Courtney Cole, the Democratic Party candidate in the 121st Legislative District, issued a press release on job creation yesterday:

Courtney Cole Calls for Special Session on Jobs Bill and Tax Credits

Urges Legislature to Pass Bi-Partisan Jobs Bill, Support the Ford Claycomo plant and quit playing politics with tax dollars

Warrensburg, MO — Democratic candidate for 121st District State Representative Courtney Cole is calling on the legislature to remove political agendas and agree to a special session to focus on passing a badly needed jobs bill to put Missourians back to work.

Cole’s request is after Governor Jay Nixon announced that he would be open to a special session if the legislature would guarantee it would be productive.

“Missouri has a 9.5 percent unemployment rate and small businesses are closing their doors every day. We cannot afford to lose more jobs.That is why today, I’m joining the bi-partisan call for the legislature to hold a special session focusing on a serious jobs bill that puts Missourians back to work and food on the table,” said Cole.

Cole is calling for the legislature to support incentives to keep the Ford Claycomo plant here in Missouri, incentives for manufacturing and small business growth in rural areas, and a serious review of the recent findings in an audit completed by State Auditor Susan Montee regarding tax handouts.

The audit, released in April, found that the legislature underestimated tax credit giveaways by over $1 billion dollars.

“The legislature must pass a plan to bring in long-term, good paying manufacturing, agricultural and small business jobs for Missouri families throughout the state,” said Cole. “We must remove politics out of who gets tax credits and allow Economic Development Director David Kerr to focus the necessary resources on attracting jobs. The partisan political games in Jefferson City have wasted millions of our hard earned tax dollars and kept too many people out of work. It’s time for it to end.”

And then there was this interpretation:

Mrs. Courtney Cole (D-Warrensburg)

May 25, 1:06 PM

Kansas City Religion & Politics Examiner Steven Fines

….Cole, who has increasingly close ties to the Missouri democratic establishment, is using Nixon’s Kansas City jobs speech to further the bond between her and the democratic minority. The Missouri Democratic Party is desperately trying to pick up seats in the Missouri House of Representatives after a dismal 2008.

However, in Cole’s August 3, 2009 candidacy announcement, she immediately highlighted job creation….

….Cole signaled early on that job creation is her number one priority.

“…Cole, who has increasingly close ties to the Missouri democratic establishment…”

Uh, Courtny Cole filed as the only Democratic Party candidate in the 121st Legislative District. She is an elected member of the Missouri State Democratic Committee. Now, would you mind telling us, good correspondent of the Kansas City Religion & Politics Examiner, how “increasingly close” worked into your story? Just asking.

“…The Missouri Democratic Party is desperately trying to pick up seats in the Missouri House of Representatives after a dismal 2008…”

Uh, if the Democratic Party picked up seats in the Missouri House in the 2008 election you’d think that it was the republican party that had a “dismal” year in 2008. You’d think.

And besides, Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) really hasn’t had a very good 2010.  

House Minority Leader and Representative Paul LeVota (D) was the featured speaker at the Thursday night meeting of the Johnson County Democratic Club in Warrensburg.

Representative Paul Levota (D) speaking at the Johnson County Democratic Club meeting in Warrensburg on Thursday night.

House Minority Leader and Representative Paul LeVota (D): ….I’m here to give a little bit of background about what happened this, this session and the real need to, I’m going to try and tell you the facts that happened this session which will make you take that extra step for Courtney [Cole]…and for Zac [Maggi] and really try to win back some seats. Because what we saw this session in Jefferson City, we can do a heck of a lot better. And we’re so close in getting these two people elected. So,  I’m hoping to tell you a little bit about what happened and then maybe you’ll be a little bit more motivated….

[….]

I’ve been the House Democratic Leader for three years, been in the House for eight years. I represent my hometown of Independence, Missouri. And, uh, we, we have seen quite a bit of change in the last eight years. When I was elected I came in with ninety new members and we were the first group of people, group of Democrats that were in the minority. We didn’t have the luxury of being in the majority.

[….]

But since that time we’ve seen this Republican legislature move us backwards in the state. And we’ve worked very hard to try to move forward. We made some progress with picking up eight seats in two cycles, which is better than any other Democratic group since nineteen sixty-four or six… And we also did our best to get a Democratic governor in there. So now we’re at a, a time when we had this successful election in two thousand and eight and we see what these Republicans are really all about. They are scared. So in two thousand and ten in the legislature the House spent a lot of time on non-binding resolutions. And these non-binding resolutions that they would put up in the House basically were messages to Congress to tell them what to do. One of them was that we reject the new health care out of Congress. One of them was to remind them that we are sovereign state. [laughter] Yeah, I didn’t, I wasn’t aware of that one. One was that we have the right to pray even though we already have the right to pray. Also, they need to do a balanced budget and they need to, anyway there’s a lot of things that the Missouri House spent a lot of time telling Congress what to do. Well, we needed to work on Missouri.

