The Boston Globe tries hard to parse Scott Brown's DADT statement

[karynnj]

http://boston.com/community/blogs/gatekeeper/2010/05/scott_brown_says_no_but_maybe.html

Reading Scot Brown statements reminded me of when I tried to understand psychedelic lyrics in the 1960s.

"Always know sometimes think it's me, but you know I know and it's a dream.
I think I know of thee, ah yes, but it's all wrong.
That is I think I disagree."

Looking now - Lennon made way more sense.

[Cha]

1. Like trying to make him sound

smarter than he is?

[msongs]

2. Brown just agreeing with Obama - MAYBE later, more time, more study, more discharges

cuz the monday PR stunt doesn't actually have an end date, it just says when the military agrees, which may be never, then the politicians can blame the military and let it go.

Msongs

[Mass]

3. No. Brown opposes Obama's compromise. He wants HIS OWN study.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

4. What's wrong with Obama's study?

Oh, probably just because it's OBAMA'S study? So, he's going to pay for this supposed "study" himself- out of his own pocket? In my line of work, this would be called "duplication of services" and is kind of frowned on, particularly when it involves the "taxpayer dollars" that Republicans are forever-in-a-day lamenting the waste of. Face it, Scott Brown is an opportunistic REPUKE trying to save his a** at the polls- among the homophobic "teabagging" crowd- in the next election (that he probably won't win). I don't know why everybody waits- with bated breath it seems- to see whether he's going to vote with us or against us every time there is a crucial vote to be made. He's a "snake in the grass" at best.

[Mass]

5. You will find Brown's reason for saying NO in this blog post by a local blogger

http://chimesatmidnight.blogspot.com/2010/05/sen-brown-sez-he-wants-to-keep-open.html

Sen. Brown sez he wants to "keep an open mind" about
repealing DADT in the US Military.

Never before has an "open mind" been invoked in defense of a close minded repressive and unfair measure...BC's law school sure does graduate some subtle minds to be sure.
Right now Brownie is a no vote, mostly on grounds that his compromise last week on financial regulation means he must find a red meat wingnut issue to champion this week to quiet his tantrum-prone teabagger base.
So of course, Brownie being Brownie, he throws a few more homos onto the bonfire in hope that will stem the tide of book-burners that're defriending him on Facebook.
Still and all that, he is a remarkable pussyfooter isn't he?
Who knew?
By inclination he clearly wants to say no, the man was no friend to his gay constituents as a state senator, but of course he wants to say no in a nice safe way. The man is caught between two mutually exclusive realities, the clear preferences of his constituency (DADT spells MUD in Massachusetts) and then there is the wider fundraising world of Teabag USA Brown must satisfy and beyond that he has to stay on Mitch McConnell's good side...Disheartening prospects for Justice over the short run sez Humble Elias.
Doesn't seem like he will pull that off, just sayin'.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

7. I figured as much

I went back and edited my initial post and arrived pretty much at the same conclusion without having read the article. The "teabaggers" aren't very happy with him right now, of course, over his financial reform vote.

BTW don't you love when the Republicans (claim to) embrace the principle of "open-mindedness" (only when it suits them and their constituents, of course)? :eyes:

[DevonRex]

6. Now THAT man was high when he wrote that. Lennon, I mean.

Can't bring myself to read Brown's BS.

[Mass]

8. Here is the relevant part of the article

That’s an artful hedge by the senator, and it presented a challenge for a reporter covering his statement: whether to emphasize the “no” or emphasize the “maybe later.”

Good article as to how the media reported this. However, none of the media in question reported on the fact that Brown's rational for his vote was stupid. The bill waits for the Pentagon's review and a certification of the military, so what Brown wants is already in the bill.