Department of Non-Sequiturs

From Think Progress:

LaHood: 110th Congress has been successful.Rep. Ray LaHood (R-IL), who has a reputation for sometimes “tell[ing] the truth, unvarnished,” offered his assessment of the new Congressional leadership:

They’ve had a pretty strong quarter… They can send their members home crowing about their accomplishments, and they’ve done it in a bipartisan way, which is exactly what they promised to do.

LaHood also announced he will not be seeking re-election.

That prompted this comment from a reader:

I love that ending. Try your own: Start with a name, then the thing you’d least expect to hear, and end it with “also announced he will not be seeking re-election.” For example -

“Sensenbrenner surprised the press Thursday by announcing he had fathered a child with a space alien he called ‘Gertrude69-Omega’, and also announced he will not be seeking re-election.”

How about: "Sensenbrenner said he would co-sponsor new Disabilities Act legislation with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and also announced he would not seek re-election."

Sensenbrenner opposes contempt move

The Hill reports:

The House Judiciary Committee voted Wednesday along straight partisan lines to hold White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers in contempt of Congress, the first concrete step toward a constitutional showdown between the two branches of government.

Party line means F. Jim Sensenbrenner voted no, but he did offer an alternative that at least sounds reasonable on its face:

“I think the White House is going to win in court,” asserted Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), the former chairman of the panel. “If we do bring the case to court and lose, then that is going to be viewed as a blank check by the current president and the future presidents to snub the Congress” in its oversight responsibilities.”

Instead of moving forward with the contempt citation, Sensenbrenner suggested the committee direct the House general counsel to file a civil suit challenging the president’s claim of executive privilege in the D.C. District Court, a move he said he would support. Conyers said he would consider filing the suit in addition to moving forward with the contempt citation.

There is, of course, this sticky little problem that the LA Times notes. The Bush administration would have to agree to file the contempt case:

If the House approves the resolution, the charges against Miers and Bolten will be referred to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, although the outlook for a prosecution there is unclear. The administration has said the Justice Department would not pursue the contempt charges because it believes the law does not provide for such a prosecution when presidential aides assert executive privilege.

As my mother used to say, "There's always something to take the joy out of life."

Democrats need a seriouscandidate, not a sideshow

(DISCLAIMER: I am a contributor, not the operator, of this blog, so these opinions are not necessarily those of the management.)

Yesterday, we noted that two professors, one Democrat and one Republican, say they are going to run a joint campaign for Jim Sensenbrenner's Congressional seat. We called the idea wacky.

Today, The NY Times takes note, treating it semi-seriously.

But lest there was any doubt this is a gimmick, which will be good for some media attention but have nothing to do with any serious chance of defeating Sensenbrenner, here's some of the Times story:

In a show of bipartisan comity rarely, if ever, seen before in congressional politics, Burkee and Walz will launch a joint campaign Web site at Burkeeandwalz.com and produce joint advertising, bumper stickers and yard signs...

Although only one of them can be elected to Congress, Burkee and Walz discuss their joint campaign in terms of what would happen if “we” win. They said they would continue teaching at Concordia as they served the district’s constituents, bringing back the idea of citizen legislators instead of career politicians...

Seniors from Concordia University and the University of Wisconsin will staff the campaigns...

Gary C. Jacobson, a professor of political science at the University of California San Diego and an expert in congressional elections, said he is not aware of such an arrangement in any past congressional elections, and gave the candidates slim chances in the general election.

“It’s a gimmick that will get them some attention but ... I don’t see how they could possibly expect to win,” Jacobson said..

Then there's this:

The idea for the run came out of a series of lectures Burkee and Walz undertook during the 2004 presidential campaign. The two professors, supporting their respective parties’ presidential candidates (Bush for Burkee and Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry for Walz), conducted a series of self-moderated debates around the district to help educate voters about major issues.

Ah, yes, who can forget those exciting Burkee-Walz debates of 2004? Does anyone have any recollection of that, except the two participants?

Their first "debate" of the Congressional campaign may interest the news media, but after that they'll have to set their hair on fire to get any coverage.

If no other Democrat enters the race, Walz will be the Dem nominee. Burkee is not going to beat Sensenbrenner in a GOP primary. Come general election time, without his "running mate," what is Walz's plan to beat Sensenbrenner one-on-one? Do joint yard signs with Big Jim? Run joint TV commercials? Don't think so.

Here's hoping, once again, that a serious Democratic candidate -- one who wants to run a real campaign and try to win, even in this heavily Republican district -- gets into the race.

The voters deserve better than a sideshow.

UPDATE: I added a little more explanation and commentary on Daily Kos post.

Sensenbrenner gets bipartisan opposition

This seems more than a little wacky, with two professors seemingly wanting to test their academic theories about what kind of campaign voters want.

Be that as it may, two professors -- one Dem, one Repub -- have announced they will run in tandem for Sensenbrenner's Congressional seat next year.

Sigh.

That may well be enough to keep out any serious challenger.

Ken Mobile has more.

Jim Sensenbrenner, climate warrior

When it comes to global warming, Jim Sensenbrenner wants to have it every which way.

He calls himself "a veteran of the climate wars," but it's hard to tell just what it is he's fighting.

The Politco reports:

As the ranking member of the new Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, Sensenbrenner, 64, finds himself in the curious position of leading his party on a committee he dismisses as nothing more than a publicity stunt. In fact, Sensenbrenner voted against the creation of the committee last March...

He acknowledges that Earth is getting warmer. He takes issue, however, with some Democrats, who he thinks are overstating the perils of an increasingly hot planet and unfairly blaming the phenomenon on human beings and the greenhouse gases they help produce.

"How much climate change is caused by human activity and how much is caused by the natural climatic cycle, I don't think there is a real consensus on," he said.

That means George Bush and some conservatives don't agree with the scientific community, which says it is quite clear that humans have a major share of the blame for global warming.

You won't be surprised to hear Sensenbrenner's an Al Gore-hater:

Sensenbrenner also seems to strongly dislike Gore, who he sees as creating unwarranted hysteria over the potential consequences of global warming. Gore's name came up repeatedly during an interview with The Politico, with Sensenbrenner insinuating that Gore had a large role in the hyperbole surrounding the debate.

Gentleman Jim drafting new immigration bill

The biggest issue in Wales, Wisconsin is illegal immigration? Hard to believe, but that's what the Waukesha paper reports.

If that's not scary enough, consider this:

A federal immigration reform measure died in the U.S. Senate last week but Sensenbrenner said that isn’t the end the debate. He said he will soon introduce an immigration reform bill that will include discussion on illegal immigrants.

Sensenbrenner declined to offer specifics on the bill, noting he was still writing it.

Can't wait for those specifics. A longer, higher fence? Round 'em all up and deport 'em? Shoot illegals on sight? Or something tougher?

Fishing takes patience

F. Jim Sensenbrenner on the House Judiciary Committee hearings:

"Now, let me say that this committee has spent $250,000 of the taxpayers' money basically investigating the replacement of U.S. attorneys whose terms had expired," he said. "...It seems to me that with this fishing expedition, there ain't no fish in the water. And we've spent an awful lot of time and an awful lot of money finding that out."

It's just that the committee hasn't hooked one yet. Some of them seem to have faulty memories.

That "terms had expired" reference is another kind of fish that's commonly known as a red herring. The question under discussion is why they were replaced. The answer is not that their terms had expired.

Missing the point

Today's news release:

In response to the immigration agreement reached by the White House and Senate earlier today, Menomonee Falls Representative Jim Sensenbrenner made the following comments:

"This proposal is nothing but a massive amnesty bill that provides expedited visas for millions of illegal immigrants. This "get-out-of-jail-free" card cannot be described as a comprehensive immigration agreement. The American economy, and the American people, are not prepared to handle such a huge and immediate influx of people in the workforce.

Psssst! Jimbo! They're already here.

How's that again?

See if you can follow this convoluted piece of thinking:

OCONOMOWOC - Residents who want the United States to pull its troops out of Iraq should be more upset with the plans put forth by Democrats than with President Bush, said U.S. Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis.

Let's see ... The Democrats want to bring the troops home, and have voted for a deadline to withdraw them. President Bush doesn't have any intention of pulling any troops while he's still president.

So why should "Residents who want the United States to pull its troops out of Iraq" -- a majority of the people in the US -- be upset with the Democrats?

Because F. Jim has his head screwed on backwards, apparently. And he hopes people in Oconomowoc do, too. Story.

