Scott Brown's 'tea party' fans feel burned by jobs vote

spike

New Member
I'm not sure what they were hoping for. Something like "Fuck jobs, just vote no on everything whether it makes sense or not".

The new Massachusetts senator crosses the aisle to block a Republican filibuster on a $15-billion jobs bill. His supporters, who used the Internet to rally behind him, now turn on him.

Reporting from Washington - For Scott Brown, it appears that the "tea party" is over.

Literally overnight, the fledgling Republican senator who ended Democrats' filibuster-proof majority by winning a special election in Massachusetts has gone from being the darling of America's conservative activists to being their goat.

Monday night, Brown announced that he would join four other Republicans in voting to block a GOP filibuster and move forward with a $15-billion jobs bill designed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

Almost immediately, the political blogosphere exploded.

Cries of "letdown," "betrayal," "sellout," and "RINO" -- "Republican in name only" -- flew around Twitter. By late Tuesday afternoon, more than 4,200 people had left comments on Brown's Facebook page, most harshly negative. (And liberals engaged in some cyber-schadenfreude at the same time.)

Just five days earlier, Brown had been cheered loudly by conservative activists at a gathering in Washington. He was so warmly received that some in the crowd began suggesting he could be another Ronald Reagan and help usher in a new era of conservatism.

Tea party and other conservative activists felt particularly let down by Brown's Monday vote because many of them had poured money and manpower into his underdog bid to capture the Senate seat long occupied by liberal icon Edward M. Kennedy.

By Monday night, many of his Twitter followers had concluded that a White House run had become out of the question -- even as he entered Day 19 of his Senate tenure.

The fracas served as a reminder of how online grass-roots movements can be a double-edged sword. Brown took advantage of the Internet's exponential power to get the word out and raise money as he campaigned. On Monday, he faced its wrath in real time.

For his part, Brown has maintained since winning the Kennedy seat that his votes would reflect his diverse, liberal-leaning constituency.

Two other northeastern Republicans, Susan Collins and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine, also voted with the Democrats.

"I came to Washington to be an independent voice, to put politics aside, and to do everything in my power to help create jobs for Massachusetts families," Brown said in a statement after the vote. "This Senate jobs bill is not perfect. I wish the tax cuts were deeper and broader, but I voted for it because it contains measures that will help put people back to work."

Reid's office said the majority leader had identified Brown as a potential vote last week and spoken to the freshman on the phone. But, said spokesman Jim Manley, "Sen. Reid didn't know how Brown was going to vote" until he voted with the Democrats.

Sissy Willis, a tea party blogger from Chelsea, Mass., who supported Brown's candidacy, said many of her compatriots in the nascent anti-big-government movement were "overreacting."

"They expected him to be a conservative when he's always been an independent," Willis said.

"He's representing his constituents," she said.

Willis said she expected Brown to follow through on trying to block the Democrats' healthcare plan, a signature issue of his campaign.

She compared the mania over Brown to that which surrounded President Obama's campaign, saying that with both, there was an inevitable letdown.

Supporters "weren't using their brains, they were using their hearts," she said. "When he didn't turn out to change the world, they felt betrayed."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-scott-brown24-2010feb24,0,756653.story
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
there's always going to be some disagreement.
you can't please all the people all the time.

He doing what he was sent there for, and it's a shame that some
of the rest of the party is still showing this kind of partisanship.

imo, this legislation was put together strictly to show this.

Most all the Rep.s talked to said this wasn't bad legislation, yet they still
would not vote for it simple because they were shut out of the meetings.

Both sides were wrong in the way it was done, but it's decent legislation I think.
 

spike

New Member
Most all the Rep.s talked to said this wasn't bad legislation, yet they still
would not vote for it simple because they were shut out of the meetings.

I'd be interested in what makes you think they were shut out of meetings? I'm not finding anything on that.

Shouldn't they be voting on what's best for America instead of playing games?

