Funniest Name Change Ever

The other morning, I got stood up for a breakfast meeting, and, on the way to work, I dropped by Habanero's on Troost to see if their breakfast burritos are as ethereal as their other food, and I saw that they are changing their name. It comes as no surprise - there is another Habanero's in the area, so I figure they probably got a cease and desist letter, telling them to change their name or prepare for a lawsuit.

So, what are they changing their name to?

Chilie's.

Motivation

So, with the two kids wanting a work-out facility while they are in town for the summer, and with my doctor using more exclamation points than ever in telling me to lose weight, and with the added convenience of the shiny new Cleaver Family YMCA within easy walking distance, and with my triglycerides climbing toward the level that I can win local and regional contests, we decided to divert some of our budget to a family gym membership.

On my second night there, I'm climbing mountains of green lights on the eliptical machine, sweat rolling into my eyes, and in walks "King" Vincent, acknowledged leader of the MPAASC (MPA Alumni Social Club), 20-something flat-belly, and all-around great guy. His amused greeting reflects his surprise that I even know how to climb onto one of the machines - "Wow, fancy seeing YOU here!" Later, when I'm working on the weights, he nods toward my double-digit capacity and smirks, "Dude, you're huge!"

It's gonna be a long road, Vincent, but I'll get there . . .

Thanks for the added motivation. ;-)

How Can I Review Sam's Play?

I can't pretend to be impartial, after all, the author is my son, the director is one of his best friends, and the actors and actress classmates from NYU. The cast and crew are great people with tremendous chemistry who are tremendous fun to spend time around. If you're looking for a deeply cynical, hypercritical takedown of the Higher Power, you should probably try looking elsewhere.

But enough of attacking my own credibility. The play is intense, awful, gripping, and raw. See it.

The play opens with a limping ex-girlfriend (Larke Schuldberg) reentering the life of a smalltime drug dealer (Chris Littler) and his younger brother (Colin Hunt), who is working at Blockbuster following an unsuccessful attempt to gain admission to law school. She brings a bag of drugs, a business proposition, and a searing emotional pain that shows through in her limp. She's sexy (am I allowed to say that about one of my son's classmates?) and manipulative. Is she tender, or is she canny and tough through and through?

The older brother's cynicism and suspicion seem unjustified, as we want to believe in the redemption of the apparently fragile young woman, and the budding relationship between her and the goofy and similarly fragile younger brother. Ultimately, though, the vulnerability is found in the older brother, and ambiguity surrounds everything but the fact that the older brother has trusted too much.

The play has humor, fresh, original music, a functional and imaginative set, and a furious pace. The director, Chris Plante, has done a great job of bringing Sam's script to vivid life.

Watching this play was intense. It's not a happy-go-lucky play - it is gritty and disturbing. But I cannot imagine that anyone who sees it will not find it powerful, and thought-provoking. It's good art, and not just because it was written by my son.

Sanders v. Wheeler - Go With Sanders

The race for County Executive has been kind of a mess. A lot of the old-time democrats I know like Wheeler, for his years of service and quirkily charismatic manner. Sanders has done a good job as prosecutor, though, especially when compared to Wheeler's awful performance in Jefferson City, where he has been either inconsequential or absent.

Neither is a candidate I can feel overly positive about.

When it comes down to it, though, Wheeler must lose, because he made a conscious decision to side with the powerful in an ugly assault against the powerless. When Wheeler, a lawyer and a doctor, sided with the insurance companies in the tort reform debate, he knew exactly what he was doing. He was taking away rights from children hurt badly by faulty products. He was taking away rights from future innocent victims. He looked at the unknown person who will be horribly injured, and decided that the insurance companies make better campaign contributions. He sold you out. He sold me out. He sold our grandchildren out. Shame on him.

Wise readers may point out that tort reform is almost entirely irrelevant for the County Executive position. They are right, of course, but I have two answers. First, this is a character issue. He told people he would oppose tort reform, and then did the dirty work that the insurance companies demanded of him. Who knows what county issues will come up where he will side with the wealthy and powerful against the interests of Jackson Countians? He has shown in vivid detail that he is willing and able to screw each one of us.

Second, this is sheer political vengeance, and Wheeler deserves every bit of it. He deserves to be held accountable for what he knowingly did to us. He lied about it, and he hoped that the voters would forget, but I refuse. Wheeler told common Missourians to jump in a lake when he cast his vote for tort reform, and it's time we told him the same thing.

I heard Wheeler on the radio yesterday, and you can hear the desperation and anger in his voice. He feels entitled to this position, and is affronted that Sanders didn't run for Attorney General, as he instructed. Wheeler was negative and utterly classless, and sounded angry much of the time. He knows that he can't rely on the dotty grandfather act any more, and that pisses him off.

I'm not a huge Sanders fan, but I thank him from the bottom of my heart for giving Wheeler the ass-kicking he has richly deserved for so long.

Best Tamales in the World?

I'm underqualified to make this claim. Tamales, when I was growing up, came from a can, and were wrapped in paper. I hated them, and never ate them again until I was in my 30s.

Great tamales are unique among food. Their texture is moist, yet crumbly, with chunks of chewy pork to make them earthy and substantial. The subtle sweetness of the corn meal makes the sweet pork sing, and the spices add a bass line that pulls the whole thing up to a different level.

