MA Senate ad paints Coakley as tax-and-spend liberal

posted at 10:55 am on January 8, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

In most places in this country, getting painted as a tax-and-spend liberal would create problems for a politician. But what if that politician wants to follow in the footsteps of one of the nation’s biggest tax-and-spender, Ted Kennedy, in deep-blue Massachusetts? The free-market group American Future Fund has an ad buy in the state informing voters of Martha Coakley’s desire to hike taxes and spend more taxpayer money, while Scott Brown represents a direction that Massachusetts has rejected almost since the original Boston Tea Party. Click the image to watch:

Issues comparison.

Scott Brown supports an across the board tax cut. Martha Coakley says quote “we need to get taxes up.”

Brown has pledged not to raise taxes. Coakley says she will.

Brown opposed the two trillion dollar congressional spending spree that’s putting us deeper in debt. Coakley supports massive new spending and the tax increases to pay for it.

Call Martha Coakley and tell her we can’t afford more taxes.

American Future Fund is responsible for the content of this ad.

The question will be whether the Tea Party sensibility that started in Massachusetts over 230 years ago has rekindled at all. So far, Brown seems to be doing well running on an explicitly Republican platform of lower taxes and spending — but he still trails Coakley by a narrow margin with less than two weeks to go. Will the same voters who routinely sent Kennedy and Kennedy wannabe John Kerry to the US Senate for more than a generation find an appeal in free-market, lower-government philosophy? The fact that the race is as close as it is should be a sign of deep concern for Democrats.

Meanwhile, kudos to Brown for actually running as a Republican in Massachusetts, rather than Democrat Lite. I’d bet that he had more than one advisor cautioning against such an approach.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Brown vs. ****. Real tough choice.

LibTired on January 8, 2010 at 10:59 AM

It’s man-up time for Massachusetts; either they continue assisting the death spiral of their state and nation or they come to their senses.

Bishop on January 8, 2010 at 11:00 AM

Why not run against ObamaCare and use RomneyCare as your basis? This ad is same old, same old, and likely to be tuned out.

changer1701 on January 8, 2010 at 11:00 AM

I don’t particularly like this. The last time a local race got nationalized, the voters were turned off and we lost in the end.

I think Brown ought to put a moratorium on crap like this. He hasn’t run a single attack ad (as far as I know) and he doesn’t seem to want to start now.

If you want to give Brown money for outreach and GOTV, that’s one thing, but don’t try to run his campaign for him.

KingGold on January 8, 2010 at 11:00 AM

Aren’t they trying to push BOCare through before Mr. Brown becomes Senator Brown?

txag92 on January 8, 2010 at 11:00 AM

Good for Brown!

Brown is planting a “seed” in MA that Romney had forgotten while Republican, same tradition followed by Arnie the Gubernator in California.

It’s about time to be UNBASHED of Republican and Conservative principles.

Whatever happens, Brown will truly be remembered as one of the champions of Free Market in the deep blue socialist state of MA (with some help from Romney!)

TheAlamos on January 8, 2010 at 11:01 AM

One advisor says Brown keeps calling her “OCoakley”. He’s trying to get his bald mug on CBS again.

Marcus on January 8, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Brown can win if he gets the independent voters, who number more than half of all registered voters, to turn out.

DrW on January 8, 2010 at 11:02 AM

Aren’t they trying to push BOCare through before Mr. Brown becomes Senator Brown?

txag92 on January 8, 2010 at 11:00 AM

The election is on the 19th, and I think the Senate reconvenes in mid-month. It would be tight, especially if a few of the GOP senators started to slow things down.

Wethal on January 8, 2010 at 11:02 AM

The election is on the 19th, and I think the Senate reconvenes in mid-month. It would be tight, especially if a few of the GOP senators started to slow things down.

Wethal on January 8, 2010 at 11:02 AM

I recommend the Jim Ignatowski method: “Whaaaaaaat doooooeessssss a yellllllloooooooow liiiiiight meannnnnn?”

WashJeff on January 8, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Donated to Brown’s campaign the other day. Hope he eeks it out! I’ll support anyone who campaigns (and governs) as a true conservative Republican.

The NY Times wrote about this saying that it will be the first test of the direction the elections will be heading. They must have forgotten about NJ and Virginia.

