Obnoxious and Disliked

I'm well aware that many people are cheering, especially those who would identify themselves as "tea party" Republicans. Hey, Scott Brown won in Massachusetts, right? Shouldn't that be cause for celebration?

Not so much. I was intrigued by a tiny clip circulating around the Web right now, about 30 seconds of Sen. Brown saying that, "...it's important for everyone to have some form of health care." I can't stand unsourced videos, so I wanted to do a little digging.

What I've found is the following:

Follow up:

Scott Brown had mentioned health care previously in his campaign. Now, before anyone says, "DUH", I mean specifically the idea of government-issued health care. Even a video on YouTube that seems to be posted in support of his rhetoric (found here), contains a quote about it at 0:54. His quote there is, "I believe people SHOULD have health care, just not this particular bill, because it's not good for the whole country."

Now, after his election, it's a little more obvious in his recent comments. The actual full speech that spawned the small quote I mentioned can be found at C-SPAN (here). The especially relevant part can be found at 4:30. Here, Brown mentions the following:

However, we already have 98% of our people insured here. We know what we need to do to fix it, but to have the once size fits all plan that is being pushed nationally, it doesn't work. So, what I have suggested, and what I am hoping to suggest, because we have done it here - I have some experience in this, I VOTED for health care here, so obviously I care very deeply of it [sic] - is to let the states tell the federal government, 'Hey, this is what we'd like to do. Can we work with you in a team effort, maybe you can incentivize us to do something better, model it like we have it, or maybe come up with something better so we can learn it?'

He takes another question, then says the part that is being referenced widely now:

I think that - first of all, just so that we're past campaign mode, I think it's important for everyone to get some form of health care, so to offer a basic plan for everybody I think is important - it's just a question of whether we're going to raise taxes, we're going to cut half a trillion from Medicare, we're going to affect veteran's care, I think we can do it better. And to just be the 41st senator and bring it back to the drawing board - there are some very good things, as you just pointed out, in the national plan that's being proposed...

The small snippet I've seen only references the first sentence in that second quote. Still, it's hardly better when put in full context. The way that things are shaping up, Sen. Brown is not at ALL against government-run health care. He simply does not think that the CURRENT bill is acceptable. That is quite a difference.

This has been noticed by several sites, as can be seen from the links (here, here, and here). In addition to this one incident, which could have simply been a misstep on Sen. Brown's part, there is also (this) article from BBC News, where the Senator is quoted as saying, "I never said I was going to do everything I can to stop healthcare".

I found the video of that interview on Hulu, (here), and wanted to see what Brown says in context. It turns out the relevant piece is at about 3:10, and is transcribed by me as follows:

First of all, you're misrepresenting. I never said that I was gonna do everything I can to stop health care. I believe that everybody should have health care. It's just a question of how we do it. Do we do a one size fits all plan, or do we allow the states to get more involved and do what we did.

Once again, while I do applaud the Senator for his view on the rights of the states, I have to agree with a lot of other sites that he is still, by and large, in support of "universal health care". The way he has phrased his stand on this, he would expect it to be government-based plans, not private or individual ones. That is the root of the problem. While I might think it's a wise idea for a person to have insurance, for instance, I would never advocate the state or federal government trying to offer it, much less have them make it mandatory.

At some point in the future, I think we could expect that Senator Brown will vote FOR a health care bill, not against as people seem to expect. He will likely vote against THIS current health care bill, but even that is simply because he disagrees with the way it implements such a thing. He has no problem with the idea itself, from his own quotes, and would likely give in.

Personally, I'd say that if President Obama offered to exempt Massachusetts from the bill, Senator Brown might well give them their 60th vote back.

Except where otherwise noted, this blog author's original content is
licensed under a Creative Commons License. All works not
original to this blog's author belong to their respective creators.