The tamales at Habaneros on Troost near 63rd are tamales at their best. The corn meal (masa harina, actually - we've even made our own tamales, despite our Iriah-Polish-German heritage) wraps the fall-apart tender chunks of pork in perfect balance. The sauce and cheese on top complement that pork and corn wonderfully. They come unwrapped, though you can see them pulled from their traditional corn husks if you watch the guy in the kitchen, and that only means that you don't have to do the unwrapping yourself, with the attendant mess.At a buck fifty each, this may be the lowest priced highest quality food in Kansas City,

Because of my limited experience and gringo heritage, I'm hesitant to make the claim that needs to be made. The tamales at Habaneros on Troost are the best in the universe. If I'm wrong, prove it to me by bringing me better ones.

"Enthusiasm for Compromise"

The KC Star continued its string of poorly-thought-out endorsements today, choosing anti-gay, anti-hispanic Klumb over progressive Jolie Justus for the 10th Senate race. What about Justus did they not like - what was it that Klumb has that she doesn't??

The Star proclaims: "Justus is a pro bono attorney with compassion for the vulnerable, but she lacks enthusiasm for compromise, which is critical to getting things done." Alright - thanks for making it clear.

To be an ideal progressive politician, according to the Star, you must be enthusiastic about compromise. The Star disagrees with James Russell Lowell, who wrote that "Compromise makes a good umbrella, but a poor roof; it is temporary expedient, often wise in party politics, almost sure to be unwise in statesmanship.”

I don't want my state senator to be eager and enthusiastic about compromising her beliefs, and supporting anti-human rights legislation. I don't want a Jason Klumb down in Jefferson City enthusiastically compromising my strongly-held beliefs in the name of expediency. I most definitely want my State Senator to, in the phrase of the Star, "lack enthusiasm for compromise."

Justus is a smart, savvy person. She will know when a deal is necessary, and she can out-smart and out-maneuver greedy right-wing zealots. But she will use compromise as a disfavored tool, and that is why I want her to be my State Senator.

Two Interesting Blogs By Lawyers

Last week, I stumbled across two extremely different blogs, both done by lawyers.

The first one is written by a young lawyer I met about a year ago. Jason Kander is the co-founder and past president of Heartland Democrats of America, but this blog is about the experiences he is going though as a member of our military intelligence. His post on Saturday captures his approach - to start off a rant about the military procurement policies that send our soldiers to Iraq with inadequate body armor, he writes

The military budgeting process kills me. Yesterday morning I sat through a two hour medical inprocess brief at the base hospital. It included a half hour briefing from the "Health and Wellness Center." Clearly an air force thing. This guy told us about all these free services being offered to air force personnel here on base, thanks to the U.S. taxpayer. They actually have a class called, "Chill and relax." Apparently, they give you tools for managing stress in the class, but the majority of the class consists of you sitting in a room for an hour with aroma therapy candles lit, lights off, music playing, in a vibrating chair. Seriously. And then the guy says this: "I know what you're thinking, this is like those chairs they let you try out in the mall. No we spent some serious money on this and got the top of the line. You really oughta do this class." I sware I'm not making this up.

Jason is a super-smart, clear-thinking young man whose blog is something to look forward to - add it to your blogrolls!

For something totally different, visit The Marx Filings, which is a blog about the course of some trademark litigation. Intellectual property is a fascinating and important topic, and I want to do a long post about copyright one of these days. The Marx Filings, though, is simply the blog of somebody trying to defend her trademarks against those who are abusing the system and civil procedure to make her life miserable. Blogroll it and cheer for Terri against the forces of evil!

Higher Power on the Air

Alert readers know that I'm 1000% pimping Higher Power, the brilliant, New York-bound play written by a kid I'm pretty fond of, directed by a young man I admire, and acted by 3 NYU students from around the country who are scary talented. If you do nothing else this coming weekend, or for the rest of this summer, get off your blog-reading butt and go see Higher Power as part of the KC Fringe Festival. Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday will be your only opportunities to see this play live in Kansas City, so just do it.

If you're one of those people who needs a multi-media blitz to be convinced, dial up 90.1 on your FM dial at 6:00 Monday evening, and listen to the author. Or listen to 89.3 at the right times this week, and you might hear the entire cast peddling the product.

You know, if Tony throws a link my way for this shameless pimping, it could help launch the careers of the author, director, actress and actors . . .

Endorsement Time

The KC Star botched its endorsements horribly this morning, and not only because they backed a couple candidates whom I don't support. They did a butcher job on one of my favorite local politicians, in favor of one of their journalistic buddies. So, here come my endorsements for the season.

District 1: Scott Burnett, without a glimmer of a doubt. Scott is one of the hardest working men in local politics, always thoughtful and dedicated to the citizens of his district. All of them. I've known Scott for more than a decade, coached one of his children in Brookside soccer, visited his house, and seen him out in the community. I've seen him stop what he is doing to listen to the concerns of a constituent, even when the constituent was rude, or scattered, or simply venting about matters far beyond the jurisdiction of a county legislator. Scott is what all our local politicians should strive to be - good-humored, interested, and dedicated.

The Star would have you toss him aside because a free-lance journalist is running against him. I've never met the guy - I have nothing bad to say about him. I'm sure he is a fine free-lance journalist (for the National Catholic Reporter, which is actually kind of cool), and his website has some touching attempts at poetry (the English major in me is a harsh judge of weak poetry), but he brings nothing to the table to suggest that he could serve the people of Kansas City's first district with the level of distinction that Great Scott has.

