Blogging Against Senator Sam Brownback Since March 2005
So Senator Brownback will finally allow the Janet Neff confirmation continue now that he was told his hold and ensuing demands are constitutionally suspect:
Mr. Brownback, who has been criticized for blocking the nomination, said he would also no longer press a proposed solution he offered on Dec. 8 that garnered even more criticism: that he would remove his block if Judge Neff agreed to recuse herself from all cases involving same-sex unions.
In an interview last week, Mr. Brownback said that he still believed Judge Neff’s behavior raised serious questions about her impartiality and that he was likely to vote against her. But he said he did not realize his proposal — asking a nominee to agree in advance to remove herself from deciding a whole category of cases — was so unusual as to be possibly unprecedented. Legal scholars said it raised constitutional questions of separation of powers for a senator to demand that a judge commit to behavior on the bench in exchange for a vote.
I suppose our current President’s regard for the constitution and bill of rights certainly has set the bar very low…
On a more serious note, this is the first story dedicated to Brownback in the New York Times of any prominence since he announce his exploratory committee. You can look at this two ways. Certain GOP primary voters are going to look at Brownback and see someone who would get utterly crushed in the general election and find that unacceptable. Others will look at his steadfast (if possibly illegal) position against anything remotely tied to gay marriage and see a man who they could trust with their values.
So how does this play in Iowa?
[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. 0.328 seconds
December 19th, 2006 at 2:02 pm
Iowa, after the elections of Congress, won’t vote for this individual. Also, Republicans who have called for a ‘re-focus’ of the Republican Party and those who have said they’ve ‘lost their ways’ would be completely reversing that thought should they seriously consider ‘Good Ole Sam’. Brownback is a moral opportunist, and will lose ground b/c his platform no longer works. He’s going to find out the hard way. Oh yea… how does a superior Catholic oppose abortion but still consider the death penalty? When it gets you votes, power, status, money… all the things Brown’s voters believe liberal have.
December 19th, 2006 at 4:55 pm
Oh, I think we’ve had enough of the Christian Right in our politics for a while. They’re not going to like it, but tough S. The new slogan will be “No Hypocrites in 2008″.
December 19th, 2006 at 8:19 pm
One can only hope Sam Brownback wins the GOP primaries.
This Neff nonsense is revolting. It’s significantly worse than asking a black nominee to recuse him- or herself from any cases involving affirmative action, miscegenation, etc.–it’s much more akin to demanding recusal from a nominee who has a black friend who RETROACTIVELY may have had an opportunity to gain some sort of enhancement through that structure!! What a bigot, panderer, simpleton.
That said, I’d much rather see a Brownback than a devil-in-disguise, like Romney or McCain, sneak into the general…
December 20th, 2006 at 12:25 am
So would I, because the Democrats could run a container of rancid yogurt against Brownback and still win.
He’s a religious extremist. Didn’t the 2006 election results teach you people anything? America doesn’t want theocracy.
December 20th, 2006 at 7:03 am
“Didn’t the 2006 election results teach you people anything? America doesn’t want theocracy.”
–What are you talking about? I thought Iraq was the reason the GOP lost; now it’s religiosity?? Quit throwing crap against the wall to see what sticks.
December 20th, 2006 at 7:06 am
“…because the Democrats could run a container of rancid yogurt against Brownback and still win.”
–Then why dedicate your time to the savaging of Sam Brownback? If you’re confident Brownback won’t get the nod, then focus on someone who would and could win.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:17 am
“I thought Iraq was the reason the GOP lost”
What makes you think Iraq won’t still be an issue in 2008?
December 21st, 2006 at 9:05 am
“What makes you think Iraq won’t still be an issue in 2008?”
–I never indicated that it wouldn’t. Unless Bush can clean it up pronto (or get the process heavily underway), it will still be a huge issue in ‘08.
December 21st, 2006 at 4:18 pm
Joe,
I do this because I like Kansas and I get pissed off that people like Brownback give the state a bad name.
As I have said many times, if Brownback was the nominee the Dems could run anyone to the right of Che Guevara and win in a landslide.
December 21st, 2006 at 9:55 pm
Kudos for exercising your opinion.