Scott Brown: I oppose defunding Planned Parenthood

posted at 7:52 pm on March 22, 2011 by Allahpundit

We all understand that primarying him would be a kamikaze mission since at this point he may well be the only Republican in Massachusetts capable of getting elected to the Senate. That knowledge has bought him a wide, wide berth among the base. But I keep thinking — at some point, he’s going to cross a line and they’re going to go full RINO-stomp on him. Not even because they want to. Because they have to.

Is this that line?

US Senator Scott Brown opposes a House Republican plan to cut all federal funding for Planned Parenthood, the womens’ health service provider, and today urged budget negotiators to reach a compromise.

“I support family planning and health services for women,” Brown, a Bay State Republican, said in a statement. “Given our severe budget problems, I don’t believe any area of the budget is completely immune from cuts. However, the proposal to eliminate all funding for family planning goes too far. As we continue with our budget negotiations, I hope we can find a compromise that is reasonable and appropriate.”…

Earlier this month, Brown voted in favor the House GOP proposal that would have made the cuts, though he said at the time that he “would have had different priorities” in cutting spending.

There’s a lot of deliberate ambiguity here, obviously. He’s open to cutting PP’s budget … just not the whole thing. And he’s open to voting for the House GOP’s budget resolutions even when they completely defund PPP … although he’s not happy about it. In fact, the ambiguity goes back to the aftermath of last year’s special election, when he told Barbara Walters that yes, he’s pro-choice, but “I’m against federal funding of abortions.” If federal money went towards PP’s abortion practice, he’d have to vote no, but since it’s earmarked for contraception and unrelated services (which of course frees up other money at PP to apply towards abortions), well, that’s A-OK. Behold the dilemma of a Massachusetts Republican, forever inching his way along a political tightrope.

He’s the third Senate Republican, along with Collins and Murkowski, to come out against defunding PP. Which leaves Boehner … where? If he attaches the PP rider to the next House budget bill and any of these three end up voting against it for that reason, the Democrats will crow about “bipartisan opposition” to the “renegade” House Republicans or whatever. Boehner’s going to have to yank it, right? Or at least split it off into a separate bill and let the Senate shoot it down, which will preserve the viability of the overarching budget bill while giving the base a new reason to be angry at Harry Reid.


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

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Besides, if we’re going to settle for “best we can do” candidates, can we at least get a “best we can do” in regard to their following the laws? Does the Hyde Amendment really mean so little to those who defend Scott Brown that they would dismiss that he is under a strict obligation to defund Planned Parenthood?

RachDubya on March 22, 2011 at 11:31 PM

I should feel strongly about this, but I just don’t. Some things can be reformed. PP is no exception, and it does serve some reasonably good social purposes.

Question is: Can we axe the crap and keep the rest? I doubt it, but then it maybe worth a try.

One Angry Christian on March 22, 2011 at 11:50 PM

No, I think perhaps YOU don’t get it. What has he voted on that actually benefitted us in the end? What battle has he won? Being Scott “41″ Brown did jack for us in the ObamaCare votes, and I am drawing a complete blank on any significant votes on which he differed from a run-of-the-mill democrat.

I hear this a lot. Its simply not true:

By stifling the Democrats in the Senate, his election forced the Dems to use parliamentary tricks, and the Dems numbers plummeted. Plus, it forced them to use two more months off the calender.

He was approached by Obama after the vote to help with immigration and he said no, stifling that agenda item. He ended up voting no on DREAM Act.

He also was a nother key vote in stopping cap and trade from coming to the floor.

He was the decisive vote in killing OMNIBUS bill.

He voted against Elena Kagan.

He stood up for conservative speech and voted against DISCLOSE Act.

He didnt have to but he went to bat for Jan Brewer and Arizona SB 1070 and border security.

He did the same for gun rights after Gabby Giffords shooting.

He’ll never vote for tax increases tax increases.

He opposed civilian trials for terrorists and supports GITMO, and is solid on the war on terror.

