ago? We don't need another crook in office. It is time for a real change. If the Democratic machine does not have Acorn involved, the Republicans have a good chance at winning. Most people do NOT want the healthcare system that is being pushed now. Keep them out of control!"

Massachusetts
"Vote scott brown - he is our voice!"

Massachusetts
"A vote for Scott Brown is a vote for what the hard working people of Massachuestts want !!! Less Government, lower taxes and a fresh start on REAL HEALTHCARE REFORM legislation."

Massachusetts
"It is great that Scott Brown is in the lead, but let's remember 'the ends do justify the means' in a LIBERAL mind. If the polls are within the margin of error like they are, expect the Liberals to do what ever it takes to hold on to the 'Kennedy' seat, like trunk full of 'forgotten' votes just like in the Minnesota Coleman vs. Franken race and expect the courts to backup this fraud."

[Warph]

Barney Frank:   GOP Win in Massachusetts Senate Race Will 'Kill the Health Bill'!!!

WASHINGTON -- A senior Massachusetts lawmaker says if Republicans win a special Senate election there next week, President Obama's health care overhaul is dead.

Democrat Barney Frank told reporters Friday: "If Scott Brown wins, it'll kill the health bill."

The Massachusetts congressman said Democratic candidate Martha Coakley should have campaigned harder for the seat held for decades by Edward Kennedy. Nonetheless, Frank said he thinks Coakley will win Tuesday's contest.

The latest polls show a close race between Brown and Coakley. Kennedy died last summer of brain cancer and Democrat Paul Kirk was appointed to fill the seat on an interim basis. Brown has said he would be the 41st vote against the health bill.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/15/frank-gop-win-massachusetts-senate-race-kill-health/

Obama due in MA this sunday to stump for Coakley!

[Warph]

Clinton-Obama In MA – Haiti In Turmoil

http://conservativeamericannews.com/us-politics/clinton-obama-in-ma-haiti-in-turmoil

This is really, really rich. Here we have the president of the United States and the Special Envoy to Haiti, both in MA campaigning for Martha Coakley, while the situation in Haiti continues to deteriorate by the hour. Instead of helping out the with dire situation that the Haitians are facing, they are in the midst of an important political battle to save the 60th Democrat seat in the US Senate. It appears they view this election as being more important than the Haitians plight.

These are the same liberal Democrats who were very vocal when the situation in New Orleans was bad, but not nearly as bad as the situation in Haiti. As a comparison, let's look at the number of deaths in each one. During Katrina there were 1,800 people that died, a large number for a natural disaster, especially in the United States by any measure. But in Haiti, we're talking about tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of deaths, and many more people that are going to be displaced.

Meanwhile we have the liberal mainstream press praising Obama and his administration for swift action on providing $100 million in aid. Unfortunately, according to many reports, none of that aid has actually reached the Haitian people. I saw a Fox News report today that said it would be Tuesday before some of the emergency items were even being shipped.

Remember during Katrina how George W. Bush and Mike Brown took such a beating by the press and the Democrats? It was unmerciful, even though the overall support was pretty good once the situation on the ground allowed emergency aid to actually get into the hardest hit areas. But even today, we still hear about "Bush's Katrina" as the defining moment of what many of the opposition see as a failed presidency.

So let's get back to Obama and Clinton. In the height of this desperate situation in Haiti, Clinton was in MA today campaigning for Martha Coakley, while at the same time he was denigrating the tea party movement, and trying to paint Scott Brown as some sort of fringe right lunatic. Brown is a career military man who by all measures is a fine outstanding citizen who properly represents his constituency, yet Clinton chose to take the low road. But the question I have is, why would Bill Clinton – the Special Envoy to Haiti – be anywhere except in a control situation of the Haiti disaster. Is Clinton and the Democrats that callous, that insensitive, or that stupid?

As far as Obama goes, he was one of the loudest vocal opponents of Bush during Katrina. So give him credit for taken swift action to pledge $100 million of US taxpayer money as Haiti relief, but there has been no other outward appearance of his involvement with any logistical aspect of the Haiti plan. Nope, he's been meeting behind closed doors with Democrats on the health bill, and planning a trip to MA on Sunday to stump for Coakley.

Where is the hypocrisy? This makes me mad as heck . . . .

Obama's Risky Move To Support Coakley

The Brown vs. Coakley race is stirring a lot of emotions for the Democrats. All week long, the White House took a very arms length approach to the MA special election, and spokesman Robert Gibbs stated several times that the Obama team would not be making an appearance in MA on Coakley's behalf.

That all changed today with Obama planning a campaign visit to MA on Sunday. That follows a robocall today to MA voters today where he is pleading with them to protect the 60th seat in the Senate so they can finish their cram job of healthcare on the American people.

"I rarely make these calls, and I truly apologize for intruding on your day, but I had to talk to you about the election in Massachusetts on Tuesday, because the stakes are so high," Obama opens in his robocall. He then goes on to acknowledge the election results on Tuesday will impact the outcome of the health care bill.

This is a very risky move for the Obama team. All eyes are on this race because it is turning out to be a referendum on the Obama administration, the healthcare debate and the liberal Democrat agenda. If Brown wins – even after Obama weighs in on the election – there will be many Democrat members of Congress looking over their shoulder and rethinking their support of the Obama platform. That's why it is so risky because a Brown victory will turn out to be an Obama defeat.

Even the White House Press Corps is picking up on the importance of this election and the impact it will have on Obama's agenda. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs met a phalanx of questions today on the risky nature of Obama's visit: Video at http://conservativeamericannews.com/us-politics/obamas-risky-move-to-support-coakley

[redcliffsw]

Our Constitution proviided for the state legislatures to elect the Senators until the
17th Amendment was ratified in 1913 for direct election by the voters.

Our Founding Fathers had it right from the beginning.  This a state sovereignty issue
and it's a good time to abolsih the 17th Amendment for direct election of the Senators
so that the state legisltures can once again send the Senators to Washington DC.