Replies to post #297543 on $Stock*Shop*Charts*News*Option$

[Stock Lobster]

BostonGlobe: In stunning upset, Brown tops Coakley for Senate seat

By Matt Viser and Andrea Estes
Globe Staff / January 19, 2010

Republican Scott Brown tonight pulled off one of the biggest upsets in Massachusetts political history, defeating Democrat Martha Coakley to become the state’s next United States senator and potentially derailing President Obama’s hopes for a health care overhaul.

The victory caps a dramatic surge in recent days as Brown, a state lawmaker from Wrentham once thought to have little chance of beating a popular attorney general, roared ahead of Coakley to become the first Republican senator elected from Massachusetts since 1972.

With 73 percent of precincts reporting, Brown had 53 percent and Coakley had 46 percent.

In a race that became the center of national attention, Brown’s win is widely seen as a vote against the president’s agenda from one of the most reliably Democratic states. And in a particularly ironic twist, Brown, in succeeding Edward M. Kennedy -- the late liberal lion who deemed health care “the cause of my life’’ -- may well be the 41st vote to prevent the Democratic-led plan from moving forward.

© Copyright 2010 Globe Newspaper Company.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/19/in_stunning_upset_brown_tops_coakley_for_senate_seat/


READER COMMENTS (14) Sort: Chrono order | Latest first | Most recommended

Report item as: (required) X Obscenity / Vulgarity Hate speech Attack on another user Advertising / Spam Copyright / Plagiarism Other Comment (optional):

deminimus wrote:
Bill Buckner. Martha Coakley. 'Nuff said.


1/19/2010 9:40 PM EST Recommend (1) Report abuse Permalink

mjumju wrote:
Let the gloating from the right wing talk radio nuts begin.
1/19/2010 9:41 PM EST Recommend Report abuse Permalink

whatnow2 wrote:
Congratulations Senator Brown. Now get to work.

Great Night!!!!!!
1/19/2010 9:42 PM EST Recommend Report abuse Permalink

Realityinnewengland wrote:
God Bless you Scott Brown and THANK YOU!

Let all of his supporters stand behind him and WITH him to help him bring America BACK!

GO SCOTT GO!!!
1/19/2010 9:42 PM EST Recommend Report abuse Permalink

victimnation wrote:
Do you believe in miracles !
1/19/2010 9:43 PM EST Recommend Report abuse Permalink

chai4life wrote:
11-2010 The Next Step In the SAVE AMERICA Tour
1/19/2010 9:43 PM EST Recommend (1) Report abuse Permalink

SMTMC wrote:
Martha Coakley and the Democratic Party ran a PATHETIC campaign.

"As opposed to standing outside Fenway Park? In the cold? Shaking hands?"

Damn right she should have been! Thanks Martha - you just blew the chance of decent healthcare for all. Sleep well knowing you can afford healthcare.
1/19/2010 9:43 PM EST Recommend Report abuse Permalink

140dBA wrote:
Maybe now Mary Jo Kopechne can rest in peace. Fellow Americans, TODAY IS THE FIRST DAY IN MY ADULT LIFE I AM PROUD TO ADMIT I AM FROM MASSACHUSETTS!

I must also apologize to the entire nation for my fellow citizens who voted for Ted Kennedy for all these years. Maybe now the healing can begin!

1/19/2010 9:45 PM EST Recommend (3) Report abuse Permalink

mikeyyy wrote: The biggest upside of this election. . . . we won't have to listen to "Tigress" or "ImpeachBush" anymore! Hey Tigress, how do your bold predictions of an easy Coakley win sounding now? Hey ImpeachBush, you must be rethinking alot of your posts right about now. Bye Bye.1/19/2010 9:46 PM EST Recommend Report abuse Permalink


dmrosen9 wrote:
This is actually good news for the Democrats. They can now win back the seat in 3 years. If Coakley had won, she'd be there forever. Capuano would have destroyed Brown. The Demorats are out of touch with the public nationally. Hopefully they will now get the message.
1/19/2010 9:47 PM EST Recommend Report abuse Permalink

WillRuss wrote:
Why?Why?Why? Because Ted Kennedy wouldn't give up his power until it rigor mortis set in. Let's let this entire election be a morality lesson for any Senator or other politician who lacks the wisdom to graciously lay aside their power. Had Ted decided to step down when when alive, he could have chosen his successor, mentored him or her and had a lasting influence well beyond his years. Instead, in great irony, he is succeeded by a member of the competing party. What politician is next to be in this same school? Barney Frank? Or another? Wisdom is that those who mean to keep their power, will in the end lose it.
1/19/2010 9:47 PM EST Recommend Report abuse Permalink

adamtanner wrote:
I'm ashamed to be from MA tonight. Scott Brown's HOMOPHOBIC politics do NOT represent me or the MA I live in.

During a State Senate debate in 2001, Brown referred to the decision of his lesbian Democratic opponent, Cheryl Jacques, to have children as "not normal". He also described her parenting role as "alleged family responsibilities."

Thank god we will only have 2 years of this nonsense to look forward to.
1/19/2010 9:48 PM EST Recommend Report abuse Permalink

Diogenes-Sinope wrote:
If Brown had lost this election by only 5% it would have been a shot across the bow of the Obama machine.

The fact that he WON it by 5% is a torpedo amidships. You can bet that the message from the people that WE DON'T WANT YOUR DAMN SOCIALIZED MEDICINE is finally coming through loud and clear to the political elite in Washington. And those who aren't listening will get it shouted in their ear come November.
1/19/2010 9:51 PM EST

[Stock Lobster]

WSJ: How Brown's Win Affects Democrats' Agenda

JANUARY 19, 2010, 10:09 P.M. ET.
By COREY BOLES

The Republican victory in Massachusetts imperils, but may not derail, the Democratic agenda in 2010, analysts and congressional aides said Tuesday.

Scott Brown's election to the Senate gives Republicans 41 senators, robbing the Democratic bloc of the 60 votes needed to override filibusters and press ahead with legislation.

How the result could affect specific policy initiatives:

Health Care: To complete sweeping health-care legislation, Democrats have a couple of unpalatable options: Jam through an agreement that has yet to be reached between House and Senate Democrats before Mr. Brown takes his seat; or have the House take up the Senate's version of the health-care bill.

Financial Regulation: The Republican victory puts pressure on Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.) to craft a bipartisan deal. Talks with Republicans over a draft proposal were already at a deadlock. Now that Democrats have lost their filibuster-proof majority, Mr. Dodd will have to offer more concessions to win Republican support. Gerald Hanweck, a professor of finance at George Mason University, said Democrats might wait to take up the issue until after congressional elections in November.

Jobs and the Economy: Senate Democratic leaders pushing for new tax cuts and spending to create jobs will now need to listen to Republican ideas on what to include in that package. A focus on job creation in an election year could overshadow other domestic policy priorities.

Climate Change: Democrats have long faced problems advancing legislation to curb emissions of greenhouse gases amid resistance from oil, coal and manufacturing interests within their own party. "If an economy-wide cap-and-trade bill was unlikely before, we think a Republican win in Massachusetts would put it on life support," wrote Whitney Stanco and William Hederman, analysts with Concept Capital, a research firm in Washington. More likely: a bill aimed at encouraging U.S. production of energy from alternative sources.

Immigration: Prospects for an immigration overhaul might not be damaged by the Massachusetts election outcome, given talks between Democrats and Republicans on the topic, said Jennifer Duffy, an analyst with the nonpartisan Cook Political Report. But she added that with the dicey politics of immigration, any bill would be an uphill push this year.

Bank Tax: One Obama proposal could receive a boost from the Brown victory: the proposed tax on financial institutions to recoup the costs of the Wall Street bailout, if Democrats seize on it to establish their populist bona fides, as some have already tried to do.

—--Henry J. Pulizzi and Siobhan Hughes contributed to this article.
Write to Corey Boles at [e-mail]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703837004575013443192299132.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

[Stock Lobster]

UKT: The G20 and IMF Should Merge (!)

Bank of England Governor Mervyn King calls for merger of G20 and IMF

The G20 should effectively merge with the International Monetary Fund, under a radical proposal to overhaul management of the international economy issued by the Bank of England Governor

By Edmund Conway and Angela Monaghan
Published: 7:42PM GMT 19 Jan 2010

Comments 4 | Comment on this article

Mervyn King said that unless politicians act to create an international body with the authority to reform the monetary system, the world would be consigned to another crisis in a matter of years. He warned that although much attention was being paid to efforts to overhaul the financial sector, in the meantime the global economic imbalances which fuelled the crisis were worsening.

The Governor has often voiced concern about these imbalances, under which rich countries have been reliant on borrowing to pay for cheap exports from overseas. In his speech at Exeter University last night, he indicated that in order to fix them, politicians would have to transform the multilateral institutions responsible for monitoring the global economy.

Pointing out that with so many economies involved in the global trading system, the idea of another Bretton Woods conference is "wholly impractical". Mr King suggested the G20 may be the ideal forum to push through the necessary reforms, urging exporters to spend more and deficit economies such as the UK and US to save more.

He said: "The legitimacy and leadership of the G20 would be enhanced if it were seen as representing views of other countries too. That could be achieved if the G20 were to metamorphose into a Governing Council for the IMF, and at the same time acquire a procedure for voting on decisions."

Mr King has frequently expressed his frustration with the IMF, which repeatedly warned about the scale of global imbalances in the years running up to the crisis, without achieving any notable reforms in creditor or debtor nations. However, his plan may be opposed by the US, which holds the balance of power at the IMF.

David Blanchflower has called for the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) he formerly sat on to be "disbanded". In a column in the New Statesman, he claimed that it failed to see the recession coming and made it worse by acting too late.

"The MPC's days are numbered, certainly in terms of its remit and probably its membership," he said. "After the election we are going to have to reconsider who sets monetary policy."

He added that the committee had failed adequately to communicate quantitative easing. The Bank declined to comment.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7029818/Bank-of-England-Governor-Mervyn-King-calls-for-merger-of-G20-and-IMF.html