It isn't every day that I don't have to hold my nose...

While I don't shy away from writing about politics, crass political advocacy is just not my style. Which is why -- despite the fact that I have donated to his campaign twice -- I have refrained until now from writing posts about Scott Brown's candidacy. I find the guy genuinely refreshing, and obviously the Massachusetts voters do too, because while things are still close, it looks as if he has a good chance of actually winning. That's saying something, considering that he's a Republican, and the state is Massachusetts.

Not only is this a crucial race at a crucial time (as it would deny the Democrats their supermajority which they have used to ram through unconstitutional legislation), but Scott Brown's opponent just plain stinks. Martha Coakley is the epitome of an anointed candidate who thinks she should not have to run, and her disgraceful record as District Attorney ought to horrify any libertarian. The sickening litany -- of innocent people sent to prison based on nonsensical "recovered-memory" testimony, including the notorious Amirault/Fells Acres day care case -- is detailed in a piece by Radley Balko which Glenn Reynolds linked. Balko also cites a personal exchange he had with her over the drug issue: she is one of those people who advocates depriving patients of pain-killers lest they become addicted:

I had my own exchange with Coakley in the letters section of The Boston Globe a few years ago over the issue of prescription pain medication. Coakley had told the paper that "accidental addiction" to opiate pain medications such as OxyContin was a common problem among chronic pain patients, despite considerable medical evidence to the contrary. Such wrongheaded statements by law enforcement officials and the policies that go with them are a big reason why doctors have become increasingly reluctant to treat pain patients. Coakley conceded that she's "no medical expert" but then went on to question the body of medical literature showing accidental addiction to be a myth. Coakley cited only her own experience as a DA to contradict the litany of peer-reviewed medical research.
I don't have time to check her record, but I shudder to think what "experience" that might be. Sending doctors to prison, perhaps?

For those who aren't familiar with the Amirault case,
Dorothy Rabinowitz
-- who has written a book on the general subjectWhat does this say about her candidacy? (Ms. Coakley declined to be interviewed.) If the current attorney general of Massachusetts actually believes, as no serious citizen does, the preposterous charges that caused the Amiraults to be thrown into prison--the butcher knife rape with no blood, the public tree-tying episode, the mutilated squirrel and the rest--that is powerful testimony to the mind and capacities of this aspirant to a Senate seat. It is little short of wonderful to hear now of Ms. Coakley's concern for the rights of terror suspects at Guantanamo--her urgent call for the protection of the right to the presumption of innocence.

If the sound of ghostly laughter is heard in Massachusetts these days as this campaign rolls on, with Martha Coakley self-portrayed as the guardian of justice and civil liberties, there is good reason. Coakley is so bad that I would support almost anyone who ran against her -- even someone I didn't like.

But far from being the latter, Scott Brown is a genuinely refreshing candidate. I say this as someone who has become very, very accustomed to holding my nose. The last time was that guy in upstate New York whose name I couldn't remember, who said he was another Reagan but who had all the charm of an embalmed cadaver. Unfortunately, appearances do matter. In order to win, candidates need to demonstrate at minumum that they are living, breathing, human beings. Yet as I say, if an embalmed cadaver were running against Coakley, I would unhesitatingly vote for the embalmed cadaver. But I would of course need to hold my nose.

Well, not this time. Scott Brown both looks good, and sounds good. His background shows him to be a real person and not a professional candidate, and I like his politics:

Brown's opinions on the issues are a mixture of liberal and conservative ideas, which he has called "fiscally conservative and socially conscious."[1]
As to how he looks, I've checked him out. Not only is he no cadaver, he has a genuinely sincere and winning style.

Watch for yourself.

Here he is, with Rudy Giuiliani, speaking about how the "Bank Tax Will Be Paid By The Middle Class":

(Not to complain, but I do think that if he'd gotten Giuliani to wear a dress, the video would get more hits.)

And in this one, "Scott Brown Discusses The Support He Has Received From Everyday Voters"

Well, I am glad to say that in this instance, I am one of those everyday voters. But because I have this blog, I'd like to think I can do a little more than contribute money to help him win.

So at the risk of sounding crassly political, I strongly urge you to help too.

As I say, I try to keep political endorsements to a minimum, and I don't carry on about candidates. But this is an unusual situation. It isn't every day I endorse a candidate (much less ask readers to help), but in all honesty, I can't think of the last time I didn't have to hold my nose.

Please contribute if you can.

UPDATE: For more on Scott Brown, Rick Moran has a fascinating in-depth analysis.

The people of Massachusetts began to realize that sending Scott Brown to the United States Senate is a golden opportunity to let the politicians in D.C. know that they are fed up with a stinking economy, the jobless recovery, the maniacal spending, and the obsessive concentration on a health care reform bill even liberal Massachusettians oppose.

And Coakley played her role as heir apparent to this elitist, liberal legacy perfectly. She rarely campaigned among ordinary voters. She refused to debate. And in the last week, she has all but imploded with a series of gaffes that revealed the candidate to be insensitive, clueless, and not ready for prime time.

Couple that with voters taking a good look at the dynamic Brown, and the 9-point gap in the polls on January 5 has morphed into a 4-point lead by Brown in a Suffolk University poll out Friday. Meanwhile, a Pajamas Media-CrossTarget poll has Brown by a whopping 15 points.

But beyond voters wanting to send a message, there is something else happening in Massachusetts. A new kind of Republican is bidding to redefine the GOP in the Northeast with a message of fiscal discipline and low taxes, but with a "socially conscious" agenda as well.

It's about time for someone to breath new life into the GOP in the moribund Northeast.

Read it all.

MORE: I realize that this is hardly a RAH-RAH post, but "RAH-RAH!" just isn't my style. However, if you want RAH-RAH, check out this video of what was supposed to be a Coakley rally! The RAH-RAHs don't seem to be going her way.

Damn, there are even SEIU supporters for Brown!

(Via Glenn Reynolds.)

posted by Eric on 01.16.10 at 10:32 AM










Comments

This is not the first time there has been an election between the not so hot and the utterly appalling, and it will not be the last.
You made the right decision.

Bleepless   ·  January 17, 2010 9:42 PM

Post a comment


April 2011
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail



Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives



Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits