Is this a trick question?
The title of this post repeats a question asked recently by the LA Times. In response, the Internet exploded with postings that screamed “Scott Brown is no Debra Medina.” The posts were all clones of an article written by Alex Wallenwein, who concluded with the following:
People like Debra Medina are what every state government needs, whether in the governor's mansion, in the state senate, or in their legislatures, county commissions, or city halls. It won't be the Scott Browns of the world who will clean up DC. Watch him closely. He will get "turned" rather quickly and start singing a different tune once he is there. If he doesn't, it's only egg on my face. If you keep him there and he indeed turns, it's egg on yours. I'd rather have it on mine. It affects fewer people.
We need more Debra Medinas in America. Watch what a huge boost candidates like her will get after she wins this election. Let's keep the Debra Medinas at home and send the Scott Browns to Washington DC. That's my idea of "federalism." Let Washington DC have the scraps that fall from our states' tables. We're not without compassion. DC must "eat", too.
We just have to make sure it doesn't keep eating our own lunch!
On another site, Likkerish turned the phrase around in his headline: “Debra Medina is no Scott Brown,” and then wrote:
But, they are both tea partiers, right? Yep, but the difference ends there. They host very different tea parties.
Debra Medina is the "real deal." Scott Brown is really a wanna-be "wheeler dealer," who happened to be in the right place at the right time to take advantage of the dire need to block Democrats from having their 60 vote super majority in the Senate. His farm coat and pickup truck were political props that covered his Cosmo playgirl image. Debra Medina grew up on a farm and is a rancher who drives a real truck and pitches hay, not B.S. Witness Brown's immediate solicitation of support for John McCain after his election to the Senate.
Yep, Debra Medina is "the real deal," not someone who fancies herself as a "wheeler dealer" who will ignore the interests of "We the People" to get the best self-serving deal.
To understand her political style and to deconstruct the implication that she supports secession, as implied in the LA Times article, go…[here] [Embedded link not in original].
Likkerish nailed it! Debra Medina and Scott Brown do, indeed, host very different Tea Parties.
The Tea Party Movement was effectively birthed by the massive outpouring of financial support for Ron Paul on the December 16, 2007 commemoration of the original Boston Tea Party. The Internet “Money Bomb” raised an all time one-day record of more than $6 million in small contributions. However, in early 2009, the idea of the tea party was co-opted by individuals in the Republican Party (GOP) with quite different values from those of the Ron Paul Revolution. So, now the Tea Party Movement is an amorphous, hodge-podge of individuals of very differing persuasions and goals, some of whom are conservative, some neoconservative.
The essential difference between Debra Medina and Scott Brown is that people who attend a Medina Tea Party consume the elixir of Freedom. Those who attend the Brown Tea Party often imbibe something quite different.
An easy visual mnemonic to keep the two tea parties separate is to be found in the following photo, a larger version of which shows Sarah Palin’s 7th-grade-style, crib notes written on her palm.
Sarah Palin, the “darling” of the GOP co-opted faction of the Tea Party Movement endorsed Scott Brown and didn’t endorse Debra Medina, but rather endorsed the Big Government incumbent governor, Rick Perry, after which she endorsed Rand Paul, Ron Paul’s physician son, for U.S. Senator. Go figure. Maybe she couldn’t read her own writing.
Thanks for this! The blog and posts are great.
ReplyDeleteThanks for stopping by, JB. As they say in Texas, "Y'all come back, hear?"
ReplyDeleteYou betcha! I added your blog to my feed reader. :)
ReplyDelete