Tea party Part II

Predicting election outcomes these days is like guessing whether or not it will snow two weeks from now.
The victory of Scott Brown in Massachusetts is a shocker. Nobody in his wildest imagination could conceive that a relatively unknown Republican candidate could win the seat that was practically the property of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy for forty years.
Massachusetts is the kingdom of liberalism and Obama just took the state by a landslide in the last presidential elections. What happened?
Scott Brown, the candidate who drives a truck that was mocked by Obama, let the voters knew where he stood. He promised that he would be the 41st vote in the senate in opposition to the health care bill. He decried the lack of transparency in the crafting of the proposed legislation. He said that he would rather spend federal resources to hunt for terrorists rather than for attorneys to defend terrorists. He was the antithesis of Ted Kennedy.
Citizens of Massachusetts know something about health care reform. During the administration of former Governor Mitt Romney, the state government expanded health care coverage to its citizens. The largesse resulted in the coverage of up to 97% of its citizens.
One cannot quarrel that it was a very noble intention. According to Steve Forbes in his recent TV appearance, 70% of Massachusetts citizens initially approved of the expanded coverage. It did not take long however for reality to sink in. The actual cost of the health reform overshot budget estimates. Insurance premiums increased at a rate faster than the increase in costs. Public approval of the health reform fell to 30%.
So when Pres. Barack Obama descended on Massachusetts to campaign for Democratic candidate Martha Coakley, the people just shrugged when he told them to swallow this health care pill, its good for you. In their minds they said, we know better, Barrack. Been there, done that. Even Union members defied their leadership and went for Brown. Wall Street Journal reports that a poll of union households conducted by Hart Research Associates for the AFL-CIO found that 49% of Massachusetts households voted for Brown while only 46% voted for Coakley.
Critics of the health reform package designed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid say that Browns victory is a clear repudiation by the people of Pres.Obamas over reaching agenda.
But the president is not waving a white flag. In a battle of spins, he attributes Browns win to the same reasons that made him win the presidency. Appearing in Good Morning America the day after the election debacle, he explained that people are frustrated over the failed policies of his predecessor. Oh yeah, blame Bush. When in trouble, blame Bush It has become the default defense of the Obama administration. so automatic that it made him look ridiculous. If people were upset with Bush, why would they dump Obamas candidate and vote for a Republican?
After the backdoor wheeling and dealing to pamper a couple of Democratic senators and labor unions that could cost taxpayers billions of dollars, it appeared the Democrats were poised to run over Republican opposition. The Massachusetts Tea Party of the new era has brought pause to the arrogance of Congressional Democrats and the White House that have so far refused to heed the clamor of the people- do not increase our burdens, now and in decades to come. The job market is bad enough, do not make it worse.
The people of New Jersey have spoken. The people of Virginia have spoken. The people of Massachusetts have spoken. They all said no to Barack. Ignore the people at your peril. Blame Bush has run its course. The buck now stops with Barack.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *