Today, Brown is Golden

brown

Last Tuesday, the voters of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts sent an incredibly powerful message to the Democrats in Washington that their out-of-control spending and efforts to rush through healthcare legislation will not be tolerated by the electorate. In a stunning upset, Republican Scott Brown defeated his Democratic opponent in the bluest of blue states to capture the United States Senate position left vacant by the passing of the late Ted Kennedy.

Only a year ago pundits across the nation were proclaiming the Republican Party dead in the water — causing many Democrats to feel they had free rein. However, things are about to change in a different direction than anticipated by the president just one year ago.

There’s just no way to oversell this victory. Massachusetts hasn’t fielded a Republican Senator for 31 years. Senator-elect Brown will be the only Republican in the entire state delegation to Congress. Less than a year and a half ago, Barack Obama took Massachusetts by 26 points, which makes Scott Brown’s triumph a 31-point reversal.

Today, many Democrats are rushing in to do damage control — claiming that this was a case of a bad candidate in a challenging local environment, as was also claimed after Republican victories in Virginia and New Jersey earlier this year. However, coming into this race, Martha Coakley was not an unknown commodity who was quickly cast on the most public of stages. Rather, she came into this general election only after having earned her party’s nomination due, in part, to her position as a popular statewide figure who had previously received over 78 percent of the statewide vote earning her the commonwealth’s attorney general position. And she also had one of the strongest political machines in the country at her disposal. No, this was not a case of a bad candidate struggling in a tough local environment. (How anyone could call Massachusetts a tough local environment for a Democrat while maintaining a straight face is beyond me.) This was clearly a rebuke of the Democrats’ national agenda.

And not only did Scott Brown win a political race — he may have helped delay or defeat one of the most dangerous pieces of legislation to sniff passage in decades. And for Democrats who may hold on to the hope that the Massachusetts results were not about the Democrats’ national agenda — they only need to be reminded the Republican candidate Brown was victorious in Ted Kennedy’s own precinct.

I don’t often give advice to my friends across the proverbial political aisle, but I feel compelled to do so today. Democrats need to step back and realize that a wave of populism is taking hold in this country, uniting Democrats, Republicans and Independents alike.

If the fact that over 20 percent of registered Democrats in Massachusetts gravitated to the Republican candidate does not help my Democratic friends come to this realization, nothing will. Just 11 percent of voters in Massachusetts are Republicans. Republicans did not carry this victory. The people of Massachusetts did, people of every political stripe.

Democrats need to immediately suspend debate and votes on healthcare legislation until Scott Brown is seated — as was articulately stated by Democratic Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia. They also need to realize that when polling shows that a mere 38 percent of Americans support that legislation, it is time to make significant changes to their agenda.

It should not be lost on them that the 38 percent number equals former President George W. Bush’s approval at the end of this presidency — a number that Democrats once pointed to as proof that Americans clearly rebuked the policies of his administration past his final day in office.

Three consecutive times now — in the races for Governor in New Jersey and Virginia, and now in Massachusetts — independents have surged against the president and brought the Republican candidate to victory. Now that’s a rebuke!

The results in Massachusetts demonstrate that a tide of real change is finally taking hold in this country — rejecting excessive spending whether it is promoted by Republicans or Democrats. Republicans would be wise to take advantage of this sweeping movement by returning to their party’s roots of promoting a smaller, smarter and more efficient government — a government that is not in the business of running our nation’s healthcare programs.  Working together, holding to Americans’ core principles, and speaking for the people, the Republicans can carry this momentum westward to electoral victory, even in the most blue of states and districts.

  • http://netzero.com Steve Chavez

    BEWARE OF SUDDEN FLOOD OF STIMULUS FUNDS THIS SUMMER JUST IN TIME FOR THE ELECTION!

