The republican cult of the victim.

Previously:

Sen. David Pearce (r): fundamentally, a useful idiot (August 30, 2014)

Call yourself what you want, obscure and manipulate language, it still doesn’t change the reality of what you are….

SB 519, HB 1307, HB 1313: wait, wait, wait (January 12, 2014)

On the right to privacy:

The ACLU is our nation’s guardian of liberty, working daily in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country.

These rights include:

[….]

Your right to privacy – freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs….

[emphasis added]

ROE v. WADE, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

….This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. The detriment that the State would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this choice altogether is apparent. Specific and direct harm medically diagnosable even in early pregnancy may be involved. Maternity, or additional offspring, may force upon the woman a distressful life and future. Psychological harm may be imminent. Mental and physical health may be taxed by child care. There is also the distress, for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically and otherwise, to care for it. In other cases, as in this one, the additional difficulties and continuing stigma of unwed motherhood may be involved. All these are factors the woman and her responsible physician necessarily will consider in consultation….

[emphasis added]

Last Thursday morning there was a meeting in Warrensburg with Senator David Pearce (r), requested by some constituents, on the subject of HB 1307 and the upcoming override vote concerning the Governor’s veto of the imposition of seventy-two hour waiting period for an abortion. An individual in attendance provided us with audio from that meeting.

Senator David Pearce (r) [file photo].

About thirty-two minutes into the meeting there was this remarkable set of statements:

Senator David Pearce (r): ….Some of you have probably seen, um, the Internet, uh, campaign against me. Uh, maybe you’ve gotten the robocalls.  And let me tell you who’s behind that. ACLU. And, uh, it’s not, there’s nothing that talks about pro life or abortion in that. It just says, uh, David Pearce should not, uh, be involved in your personal decisions. You want to talk to him? And then they, they automatically filter those phone calls to my office. Nothing [emphatic] about a seventy-two hour waiting period, nothing about babies being aborted. Nothing like that, so it’s a terribly misleading, um, uh [interrupted by a constituent question]….

Oh, the horror of having to explain yourself to constituents.

Apparently, just mentioning the ACLU is supposed to strike terror in the hearts of your constituents. Think about that for a moment – a politician in a room with a group of constituents that probably includes a significant number of ACLU members and sympathizers relates an anecdote that’s supposed to elicit, what, a negative opinion about the ACLU?

Really? As if anyone engaged in politics is required to use the language and memes of their opponents when they’re engaged in the rough and tumble struggle over issues?

The outrage could maybe be funny under other circumstances. In this case it’s just narcissism.

Uh, the ACLU is concerned about personal privacy. The issue of privacy and abortion was settled by the U.S. Supreme Court over forty years ago. Stare decisis.

Call yourself what you want, obscure and manipulate language, it still doesn’t change the reality of what you are.

Senator David Pearce (r) [file photo].

On the morning of Thursday, August 28th there was a meeting in Warrensburg with Senator David Pearce (r), requested by some constituents, on the subject of HB 1307 and the upcoming override vote concerning the Governor’s veto of the imposition of seventy-two hour waiting period for an abortion. An individual in attendance provided us with audio from that meeting:

Constituent: …Thank you Senator [David] Pearce [r] for joining us here today. We really appreciate it. We know you have a lot of things on your schedule. Uh, what we wanted to talk to you about is the House Bill 1307, increasing the wait time between counseling and an abortion from twenty-four to seventy-two hours…

[approximately twenty minutes later]

Male constituent: …I have three daughters….I know in the debate, uh, and I, I heard on the news, uh, one of the rep[resentative]s said, was asked, what the appropriate waiting period would be…and he said, nine months. How absurd. And, and, I, I cannot believe that…

[….]

