UPDATE: It appears that the Globe booted this one pretty badly. Audio supplied by the Brown campaign to TPM does seem to show that Brown, while obviously not wanting to talk about the teabaggers, didn’t actually deny knowing who they were.
Here’s Scott Brown on boston.com yesterday:
He also claimed that he was unfamiliar with the “Tea Party movement,” when asked by a reporter.
“Unfamiliar” with the Tea Party Movement. First of all, anyone who pays even passing attention to politics is “familiar” with the Tea Party Movement, so unless Brown has been living under a rock for the last couple of years, he’s heard of it.
Now, I wouldn’t normally discount the possibility that Brown has, in fact, been living under a rock for the last couple of years. But the video doesn’t lie, and the fact is that Scott Brown gave a speech at the Worcester Tea Party rally on April 15, 2009.
Just sack up and admit it, Scott, for God’s sake. What are you so afraid of?
UPDATE: As alert commenter johnk accurately points out, there’s a “Friends of the Tea Party” reception on his own website. Good grief.
Discuss
15 Comments . Comments are closed.Team Coakley needs to RUN AN AD WITH THIS CLIP!
ASAP! Expose Brown for the bald-faced liar that he is, and show the world that he is a tea-bagging Palinite. That should scare enough progressives into action.
A bit of levity: I'm surprised that our side has to expose Brown like this-- I thought he had no trouble exposing himself!
But that would be $quot;Negative$quot;
And then the media would cover the fact that Martha is running a negative ad, without ever analyzing the actual content of the ad. Then Scott would have his beautiful daughters back up there saying "Don't tear down my Dad. He would never drink tea." and WBZ would report "American Idol finalist and BC basketball star blasts Coakley campaign for lies and distortions."
Meanwhile, in the real world, my wife's friend, a lifelong liberal who abhors everything Scott Brown stands for, would note "I just don't like that Coakley is being so negative."
Sigh.
Ere the cock crows you will deny me three times
So Brown takes 1.4 million in small donations from them and then says "tea who"? If I were a Tea Partier I'd be more than a bit miffed by this turn of events. I wonder if that means that should he win election to the Senate he'll prove moderate after all. He would need to stand for reelection in three years, so I wouldn't be surprised if quickly abandons his out of state backers and drifts to the center.
I wouldn't count on that.
Remember, to run for re-election, one also needs money. And these days, the Tea Party movement is a cash cow for the GOP.
Tea Partiers don't care
You make the rash and totally unsupported assumption that Tea Partier's care about the truth.
They don't.
They lie, he lies, and they all lie together. "Whatever it takes" (to get elected).
He is a rightwing celebrity. He, like Sarah Palin, doesn't need to win. Even now, the story is "Republican resurgence forces Democratic goal-line stand in Massachusetts."
Any "drift" that happens will be a hard right turn, so that he proceeds full-speed ahead into the arms of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and the rightwing smear machine.
The TeaBaggers understand
They know Scott has to play it both ways a bit because he's in Massachusetts. I more likely think he's pulling the wool over our eyes, rather than theirs.
Sure, he may get a little spooked when he gets a look at the real extreme right wingers that exist out there beyond New England's borders. But I don't think for a second he's going to be anything but a reliable vote for the other side of the aisle. Maybe not 100%--there are issues that unite regions more than parties--but pretty damn high.
What about his own web site?
From Salon, he even has references on his web site. Scott, what's up?
I'm shocked and surprised
Candidate Scott Brown offers a flagrant and easily-documented lie — I'm shocked and surprised.
The travesty here is that the media (both local and national) frame this race as a defensive Martha Coakley running "attack ads", rather than yet another shamelessly deceitful Republican leading with lies.
When will the media pick this up ...
This is ridiculous, more links:
Greater Boston Tea Party
Breakfast with US Senate Candidate Scott Brown, January 2, 2010
Follow up posting on how wonderful the event was.
Ahem, sorry who are you guys again I'm having a breakfast fundraiser with?
An ad is necessary to make clear how deceptive Brown is
Nothing fancy--something along the lines of:
Scott Brown claims he does not know of the existence of the Tea Party movement, but here he is addressing them in Worcester: (very short clip)
Scott Brown: Wrong on the Issues; Wrong on Facts
Now if I had a few hundred thousand dollars I could hire a firm and run the ad myself.
I called the Coakley campaign office at 9am . . .
. . . and alerted them to this whole development, and urged them to run an ad about it. I suggest that all of us progressives here should do the same-- drive the point home to Team Coakley that they need to jump on this IMMEDIATELY!
Hat tip, johnk
Worth well more than 1,000 words:
Brown tripped over his fine line...
...trying not be a right wing loon...but trying to cozy up to the right wing loons...and ignoring his own loon positions in the past (anti emergency contraceptive). Did he think no one would notice? Perhaps he was counting on people not caring...but they do...I have heard from alot of women in the past few days...and they are energized to get out the vote for Martha.
Personally I think the wrong Clinton is coming to Mass on Friday, but I understand the Sec. of State can not campaign here.
~
Looks like the Globe screwed the pooch on this one. Talking Points Memo has the audio of the interview in question, and he clearly doesn't say what the Globe claimed he said.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c...
At least we can still mock him for denying his own voting record.
Actually, not even that
My hat is off to you for linking to the audio. I've had enough experience being interviewed by reporters to know that what appears in print often loses the original meaning of what was said. Most of the time, I think it's unintentional -- it's not easy for a reporter to have a normal conversation with someone and both capture the meaning of what's being said as well as trying to find those usable soundbites.
But sometimes the distortion is intentional. It's been going on since the history of the press. And it means that we have to be more critical of everything we read.
At least we can still mock him for denying his own voting record.
Yeah, not even that part is accurate when compared to what was said. The audio and video is posted at The Lowell Sun. I definitely see value in getting both the article and the audio/video -- that's something I would subscribe to, so long as the raw footage isn't doctored.
Anyway, the reporter's question starts at 7:58 and is referencing the allegation that he would be "lockstep with the national party". Here's what Brown says about the 96% voting record:
« Blue Mass Group Front Page
Wed 23 May 8:46 PM