Unless Bob Kerrey’s working from some information I’m unaware of, this is a pretty slimy thing for him to do. From the New York Times:

The risks to the White House are both immediate and long-term. A victory by Mr. Brown would mean losing the 60th vote Democrats need to stave off a filibuster in the Senate.
“If he’s running against 60 votes and wins, that is not good,” said Bob Kerrey, a former Democratic senator from Nebraska. “It says that in Massachusetts, they are willing to elect a guy who doesn’t believe in evolution just to keep the Democrats from having 60 votes.”

Really, Scott Brown doesn’t believe in evolution? I checked Nexis-Lexis and did some quick Googling. Anyone know what he’s talking about? Maybe the Times could have clarified the charge?