Fired Up! Missouri

Since we are on the subject of John McCain, I don't understand why the national press is ignoring the fact that McCain is a total hot head who simply does not have the temperment for leadership, much less international diplomacy.  The latest example is yesterday's story from Thad Cochran about how John McCain's version of diplomacy in Nicaragua was to physically grab a guy by the collar in a room full of guns.  At least the press in Mississippi is willing to write that story.  The other story that likely won't make the msm is about McCain calling his own wife a word so vile that no one seems willing to report it (WARNING:  clicking this link takes you to a story that reveals the highly offensive word McCain used to describe his wife).  Can you imagine this guy representing us to the international community?

P.S.  Let's play the "is it fair for all" game by asking yourself what would happen if we learned that Barrack Obama called Michelle Obama that word.  It would be the top story on Fox News for a week.  Also, the word is so offensive that the whole quote gets lost.  "At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you XXXX."  Nice.  Really shows some respect for the wife and an indication, me thinks, of how he thinks about women in general.

A Mid-Missouri tipster tells Fired Up! that the McCain campaign is up with a round of Interactive Voice Response (IVR) polling calls to voters in the state.  IVR uses automated voice prompts and asks respondents to reply to questions with a press of the telephone keys.

Yesterday's McCain IVR calls asked a battery of five questions (as remembered and relayed):

1. Do you consider yourself a Republican, Democrat or Independent?

2. If the Presidential election were held today, would you vote for John McCain, Barack Obama or other?

3. Have things that you have recent seen, heard or read made you more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain?

4. Have things that you have recent seen, heard or read made you more likely or less likely to vote for Barack Obama?

5. Which candidate has stood up to President Bush on the issue of global climate change by promoting new policies to deal with that issue: John McCain or Barack Obama?

Looks like Team McCain is trying to gauge whether his smoke and mirrors energy policy townhall meeting in Springfield and associated press blitz did any good with voters here. 

Hank Waters today makes the increasingly common mistake of suggesting "accurate" ballot summary language is synonymous with "ballot summary language that portrays the initiative in the way I'd portray it."

Difficult as this may be to believe, nowhere do the statutes require that ballot summary language be crafted to reflect Hank Waters' eccentric worldview.

Over the last four years, there is a list longer than your arm of ethical improprieties in Jefferson City and across Missouri which Peter Kinder saw fit to ignore completely.  Kinder never, not once, piped up to talk about ethics in government during any of the following ethical lapses and scandals...

The fee office scandal

The Jewell Patek-Andy Blunt favored lobbyist strongarm

The Fred Ferrell sexual harassment scandal

The Blunt brothers' Show Me Ethanol escapade

The Nathan Cooper illegal immigration saga

The Carl Bearden lobbyist-and-legislator-at-the-same-time trick  

Catherine Hanaway's Sweetheart Deal for Nathan Cooper

The Scott Eckersley firing

The Governor's Sunshine Law violation and cover-up

The Randa Hayes fiasco

Rudy Farber's $50K Purchase of a Transportation Commission seat 

Mike Kehoe's illegal in-kind bus donation to the Matt Blunt campaign

Yet now, all of the sudden, Kinder is drawing a bead on Rod Jetton, rolling out an ethics package clearly aimed at the Speaker.  I wonder if Kinder knows something the rest of us don't that he's trying to get out in front of by throwing Jetton under the bus?

Whatever his reason, it's interesting to note that Kinder acted here in true weaselly GOP fashion by waiting until there is absolutely no downside risk before launching his attack, as Jetton is on his way out and the session is over.  Kinder certainly wasn't bashing Jetton's ethics when Jetton was helping him ram his pal Paul McKee's $100 million tax credit through the legislature.   

This evening, bestselling author and nationally syndicated columnist David Sirota will visit St. Louis to discuss his newest book, THE UPRISING: An Unauthorized Tour of the Populist Revolt Scaring Wall Street & Washington.   The event will be held at 7pm at Left Bank Books (399 N. Euclid, St. Louis, MO.) at Euclid and McPherson in the Central West End.

Sirota, a longtime Congressional committee advisor to Wisconsin Democrat Dave Obey and consultant to Dem Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer, has a new book that looks at populism on both the Right and Left and how it is shaping American politics. 

