The Anti-Sam Brownback Blog

Senator Sam Brownback was on the Fox News morning show today and had the following to say about the White House’s nomination of Harriet Miers:

Them providing this type of information from the White House is almost a risk they assume when you nominate a candidate that’s from inside the White House. We’re going to have to see more information - not attorney-client privilege-type information - but more information of the work product that she was involved in the White House that is not of a legal nature but that’s of a policy nature.

Ahhh how times change. Suddenly Brownback is sporting the same talking points that Ted Kennedy used just a few weeks ago during the Robert’s nomination. Brownback’s questions put the White House in a bind. He has the ability to make life rough for Miers if he doesn’t get what he wants. As of this moment, the administration does not hold much bargaining power. Bush’s lack of popularity is causing intra-party dissent and Brownback is at the forefront.

Will the Whitehouse give up the documents that Brownback wants? My guess is no. There is no guarantee that the documents will satisfy him and giving in to the demands of a Junior Senator from Kansas would be a sign of weakness. Moreover, I doubt that Brownback really wants the documents. This is simply preparing cover for his eventual opposition. The more conflict the better for Brownback’s name recognition and ambitions.

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.

Today (Friday) Senator Sam Brownback will be in Ohio to attend a rally for Reformation Ohio, a group that wants to register 400,000 conservative voters in that state. The associated press reports:

A second conservative Christian movement is planning a foray into politics built on its success in helping gain passage of a gay marriage ban and the election of President Bush in Ohio last year.

Reformation Ohio, created by a suburban Columbus minister, the Rev. Rod Parsley, is a four-year plan to bring 100,000 people to Christianity, help low-income families and recruit 400,000 new voters.

It scheduled a Statehouse rally on Friday expected to be attended by U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback, a Kansas Republican, and U.S. Rep. Walter Jones, a North Carolina Republican.

What the story leaves out is Rev. Rod Parsley’s sketchy background. The Reverend is a “Big Money” Christian who focuses on financial wealth and giving plenty to his church. He claims no political affiliation and claims he is a “Christocrat”. He also has some interesting ideas about Islam. The Columbus Dispatch reported on April 17th 2005 (via lexis):

Parsley’s book advocates fighting “judicial tyranny” expressed in rulings such as in the Terri Schiavo case in Florida; opposing homosexuality and abortion; ending poverty and racism; and challenging Islam, which Parsley calls “the anti-Christ religion.”

Additionally, The Columbus Dispatch reported on August 21st 2005 (via lexis):

In his book, he also condemns Islam as being responsible for “more pain, more bloodshed and more devastation than nearly any other force on Earth.”

CoughBullshitCoughCrusadesCoughCough

The real question is what kind of credibility would Brownback have as President if he keeps company with people who hold views like those? None. You think Muslim nations are wary of President Bush’s motives? Brownback associates with pastors who want to destroy Islam.

The political reasons for this visit are obvious. Parsley is a powerful advocate with the group of voters most likely to identify with Senator Brownback. A tacit endorsement some time down the road would be a boon to Brownback’s campaign.

Additionally this should put to rest those that say Brownback is throwing his hat into the 2008 contest solely to advance his pet issues (such as Tancredo). While Ohio used to be relevant in primaries, super Tuesday is less super because of the large number of states that have leapfrogged Ohio and now have primaries in February. The only reason to pander to an Ohio preacher in 2005 is to lay the ground for a general election in 2008. By campaigning in Ohio Senator Brownback is tipping his cards and showing he’s all in.

The GOP is trying to enlist grassroots support (or at least make it look like grassroots support) to pressure Senator Sam Brownback into supporting the nomination of Harriet Miers. The Hew Hampshire Union Leader reports:

The White House effort to try to pressure Brownback and others through prominent Republicans in New Hampshire was first reported yesterday by the New Hampshire Union Leader. White House aides confirmed the account and said a similar effort was being made in Iowa.

Some GOP activists attending a Brownback appearance at St. Anselm College in Manchester Tuesday brought with them a letter to the senator signed by Republican National Committeeman Tom Rath and three others expressing confidence in Miers and asking that she receive fair treatment.

What does this say to me? The White House is desperate and feeling the heat from Brownback’s criticism. This is not about a yes or no vote. This is about Senator Brownback’s ability to fan the fire of indignation that is emanating from the religious conservative base. This also means that their straw polling of conservative Senators is showing support for Senator Brownback’s point of view. If he was all on his own they would paint him as an extremist and forget about it. As it is, Brownback is poised to lead a movement. As far as the White House is concerned, that makes him dangerous.

The laughable part about this whole scheme is that it is being executed in New Hampshire. Realistically, even if in 2008 Senator Brownback was riding high in the polls, he would still count a 3rd place in New Hampshire a victory. Many New Hampshire republicans are ideologically much closer to the libertarians. Brownback’s social conservatism does not poll well there and he has often met with less than enthusiastic crowds while in New Hampshire speaking.

As the initial furor over Mier’s nomination slows, there will likely be a lull in information for the next few weeks until the hearings begin. Additionally, the spectacle of multiple indictments in the Plame case will also increasingly vie for news time. For now, all of the important action is happening behind the scenes. Senator Sam Brownback is busy courting other members of the judiciary committee and feeling out the entire Senate for how they are leaning.

If it looks like there may be widespread opposition then Senator Brownback might want to moderate his crusade and focus his public rhetoric on her qualifications and intellectual capability. he would still be remembered as the first Senator who “got it” and would still be revered by the Christian Fundamentalists but he would avoid making negative impressions on the more moderate wing of the party.

If on the other hand it looks as though there are few Senators who strongly oppose Miers Senator Brownback will want to radicalize his public statements and focus more on his misgivings with her possible votes on social issues. If she turns out to be a shoe-in then there will be less press and he can carefully target his extremist message to those who will appreciate it.

I personally think there will be widespread opposition and believe that we will see Senator Brownback begin to moderate his tone an focus on her lacking credentials as a judge rather than her lacking credentials as a Christian Fundamentalist.

Pat Robertson of the 700 Club today threatened those who oppose Miers (ie Senator Sam Brownback). Via PFAW:

Robertson concluded by noting: “These so-called movement conservatives don’t have much of a following, the ones that I’m aware of. And you just marvel, these are the senators, some of them who voted to confirm the general counsel of the ACLU to the Supreme Court, and she was voted in almost unanimously. And you say, now they’re going to turn against a Christian who is a conservative picked by a conservative President and they’re going to vote against her for confirmation.’ Not on your sweet life, if they want to stay in office.

As Kos put it, this is a shot across the bow of the U.S.S. Senator Sam Brownback. It certainly devolves the discourse. Previously Senators like Brownback refrained from attacking those who support Miers and vice versa.

The real question is why would Robertson come out so strong. These were not gentle, nuanced words but incendiary grenades meant to get press and send a message. He must feel something is at stake. The obvious answer would be that he thinks Harriet Miers would be a strong social conservative judge. This may well be the case, but I also get the feeling that he was providing damage control for the White House. I don’t think he would have come out as strong on his own, at least publicly. He may be less concerned with the nomination of Harriet Miers than keeping his access to the President.

It seems that Senator Sam Brownback has some allies on the judiciary committee. While the Senators have previously publicly withheld their judgment, it appears that Senator Brownback’s views are shared by many of the aides and lawyers helping the committee prepare. From tomorrow’s New York Times:

As the White House seeks to rally senators behind the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet E. Miers, lawyers for the Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee are expressing dissatisfaction with the choice and pushing back against her, aides to 6 of the 10 Republican committee members said yesterday.

“Everybody is hoping that something will happen on Miers, either that the president would withdraw her or she would realize she is not up to it and pull out while she has some dignity intact,” a lawyer to a Republican committee member said.

