All was not forgiven after Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., got out of the way of the nomination to the federal bench of Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Janet Neff last week. The New York Times editorialized: “Whether someone has attended a same-sex commitment ceremony is not a worthy litmus test to impose on someone seeking an important office. Whether someone holds hateful views toward gay people certainly is.”
Newsday opined: “In the annals of politicians using the federal judiciary as a foil to advance their own careers, the shenanigans of Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) will earn a special spot in the section dedicated to bigoted fools.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- outlander on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/23
- American_Way on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
33 Comments
RHIS: And how was your Christmas?
RHIS: Apparently you know Sam Brownback personally?
Sam Brownback has much more to worry about in his hopeless quest for the Grail than what Time or Newsweek said about him, (even though both of their points are dead on-point). He’s going to end 2008 out on his ass from Washington, D.C., scrambling with Phillkline for a new public teat.
I applaud Sam for drawing attention to what this nominee for a seat on a Federal bench has done. After all those who are pushing a homosexual agenda have used the courts to advance their cause. The last thing we need in this Country is more liberal activist judges legislating fom the bench.
How many times have we been told by the left that holding certain views like a belief in States Rights or believing that original intent is the proper way to interpret the Constitution is enough to disqualify a judicial nominee? Sam Brownback is only doing his job as a Senator in questioning the behavior of this judge
Why are these people so worried about what gay people do anyway?
I just don’t get it. Leave people alone and live your own life for crying out loud.
“questioning the behavior of this judge”
The judge attended the wedding of the daughter of her neighbors of 26 years – the daughter happened to be a lesbian – and that should disqualify her for a Federal appointment?
The homosexual agenda is to have the same protections and laws that protect them from discrimination and allow them to live with their loved ones with the same rights as heterosexuals. That hurts you HOW?
PMom: They can’t “live their life”. They haven’t got one. They have to vicariously dream that in another life they were or will be Sam Brownback, Phillkline or Phreddphelps.
Sam Brownback has as much of a chance to win the presidency as Charlie Tuna! Sure, he espouses consevative view but now that the conservatives have so foolishly thrown away their political lives through corruption, divisivness,lies and greed Brownback faces the uphill battle for the top seat in history. There’s no way that Sam can bring this country together with the values he holds dear. I don’t believe him now and wouldn’t believe him if he changed. Once a skunk, always a skunk!!!
“The judge attended the wedding of the daughter of her neighbors of 26 years – the daughter happened to be a lesbian – and that should disqualify her for a Federal appointment?”
Of course! She should have turned these people and their lesbian daughter into the SSAG (Secret Service Against Gays), where she would’ve gotten help via brainwashing and repentend her sinful ways.
If you don’t like gays, don’t become one! (more )
Seriously, what’s wrong with loving them all and letting God sort it out? Isn’t it God who the gays are sinning against (according to CHRISTians)? Or is it CHRISTians who’ve interpreted God’s laws (remember, Jesus CHRIST never addressed the homosexuality issue) who decide who is a sinner and who isn’t?
If people would stop attacking others for their “sins” and focus on their own “sins,” maybe we could all get along.
Sorry, guys. My /sarcasm didn’t work. :(
Hey cuckoo Chris?
Guilt by association huh?
This prospective judicial appointment went to a gay wedding.
Dick Cheney’s daughter is carrying a baby to be born into just such a family!
So? Would this in YOUR view give new meaning to his status as “vice” President? Just curious.
Damn, hypocrisy’s a bitch!
I think it’s incredulous that Christians equate anyone…gay, atheist, whatever, in the same judgement seat as Charles Manson.
I really want to know why they’re not just worried about their own salvation, do they get brownie points or better seats in heaven for trying to tell other people what to do?
Evangelical Christians think they have a duty to ‘witness’ to others to bring them the message of salvation. How do I know? I went to college with them and I used to be one.
I have no problem with Christians being able to share their faith with others who are willing to listen to it. I do have a problem with these Evangelical Christians that will scream and shout into the faces of everyone that they disagree with politically and denounce them as godless lefties andor godless liberals.
Jesus never used demeaning words in his ministry. Jesus taught love and compassion for ALL. The way I read the Bible. God loves everybody – why even those Muslims in Iraq.
So if the Evangelicals really believed their Bible and did not just pick and choose their Scriptures out of context to ‘prove’ their points against homosexuality; then the world would be a better place. And if Evangelicals would clean up their own backyards and stop living a double life (such as Ted Haggard), then perhaps more people would be willing to listen to them sharing their Christian faith. Much is accomplished through the soft voice than the loud screaming voice.
What happened to Republicans demanding “a judge deserves an up or down vote?!”
I can’t be reading this correctly, can I? Sam Brownback tried to hold up an appointment of a FEDERAL judge because that judge attended a gay or lesbian wedding????????
Attendance at a wedding is now considered a qualification for the federal judiciary? What is next, if someone has ever watched a movie about people who own guns? Or if a judge went to high school with someone who knew someone who might have had an abortion?
Has the entire world gone nuts? Or did Brownback just completely lose what little sense he might have had once upon a time?
If I was a Senator, which I am not, I wouldn’t have allowed this type of criterea in the first place.
I would be interested of course in any illegal or suspect associations but none that are based on social or religious preference.
I would think that a Senator from either side of the aisle could and would limit themselves to what matters. Would this person do well on the judiciary and has their record shown such.
He started this little pissy hissy fit BEFORE the november elections.
You know, when he thought the fundies would still be in charge?
hehehehehe
Now, he wants to step aside?
Gee, do ya think that was a spiritual decision or a political decision?
heheheheheheheheh
IIRC, Sen. Brownback wanted the nominee to promise not to hear any “gay marriage” cases as a condition precedent to lifting his block. As posted within the last two weeks, any judicial nominee who would make such a promise isn’t fit to be a judge.
I saw a comedian this weekend who said…
“What is the gay agenda? They want to get married and join the military.
What pigs! How dare they want to serve their country and be monogamous!”
hee hee hee hee hee hee hee hee hee
Yep. What a HORRIBLE agenda that is….
Well gee, does that mean any judges that attend straight marriage cermonies shouldnt be allowed to hear marriage related cases? Wouldnt that imply bias on the other side?
Or is it only bias if it is done by THEM not US?
Typical hypocrisy from the oh so christian right.
I think this is Sam Brownback’s way to get his name out into the public. This has received national attention and one of his major problems in running for president is name recognition. What better way than to do this stunt? Plus, it makes him look good to his Evangelical Christians. It is all about politics and nothing else.
By Sam’s theory, Dick Cheney should have nothing to do with his pregnant lesbian daughter. Is that the case?
I think you’re a bit off, suza; Dick Cheney should not have anything to do with his pregnant daughter iff he is nominated to the federal bench.
But if the issue of gay marriage or homosexuals having children came up in the Senate and there was a tie vote – then Cheney would have to break the tie – wouldn’t he?
” Whether someone holds hateful views toward gay people certainly is.”
Or any other group of people!
Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas will fade to obscurity after 2008 as a result of corruption scandal and his discredited pro-immigration outlook.
Hey Chris From Mactown:
Did you ever bother to read the Constitution? If you had, you’d know that *individuals* have rights, not states. States have *powers,* which are granted to them by the consent of those individuals governed.
Go read a book, moron.
Tom,
Not sure what offended you about “States Rights.” I agree to a certain extent on the interpretation of who the power is granted to.
However, just for personal notes, the 10th amendment is often referred to as the “States Right” amendment.
I’ll let the legal beagles further describe it’s implementation.
This describes most evangelicals PERFECTLY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTrYE4a1BmE
Great song, though.
I once met Brownback in Wilson, Ks. He was attending a festival and had a congressional meet & greet in the loca bar. I thought it was ironic that His Pureness was getting hanging out in a bar. I have been in this bar several times. Let’s just say – boozin, cussin, lying, cheating, carousing, womanizing, and great fun takes place in this bar.Should Sam step-down because he attended a congressional meet & greet in a bar? I think he should. Go ahead Sam, set an example for all of us.
JM,
Conflating “powers” with “rights” is part of the same language-twisting strategy that brings us “pre-born citizens” and “death tax” and the like. Just as states do not have rights, fetuses are not citizens, and people don’t get taxed for dying.
The Constitution sets forth the limits on government and its powers, and guarantees rights to all citizens. It was *not* written to give states unlimited “rights.” Every time some mouth-breathing right-wing moron uses “state’s rights” to justify some new attack on individual rights and liberties, it diminishes the Constitution that much more.
For Rhonda Holman to use the word bigot in any context other than her own resume is the height of hypocrisy.
For Rhonda Holman to use the word bigot in any context other than her own resume is the height of hypocrisy.