NYconservative on January 8, 2010 at 11:06 AM


One advisor says Brown keeps calling her “OCoakley”. He’s trying to get his bald mug on CBS again.

Marcus on January 8, 2010 at 11:01 AM

you are an idiot. It isn’t Jerry Brown it is Scott Brown. he has a full head of hair and is about 20ish years younger.

Ricki on January 8, 2010 at 11:07 AM

I love the idea of trying to tap into MA’s formitive roots. It may not work, but run as a conservative on principles that this country was founded on and hope that the people come to their senses.

search4truth on January 8, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Aren’t they trying to push BOCare through before Mr. Brown becomes Senator Brown?

txag92 on January 8, 2010 at 11:00 AM

I wonder if the Dems would do something to not seat him until after the vote. Would they be so brazen?

WashJeff on January 8, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Meanwhile, kudos to Brown for actually running as a Republican in Massachusetts, rather than Democrat Lite. I’d bet that he had more than one advisor cautioning against such an approach.

Is that why Steele and the RNC are paying him no mind? He’s not a liberal go-along-to-get-along “Republican” that the RNC keeps foisting on the party?

highhopes on January 8, 2010 at 11:08 AM

I wonder if the Dems would do something to not seat him until after the vote. Would they be so brazen?

WashJeff on January 8, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Yes.

Knucklehead on January 8, 2010 at 11:09 AM

Brown has to somehow thwart SEIU from reviving all the dead people. The only signs I’ve seen (all outside of Boston) are all Scott Brown signs. If we can keep his momentum going – which includes conservative blogs – (which really started the momentum) I think he has a chance for a Tsunami. 11 days to go.

Jane on January 8, 2010 at 11:10 AM

I love the idea of trying to tap into MA’s formitive roots.
search4truth on January 8, 2010 at 11:07 AM

As someone who loves American History, I like that to. A little slogan like, “This is where the fight for liberty started over 2 centuries ago, and this is where it will start again!”

WashJeff on January 8, 2010 at 11:10 AM

I wonder if the Dems would do something to not seat him until after the vote. Would they be so brazen?

That’s my biggest fear too.

Jane on January 8, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Jane on January 8, 2010 at 11:10 AM

When you go to vote be on the look out for people named “Pookie”.
/sarc

milwife88 on January 8, 2010 at 11:11 AM

The question will be whether the Tea Party sensibility that started in Massachusetts over 230 years ago has rekindled at all.

Good point, Ed. Maybe they just need to be reminded of that great bit of history. Something to be proud of then and now.

Extrafishy on January 8, 2010 at 11:12 AM

I’m guessing the Democrats are huddling today in Boston and preparing a riproaring set of nasty attack ads on Scott Brown that will start airing shortly. This is what they did to Mitt Romney in the last 3 weeks when he ran against Ted Kennedy and appeared to be gaining. They will lie through their teeth about Brown if thery have to. They will paint him as a dangerous right-winger who wants to send women to back-alley abortionists and send black people back into slavery. They will Photoshop pictures of him with George Bush. Brown will have to spend so much time trying to refute the lies that he will lose all the momentum he has picked up. And enough voters will get confused or disillusioned that they will either stay home or vote for Coakley.

rockmom on January 8, 2010 at 11:13 AM

One advisor says Brown keeps calling her “OCoakley”. He’s trying to get his bald mug on CBS again.

Marcus on January 8, 2010 at 11:01 AM

you are an idiot. It isn’t Jerry Brown it is Scott Brown. he has a full head of hair and is about 20ish years younger.

Ricki on January 8, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Thought Marcus was making a joke about Steve Schmidt . . . (his constant “Palin was not ready for the debates, she kept calling him O’Biden” yadda yadda)

Firefly_76 on January 8, 2010 at 11:14 AM

I wonder if the Dems would do something to not seat him until after the vote. Would they be so brazen?

WashJeff on January 8, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Hopefully the GOP would use every possible procedural delay to grind the Senate to a halt until they seat him.

pedestrian on January 8, 2010 at 11:14 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvn-tBeLpCk

Iggy

alexwest on January 8, 2010 at 11:15 AM

There are still too many people who in MA who are convinced that voting for a Republican is tantamount to voting for the Klan.

mankai on January 8, 2010 at 11:18 AM

Ricki on January 8, 2010 at 11:07 AM

I was wondering what the dude was talking about…glad you cleared that up for me.

BTW, for the first time in my life I have contributed to a political candidate, Scott Brown. and I live in New Orleans.

I hope more of you will do the same!

lukespapa on January 8, 2010 at 11:18 AM

I’ve attended 3 tea parties in MA – the first on April 15th in Worcester was huge – for MA. Deval Patrick is as unpopular as any Governor can be. But the state is full of democrat special interests. They may vote, but I don’t know any entrenched democrat who is actually happy about Coakley.

Jane on January 8, 2010 at 11:19 AM

If Brown could get an absentee ballot out here to IA, I’ll vote.

Someone has to halp the RNC won’t and the ACORNs will have busses runnin from Conn. and Maine.

Supposed to be 30 BELOW ZERO tonight! I hope Al Gores’ warm.
If i ever see that fat, pretentious bag of used dog food I’ll let a little air outta…. Oh never mind just blowin off steam!

dhunter on January 8, 2010 at 11:19 AM

I don’t particularly like this. The last time a local race got nationalized,

Exactly, don’t nationalize local elections… especially in off cycle elections…

ninjapirate on January 8, 2010 at 11:20 AM

Thought Marcus was making a joke about Steve Schmidt . . . (his constant “Palin was not ready for the debates, she kept calling him O’Biden” yadda yadda)

Firefly_76 on January 8, 2010 at 11:14 AM

OF COURSE THAT’S WHAT MARCUS IS SAYING!

Ricki is the idiot.

jay12 on January 8, 2010 at 11:21 AM

Could it be the case that Massachusetts folk were more in love with the Camelot myth than with Ted’s tax and spend policies?

EnglishMike on January 8, 2010 at 11:21 AM

Did Steele and Palin get asked to stay out of this? Campaign chest wise, the last numbers I saw showed Coakley with a ~4:1 edge. Still, the poll gap is down from 20+ points to 2-5. Very encouraging but time is running out.

GnuBreed on January 8, 2010 at 11:21 AM

Please do not nationalize this race. Everyone who is not from MA has to stay away.

One of the things helping Brown right now is that he is an outsider to the DC GOP. So much so that they will not give him any support. This negative attack could hurt Brown more than help him.

SED on January 8, 2010 at 11:22 AM

One advisor says Brown keeps calling her “OCoakley”. He’s trying to get his bald mug on CBS again.

Marcus on January 8, 2010 at 11:01 AM

you are an idiot. It isn’t Jerry Brown it is Scott Brown. he has a full head of hair and is about 20ish years younger.

Ricki on January 8, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Oh, go watch Allah’s last night Quote of the Day and get back to me. Ed’s inclusion of “some advisors aren’t happy he’s running as a Republican” made me think of the adorable Steve Schmidt, RINO-candidate-creator extraordinaire.

Marcus on January 8, 2010 at 11:22 AM

I’m guessing the Democrats are huddling today in Boston and preparing a riproaring set of nasty attack ads on Scott Brown that will start airing shortly. This is what they did to Mitt Romney in the last 3 weeks when he ran against Ted Kennedy and appeared to be gaining. They will lie through their teeth about Brown if thery have to. They will paint him as a dangerous right-winger who wants to send women to

back-alley abortionists and send black people back into slavery. They will Photoshop pictures of him with George Bush. Brown will have to spend so much time trying to refute the lies that he will lose all the momentum he has picked up. And enough voters will get confused or disillusioned that they will either stay home or vote for Coakley.

rockmom on January 8, 2010 at 11:13 AM

\
That used to work, but in todays climate that may be just what Brown needs.

All he has to say is “look, the liars are lying about me now! Please for the sake of your kids and grandkids send someone to D.C. who is honest and will not lie to the voters! Someone who will help return the process to the honest hardworking citizens not just lie cheat and steal from them!”

dhunter on January 8, 2010 at 11:24 AM

dhunter writes:

If Brown could get an absentee ballot out here to IA, I’ll vote.

You can do the next best thing by going to http://www.brownforussenate.com/ and supporting the campaign.

The Democrat gets massive funding from the national party, unions (SEIU, ec) and other ACORN-types.