The Governor came out with goals that all Missourians could get behind for the session. Number one is create new jobs in the state. Number two, to make sure we have a balanced budget. And number three, to have real ethics reform at state, so we can get rid of that cloud of pay to play mentality in Jefferson City. And as the Governor presented those proposals at the beginning of the year everybody was on board with those. The Republicans were saying this sounds good. But then they wasted time with these non-binding resolutions. Where even the Senate was doing some work, the House continued to do that.

Then the Governor came back and said it’s even worse than we thought. We have to cut a half a billion dollars from the current budget to make everything balanced. So you put that on the legislature. Well, this was not a problem that is a natural disaster, this was a man made disaster. And it was man made because the continual, uh, belief by these Republicans that all you need to do is cut, cut, cut, give away our tax money to big businesses through tax credits and have them not be accountable, and ignore any other way to bring in more money to the state. So that’s where we are now, we’re, we’re reducing revenue continually. House Democrats continue to say we need a balanced approach. We need to first a foremost look at these tax credits, uh, review them, but that was off the page because these Republicans want to give money continually to their big business friends in the state.

So, it consumed the rest of the year, in the budget. And we had to figure out a way to make cuts, they were very painful. Um, but the worst part of it is that we did nothing to help solve the problem for next year. And we’re going to be in a deeper hole next year.

Meanwhile, the other goals of getting new jobs in the state, the Republicans failed to pass the Governor’s jobs bill to help create those jobs in the state, particularly help create jobs for, uh, manufacturing, like Ford, in the Kansas City area. And they even refused to do a real ethics reform bill. The House Democrats continue to push for, uh, ethics reform, saying that we have to stop these committee to committee transfers. Got to stop the revolving door of someone being a legislator then a lobbyist. You’ve got to ban the practice, this is legal, but we were saying we need to ban the practice of a legislator being a political consultant at the same time. But we also said that we need to reinstate campaign finance limits. The people in Missouri, late nineties, wanted those. They voted for those. It’s fair. Uh, we had a hearing on that bill. Uh, we, we made some progress with that ’cause we actually were gonna, we thought we were gonna get to the Senate, but then again, continually, stopped over and over again. Particularly by the Speaker of the House and the Floor Leader who, um, will be the leader of the Republicans next year, Steve Tilley. He received a hundred thousand dollars from one person. Now that just doesn’t make sense, does it? [voice: “No.”] It doesn’t make sense that the person controlling legislation would make that much, so it’s my hope that we work hard to make him a, the next minority leader. [laughter, applause] [inaudible] We continue to push the issue. They, they try to play games with it. We ended up with an ethics bill that only included the committee to committee stuff, without the other stuff.

And they claim that this is a successful, uh, session. So, here’s my motivation for you. It wasn’t a successful session. There are people in Missouri who deserve better, people in Missouri who deserve representatives, regardless of what party, to look at everything in a balanced approach, figure out how we fund education, how we fund higher ed, how we make sure we take care of the, the least fortunate. And also those who are, are proud to be very ethical and have, return accountability to the state.

And I don’t just buy this act that this is gonna be a Republican year. I think people are tired of the games. They’re tired of the games in Washington…but there’s no better, bigger group of game players than the Republicans in the House of Representatives of Missouri. When they try to have an ethics bill that includes voter, a voter ID measure in there, trying to hurt unions in there, all this other crazy provisions, they were playing games.

And I think when you have good candidates like we do, we’ve got three good candidates in the room….When we go out there and when we knock on the door and we talk about what’s really going on in Jefferson City and the real need for change there. And we talk in terms that the people of the state are hurting because of inaction of this legislature. [Governor] Jay Nixon can’t do everything by himself. And, by golly, now he’s gonna have to with this budget since the budget wasn’t right. He’s gonna have to do it. And just on a side note, the, the things that the Governor has had to do to withhold money, the things that he will have to do, is going to be painful. I want everyone in the room to think, whenever when we’re unhappy with something that the Governor has to cut or do, remember it could have been a heck of a lot worse if someone else were sitting in that chair. [voice: “That
‘s right.” voice: “Amen”] They handed him a complete mess. And the only way he’ll get this better is if we get these candidates elected. [applause]

[….]

We really need your help to explain to folks that we could be doing a lot better in the state. And the people of this district particularly, but the other districts that we’re focusing on, deserve a heck of a lot better than what they have. And that should be our message this fall….

