Brown, Scott Sen

===

beat again 2014, steyer pushed to drop denial?

Fox News gave its contributors Pete Hegseth and Scott Brown platforms to publicly audition to be President-elect Donald Trump’s secretary of veterans affairs, a position for which they are both reportedly being considered.On the December 16 edition of Fox & Friends, Hegseth answered viewers' questions about veterans' issues and explained his vision for the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA). The hosts openly acknowledged Hegseth’s possible pick as VA secretary, and he acted as if the segment were an audition for the role, answering questions sent to the show, such as, “How will the VA combat corruption and avoid awarding bonuses to executives who do not meet targeted objectives?” and, “What will you do about the corrupt unions that continue to play politics and use intimidation tactics to keep all corruption issues quiet?” In addition to pushing for firing certain VA officials and allowing the use of private doctors, he bragged that the VA union disliked him because “we've been taking them on for years.” Hegseth discussed his meetings with Trump and lauded the president-elect for being “willing to fight back” and said he will be “an amazing president.”The same day, Brown appeared on America’s Newsroom, where he also acknowledged he was “in the mix” for the VA position and was asked by co-host Bill Hemmer “what [his] big sales point” was to Trump about why he deserved the position. Brown said he had “political” and “media experience” and pushed for fixing “mismanagement” at the VA. He also praised Trump’s “plain talk” and his “positive” message.Hegseth and Brown are reportedly top contenders to be Trump’s VA secretary, and have met with Trump multiple times to discuss the position. According to The New York Times, veterans groups have strongly opposed Hegseth and Brown. The groups told the Times that their opposition to Hegseth stems from his work with “Republican-funded activist groups and think tanks that have portrayed veterans health care as feckless and corrupt,” including the right-wing group Concerned Veterans for America (CVA) where he served as CEO. The group, which is backed by the Koch brothers and supports the privatization of the VA, has been criticized for its “partisan attacks” against Democrats. Hegseth was also criticized by veterans groups for his position that veterans should have “the choice to seek care in the private sector,” which those groups said could “siphon billions of dollars away from veterans hospitals, causing the system to collapse.”Joe Chenelly, the executive director of the advocacy group Amvets, told the Times that Brown “lacks the experience to run a nationwide health care and benefits system with 350,000 employees.” Brown, a former Republican senator, has used Fox multiple times previously as a platform to criticize the VA and the Obama administration’s promise to help veterans.If picked to head the VA, Hegseth or Brown would join the multiple Fox personalities who have joined or are being considered for the incoming Trump administration.MEDIA WATCH: With only THREE DAYS LEFT, FOX News is RE-AIRING a “documentary” on Obamacare in New Hampshire to SCARE voters into supporting Scott Brown==

ASHINGTON -- Republican Senate candidates Scott Brown and Cory Gardner on Monday embraced the notion that climate change is caused in part by human activity, despite previously expressing skepticism that man-made climate change is real.

Brown, a former Massachusetts senator, is seeking to unseat Sen. Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire, while Gardner, a congressman from Colorado, is looking to defeat Sen. Mark Udall in that state. Both Senate races, regarded as unexpectedly competitive for Democrats, had debates on Monday -- the first for New Hampshire candidates, the second for Colorado. In both, candidates were asked if they believed that humans were causing climate change.

Gardner briefly weighed in on the human contributions to climate change, then used his response to criticize the so-called Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill passed by House Democrats in 2010:

<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; direction: ltr; line-height: 21px; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal;">There is no doubt that pollution contributes to the climate changing around us, but what I refuse to do is support a climate tax bill like Waxman/Markey put in place, that would have cost farmers and ranchers in the state, that would cost small business the opportunity to grow, that would increase that bills that families pay, $1,700 a year. We hear people talk about putting a price on carbon, but they won't talk about how much that price of carbon is. Let's just have an answer: What is the price? Is it $5 a month, is $10 a month, is it $20 a month? Senator Udall, am I not going high enough?