Scott is funded by individuals who want a change in their government, not more of the same.

KingGold: the attack ad was run by outsiders WITHOUT Brown’s knowledge of approval. He has asked that they stop running the ad. His campaign has been positive, not negative.

sultanp on January 8, 2010 at 11:25 AM

While this would be a great pickup, we have to remember this is the swimmers old seat. Massachusetts is about as liberal gets.

Howcome on January 8, 2010 at 11:28 AM

C’mon, Massachusetts. Wake up! It’s the 21st century. The Kennedys are so 20th century. Bury Coakley with Teddy.

BuckeyeSam on January 8, 2010 at 11:29 AM

Two things …

1. Never bet on the New Orleans Saints.

2. Never bet on a Mass Republican.

That is all.

HondaV65 on January 8, 2010 at 11:29 AM

I already have Senator Brown representing me, unfortunately.

KeepOhioRed on January 8, 2010 at 11:30 AM

The question will be whether the Tea Party sensibility that started in Massachusetts over 230 years ago has rekindled at all.

Massachusetts has had not one but two tax revolts in the recent past. Proposition 2-1/2 capped property taxes at 2-1/2% and is still in effect. A few years ago the voters passed another proposition that cut state income taxes (the legislature brazenly ignored it).

Massachusetts voters also elected an unbroken string of Republican governors over 20 year from Dukakis to Patrick. The state is capable of electing Brown. Please support his campaign if you are able.

cool breeze on January 8, 2010 at 11:35 AM

But if Brown wins by less than 20% he will be tied up in the democratic courts with charges of election fraud.

GaltBlvnAtty on January 8, 2010 at 11:39 AM

When you go to vote be on the look out for people named “Pookie”.
/sarc

milwife88 on January 8, 2010 at 11:11 AM

Hey! Just because my husband looks and acts like a hitman… ;)

pookysgirl on January 8, 2010 at 11:42 AM

Please do not nationalize this race. Everyone who is not from MA has to stay away.

Yeah? Tell that to ACORN…and the buses full of Dem “voters” that will be swarming into Mass. in a few weeks.

rvastar on January 8, 2010 at 11:44 AM

This just in..MA to change election law and just give the seat to The Swimmer’s widow because she knows what the Cape Cod Orca would have wanted…/s

Caper29 on January 8, 2010 at 11:44 AM

Scott Brown is becoming pivotal to the future of this country.

http://www.brownforussenate.com/

notagool on January 8, 2010 at 11:48 AM

Will the same voters who routinely sent Kennedy and Kennedy wannabe John Kerry to the US Senate for more than a generation find an appeal in free-market, lower-government philosophy?

Not bloody likely. The state that threw the very first Tea Party is now all too willing to kiss the king’s a$$.

UltimateBob on January 8, 2010 at 11:56 AM

It’s just like with our local government here in D.C. but at the state level, Massachusetts has been run into the ground for so long by the democrat establishment that has monopolized the state and sucked the lifeblood out of it they don’t know anything else. Virginia has shown signs of intelligence by getting rid of that idiot Kaine as governor and electing Bob McDonnell. Now they need to flush out Webb and Warner. And maybe there’s still hope for Maryland getting rid of that crook they have as governor. Any place with a democrat monopoly is corrupt and mismanaged.

mozalf on January 8, 2010 at 11:57 AM

I just emailed all my friends and those on the local Repub mailing list and told them to “Put your money where your mouth is” and donate to Scott Brown. I’m unemployed and I’m so concerned about America’s future that I managed to scrape up $100 to give. How about you?

ksm on January 8, 2010 at 12:00 PM

rvastar on January 8, 2010 at 11:44 AM

I agree. What is this crap that we’re supposed to “stay away”? This is for the U.S. Senate who is making laws for all of us, not just for MA. I can’t vote but I can have an opinion and root for who I would like to win. What’s wrong with that?

gatorfanatic on January 8, 2010 at 12:03 PM

I don’t particularly like this. The last time a local race got nationalized

Exactly, don’t nationalize local elections… especially in off cycle elections…

ninjapirate on January 8, 2010 at 11:20 AM

As long as the votes of any US Senator from another state have an effect on MY life and MY livelihood, I see no problem nationalizing the race.

