Blogging Against Senator Sam Brownback Since March 2005
There is writeup in today’s New York Times about Senator Sam Brownback’s aspirations for 2008. The article makes it very clear that Senator Brownback is running for president and discusses his total reliance on Christian Conservatives for votes. It also notes that Mier’s nomination gives Brownback a valuable means of publicity:
Before the debate over Ms. Miers, however, Mr. Brownback’s message was not carrying very far, some conservatives said.
“Sam would need, either by major legislation that he sponsored or by taking on the administration on something, to drastically increase his profile in order to have people around the country say, ‘Boy, that is the guy we want to support,’ ” Mr. Weyrich added.
The profile was overall quite positive. Articles like this are what could make Brownback a contender in 2008. This article alone may precipitate his inclusion in 2008 tracking polls.
The bottom line is Brownback is running and he could very well be formidable in a crowded GOP primary. Thankfully the Democrats would crush him in the general election if we ran anyone to the right of Che Guevara.
[powered by WordPress.]
Blogging Against Senator Sam Brownback Since March 2005
I am a student of political science at the University of Kansas. Contact me with any questions, comments or tips.
21 queries. 0.275 seconds
October 14th, 2005 at 6:22 pm
I felt bad that there are no comments on this site, so I thought I’d leave one. I don’t think there are enough of us Christian Conservatives out there, even in the GOP for Brownback to win the primary. Shame. I also have a question. It doesn’t seem to me that you are saying what makes Brownback such a horrible person. Rather, you are attacking the two things you know about him; that he is a Christian and that he is a Conservative.
October 21st, 2005 at 4:58 pm
This is from Redstate.org
Brownback’s Moment
By: Augustine · Section: SCOTUS
The Harriet Miers nomination is in shambles. The combination of a nominee whose views on the Constitution are, shall we say, troublesome - a narrowly divided Senate unable to disguise profound dissatisfaction - and a White House too arrogant and convinced of their own rightness to see social and legal conservatives as more than an irritating nuisance or a useless demographic group - and you end up with this. Let me put it this way: the clash of opinions at the Federalist Society convention in two weeks ought to be rather interesting… if not Armageddon on a smaller scale.
So: If there is any positive to grasp from this nomination, what is it?
For conservatives at this moment in time, there is no true standard bearer going into the 2008 presidential stakes. Frist is kaput. Rice, Giuliani, Sanford, Jeb, and other big names aren’t running. McCain, Hagel, Pataki, and Romney are too liberal. Pawlenty, Barbour, and Huckabee can’t command grassroots support outside of their states. Allen’s abortion views will sink him.
Yet the answer to who will take up a leadership role in the post-Bush era and in 2008 may well be answered by the Miers hearings, when Sam Brownback has a very real opportunity to shine. He is ideologically solid, a Catholic convert, an unashamed conservative with international knowledge, and from day one, he has never been liked by the party establishment.
Whether this nomination dies, as it deserves to, or not - perhaps the attention in the arena will vault a Kansas Senator into the spotlight. Perhaps, like Sam Ervin during Watergate, this is an opportunity for a little-known to become a well-known. And perhaps, when the day is done, the conservative movement will have the champion they desperately need.