How stupid of me. I thought Massachusetts voters kept re-electing Senator Ted Kennedy time and time again because they believed in his life's mission--quality health care for all. But yesterday's election of Scott Brown to the US Senate has made me re-think yet another of my assumptions.
However, I still believe in my admittedly controversial theory that independents are unprincipled--otherwise they'd join a party. Wichita's KAKE News reports today that more Bay Staters are Independents than either Democrats or Republicans, and Independents probably decided yesterday's election. That same voting demographic went for Obama in the last presidential election. All together now, all you registered Independents, can you say "schizophrenic"?
In the latest Newsweek, Howard Fineman makes a convincing case that the man most responsible for helping Republicans get elected these days is Roger Ailes, President of Fox News. He was a leading power behind the summer tea parties, and tea partiers undoubtedly played a key role in Brown's election, too. (How many tea partiers are Independents, I wonder?) I understand that there is going to be a tea party national convention later this year. Maybe some wild-eyed liberal Democrat should sneak in and spike their tea with tranquilizers just to calm them down a bit. (I was going to say "with bourbon" until I recalled all the mean, loud-mouthed drunks I have known.)
I once discussed the strange choices that US voters make with a friend who has a master's degree in history from Fordham. She said quite simply, "People don't read anymore." So true. In contemporary politics, a telegenic smile and a photogenic body go much further than a well-reasoned argument that, at the very least, would pass muster in a high school debate class. I'm talking about you, Senator-Elect Brown. Who knew the day would come when posing nude for a boy-toy magazine could accurately predict a successful career in public service?
Sigh. Guess we'll never see the likes of Harry Truman again.













