Tag Archives: Martha Coakley

February 5, 2010 · 2:44 pm

Lemming Left Still Follows Obama

Ideologue-In-Chief drives away support

How optimistic of Michael Cook to write the column entitled, “Obama not lame duck…not yet,” in the Newburyport Current after Ted Kennedy’s seat moved across the aisle.

Relax Michael, Newburyport did not vote for Scott Brown. In fact, Mike Capuano was the preference of the area Dem leadership not Martha Coakley and their support for her was very mellow.

Actually, Martha should have won statewide. Forget her underwhelming approach to campaigning; this is, after all, Massachusetts. She lost because the formerly magic letter beside her name on the ballot was a “D.”

And that “D” joined her at the hip with the current administration. Martha didn’t have the willingness or sense to run away from the current administration and the voters made her pay for that foolishness.

How can you describe Scott Brown’s campaign as “a tad disingenuous,” without any explanation?

You mentioned chuckling over writers referring to Obama’s dreadful poll numbers. Thanks for giving me a chuckle by stating that, “President Obama remains the most respected politician in America today.” Since you cite no polls for such an unlikely statement, I’ll assume that you made it up.

You said that Obama “receives high marks from most Americans on national security issues.” Again, no source cited, so again dubious conclusions pass as fact. Those high marks could have been for his having an opinion on issues. I’m not so sure that folks familiar with Fort Hood or the attempted airline bombing are giving him high marks for national security results.

Michael, how can you blame health care reform opponents for stopping it. Your Democrat friends have the numbers in Congress without including anyone else. So why can’t they get it done? Simple. Their indescribable attempt at health care reform cannot even get full Democrat support. Weren’t those bribes to Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson a sure sign of the bill’s impossible-to-sell provisions?

Next time there’s a tea party in Massachusetts you ought to show up to get a clearer view of what they’re up to. I went to one on the Boston Common and noted two themes – (1) government spending is out of control and, (2) Barney Frank had a major part in the collapse of the housing market. What is your problem with either?

Of course, there are extremists in any movement. Denouncing tea partiers, because of the work of a few of them, is like suggesting that the Democrat Party is evil because bomber Bill Ayers is on board.

Thank you for conceding that, “the Dems will still likely lose some seats in November.” Under the best of situations that usually happens. Brace yourself, Michael, because things will be much worse seat-wise if Obama lets his ideologue nature get the best of him. The voters in three states have tried to get his attention.

Let me make a prediction: If Obama does not change his approach shortly, he will lose the support of every moderate Democrat in Congress. And those Democrats will have to start taking action against Obama very soon or they will be hung with their support for him in November and risk suffering Martha Coakley’s fate.

I wonder what could happen to Congressman John Tierney if an opponent could chain him to supporting President Obama’s agenda. Is there another Scott Brown in the Sixth District?

( This letter-to-the-editor appeared in the Newburyport Current in the February 5th edition. )

Scott Brown for US Senate

US Senate candidate Scott Brown is making a strong run against Democrat Martha Coakley in Massachusetts

Now that we have had a year to see what “hope and change,” is all about, the time has come to “hope for some change.”

That is why I am voting for Scott Brown in his US Senate race here in Massachusetts against state attorney general Martha Coakley on January 19th.

On stage with Barack Obama today (Sunday) at Northeastern, Martha said that people, “deserve someone who’s going to handle the tough problems and get us back on track.” She hit the target but not the way she expected. In my opinion, a vote for Scott Brown, not Martha Coakley, sends a clear message that the current administration is trying to take this country in directions we do not care to go.

Scott has promised to be the 41st vote against the health care reform bill. It interests me that already strategies are in circulation detailing what the Democrats will do statewide and nationally to thwart the impact of an elected Scott Brown.

Someday there will be a book written about Martha Coakley’s race for the US Senate. The title? “How Not to Conduct a Political Campaign.” The writer will detail Martha’s head-scratching decisions to try to avoid debating Scott Brown as well as avoiding the voting public.

I think that probably the toughest thing for Martha has been to try to speak positively of Obama’s administration. He is strongly approved by a miniscule 27% according to a January 17th Rasmussen poll. Presenting oneself as less of a lock-step partisan for an unpopular national government has been an untried strategy for Martha.

Another big surprise has been the usually predictable Boston Globe running articles critical of Martha’s campaign. What are they trying to do, increase circulation??

