Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

April 15, 2010

QUOTE OF THE DAY.... Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) was asked for his opinion yesterday on the financial regulatory reform bill advancing in the Senate. "I can't support it,'' he said.

Explaining why, the Republican said one of his main concerns is that the legislation is "going to be an extra layer of regulation." Which is, of course, true. That's the point of the legislation. The financial industry went unchecked and nearly destroyed the global economy. That's why the legislation is being considered -- to bring oversight and accountability through regulation.

What was especially interesting, though, is hearing the confused senator try to explain how he'd like to see the legislation improve. (thanks to reader R.L.)

Brown left open the possibility that he could support a compromise.

"I want to see when it's going to come up, how it's going to come up,'' he said. "I'm always open to trying to work something through so it is truly bipartisan.''

Brown, whose vote could be critical as Democrats seek to find a GOP member to avoid a filibuster, assiduously avoided talking about specifics.

When asked what areas he thought should be fixed, he replied: "Well, what areas do you think should be fixed? I mean, you know, tell me. And then I'll get a team and go fix it.''

To clarify, when the senator asked "Well, what areas do you think should be fixed?" he was talking to a reporter who wanted to know what kind of changes he hoped to see.

Brown went on to say that he finds the notion of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency problematic because "it's more government." He added, "Is that good? ... If it's an area we need to fix, then I'm certainly open to it. But I haven't heard that that's the biggest thing that's problematic with it.''

Do you ever get the feeling that maybe Scott Brown isn't quite ready for prime-time, and that his service in the Senate is more humiliating than it should be?

Steve Benen 2:05 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (41)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

handlers musta been on break...
this kinda shit dont last long in massafuckingchusetts

Posted by: neill on April 15, 2010 at 2:03 PM | PERMALINK

Clearly, he's stupid. He's a himbo.

Posted by: SaintZak on April 15, 2010 at 2:05 PM | PERMALINK

One word: Idiot

Posted by: winddancer on April 15, 2010 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINK

but he poses Nekkid and drives a pickup truck . Gee what more do you need?

Posted by: john R on April 15, 2010 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINK

The problem with Brown is that he actually wants to be a good Senator and actually do stuff while he belongs to a party that wants to make sure nothing happens. So when he asks to be briefed about the bill all he gets from his party is IT'S BAD, KILL IT!!! and so he's left floundering by himself.

Posted by: Rob on April 15, 2010 at 2:09 PM | PERMALINK

The problem with Brown is that he actually wants to be a good Senator and actually do stuff

So far, all he's done is say "no" to anything coming out of Reid's or Obama's mouth, or, alternatively, the Palin two-step when he has no clue as to what he's talking about. Which is frequently the case. Also.

Posted by: dr. bloor on April 15, 2010 at 2:15 PM | PERMALINK

The only good thing to come of the Brown situation is that Mass. will likely replace him with a better Dem Senator in two years, as opposed to Coakley.
If they aren't already embarassed to be stuck with him, they will be.

I shouldn't talk though, I could get stuck with Toomey for a full six. Although I still think Santorum was even worse.

Posted by: Allan Snyder on April 15, 2010 at 2:16 PM | PERMALINK

Scott Brown isn't quite ready for prime-time

Scott Brown isn't quite ready for time, period. From an intellectual standpoint, he's still "primordial ooze" in the gray-matter department....

Posted by: S. Waybright on April 15, 2010 at 2:17 PM | PERMALINK

Well, no surprises here from Scott "I'll be the 41st vote, not the 60th vote" Brown.

Posted by: June on April 15, 2010 at 2:19 PM | PERMALINK

Sounds to me like he has the misfortune of being a more or less normally honest human being and a Republican Senator. One of those two has got to go.

Posted by: MattF on April 15, 2010 at 2:26 PM | PERMALINK

That exchange with the reporter was really pathetic. He can't support financial regulatory reform but he can't intelligently explain why? His responses were incoherent. I wonder if buyers remorse has set in yet with the voters of Massachusetts?

Posted by: Ladyhawke on April 15, 2010 at 2:34 PM | PERMALINK

Aren't they (Senate Republicans) all incoherent?

It's like he's begging the Democrats to come to him and make a deal so he can win reelection in 2012, knowing that the Democratic turnout is going to be HUGE in a Presidential year.

