Missouri State Representative Cynthia “Are there no prisons? Are there no work houses?” Davis (r) continues to have a not so good, very bad month. Some of our previous coverage:

Missouri State Rep. Cynthia Davis (r – Pluto): There IS such a thing as a free lunch

Missouri State Representative Cynthia Davis (r): the Mozart of cluelessness

An unsigned lead editorial in the dead trees edition of today’s Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal takes Representative Davis to task for her views on the summer meals program:

Rep. Davis shows no understanding of poor

Rep. Cynthia Davis, R-O’Fallon, in a newsletter states “hunger can be a positive motivator” for getting people to find jobs.

Davis must never have heard of Abraham Maslow. In 1943, he wrote “A Theory of Human Motivation.” He articulated ideas that “oft were thought but ne’er so well expressed.” In making his point about why humans behave in basic ways, he produced what became known as Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. At the base of his pyramid are a person’s most basic needs – to breathe, to drink, to eat… To be plain, to eat is to live. Food is for life, not for motivation.

Davis no doubt did not realize that motivation is best described as an award from peers, a bonus from the boss, a kiss from a spouse, a hug from a child. She must have missed Maslow’s lessons while living in her nice suburban St. Louis home, far from those low-income people in the big cities who so need her to provide proper motivation…

…May Davis never know hunger, but if ever she does, she can dine on that foot in her mouth.

Ouch. That’s gonna leave a mark. Go. Read the whole thing.

Now, the question for Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) is, since your home town paper stated, “…for Davis to head the House Special Standing Committee on Children and Families seems about as useful to those children and families as putting Trick “Pass Me the Blunt and Let Me Roll It” Daddy in charge of the state’s drug prevention programs…”, should she continue in that House leadership role? We’d certainly like to know if you endorse her views and her chairmanship of that committee, Representative Hoskins.

There are people who fervently believe that President Barack Obama was not born in the United States, despite all evidence and logic to the contrary, and hence, that he is not actually qualified to hold that office.

Is this a “mainstream” republican party issue in Missouri? Apparently so:

From the Platte County, Missouri republican Central Committee web site.

Dr. Orly Taitz

Dr. Orly Taitz, lead attorney on the Obama Birth Certificate issue, will be coming to Missouri to speak with Senators, Representatives, and Citizens about getting into action regarding the Obama Birth Certificate dilemma.

Obama has spent millions keeping his birth certificate a secret, but the issue WILL NOT go away. There will be two meetings on July 1st, lasting 1-2 hours each. Please join Dr. Taitz and bring a friend!

The disclosure statement from the Platte County, Missouri republican Central Committee web site.

There are two scheduled events in Missouri tomorrow. One in St. Louis at 11:00 a.m. and one in Jefferson City at the Capitol Plaza at 4:00 p.m. It seems that bloggers aren’t welcome, even if we are somebody’s friend.

Our good friends at Fired Up were discouraged from attending:

I am familiar with your SMEAR Journalism (sic). You are not welcome at either events (sic). If you do show up, we will be forced to call security.

Man, how are we gonna get to see who attends this? I guess we’ll have to ask republican members of the Missouri General Assembly one by one if they attended and if they subscribe to the birther premise. That could be fun. Any guesses?

A friend of mine just got a response from Senator McCaskill regarding her position on hate crimes legislation, which I’ve copied below (minus my friend’s name.)

Dear ——–:

Thank you for contacting me regarding efforts to protect Americans from hate crimes. I appreciate hearing from you, and I welcome the chance to respond.

Hate crimes are destructive and divisive. Any random act of violence is a tragic event that can devastate the lives of the victim and his or her family, but the intentional beating or murder of an individual based on who they are can terrorize an entire community. Current hate crimes law is limited to investigating and prosecuting certain civil rights offenses when it is determined that the offender was motivated by a bias against race, color, religion, national origin and, in limited instances, disability. In the 110th Congress, Senator Kennedy (D-MA) and Senator Smith (R-OR), introduced the Matthew Shepard Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (S. 1105) in an attempt to strengthen current law and expand it to cover sexual orientation, gender, gender identity and disability.

The Senate voted in favor of attaching the Kennedy-Smith hate crimes bill to the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 1585). I supported this amendment because there is evidence that violent, bias-motivated crimes are widespread and a serious problem within our nation. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) statistics show that since 1991, over 100,000 hate crimes have been reported, with 7,720 in 2006, the FBI’s most recent reporting period. We need strong laws at every level – local, state and federal – to prevent these crimes. Unfortunately, while the Senate passed the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act by a vote of 93 to 2, the hate crimes language was later stripped from the bill during negotiations to iron out the differences between the Senate-passed and House-passed versions.