These aides are not only “not convinced” about Miers, they are openly hostile. I don’t think I need to state just how much Senators rely on their aides for advice and counsel. The aides are enormously influential. Additionally, it appears that the republican Senators on the Judiciary committee are preparing for a fight. Not against the Democrats but against the President and his choice.

Republican staff members on the Judiciary Committee usually research and prepare arguments to defend the president’s nominees. But Republican staff members on the panel said committee lawyers were doing research to rebut the “talking points” the White House has provided for senators to support Ms. Miers’s nomination.

Why is this important to Senator Brownback’s eventual presidential run? This could legitimize his point of view as well as showing him in a leadership role. If he turns out to be the head of a coalition of conservative senators his profile will not only be that of an arch-conservative but also that of a leader who rides into battle for principle and can convince and inspire those around him.

For the moment it looks like Senator Brownback’s gamble has paid off. If conservatives on the committee end up joining him in dissent he will be remembered as the pioneer.

The Washington Times reported today that half of Senate Republicans remain doubtful about the President’s choice of Harriet Miers for the Supreme court:

What’s troubling for President Bush, however, is that 27 Republican senators — almost half of his party’s members in the chamber — have publicly expressed specific doubts about Miss Miers or said they must withhold any support whatsoever for her nomination until after the hearings.

Realistically speaking, most of the Senators that expressed their doubt to the Washington Times personally don’t care if Miers is installed on the court. This doubt is reflective of uncertainty about Brownback and whether he is going to mount a Christian Fundamentalist crusade against Miers. If he chooses that route, other conservative Senators don’t want to find themselves on the wrong side of righteous indignation.

All of this must feel weird to Brownback. He has never distinguished himself in the Senate and never had the spotlight. While some of his supporters claim this as positive “character” trait, I would claim he has alienated enough people on the hill that it is hard for him to advance any sort of agenda. Senator Brownback is not known for making compromises.

From the Financial Times:

Mr Specter insisted his committee would investigate whether there had been what he called a “back room deal” between Ms Miers and Mr Bush, committing her to overturn Roe v Wade. James Dobson of the leading social conservative group Focus on the Family has said he believes Ms Miers opposes abortion, based on conversations he has had with the White House. Senator Patrick Leahy, the ranking Democrat on the Senate judiciary committee, said Ms Miers told him she had given no such assurances.

Things are getting interesting. Dobson could possibly be subpoenaed by the judiciary committee. Does he actually have information or is he just lying?

Additionally, Brownback was interviewed on CBS’s Face the Nation and had this to say about the nomination:

But on the court, when–I think what you’re seeing are two things going on. Number one, a lot of us wanted to see somebody that was a well-formed jurist so that they had a track record of what they would do in key cases coming in front of the court. And we could have a debate with the country and within the Senate about what this means, if a person has already ruled, say, on some of the key cases of the day, and have that discussion. Harriet Miers doesn’t have that track record and doesn’t seem to be well-formed in her judicial philosophy, having never been on the bench.

And over a period of time–and this is the second point of what’s going on–is jurists have tended–that have been appointed by Republican presidents, to veer to the left over a period of time if they’re not well-formed in their judicial philosophy. And I think you’re seeing both of these at play: one, not a clear philosophical position; and number two, the potential over time of veering to the left.

All of this is pretty standard and nothing new. The Christian fundamentalists are very afraid of another David Souter. He is the bogeyman that haunts their dreams of a dominionist nation. By tapping into that frustration and fear, Senator Brownback is establishing himself as a “normal guy” with the Christian right. The more interesting part of the interview was later when Scheiffer asked:

After talking to her up at the Capitol this week you said publicly only that she’s a nice lady, and I’m told that you told some in private, according to Newsweek magazine, the confirmation hearings are going to `cut her up.’ Is that accurate?

Senator Brownback responded, “That… statement is not accurate.” I heard something very similar yesterday evening from an e-mail tip but with different wording. According to the tipster Brownback said the confirmation hearings are going to “chew her up”. So take it as you will… but it seems as though Brownback is worried about her intellectual ability. As he should be.