Blogs 4 Brownback

August 2, 2007

How Low Will They Go?

Filed under: Breaking News,Muckraking — Lyssie @ 1:41 pm

MuckrakingAndrew Sullivan has recently developed an interest in the web site of our guest contributor, Mrs. T.D. Gaines-Crockett. Unfortunately, it appears that his interest has been taken advantage of by someone who is rather desperately trying to discredit a fervent Brownback supporter.

Here’s the official statement from the Brownback for President campaign:

“Baptists for Brownback is clearly a parody. Frankly, our campaign is flattered that an individual would take hours out of their day and sit behind a computer anonymously to make a parody of Senator Brownback and his consistent, conservative positions on the issues. It certainly is one of the weirder hobbies out there.”

I smell a rat. A big, sneaky rat.

Andrew Sullivan is no fool, but I fear that he has been taken in by a rather clever bit of sabotage. Does anybody think for even a second that someone charged with the great authority to speak on behalf of a presidential campaign would be so unprofessional as to dismiss a supporter with insults, without even having attempted to have contacted the supporter in question to verify the legitimacy of the site?

Come on! There is no way that someone in that position of authority would be that careless, reckless and unprofessional.

So, from where did the message come, then?

I can only voice suspicions, but it seems to me to be a rather obvious attempt to drive a wedge between Senator Brownback and his supporters, by feigning betrayal on the part of Senator Brownback. It’s ugly, it’s mean, and it really seems rather pathetic. To whoever did this, I hope you are proud of yourself for stooping to such levels. It says much more about you than it says about Mrs. Gaines-Crockett or Senator Brownback.


  1. It is possible they wish to disassociate themselves from that horrid site, of course.

    Comment by Brandon Explosion — August 2, 2007 @ 2:05 pm | Reply

  2. Watch out they’ll be trying the same foolishness with this site soon.

    Comment by dadaclu — August 2, 2007 @ 2:19 pm | Reply

  3. OR perhaps he just wants to cut loose those few supporters that are letting more people refrain from becoming BB supporters because they´re (sorry) nutjobs?

    Comment by PG — August 2, 2007 @ 2:27 pm | Reply

  4. Oh noes!!!1! We are discovered!

    Comment by interpreted — August 2, 2007 @ 3:33 pm | Reply

  5. I’d take it with a grain of salt. I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the official line coming out of the Brownback campaign. It called CYA.

    The Denver Post claimed to have contacted the Brownback campaign and this was the response:

    Brownback spokesman John Rankin, who didn’t know about the blog sites until told by a reporter, declined to comment.

    That’s absolute nonsense. I had emailed the campaign months before (march or april) to comment about the blog section of their website and to let them know about the work being done to get the word out about the campaign by Students for Brownback and Blogs 4 Brownback.

    I have no doubt that the campaign watches what is said in the press and on the blogs about the good Senator. If not, they should be fired and replaced by competant staff members. Search englines are easy to use. I’d be surprised if a staff member or an intern didn’t read us every day. I would.

    That “official statement” doesn’t really say anything. And of course the campaign would distance itself from any website that was not under its control. This is politics. This is common sense.

    I don’t think Baptists for Brownback needs to be concerned about Andrew Sullivan’s muckracking. It was probably a slow day. Sully needed something to post about, so he made some unsubstantiated allegations and put the Brownback campaign in an uneasy position. So they did what they had to do: agreed with him so this didn’t become a big deal.

    I think they did the only thing a campaign could reasonably be expected to do.

    Comment by Psycheout — August 2, 2007 @ 3:52 pm | Reply

  6. dadaclu, we state clearly that we are Blogs 4 Brownback, not Blogs of Brownback. We are obviously not part of the campaign. If the Brownback campaign were put in a position to have to make a statement about us that wasn’t flattering, it wouldn’t matter one bit.

    We’re here and we support Senator Brownback’s nomination. Period. We each have to do what is right to achieve that goal.

    And Lyssie, you may be right, but I’m going to go with the assumption that this is 100% true, just to cover all the bases. Notice that they are flattered by Baptists for Brownback. The official statement wasn’t an attack. They probably thought it was best to disassociate themselves from the website since Sully was trying to make a stink about it. But I’m sure they do appreciate that the site exists even if they cannot say so publicly. This is called PR, Public Relations. It’s what they have to do.

    But if it’s a stupid immature prank by someone posing as somebody from the Brownback campaign, of course, all bets are off.

    Either way, none of this matters.

    Comment by Psycheout — August 2, 2007 @ 3:56 pm | Reply

  7. I suspect Fred Thompson. He is a member of the screen actors guild. SAGA is an integral part of THE CONSPIRACY that was formed in 1066 A.D. They along with the Illuminati, Freemasons and the Gay Mafia; control the MSM; 83.7% of our government and most of the world.

    I wouldn’t put it past him. That is how they operate. That is how they have always operated.

