I also find Scott Brown to be clever, humorous, witty and engaging.  He either has a great speechmaker or has a natural talent.  He talks about his truck and used it as a moving symbol of ordinariness – much like the log cabin in the 1800s.  Try this out:   

“I’m Scott Brown, I’m from Wrentham, and I drive a truck.”

and this:

“Would you like me to drive the truck down to Washington so you can see it?”

Absolutely brilliant.  Brown was respectful and gracious to his opponents, the Kennedy family and others including President Obama.  Brown’s smart and may not be a classic conservative voice.  But he may be different.  He will be heard from again.  I wish Senator-elect Scott Brown all the best.  BUT…

BUT, there was a report on Morning Joe that by a 3 to 1 margin Americans reject rights for terrorism suspects.  This concerns me greatly.  Brown said in his acceptance speech:

“I believe and I know all of you believe that our Constitution and laws exist to protect THIS nation.  *  *  *  They do not grant rights and privileges to enemies in wartime.  *  *  *  Our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them and not lawyers to defend them.”

Let me make myself clear, will all due respect Senator elect Brown, this is a terrible issue to raise.  He is an attorney, he ought to know better.  Brown continues:

“Giving new rights to terrorists is the wrong agenda for our country.” 

They are not new rights; they are centuries old.  They protect all of us.  This issue will surely be used by other Republicans since it worked in one of the bluest states – Massachusetts – and they will probably do well.  But it’s wrong.  Let’s step back and ask what are we doing.  I am reminded of the quote Robert Bolt attributed to Sir Thomas More in A Man for All Seasons (thanks to that rare conservative who is not involved in this demagogy – Judge Andrew Napolitano):

“This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s!  And if you cut them down-and you’re just the man to do it-do you think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?  Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s safe.”

If we can give the Devil due process, we can do it for terror suspects.  I reject the idea of a “war on terror” because there is no end to the conflict.  This then by the reasoning of most of my fellow conservatives means there must always be military tribunals in continuous session.  Suppose the next terrorist attack is accomplished by a conspiracy of both domestic radicals and foreign terrorists?  Or criminal gangs paid by Al-Qaeda?  Do we try both in military tribunals?  Then US citizens would then be deprived of their constitutional rights.  Do we want that?  American jails may one day be filled with conservatives or libertarians or evangelical Christians.  To paraphrase our newest Senator, we can do better!  We libertarians must find opportunities to explain that this rights issue is a necessary one to do.  Liberty and rights for all!

There is a surge of support for the GOP candidate, Scott Brown and he now has a chance to win.  It might be decided by a point or two.  Gary Bauer at the Campaign for Working Families has indicated his support of Brown even though he is “less solid” on values issues.  I respect Bauer very much.  I also do not like Attorney  Martha Coakley; she’s a typical liberal Democrat who played the Bush card shamelessly and disingenuously in a prior debate.  The Bush tax cuts helped the wealthy; Bush ran up deficits blah blah blah…  Actually, the rich pay most of the taxes in the USA.  What programs will Senator Coakley cut in DC?  As for me, to quote a great man, “I’d start with the departments:  The Department of Education, Department of Energy, Homeland Security..” 

Speaking of Ron Paul, there is a third candidate:  A libertarian with the ironic name of Joe Kennedy.  He has a great platform.  One I almost totally agree with.  But Kennedy has virtually no chance to win.  I would have easily suggested voting for Kennedy if Brown was far behind in the polls. 

I also reject this sordid notion that terrorists ought to tried before military tribunals for the duration of an indefinite “war on terror.”  Sounds like a great recipe for authoritarian rule in the United States.  The USA Patriot Act has already eroded our liberties.  But Brown is using it in a manner as shamefully as Coakley invoking Bush.   But Brown is willing to consider voting against Obamacare. 

So what do I do?  So, my heart rises at the idea that Brown can win over Coakley.  But Kennedy is my hero for running and taking the Ron Paul message in hostile territory.  Thankfully, I do not vote in Massachusetts.  I always pray about my vote and I urge my fellow believers and fellow libertarians in Massachusetts who read my blog (that’s all two of you!) to vote your conscience. 

Sandy the Conflicted Libertarian