The despicable aspect of the Star's endorsement of their part-time journalistic buddy, though, is that they claim that "he has also been the target of ethical investigations that are not yet concluded." Bullshit. This is simply a bullshit charge that the Star should be ashamed of making. The charge relates to Bob Stringfield, the nutcase who started a fight with a fellow legislator, and it has already been dismissed by the Jackson County Ethics Commission. Bob Stringfield sent the already-dismissed charge on to Jefferson City, where the ethics commission has ignored it for months. For the Star to act like there is any validity to the charge is outrageous and dishonest.

District 1, at-large: Theresa Garza. Theresa is a bright, dedicated Hispanic woman who will bring diversity and integrity to a seat which has had neither while Bob Stringfield has been there. The Star supports an aide to Stringfield, claiming that "he knows what it would take to reduce the disruptive personality clashes in the Legislature." HAH! They are talking about a man whose boss started and lost a freaking fistfight at a meeting of the Legislature!! Theresa Garza may not generate sensationalist headlines for the Star, but she will be a great addition to the legislature.

District 2: Eugene Standifer, Jr. The Star got one right. The fact that his opponent is a convicted felon made it easy for them.

District 3: Wendy Dye. I don't know her, but the incumbet, Denny Waits, has been unimpressive and divisive.

District 4: Dan Tarwater. When Tarwater first ran for his seat, I worked on his opponent's campaign, and I don't regret it in the slightest. Tarwater was a Waris protege, and the campaign featured all the dirty tricks and misconduct you'd expect from a scumbag like Waris. In the 12 years since that election, though, Tarwater has grown and matured. He is an even-handed legislator who quietly works for the good of his district and the County. He's good enough that Stringfield took a swing at him . . .

District 5: Neal McGregor. The only Democrat in the race. The Republican candidates are both, well, republicans. 'Nuff said.

District 6: The Kansas City Star Editorial Board, write-in candidate. Nobody worth a damn is running in this district, so the Kansas City Star Editorial Board should be as good as anyone else. And, given their lousy crop of endorsements this time around, they should be forced to serve with the ineffective and dysfunctional legislature they are wishing upon us.

Fun With Numbers - Blacks Love Bush!!

Right-wing blogger DJ Drummond was looking for some happy news for Bush in the wake of his mediocre performance at the NAACP convention. So, he broke down recent the Survey USA poll, and drew out such nuggets as "Rhode Island: 26% Job Approval among Blacks, in a state where the total gives him just 23% approval." 26% approval rating! Yippee! Break out the champagne!

He saves his best for last, though. Who knew that South Dakota is a hotbed of black Bush loving? "South Dakota: 66% Job Approval among Blacks polled!," Drummond proclaims!

600 people were surveyed in a state with .6 percent black population, so it appears that 2 of the 3 contacted like Bush. It's a tidal wave of support!

KC Fringe Festival - Tickets and Higher Power

The KC Fringe Festival is going to take place next weekend at venues all over the mid and down town areas. They've just announced their ticket plans, and it's a different approach than you might expect, so pay attention!

First thing is, if you want to see a show, you have to buy a button for $5 before you can buy a ticket for $5. In a way, that makes your ticket price $10, but not really, because you can buy 5 tickets for only $20, which means that, if you expose yourself to a bunch of new artists (which is the whole point of the Festival - wait - be careful about the "exposing yourself" thing), it'll only cost you $5 per show, plus you get a button to keep as a souvenir.

Now that all that business is out of the way, GO SEE HIGHER POWER. "Sex, drugs, rock and roll, and Catholicism collide in the lives of three young Midwesterners as a last-ditch drug deal causes the undoing of family and friendships." Do you really want to miss out on all that? Or, to draw from the show's production blog, as written by the play's author -

Higher Power is an intense show, and there's no way around it. A lot of awful things happen and a lot of brutal things are said. But nothing could prepare me for what this show is becoming. The show is sexy, the show is violent, the show is gutwrenching. In Chris's staging, the show is a living, breathing thing that doesn't hold back from being as real as it needs to be.

If that sounds a little pretentious, well, yeah, I can see that, but I've met these people, and they are onto something pretty great, and they are funny and talented, and way too sarcastic to let Sam take himself too seriously for very long.

After its run here, this show is off to Minneapolis, and then it is going to the Big Apple - New York City. The writer of the play (Sam Ryan) and the director of the play (Chris Plante) are local kids going places.

Here's my guaranty. See Higher Power. (Really. Please.) If you think it's great, tell people right away, so they can catch the show before it closes. Or call your friends in Minneapolis and New York and tell them about this homegrown play that's coming to their cities - kind of like you're sending them flowers, but you're sending them a great play instead, which is way cooler than dyed carnations in a cheap vase.

And, if you don't like it, just let me know, and I'll give you a 10% discount on guest memberships to this blog. (Offer not valid in Alaska, Hawaii, or North Korea. Or Delaware, for that matter. Texas either. Must be 18 or older to redeem prize. Void where prohibited by law.)

Raising the Next Ken Lay

Hal Becker is one of those obnoxious sales gurus/motivational speakers who make a living telling anecdotes intended to inspire. In this week's Kansas City Business Journal, he talks about his thirteen-year-old daughter, praising her as a "Master in International Negotiation", but inadvertantly showing that he is raising her to be an unpleasant, unethical, lying thief.

First, he describes her as "a great kid who loves to play any game as long as she can win." Wow - just what the world needs now.

Then, he describes taking her to China, explaining that "the business climate there has no regard for trademark, patent infringement or copy protection. You can buy fake or perfect copies of anything from the current release DVDs to Nike shoes, Rolex watches, Prada purses or even new Nintendo DS games (which is my daughter's favorite)." Does he use this fact as a teaching opportunity about the damage that theft of intellectual property can do (he's a freaking writer, after all . . .)? Does he teach his daughter the value of holding to your own ethical standards even when surrounded by others who do not share them? Does he discuss with her the fact that the knock-offs around them may have been produced in subhuman conditions?

Of course not! He takes a "when in Rome . . ." attitude and teaches her to get away with whatever she can get away with. (Thank God he didn't take her to one of the child prostitution palaces that Rush Limbaugh is suspected of visiting with his Viagra.) He gives her $7 to steal some intellectual property.

How could this unethical, thieving daughter possibly make her father any more proud?

She lies!! He approvingly tells how she lies to the vendors and tells them that she only has $5. He is proud of her for abandoning her integrity to save a whole $2! What a great kid! Many lesser kids would have managed to negotiate without actually making a material mistatement of fact, but this young Ken Lay jumps right into the ethical cesspool for only $2.

Now, I don't mean to be a moral prig here. I won't deny that I may have an unauthorized item or two of intellectual property in my life. And I understand that standards of truth are lower in a Chinese market than elsewhere.

But I can promise you that if my father caught me lying and stealing for a $5 game, he wouldn't have praised me in a newspaper column. And, of all the reasons that I have bragged about my two wonderful children, I will never brag about them for lying and stealing.

Colbert Honors Buck O'Neil

Stephen Colbert just put a picture of local favorite Negro-leaguer Buck O'Neil on his mantel, proclaiming it a bigger honor than the Hall of Fame.

I'm not sure I entirely agree, but I will agree that Stephen Colbert is more honorable than the boneheads who failed to elect O'Neil to the Hall of Fame.

Noodletown Gets Ink

Recent addition to the Kansas City blogworld Noodletown shows up today in the Kansas City Star's food section, with a profile and a recipe for Uncle Louie's Jalapenos. Plus, she's back from her vacation, so we can look forward to more regular updates.

It's great to see one of my new fave bloggers get some publicity in the print world, but we all know that Tony's Kansas City is the place to see and be seen.

Clarification on the Confederacy

You just never know what is going to touch people off. I did a perfectly charming post on Saturday, pointing out that a bunch of people were gathering in nearby Higginsville to celebrate an oppressive, human-rights-violating group of anti-American terrorists, and, the next thing you know, I'm losing one of my favorite commenters (Travelingal, honey, I'm sorry, I miss you, let's not give up on what we had, it was special, we can work this out, don't leave me, please . . .), another commenter is giving me the silent treatment, and Anonymous Me is telling me I need to make some apologies . . .

Well, I'm not going to apologize, but I'll agree I should have been a little more clear in what I was trying to say.

Were the Confederates "terrorist attackers of the United States"? Pretty much, yeah. They launched an unprovoked attack on Fort Sumter, and then launched a series of attacks on civilian targets, using guerilla tactics. Indeed, the Confederates pretty much approved of such behavior when it passed the Partisan Ranger Act in 1862, fueling the bitter irregular conflict that festers to this day in the Kansas City region.

Let's be clear here. I'm not saying that the Union side was angelic. But the Confederates were terrorist attackers of the United States.

Now, is it fair to say that the reenactors and history buffs that go to things like the event this past Saturday in Higginsville are supporters of the Confederacy? Probably not. So, maybe I do owe an apology on that point, and, if so, I hereby offer it (something about discussing that period draws out a certain formality of expression).

I doubt that any of them support slavery, and few of them would really choose to live in the old South, at least without being the owner or belle of a magnificent and wealthy plantation.

Instead, most of them are doing something pretty cool. They're bringing reality to the fight against the old rule that "history is written by the victors". By tradition, the Union should have dehumanized the South and obliterated its culture and values. As history shows us through other wars, the Hun and the Jap and the Gook are subhuman, evil beings, whose death and destruction are worthy of celebration. Kind of like the "haji's" of today.

By reenacting the daily life of Confederates, the participants are standing up for the radical proposition that enemies are people, too. Those blood-thirsty, amoral drones who advocate making the hostile parts of the Middle East into a parking lot would benefit from spending some time around reenactors - people who choose to inhabit the world of the losing side of history, and reclaim the humanity of those we might prefer to revile. Yes, by all means, the Confederates were "terrorist attackers of the United States".

But, if things had gone slightly differently at a few crucial turns, we might be citizens of the CSA, and we might be deploring the Yankee terrorists.

Remember that when you read hate-filled crap from the yellow elephants encouraging us to forget that only the foolish and deluded believe that the other side is truly evil.

Meeting Helprin

Just a couple weeks ago, I did a brief blog entry about Mark Helprin, on the occasion of his birthday. A couple years ago, I led off my list of 10 Important Books with

1. A Soldier of the Great War, Mark Helprin: The main character in this novel happens to be a veteran of World War I, but the great war is, in my opinion, the struggle for the human soul to see the beauty and feel the pulse of love. The prose in this book is rich and luscious, and my copy is dog-eared from where I marked passages I wanted to return and savor.

Even before that, I had posted the entirety of a graduation speech he had written - I encourage you to take a few moments to enjoy the lyricism and inspiration he delivers.

I finally get to meet my favorite living author.

On August 3, Mark Helprin will be reading from his latest book and answering audience questions at Rainy Day Books (itself a Kansas City jewel, and worthy of a separate blog post). Only 40 people will be there, so I will get an opportunity to meet him, and perhaps even ask a question. I have to admit, I'm more than a little awed by the man. At his website, you can get a taste of the depth of the man, as it ranges from illustrated books for children to thoughtful rightwing commentary.

This is the man who wrote Bob Dole's acceptance speech at the Republican Convention - remember that highlight of modern American oratory? No, you probably don't, so allow me to refresh your recollection with a snippet that will bring a lump to the throat of those who admire what our language can accomplish:

And do not think I have forgotten whose moment this is above all. It is for the people of America that I stand here tonight, and by their generous leave. And as my voice echoes across darkness and desert, as it is heard over car radios on coastal roads, and as it travels above farmland and suburb, deep into the heart of cities that, from space, look tonight like strings of sparkling diamonds, I can tell you that I know whose moment this is: It is yours. It is yours entirely.

And who am I that stands before you tonight?

I was born in Russell, Kansas, a small town in the middle of the prairie surrounded by wheat and oil wells. As my neighbors and friends from Russell, who tonight sit in front of this hall, know well, Russell, though not the West, looks out upon the West.

And like most small towns on the plains, it is a place where no one grows up without an intimate knowledge of distance.

And the first thing you learn on the prairie is the relative size of a man compared to the lay of the land. And under the immense sky where I was born and raised, a man is very small, and if he thinks otherwise, he is wrong.

I come from good people, very good people, and I'm proud of it. My father's name was Doran and my mother's name was Bina. I loved them and there's no moment when my memory of them and my love for them does not overshadow anything I do -- even this, even here -- and there is no height to which I have risen that is high enough to allow me to forget them -- to allow me to forget where I came from, and where I stand and how I stand -- with my feet on the ground, just a man at the mercy of God.

And this perspective has been strengthened and solidified by a certain wisdom that I owe not to any achievement of my own, but to the gracious compensations of age.

Now I know that in some quarters I may be expected to run from this, the truth of this, but I was born in 1923, and facts are better than dreams and good presidents and good candidates don't run from the truth.

I do not need the presidency to make or refresh my soul. That false hope I will gladly leave to others. For greatness lies not in what office you hold, but on how honest you are in how you face adversity and in your willingness to stand fast in hard places.

Age has its advantages.

Let me be the bridge to an America that only the unknowing call myth. Let me be the bridge to a time of tranquility, faith and confidence in action.

And to those who say it was never so, that America's not been better, I say you're wrong. And I know because I was there. And I have seen it. And I remember.

And our nation, though wounded and scathed, has outlasted revolutions, civil war, world war, racial oppression and economic catastrophe. We have fought and prevailed on almost every continent. And in almost every sea.

We have even lost. But we have lasted, and we have always come through.

(Text via 2blowhards.com.) If given the opportunity to ask him a question, what should I ask?

Nelly Don at the Screenland

On Saturday, we ventured over to the wonderful locally-owned Screenland Theatre to watch the locally-produced movie "Nelly Don: A Stitch in Time", about a local woman who became the largest dress manufacturer in the world, before the rise of globalism and third-world sweatshops. (While in the movie, I enjoyed a locally-brewed ale.)

I never thought that a documentary about a dress-maker could be crafted into anything but a tedious movie, but I was mistaken. "Nelly Don" is a loving portrait of a fascinating lady who lived a extraordinary life. The mob, Kansas City history, politics, labor relations, management techniques, a child born of an extra-marital relationship with a Senator - this is not a movie about hemlines and fabric.

Want to Spend Barbara Boxer's Money?

Barbara Boxer's PAC for a Change is raising funds for Democratic Senatorial challengers, and the money goes to whomever gets the most votes here. Right now, Claire McCaskill trails Bob Casey by a few percentage points, and, if you go there and cast your vote, you might swing the tide Claire McCaskill's way.

If you're from Missouri, the opportunity to get rid of Jim Tlent is an obviously good thing, but I know a lot of my readers come from other places. They may be wondering why it would be better to vote for Claire McCaskill rather than Bob Casey. After all, Talent is merely a lapdog Republican, wishy-washy and ineffective, while Casey's opponent is the truly obnoxious Rick Santorum. Santorum is third on the Republican Senatorial depth chart, while, as junior Senator, Talent is in third place on Missouri's Senatorial depth chart (behind whomever is lobbying Kit Bond at the moment).

The biggest reason to vote for McCaskill is that she is barely leading in her race against Talent, while Santorum is hopeless in his race against Bob Casey. They just published a new poll yesterday, and statewide, the poll had him down by 18 points, with a whopping 67 percent of voters saying they've made up their minds. Blessed with an opponent like Santorum, Casey does not need the additional blessing of Barbara Boxer's dollars.

To cast your vote, you do need to give Barbara Boxer your email address, but you can opt out of the email list. So, for the sake of Missouri and the Senate, please go here and cast your vote for Claire McCaskill.

Pissing Osama Off Every Friday Morning

I never realized it, but Slate reports that my participation in Rotary International is a particular irritant to Osama bin Laden and other Islamic fundamentalists. If anyone wants to learn more about this threat to Islamic fundamentalism, and perhaps even join my in my courageous stand against bin Laden (now that Bush has apparently surrendered), drop me an email and I'll be happy to tell you more about Rotary.

Terrorists in Higginsville

Supporters of terrorist attackers of the United States are gathering in Higginsville today for a celebration of their oppressive culture, which restricted women to narrow roles and flagrantly ignored human rights - engaging in slave labor and child labor. This group, many of whom were religious fundamentalists, attacked symbols of America in their own territory, and then expanded their attack to our own territory. They truly hated us for our freedom.

Fortunately, the Republican in the White House at the time was competent, and he managed to defeat their military, and avoided an extended insurgency of any real significance by engaging in a Reconstruction that eschewed using Halliburton and Blackwater mercenaries, and, instead, won the hearts and minds of the backward people of the region.

Nowadays, the great clash of cultures that once threatened our society's very existence is reduced to a few people who get together to play dressup and imagine that their ancestors really weren't losers.

Margolies Protecting Eisenhofer and Friends?

The Kansas City Star today reports on the possibility that lawyers who gave the Star copies of depositions in Sprint litigation could face sanctions for violating a protective order. Its author, Dan Margolies, does a workmanlike job of presenting the facts, except for one glaring exception.

Who are we talking about?

Nowhere in the article do the names of the attorneys who are being threatened with sanctions show up. They are referred to only as "attorneys for plaintiffs".

Why is Mr. Margolies being so squeamish about publishing their names? Back when the offending article was published, Mr. Margolies included a little more information about his source:

"We only gave you the parts not designated confidential," Jay Eisenhofer, one of the plaintiffs attorneys, said in a phone interview with The Star. "Why that wasn't done here, I have no idea."

Strangely, neither article appears in the "In the News" section of Eisenhofer's website.

Dan Margolies has a well-earned reputation as a fine reporter and a good guy. He is friendly, and he keeps information provided "off the record" confidential. The Kansas City bar is a relatively small community, and Dan has earned its trust by keeping our names out of the paper when we don't want to appear, if it doesn't interefere with the story.

In this instance, though, where a court order lists the names of the parties in controversy, it seems like Mr. Margolies is going awfully far in shielding his friends. One of the first rules of journalism is to focus on "Who, What, When, Where, Why and How".

Why don't we get the "Who" part this time? Who else besides Eisenhofer is going to get sanctioned?

May We Just Put The Double-Taxation Whine about the Estate Tax to Rest?

One of the infuriatingly stupid arguments made by advocates for repeal of the Spoiled Brat Tax is that it amounts to double taxation, because the creator of the estate may have paid income tax while building a windfall for his or her heirs. As stated by one of Ladue's favorite lapdogs, Jim Talent: "Moreover, taxes on estates represent a form of double and sometimes triple taxation because everything taxed when you die has already been taxed at least once.

There are two problems with this argument. One is factual and one is theoretical. Let me start with the factual.

"Real Wealth and "Salary Trash"" Wealth may be earned, but real wealth is inherited, and repeal of the Spoiled Brat Tax will exclude real wealth from any taxation. Here's an anecdote to make that point more clear. We were at a garden party at the home of one of the wealthiest families in Kansas City, and we were talking with a senior partner of one of Kansas City's silk-stocking law firms. I was surprised to hear him voice some discomfort at being surrounded by such wealth, and I assured him that his income was probably in the upper quartile of the party. He laughed at my lack of understanding, and explained that he was "salary trash", one of the lower class who relies on income - rather than wealth - to live.

The estate tax, in its most aggressive modern forms, has impacted only the top 2 percent of estates. While the spoiled brats and their lapdogs like to talk about the tax in terms of scrappy mom-and-pop stores and family farms, the undeniable truth is that the only people who pay estate taxes are the offspring of multi-millionaires - and most of them inherited the country-club memberships they seek to pass on without contributing to the country that has afforded them their wealth.

Truth is, inheritances are not created from money that anybody has paid income tax on for generations. Only a few insanely overpaid individuals, like Ken Lay, manage to salt away enough income to approach the estate tax.

It's Not Double Taxation if the Heirs are Only Paying Once: On a more theoretical level, when money changes hands in our society, that is normally a taxable event. People who want to see the Spoiled Brat Tax eliminated act like taxation is an extraordinary burden if it is heirs, rather than than strangers, who "suffer" from having to pay Uncle Sam when they inherit millions of dollars.

Perhaps this can be made more clear by a hypothetical. Assume that Scrooge McDuck has a hundred thousand dollars in his bank account. He faces the choice of adding it to the billions of dollars he is passing on to Donald Duck, his spendthrift nephew, or hiring me to act as a political consultant, to help him see through the hypocrisy of the Republican party.

