Irony, thy Name is Brownback

Senator Sam Brownback has complained that the Chinese Government is spying on the internet usage of Americans in China for the Olympics.

He proudly voted in favor of the American Government doing the same thing, and voted in favor of immunizing private companies that helped out.

Incredible.

Cheap Cynicism Aside, It Really Didn't Used to be This Way

In terms of public sentiment, the scandal about hiring practices at the DOJ doesn't really trigger many seismic shocks. It all sounds so trumped up - we're supposed to be surprised that W's administration looked at the politics of people it was hiring, and sought to only hire people who toed the Republican line? Who among us, if interviewing for a position in the DOJ during the the past 7 years, would not have expected a question along the lines of "What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"

Count me sadly naive, but I never dreamed that we had slipped so far.

The Department of Justice formerly was a proud institution (and I'm certain that many fine people remain in the ranks), and part of that pride was based upon the fact that they hired the best people for the jobs they filled. When I graduated from law school, Ronald Reagan was in the White House, and the only reason I did not bother applying for a job with the DOJ was the fact I knew my grades weren't high enough.

I fear that speaking of the days when the US Attorney's Office was a meritocracy makes me sound like some old fogey talking about the fictional days when children were always polite to their elders and there weren't any race problems. But, honestly, it didn't used to be this way. Sure, the heads of the local offices were political appointees, but they were appointed to run their offices competently and even-handedly. I disagreed with some of their priorities and decisions, but it was always an honest disagreement with the complete expectation that the work of the DOJ was above politics.

No more.

When Shields and Cardarella were charged, I heard their claims that the prosecution was politically motivated, and I didn't want to believe them. But something about the charges and their timing seemed "off", and, sure enough, the people involved with the charges are up to their neck in the DOJ scandal. My inability to see clearly what was going on was because I filtered the fact through a rigid lens that saw the DOJ as apolitical. My vision was clouded by the memories I had back in the "good old days" of the Reagan administration (yes, I just typed that phrase).

It takes years to build a reputation, but only a weak moment to ruin it. The DOJ's reputation is now ruined. Those who wanted to elide "Justice" of the Department of Justice in favor of Department of Dirty Tricks - Legal Division, are now justified in believing they are correct. Most of the political hires were into "career" positions, where they will be tainting the process until the day they retire.

How many interviewees responded to Monica Goodling's sinister question by claiming a desire to serve Justice rather than George W. Bush? And how quickly did those good lawyers receive their rejection letters?

The Star's Sloppy Endorsements

I was early to make my endorsements during this cycle because. as I wrote then, "I'd hate for anyone to think that the Star's analysis influences me . . ." At the time I wrote that, though, I had no idea how sloppy the Star would be.

I'm not complaining about endorsing candidates other than the ones I support. I'm complaining of my disappointment with their ability to get facts straight and arguments lined up correctly. This season, the Star has erased its own credibility.

In the Sheriff's race, the Star had nice things to say about my favorite candidate, John Bullard, but wound up endorsing Mike Sharp. That's fine with me - reasonable minds can differ as to who is the superior candidate. But what made their endorsement laughable was their mistaken reasoning - the headline of their endorsement noted "Sheriff jobs require experience, solid administrative skills" and the text of their endorsement claimed "Mike Sharp has impressive credentials for the sheriff’s job, given his combination of service with the Kansas City Police Department and years of experience as a businessman". That all sounds pretty reasonable, but Mike Sharp has hardly any relevant experience! What happened was that the Star took at face value Sharp's claim that he has twenty something years of experience as a reserve officer, but, in fact, that's apples compared to oranges. That's like claiming that a kid who received a pair of pilot's wings on his or her first plane trip a dozen years ago has 12 years of experience as a pilot. It's absolutely fine to endorse Mike Sharp if you like him personally, or you think he will bring fresh perspective, or whatever, but it's just plain sloppy and embarrassing to endorse him because he has experience. He doesn't, and the Star should have realized that.

As sloppy as that endorsement was, though, they really shocked me with their endorsement of Jeff Harris - even when we agree that Jeff Harris is the best candidate! Clearly they reached the right result, but they gave him an edge "based on his leadership role [in the General Assembly] and prosecutorial experience". There are two things wrong with that statement - in an Attorney General race, prosecutorial experience is only important for those who do not know what the AG's office really does, and, second, Jeff Harris doesn't really have much irrelevant prosecutorial experience. Instead, Jeff Harris has experience as a division leader in the Attorney General's office itself - much better, and much more relevant!

Over the past several years, political insiders have been chattering about how fewer and fewer people pay attention to the Star's endorsements. Is it because of the rise of blogs, is it because of declining circulation, or some other reason?

I suspect the reason fewer people are paying attention to the Star's endorsements is because the Star is not paying attention when they are making them.

Living Like Royalty

Through an unlikely but fortunate string of events, I wound up with 5 tickets to yesterday's Royals-Tampa Bay baseball game. But not just any seats - Crown seats. A few yards behind the homeplate umpire, buffet before the game, all you care to consume food and beverage during the game, brought to you by waitstaff.

Gold parking pass that put us between the two stadiums.

A 6-1 victory over Tampa Bay.

Hot weather, but plenty of beer and ice water to keep comfortable.

Most importantly, 4 good friends to share the game with.

The Crown seats are amazing, and I hope, if you're a baseball fan, you get to sit in them someday. Seeing the game with your eyes at the same level as the players' is really something special. I'm not sure I would ever pay the $185 face value, but it was nice to live like royalty yesterday.