Say what you will, he has some bad votes. But he is no Ted Kennedy or Martha Coakley. Its just retarded to state that it would be no different if a Dem were elected, or that he had no impact as 41. Remember before he won Dems were talking health care, immigration, cap and trade and card check.

swamp_yankee on March 22, 2011 at 11:52 PM

PP has to be defunded and flushed. If women need help, go see a doctor.

Mirimichi on March 22, 2011 at 11:55 PM

Rush talked about this topic indirectly today on his show. Apparently census numbers are coming out by cities because he mentioned an article written that blacks make up a smaller percentage of the population in many bigger US cities. The article said there was upward mobility, blacks moving to the suburbs, etc. and just danced around the issue of how many of these black babies actually manage to leave the womb alive. Rush mentioned again the huge % of abortions per pregnancy in the black community. So it is really funny how liberals are destroying their future voting demographic through abortion. The Rabid pro-choice NOW women haven’t connected the dots that abortion is killing future liberal voters.

Scott Brown wasn’t given the opportunity to be the 41st vote to block Obamacare, since they cheated with the rules in how they jammed that sucker down our throats. If I recall, the original Senate bill that passed, was the bill that was passed after he was elected, but not yet seated in the Senate. Then they did that backward move of jamming it through the house with no amendments, and then used reconciliation. So we really can’t blame it on him.

Scott Brown has outlived his usefulness to me. I thoroughly enjoyed poking it in the Dems eye by handing “the Kennedy Seat” over to a republican for the first time since WW2, right? After that, meh. I won’t support him financially for re-election. There are too many target rich opportunities against the 23 Dem senators in 2012, and also removing more RINOS from the Senate. If MA wants Brown back in office and if he wants to keep his sorry butt there, then they have to work that out themselves.

karenhasfreedom on March 23, 2011 at 12:08 AM

Futures prices on Brown’s daughters have dropped considerably with his asking bids down to single digits. A major red flag late in his campaign even if he had passed it as a joke.

We all knew that Brown was only slightly better than AG from Hell Martha Croakley but not much. So, with Brown’s latest weasel position the GOP now has four corners of the major red-light district intersection fully covered if you count the Maine twins and Moocowski.

viking01 on March 23, 2011 at 12:09 AM

swamp_yankee on March 22, 2011 at 11:52 PM

Yep, & Caucusing matters too…

lexhamfox on March 23, 2011 at 12:39 AM

I seriously think Brown was a plant from the start, he is a good looking talker and everybody loved him. When Øbama is done, Brown will be changing course and be the front runner for the New and Improved Communist party, I mean Democrat party.

Should have been clear by the way he talked about his truck, ppl who drive trucks don’t bring it up in every sentence. We really need to get rid of this American Idol fascination. Pretty packages can hide an empty box, or suit. Just sayin.

nwpammy on March 23, 2011 at 12:45 AM

I understand that and if PP merely preformed abortions I would be against them getting any funding but that is not what most people use places like PP for.

lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:45 PM

$125M of “income” from abortions in 2009. One third of their budget is from the United States Government. I don’t particularly care what most people use places like PP for — they obviously live to do abortions. If they want to prove they don’t, then let them spin the abortion factories off as a separate (for profit) business.

Again, money is fungible. If someone told you in 1939 that your tax free contribution to the Nazi pary in Germany wouldn’t be used to kill Jews, what would you tell them?

unclesmrgol on March 23, 2011 at 1:32 AM

while giving the base a new reason to be angry at Harry Reid.

We ar eno longer angry at Reid are anger is starting to be directed at the new speaker…

unseen on March 23, 2011 at 1:56 AM

Abortion is not family planning, it is genocide and should not be funded with taxpayer dollars. If Scott Brown believes in abortion let him donate his personal monies to Planned Parenthood. There are plenty of wealthy individuals in this country that can donate enough money to keep both Planned Parenthood and NPR in business.
And to think that I donated to the Scott Browns campaign – won’t happen again.

kaye on March 23, 2011 at 2:06 AM

I agree that it is not right to have federal dollars fund abortion.

But can we all agree that we have much bigger fish to fry for 2012? I am not saying to support Brown (neither here nor there) but don’t rise to the bait and make this a huge issue.