</div></div></blockquote>

<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; direction: ltr; font-weight: normal; line-height: 21px; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Democrats were quick to point out that in January of this year, Gardner <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/01/28/3215971/house-members-deny-climate-change/" target="_hplink" sl-processed="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">voted against an amendment</a> that would have explicitly stated that climate change is real. The measure, which failed to clear the House Energy and Commerce Committee, stated that "Congress accepts the scientific finding of the Environmental Protection Agency (contained in the proposed rule referred to in section 4(2)) that '[g]reenhouse gas (GHG) pollution threatens the American public’s health and welfare by contributing to long-lasting changes in our climate that can have a range of negative effects on human health and the environment."

Gardner also rejected the theory of man-made climate change as a Colorado state representative in 2010. "I think the climate is changing, but I don't believe humans are causing that change to the extent that's been in the news," <a href="http://archive.9news.com/rss/story.aspx?storyid=153730" target="_hplink" sl-processed="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">he said at the time.</a>

In the New Hampshire debate, Brown said he believes climate change is "a combination of manmade and natural."

"That's what I've said, and I continue to believe that," he said, before listing ways he has appreciated the environment and encouraging the United States to reduce its dependence on foreign oil:

<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; direction: ltr; font-weight: normal; line-height: 21px; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal;">The question is how do we deal with not only respecting our environment -- as someone who's hiked Mount Washington with [New Hampshire state Sen.] Jeb Bradley and appreciated the environment as a triathlete, swimming, biking, camping. We want to respect that environment but we also want to find a way to balance the ability to live within the environment and use its natural resources to become energy independent and to step back from our dependence on foreign oil. I think that's very critical and you can find that balance and there are opportunities to do just that.

</div></div></blockquote>

<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; direction: ltr; font-weight: normal; line-height: 21px; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Brown's comments marked a departure from a GOP primary debate in late August, when he was asked if he believed that the theory of <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/25/scott-brown-climate-change_n_5711431.html" target="_hplink" sl-processed="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">man-made climate change had been scientifically proven.</a> At that debate, Brown responded, "Uh, no."

That answer, too, was dubbed a flip-flop from Brown's position in the 2012 Massachusetts Senate race, when he lost his seat to Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D). During that race, Brown said he "absolutely" believed that climate change was real and deemed its causes to be "a combination of man-made and natural."

Brown's campaign has insisted that his stance on the issue is what he stated both on Monday and in 2012 -- that climate change is real and caused by factors that are both man-made and natural. But Democrats in New Hampshire accused Brown on Monday of trying to have it both ways by refusing to endorse climate change during the primary, when he took on a more conservative tone, only to revert back to his more centrist position now that the general election is underway.

Despite the reversal by both Gardner and Brown, environmental groups remain unconvinced. NextGen Climate, the progressive group founded by billionaire investor Tom Steyer, recently <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/15/scott-brown-climate-chang_n_5825584.html" target="hplink" sl-processed="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">launched a truck tour</a> targeting Brown's environmental record, citing his support for the Koch brothers and "Big Oil tycoons." The group has also gone after Gardner through <a href="http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/2014/09/16/nextgen-climate-colorado-cory-gardner-mark-udall/112823/" target="hplink" sl-processed="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">attack ads</a> on television and billboards in Colorado.

NextGen Climate spokesman Bobby Whithorne said Brown and Gardner only seemed willing to move to the middle when it was politically convenient.

"First he denied the basic science behind climate change, now he’s changing his tune," Whithorne said in an email to HuffPost. "Scott Brown can’t make up his mind about what he believes. One thing is clear, he’ll say anything that’s politically convenient to try to get himself elected."

Gardner, according to Whithorne, "couldn't even answer the question without attempting to deny and deceive."

