Senators Collins contributed a couple thousand dollars to my 2008 campaign for Maine’s second congressional district seat. I assume the only reason the Democrats have not advertised this donation as evidence that Susan is a dangerous reactionary is the insignificance of my campaign. My 32% share of the vote gave Maine’s Democrats no nightmares, although it’s true that I was already committed to conservative principles while sill in a fetal state.

(A word of explanation: It’s very uncommon on the left to recognize the existence of living conservatives. They will sometime acknowledge that certain safely dead individuals were respectable conservatives, but all conservatives who have not yet made it to the grave, the cinerary urn, or the compost heap require prefixes like “ultra-, far-right-, extreme- or hard-right. I prefer pre-natal conservative, but I’m willing to go along with the alternatives)

When voters consider their senatorial choice this year it is necessary to consider what’s at stake for those who contributing millions to replacing or retaining Collins in the Senate. We are talking about political power first, foremost and always. The customary rules of the campaign game forbid the contestants and their supporters from openly admitting that their primary concern is the acquisition and use of political power. They don’t deny it; that would be silly. They just don’t talk about.

The left-lurchers’s immediate goal is to tip the narrow balance in the Senate to the Democrats and replace Mitch McConnell (R-KY) with Chuck Schumer (D-NY). The longer term goal is to guarantee that the United States Supreme Court will be a “progressive” power base. The concerns and interests of Mainers is of very little interest to people sending money from away,

Millions will flow into this senatorial campaign from both left and right and neither side can compete without it. Anyone familiar with my writings and beliefs will know that I favor Collins. This column makes no pretense of being the sole reliable source of information, but it offers factual information of some value.

Readers of are interested and have access to the Internet can go straight to SusanCollins.com for the way she will be presenting herself. Her initial announcement below gives the essence:

“One reason why I have been able to pass so many laws is because of the bipartisan, commonsense approach I learned growing up in Maine. My commitment to you remains strong, and I am as determined as ever to keep bringing people together, to speak out for the values that unite our great country, and to deliver results for Maine and America. That is why, today, I officially announced my intention to seek another term serving you in the United States Senate.”

She (unlike Angus King) gets things done; she knows how to pass laws. She delivers results for Maine and America. She’s a one-hundred percent Maine, born and bred. She cares about Mainers. She’s guided by common sense like a true Mainer. She’s bi-partisan, independent.

At this point the website boasts of three legislative achievements beneficial to Maine. In addition illustrations of the senator mingling happily with honest-to-goodness, salt of the earth Mainers are provided. Then there two sections about the “latest news” which reveal the meat of the campaign under way and still to come. Under the heading “Left Targets Susan Collins in False Ads on Medicare,” the article attacks Maine Momentum (a.k.a., the Sixteen Counties Coalition) an “educational nonprofit” which doesn’t mention its Democratic Party affiliations and doesn’t disclose the sources of its financing.

According to Advertising Analytics, which tracks political advertising, Maine Momentum has spent over $716,000 in Maine to “educate” voters on the 2020 senatorial race. This education has only one purpose, to revive the old “Medi-scare” strategy of planting fears that Republicans have secret plans to weaken the social safety net of Medicare and Social Security. The story under this headline comes from a conservative news source, but it’s backed up by the liberal Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler who dismissed it. “The campaign season has barely begun,” Kessler wrote, “but there’s little excuse for this line of attack. There is no connection between the tax cut and Trump’s proposed Medicare reductions – many of which have bipartisan support.”

Attempts to panic elderly citizens (e.g., me) by indirect hint that their government checks are going to shrink or disappear just because Republicans like to torture old folks, or something. Back in 1982 when I served as campaign chair for Bert Buckler’s congressional campaign in New Jersey the Reagan administration disclosed that it was making plans to reform social security to insure its long-term solvency, the national Democrats went all out to spread panic over the imminent destruction of social security. The strategy worked very well and Reagan stood well clear of that “third rail of American politics ever after. When reforms introduced, engineered largely by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY).

One lesson is there will never be any kind of Republican “safety net” reform. It can only happen with bi-partisan co-operation. Another lesson, no politician representing the oldest state in the nation is going to talk about reducing either Social Security or Medicare.

John Frary of Farmington, the GOP candidate for U.S. Congress in 2008, is a retired history professor, an emeritus Board Member of Maine Taxpayers United, a Maine Citizen’s Coalition Board member, and publisher of FraryHomeCompanion.com. He can be reached at jfrary8070@aol.com

Copy the Story Link

Comments are not available on this story.