Crowned heads vs. headdresses.
COLUMN: DIANNE WILLIAMSON
I think we're being too hard on Scott Brown, who recently took a commanding lead in the political gaffe-athon for claiming in an interview that he's had secret meetings with kings and queens.
OK, so maybe that statement was incorrect, based on the fact that, as far as we know, his closest brush with royalty came from watching "Game of Thrones" on HBO. And yes, it's odd for Brown to make such a statement, a year after claiming to have seen photographs of a dead Osama Bin Laden that he never saw.
But logical explanations exist. Maybe he is still trying to pawn off poor Ayla, this time on one of England's lesser princes. Or maybe he got bored playing fantasy baseball and decided to staff his team with members of the royal family.
"Each and every day that I've been a United States Senator, I've been discussing issues, meeting on issues, in secret meetings with kings and queens and prime ministers and business leaders and military leaders talking, working, voting, on issues every single day," he told WTKK-FM last week.
His spokesman quickly acknowledged that the senator misspoke. And, in the spirit of trying to raise the level of discourse that has characterized the Senate race between Brown and Elizabeth Warren, his challengers quickly urged voters to ignore the gaffe and move on to issues of substance.
Ha, ha! I joke. The Democrats immediately pounced and released a video set to the tune of "Dancing Queen" that showed Brown wearing a crown, and they're milking the gaffe for all it's worth in the hopes that voters will forget that their candidate claimed to be part Cherokee, apparently because an ancestor had high cheekbones and a fondness for feathers.
What is going on? This race should be an intelligent contest between two engaging candidates with opposing political views, and all we've got is a debate about whether it's worse to pretend you're an Indian, or that you secretly shmooze with monarchs.
But I'm giving Brown the leg up when it comes to campaign commercials. In a pair of mommy porn ads I've dubbed "Fifty Shades of Brown," the hunky senator is shown doing all sorts of stuff designed to attract women - folding laundry, making breakfast, shopping for feminine hygiene products, etc. In the ad called "Dad," wife, Gail Huff says Brown would "get the girls up, get them fed, get them dressed, get them off to school," and no wonder the poor guy fantasizes about hob-knobbing with queens, because he's practically Cinderella. How he finds time for Senate budget hearings is anyone's guess.
In another ad pandering to women, Brown plants a kiss on Gail's forehead while she tells us that hubby "is by far the most understanding of women, probably of any man I know."
This pablum is intended to distance Brown from his fellow Republicans and their poor record on women's issues. Warren, meanwhile, is running stark ads in which she criticizes Washington for giving "billions to oil companies" while slashing student loans and Medicare.
Wouldn't it be refreshing to see Warren's husband on TV, talking about how she really understands men's concerns? Maybe she could be parked in a Barcalounger and pounding a Bud while debating the merits of higher spikes on golf shoes. A second ad could show her walking through the door, indifferently late for dinner, complaining about how everyone at the office except her is an idiot.
"Elizabeth really gets us," her husband could intone. "She never asks me about my innermost feelings. She understands, more than any woman I know, that we don't have any."
Now that would be worth watching. In the meantime, the great Debate About Debates continues, and it would have been nice to have one in Worcester. But four is enough for any candidate, especially one with so much laundry piling up at home.
Contact Dianne Williamson via email at firstname.lastname@example.org