Economy, Debt, Federal overreach –> important

Abortion, gay marriage –> “whatever” for now.

jlibson on March 23, 2011 at 2:44 AM

The closer our government gets to defending then dehumanizing then advocating, then financing Auschwitz the closer we as citizens of any age move towards that fate. Whether its the bolted killing showers or the curtained killing clinics when convenience rules the day all of us become more readily disposable.

viking01 on March 23, 2011 at 4:47 AM

In Mssachusetts, one of the most leftists states. A state who had a GOP guy take over Kennedy’s seat? And your going to expect much out of him? Lucky to even have that spot.

Ask yourself. Would you rather have a Democrat in that spot or a RINO. I dont even think hes at that point yet.

Blacks mostly being Democrats, favor abortion. Yet since the ruling. They have cut the black population in half themselves by having the most abortions of any race.

Gedge on March 23, 2011 at 6:29 AM

Another reason why I return his postage-paid “begging” letters to him full of my “comments” but NO MONEY !

stenwin77 on March 23, 2011 at 6:34 AM

JLibson (2:44 a.m.), a “whatever” attitude attitude about abortion until the next election means that approximately 3,000 innocent, helpless babies will continue being killed each day. What about them?

Unclesmrgol (1:32 a.m.) is absolutely right — money given to Planned Parenthood is indeed “fungible”: you might think your donation (or tax dollars) would be spent just to keep the lights on, or to pay for some legitimate health service; but even if that were true, that money frees up other money to be spent aborting babies. It’s all tainted, and doesn’t deserve anyone’s support.

By the way, PP’s “Teen Wire” web site has for years encouraged kids to experiment with sex and do as they please, without parental control. PP’s advice is a kid’s dream come true — until it turns into a nightmare of disease, abortion and emotional pain.

KyMouse on March 23, 2011 at 7:02 AM

I think the problem some people have with completely defunding Planned Parenthood is that they do things other than perform abortions.

I do think they have crossed the line and are far too political however and in that sense they have opened themselves up for these cuts.

Many many years ago when I was a college student and on my own for the first time, I went to PP for a medical exam and some medication. It had nothing to do with getting an abortion, I would never do that. But there are people who continue to go to PP for exams and meds and routine problems with their lady parts. That is what makes some people squeamish about totally cutting them off.

Terrye on March 23, 2011 at 7:08 AM

Rush talked about this topic indirectly today on his show. Apparently census numbers are coming out by cities because he mentioned an article written that blacks make up a smaller percentage of the population in many bigger US cities. The article said there was upward mobility, blacks moving to the suburbs, etc. and just danced around the issue of how many of these black babies actually manage to leave the womb alive. Rush mentioned again the huge % of abortions per pregnancy in the black community. So it is really funny how liberals are destroying their future voting demographic through abortion. The Rabid pro-choice NOW women haven’t connected the dots that abortion is killing future liberal voters.

The reason there are less blacks in cities is not because of upward mobility, illegal immigration should have destroyed any notion of that alone, not to mention the current economic situation. The reason that less blacks are in cities is because of gentrification. Its simply becoming too expensive for poor blacks to live in areas that used to be black neighborhoods. All that artificially cheap credit during the housing bubble helped fuel the relocation. If they try to spin it any other way they are just trying to cover up what you can see in pretty much every city.

LevStrauss on March 23, 2011 at 7:09 AM

The GOP will betray you

True_King on March 23, 2011 at 7:11 AM

Speaker B,Sir,
De-fund the abortion part, mandate that PP give women’s health services only.Other services may be of use but provide no money for the killing. Mandate inspections of all PP units and allow states,not the feds to regulate and inspect these places unannounced.Feds can supply the money,states run the show. Brown can say he supported PP and he gets off the hook for a while.

Col.John Wm. Reed on March 23, 2011 at 7:11 AM

He’s the third Senate Republican, along with Collins and Murkowski, to come out against defunding PP. Which leaves Boehner … where? If he attaches the PP rider to the next House budget bill and any of these three end up voting against it for that reason, the Democrats will crow about “bipartisan opposition” to the “renegade” House Republicans or whatever. Boehner’s going to have to yank it, right? Or at least split it off into a separate bill and let the Senate shoot it down, which will preserve the viability of the overarching budget bill while giving the base a new reason to be angry at Harry Reid.

