Scott Brown still smarting from his co-sponsoring of the failed Blunt Amendment, which would have allowed employers to determine contraceptive and other health insurance coverage has been trying to dig himself out of the mess he created.
Brown has been on a full court press over the past week to try to win back supporters. Once such event last week involved Olympia Snowe and his wife Gail Huff.
Brown was introduced at the press conference by his wife, former Boston television reporter Gail Huff.
Huff wasn’t actively involved in the campaign that led to Brown’s 2010 special election win to the seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy, but said she’s able now to be more involved since she’s no longer a reporter in Boston.
Brown said he’s used to being surrounded by “strong willed women”
Huff continued or jumped in to prevent Brown from sticking his foot in his mouth, since I’m not sure where he was going with the “strong willed women” comment, that in their family, the couple and their daughters have open discussions.
When pressed by reporters to actually provide an example rather than generic statements, the only thing that Scott Brown could come up with on the influence of women in his life was “how to cook”.
Brown declined to be more specific about the family discussions, but when a reporter asked Huff to name an issue that she and the couple’s daughter have educated Brown on, Brown chimed in and said “how to cook.”
He’s “nougat and the caramel and the nuts.”
– Gail Huff
hopefully he’ll be asked to explain a position.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman_on_top_%28sex_position%29
n/t
n/t
to characterize Brown as totally fake, but I saw him talk once about how when his wife was working the morning news, his kids were very small and it was up to him to get them ready for school/preschool. He went into some detail about it.
I could relate because I had been in the same spot at one point in my life. It seemed very genuine (because the story had bits that paralleled mine), and it’s made it difficult for me to buy all the anti-women barbs.
We’ll see what the voters think. I realize these impressionas are trivial to most followers of politics, but an impression of the real person behind a candidate mask often transmits down to the voters.
he talks about his life experiences then does the opposite of what you’d think he learned from those experiences.
With a Senator, all we have is his voting record.
Brown is fake so much as he is shallow.
He’s intelligent enough to have graduated from college and law school, though, to be fair, I know a lot of idiots who have passed the bar. I think he doesn’t have a lot of deep thoughts about much.
He seems a wee bit slippery though.
I don’t think I would answer much differently, though, facing a question about what fights I have with my wife. The alternative answer would be “@#$%*& off” And I don’t care if he “opened the door” with the initial, anodyne statement, which is exactly the same thing most married men with grown daughters would say.
and then there is this:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/05/15/perrys_record_as_officer_examined/
I know people who knew about ethical issues with Perry going back to him selling caskets in Florida, among other things.
There’s nothing like that trailing Brown around.
Jeff Perry’s involvement in the episodes involving the two young women was appalling, as were his subsequent denials of any wrong-doing. Scott Brown’s steadfast support for Mr. Perry, in spite of the disclosure of Mr. Perry’s behavior that night, speaks eloquently to Mr. Brown’s real view of women.
That’s what Mr. Perry has to do with Scott Brown, at least for me.
expecially when they are of the same party.
It’s just not done. I think it speaks more to his polical sensibilities rather than his views on women.
I didn’t see anyone turning on Bill Clinton, and I think that he’s shown his views on women are not good.
We should also be damning the memory of the JFK, especially in light of the recent allegations. The whole “how about doing my buddy, he looks a little stressed” turns my stomache. I am considering writing an op-ed suggesting the JFK library be renamed I’m so disgusted.
Scott Brown didn’t need “denounce” Jeff Perry — he’s an experienced and skillful politician and every politician with B-average chops knows how to distance himself from a distasteful candidate.
Your attempt to conflate Bill Clinton and Jeff Perry is false, dishonest, and does a disservice to the victims of Jeff Perry’s abuse. Do you really think that Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky is comparable to a uniformed on-duty police officer enabling and defending the sexual abuse of two teenage girls?
It’s like the Monty Python argument sketch around here.
Okay. Brown hates women. Everyone of his actions shows it. His daughters are in trance. His wife is acts in support of her career. Every woman that meets him is under a spell. He is just waiting to get reelected so he can vote to gut women’s programs.
Are you happy now?
Again, all he has to show is his voting record. He co-sponsored legislation that would have make a woman’s employer determine contraceptive insurance coverage. Bottom line, totting out your wife and kids doesn’t change that.
I was thinking of more like the Paula Jones era when low level state employees were procured by state troopers and brought before the Gov. Clinton to orally service him.
Note that Jeff Perry never killed or paralyzed any women after “dating” them, and didn’t repeatedly cheat on his wife. Another person who in his personal life acted poorly with women yet will be memorialized in MA with a building.
Note that I wouldn’t put Perry’s actions (which I think actually happened, not disputing that) into a male-female concept. I think he looked at it from a cop buddy code standpoint, and if the other officer was doing anything “gray” he would have looked the other way. If the other cop had a history of aggressive actions towards minorities, Perry might have looked the other way as well, but that would not have made him a racist.
Paula Jones was and is trailer-trash. There was never any substance to her bought-and-paid-for complaint, and she admitted as much when accepted the settlement she ultimately extorted from Mr. Clinton.
Here’s the most offensive part of your comment:
Jeff Perry was a corrupt cop who looked the other way while an officer under his command committed criminal sexual abuse against teenage women. Scott Brown (and apparently you) enthusiastically endorsed him anyway. You apparently have no problem with that.
I do.
Calling a woman trailer trash is classist and sexist arguably Tom jut an FYI. Frankly the blue collars we lost could care less abou Browna votes on the Blunt amendment or gays. They might care more about his votes against unions, unemployment, health care, emergency relief for Gloucester fisherman and stimulus packages helpin the T and creating MA jobs. When Warren hit him on this and emphasized her own blue collar roots she was up in the polls, now she sounds like another feminist Harvard prof. As far as Republicans go his record on women isnt awful (not stellar either), his record on jobs is extremist. Coakley tried the women and abortion angle and it backfired, O’Brien did against Romney and lost too. Hit him where it hurts for all voters-their wallets. Latch him to Ryan not Blunt.
Paula Jones is what she is. I think most readers know I’m quoting James Carville and Ann Coulter. I’m open to whatever adjectives you prefer — so long as they accurately describe her before, during, and after her period in the national spotlight.
I’m commenting on Scott Brown’s long record of contempt for women. I’m not talking about his “record on women”, I’m talking about the sexism he demonstrates when does things like offer his own daughters for sale at a nationwide press conference. He thinks he was making a joke — and that’s the attitude I mean.
Elizabeth Warren is not Martha Coakley. The focus of Elizabeth Warren’s campaign remains on the economy — pocketbooks, wallets, jobs, and the many ways that Scott Brown and his party help corporate America plunder the 99%. In the context of that focus, it does Elizabeth Warren no harm to remind folks that Scott Brown also exemplifies the sexist attitudes that lead to his party’s ongoing war against women. And if you think THAT isn’t working, you’re not paying attention to the (national) polls.
Like I said I find no fault with a strategy of reminding voters that Brown has a bad record on women, bad by Massachusetts standards for sure. But that might be the fifth or sixth thing I’d talk about, maybe lead national fundraisers targeted to the Emily’s List and its donors. But ads in MA should be about Jobs, Economy, Brown hating workers. In that order.