Here's another example of them playing games on this one.

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/02/who-switched-on-the-jobs-bill.php
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
I'd be interested in what makes you think they were shut out of meetings? I'm not finding anything on that.

Shouldn't they be voting on what's best for America instead of playing games?

what makes me think?...you didn't read what I wrote very well.
I said, "they said", not I think. (maybe I should have used more quotations)
and, yes, to that second part.
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
I just saw some interviews.

Not so much shut out of meetings, but that they weren't allowed to bring
any amendments mostly it seems, or have open discussion/debate.
 

valkyrie

Well-Known Member
There are going to be extremes on both ends of the political spectrum. This is just one of those. They don't like President Barak Obama so they want to oppose everything that's up for a vote that he favors.
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
don't remember if I said it here, but anyway...

seems the problem isn't so much with the goal Obama wants as it is
'How' he wants it. (and how to get there)

imo on some things the ends may justify the means, but not on everything,
and not on the so-called healthcare thing.

imo also, I personally don't care about if it's bi-partisan or not, but it does
have to be done Right, and openly, and *gasp (somewhat polled)
yep, there, I said it, and I very much dislike polls, but
they are going to have to show somehow, that they've got the bases covered,
and present it in a way people can understand exactly how it will affect them
personally, then if they Still don't want it, do different.
ATM they seem to be 'one-tracked', and that ain't working.

Obama said that basically how he was going to do it, when he was campaigning,
but like most of his rhetoric, he's reneged again.
 

spike

New Member
imo also, I personally don't care about if it's bi-partisan or not, but it does
have to be done Right, and openly, and *gasp (somewhat polled)
yep, there, I said it, and I very much dislike polls, but
they are going to have to show somehow, that they've got the bases covered,
and present it in a way people can understand exactly how it will affect them
personally, then if they Still don't want it, do different.
ATM they seem to be 'one-tracked', and that ain't working.

Obama said that basically how he was going to do it, when he was campaigning,
but like most of his rhetoric, he's reneged again.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. It has been done fairly openly. I would like to hear exactly how he's "reneged". He's actually been covering his campaign promises pretty well.

Obama doesn't have a ton of control over how the bill shapes up. That's mostly up to congress. The main problems we have at the moment are lobbying money and having congress members beholden to special interests, fear tactics lies and distortions pushed by those special interests, and republicans that are afraid to back anything at the moment no matter how much it will benefit the citizens.
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure what you're saying here. It has been done fairly openly. I would like to hear exactly how he's "reneged". He's actually been covering his campaign promises pretty well.

ok, well if you are happy, I'm happy.
I'd just a soon have a lame duck atm.
 

valkyrie

Well-Known Member
don't remember if I said it here, but anyway...

seems the problem isn't so much with the goal Obama wants as it is
'How' he wants it. (and how to get there)

imo on some things the ends may justify the means, but not on everything,
and not on the so-called healthcare thing.

imo also, I personally don't care about if it's bi-partisan or not, but it does
have to be done Right, and openly, and *gasp (somewhat polled)
yep, there, I said it, and I very much dislike polls, but
they are going to have to show somehow, that they've got the bases covered,
and present it in a way people can understand exactly how it will affect them
personally, then if they Still don't want it, do different.
ATM they seem to be 'one-tracked', and that ain't working.

Obama said that basically how he was going to do it, when he was campaigning,
but like most of his rhetoric, he's reneged again.
It's been open, but people don't pay much attention until the media fluffs it all up (or someone makes up crazy shit like the "death panels"). In some ways I wish it had been televised on every station, every evening, because most of the Republicans stuck their heads in the sand and wouldn't participate. They forgot that they are not needed to pass the bill.

I do not care for the way the health care bill has shaped up. The US government has no right to force me to buy a product from a private company unless they are offering an alternative.
 

spike

New Member
The public option has a decent chance of still being included. 37 or so senators now are signing on to it.

