Tag Archives: Ann Wagner

Ann Wagner praises police who “own” the streets

19 Tuesday Sep 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

Thesis:

The St. Louis Police Department doesn’t have a great record for  putting its best foot forward, but, really, these guys needs some competent PR advice – which they need to follow. And Ann Wagner needs a reality check.

Discussion:

A relatively small bunch of stragglers leftover after the day’s demonstrations against the Stockley acquittal went on a petty vandalism spree that, if the descriptions I’ve read are correct, was at a far remove from the serious violence that racked Ferguson. They were met by scads of armed police decked out in full riot regalia and raring to go. A bunch of protestors were arrested. The Guardian reported claims by demonstrators of “aggressive responses from police, including the macing and violent takedowns of compliant demonstrators.”

This mighty victory pumped up the interim police chief,  Lawrence O’Toole, to the point that next day he strutted around crowing about how proud he was that St. Louis was still “safe” and the police had “owned” the night.” His officers evidently shared that opinion since they reportedly celebrated brutally beating down a group protesting police brutality against black people by chanting “whose streets, our streets.” That chant was a step too far, even for some police, as The Guardian reports, “Sgt Heather King, president of the Ethical Order of Police, a group founded by African American officers, said: “That chant goes against the very code of ethics we swore to abide by.”

I’ve read reports on Facebooks from other folks who saw what went down. They seem to think it was harsh, as in excessive. But still, protestors vandalize private property, they get arrested. That’s fine. Throw bricks and “chemicals” at the police, police get mad. That’s life. Vainglorious boasting about how armed police beat the vandals down and gratuitiously hurt them – including folks who weren’t resisting – that’s another thing entirely. Don’t any of these fools realize how hairline delicate the situation is right now? Do they want riots?

I get the impression however, that now that the adrenaline high is fading, O’Toole realizes that he’s got to control the narrative a little better. The police chief is adamant that the only folks arrested were “criminals,” although they managed to haul in a presumably non-criminal Post-Dispatch reporter who was caught in the crush when the police moved in. You’ll also notice in many reports how, when O’Toole talks about his big victory, he’s careful not to mention that the “demonstrators” he put down were no more than a relatively small group who hadn’t heeded the call of protest leaders to desist for the evening. However, O’Toole was quite willing to whine about injuries suffered by his troops – injuries that he does not actually specify, but admits to have been mostly “moderate or minor.”

Wagner enters from the Right wing:

The merest hint of police blood shed, however, was enough to provoke Rep. Ann Wagner (R-2) to paroxysms of praise for police. In her latest email newsletter, she informs us that, “on Saturday, I had the privilege of visiting the brave men and women of law enforcement who risk their lives every day to protect us. Their work this week has been nothing short of exemplary …”. This high praise followed the text of the Peace Prayer of Saint Francis, which she tells us she is offering “in light of the recent unrest in our community.” The Peace Prayer is supposed to embody “the spirit of St. Francis of Assisi’s simplicity and poverty,” two things I’m pretty sure Wagner doesn’t really know much about.

Punchline:

All this hyper-respectable, authority-loving piety is coming from a woman, who, so far as I  have been able to determine, has in no way indicated that she understands that there is any reason why some St. Louisians might legitimately be even a bit upset. Even her fellow Republicans, Senator Roy Blunt and Governor Eric Geitens, showed some sensitivity to the situation as well as a recognition that the issues are not cut-and-dried. Wagner, however, is carefully letting us know that for her, its a black and white situation and she thinks that the answer is, as it always has been, to color it blue.

Update (9/19): Well that didn’t take too long – Greitens’ restraint was too good to be true and now he’s back in prime form according to the Post-Dispatch’s Tony Messenger, playing to the deplorable gallery by poking an angry bee hive with a stick:

… we are following the lead of Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens, who this weekend pinned a video atop his Twitter page of some of our officers in riot gear carrying a hog-tied prisoner through the streets of St. Louis. “Saturday, some criminals broke windows & thought they’d get away. They were wrong. Officers caught ’em, cuffed ’em, and threw ’em in jail,” he wrote.

I’m sure it’ll play well in the boonies and some suburbs, but shouldn’t the Governor be trying to help heal divisions, not make them worse?

Why does the GOP have it in for us?

18 Monday Sep 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

What does Senator Roy Bunt and my Representative, Ann Wagner (R-2), have against me? Or should I really be asking what the Republican Party has against the people of the United States (those, that is, who aren’t billionaires)?

I’ve had a chronic illness since 2012. So far Medicare and a supplemental policy have taken care of me. However, the GOP healthcare shenanigans in which Blunt, Wagner, and their partisans indulged themselves these past months could have resulted in my supplemental policy, which pays for a big share of my expenses, being priced out of my reach.

For a while it looked like they had decided to give up and leave me be. Killing several million people with a few pen strokes is harder work than it looks – especially when those folks start calling for the heads of compliant legislators.

But my relief has been short-lived. We all should have learned by now that the folks who pay the bills for today’s GOP will never rest until the peasantry learn to live with the low expectations that characterize their cohorts in other third world countries. And obedient senechals Blunt and Wagner are no doubt already on point, along with the rest of the Missouri pack of GOP running dogs, as we used to call their ilk back in the old days of the New Left and Chairman Mao’s vastly overrated little red book.

How do I know this? There’s a legislative abomination, the Graham-Cassidy-Heller bill, that has just been introduced into the Senate and which could easily pass if the Republican leadership can drum up 51 votes – which is looking more and more likely. Named for Senators Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), and Dean Heller (R-Nev.), this latest iteration of Obamacare Dump & Dupe is really, really bad:

As you can see, I and my fellow preexisting conditions sufferers are not the only ones Republicans like Blunt and Wagner want to work over. Graham-Cassidy-Heller would do a job on hundreds of thousands of Missourians. And nobody is even talking (yet) about the destabilizing effect on the private insurance industry.

Pair this effort to gut Obamacare and drastically peel back healthcare funding by 2027 with the suspicion that Paul Ryan will use Trump’s tax “reform” mantra to further his goal of privatizing and ultimately crippling Medicare, and you’ve got the wherewithal to begin to finance the tax cuts GOP leaders have promised their wealthy patrons. Does anyone believe Blunt, Wagner and the Missouri GOP boyos in the House won’t go along? Even though it’ll leave folks like me out in the dead cold. And I do mean dead.

It seems like Republicans in Congress not only want to pull the healthcare rug out from under us, but kick us in oour collective ribs after we’re down. Were we getting a little too uppity what with our Obamacare and all?

But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe they don’t have it in for us. Maybe they just think we’re too dumb to notice how far they’re willing to go to give tax breaks to rich cronies.

All of which means that maybe it’s time to roll out the tumbrils again and start building that electoral guillotine – and, don’t forget, make some noise while you’re doing it: Senate Switchboard number: (202) 224-3121

Addendum: Remember how GOPers howled about how Democrats, who in reality bent over in the proverbial backwards direction to secure GOP input, rammed Obamacare down throats; well, read this and weep for what we’ve become:  Republicans go to ludicrous lengths to pass a ‘healthcare’ bill that deliberately harms blue states; (2)

Ask Ann Wagner why, after Equifax fail, she wants to gut the CFPB?

09 Saturday Sep 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is, as it states on its Website, “a U.S. government agency that makes sure banks, lenders, and other financial companies treat you fairly. ” It was an important component of the the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), a law designed to protect Americans from the excesses that led to the financial crisis of 2008. To date the Agency has been very effective. In the few years since it was established, it has settled over a million complaints and has saved consumers more than 11 billion dollars.

So what’s not to like? An awful lot if you are part of a financial industry that got used to running wild during the Bush years. As The New York Times asserts, the CFPB may have been too effective. It has far too much independence for Big Banking’s tastes; it can operate outside the realm of strategically distributed campaign funding and lobbyist blandishment.

Needless to say, when it comes to the CFPB, Republicans have been more than willing to take up the cudgels on behalf of their patrons in the financial sector. And nobody’s been more assiduous in going after the CFPB than Missouri’s own Ann Wagner, who, not incidentally, rakes in a big part of her considerable campaign war chest from grateful banking types.

The reason I’m returning to what is now an old and, at this point, oft-told story is simple: Equifax. The Equifax data breach that has exposed at least 148 million consumers to potential ID theft, to be precise. Also the fact that Equifax botched its response to its big fail by revealing the breach belatedly, and then offering inadequate follow-up, even, according to some sources, attempting to make money off of the disaster.

