The Anti-Sam Brownback Blog

Now this is very puzzling. Senator Brownback, staunch conservative and ever-ready defender of the President’s war in Iraq, voted twice in the last month against the troops.

On April 12th Senator Brownback voted no on S.Amdt. 344 to H.R. 1268. H.R. 1268 is the giant emergency appropriations bill named “Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005 ” Whew… what a mouthful. The amendment in question, S. Amdt. 344 was “To provide $1,975,183,000 for medical care for veterans”

It was practically a party line vote,with only Arlen Specter and Jim Jeffords joining the democrats in voting for the amendment. My question would be “What does Brownback have against the veterans of this country?” Why would he vote against their health care? How can he in good conscience support a war and then turn around and not fund veteran’s health care. Irresponsible and reprehensible.

The sad thing is, this vote is not an anomaly. On April 21st Senator Brownback voted against S. Amdt. 520 to the same appropriations bill. This amendment was “appropriate an additional $213,000,000 for Other Procurement, Army, for the procurement of Up-Armored High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles” AKA Armored Humvees. This amendment thankfully passed due to a significant number of republicans crossing the aisle and supporting a clearly worthy cause.

This vote against armor for Humvees is perhaps the most disturbing of the two. How many times have we heard reports of soldiers dying from IEDs while riding in un-armored vehicles? I can see no good reason to oppose this amendment. Apparently many republican senators agree with me, including: Lott, Martinez, Lugar and McCain among others.

Why does Brownback want to send our troops into battle without the necessary armor to protect their lives and limbs? Why does he pay lip service to veterans and then stab them in the back when they need health care? Why does he think he has any chance of becoming president with these types of votes hanging over his head?

That is what I find most interesting about this. These votes were the action of a senator who feels safe in his district… not of a presidential hopeful who will undoubtedly have his record scrutinized.

I have contacted the Senator’s Press Office and was transferred to voicemail. If I ever get a call back, I’ll update here.

It’s true. He wishes them to lead a life of constant finger pricks and needles. He wants them to go blind, have kidney failure and become amputees.

You know, I wish Senator Brownback had the balls to talk to a juvenile diabetic in person. I wish he was enough of a man to tell a five year old that he opposes the best chances for a cure in his/her lifetime. Does he have any idea how hard it is to tell a small child that they have to prick their finger every day for the rest of their lives? These are kids who should be worried about missing Clifford the Big Red Dog on PBS, not worried about how many milligrams of glucose per deciliter of blood the cookie will cause.

I saw a PBS Nova program the other day about stem cell research. It featured a teenage diabetic female and her mother. Her mother is a self described Catholic. She talks about how a clump of cells should not have the same rights as her daughter. I could see the pain in her face as she talked about the chance of finding a cure for type one diabetes.

I can’t help but wonder if one of Senator Brownback’s kids had diabetes, would he have a different view? Would he love his child or his politics? The sad thing is, I have seen nothing from the man that would suggest he would choose his child. His actions in the past would lead to the conclusion that he would gladly let his child die in order to save the “life” of a clump of cells.

The Washington Times, not exactly a paragon of liberal bias, reported today that there are two bills regarding human cloning currently in the legislature. One, sponsored by republican Mary Bono (R-Calif) would ban cloning meant to produce a child. It does, however, protect cloning of embryos that is necessary for stem cell research to continue. The other bill, sponsored in the senate by our own Senator Sam Brownback bans all types of human cloning, including therapeutic (or embryonic) cloning for research.

It is in times like these that I get a sense of what Galileo’s friends must have felt like. Earth is not the center of the universe? Heretic! Pagan! Democrat! How dare he push the scientific envelope. Research? Why do research? The Bible tells us everything we were meant to know. Especially how it is Godly to sell our daughters into slavery. Check Leviticus, it’ll fill you in on the details.

You want to worship your God? Great. That is what makes America the wonderful, diverse country that it is. Worship your God, gods, allah, yaweh, satan, gaia, vishnu, buddha or ganja for all I care. Just keep your holy Jesus fingers out of science.

