Sam Brownback -- one of the leading opponents of the filibuster and the hold -- held up the nomination of Julie Finley to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. He did so to pander to the right-wing extremists of the party. Finley had a solid Republican pedigree with one exception -- she was pro-choice. He was due to
speak at the National Right-to-Life Conference. Just recently,
he caved in and released his hold on the nomination. One would think that the OSCE would be really far removed from the abortion issue that people wouldn't care. But, no, apparently the decree is out -- Emperor Dobson has decreed that nobody who is pro-choice should have even a remote say in what goes on in the administration.
Anti-Sam, a blog highly critical of Brownback, suggests that the reason Brownback is so extreme is because he is trying to position himself as the most ideologically pure candidate so he will receive the backing of Emperor Dobson and his minions come primary election time. Many right-wingers are disillusioned by Frist's inability to pull off the nuclear option and keep his moderate troops in line, so Anti-Sam suggests that Brownback is attempting to take up the mantle dropped by Frist.
From the AP:
Her nomination had provoked an outcry among some anti-abortion groups, which claimed Finley might promote her pro-abortion views at the Vienna-based organization that monitors compliance with human rights and security standards in Europe.
Brownback, a Kansas Republican who strongly opposes abortion, said he temporarily blocked Finley's appointment because of "concerns" he did not specify. He met privately with Finley on Thursday and an office spokesman said the hold was released after the meeting.
"I had a very good meeting with Ms. Finley yesterday, and we had an opportunity to address concerns I and others have regarding the OSCE," Brownback said in a statement. "I am satisfied that she will well represent the interests of the United States."
But was this his own initiative, or was Rove dire consequences to bring Brownback back into line? Rove must be fuming right now at the lack of discipline within the ranks, especially following the deal by the Moderates to uphold the filibuster on the judges.
In any event, Brownback just hurt his chances for the nomination. The problem is that many right-wingers want a candidate who does not flip-flop on the issues. But this is a blatant example of flip-flopping because Brownback was a supporter of the nuclear option. So, while Brownback may still be an acceptable candidate to some wingnuts, that voting group may split their votes between Brownback and Allen should the latter decide to run.
Brownback's flip-flops on the filibuster and the holds can come just days apart:
Brownback pointed out that "we've been hung up now four years" on several of the nominees.
"There's no sign of it ending," Brownback said. "We're kind of at the end of the string. I don't know what else we can do" other than change the rules.
And here he is a week later:
"We're going to do everything we can to stop it," said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan. He vowed to mount a filibuster, which allows a minority of senators to block a vote on the measure.
People on the base in both parties want straight answers. John Kerry did not get elected because of his reputation as a flip-flopper. People elected Schweitzer because he gave straight answers even though people didn't always agree with them. Wellstone got elected in Minnesota the same way. Feingold got elected in Wisconsin with 56% of the vote the same way; Kerry only won by 10,000 votes there. Howard Dean is popular among the Democratic base because he gives straight answers. If the Republicans want to accuse us of being flip-floppers, the least they can do is provide straight answers as to whether they are for or against the filibuster.
Even Red State is disgusted at this flip-flop from Brownback:
On the issue of Bolton's nomination, we were particularly upset when Senator Boxer placed a hold on his vote (since lifted) because it represents an even more odious version of the filibuster- one that can be used by one Senator only. Sen. Brownback should certainly not be immune to criticism for his use of this undemocratic procedure, even though the great majority of Republicans may agree with his justification. He was behind the President on the nuclear option. Why he now chooses to violate the spirit of that principle is incomprehensible, no matter how pro-life he is.
That is because he takes his orders from Emperor Dobson. Dobson has decreed that a loyal Republican never vote for a person who supports abortion in any way, shape, or form. Therefore, the ends justify the means even if it means lying, hypocrisy, or other actions forbidden by the Bible. Dobson apparently believes it is OK to violate biblical commands as long as the objective is to end abortions.
The Washington Post has noted Brownback's hypocrisy:
More to the point, Mrs. Finley's opinions on abortion, whatever they may be, have nothing whatsoever to do with European security and democracy, peacekeeping in Chechnya, or the enforcement of arms control treaties, the main issues of concern to the OSCE. Mr. Brownback has in the past shared Mrs. Finley's enthusiasm for expanding NATO and promoting democracy in Eastern Europe. That he would slight those ideals and abandon a firm supporter of those causes bodes ill for his potential candidacy and for the next presidential election more generally.
All of these priorities affect millions of human lives. But apparently, Emperor Dobson's concern for the sanctity of human life stops once the baby is born. And Brownback is positioning himself to be nothing but his puppet.
Which is suddenly why the potential candidacy of Tom Tancredo suddenly makes a lot of sense. Tancredo may be positioning himself to capitalize on the massive disillusionment that is taking place within the fundamentalist community. I suggest he may try to run as an outsider, trying to win over the votes of Buchananite America-firsters and Emperor Dobson and his followers. Tancredo could try to win in Iowa, where there are plenty of people afraid of the Mexicans who they think are trying to take away their jobs. Many people in the Midwest believe in knee-jerk equality. But when Mexicans move in, many Midwesterners are not comfortable. Tancredo will try to capitalize on people's fears of Mexicans in the same way that Bush capitalized on people's fears of another terrorist attack after 9/11.
Tancredo, in many ways, is even more dangerous than Bush. He would advocate almost completely closing the borders between the US and Mexico. He opposes any kind of amnesty for illegal aliens:
Only if you believe that rewarding illegal behavior will increase illegal behavior, and of course it will. It has happened before, it's completely predictable. If you tell people they will be benefit from coming into the United States illegally, not by waiting in line like everybody else, they will come. And why would they not?
Of course, it's a terrible idea. It will not only encourage illegal immigration, but it will tell every single person who has done it the right way, who has waited in line, who has paid the fees, who has hired the lawyers, who has spent five or ten years trying to coming in, it's telling them they're nothing but suckers. It's telling everyone else who's waiting in line to do it the right way that they're also suckers.
Tancredo also accuses Mexico of plotting to send over 20-30 million people here and refers to California as "Mexifornia."
Tancredo may very well surprise people by winning Iowa. I had a grandmother who lived in a small town there; she and a lot of other local residents were spooked when an egg factory located there and hired a bunch of Mexican workers. The common complaint is that they don't pump money into the local economy, but send it back to their friends and relatives back home. However, he will have his work cut out for him after that. McCain is popular in New Hampshire, while if Allen runs, he will control the South.
Tancredo may be positioning himself to become the Howard Dean of the right. But the problem is that he will NOT win anywhere where there is a large Hispanic population. He may win Colorado, but will have trouble in places like New Mexico and Arizona. We could be looking at getting 70%+ of the Hispanic vote if he gets nominated.
Tancredo is a dark horse hoping that the people ahead of him collapse. If Allen is outed as gay, Brownback loses favor with the right for his flip-flopping and caving in, and Frist fails to regain control of the Moderates, Emperor Dobson and his ilk may give him a look.
Update: Some of you were asking why I wonder if Allen is gay. Studies show that homophobic individuals are frequently (80%) gay themselves. So whenever I ask if a homophobe is gay, it is not intended as a slur; it is a question based on fact.