Oh ja! We do the Liechtensteiner polka

That's the tune the F. Jim Sensenbrenners are dancing to. Sing along, if you wish.

They love Liechtenstein. And other people love picking up the tab for the Sensenbrenners' visits.

Dan Bice has the goods. Ja!

An Inconvenient Truth

Always Something There to Remind Us?


Think Progress announces that "House Conservatives Appoint Chief Climate Skeptic to Lead Global Warming Panel."

That would be, I'm afraid -- our own F. Jim.

Once again the 5th CD looks like we have terrible taste in Congress and a low self-regard.

The posting goes on:

The House of Representatives voted yesterday to create a new congressional committee devoted solely to addressing the global climate crisis.

Unable to block the creation of the committee, House conservative leaders are now doing everything they can to neuter it. Conservative leadership aides reportedly told Republican members that a vote in favor of the bill creating the global warming panel “would put them out of running for a seat” on the panel.

Worse, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) has named Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) to be the committee’s top ranking Republican member. A look at Sensenbrenner’s record:

• Sensenbrenner praised as ‘Inhofe of the House’: “If there is an Inhofe on the House side, it has to be Wisconsin’s James Sensenbrenner Jr.,” says the American Conservative Union’s David Keene, referring to Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), who calls global warming the “greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.”
• Sensenbrenner led climate skeptic delegation to Kyoto conference: “As chairman of the Science Committee back in 1998, Sensenbrenner led a delegation of skeptics to the Kyoto conference and fought then-President Clinton’s attempt to go along with the Kyoto protocols.”
• Sensenbrenner asked scientist about placing catalytic converters on cows to combat warming: “Does (it) mean to stop this increase in methane we’ve got to put catalytic converters on the backs of cows?” Sensenbrenner asked a climate scientist at a hearing last month. If cows are partly responsible for methane gases, Sensenbrenner said, that “could hit Wisconsin’s economy right between the horns.”
• Sensenbrenner endorsed by Competitive Enterprise Institute: A spokesman for the oil industry-backed Competitive Enterprise Institute called Sensenbrenner “exceptionally well qualified” and “a good choice.”

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) — who last month claimed that global warming may have been caused by “dinosaur flatulence” — was reportedly a finalist for the ranking member slot. Only 13 percent of congressional Republicans say they believe that human activity is causing global warming, according to a recent poll, compared to 79 percent of Americans.

Wrong again, and proud of it

Sensenbrenner tells the Conservative Political Action conference that Republicans lost the last election because they "forgot to be conservatives."

Actually, the GOP got its just desserts because it went to war in Iraq under false pretenses and then totally mismanaged the war effort. Real conservatives would not have cooked up or supported that kind of international adventure.

Sensenbrenner, you'll be happy to hear, is proud of his standing in the Latino community over immigration issues. He's pretty much public enemy number one and just pleased as punch.

The Journal Sentinel has the details.

Big Jim to Hmong: Tough luck; drop dead

The Hmong who were US allies in the "secret war" against communists in Laos are considered terrorists under the Patriot Act and Real ID Acts, and are being denied green cards and asylum, the AP reports.

Big Jim is his usual compassionate, empathetic self:

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, the Wisconsin Republican who was a main driving force behind both the Patriot Act and the Real ID Act as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, declined an interview request. Through a spokesman, Rajesh Bharwani, he said: "The laws are fine. If the Department of Justice and other agencies are overstepping their bounds, then the courts will stop them."

Just like they've stopped Bush and Cheney, presumably.

Right, but for the wrong reasons

"If you want to stop the war, stop the money," said Sensenbrenner. "The Democrat[ic] resolution has no force or effect. The trump card we have is the power of the purse. They have to have the guts to say we are not going to fund it. ..."

Sensenbrenner, of course, would never support cutting off the funds. He wants to put Democrats on the spot.

But he's right. If you want to stop the war, stop the money.

Story.

Sensenbrenner gets his gander up

Jim Sensenbrenner, still trying to figure out his minority status, continues to throw his weight around. Thursday, he badgered Speaker Nancy Pelosi, using an obscure rule to question her when she testified before a House committee.

The Hill has the story.

The last line of this excerpt is a little ironic. The guy who wants to ask the questions doesn't want to answer any for the media without an appointment. Apparently, what's good for the goose doesn't apply to the gander, according to House Rule XI.