This could happen, but my understanding is that both Murkowski and Collins went along with the decision to cut funding even though they did not like it. I am not sure however, this is sort of confusing. On one hand they don’t support it, on the other my understanding is that they voted for it.

Terrye on March 23, 2011 at 7:14 AM

What happened to self reliance and responsibility? What ever happened to a little discipline or abstinence if one doesn’t have money for contraception?

CCRWM on March 22, 2011 at 9:45 PM

This would help people that are still minors for the most part. We don’t rely on them for contracts, so if they do not have capacity, then you cannot assume and expect responsibility. The previous sentence is not an opinion, it has been established law in many states for years. What if their parent is a deadbeat and out all the time, where is the teen going to find out at least what is required to be safe. Child labor laws restrict their ability to work in many cases and drivers license laws restrict their ability to move about since under 18 in many states have more restrictions on drivers, so if the government restricts their ability to make up for their parents neglect and take on that responsibiity, then giving them contraceptive and disease testing services does not really bother me, especially since the expenditure is so small. It is not like subisidies and other legislation that only benefits special interests that seek to manipulate tax money for their own profits. Those are where the cuts should be directed. And then Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid need to be attended to. This and NPR are such a waste of time and they are actually things that provided services that all people can use and get some benefit from. Big business got more from the bailout and QE2 than these service providing organizations will get for decades.

LevStrauss on March 23, 2011 at 7:22 AM

Had Brown not come out for Planned Parenthood in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts, he would have reduced his chances for re-election to zero. Still, I don’t see why he couldn’t have come up with a more artful dodge. Why not say “Planned Parenthood should be funded by the States…..If Massachusetts wants to fully fund PP in Massachusetts, they should be free to do so, and if South Dakota wants to zero out funding for PP in their State, they also should be free to do so. Kick it away from the Federal funding trough and have it feed at State funding troughs.”

olesparkie on March 23, 2011 at 7:40 AM

A staunch conservative mentor once asked me why I initially supported Scott Brown, when I knew he was a RINO… and didn’t I realize that he was using the TEA Party to get elected?

My answer remains the same…

He didn’t use the TEA Party, the TEA Party used him… to send a shot across the bow and force the Democrats to re-evaluate their path. swamp_yankee on March 22, 2011 at 11:52 PM put it elegantly.

He was a useful cannonball at a time when we needed someone to shoot out of a cannon. He has served his purpose, and I will do my best to see that he is replaced in the primaries.

If anything, he has proven one thing… RINOs cannot be trusted in the party any longer. They must be expelled like viruses (“Good to Great“). If they wish to vote for our ideals, that is fine. But they must never again be allowed any position of leadership.

dominigan on March 23, 2011 at 8:01 AM

He’s crossed the line now. So he thinks us taxpayers should be forced to pay for abortions? To hell with him. I don’t care if he’s from Massachusetts or not.

WannabeAnglican on March 23, 2011 at 8:04 AM

How about a compromise, of sorts…

In the budget bill, make the (reduced) funding dependent on “no abortions”. If PP performs a single abortion, funding is automatically cut off and any funds already received must be paid back immediately. (If not, asset seizure would commence.)

The obvious PP reaction would be to split off the abortion segment as a separate business entity from the women’s health. But this works to our advantage in the long run. Dems could no longer use “women’s health” as a defense for the abortion organization. It would split off that side for easier targeting… by all pro-life organizations, and conservative politicians.

dominigan on March 23, 2011 at 8:09 AM

LevStrauss on March 23, 2011 at 7:22 AM

So when did we stop teaching sex ed in school?

dominigan on March 23, 2011 at 8:11 AM

The GOP leadership will just have to tell Brown to shove it on this one, plain and simple. If he wants to fund them, he can have his state do it, but he can throw conservatives a bone on this one.

Daemonocracy on March 23, 2011 at 8:13 AM

So when did we stop teaching sex ed in school?

dominigan on March 23, 2011 at 8:11 AM

One day out of the year they play you a video from the 80s and that’s going to keep people from getting pregnant and diseases? Give me a break.

