Scott Brown has been a huge disappointment. He has done nothing for the State since being elected and has only worked to enhance his own career within the GOP. I don't believe he supports the middle class at all. In fact, given his ties to Wall St and big oil I think he has fallen right into the trap. As for his latest stunt trying to import 10500 skilled Irish - that is shameful given the job market here. Obviously he is trying to catch the Irish vote.

He still doesn't believe in global warming... for this single-issue voter, that's pretty much all that matters.

via Facebook ...
Alex Oneto: All of the options are valid but each candidate views them differently and that's the issue in this election: How each candidate will handle each of those issues!! Clearly Elizabeth Warren will handle them to the best of America's/ MA's Needs NOT to the Needs of Big Money or The GOP...

Nothing says "in touch with the common man" like a carpet-bagging member of the academic elite

Plus, she doesn't even drive a pick-up truck!
How could anyone vote for someone who doesn't drive a pick-up truck?

Erm... Warren isn't Harvard educated either. She did attend GW, University of Houston (that bastion of socialism) and Rutgers.

But hey Scott Brown MUST be okay. Dan Marcella says he is. ;)

Yes, thinkprogress.org strikes me as a neutral, nonpartisan website. I'm glad that Senator Brown's record was posted though. Voters need to see that he's served exactly the way he said he would....as an independent voice for Massachusetts. I haven't agree with every vote, but it's nice to have a Senator who isn't beholden to a political party or agenda.

And seriously, what's up with the raging intellectual insecurity around here? I didn't go to Harvard either, but I don't tell myself bedtime stories about how people who went there aren't REALLY smart, just to make myself feel better.

And I HATE when the lamestream media refers to it as "Ted Kennedy's Seat"! Yes; he did serve on it for 40+ years, but that just makes it obvious that we need term limits. (In fairness, not just because of Ted, but countless others have sat in Congress WAAAAYYYY TOO long!)

I'm not insecure at all. The point is that liberal academics like her have the "smartest person in the room" complex. They feel a sense of superiority whereby they should dictate to the rest of us because they know better.

Yeah, I hate when people who have advanced degrees in stuff I know nothing about think that they know more than I do.

So, just out of curiosity, if a liberal academic and a conservative academic each vote on a bill before the Senate, which of them is "dictating" to the rest of us?

We'll be voting for presidential candidates on March 6th. While the state Democratic Party is holding caucuses this week, and holding a convention in June, the primary ballot isn't until September 6th - see http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/elepdf/2012_State_Election_Calendar.pdf.

Brandon (can't reply directly to your post for some reason), those aren't ideologies, those are stereotypes. I suppose I could reflexively counter with "conservatives want government to be juuuuuuust small enough to fit in my bedroom", but why bore ourselves to death? What about Brown's voting record or policy stances specifically impresses you? What about Warren's history or stances specifically displeases you?

I don't think Brown's props such as the truck, brown jacket and the singing daughter who gets paid by his campaign will work this time. He has delivered nothing since being elected. No jobs. No money to our State. Furthermore he has voted against extending unemployment during the recession and the budget which would increase taxes to the rich. I could go on and on; however, it is easier to look up his Legistlative record yourself. His Bill to prohibit insider trading only came two days after the 60 minutes expose. He says he didn't know about it until then. He should have known.

Unfortunately, the most important issue to most Massachusetts voters (whether they acknowledge it or not) is a candidate's gender.

Here's a few fun facts: Massachusetts has NEVER elected a female governor. Massachusetts has NEVER elected a female U.S. Senator. Boston has NEVER elected a female mayor. Only four times has a female been elected by Massachusetts voters to the U.S. House of Representatives.

I hope Elizabeth Warren can clear this hurdle because she would make a great Senator, but its a tough hill to climb.

Warren is well spoken and intelligent, but like most liberal idealists her opinions are ba ckwards. Her infamous "factory" speech should be reversed. We should be creating a favorable environment for business to come, we should be courting them, not promoting ways to charge them more money. Many major building and updating infrastructure projects are initially funded by fancy loans in the form of bonds, these are ultimately paid off by taxes collected by businesses. In other words the nest is not built before the businesses arrived, as she claims....something she then suggests requires business to relinquish all of their profits for, a sort of 'priveledge' tax. Everyone thrives when businesses are successful (jobs, increased tax revenue, etc) and we should be doing everything to attract businesses. She's a small and large business killer, it's amazing she doesn't get it. Instead she spouts anti-rich, anti-business, anti-success rhetoric. The democrats need you to believe these successful businesses, or successful business people are the enemies, they think it will lead to votes if they are seen as "big business" slayers. The reality is they are not our enemies but our friends....we need each other. Businesses need us and we definitely need them. Our towns need them, schools need them. Look at cities where businesses have failed or left, the entire community suffers. We need a pro-business, pro-free enterprise, low corporate/small business tax candidate. It helps us all.

Sure we can 'stimulate' jobs by essentially taking everyone's money to buy "dig a ditch, then fill it in again" jobs... at an exorbitant cost, but why not create an environment where jobs create themselves? Sure Professor Warren, no one gets rich on his/her own but the "99%" can't have jobs without business. Stop penalizing them for being successful. It will only drive business away.....then everyone will suffer.

Well-said, CB.

I'm voting for Brown because A, he genuinely seems like a nice, honest, guy, and B, he doesn't just toe the party line; he votes what he believes to be right. I'd say for a freshman Senator who's only been there two years he's had a huge impact.

Brown is cosponsoring a bill that would let any employer limit health insurance coverage for any thing they have a moral or religious objection to. Do you want employers to be able to limit coverage for vaccinations, blood transfusions, etc?

Alicia, can you post a link for that? I can't find the bill on the list of his sponsored or co-sponsored bills below, although I may be missing it because I don't know the name.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billsearch.xpd?sponsor=412384

Video of Elizabeth Warren speaking about Scott Brown's cosponsorship of this bill at last night's Reading Dems Caucus on Reading Patch at 1 p.m.

The bottom line for me is anyone who supports Elizabeth Warren supports the entitled occupiers.

Erm... could you elaborate?

Let's get serious , you as a parent have a choice to send your child to A. University
of South Carolina , Georgia , Florida , Alabama . B. Harvard , MIT , Holy Cross, Clark
Think you might choose B. ? or Your Ill and you again can choose where to go to for treatment A. Boston Hospital's or B. Savanna, Richmond, Miami, etc.
Think you might choose A ? Attacking a candidate for their success in Education or
for being an elitist begs the Question . I would suggest that co-sponsoring the Blunt
Bill on Women's contraception was and will be an issue that will haunt Brown,
His political advisers dropped the Ball on That one . as a quick aside unlikely
Richard T will make that mistake . ( much to Bright ) Luck Cy

I agree that it's ridiculous for her to claim that she's not wealthy, but to suggest that anyone who supports her automatically supports Occupy is as silly as to suggest that anyone who supports Brown automatically supports nude modeling.

In the interest of full disclosure, I personally happen to find Occupy's goals entirely too vague for my taste, but don't understand the visceral hatred directed at them. If you truly believe that Occupy is the problem, I suggest that your anger may be misdirected. And if you truly believe that paying a greater percentage of taxes on your income than Mitt Romney does is just and fair, all can say is, well... how's that self-loathing working out for you?

Talk about a "typical campaign manuever", this one by the right, since when has there been a 50% tax rate as you have "claimed"?

Of course taxes should be fair. Are you actually endorsing the idea of unfair taxation? And why is it that "class warfare" is only ever waged by the poor? Is there a different preferred term that we should use for the way the poor are routinely screwed by the rich?

Sigh. You know, just to save time, let's compile a list of terms that will make me automatically disregard you as having the intellectual capacity of a parrot: I reserve the right to add to it as we go.

class warfare
indoctrination
Harvard liberal
lamestream media (and likewise "faux news")
anything "elite" (ALL the people we're discussing here are elite)

Elizabeth Warren On Occupy Wall Street: I Created 'The Intellectual Foundation For What They Do'... from the most liberal news site... can't understand why anyone could associate themselves with that movement

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/25/elizabeth-warren-occupy-wall-street_n_1030974.html

@Diana is it fair that 50% of the country pays no income taxes and that 1% pays 40% off all income taxes collected?

Nancy, I realize it's kinda mathy, but try to focus on percentage of individual income. You do realize that those who pay no taxes are so unbelievably poor that even a rapacious government thinks it best to leave the poor souls alone?

Do you think it's fair for me to pay a higher tax rate than Romney? This is a very simple and direct question.

Brandon, I didn't call you any names. The list was directed to a general "you". I'm just trying to have a discussion about what people actually THINK, instead of a repetition of the same inane catchphrases I could find on any other website in the world.

Yes, it is unfair in my opinion that capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than earned income. You're welcome to try to change my mind.

"My answer is, yes I do believe its fair because the money invested that results in capital gains can be used to create jobs...the earned income is used to pay for the poor who pay no taxes."

Nancy, I can't parse this, can you please clarify? Are you under the impression that income is taxed based on what it might potentially be used for rather than how it comes about? If I win the lottery and promise to create a bunch of jobs should I get the capital gains tax rate rather than the gambling winnings tax rate?

Karl, how does that argument apply to individual capital gains?

The lower rate for individuals has the added bonus of incentivizing investors to put their money into the system. Without investment the economy would grind to a halt. Some people see the 15% rate and think it favors the wealthy, but remember that no investment is guaranteed to be successful. In addition to the double taxing Karl mentioned, the "reward" for the risk is a lower tax rate

Isn't the reward for risk supposed to be winning? Hey, there are winners and losers in a capitalistic society. ;)

What would you think about a graduated tax on capital gains, like there is on earned income? That would go a long way toward convincing me that it's not designed to favor the wealthy.

Technically there already is. Not only are the rates dependent upon how long an investment is held, but there are different rates per income bracket as well. As a matter of fact the hated "Bush tax cuts" set a 0% cap gains rate for the 2 lowest income brackets

Short term is graduated (and also taxed at a higher rate), long term is not (I don't consider 0>25 for infinity to be "graduated").

What % of large corporations / conglomerates are paying "Uncle Sugar" anywhere close to the top corporate rate of 39%? We all know that is not happening very often, would like to see some stats from a neutral source.

Thank you, Bob and Karl. Karl, I'm not trying to be obtuse, but can you help me to understand how the individual investor in your Sprocket example is being double taxed? Feel free to break it down like I'm a challenged kindergartner, because I am admittedly not numbers-oriented.

I personally think Governor Romney's proposal of eliminating all cap gains taxes on people making less than $200k (and keeping the rates the same for those making more) is a good start in settling Bob's middle class concerns

So, what is a "fair" rate for taxing corporations? 30%? 25%? Or less?

Even if the government imposed a smaller tax rate on corporations, who is to say that these companies (especially the multinational ones) won't try to get around paying taxes by finding loopholes? Just think about GE not paying ONE CENT of taxes to the Feds in 2010, even though they made BILLIONS in profits. Read the article here:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/general-electric-paid-federal-taxes-2010/story?id=13224558

Bob, you sound suspiciously reasonable. Are you new to the internet? ;)

Ok, I stand corrected and I understand your position. I'd argue that a tax cut like that is exactly what we need to address the bigger problems, which are jobs and the economy. It's not hyperbolic to say that many small businesses fall under the $200k threshold, so I think a cut would provide a great shot in the arm for them to expand and hire people.

Thanks Karl (I wish there were a way to respond directly to your post, someone please tell me if there is and I'm missing it), that's what I thought, and that seems fine to me. Money is taxed when it changes hands, because that's the point at which it becomes "income". Calling it a "death tax" implies that I'm being taxed for dying, which is clearly not the case. My heirs are being taxed on incoming funds.

I have the right to not be taxed twice on the same money. Money has no rights, we can tax it as many times as we like.

Bob that exemption is for investments in certain small businesses, not by small businesses

I would also add that Scott Brown is a Lieutenant Colonel in the National Guard, and has trained in Afghanistan. This is far more commendable (in my opinion anyway) than professing "law" at Harvard. The university banned the ROTC from campus some 40+ years ago (during the Vietnam War, naturally) and has JUST recently allowed them back on campus.

Judy, Scott Brown has been in the armed services since 1984, most of his time in the JAG. He's an armed services attorney not a machine-gunner.

Regarding your comment about schools. My answer would be, go public! Harvard is a label, a name brand. It's worth something in the real world, I'll give you that but the information is the same. Education is what you make of it. I'm not just spouting, I teach medical students and residents at Harvard and the best residents are from public medical schools, by far. Harvard is a name and going there doesn't necessarily make you a better student, better graduate, or better person. When Sallie Mae comes knocking, you'll be wishing you went to a public school!

