Tea party beliefs going down regardless in MA? (updated)

..they are according to  Right Conditions with Scott Brown , and is probably pre-writing the "I told you so" post for sometime down the road..  (And by default.. why SarahPAC is doing the right thing by not getting involved...)

I'm actually willing to say that I'm in partial agreement with him in terms of this election turning into nothing more than an "election of the lesser of two evils".


Don't get me wrong, I'll say that Brown taking a win from Coakley would be the better result than the SEIU stealing the election for Coakley (which I'm not ruling out).      But this is one of those times, where I think even Tea Party fans may have forgotten their original "cause".

"Less government, less spending, less taxes".

Everything I see with Brown is, as Right Condition writes, a perfect example of a "compassionate conservative".    He's running on the 'fiscal conservative label', but if everything that RC writes is exact (and I Have no reason to believe otherwise), he's anything but, and if they continue to support him, the general spiel for "Tea partiers" is done, completed, finito!

The one issue that bothers me most is:

In fact, Scott Brown in a debate just yesterday announced that he will go to Washington and bring RomneyCare with him.

"I helped write it....I would be happy to go down there and tell them how we did it"

Brown (again, all according to RC)... voted against ending income tax  (hey, less taxation!)
.. voted for RomneyCare (hey, less govt!)
... voted for millions in additiaonal spending (oops.. 0 for 3).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Joe Kennedy would/wouldn't be the better choice

Again, anyone who proposes anything involving  marriage on a national level (gay or straight), proposes legalizing marijuana on a national level (Hey, thought libertarians were _States Rights_ supporters?), nor proposes ending various military alliances is not my ideal candidate.  (Nor am I a fan of the two-state solution with Israel/Palesitne.. there never was a state of Palestine!)

But I do see where if Brown wins (again, "If").. i can see RC coming back and rightfully saying "I Told you so", and I'd be serious inclined to agree with him.

Unfortunately for people, that's exactly what they're getting.. "lesser of two evils" for one reason.. to try to prevent a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.   And in the process the people who say they're "tea partiers" who are jumping on the "not-a-democrat" Brown, are pretty much left high and dry, and will have no leg to stand on when their support for Brown is called on the carpet.

Funny thing is, the one group that is sticking to their guns in regards of "conservatism" is the SarahPAC, and if Kennedy REALLY intended to make a splash, should have run with this (see, you've got a 'conservative group' that's not supporting your "conservative" candidate.. ). 

But they didn't so Massachusetts is going to have to choose the "lesser of two evils", Brown and Coakley.

But if Brown is elected, there will be an "I told you so" coming from RC.. and I wouldn't blame him one bit.


UPDATE :   1/12/09 - 10:19 PM - BTW.. I got an email from "TeaPartyExpress" that coincides with the RC blog posts that now has me wondering myself about the TPE activists...

Date:	Monday, January 11, 2010 2:35 PM
From:	Tea Party Express

At the same time we're also working on our new television ad endorsing Scott Brown for Senate in Massachusetts.

We will have the ads completed by Wednesday and then up on the airwaves.

Our goal is to raise an additional $50,000 to fund this campaign supporting Scott Brown by Wednesday.

 If all of the above is true about Brown, why is the TPE supporting him?