I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind should hate crimes legislation be introduced in this 111th Congress. It is important to note that previous hate crimes legislation sought to protect innocent Americans from violent crimes without infringing upon the constitutionally-protected right to free speech. Hate crimes laws punish violent acts, not beliefs or thoughts – even violent thoughts. Proponents of hate crimes legislation do not seek to punish, nor prohibit in any way, name-calling, verbal abuse or expressions of moral disapproval toward any group. I will oppose any proposals that infringe upon the lawful expression of one’s deeply held beliefs.

Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any further assistance.

All best,

Senator Claire McCaskill

Overall, it’s a good response. McCaskill points out the need for stricter laws and greater resources provided to law enforcement at all levels in order to protect against an increase in violence motivated by race, gender, religion, and/or sexual orientation. And she succinctly defangs critics who claim that hate crimes laws would criminalize thought and persecute people for their religious beliefs.

But she’s wrong about one thing. McCaskill claims in her first sentence, that she “will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind should hate crimes legislation be introduced in this 111th Congress.” Thing is, such a bill has already been introduced in the 111th Congress. HR 1913 passed the House back in April and was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Maybe my friend is confused about when she received McCaskill’s e-mail. Or maybe because McCaskill isn’t on the committee that received the bill in the Senate, she wasn’t aware of it yet. Or possibly there’s some Senate jargon that I don’t understand, and a Senator generally doesn’t state that a bill is before her until she has a chance to vote on it – in McCaskill’s case, when the bill reaches the floor.

Regardless, based on her letter and her support of previous hate crimes legislation, I’m confident that Claire will do the right thing and vote yes when she gets the chance.

Cynthia Davis is has been popular in the 19th district, O’Fallon. Unbeatable, in fact. Partly that’s because she’s such an effective campaigner. When she’s out there going door to door, she can make with the small talk like nobody else. Even Democrats report voting for her because she’s so friendly. Friendly? Maybe. But one man’s friendly is another man’s smarmy. I wince when I hear a woman emote, “I just love your house“.

Regardless of how you judge her personal style, though, the hard truth for Cynthia is that, as of 2010, she’s termed out. She’s thinking of running for auditor, but the idea of a win in that race, especially in light of her current toxicity, is so far fetched it’s almost cute. And the loss of her salary as a state rep is going to be a serious financial blow, because the income from the Christian bookstore she and her husband run is unlikely to feed them and their seven children.

So she wants her husband Bernie to run for the state rep seat and has been trotting the idea out to anyone who might listen, even though there are two Republicans in the district who have already formed committees for the job. Bernie Davis would have name recognition going for him, but other than that, he’d be one sorry candidate. I wasn’t kind about Cynthia’s personal style, but at least she has one, and it has served her well. The report I get is that her husband has less charisma than unpainted drywall–both one-on-one and in front of a group. But wait. I’ve got the solution to their problem. She can leave him at home in charge of the kids and do all his campaigning for him.

Running against him–or whoever wins the R primary–will be Matt Simmons. Simmons is a fortyish guy who has done his time in the trenches, serving on the Hazelwood school board and currently as chairman of the St. Charles County Ambulance District and as Boone Township Democratic Committeeman.

Simmons is already getting the support he needs for a successful run for office. The St. Charles County Democrats had a fundraising BBQ for him earlier this month. And, AND, he will be the beneficiary of funds that have been earmarked for Democrats running for open seats that have been held by Republicans. There’s money available for those seats in this all important effort to take the majority in the State House in 2010. Governor Nixon wants to use the political capital that he is still enjoying from the November 2008 election, and he’s glad to use it in hopes of moving the House over to his side of the fence.

Work is already in progress on Simmons’ website, and he’s getting professional advice on how to run the campaign. Early donations to his campaign are already coming in. This is the kind of help that normally doesn’t materialize before the spring of election year.

O’Fallon is going to be interesting to watch. If primary voters go for the familiar Davis name, the contest would boil down to a choice between a sane Democrat and the spouse of a “birther“, “let them eat McDonalds” Wacko.  I say, if you’re going to offer voters a Wacko, at least let people have the real McCoy, not just a colorless imitation.