But don’t worry. The CFPB is on the case:

In a statement provided to HousingWire, CFPB Senior Spokesperson Sam Gilford said the bureau is already looking into the situation.

“The CFPB has authority over the consumer reporting industry, including supervisory and enforcement authority,” Gilford said in the statement.

“The CFPB is authorized to take enforcement action against institutions engaged in unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, or that otherwise violate federal consumer financial laws,” Gilford added. “We are looking into the data breach and Equifax’s response, but cannot comment further at this time.”

Additionally, Gilford said the CFPB is looking into the arbitration clause inserted into Equifax’s credit monitoring.

As CNN points out, consumers who want to take Equifax up on its offer of free credit monitoring for a year have to waive their right to sue, something that the CFPB is currently battling over on Capitol Hill.

“Equifax’s credit monitoring product contains a mandatory arbitration clause that denies people their right to join together to sue the company for wrongdoing,” Gilford said.

True, the New York Attorney General is also launching an investigation, and Congress is promising hearings. I don’t know about you, though, but when it comes to who is more likely to be thorough and transparent, I prefer that the task be at least shared with an agency like the CFPB, whose independence is assured. Unlike some congresspersons I could name, it doesn’t have any favors to repay that might soften the zeal with which it goes after a bad actor.

The CFPB  went after Equifax and TransUnion earlier this year for deceiving consumers about the usefulness and cost of credit scores they sell. Given their record to date, I don’t need to add that the CFPB got results; it cost the credit agencies $5.5 million in fines and $17.6 million in restitution paid to consumers. The CFPB’s got a track record when it comes to Equifax and its ilk.

Of course, it’s the very independence of the CFPB that sticks in Wagner’s craw. It’s what lies behind the usual Republican charges of government overreach or, in a more grandiose vein, charges that it is not constitutional to have a government agency with so much power that is funded independently of congress and is led by an executive appointee who cannot be dismissed on the whims of various and sundry elected officials without substantial cause. So far, the courts, our constitutional arbiters, don’t agree with Wagner et al. when it comes to questions of constitutional overreach. (Do you, too, find “unconstitutional” kind of funny coming from GOP politicians who seem to be purposely blind to the constitutional issues that bedevil their current President?)

Wagner’s onus against the agency extends to its director. She has been in the forefront of trying to drum up an appearance of malfeasance on the part of CFPB director Richard Cordray, even going so far as to level poorly substantiated charges of workplace discrimination. Most recently, she and her anti-CFPB cadres have tried to besmirch the record of the CFPB investigation into Wells-Fargo’s financial malfeasance.

But right now, when a truly huge number of Americans are facing the potential of identify theft or worse, and the company responsible for losing their data is acting poorly, do you think Wagner could be prevailed upon to leave the CFPB alone and let it serve the people who need it? I’m not optimistic – it’s clear that Wagner sees the Trump presidency as a lifeline when it comes to her heretofore ineffectual crusade to re-empower our financial overlords, but maybe, nevertheless, we should ask her to “can” it? Or else.*

*Note to Ann Wagner: No, Ann, “or else” is not a threat of anything worse than an election. I know that many of your grey-haried constituents scare you silly, but you don’t need to be worried about anything worse than losing their votes.

Which Missourians voted for or against the Trump-Schumer/Pelossi deal

08 Friday Sep 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 8 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

The House of Representatives voted today to pass a bill authorizing 15.25 billion dollars in emergency relief aid for the victims of hurricane Harvey; it was attached to a continuing resolution that would raise the debt-ceiling and fund the federal government through Dec. 8. The vote tally was 316 yeas and 90 nays. All ninety nays were Republicans including the five six Republican members of the Missouri House delegation.

The Senate voted on the measure on Thursday and passed it on a 80-17 roll call vote. Both Missouri Senators, Republican Roy Blunt and Democratic Claire McCaskill, voted for the measure.

McCaskill’s vote is no surprise, but ol’ Roy? Maybe no surprise there either. It’s not necessarily a case of the the tiger changing its stripes – it’s just that some of those stripes are more attractive than others. In short, Blunt is a pragmatist, a corrupt, power-seeking, self-interested pragmatist, true, but he does understand what’s involved in raising the debt ceiling. And he knows that the economic nightmare that would result from a default would not serve anyone’s interest.

