Nathan R. Jessup

Posts Tagged ‘Scott Brown’

Marco Rubio Kicks A*s At CPAC!

In Congress, freedom, Integrity, living free, Obama, Scott Brown, US Senate, World News on February 18, 2010 at 2:10 pm

(video provided by Gateway Pundit via The Right Scoop)

Rubio, the 38 year-old son of Cuban immigrants rocked the house today in front of thousands.  Marco Rubio’s straight talk and bold patriotism electrified audience members as they listened to his plan for the future.  First, Thaddeus McCotter, then Scott Brown, and now Marco Rubio? See a trend?  Make no mistake, these are citizens stepping up to be politicians rather than children raised to be politicians. Americans have had enough of career politicians, unlimited expense accounts and high-brow cocktail parties, they want results.

Rubio explains (via Washington Post) how the Obama administration has furthered their cause through opportunity: “They are using this downturn as cover, not to fix America but to try and change America, to fundamentally redefine the role of government in our lives and the role of America in the world,” Rubio said. “The good news is it didn’t take long for the American people to figure this out.”

UPDATE: The Washington Post covers the speech

UPDATE: Read the dailykos.com comments and story for a good laugh

Advertisements

Scott Brown: “Seat Me Now!”; Congress Tries To Jam Legislation While They Still Can

In Congress, Government Lies, Scott Brown, US Senate, World News on February 3, 2010 at 4:57 pm

What games they play…

Amazingly, Congress is trying to ram legislation through the Senate before Scott Brown is seated to benefit the American people. Thank you Congress.

(Washington Times) Massachusetts Sen.-elect Scott Brown on Wednesday demanded to be seated immediately, saying that while he is scheduled to be sworn in Feb. 11, “there are a number of votes scheduled prior to that date.”

In a letter from his lawyers to Gov. Deval Patrick and Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin, Mr. Brown argues that the results of the special election in Massachusetts on Jan. 19 are not in doubt and he should be able to take the seat right away.

“We represent Senator-elect Scott Brown. We understand that the election returns from Massachusetts cities and towns were transmitted this morning to the State Secretary’s Office and by the State Secretary to the Governor’s Office. While Senator-elect Brown had tentyatively planned to be sworn into office February 11, he has been advised that there are a number of votes scheduled prior to that date, For that reason, he wants certification to occur immediately. As he is the duly elected United States Senator from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, he is entitled to be seated now.

“Accordingly, on behalf of Senator-elect Brown, we request that the results of the special election January 19, 2010, be certified without delay and that a duplicate be provided me in hand no later than 11:00 a.m. on Thursday, February 4, 2010, so we may deliver the original by hand to the Secretary of the United States Senate in time to allow Senator-elect Brown to be administered the oath of office by the Vice President tomorrow afternoon,” wrote lawyer Daniel B. Winslow.

Read the rest of this entry »

Scott Brown: "Seat Me Now!"; Congress Tries To Jam Legislation While They Still Can

In Congress, Government Lies, Scott Brown, US Senate, World News on February 3, 2010 at 4:57 pm

What games they play…

Amazingly, Congress is trying to ram legislation through the Senate before Scott Brown is seated to benefit the American people. Thank you Congress.

(Washington Times) Massachusetts Sen.-elect Scott Brown on Wednesday demanded to be seated immediately, saying that while he is scheduled to be sworn in Feb. 11, “there are a number of votes scheduled prior to that date.”

In a letter from his lawyers to Gov. Deval Patrick and Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin, Mr. Brown argues that the results of the special election in Massachusetts on Jan. 19 are not in doubt and he should be able to take the seat right away.

“We represent Senator-elect Scott Brown. We understand that the election returns from Massachusetts cities and towns were transmitted this morning to the State Secretary’s Office and by the State Secretary to the Governor’s Office. While Senator-elect Brown had tentyatively planned to be sworn into office February 11, he has been advised that there are a number of votes scheduled prior to that date, For that reason, he wants certification to occur immediately. As he is the duly elected United States Senator from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, he is entitled to be seated now.

“Accordingly, on behalf of Senator-elect Brown, we request that the results of the special election January 19, 2010, be certified without delay and that a duplicate be provided me in hand no later than 11:00 a.m. on Thursday, February 4, 2010, so we may deliver the original by hand to the Secretary of the United States Senate in time to allow Senator-elect Brown to be administered the oath of office by the Vice President tomorrow afternoon,” wrote lawyer Daniel B. Winslow.

Read the rest of this entry »

Paul Kirk Illegally Votes In Place Of Scott Brown Today

In Congress, Corruption, Government Lies, Obama, Scott Brown, US Senate on January 29, 2010 at 3:33 am

Today the Senate voted on three major pieces of Legislation that require 60 votes to pass.

1. To raise the debt ceiling to $14.3 trillion.
2. To reduce the deficit by establishing five-year discretionary spending caps.
3. And Ben Bernanke’s confirmation.

