Scott Brown—a McCain Republican?

Paul C. writes:

Brown and Palin are campaigning for McCain. Business as usual.

LA replies:

Ok. But it’s been clear from the start that Brown is not a conservative. Not only is he pro Roe v. Wade, he has no problem with homosexual “marriage.” And when we remember how he and his wife let their daughters dress at his victory speech, it’s clear that this is not a conservative family.

But being a conservative is not his role in history. His role in history was to get elected and by his election to stun the left and very possibly to save America from socialism.

Paul C. replies:

You’re correct, of course. It’s never been a question that Palin was a dolt and Brown a man of suspect motives who oozes a creepy sort of sexuality. The issue has been what has been read into their popularity and success. They were supposed to be the direct manifestation of widespread, popular revolt against Washington DC and all that it stood for—and that means Obama, in particular. VDARE.COM, in fact, has positioned Brown’s recent victory as a sort of awakening for White people.

Yet just the opposite is happening. And it is remarkable to see just how easily the people who voted in Brown or back Palin or agitate for Tea Parties are coopted. They are being mainstreamed into the GOP—and thus completely disarmed. Palin and the Tea Partiers know they have one source of mainstream postive publicity—from Fox News. Palin already works for that network and, last night, I caught Fox News’ three blind mice, their Fox News “All Stars”, all declaring how the Tea Partiers, Palin, and Brown all had the very same agenda as the Republican Party, to cut spending. The only “danger”? Well, that would be if this anti-Obama movement was “hijacked” by “anti-immigration” forces, which “nearly destroyed” the GOP in 2008.

That’s going to be the storyline, which is why Palin and Brown are following orders to get out the vote for the one man in the U.S. Senate, John McCain, who did almost as much as Ted Kennedy to destroy traditional America.

LA replies:

I have to protest your over-the-top descriptions of Palin and Brown. To call Palin a dolt is to verge on anti-Palin bigotry. The fact that she’s not an intellect doesn’t make her a dolt. And your description of Brown, I don’t know what is your basis for saying that. Maybe you’re thinking of the actor who played him in that vulgar skit on Saturday Night Live. And why accuse him of suspect motives? He seems pretty straightforward about all his positions.

Part of what seems to have happened here is that right-wingers liked Brown, and therefore immediately imagined that he was an immigration restrictionist, though he had never said anything to indicate that, but rather the opposite, with his emphasis on streamlining admissions. But then, when Brown turns out not to be a restrictionists, these same right-wingers feel that Brown has deceived and betrayed them, when he’s done nothing of the kind. He only disappointed their groundless hope that he was one of them, and therefore they feel that he has committed a betrayal.

February 10

J. Brady writes:

The answer is “yes.” McCain gave a large cash donation from his PAC to Brown’s campaign. Also, in his post-election speech, Brown specifically thanked Senator McCain, which I took to mean that he probably also got advice from McCain. McCain’s PAC also donated to Kirk’s campaign in Illlinois. I think McCain’s plan is to get RINOS elected and it’s also the reason MSNBC has had a couple of blips about McCain being the leader of the Republican party. MSNBC/McCain collusion? He’s been the MSM’s favorite Republican for years. Plus, McCain is obviously rebuilding a new, like-minded base.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 05, 2010 01:44 PM | Send