"First he ducked it entirely, then deceived Coloradans with an incomplete answer to deliberately mislead voters on his record," Whithorne said. "Maybe he thinks all of the pollution is caused by cow farts? The facts are clear; Gardner has taken votes to deny the reality of climate change and to let power plants dump unlimited carbon pollution into the air."

HuffPost's Pollster average, which combines all publicly available polling, shows Gardner and Udall tied....

<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/06/republicans-climate-change_n_5941866.html">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/06/republicans-climate-change_n_5941866.html</a>

===

180  <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/09/02/climate-change-scott-brown">http://ecowatch.com/2014/09/02/climate-change-scott-brown</a>

2012 vs ew

“I absolutely believe that climate change is real, and I believe there’s a combination between man-made and natural,” he said in a debate during that campaign. “We need to work together, finding that balance to not only address our climate change problems but also to allow people to work and create jobs.”

Now he’s crossed state lines to New Hampshire where he’s running against Democratic incumbent Senator Jeanne Shaheen. And when he was asked in a recent debate “Do you believe that the theory of man-made climate change has been scientifically proven?,” he responded “No.” Watch the video:...

===

BREAKING: Scott Brown to host live screening of FOX News’ sham “documentary” on Obamacare in New Hampshire, TONIGHT. <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/jeanne-shaheen?refcode=20140822pm-nd&amounts=5,25,50,100,250,500" style="line-height: 1.2em; outline: none;">Give right now to stop Scott Brown, FOX News and their SHADY propaganda!</a>

Poraig – First he said it was “laughable” that FOX would’ve made a documentary just to prop up his campaign. Now he’s not even TRYING to hide it anymore.

We know Scott Brown and FOX News conspired on this flagrant propaganda – and their lies have been working. Yesterday’s University of New Hampshire polls show Scott Brown only trailing Jeanne by TWO points. The Boston Globe says it’s a “dead heat.”

We have to fight back NOW or we will lose New Hampshire and our Senate majority. There are still 6 hours left to give to Team Shaheen’s Rapid Response Fund, and we still need to raise $13,000.

Give every dollar you can – right now, before midnight – to stop Scott Brown, FOX News and save the Senate from their shady dealings.

If you've saved payment info with ActBlue Express,   8/14

</div>

==

Scott Brown was chosen US Senator from Massachusetts on January 19, 2010, in a stunning landmark election. The race was called the "first electoral victory for the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Tea_Party_Express" title="Tea Party Express" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Tea Party</a> movement." The seat was held for decades by liberal Democrat <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_Kennedy" title="Edward Kennedy" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Edward Kennedy</a> and prior to that, by his brother John F. Kennedy.

According to Brown's campaign website, "His career in public service began as selectman in Wrentham. He then went on to serve three terms as a State Representative and won his current State Senate seat in a special election in 2004. He is currently in his third Senate term. ... Senator Brown is a graduate of Wakefield High School, Tufts University, and Boston College Law School. He lives in Wrentham, MA with his wife Gail and their two daughters, Ayla, a student at Boston College, and Arianna, a student at Syracuse University."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#cite_note-1" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[1]</a>

<h2 style="font-weight: bold; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border: none; display: inline; background: none;">Contents</h2>

[<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#" class="internal" id="togglelink" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">hide</a>] </div>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#Brown_on_global_warming" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">1 Brown on global warming</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-2" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#Related_SourceWatch_articles" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">2 Related SourceWatch articles</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-3" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#External_resources" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">3 External resources</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-4" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#References.3D" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">4 References=</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); background: none;">Brown on global warming</h2>

On his 2010 campaign website, Brown stated that he supports a "common-sense environment policy that will help to reduce pollution and preserve our precious open spaces. I realize that without action now, future generations will be left to clean up the mess we leave. In order to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, I support reasonable and appropriate development of alternative energy sources such as wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal and improved hydroelectric facilities. I oppose a national cap and trade program because of the higher costs that families and businesses would incur."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#cite_note-2" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[2]</a>

