Those looking for a true conservative to enter the Republican presidential field might be feeling a bit perplexed in the wake of Sam Brownback's performance on this morning's Fox News Sunday. The senator from Kansas:
- Endorsed the ISG report and appeared to strongly support negotiations with Iran and Syria.
- Called for a timetable for US withdrawal.
- Spoke approvingly of a Bidenesqe division of Iraq into three ethnic regions.
- Declined to swing at the softball host Chris Wallace lobbed at him regarding Mitt Romney's flip-flops on abortion and gay rights.
- Seemingly described himself as a "compassionate conservative."
Invited by Wallace to comment on the ISG report, Brownback was surprisingly supportive: "I think [Pres. Bush] really should look at these recommendations very seriously as well. And it seems to me that what Baker-Hamilton provides us is a chance to kind of reset the table and get a bi-partisan buy-in and not just a bipartisan buy-in, a global buy-in to what we can do to move forward in Iraq and get our troops out of harm's way and out of the sectarian violence. I think this is an important moment, like senator Dodd identifies as well"
Most surprising was this statement: "One of the things I like about the report is it talks about a very aggressive regional political diplomatic effort which I think is key for us now to really get engaged with." Hard to read that as anything but a strong endorsement of negotiations with Iran and Syria.
View video of Brownback's praise of the ISG's call for a "very aggressive, regional diplomatic effort" here.
Brownback also endorsed the idea of a timetable.
Wallace: "Let me ask you about that, Senator Brownback - the idea of putting out a date, maybe with caveats, but a specific statement that says this commitment is not open-ended."
Brownback: "I think that's a good thing as well, to force action in the region."
Without prompting, Brownback then expressed support for something that Joe Biden has proposed but that the ISG rejected - a tri-partite division of Iraq. Brownback: "You may have to see that place move more to where you have a Sunni-dominated area, a Shia-dominated area, you certainly have a Kurdish-dominated area, to get to some form of political equilibrium."
While Brownback denied it, it was hard to take issue with Chris Wallace's assessment of the senator's statements: "I get the sense that you're getting a little close to jumping ship on the president's policy."
Moving to presidential politics: almost a year ago, Chris Wallace, in an outstanding bit of cross-examination described here, forced Mitt Romney to admit that his views on abortion have "evolved" from pro-choice to pro-life.
Wallace tossed Brownback a softball on that and other Romney flip-flops: "Senator Brownback, you say that you are the true conservative in this potential Republican field. It turns out that one of your potential rivals for that mantle up there on the screen, governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, has changed his positions on abortion and now it turns out on gay rights since the 1990s. How concerned should . . . social conservatives be about that?"
Brownback wouldn't swing: "These things come out during lengthy campaigns and Mitt Romney is a wonderful American with great accomplishments. I'm just looking forward to get out there and the competition of ideas."
Brownback went on to describe himself as "conservative on economic and fiscal and moral and social and compassionate conservative issues." Conservative on compassionate conservative issues? An enigmatic statement that some might interpret as meaning he is opposed to big-government compassionate conservatism as practiced by Pres. Bush. But, in its context, I read it as saying he identifies as a compassionate conservative, which might come as troubling news to more traditional conservatives.
Wallace tried once more to get Brownback to distinguish himself from Romney: "Should people be concerned, though, if someone in the course of the last decade has changed their position on abortion and gay rights?"
Brownback again declined to go after his rival directly: "I think they should examine track records. Examine mine. Examine other people's to make decisions about where they think that person is on the topics. But that's why we have campaigns and debates, is to talk about those issues. And I look forward to putting them out there and having mine tested as others are tested as well."
Brownback's reluctance to go after Romney this early in the campaign season is certainly understandable. But put alongside his enthusiasm for Baker-Hamilton, including the endorsement of negotiations with Iran and Syria, and a picture emerges of Brownback at odds with that of the fire-breathing conservative some would make him out to be.
Contact mark@gunhill.net
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.















Editor at Large

Comments Policy
Ugh...Brownback might sell in Kansas but not nationally
December 10, 2006 - 15:32 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasWho adivises these megalomanicas...oh nevermind I just answered my own question, heh heh. Brownback is as nationally electable as Bob Dole. Whether he is a genuine super-con or some other form of conservative...he is not electable and about as boring as they get. He is a professional double-speaker and has little "real" experience in making decisions and leading, his expertise is in voting in Congress. In the end he will remain irrelevent. GO RUDY!!