Expose' From Inside the Kander Campaign - What I've Learned in Working With the Kanders

Sorry, friends and readers, this is going to be a long post, so either click to another page or settle in for a few paragraphs. The primary votes will be cast in 10 days, and I suspect that what I type here will be too late to either show up on a campaign post card or change the minds of anyone who reads it. So this post is not an attempt to sway voters or to impact a campaign. This one's for me.

When I first spoke of supporting Jason Kander to seek Jenee Low's seat when she was "termed out", several people cautioned me against it. A political insider told me I would be wasting my time, because the "insiders have found a lobbyist they like". An old friend assured me that the Kanders would run a dirty campaign. Several people told me that the Kanders had an awful lot of enemies, and it would be unwise for me to associate with them. One person emailed me and told me that they would try to destroy my life if I crossed them.

My own experience, though, suggested otherwise. I had met Jason a couple times, and he was bright, straight-shooting, and honest. Where he disagreed with me, he asked questions to make certain he understood where I was coming from. When I pushed him on topics, he didn't candy coat his perspective or try to be all things to me. He promised to work hard and run a clean campaign, and he looked me in the eye. I believed him.

Was I getting scammed by a smooth politico? If so, it wouldn't be the first time that someone I admired turned out to be something less than what I thought he was. As an enthusiastic delegate for Gary Hart, I've learned that you cannot judge politicians by looking at them.

I also had some experience with Jason's wife, Diana. Diana worked for Doug Gamble when he ran for City Council against my friend, Beth Gottstein. Diana and I had several conversations throughout the campaign, and, even though we both strongly wanted the opposite side to prevail, she was always respectful, thoughtful, and honest. I once posted something that I mistakenly attributed to the Gamble campaign, and when she telephoned me to point out my error, she was calm, accurate and professional. She impressed me as intense but absolutely fair and upstanding.

The campaign was a tough one, though, and the lowest point, in my opinion, was reached by a campaign piece that I thought was anti-Semitic. A lot of people attacked me for making that accusation, and many local politicos thought I was being oversensitive, but I call them the way I see them, and that was definitely the way I saw it. After the campaign, I had an opportunity to discuss the matter with her. She is a Jew who fled Odessa because of anti-Semitism, so I wanted to know the background. Our conversation was confidential, but I can say that I walked away from it satisfied that her integrity was beyond reproach.

So I volunteered my time to help Jason Kander on his campaign.

This may seem an odd choice to some. Why would I volunteer to work to elect a guy I didn't know incredibly well, when my friends were telling me he was bad? Why would I affiliate with a guy who the "insiders" weren't supporting?

Those are fair questions, and they get to the very heart of why I blog and why I am interested in local politics. In a nutshell, I think a lot of local politics is controlled by a relatively small group of not-incredibly-bright insiders, and they are accustomed to getting their way. Second, I think that reputations are often completely unearned, both positive and negative. Reputations, by their very nature, reflect mob mentality. Third, the whole reason I blog is to stroke my own ego and perhaps have a positive impact on my corner of the world. As such, the Kander campaign offered a no-lose opportunity for me.

If I got involved early for Jason, and I was right about him, I would have the opportunity to support a great, hard-working candidate who has the determination and skills to be HUGE in Jefferson City. I win, and the citizens of the 44th win.

But, if I got involved early for Jason, and I was wrong about him, I would have an opportunity to make a huge impact by loudly breaking with those evil Kanders. I am not one who believes that bloggers generally have much influence on anything, but I'll flatter myself and say that if I loudly denounced the Kanders and wrote about bad tactics they had employed, after having loudly been on their side, it would have had a major impact on this local race. The local insiders would love me, and I would help cut short the career of an up-and-coming slimeball. I win, and the citizens of the 44th win.

So, my little win/win scenario dancing through my head, I called up Jason and told him I'd like to help on his campaign.

Since then, I've gotten to know both the Kanders a lot better. I've stuffed a few envelopes, filled out a few postcards, made a few phone calls, put up a few yard signs, and hosted a small neighborhood event. I've participated as a volunteer - not a great volunteer, or a spectacularly dependable one, but I like to think I've helped. I've traded emails with the candidate on a couple policy issues, though not too much of that (he's better thought-out than I am, and needs my input like he needs another tour of Afghanistan), and I've been around at the end of long days in the unguarded moments when exhaustion and camaraderie allow you to say whatever you want to say.

(Let me interject here what I have not done. I have NOT served as a mouthpiece for the campaign. I have NEVER allowed Jason or Diana to write anything for me, and they have not even suggested what to write about. I have never offered them an opportunity to review what I write before I post it, and they have never asked me to edit my pieces. I suspect, as some commenters have surmised, that they have occasionally wished that I would shut the heck up, since I have certainly provided those who oppose Jason plenty of opportunity to dish out whatever anonymous abuse they want. The ONLY time that I received a request from Jason regarding my blog was one time he called me up and directed my attention to a comment that described a local politico in nasty homophobic terms, and he requested that I delete the comment. I did so, and felt awful that I had missed the comment when it was made.)

So here's the news, folks. Jason is running a squeaky-clean campaign, and he really is as bright, sincere and hard-working as he appears.

A campaign presents thousands of temptations, and it takes a person of remarkable character to avoid them. It's a weird phenomenon, but campaigns attract the attention of nutcases and scumbags from all over. I've seen it as a blogger in past campaigns, when people send me "shocking" info about some candidate's minor arrest from decades ago, or claim that the candidate is having sex with someone s/he shouldn't be, or that they cheated on their 4th grade math test. It's even worse in a campaign, because people who have grudges from anywhere along the person's life feel compelled to call the opposing camp and report all kinds of transgressions, minor to allegedly major. And, in the heat of a campaign, it's tempting to spread the word about some of them. But a great candidate says, "Really, I'm not interested in hearing that. I'd rather talk about why I am running." And that is how Jason has handled those calls, and I admire him for it. My friends who told me about how dirty Jason is would be shocked. Or disappointed.

