• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Monthly Archives: March 2010

Final Day of the Fundraising Quarter Open Thread

31 Wednesday Mar 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2010, Actblue, fundraising, MO-Sen, Q1, Robin Carnahan

{First, a cheap plug for my blog Senate Guru.}

I just wanted to remind everyone that today (Wednesday) is the final day of the first fundraising quarter of 2010.  The fundraising totals reported by federal candidates will help determine their relative strength as we head toward Election Day 2010.

Please contribute as generously as you can today.

For instance, you can contribute to Robin Carnahan’s campaign for U.S. Senate via my Expand the Map! ActBlue page.  On it, Robin has 49 contributions.  Can you be contribution number 50?

(Remember: every contribution you make to Robin via the Expand the Map! ActBlue page is not only a show of support for Robin but an investment toward Roy Blunt’s long overdue retirement!)

Consider this an open thread.

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: and some will think that it’s all over, part 2

31 Wednesday Mar 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Aaron Podolefsky, missouri, presidential search, University of Central Missouri

This is the fifty-fourth post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

The student newspaper at the University of Central Missouri, the Muleskinner, published an unsigned lead editorial in last Thursday’s edition (yes, we asked):

Editorial

Issue date: 3/25/10 Section: Opinion

President Podolefsky moves to Buffalo to assume duties as the new president of Buffalo State College this summer.

He gets a pay raise and additional opportunities to excel.

We hope he does well and enjoys the new challenges.

From the first announcement that Podolefsky’s contract was not renewed, one has had to wonder if there was enough time for him to find a position before next year.

It says something about Podolefsky that he landed another position as quickly as he did. And it says something about UCM that we have not moved forward on our presidential search effectively.

The deadline for applications was March 1. However, the Board is still accepting applications and has not released how many applications have been received. That says something, too.

It says that few people have applied for the position of president of UCM.

A thinking person would wonder why the University is unable to get dance partners. Is the school undesirable? What would make this University a place where quality people would not seek employment?

Could it be the way the Board of Governors acts?

Perhaps it was the way the Board handled the Podolefsky contract; perhaps it was the way the Board handled the Benoit Wesly situation — or failed to handle it; perhaps it is the looming cliff of budgetary shortfalls that will leave the new president trying to bail out the Titanic with a soup cup.

Perhaps people from outside the area have followed Warrensburg’s response to Ronnie Podolefsky’s work to protect children. Perhaps it is comments by local radio personalities that could be anti-Semitic.

Perhaps the problem is our community, our Board of Governors, our city and our failings. Perhaps we should be better citizens and hold the powers-that-be accountable.

Or perhaps the Board of Governors already has their selection for president made and the search is a sham to meet legal requirements.

Perhaps we will never know why this great University is suddenly undesirable.

The fix is Sunshine; an open and honest Board of Governors that doesn’t seek to act in secrecy.

Let people see the pretty face of UCM.

Time is short. Will the Board choose to move forward in the sun, or continue scurrying around in the dark?

Evidently, the Muleskinner doesn’t think this is all over either.

Meanwhile, the University’s search for a new president continues, and the institution distributed the following today via campuswide e-mail:

From: [….] Tuesday – March 30, 2010 2:53 PM

To: [….]

Subject: Presidential Search Update

Dear Campus Community:

This update is provided in an effort to keep the campus community informed of the progress of the Presidential Search. There is a strong pool of highly qualified applicants, representing a variety of institution types from coast to coast. The Presidential Search Advisory Committee and the Board of Governors have agreed on the candidates to bring in for “airport interviews.” At this time we are preparing for interviews to be held April 12 and 13. Following these interviews, finalists will be invited to the campus, schedules permitting, in early May.

Sincerely,

[….]

“…There is a strong pool of highly qualified applicants, representing a variety of institution types from coast to coast…”

Well, that’s at odds with:

These things sometime happen when you afflict the comfortable

….

Request denied for number of presidential applicants

Patrick Nolan: Muleskinner

Issue date: 3/11/10 Section: News

In response to a Sunshine Law request by the Muleskinner, the Board of Governors last week refused to provide the number of applicants for the open position of University president….

….The number of applicants doesn’t seem on the surface to be information that can be closed under the Sunshine Law as there is no individually identifiable information contained within a number.

However, Setser said he reads the law allowing to close the records and the University decided to keep the number of applications confidential for the time being.