In 2013 Bunt indicated that he couldn’t support using the urgent need to raise the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip to deny funds to Obamacare, remarking that “I think holding the debt limit hostage to any specific thing is probably not the best negotiating place.” So now he’s reversed himself, showing admirable flexibility; the new circumstances, he implies, justifies the contingency. He observed that that tying the debt ceiling to Harvey aid is “one way to do it, ” i.e., raise the debt ceiling, a crucial must-do, adding that the need to address the destruction left in the wake of the hurricane is “another reason as to why you’d want to keep the government open.” Even though it looks like a flip-flop, Blunt’s consistent about one thing. No debt ceiling default. Ever.

Sadly, the other members of the Missouri GOP delegation don’t get it. Perhaps it’s because they don’t actually understand that extending the debt ceiling has nothing to do with increasing Government spending, but simply permits Treasury to pay the bills Congress has already run up.Or maybe they want their constituents to believe that they had a “fiscally responsible” reason for voting to leave Harvey victims high and dry (so to speak), while undermining the functioning of the federal government and maybe even wrecking the heretofore sterling credit worthiness of the United States.

Here’s a sample of the debt flim-flamming we’re hearing from our Missouri congressional representatives:

Rep. Ann Wagner (R-2): “I promised the people of St. Charles, Jefferson, and St. Louis counties that I would go to Washington to cut up the government’s credit card and put a stop to wasteful federal government spending.”

Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-3), also thinks that raising the debt limit so that Treasury can pay the bills that he and other congressmen have already run up represents a failure to “curb future spending.”

(You’d think that folks who’ve worked so assiduously as Luetkemeyer and Wagner to assist the financial industry would understand what the debt ceiling is and how it works. But, evidently, you’d be wrong.)

Rep. Billy Long (R-7) explained his “no” vote by declaring that “simply raising the debt limit is not the answer to fixing our nation’s fiscal mess. (Note to Billy: nobody said it was. The answer, that is, to a supposed fiscal mess. Different topic totally).

Give Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-4) points for originality: she purports to think that extending the debt ceiling for three months “freezes defense spending at current levels and ties the hands of our Defense Department, preventing them from making desperately needed investments to meet the threats we are facing.” Nu-uh, Vicky! Talk about deflecting from the actual topic.

What really puts these excuses to the lie is the fact that House and Senate leadership wanted to go for an eighteen month extension of the debt limit. They were hoping to avoid the inconvenient messiness that would be sure to ensue when the limit has to be negotiated again at the very beginning of the midterm political season come December. Are you willing to bet good money that had that deal come down the line, all of these GOPers – even go-along-to-get -long types like Wagner – would have oppposed it?

And, in case you are persuaded by occasional claims that these folks were willing to vote “yea” on Harvey relief, but balked at voting on the debt ceiling because they believe the debt ceiling vote ought to be “clean,” with no need-to-pass riders, just think back to the behavior of almost all of these stalwarts when it came time to take debt ceiling hostage during the Obama years. Dead-enders, every one of them.

Addendum (9/9/2017, 11:56 am): You will notice that there’s nothing in the post above about the positions of Jason Smith (R-8) and Sam Graves (R-6). That’s because I couldn’t find anything. Too early? It struck me that the absence of online info about these two lawmakers actions is pretty predictable. Takes them a while to issue a statement if they ever do. Don’t their constituents care? Do folks in their districts just reflexively vote Republican, relieving them of any obligation to take care with their votes or to explain them? Do I need to subscribe to their newsletters? Do they have newsletters? Guess I’ll have to check it out.

Voting against Hurricane Harvey disaster aid

08 Friday Sep 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , ,

That would be Missouri republicans.

Today in the U.S. House of Representatives:

H.R.601 – Reinforcing Education Accountability in Development Act
Notes: The measure is the expected vehicle for supplemental appropriations for disaster relief, increasing the debt limit, and funding the government through a continuing resolution.

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 480
H R 601      YEA-AND-NAY      8-Sep-2017      10:33 AM
QUESTION:  On Motion to Concur in the Senate Adt to the House Adt to the Senate Adt
BILL TITLE: Reinforcing Education Accountability in Development Act
[….]
—- YEAS    316 —
Clay
Cleaver
—- NAYS    90 —
Graves (MO)
Hartzler
Long
Luetkemeyer
Smith (MO)
Wagner
—- NOT VOTING    27 —

Every Missouri republican in the House voted against disaster aid for the people and states affected by Hurricane Harvey.

They made excuses.

Representative Anne Wagner (r):

I promised the people of St. Charles, Jefferson, and St. Louis Counties that I would go to Washington to cut up the government’s credit card and put a stop to wasteful federal government spending. What Congress voted on today did neither. Tying reckless spending policy to desperately needed emergency disaster relief sums up what people, myself included, hate about Washington politics. Today should have been about providing emergency resources for disaster relief and recovery, not playing beltway politics and punting on our national debt.

Representative Vicky Hartzler (r):

Today, the House passed a continuing resolution to provide funding for the government for the remainder of the year. While I voted for funding for Hurricane Harvey flood relief earlier in the week and am glad they will get the help they need, that funding measure included legislation that freezes defense spending at current levels and ties the hands of our Defense Department, preventing them from making desperately needed investments to meet the threats we are facing….

No statements yet from the other four.

Rep. Ann Wagner (r): a “town hall” means you invited the town

29 Tuesday Aug 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

She didn’t.

Representative Ann Wagner (r) today, via Twitter:

Ann Wagner‏ @RepAnnWagner
Kicking off my townhall in Chesterfield at RGA! Thanks to the 300 Missourians for attending!
2:57 PM – 29 Aug 2017

Some of the responses:

This is not a townhall. They are at work. Perhaps you could hold a real town hall w/ constituents. How can u represent us if u ignore us?

Why wasn’t this event open to the public? Your constituents in the 2nd (including me) weren’t able to attend. That’s not a Town Hall!…
It’s not even listed on your webpage. But you sure do have a very visible picture of you next to Trump!

You could have spoken to a much larger crowd if this event were open to the public. It’s not a “town hall” when the “town” is not invited.

Ann you’re better than this …

I am a registered voter in Chesterfield. How did you announce you were holding one? By carrier pigeon? Mine got lost in the “air” mail.

This is not a town hall so quit lying! Ask Sen. McCaskill to give you lessons on town halls for all people not just who you want to attend!

And again, this is a rep that thinks they have nothing to worry abt in 2018. #voteannout2018

So you’re going to brag about it on twitter, but where was the announcement?
– a voting constituent

“Thanks to my captive audience of RGA employees. They’ll sign up to hear anyone speak to get a little time away from their desks!”
Fixed.

Speaking to workers in the the middle of a work day is not a townhall #coward

How many times have I called and asked for a town hall? Where was this publicized? Why wasn’t I invited?

Hey Ann! Talked to your staff – why didn’t you let them know you had a Town Hall. They were Clueless!

.@RepAnnWagner hosting an “invitation-only” meeting…2nd District Constituents not invited. This was not a public event. #NotOk

A TH is where constituents have the opportunity to stand up in a public meeting and question you on issues; not A$$-kissing private events.

Real town halls are publicized and open to all. This is no more a town hall than Harlem Globetrotters vs NJ Generals is a basketball game.

That’s not a townhall according to American political tradition. It is not an open event.

Nope. #notatownhall. Why are you afraid of your constituents?

Fake News! How do you call a staged private event with paid attendees a town hall? Did you you answer staff-planted Q’s with relative ease?

At 3pm on a Tuesday? And why was I not aware? I’ve been asking.

3 words
Bogus…town…hall…

That is not a Town Hall, that is a chamber event you were invited to.

If it’s not open to the public, it’s NOT a town hall, Congresswoman.

But Ann, you didn’t invite the townsfolk to your Town Hall!

Didn’t want to face your constituents? Phony town hall. Can you say BS???

And on and on…

Previously:

Senator Claire McCaskill (D) – town hall in Warrensburg – Press Q and A – August 17, 2017 (August 17, 2017)

Senator Claire McCaskill (D) – town hall in Warrensburg – August 17, 2017 (August 18, 2017)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r) – about those constituent meetings (August 23, 2017)

Mark Osmack’s gonna be a contender

19 Saturday Aug 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 17 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

Missouri’s 2nd congressional district is relatively wealthy, mostly white and traditionally conservative. For years it was represented by retrograde moron and dominionist Christian, Todd Akin, who worried the issue of something he called “legitimate rape” like a dog worrying a bone until he found himself out of a job. His replacement, GOP Rep. Ann Wagner, who can best be described as a political Mommy Dearest, is preoccupied with the sad plight of bankers and financiers whom she struggles to protect, while cloyingly reassuring her other constituents that she has only their welfare in mind – a position the defense of which has necessitated that she rarely make contact with folks from her district who might be inclined to ask inconvenient questions.

