Representatives of the Party of No and its supporters responded in one of two ways immediately after the passage of the Senate bill on Mondayhealth care reform law – with violent rhetorical excess, or with real violence. The first characterized the GOPers in congress who competed to outdo each other’s demagogic excesses in their efforts to portray this bill as an  “outrage” that threatens democracy. Their tantrums arguably helped whip up the second, more violent response on the part of their out-of-control Tea Party dupes. The result? Violence and threats of violence against Democrats who had refused to be intimidated by months of implied threat.

The latest beneficiary of the Republican efforts to fan the Tea Party frenzy is Rep. Russ Carnahan (D-3rd). A coffin that had earlier figured in a Tea Party protest was left on the lawn of Carnahan’s residence Tuesday night. Even KMOV reporter Matt Sczesny, who has seemed at times perhaps a little too friendly to the Tea Partiers to be considered objective (they certainly appreciate his coverage, at any rate), was moved to observe:

… the police were not involved, since it doesn’t appear there was any direct threat and the coffin was empty. However, one can only imagine what may be implied by leaving a coffin on a front lawn.  We all know that emotions have been running high over the health care reform debate, but this has to make you wonder where this debate is going.

Sczesny is correct – even though the Tea Party is claiming that they have been “smeared” by Carnahan and the coffin was simply part of a prayer vigil in which it symbolized the death of freedom. Viewed in the context of the the recent threats of violence, Carnahan, along with all sane Americans, should be concerned about where the delusional hysteria and bullyboy tactics of this group may take us.

The individuals, however, who ought to be most concerned are our putative Republican leaders who have been willing to play on the emotions of the looney tunes brigade for their own political purposes. As Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo observes about the recent spate of violence:

… this didn’t come from nowhere and it can’t be pawned off on a few cranks. Everything that’s happened over the last five days has grown from a pattern of incitement going back almost a year — wildly hyperbolic statements, coded appeals to menacing behavior, flippant jokes about bringing firearms to political events and all the rest.

We need to contact our Republican congressional representatives and demand that they take responsibility for inciting fear and anger among their more unstable constituents, and for implicitly indicating that violence might be justified whenever individuals fail to prevail politically. Not that they’ll ever own up to their role – already they are fishing around for ways to blame the victims – but they ought to hear that a few of us at least know just what they have been doing – and that we will do our best to make sure that that knowledge becomes a commonplace.

Addenda:  Ezra Klein gets it right while keeping a calm, civil tongue in his head.

Yesterday I wrote about Claire McCaskill’s sad decision to join a cabal of Democratic senators out to derail the EPA’s authority to regulate green-house gases from industrial sources. Today we learn that their efforts have succeeded in delaying new EPA rules – which were devised in the first place to compensate for the unwillingness of the Senate to respond to our developing climate crisis.

The reason McCaskill and her fellow letter writers give for their delaying tactics is that they represent the interest of coal-dependent states. Of course, one goal of the EPA regulations as well as the the cap-and-trade provsions in proposed House legislation, the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), is to wean the U.S. from its coal addiction – currently 50% of U.S. electricity is coal generated.

Coal is definitely not a benign source of energy.  Its extraction destroys our natural environment, the fine particles produced by burning coal are harmful to human health, and, of course, coal constitutes one of the main factors exacerbating the climate crisis we face since coal-burning plants are the largest producers of CO2 emissions in the U.S.

So why is McCaskill, a politician who loves to claim that she shares the progressive values of the Democratic party – in fundraising letters at least – trying to prolong Missouri’s dependency on coal? Instead of whining about the short-term costs of moving us from coal dependency, shouldn’t she be exercising the leadership we expect from her?