    Comment by ec1009 — August 2, 2007 @ 5:40 pm | Reply

  8. None of this worries me. The Brownback campaign knows what it’s doing. If they have to disavow Blogs 4 Brownback and Baptists 4 Brownback to woo moderate voters, that doesn’t bother me in the least. Ultimately, we know what their real positions on the issues are- they coincide with our own. Idiot RINO moderates, however, must sometimes be led by the nose to what is good for them. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.

    Comment by Sisyphus — August 2, 2007 @ 5:55 pm | Reply

  9. Leave it to Sisyphus to say in a few sentences what I ended up writing a book about. Well done!

    Comment by Psycheout — August 2, 2007 @ 6:37 pm | Reply

  10. Uh-oh, has Mr Sullivan been drinking the truther kool-aid?

    What a crazy world he must live in – a zany world full of hilarity and constant guffaws where pretty much everything is “ironic”, “satirical” or a “parody”.

    It seems to me that these are just labels that liberals uses to conceal their cognitive dissonance. When somebody dares to speak unpleasant truths it must be “parody”. Well that might be the case for Al-Gore’s environmental screeds, but as for the B4B writers, I’d say they are sincere.


    Comment by Tristan J. Shuddery — August 3, 2007 @ 4:10 am | Reply

  11. Comment by Sisyphus: “The Brownback campaign knows what it’s doing.”

    Really? Is this why Senator Sam is trailing in the polls?

    Republican Presidential Nomination: 07/12/2007 – 08/01/2007
    Giuliani 28.0%
    Thompson 18.7%
    McCain 15.5%
    Romney 9.8%
    Gingrich 5.3%
    Brownback 1.0%

    If that’s your definition of “knows what it’s doing”, I’d hate to see what happens when they drop the ball…

    Comment by Tyler Durden — August 3, 2007 @ 5:01 am | Reply

  12. Shorter Tyler: quack quack quack poll poll poll I’m an idiot quack quack quack.

    Comment by Psycheout — August 3, 2007 @ 6:55 am | Reply

  13. It’s a dirty job but someone’s gotta do it!! 🙂

    Don’t shoot the messenger Psycheout, just because you don’t like the message.

    Comment by Tyler Durden — August 3, 2007 @ 7:29 am | Reply

  14. Is Psycheout upset cause he’s losing (badly), awwww, poor Psycheout! Want a lollipop?

    (If you’re upset now, just imagine how you’ll feel when Brownback drops out of the race any day now, AND the next president is a democrat)

    Comment by Tyler Durden — August 3, 2007 @ 7:42 am | Reply

  15. Polls indicate nothing, especially in these early days. The frontrunner now may very well be back of the pack by the time fall rolls around. You don’t believe me? Go ask Howard Dean.

    Comment by Lyssie — August 3, 2007 @ 8:49 am | Reply

  16. And you’re expecting Brownback just to leap from near last place to first? Based on…

    Even if the current GOP frontrunner were to collapse a la Dean, there’s still 7 other candidates ahead of Senator Sam. Expecting “god” to smite them all down?

    As I said earlier Lyssie: I rely on evidence, whilst you rely on wishful-thinking! 🙂

    Comment by Tyler Durden — August 3, 2007 @ 9:08 am | Reply

  17. I’m not expecting anything, but I am saying that it’s foolish to take such early polls as being any sort of predictor of the final results.

    Comment by Lyssie — August 3, 2007 @ 9:17 am | Reply

  18. Going from first to last is a distinct possibility in politics (scandal, ill-health, funding, policy etc.), however, to go from last to first is an entirely different proposition as too many factors involved, whereas losing the lead can sometimes be entirely up to the individual candidate (e.g. Dean)

    If Senator Sam Brownback gets the 2008 GOP nomination, I will convert to Christianity!!

    Comment by Tyler Durden — August 3, 2007 @ 9:38 am | Reply

  19. “But if it’s a stupid immature prank by someone posing as somebody from the Brownback campaign, of course, all bets are off.”

    I would just like to point out for the record that it wasn’t me. I should’ve thought of it but, alas, work sometimes gets in the way of play 😉

    Comment by Tyler Durden — August 3, 2007 @ 9:49 am | Reply

  20. Don’t do us any favors, Tyler.

    You’ve made it QUITE clear that you feel that religion is nothing more than a stupid superstition and a crutch for the feeble-minded and those with their heads in the clouds, and that those who do have faith, no matter how gracious they are to you, deserve to be belittled. I’d rather not have you defecating on my beliefs from within my own church, thank you very much.

    Comment by Lyssie — August 3, 2007 @ 9:49 am | Reply

  21. “Religion is comparable to a childhood neurosis”. Freud

    Comment by Tyler Durden — August 3, 2007 @ 9:57 am | Reply

  22. Freud also said that boys want to have sex with their mothers. Do you want to have sex with your mother, Tyler?

    Comment by Patricia — August 3, 2007 @ 10:41 am | Reply

  23. I think it’s hilarious that Tyler Durden wants to discourage us by linking to polls published by the Liberal Media.

    They said the same thing about Robertson back in ’88, and we showed them that we were not to be ignored. A national poll is meaningless, when what’s important is the Iowa caucuses where we have a superior ground game. People in Iowa, like local boys, and Kansas is a lot more local than Taxachusetts and Liberal New york.

