The Anti-Sam Brownback Blog

Noam Scheiber of the New Republic reads into Brownback’s stance on Iraq:

So what is Brownback up to? On one level it’s pretty obvious. John McCain and, to varying degrees, the rest of the GOP field have cast their lot with Bush and the surge. There’s nothing for a longshot like Brownback to gain by falling in line behind them, and plenty to gain by distinguishing himself on the issue. That’s particularly true given the exceedingly likely possibility that the surge will fail, at which point Brownback will look somewhere between sober and prophetic.

More interestingly, the move turns out to be pretty welcome among Brownback’s desired base of social conservatives. While 52 percent of Republicans support the surge according to a just-released AP/Ipsos poll, some 60 percent of white evangelicals oppose [a troop surge in Iraq], as do 56 percent of self-described conservatives. So we’re actually talking about a twofer here: shore up your base while positioning yourself to poach votes from the other guys. (Actually, a three-fer, since this has the added merit of being the substantively sane position.) Not bad for a day’s work.

I’ve always maintained that Brownback is crazy like a fox…

Further distancing him from the other GOP primary candidates, Senator Sam Brownback has come out against the McCain-Bush plan for Iraq:

“I do not believe that sending more troops to Iraq is the answer,” Brownback said. “Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution.”

Brownback had previously supported a short-term increase in troop levels if it could help achieve long-term political stability, which the Bush administration has said it hopes a surge will help achieve.

But Brownback rejected that argument after meeting this week with several Iraqi leaders and U.S. military commanders.

“I came away from these meetings convinced that the United States should not increase its involvement until Sunnis and Shiia are more willing to cooperate with each other instead of shooting at each other,” Brownback said. “The best way to reach a democratic Iraq is to empower the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own nation-building.”

It is not in the U.S. interest to get deeply involved in sectarian strife, he said.

I have to admit, I never thought I would see the day. It certainly appears that Brownback is attempting to run to the left of the other GOP candidates on the Iraq war.

Brownback’s Iraq policy is certainly an epic political maneuver. It is a daring attempt to make some noise and differentiate himself from the pack. The telling moment will come in three weeks when Brownback’s first FEC quarterly filing (for Q4 of 2006) will be publicaly available. A candidate can have a lovely message, but it takes big bucks to reach those caucus goers.

If anyone has any info on his numbers before the official filing, I would love to hear.

Appearing on Fox News, Senator Sam Brownback seemed to be fed up with the pace of the war in Iraq:

BROWNBACK: And we’ve invested nearly 3,000 American lives, precious lives to each and every one of us in this country. I — I think the American public has been pretty patient. And I think we’ve been quite patient. It’s time to move forward.

WALLACE: But let me — I don’t want to put words in your mouth, Senator Brownback, and I’m sure I won’t, but I get the sense that you’re getting a little close to jumping ship on the president’s policy.

BROWNBACK: I’m not — I’m not jumping ship. I just think it’s time that we really put pressure on the situation. And we’ve been very patient with this, and we’ve invested a lot.

This is a gutsy strategy which could pay off big for him in Republican primary.

A comment on an earlier post questioned whether I was supporting Brownback’s Iraq policy. I don’t feel that I know enough about the situation in Iraq to endorse a specific course of action. However, I can tell that the current course of action is not working, and that we need change. I think Brownback can tap into Republican frustration with the war, especially it’s high cost, and could differentiate himself from the field.

In a dramatic departure from the rank and file GOP talking points on Iraq, Senator Sam Brownback is advocating a partitioning of Iraq by religious lines in order to quell the never-ending violence that is plaguing the country. The AP reports:

“We are not willing to impose a military solution in Iraq. The Iraqis, I don’t believe, are going to be capable of imposing a military solution. Therefore, you must get to some form of political equilibrium in Iraq. And by that I think you may end up having to have a Kurdish, a Sunni, a Shiite area, and Baghdad being a federal capital. Hopefully you can maintain it in one country,” he said.

This is exactly the kind of risk that Senator Sam Brownback will need to take if he is going to be competetive in the republican primary for President. While John McCain wants to throw more troops at the problem and Romney doesn’t have a clue what he wants to do, Brownback is coming out with a tough solution that just may resonate with the republican primary voters.

Another striking piece of the equation is Senator Brownback’s choice of words when describing a good outcome:

Therefore, you must get to some form of political equilibrium in Iraq.

So now mere equilibrium is a success. The sad part is, equilibrium is likely the best case scenario.

I’ll leave the implementation problems for a later post, but Brownback is certainly going to keep his press run going with this new proposal.

During a conference call with reporters, Senator Sam Brownback today called for a substantial reduction in troop levels in Iraq:

Sen. Sam Brownback said today that he supports “substantial” reductions in U.S. forces in Iraq within the next year, but would not commit to a timetable for withdrawal.

“They have to take control of their country,” said Brownback in a teleconference with Kansas journalists. “As far as setting a hard date to be out and I don’t think that would be wise.”

On April 8th, 2004 Senator Brownback had the following to say about troop reductions in Iraq:

VAN SUSTEREN: Senator Brownback, tonight are you concerned that it is getting worse in Iraq?

SEN. SAM BROWNBACK (R), KANSAS: Well, I’m concerned that it’s getting worse and that the situation needs to stabilize but, Greta, we’ve got to stay on the course that we’re on. We need to hand over the governing of the country on the deadlines that have been set.

We cannot back out of this and you can see clearly what the opposition to democracy coming into Iraq is after. They are trying to get at U.S. public opinion. That’s what they’re really driving at here and we need to stand firm and behind our troops and behind the efforts that’s taking place in Iraq.

What a hypocrite. Senator Sam Brownback wants it both ways. When support for the war was high, he was a chickenhawk cheerleader. Now that the American people have turned against the war, he clamors for the troops to be brought home. This man has no integrity. Perhaps “sanctity of life” rules his heart, but “sanctity of public opinion” rules his words.