Redstate.com explains:

According to Senate rules and precedent, Kirk’s term expired last Tuesday upon the election of Scott Brown. Furthermore, Massachusetts law can be interpreted, according to GOP lawyers, as:

Based on Massachusetts law, Senate precedent, and the U.S. Constitution, Republican attorneys said Kirk will no longer be a senator after election day, period. Brown meets the age, citizenship, and residency requirements in the Constitution to qualify for the Senate. “Qualification” does not require state “certification,” the lawyers said.

Additionally, as reported in the Weekly Standard and investigated and confirmed by GOP lawyers:

Appointed Senator Paul Kirk will lose his vote in the Senate after Tuesday’s election in Massachusetts of a new senator and cannot be the 60th vote for Democratic health care legislation, according to Republican attorneys.

Using this interpretation, Kirk cannot vote on any other legislation. Moreover, further analysis by Michael Stern concludes:

The Senate subcommittee and committee concluded, based on its hearing and review, that “the term of service of a Senator appointed to fill a vacancy in an unexpired term ends on the day when his successor is elected by the people.” 1939 Congressional Record, p. 998. There was evidently no controversy among either the subcommittee or full committee regarding this legal conclusion, and the committee then presented a resolution to the Senate for adoption, expressing the view that Berry’s term of service expired on November 8, 1938, the date of the special election. As Senator Connally, a member of the subcommittee, explained to the Senate, the fact that the Tennessee statute purported to extend Berry’s term until the qualification of his successor was of no force because the statute was “plainly in conflict with the provisions of the seventeenth amendment.” Accordingly, the Senate adopted the proposed resolution without dissent. 1939 Congressional Record, p. 1058.

Based on this authority, it would appear that a valid point of order could be raised as to Senator Kirk’s participation in Senate proceedings after January 19, 2010.

Perhaps the GOP is so accustomed to being shut out, they failed to act on such a blatant violation of Senate law. Only time will tell if today’s votes will be upheld. I am really getting tired of this nonsense.

UPDATE: Legal Insurrection discusses the legislation scam.

Robert Gibbs Struggles To Keep A Straight Face

In Corruption, Government Lies, Health Care, Scott Brown on January 24, 2010 at 3:59 pm

According to Gibbs, Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts is a great sign for Obama. The people are angry. They are angry about the last eight years [of George W. Bush], not Obama. Is anyone buying this? How long will it take before someone looks one of these delusional moonbats in the eye and says, “Are you kidding? You don’t make the slightest bit of sense.”

Let’s follow the argument: People are angry about the previous eight years of George W. Bush. Scott Brown walks in “lockstep” with George W. Bush (according to Obama, Coakley and Deval throughout the campaign). Hence, Scott Brown wins impossible election in the bluest state in the Country. Got it.

Here is part of the transcript taken from Gateway Pundit via Fox News:

Chris Wallace: It wasn’t the same thing that swept Barack Obama into office. Scott Brown explicitly campaigned against the Obama agenda. His approval rating among that electorate was 61%. Their enthusiasm for Republican policies among that electorate was 40%.

Chris Wallace: But your not suggesting that this was a mandate for Barack Obama?

Robert Gibbs: No. Of course not. But I’m also not suggesting that what you said a minute ago meets the truth test either.

Chris Wallace: You don’t think that when they voted for Scott Brown they were voting against Obama’s policies?

Robert Gibbs: That’s not what they told pollsters. No.

Robert Gibbs on Scott Brown’s win: That may be what he campaigned on but that’s not what the voters in Massachusetts said in the Washington Post poll… They did a poll of voters who participated in why they voted. Right. More people voted express their support for Barack Obama than to oppose him.

How long will the denial continue? John Edwards found the end of the road came in the form of an inconvenient paternity test. Only time will tell which piece of irrefutable evidence will ultimately force the rest to their knees; dare to dream.

Fake Pro-Life Callers Against Scott Brown

In Corruption, freedom, Government Lies, Health Care, Integrity, morality, Scott Brown on January 19, 2010 at 2:31 am

I first saw this story on Gateway Pundit (Jim Hoft) and had to spread the word. Sadly, the story is true. Should it be an indication of a person/candidate’s character when something like this is taking place? Read below:

“The most disgraceful thing is happening!

Pro-lifers are receiving phone calls from people claiming to be Mass Citizens.  The callers say that Mass Citizens is not supporting Scott Brown because of his position on health care!

The truth is that Mass Citizens is suporting Brown because of his position on health care!

These deceitful calls are coming from 202-461-3441, a Washington, DC number.  The phone company says this is a company called SOOH.  Pro-lifers are not the only victims of this scam.  Our MCFL sleuths have found that this same number is calling people across the state claiming to be different groups with different messages – all anti-Brown!