(It occurs to me that in the crazed world of blog commenters, someone could think that I wrote the above paragraph to sneakily hint that some awful facts about Jason's opponents have come to the campaign, and that I'm trying to plant that seed without making a real accusation. No. Simply no. I have heard nothing about either of Jason's opponents that is both credible and major. Nothing. So, if that seed has been planted, please douse it with Roundup, okay?)

So, while commenters here have been telling us all that Jason is a lying sack of sh*t and that he and his wife are the local versions of Karl Rove and Dick Cheney, I've been witnessing something quite different.

One would have expected that the complete absence of negative or dirty campaigning by the Kanders would silence the complaints about negative or dirty campaigning by the Kanders. Unfortunately, such an expectation would be unjustified. Instead, it has only turned the complaints louder and more unhinged.

Tony's Kansas City did a post yesterday about the gossip attacks on the Kanders. The KC Blue Blog did a follow-up post responding to the bogus nature of the attacks and busted out the red letters for an "easy" endorsement for "Democrat and Veteran Jason Kander for State Representative."

Rumor has it that the next ten days will see some negative pieces sent out to trash Jason and his wife, Diana. I hope the rumors are mistaken, but the figure of $20,000 has been attached to them, allegedly at the absolute insistence of a local elected official. Who knows? Again, this stuff is circulating at the rumor level, and may have exactly the same lack of credibility that I have seen were behind the accusations of the Kanders engaging in underhanded campaigning.

So, here I am, nearly at the end of my little experiment in local democracy. The people who were shrill in attacking Jason at the beginning of the race for being an underhanded campaigner have shown themselves to be the ones engaging in negative tactics and underhanded campaigning. The rumor-mongers and spreaders of hate, it turns out, have not been in the Kander camp.

When this campaign got started, I thought there was a chance I could be writing a huge expose' today about slimy tactics, lies, rumors, and underhanded campaigning. Instead, I find myself writing about a candidate I admire more than when I started. When people at the doors have been mean to him, he has been polite in response, and respected their views. When I have been angered, he has been calm. When cheap shot opportunities have presented themselves, he has refused them.

I don't know how the votes are going to come in next Tuesday. Amy Coffman and Mary Cosgrove Spence have run good races, and they have been supplemented by an enormous amount of gossip and nastiness directed at Jason Kander. Amy's years of lobbyist experience have paid off in lobbyist money and endorsements. Mary Cosgrove Spence has some wonderful volunteers and supporters who are refreshingly enthusiastic and positive. All three of them are good Democrats who I hope to support in future elections.

As for my expose' - well, I'm just awfully proud and happy I didn't get to write one this time.

112,000 Brave Americans

I've written before about my opinions of airline security, but I've never filed an official complaint about it. Yesterday, I read this well-written blog post on the topic, and learned that 112,000 brave Americans have actually dared to complain.

My hat's off to those brave souls. So are my shoes, my belt, and anything else the TSA people feel like telling me to remove . . .

Kinder has Multiple Scandals - Turns to Karl Rove to Help

Missouri has a bunch of great contests this year, and the Lieutenant Governor's race is one where we stand a strong chance of replacing a Republican incumbent with a great Democrat.

Peter Kinder, the incumbent, got caught up in a sex scandal when his Chief of Staff was arrested for having pornographic conversations with a cop he thought was a thirteen year-old girl. The police report is nauseating. Kinder drew himself into the fray by declaring, 3 hours after the arrest, that an investigation had determined state computers weren't used, and the criminal conversations took place during "comp time".

Bad enough? Yes, but there's more . . .

It turns out that people at the Chief of Staff level do not receive comp time, and computer experts are pointing out that forensic investigations of computers cannot be conducted in three hours. What we're seeing here is a little CYA.

Wait, there's more . . .

The person in charge of the office that supposedly did the computer investigation has now been hired by Peter Kinder as Chief of Staff to replace the pervy predecessor! Not only that, but that new guy is already under investigation for helping the one-term sitting governor violate Missouri's sunshine law by deleting public record emails.

Yes, there's more . . .

The Governor who has been hiding the emails has now left the country. That means that Kinder has the ability to release the emails and quell the scandal. Sam Page, the Democrat running against him, has called upon him to do just that, but Kinder has refused.

Instead, he's bringing in Karl Rove today, to speak at a $2700/plate fundraiser, and, presumably, offer some off-stage advice in how to juggle multiple scandals.

And, just in case you were wondering if that was all, there's (at least) one more scandal related to this sordid story. Kinder's campaign fundraising got rocked this past week by the explosion of a money-laundering scandal.

If you want to help Missourians replace their corrupt Republican Lieutenant Governor with a solid, ethical candidate who happens to be one of the nicest and best-qualified candidates I've met this election cycle, give his website a click and maybe even put some money in his kitty to offset Karl Rove's visit today.

Koster Won't Use the "D word"

Have you noticed anything funny about Chris Koster's yard signs?

They don't use the word "Democrat".

I would put up a photo of one, but it appears most of the people who had Koster signs took them down in disgust when they heard about his ethical problems with money laundering in fundraising. If I find one in the yard of someone who has a strong enough stomach for Koster's behavior, I'll try to get a snapshot and post it.

Jeff Harris and Margaret Donnelly both proudly claim to be Democrats on their yard sings. Perhaps Koster's Republican donors would not pay for signs with the "D word".

All This for a Chauffeur?

I'm embarrassed for our country. Truly embarrassed.