    Comment by Harry — August 3, 2007 @ 11:31 am | Reply

  24. Those polls came from Fox News, which is not exactly known for being “liberal”.

    Also, I seem to remember Robertson NOT getting the Republican nomination.

    Comment by AutoFire — August 3, 2007 @ 11:40 am | Reply

  25. Patricia,

    It’s a theory called “The Oedipus complex”, it’s a concept from Freud’s work in psychosexual development where a child of either gender regards the parent of the same gender as an adversary, and competitor, for the exclusive love, time and energy of the parent of the opposite gender.

    It’s not meant to be takenliterally, but merely as an analogy for how young children (male/female) develop relationships with and around their parents (Mother/Father).

    Freud developed the “Oedipus complex” as an explanation of the formation of the super-ego. The traditional paradigm in a (male) child’s psychological coming-of-age is to first select the mother as the object of libidinal investment. This however is expected to arouse the father’s anger, therefore getting the child attention – and the infant surmises that the most probable outcome of this would be castration.

    But although Freud devoted most of his early literature to the “Oedipus complex” in males, by 1931 he was arguing that females do experience an “Oedipus complex”, and that in the case of females, incestuous desires are initially homosexual desires towards the mothers. It is clear that in Freud’s view, at least from his later writings, the “Oedipus complex” was a far more complicated process in female than in male development.

    If you have children you might have experienced this scenario: Mom and Dad in bed sleeping, child enters the room, wakes parents, asks can he/she sleep in their bed, parents agree. Child will choose to sleep between the parents not just for comfort but to separate the parents in order to gain love and attention from one particular parent – boy/mother, girl/father.

    And just for the record: no, I don’t want to have sex with my mother as she’s dead over 16 years, so that would be very weird!!

    Comment by Tyler Durden — August 3, 2007 @ 11:46 am | Reply

  26. Harry,

    Iowa Republican Caucus: 06/13/2007 – 07/30/2007

    Romney 23.5%
    Giuliani 16.0%
    Thompson 15.3%
    McCain 10.8%
    Huckabee 3.8%
    Brownback 1.5%

    Doens’t look good, does it?

    Contact Team Brownback yourself, you’ll get the same info back from them as I got on FoxNews!!

    Comment by Tyler Durden — August 3, 2007 @ 11:55 am | Reply

  27. Speaking of poll numbers, Lyssie, is the title of this particular blog “How Low Will They Go?” in reference to Brownback’s poll numbers? Can’t get much lower than 1.5%, oh wait, maybe 0.5% 🙂

    Comment by Tyler Durden — August 3, 2007 @ 12:13 pm | Reply

  28. Tyler, take a deep breath, read the thread again, and I think you will end up supporting Blogs4Brownback.

    Comment by The Narrator — August 5, 2007 @ 11:01 am | Reply

  29. Sodomite Andrew Sullivan is calling Baptists for Brownback a “parody?”

    I used to be fooled by the phony “libertarian conservatism” of sodomite Andrew Sullivan. But once it became clear to me that he truly is a sodomite, I knew he could do nothing but lie, lie, lie, as all sodomites do. So if Andrew Sullivan says that the obvious Christian truth being told at Baptists for Brownback is a “parody”, you can be safely assured that it’s all meant in dead earnest, and must be taken seriously for the salvation of America.

    Comment by Godly Miss Dodd — August 7, 2007 @ 1:06 pm | Reply

  30. Hey! ANOTHER great parody site!

    You all seem a bit more into it than the BaptistsforBrownback, though. It’s harder to tell that you’re all joking.

    Comment by lowly grunt — August 7, 2007 @ 3:23 pm | Reply

  31. “You’ve made it QUITE clear that you feel that religion is nothing more than a stupid superstition and a crutch for the feeble-minded and those with their heads in the clouds, and that those who do have faith, no matter how gracious they are to you, deserve to be belittled.”

    1. We don’t think religion is a superstition. We think that any religion taken to an extreme becomes asinine and loses any esteem. You are fascists and conspiracy-theorists. People who are religious are not necessarily feeble-minded or have their heads in the clouds. You people do, though.
    2. It’s clear that you’re very gracious to us. You’ve done so much for us. And you belittle us.

    Lyssie – At least you aren’t too much of an extremist, but you’re just as much a hypocrit as these other a-holes.
    All you people who seriously think Brownback stands any chance against the competent candidates:
    Kiss my bottom.

    [Ed Note: How does using foul language help your case?]

    Comment by Franknfurter — August 10, 2007 @ 10:00 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: