The Anti-Sam Brownback Blog

Senator Sam Brownback, having been rebuked by constitutional scholars for trying a complicated promised recusal scheme with a judicial nominee, now wants to bring Janet Neff back to the committee:

In Iowa on Tuesday to meet with GOP activists, Brownback said he only wants a chance to question Neff about her role in the 2002 ceremony. Brownback also wants a recorded vote in the Senate.

“I am not opposed to her getting a vote,” Brownback said before a lunch with potential donors and supporters in Davenport. “I would like her to come back through committee so she can testify what took place, factually … her legal views on same-sex marriage and her ability and willingness to be impartial.”

Neff has said she attended the commitment ceremony as a friend of one of the two women, a longtime neighbor.

Brownback needs to stop using this woman as a political cudgel and let the nomination forward. Let’s get this straight. She once attended the commitment ceremony of a longtime friend and neighbor. Once. For a friend and neighbor. Whoop-de-freakin-do.

So does Brownback think Neff caught the gay virus at the ceremony? Was the punch spiked with a gay mind control potion? How ridiculous can you get?

News flash to Senator Brownback. Being compassionate and supporting your friend by attended a non-binding ceremony in still A-OK in this country. Get over it.

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?

During a speech to a conservative Christian radio group, Brownback told them:

“We win when we engage,” he told more than 800 people attending the Bott Radio Network’s annual Christmas party. “We lose when we sit back.”

The Bott network offers Christian programming on 39 radio station across the United States, including the Kansas City area.

Brownback, a Republican considering a run for the presidency in 2008, called abortion and gay marriage key issues that the nation needs to debate.

“We are winning this fight on life,” he said, referring to the abortion debate.

Yeah, the American people sure agree with you Sam. Except of course for those liberal pinko commie bastards in South Dakota. They must have been smoking pot in their VW’s while sipping a latte - just before voting in November to strike down the abortion ban that the Republican State House tried to force on them. Yeah, South Dakota. Real liberals.

Keep dreaming Senator.

According to Salon.com, Brownback was not in attendance at the panel “Marriage in the States” which he was previously scheduled to attend. Must have been something important to keep him from throwing some red meat to his base.

Also, Josh over at Thoughts From Kansas has an excellent dissection of one part of Brownback’s appearance on NPR.

According to Campus Progress’s mole inside CPAC, Senator Bill Frist intends to bring an anti gay marriage amendment to the Senate in June:

Frist went on to flaunt and advertise the fact that he would be bringing a Marriage protection amendment to the senate on June 5th, telling conservative attendees to “mark their calendars.” Anyone who opposes such an amendment, take note: things will soon be heating up.

This is big news.  I’m sure Senator Sam Brownback will be a cosponsor.  For Brownback, this is yet another opportunity for him to increase his name recognition.  If the republicans actually try to force the issue beyond a symbolic vote this could become quite the fight.  Brownback could easily end up the de facto spokesperson for this orgy of intolerance.

On a different subject, if anyone has access to tapes or transcripts of Brownback’s remarks at CPAC I would be interested in taking a look.  Let me know.

As per the Wichita Eagle, Senator Sam Brownback attended Coretta Scott King’s funeral this morning. Via Thoughts from Kansas, a quote from the great lady that Brownback should take to heart:

“Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood.”

“We are all tied together in a single garment of destiny…I can never be what I ought to be until you are allowed to be what you ought to be,” she said, quoting her husband. “I’ve always felt that homophobic attitudes and policies were unjust and unworthy of a free society and must be opposed by all Americans who believe in democracy.”

Amen Mrs. King. I only wish our Senator Brownback could have the same tolerant, outlook on life and liberty.

Senator Sam Brownback issued a statement today following the news of civil rights icon Coretta Scott King:

“I was greatly saddened to hear of Mrs. King’s passing,” said Brownback. “Mrs. King was a courageous and valiant woman who held our nation accountable to the principles of peace, equality and equal rights for all Americans. Her strength and fortitude helped America rise to the challenge of non-violent social change.

“I had the pleasure of meeting with Mrs. King several years ago. She was a role model for those of us working toward racial reconciliation in this country. Mrs. King and her husband saw the possibilities of a nation united, not divided by race or other divisions, and we owe it to them to continue this legacy of compassion and change.

I completely agree. One of the most admirable traits possessed by Mrs. King was her insisitence that the equality movement be inclusive. The following are some excerpts of her comments at the Creating Change Conference in 2000:

I say “common struggle” because I believe very strongly that all forms of bigotry and discrimination are equally wrong and should be opposed by right-thinking Americans everywhere. Freedom from discrimination based on sexual orientation is surely a fundamental human right in any great democracy, as much as freedom from racial, religious, gender, or ethnic discrimination.

My husband, Martin Luther King Jr., once said, “We are all tied together in a single garment of destiny…an inescapable network of mutuality.… I can never be what I ought to be until you are allowed to be what you ought to be.” Therefore, I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream to make room at the table of brotherhood and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people.

I hope that someday Senator Brownback will be able to embrace the sort of universal equality that Coretta Scott King so eloquently expressed.

[Hat tip to Pam’s House Blend. If you aren’t reading her daily you are missing out]

Tomorrow, after Samuel Alito is confirmed, Senator Sam Brownback will be a participant in a GOP news conference discussing the outcome. Expect him to attempt to use the pulpit to his full advantage. Now that the Supreme court is full, Brownback will have a tougher time garnering media attention.

Personally, I don’t think he performed as well as he needed to during the hearings. Brownback had an opportunity to introduce himself to the American people and yet he couldn’t muster anything that got their attention. His other large issue is Iran, and I expect him to ramp up the rhetoric in the coming weeks and months. If he can maneuver himself into a position of expertise on Iran he can keep himself on the stage. With the Iranian government appearing more psycho by the moment, he might just get the chance.
Looming in the background is the anti gay marriage amendment. It is not clear when (or if) this will be brought to the full senate, but Brownback would also be the leader of that crusade.

In response to the outrage over his comments about Sweden being known by their “fruits”, Senator Sam Brownback today issued a clarification stating that he did not mean it as a joke.  The Washington Post reports:

“While this biblical passage was pertinent to our overall conversation about faith and deeds, it apparently led the writer to believe I was making a joke,” said Brownback, a frequent critic of gay marriage who is pushing a Constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

“I was not and would never do so with such a personal and sensitive issue,” Brownback said.

His explanation was greeted with skepticism by the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay rights organization.

“It’s nice to know that Senator Brownback doesn’t resort to name-calling from the 1970s, but unfortunately his anti-gay agenda continues to speak for itself,” said spokesman Brad Luna.

I’ll take him at his word.  I’m glad that he felt it necessary to issue this clarification and I would hope that in the future he would respond in a more rapid fashion.  It seems that he only took time to clarify once it developed into a national story.  But again, I applaud the Senator for making it clear that he doesn’t use derogatory terms to describe people of other sexual orientations.