"Brownback says his campaign will work past divisive issues" by The Brownback Report / LJWorld.com

Blogs home Staff blogs The Brownback Report

Brownback says his campaign will work past divisive issues

Campaign Trail[(Des Moines Register) Brownback to Focus on Consensus:][1] Kansas senator and presidential candidate Sam Brownback said Tuesday that he would focus his campaign on issues that have a bipartisan consensus, a break from his trademark social conservatism. "The political discourse automatically goes to the most difficult issues, and then we can't talk about them," said Brownback, in Iowa for the first time since announcing his bid on Jan. 20. "I'd rather work on a core set of issues that we can agree on." Human trafficking, climate change and poverty were issues Brownback identified as consensus builders.[(Radio Iowa) Brownback: Iowa GOP Wants Pro-life Candidate:][2] Kansas Senator and Republican presidential candidate Sam Brownback says once Iowa Republicans learn about his record, he'll vault ahead of better-known GOP candidates like John McCain and Rudy Giuliani. [(The Detroit News) Brownback to Speak at Michigan Law School:][3] Brownback, who was the school's inaugural commencement speaker in 2003, will briefly talk about the role of the judiciary in an event that is open to the public.Polls, Surveys and Such[(National Journal's blogometer) Darkhorse the Old-Fashioned Way][4] Ex-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) and Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) continue to receive chilly online receptions. Neither candidate does well in online straw polls (see Pajamas Media's new straw poll and GOP Bloggers straw polls). Righty bloggers are particularly turned off by Huckabee's "big government" conservatism. It's worth keeping in mind that few on the right ever really liked Pres. Bush's 'compassionate conservatism' either. If either Brownback or Huckabee catch on in IA, it's going to have to be face-to-face in diners and auditoriums, not online through pixels and video.[(Students for Brownback) Brownback Supporter Upset at National Review Online:][5] When I heard about the conference awhile ago, there was no doubt in my mind that surely Sen. Brownback would speak there. After all, he has a 95% lifetime rating with the American Conservative Union, higher then any other viable candidate - an even higher rating then Newt Gingrich. ... So it came as a shock to me when the schedule came out without Brownback included. After doing some investigating, it has been confirmed that Kathryn Lopez actually invited Brownback, only to then disinvite him. And then, it was announced that Mitt Romney would be the keynote speaker. I have long seen Kathryn Lopez as a strong voice for the pro-life movement. We need strong pro-life women voices more then anything else in the pro-life movement, and she has been one of them. But so has Senator Brownback. Not only does he vote pro-life, but he actually fights for it. And it doesn't stop at legislation. As a member of the judiciary committee, he single-handedly tore down the abysmal nomination of Harriet Miers, which resulted in a presumably solid pro-life justice in Samuel Alito.More Issues[(AP) Brownback says it's Time to Tackle the Greenhouse Gas Problem:][6] Speaking with reporters Tuesday, the Republican presidential candidate said most scientists agree that rising levels of carbon dioxide have caused a rise in global temperatures. Brownback said levels of carbon dioxide, or CO2, have increased since the industrial revolution but have risen more quickly in recent decades. "It seems to me just prudent that we recognize we have climate increase and temperature change," he said. "We have CO2 loading and we need to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere."[(U.S. News and World Report) Ten Things You Didn't Know About Brownback:][7] 9. Prison Fellowship founder and Watergate felon Chuck Colson encouraged Brownback to adopt evangelical parliamentarian William Wilberforce, the 19th-century British crusader against slavery, as a role model. The Economist called Brownback "the Wilberforce Republican."_The Brownback Report will appear Monday through Friday. If you've seen a news story or other blog entry about the GOP presidential hopeful that we've missed, do [let us know.][8]_ [1]: http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070131/NEWS09/701310363/-1/ENT05 [2]: http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=758BDB4F-CA7D-CC09-3ED4D41E7C2F71C7 [3]: http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070130/UPDATE/701300453 [4]: http://blogometer.nationaljournal.com/ [5]: http://studentsforbrownback.org/index.php/2007/01/29/kathryn-jean-lopez-mitt-romney-sam-brownback-harriet-miers-and-the-national-review/ [6]: http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2007/01/31/news/latest_news/8baa894bbd90128286257274004d33d2.txt [7]: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070130/30brownbackfacts.htm [8]: http://www2.ljworld.com/submit/blog_link_submission/

By George Diepenbrock

January 31, 2007

The Brownback Report

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

31 January 2007
at 1:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Newell_Post (Anonymous) says…

His campaign is inherently a divisive issue.

All lovers of liberty should vigorously oppose all theo-fascists, of all religions, everywhere.
31 January 2007
at 3 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

LiberalDude (Anonymous) says…

No more Brownback. Ugghhh, I'm so sick of him and we've still got over a year before he loses in the primaries. Plumberscrack is right, it seems Brownback will say anything and support anything to get elected. He is the scariest type of politician.

It will be funny when he loses the Kansas primary.
31 January 2007
at 7:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cait48 (Anonymous) says…

The SD “Task Force” Report was hardly bipartisan nor was it objective.
I think many people realized this when the abortion ban was voted down last November.
That said, I refuse to debate abortion. I have done so for almost 20 years and frankly I'm done. I'm accused of being a “bleeding heart liberal” as all the prolifers scream to “save the babbbbbeeeeeeiiiieeess” while fully one quarter of the BORN children live below the poverty line and more than 10 million children go to bed HUNGRY every night in the us!
Don't believe those statistics? Google it and be prepared for a shock if not nausea at what we do to the kids in this country.
You believe in the “sanctity of life”? Then go take care of it!
Hypocrites.
31 January 2007
at 7:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

What Brownback, parkay, and other extremist yahoos need to come to grips with is this plain, simple fact:

Abortion, today, is legal. Because it is legal, there is no *LEGAL* way to stop it.

