When I woke up this morning, I immediately checked the Scott Brown moneybomb total and was thrilled to see that it had raised $1, 303,302.50. Woohoo! Considering that the original goal of $500,000 was reached at around 4 p.m. yesterday and the the donations were coming not from huge organizations or special interests but from ordinary patriots across the country (nothing “ordinary” about us!), this is truly astounding. But the fight isn’t over yet. Last night’s debate showed Croakley at her worst–cold, sneering, and obviously unsure how the Senate works (she thinks she’d be voting on the House bill, for God’s sake), and Brown, if not at his best, certainly miles better than Croakley, he understands the war on terror, how legislative bodies work, and what needs to be done to spur job growth (the Globe, er, that’s the Boston Globe, a lefty rag owned by the NYT, to those outside MA, actually gives a decent overview of the debate). And that dastardly, SEIU- and ACORN-supported Croakley is up to the same old tricks. One of Brown’s supporters told me that she was chatting with a union guy outside the debate last night, he was holding a Croakley sign, and he told her that he wouldn’t be there if his union hadn’t paid him $50.00 to hold that sign. Astroturf, anyone?
And of course, the disingenuous nasties don’t stop there. Consider the following Croakley ad “Lockstep Republican”:
Two things here strike me as quite awful: one, why is “lockstep” narrated over an image of Rush Limbaugh holding up his hand (ala Hitler?)? Bizarre. And two, the implication, no, statement, that Brown supports “denying emergency contraception to rape victims.” That’s patently misleading and refers to an amendment Brown co-sponsored that would prevent forcing medical personnel to perform procedures (like abortions) or provide drugs (the so-called “morning after pill” to which this ad refers without saying so) despite their own religious objections. As I’ve written before, I oppose this, too. Forcing someone to do something that they think is morally wrong, even a sin in the eyes of their God, is reprehensible. And it is intolerant. Squared.
Pretending that this protection of Christian (and Muslim) doctors who cannot, in good conscience, prescribe this drug (or perform abortions), would impair a woman’s ability to get these drugs or procedures is disingenuous at best, downright dishonest at worst. Hospitals are not staffed by one physician, this isn’t the wild west where you can’t find a doctor for a hundred miles. This is friggin’ Massachusetts, tiny state, crammed with hospitals (we joke about Dunkin Donuts being on every corner, and right next to every DD is a hospital, clinic, or some other medical facility . . . well, pretty much). If one physician cannot, for moral reasons, prescribe the morning after pill, then a thousand more can and will. Even if it took said rape victim three days to find one, and it would take no more than three seconds, she’d still receive it in time (within 72 hours) to avert an unwanted pregnancy that could result from rape. Furthermore, any woman, raped or not, can easily find doctors who will prescribe this drug. It’s legal, after all, and readily available.
Also, Brown is not in favor of denying prescription drug coverage to seniors, that’s patently absurd. What he IS in favor of, here in MA, and one might imagine nationally, is allowing individuals to purchase insurance plans that suit their needs without having to pay the current fine that we all have to pay (and that will go national and be far worse if ObamaCare passes; here in Mass, you won’t be thrown in jail if you don’t pay!). Oooh, that evil man! He doesn’t think that people who aren’t . . . oh, men, should have to pay for erectile dysfunction coverage or that men should have to pay for in vitro coverage (personally, I don’t think that either should be covered at all, but that’s just me). Brown’s recommendations are spot-on and that kind of thinking would be very helpful if he gets elected and we can really start the whole healthcare reform debate from scratch–not that this will happen, but his level-headedness and supermajority-breaking vote are needed in D. C. to stop other pending legislation that will bankrupt this country, and he will oppose this administration’s determination, and Croakley’s, to treat terrorists as criminals who should get “the right to remain silent,” and he will oppose showcase trials that provide a pulpit for their twisted ideology. As he said last night, with him in the Senate we can finally begin debate on healthcare reform in this country–Croakley seems proud that with her in the Senate as the 60th, filibuster-breaking, lockstep-radical democratic vote, all debate would be shut down and that one party will decide what happens to 1/6 of our nation’s economy. Is that what our founding fathers intended?
Update. Here is Scott Brown’s rebuttal to the Croakley craziness that attacks Brown rather than defending her own positions (if she had any that weren’t exactly in line with whichever wind is blowing in Washington, maybe that’s why she attacks? Dunno.). Notice how Brown is dignified and retains his principles rather than sinking to her level.