UltimateBob on January 8, 2010 at 12:03 PM

gatorfanatic on January 8, 2010 at 12:03 PM

You beat me by seconds with a similar comment. :-)

I’m glad that some of us agree.

UltimateBob on January 8, 2010 at 12:05 PM

I hope Brown has another horse to ride in this race. There’s got to be something else the voters in MA are interested in. Like jobs.

Kissmygrits on January 8, 2010 at 12:06 PM

Hayworth Gearing Up For Senate Race

Ex-Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R) is seriously exploring a bid against Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), according to sources with knowledge of his plans.

commodore on January 8, 2010 at 12:08 PM

Hi UltimateBob, I think there’s a lot who agree.
One other thing, I don’t see supporters of Scott Brown saying stay away. People from MA are welcoming contributors. I contributed. I seriously doubt my contribution will make someone who is going to vote for Scott Brown change their mind.

gatorfanatic on January 8, 2010 at 12:22 PM

Brown’s secret weapon is Mah-tha, she gives me the Hillary vibe.

Little Boomer on January 8, 2010 at 12:28 PM

Very well-produced ad. This guy really knows what he’s doing. Maybe it’s for the best that the RNC isn’t doing anything to “help” his campaign.

As for the content of the commercial: MA, like every other state in the union, has only a small minority of committed Communist voters. They elected Teddy IN SPITE of his politics, not because of them.

The Kennedy Regime was based on the legacy of John F. — the second-most conservative President of the past hundred years. Teddy rode on his dead brother’s coattails and a wildly over-milked public sympathy. Coakley is too far removed to benefit from that.

logis on January 8, 2010 at 12:31 PM

It’s man-up time for Massachusetts; either they continue assisting the death spiral of their state and nation or they come to their senses.

Bishop on January 8, 2010 at 11:00 AM

It is so far beyond my comprehension, why people would appeal to tax, and spend politicians? Gluttons for punishment? Everyone is on an entitlement program in this state? I don’t get it?

I do however remember, when the Obama’s were on Martha’s Vineyard last summer, a news crew went around asking residents how they liked having the Obama’s there? No one was rude, but there were those who LOVED them, but there were plenty who voiced their discontent with the President. They did NOT like where he was taking the country. I think, based on the narrow gap between the two running for Kennedys seat…that a lot of them are discontent with the tax, and spend crap. The bigger question is….are there enough of them, to take the seat away from a Democrat?

capejasmine on January 8, 2010 at 12:32 PM

The point of asking not to nationalize the election is prevent it from becomig some national media tsunami. The instant it does; the Dem machine will be galvanized and Scott Brown will not have a chance.

Being low key and just focusing on the jobs issue has brought Brown into single digits. I thinkIf you want to donate, go for it. However, the worst thing that could happen is stopping the momentum by linking Brown to the DC machine. The people of MA hate the image of the national GOP.

SED on January 8, 2010 at 12:36 PM

kissmygrits: Don’t worry. Brown has jobs covered along with his positions on healthcare, cap-and-trade, defense, etc.

Many, many horses.

sultanp on January 8, 2010 at 12:40 PM

I’m still flabbergasted by this section of The New York Times article linked in the earlier “Headlines” thread about this contest:

“The poll that suggested Ms. Coakley’s lead was narrowing, which was conducted by Rasmussen Reports and does not meet the polling standards of The New York Times because it relied on automated telephone calls, suggested Mr. Brown had strikingly strong support among independent voters.”

The New York Times believes that they have certain standards for polling, but what they have are old habits. The Rasmussen Reports polling organization is clearly and constantly more accurate than The Times’ polling attempts, yet The Times believes that Rasmussen is beneath their standards.

The late Willaim Safire had a memorable phrase that would describe The Times in this situation: “effete, impudent snobs.”

Emperor Norton on January 8, 2010 at 12:44 PM

Republicans in Mass do poorly, but anti-tax referenda do well. If Brown make the election an anti-tax referendum he may do well.

pedestrian on January 8, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Don’t watch much of the Boston teevee, so I haven’t seen this ad, or any of Brown’s own ads. But I heard one of his radio spots this morning and was very impressed.

No wonder the Masshole Dems are quaking in their Birkenstocks.