“At some point it may be that we decide to release more information,” Setser said. “It’s all geared for what we think is best for the presidential search process….”

[emphasis added]

That’s very interesting. Somebody forgot to tell the search consultant who has an $80,000 contract with the University. From the January 28, 2010 issue of the Muleskinner:

…With the narrower time frame, the Board, along with Hutchinson and Baker and Associates, has mailed out 216 letters to various presidents of universities across the nation as of Jan. 20. They are also advertising the position in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Diverse Issues of Higher Education, Women’s Issues in Higher Education and Hispanic Outlook. UCM has received nine applications for the position so far. Seven candidates responded to the mailed letters, and two responded to the advertisements. There isn’t a set due date for resumés, but the Board believes the optimal date would be March 1, 2010….

[emphasis added]

So much for experience. It would appear that a few people need to work on keeping their ducks in a row.

How are we to make a judgement about that “strong pool” if they won’t even tell us the number of applications? Just asking.

“…Will the Board choose to move forward in the sun, or continue scurrying around in the dark?”

If the past is any indication we already know the answer to that particular question.

Our previous coverage of the issue:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse
 (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle (November 13, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? Follow the money and it reveals the timeline (November 14, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the new president search consulting contract (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a march on a cold and rainy day (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: raise their voices (November 19, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: great moments in radio reporting (November 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Oh, my! (December 3, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: It’s simple, really… (December 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I do truly care about the success of our students (December 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: “…a wonderful relationship there we’re really proud of…” (December 7, 2009)

Oh brother, it’s time to convene another panel on blogger ethics… (December 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a simple question (February 8, 2010)

Find the Non-Employee Game! (February 8, 2010)(NYCMule)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a different choice of phrase would have made it all better (February 11, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: never mind the facts, here’s right wingnut talk radio (February 13, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: and we should give weight to your opinion… (February 18, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: fools for spin (February 20, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: fools rush in… (February 21, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Who’s the more foolish… (February 25, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a phone call from out of the blue (February 26, 2010)

HASSLER to PHILLIPS Connect-the-Dots Game! (February 27, 2010)(NYCMule)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: project much? (February 28, 2010)

These things sometime happen when you afflict the comfortable (March 12, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: and some will think that it’s all over (March 18, 2010)

Candidate filing review for 3/30 (filing has closed)

31 Wednesday Mar 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 10 Comments

Tags

2010 Elections, Clint Hylton, Scott Eckersley, Ted Rights, Tim Davis

Democrat Arthur Lieber filed to face Todd Akin. Lieber may be an innovator in Clayton touch football or it might be another Lieber. 2008 Democratic Nominee Bill Haas filed as a Republican to expand the primary field to 4 Republicans. Haas is presumably the most liberal candidate in the Republican field and the favorite to finish last. Cya in 2012, Bill.

Democrat Clint Hylton of Polo filed in the 6th Congressional district today. Hylton appears to be an insurance salesman and he will face Doctor Ted Rights of Hamilton in the Democratic primary to face noted Republican street-brawler Sam Graves in November.

Democrat (!?!?!) Scott Eckersley of Kimberling City filed in CD7 to face Tim Davis of Branson. Eckersley is best known for suing the state of Missouri, alleging he was fired for blowing the whistle on Blunt administration e-mail destruction. Tim Davis seems like a pretty qualified candidate and I hope Eckersley got the gift basket for joining the party already. If you’re a Democrat in CD7 and undecided, at least you’ll get a contested primary to vote in this Summer. Republican Steve Hunter of Joplin also filed in the 7th CD, expanding that field to 9 candidates.

And why yes, no Democrats filed against Blaine Luetkemeyer. But another Libertarian filed (Christopher Dwyer of Hallsville will face Steven Wilson of Westphalia). Hope the Libertarian isn’t embarrassingly crazy because he’ll be the only alternative to Luetkemeyer now.

Republican Ronald Beller of Kaiser and Libertarian Martin Lindstedt of Granby filed for the US Senate. Beller ran for Congress as a Democrat in 1992 and for the state House as a Republican in 1998, losing primaries both times. Lindstedt is a White Supremacist who ran in every cycle from 1994 to 2004, missing the last two while imprisoned/institutionalized. The Senate Field is 11 Republicans, 3 Democrats, 3 Libertarians, 2 Constitution Party candidates and 1 nutball racist write-in.

More under fold

2008 Republican CD4 nominee Jeff Parnell of Rogersville filed for the 4th district again, providing an early favorite to finish third in the 10 candidate primary.

Lots of Libertarians fueled up their freedom-powered minivan and filed today. Steven Hedrick of Warrensburg filed for Congress in the 3rd district, which is a few hours east of Warrensburg. Thomas Holbrook of Warrensburg filed in the 4th Congressional district, to create a contested primary with Jason Michael Braun of Harrisonville (and you say that there’s no Johnson/Cass rivalry). Randy Langkraehr of Warrensburg filed in the 5th Congressional District. Constitution party candidate Nick Ivanovich filed in the 3rd district as well.

Democrat James Long of St. Louis filed in the 4th Senate District. Republican Greg Zotta of Imperial filed to face Senator Ryan McKenna in the 22nd Senate District. Democrat Helen Steele Burton of St. Louis filed in the 24th Senate District. Constitution party candidate Richard Newton of Washington filed in the 26th Senate district. Republican John DeStefano of Kansas City filed in the 34th Senate District. Democrats are contesting 12 of 17 Senate Districts, Republicans are contesting 14 of 17 Senate Districts.

Democrat Robert Ritterbusch of Maryville filed to face Mike Thomson in HD4. Democrat Dale Toms of Polo filed to face Mike Lair in HD7. Republican Jason Gregory of St. Joseph filed to face Pat Conway in HD27. Republican Fred Walter filed in HD35 in a 3 candidate field, with the winner facing Democrat Jim Baldwin of Holt.

Four more Democrats filed to replace Roman LeBlanc in HD43 (who is leaving after one term). Ron Hunt, Karis Harrington, Randy Dunn, and Kim Douglass will join Mark Wassterstrom in that primary.

Democrat Penny Hubbard (mother of Rodney? asked Jake Wagman) filed in HD57 against Freshman Dem James Morris. Democrats David Leipholtz and Daniel Schesch filed in HD64. Republicans Patricia Verde and Damien Johnson filed in HD64 as well. Republican Bill Hartzog filed in HD66. Democrats Stephen Findley and Paul Kieselhorst filed in HD73, challenging Stacey Newman. Democrat Eillen McGeoghegan filed in HD77. Republican Ryan Meyer of Ballwin filed to primary Andrew Koenig in HD88 (no word on if Meyer likes tourism promotion). Republican Keith Guichet of Manchester filed in HD92, joining Don Griffin in primarying Sue Allen for some reason. Former State Rep and current Abe Lincoln lookalike George “Bob” Engelbach will be facing Ron Casey in HD103. Republican Joe Rusch will be facing Jacob Hummel in HD108. Democrat Cy Dashtaki of Jefferson City is running for the open seat in HD113.

Constitution Partier Gary Murray of Lawson filed in HD5. Constitution partier Steven Newton filed in HD95, setting up a contested Constitution Party primary with Charles Harter. Constitution Partier Jennifer Friedrich of St. Mary is running in HD157. While Libertarian Bill Wayne filed in HD121 and he will be facing our favorite Republican CPA and his much more qualified able Democratic opponent in November.

Our Congrats to Linda and John Fischer because they will be facing each other in November in HD107. If this is a “we’ll make it in the newspapers” campaign, I hope they use the same campaign manager to cut costs.

581 candidates filed total. 212 Republicans, 171 Democrats, 19 Constitution Party, and 11 Libertarians are running for the State House. The Libertarians filed more candidates overall than the Constitution Party, by a 28-27 margin.

The smoke is clearing. Time to have fun.

Fewer candidates in Missouri?

30 Tuesday Mar 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

On Monday, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran a story on how fewer candidates have filed at this time than in previous non-presidential election years. There was lots of handwringing in the article about the difficulty of running for office, and how only wealthy people or people with part connections who can help raise money are able to run for office, and the reporter cited higher numbers filing in 2006 and 2002 as evidence that more people are shying away from seeking office. Apparently Steve Tilley also thinks that people are very happy with the state government and so decline to run for office themselves.

The article was premature to say the least. As of this writing, there’s now 540 542 filed candidates for office in Missouri, only 8 less than in 2006. And we’re sure to see some last-minute filings yet today – last night I ran into someone who planned on making the drive to Jefferson City this morning to file to represent my district.

