We have all heard of famous comebacks before. Richard Nixon made a historic political comeback after having the 1960 election stolen and losing the CA governors race in 62. My favorite was Elvis Presley relaunching his singing career in the NBC 1968 Comeback Special.
Scott Brown reminded me of Elvis during his appearance on The Sean Hannity Show. He looked great, relaxed, comfortable, and answered the political questions with such ease, much like The King sang Jail House Rock for the first time after 10 years of doing sub-par movies.
Like Elvis, Brown surely has his critics here on BMG. One said he has limited intelligence, another said his political career is over now. One said he was surprised Brown made it as far as he did. That may be true when you consider he wasn’t growing up on the ragged-edge of the middle class, he was up to his neck in poverty quicksand, with a sexual predator trying to push his head below the surface. Brown not only survived, but was successful in life, without taking any shortcuts, such as claiming to be something you are really not……He did it the old fashioned way, he earned it.
What I see is a very smart individual, who just relaunched his political career. Similar to Elvis getting tired of his horrible movie scripts, Scott Brown tossed aside the B-Grade politics of Massachusetts by deciding not to run, and setting his sights on another arena, where his message will be received by the majority of the voters. By doing political commentary on Fox, he will give the listeners an insight as to how dysfunctional Harry Reid and his lieutenants, Schumer and Durbin really are. No budget passed in the Senate for over four years, limited debates or amendments allowed on bills, etc, Scott Brown’s popularity will grow, he will sell his home in Massachusetts, escape Deval’s tax increases, and buy a home in tax-free New Hampshire, his new stage, just as the Vegas Hilton was for E.P.
Jeanne Shaheen, your next opponent in 2014 (non presidential year) will be Scott Brown, be prepared to lose. Clearly NH would have the best looking senators in the nation. Kelley Ayotte/Scott Brown would be like Ann Margaret/Elvis Presley. Wow, can hardly wait.
Absolute garbage posting. Dan, are you sure when “one said he has limited intelligence” he was referring to you?
I can’t wait to see your comparison of Scott Brown to Ashton Kutcher’s comeback on Two and a Half Men. What garbage!
Downrate his comments, but otherwise ignore him, maybe he’ll go away
With his “months” of experience?
This is what I got. Male Sarah Palin – just trying to squeeze as much cash as he can. Pretending to run or hint at it just enough to get people like you excited and keep watching and buy whatever crap he’s going to publish.
Now Herman Cain, he’s going to be interesting. I might even watch (who am I kidding, I’m not going to watch), but the guy seems to have a decent sense of humor. He’ll say enough wacky stuff that the far right will enjoy his appearances. Hey, it’s just political entertainment after all. People liked to hear Johnny Most for his unbiased calls of Celtic games? No. It’s your team, it’s more enjoyable he hear it from your viewpoint. Jack Edwards with the Bruins.
Brown to his credit, probably won’t give Hannity enough red meat that he’ll crave during his show. My overall take from the clip of Brown’s appearance: boring dipshit.
He’ll fan the flames with each passing election, no doubt, but he’s done. He just wants your money.
Jack Edwards is awesome and I loved Johnny Most calling a Celtics game.
you’re just going to feel used.
Jack Edwards, it is an act? Or is he insane? Whatever it is, he’s entertaining.
To me, he kinda looks like former Boston Mayoral candidate David Finnegan, same thin body frame. Of the whole bunch in 1983, he was my favorite. Reminds me of Christy Mihos too, ranting and raving, funny to watch and listen too.
Edwards can be over the top comparing a Bruins win over Montreal to the Minuteman defeating the Red Coats, like saying we all will be under water in 50 years unless we curb our appetite for energy….
voted for NAFTA.
But thanks for commenting on my post
I was just being a nudge.
I think it’s more of a guilty conscience. You don’t like Ed Markey, especially after I exposed how he voted on those trade bills, and worse, why he voted for them…he sold his vote to Clinton for a political favor.
Mark- join me or better yet, join Striker, and the house of cards known as Markey’s support base, will just collapse, as evidence in the latest poll.
you inspiring to research NAFTA. It’s been hard to find more recent info. I’ve found some union stuff and some economics stuff. They look at things in the aggregate with trade offs. Brad Delong expected more out of NAFTA, he was with the Clinton Administration at the time. In part, China derailed whatever good stuff was supposed come out of NAFTA. Still haven’t found what I’m looking for.
I actually supported NAFTA. I also thought the common currency in the EU was a good idea. I didn’t know much then. I know more now. No guilty conscience.
It seems to me that you put too much stock in liking a candidate. Scott Brown was not pro-union or pro-worker, yet you supported him. Makes no sense to me. Honestly, I don’t care much if I like a candidate. If I do, great. If not, they just have to be better than the alternative. I’m not crazy about Obama’s presidency, but I never would have voted for McCain or Romney. And unless his past is prologue to his future, I don’t care much about his past.
The MTA endorsed Markey, and unless one of my Congressmen, retiring and remaining, endorse Lynch, it’s a done deal for me. With that said, should Lynch win the primary, I’ll gladly support him and perhaps work for him.
troll runs away from an argument?
How sad to think an individual would put his one and only vote in the hands of a union boss or rely on a political endorsement of an elected politician.
Either case, what you are saying is you can’t make your own decision, do your own research, make your own independent analysis of the race. You fail to see that your union has its own selfish interest in mind, not the interest of the country as a whole. In other words, the “ME” generation. Word of advise regarding politicians, trust them as far as you can throw them. But since pro- life Harry Reid endorsed Ed Markey, that alone should make you running for the hills and to the Lynch Campaign. I did not want to point this out to you or BMG, but since you asked me to respond, I had no choice.
I didn’t know it was pro-union to tax Cadillac health care plans under Obamacare. Who tends to have those? Yep, union folks, here in Waltham, their workers have diamond-studded plans.
You can go back to my comments on the Brown/Warren race, pretty clear my disgust for Warren. At the State of The Union, she was up and down on her seat applauding Obama, she reminded me of a “Jack In The Box”. Conversely, Brown would sit with his legs crossed, reading and taking notes, going to Obama after the speech asking him to get Harry Reid to move his insider trading bill.
Thanks for admitting your mistake on NAFTA and GATT. I agree, many got it wrong, although I said from the beginning it was horse-dung and why I voted for (hold your breath) Pat Buchanan in 92 over Bush and Perot in 92-96 general.
Final suggestion, don’t go to the level of mike cote, it adds no value and as you can see, I ignore him. You are better than that and was a little disappointed in your latest comment.
Do you really not take into account opinions of people and organizations that you trust? Mark has not at all surrendered his right and ability to vote his own conscience. If Mark is in a union then he also voted for the union leadership to look at races on his behalf and as such represent him. If he happens to disagree he is of course free to vote his own way. Politicians are also elected by the people and often work with the candidates if they are colleagues as would be the case for any House member not running, so their insight is certainly valid. Your comment about Reid endorsing Markey, therefore vote for Lynch based on Reid being prolife just plain has no logic. Mark has not stooped to Mike Cote’s level, but it is the height of pot, kettle, black for you to be the one advising not to go there.
call you a horse’s ass, but that really doesn’t quite cover it. What you are is intellectually dishonest. Deeply and fundamentally. You write well, you’re not stupid, but when it comes down to it, you’re more concerned about defining yourself and other people than policy or outcomes.
It’s not your opinions or political perspective, it is the way you communicate. It’s talk radio conversation, not about issues, not about policy, not about outcome, it’s about identity. I’ve heard it on WEEI, where they guys spend all their time not investigating an issue, but investigating how the other guy could possibly hold their opinion. It’s not illuminating, it’s stupid. I want to know why the Red Sox, and I get one idiot arguing about how the other could possibly hold that opinion. What ensues is an argument about how the other guy could hold the opinion. Ultimately, that’s what makes you a waste of time. You patronize, you cajole, and intentionally misunderstand what other people are saying. But in the end, you fail to make anyone wiser because in the end, politics for you is a talk radio show.
…when NAFTA was approved.
from Congress now.
Just like Palin’s political career has been reinvigorated by appearing on Fox? Or Mike Huckabee? Or Newt Gingrich? Or Rick Santorum. It seems more like getting hired by Fox pretty much signals the end of one’s (successful) political career.
It is going to be *really* hard for Brown to appear on Fox regularly without saying something that could be used against him in a future campaign in Massachusetts. Maybe it would help him to get elected in a Red State.
for one of the funniest posts on BMG in a long time. A grand slam? Senator from NH? Elvis, for God’s sake? Comedy gold, I tellya.
“he will sell his home in Massachusetts, escape Deval’s tax increases, and buy a home in tax-free New Hampshire,”
NH is hardly tax-free, especially when it comes to property.