David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
Turned already? Has Scott Brown betrayed conservatives after only eighteen days in office? The liberal media certainly wants America to think so. Look at the headlines: New senator helps Democrats advance jobs bill, or, Republican senator sides with Democrats, or, Step toward restoring bipartisanship. Of course, that’s all Reuters and Yahoo.
New Massachusetts senator, Republican Scott Brown
But even FoxNews had it, “Brown Helps Democrats Break GOP Filibuster.” Of course, the liberal Nation bragged, “Scott Brown’s Makeover: No Longer “41,” Now He’s “61.”
And that’s lock-step with Barry “Obama” Soetoro’s desperate call for “bipartisanship.” In spite of the fact that the Democrats had the majority in the House and in the Senate, they weren’t been able to pass the key Communist legislation they crave, so, it must be the Republicans’ fault. That’s what the call for “bipartisanship” means–blame the Republicans. “Bipartisan” is code word for “Democrats have failed, and need Republican votes to pass Communist legislation.”
Now that we have a peculiar move by the new “conservative” hero Scott Brown, it seems that the liberals have a wonderful opportunity to weaken the Republican conservative resolve by calling everything now “bipartisan.” Brown, despite whatever his motives are, has given the liberals exactly what they need, at least in the way of a new propaganda mantra. See? Even the great, heroic Scott Brown, who won a magnificent victory by mouthing conservative values, is already working with the wonderful Democrats. No need to fear. All will be well.
Jobs bill, is it? $15 billion? Why, a drop in the bucket, according to the puerile perspective of Barry boy, who likes to impress everyone with his daring and courage. Spending money, more than anyone in history, faster, more wastefully, aimlessly, and foolishly–this is his way of making history. Add zeroes, more and more. How bold! How grand! What a show! What a man!
Maybe Scott Brown has already played into the Washington game. Mabye he’s not a reliable conservative after all. BadEagle.com never endorsed him, but that wasn’t because of any evidence against him. Yet, considering that soft porn disposition, the same he bequeathed and condoned in his daughter, we really can’t consider him “conservative” now, can we?
In any case, the American people will have to continue to toughen up. Voting people in, voting them out. Indeed, there are too many Republicans in Washington already who are not Republican at all in doctrine or practice. It was never about anything more than their own careerism.
We need a faster, more efficient politician replacement system. There should be more recall and impeachment. In the old 1934 Bureau of Indian Affairs constitutions that were forced on all the plains tribes, there is a provision for recall, at any time, of any leader. A petition is drawn up by someone, and with a required number of signatures, and then there is a general meeting of the tribe, and a new vote on the individual in question. He could remain in, or be voted out, right then and there. Perhaps such a provision is pertinent and workable in a small social circumstance, such as an Indian tribe, but, there seems to be a bit of wisdom in it, after all.
Is Scott Brown a true Republican, let alone “conservative”?
American politicians need to take office with fear, not presumption. It they can’t keep their ideals, much less their words, then they need to pull out. Otherwise, they end up like Schwarzenegger, criticizing Republicans for the same reasons Barry does. And remember, too, that first jobs bill was rejected by Republicans–not because they were interested in cutting wasteful spending, but because Harry Reid cut out their earmarks! Miséricorde!
6 responses so far ↓
1 geronl // Feb 22, 2010 at 11:51 pm
I was never under the illusion that he was a conservative, but his opponent was a daughter of Satan. (See the infamous Curling Iron Case)
The ectasy on the conservative side at his victory worried me. There was even talk of his becoming the GOP nominee! I bet that has been nixed, at least I would hope.
The man helped shephard RomneyCare through the Mass legislature. It is not all that different than ObamaCare and it is already breaking the bank and running off medical specialists.
But is he any less Republican than Lindsay Graham, Arlen Specter, Jim Jeffords, Arnold Swarzenwhatever or Bloomberg-the-fraud?
Okay, that was a bad question. The man will fit in very well with the RINO’s like Olympia Snowe, he is probably more “conservative” than she is. We just don’t really know yet.
In my opinion it wouldn’t really matter if the federal government were constrained to its Constitutional limits. If all it really did were to defend the nation from attack and invasion, collect tarriffs on some imports (I guess that’d be the big issue, tarriff on what if anything and how much) and a few other enumerated duties… how many people would actually run for office?
Heck if it got me some votes for real conservatism I’d support giving more federal lands back to the native tribes and giving them real autonomy. I think that actually is a conservative position, after all.
Good post, by the way, always one of my favorite blogs.
2 David Yeagley // Feb 23, 2010 at 9:00 am
Thanks, Ger. When I saw these headlines last night, I was sick, for about two seconds…
Today the libral media is making Scott Brown into a national hero.
Analysis: Brown revives GOP moderates’ pivot role. Key word there, “analysis.” Yeah, right!
Massachusetts Republican Sen. Scott Brown may have crushed Democrats’ spirits in winning a special election last month, but he’s also helped revive them by providing critical momentum to advance a bipartisan jobs bill that had become entangled in familiar partisan wrangling.
Unifying the country! A hero. Imagine–simply by spending more money, precisely what he promised not to do!
This is the American politician, par excellence.
3 steve // Feb 23, 2010 at 9:42 am
Brown, if he wants to stay in office, must make certain votes that conservatives do not like. The dirty little secret is, the senate leadership probably OK’ed the vote. He probably had to give his word that he would say no ObamaCare and NO! to Cap and Tax. You must admit he is better that Ted “the Murderer” Kennedy.
4 David Yeagley // Feb 23, 2010 at 3:24 pm
I know I’m not terribly disappointed, because it all happened so fast, Brown’s election. I knew little about it, before it happened.
I am, however, quite offended. Is it all about balance?
One thing we know: we cannot depend on Scott Brown. That is the clear, cold evidence. He will never fair better than John McCain in any national election. Moderates are losers. Big time. Thats would include Gingrich, I must say. Talk is nothing.
5 Sioux // Feb 23, 2010 at 6:21 pm
When I saw the picture of Brown with his two scantily clad daughters, that’s when I knew the apples didn’t fall far from the tree. Anyone with children who voluntarily stays in Massachusetts is highly suspect to me considering all of the socialism going on in the politics and education – look at Barney FRank and the Vietnam Veteran, John Kerry. There was no reason to vote with the Dems on the jobs bill. That’s a Dem trick to let their blue dogs put on a show for the Peasants (Bart Stupak comes to mind).
6 David Yeagley // Feb 23, 2010 at 8:17 pm
The Dems have destroyed the concept of “bipartisan.” It means do it their way. This is liberalism–to usurp words, to make them mean what liberals want, not what the words actually mean.
You must log in to post a comment.