Martha Coakley's brilliant debate gambit

for violating American citizens' fourth Amendment rights (based on a decidely judical judgment of "good faith") as a memeber of the US Senate.

What? You dont know? You're not alone.

No one knows becuase the press insists on covering this like a horse race. A gender race? A run against history or the "old boys" network. How is Scott Brown part of the "old boys netowrk?"

We have never lived through a period with so many Constitutional crises as the eight years of the Bush Administration. Can we get Martha on record about how she'd vote on issues other than social ones like child protection, senior citizens and LGBT? How about civil right and governemtn authority?

I caught a flash of Brown's reply to all this on the news this morning. He was of course dressed in camo for the camera spot. I have a feeling he will be wearing fatigues 24/7 until the election. Perhaps he will wear a helmet during the debate and tote his rifle. Oh wait, I forgot - he's a lawyer. Maybe his Kevlar-laminated briefcase?

I concur concerning your analysis of why she did it, but you can rest assured that, if he's included, both Coakley and Brown will be held to a higher standard. Folks have a tendency to forget that Libertarians are not only aligned with conservatives on such issues as taxes, but also very much with liberals on privacy, non-declared wars, drug laws, etc.

A three-way is so much more fun.

Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com