Previously: Rep. Denny Hoskins (r): a short fuse on the floor of the House (May 15, 2010)

Representative Michael Frame (D):….And when looked up, when I turned up again he was almost nose to nose with me. And asking me if, if I had a, a problem, with some few other cuss words thrown in there as well, too. And, and do I have a problem, do I have problem. I told him he was, you know, to paraphrase, was, was way out of line. He really needs to step back…

“…with some few other cuss words thrown in there as well…”

The Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal printed the story in today’s edition, quoting Representative Tim Flook (r):

5/17/2010 1:26:00 PM

A Dust-Up for Denny?

Tempers or politics flare in final hours of session

Jack Miles

Editor

….”All Denny did was walk over and say, ‘Hey, what’s the problem with the bill? He had his hands in his pockets,” Flook said, adding, “The whole thing was a joke.”

Well, that sounds totally innocent, doesn’t it?

Okay, the Star-Journal also quotes Representatives Frame (D), Burnett (D), and Skaggs (D), the latter relating the use of “curse words”.

Old media presents equal and opposing viewpoints. I suppose all we can do for them is hope that someone caught the confrontation on audio and/or video.

You’d think someone would ask Representative Flook (r), when you were actually interviewing him, about how he managed to get across the floor of the House to so closely and definitively witness the exchange on the Democratic side of the chamber and how he could characterize the incident so differently from those three Democratic representatives. You’d think.

It’s time to convene another panel on blogger ethics.

Update: Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) via Facebook:

Wow, only in Warrensburg can two legislators disagree and it makes the news. Since my side of the story was not printed, I’ll elaborate more here. Rep. Frame and others were yelling, making noises and snide comments from the back of the House Chamber during my presentation of SCR 31. As I prefer to talk face-to-face… with someone versus shouting and hiding in the “peanut gallery”, I finished my closing remarks, went over to Rep. Frame and asked him if he had a problem with my bill as I could not help but hear shouting and yelling from the back of the chamber. Rep. Frame responded “Don’t you square up to me!” to which I responded, “I’ve got my hands in my pockets, I’m just asking you a question.” Rep. Skaggs and Rep. Burnett then jumped in and tried to escalate the situation by yelling remarks at me.

If Mr. Miles, Editor of the DSJ, was not friends with Rep. Skaggs this would have never even made the news.

I will continue to advocate for legislation important to my constituents and not be bullied by Rep. Frame or his accomplices.

[emphasis added]

A quote from the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal:

…Hoskins said, “I had a disagreement and didn’t appreciate some of the disrespectful comments from the peanut gallery…”

Maybe the paper doesn’t print some of the stuff it doesn’t find credible.

And using the term “peanut gallery” is respectful? Just asking.  

Yesterday, while in the side gallery of the House covering the close of the legislative session I was made aware of a confrontation on the floor of the House during the previous day between Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) and Representative Michael Frame (D-105).

On Thursday the House was considering SCR 31 on international education. Representative Hoskins (r) was the handler for the bill. From the bill summary:

SCR 31 – This resolution encourages students and faculty in Missouri to promote international education as part of curricular and extracurricular life at Missouri’s colleges and universities.

This resolution is substantially similar to SCR 13 (2009) and to HCR 7 (2008).

[emphasis added]

Representative Michael Frame (D) at his desk on the floor of the House

on May 14, 2010 at the far side and back of the Democratic side of the aisle.

I interviewed Representative Frame yesterday:

Show Me Progress: Could you describe what happened with, Representative Hoskins on the floor yesterday?

Representative Michael Frame (D):  Sure…and, yesterday there was a, a House, a resolution, for international students or international studies. We spent a great deal of time on it, which I found a bit odd with this time of the year, spending so much time on a, on a, you know, for a non-binding resolution. When he finished, when he, when he closed he said that, this is a very good resolution and I turned to one of my, colleagues and said, it’s the best resolution in the universe, kind of making fun of what Representative [Bryan] Pratt [r] had claimed about the ethics bill, a day or two earlier. I didn’t intend for him to hear that, but I guess he had heard it and, and there’s a lot of this talking going on the floor. And while he was still on mic he said, come on over here and say that. Or something like that and, and I didn’t, I just kind of ignored his, his invitation and began to reach down, and actually, I was going to vote in favor of it. And as I was looking at, at my screen I heard my colleague Representative [Trent] Skaggs say, “He’s coming over here, he’s coming over here.” And I really didn’t know, you know, what he was referring to, I did hear him say those words. And when looked up, when I turned up again he was almost nose to nose with me. And asking me if, if I had a, a problem, with some few other cuss words thrown in there as well, too. And, and do I have a problem, do I have problem. I told him he was, you know, to paraphrase, was, was way out of line. He really needs to step back. And Representative Skaggs and Representative [John] Burnett physically got between the two of us. And again informed him you really need to return to your other side. Burnett, there was a bit of an exchange there, Burnett said you [inaudible], you, you charged over here in a very physical way that was, you know, a bit intimidating and, and a little bit threatening. And you just need to back off. And, and I didn’t see him charge over here, I’ll take their word for it he did. I was looking at my monitor. But, informing him he needed to back off, back off. At that point some of his Republican colleagues came over and, and encouraged him to return to his side of the aisle…

Representative Denny Hoskins (r) in conversation on the floor of the House on May 14, 2010.