Outlawing abortion at any level—municipal, state, or federal—will ultimately prove to be ineffective. The abortion trade will simply be driven to other areas. Tour buses will offer “medical tour packages” that will take women over the Canadian and Mexican borders to have abortions. Or maybe some rich doctors will pony up the money for a small yacht or cruise ship… load it up, cruise out into international waters… and come back to shore a few days later. And then, of course, there's the old favorite, the “back alley” approach… mail-order concoctions of all times, “herbal remedies” forgotten in the 19th century will return to the back pages of “Rolling Stone” magazine.

Brownback needs to realize that the only truly effective way to reduce abortions (and I mean “reduce” [realistic and logical], not “eliminate” [unrealistic and illogical]) is to reduce the number of women who need abortions.

Following that line of thought… pre-pubescent girls and older women who have been through menopause generally don't seek out abortions. Most doctors would agree that the women who seek out abortions are exclusively of “childbearing age.” These same doctors would probably also agree that the women of childbearing age who seek out abortions… do so because they are pregnant. Women of childbearing age who are not pregnant, generally do not seek out abortions.

It is also my understanding that abortions generally terminate pregnancies. Women who are pregnant, and want to stay pregnant… generally do not seek out abortions.

Therefore… I hope we can all agree on the following:

Most, if not all, of the women who seek abortions, are of childbearing age, and are pregnant.

Agreed?

To my knowledge… there are currently no effective means of keeping a pre-pubescent girl “young” for a longer amount of time; that is, to stave off puberty, maturity. Likewise, there are currently no effective means of hastening a woman's advancement into menopause, ending her “childbearing years.” So, women have no control over this, and neither do their partners (male or female). So… maybe we can also agree on the following:

Women of childbearing age that do not wish to risk getting pregnant, should probably abstain from sexual activity. If they can't or won't abstain from sexual activity, they should probably employ some means of birth control, and/or insist that their male partners employ some means of birth control.

Why? Well, I suppose that we can agree…

If we can reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, we will reduce the need for abortion providers and methods of all kinds.

[continued on next post]
31 January 2007
at 7:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

I feel the best way to accomplish this reduction of unwanted pregnancies is through a series of “safety nets.” No single solution works for everyone; there is no “one-size-fits-all” cure. So, I would propose the following:

safety net #1—abstention: Abstaining from sexual activity is the only, truly 100% effective way to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. Abstention should be promoted not only to girls, but boys as well. There are a myriad of reasons, lessons, ideas etc. that can be taught and promoted to our young people, when it comes to abstaining from sex; many of these reasons and ideas are secular, non-religious. It should be very easy to promote abstention in our public schools, without relying on one religious doctrine or another. Religious and/or spiritual reasons for abstention can be taught in private schools, churches, synagogues and other religious gathering places… and of course, the private home.

I think it's important to realize that we must also be *very clear* about what we are recommending these folks abstain *FROM*. As tough as it might be for some of the more “uptight” parents, you *will* have to address things such as: oral sex… mutual masturbation or “heavy petting”… same-sex relationships… and even anal sex. All of these things carry risks with them (“disease” being just one of them) and yet provide little or no opportunities for unwanted pregnancies. Agreed?

For some youngsters, teaching and promoting sexual abstention will be enough; for others, it will not. So for those youngersters, we need…

safety net #2—birth control: Some youngsters—and adults, as well—choose to engage in sexual activity for reasons other than procreation. If these people employ some means of birth control it will reduce their risk of unwanted pregnancy… and in turn, reduce the risk that somebody will need an abortion. So, logically, ensuring that these folks have access to birth control, and know how to use it properly, will reduce the number of women seeking out abortions.

I think it is important that condoms be available in our public schools, through the school nurse or nurse practitioner. I don't think this needs to be promoted—there's no need for the nurse to keep a bucket of condoms outside her office door. We're talking about schoolkids here; if only three or four kids are handed a condom by the school nurse during the first day of the school year, the entire student body will be spreading the news over lunch that same day. I also think a way should be devised to bring parents into the discussion. Maybe a discreet email or phone call from the school nurse?

In any case, regular use of birth control, by those that choose not to abstain from sexual activity, will reduce the risk of unwanted pregnancy. Sadly, no method of birth control is 100% effective, which makes it wise to have available…

[continued on next post]
31 January 2007
at 7:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

safety net #3—ru-486 aka The 'Morning-After' Pill: Condoms break. Women/girls may forget to take their birth control pills. And sometimes, people just forget.

RU-486, “Plan B,” whatever you choose to call it… provides a relatively safe, quick, and easy way to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. It's just as safe—if not safer—than Viagra.

People have tried all sorts of things to put George Tiller out of business—most of them legal, a few of them were illegal and even immoral. The only strategy that's never been tried is eliminating his market, his customer base. Cut into that heavily enough, and he'll find something more lucrative to do.

I've just given Senator Brownback three great ways to do that! :)

Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com