David Sirota will join State Senator Jeff Smith at a reading, Q&A and book signing sponsored by Fired Up Missouri, the Young Democrats, the Midwest Coalition for Responsible Investment and the Missouri Progressive Vote Coalition.  

Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder recently addressed the meeting of a Missouri lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police.  When Kinder finished his remarks and opened the floor to questions from those assembled, one officer asked Kinder about the series of events in his office regarding the charging of his chief of staff, Eric Feltner, for furnishing pornography to a minor.

The question set off a rambling seven-plus minute response --the length of which exceeded his initial remarks.  Though audio of the entire event is available here, below is a transcript of a particularly compelling portion.  In the excerpt, Kinder seeks to enlighten his audience about the "nature" of the behaviors undertaken by people like his former chief of staff:

It is in the nature of these charges and these people who engage in that kind of behavior, I will further add, that it is located in a very dark and compartmentalized part of their life.  I consulted with a prosecuting attorney who's known to many of you with a statewide reputation who has prosecuted some of these cases and he said "Governor, we have priests, we have captains of industry, we have respected professionals --lawyers, doctors and CPAs-- we have ex-cops who we have charged and in most cases you will find that they have displayed wonderful judgment, excellent judgment, were reliable employees in every other facet of their work life and their daily lives."  And they've got this little dark thing going over here that no one else knows about, including in this case his wife.  And it's in the nature of these things that they are unknown to the rest of us.  So that's what I'm dealing with there, and it's in the courts and I await resolution to the case. 

­This part of Kinder's performance is revelatory in its depth of knowledge of and empathy for those who "compartmentalize" difficult aspects of their selves.  Rarely do attendees get to plumb the depths of psyches during a fifteen minute stump visit on the campaign circuit as did participants in the recent FOP meeting.

In other parts of Kinder's response, he also answered a more narrow question about his belief surrounding what should happen to Eric Feltner now:

Now, you ask if he [Feltner] should be put on a registry somewhere.  He is an American citizen who enjoys the presumption that we all enjoy when we're charged with a crime of innocence until proven guilty.  I do not believe it is an issue at this time, sir, of being placed on a registry until his case has been adjudicated.

Some observers have noted that this is a far cry from some of the recent GOP rhetoric about sex offenses against children, much of which has focused on decrying the unconstitutionality of use of the death penalty for certain offenders.

Regardless, Kinder's FOP visit --and the permanent record of it-- makes for an interesting view into the mind of the current Lieutenant Governor.

[Ed. note: Kinder's address runs from approximately the 1:15 point to the 14:40 point on the attached audio clip.]

Yesterday Matt Blunt signed into law a bill intended to toughen some sex offender laws.  Among the changes to statute was one that would change a certain offense from a Class C misdemeanor to a Class A misdemeanor.  As summarized by Senate research, the bill changes RSMo. 573.040 thusly:

Under this act, attempting to furnish pornographic materials to a minor is a Class A misdemeanor in the same manner as actually furnishing the materials to a minor. It is not an affirmative defense to prosecution that the person being furnished the pornographic material is a peace officer masquerading as a minor.

This is interesting, since furnishing pornographic materials to a minor is precisely the charge faced by former Peter Kinder and Kenny Hulshof aide Eric Feltner.  But, as noted by the Jefferson City News Tribune's Bob Watson, Feltner is faced with lesser infractions that the new law requires:

Feltner, 40, Columbia, was charged May 21 with two Class C misdemeanors - the least serious criminal charge possible in state law.

In other words, it appears as though Feltner will slip away from more serious punishment, as he'll be prosecuted by Republican Mark Richardson for "the least serious criminal charge possible" instead of for the more harsh Class A misdemeanor which the legislature and Governor apparently believe is appropriate for the crime he's committed. 

If there's a lesson in all of this, it seems to be that Missouri Republicans --while they love to talk the talk about making laws tougher on child predators and sexual offenders-- have very little stomach for actually doing so when it requires cracking down on one of their own. 

Former Missouri House Speaker and PSC Commissioner Steve Gaw is up with the first ad on the Democratic side of the 9th district primary.

Check it out.