I can sympathize with the concerns about money and nepotism (like wives running to replace their termed-out husbands) but what worries me more is the fact that you have races like the Democratic primary for US Senate, where Carnahan has two primary challengers, and yet Blaine Luetkemeyer faces no opposition after the primary, when clearly one of Carnahan’s primary challengers lives in Luetkemeyer’s district! If he’s going to run a longshot candidacy, you would hope he would at least try one that serves to build the party and oppose someone further from his own views.

Of course, perhaps I’m writing this post too early, and we’ll see some more slots filled in those uncontested races later on today.

UPDATE: The count is now 560, 12 more than 4 years ago. Take that, Virginia Young!

…And speaking of uncontested races, not only does my district have a Republican challenger, it has a Republican primary. Wonders never cease.

Colbert and Claire

30 Tuesday Mar 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Claire McCaskill on the Colbert Report last night, in case you missed it:

http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:comedycentral.com:268467

Update – the transcript:

Stephen Colbert: My guest tonight helped pass the health care bill. She better hope it covers nailing. Please welcome Senator Claire McCaskill. [applause][cheers] Oh!  Senator.

Senator Claire McCaskill: Hi Steve.

Stephen Colbert: You might want to wash that hand, I’ve been handling [crosstalk] raw chicken.

Senator McCaskill: Yeah. Chicken, eh.

Stephen Colbert: Now, uh, madam, I assume you are here tonight to gloat over the destruction of the American economy.

Senator McCaskill: No, no, no [crosstalk], no.

Stephen Colbert: Thanks to the selfish passing of health care regulation by the Democrats.

Senator McCaskill: No, no [crosstalk].

Stephen Colbert: Really?

Senator McCaskill: I’m, I’m [crosstalk]…

Stephen Colbert: Really?

Senator McCaskill: …here to educate you about that this is a good bill. [crosstalk]

Stephen Colbert: Is it really?

Senator McCaskill: Hard.  It’s a miracle that we did something very hard [crosstalk]…

Stephen Colbert: Um, hm.

Senator McCaskill: …in Washington.

Stephen Colbert: Yep.

Senator McCaskill: The subject matter [crosstalk]…

Stephen Colbert: It is hard to watch your country die. [laughter][audience laughter] Isn’t it?

Senator McCaskill: By the way [crosstalk]…

Stephen Colbert: Who were you doing this for? Who’s pocket are you in?

Senator McCaskill: The American people.

Stephen Colbert: Okay, you’re, oh, you’re in the pocket of big American. [applause]

Senator McCaskill: I’m in the pocket of the American people who want to be able to get health care and afford health care.

Stephen Colbert: Um, hm. Why, they should, well, le, nah ah. [audience laughter] Then why don’t they get jobs that provide health care?

Senator McCaskill: Because [crosstalk]…

Stephen Colbert: I’m just saying. [crosstalk]

Senator McCaskill: …because many jobs. [crosstalk]

Stephen Colbert: But the conservative position, the conservative position is you can get health care if you needed it.

Senator McCaskill: No. [audience laughter] Uh, you cannot. That’s the problem. Tens upon millions of people cannot get health care. They work for employers that don’t provide it, or they had the nerve, the absolute nerve to get sick before. And then the insurance companies won’t sell them health insurance.

Stephen Colbert: That’s the free market, madam.

Senator McCaskill: No. [audience laughter] That, that [crosstalk]…

Stephen Colbert: The free market. Right now do we have a health care free market?

Senator McCaskill: No.

Stephen Colbert: What do you mean?

Senator McCaskill: We don’t.

Stephen Colbert: They get to set any price they want. That’s the free part. [laughter][audience laughter] What part of that don’t you understand?

Senator McCaskill: What, what I understand is that most Americans know that health care is getting too expensive. In fact, for fifty years we’ve kind of been talking about how the care, health care system doesn’t really work. This is gonna make it better, not perfect. It’s not a perfect bill, but it’s gonna make it better. And you know what? The sky is not gonna fall. It’s gonna [crosstalk] be okay.

Stephen Colbert: Oh, really? Oh, really? Because John Boehner said. [crosstalk]

Senator McCaskill: Also has a tan.

Stephen Colbert: Yes, he does. [crosstalk]

Senator McCaskill: By the way. [laughter][audience laughter]

Stephen Colbert: He has a. [applause][cheers] He looks like he tried to replace the core of a nuclear reactor, actually. [laughter][audience laughter]

Senator McCaskill: A little orange.

Stephen Colbert: Now, John Boehner got up there, on the floor of the House and said, he spoke the hard truth that if this bill passes we’ll be facing the apocalypse. His word, apocalypse. Now, I’m down here in the Colbert bunker [audience laughter], six hundred feet burrowed into Manhattan’s bedrock, so I don’t know what’s going on up there. [audience laughter] When you came down the tube, uh, to do the show tonight [audience laughter] were there half-man half-wolves devouring people? [audience laughter]

Senator McCaskill: No, no.

Stephen Colbert: Is the world coming to an end?

Senator McCaskill: No, it’s not. In fact, I think, uh, they’ve a little overstated the case. Um, I think that [crosstalk]…

Stephen Colbert: We shall see.

Senator McCaskill: …my friends, my friends have overstated, uh, the problems in this bill. Most Americans, frankly, have not yet figured out everything in the bill that’s good. They’ve heard a lot of bad things, but they haven’t heard, like, for example [crosstalk]…

Stephen Colbert: The cornhusker kickback.

Senator McCaskill: Gone. [crosstalk] Took it out.

Stephen Colbert: Uh, huh. The Louisiana purchase.

Senator McCaskill: Took it out. Not really a Louisiana purchase.

Stephen Colbert: Oh, but it’s really in there.

Senator McCaskill: It applies, it applies [crosstalk] to other states. [crosstalk] That was, that was a [inaudible].

Stephen Colbert: Right? Hundred million dollars. Hundred million dollars for [crosstalk] Mary Landrieu. For not, did you get a hundred million dollars for Missouri?

Senator McCaskill: You know what I got for Missouri, I hope?

Stephen Colbert: What?

Senator McCaskill: Affordable accessible insurance for everybody who wants it.

Stephen Colbert: Mary Landrieu got that [audience cheers] and, and, Mary Landrieu got that and a hundred million dollars. [laughter] Don’t you seem like a cheap date now? [laughter][audience laughter]

Senator McCaskill: Now, now. Be nice, now, now you can’t talk that way about [inaudible].

Stephen Colbert: But what should I be nice to a Democrat when Democrats are inciting violence?

Senator McCaskill: [audience laughter] No, not so much.

Stephen Colbert: Yes, they are. Karl Rove said when you discuss the fact that you’ve been threatened you encourage more threats.  [audience laughter] Isn’t it best if you are threatened by someone to just never tell anyone? [audience laughter]

Senator McCaskill: I don’t think that’s probably a [crosstalk] good idea.

Stephen Colbert: That’s what he said.

Senator McCaskill: But, there, you know, there’s been a lot of name calling and going back and forth and, frankly, um. [crosstalk]

Stephen Colbert: What name calling back and forth? Democrats do all the name calling.

Senator McCaskill: Well, no, not so much.

Stephen Colbert: Yes.

Senator McCaskill: No, not so [crosstalk] much. [crosstalk] No, you’re wrong about that.

Stephen Colbert: They called Republicans [crosstalk] obstructionist. They called republicans obstructionist. That’s hurtful. [audience laughter]

Senator McCaskill: No. No, they wear that like a peacock with feathers, the obstructionist [crosstalk] label.

Stephen Colbert: Now you’re calling them peacocks. [audience laughter]

Senator McCaskill: That, too. [laughter] That, too.

Stephen Colbert: Um, your, your, your state, Missouri, is also the, am I pronouncing that correctly? Missourah?

Senator McCaskill: Or Missouri, you [crosstalk] can get away with either one.

Stephen Colbert: Or Missouri, either one? ‘Cause I, when I say Missouri I often get threatened by Missourians. [audience laughter] You’re also, uh, the original home to Rush Limbaugh.

Senator McCaskill: That’s true.

Stephen Colbert: And he said that if this passed.

Senator McCaskill: Yes.

Stephen Colbert: That he would move to Costa Rica. So I’m putting, uh, uh, a, uh, a little wish you were here video [crosstalk]…

Senator McCaskill: Okay.

Stephen Colbert: …for Rush. [audience laughter] ‘Cause I know he’s left the country ’cause a man, he’s a man of his word. Is there anything [audience laughter] that you would like [audience laughter] , is there anything that you would like to say to Rush, uh, down in his, uh, Central American home?

Senator McCaskill: Uh, ah, well, you know, how you likin’ that single payer government run health care in Costa Rica? [audience laughter] [cheers]

Stephen Colbert: Rush [applause][cheers], stay strong. Senator Claire McCaskill.

Senator McCaskill: Thank you.

Stephen Colbert: Thank you so much. [applause][cheers] Senator Claire McCaskill, one of the Democrats destroying America. [laughter]

In Ag Industry, Missouri Puppy Mills Have New No. 1 Fan

30 Tuesday Mar 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

(Not in the habit of promoting first-time diarists to the front page, but I do have a soft spot for puppehs. – promoted by Clark)

Editor’s note: It’s been brought to my attention that HSUS is one of the most strident animal rights groups in US, going so far as to oppose all hunting. Without going to the ins and outs of how I feel about human interaction with the animal word (I’m pro-hunting for example), let me just say that I agree with their stance on puppy mills. Other front pagers might disagree, and you might, too. -Clark

The most reactionary agribusiness groups falsely claim The Humane Society of the United States is extreme, even though the reforms we work for in animal agribusiness relate almost exclusively to giving animals a modest amount of increased space during production and providing more humane handling during transport and slaughter. Those are just common sense principles, and we continue to have success in our campaigns through the ballot initiative process or in our dealings with major food retailers because average Americans consider the reforms to be sound and sensible. All the public attitude surveys I’ve seen, including those commissioned by the American Farm Bureau Federation, reveal that Americans demand the humane treatment of all animals, including those raised for food.

It’s actually these agribusiness groups acting like extremists. And there’s no better example than what’s going on in Missouri right now. There, The HSUS, the ASPCA, the Humane Society of Missouri, and the Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation are the four organizational sponsors of a ballot measure, the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act, to set higher welfare standards in dog breeding. It’s an attempt to crack down on the excesses in Missouri, which accounts for more than a third of all puppy production in the country. The ballot measure-which will qualify for the November 2010 election if enough Missouri voters sign the petition-would impose standards that dogs must be fed and watered, protected from extremes of heat and cold, housed in enclosures other than stacked wire cages, provided with space for exercise, and guaranteed at least one annual check-up from a licensed veterinarian. The measure would not apply to any commercial breeder with 10 or fewer reproductively intact animals, and it would not allow a single dog breeding operation to have more than 50 intact animals-which would still allow a single operator to sell upwards of 200 dogs a year.

As Matt Campbell reported yesterday in the Kansas City Star, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the Missouri Farm Bureau, and the Missouri Pork Association are in a froth over the ballot measure to combat puppy mills, even though the measure has absolutely nothing to do with animal agriculture or their industries. They oppose it because it could lead, they are arguing, to future reforms in the realm of livestock agribusiness. The fact is, enacting a measure to crack down on puppy mills does nothing, one way or the other, to affect future legislation on any animal welfare topic, including reforms in the livestock industry.

It’s déjà-vu in Missouri for me. About 12 years ago, we worked with local partners in Missouri on a ballot initiative to outlaw the barbaric practice of cockfighting. The livestock groups trotted out the same false arguments then and opposed that measure, too, because they said it would be a slippery slope to banning all animal agriculture and hunting. Well, voters approved that measure in a landslide vote in November 1998, and there have been no hunting or factory farming ballot measures in Missouri advanced by The HSUS or anyone else since that time. Their claims were false, and the evidence is there to prove it.

So here’s the question: With animal agribusiness trade groups effectively working to block legislation to outlaw cockfighting and puppy mills-and in the past, they have also fought the enactment of even the most basic anti-cruelty legislation-should we really have confidence that they are a force for animal welfare within their industry? If they have no problem with staged animal fights, or if they have no problems with the rampant cruelty we’ve documented time and again at puppy mills, do they really merit the public’s faith in either their judgment or their own animal welfare standards and practices? With certain factory farming producers also defending the lifelong confinement of animals in cages and crates barely larger than the animals’ bodies, the strangling of animals on the farm, and the dragging of sick and lame animals unable to walk into slaughterhouses, I’ll let you answer that for yourself. For me, it hardly inspires my trust.

Wayne Pacelle is president and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States. This post originally appeared on Pacelle’s blog, A Humane Nation.

Candidate filing review for 3/29

30 Tuesday Mar 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Linda Fischer, Robin Carnahan, Sam Graves, SD2, Ted Rights

We have some success on the “Finding candidates” front! Democrat Theodore “Ted” Rights of Hamilton filed in the 6th district to challenge Republican Sam Graves. Rights is a Doctor in General Practice in Jamesport (Daviess County). Which should make Graves “The Government took over your health care” talk a lot more ridiculous since he will be facing an actual doctor. Graves also got a primary opponent, as Christopher Ryan of Liberty filed.

Frequent candidate Richard Charles Tolbert (D-Kansas City) filed for the US Senate today. He is running for re-election to the Metropolitan Community College Board of Trustees on April 6th. Tolbert ran for Lt. Governor in 2008, Jackson County Executive in 2006, 2002, and 1998, and he last ran for the Senate in 1992. Tolbert and Francis Vangeli will be splitting the contrarian vote while Robin Carnahan wins the primary easily.

Republican Marshall Works of Ballwin and Republican Fred Sauer of St. Louis filed for Congress in the 1st Congressional district. Expanding that field to 4. Republican James “Bryant” Walker of Jefferson City filed in the 4th Congressional District, expanding that field to 9 candidates. Republican Ron Shawd of Lee’s Summit filed in the 5th Congressional District, expanding that field to 5.

But we don’t have Democrats in the 2nd or 9th district. Which should be fixed before filing closes tomorrow, hint hint.

Democrat Don Crozier of O’Fallon filed in the 2nd Senate District, providing valuable insurance in case Cynthia Davis wins the primary and expands on the virtue of hunger. Can’t win if you don’t file.

Libertarian Bob Ludlow filed in the 10th Senate district, meaning that he will talk about liberty as he loses to Jolie Justus in November.

Jack Jackson withdrew and filed again in the 26th Senate District to get the bottom of the ballot spot. Two of his opponents for Auditor in 2006 played that trick while Jackson had the top spot on the ballot.

Speaking of tricks. The weirdest filing of the day comes out of HD107, Republican John Fischer of Bonne Terre filed to face Democrat Linda Fischer of Bonne Terre. John and Linda are married. When I speak of having contested elections, I never spoke of filing for office against your spouse. Seriously guys, you’re getting a bit too clever for your own good. Either a Republican or Democrat is going to file there to block whatever you two have in mind.

More under the fold

Democrat Debbie Bixler of St. Charles filed against Mark Parkinson in HD16, presumably as an agent of the anti-antique slot machine conspiracy. Democrat Henry Iwenofu of Uplands Park filed in HD71, expanding that field to 3.

Republican Glenn Crowther of Osborn filed in HD5, expanding that field to 3. Republican Sarah “Sally” Miller filed in HD44 against Jason Kander. Republican Pam Osgood of Lee’s Summit filed in HD48 expanding that field to 3. Republicans Roger Teagarden and Patrick Brennan filed in HD83 against Jake Zimmerman. No word on if Teagarden has the Teaparty vote. Republican Mark Stuppy of Brookline Station filed in HD134, setting up an epic town name battle with Battlefield Republican Thomas Long and Republic Republican James Green. Republican William Breshears of Billings filed in HD141. Libertarian Bill Pinkston filed in HD92. Constitution Party candidate Josh Allum of Bowling Green filed in HD10.

That was August. This is March.

29 Monday Mar 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

On March 21, my Congressman, Emanuel Cleaver II, was spit on and derided for his race as he walked toward the capitol, and I am still furious about it. The man is the founder of the Civility Caucus, fercryinoutloud, and they chose him to spit on. Talk about stuff you can’t make up…

On March 27th, he held one of his Saturday morning constituent meetings, known as Coffee with Cleaver, at the Crossroads coffeehouse. It was very well attended by supporters, and while a couple of teabaggers showed up, they didn’t hang around, choosing to get back to whichever suburb they ventured into the inner city from, because if there is one group of people that they will openly admit they hate, it is the dirty fucking hippies, and the Crossroads is absolutely lousy with ’em. Art majors, organic gardeners, loft dwellers, urban hikers…All that peacemongering and patchouli was just more than they could abide, and they split within minutes.

It’s amazing what coming home a winner will do for you. One thing is for damn sure – It isn’t August anymore, as Nancy reminded them right before the recess when she gathered the caucus for a pep talk before they headed back to their districts.

After passing the final piece of health care reform Thursday night, members of the House adjourned and headed home. They aren’t scheduled to return until April 12. It’s a “critical time to go on offense,” the speaker’s office told members in a memo obtained by TPMDC.

“Members were eager to get out of here, go back to their districts and start talking about this thing,” Rep. Chris Van Hollen’s spokesman Doug Thornell told TPMDC in an interview Friday.

Leadership is telling members to reach out to local chapters of the hundreds of national organizations that endorsed the health care legislation to help organize events in town. Instead of just holding a town hall, members are advised to find constituents who would be helped — a child with preexisting conditions who can now get health insurance, or a small business that will benefit from new tax credits — and host events with them showcasing how the bill reforms the health care system.

Members were given several-inch thick binders filled with statistics for how many people in their districts would benefit from each specific provision in the health care bill. Capitol Hill aides admit that one reason things went south so quickly last summer is that members were not prepared. (The Senate is partially to blame for that, since there wasn’t actually a bill to campaign on yet. The House had finished its committee work but hadn’t rallied behind a final plan, either. A delay in the Senate Finance Committee had a lot to do with the uncertainty House members faced back home.)

“Convey the immediate benefits of health reform to your constituents,” leadership recommended. “Tell your constituents how all this was done in a fiscally responsible, open, and transparent way.”

The Senate side isn’t any different, according to Majority Leader Harry Reid’s spokesman Jim Manley. “We are telling them to talk about health care as much as possible,” Manley told TPMDC.

I watched Claire McCaskill last August as she tried to explain to a group of teabaggers that she couldn’t very well read a bill that didn’t exist yet, that was still being hammered out, only to have them crow “she hasn’t read the bill!”

I knew then that we were up against an opposition that was, frankly, insane.

The only thing to do is run on the success of passing it, and repeat long and loud what it actuially does, especially the parts that will kick in come September, several weeks  before the election.

Remember, Bill Krystal told the republicans during the Clinton healthcare debate that if Democrats delivered healthcare reform and universal coverage, they would lose the middle class for at least a generation.

This is the only thing that Billy the K has ever been right about. Ever.

And still, the republicans weren’t smart enough to look around when they had both chambers and the White House, and say “Hey! Why don’t WE do health care and grab the middle class for a generation or more?” (Maybe someone did and was told that they didn’t need to bother because they would always have gay marriage, and that didn’t cost a lot of money.)

Now the Democrats have done it, and the republicans appear to have peaked in January with the election of Scott “Cosmo” Brown. The Democrats seemed to come out swinging on January 20, and they still haven’t let up.

And now they are home in their districts and they got to come home winners, having just passed the largest piece of social legislation that we have seen in two generations.

Yes. Two generations have grown up and a third one has been born since the last time we tackled any reform or an expansion of federal benefits opening access to our healthcare system.

Case in point: I was a toddler when Medicare became law, and I am a grandmother now.

Every day, opposition lessens and support increases as the facts about healthcare reform penetrate the veil of lies and propaganda and facts take the place of wild hyperbole about “death panels” and “socialism.”

Our time in a nutshell

29 Monday Mar 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Digby

From the incomparable Digby:

…Let’s face it, these people are ridiculous. At least the 60s revolutionaries were trying to stop the government from fighting a war, fergawdsake. These people are trying to stop the government from helping people buy health insurance. Have you ever heard anything so absurd?…

We are not worthy.

Between him and Cynthia Davis

29 Monday Mar 2010

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Again, Todd Akin makes our state look like it’s inhabited by retards.

Democratic House members walked out of a bipartisan prayer breakfast Thursday morning, after Republicans invited Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas) to speak. Given that Neugebauer had just shouted “baby killer” during the House debate on health care, Dems were disgusted. In a letter to Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO), Dem representatives wrote, “Your last minute invitation to Rep. Randy Neugebauer to address our group at this morning’s breakfast was not only irresponsible, but politically tone-deaf.”

← Older posts

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007

Categories

  • campaign finance
  • Claire McCaskill
  • Congress
  • Democratic Party News
  • Eric Schmitt
  • Healthcare
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Interview
  • Jason Smith
  • Josh Hawley
  • Mark Alford
  • media criticism
  • meta
  • Missouri General Assembly
  • Missouri Governor
  • Missouri House
  • Missouri Senate
  • Resist
  • Roy Blunt
  • social media
  • Standing Rock
  • Town Hall
  • Uncategorized
  • US Senate

Meta

  • Log in

Blogroll

  • Balloon Juice
  • Crooks and Liars
  • Digby
  • I Spy With My Little Eye
  • Lawyers, Guns, and Money
  • No More Mister Nice Blog
  • The Great Orange Satan
  • Washington Monthly
  • Yael Abouhalkah

Donate to Show Me Progress via PayPal

Your modest support helps keep the lights on. Click on the button:

Blog Stats

  • 772,430 hits

Powered by WordPress.com.

 

Loading Comments...