In a campaign debate in December 2009 Brown stated "I [have] said the climate is always changing. The question I have is, is it man-made, or does it just happen naturally?"<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#cite_note-3" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[3]</a>

<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); background: none;">Related SourceWatch articles</h2>

<li style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Tea_Party_Express" title="Tea Party Express" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Tea Party Express</a></li>

<li style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Waxman-Markey_Climate_Bill" title="Waxman-Markey Climate Bill" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Waxman-Markey Climate Bill</a></li>

</ul>

<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); background: none;">External resources</h2>

<li style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Doug_Heye&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Doug Heye (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Doug Heye</a>, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.usnews.com/blogs/doug-heye/2010/01/18/brown-vs-coakley-shows-obama-has-become-a-political-albatross.html" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url("") 100% 50% no-repeat;">Brown vs. Coakley Shows Obama Has Become a Political Albatross</a>, US News and World Report blog, January 18, 2010.</li>

<li style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;">Dan Abramson, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/19/jon-stewart-gets-fed-up-d_n_427917.html" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url("") 100% 50% no-repeat;">Jon Stewart Gets Fed Up: Dems Set The Bar So Low They're Tripping Over It (VIDEO)</a>, Huffington Post, January 19, 2010.</li>

<li style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;">Robert Hendin, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/01/19/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6116071.shtml" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url("") 100% 50% no-repeat;">Scott Brown's Surge Boosted by Dems' Failed Health Care Message</a>, CBS News, January 19, 2010.</li>

<li style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;">Scott Powell, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2010/0119/Scott-Brown-the-tea-party-s-first-electoral-victory" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url("") 100% 50% no-repeat;">Scott Brown: the tea party’s first electoral victory</a>, Christian Science Monitor, January 19, 2010.</li>

<li style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;">John Stauber, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.prwatch.org/node/8841" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url("") 100% 50% no-repeat;">Tea Party Money Bomb Elects Scott Brown, Blows-Up Obama Care</a>, PRWatch.org, January 19, 2010.</li>

<li style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;">Shawn Doherty, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/health_med_fit/vital_signs/article_ad9db6f4-0604-11df-8b8f-001cc4c002e0.html" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url("") 100% 50% no-repeat;">Vital Signs: Will health care reform crash after Massachusetts election?</a>, Capital Times, January 20, 2010.</li>

</ul>

<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px 0px 0.6em; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0.17em; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); background: none;">References=</h2>

<li id="cite_note-1" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#cite_ref-1" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style=" top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.brownforussenate.com/senator-brown" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url("") 100% 50% no-repeat;">"Senator Brown"</a>, Scott Brown website, accessed January 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-2" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#cite_ref-2" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style=" top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.brownforussenate.com/issues" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url("") 100% 50% no-repeat;">"Issues"</a>, Scott Brown United States Senate, accessed January 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-3" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_Brown#cite_ref-3" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;"><span class="cite-accessibility-label" style=" top: -99999px; clip: rect(1px 1px 1px 1px); overflow: hidden; position: absolute !important; padding: 0px !important; border: 0px !important; height: 1px !important; width: 1px !important;">Jump up↑</a> Matt Viser and Andrea Estes, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/12/22/senate_candidates_spar_over_health_care_climate_change/?page=2" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background: url("") 100% 50% no-repeat;">"Senate hopefuls fire away in debate: Coakley, Brown at odds over health bill, climate"</a>, Boston Globe, December 22, 2009.</li>

</ol>

</div>

<div id="mw-normal-catlinks" class="mw-normal-catlinks"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Special:Categories" title="Special:Categories" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Categories</a>:

<li style=" margin: 0.125em 0px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1.25em; border-left-style: none; padding: 0px 0.5em 0px 0.25em; zoom: 1;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Politics_(U.S.)" title="Category:Politics (U.S.)" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Politics (U.S.)</a></li>

