thats alright scott now 2 strikes against you going with obama's last failing job stimulus and now this-your on your final strike you better follow us tea partiers next vote or your out-no money from us-and we will just sit at home-you will lose-probably to someone 3 times more liberal than you-hurts us in the short time-but we need to weed you lib leaning republicans out of the party-as they say one rotten apple ruins the whole bunch-you are doing just that-one more strike and your out-we need a very strong far right conservative base to put an end to these dem give away programs-you are not that person-either get on board or off the plank!!

Vacation in your home town DEMOCRAT State can show what a big blowhard says and does in Washington D C doesn't mean much. He can see the writing on the wall HE IS GOING TO BE BURNT TOAST IN NOVEMBER.The home town folks will remember his two face WASH.and BOSTON facades . I am sure that the unempoyed in Mass. are frothing at the mouth to RE-ELECT The Poster boy.

Another RINO

Disappointed in Brownie! I think the party of "No" is what the country needs regard Obama. Obama's policies need to be neutered - not approved.

Any bill w/o a FANNIE and FREDDIE control is useless and all know it.

Brown is one of 545. Maybe he is worthy of staying but, the next few months will tell that story.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 370 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.... . The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 370 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ.

obama and his super majority in congress could have helped small business with incentives to hire new employees, he and his majority failed, now all they can do is blame any repub that has fiscal responsibility as part of their mandate. It's time for them to go, move-out dot org is going to be the call come Nov. No more promises are needed, the promise of jobs was just that and only that. Stop wasting your cheer leading skills on old fools like reid. Move out!

Brown is one of 545. Maybe he is worthy of staying but, the next few months will tell that story.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 370 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.... . The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 370 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ.

obama and his super majority in congress could have helped small business with incentives to hire new employees, he and his majority failed, now all they can do is blame any repub that has fiscal responsibility as part of their mandate. It's time for them to go, move-out dot org is going to be the call come Nov. No more promises are needed, the promise of jobs was just that and only that. Stop wasting your cheer leading skills on old fools like reid. Move out!

Chuck, Mark and the rest of this crew is farther left than Limbaugh is right........... November would be a good time to replace them also with some balanced reporting. Even someone just a little left would be a breath of fresh air compared to this radical crew. Give us some balance please, it will give MSNBS some credibility! The only moderate was Tim but, unfortunately he is gone. Miss you Tim.

it seems that we will have watered down reform... not unseen as thoes that have power want to hold on to it.... the best way to get wallstreet out of the government is to start financing campains with tax money... ya it seems like its taking from the people but if we finaly make it to where our representatives dont have to pander to these corps. to get their campain money and we make it so bribery is made a crime like robbery... we might just keep from goin down like the romans.... dont get me wrong i think there are some good things in capatalisim but it has now transformed in to a whole new monster with its welding to our government.... we need to remove them befor they act like a cancer and kill us by getting too big and many....

Glad to see that Mitch finally pulled Boston Bean Brownies chain! Does Boston Bean Brownie even know how to vote in the senate? Bet Mictch is happy to have another automatron!

If Brown votes for what he thinks is best for his state and country then he is doing his job, which he was hired through an election to do. It is more then can be said for some from either party which vote strictly party line. To vote for or against a bill based on the merits of the bill is why these guys were hired. They are not there for the good of a particular party.

No problem with this. The problem is that all the Dems will vote for it. No independence there just KA drinkers.

Both Democrats and Republicans -and more importantly, ALL of us Americans- need more people like this guy in positions of power. This man was able to work together with people on the other side of the aisle and still get things done while holding onto what he believes in and keeping his integrity.

Our elected officials need to start working together for the people of this country instead of simply playing politics and doing what they feel will make their party look better than the other party. The Republicans do not want to let ANY Democrat-drafted bill pass (even if it helps Americans like the unemployment extension would have) because it will make the Democrats look good, so the good old GOP has decided to set an all-time record for fillibusters. Never in the history of our country has such a high percentage of bills ended with fillibusters. The historical average is about 7% of bills getting fillibustered, whereas this Senate has it over 60%, which is completely ridiculous and uncalled for.

Please, people, stop whining about the passage of health care reform. America was just about the last -if not THE last- of the "top" countries to have some type of health care package for its citizens, and even at its best it still falls short of most other countries. You guys go ahead and ask the people who work 40+ hours per week but get no health benefits how they feel about now having the opportunity to get insurance and most of them (at least the one who do not believe the GOP's propaganda) will tell you how happy they are about it. From what I have personally seen, the only people who are complaining about it are people who already have insurance or those who can afford it if they wish. Roosevelt's New Deal legislation was supposed to turn us all into socialists, and so is this health care legislation. They are just as wrong about that today as they were wrong about it then; Obama has no interest in turning us into a socialist state; get real, people, and stop whining already!

I think Senator Brown is doing what he is suppose to do… GOVERN! He was against it, he fought for changes, and changes were enacted; now he sees fit to support it. I would think that the people that elected him are happy that they elected an individual that is governing rather than following party lines.

afloatinasea:
Afloat in a sea, indeed. Perhaps on a ship of fools. If any part drinks the KA, it is most definitely the GOP. If you were to look at both parties' voting records going back at least ten years, you will notice that it is the Democrats who are MUCH more likely to cross party lines with their votes and most definitely NOT the Republicans, who are quite obviously united in their opposition to anything that benefits the American people.
Ever since Obama was overwhelmingly elected president it has become very clear that the Republicans have absolutely no intention of working with Democrats, whose party has shown over the years that, despite Republican propaganda (which I admit is quite effective, as it has fooled a lot of people), it is the Democrats who are for the "little guy" and that the GOP is in the pockets of big business. Were it up to the GOP we would be a fascist state.

Gary-302710 and Andygrd,

Regarding your comments about Brown doing his job, I could not agree more with you two. Now if we can just get the rest of the senate to think for themselves and what is right for Americans rather than their political party or their campaign donors, we will all be in better shape. Everybody is too concerned with making their party look better than the other party, not many Democrats and practically NO Republicans are willing to reach across the aisle and work WITH the other party for the good of all America. I do not think the House or the Senate has ever been so divided in the entire history of our nation. It seems as though the far right is running things for the GOP and the far left is running things for the Dems, while most of us Americans are closer to the middle.

Wasn't it Lincoln who said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand?" Whoever said it was completely right, and the truth of that statement does not bode well fot he immediate future of our country, as Congress has never been so divided and contentious. We are headed for big trouble if we cannot right this ship.

At least a few Republicans realize that Financial Reform is strongly needed. This is a good start to stop the Runaway Train left by President Dumbya. You people need to realize and remember: Fact: The current administration inherited a $1.3 Trillion Dollar Deficit, an economy that was losing 800,000 Jobs a month for 18 straight months, also an economy that was on the brink of the 2nd Great Depression with the worst Recession in our country's history. Also remember the Wall Street Bailouts all caused by "GREED" and the lack of Financial Oversight and Regulations. I could go on but the majority of you idiot RepubliCons are too far gone to be helped. Keep on listening to the Tea Party, Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, etc. You are simply setting the stage for your own failure in the 2010 and 2012 elections.

SNOW COLLINS, BROWN, have fun, you played footsies with the parasites, one time too many. Relection, you won't be running as republicans.

I guess Brown is now not listening to the people.. This bill is a banade filled with bribes

Stick with the Party the people are behind them Obama and his friends out by 2012..

Look at the latest polls 60% does not believe in our President in only 18 months.. Vote for this bill and your numbers will follow...

And you teabaggers fell for his line.

Guess who has the last laugh.

Way to go Messrs. Brown and Obama !!! You exposed the teabaggers for what they are - uneducated and unable to connect the dots in politics.

It strikes me that Scott Brown is not what the Tea Party expected, and not what Republican leadership wants. While there is no doubt he is very conservative, he also has a pragmatic element, one that doesn't necessarily include him 'always' going along with his party's leadership which wants ALL republicans to remain in lockstep in oppostion to anything and everything Obama wants to accomplish. There's an interesting dynamic at work at this point in time. Americans are trying to identify why our system is broken, and why we seem to have so little impact on our so-called representatives who persist in either obstructing progress on one side of the aisle, and being too namby pamby to stand up strongly against the opposition on the other side. Perhaps there's an opportunity that is being elevated as a potential partial solution. For instance, wouldn't it be fruitful indeed if people as disparate as Scott Brown and Harry Reid, or Olympia Snowe and Nancy Pelosi, and Bill Clinton and John McCain (the old John McCain before his worries about the Tea Party), and others who while often on the opposite sides of debate, are also interested in finding and deploying solutions in negotiation and agreements with others. We can argue about the names I mentioned, include others, remove some or adend and delete, but the concept remains the same. Recently there has been a movement among those unhappy with both parties and with the Tea Party which is perceived my many Americans as having become the far right wing arm of the Republican Party. Whether that is accurate or not, perception has become reality and it's too late to turn that perception around. To that end, there is a growing discontent in what is essentiall the great center of our country, those who possess the compassion usually attributed to liberals with the pragmatism normally assigned to conservatives. As you'll note from what follows, the two are not mutually exclusive.

There's an interesting poll about Progressives on Gallup. What's more interesting than the poll itself is not what segment of the political spectrum identify with the term 'progressive', but the fact most people don't actually know what a progressive is. First I'll provide the poll results themselves. Self-described conservatives, moderates and liberals were polled. Here is the question Gallup asked.

_____________________________________________

Copy/paste from Gallup site in Italics:

As you know, some people use the label 'progressive' to describe their political views. From what you have heard or read about the term, do you think the term 'progressive' describes your own political views, does it not describe your political views, or are you unsure?

Results:

Of self-described liberals, 26% said it describes them, 17% say it does not, and 57% say they are unsure.

Of self-described moderates, 11% say it does, 23% say it doesn't, and 65% aren't sure.

Of self-described conservatives, 7% say it does, 48% say it doesn't, and 45% are unsure.

BTW, when all denominations are grouped together as American adults, 12 say it does, 31% say it doesn't, and 54% are unsure.

(The numbers are similar when people describe themselves as democrats, moderates and republicans. There are additional polling questions that generally address the same issue. I'll provide the link to the Gallup Poll at the end of this post)

Did you notice how high the number of 'unsure' is? Here's why according Gallup's analysis.

Gallup text in Italics:

This measure of the progressive label was included in a June 11-13 USA Today/Gallup poll, which also assessed Americans' political ideology using Gallup's standard liberal-moderate-conservative scale.

Large segments of all three ideological groups are unsure what "progressive" means, though liberals are more likely to embrace than reject the label (26% vs. 17%), while conservatives are more likely to reject than embrace it (48% vs. 7%). Democrats are evenly divided on whether the term applies to their views, while Republicans overwhelmingly reject it.

Today's findings are consistent with those from a Gallup Panel poll conducted four years ago in which Americans rated their familiarity with "progressive" and five other political terms. At that time, 22% said they were very familiar with the progressive label and another 37% were somewhat familiar, while 40% were not too or not at all familiar -- much higher than the levels not familiar with "conservative" (8%) and "liberal" (10%).

Progressives Have a Diverse Political Profile

Close to half of Americans (45%) who identify with the progressive label separately describe their political views as either very liberal or liberal. At the same time, a third of progressives call themselves moderate and nearly a quarter, conservative -- indicating that Americans' definitions of the term may vary widely or perhaps that Americans lack clarity about its current meaning in U.S. politics.

Bottom Line

The progressive label seems to be gaining popularity in American politics, with numerous high-profile political players and groups using it either as a substitute for "liberal" or as a nuanced alternative to it. Given the high degree of public uncertainty about what the term means -- as well as the lack of opposition to it from the political center -- that could be a successful strategy, at least if the goal is to avoid being pigeonholed.

____________________________________________

What is a progressive?

It's actually a pretty straightforward definition. In the American lexicon of the day, a progressive is someone who holds socially liberal views, while embracing a conservative fiscal philosophy. As in any grouping of people of course, there are gradations, greys, differences, between which element trumps the other. Perhaps some are more concerned about social justice, while the worry of others is more in line with the cost of programs, etc. There's a balance depending on philosophy. If you are 'purely' a social liberal without care about what it costs, you're not a progressive. If you're only worry is the cost, a proponent of only the law of the jungle regardless of what harm it does to those who are damaged, then you're not a progressive. Almost everyone falls somewhere in between those two opposing views. All of those people in between may indeed be progressives, and in effect, make up the largest part of our population.

A few things to consider.

• What would happen to those who currently do not define themselves if they knew the true definition of the term?

1. If self-described liberals knew progressives have a social conscience regulated with the desire to help those who are less fortunate, but only when a program or proposal has an equal or superior value to the cost in the short or long term, or the injustice was so great it had to be addressed, how many of them would then define themselves as progressives instead of liberals?
2. If self-described moderates knew the same thing, realizing both compassion and practicality were generally equal elements of the movement, how many of them would define themselves as progressives instead of moderates?
3. If self-described conservatives, especially old time conservatives and the ones we now call 'compassionate conservatives' were aware the progressive movement used pragmatism to move society forward when taking care of those who are less fortunate and protecting the rights of all, how many of them would opt for the term 'progressive'?

A full 54% of all Americans don't really know what a progressive is. Further, many of those who define themselves as NOT progressives don't know what it is. Even some of those who DO define themselves as progressives think it means the same thing as liberal. How many of all of those would alter their thinking if they saw proof of the difference and took inventory of their own views? I don't know many conservatives who don't believe they have some compassion. I don't know many liberals who believe in spending even if there's nothing to spend, and no chance of getting value from what we do.

I submit a true progressive movement could be the most inclusive force in American politics, having more in common with one another than those who call themselves democrats or republicans and conservatives and liberals. Newsvine isn't always a very good example. The extremes tend to be noisier than those with substantive ideas. But even here I believe there is commonality of thought on both social and fiscal issues, the differences being only a matter of quality and quantity, certainly negotiable elements of today's challenges. I'll be interested in other's thoughts, comments and suggestions as it relates to this subject.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/141218/Americans-Unsure-Progressive-Political-Label.aspx

The problem I see here is that so many people on here and in our gov't fight to win rather than be right. Unlike lady justice currently, people need to put on the party line blindfold and start paying attention to the details of the bills we are being asked to pass. Our gov't makes decisions on what will allow them to be re-elected rather than what would be best for our country. When we start putting our country ahead of our party we will begin to see and feel real change. Until then, it will always be politics as usual and tit for tat as we continue as citizens to be the losers. Time to put country before party! They want us to fight each other rather than gang up on them and fight for US.

I supported Scott Brown and now regret it. Both he and Olympia Snowe received exemptions or consessions for their votes. He admitted this bill just better than when it started, but not perfect. Why can't our Congress aspire to pass bills that aren't thousands of pages, so that they can read the entire bill? Let's pass bills that ARE good and near perfect. Is that too much to ask of our elected representatives? I am sick of the bribes, corruption and buying of votes. But I guess that is Obama's Chicago style of government. They have had to buy votes on their bills, because they couldn't pass them any other way. Scott Brown was voted for by the people of Massachusetts, but he was supported by people all over this country. When our representatives cast their vote, it affects not only their constituents, but all Americans. The financial reform bill is just another disastrous bill. They passed it under the guise of consumer protection. I don't need protection from Wall Street and the Banks, I need protection from the people in Washington. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were the cause of our financial crisis, because liberals thought every person is "entitled" to own a home whether they can afford it or not. Fannie and Freddie weren't even addressed in the bill. Bush warned Congress five years ago about Fannie and Freddie, but Barney Frank assured us that they were not facing any kind of financial crisis. And this man co-sponsored the financial reform bill??? Congress has no idea how this financial reform will even work, which Dodd admitted. Let's just keep passing bills and as Nancy says, "You have to pass the bill to see what's in it". That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. November is coming. Vote them out!