The other shoe drops, thereby discrediting all the liberal hand wringing about Kerry going to State

[beachmom]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/02/01/scott-brown-wont-run-for-senate/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014387553

Looking forward to Senator Markey!!!

[C_U_L8R]

1. Funny the Mass GOP doesn't even mention this guy...

Mitt "I really do live in Massachusetts I do" Rmoney.

[madinmaryland]

2. Who??

[leveymg]

3. It wasn't really "liberal" handwringing about Kerry. It was mostly the neocons

Last edited Fri Feb 1, 2013, 04:18 PM - Edit history (1)

who preferred Rice and were anxious about Kerry's willingness to go for the kill in Syria, Lebanon and Iran.

[Mass]

4. I am all for Markey,

but this is mostly SCLM in DC and NYC that pushed the meme Brown was running and could not be beaten.

In at least the last few weeks, the Boston media were all but predicting that for reasons that were clear, including 4 races in 4 years.

This and the preference for Rice are two memes that they propagated for weird reasons.

[beachmom]

5. Yup. Skepticism seems to be the only way to treat these articles.

Especially since now Josh Marshall (on the other thread I posted on) is saying he never got the vibe from the POTUS that Rice was his first choice for State. Sheesh.

[politicasista]

6. Then

why is he mad at Kerry?

Never got caught in that tidal wave here of those afraid of Brown either.

[Mass]

7. Where?

[politicasista]

8. In a reply

to beachmom in her OP.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1109&pid=2530

[Mass]

9. I have seen that, but where is the criticism?

And frankly, it is not a big deal.

OK, I see it is TPM Prime, but I doubt it is a big deal, from her comment. I also wondered why he let that out. But frankly, this is no big deal.

[politicasista]

10. He (Marshall) thought it was about ego

and a dig at Rice (who put a nice tweet after Kerry was confirmed by the Senate). No big deal, just wondering if he had an axe to grind with Kerry.

[Mass]

11. No, just a comment,

You, however, seem to want to tell us everybody hates Kerry.

Clearly, Kerry is not sensitive to criticism or he would not have hired Glenn Johnson. So, we should just imitate him.

[politicasista]

12. No, I don't

Just wondering if the author had an axe to grind.

Wonder what he thinks about the Hagel confirmation. He is getting more sympathy from Dems because "The Club" hates him.

[Mass]

13. Josh is on record saying that Hagel was bad during the hearing and it made

things harder. This is the general opinion anyway, even if the Club's questions were ridiculous.

As for the question, it does not reflect an ax to grind, but a reasonable question about why he said that.

BTW, I know why he gave the answer. He was asked about being the second choice or something like that. However, the AP release just gives the answer, not the question, hence the fact that people are curious of why he said that, I actually thought of you when I saw the comment, as I was sure it would attract you here.

[politicasista]

14. Ok

Makes sense.

Just curious as to what Kerry thinks about McCain's vile aggression towards Hagel when he was nothing but nice to him during his confirmation hearing.

Hate that this was taken as me hating Kerry, so apologies.

[Mass]

15. I do not want to bring Hagel's hearing here.

and frankly, Kerry probably saw through this, and is smart enough not to say anything on that.

But I suggest you read the POV of smart and liberal people on this hearing, including people who support Hagel strongly. If he cannot withstand these types of criticism, how can we hope he will say no to senators and military contractors when it comes to cutting the budget? This does not mean the GOP's questions were good. They were not, but he was very unprepared and this is what we should care about, not the fact that McCain was unhappy because Hagel was refusing his leadership and expertise on military questions.

BTW, I was not saying that you hate Kerry, but that, for some reasons, you insist to tell us that other people hate him and therefore he should change.

[politicasista]

16. Ok.

Last edited Sat Feb 2, 2013, 01:06 AM - Edit history (2)

Not trying to bring this or anything here, was just curious as to what he thought (cause that got the most attention). But you are right, it may better not to say anything.

Already said I was sorry to new SOS Kerry for other things, so thanks for the replies. Peace.

[JI7]

17. did you all see this ?

republicans trying to get romneys to run ? not sure how serious it is but they would be a lot better off not running anyone.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022301329

[wisteria]

18. They can't be serious. nt

[Mass]

19. Yes, and I doubt it is serious.

However, there are rumors of Dan Winslow, a MA state legislator, considering a run. Winslow is close to Romney and was part of American Elect, therefore a moderate Republican. This said, the media have in on record saying he is not sure there is place in the Republican party for a socially moderate Republican like him.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/280715-massachusetts-state-gop-rep-mulls-run-for-kerrys-seat

In a statement, Winslow said he was "honored by so many calls and emails urging me to run for the United States Senate," adding that he would consider mounting a run over the weekend, taking into consideration whether the GOP could back a Republican with more socially liberal positions.
In particular, he said he would consider "whether there is room in the national Republican Party for a member who is both fiscally prudent and socially tolerant."


Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/280715-massachusetts-state-gop-rep-mulls-run-for-kerrys-seat#ixzz2Jsu1OnFp
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

If he has to ask, the answer is probably NO.