<li style=" margin: 0.125em 0px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1.25em; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0px 0.5em; zoom: 1;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Tea_Party_Movement" title="Category:Tea Party Movement" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Tea Party Movement</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

</h3>

==

With the 2010 Congressional elections looming, the U.S. Chamber has stepped up its anonymous fundraising to build a huge war chest to unseat supporters of health care reform, financial services reform and climate change legislation. The Los Angeles Times reports that U.S. Chamber fundraising for the year is expected to soar well above the $144 million raised last year, with much of it earmarked for local ads targeting Democratic incumbents during the fall elections.

The template? The U.S. Chamber ran $1 million in so-called “issue ads” in the final days of the Massachusetts race that elected Republican Scott Brown, who won the race with the U.S. Chamber’s support and quickly voted with their position against health care reform legislation.  Tom Donohue called it the model for their 2010 effort.

===

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/04/01/the-politician-to-pundit-route-scott-brown-to-guest-host-the-oreilly-factor/

Failed senator and sometime-<a href="http://www.votecorevalues.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/scott-brown-nude-cosmo.jpeg">nude model</a> Scott Brown will continue his politician-to-pundit career transformation Monday by guest-hosting The O’Reilly Factor on Fox News.

Brown, who lost his Senate seat to <a href="http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/12/10/elizabeth-warren-brown-still-calling-me-professor/">Professor</a> Elizabeth Warren in the November election, has been a paid contributor at Fox News since February. His gig on O’Reilly, the network’s highest rated show, will be the former senator’s most prominent TV appearance to date.

Speculation about Brown’s political future was effectively quashed earlier this month after he took <a href="http://www.nixonpeabody.com/Scott_Brown_Joins_Nixon_Peabody">took a job</a> at the Boston law firm Nixon Peabody. Before that, a number of pundits <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/29/sources-scott-brown-moving-closer-to-senate-run/">theorized</a> that Brown would jump into the special election for John Kerry’s vacant senate seat. Brown had won his place in the Senate, after all, in the special election for the late Ted Kennedy’s seat.

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell <a href="http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/14/lawrence-odonnell-on-why-scott-brown-has-better-shot-at-governor-job/">had his doubts</a> about “loser Scott Brown’s” political ambitions after his loss in November. The Last Word host accused Brown of running a Senate campaign ”worthy of the thugs in my old Boston neighborhood” in a Rewrite segment in January.

“You heard it here first, which is to say you’re hearing it right now—Scott Brown probably won’t even run against Ed Markey,” O’Donnell predicted on January 8, after Markey, a longtime Massachusetts representative, threw his hat in the ring for Kerry’s seat. O’Donnell said a run at the Massachusetts’ governorship would be a more feasible option for the Republican Brown.

But even that prediction overestimated Brown’s desire to stay in politics. When news broke about the former senator’s lobbying position at Nixon Peabody, O’Donnell knew <a href="http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/03/11/rewriting-scott-browns-political-future/">the jig was up</a>. “Scott Brown is smart enough to know that he cannot go off and become a lobbyist and then take that dreaded occupation onto a debate stage as a candidate for anything ever again,” he said. “This is Scott Brown’s full Palin: take Fox News’s money, and then go for the money anywhere else he can. Like Sarah Palin, Scott Brown is all about the money now.”

It remains to be seen whether Brown’s tenure at Fox News will be more successful than Palin’s: she was <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/25/sarah-palin-fox-news-out_n_2553421.html">dropped</a> from the network at the beginning of the year.

===

grist:

The question: ��Do you believe climate change is real, and, if so, what should the federal government be doing about it?”

Brown answered first, asserting strongly that he does believe in climate change — but that it's a combination of “manmade and natural.Which is technically true, but a massive cop-out. His answer on what the government should do was substantially worse.