Or, Senator Brownback, if you must meddle… at least have the courage and the spine to meet the victims of your crusade face to face. Visit a pediatric ward and talk to the kids with diabetes. Explain to them the consequences of your actions. You will still be a heartless, ignorant, child hating bastard… but at least you won’t continue to be a coward.

An article in today’s Topeka Capital Journal discusses Senator Sam Brownback’s recent travels and goes over much of the same old information that has been circling for months. However, one part did jump out at me. They interviewed some people in Brownback’s hometown, the tiny hamlet of Parker, and asked them if they thought he would make a good president. As the article points out, there is no doubt that in a presidential election he would carry Linn County, but some residents expressed some trepidation at the thought of Brownback going national:

Former Parker Mayor Tony Borum, who runs a metal fabrication shop in town, said Brownback’s parents, Bob and Nancy, are fine people. Their son’s brand of conservatism accurately reflects the majority of his Kansas constituents, Borum said.

If that is where the senator held the political line, Borum would be content.

“When you start talking about Brownback the president, you have to raise an eyebrow,” he said. “He would not make a good president because of his alignment with radicals.”

This is further evidence that even here in red Kansas, there is an ongoing fight between the moderate “Bob Dole” republicans and the crazy, hateful evangelical Christian republicans that have invaded the state in the last 10 years. Additionally, it seems that some of Brownback’s constituents aren’t happy that he spends his time in Washington D.C. dealing with issues that get a lot of public attention but have little effect on rural America:

Kim Johnson… said she has been a close friend of Brownback for 30 years. They went to school together. He consoled her when a friend died. He introduced his future wife to her. Johnson received “for your eyes only” notes from the senator. She believes Brownback to be a moral person.

But she is drafting a letter to him outlining reasons that it may be necessary to end their friendship.

“He needs to get back to his roots,” Johnson said. “He’s concerned about international affairs. His heart is in Sudan. But is he going to do anything for our economy? He’s not been there for education. He’s not voting for the minimum wage, and I know people struggling in his hometown to pay the bills.”

I don’t know of any republican who wants to raise the minimum wage, but education is an issue that Brownback has not focused on yet is very important to rural America. People in Kansas knew from the start that No Child Left Behind didn’t make sense for the reality of a rural school district. They are fed up with being told the federal government is further regulating the schools. This issue in particular I know has hurt Brownback’s following here.

The key though, is that the religious fervor that has swept Kansas overrides all of that. Many Kansans couldn’t care less if their kids are getting an awful education as long as scientists in California are unable to use discarded cells from in vitro fertilization. It is ignorant and irrational, but it is reality here in Kansas.

In a move surprising no one, and outraging every non-bigoted person in the country, Senator Brownback has declared that the federal government should take a hard line against gay rights in Washington DC. He was quoted in the Washington Post as saying:

“I have been and continue to be a strong believer and protector of traditional marriage. I think it’s an important issue for society and for the country,” Brownback said. “This issue has now been moving across the country for several years, and I guess we will deal with something in D.C. now.”

So Mr. “I hate gays but try to be like Jesus” Senator, how exactly are you going to “deal with” this issue in DC? The article points out that DC ranks second only to San Francisco in the number of gay couples living together. The district voted for for John Kerry at the tune of 90 percent! It would seem as though the community is likely to support the right for married gay couples to jointly file their income taxes.

The mayor of DC certainly has a feeling what could happen if the district recognizes the Massachusetts marriage:

The mayor explained his reticence, saying he is “very — extremely — concerned” about the reaction by Congress, where “I think that a lot would be in jeopardy, yes.”

He cited the District’s $8 billion budget, which requires annual approval by Congress and which city officials have tried in recent years to rid of such controversial social issues as amendments barring its spending of tax dollars on free drug-needle exchange programs and statehood lobbying.

It truly is sad when Brownback believes it is his right to force his misguided morals of hatred and bigotry on people who haven’t even elected him. Heck, they don’t have any real representation anyway.

