Senator Matt Bartle (R-Lee’s Summit) hates, hates, hates the sex industry.  In 2004 he got legislation enacted to prevent strip clubs and businesses that sell adult sex merchandise from advertising on billboards.  Two years and many legal briefs later, the courts ruled it unconstitutional.  The businesses are legal in Missouri, the court said, so it would be illegal to discriminate against them in the billboard industry.  The state wasted mucho dollars defending that law and yet Bartle plans to rewrite the legislation in hopes of getting it by those “activist judges.”  Bartle has also tried to pass legislation banning lap dances and full nudity in gentlemen’s clubs, as well as legislation adding an extra tax on stores that sell adult toys.

Representative Cynthia Davis (R-O’Fallon, pictured at left) wastes her time and that of the legislators trying to give school districts the option of teaching abstinence only sex education.  Any such law would gag teachers in districts that chose abstinence only from even mentioning contraception.  Her focus, unlike Bartle’s attempt to get rid of sexually suggestive billboards, is actually harmful.  Dozens of studies show that pregnancy rates are higher among students who don’t have accurate information about contraception.

Jane Cunningham (R-Chesterfield, pictured at right) is working herself into a dither over teachers guilty of sexual misconduct with students.  Between 2001 and 2005, 87 licensed teachers lost their credentials in Missouri because of such behavior.  What’s got Cunningham’s knickers in a twist is the sort of situation involving a teacher named Greg Crowley:  he quietly resigned from the Kingston District in 2000 after allegations of sexual misconduct, and he managed to work in three more districts before losing his license.

It’s not like I’m recommending that we ignore the Greg Crowleys, but it’s a relatively minor problem in the big picture of state issues, a minor problem that Jane Cunningham plans to exploit to the fullest.

The chairwoman of the House Elementary and Secondary Education Committee said she plans to file legislation and hold public hearings on teacher sexual misconduct after the Legislature reconvenes in January.

“We need to know the level and the breadth of the problem in Missouri,” she said. “We can’t turn our back on a situation like this.”

Missouri’s crotch legislators waste legislative time and money on the useless (banning sexy billboards), the counterproductive (abstinence only), and the mostly irrelevant (making sure that teachers guilty of misconduct lose their licenses immediately).

None of these three Republicans is going to approve of stem cell research or SCHIP or giving more money to the St. Louis City Schools.  I know that.  But still, they could spend their time on worthwhile issues that don’t involve forcing their moral agenda on the rest of us.

For example, Missouri is one of only eleven states not to pass a law yet to protect consumers from identity theft.  Hey.  Jane!  Forget about Greg Crowley.  Do something to protect me if somebody gets hold of my personal information and starts opening charge accounts in my name.

In 39 other states, a security freeze is mandated by law:

In one-third of the estimated 10 million cases of identity theft each year, crooks use stolen personal information like Social Security numbers to open new accounts in their victim’s name. A security freeze gives consumers the choice to “freeze” or lock access to their credit file against anyone trying to open up a new account or to get new credit in their name.

When a security freeze is in place at all three major credit bureaus, an identity thief cannot open a new account because the potential creditor or seller of services will not be able to check the credit file. When the consumer is applying for credit, he or she can lift the freeze temporarily using a PIN so legitimate applications for credit or services can be processed.

Another useful issue that the crotch reps could spend their time on is public transportation.  Willy Kessler just complained that Cynthia Davis ignores people like her who use public transportation.  Willy resents Davis’s flippant attitude about the need for more buses.:

Buses work best in high-density areas with streets laid out on a grid.  St. Charles County is distinctively different from St. Louis County.

Willy believes Davis could do better for St. Louisans:

This line of reasoning is, of course, highly specious since I can point to numerous SF bay area communities that are laid out similarly and are still served by numerous feeder lines that converge on main roads and highways.  Wouldn’t a real, far-sighted leader investigate and try to find out how places that have good public transportation solve these “problems”?

And given the Highway 40 construction that’s going to drive all of us crazy for two years, not to mention the effects of global warming that our many cars are exacerbating, Willy resents Cynthia’s solution:  not more public transportation, oh no.  But this:

I believe we have enough kind-hearted friends and family members who will give a ride to their neighbors who don’t drive.

Do you mean to tell us, Ms. Davis, that as a state legislator, you can’t do any better than that?  Maybe if you got your mind off everybody else’s crotch, your thinking processes would improve.

( – promoted by Clark)

My husband got annoyed enough by an article in this morning’s paper to e-mail the Post this letter:

As reported in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on November 2nd, federal Judge Michael Mukasey, President George Bush’s nominee for Attorney General, says the controversial interrogation technique known as waterboarding is “repugnant,” but he is unsure that it is illegal. If Judge Mukasey would submit himself to this technique, he might have a decided opinion on its legality.

Respectfully submitted,

Cornelius Alwood

Claire McCaskill said that, under the circumstances, she was “torn” about the nomination and that she would wrestle with it over the weekend.  No wrestling needed, to our way of thinking.  If Mukasey won’t call waterboarding torture, what’s to think about?  As Pat Leahy, who’s on the Judiciary Committee, explained:  torture is illegal in this country and waterboarding is torture (has been considered so for centuries), so waterboarding is illegal.

I don’t think this is going to end any time soon.

I have previously written about the commitment announcement of two males and the reactions in letters to the editor in the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal here [original diary], here [part 2], and here [part 3].

It really is true – one should never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel. The ability of the Warrensburg paper to control the dialog (as long as they receive content in the form of submitted letters) bodes ill for the direction of public opinion in the views of those who chose to criticize the paper.

Maybe it’s the fact that finally there’s a critical mass of people who decided not to remain silent. That bodes well for everyone.

Today’s edition of the paper printed five letters to the editor – all in support of the paper publishing the announcement.

The Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal does not have an on-line edition. Excerpts from today’s edition follow. The headers for each letter were provided by the paper.

The first letter:

Kudos for Publication

“…your paper has still done the correct thing by having not discriminated against the purchaser based upon sexual orientation or sociological mores. The content itself is not prurient, and therefore equal protection demanded the publication of such an item…”

Another letter:

Not Everyone is Anti-Gay

“…I am motivated by the cowardice of three advertisers to pull their advertising from your newspaper. Please let the people and advertisers in the community know that not everybody is anti-gay/lesbian.”

Another letter, possibly from Columbia, Missouri:

Judgements Admonished

“…I am a happily married (straight) woman in my mid-forties…Your readers and advertisers who have taken offense to your actions should be ashamed of themselves for being so close-minded and judgemental of a lifestyle that is anything but ‘unnatural.’ Love is love and it deserves to be celebrated!”

Another letter, from a Warrensburg resident who has been nationally recognized for community service:

Renew My Subscription

“…I was brought up as a humanist, so I don’t understand this controversy. Human beings come in all shapes, sizes and styles, and I try to get to know them on person by person basis, without bias…

….Hmmm. Happy is good. I hope everybody will try to be happy.

Hold the good thought.  Oh, and renew my subscription please.”

The final letter, from a long time Warrensburg resident:

Fighting Hate, Bigotry

“My great uncle…was editor of the Star-Journal 80 years ago and he was threatened by the voice of ignorance and intolerance.  It was then the resurrected Ku Klux Klan, including a few of the local clergy.

He fought the forces of hate and bigotry then, as I trust the present editor will today…”

The letters say what should be said. And speak well for a view of tolerance in a community.

The to-do between Scott Eckersley and the entire Blunt administration hinges on one contested issue:  Did Eckersley, previous to his firing, warn the governor that deleting e-mails was illegal under the Sunshine Law?

Blunt’s office, in the person of Rich AuBuchon, has insisted there are no such e-mails:

“Mr. Eckersley never once voiced a concern, never once wrote an e-mail, never once talked to other employees in the office evidencing any concern that the governor’s office was not complying with the Sunshine Law or any record-retention policies.”

So far, we don’t have the definitive answer, but we do have a pile of circumstantial evidence that Baby Blunt is lying.  To begin with, Blunt is hiding the e-mails in question behind attorney-client privilege.  Possible motives for doing that would be: 

a)  He wants to keep the story going, so that he can continue to look bad.

b)  Like his role model, George Stonewall-’em Bush, he thinks no one should have the right to ever question him or make him prove anything.

c)  There are several e-mails in there that would hang him, and he’d rather look guilty than be caught with his pants down.

Without the definitive proof, reporters are left to work with what they’ve got, and that would be the boxes of Eckersley’s effects that the Blunters shipped to the Post-Dispatch and to Tony Messenger at the Springfield News-Leader. According to Messenger, there are items of interest in those boxes:

One of the e-mails sent by the state to reporters was sent Sept. 20 from Eckersley to Jonathan Bunch, a former Blunt employee. Here’s what Eckersley wrote after Bunch asked about Eckersley’s discussions with his bosses about e-mail retention:

“Wow … I fired on people yesterday about that – I just got so sick of it – I emailed Chrismer and HH and ed.”