The time has come to put the cards on the table, and display for all to see the fine work we have done in counter-terrorism. The reason we have set up secret prisons, lied to the Red Cross, copied torture techniques from the Chinese, emulated Stalin's web of secret prisons, become the sort of people that true Americans - real, red-blooded Americans - loved to hate during the Cold War, indeed, even changed our self-reference from "America" to the vaguely teutonic "Homeland" - all our post-9/11 transformations may be looked at and weighed against the big evil terrorist we have brought to justice.

And he's a chauffeur.

We're demonstrating that we can put a driver on trial. The most damning piece of evidence? He may have overheard where the fourth plane was headed.

When in the course of history has such a great nation transformed itself for such a small fish? When did America, land of the free and home of the brave, crawl through Stalinist slime to nail a chauffeur?

If this is the new America, I want to see Ken Lay's admin dragged into court and prosecuted because he or she typed his memos and placed his calls. I want to see Tom Delay's maid prosecuted, because she was in his "inner circle". I want every taxi driver who overheard a conversation between John Sununu and his phonegate conspirators to do time.

On second thought, I don't really want those things. I want my country to recapture its dignity and sense of itself. I don't want to ever again see it stoop to putting on show trials for bit players. I want a new administration and a new direction. I want change. I want America back.

Time Magazine - Only Two Years Behind Bloggers

Time magazine, presumably while perusing the archives of this and other blogs, came up with the startling realization that some fathers are having ceremonies where their daughters pledge their virginity to their fathers. As written about years ago here and elsewhere, EEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWW! (Followed by Clarification on Purity Balls.)

But Time manages to come up with a favorable spin on the practice, and the whole thing hangs on one crucial sentence that masterfully renders all common sense inapplicable - "Leave aside for a moment the critics who recoil at the symbols, the patriarchy, the very use of the term purity, with its shadow of stains and stigma." Leave aside the fact that a girl is being told her father owns her sexuality. Leave aside the disturbing symbolism of men holding "large swords" over kneeling girls. Leave aside the girl who felt "too dirty" to wear a purity ring because she was sexually assaulted.

You know, if you "leave aside for a moment" everything wrong about it, what cannot be made to seem okay? Severe gas pains? Genocide? Fathers creepily obsessed with their daughters' hymens?

Candidates and "Spam"

I get a lot of political email. I've been invited to fundraisers for candidates from the far right to the far left, in spaces from lavish ballrooms to modest living rooms. I get invited by close friends and people I've never met. Most email asks for money, but some simply updates me on a candidate's news and views.

I don't think any of it is "spam".

But some people need something to complain about, and, this political season, it's been "spam". A commenter here responded to my endorsements by asking one of the candidate's "policy on sending unsolicited bulk e-mail to promote a campaign". In a nutshell, I don't know and I don't care.

Political speech needs to be free speech. Indeed, our federal laws regulating email recognize that political email is different from commercial "spam", and is entirely legal. Any alternative would be equivalent to our founding fathers passing a law banning pamphleteers.

Campaigns are fairly short-term enterprises. They rely on quickly and efficiently creating networks of like-minded individuals. In prior generations, this process was slow and expensive, relying on snail mail and traditional political clubs. Today, candidates can build email lists from prior campaigns and membership organizations, and create a viable campaign without selling their souls to major donors or third party committees.

The way I see it, each email I receive from a candidate, solicited or not, is evidence of democracy struggling to free itself from the corrupting influence of big money.

Now, I realize that some people need something to whine about, and I'd even agree with those people that candidates ought to be judicious in their use of email to avoid becoming email nuisances. The delete key, however, ought to be a sufficient tool for those who value the purity of their inbox more than freedom of political speech.

Gone Mild Endorsements for August 2008

Two weeks from today, the primary season of 2008 will be completed. The Star will start issuing its endorsements this week, so I thought I would beat them to the punch with my own. I'd hate for anyone to think that the Star's analysis influences me . . .

I'm tempted to put in a cautionary note on the difference between endorsements and predictions. Sometimes, the better candidate doesn't really stand much of a chance, but, in this cycle, I'm feeling pretty confident that each of my favorite candidates will win his or her respective race, so these are both predictions and endorsements.

In order of the ballot:

FOR GOVERNOR
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon - By no means is Jay Nixon my favorite Democrat, but he's the best candidate in the governor's race by a long shot. He has the ability to win the general, and the experience to be successful in the Governor's Mansion.

FOR LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
Sam Page - Sam Page may be one of the nicest people I've met in politics, and his sincere desire to serve the public as our Lieutenant Governor is exceeded only by his qualifications. He should win the primary easily, and then the real race begins. Look for Sam Page to oust Peter "Crooked Cash" Kinder from the office of Lieutenant Governor.

FOR SECRETARY OF STATE
Robin Carnahan - She's served us well, and will win the general in November, too.

FOR STATE TREASURER
Clint Zweifel - This is going to be an interesting race. I like Andria Simckes a lot, but Clint has the edge in qualifications and savvyness. Either would be great in the office, but Clint has had a sharper campaign team.

FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL
Jeff Harris - No surprise here for regular readers. Jeff has experience, integrity, and a willingness to outwork his opponents. As a result, he has better poll numbers without selling his soul through unethical campaign finance shenanigans. Jeff is just plain solid - a great guy with a good sense of humor and an outstanding sense of himself. If you want to see Missouri's Attorney General's office function as one of the best and most ethical AG offices in the entire nation, then vote for Jeff Harris.

FOR U.S.REPRESENTATIVE
5th District: Emanuel Cleaver, II - He's had a couple surprisingly bad votes (favoring the credit card companies over his constituents was particularly egregious), but Emanuel Cleaver is one of our best, most dedicated public servants. I hope he serves a long time.

FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
40th District: John Patrick Burnett - This is not my district, but I cannot understand why Rizzo would try to unseat John Burnett. John is smart, hardworking and effective. He deserves to retain his seat.

44th District: Jason Kander - This comes as no surprise - I've admired Jason as a person of integrity and serious purpose since I met him before he went to Afghanistan. When I started this campaign, I thought he was a great candidate running against two good candidates. I haven't changed my feeling one iota - Jason's integrity and class have proven to be exactly as I thought they would be. Less importantly, but still persuasive, is the fact that he is precisely the kind of straight-shooting, dependable, competent, hard-working, thoughtful leader who will stand out in the legislature. He doesn't waffle, he doesn't flinch, he doesn't whine. He will get things done in Jefferson City, and he will be a spark for the entire Democratic team in our Capital.

FOR PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
Jim Kanatzar - Jim is a fine prosecutor, and will continue to serve us effectively.

FOR SHERIFF
John Bullard, Jr. - John Bullard is simply the kind of guy you want in the Sheriff's office. Law enforcement is what he thinks about when he wakes up, and he stays on point all day long. He has great plans to increase cooperation among the local departments, and he has the credibility to pull it off. He will also make the Sheriff's office more accessible and visible.

DEMOCRATIC COUNTY COMMITTEEMEN
8th Ward, Stephen Bough - Stephen Bough is fair-minded, has solid values, and is the hardest working politico in Kansas City. We disagree often enough that I know my endorsement isn't solely due to lockstep agreement - he's just a great volunteer, and belongs on the County committee.

DEMOCRATIC COUNTY COMMITTEEWOMEN
8th Ward, Mary Frances Weir - Mary is a solid Democrat with a solid grounding in social justice. In 2006, she received the prestigious Tiera Farrow Community Award from the UMKC Association of Women Law Students for her work on behalf of victims of domestic violence.

Lawyers Strongly Support Jeff Harris - Including Koster's Old Firm

Attorneys generally pay more attention to the Attorney General election than the average voter. They know that the AG is not a prosecutor, but the managing partner of one of Missouri's largest law firms, dedicated to serving as the State's main lawyer.

Attorneys are strongly backing Jeff Harris for Attorney General. Missouri Lawyer's Weekly, a trade newspaper for lawyers, did a thorough analysis of attorney's contributions to the race, and concluded that Harris raised the most money from attorneys, that Harris received the most contributions from Bryan Cave (his former law firm), and that Harris received the most contributions from Husch Blackwell Sanders.

The Harris advantage at Husch Blackwell Sanders is raising a lot of eyebrows, because Koster used to work there! Did Harris draw more support from Koster's ex-colleagues despite that fact, or because of that fact?

More Republican Fundraising Shenanigans - Kinder Cheats on Money Coming In and Going Out

As regular readers know, Chris Koster has run into a whole lot of trouble for his shockingly underworld system of fundraising/money-laundering through third-party committees. Leading Democrats, like Jason Kander, have condemned these kind of tactics.

Peter Kinder, Republican candidate for Lieutenant Governor, on the other hand, has managed to build upon those tactics. Not only is he funneling excessive contributions through third party committees he controls, he is actually paying his staff through those same committees! He's even paying his rent through the committee he controls!

To read the whole story, visit Fired Up! Missouri.

Vote for Sam Page for Lieutenant Governor.

Molly Korth Williams Starts Rattling a Few Cages

The Williams campaign just sent me a link to this video -



This is the first volley I've seen from the Williams campaign, and it's a little surprising that it goes after Donnelly. If I were going to attack an AG candidate for voting Republican, I'd go ahead and focus on the genuine Republican in the race, Chris Koster, who has a long history of voting Republican and still raises money from Republicans.

Does Williams' odd choice of targets provide more evidence to support those who think that she was recruited into the race by Chris Koster's friends?

Don't Drive Drunk on Saturday, in South KC

It will probably be a great Saturday evening for getting your drink on and cruising the roads of Kansas City north of 75th Street, because the Police Department has announced it will be running a DUI checkpoint in South Kansas City, starting at 11.

What does this mean to you? If you drive in South Kansas City, it means you may be accosted by the police without any individualized suspicion of wrongful behavior. If you live elsewhere in Kansas City, you may face blackouts of police coverage, since dozens of officers will be spending hundreds of man-hours to arrest a few buzzed drivers. If you pay taxes in Kansas City, you will simply have your tax dollars wasted in an effort that is more about misguided PR ("We're a police state, and we can interfere with you whenever and wherever we like" being the PR message) than about saving lives.

If, by chance, you or a loved one is killed because some drunk moron blows through a red light, well, the police will respond to the scene when they get around to it. They'll be busy delivering a PR message in South Kansas City.

Midwest Voices

A while back, someone brought Midwest Voices to my attention, and I've been meaning to link to them ever since. It defines itself as follows:

Welcome to the Midwest Voices blog, a community forum created to foster discussion on issues that matter to our region, nation and the world. We hope it will become a gathering place of thoughtful debate, a spot to share ideas and push projects. The blogosphere is full of opinion options, but we hope to fill a niche by offering conversation among neighbors in this region who like to debate the issues of the day.

In short, it's a good collection of the editorial columnists of the Star mixed in with some amateur content of varying quality. Definitely worth visiting - and I'll add it to the blogroll the next time I tinker with the template.

By the way, who do you think I should add to the blogroll on the left?

Sam Page Poised to Win

One of my most pleasant political moments of the past year was the opportunity to sit down and chat with Dr. Sam Page, the leading Democratic nominee for Missouri Lieutenant Governor. Dr. Page is bright, compassionate, genuine and freakishly well-qualified for the Lieutenant Governor position.

The lieutenant governor spot is usually a place to park a political hack while he waits for his turn to run for something else. That's how the Republican party is using it now, and thus we have Peter Kinder taking up space in that office.

The power of incumbency ought to have given Kinder a massive lead, but Dr. Sam Page's dedication to the position and hard work have now drawn him even with Kinder in cash on hand, and the momentum has shifted strongly in Dr. Page's advantage. Kinder actually lost money in the past quarter, and Dr. Page is now even with him in cash on hand.

More shockingly, Kinder made a terrible mistake in hiring Richard AuBuchon - a central figure in the Blunt email scandal - to be his Chief of Staff. Kinder's prior Chief of Staff was forced to resign after he got caught furnishing pornography to a minor. In a nutshell, Kinder has gone from a guy who got caught in an internet scandal to one who has created one. Great work.

The indefatigable Stephen Bough over at Blog CCP has more on this tale of a quiet, hard-working, well-qualified Democrat kicking the daylights out of a Republican who should have had an easy time retaining his office, if he weren't Peter Kinder.

McCaskill for Veep!

Rumors are plentiful that our local political leading lady, Senator Claire McCaskill, is on the proverbial short list for the Obama Vice President slot. Please, please, please let it be true!

The practical reasons are obvious. McCaskill could help Obama in Missouri - a purple state that could turn blue. She brings a blind loyalty to the Bush administration and its optional war that Obama lacks, and a willingness to support warrantless spying on Americans coupled with an abiding respect for law-breaking telecoms that is new ground for Obama. She could balance out Obama's out-dated support of free speech with an eagerness to use all the power at her disposal to squelch dissent and dictate orthodoxy.

In short, her selection as Veep would be a brilliant way for Obama to demonstrate to America that he supports mainstream Republican values, and will sell America out to the same corporate interests that are accustomed to owning the White House. In selecting McCaskill, Obama could assure a nervous America that change is a buzzword, not a goal.

But those are just the obvious reasons, and I know you expect deeper analysis from me.

Less obviously, but just as importantly, a Veep nomination would be an important step in creating a Lieberman for a new generation. Let's face it - Joe Lieberman is no spring chicken, and America needs to groom a national Democratic voice willing to stand up for Republican values. Just as Lieberman gained that national audience by running in the Vice Presidential slot of a far better person, McCaskill could become recognized as one of the faces of the Democratic Party by being the first tragic misstep of the Obama campaign.

Another less obvious reason for McCaskill to be Obama's veep choice would be her demonstrated willingness to tear down the Democratic Party to promote her own career. She, more than any other Democrat, is responsible for the horror that has been Matt Blunt's term as governor. By opting, against all good advice, to run against sitting Governor Bob Holden in the Democratic primary, she bloodied the eventual gubernatorial nominee and emptied his coffers, making him vulnerable to Matt Blunt. Claire McCaskill represents a "me first" approach to party loyalty that could pay off in ways we cannot even imagine today. Let your imagination run - Claire does. I like to think that she could be the first sitting Vice President to use her Senate seat to filibuster a Democratic bill.

Finally, and this is really why I would, in all sincerity, be thrilled to see McCaskill get the nod for the Vice Presidential slot, it would open up Claire McCaskill's seat for a real Democrat. In exchange for giving her eight years of state dinners and "B list" funerals, we would have an opportunity to run somebody great for her seat without the daunting and improbably prospect of winning both a primary and a general election. With Bond's rumored retirement upcoming, we could wind up with two Democrats from Missouri in the Senate.

McCaskill for Vice President!!

AG Race - Harris on Top!

Only fools take polls very seriously, but I'm foolish enough to be blown away by AG candidate Jeff Harris' showing in the recent poll released by the St. Louis Post Dispatch. Jeff Harris is leading by double digits over Chris Koster and Margaret Donnelly!

A few cautionary words are in order - this poll was done before the TV blitz, which has begun and will continue. Chris Koster's republican donors and third party committees - 81% of his war chest - have made it possible for him to interrupt our television viewing more often than Katie Horner in a rainsuit. Second, the survey shows 23% undecided, which means that a lot of people could be influenced by those ads. (Theoretically, though, it also means that Molly Korth Williams could build upon her base of 1% and defeat Koster 24-23. Go Molly!!)

On the plus side of the unknowns, though, the undecideds and some of Donnelly's support may tilt toward Harris, since most democrats are unlikely to support a candidate who endorsed John Ashcroft, campaigned against Governor Mel Carnahan, and helped kick hundreds of thousands of Missourians out of health coverage.

The poll also does not reflect the impact of Jeff Harris' television advertising, which will probably be less widespread yet more effective than Koster's. It's easier to sell a Democrat to Democrats than it is to sell an Ashcroft Republican.

Another reason to suggest that the poll may under-represent Harris' advantage is that the news continues to break on Koster's shady campaigning. Now, we've learned that he has a pending ethics complaint to worry about, based on his money-laundering tactics. Things are crumbling for Mr. Koster.

All told, it's just a poll, and those who want to see a real Democrat in the AG's office cannot mistake a road sign for the destination. Until Jeff Harris wins on August 5 and on November 4, this race is up in the air. Indeed, now would be a great time to go to ActBlue and make a donation for Jeff Harris, to make sure that he does not get outgunned by Koster's republican buddies.

Republicans Attacking the Rural Areas?

This is kind of funny in a not-funny way. Voter ID has always been a scam designed to suppress voting by the poor and elderly, and pushed by Republicans as a way to restrict suffrage under the cover of solving the virtually non-existent problem of voter fraud.