LevStrauss on March 23, 2011 at 8:23 AM

Don’t have time to look at all of the comments. How long did it take for some GOP flack to observe that “this is Massachusetts; we can’t expect our candidates to act all conservative-y in Mass?”

james23 on March 23, 2011 at 8:38 AM

One day out of the year they play you a video from the 80s and that’s going to keep people from getting pregnant and diseases? Give me a break.

LevStrauss on March 23, 2011 at 8:23 AM

Considering I had several weeks of it in high school, 25 years ago… I’m not going to give you a break. I’m going to ignore your ignorant comment as a strawman propaganda argument of the poorest construction.

dominigan on March 23, 2011 at 8:57 AM

This guy is just another RINO . . . which is about the best one can expect from that ultra liberal state.

rplat on March 23, 2011 at 9:05 AM

He’s the best you are going to get from that DungHill of a state.

At the end of the day, he’s a member of the “Scott Brown Party.”

He’s a lot like Bill Clinton in that regard. He doesn’t really hold one honest political opinion. What he holds is his own ambition and love of self above EVERY other thing.

Had it been required for him to be a total liberal to advance himself, he would have done that. He simply ended up with the GOP jersey. But like every other person who wears a jersey, i.e. pro-athletes, he’s available to the team that’s going to best serve him.

TiminPhx on March 23, 2011 at 9:12 AM

Considering I had several weeks of it in high school, 25 years ago… I’m not going to give you a break. I’m going to ignore your ignorant comment as a strawman propaganda argument of the poorest construction.

dominigan on March 23, 2011 at 8:57 AM

No I am not ignorant, you are proving my point. My location had much much less and am significantly younger. I am aware some places have extensive sex ed, but others don’t, and the vast majority don’t have testing clinics or provide contraception. Then there’s private schools and home schooled kids. Of course what about dropouts? They are the ones we really don’t want unecessarily reproducing. These people aren’t “straw” men, they all exist, and there are plenty of more expensive and higher priority cuts that will actually make an impact on the debt.

This small percentage of spending whose impact is mnimal is a complete joke, President, Senate, and Congress wont agree on it, so it won’t be permanent, and the only reason they are seeking these priorities is to fire up the bases on both sides for the election, so we can drown out any sanity from either side. I am sick of it and so are many others, if the so called “informed” bases actually made sense that would be a different thing, but they exhibit reactions that resemble being brainwashed. Of course I guess the name “base” says it all so I shouldn’t be surprised. You want to cut the budget, you need to trim Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, and Military spending. Have at it guys, what’s it going to be? Going into Libya isn’t going to do it. Who’s the next dictator that doesn’t support Al Qaeda that we are going to depose? And how much more are we going to spend on this nonsense, the Middle East could possibly explode right now, and the many on the right that support this garbage are crazy. If we are going to do anything, we need to pick our spots. Of course I really wonder if Libya is just a result of a deal by the G7 to solve that pesky “Japan not buying foreign treasuries” problem. Both were decided on the same day, the veto members abstained, and the US is trying to court foreign markets for our debt now that QE2 is going to end soon. Explosion on a bus in Jerusalem just now…and our hand is in the Libyan cookie jar?

LevStrauss on March 23, 2011 at 9:26 AM

True_King on March 23, 2011 at 7:11 AM

The anti-semite continues his spamming.

MadisonConservative on March 23, 2011 at 9:29 AM

I oppose funding Scott Brown’s campaign.

keepinitreal on March 23, 2011 at 9:32 AM

RINO, RINO, RINO, RINO, RINO!!! What a disappointment and a disgrace.

ultracon on March 23, 2011 at 9:39 AM

He’s crossed the line now. So he thinks us taxpayers should be forced to pay for abortions? To hell with him. I don’t care if he’s from Massachusetts or not.
WannabeAnglican on March 23, 2011 at 8:04 AM

Please show me the part of Allah’s post where it says Scott Brown thinks taxpayers should be forced to pay for abortions. Please.

joejm65 on March 23, 2011 at 9:50 AM

Anyone who thinks Scott Brown is anything like Martha Coakley has obviously never been to MA. We have 2 types of people here; the Democrat by birth who are Dems for the same reason they are Catholic – that’s how they were raised and accept it on blind dumb faith and laziness. You won’t get much critical thinking here.

