Martha Coakley wants to be a US Senator. Martha Coakley should not be allowed to represent any part of our government, and certainly not grace the seat held for decades by the Kennedys.
I am never confused with a Democratic Party apologist. I am conservative in action, though sometimes more moderate or liberal in thought. But I wouldn't vote for Coakley even if I were to the left of James Carville.
For decades the Kennedys (mostly Teddy, though JFK before him) represented Massachusetts and the Democrats well in the US Senate.. I don't have to agree with their policies or their politics to recognize good Senators when I see them. Teddy Kennedy was never meant to hold the highest office in the land--too volatile--and he is certainly no paragon of virtue--see Chappaquiddick. But he was a good senator, and an effective representative for strong liberal values. As a conservative, one could always count on Teddy to be consistent in his liberalism.
That consistency is a virtue.
Martha Coakley is a bumbling attorney who has always looked beyond the mark. When she was a prosecutor she inherited the toxic Amirault case...and prosecuted it beyond rational limits. Her career is littered with personal grand-standing and zero political consistency. She stands for nothing.
In this day and age is celebrity really all we care about? Martha Coakley has attempted to become a "celebrity" lawyer, and thus advanced her career. She became Attorney General. Now she wants to be a Senator. But what qualifies her to represent Massachusetts? She has decided that celebrity status in politics is what qualifies her to be a Senator. In other words, she has become the Paris Hilton of the Democratic Party.
Much has been made of this seat not being "The Kennedy Seat" but "The People's Seat." Certainly her opponent, Scott Brown, would have you believe that this is not a seat to be "held" for a Democrat.
I disagree. I believe that the most liberal state in the Union deserves a strong liberal candidate to replace the Liberal Lion himself. I believe that there must be dozens of qualified candidates out there who can stand for liberal values and represent their constituents well. Massachusetts deserves that kind of strong representation--someone who follows the Kennedy's strong stance, and not the Me First approach of John Kerry. And Coakley is certainly more Kerry than Kennedy.
As a Republican, I drool over the possibility of reducing the Democrats majority in the Senate. I would love to have a GOP Senator from Massachusetts sending a message of opposition to Obamacare. But Massachusetts deserves better. And even I can see that a reasoned debate, between consistent representatives of differing points of view, is healthy for our country's future. We just won't get that debate from Martha "Paris Hilton for Senate" Coakley.
I would agree. What has happened to the Senators representing the people of your state? I also am drooling over the possibility that Obama may have to actually work with republicans and not steam roll through some of the worst political and fiscally irresponsible decisions in the history of this great nation. It is time for at least some balance of power.
So I find myself hoping beyond belief the a GOP is elected. However, there is the concern that a GOP senator will not accurately represent the state.
Posted by: Dave Caswell | January 19, 2010 at 08:55 AM