HotAir is a big voice in the conservative blogsophere and has done much to advance the cause of those wishing to stop and reverse the growth of a large central government.  Unfortunately Hot Air's Ed Morrissey has brashly thrown his weight behind Scott Brown in the Massachusetts special election.  This is disturbing and disheartening for every tea party, small government loving soul in America.   While I certainly cannot blame casual Massachusetts Republicans for getting excited over Brown's possible win over Martha Coakley, it becomes much harder to justify it in the case of Ed whose life revolves around politics and whose message is fundamentally Jeffersonian.

In a piece called Where is the national GOP in the Massachusetts special election Ed shows his frustration over the apparent lack of support for Brown, correctly pointing out that in NY-23 the GOP heavily contributed to the liberal Dede while throwing Hoffman under the bus. While Brown is obviously no Dede he is a far cry from the mantra of HotAir: small government and fiscal responsibility. Oddly and most puzzling of all, Ed writes:

Brown has a perfect platform on which to run. MassCare has become an expensive flop, and ObamaCare is worse. All Brown needs is the money and the bullhorn to say, “Let’s not make the same mistake twice,” and he could score an upset over Coakley. But the GOP needs to start taking the race seriously — and even if Brown comes up short, it would still give the GOP some momentum toward stopping ObamaCare in 2010.
This is painfully nonsensical considering Brown is as much of a part of MassCare as is Romney and Brown realizes this which is why he continues to proudly announce his support for socialized medicine. Brown supporters will invariably attempt to marginalize the failures of RomneyCare and even go far as to blame the current Democrat governor, but this is ignorant partisanship. A program fundamentally designed to provide health care at the expense of other citizens is socialization and can only result in higher costs at the expense of quality.  Brown admits that costs have gotten out of control, but this either illustrates his utter incompentence of basic economics or deliberate deceit.

Of course Ed Morrissey unlike Brown supporters is under no illusion of Romney Care's fundamental flaws yet he continues to embrace Brown. Yes, it would be unreasonable to expect for Ed to swing his support to a third party candidate. But, it is perfectly reasonable to expect at least some kind of repudiation of the status quo Republicanism that has dominated American politics for centuries and is responsible for the current broken system. It is perfectly reasonable, in the face of a rising tide of GOP discontent to at least more carefully examine the candidate before blindly dishing over one's support. It is perfectly reasonable in the wake of the Tea Party beating out the GOP in a Rasmussen poll to at least MENTION the one candidate that actually represents the movement: Joe Kennedy who is also running in this race as an independent.

When RightCondition interviewed and examined Joe Kennedy's positions on various issues concerning taxation, spending, social security, wars and health care it became very obvious as to who deserves our vote.  The clarity of this decision is especially magnified by the most obvious realization of who Scott Brown really represents; a man who supported and still supports RomneyCare, spoke out against ending the MA income tax and voted for real estate tax increases while presiding and voting with Mitt Romney over every gun and car fee raise in a span of several years.  A credible source like HotAir's Ed M. could have discovered this information in a span of 5 minutes, this is no big secret.  Supporting Scott Brown is negligent and a spit in the face of independents and Tea Party activists - ironically, a movement that Joe Kennedy is actually part of unlike the Republican Scott Brown. 

Whether this is a case of innocent negligence or something bigger has yet to be determined, but the clash in action over words is as apparent as daylight.  Many including myself can sympathize with supporting Brown in an effort to stifle Coakley's 60th vote for ObamaCare, but not at the expense of principles!  A fragile movement born out of the rapid socialization of HopeNChange requires principles, values and honesty.  How can a movement gather momentum when the very same people that claim to represent it are so quick to embrace the one thing capable of destroying it? 
"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.” - M. Rothbard