...Pelosi experienced the effect of the new strategy yesterday when Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) stunned her by using a procedural tactic to force her to answer questions from members of the Science Committee and White House spokesman Tony Snow defended her right to travel nonstop across the country aboard a military jet.

After Pelosi finished making an opening statement on global warming before the Science panel, Sensenbrenner employed House Rule XI, which allows lawmakers to question witnesses for five minutes.

The move flustered Science Committee Chairman Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.) and committee aides. Gordon asked for unanimous consent to waive the rules, but Sensenbrenner did not agree.

It is rare that the House Speaker, who does not vote on or sponsor legislation, would testify before a committee; it is rarer still that lawmakers would force one of their own to submit to questioning. Lawmakers testify in committees all the time, but their colleagues routinely dispense with all but the friendliest questions.

Pelosi delivered an opening statement at a hearing where scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) testified about a report issued last week that said humans “very likely” have caused global warming.

“It’s tough being in the minority, but the American people are looking for cooperation on this very serious issue and the Speaker showed today she’s willing to talk about the issue with anyone anywhere,” said a spokesman for Pelosi.

Sensenbrenner responded in a statement to Pelosi’s allegation that “for 12 years, the [GOP] leadership stifled all discussion and debate of global warming. The long rejection of reality is over, to the relief of members on both sides of the aisle.”

Sensenbrenner, chairman of the Science Committee from 1997 to 2001, said he held hearings on global warming. He then asked Pelosi to explain the economic impact of policies that would slow global warming.

“He’s a rules kind of guy and he felt he had a right to question her,” said Sensenbrenner’s spokesman, Raj Bharwani. Whether Sensenbrenner’s plan was premeditated or extemporaneous is unclear. Sensenbrenner rarely talks to reporters without an appointment...

Big Jim just as offensive, but powerless

He's used to getting his way, but now has to settle for getting some publicity.

Have to wonder, though: Does Sensenbrenner secretly like cockfighting or dog fighting, or what's his deal?

Former chairman shakes things up on animal fighting bill

By FREDERIC J. FROMMER
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Until January, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner ruled the House Judiciary Committee with an iron fist, refusing to bring up an anti-animal fighting bill for a vote last year despite the support of more than 300 House members.

So when a similar bill finally came up for a committee vote Wednesday, the Wisconsin Republican wasn't ready to sit on the sidelines. He tried unsuccessfully to attach an anti-abortion amendment to it. After the amendment was ruled out of order, the committee approved the bill on a voice vote.

"The answer to the age-old question of 'Which came first, the chicken or the egg?' - I would argue that it doesn't matter which came first," he said. "Both deserve our protection. Without this amendment, we will be giving more protection to chickens than we will be giving to minor children, their parents and their unborn baby."

The president of the Humane Society of the United States, Wayne Pacelle, called the amendment "outrageous."

"It was designed to load up the bill in order to kill it," said Pacelle, whose group took out newspaper ads last year lumping Sensenbrenner in with illegal cockfighters and dogfighters.

The legislation, which now moves to the full House for a vote, would make transporting animals across state lines for fighting a felony, punishable by up to three years of jail time. Under current law, it's a misdemeanor. Cockfighting is banned in every state except Louisiana and New Mexico, and dogfighting is banned in every state.

Sensenbrenner's amendment would have made it a crime to transport a minor across state lines for an abortion to circumvent parental involvement laws.

But one of the perks he lost as chairman was the ability to rule on whether an amendment is "germane," and his successor, Michigan Democrat John Conyers, ruled this one was not.

Sensenbrenner was not alone in his crusade Wednesday.

"I will not sit here and lend my vote to a piece of policy that elevates chickens above the lives of humanity," declared Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa.

Supporters of the animal fighting bill argue that cockfighting is barbaric and inhumane, and is tied to crimes such as money laundering and drug running.

Sensenbrenner spokesman Rajesh Bharwani said that the congressman was not trying to revive his influence on the committee.

"His amendment at today's meeting was about raising the point that Democrats are more interested in protecting the rights and well-being of chickens over minor girls and their babies," Bharwani said.