One of the biggest things we can do is get an energy policy, and we don’t have one. Wind, solar, nuclear, hydro, geothermal, coal, siting, permitting, conservation. A true all-of-the-above approach as I have. Professor Warren has a none-of-the-above approach. She’s in favor of wind and solar.

</blockquote>

He then, oddly for the topic, transitioned to Keystone.

She’s against the Keystone pipeline, which will help create union — all you union guys listening out there? — She’s denying union jobs and non-union jobs. Making sure we can get more of our energy on the world market, to stabilize those costs that you’re paying at the pump.

</blockquote>

(Pro tip: Union guys don’t get excited about hearing that non-union jobs will be created.)

Brown then dinged Warren for supporting Cape Wind, the offshore wind-power development <a href="http://grist.org/news/mitt-romney-may-have-a-few-million-reasons-to-oppose-wind-power/">loathed by William Koch</a>, of the Koch Kochs.

He summarized his argument as advocating for a “balancing role” by the government. Which is where Warren picked up.

Senator Brown says that he’s about a balanced approach. He’s not. He’s about a rigged playing field.

</blockquote>

Brown, she notes, supports oil subsidies, which helps “tilt the playing field.�� The topic of oil subsidies had also come up earlier, briefly (41:39). During a question on education, Warren pointed out that a key consideration in governance is “priorities, making the right investments.” Instead of subsidizing oil companies, why not invest in education? Scott Brown responded by noting that taxes and small business and Warren worked at Harvard.

As for Keystone, Warren noted that the pipeline won’t create as many jobs as is claimed and, she correctly notes, won’t create a single job in Massachusetts, while clean energy could.

Then she dropped a partisan bomb.

Sen. Brown has been going around the country, talking to people, saying, you��ve got to contribute to his campaign because it may be for the control of the Senate. And he’s right. … What that would mean is if the Republicans take over control of the Senate, Jim Inhofe would become the person who would be in charge of the committee that oversees the Environmental Protection Agency. He’s a man that has called global warming “a hoax.” In fact, that’s the title of his book.

</blockquote>

Brown replied, “You’re not running against Jim Inhofe, Professor. You’re running against me.” He then noted that he supports wind and solar, that he was “one of the original sponsors of the production tax credit” for green energy. This is not accurate — it predates his time in the Senate, though he has supported the PTC.

Here’s Warren’s main point: The race isn’t about Elizabeth Warren versus Scott Brown, it��s about which party controls the Senate. “This matters in this race, control of the Senate.”

Brown’s response? He��s bipartisan, unlike Warren. “Can you imagine 100 Professor Warrens down there, placing blame and raising taxes?” He blamed her for both founding Occupy and for inspiring the “you didn’t build that” slogan that the GOP has tried to hang around the president��s neck.

For neither candidate was climate change or the environment a key point to attack or defend: for Brown, it was a chance to point out Warren’s extremism; for Warren, an opportunity to note how much more is at stake. Voters in Massachusetts have delivered over 60 percent of the vote for the Democrat in each of the last four presidential elections. This year will be similar. Scott Brown’s election to the Senate came during an off-year election against a particularly bad candidate. Warren’s argument wasn’t about Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren. It was about the America that voters want to see. In 2012, with this presidential race and in that state, it’s a strong political argument to make.

��

Philip Bump

</div>

===

Fox boosted scott brown, helped him raise $ (unprecented by news org?) also huckabee and morris!

fox distorted brown opponent on afganistan and catholic health care workers (she's catholic)

fox biz guy said stock mkt/ 401k would go up if brown elected.

��

link to vid: "a vote for scott brown is a vote for libery" vs tyanny day before election!

fox effect

----

moderate?

==

<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/03/28/453546/big-oil-runs-ads-for-scott-brown-breaking-peoples-pledge-ad-ban/">http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/03/28/453546/big-oil-runs-ads-for-scott-brown-breaking-peoples-pledge-ad-ban/</a>

koch and api $

===

The American Petroleum Institute has been a good friend to Scott Brown, but that friendship is starting to cost him.