I would suggest that McCaskill could learn from the example of Russ Carnahan, who, in his just released economic action plan, A Regional Approach to Job Growth, emphasizes the importance of legislation like ACES in guaranteeing Missouri’s continued, long-term prosperity:

Nations around the world are emerging as leaders in clean-energy production creating jobs in their respective countries because of the growing demand of these technologies. Clean energy technology can and must be made in America. The Clean Energy and Security Act – which was passed by the House of Representatives in June, 2009 – would create millions of jobs that cannot be shipped overseas, making America the global innovation leader; it would increase our national security by reducing our dependence on foreign oil; and it would preserve our planet by reducing the pollution that causes global warming.

Too bad McCaskill, who has signaled her opposition to ACES, doesn’t have this kind of vision or courage, but, instead, seems to be choosing to work against our long-term good to further the goals of the powerful coal-lobby and placate brainwashed rural voters.

 

An enthusiastic group of fifteen or twenty people greeted Russ Carnahan as he exited the concourse on his return to St. Louis after the historic vote in the House on HB 3200. A minute later, Lacy Clay strolled out of the same concourse and was delighted to be greeted so warmly.

The House vote on health care legislation, scheduled for Saturday, precedes the Thanksgiving break. HCAN (Health Care for America Now) is urging St. Louisans to turn out and thank the two St. Louis Congressmen who will vote in favor of it: Lacy Clay and Russ Carnahan.

Next Monday, Nov. 9, at 11:00 a.m.

That’s short notice, I know, but do your best to get there. Progressive activists should be aware that party politics isn’t unlike personal relationships. If you only complain when your friends do something you disapprove of, but you never compliment them for their thoughtfulness, don’t expect tight bonds.

If you’re in Clay’s or Carnahan’s district, did you phone either of them to thank him for his ACES vote? I thought not. Have you ever complained to either of them about their stands on  issues? Right, just as I figured. When you think about the heat they’ve been taking–and I twice last summer watched Carnahan deal with rude tea partiers over the health care issue–they need to hear some appreciation. They’re not voting automatons; they’re people.

And besides, attending such an event is a chance to celebrate what we as progressives have accomplished on health care since the Alice in Wonderland contingent almost killed the public option last August.

Lacy Clay’s office is at Delmar and Euclid. The address is 624 North Euclid, Suite 326. Russ Carnahan’s office is at Brentwood Blvd. and Manchester. The address is 8764 Manchester Rd., Suite 203.

A similar sort of event is probably being planned for thanking Emanuel Cleaver. Feel free to post that info here if you know of one, and I’ll add  it as an update on the front page. And if there’s an event to give Ike Skelton the raspberry, I’ll be happy to post that info as well.

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about Missouri Republicans who were gearing up to fight Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules that would guarantee net neutrality.  Net neutrality is the collective term for a set of principles that would guarantee that Internet service providers (ISPs) cannot discriminate or deny access based on content. It is vitally important to a free and transparent internet.  Consequently, in these days of a debased and diminished news media, it is arguably of equal importance to our democracy.

Since it is to the advantage of the ISPs to be able to charge differentially based on content, they are fighting these new rules tooth and nail.  Thanks to their deep pockets and hard lobbying they are successfully recruiting many congress members to their cause.

Three Democratic members of the House from Missouri, Russ Carnahan, William Lacy Clay, and Emanuel Cleaver have signed onto a letter to the Chair of the FCC, Julius Genachowski, asking him to back away from his proposed new rules:

As the FCC embarks on its much anticipated rulemaking addressing the subject of “net neutrality,” we therefore urge the commission to carefully consider the full range of potential consequences that government action may have on network Investment. We are confident that the objective rule of facts will reveal the critical role that competition and private investment – and of necessity will continue to play – in building robust networks that are safe, open and secure.  In light of the growth and innovation in new applications that the current regime has enabled, as compared to limited evidence demonstrating any tangible harm, we would urge you to avoid tentative conclusions which favor government regulation.

As I noted in my earlier post, these assertions are wrong on almost every point since they consist of easily discredited fictions promulgated by the ISPs. Read this Free Press report to understand just how misleading this letter is, and if any of the three congressmen represent you, contact them and make sure they understand the pertinent facts.