That Eckersley says he e-mailed Blunt spokesman Rich Chrismer, HH (probably attorney Henry Herschel) and ed (likely chief of staff Ed Martin) proves nothing, of course.

But it would sure indicate that somebody ought to be looking for e-mails to those three high-level Blunt staffers.

Messenger emphasizes the importance of that and other e-mails that are similarly inconclusive but that, taken together, indicate that Eckersley is credible.

One of the most intriguing parts of the story is that the governor’s office sent those boxes of Eckersley effects of its own free will.  Nobody asked to see them (except for Eckersley’s attorney, who was refused).  The state just … sent them, apparently without reading all of them first, since several of them lend credence to Eckersley’s claims.  They sent out enough material to pique our interest and tar their own credibility, and now they want us to drop it. 

Never mind being effective at governing.  These dimwits weren’t even smart enough to leave well enough alone.

(photo of Scott Eckersley courtesy of Fired Up!)

On November 1, 2007 30 senators signed a letter [pdf] sent to dubya on the subject of Iran. Claire McCaskill was one of them.

Dear President Bush:

We are writing to express serious concerns with the provocative statements and actions stemming from your administration with respect to possible U.S. military action in Iran. These comments are counterproductive and undermine efforts to resolve tensions with Iran through diplomacy.

We wish to emphasize that no congressional authority exists for unilateral military action against Iran. This includes the Senate vote on September 26, 2007 on an amendment to the FY 2008 National Defense Authorization Act. This amendment, expressing the sense of the Senate on Iran, and the recent designation of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, should in no way be interpreted as a predicate for the use of military force in Iran.

We stand ready to work with your administration to address the challenges presented by Iran in a manner that safeguards our security interests and promotes a regional diplomatic solution, but we wish to emphasize that offensive military action should not be taken against Iran without the express consent of Congress….

The office of Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia) issued the following press release:

Press Releases

November 1, 2007
30 Senators Say White House Must Seek Congressional Approval for Offensive Military Action against Iran

Aggressive Rhetoric Undermines Diplomacy

Washington, DC- Along with 29 co-signers, Senator Jim Webb of Virginia sent a letter to the White House today warning the President not to take offensive military action against Iran without the express consent of Congress. Designed to clarify any ambiguity as a result of a recent Senate amendment urging designation of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization, the Senators also expressed concern that the administration’s increasingly provocative rhetoric has undermined diplomatic efforts with Iran….

Here is the list of those 30 senators who signed:

Webb
Akaka
Baucus
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feinstein
Harkin
Johnson
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Leahy
McCaskill
Mikulski
Murray
Reed
Rockefeller
Sanders
Stabenow
Tester
Whitehouse
Wyden

Claire’s in good company. It would have been nice to have a few more senators sign, too.

(As another non-driver, I can appreciate this post all the more. – promoted by Clark)

As a non-driver, public transportation is dear to my heart.  And for years in the San Francisco Bay Area, and even for a brief stint in Detroit (where I commuted daily by bus from one of the outer suburbs into the city of Detroit), it enabled me to get around with little or no inconvenience.  Consequently,  about the only thing I really regret about my move to St. Louis’s West County is the lack of usable public transportation (i.e. sufficient buses, feeder routes, light rail, etc.) which has seriously curtailed my activities. 

Imagine, then, my outrage when I read a recent letter to the editor of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, written by State Representative Cynthia Davis.  In the letter, which is the second letter printed here, Davis explains that bus lines should not be expanded into St. Charles County because of the initial poor planning (whch she states she supported “because that is what our constituents wanted”) when the residential subdivisions were built:

Most of our people live in cul-de-sacs and don’t have sidewalks. To get to a bus stop, you have to be able to walk safely and not too far.

Instead of trying to act like a leader who can use numerous resources to creatively solve  problems, she states categorically:

Buses work best in high-density areas with streets laid out on a grid.  St. Charles County is distinctively different from St. Louis County.

(This statement does make me wonder why we don’t have decent public transportation in St. Louis County.)  This line of reasoning is, of course, highly specious since I can point to numerous SF bay area communities that are laid out similarly and are still served by numerous feeder lines that converge on main roads and highways.  Wouldn’t a real, far-sighted leader investigate and try to find out how places that have good public transportation solve these “problems”?

But that is the least of it.  Davis would deny St. Charles citizens the initial infrastructure to what could become an increasingly important service in the future because:

Waiting at a bus stop in bad weather can be a bad experience if one has to sit out in the heat, rain or freezing temperatures to catch another bus. This is not a workable option for the elderly and those with fragile health conditions.

Davis’ solution is really easy though, especialy since she seems to think that the only potential users of a well-planned bus system would be elderly or otherwise fragile–just mooch off your relatives or neighbors–and you can, afterall, always depend on the kindness of strangers:

I believe we have enough kind-hearted friends and family members who will give a ride to their neighbors who don’t drive.

Hasn’t she heard of the energy crisis–which will only intensify problems for drivers–or even, in the short-term, events like the Highway 40/64 closure (which, given that there are really no viable public transportation solutions, will make my husband’s life torture soon). There is the envronmental damage done by emisions from proliferating cars and the financial burden of providing and maintaining the road infrasructure to support all this driving.  Although I hate to put words in someone’s mouth, I do have to speculate, based Davis’ other positions (anti-reproductive choice, school prayer, etc.), that she is probably a global-warming denier who believes that our energy problems will be solved by opening up the Alaska oil-fields.

Does it seem to anyone else out there that we need leaders who can figure out how to extend public transportation so that we are ready for the time when individually operated cars may no longer be feasible?  And that we really need to get rid of short-sighted, parochial types like Davis in goverment?  Extending some bus lines is just the very beginning–if Davis were a real representative of the needs of her constituents, she would be planning how to insure that public transportation into her area could be enhanced with light rail lines, etc. 

Of course, if St. Charles really, truly doesn’t want bus service, the bus service in West Count could certainly stand to be beefed up.

Matt Blunt’s been claiming that no e-mails exist from Eckersley telling him that deleting e-mails is illegal under the Sunshine Law.  He won’t release e-mails so that reporters can look for themselves, but he claims Eckersley never warned him–until a reporter mentions that she saw one.  Oops.

I have previously written about the commitment announcement of two males and the reactions in letters to the editor in the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal here and here.

The supreme ironies in today’s Warrensburg paper (wasted on those who are irony impaired): a lead editorial (reprinted from a letter in the Kansas City Star) pleading for less divisiveness and an article on the front page announcing that the News Press & Gazette Co. of St. Joseph has bought the Warrensburg paper from publisher Avis Tucker.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported today that “[t]hree advertisers are pulling their business from a Warrensburg, Mo., newspaper and several readers are threatening to cancel their subscriptions after the publication of a same-sex engagement announcement….” [hat tip to WillyK] 

The letters to the editor today include two (one lengthy) which chastise the Warrensburg paper and eight which support the paper. Though, one of the letters taking umbrage, while relatively concise, is signed by 14 individuals (that must have been some pearl clutching, hand over mouth gasping, and vaporous committee meeting – my word!).

The first letter in today’s paper comes from the “committee”:

“…I [I guess that’s the “committee” name] would hope to think that our small Mid-western town is not becoming tolerant of such matters…”

Yeah, those small town values, like intolerance, just add so much to the cachet around here.

Another, much lengthier letter:

“…Prior to the 1970s the American Psychological Association defined this as a “deviant” behavior. What changed the APA definition[?] Possibly political correctness, an acceptance of any and all beliefs as being equally valid, and a homosexual movement that has gained acceptance in the media, political arena, and the boards of many major business are the culprits…”

Yep, the “science never makes any decision based on science and global warming is a myth” crowd.

Just for the record, I don’t consider that stupidity and bigotry are equally valid beliefs when compared to reason and tolerance.

Another letter:

“…I’ve noticed from reading the viewpoint of a few others, the Bible is used to defend their position. Perhaps, quotes should be taken from the entire book rather than select parts that can be manipulated to prove a narrow-minded view correct….Who is anyone else to cast stones?”

Another letter – from a friend of the couple:

“…I don’t think it’s anyone’s business to say what they are doing is right or wrong…”

Another letter for tolerance – with a dash of sarcasm:

“…Did I miss something [in the photo]? Were they naked or engaged in some act unsuitable for innocent eyes? The picture must have been dreadful to cause so many people to be disgusted, saddened, disappointed, disturbed and grieved at the Star-Journal’s lack of respect and concern and it’s flagrant, blatant attack on the traditional family…”

I bow down before a great master of snark. We are not worthy.

Another letter – very short and to the point:

“I want to commend you for posting the wedding announcement…It shows great courage and forward thinking.”

Okay, it wasn’t a wedding announcement. It was a commitment announcement.

Another letter – in favor of editorial independence:

“I thank you and support your endeavor to offer an unbiased perspective to the people of Warrensburg. I fully support your recent decision to include the announcement of…[the] commitment ceremony in the paper…”

A letter of support from Maryland [The state, I presume. Knowing Missouri I suppose there could be a town by that name, but I didn’t bother to check.]:

“…I cried when I read this.

…because I finally felt like I was one of the normal people…”

Another letter of support:

“…I wanted to let you know how happy I was to hear the news and how much I support your decision to print the announcement…it’s little things like this that keep pushing our society further and further towards making change…”

Ah, there’s the rub with some folks.

And finally, a brief letter from someone in Columbia [It could be the country, but I’m fairly certain it’s the city in Missouri]:

“Thank you for your paper’s respect for equality and human rights by printing all engagement announcements without discrimination.

Thank you for doing the right thing.”

As for those businesses who pulled their ads from the Warrensburg paper over this? I figure I’ll just frequent the local businesses which continue to advertise in the paper, and avoid those which don’t. Now, if I could only get a letter to the editor into the paper to that effect…

The Army started off the recruiting year with the lowest number of recruits signed up for Basic Training since the United States military became an all-volunteer force in 1973.  Gen. William S. Wallace, commander of Army Training and Doctrine Command, told Pentagon reporters on Wednesday that the diminished number of delayed enlistment recruits in the pike will make it extremely difficult to reach the goals for 2008.

For the last two years, the goal of 80,000 new recruits  has barely been met.  To meet the numbers, qualified OCS candidates were not informed of the option (even though the Army is experiencing a paucity of Lieutenants and Captains).  Additionally, the Army has been forced to admit a staggering percentage of recruits on waivers.  In FY 2006, fully 17% of all recruits were admitted under waivers for psychological, criminal and health problems.  Nearly one in five who were actively recruited,  would not have gotten five minutes of a recruiters time five years ago.

In a perfect world, the recruiting year starts with 20,000 recruits, or 25% of the yearly goal,  in the pike and scheduled for Basic.  The  remaining 60,000/75% are to be recruited over the course of the fiscal year.  Last summer, the Army toted the board and realized they were not going to meet their 2007 numbers unless drastic measures were taken.  Over 1000 former recruiters who had fulfilled their recruiting duties were sent back to the sales floor.  Additionally, the Army instituted recruitment bonuses.  Recruits willing to leave for basic training by the end of September (to bolster 2007 numbers) were offered healthy $20,000  bonuses –  a years salary in many cases.

As a result of rushing recruits into uniform to meet the 2007 goals, the Army started this recruiting year with less than 7400 recruits, or a mere 9% of the 2008 goal, in the queue.  “It’s going to be another tough recruiting year,”  said General Wallace.

From Army Times:

The bonus program, which began July 25, was part of a last-minute push by the Army to meet its year-end recruiting goal, after having fallen short on recruiting numbers in May and June. It had the effect of getting many of the recruits who signed up after July 25 into basic training sooner than they would have otherwise, thus reducing the number with entry dates after Oct. 1.

“That is of concern for us because the delayed entry program gives us guaranteed enlistees to meter out across the year,” Wallace said. Without that cushion to begin the recruiting year, recruiters are going to have to sign up enough people to meet the existing goal as well as replenish the pool for next year.

Coupled with the recruiting problems are retention problems.  The backbone of any military is the mid-level NCO’s, and they are not reupping.  Instead, worn out by repeated deployments and  feeling a sense of futility about  the misadventure in Iraq that has cost nearly 4000 American lives, they are opting to leave the service.  These losses in leadership will undoubtedly haunt the military for the next two decades.

Without top-notch NCO’s the force suffers.  They fill a unique role, because they manage both up and down the chain of command.  They transmit orders to the troops they supervise, and they have great influence over the decisions made by the officers they serve.   

NCO’s simultaneously prepare their units to complete their mission and know the personal pertinents of their personnel.  They know whose kids are struggling to adjust, whose marriage is rocky, who is expecting a baby, whose mother is ill, who has an in-law “vacationing” on their couch and clueless about why they can’t come play.  They have the standing to pull a green Lieutenant aside and tell him or her the real score.

These middle managers are especially important in wartime.  Not the least of all among reasons: seasoned NCO’s keep Leiutenants alive long enough to become seasoned officers.  There are more Sergeants leading Soldiers and Marines down dangerous alleys and on patrol than there are Lieutenants and Captains. 

  These are the enlisted personnel that an Army facing a three-decade rebuilding process after the folly of destabilizing and occupying Iraq needs to retain most, but they are not staying.  Instead they are leaving in droves.  And Sergeants who leave  after 8, 12, 15 years in service are  not  G.I.’s  who can be replaced at the local recruiting station.