The other type is the full-on Nanzi Pelosi true believer. See Mike “get bloody” Capuano. You are not going to change this culture overnight. What Brown showed people in MA was that the Dem-by-birthers don’t have to vote for a Dem. My mother voted for Sean Bielat this past November, the 1st time in her life she hadn’t voted for a Democrat.

Do I love everything that Brown votes for? No. But I would rather have his vote 80% of the time than his likely challenger Deval Patrick infecting the whole country instead of just this state.

I’m sure this makes me a RINO or whatever.

SittingDeadRed on March 23, 2011 at 10:01 AM

THERE HAS NEVER BEEN SUCH A SILENCE.

Elizabeth Taylor, the quintessential Cleopatra, has died.

Mutnodjmet on March 23, 2011 at 10:04 AM

The anti-semite continues his spamming.

MadisonConservative on March 23, 2011 at 9:29 AM

Educate yourself lady. You’re in desperate need of a history lesson in Israelite tribal migrations. Ignorance is bliss, especially when it allows you to falsely accuse others of things you know nothing about. It’s a shame that a Mexican of Opati Indian descent like yours truly knows more about Caucasian tribal migrations than a descendant of true Israel like yourself.

Do you not know who the Khazar-Kenites are? Do you not know that modern claimants of the tribe of Judah are actually 90%+ converts? Cannot you not make the distinction between true Judah and those of Revelations 2:9 and 3:9? What do you think the controversy of Zion is all about (Isaiah 34:8)?

(Rev 2:9) I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and [I know] the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but [are] the synagogue of Satan.

(Rev 3:9) Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

As you can see by the two verses above, your contention is with Jesus Christ (true Judah, not of Khazarian descent), not me.

Besides, you KNOW the GOP will continue to betray you, and you’ll gladly take it. It’s all you know.

True_King on March 23, 2011 at 10:06 AM

So he thinks us taxpayers should be forced to pay for abortions? To hell with him. I don’t care if he’s from Massachusetts or not.
WannabeAnglican on March 23, 2011 at 8:04 AM

Scott Brown does not support federal funding for abortions. However, he does support continued federal funding for other services that PP provides. In doing so, he seems to be blind to the fact that any federal funds provided to PP will, in fact, support abortion. It simply frees up funds for abortions that would have otherwise been spent on other services that are now paid for by the government.

His stance is like providing financial support to Hamas on the condition they don’t buy rockets with it to kill Israelis.

Rod on March 23, 2011 at 10:44 AM

True_KingQuack on March 23, 2011 at 10:06 AM

steebo77 on March 23, 2011 at 10:45 AM

…Mexican of Opati Indian descent like yours…

True_King on March 23, 2011 at 10:06 AM

My apologies. The anti-semitic lunatic continues his spamming.

MadisonConservative on March 23, 2011 at 10:46 AM

Mass. voter here. swamp_yankee summed it up nicely at 11:52 PM. Criticisms of Sen. Brown fall on deaf ears considering he is the best Senator we have had in decades (or longer) and he votes with GOP 80%+ of the time. He supports cutting off taxpayer $ for abortions, but as he says, this bill goes too far. I can live with that since it’s true.

shanimal on March 23, 2011 at 10:47 AM

Not “Uh-oh.” YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The CJ Political Report on March 23, 2011 at 11:08 AM

The supposed good that PP does cannot be justified with the blood of 50 million Americans on their hands. There is nothing good enough to justify that.

abcurtis on March 23, 2011 at 11:35 AM

PP has to be defunded and flushed. If women need help, go see a doctor.

Mirimichi on March 22, 2011 at 11:55 PM

PP has doctors, available at a significantly reduced rate. I’m not fan of PP, but it is the best option available to most women who don’t have health insurance and need basic gyno medical care. It’s a shame pro-lifers haven’t come up with their own version. If I had the money or the medical skills, I’d do it myself. Maybe one day I will.