I still think going the route of making medicare available to anyone that wants it would have been a good way to go. Just the wording would have solved the problem with some people screaming "Socialized medicine, oh noes!". Instead it would have been "Medicare, I'm on Medicare. It's great. Just keep that socialized medicine away from me!". :laugh:
 

spike

New Member
28abelson-grfk-popup.gif


http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2010/02/28/weekinreview/28abelson-grfk.html?ref=weekinreview
 

valkyrie

Well-Known Member
I think C-Span would beg to differ.

I haven't been able to find much on their website either, but OK, if you say so.
I'm sorry, cat... I didn't want you to take my word for it. I've been reading articles online (I don't watch TV) about the health care bill. That information has to come from somewhere. If it were as closed as some say I would not know what I know. I would not have been able to follow the debate and how politicians are voting. That's all I was saying.

C-SPAN: Have you checked here? http://www.c-span.org/
There are broadcasts available.
"Health Insurance Experts Discuss Health Care Reform
Today

Health policy experts and health insurance leaders spoke at the America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) 2010 National Policy Forum. Experts discussed the state of health care reform and its implications for the nation.

Later, Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who also spoke at the event, is expected to outline 2011 FY HHS programs before a Senate Appropriations Subcmte. "

Here's another...
"President Obama Remarks on Health Care (March 8, 2010)
With the White House asking Congress to pass health care legislation quickly, Pres. Obama took his message to Glenside, PA. Recently he called on the House and Senate to schedule votes in the next few weeks. He repeated his call for Congress to take an up or down vote on health care legislation, and said again that “the time for talk is over
.”
 

valkyrie

Well-Known Member
The public option has a decent chance of still being included. 37 or so senators now are signing on to it.

I still think going the route of making medicare available to anyone that wants it would have been a good way to go. Just the wording would have solved the problem with some people screaming "Socialized medicine, oh noes!". Instead it would have been "Medicare, I'm on Medicare. It's great. Just keep that socialized medicine away from me!". :laugh:
I always found the videos online to be hilarious when someone in the audience (or the politician that is the current Tea Baggers' target) asks the Tea Baggers if any of them are on Medicare. Most raise their hands. :lol: But none of the Tea Baggers are smart enough to figure it out. I don't know which is funnier: the clueless Tea Baggers or the irony by itself. :evilgrin:
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
C-SPAN: Have you checked here? http://www.c-span.org/
There are broadcasts available.
"Health Insurance Experts Discuss Health Care Reform
Today

Health policy experts and health insurance leaders spoke at the America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) 2010 National Policy Forum. Experts discussed the state of health care reform and its implications for the nation.

Later, Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who also spoke at the event, is expected to outline 2011 FY HHS programs before a Senate Appropriations Subcmte. "
I don't see the transcript anywhere, where he met with the insurance execs. yeaterday.
Have you seen it?
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
yeah they had one yesterday.
I saw the protest outside by seiu, and Fox covered a little of it.
see
See you didn't even know.
No publicity, coverage, transparency...nothing.
Just more backdoor dealing.
 

valkyrie

Well-Known Member
yeah they had one yesterday.
I saw the protest outside by seiu, and Fox covered a little of it.
see
See you didn't even know.
No publicity, coverage, transparency...nothing.
Just more backdoor dealing.
I didn't know because I worked until 1am yesterday (normal work day is 9am - 6pm). :D Sometimes I'm too busy and have to catch up over a couple of days.

If Fox covered it then there should be something there. Do you have anything?

From NPR.org there's these...
Obama Takes Health Care Overhaul Push To Missouri by The Associated Press March 10, 2010
Obama Stumps For Health Overhaul, Ripping Insurers by Scott Hensley March 08, 2010
Protesters, Including 'Vampire Squid,' Picket Health Insurers' Confab by Julie Rovner March 09, 2010

I don't think the Insurance Companies would have met him in an open forum, nor televised.
 
Top