Del Dolemonte on January 8, 2010 at 1:07 PM

I’ve donated to Brown. We all should. Even if he doesn’t win, the money flowing in will hopefully send a powerful message of its own.

pjaromin on January 8, 2010 at 1:10 PM

I’m still flabbergasted by this section of The New York Times article linked in the earlier “Headlines” thread about this contest:

“The poll that suggested Ms. Coakley’s lead was narrowing, which was conducted by Rasmussen Reports and does not meet the polling standards of The New York Times because it relied on automated telephone calls, suggested Mr. Brown had strikingly strong support among independent voters.”

The New York Times believes that they have certain standards for polling, but what they have are old habits. The Rasmussen Reports polling organization is clearly and constantly more accurate than The Times’ polling attempts, yet The Times believes that Rasmussen is beneath their standards.

The late Willaim Safire had a memorable phrase that would describe The Times in this situation: “effete, impudent snobs.”

The only “polling standard” the NY Fishwrap employs is to always sample 14% more Democrats than Republicans.

For them to rag on Rasmussen for “automated telephone polling” is BS. I was telephone-polled by Rasmussen 3 years ago and it was very well done.

Del Dolemonte on January 8, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Yes but MA likes the big tax and spend type candidate.

FireBlogger on January 8, 2010 at 1:14 PM

Meanwhile, kudos to Brown for actually running as a Republican in Massachusetts, rather than Democrat Lite. I’d bet that he had more than one advisor cautioning against such an approach.

Why not? When someone yells “Take back the Party!” couldn’t they be referring to the Democratic Party as well?

We could take a leaf out of Acorn’s book and all register as Democrats, and then turn the Democratic Party into the Republican Party — as much as one can, given that the Democrats have an unerasable history of being pro-slavery.

unclesmrgol on January 8, 2010 at 1:15 PM

In order to pay for all the liberal programs and the expansion of those on the government payroll, I propose we the people require anyone who wants to be a politician to have to pay a special “Politician Tax” on their income at the percentage rate of the National Debt to GDP. In addition, for each law or bill proposed by a politician there should be an additional tax or fee based on their income at the percentage rate the legislation, once passed, will add to the current budget. Maybe then, we can get back to responsible government which is for the benefit of all Americans.

wtng2fish on January 8, 2010 at 1:47 PM

I propose we the people require anyone who wants to be a politician to have to pay a special “Politician Tax” on their income at the percentage rate of the National Debt to GDP.
wtng2fish on January 8, 2010 at 1:47 PM

Um, how about we first try to get politicians to pay their taxes AT ALL??

logis on January 8, 2010 at 1:59 PM

Apparently push polling against Brown has begun:

Jane on January 8, 2010 at 2:04 PM

His campaign got his photo up on the special elections wikipedia page now. Before he was just a silhouette no photo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_special_election_in_Massachusetts,_2010

Dr Evil on January 8, 2010 at 2:19 PM

I get the impression that MA is pretty sick of more and more taxes. Some tax relief would be a good message for Brown to drive home these last few days. The Dem insiders there will stop at very little to manipulate outcomes their way. But, maybe the end of the Kennedy dynasty will slowly turn things around. Events there could continue to slowly eat away at the establishment. Let’s hope.

jeanie on January 8, 2010 at 3:08 PM

It is dangerous for republicans to campaign on a theme of promising to reduce taxes. I think the damage is done and it is an almost certainty that there will be tax increases ahead. I think the democrats understand this and are almost giddy at the prospect of republicans being forced to do what Obama has chosen to do – completely lie in order to get elected and then go back on the promises once in office. Republicans need to find a way to avoid the trap. It has hurt the democrats and it will hurt republicans.

Taxes will be necessary. The important point to highlight is that if democrats maintain control of the government we will need even more, and yet more, and then more taxes. Republicans must argue on the subject of the magnitude not the existence of the taxes as we go forward.

tartan on January 8, 2010 at 3:29 PM

I live in Texas and I contributed to Scott Brown…we need all we can get…

KILL THE BILL…

Ltlgeneral64 on January 8, 2010 at 5:13 PM

Let’s stop reading & commenting and send Brown some money. I made a $35 contribution a few hours ago, and I live in Illinois.

Owen Glendower on January 8, 2010 at 10:03 PM