…Show Me Progress: Do you think that this is a symptom, one of the symptoms of, maybe, the environment?

Representative Frame: Yes. And, I, I think he’s a frustrated legislator. I’m not sure about that. I, I’m not sure what it was. I don’t know if he was having a really bad day or, or why it was. I, I really didn’t think what I said, and again, it wasn’t directed at him, but I don’t know why he took such great offence to me calling his resolution the best resolution in the universe. I thought that would actually be a compliment, but, to tell you the truth, it wasn’t directed at him, it was really more directed at Representative Pratt. But wasn’t even talking with representative, I was actually talking with Representative Skaggs, but my comment was, was more directed at Pratt and just making a bit of fun. And he, he became very angry though and, and charged over at me. And like I said, when I looked up, it was nose to nose. I got to think that there was something else behind it. That it was a pretty, I won’t say innocent, but, but a very casual statement that I made. I don’t think it was any way majorly offensive enough that you would actually enter into some type of physical violence because of it.

Show Me Progress: All right, well thank you.

Representative Frame: Okay, thanks.

The vote on the bill, at the time of the incident (from the Journal of the House, May 13, 2010):

SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTIONS

           SCR 31, relating to international education, was again taken up by Representative Hoskins (121).

           On motion of Representative Hoskins (121), SCR 31 was adopted by the following vote:

AYES: 137

NOES: 012

Biermann

Bringer

Calloway

Frame

Hodges

Kuessner

LeVota

McClanahan

Newman

Quinn

Skaggs

Still

[emphasis added]

Maybe behavior on the floor can influence a few votes.

A non-binding resolution takes up a chunk of floor time on the House during the second to last day of the session. Does anyone think it’s possible that the majority leadership was throwing one of their members a public relations bone?

The 121st Legislative District has a three way race in November with no contested primaries:

State Representative – District 121

Democrat

COURTNEY COLE WARRENSBURG MO 166 2/23/2010

Republican

DENNY L HOSKINS WARRENSBURG MO 992 2/23/2010

Libertarian

BILL WAYNE WARRENSBURG MO 3/30/2010

Courtney Cole, the Democratic Party candidate in the 121st Legislative District, filed her first quarter campaign finance report with the Missouri Ethics Commission today:

Committe: COLE FOR HOUSE

ReportDate:

1. TOTAL RECEIPTS FOR THIS ELECTION PREVIOUSLY REPORTED $23,414.73

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $8,365.00

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $32,429.26

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $25,457.29

35. TOTAL INDEBTEDNESS AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 29 + 30 + 31 – 32 – 33 – 34) $0.00

[emphasis added]

$8,365.00? That’s a good fundraising quarter. She has consistently had impressive fundraising quarters.

And where did the money come from?:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: COLE FOR HOUSE

Report Date: 4/15/2010

Jefferson Countians for a Democratic Majority Arnold, MO 03/31/2010 $250.00

Conservative Democrats of Missouri Harrisonville, MO 03/30/2010 $500.00

Main Street Values Harrisonville, MO 03/21/2010 $100.00

Central Missouri Blue Collar Workers Kansas City, MO 02/17/2010 $500.00

LEPCI Kansas City, MO 03/17/2010 $100.00

IBEW Local 53 Kansas City, MO 01/21/2010 $350.00

IBEW Local 53 Kansas City, MO 03/23/2010 $350.00

Pipefitters Local 533 Kansas City, MO 02/16/2010 $1,000.00

Teamsters Local 600 Maryland Heights, MO 03/22/2010 $300.00

Friends of Shoemyer Paris, MO 02/23/2010 $50.00

Citizens to Elect Oxford Saint Louis, MO 02/22/2010 $30.00

Jake Hummel Campaign Fund  Saint Louis, MO 03/19/2010 $200.00

New Leadership for Missouri St. Louis, MO 02/27/2010 $250.00

IUPAT Washington, DC 01/11/2010 $500.00

Organized labor (working people!), a few office holders, and a ton of small dollar contributions from individuals – many as small as $10.00. Now, that’s grass roots.

And where did the money go?:

Detailed Summary of Expenditures And Contributions Made

Committe: COLE FOR HOUSE

ReportDate: 4/15/2010

A. EXPENDITURES OF $100 OR LESS BY CATEGORY

USPS – Stamps $44.00

Java Junction – Refreshments $25.21

MO Democratic State Party – Filing fee $50.00

Johnson County Central Committee – Donation $45.00

Project Graduation Warrensburg – Donation $50.00

ActBlue – Fundraising $63.00

B. ITEMIZED EXPENDITURES ALL OVER $100 AND ALL PAYMENTS TO CAMPAIGN WORKERS

Lettercraft Printing Lee’s Summit, MO 02/05/2010 Printing $500.34

Beacon Press Lee’s Summit, MO 03/11/2010 Printing $111.90

Big Brothers Big Sisters Warrensburg, MO 03/11/2010 Donation $200.00

Fundraising and a few donations.