He chooses to hire me. Now, by the logic of Jim Talent and the anti-Spoiled Brat Tax brigade, I should not have to pay income tax. If Scrooge McDuck paid income tax when he "earned" his wealth, I should not have to pay tax on that same money when he passes it on to me, right? Perhaps we should devise some sort of indelible stamp we could press on to our dollar bills when we earn them, so that they could never be subjected to Jim Talent's theoretical "double taxation".

To be fair, Jim Talent doesn't take it this far. He's not actually arguing that someone who works for the money shouldn't be subjected to taxation. That would be absurd. He's only arguing that people who don't earn the money - the people who "earn" their money through inheritance - should be able to dodge their obligation to support our country.

Pro-Peace Blogs Fueling the Insurgency?

For years now, the right wing has been claiming that those of us who oppose Bush's optional war are inspiring the insurgency in Iraq. I was a little surprised to learn that radical Islamist insurgents were waking up in the morning and logging on to Gone Mild to read my latest posts, in the hopes of catching an anti-Bush rant among my musings about Pancho's or the Cardinals or Troost Avenue, but who was I to argue with the wisdom of those savvy right-wing bloggers?

Sadly, now it appears that the insurgents are ignoring my anti-Bush rantings, and attacking our soldiers because a few sick puppies that Bush sent to Iraq are doing things like raping 14 year-olds. Now I'm all upset because my hit counts are going to plummet. How can I compete for the potential terrorist's attention now?

The Sports of Kings - Horse-Racing and Buying off Republicans

The Republican Congress is about to play nanny again, this time in the form of an anti-gambling bill that will block access to internet gambling sites (didn't the Republicans claim they wanted an unregulated internet when we were talking about net neutrality?) and outlaw using credit cards to pay online bets. The party that once claimed to be the party of small government is working hard to expand its presence in your bedroom and now your poker room.

Hilariously, though, the bill specifically exempts horse-racing from the restrictions. Really. You can't play poker online, or bet on the St. Louis Cardinals, or even wager on the greyhounds, but you are allowed to lay down your money on the ponies.

Is this favoritism toward the sport of kings a symptom of the Republicans' pathological love of the uber-wealthy? Well, perhaps the exemption is yet another skirmish in the class warfare we regular people have been losing during the Bush regime, but the real truth is more likely due to the success of the horse-racing industry lobbyists. Nothing over-rides a Republican's sense of family values quicker than a campaign donation, and the horse-racing industry has made sure that the Republicans answer their calls.

Anybody out there want to bet on whether the horse-racing lobby wins? I'll put my money on the corruption of the Republicans. Heck, I'll even lay odds . . .

Kraske Gets Paid Money for This?

I used to enjoy Steve Kraske's political columns, but they have really suffered lately, and today's was the worst ever. I guess the advantage of blogging over column-writing is that if I have a day without anything to say, I can simply not post. Unfortunately, the editors of McStar do not allow Kraske did that luxury, and this is the sad result.

Most of the column is a fluffy complaint that the local primaries are not interesting enough. It's a free-form, rambling, meatless piece of crap. It is like a food fight in marshmallow factory - nothing even approaches hard-hitting or even solid analysis. He mildly irks me with a foolish claim that Jim Talent "gets it", but the claim is so shallow and facially invalid (Talent deserves credit for holding positions opposite of McCaskill - but McCaskill apparently doesn't get credit for holding those opinions opposite of Talent) that it doesn't really warrant a reaction. A tale told by an idiot, signifying nothing, but it doesn't even have sound and fury to make it exciting.

Worst of all, he closes out his column with one of the most foolish pieces of "conventional wisdom" floating around on third-tier political blogs.

Today’s most important race of the year: The tough August primary battle in Connecticut where U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman is seeking re-election.

The issue: If a conservative Democrat like Lieberman can’t win, it’s a sign the Democrats are home to liberals only. And then Democrats will be the ones doomed in November.

First off, Lieberman has abandoned the party, and doesn't deserve a Democratic primary victory. From supporting Bush's optional war to the infamous sloppy man-kiss he shared with Bush, Lieberman is no more a Democrat than Bond is. If Lieberman can't win, it's a sign that Democrats are home to Democrats only.

Even if I were wrong on this, and I'm not, the conclusion he draws - that Lieberman's loss would mean that the Democrats are doomed in November - is half-assed beltway thinking. How in the world would Lieberman's loss have an effect outside of Connecticut? Will people somehow switch their votes from McCaskill to Talent because Lamont beats Lieberman? How exactly will that work, Steve?

Only in the deadline-driven world of Kraske would it be possible for a Lieberman loss to have some bizarre kind of negative coat-tails benefitting Republicans. If he really believes that the future of the Democrats rides on electing Bush's makeout partner to the Senate, he'd better hope that the rumored layoffs at the Star free him from further embarrassment soon.

Free Market Republicans?

Republicans have managed to craft an image for themselves as supporters of the free market - willing to trust the Adam Smith's invisible hand to solve the problems of the day.

When there are special interests to be served, though, Republicans are just as willing as their cohorts across the aisle to interfere with the free market. In that vein, Matt Blunt on Wednesday made a splashy event around signing a bill requiring that every gallon of gasoline sold in Missouri include 10% ethanol. Traditional free-marketers would have faith that, if 10% ethanol made economic sense, companies would bring it to their pumps on their own.

Oh, by the way, Andy Blunt is looking to make a small fortune off of ethanol.

Are consumers well-served by special-interest legislation like this? I sincerely do not know - I've read that the production of ethanol consumes more fuel that it produces, but I certainly support the development of alternative fuels.

