Massachusetts voters decided, for the first time in almost 40 years, to send Republican representation to Washington in the form of Scott Brown, R-Wrentham. This was no ordinary race, mind you, as this is the very seat that our venerable statesman, Edward Kennedy, held for almost 50 years. If there is anyone more dissimilar to that great man, I would be surprised.
How did this happen? Sure, Martha Coakley ran a lousy campaign, which even the assistance of Barak Obama could not save. But this race was more than that. It was also about preserving a Democratic majority in Washington, as well as passing health care reform. Ted was indisputably popular, yet Brown is almost his exact opposite. He has vowed to vote against health care reform, one of Kennedy's lifetime goals. He is also arrogant. In his "Open Letter to the People of Massachusetts" he states, "We can send another (emphasis mine) rubber stamp to Washington or...we can elect an independent voice..." Well, I assume he's speaking of Coakley here, but he appears to also be referring to Kennedy. Brown sits on many key committees, yet I have yet to hear what good his "independent" voice has done for us. Someone needs to tell him that he is no Ted Kennedy!
This election has been labeled a "referendum" not only on the track record of Democrats, but also that of President Barak Obama. People are disappointed with the lack of promised change, they say. So--they elect a Republican? Who has been keeping real health care reform from occurring? The Republicans. Who started both the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Right. Which party has made the health reform bill about Obama, and not health care? Right again.
People blame Obama for making promises he could not keep, yet obstructionism, not lack of effort on his part, has kept real change from taking place. On the other hand, politicians always make promises during election campaigns; why should Obama have been any different? Decades and decades of corruption and ineffectual rule have gotten us to the point we are today. Expecting one man to change it all in a year's time is just plain ridiculous. By the way, do you remember any other President being called on the carpet only one year into a new administration? Perhaps there is more to this "referendum" than meets the eye.
How did this happen? Sure, Martha Coakley ran a lousy campaign, which even the assistance of Barak Obama could not save. But this race was more than that. It was also about preserving a Democratic majority in Washington, as well as passing health care reform. Ted was indisputably popular, yet Brown is almost his exact opposite. He has vowed to vote against health care reform, one of Kennedy's lifetime goals. He is also arrogant. In his "Open Letter to the People of Massachusetts" he states, "We can send another (emphasis mine) rubber stamp to Washington or...we can elect an independent voice..." Well, I assume he's speaking of Coakley here, but he appears to also be referring to Kennedy. Brown sits on many key committees, yet I have yet to hear what good his "independent" voice has done for us. Someone needs to tell him that he is no Ted Kennedy!
This election has been labeled a "referendum" not only on the track record of Democrats, but also that of President Barak Obama. People are disappointed with the lack of promised change, they say. So--they elect a Republican? Who has been keeping real health care reform from occurring? The Republicans. Who started both the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Right. Which party has made the health reform bill about Obama, and not health care? Right again.
People blame Obama for making promises he could not keep, yet obstructionism, not lack of effort on his part, has kept real change from taking place. On the other hand, politicians always make promises during election campaigns; why should Obama have been any different? Decades and decades of corruption and ineffectual rule have gotten us to the point we are today. Expecting one man to change it all in a year's time is just plain ridiculous. By the way, do you remember any other President being called on the carpet only one year into a new administration? Perhaps there is more to this "referendum" than meets the eye.
No comments:
Post a Comment