Scott Brown – The Libertarian Perspective by Pete Blome

Dear Fellow Tea Party members,
The election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts has been widely hailed as a victory of conservatism over the collectivist trend that exists in America.  I say it is nothing of the sort.

This is just the same old two-party setup that has led our country to the situation it is now, and lies at the heart of why there is a Tea party movement at all.

The lesser of two evils?  People are convinced that they have to use one of two parties to have any voice, when in reality they have none with either.  What have you gained?

We have to play a numbers game to win elections?  Sure, go ahead and assume everybody else is stupid, and try to outwit them by voting for something you do not want.

He was against health care, so we are ahead?  He wasn’t against health care, he was just against somebody else (not him) controlling healthcare.  He wrote the current state health plan for Massachusetts known as “Romneycare.”

Posing naked is legal, so this shouldn’t be held against him?  So is being easy, but that does not mean I would want a nude male model to lead my country.  There are thousands of real heroes out there who are not so desperate for self-aggrandizement, and would do a better job.

The major parties are experts at making you think this is the best you can get.  It is, of course, nonsense.

Vote for what you want, not for what you are given.


Pete Blome



3 Responses to “Scott Brown – The Libertarian Perspective by Pete Blome”

  1. Mary Brown Says:

    The Progressive Movement did not happen overnight, so we can not expect the Tea Party Movement to correct the ills of our nation overnight. We are electing people who differ from the progressives and share some of our principles. If we continue on this path, we will gradually rid our federal government of the politicians and replace them with American Statesmen. We have a two-party system right now and eventually, one of these parties may be the Tea Party, but for now, we have to take one step at a time. What is better – to vote for a “better” candidate who stands for some of our principles or to vote for a 3rd-party candidate who does not have a chance of winning? Do you want to end up with the Progressive by default?

  2. Bill Anderson Says:

    As far as I am concerned, Brown bought us time to try to get our ducks in order. I am more interested in who he IS more than I am in who he WAS! If they are one in the same, then we can only hope for the best. How he votes on crucial issues are what matters to me.

    In the mean time, WE need to get busy and elect people who are truly Conservatives. That will require time and MONEY. We cannot leave it for “George to do”, there aren’t enough “Georges” !

    There are things we can do locally which hopefully will spread across the country. By word of mouth or by email. Clinton got a lot of mileage out of the slogan “It’s the economy stupid.” because slogans work. We need to use our imagination.

    Right now Democrats are saying that Republicans have changed their tune on health care reform, Republicans should respond with “Republicans haven’t changed their tune, Democrats have changed the lyrics.” You might even add, “Again, and again and again” BECAUSE THEY HAVE!

    It’s worth a try.

    Scott Brown’s line from his victory speech should be repeated continuely by all Conservatives. In case you missed it, it was:

    “Taxpayer’s money should be spent on weapons to defeat terrorists, not on lawyers to defend them”

    That is a terrific line and will keep before the public the fact that the administration is willing to spend upwards of $200 million to prosecute these cowards in a civilian court when they could be prosecuted for relatively nothing in a military court.

    It seems to me to be an issue with keeping alive.

    Don’t let the Liberals dominate the editorial page, write letters and/or call into C-SPAN.

    I would have preferred that the local Tea Party had formed as a 501 (c) 4 organization or a 527 organization rather than a 501 (c)3 so we could indeed endorse a candidate just as Planned Parenthood and LaRaza do. Both receive taxpayer’s money.

    As for who will represent this district in Washington in the 112th Congress, is more or less a forgone conclusion -Jeff Miller. So I won’t be contributing to his campaign as he won with 70% of the vote last time and I suspect, does not need any money. I intend to give it to someone who really needs it.

    As for my vote, I want it to have an impact, the stakes are too high to play games which could actually result in my grandchildren paying the price for my mistakes.

    I am hoping that the Tea Party has a cleansing affect on the Republican Party, and eventually morphs into the Republican Party – not as it is today, but what it can become if we systematically work at it.

    So, I guess, if I understnd Mary Brown’s comments correctly, I find myself in agreement with her on how I will be voting.

    Finally, Chris is to be commended on the work he has done to put this thing together. It is not easy!

    Thanks Chris.

  3. Carla Says:

    I agree with Mr. Anderson. The Tea Party represents true conservative views and must morph into the new Republican party so that we can take back our country by sending elected officials to Washington who will uphold the Constitution. We need a Republican party that will get back to the roots of conservatism. I hope the Tea Party movement is the force that will create that change.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: