Brown lost when he failed to stand for anything
To the editor:
He came out of nowhere, a state senator from the “nowhere” town of Wrentham, to vie for the U.S. Senate seat once held by Massachusetts icon Ted Kennedy. His opponent would be Martha Coakley, who held the title of state Attorney General.
Scott Brown was the immediate underdog. Even worse — he was a Republican. Coakley had name recognition, Brown did not. Coakley had the state Democratic machine behind her, Brown had the almost nonexistent Republican Party behind him.
But soon people began taking note of the attractive, well-spoken candidate who campaigned from his pickup truck. He was coming across as a regular guy. He had even posed partially covered in a women’s magazine. He was different.
But Martha Coakley still held a comfortable lead. Nothing to worry about. But then Scott Brown went as far to the right as it is possible to go in Massachusetts. He said: “I will be the 41st vote against Obamacare!”
Wait a minute. Wasn’t a national health care plan one of Ted Kennedy’s main goals in life? Wasn’t this his baby? How could anyone oppose this in Massachusetts and expect to win election? Ted wasn’t even cold in the ground yet and this Brown character is going to trash his big dream?
But many voters rallied to his call. “Hey, we finally got a live one.” “This guy tells it like it is.” “It’s about time someone ...” and so on. And Scott Brown went on to win — even in Hyannisport.
That is how Scott Brown rose to the top — and this is how he fell back to the bottom.
Once in Washington he evidently fell for the line that said, “If you want to get re-elected from Massachusetts you have to move more to the center; you have to work more with the opposition party.” So Scott Brown listened to these seasoned pros who were supposed to know what they were talking about and became one of the most bipartisan senators in Washington. But what he did not realize is that the Republicans and independents who worked and voted for him did not send him to Washington to work with “those across the aisle.” They sent him to Washington to beat those across the aisle because they believed them to be dangerous to the country. So what’s with this “bipartisan stuff?”