We in the 2nd district may be able to tell a different story, though, after 2018. In past election cycles, Wagner has had few opponents who have been able to go up against her scads of banking industry money and local connections and she has easily prevailed. But all things must pass; change is inevitable.

Democratic strategists see the possibility of an upset in the 2nd – how much of a possibility and how seriously the Democratic party plans to support it has yet to be determined; it’s early days yet. Nevertheless, the party’s interest, coupled, I suspect, with the renewed activism triggered by the truly hideous garden path down which Republicans, led by their Trump man-baby, are taking us, has led to several viable candidates stepping up to take Wagner on.

One of those candidates, Kelli Dunaway, was profiled by Gloria Bilchik of Occasional Planet, and based on Bilchik’s comments, certainly seems promising. Another, Mark Osmark, currently employed as a consultant with Deloitte, met with a few members of the Queeny and Lafayette Townships’ Democratic Club last Wednesday (Aug. 16) and also managed to come across as an excellent alternative to the artificial and subtly doctrinaire Wagner. The following comments reflect my impressions of Osmack and what he had to say, in my language, not his – but if I misstate any facts, I would welcome corrections.

Like Dunaway, Osmack, is a newbie when it comes to running for office, although, again like Dunaway, he’s spent some time lurking on the periphery of the political world, putting in stints with both Claire McCaskill and Tammy Duckworth. He implied that he learned from these two distinctive politicians the importance of persevering in the face of obstacles, as well as more than a little about the realities of political give-and-take – and in spite of that baptism, he still believes that government has the power to make lives better for everyday people.

Osmack is a fluent and graceful speaker. Without once mentioning that he was awarded a bronze star, he was able to convey the importance of his two combat tours in Afghanistan. What he focused on when he spoke about his time in the military, was the importance of stepping up and accepting the challenges of leadership – he was a platoon leader – no matter how daunting it might seem.

Apropos of his experience in the service as well as his readiness to start big and run for the US Congress, he noted that no one would ever do anything if they waited until they’re “ready” for new challenges, but instead, one succeeds by stepping up and purposefully addressing the task in hand. To very loosely paraphrase, he presented his approach to the challenges of public service as something you just do because it has to be done and there’s no alternative but to succeed.

Osmack demonstrated familiarity with the ins-and-outs of the major political issues of the day as well as the lay of the land in the 2nd district. His offered acceptable if not daring answers to specific questions concerning such political danger zones as local racism (he won’t shy away from calling out racism despite the fact that the 2nd is a staid, predominantly white district), and, that major spoiler, reproductive rights (he “hates” abortion, but defends the right of women to choose to have a safe, legal abortion). What was impressive in his answers, though, was the way they were laid out clearly within a fully-fleshed, often personal, context that could help to make them palatable to many who are not firmly located on one or the other ends of the political spectrum.

Osmack’s answer to a question about gun violence was typical of his seemingly anecdotal but still laser-sharp approach to explaining his positions. After establishing his military bona fides as a man who knows about guns, he recounted his experience as the victim of an attempted car-jacking. His made the point that the perpetrator was armed with a gun and clearly understood how to deploy it; had Osmack been carrying a firearm and had he attempted to use it, he said that he is convinced he could now be dead. And had there been a gun concealed in his car, a criminal with one gun would now be, he noted, a criminal with two guns – an important point since most authorities agree that the proliferation of illegal guns on our streets is fueled partly by the theft of legal guns.

Nor is Osmack in denial about the potential roadblocks he may need to overcome to win the Democratic primary and prevail over Wagner in 2018. When asked about Wagner’s war-chest, his noted that money isn’t the whole picture and he doesn’t really need to match her reserves: there’s only so many TV spots etc. that can be purchased. He’s equally que sera, sera when it comes to the question of Democratic Party support and his current primary rivals. As noted above, it’s early times yet, and Osmack let us know that he is aware of that fact.

