Rove figures that if Sebelius nominates a Democrat he would not last...and prove a liability to her political future. But I checked: Browback was just reelected so even a character like Thomas Frank would have almost six years to prove himself or herself and become a fearful incumbent.

I think you're being a just a little overly melodramatic regarding "evil"-ness. These misguided fools may be stupid and deceptive, but hardly demon spawn from hell.

Oh yeah, I think Kansans are starting to get a little concerned about the war and the torutur.

"Go east, young woman!" (Go to D.C., Kathleen!)

BUT...he is loyal and won't make a peep.

So, just think, we are due!  A Brownback vacancy would be good for the Senate Dems in the short term, but only if whoever is nominated can stand on his or her own feet when they face the voter sin 2006.  Remember, we have a lot of races to defend and quite a few to attack.  The last thing we need is another millstone around our necks to spread our money around too thinly.

(and I am not a right winger, in any sense)

I'd say, that it should be his choice.

We could certainly do much worse..

Did anyone else here think that Brownback would have been a outside threat to cause some serious damage to whoever the frontrunner was in the 08' Pres primary, particularly in IA?

The exciting part for political junkies, however, is wondering who might fill his seat if it happened. Rep. Dennis Moore would probably be interested in the appointment, though one can only wonder if he has the fire-in-the-belly to move beyond his northeastern Kansas base.

Of course, since someone actually had the moxie to wonder about Bill Clinton taking the Bank helm, we cannot help but wonder whether it is anything but speculation.

And no, that's not a good trade-off, even if we can possibly hold down that Senate seat, which, frankly, I doubt. Kansas is pretty darn red these days, the Sebelius miracle aside. They could run a thieving liar who posed as a religious goon lightyears to the right of Bush and still win the seat handily (um... 'cause they have for some time now).

As active, partisan Dems, we are the driving members of the single most important progressive institution in the world today--that´s some power. Now (and I apologize for the ire so evident in the post--I have TONS of respect for the work and analysis you do, Chris), we have got to be responsible with that power.

And the post above is right: Brownback wants to run for Pres., and we should rejoice at that possibiliy. How great would a debate between Brownback and McCain (or Giuliani) be!! In fact, that might be precisely the reason for the appointment. Remember, that´s how Johnson got rid of McNamara.

If true, it would shake up Kansas politics.  Scholars of International Relations I've spoken with uniformly think Brownback would be an awful choice.  Since, given the chance, the Bush administration has always made the awful choice, this might just happen.

If so, a Democrat would hold the seat for 2 years and then almost surely be beaten the next year.  There are ways around that, but the chance to embarass one of the few viable Kansas Dems might make Rove chuckle.