Earlier this week, Big Oil broke the "<a href="http://swampland.time.com/2012/01/24/can-a-bipartisan-pact-disarm-the-super-pac-arsenal-in-massachusetts/" target="hplink">People's Pledge</a>" between Brown and Democrat Elizabeth Warren to keep third-party ads off the Massachusetts airwaves. In a new radio ad, Big Oil called on citizens to contact Scott Brown in support of his position to continue the tax loophole for oil companies. Now Brown has agreed to pay up, recognizing the <a href="http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2012/03/elizabeth-warren-campaign-calls-scott-brown-demand-that-oil-industry-group-stop-running-ads/ueJsgcKMIkKFmOuRTLO9vL/index.html" target="hplink">ad is a violation</a> of the historic agreement.

A few months ago, before Brown and Warren signed the People's Pledge, the League of Conservation Voters ran an ad charging that "Scott Brown has gone to Washington," taking thousands of dollars from the oil companies just weeks before he voted to keep their special breaks and voting repeatedly against the environment and public health. LCV even gave him a 0 percent on their environmental report card because of his abysmal record.

Unlike Big Oil, LCV played by the rules; they're no longer running ads calling out Brown for his anti-environmental votes. You'd think Brown and friends might be happy to change the subject in a state like Massachusetts, but this new Big Oil ad is going to cost him -- not only economically, but also by bringing back into the spotlight Brown's shoddy record about whose side he's on.

Big Oil has given Brown <a href="http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2012/03/elizabeth-warren-campaign-calls-scott-brown-demand-that-oil-industry-group-stop-running-ads/ueJsgcKMIkKFmOuRTLO9vL/index.html" target="_hplink">almost $200,000 in contributions</a> already, eight months before the election, against the average taxpayer who is now paying almost $4 a gallon of gas. He can't walk away from this reality, even as he'll try to appear more moderate.

Brown has picked sides in the fight over environmental protections -- if he and his allies were smart, they'd try to let his record on the topic fade away.

===

This is a monstrous tally for Brown. Wall Street is clearly not messing around when it comes to stopping Warren:

Financial service lobbyists and other K Street advocates have for weeks been working hard to help the freshman senator win his high-stakes battle for re-election against Elizabeth Warren, a liberal Harvard law professor. Warren is anathema for many finance-sector lobbyists and Wall Street leaders who abhor the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau�� a centerpiece of the financial services overhaul—of which Warren was the intellectual architect. [...]

In his two Senate races, Brown’s top five contributors included four financial giants: Fidelity Investments, Goldman Sachs, Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co., and Liberty Mutual Insurance, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The most generous donor has been FMR Corp., the parent of Fidelity Investments, chipping in at least $97,000 to his campaign committees from executives and the firm��s PAC.

��

Executives and PACs affiliated with Goldman Sachs pumped at least $60,500 into Brown’s coffers; at least $51,000 from Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance; and at least $46,000 from Liberty Mutual Insurance. [...]

Inside the Beltway, fundraising has been heating up too. On Nov. 30, veteran financial services lobbyist Dan Crowley, a partner at K & L Gates, hosted a breakfast fundraiser for the senator that drew about a dozen other lobbyists.   “There is no Senate race that more clearly reflects the choice for the future direction of the country,” Crowley said, pitting the role of government versus the role of the private sector.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/10/1053386/-Wall-Street-posts-huge-numbers-against-Elizabeth-Warren?detail=hide

kos

===

grist on AGW:

10.  Scott Brown

U.S. senator from Massachusetts

Before: "Reducing carbon dioxide emission in Massachusetts has long been a priority of mine,'' <a href="http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/01/scott-brownclim.html">he said</a> in 2008 when, as a member of the state Senate, he voted in favor of his state joining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a carbon-trading initiative in the Northeast. "Passing this legislation is an important step ... towards improving our environment.''