If you claim to be a conservative, please don't disgrace yourself and conservatism by thinking and arguing like a liberal.
Explanations, please!
December 10, 2006 - 15:54 ET by UnsaneMaybe the good Senator can explain to me what Israel surrendering the Golan Heights, as called for in the ISG, will do for our troops in Baghdad.
The ISG, or Iraq Surrender Group, can just as easily be called the Israel Surrender Group if you look at some of their nutty recommendations.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy." -Sir Winston Churchill, British statesman (1874-1965)
No political motive. Why do
December 10, 2006 - 16:07 ET by JDWNo political motive.
Why does such a large portion of the world covet such a minute piece of land? What are they going to do with it if and when they control it?
As far as Iran is concerned, how many years have we been 'negotiating'? During that time, what nuclear advancements has Iran made?
JDW
Kerry: "You know, education, if you make the most of it ... you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
Exactly. I find it hard to
December 10, 2006 - 16:17 ET by UnsaneExactly. I find it hard to believe that all of the world's troubles eminate from seven million people living on a parcel of land the size of New Jersey. Imagine, if you will, 49 of the 50 states having horrible state governments, and the federal government, all having crap for economies and political systems, ALL pointing at New Jersey as the source of their trouble.
I don't think it's too much to ask that Baker, et. al, explain to us all how Israel remotely figures in to what our troops are doing in Baghdad...
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy." -Sir Winston Churchill, British statesman (1874-1965)
Don't you know? Israel is the
December 10, 2006 - 16:38 ET by NazarethDon't you know? Israel is the reason for all the world's ills. Why if they didn't exist, the Muzzies religion wouldn't even have to advocate a 'convert or die' philosophy. If Israel didn't exist, Radical racial islam wouldn't hate anyone, and we'd all be singing hymns of love and happiness right alongside them. Why if Israel didn't exist, the murderous ideology of the insane imams who preach hate would majocally dissolve. It's all Israel's fault-
http://sacredscoop.com
Back to politics, last mont
December 10, 2006 - 16:43 ET by JDWBack to politics, last month Leaky announced his desire (as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee) to give habeas corpus to the terrorists. As I stated, the plan is to 'negotiate' while Iran builds nuclear weapons and al-Qaeda attacks, and when we capture those either attempting to attack or those who have done so, the honorable approach is to provide them with civil rights.
What about the rights of those innocent citizens being brutalized in Iraq, Iran, Syria... let alone America?
JDW
Kerry: "You know, education, if you make the most of it ... you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
The Arab/Israeli problem figu
December 10, 2006 - 16:52 ET by Ten7sThe Arab/Israeli problem figures into everything that's happening in the Middle-East. You say its irrational. It is irrational, but its a fact. In case you haven't noticed, the Muslims aren't the most rational, peaceful group. What's more, the Arabs believe that America is in Iraq at the behest of Israel, even our "friends" who are funding the Sunni insurgents in Iraq.
Why do terrorists attack Sp
December 10, 2006 - 17:29 ET by JDWWhy do terrorists attack Spain and Britain if Israel is the problem?
JDW
Kerry: "You know, education, if you make the most of it ... you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
JDW....They were just looking
December 10, 2006 - 17:38 ET by Clear thinkerJDW....
They were just looking for a little practice!
They believe that America is
December 10, 2006 - 17:52 ET by Ten7sThey believe that America is in Iraq at the behest of Israel. They attacked Spain and the UK to intimidate them into renouncing their alliance with us. IOW they thought that the attacks would break the "Coalition of the Willing" and further their goal of driving us from Iraq. And in the case of Spain, it worked.
Why don't you think Spain w
December 10, 2006 - 18:08 ET by JDWWhy don't you think Spain was attacked to change the outcome of an election?
How did Israel force the attack on Bali?
Whay do Islamofascists attack the Hindus?
JDW
Kerry: "You know, education, if you make the most of it ... you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
Your first question doesn't m
December 10, 2006 - 22:46 ET by Ten7sLeadership decisions in parliamentary democracies are made through elections. The Spanish leadership before the terrorist attacks supported the U.S. Iraq policy. After the terrorist attacks, the Spanish voters elected an anti-war/anti-American government. That was the Islamist's short-term objective in Spain; they achieved that objective.