Given that it is early times, what did I learn last Wednesday? First, Osmack could be a real contender. He’s got serious potential and I hope, no matter what happens in the months ahead, that we see more of him in the Missouri political arena. Second, Democrats in the 2nd may be in the almost unprecedented situation of having an embarrassment of riches when it comes to possible challengers to Wagner. I’m looking forward to a promised panel discussion (or debate?) later on when we are closer to the primary.

Oh yes … I’m also feeling just a little more optimistic about being able to say adiós amiga once and for all to Ann Wagner.

Will Missouri pols do Trump’s racist bidding?

16 Wednesday Aug 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

In the wake of Donald Trump’s dimwitted apologia on Tuesday for the triumphalist white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, public condemnation has been swift. Few Americans are able to stomach blaming a rightwing “alt-truth”construct, the “alt-left,” for violence that left one peaceable anti-racist demonstrator dead, 20 wounded including a protester who was severely beaten in a parking garage. As Steve Benen observes, Trump’s unhinged press conference amounted to a “moment of national shame,” adding that “it’s also the basis for a challenge to Donald Trump’s partisan allies: what exactly does the Republican Party intend to do with its president in the face of such a scandal?”

What indeed.

But wait – Donald Trump has an idea about how Republicans should answer that question:

The White House is asking Republican members of Congress to follow the President’s lead as he blames “both sides” for the violence that broke out in Charlottesville, Va. during a white supremacist rally over the weekend, according to a memo obtained by The Atlantic.

Just hours after President Donald Trumps gave a provocative press conference — claiming that both the “alt-left” and the “alt-right” are to blame for the deadly violence that broke out in Charlottesville when a self-proclaimed white supremacists allegedly drove his car into a crowd of counter protestors — the White House gave Republicans guidance on how to discuss Charlottesville.

I don’t know about you, but today I’m calling GOP Senator Roy Blunt’s office and that of my Republican Representative, Ann Wagner (2nd Dist.), to find out if they’re planning on going along with the President’s directive. Trump’s memo gives rise to several pertinent Charlottesville-related questions that these folks need to answer:

  • Do they think there is actually an alt-left that corresponds to the group of Nazis and white nationalists who are now often collectively referred to as “alt-right.” If so, why?
  • Do they believe that “both (or many) sides”were equally to blame for the atrocities of last Saturday?
  • Do they believe that figures known only for their association with the Confederacy, an armed rebellion against the government of the United States for the purpose of continuing black chattel slavery. can be equated with historical figures, such as the Founding Fathers, who may have owned slaves, but who never took up arms against their government to defend it, and whose honored status has nothing to do with oppressive beliefs?
  • Do they believe that white people who are aggrieved about “political correctness,” which is to say the recognition that they are no longer call the shots and abuse women and minorities at will have a legitimate complaint?

If the answer to any of these questions is “yes,” I intend to let my GOP congresspersons know that I support their right to disgusting beliefs, but that I’ll be doing all that I can do to see that they lose their government job come next election.

If the answer to these questions is “no,” I intend to ask my GOP congresspersons, assuming that they have remained silent or have responded, as has Senator Roy Blunt (at least to my knowledge at this point) in the blandest way possible, where they’ve stored their spine.

Oh … and I’ll also l let them know that unless they can do better than mouthing safe platitudes when it comes to standing up to abomination, I’ll support anyone coming after their jobs who promises to do what’s necessary when it comes to shipwrecks like the Trump presidency.

I suggest you do the same.

Laugh of the day – Ann Wagner’s constituent outreach

07 Monday Aug 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

GOP Rep. Ann Wagner seems to be getting all hot and bothered by the fact that constituents who want to talk to her collectively in an open venue, one that is not stage-managed to avoid real give-and-take – something in which she has never, during her entire tenure, participated – aren’t quieting down, but keep getting in her face. Hence, her latest email newsletter’s opening salvo:

While there is tremendous focus on the work Congress does in Washington D.C., the time I spend in the district assisting my constituents is equally, if not more, significant. In addition to listening to your concerns and having a presence in the community, my district office provides extremely valuable services. …

Try to control your laughter.

I don’t doubt that Wagner’s staff perform their routine duties involving constituent requests adequately. I would expect nothing else. But trying to take credit for their efforts and pretending that it amounts to “listening to your concerns”? Yeah sure. And I just saw a flying pig take off from my backyard.

We’ve noticed how carefully Wagner has been listening to us over the past few years. We’ve deluged her with letters begging her not to take away our healthcare, we’ve trekked to her office time and again, to let her know how much we need her to hear us.