Another positive for Scott’s electability is “Mad Money’s” Jim Cramer saying that a Brown election would cause a huge stock rally because it would be considered pro-business. Who wouldn’t want that??

The Far Left has not done Martha any favors. An example is MSNBC’s Ed Schultz saying on his Friday radio show that he would try to vote ten times if he lived in Massachusetts to keep Scott Brown from winning. In a bygone era, someone could get away with these types of remarks because they would not be distributed very far or very fast. Not anymore and Ed has unwittingly stirred up folks to vote against Martha.

Anyhow, I am voting for Scott again – I did in the primary as well.

The optimist in me has the race close but the difference being the votes that Independent Joe Kennedy gets. I can imagine some confused Democrat voters, who would have chosen Martha otherwise, mistakenly selecting the Kennedy name.

It is safe to say that a Scott Brown win will have me recalling the Winter Olympics at Lake Placid, when in the final seconds of the upset of the Russian hockey team the announcer said, “Do you believe in miracles?” A Martha Coakley loss would certainly fall into that category.

Mike Capuano Brings US Senate Seat Campaign to Newburyport

Mike Capuano talks to Democrat supporters in Newburyport

Mike Capuano was in Newburyport this Sunday AM (at the Caffe Di Siena) to seek and solidify support for his bid for the Massachusetts US Senate. He’s trying to win the Senate seat that belonged to Ted Kennedy.

First, he needs to win the Democrat primary on December 8th and opponent Attorney General Martha Coakley may have a lot to say about that. She is well ahead in the polls so far. The actual election will be on January 19th and the Democrat primary winner will almost certainly be our next US Senator.

I attended, not to solidify Mike’s support, but rather to see what he looked like and what he had to say. There was also talk of an open mike and questions being fielded. It was amusing for me to try to anticipate what questions I might have for someone as unashamedly liberal as Mr. Capuano.

Mike has been in the US House since 1998 representing the “Harvard” district. Talk about a haven for liberal elites!

Amesbury’s mayor (Ted Kezer) and the area state rep (Mike Costello) introduced him.

The candidate explained that he had experience at numerous levels of government and that this separated him from the other US Senate aspirants. He talked of the benefits of being a Washington insider.

He said that he fully supported the public option in the Healthcare bill. He said that not only was he reading the bill but also making sure, he understood it as he went along. That second part would separate him from other reps, he claimed.

He bragged about being opposed to the Iraq War and added that we should pull our troops out of Afghanistan. He claimed that there were only about 100 Al Qaeda terrorists around and that they were moving into various countries. I wondered if he cared what the Taliban would do in Afghanistan after we left.

I concluded that he was keen on interventionist policies at home but not abroad. He seemed very convinced that government had the answers to this country’s domestic issues. A person, like Mike, who has never had a non-government job, could easily think this.

I wanted to tell him that according to actual polls, a higher percentage of people believe in UFOs than approve of the job Congress is doing. Folks want less government not more.

He talked about his early years in politics as mayor of Somerville and how he had wanted to be available to make sure that he could help his constituents in any way. He mentioned getting an unplowed street plowed after he had received a late phone call. I wanted to ask him, “Since you have swallowed Al Gore’s global warming fantasies, wouldn’t hot air likely be a bigger threat than snow?”

I came away thinking that the nanny staters in his seventh Congressional district could easily elect someone with Mike Capuano’s views forever. Taking those views statewide might not work so well. His views do not differ one degree from Teddy’s but he clearly lacks the notoriety that carried Senator Kennedy into power and kept him there.

I believe that the wave that rolled Obama and numerous liberals into office has now hit the shore. The country has seen what those pleasantly presented sound bites look like in real life and many don’t like what they’ve seen. A stimulus plan that takes money from one group and gives it to another is on thin ice. A group that punishes folks who choose not to carry health insurance is out of control.

I guess I should be thrilled that Mike Capuano shook my hand. I guess I should also be thrilled to have been in a room with so many of the Democrat big shots of this area. Alas, I did not get the “Chris Matthews thrill” up or down the leg over either of those.

The Democrats are in trouble nationally. President Obama has figured this out and now is shifting from having all the sound-bite answers, to searching for real-life answers. By shifting away from his original message, the President alienates the likes of Mike Capuano and his supporters.

Can Mike run successfully by running against Obama’s most recent waverings? I’m guessing he tries and loses the primary to Martha Coakley on December 8th as a result.