i think scott brown would provide some balance.Markey sticks in my craw since he orinally ran as the "father of term limits!"..and 20 + years later he is still in washington enjoying the "pork"

The person most qualified to be Kerry's replacement is Congressman Ed Markey. He has the experience and proven record of accomplishment necessary to do the job.

@ Earnhardt: Brown hasn't officially announced. But he's trying to install his anointed MA-GOP Chair. That only means he want to control all the party resources for his run.
I certainly support him over Markey. But he shouldn't get the keys to the MA-GOP. Yes if he's the nominee should get some support, but not the whole ball of wax. He spent his entire time after being elected running away from the GOP, not doing whole heck of a lot for down ticket candidates. Now all of a sudden he wants to be titular head of the MA-GOP and get all the resources.

@ Rose: The way to eliminate partisanship in the Senate is to repeal the 17th Amendment passed in 1913. Senators are supposed to represent the sovereign state who sent him to Washington. That's why the founders in their wisdom wrote the Constitution so State Legislatures elected Senators. That meant Senators would likely to cooperate Senators of States with similar interests as much as the would with their party. This would also force people to pay more attention to who they elected to the State Legislature.

Finally Markey is a joke. If had his way, we'd be paying through the nose to heat our homes, while China and India burnt fossil fuels with practically no emission controls. He's screwed up telecommunications.

I hate giving them advice; but If the Democrats are smart, they'll nominate Steve Lynch instead. I'd never vote for him obviously, he's still a huge fiscal liberal. But, he'll keep the culturally conservative/moderate Reagan Democrats on farm. He will win a lot of the similar thinking independents who voted for Brown before, but are now mad at him. And he might get some pro-life Republicans because he professes to be pro-life. Certainly he'll put faithful Catholics in a pickle. Catholics who follow the "de-fide" teachings of the Church and directive of the Bishops, vote for the pro-life candidate if there is a viable pro-life candidate on the ballot. If not they'll vote for the lessor of two evils. Or they stay home. So some Republicans Catholics and other pro-life voters, faced with a Brown vs Lynch, may stay home.

Let me be clear, I'm not endorsing Lynch. I'm just giving analysis. I don't think he'll run. Markey has been endorsed by Kerry and I think Vicky Kennedy. So I doubt Capouano or Lynch will get in the race. But if Capuano gets in, look for Lynch too.
Markey and Capuano will split the socially liberal vote. Conservative Independents, will vote for Lynch rather than vote in a Republican primary that will more than likely go uncontested or have nominal opposition for Brown.

Michael Capuano

Dan Cavaretta. Good guy.

There are more faithful Catholic than you think. Catholicism isn't a cafeteria. It's a binary equation when it comes to De-Fide (defined matters of faith and morals).
Those that dissent from these doctrines, are no longer in full communion with the Church. It's like being pregnant, you either are your not.

As for pro-life voters, they vote on the issue, they work for candidates on the issue, they donate to candidates based on that issue.

Why does Stephen always digress on the topic at hand and begin his own agenda? If you don't know him, he went into a ridiculous tirade about gun ownership. He was silenced out of that discussion and now he's here. Stephen, you have a lot to learn about mature discussions. I strongly suggest you stop before you make an even bigger fool of yourself -that is if you really are who you say you are.

Back to the discussion - Scott Brown. He proved himself before the Obama Chicago machine annointed Cherokee Warren to oust him. This state needs a balance in the Senate, not another party Democratic liner like Warren.

This seat should go to Scott Brown. He is the only candidate that represents all interests. Many of us in Mass feel like we have no representation. Its time we had a voice. Scott Brown is the right person. He has a solid and honest track record unlike most of Washington.

Ed Markey would represent the Commonwealth ably. Moving from the House to the Senate, he would know the workings and players in the other branch and relationships are invaluable for getting things done. Moreover, Markey has expertise in the key issue areas of telecommunications and environment. He's a strong consumer advocate. Remember he's been outspoken on wasteful military spending while advocating for R&D, which employs thousands of people in Massachusetts. He supports women's employment and health-care rights, and he can raise money. Scott Brown would be a retread whom voters rejected as a feckless stealth Republican and a reliable vote for the Republican filibuster.

I voted for Scott Brown last election and I'd vote for him again but I think he hurt himself by not standing up for his party and also with his votes on Don't Ask, Don't Tell and the Dodd/Frank amendment. I believe his votes on these bills were wrong and he needs to be a true Republican not a RINO. Being bipartisan is one thing but voting with the other party just to get along is in my opinion wrong. We do need a balance though because the liberals in Massachusetts don't care if we go off the fiscal cliff and that includes Elizabeth Warren.

Definitely Ed Markey for all the reasons stated by Carolyn Gritter.

Scott Brown. He reads bills before voting He is not yes man.

" And [Lynch] might get some pro-life Republicans because he professes to be pro-life."
Deal-breaker for most women.

It amazes me that in a one party state that people are so afraid of putting an experienced Senator Scott Brown back into a seat which he has held and was making great progress for America and the State of Mass. We in Massachusetts have just sent two (2) other inexperienced people to Washington, do we need a third non functional trainee or should we finally look to send someone with experience.

Ed Markey will be an outstanding U.S. Senator, just as he has been an outstanding Congressman. He has taken the lead on many issues, including Climate Change, which threatens our way of life and our very existence. The last two Republican U.S. Senators from MA (before Brown; I'm referring to Saltonstall and Brooke) were, unlike Brown, good and decent men who stood for principles and did not wait till the last minute to declare their positions on issues. I wish there were still Republicans with their character.

The thing about Brown is that he's LIKEABLE. Or at least he was, until he decided to bully Senator Warren (I like the sound of that) about her Cherokee heritage.

The New England Genealogical Society (perhaps the premier such group in the world) came out in support of Ms Warren's claims. Why isn't that good enough for you heritagers? (On second thought, please don't use that word. It's awful. But it got its point across.)

Yes Deacon, how DARE we keep voting in politicians who we feel are doing excellent jobs? We must give time over to the minority party: it's only fair!

Come on. Massachusetts is overwhelmingly liberal. Has been for the better part of a century. I would gladly vote for a Republican if he followed a Nelson Rockefeller mould. But we both know the Rockefeller Republicans are dead and gone. Hell, even your beloved Ronald Reagan probably wouldn't be reactionary enough for the Tea Party: remember how he distanced himself from the John Birch Society during the 1968 California gubernatorial election?

I believe the Governor and legislature plan to change the law again so they can appoint the senator to replace Kerry until the next election anyway. If they could find a way to appoint him permanently I'm sure they would. We do need some balance in our State's politics I think so I would consider voting for Brown again. Although I would not rule out Markey or Lynch. The others are far too liberal for me.

I never took my Brown bumper sticker off and I'm just thankful we might get the chance to keep him as one of our Senators.

How sad, Murray. Only in America is 'socialist' an insult.

I am a PROUD Social Democrat. If you think that makes me a Commie pinko, I would be happy to explain to you the differences between Communism and Socialism.

Oh and Liz, I see people driving around with Dole/Kemp 1996 stickers still on their cars. I doubt that'll happen anytime soon, either.

Steve, your rants give your hometown of Waltham a bad name- go seek help

Kai, you believe Steven needs psychological help simply because he argues his opposing viewpoint forcefully?

Maybe you need to spice up your diet. Thin gruel can't be all that good for your constitution.

No date on a Saturday night?

Stop stalking me.

We should vote for nice guys. Scott Brown is a nice guy. Elizabeth Warren is a nice guy. Markey is a nice guy. Barney frank is a nice guy. They all know how to spend money that we would only waste. Good thing we have such intelligent voters.