Massachusetts misinterpreted. Thinking out of the box.

Many different explanations have been given about the triumph of Senator Scott Brown in winning the Senate seat previously occupied by Ted Kennedy:

• The voters overwhelmingly rejected the healthcare liberal agenda
• It is time to stop this socialist administration from taking over the government of this country
• People want freedom, and independence, and they want to be able to exercise their right to make their own decisions without government interference
• Congressional seats do not belong to anybody: they belong to the people of the State
• The Federal Government should not interfere in matters better left to the States
• The radicals and their liberal agenda are a threat to our democracy and to our freedoms
• The liberals want to spread the wealth around giving it to those who do not work and getting it from those that produce and create businesses

Put on your thinking hat and consider this:

First, people, not only in Massachusetts, but everywhere else in the nation are fed up with the incumbents, both Republicans and Democrats, because of their incompetence and inability to think and solve real problems. A clear example of this incompetence is their inability to discuss intelligently the healthcare issue, in spite of the fact that it has been talked about for more than 50 years, and it was discussed in Congress for more than a year now. Many other examples could be mentioned here, but this incompetence is the same when discussing matters of education, energy, the role of government in society, church and state relationships, etc. All of these are issues of paramount importance to be critically analyzed if a modern society wants to progress.

Second, Massachusetts has a Health care system that covers 95% of the people and most of them are happy with what they have. What benefit do they get by signing up for a proposed bill that was rewritten in the Senate to make everybody happy except the people the reform bill was supposed to help? None! They voted against the wrong kind of reform (reform to keep lobbyist happy and to spread the pork around amongst the signers), not against smart legislation to change the way our healthcare system is bankrupting the country.

Third, and finally, just because you want to succeed a Kennedy, does not mean that you do not have to work hard and show intelligence. It does not mean that the voters owe you an appointment. You have to demonstrate that you deserve the position and that you will defend the gains they have already accomplished.

It makes sense to me.

February 20, 2010