A stairwell in the Capitol.

We traveled to Jefferson City early this morning and watched from a side gallery as the House was in session.

For the most part the republican majority moved a number of bills through (calling “the previous question”) including, a House joint resolution on “the right to farm”, HJR 17 on limits on state appropriations, SJR 16 on transportation funding, SB 222 on domestic violence, SB 256 on child abuse and neglect, SB 252 on the Department of Revenue (no cap on damages when suing the Department of Revenue? Seriously). The afternoon session included SB 236, on the Highway Patrol Fund – more on that later.

Representative Jill Schupp (D).

Representative Jeremy LaFaver (D).

Representative Genise Montecillo (D).

Representative Margo McNeil (D) (left).

Representative Jill Schupp (D).

Greeting guests in the side gallery.

Stained Glass in the House chamber above the press gallery.

Minority Floor Leader Jacob Hummel (D).

Representative Chris Kelly (D) speaking to broadcast media in the corridor after the morning session.

SB 236 is a result of the fallout from the purchase of an aircraft. The House truly agreed summary of the bill:

SB 236 — HIGHWAY PATROL VEHICLE FUND [pdf]

Currently, the Highway Patrol’s Motor Vehicle, Aircraft, and Watercraft Revolving Fund, which is administered by the Superintendent of the Highway Patrol, includes funds received and used for the purchase of Highway Patrol vehicles, watercraft, and aircraft.

This bill requires the fund to include money received and used for the purchase and maintenance of vehicles, watercraft, and aircraft. In addition, the bill requires the Highway Patrol to receive a specific appropriation from the General Assembly before obligating any funds for the purchase of an individual unit that costs more than $100,000.

Representative Diane Franklin (r), handling SB 236 on the Highway Patrol Fund.

Elizabeth Crisp ‏@elizabethcrisp

House is back. Taking up SB236 on the Hwy Patrol revolving fund. Legislation came about following purchase of $5.6M plane #MOleg

2:01 PM – 14 May 13

The debate included references to the previous aircraft purchase, with Representative Mike Colona (D) labeling the $100,000 limit without legislative approval a “temper tantrum” amendment.

Representative Mike Colona (D).

Minority Floor Leader Jacob Hummel (D).

Today, Representative Vicky Hartzler (r) jumped on the right wingnut Benghazi bandwagon via a release:

….On another matter, I am pleased that three career diplomats with knowledge of the events surrounding the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya were given the opportunity to testify before a House committee this week.

Mark Thompson, the U.S. State Department’s Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism; Gregory Hicks, the U.S. State Department’s Foreign Service Officer and former Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya; and Eric Nordstrom, the U.S. State Department’s Diplomatic Security Officer and former Regional Security Officer in Libya all provided insight and thoughts on what really happened when four brave Americans were killed.

As you might recall, the American people were first provided a story about a video being responsible for inflaming a group of Libyans, enraging these individuals to the point they decided to attack the U.S. consulate and murder Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. The decision was then made to not disclose al-Qaeda’s role in the attack.

Mr. Hicks’ emotional account of what he experienced that night raises questions about the attack and whether more could have been done to assist U.S. personnel on the ground. And he told the committee of his shock at hearing United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice telling American TV audiences that the deadly attack grew out of a protest over the video. Mr. Hicks said of the official White House line: “I was stunned, my jaw dropped and I was embarrassed.”

The American people deserve to know the truth about what happened in Benghazi and why a team of special-operations forces was told to stand down instead of heading to Benghazi to help. The effort to learn the truth is not a “witch hunt” as some have suggested. It is an effort to determine why four Americans died that night in Libya and to inform the American people.

As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, which has held classified briefings and sought information of its own into the Benghazi attack, I must take strong exception to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s comment, when questioned about Benghazi and the killings, “What difference at this point does it make?” It makes a difference to the families of those brave Americans whose lives were lost in Benghazi. Those families and all Americans have a right to know what happened and why it happened. I will continue to work with my colleagues to shed light on this sad event and to try to prevent similar such tragedies from happening in the future….

“….The American people deserve to know the truth about what happened in Benghazi and why a team of special-operations forces was told to stand down instead of heading to Benghazi to help….”

Robert Gates: Obama made right decisions night of Benghazi attack

[….]

By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff writer / May 12, 2013

….Republican critics have said a Special Forces team or overflights by fighter aircraft based in Italy might have prevented the US losses or at least frightened off the attackers. Mr. Gates disagrees.

Such actions, he said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday, “without knowing what the environment is, without knowing what the threat is, without having any intelligence in terms of what is actually going on the ground, would have been very dangerous.”

“It’s sort of a cartoonish impression of military capabilities and military forces,” Gates said, referring to morning-after analysis. “The one thing that our forces are noted for is planning and preparation before we send people in harm’s way, and there just wasn’t time to do that….”

Uh, Robert Gates served as Secretary of Defense for both Presidents Bush and Obama.

“….It is an effort to determine why four Americans died that night in Libya and to inform the American people….”

No Shame

October 14, 2012

….The ugly truth is that the same people who are accusing the administration of not providing sufficient security for the American consulate in Benghazi have voted to cut the State Department budget, which includes financing for diplomatic security. The most self-righteous critics don’t seem to get the hypocrisy, or maybe they do and figure that if they hurl enough doubts and complaints at the administration, they will deflect attention from their own poor judgments on the State Department’s needs.

At a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform last Wednesday, Representative Darrell Issa, Republican of California and the committee’s chairman, talked of “examining security failures that led to the Benghazi tragedy.” He said lawmakers had an obligation to protect federal workers overseas. On Sunday, he said more should be spent on diplomatic security.

But as part of the Republican majority that has controlled the House the last two years, Mr. Issa joined in cutting nearly a half-billion dollars from the State Department’s two main security accounts. One covers things like security staffing, including local guards, armored vehicles and security technology; the other, embassy construction and upgrades. In 2011 and 2012, President Obama sought a total of $5 billion, and the House approved $4.5 billion. In 2009, Mr. Issa voted for an amendment that would have cut nearly 300 diplomatic security positions. And the draconian budgets proposed by Mitt Romney’s running mate, Representative Paul Ryan, would cut foreign affairs spending by 10 percent in 2013 and even more in 2016….

So, is Representative Hartzler (r) going to to let us know how she voted on those State Department requests for security funding? Just asking.

“….I must take strong exception to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s comment, when questioned about Benghazi and the killings, ‘What difference at this point does it make?’ It makes a difference to the families of those brave Americans whose lives were lost in Benghazi. Those families and all Americans have a right to know what happened and why it happened…..”

A little more of that very special quote:

Hillary Clinton, Ron Johnson Engage In Heated Exchange At Benghazi Hearing (VIDEO)

Posted: 01/23/2013 11:09 am EST  |  Updated: 01/24/2013 12:12 am EST

“….With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans,” Clinton responded, raising her voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her. “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator….”

Context is everything, except in the right wingnut political universe.

“….I do not dwell on this aspect of the prejudice suffered by the population of the youngest adolescents, although it should not be ignored, because the number of these adolescents who actually use levonorgestrel-based emergency contraceptives is miniscule, and they have been invoked in the debate over access to these contraceptives mostly as a red herring to justify the continued burdens suffered by older women who seek access to the drug….”

On Friday Judge Edward Korman of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York rejected the administration’s request for a stay while they appeal his ruling on lifting restrictions on the the availability of Plan B contraception.

The language is scathing:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

ANNIE TUMMINO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

– against –

MARGARET HAMBURG, Commissioner

of Food and Drugs, et al.

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

No. 12-CV-763 (ERK)(VVP)

KORMAN, J.:

[….]

….This salutary principle was flagrantly violated by Secretary Sebelius, who completely lacks the “necessary information and scientific expertise to assess the data and information required to make a determination that a drug is safe and effective,” and whose role in the process has been circumscribed by Congress as well as by the delegation to the Commissioner of any authority that the Secretary may have-a clear recognition by Congress and the Secretary of her lack of competence in this area. See Tummino v. Hamburg, 2013 WL 1348656 at *21. Yet, in something out of an alternate reality, the defendants seek a stay to pursue an appeal that would vindicate the Secretary’s disregard of the very principle they advocate….

Ouch.

And, living in the real world:

….Moreover, while there are some retail establishments that are open for longer hours than their pharmacy counters, the unjustifiable point-of-sale restrictions left in place under the Teva-FDA agreement will continue to present barriers to all women. Many women do not live near a store with an on-site pharmacy, and even when the drugstore or comparable facility has an on-site pharmacy, the difference between the hours of the pharmacy and the store itself is often significant. Indeed, a research letter published in the journal of the American Medical Association found that “of the 943 pharmacies called” in a survey of emergency contraceptive availability in five geographically diverse cities, “only 4.7% were open 24 hours.” Tracey A. Wilkinson et al., Research Letter: Access to Emergency Contraception for Adolescents, 307 J. Am. Med. Ass’n 362 (January 25, 2012)….

As anyone who lives in the real world can tell you, a twenty-four hour store with a pharmacy doesn’t necessarily have a twenty-four hour pharmacy. And that can depend on where you live. There’s a significant difference in availability from “on the shelf” to “behind the counter and you have to ask for it and present ID”.

And, further, the administration’s motivation for opposing availability of Plan B contraception gets attention:

….This argument ignores the fact that the FDA found that the drug was safe and could be used properly without a doctor’s prescription, and was prepared to make it available over-the-counter for all ages. As Commissioner Hamburg observed, “there is adequate and reasonable, well-supported, and science-based evidence that Plan B One-Step is safe and effective and should be approved for nonprescription use for all females of child-bearing potential.” Statement from FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, M.D., on Plan B One-Step (Dec. 7, 2011). Thus, if a stay is denied, the public can have confidence that the FDA’s judgment is being vindicated, and if a stay is granted, it will allow the bad-faith, politically motivated decision of Secretary Sebelius, who lacks any medical or scientific expertise, to prevail-thus justifiably undermining the public’s confidence in the drug approval process….

[emphasis added]

And, even more smack down of the administration:

….Nor is there any merit to the related argument that a stay will “prevent public uncertainty regarding the status of the drugs at issue here pending the government’s appeal to the Second Circuit.” Defs.’ Br. at 13. This silly argument ignores the fact it is the government’s appeal from the order that sustained the judgment of the Commissioner of the FDA that is the cause of any uncertainty, and that that appeal is taken solely to vindicate the improper conduct of the Secretary and possibly for the purpose of further delaying greater access to emergency contraceptives for purely political reasons. Whether my order is stayed or not will not resolve any uncertainty….

And, the “I can’t believe anyone with a grandmother, mother, sister, or daughter wrote that” quote:

….The defendants also argue that “if the status of these drugs is changed and later reversed, it can lead to situations in which women mistakenly believe that they can obtain the drug without a prescription or at certain locations where it used to be available, but is no longer.” Defs.’ Br. at 13. This argument assumes that defendants have a likelihood of success on the merits, an issue that I will shortly address, and is largely an insult to the intelligence of women….

This is not a happy judge:

….On remand, defendants engaged in the same bad faith that resulted in my initial remand. They delayed the decision for three years and, ultimately, improper political influence prevented the FDA from granting the petition. Nor do they claim a reasonable probability of success on appeal in challenging my analysis of their flagrant misconduct….

And, the final say:

….The motion for a stay pending the appeal is denied. Indeed, in my view, the defendants’ appeal is frivolous and is taken for the purpose of delay. Nevertheless, as a courtesy to the Court of Appeals, and to enable it to schedule the motion in the ordinary course, I grant a stay pending the hearing or submission of the defendants’ motion for a stay in the Court of Appeals on the condition that the motion for a stay be filed by noon on May 13, 2013….

This will be interesting.

It’s nice outside today, you think I’m gonna do any research on the Internets?

A few days ago, at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

C081066 05/10/2013 CLINT ZWEIFEL FOR MISSOURI Hoisting Engineers Local 513 Political & Educational Fund 3449 Hollenberg Dr Bridgeton MO 63044 5/10/2013 $10,000.00

C081066 05/10/2013 CLINT ZWEIFEL FOR MISSOURI Dollar, Burns & Becker, LC 1100 Main Street Suite 2600 Kansas City MO 64105 5/10/2013 $10,000.00

[emphasis added]

We already know it’s not governor.

“Useless laws weaken the necessary laws.” – Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu (1689 – 1755)

The past week Missouri General Assembly did its utmost to hold back the tide of Sharia and international law cases contaminating our state courts. Yes, that’s sarcasm.

All nuts, all the time.

This has been a right wingnut obsession for quite some time.

Previously:

HJR 31: things that keep us awake at night worrying, part 2 (February 25, 2011)

Anti-Sharia bigotry in Missouri hides behind a constitutional pretense (March 28, 2012)

HB 1512: definitely not a jobs bill (March 27, 2012)

One question:

What does God need with a starship?

“…political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Prize…” (May 8, 2013)

Ladies and gentlemen, your right wingnut controlled General Assembly (May 9, 2013)

HB 436: nullification – there’s no such thing as a moderate republican (May 10, 2013)

SB 265: tinfoil hats – there’s no such thing as a moderate republican (May 11, 2013)

SB 267, as truly agreed and finally passed on May 8th:

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

[TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]

SENATE SUBSTITUTE FOR

SENATE BILL NO. 267 [pdf]

97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

2013

1409S.02T

AN ACT

To amend chapter 506, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to the laws of other countries.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows:

Section A. Chapter 506, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 506.600, to read as follows:

506.600. 1. This section shall be known as the “Civil Liberties Defense Act”. The Missouri general assembly finds that it shall be the public policy of this state to protect its citizens from the application of foreign laws when the application of a foreign law will result in the violation of a right protected by the constitutions of the state of Missouri and the United States, including, but not limited to, due process, freedom of religion, speech, or press, and any right of privacy.

2. The Missouri general assembly fully recognizes the right to contract freely under the laws of this state, and also recognizes that his right may be reasonably and rationally circumscribed pursuant to the state’s interest to protect and promote rights and privileges protected under the Missouri and United States constitutions, including, but not limited to, due process, freedom of religion, speech, or press, and any right of privacy.

3. As used in this section, the following terms mean:

(1) “Court”, any court, board, administrative agency, or other adjudicative or enforcement authority of this state;

(2) “Foreign law, legal code, or system”, any law, legal code, or system of a jurisdiction outside of any state or territory of the United States, including, but not limited to, international organizations and tribunals, and applied by that jurisdiction’s courts, administrative bodies, or other formal or informal tribunals;

(3) “Religious organization”, any church, seminary, synagogue, temple, mosque, religious order, religious corporation, association, or society, whose identity is distinctive in terms of common religious creed, beliefs, doctrines, practices, or rituals, of any faith or denomination, including any organization qualifying as a church or religious organization under section 501(c)(3) or 501(d) of the United States Internal Revenue Code.

4. Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in the matter at issue in whole or in part on any foreign law, legal code, or system that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions.

5. A contract or contractual provisions, if capable of segregation, which provides for the choice of a law, legal code, or system to govern some or all of the disputes between the parties adjudicated by a court of law or by an arbitration panel arising from the contract mutually agreed upon shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the foreign law, legal code, or system chosen includes or incorporates any substantive or procedural law, as applied to the dispute at issue, that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions.

6. (1) A contract or contractual provisions, if capable of segregation, which provides for a jurisdiction for purposes of granting the courts or arbitration panels in personam jurisdiction over the parties to adjudicate any disputes between parties arising from the contract mutually agreed upon shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the jurisdiction chosen includes any foreign law, legal code, or system, as applied to the dispute at issue, that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions;

(2) If a resident of this state, subject to personal jurisdiction in this state, seeks to maintain litigation, arbitration, agency, or similarly binding proceedings in this state and if the courts of this state find that granting a claim of forum non conveniens or a related claim violates or would likely violate rights protected under the Missouri and United States constitutions of the nonclaimant in the foreign forum with respect to the matter in dispute, then it is the public policy of this state that the claim shall be denied.

7. Without prejudice to any legal right, this act shall not apply to a corporation, partnership, limited liability company, business association, or other legal entity that contracts to subject itself to foreign law in a jurisdiction other than this state or the United States.

8. No court or arbitrator shall interpret this act to limit the right of any person to the free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States constitution and by the constitution of this state. No court shall interpret this act to require or authorize any court to adjudicate, or prohibit any religious organization from adjudicating ecclesiastical matters, including, but not limited to, the election, appointment, calling, dismissal, removal, or excommunication of a member, officer, official, priest, nun, monk, pastor, rabbi, imam, or member of the clergy, of the religious organization, or determination or interpretation of the doctrine of the religious organization, where adjudication by a court would violate the constitution of this state or the prohibition of the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

9. This section shall not be interpreted by any court to conflict with any federal treaty or other international agreement to which the United States is a party to the extent that such treaty or international agreement preempts or is superior to state law on the matter at issue.

[emphasis in original]

….4. Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in the matter at issue in whole or in part on any foreign law, legal code, or system that is repugnant or inconsistent with the Missouri and United States constitutions….

Ah, that would be the blanket immunity from answering for crimes against humanity clause. I wonder who that was for? Just asking.

Think about that “any foreign law, legal code, or system” phrase for a minute. Apparently America popped into existence fully formed. One minute it wasn’t there, then, “poof”, it was. Go figure.

Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

…In Great Britain, the King himself is sued in the respectful form of a petition, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court…

Great Britain isn’t in the United States and we don’t have a king, right? Apparently we do have a Kenyan born usurper who’s gonna put us all in U.N. mandated FEMA gay marriage camps. But, I digress.

Damn, with one bill the Missouri General Assembly swept away over two hundred years of American legal precedent. They can do that?

In the Journal of the Missouri House for May, 8, 2013:

[….]

2267 Journal of the House [pdf]

[….]

SS SB 267, relating to the laws of other countries, was taken up by Representative Curtman.

Representative Diehl assumed the Chair.

On motion of Representative Curtman, SS SB 267 was truly agreed to and finally passed by

the following vote:

AYES: 109

Allen Anderson Austin Bahr Barnes

Bernskoetter Berry Black Brattin Brown

Burlison Cierpiot Conway 104 Cookson Cornejo

Cox Crawford Cross Curtm an Davis

Diehl Dohrman Dugger Elmer Engler

Entlicher Fitzpatrick Fitzwater Flanigan Fowler

Fraker Frame Franklin Frederick Gannon

Gatschenberger Gosen Grisamore Guernsey Haahr

Hampton Hansen Harris Hicks Higdon

Hinson Hoskins Hough Houghton Hurst

Johnson Jones 50 Justus Keeney Kelley 127

Koenig Kolkmeyer Korman Lair Lant

Lauer Leara Love Lynch Marshall

McGaugh Messenger Miller Molendorp Moon

Morris Muntzel Neely Neth Parkinson

Pfautsch Phillips Pike Pogue Redmon

Rehder Reiboldt Remole Rhoads Richardson

Riddle Roorda Ross Rowden Rowland

Schatz Schieber Schieffer Shull Shumake

Smith 120 Solon Sommer Spencer Stream

Swan Thomson Torpey Walker White

Wieland Wilson Wood Mr Speaker

NOES: 041

Anders Burns Butler Carpenter Colona

Conway 10 Curtis Dunn Ellinger Ellington

English Hodges Hubbard Hummel Kirkton

LaFaver May McCann Beatty McDonald McKenna

McManus McNeil Meredith Mitten Montecillo

Morgan Newman Nichols Norr Otto

Pace Peters Pierson Rizzo Runions

Schupp Smith 85 Swearingen Walton Gray Webb

Wright

PRESENT: 002

Englund Mayfield

ABSENT WITH LEAVE: 011

Funderburk Gardner Haefner Kelly 45 Kratky

Lichtenegger McCaherty Mims Scharnhorst Webber

Zerr

Representative Diehl declared the bill passed.

[….]

[emphasis added]

Well, Representative Dean Dohrman (r) and Representative Denny Hoskins (r) were three for three when it came to right wingnut dogma this past week. Nope, no moderates around there.

By @BGinKC

File this in that bulging folder labeled “This Session Can’t Be Over Soon Enough.”

One thing the Missouri General Assembly did right — no thanks to Casey Guernsey, who voted the way the speaker told him to, the schoolchildren of his district be damned, Speaker Tim Jones (and more importantly, the Speaker’s benefactor Rex Sinquefield) wanted him to vote “aye” on the legislation, so he did what any good mindless, brainless, clueless drone would do — he voted “aye.” Because he’s a whore for Rex and ALEC and the Koch brothers. Fortunately for the schoolkids, most of the Democrats and 42 Republicans voted “no.”

 In a stinging rebuke to Speaker Tim Jones, the heavily Republican House has rejected for the second time his drive to tie educators’ job evaluations to students’ academic progress.

The latest defeat came shortly before midnight Wednesday, when legislators refused to accept a scaled-down bill that would have applied the mandatory evaluation system to public school administrators only – not teachers.

Rep. Jay Barnes, R-Jefferson City, said the new plan aimed to create “a system of continual improvement in our schools for the people in charge … the people, as Harry Truman would say, who sit at desks where the buck stops.”

Though Jones, R-Eureka, held the voting board open for nearly a half-hour and his lieutenants roamed the chamber wrangling votes, the proposal fizzled on a vote of 76-82.

Forty-two of the 110 House Republicans voted against the bill. Opponents were not given a chance to speak but said afterward that the plan was poorly drafted and would have done little to improve education.

“If we have problems, we remove the School Board,” said Rep. Chris Molendorp, R-Belton. “I don’t need a top-down, bureaucratic, big-government approach to local education.”

Some Republicans also resented Jones’ tactics; he recently removed two GOP members of a fiscal review committee who opposed the bill.

The bill was a priority of a national reform group, StudentsFirst, founded by former Washington, D.C., schools leader Michelle Rhee. The group contends that a statewide system would improve the transparency and consistency of educator evaluations.

Originally, the bill would have affected teachers’ tenure, as well as the evaluation system. That broader proposal was defeated 102-55 last month.

Personally, I found this sentence absolutely delicious, and reread it a dozen times, each time my smile getting broader. “The bill was a priority of a national reform group, StudentsFirst, founded by former Washington, D.C., schools leader Michelle Rhee. “

My husband and daughter are teachers. I consider Michelle Rhee to be not just a grifter, although she is that too, but she is more dangerous than any grifter. She is a terrorist who targets the education system and wants to blow it up. The bitch ought to be in jail for fraud, not a top-dollar consultant/lobbyist, after she faked the improvements in student performance in D.C. She only has credibility among people who want to destroy public education. Like Rex Sinquefield. Learn that name, outstaters. He is who your republican senator and representative that YOU sent to Jeff answers to, not you. Unless you’re a billionaire, too.  

“Useless laws weaken the necessary laws.” – Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu (1689 – 1755)

Yes, this about Agenda 21 paranoid posturing.

If the hat fits, wear it:

The ultimate in head wear, with accessory, for the right wingnut controlled Missouri General Assembly.

From the Southern Poverty Law Center (March 14, 2012):

….In the world of far-right extremists, Agenda 21 is demonized as a sort of Trojan horse, part of a larger scheme to shatter Americans’ liberties and institute a totalitarian, one-world government known typically as the “New World Order…”

…to the John Birch Society (JBS), one of the main groups promoting the conspiracy theory about Agenda 21, it represents the end of America as we know it. This is the same group, of course, that claimed President Dwight D. Eisenhower was a secret communist….

Previously:

HB 42: first, they came for the black helicopters and I did not speak up (December 5, 2012)

SB 265: if you didn’t want the black helicopters to track you down… (February 6, 2013)

“…political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Prize…” (May 8, 2013)

Ladies and gentlemen, your right wingnut controlled General Assembly (May 9, 2013)

HB 436: nullification – there’s no such thing as a moderate republican (May 10, 2013)

On May 8th the Missouri House passed SB 265, an anti Agenda 21 bill, by a veto proof majority. The bill, as truly agreed to and finally passed:

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

[TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]

SENATE BILL NO. 265 [pdf]

97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

2013

1330S.01T

AN ACT

To amend chapter 1, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to prohibition

on certain policies that infringe on private property rights.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows:

Section A. Chapter 1, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 1.370, to read as follows:

1.370. 1. As used in this section, “political subdivision” means any state, county, incorporated city, unincorporated city, public local entity, public-private partnership, and any other public entity of the state, a county, or city.

2. Neither the state of Missouri nor any political subdivision shall adopt or implement policy recommendations that deliberately or inadvertently infringe or restrict private property rights without due process, as may be required by policy recommendations originating in, or traceable to Agenda 21, adopted by the United Nations in 1992 at its Conference on Environment and Development or any other international law or ancillary plan of action that contravenes the Constitution of the United States or the Missouri Constitution.

3. Since the United Nations has accredited and enlisted numerous nongovernmental and intergovernmental organizations to assist in the implementation of its policies relative to Agenda 21 around the world, the state of Missouri and all political subdivisions are prohibited from entering into any agreement with, expending any sum of money for, receiving funds from, contracting services from, or giving financial aid to those nongovernmental and intergovernmental organizations as defined in Agenda 21.

[emphasis in original]

In the Journal of the Missouri House for May, 8, 2013:

[….]

2237 Journal of the House [pdf]

On motion of Representative Rowland, SB 265 was truly agreed to and finally passed by the

following vote:

AYES: 118

Allen Anderson Austin Bahr Barnes

Bernskoetter Berry Black Brattin Burlison

Cierpiot Conway 10 Conway 104 Cookson Cornejo

Cox Crawford Cross Curtm an Davis

Diehl Dohrman Dugger Ellington Elmer

Engler English Entlicher Fitzpatrick Fitzwater

Flanigan Fowler Fraker Frame Franklin

Frederick Gannon Gatschenberger Gosen Grisamore

Haahr Haefner Hampton Hansen Harris

Hicks Higdon Hinson Hodges Hoskins

Hough Houghton Hurst Johnson Jones 50

Justus Keeney Kelley 127 Koenig Kolkmeyer

Korman Lair Lant Lauer Leara

Love Lynch Marshall Mayfield McCaherty

McGaugh Messenger Miller Molendorp Moon

Morris Muntzel Neely Neth Parkinson

Pfautsch Phillips Pike Pogue Redmon

Rehder Reiboldt Remole Rhoads Richardson

Riddle Roorda Ross Rowden Rowland

Scharnhorst Schatz Schieber Schieffer Shull

Shumake Smith 120 Solon Sommer Spencer

Stream Swan Swearingen Thomson Torpey

Walker White Wieland Wilson Wood

Wright Zerr Mr Speaker

NOES: 037

Anders Burns Butler Carpenter Colona

Curtis Dunn Ellinger Englund Hubbard

Hummel Kirkton Kratky LaFaver May

McCann Beatty McDonald McKenna McManus McNeil

Meredith Mitten Montecillo Morgan Newman

Nichols Norr Otto Pace Peters

Pierson Rizzo Runions Schupp Smith 85

Walton Gray Webb

PRESENT: 000

ABSENT WITH LEAVE: 008

Brown Funderburk Gardner Guernsey Kelly 45

Lichtenegger Mims Webber

Speaker Jones declared the bill passed.

[….]

[emphasis added]

Nope, no “moderate” republicans here.

Previously:

HB 436: loonier than Wayne LaPierre at a press conference (February 5, 2013)

National Firearms Act (NFA)

….Firearms subject to the 1934 Act included shotguns and rifles having barrels less than 18 inches in length, certain firearms described as “any other weapons,” machineguns, and firearm mufflers and silencers….

Uh that would be sawed off shotguns, fully automatic machineguns, and silencers.

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

[TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]

SENATE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR

HOUSE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR

HOUSE BILL NO. 436

97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

1204S.04T          2013

AN ACT

To repeal sections 21.750, 571.030, 571.101, 571.107, 571.117, and 590.010, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof fourteen new sections relating to firearms, with a penalty provision.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

[….]

3. (1) All federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, shall be specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.

           (2) Such federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations include, but are not limited to:

           (a) The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1934;

           (b) The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968…

[….]

[bold emphasis in original, underline emphasis added]

In the Journal of the Missouri House for May, 8, 2013:

[….]

2273 Journal of the House [pdf]

On motion of Representative Funderburk, SCS HCS HB 436, as amended, was truly agreed

to and finally passed by the following vote:

AYES: 116

Allen Anderson Austin Bahr Bernskoetter

Berry Black Brattin Brown Burlison

Cierpiot Conway 10 Conway 104 Cookson Cornejo

Cox Crawford Curtman Davis Diehl

Dohrman Dugger Elmer Engler English

Entlicher Fitzpatrick Fitzwater Flanigan Fowler

Fraker Frame Franklin Frederick Funderburk

Gannon Gatschenberger Gosen Grisamore Guernsey

Haahr Hampton Hansen Harris Hicks

Higdon Hinson Hodges Hoskins Hough

Houghton Hubbard Hurst Johnson Jones 50

Justus Keeney Kelley 127 Koenig Kolkmeyer

Korman Lair Lant Lauer Leara

Love Lynch Marshall Mayfield McCaherty

McGaugh McKenna Messenger Miller Moon

Morris Muntzel Neely Neth Parkinson

Pfautsch Phillips Pike Pogue Redmon

Rehder Reiboldt Remole Rhoads Richardson

Riddle Roorda Ross Rowden Rowland

Scharnhorst Schatz Schieber Schieffer Shull

Shumake Smith 120 Solon Sommer Spencer

Stream Swan Thomson Torpey Walker

White Wieland Wilson Wood Zerr

Mr Speaker

NOES: 038

Anders Barnes Butler Carpenter Colona

Curtis Dunn Ellinger Ellington Englund

Hummel Kirkton Kratky LaFaver May

McCann Beatty McDonald McManus McNeil Meredith

Mitten Montecillo Morgan Newman Nichols

Norr Otto Pace Peters Pierson

Rizzo Runions Schupp Smith 85 Swearingen

Walton Gray Webb Wright

PRESENT: 000

ABSENT WITH LEAVE: 009

Burns Cross Gardner Haefner Kelly 45

Lichtenegger Mims Molendorp Webber

Representative Diehl declared the bill passed.

Speaker Jones resumed the Chair.

[….]

[emphasis added]

Yes, you got that right. A veto proof majority in the Missouri General Assembly voted to nullify federal prohibitions of sawed off shotguns, fully automatic machineguns, and silencers.

Forget seersucker. It looks like scratchy gray wool uniforms are back in vogue. [That sarcastic reference to the last serious nullification disagreement which was settled almost 150 years ago came from someone else on the Internets.]

There’s even more right wingnutty goodness in HB 436:

….6. Any official, agent, or employee of the United States government who enforces or attempts to enforce any of the infringements on the right to keep and bear arms included in subsection 3 of this section is guilty of a class A misdemeanor….

[emphasis in original]

Oh, that’ll cost a lot of money to litigate all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

It looks like Representative Dean Dohrman (r) has earned his keep.

And Representative Denny Hoskins (r) is running for a leadership position:

Denny Hoskins, CPA

Missouri House of Representatives

District 54

Capitol Report

May 10th, 2013

[….]

….I am pleased to officially announce my candidacy for Speaker Pro Tem of the Missouri House of Representatives. As you may, or may not know, Rep. Jason Smith, current Speaker Pro Tem, is running for the vacant Congressional seat in Missouri’s 8th district. I believe I have the experience, character, and conviction needed to fill the position. Speaker Pro Tem is selected by a vote of my House colleagues, many of whom have already expressed their support of my candidacy….

[….]

Heh. Service is its own reward.    

Via Twitter:

briannieves ‏@briannieves

Tonight we sent THREE of my pieces of legislation to the governor’s desk! Property Rights, American Laws, & 2nd Amendment Preservation Act!! 10:14 PM – 8 May 13

That would be to keep the United Nations black helicopters from seizing vehicles with Gadsden Flag license plates (Agenda 21), to curtail the epidemic of court cases influenced by Kenyan born office holders (Sharia Law), and to spend millions of dollars re-litigating the constitutionality of the North’s victory over the South in the Civil War (nullification! guns!).

We’re all aquiver with excitement at the prospects for the future.

briannieves ‏@briannieves

[….] Thnx Brother! I NEVER Brag about Senator stuff BUT… I just passed the most Hard Core 2nd Amendment Bill, perhaps in the country 10:20 PM – 8 May 13

Well, someone is.

Previously:

SJR 45: Sen. Brian Nieves (r) – same tune, different concert hall (January 11, 2012)

SB 265: if you didn’t want the black helicopters to track you down… (February 6, 2013)

Well, yeah (February 7, 2013)

“…political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Prize…” (May 8, 2013)