Remember how Scott Brown was once all “let’s stop the negative politics and partisan bickering,” and all that?
Well, clearly, IOKIYAR.* Because now that one of Brown’s top advisors has been caught doing exactly what he’s been complaining about since before he was elected to the Senate, he’s apparently taking no action.
US Senator Scott Brown today said he was unaware a top adviser was mocking a potential political rival under a false Twitter account, but he’s “made clear to everyone on or associated with my team that this type of thing is not to happen again.”
In a statement to the Globe this afternoon, the Massachusetts Republican said of the actions of aide Eric Fehrnstrom: “While it’s clear Eric was seeking to inject a little levity into politics on his own time, I wasn’t aware of what he was doing.”
Ah – so when it’s directed at Democrats, it’s just “a little levity.” Well I’m glad we’ve cleared that up. And, yeah yeah, “not to happen again.” Shouldn’t it have been pretty clear from the get-go that Brown didn’t want his staff engaged in exactly the kind of “dirty” and “slimy” politics he’s been moaning about? “Not to happen again” is weasel-speak for “I wouldn’t know what to do without Fehrnstrom, so I can’t fire him.”
Hey look – there’s Scott Brown, failing to lead. Again.
*”It’s OK if you’re a Republican”
It was a stupid thing to do, and I hope he got read the riot act, but I’ve seen SO MANY people thrown under political buses for SO LITTLE and SO OFTEN, that I frankly think it’s refreshing when pols show some downward loyalty.
There’s no question that Eric F. is a major jerk, but (like most people in politics), I’m sure he’s given more (a lot more) to Scott Brown than Brown ever gave him. So kudos, Senator Brown.
Meanwhile, any progress on that apology to Alan Khazei?
It was just “a little levity,” after all.
I still hold firm to the notion that there’s no way this was some “rogue element” in the campaign. They campaign bought the CrazyKhazei domain name, for heaven sake’s! No boss should fire someone for doing exactly what they told them to do.
But Brown’s “online strategist” was also involved. Willington actually paid for two domain names based on the idea!
If Brown is telling the truth about not knowing, then it exposes who’s really running the show: his advisors.
He’s a puppet.
While it’s true that after Fehrnstrom the MA GOP bench is nil, could be that Brown needs Fehrnstrom more than Fehrnstrom needs Brown, even though he didn’t want to go out this way. But make no mistake Scott Brown defended negative campaigning, one that was spearheaded by his campaign’s inner circle. He didn’t act or apologize, that speaks volumes on what he is and his character.
Can’t say that I’m surprised, at the end of the Gretta post I ended it with:
Unfortunately, he proved me right.
nt
if you posed for centerfolds and had an appearance to keep up…
Sorry, low, that was low, I apologize. 😉
if it was something Fehrnstrom did on his own time, they why did Brown’s web guy purchase the domain name? Just wondering?
Isn’t telling him to stop, taking action? Isn’t that consistent with the quote “let’s stop all the negative campaigning and bickering”? That quote didn’t say “and let’s fire people that do it” it just said “let’s stop” and that’s what he’s still saying.
The question now is, will anyone else follow suit and stop with their negative campaigning? Or will we still see fake Twitter accounts and attack ads from unions pretending to be regular voters?
he stopped because he got caught, thank chrismatt if you want to thank anyone. Brown did nothing, his campaign crudely attacked candidates with no repercussion. That’s the Brown campaign.
Careful, don’t get too close, you might lose a finger.
No.
Telling him to stop is taking action. Sorry to phrase it as a rhetorical question, but I thought you may have missed the part where he told him to stop.
No it isn’t, because, having been caught and forced to confess, he had already stopped. What Brown really meant was (a) I’m not firing you, and (b) don’t get caught again.
I remember a tweet thanking @bluemassgroup for all the mentions and it appeared he was going to keep right on going. Now it appears the account has been taken down.
went out hours before Fehrnstrom confessed to the Globe.
Maybe that’s how you interpret rules, and maybe you want the levity to continue, but I bet beyond a shadow of a doubt that everyone on the campaign is clear that they are not to make fake twitter accounts or mock the other candidates on line anonymously.
now that we were caught. Oops.
[Twim-uh-Ree-yur]
Two wrongs make a right if you’re a Republican.
In running his campaign, Mr. Brown wants as little attention on this issue as he can get away with. One strategy therefore is to do as little as possible in response: answer no questions, fire no Fehrnstroms, make no statements.
