Home / Culture and Society / Scott Brown Hides Behind Discredited Talking Points As He Sells Massachusetts Out To Big Banks

Scott Brown Hides Behind Discredited Talking Points As He Sells Massachusetts Out To Big Banks

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Scott Brown joined every other Republican senator Monday to block financial reform legislation from even coming up from a vote.

And, like every other Senate Republican who sold out their constituents while protecting big-bank greed, Brown did so while hiding behind discredited talking points cooked up by a longtime GOP hack.

It was another attack of a mental condition that has often seemed to plague the freshman senator since he came to Congress, in which Brown mistakenly thinks that he's the junior senator from South Carolina, or perhaps this time, he thought he represented the good folks back in Mississippi.

Brown apparently forgot that he's no Red State good ol' boy. Rather, he's the first Republican to represent that bluest of blue states, Massachusetts. Moreover, Brown owes his Senate seat to a January special election, and has to face the Bay State voters again in just two years.

The problem is that Brown just threw those voters under a financial bus by blocking a vote on new common-sense financial regulation.

Of course, the senator can't actually admit to knuckling under to Wall Street fatcats who want to block this legislation at all costs. So instead he blames "loopholes" in the legislation that could leave the taxpayers on the hook for future bank bailouts.

One could forgive Sen. Brown, since so many Republicans have been repeating the same talking point which Frank Luntz, a tired GOP strategist cooked up recently.

Except that it's not true. Like Yeti, Bigfoot and healthcare "death panels," the claim that the financial reform bill contains bailout "loopholes" have been thoroughly debunked. The well-known non-partisan factcheck website PolitiFact calls the accusation plainly false, and goes on to accuse Republicans who wield it of "using seriously overheated rhetoric."

Conservative-leaning voters in a Red State might otherwise be willing to swallow such bunk, but not those who go to the polls to pull a lever for their new senator in 2012.

Despite all the hype surrounding Brown's upset victory, it has become plain that his election has not created any substantial realignment in Massachusetts politics.

Even in the days immediately following his Jan. 19 special election, a poll indicated that most Bay State voters want Brown to work with Democrats to advance their agenda, not block it. That includes 60 percent of Brown voters who feel strongly that Brown should work with Democrats.

Those aren't exactly the sentiments of the tea party types.

Another poll that may prove nettlesome for Sen. Brown: most Americans actually support tougher regulations on banks, including specific provisions of the bill he just tried to sink.

In blocking financial reform, Brown got caught between his fatcat Republican friends, and the hardworking folks back in Massachusetts who sent him to Washington in the first place. He decided to kick those good folks in the teeth.

He's also now caught in something else: a lie. Democrats, labor, and every other progressive political group back in the Bay State now could, and should, force Brown to spend potentially millions to defend the indefensible. Make Brown defend the lie he just told everyone in Massachusetts, every day from now until November 2012 if necessary.

If PolitiFact could unwrap the Republican falsehood, so will the voters of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. They may have been ready to embrace this young new senator. I doubt they will be pleased that he lied to them so soon.

Powered by

About Scott Nance

  • One important factual correction. Politifact is not a neutral fact checking site. It’s blatantly left-leaning and subjective.

    That aside, I find it odd that the “loophole” argument is even being used for opposing this additional bank regulation. Maybe the real reasons for opposing it are too hard to explain to the public. The truth is that the legislation is excessive and misdirected. The banking system needs better oversight in areas which aren’t addressed by this bill, but what really needs more regulation is the influence which these bankers have over Democrat lawmakers.


  • So, let me see if I get this straight. First Geo. Bush (a banker’s grandson) sells out to the big banks in Sept. 2008. Then Obama sells out to the big banks and brokers (like Goldman-Sachs) and calls it “stimulus money”. Now Obama wants to “regulate” these big banks and the Republicans are again selling out to them.

    How are any of these pigs different? How do you tell all the pigs as different when they all do the same thing – sell you out?

    How come you Americans can’t see you are being fucked over royally from all ends? Or are you all just ashamed to admit it and have to argue like animals in the mud, instead?


    Dear Senator Brown,

    Your press release gave your reasons for voting to block open Senate discussion – you want to “protect the safety of the financial system and the interests of taxpayers and consumers”…that this bill and its “serious problems” “would leave taxpayers on the hook for future bailouts”, “hurt jobs in Massachusetts, including small businesses” – but no supportive detail re the content of the financial reform bill which guided your conclusion.

    Have you read the bill? I ask because on Jan 10, 2010, in an Op-ed in Boston Globe, you wrote the Stimulus (ARRA) “had not created a single job”. You repeated same on Feb 4 at your signing-in ceremony, and you were disdainful. Yet on Dec 31, 2009, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts issued a formal report, copy on http://www.mass.gov, detailing that in 3 months, Oct-Dec ’09, ARRA created 13,879 jobs in your state alone! Since then ARRA poured more funds & jobs into Mass AND $5.5 billion tax cuts, COBRA/unemployment & other subsidies. Mass is finally to benefit from over 50,000 jobs….not a single job, Senator Brown? Do you know what’s going on in your own state?

    On finan reform, did you know Sen. Bob Corker (R) already refuted GOP allegations, asserting how the $50 billion fund which banks must pay, NOT taxpayers, “is anything but a bailout….it is to provide upfront funding by the industry so that if these companies are seized, there’s money available to make payroll and to wind it down while the pieces are being sold off”, thus protecting taxpayers.

    As a new US senator, when your words raise serious issues we look to you for substantive responses not Frank Luntz style statements. Could it perhaps be your pro-business, pro-banks, anti-middle-class Republican voting record is getting in the way of your commonsense, since the “serious problems” in this bill will be for Wall St, not taxpayers or small businesses.

  • CPJ

    It’s frightening to hear the word “common sense” applied to this legislation. I have read the ENTIRE 14XX page bill in its current form. There is a reason that GS, JPM and other investment banks have come out in SUPPORT of this legislation. If it’s supposed to regulate them to their own detriment (and to “our” benefit), why would they support the legislation? If this has become an “us vs. them” populist movement – which it has – why are we on the same side of the fence?

    It’s because they know what we don’t: that this bill is toothless. Who do you think has a better idea of how this bill will effect REAL reform: the bankers, or the populist cries for “common sense reform!” emanating from all corners of this country. You are being duped, swindled, and lied to. And you’ve swallowed it hook line and sinker.

    This bill is AWFUL – not because of what it purports to do, but what it actually does. I fully and wholeheartedly support real financial regulation, but not emanating in concentric circles from Washington. Reform is brought about through pristine transparency, and the enforcement of the rules that are already in place. Separate all consumer functions from speculative, and re-instate Glass. I could write a financial reform bill in 4 pages that would contain more barbs than the monstrosity that’s been produced to-date. This is an absurd exercise, one which the bankers wholeheartedly support, and one which will affect the “good” businesses far more than those which this administration seeks to control. And they know it. Do you?

    To everyone – including this author: Read the bill and educate yourself about markets & finance before rendering your opinion. The only thing more dangerous than ignorance is a little bit of knowledge; a warning which you have proven yet once again.

  • PolitiFact may be further left in orientation than Dave Nalle prefers — what isn’t? — but it did win a Pulitzer Prize in 2009, and it is an invaluable source. That doesn’t mean you have to swallow it whole, but they do provide back-up for their evaluations.

    And their two most frequent targets are the president and VP.