­ 

Rarely do we respond to a comment on the site, but one recent comment deserves a front page reply.  Specifically, a commenter with the handle 'blessedcurse' fired off a comment in response to a recent post about MOHELA's recent failure to make another scheduled Lewis & Clark payment.  'blessedcurse' wrote:

MOHELA's woes have very little to do with Lewis & Clark and are mostly due to the colapse [sic] of the auction rate bond market and changes in federal regulations governing student loan lenders...

In other words, 'blessedcurse' makes the case that Matt Blunt's sale of MOHELA can't be blamed for any the loan agency's current woes because those difficulties are attributable to fluctuations in the market and interceding federal action.  Implicit in the argument is the idea that the events 'blessedcurse' cites were either unforeseen or unforeseeable, leaving the proponents of the sale of MOHELA's assets free from any responsibility.

Of course, the trouble with this line of reasoning is that all of the "unforeseeable" occurrences cited by 'blessedcurse' were the very same reasons pointed to by opponents of the MOHELA sale while it was being discussed in the legislature as reasons why the asset sale was a terrible idea.

Back in February 2007, audit firm Liscarnan Solutions foresaw the dangers posed to the feasibility of the sale by pending changes in federal law and made them plain:

“The modeling of MOHELA’s future business activity and the related cash flow projects, may no longer be valid,” said Liscaman staffer Seamus O’Neill. “We urge MOHELA not to take any further actions related to the Cooperation Agreement until we are more confident as to statutory changes to the Higher Education Act and their impact on MOHELA.”

Also last February, Democratic leader Jeff Harris cited similar concerns when withdrawing support for the MOHELA initiative:

But Harris said in a letter to the Republican governor that he longer backs the sale of MOHELA loans to finance the buildings because of concerns the plan could jeopardize the quasi-governmental agency's ability to continue providing low-interest loans.

Further, banker John Greer spoke up at the time to point out that the sale could foist illiquidity upon MOHELA and hamper its ability to deal with the sort of market downturn the agency now faces:

I also warned that it was essential for MOHELA to marshal its assets to be prepared to react quickly to whatever changes occurred in federal law regarding student loans - changes being considered by Congress at that very moment. The governor’s plan, I said, would leave MOHELA without financial liquidity when it would need it most.

To hear apologists for Matt Blunt and the GOP legislature tell it, nobody can bear any fault for MOHELA's current predicament because no one could possibly have known that the securities market entails risk or that Congress might pass new laws that were already being considered.  But to believe their story one must also be willing to pretend that no one was pointing to those very same soft spots back prior to the MOHELA deal's consummation.  Doing that requires making believe that lots of people weren't saying things that they very clearly did.    

You probably knew things were bad for the Republican Party as an organization and as a brand, but you probably don't know how bad until you read about the party's future from some GOP blogger called Middlebury Republican.  Middlebury Republican sees some GOP heroes out there on the scene:

But it is in gubernatorial politics that Republicans future may lay....  Governor Matt Blunt of Missouri is a decorated Navy veteran and highly successful governor who has earned the nation's highest rating from the libertarian Cato Institute, and is well regarded for his successful work to reduce the size of the state's government...

To have these...young leaders, each moving forward with a clear united conservative vision for the country, is something that happens once in a generation. And for all the stories that are written about the Democratic Party's young power, they don't have this. In today's closely divided political environment, that may be all the difference.

This guy must've gleaned everything he knows about our illustrious governor from the eight-minute infomerical on Matty's repurposed campaign website.

Matt Blunt is going to be a keystone of "a Republican resurgence in the next decade" despite his having been chased from office after his first term as governor, despite having his administration's principle-free ethics targeted by fellow members of his own party who wish to succeed him and despite existing now largely as the subject of a constant murmur of speculation about when the next big scandal will hit.

If this is Middlebury Republican's concept of a "leadership foundation" then I count as fortunate any Party which, like the Democrats in his view, doesn't have such a foundation.

Considering that even the candidate whom Blunt (privately) supports in the GOP gubernatorial primary has thus far opted against having the Governor make his endorsement public, it is hard to imagine that Blunt is someone around whom Republicans can "build their future."  Or perhaps Middlebury is right, and even a bruised melon like Matt Blunt is the best that national GOPers have to pick from the bin.  Neither scenario portends the happy future that the blogger tries to conjure.