BTW, many southern hospitals are leaders in medical therapeutics and research: UAB, Vanderbilt, Tulane etc...

Karl "is over simplyfing it"? he is dead on about the capital gains.The best I have read so far. Everyone please give Brown more time, heck we gave some political families generations......

I spent a decade at Bethesda Naval Hospital caring for patients, including elected officials and Supreme Court members (SecNav designees). Politicians of all stripes will pretty much say or do anything to meet the prime directive, "get re-elected". The hatchet job on Max Cleland and the Virginia campaign against war hero Lewis Puller are testimony to that. Everything is posturing...sad, indeed.

Time was when healthcare prevention was associated with smoke-cessation, dieting and exercise to avoid preventable diseases such as heart attacks, cancer and strokes. With the HHS mandate requiring contraception coverage under all insurance programs, including religious organizations, pregnancy has now moved into the realm of preventable disease.

What a great society that we live in that considers pregnancy a disease that can be prevented with a pill and “treated” with another pill.

You’ve come a long way baby!

Judy, I'm simply saying Harvard is 1 part educational institution and 1 part Hollywood sensationalism. There is nothing magical about the place. Its a mistake to assume you are automatically a success because you attend or that it's always the best move to accept an offer if you also get into the University of Vermont or UNH. I see their product everyday and I've yet to be wowed. Now, I would feign ignorance while simultaneously trying to send the message that I'm smarter than everyone, but Diana already does that so well. Geez, I'll make sure to triple check my use of coined phrases and punctuation. I fear her wrath and public ridicule, heh :)

First, Scott Brown received a lot of money from Texas and other states in the special election. I know personally of people in Texas who sent him money just because they don't like the influence that Massachusetts has in national politics. Having Republicans in the Senate benefits the national Republican agenda (which obviously benefits interests in oil and other interests in Texas). Secondly, Scott Brown is a lawyer, educated at Tufts and Boston College. To suggest that he is not part of the "elite" that conservatives love to bash is odd. It's a bit like suggesting Mitt Romney, who is worth $250 million, is "just a regular guy." Yeah, right, and I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you!

As a working man I couldn't even afford to pay Warrens real estate taxes on her home in Cambridge, nevermind the mortage. She could care less about the working family and you people know this but keep voting for people who hurt America.

Enrique,
How many poor politicians do you know in either party? Are you saying that her wealth has to do with how much she cares about working families?
Could you afford to pay Scott Brown'sreal estate taxes or mortgage?

You can support Warren all you want. I dont like her or what she stands for. Have you read about what she did to protect the insurance companies at the expense of people who were hurt?

Who do you think you are talking to? I'm not one of your kids so mind your tone

As for the so-called Conscience Exemption: I would support it if the organizations that claim it would be willing to forego accepting Federal funds. As long as they are getting money from the government, they need to conform to the same laws as do the others who get this money. The question here is: how much is their "conscience" worth? and the other question is: how deep are their religious convictions?

JP, you hit on Obama's plan. Force the private religious hospitals out of business. The rest will fall in line and then you'll get rationed healthcare along with death panels. The ironic thing is then your only option will be to pray to get better.

So Willard Romney, Dubya, and Bielat all went to Harvard, how come that's NEVER mentioned or held against them? It's only democrats who attended Harvard are ''elite''? Warren didn't attend Harvard she teaches there. It's unbelievable that going to Harvard is somehow something a democrat should be ashamed of , it's mind blowing how having a great education is something the right considers unAmerican.

I rather liked the Sunday Globe cartoon
Humor so often hit's the mark
Cy Bode

The Herald is doing so good that it gets printed by the Globe. They moved all their production to a non UNION sweatshop in Chicopee. The Herald will be gone long before the Globe. But I hope not because we need 2 newspapers. And what will all you wingnuts ''read''? I think Cowie Harr wrote a column on ''hacks'' today , democratic hacks of coarse, because we all know that there are NO republican hacks ?

Dan, she's an actual professor. Do you just not understand the proper use of quotation marks?

Jeremy Lin went to Harvard.

Jeremy Lin went to Harvard.

Of course he would, he went to Yale. :)

Kudos on the correct use of quotation marks, though.

Aw shucks that's too bad, you were so "entertaining"!!!