So much for running as an independent, the folks who will likely decide the Senate election in Massachusetts.
When matters came to a vote today Scott Brown cast his lot with the ultra-rich and in favor of high national deficits. NYT:
Senate Republicans on Monday blocked a move to open debate on the so-called Buffett Rule, ensuring that a measure pressed for months by President Obama and Senate Democrats to ensure that the superrich pay a tax rate of at least 30 percent will not come to a decisive vote. …
[A] CNN poll was released putting support at 72 percent, including 53 percent of Republicans. …
In the Senate, all the Republicans but Senator Susan Collins of Maine voted against allowing debate on the Buffett Rule. Every Democrat but Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas voted to allow it. Four senators did not vote.
In combination with his fervent support for the extremist Blunt Amendment, which would have allowed employers to cut health insurance coverage for employees for anything they judged objectionable, it suggests that Brown is (a) gearing up to run as the far-right Republican he is, or (b) thinks voters don’t care about his positions on the issues, because of his skill at reading top secret eyes-only intelligence photos of Osama bin Laden sneering disdain for education, Harvard, and professors sensitive, introspective memoir.
Scott Brown said that he voted against this because it wouldn’t raise that much revenue. The bill would have raised $47 billion dollars over ten years.
Brown said:
Scott will likely cast his lot in voting against symbolic Republican bogeymen such as NPR or NEA (maybe he’s already done so) and will say that is doing this because we “can’t afford” those programs.
His hypocrisy must be pointed out to the regular voters. He is not an independent voice. He votes for the 1%.