Incumbent Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) also filed his campaign finance report with the Missouri Ethics Commission today:

Detailed Summary of Committee Disclosure Report

Committe: CITIZENS FOR HOSKINS

ReportDate:

1. TOTAL RECEIPTS FOR THIS ELECTION PREVIOUSLY REPORTED $19,612.64

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $7,175.30

5. SUBTOTAL MONETARY RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD ( SUM 2A + 3A + 4A ) $7,175.30

6. IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $5,900.00

7. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD (SUM 5A + 6A) $13,075.30

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $32,687.94

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $21,006.70

35. TOTAL INDEBTEDNESS AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 29 + 30 + 31 – 32 – 33 – 34) $2,000.00

[emphasis added]

That’s a lot of in-kind contributions. Let’s see where the money (and in-kind) came from:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: CITIZENS FOR HOSKINS

Report Date: 3/31/2010

Denny Hoskins 2008 Warrensburg, MO 03/01/2010 $4,900.00 In-Kind

MO Assessors Association New London, MO 02/02/2010 $300.00

12. TOTAL ANONYMOUS CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED FROM PERSONS GIVING $25 OR LESS $250.30

13. TOTAL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED FROM PERSONS GIVING $100 OR LESS $1,725.00

[emphasis added]

Okay, a candidate giving their campaign $4,900.00 in-kind. What’s with that?

Yep, that in-kind stuff doesn’t exactly help with the cash on hand total, does it?

Let’s take a look at expenditures:

Committe: CITIZENS FOR HOSKINS

ReportDate: 3/31/2010

A. EXPENDITURES OF $100 OR LESS BY CATEGORY

Advertisement – $62.00

Supplies – $60.62

Advertisement – $75.00

Supplies – $50.00

Donation – $100.00

Supplies – $58.21

B. ITEMIZED EXPENDITURES ALL OVER $100 AND ALL PAYMENTS TO CAMPAIGN WORKERS

OFFICE DEPOT WARRENSBURG, MO 01/25/2010 ENVELOPES, STAMPS, SUPPLIES $330.38

HEATHER MYERS WARRENSBURG, MO 02/03/2010 CAMPAIGN WORK $400.00

HEATHER MYERS WARRENSBURG,MO 03/02/2010 CAMPAIGN WORK $400.00

Postmaster Warrensburg, MO 03/05/2010 Stamps $176.00

Postmaster Warrensburg, MO 03/22/2010 Stamps $220.00

Midland Printing Warrensburg, MO 03/18/2010 Envelopes $239.86

Fundraising and a campaign worker.

Libertarian Bill Wayne filed a waiver [pdf] with the Missouri Ethics Commission on April 13, 2010 stating that he will neither raise nor spend $500.00 for the campaign cycle.

In a tribute to irony and also the spirit of participatory Democracy, he had a letter to the editor published in the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal on April 14th complaining that the paper was ignoring third party candidates:

4/14/2010 12:22:00 PM

Libertarian wants public to hear he is running, too

Letter to the Editor

Bill Wayne

Libertarian candidate, Warrensburg

Your list of legislative candidates was incomplete. I filed as the Libertarian Party candidate for 121st District State Representative. Neighboring districts that serve much of Johnson County, the 120th and 122nd, are both contested by the Constitution Party….

….The Daily Star-Journal should not pre-determine which parties and candidates are viable….

Mr. Wayne, I applaud your civic mindedness in writing that letter to the paper and your commitment to American ideals expressed by filing for office. But spending less than $500.00 on your race ain’t gonna get you elected unless lightning strikes. Twice. Aren’t there other like minded Libertarians out there who’d be willing to contribute to your campaign?

From time to time someone will reply to a post via Twitter and I don’t catch that reply right away. Sure enough, this evening I was checking for replies and, lo and behold, look what I found, from Representative Mark Parkinson (r):

@MBersin do you honestly think Rep. Hoskins has it in his budget to hire a tracker? If so, you are an idiot.     8:36 PM Mar 31st  via Tweetie  from Jefferson, MO   in reply to MBersin

“…If so, you are an idiot…” Heh. That wasn’t very nice. But, that’s okay, it’s still really nice to know that Representative Parkinson (r) reads Show Me Progress.

Well, there was a tracker. That’s indisputable. But Representative Parkinson (r) may have a point about that budget stuff since Representative Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) couldn’t even pay his taxes on time.

