Contrary to what you might think about the State of Massachusetts being a Democratic stronghold, there are more Independents in Massachusetts than there are Democrats and Republicans combined. The two-party system that we are forced to endure is an unacceptable yoke that we are seeking to change. You see, we still do not like the boot of "the man" stepping down upon our necks any more than we did in 1776. But if you think that joining the Tea Party is the solution, or at least this tea party, "Government on the side of the people?" - I feel sorry for you. I'm looking for a tea party but nothing with the likes of these people.
With the election of Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate, the Tea Party people fell all over themselves claiming victory in "a rock-solid blue state and center for the liberal establishment."
Whoa! Wait a minute.
Most of us Massachusetts "Independent voters" have a pretty even split when it comes to our voting records. We vote republican or we vote democrat or we will vote a third party candidate when we think that it will restore some balance to the already unbalanced world of politics.
We don't do no goose-stepping for no one.
And don't be silly enough to believe that our vote for Scott Brown is a signal that we are unhappy with democratic leadership. No. We're just plain unhappy with everything political. No matter what your ideals, your dreams of making a difference: If you enter the political machine it will chew you up and spit you out if you don't learn quickly how to play ball. The lobbyists run the show.
Scott Brown, you're in for a wild ride!
Is there really any such thing as a "good politician" in this world of "bureaucratic efficiencies" and "Congressional ethics" and other such oxymoron's that make up what we call, "Washington?"
I voted for Scott Brown because I think that the administration's health-care reform bill was a sham and it was the only way that I could throw a monkey wrench into the works. Balance that with Scott Brown thinking that the Massachusetts health-care plan is working well and you quickly understand, "Meet the new boss; same as the old boss."
His Cadillac plan works for him while my wife is presently one of the State's uninsured.
Massachusetts gives two options for my wife. Buy insurance through the State of Massachusetts or add her to the insurance plan from my employer. It is the law. She must have insurance.
Option 1 will provide a no prescription drug coverage plan with a limited list of physicians for a cost of just under $300 a month with a deductible. Her doctor for over thirty years is not on the list. Quite a bite for a couple that now earns less than $45,000 a year. This is probably the reason that the number of uninsured in the state remains at 5.5%.
Option 2 is adding my spouse to my employer's HSA at an added cost of about $175 a month. Sounds appealing. But wait; there's more! With a deductible of $7000 for the two of us it begins to look less like a health-care plan and more like a crap-care plan.
Yeah. Politicians are always speaking of change, of reform. Even if you believe them you have got to know that they're outnumbered. The chances that any politician will have a sincere desire to serve the people remain intact once they're in Washington is like still believing in Santa Claus when you're an adult.
This ones on me.....