Jim gets demoted

Outgoing House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner will relinquish the gavel when the Republicans become the minority party in January. He was reportedly seeking a position as the Ranking Member on the committee in the new Congress. Unfortunately for Jim, that position will go to Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX).

To add insult to injury, Sensenbrenner didn't get a Ranking Member spot on any other committees. He has been serving in the House of Representatives since 1979.

WisPolitics has the list of new Ranking Members in PDF format.

Crossposted at Brewtown Politico.

Sensenbrenner 'wrong on too much'; Journal Sentinel endorses Kennedy

Sunday's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial:

It's time to send the congressman home

Two years ago, we recommended Jim Sensenbrenner for another term representing Wisconsin's 5th Congressional District. Today, we simply cannot. Sensenbrenner has been wrong on too much, from an immigration policy that puts him at odds with much of his own party and the business community to failure to exert meaningful oversight over White House domestic spying policies.

We recommend his opponent, Democrat Bryan Kennedy. He will be a competent, thoughtful congressman who can restore a sense of dignity and balance to the 5th District. It's time for that after years of folly from Sensenbrenner.

Sensenbrenner has too often been an obstructionist to good policy. Given the reins of the powerful House Judiciary Committee, he had a chance to lead for the common good during a congressional session when few representatives had even a notion of what that meant. Too often, he didn't.

Sensenbrenner was wrong on immigration. His enforcement-only plan included making felons of undocumented immigrants and a useless 700-mile fence that will do nothing to solve this national problem. Worse for Republicans, his obstinacy split his own party and cost it a rare opportunity to significantly broaden its base.

Sensenbrenner was wrong on the USA Patriot Act. We need many of its provisions in this era of terrorism, but the version he championed strode upon the liberty of every American.

Sensenbrenner was wrong on Real ID, which will cost states millions of dollars to implement and which fixed something that wasn't broken.

Sensenbrenner was wrong not to dig deeper into the National Security Agency's domestic spying program. Sensenbrenner sent a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales but didn't bother with the real spade work.

Sensenbrenner was wrong to waste taxpayers' money by taking more than $160,000 in junkets since 1994, not to mention the more than $200,000 in world travel paid for by lobbyists and think tanks over the past six years.

Sensenbrenner was wrong to push bills that would make it harder for police agencies to track illegal guns and to crack down on rogue gun dealers.

Sensenbrenner was wrong to indict Milwaukee as "fast becoming the murder capital of the U.S." and wrong to lash out at Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, calling him a "crybaby" for having the brass to criticize Congress. It's but one example of the congressman's increasingly belligerent and unproductive tone.

Give Sensenbrenner credit for pushing to renew the Voting Rights Act and for bucking the administration on ethics reform. He was right about the risk for fraud in relief money sent to the Gulf Coast for victims of Hurricane Katrina.

But those are meager accomplishments.

Like Sensenbrenner, Kennedy favors tough border security but, unlike Sensenbrenner, also a path to legalization for the millions of illegal immigrants now here. He favors incentives to promote the entry of whole families, which he says would force immigrants up the wage scale, and bigger fines for businesses that employ illegal immigrants.

Kennedy, a University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee professor, favors a flexible withdrawal from Iraq but wants the generals to make those decisions. He notes, correctly, that the real fight is against terrorism.

He favors targeted tax cuts for the middle class, arguing that the Bush tax cuts missed that mark.

Some voters may be put off by Kennedy's decision to pay himself, a campaign staffer and a baby sitter from campaign funds. But if middle-class candidates are going to run, accommodations must be made. The Federal Elections Commission allows what Kennedy did. And keep in mind: Sensenbrenner is paid by the taxpayers while he campaigns.

No doubt, the district loses something in experience and seniority if Sensenbrenner goes. But a return to more moderate positions and tone, especially on immigration and guns, is well worth that price.

Big Jim digs deep for NRCC -- $100,000

Rep. F. Jim Sensenbrenner is making an investment to try to remain a part of the majority in the House. He's like to chair a committee again, no doubt.

The tight-fisted Sensenbrenner has given the National Republican Congressional Committee $100,000. Of course, it's from his campaign account, not his wallet. Still, it's a sign he wants to try to buy a spot in leadership if the Rs happen to prevail.

CQ has the story and list of other big donors.

Who's the tall nerdy guy in the suit?
Hint: What's the name of this blog?