Israel doesn't force any of the attacks committed by Islamists. The Islamists are responsible for their own actions.
Islamists believe that any non-Muslim in a majority Muslim area should either be killed, enslaved, or subjugated. Christians and Jews can theoretically become "dhimmis" or third-class citizens in Muslim lands and not be enslaved or killed (in practice the Islamists usually just kill everyone, see Sudan for example). OTOH, under Islamic Law, atheists and pagans are viewed as no better than animals.
All too true, and I AM a real
December 11, 2006 - 00:59 ET by UnsaneAll too true, and I AM a realist at heart, but I need to know what Israel giving the Golan Heights back to Syria will do for our troops or why our politicians would sign up for such an idea.
And trust me...I don't consider a group of people who think "Akrah Israel" (the number one hit song in the Arab world in 2001) to be entirely rational.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy." -Sir Winston Churchill, British statesman (1874-1965)
For Israel, it's a matter o
December 10, 2006 - 18:16 ET by Wonder95For Israel, it's a matter of security. Syria used to shell Israeli settlements and civillian farming communities regularly from there before Israel captured the area during the Six Day War. According to Yitzak Rabin:
Controlling this ground gives them a view into Syria and helps prevents attacks coming from Syria.
And that is exactly why I won
December 11, 2006 - 01:02 ET by UnsaneAnd that is exactly why I won't lose any sleep if Israel keeps the Golan forever. (And again, why I can't understand why that bone-headed recommendation would make it into that bone-headed report. Hence my tagging it the "Israel Surrender Group".)
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy." -Sir Winston Churchill, British statesman (1874-1965)
Brownbackside
December 10, 2006 - 18:05 ET by misterbillJust emailed the Senator to let him know I will never vote for someone who endorses the ISG plan (which I consider to be a cut and run plan). Setting a firm date to leave is essentially the same thing. Old abou can sit back and wait. Then when we are gone, the flags of Syria and Iran will rise over Iraq just as over Lebanon.
I saw this show, I was waitin
December 10, 2006 - 21:57 ET by bigtimerI saw this show, I was waiting for Yellowback to start quipping, 'We need a New Direction' and 'Truth to Power' and all that jazz!
I have never cared for Brownback since I think it was one of the many hearings or something related during the Clintoon administration, that is when I started calling him Yellowback, I was furious with him then and things haven't changed a lick since, except I am no longer furious whatsoever...he isn't going anyplace in the Presidential polls, just a simpleton with a pipe dream....puff away Yellowback...puff away.
"Once the coffers of the federal government are opened to the public, there will be no shutting them again." - Grover Cleveland
Brownback is my Senator. Th
December 10, 2006 - 23:30 ET by kubob21Brownback is my Senator. The guy is great at constituent svcs, and is a fiscal conservative, unfortunately he is not much of an original ideas type of guy and probably lets his social conservatism take the fore too much. His support for ISG is probably more due to him not having any better ideas himself than an actual embrace not to mention the favorable press it gets him from the MSM.
Man everyone one this site is
December 11, 2006 - 05:03 ET by Donovan16Man everyone one this site is coming down on Senator like a snowstorm. It's his first time out of the gate as a presidential candidate so he hasnt found his niche as of yet.
He is one of the primary reasons why Sam Alito is going to be on the court for the next 30 years so he already is in good standing with me.
We really don't have very many candidates, so I am not ruling anyone out as of now.
Well, this did it for me--I'm
December 11, 2006 - 08:36 ET by TinianWell, this did it for me--I'm ruling him out as a presidential candidate.
So, what you really are saying is Brownback is stupid??
December 11, 2006 - 08:53 ET by acaiguana"His support for ISG is probably more due to him not having any better ideas himself ..."
So, what you really are saying is Brownback is stupid??
I agree.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Ya can't win if ya don't play."
A few months back (during
December 11, 2006 - 06:48 ET by Jack BauerA few months back (during recess) a major UK political blog (Conservative Home) invited blogger questions for Senator Brownback, which he had promised to answer in due course...
He never did.
Now maybe it wasn't his fault, but he got about 20 varied and interesting questions, including a couple from your humble correspondent.
Sort of makes you think... if he won't answer a few questions when he promised he would..
Proud member of the all-powerful and vast
militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex
Who amoung them will have t
December 11, 2006 - 08:58 ET by msh1973Who amoung them will have the guts to stand for what is right? I am sick of all of them.