Strike One?

I'm going to call this one early - don't expect Scott Brown to win any more friends or maybe even lose his re-election bid if this the man he will patterns his legislative practices on is John McCain.

Malkin most certianly isn't a fan of McCain ( anymore ) and let's it known as often as she can:

Red Flag Number One: A reader from Arizona informed me the day after the Bay State Bombshell that he had received a robo-call from Massachusetts GOP Sen.-elect Scott Brown. “He basically wanted me to vote for John McCain in November,” the reader said in his description of the automated campaign call supporting the four-term Sen. McCain’s re-election bid. “No wonder [Brown] said he hadn’t had any sleep…he was busy recording phone messages!”

Malkin is one of the most vocal supporters of the Tea Bagger movement ( aside from Beck is more of a "studio-gangster" on that front anymore ) and her opinion, patently absurd as it is, is often taken as gospel.

Ed Morrissey over at HotAir seems rather pleased that key portions of McCain/Feingold have been overturned:

Free political speech is not free if the government can dictate when and where you exercise it. It’s true that CU could have run the movie earlier than 30 days before the election. They felt — not without reason — that their speech would be more effective using the same venues within 30 days of the election. Assuming they break no other laws, what gives government the right to dictate when on the calendar they can exercise free political speech? Apparently, being “rich” is a Constitutional exception through which the government can infringe on rights.

So with reports of the GOP rearranging it's "strategy" to not just include by mirror Brown's, one has to wonder if his plan really is so revolutionary.