Everyone in this country is agreed on the landmark importance and symbolism of today’s Massachusetts special election for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the late Ted Kennedy. There are two candidates in this race whose starkly contrasting views tell the entire story:
The Massachusetts Alternatives:
One candidate supported a major tax increase on the people of Massachusetts. The other opposes tax increases on principle.
One candidate supported and helped pass Massachusetts’ 2006 universal health care law. The other opposed it.
One supports President Barack Obama’s foreign policy. The other is unequivocally opposed to it.
One is a lawyer. The other is a businessman with a background in information technology, computer science, and business management.
One was born to a political family, and held signs for their father at a young age. The other was born to poor immigrants and adopted as an infant by a pastor and his wife.
One supports the nanny state and agrees with Barack Obama’s opposition to gay marriage, but support for civil unions. The other believes government should stay out of the issue of marriage altogether.
One supports the Federal government’s role in taxing income, regulating education, and allowing the Federal Reserve Bank to continue printing money out of thin air. The other adamantly opposes all three.
The first candidate in the comparisons above is not Democrat Martha Coakley (though she is admittedly even worse). The first candidate is actually Republican Scott Brown, who as a state senator voted for a major tax package and Romney’s universal healthcare plan, who supports Obama’s reckless troop surge in Afghanistan, and who is a career lawyer and politician.
The second candidate is the Libertarian Party candidate in the Massachusetts’ Special Senate Election, Joe Kennedy (no relation to the Kennedy family). Sources: here, here, and here. So why on earth are conservatives, libertarians, and tea party activists celebrating Scott Brown’s likely victory today?
The Massachusetts Outcome
Brown’s victory seems imminent. He’s absolutely massacred his second biggest opponent, Martha Coakley. The talking heads on MSNBC have essentially conceded the race to Brown. Scott Brown’s raging online support positively dwarfs Martha Coakley’s.
And on the ground, she’s not doing much better, flipping out and calling Curt Schilling a Yankee fan, trailing Brown in the polls by nine points, unable to convince a primarily Independent state that she’s an independent thinker, and even unable to energize her own supporters who have abandoned her campaign (last three links via: The Reaganite Republican).
With this kind of overwhelming victory against the Democrats on the horizon, I can see why it’s easy for conservatives and even some libertarians to get excited, but DID YOU READ what Scott Brown really stands for in the list of alternatives above? Can we really be happy with a tax-increasing, universal-healthcare-voting, money-printing lawyer!?
I feel like I’m the only libertarian left who hasn’t completely lost his mind. Please somebody comment and tell me that I’m not the only sane one left who’s keeping his head on straight in the midst of all of this!
Conservatives and Libertarians Hail Brown Victory
The Libertarian Republican, Eric Dondero, is celebrating Scott Brown‘s imminent victory as “The Greatest Republican Victory since Bush beat Kerry in 2004.” I respect Eric Dondero, have collaborated with him on the blogosphere before, and will continue to do so, but Eric- how can you see either Brown’s or Bush’s victory as a victory for the Republican Party?
After winning in 2004, Bush continued to push his agenda of unprecedented government expansion, control, and intrusion. His administration saw the most radical growth in the welfare state since Lyndon B. Johnson. He tarnished the Republican brand, angered conservative voters, and set up the GOP for massive losses in 2006 and 2008.
With his voting record, speeches, and interviews, we can count on no less from Scott Brown. Is it really a victory for the GOP to elect another Olympia Snowe-style Republican from the Northeast? And I have no clue what the 2008 Libertarian Party VP candidate and prospective 2012 Presidential candidate, Wayne Allyn Root is doing supporting a big-government Republican over the LIBERTARIAN PARTY candidate, Joe Kennedy!
Meanwhile, even the Cato Institute’s, Dr. Jeffrey Miron wonders out loud whether he should vote for big-government Republican Scott Brown or small-government Libertarian Joe Kennedy- the classic lesser-of-two-evils conundrum. Dr. Miron, the lesser of two evils is still evil. Mark my words- Scott Brown’s record proves what side of history he’s on- the side of the establishment and its machinations. He and his mindset are part of the problem, not the solution.
Am I The Only Sane Libertarian Left?
Seriously- what the hell, everybody?