Update:  Also consider these suggestions (via the DailyKos):  Please ask Reps. Carnahan, Clay and Cleaver to:

… sign on with Rep. Waxman, Eshoo and Markey as co-sponsors of the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009 (HR 3458). He should also write a separate letter to Chairman Genachowski of the FCC pledging his support of strong Net Neutrality rules.

The DailyKos diarist also points out that

The fight for Net Neutrality is very real, and it’s getting nasty. You can send a message to Washington by adding your name to the 2-million-person call to action.

Nancy Pelosi was in town Saturday to do a fundraiser for Russ Carnahan, which event seems to have come off uneventfully.  Uneventful, though, does not mean that the presence of such a visceral target of right-wing fury went unremarked by the local fringe-wingers who put on their best Saturday night bib and tucker to celebrate the Speaker’s visit. High points of the eventing:

–Ed Martin, who is running for Carnahan’s congressional seat, held his own wannabe populist chic “shadow” event, which he called the “‘Welcome to St. Louis Speaker Nancy Pelosi’ Pork and Beans Party!”  This guy belongs to the same party as Kit Bond and Roy Blunt and he’s calling Nancy Pelosi out about pork?  

That wasn’t all he got wrong, since the  pièce de résistance at his pork and beans banquet was his claim that Pelosi was flying in for a political fundraiser on a military plane. Unfortunately for Mr. Martin’s credibility, the claim was false. Pelosi traveled to St. Louis in a commercial plane paid for by the campaign.

–The ubiquitous, local teapartiers infiltrated the Carnahan fundraiser. Local fringe diva, Dana Loesh, has posted what I suppose one could call contraband video of Pelosi’s comments on her Webpage, where one can enjoy the added bonus of parsing Loesh’s rather startling use of language – evidently her kinship with Sarah Palin goes beyond the political.  

Loesh, who seems to be hunky-dory with those Republicans who were almost too eager to march in lockstep with BushCo as it decimated the United States’ prosperity and reputation, captions the video thusly: “Wherein Nancy Pelosi praises Russ Carnahan for following her lead instead of leading on his own.” Irony or what?

I do wonder, though, if any of the “infiltrators” paid the $250 charge for tickets. If they didn’t, would Loesh’s video, demonstrating her presence, justify sending her a bill for the price of entrance?

–Finally, the funniest – and the most chilling – response to Peloisi’s visit was posted on the St. Louis Tea Party Webpage prior to her arrival by Bill Hennessy. He issued a somewhat half-hearted call to arms, including this hilarious list of Dos and Donts for anti-Pelosi protestors:

•Be in groups of 2 or more, never alone, from the time you park to the time you pull away.

•Pick an end time and stick to it.  Trouble starts late and with stragglers.  The other side won’t (usually) try anything in a large crowd.  (They’re brave in a funny way)

•Carry a camcorder and photograph or video everybody – not the “celebrities,” the people

•Don’t be surprised if the other side inserts plants to start trouble to be blamed on us

•Don’t give in to taunts

•Pray before the event, by yourself or in groups, for courage, patience, and resolve

•If there is a theme, stick with it.  If it’s hippie, dress like a hippie.

•Don’t worry about being called AstroTurf.  Don’t. We’ve already won that battle, and the whole world knows that the people with the printed signs are the AstroTurfers.  Coordinated, planned protests are not AstroTurf-they’re just street theatre.  We can use some of that.

•Don’t spread yourselves out-stay packed.  Safety is more important than appearances at this point.

You can laugh all you want about the teapartiers willingness to sacrifice their usual revolutionary war hero shtick to go underground as hippies – these folks do love a good theme party – and about the level of self-delusion manifest here. Hennessy seems to think the teapartiers have shed their association with Astroturf after all – but am I the only one that gets the chills at the level of paranoia that permeates this list?  

Although it does animate my own paranoia, I admit, when I read that the biggest group of gun nuts in the state is being told to ” Carry a camcorder and photograph or video everybody – not the “celebrities,” the people.”  The people – that, my friends, is you and me and who knows what these fools are capable of.

Does Dana Loesch speak from the heart or what? What passion. In reference to Russ Carnahan’s statement after the Thursday town hall, she laid it on the line:

The first opportunity this man has to address his constituents, the very first opportunity he has, what does he do? He blames YOU! He says you’re the disruption. He says nothing about the beat down of Kenneth Gladney. Nothing! That’s the first … It’s the first chance he has to make a statement. He coulda been peaceable. Again, folks, this is your legislator (inaudible). He decided to make you the enemy, even though it is known that people were bused into that town hall. It is known they were staff.

That is some powerful oratory. And indeed, why couldn’t the congressman look past the shouted insults and see into your hearts, understand that you oppose every one of his political principles and that you will stop at nothing to stay him from achieving them? Knowing that, why couldn’t he be more Christ-like, turn the other cheek, and vote no on health insurance reform? His stubbornness is unfathomable.

As for Carnahan’s failure to comment on the beat down of Kenneth Gladney, a bigger man than he would assume that Gladney’s account of the skirmish is the truth and that the SEIU person, Elston McCowan, lied. After all, Gladney hollered the loudest to the media.

And finally, Loesch has a point about the busing. How dare those SEIU people carpool to an event?

Speaking of Christ-like behavior, though, I have to admit to a niggling doubt about the teabaggers’ basic aims on this issue. I mean, Christ was always about healing the sick, so where would he stand in this debate? Oh! Never mind. It’s come to me. He’d probably keep the system we have and tell sick people to look for a miracle from Him. Right, Ms. Loesch?

The House Energy and Commerce Committee has helpfully produced a district-by-district breakdown of how HR 3200 (the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act) will affect Missourians.

Here’s a list of each district breakdown in Missouri:

   * Wm. Lacy Clay (MO-1)

   * W. Todd Akin (MO-2)

   * Russ Carnahan (MO-3)

   * Ike Skelton (MO-4)

   * Emanuel Cleaver (MO-5)

   * Sam Graves (MO-6)

   * Roy Blunt (MO-7)

   * Jo Ann Emerson (MO-8)

   * Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO-9)

Looking at some of the breakdowns, it’s interesting to note that Blunt’s district would benefit quite a bit. Of the 5 categories of benefits listed here, the 7th District is either the leader or the 2nd highest recipient in each category. 16,500 small businesses in Blunt’s district would be eligible for tax credits to pay for their health care plan. 12,500 seniors would no longer face a donut hole in their prescription coverage from Medicare. And so on.

Another interesting fact. The health care reform bill is largely financed from a surtax on the wealthiest Americans. Most families in Missouri won’t face this surtax – in most district the percentage of households that won’t face the surtax is over 99%! The 2nd, represented by Republican Todd Akin has the highest percentage of families that will face the surtax… at a whopping 2.6%.  Just as sure as I am that Akin will vote against any health care reform bill, I’m positive that he’ll claim “higher taxes on hard working Missourians” as a reason for his opposition. Sad, really.

I’m not impressed.

Look at this post that is currently making the rounds on conservative blogs and on Twitter, creatively titled “Russ Carnahan Dismisses Black Man at Townhall.” The video in the post shows Russ Carnahan speaking at the same health care town hall that hotflash attended earlier this week. A questioner, presumably the author of the blog Blacksphere, shouts a question in the middle of Carnahan’s presentation, at which point Carnahan proceeds to talk through the question without answering it.

Is there evidence, presented in the video or otherwise, that Russ Carnahan dismissed anyone because of the color of their skin? Or that he even dismissed someone because they did anything other than speak out of turn? Questioners were given time to speak at microphones at the town hall, and as hotflash noted, they weren’t all critics from the right – single payer advocates were able to make their voices heard forcefully and politely.

Mind you, this guy is prone to make wild parallels between the conservative Democrats of the segregated South (many of whom became Republicans after the national Democratic Party led the way on civil rights) and the Democrats of today. In the very next post, tastefully titled MO Senator McCaskill Denies Access to Certain Blacks Kevin compares an incident at McCaskill’s office in St. Louis with police sending attack dogs against defenseless protesters.

The incident hearkened me back to the ’60’s when racist Democrats controlled the police. In those days they would have turned loose the German Shepards attacking Republicans supporting the civil rights of black Americans. Likely a disappointment for McCaskill’s office that they didn’t.

What did McCaskill’s staff do to merit such a comparison? They asked police to move the rightwing protesters away the building after the protesters began beating on the doors and windows of the office building, including those of adjoining businesses unrelated to McCaskill’s Senate staff. The protesters were allowed to remain within view of McCaskill’s office. And of course, no attack dogs, batons, tear gas, fire hoses, gunfire, or other physical means were used to relocate the protesters.

If the best conservatives can do is to use Alan Keyes and Neal Boortz as standards for sober-minded discussion, they best be prepared for decades in the wilderness.

UPDATE: Here’s a link to the results of the CBO report that shows a $6 billion surplus projected over 10 years if the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 were enacted. (added by Clark)

______________________________________________

I assume that Russ Carnahan’s Monday morning town hall on health care reform was part of Obama’s push to mobilize support for passing the legislation. I got a robocall this evening while I was out from Lacy Clay, inviting me to take part in a conference call about health care. Part of the same campaign, probably.

And maybe Carnahan convinced a few more people in the crowded cafeteria at Forest Park Community College that the current ideas being floated in the House are worth their support. Most of the audience members were Democrats, as you could tell by the vocal support when Carnahan mentioned the proviso in the legislation calling for a tax on the most affluent 1.2 percent of the population to help fund health care reform. But there were plenty of right wingers there who wouldn’t have been convinced of the need for health care reform if Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater had appeared in the flesh, with halos shimmering above their heads, and told them so.

The wingnuts were there to heckle. Listen to the tempest they raised when Carnahan said the CBO estimates that the new plan might actually accrue a $6 billion surplus over the next ten years.

There were plenty of other times when they booed or laughed or yelled, “Lies! Lies!”

Not that all of the heat came from right wingers. Quite a few single-payer advocates were in the room and they expressed their opinions–forcefully but in a mostly civil manner. They got in line at the mikes and had their say.

Despite the sometimes heated emotions in the room, Carnahan and the five people on the panel managed to dispense a good deal of information. Calmly.

But the bozos who think health care reform will send this nation to the devil provided an object lesson in the differences between Democrats at a Republican town hall and Republicans at a Democratic one. As soon as Carnahan announced that some of the questions would be read from cards that people had filled out, one yahoo yelled: “Gonna screen those? Or will they come out of a basket?”

The fella’s been attending too many Republican town halls. Hey, mister? Don’t assume that Democrats follow the same play book as your guys. At the Akin/Luetkemeyer town hall last April, the questions obviously were screened, and only after listening for half an hour or more to factually-challenged assertions from the two representatives, did one man speak up and point out that the Employee Free Choice Act did not contain any provision depriving workers of the right to a secret vote, as Akin was saying it did. The protester wasn’t voicing a mere matter of opinion. He was pointing out incontrovertible fact. That audience member was escorted from the room.

Admittedly, the questions Carnahan read off of cards–there were only a few–were screened. But anybody could have his say at the mike. Indeed, one of the right wingers did.

If I’d gone into that meeting with no opinion on the merits of the new legislation, the wingnuts would have helped me decide what I believed. The opposite of whatever they did. But the apostles of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, who find bombastic hatefulness appealing, wouldn’t understand those of us who don’t.