He toed the line? I thought he towed it.

No, Scott, your current record in Washington is all that counts and it is abysmal for a senator from Massachusetts. You haven't done a thing to help anyone but the party. That is not what we need and your 2 years as a replacement senator is all you will see. Mass has no problem with republican senators. We elected Edward Brooke. You failed.

"When asked whether he has compromised in any way because he received about $280,000 from coal, oil, and gas interests — compared with Warren's collection of about about $11,000 from oil and gas — he said he does not base his votes on who contributes to his campaign. "Listen, I'm raising money like President Obama, like Professor Warren, and every other member of the delegation," he said. "So, no, I don't believe so at all." WINK, WINK, WINK.. We get it Scott, you have been bought.

How is he any different than any other Republican or Democrat?

...and paid for!

Scott Brown "regrets" his efforts to reduce GHG emissions because when he got to Washington he realized that makes you enemies in the GOP and doesn't get you funding from big polluters. If you don't want a market based program, you don't want to regulate GHG under the CAA, and you don't want to provide any incentives for renewable engery start ups, how exactly do you propose this problem be solved? Oh right, I forgot, in crazy town the problem doesn't exist. All those money-grubbing and fame hogging atmospheric chemists have been tricking us for far too long and it's time to put a stop to it! At least he supports the ESA, that's a huge sigh of relief because the ESA's power lies in its ability to cover environments and natural resources that fall through the cracks of the other major environmental laws. In general though it's absolutely insane to me that environmental issues and even just science itself have become a matter of party politics. And it's bogus that EPA has become the sworn enemy of the GOP. Maybe EPA has been too successful--I think people have forgotten that just 40 years ago rivers were catching on fire, you couldn't breathe the air in Los Angeles, and whole populations of children would mysteriously get cancer. Does this stuff sound like party politics? And why are GHG emissions suddenly so different? If congressional Republicans don't want cap-and-trade or another market-based system for GHG reduction (something that you'd think they'd like since it was invented by neo classical economists and would provide a whole new securitues market) then fine--it's not the best solution for GHGs anyway. If you truly believe the CAA isn't supposed to extend to GHGs (even though the Supreme Court says otherwise) then come up new legislation to let the EPA do its job and protect the environment! The agency is there, we're paying for it, use it!

1) the article is about Scott Brown, not Obama. 2) how are environmental issues only those of "liberal extremists"? Last time I checked everyone lives on the same planet. 3) Scott Brown is a big boy, he can think about more than one issue at a time. And who says the two issues are mutually exclusive anyway?

"..voting against multiple efforts to eliminate billions of dollars in federal subsidies for oil companies.." David, your describing the IRS tax credits available to all businesses, including oil companies, as subsidies is akin to the word ruse of calling any reduction in the historical growth of a budget item a "cut". Words matter, and can serve to inform or to deceive. A professional reporter should use words carefully and accurately. Or are you a commentator? I think your article is under NEWS, maybe the editors messed up?

I am a Brown supporter for fear that the Demohacks will regain a total control of the Massachusetts congressional delegation via this election. But there is a real question whether Sen. Brown's support for federal protection of seals means he supports great white sharks. This may be silly to some, but there is also a real question of whether supporting protected seals is not an attack on businesses in areas like Cape Cod, which cater to tourists who won't come in large numbers if more and more great whites lurk offshore for easy seal pickings.

Um, that should be "toe the line." A lot of people who don't know the origin of the phrase picture someone pulling a rope, cord, or some other "line"--"tow the line"--as a way of working for whomever the "line" belongs to. Thus, if the administration has a "line"--i.e., a "party line"--then those who side with the administration help to pull it ("tow" it) along. Wrong. The phrase "toe the line" is equivalent to "toe the mark," both of which mean to conform to a rule or a standard. The Oxford Dictionary of Word Histories (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2002; ed. by Glynnis Chantrell) says, "The idiom toe the line from an athletics analogy originated in the early 19th century" (514). The specific sport referred to is foot-racing, where the competitors must keep their feet behind a "line" or on a "mark" at the start of the race--as in "On your mark, get set, go!" So one who "toes the line" is one who does not allow his foot to stray over the line. In other words, one who does not stray beyond a rigidly defined boundary. From: http://grammartips.homestead.com/toetheline.html

So basically speaking, Senator Brown supported environmental protections in a legislature and state where a "no" meant nothing except vulnerability. When given the opportunity to vote for the environment in the US Senate when it really means something and sends a message, he votes against the environment. I pride myself on respecting our leaders, but I need to ask: "How do you look yourself in the mirror after this kind of nonsense?" I will freely admit that "Professor" Warren already had my vote, but you are losing any respect that I had for you. I will be gone in 15 or 20 years if I am lucky. But I want my children and their children, and yours, to enjoy a healthy planet. That doesn't just happen....it requires commitment and strength and will. Hoping you will do better than advertised if re=elected!

Buggie, talking to the golfer guy only encourages him. He is, to be kind, a sad person. I agree with your post;but he never will, but will challenge you for the attention he derives from the reactions.

Name calling always degrades your message. I'm guessing that you don't care, but it is an honest observation in the service of more meaningful discourse.