VIDEO: Scott Brown’s lies

Sunday, January 17, 2010 at 11:05 AM by GottaLaff View Comments

By GottaLaff

What have we here? Why, it’s an entire site devoted to the lies that slime out of Scott Brown’s mouth!

Why does Scott Brown need to lie? So he can cover-up his record of voting lockstep with the Republican leadership.

Despite Brown’s claims, he voted in LOCKSTEP with Republican Leadership, stands WITH the TEA PARTY movement, is AGAINST Mammograms For Women and AGAINST Contraception For Rape Victims.

Now go check all the debunking out for yourselves.

Uncategorized 2010 elections, massachusetts, U.S.Senate, Uncategorized, video

JayInDallas

Unlike Obama, Brown chose to create a fictitious opponent that was decidedly liberal in order to make his "stance" as a conservative look better. He LIED and continues to do so. Maddow herself debunked this lie, called him a liar and has asked him to stop LYING. THIS is what you want representing you and your state? At least we all know Michelle Bachman is completely wacko.
Anonymous

Scott Brown Won just like President Obama . Let us give him the opportunity to do his job in Washington DC. Then we can compare what he has or has not accomplished in the next 100 days.The whole country is watching all of the mistakes our government is making. YOU CAN'T THROW MUD OR( MONEY)AGAINST THE WALL AND HOPE THAT WILL STICK AND TAKE CARE OR THE PROBLEM.
Mr. Dak

It may be against a doctor's religious beliefs to assist a black patient, or a gay patient, or... Once we allow doctor's to only perform according to their religious beliefs, then we are moving our society one more step towards a religious theocracy (see Taliban). The doctor works for the patient. It is the patient's beliefs that must be respected. Period. While some of us may be wealthy enough and fortunate enough to live in areas where we have multiple choices of doctors, it is pure idiocy to think that the argument that a poor scared girl should go find a doctor whose beliefs do not get in the way of helping her justifies allowing doctors to pick and choose who they will help. Any doctor who has taken the Hippocratic (sp?) oath has no business picking and choosing which patients to help based on his religious beliefs. What's next? Let teachers grade their students based on their religion? One's religion and relationship with god is a deeply PERSONAL thing and can have NO bearing whatsoever on how we treat others. We should treat everyone equally and as we would expect to be treated. No one is forcing a doctor to violate his beliefs. If he doesn't want to take contraception, no one is forcing him to. If he doesn't want to have an abortion, no one is forcing him to have one.
Anonymous

I put the link on Think Progress, Democratic Underground and Huff Post...the bad part is there were no new/immediately current articles about the race, so I'm not sure how many will see it.

But I'll keep trying!

Steve
H.C.
Anonymous

Even more weak is the Anonymous dimbulb that makes a comment arguing for Browns independent thought }"Voting with Republicans does not mean he didn't think independently. 90% shows to me that he is willing to make the vote he independently dete."|If he was voting with a independent mind he would be at 50 not 90 percent gerbil brain ! ~jfkfan @twitter
Anonymous

Pretty weak....

Voting with Republicans does not mean he didn't think independently. 90% shows to me that he is willing to make the vote he independently determines is right.

Allowing a Dr. to choose to offer a treatment based on religious beliefs is right in my mind. If you don't like the beliefs of your Dr. there are thousands out there with beliefs to match you. The reverse of this is forcing a Dr. to do something they don't believe in...is that right?

blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous Post Next Post

For archived posts prior to October, 2009, please go to our old site at
thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com.

For posts older than October, 2009 go to:

thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com

SiteMeter

Have you watched
a Blunt today?

For further information on Lt. Col Barry Wingard's case and/or Fayiz Al-Kandari please click on the image below

You can read the complete story here or on Wikipedia.

Buzzflash

Disclaimer

This is a personal web site. It is not a production of any organization. Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of any organization. Preferences for electoral candidates posted on this site have not been expressed using any organizational resources. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.5 License. FAIR USE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I have posted it here an effort to advance the understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, and so on. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The material in this site is provided for educational and informational purposes only. I have made effort to include attribution to the source material.

Our Facebook Fan Page

The Political Carnival on Facebook

The Political Carnivalgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info