I do know, however, that Republicans can no longer claim to be "free-market". And I do know that Andy Blunt is one lucky Missourian . . .

McCaskill Outclasses Talent

Claire McCaskill recently sent the following letter out to bloggers, in an attempt to keep a little dignity in her race for the Senate:

I have an important request for all of you. This race will be close and it appears that it may get nasty. I respectfully ask that none of you ever post to any blog anything that could be considered personal or negative about Jim Talent’s wife, Brenda, or his children. After reading a very ugly, unfair, and untrue post on a Republican blog this morning, I decided that it was important that I speak out to all of those who want us to win in November. No election is worth this, and I believe that we need to set an example. As tempting as it might be, especially in the anonymous world of the web, to get down in the mud with them, I hope we can all resist the temptation. Please. It’s important. No candidate should ever have to have the discussion I had with my 14 year old daughter this morning after she read it and began asking questions. Let’s win this thing the old fashioned way….with great ideas, hard work, and good manners. Thank you all.

I'll even go further, and continue my noble refusal to call Jim Talent a "puffy lipped sissy" . . .

How NOT to Criticize a Judge

Over at The Sores, high-powered Republican insider Jeff Roe launches an all-out attack on "liberal" US Federal District Judge Fernando Gaitan, breathlessly titled "Liberal Judge Sides With Murderers, Rapists", headed off with a grainy picture of Gaitan to make certain that all his readers know that Gaitan happens to be African-American. The screed accuses Judge Gaitan of being "obviously sympathetic to the feelings of cold hard killers and rapists", and opines "So once again, one of America’s liberal judges has taken liberties with his position on the bench . . .". It concludes by expanding Judge Gaitan's opinion to represent the position of all Missouri Democrats:

Gaitan, who has ties to U.S. Congressman Emanuel Cleaver and other Missouri Democrats, just doesn’t get it. The judge’s decision goes against everything that Missourians believe. The people of Missouri do not take sides with violent criminals. It is time that someone ask the liberal Democrats why they continue to defend murderers and rapists. It simply does not make sense.

Three aspects this Republican assault on Judge Gaitan anger me. First, it is an intellectually dishonest effort to confuse analysis and parties. Second, it personalizes disagreement with a result and even attaches a photo to focus the hatred. Third, and most laughably, they picked the wrong judge to use as a poster child for "liberal democrats" - Gaitan was appointed to the federal bench by Bush the Elder, and to the state bench by John Ashcroft.

Confusing Analysis and Parties: One of the primary strengths of our court system is that it focuses on legal positions instead of persons. If legal rights have been violated, the courts focus on that violation rather than who committed the violation and who suffered from it. To argue, as Jeff Roe does, that a judge should be condemned for "siding with violent criminals" is to begin forming a legal caste system, where parties are entitled to different flavors of justice according to their position in life. Jeff Roe is a lobbyist, so he's accustomed to that kind of treatment in the Republican halls of Jefferson City, but "some are more equal than others" is not the way the courts are intended to work.

Personalizing Disagreement with a Result is Intellectual Cowardice: First off, please understand that judges have their hands tied behind their back in the boxing ring of public opinion. They are not allowed to comment on pending litigation outside of their opinions. While they have the same First Amendment rights as any citizen, those rights are tightly bound by the Code of Judicial Conduct. When Jeff Roe attacks Judge Fernando Gaitan, he has chosen a target who cannot fight back.

That said, it is certainly fine to criticize an opinion's logic. If Roe had chosen to somehow argue that Judge Gaitan was wrong in ruling that a dyslexic surgeon mixing half the required amount of thiopental is a bad idea, then that's fine. If Roe feels that torturing someone to death with excruciating chemicals does not violate the Constitutional bar on cruel and unusual punishment, I'm willing to listen. But to shift the debate from whether the ruling was correct to whether Judge Gaitan "gets it" is intellectual cowardice. Discuss the merits or shut the heck up.

Gaitan is not a Liberal Democrat: Judge Gaitan became a judge when none other than John Ashcroft, probably the most doctrinaire rightwinger ever to occupy the Missouri Governor's mansion, appointed him to the bench, and George H. W. Bush appointed him to the federal court. While the previously mentioned Code of Judicial Conduct has prevented Judge Gaitan from actively campaigning for Republican candidates, there is not doubt among the informed which way Judge Gaitan leans.

It's also not like Judge Gaitan is anti-death penalty. His performance in the Joe Amrine case was particularly hard-nosed. Anyone who cared to do a touch of research would have seen that Judge Gaitan is a right-wing-appointed, death-penalty-supporting judge.

Now, what could have misled Mr. Roe into mislabelling Judge Gaitan as a liberal, with (gasp) "ties to U. S. Congressman Emanuel Cleaver"? Could it have been the picture at the top of the post?

Librarians in New Orleans

Kansas City's coolest librarian, Alicia (who puts out the overwhelming book blog, So Many Books, So Little Time: A Year in Reading, went off to New Orleans for the American Library Association Annual Conference. This was the first major conference staged in New Orleans since Katrina, and Alicia reports that it was a huge success.

Tonight, my daughter Ali comes home from Tulane. I can't wait to have her home, and hear her (slightly edited for the parental audience) stories of the city that Bush almost allowed to die.