Which leaves few alternatives, Keith Ablow, Kerry Healey, and a business man Gabriel Gomez. Tisei has already announced he will not run (he answered the question Winslow is asking, I guess.

[JI7]

20. HHAHHAHAHAHHA

Scott Brown joining Fox NEws

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014398300

[karynnj]

21. Brown - three weeks later - making excuses for his tweets

This is pretty unlikely and pathetic. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/02/19/scott-brown-explains-strange-bqhatevwr-tweets/ Some times you need to leave well enough alone.

He does say he may be interested in running for governor. I hope the MA reaction to that is "Bqhatevwr". I guess he is so upset that people assume that he had too much to drink, but this excuse makes no sense. (Not to mention, he has been on twitter and facebook for a long time - and I don't think he had staff to write them since he left the Senate. )

[Mass]

22. Remember, he was meeting kings and queens all the time.

His attempt to find an explanation (as unlikely as it is) may come from the fact that his prestation on Hannity was a bust. Who goes on Hannity to complain about partisanship? So, he may be looking for another career.

Anyway, BMG has a good take about this excuse:

http://bluemassgroup.com/2013/02/scott-browns-hilariously-non-credible-explanation-for-bqhatevwr/

Now, with all due respect to ex-Senator Brown, that is a ridiculous explanation. You can conceivably put your phone in your pocket and then accidentally dial someone’s number (the “pocket dial”) or accidentally post a tweet; such a tweet would probably consist of a couple of nonsense characters like “asdf” that accidentally got pressed. But sticking your phone in your pocket whereupon it accidentally types “bqhatevwr” and then posts to your Twitter account – no, that is not possible (or, more precisely, the probability of such a thing happening is vanishingly small). And the fact that “bqhatevwr” was immediately followed up by the correctly-spelled “whatever” shows that, in fact, a “pocket tweet” is not what happened. So, ex-Senator Brown is … embellishing, shall we say. Gizmodo goes into more detail about how “bqhatevwr” could not possibly have been a “pocket tweet” (key condition that would have had to be met: “Scott Brown has a very bony butt”).

What really happened is almost certainly this: Brown, irked by whatever it was that “Michael,” “Bud Parsons,” and “Matt” had to say to him, decided to respond by saying “whatever” to each of them. He hilariously mistyped that response to one of them, resulting in the now-famous “bqhatevwr” tweet (it’s unclear who he was talking to, since not only did he misspell “whatever,” he also did not include an “@” to make the tweet part of a conversation with another user), and then continued with his weird series of tweets, culminating in the grammatically-incorrect “Your brilliant Matt.” Whether or not he was drunk, I have no idea – he says he wasn’t. But he surely was not pocket-tweeting.

I have no idea why Brown went to so much trouble to concoct a story that obviously makes no sense.

[beachmom]

23. Plus, he said it was an iPhone 5, which makes it even more unlikely.

If it was a Blackberry, okay. That thing easily unlocks. But the newer smartphones require a delicate unlock motion to open the screen. So that means he would have had to leave his phone on, put it in his pocket, have not that much time go by so it didn't lock itself, and then have it type this word plus a correction. Way too much to have happen.

Seriously, the hubby has a Blackberry and that thing really does have a mind of its own. iPhone? Much more safety measures against butt calling/typing.

Dude is lying. It's better to tell the truth which actually would have been fine.

[karynnj]

24. I'm impressed by some of the comments at the end

Brown really does seem to have some major personality problems that his brief rise to fame have aggravated. This really is getting pretty sad. It seems hard to believe that the Republicans, after they lose the seat he says he could win, would then give him their nomination for governor.

[Mass]

25. Remember there is a shallow bench.

Running for Senate are 1 state rep, 1 businessman and former SEAL who was involved with the movie criticizing Obama, 2 selectmen, and one former US attorney who does not seem to want to run anyway. Not clear who will get 10,000 signatures among those, but this is hardly an interesting lineup.

Add to this Tisei, Baker, and Bruce Tarr, and you have probably every potential candidate for governor. While Baker, Tisei, and Tarr are obviously more qualified than Brown, but this is not exactly a high step.

I recommend you watch the second part of the interview. http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/21276575/2013/02/20/exclusive-scott-brown-comments-on-special-election-candidates-to-fill-seat . That is, if you have the courage.).

[karynnj]

26. Thanks for the link -- and my sympathy for Brown is completely GONE

after he took the loss of clout for MA to mean that HE was not there! ( without a word admitting Kennedy to him was a loss of clout and Kerry was FAR more important than he ever was.) Not to mention, he says that he passed 5 bills - when he actually didn't. He still is arguing that he was very important.

His comment that he said nothing because he thought Patrick was going to change the rules - but it polled badly is stupid as there would be no loss to him having said he would run in a race that then would not happen. In fact, it could then have been said that Patrick and the Democrats did that fearing him. It is also silly that he said ALL the polls showed him 20 plus points up. A simple change of word to a "majority" or "most" makes a similarly strong statement without lying.