The saga continues. Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) has removed his Twitter updates from the public eye: Denny Hoskins (r) Twitter Block: was it something we mocked?

This morning a little bird tweeted another little something that Denny Hoskins posted about the Internets and blogtopia (y,sctp!) via Twitter:

DLHoskins You mean everything I read on the internet, blog sites and chat rooms is not true?? http://bit.ly/16zNgR ColumbiaTribune.com: The Wild Web 37 minutes ago from web

Denny, you mean like really slick and expensive campaign mailings sent on your behalf and paid for by the Missouri republican party? Just asking.

Why are those nameless thugs at Fired Up deleting Supreme Court dockets and changing pay-pal addresses?

Thank heavens that Orly Taitz at least has the likes of Jim Lembke on her side.  

Special thanks to Michael Bersin and RBH who were instrumental in doing the research that backs up my smartassery. This post would have been a couple hundred words of mostly wisecracks without them and a conference room in the Plaza Branch of the KC Public Library.

*****

We have been pretty gleeful in heaping abuse and scorn on Cynthia “Fagin” Davis for her comments about hunger serving as a motivator for poor children to get jobs, and with good reason.

She is, quite simply, nuts, and unfit to serve as the chair of the state’s standing committee on children and families.  In case you have forgotten, she was one of the co-sponsors of HJR-34, the “birther bill” – legislation aimed at keeping President Obama’s name off Missouri ballots in 2012.  The bill was withdrawn and the texts removed from the Missouri general assembly web site – in the hope that everyone else would forget it ever happened. But, the Internets are forever, and we have a copy in our archives:    

…Section 8. We the people of Missouri adopt a voter’s bill of rights as a defense against corruption, fraud, and tyranny. Missouri voters shall have the following rights:

3. The right to have only qualified candidates placed on the ballot. The secretary of state shall determine that each person is qualified for the office he or she seeks, according to the law, before placing his or her name on the ballot. For candidates who are required by the Constitution of the United States to be natural born citizens, the secretary of state shall request an official copy of the candidate’s birth certificate. Other certifications, such as a certificate of live birth, shall not be accepted. Should any candidate fail to provide an official birth certificate within thirty days of the request by the secretary of state, his or her name shall not be placed on the ballot. The secretary of state shall verify the qualifications of any elected officeholder who was previously placed on a Missouri ballot. Should any elected officeholder fail to provide the required documentation or birth certificate within thirty days of the request by the secretary of state, the secretary of state shall turn the matter over to the attorney general who shall within twenty days file suit to obtain the required documentation…

Our previous ‘birther’ coverage:

Do the sponsors of HJR34 believe in anti-Obama conspiracy theories?

Down goes HJR 34

And she is quite the hopper-on of bandwagons, and the wingnuttier the better.  Before she got the ‘birther’ bit in her teeth, she tried to make political hay off the Terri Schaivo tragedy by sponsoring a(nother) bill that went nowhere.

But it isn’t just the crazy – it’s the hypocrisy.  

Cynthia Davis knows first hand that there really is such a thing as a free lunch, but her free lunches aren’t the burger and fries that McDonalds employees receive as their shift meal.  Her free lunches come from lobbyists.

Yes.  The wingnuttiest state rep of them all, the one who says it is the responsibility of the parents to feed their own children apparently thinks it is the responsibility of lobbyists to feed state legislators (and the children of one particular state legislator):

Missouri Ethics Commission – Lobbyist Reports

April 2009

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Nancy L. Giddens 4/1/2009 Individual Not Amended $8.52 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Dinner

Larry Rohrbach 4/15/2009 Individual Not Amended $17.31 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

William A Gamble 4/20/2009 Individual Not Amended $40.00 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Non alcoholic beverages

Total Amount $65.83

March 2009

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Don R. Kissell 3/3/2009 Individual Not Amended $6.33 Meals, Food, & Beverage – SAINT CHARLES LEGISLATIVE BREAKFAST

William A Gamble 3/9/2009 Individual Not Amended $30.00 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Non alcoholic beverages

Total Amount $36.33

February 2009

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Jorgen Schlemeier 2/9/2009 Individual Not Amended $5.06 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Lunch

Jeffrey T. Sweet 2/27/2009 Individual Not Amended $12.00 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Lunch provided during Boeing briefing on operations

Jeffrey T. Sweet 2/27/2009 Individual Not Amended $8.00 Gift – Desk clock provided during Boeing briefing on operations

John A. Urkevich 2/28/2009 Individual Not Amended $35.00 Meals, Food, & Beverage – CSD Legislative Breakfast

Total Amount $60.06

January 2009

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Lobbyist Name William A Gamble 1/8/2009 Individual Not Amended $67.80 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Non alcoholic beverages

Brad Thielemier 1/9/2009 Individual Not Amended $10.00 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Craig Felzien 1/12/2009 Individual Not Amended $10.00 Gift

C.K. Casteel, Jr. 1/14/2009 Individual Not Amended $33.71 Meals, Food, & Beverage – reception

C.K. Casteel, Jr. 1/15/2009 Individual Not Amended $129.00 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Annual Meeting (2 tickets)

Total Amount $250.51

That is just 2009 – we have 2008 below the fold:

December 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Patricia Lightner 12/5/2008 Individual Not Amended $24.39 Meals, Food,& Beverage –

David A. Murphy 12/9/2008 Individual Not Amended $11.99 Meals, Food, & Beverage – CAC meeting

Total Amount $36.38

November 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Michelle R. Galloway 11/18/2008 Individual Not Amended $92.00 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Educational dinner

Total Amount $92.00

October 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Lyzel Krebs 10/31/2008 Individual Not Amended $18.40 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

Total Amount $18.40

August 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Peggy Nalls 8/25/2008 Individual Not Amended $10.49 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

Total Amount $10.49

July 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Doug Galloway 7/30/2008 Individual Not Amended $30.95 Meals, Food, & Beverage – meal

Thomas W Krewson 7/30/2008 Individual Not Amended $24.40 Meals, Food, & Beverage – dinner

Mary Scruggs 7/30/2008 Individual Not Amended $31.00 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

John R Sondag 7/30/2008 Individual Not Amended $30.95 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Dinner at ALEC Conference

Charles G Simino 7/30/2008 Individual Not Amended $32.72 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Dinner at ALEC

Total Amount $150.02

June 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Donna K. Martin 6/18/2008 Individual Not Amended $40.00 Entertainment – Cardinal ticket

Donna K. Martin 6/18/2008 Individual Not Amended $56.68 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

Total Amount $96.68

May 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Richard K McCullough 5/7/2008 Individual Not Amended $12.19 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

Patricia Lightner 5/12/2008 Individual Not Amended $80.15 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

Total Amount $92.34

April 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Patricia Lightner 4/8/2008 Individual Not Amended $44.00 Meals, Fo
od, & Beverage –

Gary Markenson 4/28/2008 Individual Not Amended $10.00 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Dinner with board members

Total Amount $54.00

March 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Lyzel Krebs 3/17/2008 Individual Not Amended $10.83 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

Donna K. Martin 3/25/2008 Individual Not Amended $32.35 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

Donna K. Martin 3/25/2008 Individual Not Amended $105.29 Other – Women’s Retreat

Donna K. Martin 3/25/2008 Individual Not Amended $31.24 Travel –

Total Amount $179.71

February 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Don R. Kissell 2/19/2008 Individual Not Amended $22.98 Meals, Food, & Beverage – CITY OF SAINT PETERS CITY COUNCIL

Don R. Kissell 2/20/2008 Individual Not Amended $4.50 Meals, Food, & Beverage – LUNCH WITH VISION ST. CHARLES

Total Amount $27.48

January 2008

Representative: DAVIS, CYNTHIA

Patricia L Strader 1/23/2008 Individual Not Amended $2.80 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

Bonnie L Linhardt 1/23/2008 Individual Not Amended $12.31 Meals, Food, & Beverage – Dinner – Discuss policy issues for women.

C.K. Casteel, Jr. 1/23/2008 Individual Not Amended $125.00

Entertainment – Prize – Legislative Reception “Trivia Bowl”

Mark S. Woolbright 1/31/2008 Individual Not Amended $7.00 Meals, Food, & Beverage –

Total Amount $147.11

That is just 2008-2009.  It goes on and on and on like that, for every month of every year she has been in Jeff City.  We just got tired of copying and pasting.

And that is on top of the $80.20 per day per diem that the state pays our legislators to compensate them for being away from home each of the approximately 75 eligible days of each legislative session…for 2009 her per diem was $5934.80 – and that buys a lot of lunches.   Or would, anyway, if she wasn’t already as full as a tick after all that lobbyist largess.

And then, there are the cases that made it to the Missouri Ethics Commission.

Excerpt from 2002 campaign finance report [pdf] (8 Days Before Election – July 26, 2002):

Yep, that’s $2,850.00 for a vehicle, and $275.26 to the Missouri Department of Revenue.

Excerpt from 2004 campaign finance report [pdf] (quarterly report – April 12, 2004):

Yep, that’s $88.50 for vehicle registration and $1084.33 for Real Estate Taxes paid to the Cole County Collector.

What were those campaign funds used for?

July 25, 2005

The Missouri Ethics Commission [pdf], at its July 21, 2005 meeting, took the following actions…

…The following cases were forwarded to the Office of the Attorney General:

05E071 Missourians for Blunt

05E073/05E078 Citizens Against the Levy, Jim Ferguson, Treas.

05E075 Cynthia Davis

05E076A/05E077A/05E083A Janet Ballard…

[emphasis added]

January 23, 2006

The Missouri Ethics Commission [pdf], at its January 19, 2006 meeting, took the following actions:

The following cases were closed against Respondents:

05E131 Joan Bray

05E132 Tom Masteller

05E075 Cynthia Davis….

[emphasis added]

We foresee a Missouri Sunshine Law request to get the final disposition of this matter.

It all adds up to one screaming certainty:  Cynthia Davis is not the person who should be chairing the state’s Special Standing Committee on Children and Families.  

This is who should be leading the Special Standing Committee on Children and Families.

Major Matthew Alexander didn’t arrive in Iraq to begin questioning terrorists until 2006. The timing was fortunate for him, because by that time the pressure from the higher ups to use torture had dissipated in the wake of revelations about Abu Ghraib. Had he been there sooner, he’d have faced what a friend of his did:

Alexander faced a different kind of problem. He wanted to expose the stupidity, not to mention the moral bankruptcy, of using torture, so he wrote “How to Break a Terrorist”. Then he ran into a wall at the Department of Defense. In order to publish, he had to sue the DoD for permission.

Jon Stewart found that odd; he thought that a book showing our basic humanity might be good p.r.

It would seem to me that to have our humanity broadcast throughout the world might not necessarily be a bad thing. I would think it would be in our best interests if other countries would be, like, ‘Hey, you know what? They actually don’t electrocute our genitals, they get us to talk by not ….’ Why isn’t that positive?

Good point, Jon. His book is positive, except that it makes those who ordered torture and who are still defending it, look like … what? the monsters they are? Brave New Productions has a video juxtaposing shots of Cheney and Alexander:

Cheney: Another term out there that’s slipped into the discussion is the notion that American interrogation practices were a, quote, recruitment tool for the enemy. On this theory, by the tough questioning of killers, we have supposedly fallen short of our own values. This recruitment tool theory has become something of a mantra lately.

Alexander: At the prison where I conducted interrogations, we heard day in and day out, foreign fighters who had been captured state that the number one reason they had come to fight in Iraq was because of torture abuse.

(….)

And remember, one of al-Qaida’s goals, it’s not just to attack the United States; it’s to prove that we’re hypocrites, that we don’t live up to American principles. So when we use torture and abuse, we’re playing directly into one of their stated goals.

It’s bad to make ourselves look as evil as al-Qaida portrays us. But you know what’s worse than that? To BE as evil as al-Qaida portrays us. This is more than a matter of the U.S. suffering some distasteful global p.r. This is a matter of a country that used to oppose such wickedness losing its soul. “Tough questioning of killers” my ass!

Oh. I just wandered off into pitched rhetoric, didn’t I? Maj. Alexander avoided that, preferring instead to emphasize the necessity of people in the military defending the Constitution, which forbids cruel and unusual punishment. He feels we’ve set a dangerous precedent that makes it OK for soldiers to follow unlawful orders. After World War II, we shunned the Nuremberg defense. He points out that we still reject the Nuremberg defense–for those of the rank of Master Sergeant and below. The hypocrisy of letting those who ordered it troubles Alexander.

I suspect it galls him that Cheney is touting torture as the new patriotism.

So Alexander urges that, at the very least, we form an independent commission that would be empowered to issue a strong statement of rebuke for this precedent. To do anything less than that ensures it will happen again.

Matthew Alexander was in St. Louis at the invitation of Amnesty International as part of a nationwide tour in which he is speaking out against torture. The Amnesty International website has links to several interviews he’s done, including Keith Olbermann, Brave New Studios, MSNBC, and Fox.