Scott Brown won, and Scott Brown deserves to be congratulated for that.

That said, I’m not so sure the People of Massachusetts will be happy with the result, whether now or somewhat soon.  The one and only caveat to that statement depends on whether Senator-Elect Scott Brown changes the color of his [ more . . . ]]]> First of all, Congratulations to Scott Brown.  I mean that.  Having run for office myself (office, not public office), it’s no easy task.  It’s hard.  It’s fun.  It’s grueling.  And at least part of it is that you hope you end up with as few people hating you as possible.

Scott Brown won, and Scott Brown deserves to be congratulated for that.

That said, I’m not so sure the People of Massachusetts will be happy with the result, whether now or somewhat soon.  The one and only caveat to that statement depends on whether Senator-Elect Scott Brown changes the color of his leaf . . or color of his stripes . . or whatever visual you want to use.

The simple fact of the matter is Scott Brown is largely inconsistent with the wishes and desires of a majority of the People of Massachusetts.  As much as anyone reading this may agree or disagree, Massachusetts is one of the few states (Commonwealth actually) where Gay Marriage is legal.  Massachusetts is one of the few states with a mandatory health insurance requirement that rides along with a, roughly speaking, public option for those who can’t afford full-priced insurance.  Massachusetts is decidedly Pro-Choice on the matter of Abortion.   The People of Massachusetts don’t believe in the Death Penalty . . and soundly reaffirmed that belief as recently as 2007.  And Senator-Elect Scott Brown is incompatible with all those positions.

I’m simply making a point of consistency.

Keep in mind, while he wasn’t my choice, I by no means mean to bash Scott Brown — It’s just that his trajectory doesn’t fit that of the People of Massachusetts.

Scott Brown may have done an exceedingly good job convincing a majority of Tuesday’s voters that he was an independent, truck driving, guy just like you.  But the bigger question is whether Senator-Elect Scott Brown will actually represent the People of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts once he arrives in Washington, DC as a full-fledged Senator.

He’s won the right to prove himself, of that there is no doubt.  But my suspicion is that ‘track record’ means everything when you have something to look back on.  Scott Brown has been a reliably-voting Republican, and just as colleges look to high school performance to gauge college potential, I find it unlikely that Senator Scott Brown will pivot much toward representing the majority beliefs of the People of Massachusetts.

Again, Congratulations.  I just think it’s going to be tough road, that is unless Senator Scott Brown actually proves his value through his deeds as Senator.

As for a tongue-in-cheek review / assessment of the Special Election in Massachusetts . . .

• This is what happens when one candidate runs the best, most effective campaign they could have ever hoped for . . . and the other candidate runs the worst.  Quite frankly, it was like one candidate saved a truckload of puppies and the other was caught picking their nose in their high school yearbook photo.
• This is what happens when a candidate does such just a great job at marketing that it convinces people to vote for them for reasons like they drive a truck as opposed to (or in addition to) actual / concrete positions.  On this point, I have to call Scott Brown out on the carpet — His issues page on his website read like a 5th grader’s book report.
• This is what happens when a race, an opponent, an opponent’s party . . . and voters . . . are all taken for granted (and not by the opponent).
• This is what happens when one candidate invites the President of the United States to their city, prompting a half-mile of 1,000’s of supporters to stand in line for hours . . . and not hand out a single sign.
• This is what happens when a candidate and a party don’t fight.
• This is what happens when you don’t define your opponent (and let your opponent do it for themself).
• This is what happens when you let your opponent define you.

Did Reverend Thomas Tobin, Bishop of Providence, RI really say that on a national news program?!?  I had to rewind it several times, and I still couldn’t believe it.  One of his major arguments was “that any Catholic in public office, his first commitment has to be to his Faith.”

Again, “that any Catholic in public office, his first commitment has to be to his Faith.”

To quote someone much more respectable, “I do not think it means what you think it means.”

I’m truly dismayed.

I respect beliefs, especially those grounded in religion, that abortion is wrong — I really do.  But what [ more . . . ]]]> What?!?

Did Reverend Thomas Tobin, Bishop of Providence, RI really say that on a national news program?!?  I had to rewind it several times, and I still couldn’t believe it.  One of his major arguments was “that any Catholic in public office, his first commitment has to be to his Faith.”

Again, “that any Catholic in public office, his first commitment has to be to his Faith.”

To quote someone much more respectable, “I do not think it means what you think it means.”

I’m truly dismayed.

I respect beliefs, especially those grounded in religion, that abortion is wrong — I really do.  But what I’m much, much more adamant about when it comes to the religious angle in particular is that it’s ‘your’ angle, not necessarily mine . . or someone else’s.

That separation is one of the greatest inherent beliefs of the United States of America.  It’s proved invaluable in strengthening and enriching the United States as a whole, and it’s despicable to diminish or skirt the belief in separation in any way.

Reverend Thomas Tobin, Bishop of Providence, RI has the ability, not right, to say what he said on Hardball with Chris Matthews — in very large part – because of our having established the distinction between Faith and Governance.

And, Folks, I’m sorry, but one of the first huge mistakes the Founding Fathers realized they had made was in not establishing a separation of Church and State. Seriously, look it up — There’s a very, very ugly history to the very early days of this Country with respect to a separation of Church and State having not been established.  I’ll endeavor to provide examples, but the try by Reverend Thomas Tobin, a Bishop no less, to blur that separation is an affront to at least one of this Country’s core beliefs that Catholics and non-Catholics should be appalled at.