I say don't bother with him until he does his own homework and stops trying to crib notes from reporters.

Posted by: Lance on April 15, 2010 at 2:40 PM | PERMALINK

He's been running for reelection since he was elected. He knows his chances of getting reelected aren't great. The more obfuscation the better. If he can't be pinned down no one will vote against him.

Posted by: jeff on April 15, 2010 at 2:40 PM | PERMALINK

He's got a team

Posted by: mcc on April 15, 2010 at 2:41 PM | PERMALINK

I just don't think that he is very smart.

Posted by: Maritza on April 15, 2010 at 2:45 PM | PERMALINK

The emperor has no clothes.

Posted by: CJColucci on April 15, 2010 at 2:48 PM | PERMALINK

Good God. Is there anyone with a functioning synapse left in the GOP? I mean, really? A U.S. Senator asking a reporter for ideas to fix a broken financial system that nearly brought us to the edge of societal collapse? This is The Attack of the Brain-Dead Zombies, for fucks sake. I feel sick....

Posted by: Sam Simple on April 15, 2010 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINK

The worst interview Ted Kennedy ever gave was the Roger Mudd interview of legend. Every interview this guy gives is worse than that.

Worst than Kennedy's worst is the new normal?

Posted by: Edward Furey on April 15, 2010 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINK

As I understand it, he got elected because the Democratic candidate tried to mail in the election, and he drove the pick-up he uses to shuttle his daughter and her pony to equestrian competitions during the campaign so he could look like a regular workin' stiff.

Massuachusetts voters went for it, they're getting what they deserve.

If Brown has the intelligence and common sense to draft or even vote for a single piece of legislation that benefits his state, I'll eat my hat.

Posted by: Winkandanod on April 15, 2010 at 2:56 PM | PERMALINK

He's basically saying(almost literally saying), "There are things that need to be fixed, but I don't know what they are. Somebody tell me so I can try to fix them."

Really, Coakley must have been an even worse candidate than I ever imagined.

Posted by: Allan Snyder on April 15, 2010 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

I agree with Rob @ 2:09 - my impression of Brown is that he knows he must be effective if he wants his political career to go any further, but is bound to a party that is sworn to destroy the present government. That'd make anyone do the two-step in a disproportionally difficult effort to see far down the road to where his remarks of the moment will be interpreted. He needs the backing of his mad-dog party, but he needs to be mindful of sticker shock on the part of Massachusetts voters.

It's no reflection at all on his intelligence, and a few who have a knee-jerk tendency to start throwing the term "idiot" around ought to practice a bit in front of a mirror, throwing out responses to routine political questions that are going to be scrutinized by two camps who are pathologically opposed.

I'd remind them Scott Brown voted "yes" on the Jobs Bill, and was so eager to cast his first vote that he interrupted the clerk as he read the roll. His reasons for doing so are irrelevant to its passage.

It's difficult to imagine a return to the days of old-world courtesy as it once prevailed, when politicians respectfully disagreed and voting across party lines was common. It's impossible if everyone who doesn't say what you want to hear is automatically an idiot.

Posted by: Mark on April 15, 2010 at 3:09 PM | PERMALINK

Mark, so the thing is, I don't have to practice systematically saying things I don't mean or making up on-the-spot contortions to make me constantly appear to believe the opposite of what I actually do. *Because I'm not enough of an idiot to take a job where I'm put in that sort of situation*.

Posted by: mcc on April 15, 2010 at 3:28 PM | PERMALINK

Sounds to me like he has the misfortune of being a more or less normally honest human being and a Republican Senator. One of those two has got to go.

He's also incredibly ignorant about the issues the Senate has in front of it. He got elected nearly 3 months ago; he's had time to study up on things at least a tiny bit by now.

Most of us posting to this thread could give a coherent answer to the reporter's question off the top of our heads, and we've got day jobs and stuff. He's now a full-time U.S. Senator, and he's got a staff that can do research and outline the issues to him, and yet he punts the question back to the reporter: he doesn't even have a take on what problems need to be fixed, let alone what to do about them.

Pathetic excuse for a human being. If he's not willing to do the job, he should step aside and let MA have another special election.

Posted by: low-tech cyclist on April 15, 2010 at 3:34 PM | PERMALINK

Palin with a penis.

Posted by: Steve M. on April 15, 2010 at 3:43 PM | PERMALINK

But he has some sort of truck instead of an RV, right? And that seems cool. He definitely should be a senator.


Posted by: eric on April 15, 2010 at 3:52 PM | PERMALINK

He'd have done better with the response that Tina Fey, playing Sarah Palin used: "We're gonna look at all these problems and say 'what would a maverick do?' And then we'll do that."

Posted by: T-Rex on April 15, 2010 at 4:02 PM | PERMALINK

Steve M: Palin does have a penis.

Posted by: buddym on April 15, 2010 at 4:05 PM | PERMALINK

My sincere thanks to all the idiots I share the Commonwealth of Massachusetts with who voted for this cretin.

Posted by: noncarb on April 15, 2010 at 4:16 PM | PERMALINK

Just a thought, but is there any detectable buyer's remorse setting in yet?

Posted by: xpatriate on April 15, 2010 at 4:18 PM | PERMALINK

Wow. He's making Roland Burris look positively statesmanlike.

Posted by: digitusmedius on April 15, 2010 at 4:24 PM | PERMALINK

Hey, in his Cosmopolitan centerfold, he could cover his entire private region with his wrist. Clearly his brain isn't much bigger.

Posted by: gradysu on April 15, 2010 at 4:52 PM | PERMALINK

Brown [...] assiduously avoided talking about specifics. -- The Boston Globe

Jesus... You can't expect a guy to do a Full Monte in front of the staid Brahmins of the Globe, can you? Send someone from Cosmo (or Penthouse) for an interview and *then* see what specifics will show up.

Posted by: exlibra on April 15, 2010 at 5:13 PM | PERMALINK

Does anyone know what the hell he was talking about? Did he actually just ask the REPORTER what THEIR opinion was?

Posted by: Will on April 15, 2010 at 5:19 PM | PERMALINK

"Mark, so the thing is, I don't have to practice systematically saying things I don't mean or making up on-the-spot contortions to make me constantly appear to believe the opposite of what I actually do. *Because I'm not enough of an idiot to take a job where I'm put in that sort of situation*."

by mcc

I'm not sure we have enough information to assess what Scott Brown actually believes. Likewise, I'm not sure we have enough information to assess how important a further career in politics is to him. He's already surprised everyone twice - once when he won, and once when he voted "yes" on the jobs bill. Still nowhere near enough information to call him an idiot - people are still arguing over whether Joe Lieberman is an idiot.

I don't have a big crush on him or anything; I'm simply suggesting nothing he's done so far is sufficient evidence that he's any stupider than anyone else, and that he's already done a couple of unorthodox things. And that there are plenty of worse Republicans.

Posted by: Mark on April 15, 2010 at 5:49 PM | PERMALINK

Hey, this is the Senate, remember? He'll fit right in with Inhofe, Vitter, DeMint, McCain, Lieberman, etc., etc. They're dumbasses, too, and it never hurt them. Hell, it's an ASSET!

Posted by: Patrick Star on April 15, 2010 at 11:58 PM | PERMALINK

Palin/Brown '12! Perfect together! Mavericks on a Mission! Brains? Those are for elitists!


-Z

Posted by: Zorro on April 16, 2010 at 9:55 AM | PERMALINK

Extremely STOOOPID Massachussetts voters!!!

Posted by: Ben on April 16, 2010 at 1:45 PM | PERMALINK

I just don't think that he is very smart.

He's not paid to be. He just hasn't been told what to think yet, so that when he votes against the interests of his constituents he can say that he voted with his conscience.

Posted by: EH on April 16, 2010 at 2:56 PM | PERMALINK

"Still nowhere near enough information to call him an idiot - people are still arguing over whether Joe Lieberman is an idiot."


scott brown is an idiot. take it from a former constituent, and one who's met and spoken with him multiple times. i think he just got so used to being irrelevant -- what's more irrelevant than a GOP state senator in MA? and he got used to coasting and didn't think he'd be exposed for the incurious, unintelligent hack he really is. sorry, scotty, a complete lack of knowledge on public policy is eventually exposed by the DC press corps.

Posted by: ahoy polloi on April 19, 2010 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

Hey, Scott: Read the bill!

Posted by: Citizen K. on April 19, 2010 at 5:34 PM | PERMALINK

Citizen K. wins the thread.

Posted by: smartalek on June 28, 2010 at 3:52 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly