"Well Shut My Mouth," Scott Brown Is Told In New Hampshire

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Ethan Allen

Well, well, well. Looks like former Senator Scott Brown, defeated by Senator Elizabeth Warren in the last Senate elections in Massachusetts has been stirring up quite a controversy in neighboring state, New Hampshire.

Scott Brown, a Massachusetts resident is about to go carpet bagger. He's planning on running for the US Senate but from the Granite State just north of his legal residence.

People move all the time. Some even do it for political reasons, say, Liz Cheney. There's an election for the senate in Wyoming so she decided to carpet bag herself there to run against Mike Enzi. She doesn't stand a chance, but she needed some place to run and her family does have some tangential connection to the state. Her father was a congressman there before he became Vice President and creator of an illegal war. So perhaps an argument can me made for her choice.

But then you get to Scott Brown. He was once the darling of the Senate, a GOP newbie who had star written all over him, until he opened his mouth and Elizabeth Warren slammed it shut. But you can't keep a determined ex-centerfold nude model down for too long. So he's openly stated his interest in running as the GOP candidate against first-term Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). He's going to do it, take my word for it. And if you want to know my record at predictions like this, I called both Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren's runs six months before they each announced. I'm a New England boy, I know these things in my backyard.

You may be wondering how well the Republican golden boy's future announcement is going over? Not well. Not well at all. But the outspoken opponents are not the Democrats who think he's border jumping just to upset the apple cart. Brown's opposition is coming from his own party. And they're mad.

How mad? If I were Scott Brown I'd start wearing a bullet proof, Kevlar vest.

Huffpo reports:

During an interview with conservative podcast Granite Grok's GrokTalk on Saturday, New Hampshire state Rep. J.R. Hoell (R-Merrimack)suggested that it may some day be necessary to use "firearms and ammo" against the government if its policies continue to be shaped by elected officials like former Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.).

Yikes, that's pretty scary. There's already too much gun violence, so to start putting out hints that guns and ammo might be necessary is outrageous.

Hoell was discussing plans to protest outside a state GOP fundraiser that is scheduled to feature Brown, who is rumored to be considering a run for one of New Hampshire's U.S. Senate seats. Hoell has characterized Brown as too liberal for the state, and accused him of supporting laws that encroach on the Second Amendment. Hoell then invoked the armed uprisings of the Revolutionary War.

Progressive thinking in New Hampshire does go back to the Revolutionary War and Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain Boys. And sadly, that's the last time they had any sort of solid footing alongside contemporary thought or forward thinking. It's been a march backward in time since then.

When asked whether protesters should bring weapons to the rally, Hoell responds: I'm never going to tell a person not to carry a firearm ... I will recommend people carry firearms concealed. Tactically it's a better solution; it doesn't make you out to be a target.

The message needs to get out that Scott Brown does not represent New Hampshire. If things continue the way they are, there may be a day or a time where firearms and ammo are necessary. It happened in the Revolutionary War. I'd like to think we're not there yet, but as things continue to unravel, that may be the next step.

Protestors. Guns. Ammo. Concealed weapons. Targets. Revolutionary War. Firearms. Tactics. New Hampshire. Next step. Does this sound like peaceful discourse to you or a trip back down Memory Lane to 1776?

You can follow me on twitter: @Linzack

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare
  • Jason Rowe

    "Treason" means nothing to those who throw the idea of armed revolution out there; America was a land full of traitors, until Great Britain capitulated in 1783. These latter-day "revolutionaries" are tin-plated versions of our founders; Devoid of righteousness and bereft of moral courage.

  • Jason Rowe

    The GOP has been creating miscellaneous monsters for too long now; It's only a matter of time before one nails them in the ass. I hope that when their "uppens" do come, it's not a violent mess.

  • David G

    The Representatives comments would lead me to agree with the treason charge.

  • Sally

    The stupid. It's beyond hurting. These people are actively trying to dismantle the US and turn us into what? Kochville? ALECtown? The Old West? I am so sick of these morons who managed to get elected calling for some sort of armed revolution. That is NOT why they are in office, and frankly, I think they are all guilty of treason.