"Sissy Willis, Scott Brown doesn't want to hear from you"

"Sissy Willis, he doesn't want to hear from you," Dan Riehl just twittered in response to our own early-afternoon tweet:

Just called Scott Brown's local number, again as yesterday & phone mailbox full. Arggh!

But the DC office of our junior Senator did pick up, with a real person on the other end after a two- or three-minute wait on hold with a tasteful Mozart concerto playing in the background. As we wrote in the comments of Dan's related blogpost, "Usual Suspects: The Dodd-Frank Sell-Out":

When I asked which way the calls were trending, [the woman who answered the phone] said she couldn't say. I asked whether that meant she WOULDN'T say, and she said yes. Sounds to me like they're trending NO!

For a reality check, we ran our gut reaction by Tuck, who agreed with our assessment but had this bit of sadder-but-wiser wisdom to add:

The no's are the people who WOULD call. Those who don't call don't know what's going on anyway.

Update: Some thoughtful perspective from fellow Brown campaigner Professor Jacobson of Legal Insurrection. Be sure to read the whole thing:

I'm not going to engage in the name calling some have directed at Brown. I believe Brown was sincere in his belief that the legislation does more good than bad. And I'm still glad that I supported his campaign, because Brown stood firm on health care and other negative Democratic initiatives [Also, our own view, the "Massachusetts Miracle" served as a catalyst to break up the incumbent logjam, promising "term limits by other means" in local and national elections this spring and come November].

But Scott Brown failed to see the forest for the trees on financial reform.

Whatever good the financial legislation accomplishes could have been accomplished without another impenetrable behemoth, sprinkled with lobbyist-induced goodies, which expands government for the sake of expanding government, and which constitutes a cure which is worse than the disease.

Update: Michelle Malkin "Buzzworthy" link!

Update II: "A Sissy Willis Scott Brown Tribute" from Dan.

Update III: Instalanche!

Update IV: Interesting email exchange this evening with Professor Reynolds:

We: He's getting an earful from us Tea Party people today. Too late for FinReg, but maybe next time?

Glenn Reynolds: Indeed. Somebody should make noises about running a Tea Party candidate against him in the primary if he drifts further. . . .

Note: Brown will be up for election to a full term in 2012.

Update V: "Sissy Willis I have one thing to say to you," says blog/twitter buddy DaTechGuy:

This post is spot on, I wish I wrote it.

Crossposted at Riehl World View and Liberty Pundits.

Comments

[Gayle Miller]

Another politician starting to disappoint!

[goomp]

Is Scott Brown a liberal in conservative clothing? Either way he did show that he holds the People's seat. I wouldn't prefer
the woman he ran against.

[Howie]

Most people try to rationalize this as "still better than Coakley..."

That was last election. Brown had my solid support for the next, but his grip just loosened. A lot. I welcome conservative challengers, I will definitely look them over come the primaries.

[memomachine]

Hmmmm.

Since Healthcare Reform passed and was signed into law ... precisely what is the upside to Brown's election again?

[hitnrun]

I can't believe how many people are starting to grouse about Brown.

He barely won even with an apocalypse scenario unfolding for Democrats. Obama was literally threatening the life of the Massachusetts electorate during an unscheduled election and he still just barely cleared the bar.

This makes him - mathematically speaking - just about the most rightward candidate that state is capable of electing. If the only votes he casts with Republicans are for Majority Leader and society-destroying mad science like Obamacare, that's a major bonus for the GOP.

[Rick Caird]

They had to get health care through via reconciliation. That makes it fair game to undo via reconciliation bypassing a Senate filibuster if the Republicans get control.

[WooHooYoo]

Screw Brown. Limited government & fiscal responsibility are NOT his among his principles. This was obvious when he would not give any pointed thanks to the teaparty efforts to get him elected. Thus no more money, no more activism on social media, no calls come election time, nothing. Nada. Not. A. DAMN. Thing. This is not the first disappointment nor the last. Hundreds of open ended regulations are still to be written based on this crap sandwich. Republican, my ass. Thx for the vent space, Sissy!

[Jane]

Since Healthcare Reform passed and was signed into law ... precisely what is the upside to Brown's election again?

The fact that he isn't Martha Coakley. And I'm steaming at this vote.

[flataffect]

Didn't he run as the Republicans' 40th vote?

He seems to be quite gullible if he thinks Dodd and Frank are telling the truth.

[Orson]

DEATH to Healthcare & wealthcare fascists! DEATH to them all! On with the NEW AMerican Revolution!!!

[WRJonas]

His knife wound in the torso of Conservatism won't be fatal but it will leave a scar that we will remember when we have the power and this Judas tries to plead his case.

[NotPC]

Brown is a liberal who makes occasional conservative noises. If he's re-elected in 2012, he'll be Ted Kennedy's heir.

[Hester]

Good grief, you people will give the election to the Democrats again with your purist mentality and litmus tests.

[Tennwriter]

Put up a primary challenger. It keeps him clear on the limits, and if he loses, then we have a better replacement for him. Act from faith, not from fear.

[Smilin' Jack]

Tar and feathers! We've got a Gulf full of tar, maybe Frank Perdue can supply feathers.

When will these critters learn that they work for the people? Government in this country is for the people and by the people; not by/for an elite that thinks giving the finger to the voters is "speaking truth to power". What employer would accept that from an employee?

[Jim]

You guys from out of state don't see all the commercials here from the left and the unions attacking Scott Brown's every move. I'm not seeing any such ads from the conservatives helping defend him. He's walking a difficult tightrope here, and if he is seen as being to far to the right, a liberal democrat will be elected to that position in 2012.

[bandit]

I told you this during the run up to the election. I've known Scott for over 20 years - he's going to do exactly what he wants and his #1 priority is going to be taking care of Scott Brown. He's a pro-business GOPeer and he's not going to be tied down by conservative ideology. If you think otherwise you're sadly mistaken.

[mmgodfrey]

"Good grief, you people will give the election to the Democrats again with your purist mentality and litmus tests."

-----

Being angry at or disappointed by a Republican who votes for another huge expansion of government control, written by Dodd and Frank, no less, is hardly exhibiting a "purist mentality."

BTW, on the radio this morning Senator Brown said about Elena Kagan, "She's not as liberal as Sotomayor." Color me underwhelmed by his conservative leanings on that one. So when he votes to approve Kagan (I'm taking bets, in case anyone's interested), would that be enough to flunk the litmus test?

I knew when I voted for him he wasn't Barry Goldwater; I just didn't think he was Susan Collins in reverse-drag.

Let's get some conservative challengers, please. And no more of this "lesser of two evils" argument. It's a prime reason we're in the sorry situation we're in today.

[John Calomiris]

So,Brown displays his independence.I thought that was why he was elected.He is not any different from the 2 Republican senators from Maine.

[Frank]

I too supported Brown when he was less than a shadow on the national screen. He begged for my out-of-state money and help when things looked up for him. He bragged about being Number 41 for the people. And what is he now? Old reliable Number 60 for Harry Reid.
I WILL NOT SUPPORT HIM IN 2012!