As things Republicans do, this isn’t so bad. It’s not a campaign of lies of the sort that got Karl Rove started. It’s not an appeal to “second amendment remedies”. Or, going back to the days of the Bush Administration, it is not a suggestion that some Democrat sympathizes with terrorists.
What it is, elegantly and decisively, is a means of disarming Mr. Brown against negative campaigning. He wanted to claim that was striving to be above all that. He has just done what no Democrat could do. He has allowed his campaign to reveal that he most certainly is not above negative campaigning.
That is good and delicious because what we need right now is a boatload of negative campaigning. He needs to be revealed for the vain charlatan of a Senator he is so that his opponent will strike a most excellent contrast. So Mass Uniting owes a big thank you to Mr Fehrnstrom.
And so do we.
Keep it up, Mr Fehrnstrom!
He has clearly said that he won’t allow his campaign to do negative campaigning. As soon as this came to his attention, he made it cleat to his campaign that this was “not going to happen again.”
Will MassUniting and other rival campaigns follow his lead on this? Or will we still see them making fake Twitter accounts and attack groups?
…people would have to believe that Brown was unaware that this was happening, like you clearly do. If Brown knew nothing about this, then why did his web guy register the crazykhazei.com web address? Besides, if he’s that clueless about what’s being done in his own campaign, what could make anyone think he’d be a good or effective senator?
The only people gullible enough to believe this tissue of lies are people like yourself, easily hoodwinked into voting against your best interests time after time. You’re like the proverbial fish that swallowed everything, hook, line and sinker!
He’s the Senator. Senators don’t micromanage their campaign staff, they are focused on jobs. heh. Nice Lt. Colombo routine, but it’s easy to imagine that the web guy created all of them on his own, and sent Fernstrohm the password.
He’s the leader of his campaign – he’s the one who said “let’s stop the negative politics and partisan bickering”. So these two different guys, working for two different firms, go negative and they kept him in the dark about it? And when it comes to light, he does nothing?
Look, you’re backing the wrong horse – Brown is not worthy of your dedication, and if you are in the middle class, he’s the last person you should want representing your interests in the senate. He’ll vote against what’s good for you every time.
Massachusetts is better off with a Republican Senator than with a 100% Democratic delegation. Sure, as a freshman he has to establish his loyalty in the party and push their agenda, but that’s how he will gain more power, for Massachusetts voters to have a voice in the Republican party. And that will have a much bigger impact than another voice in the Dem chorus.
Remember he was the first Republican to give up on the Ryan budget and veer the House away from the train wreck that was coming. And that was because of pressure we put on him here. That’s the kind of thing we can expect more of if we keep in in there.
“Massachusetts is better off with person who will make our state the best it can be, for the most people possible?” If that means 100% Democrats, it shouldn’t matter. If the GOP actually put decent human beings out there on the big tickets, who actually fought for the middle class and weren’t just out there for the big corporations, then it wouldn’t be 100% Democrats in Massachusetts or anywhere close to it.
– and they were predictable. It is very presumptuous to suggest that Olympia Snowe was against it because Brown was. Not to mention, to pass the Ryan budget would have had to get 60 votes in the Senate and NO Democrat voted for it. In addition, how did he “veer” the House -away from the train wreck?
What you can credit Brown with is being the 60th vote – needed because the Republicans filibuster everything – for Dodd/Frank. His price for that is known. He forced them to take out a tax on the banks to create a fund that would bail out an institution failing – instead using returned TARP money – ie taxpayer money – was used to fund it.
I’m reminded of an older Mae West saying “Stop!” in Sextette.
I’d agree with you, dont-get-cute, if it wasn’t so clear that two of Mr Brown’s aides working for two different firms were part of this.
Here’s a thought experiment. Imagine a similar idea occurring to someone in any campaign by Deval Patrick or John Kerry. That someone would be poignantly aware that he or she would be fired immediately and would have difficulty being hired by any Democrat at that level again.
Mr Fehrnstrom, on the other hand, had no such fear. That says something. Mr Brown’s “Stop” may not be quite as breathless as Mae West’s but still..
Since Democrats are the party of regulation and nitpicky campaign rules and government oversight and righteous indignation and punitive punishments, and Republicans are the party of individual freedom and liberty and not being all bent out of shape when people rub something the wrong way.
What if I was gay and wanted to marry another male? Or if my daughter got pregnant and wanted to abort her baby? What’s the Republican stand on individual freedom in those cases? Go ahead, tell me that Republicans don’t “get bent out of shape” over those two issues, we can all use a hearty laugh!
How do you think you got to where you are today, if not for rules and regulations? Do you get overtime pay for over 8 hours in a day, or over 40 hours in a week? Do you have weekends off, vacation time, holiday pay? Do you have clean water to drink, and clean air to breathe? Would you have any of that without rules and regulations?
Successful Republicans are 100% self-made and don’t owe anything to anybody.
They pull themselves up by their bullshit.
And freedom and liberty requires shared morality and respect for life.
I am all for clean water and air and regulations and rules to protect people from exploitation and risks.
Care to expand on that one a bit? I honestly have no idea what it means.
Your side assassinates abortion providers because of their strong morals and respect for life, right? Everything you know is backwards and wrong, DGC…
I don’t believe DGC has ever called for or praised assassinations of abortion providers. Those who do that are responsible for their own actions, and said actions of a few nutcases should not be laid at the feet of every person opposed to abortion rights.
The nut cases who do take those actions are encouraged by people like DGC, who make up bullshit about how the GOP is the moral, upright party with respect for life.
…would not condone acts of violence, nor would the vast majority of religious leaders who speak for the life of the unborn. It IS possible to hold the genuinely moral and even compassionate view that abortion is wrong. I personally happen to think it’s trumped by the value of allowing a woman and her doctor to make medical decisions.
even those who state they don’t CONDONE violence against abortion providers (or Obama supporters, what have you) use rhetoric EACH and EVERY day that, when dog-whistled to the right people, cultivate a culture that allows or encourages it.
Sorry, they might have free speech rights short of incitement to do it, but they do NOT have a constitutional right to not be called the asshole that they are when doing it.
There is certainly plenty of over-the-top rhetoric with some violent metaphors that a few might take a little too literally, but for those who keep even their words civil I cannot condemn them for expressing their opinions.
(This was intended as a reply to Lynne. Apparently a quirk of this platform is that it does not provide a reply link on a comment too far to the right. I know on Soapblox crowding the right margin was awkward to read, but I think I prefer that to having to pretend it was a reply to the previous comment.)
As best I understand it, the Republican and conservative perspective is that government tends to work badly if at all. So the best one can do with it is shrink it and keep it out of the many things it just does terribly. In order for Republicans, therefore, to be qualified for office, they just need to be good at shrinking and limiting. Not a high bar.
We liberals particularly see a number of good things government can do: regulation, education, infra-structure, and alleviation of poverty. Those are all things that require wisdom, expertise, leadership, and sensitivity. So it truly is the case that Democrats must be more qualified than Republicans because our agenda is more ambitious. One wants a Dukakis not a Reagan working out environmental regulation because a whole lot of competence is really necessary for that.
So yes, we might expect Republicans to treat politics as more game-like and Democrats to take it much more seriously. That is exactly why no consultants to Gov. Patrick or Sen. Kerry would ever dream of doing what Sen. Brown’s have.
bored students, angry gays and union thugs to do the dirty work and make gross google bombs and fake twitter accounts, while the piggy consultants keep their hands clean, eating with silver forks and knives. It’s probably frustrating to Republican consultants that Republican supporters are so tame and church-going and milquetoast, that they have to do the hijinks themselves. Had to, I mean.
It’s a whole regiment of strawmen! Bored students! Angry gays! Union thugs! Piggy consultants! Churchgoing and milquetoast Republicans!
I look forward to the entire comic book.
Andrew Breitbart, Lila Rose and James O’Keefe all say “hi”.
Very quaint and old-fashioned.
You were born after the 2010 elections and their numerous acts of vandalism?
This is behavior that when it makes the Boston Globe is embarrassing. The fact that Brown, and Fehrstrom both reacted by saying it wouldn’t happen again tacitly admit they know it was wrong.
Do people think he was truly unaware that this sort of thing is part of Ferhnstorm’s m.o.? He’s been dishonest before, with that whole “I’ve seen the photos” foolishness.
Also, I gotta wonder whether Fehrnstrom himself authored Brown’s statement on this. That would be pretty funny.
Huge chance of that actually being true… I may even go as high as 50-50.
should be easy to check if the tweets were during working hours; would show Brown misinformed at best
Like he works at Burger King?
…during business hours, from his office at campaign headquarters, it would be crystal clear – he was on a coffee break! He was still doing it on his own time!
😉
he had merely labeled the account “sanity-challenged Khazei”
Totally obviates the requirement of an apology.