Brown serious and humorous—and equally sharp at both

Two good passages from Scott Brown’s victory speech:

And let me say this, with respect to those who wish to harm us, I believe that our Constitution and laws exist to protect this nation—they do not grant rights and privileges to enemies in wartime. In dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them.

* * *

It all started with me, my truck, and a few dedicated volunteers. It ended with Air Force One making an emergency run to Logan. I didn’t mind when President Obama came here and criticized me—that happens in campaigns. But when he criticized my truck, that’s where I draw the line.

And here’s a perfect combination of wit and seriousness, from Boston radio host Michael Graham at his blog:

Don’t buy the spin that it was all Coakley’s fault. It’s true that Martha was her own “Massachusetts Miracle,” combining the down-home, populist charm of John Kerry with the political skills of the ‘88 Dukakis campaign. But Bay State voters have proven they’ll elect just about any Democrat, no matter how lame.

Right, Gov. Patrick?

Here’s a good one from an L-dotter:

Reply 40—Posted by: 10sgal67 be, 1/19/2010 10:02:13 PM

Now, this is what I call real hope and change.

Obama is going to have a good time celebrating his first year as President tomorrow.Hee! Hee! Hee!

mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmmmmm

- end of initial entry -

Mike Berman writes:

You quoted Michael Graham:

Don’t buy the spin that it was all Coakley’s fault. It’s true that Martha was her own “Massachusetts Miracle,” combining the down-home, populist charm of John Kerry with the political skills of the ‘88 Dukakis campaign. But Bay State voters have proven they’ll elect just about any Democrat, no matter how lame.

Right, Gov. Patrick?

Liberal pundits are tripping over each other to tell us what a terrible candidate Martha Coakley was and that we should not interpret her defeat as a referendum on Obama or the Democrats. If she was so bad, how is it that back in December, Coakley beat her closest opponent by 19 points in a primary in which she got stronger by the day?

Tim W. writes:

Scott Brown appears to be the real deal. It’s been noted throughout the media that he’s the first Republican elected to the Senate from Massachusetts since 1972. But it’s better than that. The few Republican Senators to serve the Bay State since the New Deal have been mostly known for not being conservative. So Brown would seem to be the first Senator in almost a century elected in that state by campaigning in opposition to national liberal policies.

To the best of my knowledge, the last time such a thing occurred was when Henry Cabot Lodge Sr. crusaded against Woodrow Wilson Progressivism and the League of Nations. Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. later served in the Senate, but he was known for being a prototypical Eastern Establishment Republican who counseled acceptance of the New Deal. He also helped stop conservative Robert Taft from getting the GOP presidential nomination. Then there was Leverett Saltonstall, a blue blooded Boston Brahmin who never rocked the liberal boat. And finally, Edward Brooke, the black Republican who was as liberal as Ted Kennedy and who apparently had an affair with Barbara Walters while in office.

A historic election indeed when Massachusetts elects a man to fight against socialized medicine and ACLU benefits for terrorists.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 20, 2010 02:13 AM | Send