After: "I think the globe is always heating and cooling. It's a natural way of ebb and flow. The thing that concerns me lately is some of the information I've heard about potential tampering with some of the information," <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/2009/12/17/us_senate_candidates_at_odds_on_states_climate_change_issues/">he said</a> in December 2009, as the <a href="http://motherjones.com/environment/2011/04/history-of-climategate">

</a>

<a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-gop-became-the-party-of-the-rich-20111109?print=true">http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-gop-became-the-party-of-the-rich-20111109?print=true</a>

The battle reached a fever pitch over health care reform. To truly understand the depth of the GOP's entrenched opposition to Obamacare, it's crucial to understand how the reform is financed: The single largest source of funds comes from increasing Medicare taxes on the wealthy – including new taxes on investment income. According to the Tax Policy Center, Americans who make more than $1 million a year will pay an extra $37,381 in annual taxes under the plan. The top 400 taxpayers would contribute even more: an average of $11 million each.

Rarely in American history has a tax so effectively targeted the top one percent. "It took Republicans about four months to figure out how much they hated it," says McIntyre, president of Citizens for Tax Justice. Republican rage over the president's health care plan has far less to do with the size of government or the merits of the individual mandate than the blow to the investor class. If Obamacare remains in place and the Bush cuts for the wealthy expire as planned, top earners will be paying a tax of 23.8 percent on capital gains – more than they have at any time since Clinton cut the capital gains tax in 1997. Health care reform, griped The Wall Street Journal, was nothing but a "sneaky way" for Democrats to wage a "war on 'the rich.'"

A key element of the GOP's war on the poor was cemented by the surprise election of Scott Brown to replace Ted Kennedy in the Senate in January 2010. As a candidate, Brown had made his high-mileage GMC pickup truck the star of his campaign commercials. "I love this old truck," he said. "It's brought me closer to the people." But Brown's real allegiance was to his wealthy donors: the billionaire Koch brothers, who bankrolled the Tea Party, and the financial interests who made a last-minute investment of more than $450,000 to propel Brown into office. [nb does not say direct link]

But Brown wasn't done. At the 11th hour, he forced Democrats to spike a tax on big banks and hedge funds that was designed to generate $19 billion to pay for the costs of financial reform. As a result, consumers and small banks had to pick up the tab. Brown, meanwhile, was richly rewarded for his efforts on behalf of Wall Street: During a three-week period at the height of negotiations, he raked in $140,000 in campaign cash from big financial firms, including Fidelity and MassMutual, Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan.

When Republicans won back control of the House in last year's midterm elections, they followed Brown's lead and moved swiftly to betray their Tea Party backers by running up more deficits on behalf of the rich. Within days of the election, Republicans not only secured a two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, they also enabled America's richest scions to inherit millions of dollars without paying a dime in taxes. All told, the GOP's two favors for the party's biggest donors were secured in a lame-duck bargain that adds another $858 billion to the debt – an amount greater than the original stimulus plan the Republicans opposed so bitterly.

<a href="http://motherjones.com/environment/2011/04/history-of-climategate">----

</a>

<a href="http://motherjones.com/environment/2011/04/history-of-climategate">"Climategate" faux-scandal</a> was raging. In April 2011, <a href="http://articles.boston.com/2011-04-13/bostonglobe/29414551_1_greenhouse-gases-greenhouse-gas-emissions-scott-brown">he voted</a> to strip the U.S. EPA of its authority to regulate carbon dioxide.

Teddy's seat loss shook dems

USCoC $<a href="http://www.fixtheuschamber.org/news/news/inside-chambers-million-dollar-shell-game"> http://www.fixtheuschamber.org/news/news/inside-chambers-million-dollar-shell-game</a>

<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/scott-brown-koch">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/scott-brown-koch</a>

apparently begged for koch money in video

</div>

Brown, Scott Sen

Attachments