Unless he thinks someone else hired the tracker:

…A common, but perhaps unfortunate fact in politics today is that political parties use videographers, or “trackers,” to record the political activities of candidates for offices…

Well, okay, but if trackers are “icky” and republican don’t use them, the question remains:

…With this tracker stuff out in front of the public does that mean we won’t be seeing any darkly lit shaky videos or grainy photographs along with shock headlines and disturbing music in cable television commercials in the 121st District before the November election? Just asking.

Update: Heh. Representative Parkinson (r) posted via Twitter:

@MBersin (d-noun, cellist-verb) smp is read to track the negative mentions of R’s. The R with the most wins (it means we are effective).     about 6 hours ago  via web  in reply to MBersin

Ah, I get it. There’s a tie for first place in the mention department and someone will take the lead if they post more on Twitter.

As for being effective? That claim is debatable.

Previously:

Campaign Tracker: the worst job in politics and you still have to wear a suit (March 17, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): tracker, what tracker? (March 22, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): a clueless pilgrim in the land of republican false equivalence (March 27, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): appropriate legal remedy? (March 31, 2010)

Courtney Cole (D) in the 121st Legislative District – letter to the editor (April 6, 2010)

Previously:

Campaign Tracker: the worst job in politics and you still have to wear a suit (March 17, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): tracker, what tracker? (March 22, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): a clueless pilgrim in the land of republican false equivalence (March 27, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): appropriate legal remedy? (March 31, 2010)

Courtney Cole, the Democratic Party candidate challenging Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) in the 121st Legislative District, had a letter to the editor published in today’s edition of the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal:

4/6/2010 1:37:00 PM

Opposes political theater

Letter to the Editor

Courtney Cole

Candidate, 121st State Representative District

Now that candidate filing is over, I am truly honored to be officially running for state representative. I have been listening to the concerns of the people around the district, and I am convinced now, more than ever, it is time for a change.

These are tough times for all of us, and we need tough, serious-minded people representing our needs. I will fight to bring jobs and continued prosperity to Johnson County, instead of engaging in the negative political theater that is so common today. We deserve better than that.

As I travel all over Johnson County during this campaign I look forward to meeting everyone and sharing our views. I am energized and ready to earn the honor of serving the great people of Johnson County. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns about our district.

Contrast that with:

….Did I whine and cry to the media when this happened to me? NO! It’s a free country, I will always protect Freedom of Speech and our freedoms to be on PUBLIC land.

If she doesn’t like having her picture taken, then maybe being an elected official is not a good fit for her. – HOW IRONIC!

There might be a little irony in there somewhere, just not in the way some think.

Previously:

Campaign Tracker: the worst job in politics and you still have to wear a suit (March 17, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): tracker, what tracker? (March 22, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): a clueless pilgrim in the land of republican false equivalence (March 27, 2010)

There was a curious letter to the editor from Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) in yesterday’s edition of the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal addressing the issue of election tracker(s) and one of his challengers, Courtney Cole, the Democratic candidate (Bill Wayne, a Libertarian, filed yesterday).

The letter in the Warrensburg paper ended with:

…I call on Ms. Cole to either substantiate each of her slanderous attacks or correct her record. Otherwise I will seek the appropriate legal remedy to address the slander she has introduced into this campaign.

Slander in a campaign? Legal remedy? If there were legal remedies for what gets said or printed between political rivals Bill Clinton would be wealthier than Bill Gates and the republican party would be (monetarily) bankrupt.

Does Representative Hoskins (r) recall what the Missouri Republican State Committee did in October 2008?

Also in the letter to the editor:

…A common, but perhaps unfortunate fact in politics today is that political parties use videographers, or “trackers,” to record the political activities of candidates for offices…

If it’s common in politics and someone says politicians do it is that defamatory? Just asking.

Well, let’s take a look at a bit of American history. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964):

….Thus, we consider this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials. See Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1, 4; De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, [p271] 365…..

….Authoritative interpretations of the First Amendment guarantees have consistently refused to recognize an exception for any test of truth — whether administered by judges, juries, or administrative officials — and especially one that puts the burden of proving truth on the speaker. Cf. Speiser v. Randall, 357 U.S. 513, 525-526. The constitutional protection does not turn upon “the truth, popularity, or social utility of the ideas and beliefs which are offered.” NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415, 445. As Madison said, “Some degree of abuse is inseparable from the proper use of every thing, and in no instance is this more true than in that of the press.”….

….Injury to official reputation affords no more warrant for repressing speech that would otherwise be free than does factual error….

….If neither factual error nor defamatory content suffices to remove the constitutional shield from criticism of official conduct, the combination of the two elements is no less inadequate….