And what outcome have we gotten?

Wagner called a diverse group of folks trying to preserve their healthcare “radical leftists” who wanted to do her bodily harm – a big leap based on the fact that, since she wouldn’t come to us, several of us went to her home and church and, at a respectful distance, monitored by police, tried to engage her in dialogue.

Tetchy Ann claimed we “leftists” were threatening her life when some of her desperate constituents drew the outline of bodies in her driveway, symbolizing those of us who would likely die if the House Trumpcare bill prevailed. An extreme measure, perhaps, but can you blame people when they can’t manage to get the attention of their representative any other way than by big (or biggish) symbolic gestures?

Evidently believing that she could stifle constituent voices through such public whining, Wagner not only voted for the House’s mean-minded Trumpcare bill, but appeared giddily yodeling “freedom” after the foul deed was done.

When discussing the putative “harassment” she received, Wagner told one radio interviewer that ” she’s willing to sit down and discuss any concerns in a civil manner,” a claim which, based on past experience, many of her constituents doubt. But there’s an easy way for her to prove that she’s telling the truth – and it isn’t to be found in the cloying prose of her email PR newsletters. If Wagner wants folks in the 2nd district to believe her story about “listening” to the whole range of her constituents rather than just a few supporters, she can come to a real town hall – a venue where her responses could be publicly shared with the media and those unable to approach her during occasional, private, office visits, the content of which can always be swept under the rug.

Since Wagner’s been unwilling thus far to schedule such a town hall, her constituents have, once again, decided to start the ball rolling. She’s been invited to a Town Hall meeting on Aug. 24 – which will take place at the St. Charles County Center with or without her august presence.

If Wagner’s smart – and wants to be re-elected – she’ll surprise everybody and attend. Otherwise we’ll know just how important she thinks our needs really are, newsletter protestations to the contrary be damned. Or, alternatively and just as damning, we’ll finally understand that our delicate Annie is incapable of ever dealing forthrightly with the range of opinion that characterizes her district.

Wagner needs to learn that if you want to take the credit, you need to do the deed – not just talk about it.

Humpety Trumpety sat on a wall

04 Friday Aug 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

IMG_20170802_140203 (3).jpg

It’s pretty clear that the young architects in training at Washington University don’t want to build His Orange Majesty’s vanity wall – as clear as an uplifted middle finger. They’re in agreement with numerous engineering, architectural, and design organizations and firms that have indicated that the project not only violates professional ethical norms but poses unacceptable financial and reputational risks.

They’ve got lots of company.

As of last April 60% of Americans who were polled opposed the border wall.

Republican congressmen from districts on the border don’t support building a wall.

Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill says it won’t even keep those pesky Mexicans out. She also says it’ll cost U.S. taxpayers -you and me – at least $67 billion, or $200 per person. And McCaskill, a former state auditor, knows her numbers.

And it’s damn sure that the Mexicans aren’t going to pay for it – no matter what the Dark (Orange) Lord claims. (Of course, the recently leaked transcript of his phone conversation with the Mexican president made it clear that he doesn’t really care who pays – as long as Mexico goes along with his story publicly so he’ll look like a “winner” at least once.)

Looks like nobody with the sense God gave a turnip would allocate money for Trump’s border wall, certainly not those “fiscally conservative” members of the GOP who control the entire government apparatus just now.

But wait – did I just hear that the GOP-controlled House passed an appropriations bill, The Make America Secure Appropriations Act, that parceled out the first installment of that $67 billion?

I sure did.

It was my congressperson, Rep. Ann Wagner (R-2), who gushed that an appropriations bill that “fully funds President Trump’s request for the border wall,” meets “our conservative priorities.” Every Republican member of the Missouri delegation joined Rep. Wagner – and all but five other Republicans – and voted “yea” on this bill.

Same folks voted to take health care away from Medicaid recipients and Obamacare participants just a few weeks ago. Yet they’re more than willing to begin throwing billions at Trump’s boondoggle.

Are they inherently mean? Or maybe they’re just bone stupid? Or perhaps they’re that frightened of Donny the Orange Menace and his immigrant-hating pitchfork corps?

In any case, they might keep in mind that perching on walls can, politically speaking, lead to great falls – falls that all the king’s men can’t fix.