    The Dems are holding the money, AS PEOPLE ARE STARVING AND LOSING JOBS, HOMES, AND FAMILIES, just so they can “CREATE AND SAVE” jobs and those employed WILL HAVE TO VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT IN ORDER TO RECEIVE MORE FUNDS!

    They will also pass on the bucks to local and state Democrat crony businesspersons so they can brag about the “great work” they are doing. THEY WILL ALSO EMPLOY REPUBLICANS so those votes will also go to a Democrat!

    Brown’s victory was not a landslide and in many areas, he only won by a thousand votes. That’s nothing even with the number of Dem and Indie voters.

    Obama’s constant LIVE appearances are so he can add to his CULT OF FOLLOWERS. If a person shakes his hand, that vote is guaranteed. The audience percentage of votes is voting for him again as they saw “HIM LIVE. I GOT CHILLS!” THE MORE APPEARANCES, THE MORE VOTES!

    So, who is running in your state? In New Mexico, no Republican has announced a run for our three Congressional seats. The two Senate seats are not in play. If your state Republican Party is as ineffective as ours, then Congress will stay in the hands of Nancy Pelosi UNLESS SHE LOSES BUT WHO’S RUNNING AGAINST HER? Haven’t heard have you!!!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/FBastiat FBastiat

    Is Brown really a rebuke?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ygy0HbbKVM8&fe

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/FBastiat FBastiat

    Is Brown really a rebuke?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ygy0HbbKVM8&fe

  • poetcomic1

    WOULD YOU PLEASE STOP SPAMMING THIS THING EVERYWHERE! YOU ARE MAKING REAL ENEMIES!

  • johncarens

    The challenge for Conservative Traditionalists and Republicans will be to properly audit the Brown victory, and apply the results correctly in the upcoming primaries. It has never been more crucial for Conservatives to win these primaries, and to take back control from the squishes that are left over from the long, painful goodbye of Bush, and the McCain disaster.

    Remember, Brown did an oustanding job reading the Massachusetts electorate, and while in sum seems to be conservative, in fine things may be a bit more problematic. But, that having been said, he is the absolute best we could hope for given the circumstances. He has single-handedly pulled our nation back from the cliff (-and, it should be noted, he did it with plainly dealing with specifics of what he intended to do– no banal generalities about "putting people back to work", etc., etc. He said SPECIFICALLY he would be the "41st vote", and that he SPECIFICALLY said hauling terrorists into federal courts was stupid. SPECIFICS, Gentlemen. Specifics.)

    What I mean is this: Let's apply the tactics of Brown nationwide, but tailor the message to get the absolute most articulate CONSERVATIVE elected in each jurisdiction. This can be done, as long as we begin to coalesce around these thoroughgoing conservative traditionalists NOW. In Florida, for example, Crist needs to be shown the door, and Rubio needs to be the primary victor. In Arizona (despite Sarah Palin's disappointing campaign turn) McCain must be primaried out, and JD Hayworth needs the victory. In election after election, we need to make absolutely sure that the most viable CONSERVATIVE candidate wins, and that we begin to rebuild the congress without the likes of a Specter, or a Snowe, or a McCain, or a Graham in the long term. This way, it matters less who the president is (although, a solid Conservative President with a solid Conservative Congress would be great), and an effective, solid conservative majority remains in Washington ad infinitum.

    If CONSERVATIVE Republicans had been in control beginning in 2004, our nation would never have come to this pass. They would have rejected President Bush's overspending, and demanded real cuts in the size, scope and reach of government. This would have lead to even more conservative victories, and we could have built on the solid foundation that Michael Reagan's dad so effectively built. Now, while we have to start at the beginning again, it might well be worth it in the long run.

  • OdieCologne

    False alarm, Democrat light.

    • coyote3

      I fear you may be right. Apparently, conservatives don't run for anything. I haven't see one in long, long, long time. It is an accomplishment, however, if Brown's election will completely derail the healthcare bill. I guess we can be thankful for small things. And no, Bush was not a conservative, and really neither was Reagan.