Esthier on March 23, 2011 at 11:37 AM

@KyMouse: removing federal funding will not close down abortion. Abolition is not even on the table. The fight to remove federal funding will create a lot of heat and accomplish very little toward the practical goal of “not killing babies”.

jlibson on March 23, 2011 at 11:39 AM

It is in doubt Brown would even vote for a future Republican President’s SCOTUS nominees.

I live in MA and won’t be filling in a ballot oval for the empty barn jacket.

wraithby on March 23, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Scott keeps a portrait of his predecessor, the Lyin Liberal of the Senate, in his Senate Office.

Brown’s voting record has moved towards his hero’s.

We’ll need to monitor Scott for further drift, i.e.:

1) drinking Chivas;

2) weight fluctuations;

3) trips to South America, that include renting of houses of ill repute.

vilebody on March 23, 2011 at 12:17 PM

I am tired of excuses that get made for these people who are not conservatives. Primary him. He is a disappointment.

ReneePA on March 23, 2011 at 12:45 PM

Alternate headline:

RINOs and their Sacred Cows

tom on March 23, 2011 at 12:56 PM

PP has to be defunded and flushed. If women need help, go see a doctor.

Mirimichi on March 22, 2011 at 11:55 PM

PP has doctors, available at a significantly reduced rate. I’m not fan of PP, but it is the best option available to most women who don’t have health insurance and need basic gyno medical care.

Who want an abortion. No, you didn’t say it, but you really should have. It would only be the best option if it were completely unbiased, rather than a thinly disguised abortion provider/pusher. But the cheap — read, federally subsidized — access to doctors is the justification used to keep funneling federal dollars to an organization that doesn’t stop at promoting “family planning,” but goes further to push abortion as the best answer.

It’s a shame pro-lifers haven’t come up with their own version. If I had the money or the medical skills, I’d do it myself. Maybe one day I will.

Esthier on March 23, 2011 at 11:37 AM

tom on March 23, 2011 at 1:01 PM

I’d still rather have a Scott Brown or a Mark Kirk in the Senate that is right 75 percent of the time than a Martha Coakley or an Alexi Giannoulas who is right zero percent of the time.

pdigaudio on March 23, 2011 at 1:13 PM

It is in doubt Brown would even vote for a future Republican President’s SCOTUS nominees.

I live in MA and won’t be filling in a ballot oval for the empty barn jacket.

Great, Deval for Senate so he can plague me for decades instead of just the next four years. BTW, the fact that our fellow citizens re-elected Obama-Lite as Governor should clue you into the fact that we’re not getting Captain Conservative to represent us in any office any time soon in lovely MA.

SittingDeadRed on March 23, 2011 at 1:29 PM

I am tired of excuses that get made for these people who are not social conservatives. Primary him. He is a disappointment.

FIFY.

Fact A. He would destroy any Primary Opponent you put against him.

Fact B. We should be fighting against the leftists not each other just because we don’t all agree on every issue.

There is plenty of debate on this site even among posters that would be considered solid conservatives.

He who wants all is usually left with nothing.

SittingDeadRed on March 23, 2011 at 1:38 PM

OMG would these people just start cutting stuff? Leave it to the states if they want to fund this stuff!

vapig on March 23, 2011 at 3:51 PM

What happened to that rugged trucker guy image? Brown is all spiffily-like in his elitely cool silk suit and spectacles optics messaging.

Sherman1864 on March 23, 2011 at 8:20 PM

Uhm…anyone want a refund?

Yellowdog12 on March 23, 2011 at 10:03 PM

Why Scott? Because your Ted Kennedy staffers told you to?

Gohawgs on March 24, 2011 at 3:04 AM

Scott Brown: I oppose defunding Planned Parenthood

roy_batty: I oppose funding Scott Brown

roy_batty on March 24, 2011 at 9:31 AM

I oppose re-electing Scott Brown. Got my vote once.. aint gonna happen again pal

Viper1 on March 24, 2011 at 5:57 PM

I know “pure conservatives” aren’t going to like this, but as a person from the “Limbaugh Wing” of the Conservative party I agree with Mr. Brown.

mmcnamer1 on March 24, 2011 at 10:19 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3