Where's my hole in the sand?
After Republicans railed for weeks for an "up-or-down" vote for President Bush's judicial nominees, apparently for Senator Brownback, Julie Finley doesn't deserve one. The president nominated her as ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and Brownback has filibustered her.
Brownback is considered a 2008 presidential candidate (who isn't these days?). Why is she unqualified to serve in this post that I wouldn't have heard of if this didn't happen? She's pro-choice.
What does one's stance of abortion have to do with this position? Are all nominees going to be subjected to this litmus test? Pat Robertson wants only Judeo-Christians in government, Sam Brownback wants only anti-abortion nominees... what happened to this whole equality thing?
I reject the notion that someone has to pass a litmus test to work in government in the same way I reject a litmus test for being a Christian (you're not 100% pro-life, you're not saved!).
Does abortion politics have to invade everything about our government? Cuz really, there are bigger fish to fry and contradicting yourself and your party does not lend onesself to credibility or solutions.
Apparently principles only work if they suit your agenda. Senator Brownback, you've been convicted of a moral contradiction.
Update: He lifted the hold after talking over his "concerns" with Julie Finley.