Over at Show-Me Progress, though, Clark did a little analysis of the potentially disenfranchised, and it turns out that the rural areas have a much higher percentage of the targeted population than the urban areas. Not only are the rural areas hurt worse by percentages, they represent a higher absolute number, as well.

It appears that voter ID laws may actually be beneficial to Democrats. But don't go looking to see this analysis sway the Dems to start favoring efforts to restrict the right to vote. For Dems, some values are more important than self-interest. Like the right to vote.

I appreciate Clark's work on the issue, and hope that it another attack on poor and elderly suffrage in the next Missouri General Assembly. The Republicans should oppose it for self-interest, and the Democrats will oppose it because we are the true party of values.

World's Oldest Blogger Dies - Gone Mild Climbs the Ranks

Olive Riley, the world's oldest blogger, passed away on Saturday at 108.

Bombs Away, Bombardier

Bombardier will not be coming to Kansas City. It seems like the City and State did a good job of putting an attractive package together, but didn't make the mistake of giving away the farm.

It's sad not to get the plant, but I'm glad we didn't try to win the deal with outrageous, unsustainable giveaways. Perhaps we're learning . . .

Montreal's built-in advantage with a Canadian company could not be overcome with any semblance of financial discipline on the part of our state and local governments.

Follow-Up on Koster's Money-Laundering - Will Coffman and Spence Drop the Ice Pick?

When Chris Koster got caught orchestrating a money-laundering scheme, many people began focusing on the ugly role that "third party committees" play in Missouri politics. While Chris Koster has pushed the envelope for their corrupt abuse in an unprecedented and probably illegal fashion, political insiders know that third party committees are nasty little tools that can used in several slimy tactics - mostly in launching ugly, usually false but always despicable attacks on opponents without having the candidate's name attached. They are the ice picks of Missouri politics - dangerous tools with few legitimate uses in today's world, other than inflicting damage.

Long before the light of day was shone upon the depths of Koster's corruption, Jason Kander was already providing leadership on this important facet of campaign finance. On, June 3, Jason Kander issued a press release pledging not to use the third party committees to circumvent the law, the way that the Koster campaign has.

"I will not take contributions above the $325 limit from committees or use third party committees to criticize my opponents. I hope that my opponents will also follow the letter and spirit of the law," said Kander.

So far, Amy Coffman and Mary Cosgrove Spence have remained silent about third party committees. Now that Chris Koster has refocused attention on the corrupt uses of third party committees, will they join Jason in his simple pledge? Will they agree to not take contributions over the $325 limit from committees, or use third party committees to criticize their opponents?

Now is the time when they can either put down the ice pick or start using it to get nasty in the final weeks of the campaign.

Amy Coffman and Mary Cosgrove Spence - will you join Jason in putting down the ice pick, or will you resort to third party committees like Chris Koster?

(As soon as I receive word that Amy Coffman and Mary Spence join in the pledge, I will happily post their press releases.)

David Martin Explains the Jackson County Legislature

Money quote: "What I learned from paying closer attention: County government is, at its highest level, a mostly inconsequential exercise conducted by tedious people." I'll argue that they're not all tedious, but they all should be ashamed of themselves for not getting the Ethics Legislation passed. Even the good ones . . .

Please Don't Vote for Koster

The Associated Press dropped a bombshell on Missouri politics yesterday when it detailed the cozy triangle funneling money from donors to committees to candidates, and pointed to Chris Koster as the most flagrant and sloppy abuser of the system. Go read the article if you have a strong stomach - it's a disquieting look at the sort of person who views breaking the law as a game that everybody plays, even when they don't.

Let me state this clearly - Chris Koster is NOT a strong enough person to be our Attorney General.

He has demonstrated this time and time again. From his flip-flopping on pro-life positions, to his incendiary tactic of "calling the previous question" against my Senator, Jolie Justus, to his sudden, unconvincing switch to the Democratic party (when it appeared that Catherine Hanaway had the Republican AG primary sewn up), Koster has always sought out the quick fix, the easy way out.

Just look at the way he has conducted himself in this campaign. He has won the fund-raising race, but only because he has raised 81% of his total through his get-rich-quick scheme that sends campaign workers out to trade envelopes with shadowy groups throughout the state. He has NOT done the hard work of meeting ordinary, non-millionaire people throughout the state, the way his opponents have.

When it looked like Margaret Donnelly might have a gender advantage in a three-way race, he arranged for Molly "I'm not serious" Williams to muddy the issue.

When his right-wing donor friends invited him back with their wallets opened, Koster responded by reverting to his Republican ways.

More than any position in the legislative or executive branches, the Attorney General needs to be the sort of person with rock-solid integrity and dependability. Jeff Harris has that. Even though I'm supporting Jeff, I would never deny that Margaret Donnelly has that rock-solid integrity and dependability, as well.

Sometime during the term of the next Attorney General, there will come a time when justice and our Constitution require that the Attorney General do one thing, but the easy way out will beckon to the other path. I know that two of the Democratic primary candidates will do the right thing in that situation.

I also know that Chris Koster will take the easy way out and roll with what is popular.

Please don't vote for Koster. It's important that we have an Attorney General with strong values he or she will stand with, even when it's not easy.

Praise for Pandora.com

A couple years ago, I lamented the fact that my music choices were becoming calcified - I saw myself receding "into a world where, I fear, I won't hear anything recorded less than a decade ago, unless it's put down by Neil Young, Prince, Bruce Springsteen, or Bob Dylan."

An anonymous commenter recommended Pandora.com, and the recommendation was seconded by Chris, the criminally under-appreciated creative force behind the816, and "thirded" by no less an authority than musical polymath Happy in Bag.

