Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Scott Brown is Really, Really Good
Below, a couple of minutes of the recent debate between Republican Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts and his Democratic opponent, Elizabeth Warren.
Maybe I should warn you that you’re likely to feel a touch of cognitive dissonance: Brown, the Republican, takes the liberal side of the argument, slamming big corporations–and Warren’s decision to represent Travelers’ Insurance, the biggest insurance company in the country. But, a) to get elected in the Bay State, Brown is going to have to portray himself as independent, and, b) what he’s really doing here is using Warren’s liberalism against her, placing her on the defensive by demonstrating her hypocrisy.
Go ahead and watch. Once you get over that moment of dissonance, you’ll be able to sit back and enjoy yourself. A deft act of political jiu-jitsu.
Oh, and by the way, the Boston Globe story about the Travelers’ case supports Brown, not Warren.
Published in General
You have to have a lot of brass to practice law without a license and then run for political office. Did she think Brown would not do his opposition research? And what about the chance that Travellers’ would sue to get their 200 grand back? The lady has more brass than a Russian samovar.
If you don’t think Canadians can open up with both barrels then watch this historical archive footage from 1988 when John Turner and Brian Mulroney scrapped over Free Trade with the United States.
I’m probably just not smart enough to understand, but I read the Globe’s story to support Warren, at lease in her intentions. They said, in effect, that she helped Traveller’s to setup a fund that folks would get paid out of so there’d be no more law suits and they’d get their money. Once she was out of the picture things went sideways. If that is what really transpired, how can that be classified as her siding with the insurance company over the little guy? Did I miss something, or is it because I live in Washington that the story is filtered?