Being a victim of childhood sexual abuse is no excuse for later becoming a republican!

exhibitionist, unseemly. there is a time and place for
such untoward admissions. this is neither.

Brown was begining to be put under the microscope a bit.  Being against healthcare and opposed to taxes on medical device manufacturers.  Geez, he barely has been out to DC very long, but is already under the thumb of medical device corporations!
The timing of a book and its contents are questionable.  Afterall it would be hardhearted to skewer someone who has been abused.  Should such content really be material for public domain? 
Dont really see any modern day politicians memoirs and books worth reading anyway.  It would be the equivalent of reading Paris Hilton memoirs.

Yes, it is brave; and also profitable.

I think they (all of them, dem or rep) should wait until the end or near the end of their “public service” before profiting from their “public service”.  Just old fashioned I guess—work first, get paid after.

@ TDoff
I get the point, but you are beyond the limits of known published social science. It is established that many abusers were abused, end of science. It is not known that abused children grow up to be Republicans with Scrooge-like attitudes about social welfare and “entitlements”.
Brown, as noted previously here, is far into a social taboo for MEN in Western society - admitting victimization, especially sexual. It is brave.

Perhaps Scott Brown’s candor in revealing his childhood abuse and molestation will encourage other republican politicians to come clean on their similar childhoods. This would at least explain, though certainly not justify, their propensity for proposing economic legislation and budget cuts that will certainly abase and abuse many children by denying them health care and appropriate education, for example. As many studies have shown, abused and molested children become abusing and molesting adults. Just look at the Catholic hierarchy and Santori amongst us.

It is hard not to admire a man willing to divulge the ugliest of secrets when he has everything to lose.

Frankly, I am quite impressed by his opening the subject of childhood sexual abuse of boys (from the victim’s perspective). He may be ‘only’ (my interpretation of the editorial slant) grabbing for money, as another account (NYT) seems to emphasize, but this is ground-breaking in that he is under no duress, not obviously constructing an alibi, and A US SENATOR. I kinda like him (a little, and this is a first pulse of mild admiration for him personally, not politically).

In this book review, it would be nice to know whether there is anything positive, just to balance the ugly stuff, so we can know more clearly what to expect from this man besides a secret desire to perhaps burn down the House???