….A rule compelling the critic of official conduct to guarantee the truth of all his factual assertions — and to do so on pain of libel judgments virtually unlimited in amount — leads to a comparable “self-censorship.” Allowance of the defense of truth, with the burden of proving it on the defendant, does not mean that only false speech will be deterred. [n19] Even courts accepting this defense as an adequate safeguard have recognized the difficulties of adducing legal proofs that the alleged libel was true in all its factual particulars. See, e.g., Post Publishing Co. v. Hallam, 59 F. 530, 540 (C.A. 6th Cir. 1893); see also Noel, Defamation of Public Officers and Candidates, 49 Col.L.Rev. 875, 892 (1949). Under such a rule, would-be critics of official conduct may be deterred from voicing their criticism, even though it is believed to be true and even though it is, in fact, true, because of doubt whether it can be proved in court or fear of the expense of having to do so. They tend to make only statements which “steer far wider of the unlawful zone.” Speiser v. Randall, supra, 357 U.S. at 526. The rule thus dampens the vigor and limits the variety of public debate. It is inconsistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments…..

Stare decisis.

With this tracker stuff out in front of the public does that mean we won’t be seeing any darkly lit shaky videos or grainy photographs along with shock headlines and disturbing music in cable television commercials in the 121st District before the November election? Just asking.

Ah, a process story. Meta, even.

It appears that Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) is a clueless pilgrim in the land of republican false equivalence. Here’s a recent Facebook post from our intrepid pilgrim, taking on the corporate media powerhouse which is Show Me Progress:

Denny Hoskins  IRONIC – I guess that is the best word I can use to describe my opponent. Her Treasurer’s husband is a blogger for a Pro-Dem Ultra Liberal website and likes to follow me around and takes pictures and record my speeches. Numerous people at the County Courthouse also state that a young lady has been going through my personal and business financial records/history at the courthouse.

Did I whine and cry to the media when this happened to me? NO! It’s a free country, I will always protect Freedom of Speech and our freedoms to be on PUBLIC land.

If she doesn’t like having her picture taken, then maybe being an elected official is not a good fit for her. – HOW IRONIC!

He’s also had a rough couple of weeks:

Uh, Representative Hoskins (r), you didn’t send the Senate a “balanced budget” (March 27, 2010)

There’s no accounting for such a legislative pummeling (March 25, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): tracker, what tracker? (March 22, 2010)

Campaign Tracker: the worst job in politics and you still have to wear a suit (March 17, 2010)

Back to the Facebook post. Where to start?

Using all caps is the Internets equivalent of shouting.

You’ve got to be paying way too much for shoddy opposition research (or maybe it’s free). Your information is out of date.

I don’t necessarily like or dislike covering Denny Hoskins at public events, that just goes with the turf of blogging. I will say that it can sometimes be interesting. That’s what we do, we cover politics and government in Missouri. We’ve been granted media credentials at campaign, political, presidential, and vice-presidential events.

“…Numerous people at the County Courthouse also state that a young lady has been going through my personal and business financial records/history at the courthouse…”

We didn’t ask for the records that broke that story. Thanks for the suggestion, though, we’ll file it for future reference. That’s why they’re called public records. Is Denny Hoskins saying that he’s never been apprised of the public records concerning Jim Jackson or Courtney Cole? Just asking.

“…Did I whine and cry to the media when this happened to me?…”

Really, did you want to go so boldly on the record with that statement? Just asking.

To recap:

At Show Me Progress we cover campaign, public, and government events. We sometimes cover fundraisers when we get an invitation to do so. We either wear ID in the form of a photo credential or we present a business card with our contact information, clearly identifying our affiliation with this blog. Our identification informs those at the events that we cover that what they say to us is on the record. We utilize the public record, the Missouri Sunshine Law, as well as other public resources to access public information. Further, there’s nothing keeping Representative Hoskins from signing up on this blog and participating consistent with our user guidelines.  

A tracker, on the other hand, is a paid political operative who may or may not identify his or her associations/affiliations.

Show Me Progress: How are you doing?

Tracker: Hello. How are you?

SMP: Good, good. So, are you a tracker or something?

Tracker: Uh, you could say that I guess.

SMP: Yeah. I’m with Show Me Progress. [I handed him my business card. He took it.]

Tracker: Oh!

SMP: Yeah. So, so, where are you from?

Tracker: Uh, I’d rather not say.

SMP: Oh, okay, that’s cool. [sound of camera shutter]

Tracker: You like the license plate? [In response to me photographing the back of the car.]

SMP: Actually? Interesting.

Tracker: Um, hm.

SMP: Yeah, so, uh, so have you been doing this for long or working in, in politics and stuff like that? [crosstalk]

Tracker: Uh, yeah, I’ve been working in politics for a while. [crosstalk]

SMP: Yeah. Good, good. Uh, where are you from, just in, are you from Missouri or just?

Tracker: I’d rather not say.