Please, please send this email to your entire list and ask those people to do the same!  This deceit must go viral!

We cannot let this election be stolen!

Keep up your great work!

Anne Fox

P S If you get the call on your answering machine, please save it.  These people should be made accountable for using our name!”

Coakley Hits New Low

In freedom, living free, Scott Brown on January 18, 2010 at 4:39 pm

Pictured above is an ad sent out two days ago to Massachusetts (or if you prefer, “MassachusettEs”) residents by the Coakley campaign. The pamphlet shows the faces of supposed rape victims in the Commonwealth. Along with the mailer, Coakley spent a whopping $2M on negative advertising in the past four days alone. Can it be that Martha Coakley and the Democratic leadership is so bewildered by Brown’s recent success, they are willing to sacrifice what little character they have to steal the election?  Shame on you all.

Several days ago Scott explained a conversation he had with his wife at the start of his run for the US Senate: “Win or lose, when this is all over I want to be able to hold my head high.” As crazy an idea as it might be; Scott actually means what he says. In his refrain from running a negative campaign, the people of Massachusetts have been witness to Scott not just as a politician, but a person. Sadly for the Coakley campaign the success of Scott Brown’s campaign could be easily explained by a six-year-old: He listens to the people and tells the truth. Imagine that.

With a ground-breaking election happening two days from now, I want to correct some of Ms. Coakley’s backbiting, and set the record straight:

Lie number one: Scott Brown wants rape victims turned away from hospitals. Really Martha? That’s really how you decide to spin this? Truth: Scott voted for a bipartisan amendment that allows religious hospitals to refer a patient seeking an abortion to an affiliate. The amendment simply protects the religious beliefs of doctors and hospitals opposed to killing unborn babies. Did I mention Scott was raised by a single mother and now lives with his wife and two daughters? It certainly is believable that Scott Brown opposes medical care for rape victims.

Lie number two: Just like Bush and Cheney, Scott only wants to give the wealthiest two percent a tax break. Again, really? Truth: Scott not only wants to give “across the board” tax cuts to all Americans, he has said it repeatedly in television ads. As a young child, Scott understood firsthand the financial struggles of a child raised on welfare. It certainly does make sense that State Senator Brown opposes stimulating the economy by making “across the board” tax cuts. Hang on, there’s more…

Lie number three: Scott Brown if elected, will be forced to further the agendas of various special interest groups as repayment for getting him elected. Yes, it’s true. With Scott’s average donation being about ten bucks, he will be forced to fight for each “special interest” group (i.e. American citizen) who so generously donated to his campaign. Further, individual donations to Brown’s campaign may not exceed $2,400. Truth: the single largest special interest group in the Country, SEIU, backs Martha Coakley. Coakley receives donations from SEIU in the tens of thousands. Also, many sizable law firms (or cronies) are contributing to Martha’s campaign with sums north of $25,000.

The people of the Commonwealth along with the Nation are angry. Tuesday January 19th marks the first opportunity for America’s voice to be heard. Tuesday’s election will most likely serve as an indicator for the upcoming elections. Get out there, make your voice heard, and help send Congress a message. I leave you with the words of Daniel Webster: “The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power.”

Curt Schilling Heavily Endorses Scott Brown

In Health Care, Scott Brown on January 5, 2010 at 12:15 pm

The people are speaking out, and they are for Scott Brown. Long gone are the days that a liberal Democrat from Massachusetts can win a landslide victory by going on vacation. Scott emailed me last night saying, “I am campaigning 24/7 and am getting a great response”. Legal Insurrection points out that Brown leads by 44% with independent voters. “Hey Martha, time to get back to work, it aint over yet”  Yesterday, Boston Red Sox Legend, Curt Schilling came out in support of Scott Brown on his 38 Pitches Blog.

Below are just a few of the voices being heard:

Read the rest of this entry »

Boston Herald: Where's Martha?

In freedom, Integrity, living free, Scott Brown on January 3, 2010 at 4:28 pm

I first saw this story on Gateway Pundit.

While Scott Brown pounds the pavement, Martha Coakley opts for a six-day vacation getaway. With Martha refusing to debate Scott one-on-one, dodging media and ignoring recent terror attacks, it’s beginning to look like her advisers are instructing her to disappear until after the election. Can you imagine taking a vacation with less than 20 days until election?

Read the rest of this entry »

Boston Herald: Where’s Martha?

In freedom, Integrity, living free, Scott Brown on January 3, 2010 at 4:28 pm

I first saw this story on Gateway Pundit.

While Scott Brown pounds the pavement, Martha Coakley opts for a six-day vacation getaway. With Martha refusing to debate Scott one-on-one, dodging media and ignoring recent terror attacks, it’s beginning to look like her advisers are instructing her to disappear until after the election. Can you imagine taking a vacation with less than 20 days until election?

Read the rest of this entry »