Would Maine Democrat Shenna Bellows Really Look Forward to Working with "Nutcase" Rand Paul on Civil Liberties?


courtesy The Daily Beast

Earlier today, I posted about Shenna Bellows, the Democratic candidate for Senate in Maine, who is good on NSA issues and pot legalization and bad on economic issues. Bellows recently told The Daily Beast that if she beats Republican incumbent Susan Collins, she'll be "really excited to work on issues of civil liberties with Republicans like Rand Paul and Justin Amash."

Well, a reader forwarded me a fundraising email from Democracy For America (DFA), a group that is supporting Bellows' bid. DFA writes

Let's face it, if Republicans take control of the U.S. Senate, Tea Party
nutcases Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and David Vitter will run the Senate exactly
like the Tea Party currently runs the U.S. House.

To stop them, we need to go on offense.

That's why we've got Mitch McConnell on the run in Kentucky with Democrat
Alison Lundergan Grimes up by 4% in the most recent polls. And it's why
Susan Collins in Maine is next.

So a fair question to ask candidate Bellows is: Are you really excited to work with a "nutcase" like Rand Paul?

To be fair, Bellows didn't write the fundraising email, which is signed by Charles Chamberlain, DFA's executive director. But Bellows isn't exactly a random recipient of DFA's largess, either. In a testimonial at DFA's site, she writes about her "DFA Values," which include "the values of community, security and liberty." "My campaign will be open and affirming," she avers.

Exactly how a fundraising letter that calls the senator most associated with critiquing the NSA and Patriot Act-sanctioned incursions on civil liberties a "nutcase" fits into that effort is for deeper minds to ponder.

Bellows talks a lot about using tax dollars to seed enterpreneurial efforts and appears to be in favor of broadening Social Security, raising the minimum wage, and a host of related economic policies that are reminiscent of a progressive such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). But the rhetoric of the DFA fundraising letter and the typical liberal Democrat's lack of interest in either supporting legal pot and robust civil liberties makes me wonder whether the party would respect Bellows' articulate positions on those matters.

NEXT: Eric Holder Calls for Crackdown on Drug Smuggling Through 'the Mails'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. she writes about her “DFA Values,” which include “the values of community, security and liberty.”

    Hmm, liberty:

    1. freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.
    2. freedom from external or foreign rule; independence.
    3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.
    4. freedom from captivity, confinement, or physical restraint: The prisoner soon regained his liberty.
    5. permission granted to a sailor, especially in the navy, to go ashore.

    She must be using the 5th definition.

    1. Ah, this is obviously some strange use of the word liberty that I wasn’t previously aware of. With apologies to Douglass Adams

      1. Presumably they do have some understanding of the word. I’d be interested in their explanation of it. Seriously.

        If I hd to guess, I’d suppose some compromise between negative & positive liberties, and with a thumb on the side of the scale of the employee, tenant, and consumer, as against the employer, landlord, and producer.

  2. She is saying whatever it is she thinks she needs to say to get elected. This is called lying.

    Upon arrival in The Cesspool, it will be the Team Blue! party line, or no pork for you!

    1. This is called lying.

      Slight quibble. It is lying. It is generally called “politics” or “electioneering”.

  3. Ordinarily I would take a person’s word about what they stand for over a second party’s, but politicians are not ordinary people.

  4. makes me wonder whether the party would respect Bellows’ articulate positions on those matters.

    Wonder no longer.

    No they would not respect it.

    1. But the question is will Bellows follow through? I think she will. Vote Bellows!

      1. I don’t live in that state.

        What is her position on Bitcoin?

        If it is good I might donate.

  5. Terrible photo by the way.

    Is she a new Senator or a stock photo model posing as a Senator’s secretary out to lunch?

    1. She looks pretty doable to me in that pic, if I was into skinny white bitches.

      1. So you’re not a friend of PAWG?

  6. To stop them, we need to go on offense.

    When is TEAM Blue not on the offensive? Seriously. 24/7, they are attacking someone for insufficient adherence to TEAM.

  7. makes me wonder whether the party would respect Bellows’ articulate positions on those matters.

    She looks pretty clean and bright, too.

    1. Yeah.

      She has that kind of shiny, upbeat look so common on women who have *deep seated psychopathic fear of rejection*

      Like so =


      *Don’t you like me? I like you? Why did you sigh in frustration? You’re thinking I’m blowing things out of proportion, don’t you? You have that look on your face again like you don’t want to talk about it. Lets talk about that.*

  8. “”My campaign will be open and affirming,” she avers.”

    I believe having a degree in English simply makes my life more unbearable because I have to live my life in a world where words are constantly used as meaningless code for assaulting potential critics, sans any discussion of policy or position.

    Hope and change? Nah, used up, dead. Open and Affirming FTW.

    because if you’re not her? You’re just a negative nancy who is probably a homophobic racist. And how can you not believe her because, Awwww? She’s so cute and librarianish? This is all policy-neutral you understand. Even when people agree? (like that ‘libertarian’ guy over there who’s been anti-drug-war for like, fo-evah) The difference is, you can *trust* it when a warm-fuzzy team-blue says it!! Because we’re cool and they’re DICKS. So when SHE says, naughty NSA! you can trust she’ll totally like make sure they spy only on republicans.

  9. It’s a trick question. None of them believe in freedom.

  10. CPA,
    So many folks spout liberty but have no clue what the definition is. Here is yet another politician throwing around a word they have no clue about, nor would have the slightest idea about how to defend that natural right they swear paths to defend.

    Then we hear crap like this: “To stop them, we need to go on offense.”

    The minute anyone would go on offense and use the same acts of aggression and violence against them then all the sudden they don’t like violence anymore, and call for help.

    Liberals are like that asshole at the club that keeps stepping on your shoe, and bumping into you while ur just trying to enjoy the night without a bother or fight. The minute they move the wrong way in their attempt to use violence against you and you knock them the eff out, all the sudden you’re the bad person. It’s like, WTF!! So just ignore the violence perpetrated by this douche sheisser licking mofo, and make the defender out to be all bad.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.