I think this is a good example of the way the country would be run if heaven forbid Brownback was to become president. As I have said before, there is no place he would rather be than in your bedroom, seated on a high throne of infinite wisdom, dictating to a consenting couple which sexual acts he considers appropriate and thus legal.

Senator Brownback visited New Hampshire yesterday to speak to the conservative group Cornerstone Policy Research. The Kansas City Star reported that his address sounded like “a stump speech in the making” quoting Brownback as saying:

[He gave] some personal background, getting laughs with stories from his youth, and highlighting the issues that rev up the Republican party’s socially conservative base.

“Those of you standing for life, standing for marriage, standing for bringing God back into the public square, we’re fighting about first things now in America,” Brownback told about 150 people, who gave him a standing ovation when he finished.

The article noted that New England is not the home of Brownback’s base, and that he might have problems competing in a state with the libertarian-esque motto “Live Free or Die.” His brand of social conservatism is likely clash with this sentiment, as there is no place Brownback would rather be than in your bedroom.

Nothing in his speech was particularly notable, most of it was a rehash of the same old gay-bashing, culture clashing, hate mongering that has become a Brownback standard. However, he had some interesting things to say when asked about some challenges his hypothetical campaign would face. On the issue of fund raising, the article explained:

Brownback, his aides and many political observers point to the model of another populist dark-horse who raised unexpectedly large funds: 2004 Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean.

“That was a direct-mail campaign using the Internet, which is far cheaper than direct-mail solicitations,” Brownback said. You really put a lot of lead on the target … That’s the best type of fund raising I like to do. It’s based on philosophy.”

Given Brownback’s ties to the conservative grassroots, “he could be the kind of guy who gets a lot of people to give a couple hundred bucks,” said Dante Scala, an expert in New Hampshire presidential politics who teaches at St. Anselm College in Manchester.

As someone who closely followed Dr. Dean’s ascendancy during the Democratic primary, I agree that this form of solicitation can be very powerful. On the one hand, the Senator has the correct following to sustain such a fund raising effort. Many of his evangelical Christian supporters are fanatical in their following. They believe in the ideas behind the man and would be willing to donate, even if it looked like a lost cause.

On the other hand, Brownback is likely to be competing with other candidates for the fundamentalist’s money. In particular, Senators Santorum and Frist will be trying to drink from the same fountain of intolerance. They both have higher name recognition and have proven fund raising strategies in place. Brownback would have to distinguish himself from these candidates to have a chance of getting more than his fair share of the bigotry pie.

I addition to the Kansas City Star article, the Wichita Eagle and the Associated Press chimed in on the subject as well. The Wichita Eagle article goes a little more in depth into ‘ole Sam’s background and is a good read.

In a Focus on the Family article about yesterday’s hearing on the proposed federal anti-gay marriage amendment, these paragraphs stuck out to me:

Brigham Young University Law professor Lynn Wardle, meanwhile, said federal protection is important because the courts are subverting the will of the people.

“The people want this,” he said. “Eighteen out of 18 proposed state amendments that have come before the voters have been passed by margins that are overwhelming—from 57 percent to 86 percent.”

Wardle added that he hopes congressional interest will highlight the importance of making sure the people have the right to define traditional marriage—not the courts.

The will of the people. Say you asked a random person on the street, “What is a democracy?” I am willing to bet that the most common answer would be along the lines of, “There are votes to decide issues and the side with the most votes, wins.” In other words, majority rules.

The funny thing is, our founding fathers were afraid of this very idea. While they wanted to take power away from the King, they were also afraid of something they called “The Tyranny of the Majority.” Perhaps James Madison said it best in Federalist Paper 63:

“…an institution may be sometimes necessary as a defense to the people against their own temporary errors and delusions…. …there are particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be the most ready to lament and condemn. In these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the misguided career and to suspend the blow meditated by the people against themselves, until reason, justice, and truth can regain their authority over the public mind? What bitter anguish would not the people of Athens have often escaped if their government had contained so provident a safeguard against the tyranny of their own passions? Popular liberty might then have escaped the indelible reproach of decreeing to the same citizens the hemlock on one day and statues on the next.”

This is the reason we have an independent judiciary that is appointed for life. They are meant to be out of reach to anyone who would influence them. This is why they are to be impeached under only the most egregious of circumstances. The courts are the “temperate and respectable body of citizens” that prevents the majority from running roughshod over the rights of the minority.

Madison had such incredible foresight. Written in 1788, # 63 accurately predicts how the courts finally ended institutionalized racism during the civil rights era. How many of us today are “ready to lament and condemn” the racism of our collective past? Brown v. Board was an enormously unpopular decision at the time, yet today those people who hold the same position are ridiculed and scorned. Was the country “ready” for integration. Maybe not. That did not change the ethics of the decision.

For that is the true meaning of Democracy. All people have equal rights. Even those in the minority. Everyone has the right to vote for legislators that write laws, but also the right to live in a country where all can be free.

Will I be telling my grandchildren in 50 years about how I lived in a time when two people who loved each other were not allowed by the government to marry? I hope so. I hope they will think of it like I think of Brown v. Board. What were they thinking?

Yesterday, Senator Brownback held the first hearing in a series dedicated to pushing the Federal Marriage Amendment. Brownback argues that the state constitutional amendments are in danger of being overturned by the evil, Jesus hating, cat sacrificing, blood drinking, pagan judges that make up the federal court system.

There was staunch opposition to Brownback’s Pro-Bigotry amendment. Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese noted:

If Sen. Brownback were really concerned about families, today’s hearing would focus on families who have lost health care and domestic violence protections because of these measures. This hearing is an attack on same-sex couples and is further evidence that the far right is controlling the Senate, and keeping our leaders from focusing on issues that strengthen the whole country.

As a Human Rights Campaign press release explains, the main problems stem from rights and protections being taken away from same sex couples:

The report highlights four states that enacted constitutional amendments last year — Missouri, Utah, Ohio and Michigan — where governmental entities and/or individuals have interpreted the constitutional amendments to:

-Deny domestic partner benefits, such as health insurance, to unmarried couples — same and different sex.
-Argue that domestic violence laws do not apply to opposite-sex unmarried couples.
-Attempts to void a custody agreement between a same-sex couple.

I think an excellent question for Senator Brownback would be, “Why are you encouraging domestic violence by weakening the laws protecting women and children?” Clearly, Senator Brownback couldn’t care less about the well being of many of his constituents. These hearings exist solely to fuel the flame of hatred held high by the radical evangelicals. Thankfully, the more Brownback shows himself to be against domestic violence protections, the more ammunition he gives the democrats should he run for president. The ad campaign would be deliciously savage.

While in Washington DC, Senator Sam Brownback lives in a house named the “C Street Center”run by a secretive Christian group known as The Fellowship. He pays the low rent of $600 a month to share the house with 5 other Congressmen. While residents of the house claim that nothing crosses the line of church-state separation, an examination of the Fellowship shows that crossing the line occurs with alarming regularity.

“The Fellowship” is a loosely defined, sometimes denied, group of evangelical Christians who hold positions of power around the world. Its membership runs the gamut from our own Senator Brownback to Yoweri Museveni, the President of Uganda . Began in 1942 by a Methodist minister from Seattle, it has an annual operating budget of at least $10 million and in addition to the C Street Center also owns a mansion known as “The Cedars” in Arlington VA.

The Fellowship has been described in many way by different people. According to David Coe, the organization’s current president:

…the group’s mission is to create a worldwide “family of friends” by spreading the words of Jesus to those in power. He believes that people of every religion–including Muslims, Jews and Hindus–are swayed by Jesus. If he can change leaders’ hearts, he said, then the benefits will flow naturally to the oppressed and underprivileged.

The Fellowship has played a background role in a few high profile success. A LA Times article describes:

Democratic Republic of Congo President Kabila and Rwandan President Kagame privately met for about an hour in the living room on the first floor of Cedars. It was the first time the two warring leaders had met face to face.

“It was an important meeting,” said Richard Sezibera, Rwanda’s ambassador to the U.S. In the months that followed, members of the Fellowship reached out to both leaders, visiting them in Africa. The two men finally signed a peace accord in July in a deal brokered by the president of South Africa–a move that could be an important step toward peace.

In addition to bringing together leaders here in the United States, members of The Fellowship have brought their theology with them on officially sanctioned congressional trips. The same LA times article explains:

In January, Reps. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.), Tony P. Hall (D-Ohio) and Joseph R. Pitts (R-Pa.) traveled to Afghanistan and Pakistan on a fact-finding congressional trip, meeting with the leaders of both Muslim countries. But the men, all members of the Fellowship, discussed more than U.S. policy.

“The first thing we did when we met with [Afghan] President [Hamid] Karzai and President [Pervez] Musharraf was to say, ‘We’re here officially representing the Congress; we’ll report back to the speaker, our leaders, our committees, our government. But we’re here also because we’re best friends…. We’re members of the same prayer group,’ ” Pitts recalled…

“We meet every week together around the teachings of Jesus and we pray together,” he said. “We told them about the National Prayer Breakfast and we invited them to join us.”

Remember, this was a taxpayer financed trip and the first thing the Representatives did when visiting the foreign presidents was to talk about Jesus?

The Fellowship has also invited some controversial figures to the States. The LA times article continues:

Among them are former Salvadoran Gen. Carlos Eugenio Vides Casanova, who in July was found liable by a civil jury in Florida for the torture of thousands of civilians in the 1980s. He was invited to the 1984 prayer breakfast, along with Gen. Gustavo Alvarez Martinez, then the head of the Honduran armed forces. Alvarez, later linked to the CIA and a secret death squad, became an evangelical missionary before he was assassinated in 1989.

Not exactly people who would seem to uphold the tenets of the Christian faith. I wish someone would ask Brownback why he accepts charity from an organization that sponsors war criminals.

As you can tell from my citations, there are not many articles about the organization. The breakthrough article was written by Lisa Getter of the LA times in September of 2002. The other article of merit is Jeffrey Sharlet’s piece in Harper’s Magazine. It is especially interesting because he lived with a group of young men who took care of The Cedars and experienced the group dynamic first hand.

While it appears creepy, The Fellowship may be harmless. I don’ t know enough, and it seams no one knows enough, to determine whether it crosses the church-state boundary. Therein lies the problem. The secrecy surrounding the organization is troubling. All of the congressmen who live at the C Street Center should have to answer questions about their involvement in The Fellowship. If it is innocuous then they should have nothing to hide.

Thanks to a tip from Plutonium Page over at DailyKos I looked into Senator Brownback’s science advisor, a Dr. David Prentice. He has a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from the University of Kansas and was a Professor of Life Sciences at Indiana State University. Pretty impressive credentials.

These days, Dr. Prentice is a Senior Fellow for Life Sciences at the Family Research Council. It is a sad day in America when I automatically assume that anything with “family” as a prominent part of their name is a wingnut organization, but in this case it is true.

The Family Research Council is, well, I’ll let them explain:

The Family Research Council (FRC) champions marriage and family as the foundation of civilization, the seedbed of virtue, and the wellspring of society. FRC shapes public debate and formulates public policy that values human life and upholds the institutions of marriage and the family. Believing that God is the author of life, liberty, and the family, FRC promotes the Judeo-Christian worldview as the basis for a just, free, and stable society.

Now doesn’t that sound like a rational, scientific mission? A “Judeo-Christian Worldview”? It doesn’t exactly sound objective. What is a scientist trained in biochemistry doing working for the Family Research Council? It appears that he is trotted out like a mustachioed show pony every time there is debate on stem cell research to claim that although we don’t know all of the possible benefits of embryonic stem cells, we certainly should not study them.

So just remember that Senator Brownback’s science advisor works for an organization that is fighting to protect the “wellspring of society”.

All I have to say is “Keep your hands off my seedbed!”