Apparently, the inability to "string a sentence together" makes one "a maverick."

Who knew?

Sarah Steelman spokesman Spence Jackson on statements by Steelman's opponent:

"...more of congressman Hulshof's Washington-style deceit."

Unfortunately, this primary contest stretches on only for another five weeks.­

One of the enduring questions of this entire episode in GOP politics is how Hulshof has managed to let Steelman hang around in the game so long.

Imagine having to choose between the second coming of Fred Thompson who effectively wants to extend Matt Blunt's term by four years or some woman whom Chamber of Commerce members describe this way...

She was awful…She couldn’t string a sentence together…She wasn’t prepared…She made no sense…

Yet despite the widely acknowledged weakness of the GOP primary candidates, there aren't very many Republican lifers out there lamenting Matt Blunt's decision not to run for re-election.  Strange, that.  No? 

Garrison Keillor famously wrote about a place called Lake Wobegon, where "all the children are above average."

Under the Blunt administration, the people who run the state have apparently worked very hard to make sure that we have an opposite Lake Wobegon effect.  Bluntees have rigged the system so that state employees are always adjudged average or below. 

Blunt administration appointees have invented and implemented an employee rating system called PERforM, on which they will presumably make "merit" pay increase decisions for workers.  Because pay for working people hinges on the ratings, Bluntees have to be very careful to make sure that even employees who earn high marks don't get scored that way. 

Consider the discussion of the PERforM system from this email, sent earlier this year by a manager from a state facility in southeast Missouri...

From:        Howell, Michael
Sent:         Monday, March 31, 2008 12:34PM
To:            [Redacted]
Cc:            Miller, Bradley; Harris, Tony
Subject:    perform

As instructed all appraisal that are rated higher than a successful overall will have to be redone and scored no higher than a successful rating per Brad.

Please get this done ASAP

Mike Howell
VPS

Excellent.  That's precisely the way almost everyone understands that rating systems like this work, yet rarely do we get so succinct and accurate an admission of the system's operation.  It would almost be funny if it didn't actually affect the lives of hard-working real people.

Congratulations to all the lucky employees who earned scores higher than successful but got arbitrarily knocked down to a lower rating, and who'll probably lose out on discretionary pay increases as a result.

The latest chapter in the rousing success of Matt Blunt's crowning legislative achievement, the sale of assets from the state's student loan agency.

This good news about MOHELA's continued inability to make scheduled payments follows last month's good news about MOHELA seriously curtailing borrower benefits.

Uhh, can we officially call Blunt's asset sale a failure yet, or are we supposed to keep pretending until he leaves office?­

As the AP's Chris Blank tells us the afternoon, Matt Blunt was out wandering the countryside signing bills today before amiable reporters in places not called Jefferson City:

 Blunt was making stops to publicize the legislation Thursday in Excelsior Springs, Boonville, Park Hills and Springfield.

Today's on-the-road signings come after Blunt traveled in recent weeks to Joplin, Ft. Leonard Wood, Raymore and Belton to sign bills.  Blunt even left the state altogether this month and let Peter Kinder sign a few bills so he didn't have to. 

Bills that Blunt did sign in Jeff City --like the repeal of Rod Jetton's village law-- were done behind closed doors with no public opportunity for the media to question the governor.

The trend seems to have started around the time that Blunt canceled a bill signing and press event because of Eric Feltner's furnishing porno to a minor arrest weather.

Plenty observers are suggesting that Blunt's lack of Jefferson City public bill signings are directly attributable to the governor's unwillingness to subject himself to questioning from the capitol press.  Is Matt Blunt --who isn't running for re-election-- just out working the state to boost his profile, or is he doing everything he can to keep from answering questions about emails and other inconvenient topics?

In an indication of just how far down the wrong track things have gone, the Blunt Administration today announced its opposition to Bush Administration regulations of health-harming ozone.  Team Blunt thinks the Bush standards are too strict and wants to join the state of Mississippi in opposing them.

Quite a legacy their building there--- and that Kenny and Sarah want to continue.­­