SMP: Okay, that’s cool. Well, listen, have a good evening, all right?

Clear enough for you now? Or is that irony definition thing still a little fuzzy for you?

Besides, Missouri republican political blogs that aren’t a part and parcel to the top down hierarchical republican political establishment are a dime a dozen…oh, wait, sorry about that. My mistake.

State Representative Denny Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) issued a video “capitol report” on the state budget via YouTube. The first term state representative is being challenged in the 2010 race for the seat in the 121st Legislative District by Democratic Party candidate Courtney Cole.

In the video Representative Hoskins (r) confirms that the republican majority in the House essentially punted to the Senate when it comes to making sufficient cuts or revenue enhancements to balance the state budget:

The transcript:

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): Hi, this is State Representative Denny Hoskins, proudly representing the citizens of the one hundred twenty-first district, as well as other citizens of Missouri. I’m standing before you in the House chamber where, where we’ve spent numerous hours this week debating on the House version of the budget.

When the governor submitted his budget in January of this year he submitted an unbalanced budget. And what we’ve had to do is go back and try and cut around five hundred million dollars in order to have a balanced budget for the next fiscal year which starts July first.

As I mentioned in previous capitol reports the budget has been the main focus and will continue to be the main focus until it is delivered to the, on, to the, on the governor’s desk on May seventh.

Uh, some of the cuts that we were, that we had to make in order to have a balanced budget this year. We cut our own expense accounts, uh, for House members. We also cut five hundred thousand dollars out of the House, um, overhead account for some of our administration, um, personnel.

We ended up only cutting about two hundred and twenty-four million, but like what I’ve said, the budget process is, is a marathon, not a sprint. So we, between the House Budget Committee, which I served on, and out on the House floor we’ve cut about two hundred and twenty-four million out of the five hundred million that we, uh, need to cut in order to have a balanced budget.

After we third read and vote out the budget bills today, they will go over to the Senate Appropriations Committee, of which Senator Pearce is a member of, for debate in committee and out on their, and out on the floor. Uh, the Senate is going to have to make some cuts as well. And I believe that they have a duty and I, I know that they realize their duty in order to pa, uh, make those cuts in order to send, make those further cuts in order to send a balanced budget back to us where we both, both, the House and the Senate can vote those out.

You know in these tough economic times we here at state government, like I mentioned, you know we cut our own expense accounts, we cut five hundred thousand dollars out of administration. There’s no easy cuts. We have trimmed around the edges all that we can. Um, I am happy to report that at least, as far as pre, pre-K through, uh, twelve education we were able to hold funding at, at the same amount that we were for last year. Unfortunately we were not able to fully fund the additional one hundred and five million to the foundation formula this year. But, when, in order to have a balanced budget and in order to make sure that we didn’t have to close a prison or some other drastic measures that’s one of the cuts that we had to make.

Well, I’ve told you all before, I’m a proud supporter of education and I think that it just seems, it was prudent and appropriate in this time to maintain the same amount of funding that we had last year for this next fiscal year.

If, as always, if you have any ideas or concerns, especially if you have any ideas on how to generate revenue and maintain a balanced budget, or if you do see some, um, fat in the budget where you think that we could make some cuts, please give myself a call, uh, or shoot me an e-mail.

There’s are tough, like I said, it’s tough economic times we’re tightening our belts and there’s no, there’s no easy cuts right now. But, I was elected by you all in order to serve here and make those tough decisions and I’m proud to serve the one hundred twenty-first district. It’s an honor to be your state representative and feel free to stop and say hi this weekend when I’m at home. Thanks a lot, have a great day.

Let’s parse the video, shall we?:

“…We ended up only cutting about two hundred and twenty-four million, but like what I’ve said, the budget process is, is a marathon, not a sprint. So we, between the House Budget Committee, which I served on, and out on the House floor we’ve cut about two hundred and twenty-four million out of the five hundred million that we, uh, need to cut in order to have a balanced budget…”

Uh, so the republican controlled House punted its responsibility to make two hundred seventy-six million dollars in cuts or revenue enhancements for the next state budget to the Senate?

“…Uh, the Senate is going to have to make some cuts as well…”

That’s what we thought you said.

“…Um, I am happy to report that at least, as far as pre, pre-K through, uh, twelve education we were able to hold funding at, at the same amount that we were for last year…”

Here’s a logic problem for you. If you didn’t cut education (and you didn’t enhance the foundation formula) and the Senate still has to make two hundred and seventy-six million dollars in cuts, didn’t you effectively invite them to do your work for you and cut education funding? Just asking.

Is there another way?

“…especially if you have any ideas on how to generate revenue..”

Did we just hear a republican in the Missouri General Assembly state that he was open to raising taxes? Nah, couldn’t be, could it?

By the way, the capitol press corps let you up in the press gallery? Don’t tell them you’re a blogger.