So, finally, more than two years later, I gave it a try. It's been spectacular. Go there, create a free account (just an email address and password), and it's off to the races. You enter the name of an artist you like, and it goes out and finds others you might enjoy. You won't believe the connections it makes . . .

(As an aside, though, do NOT, under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, admit that you like Dwight Yoakam. Pandora will treat you like a half-witted hick until you convince it that you were just kidding . . .)

You can have multiple stations - I'm using Pandora to expand my knowledge of jazz, leaning more toward Dave Brubeck than smooth jazz crap or inaccessible fusion noise.

I've also heard great things about Last.fm, so I'll be giving that a try over the next few days.

McCain Agrees With Amy Coffman's Position on Bloggers

"I hate the bloggers." - John McCain

"the time has come for me to personally to address the banter to nonsense that, in my opinion discredits Democrats, the democratic process, and purports the senseless world of blogging and the damage I believe it does to campaigning." - Amy Coffman

Just to keep myself on the high road, I will extend to John McCain the same invitation spurned by the Coffman campaign - I will happily publish the answer to the question "What is the most significant policy difference between you and your opponent, and why is your position the correct one?"

Amy Coffman refused my kind invitation - will John McCain follow her lead?

Ridiculous

I'm a pretty smart guy, with a good set of priorities.

But it is ridiculous, perhaps even disturbing, how happy it makes me to see the Cardinals come from behind to beat the Cubs in the 9th. It makes me happier than it ought to.

Greatest Country on Earth?

On one point, we all agree. Republican, Democrat, Green, Libertarian - today is a day for waving flags and proclaiming that America is the greatest country on earth. Indeed, it may be the only self-evident truth we all cling to, as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness have proven to be rooted in a dangerously 9/10 innocence.

On this Fourth of July, my mind turns to the unfortunate. How do the people of other countries get through their days, knowing that they are stuck in nations that are deficient in the greatness category? It must be debilitating to wake up in Belgium, knowing that you and your neighbors - your entire life - may be good, may even be great, but are somehow less than the greatest.

Does it depress Indians to know that their country is less than the greatest?

Do New Zealanders look around their sheep-flecked islands and think "Not a bad place, but it's not America, is it?"

Citizens of Chad, even in their happiest moments of national pride, must recognize that they are a pale shadow of the greatness that is America, right?

Since America is so obviously the greatest nation on earth, what pathetic shreds of dignity are left over for the rest of the world?

Sorry, Chris Koster, that's NOT What "Unanimous" Means . . .

Last week, I received an email from the Chris Koster campaign announcing "the unanimous support of Missouri’s law enforcement community for our candidacy was solidified when the St. Louis Police Officers’ Association endorsed me."

That would be an impressive accomplishment - if it were true! But it's a lie. Koster definitely does NOT have the unanimous support of Missouri's law enforcement community. Here's a list of Jeff Harris' law enforcement endorsements, and it demolishes Koster's claim.

* AUDRAIN COUNTY PROSECUTOR JASON LAMB
* AUDRAIN COUNTY SHERIFF STUART MILLER
* BOONE COUNTY PROSECUTOR DAN KNIGHT
* CHARITON COUNTY SHERIFF CHRIS HUGHES
* COOPER COUNTY SHERIFF PAUL MILNE
* HOWARD COUNTY SHERIFF CHARLIE POLSON
* KNOX COUNTY SHERIFF MICHAEL KITE
* LAFAYETTE COUNTY SHERIFF KERRICK ALUMBAUGH
* LINN COUNTY SHERIFF TOM PARKS
* MADISON COUNTY SHERIFF DAVID LEWIS
* MARIES COUNTY PROSECUTOR TERRY SCHWARTZE
* MARIES COUNTY SHERIFF DOUG DINATALE
* MARION COUNTY SHERIFF JOHN WALDSCHLAGER
* MORGAN COUNTY SHERIFF JIM PETTY
* RALLS COUNTY SHERIFF PAUL FORNEY
* RANDOLPH COUNTY SHERIFF MARK NICHOLS
* RAY COUNTY SHERIFF SAM CLEMENS
* ST. FRANCOIS CTY. PROS. WENDY WEXLER HORN
* ST. LOUIS CITY SHERIFF JIM MURPHY
* SALINE COUNTY SHERIFF WALLY GEORGE
* SHELBY COUNTY PROSECUTOR JIM MCCONNELL
* FORMER BOONE COUNTY SHERIFF TED BOEHM

Maybe Chris Koster's years of being a Republican have made him comfortable with simply ignoring facts that don't support his position. That's the way that his fellow Republicans like George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Matt Blunt have gotten our country into this mess, and exactly why we need true Democrats with REAL values.

Jeff Harris will be an honest Attorney General for Missouri - wouldn't that be better than having one who claims to have "unanimous" support?

If You're Voting in the Missouri Republican Primary in Johnson or Cass Counties

Vote for Karl Timmerman.

I realize that the endorsement of a Jackson County liberal may not hold much water for a Republican voting in Johnson or Cass County, but I really encourage you to check out his page and talk to lawyers who have known him. In 2007, Karl was selected by the Missouri Lawyers Weekly as the Lawyer of the Year, and has the respect of his peers.

I've known Karl for years, both in person and through his weekly "Friday Night Ramblings" that he sends out to lawyers throughout the state. I frequently disagree with him, and we have had some intense exchanges, but he is honest, respectful, and completely bound to his principles.

I don't expect a lot of Republicans in the 17th Circuit to vote for Karl Timmerman because I say so. But I do expect that a lot of them will like what they see if they read his page or talk to him. He's a good man, and would be a fine judge.