Another male constituent: …I’ve been a Republican since voting for Nixon, Richard not Jay, so I, you know I’ve supported you. I’ve been proud to do it. I’ve thought you’ve always shared my values in amongst political things and, uh, I, I’ve painted a little broader stroke of this, boxed all my speech, kind of took some lines I was gonna use. But, the Republican Party has, over the years, I went back and the Reagan, Reagan  years and all of those great years. I thought they really represented what I stood for. Leave people alone, let ’em live their lives, lets them do what they want to do. Okay, that’s always been the Republican way. And it seems like they’re drifting away from that, both federal and state level. Right now at the state level is a great concern and this issue of, of womens’ rights, it concerns me. I don’t like abortion.  I think it’s personally disgusting. The next time I get pregnant I probably won’t have one. However, however, I really, really believe it’s that woman’s right to choose, nobody else’s. I don’t want you, or the Republicans, Democrats, Jews, I don’t want anyone to tell me what to do with my body. It isn’t right. It isn’t, it isn’t the way in America. I don’t think it is. And I support the veto in this matter, I really do…

Another constituent: …Can we count on you to vote to sustain the veto of House Bill 1307?

Senator David Pearce (r):  Let me, uh, give some comments first. Um, this is a tough issue. I mean, uh, it is very emotional. It’s, uh, in many cases not a black and white issue and, and all of us have, uh, uh, strong feelings. It’s one of those core values, you know, that, that fundamentally you feel a certain way. And, um, those are things that, that, that don’t change. Uh, I’ve been a pro life candidate since the first time I ran in eighty-six and got defeated and, uh, when I ran in two thousand two, two thousand four, two thousand six, two thousand eight, and two thousand twelve. Um, very strong pro life candidate. Um, I’d just kind of like to talk about a few things I’ve heard and, and, and I appreciate and respect every one of you here, uh, for, for your thoughts. And I think it’s good we can get together and talk. Uh, although in the Senate it was a partisan issue. It was straight down party lines. Twenty-two to nine. In the House it wasn’t. So I don’t think that it’s something you can say it’s a Republican versus Democrat issue. Uh, there were probably at least twenty, uh, pro life Democrats that came to vote for the bill in the House. And so I think that, that would be, uh, somewhat, uh, misleading.  Um, I sat right behind the bill sponsor, David Sater [r]. Uh, he handled the House bill and he was the Senate bill sponsor. And it was a protracted discussion we had on this bill. And, uh, David said that, and, and the reason I bring this up is that you had mentioned to my secretary that, that maybe next year there might be a compromise or maybe there would be a way to, to alter the bill. Um, at two particular times David went to the Democratic leadership in the Senate and offered to go down to thirty-six hours. That was rejected. Uh, went back and said, can we go forty-eight hours, that was rejected. And the reason why the Democrat [sic] leadership said they rejected those bills was, no, we want it seventy-two hours because that will be easier to prove the unconstitutionality of the bill. And so when this was happening there was a chance, there was a dialog, a chance for debate, a chance for compromise and it was flatly rejected. So I think you need to be aware of that. Um, also, uh, just on the political side, just so you’ll get a little bit of background information on this, two very, very controversial bills, this and right to work.  And, and basically the Democratic Party, uh, said, we’ll sit down on the seventy-two hours if you won’t bring up right to work. So, um, this was used as somewhat political leverage on this issue. And so to say it’s a Republican versus Democrat there, there’s a whole lot more to the issue than that. Um, the one thing that, that I feel is lost in this whole discussion is the baby. You know, we talk about inconvenience, we talk about over population, we talk about poor versus wealthy. What about the baby? I don’t believe it’s a tissue, I don’t believe it’s a fetus, I believe it’s a baby. And when you take a life, you take a life. Uh, and so that’s my fundamental belief on that. I am not god, and when we’re talking about how many people should populate this Earth, that’s not our decision. Uh, and so I fundamentally think that somebody needs to stand up for that baby. Because he or she can’t make that decision. Somebody else is making it for them, somebody else is saying, you’re not gonna live. And so that’s why it’s such a huge fundamental core value decision for me and, and for others. And so, to me, I think, I think it’s a good thing when we’re having less abortions in our state. And we have. We’re down to, I believe, less than seven thousand in our state, I think it’s down to sixty-five hundred now. Um, we just have one abortion clinic in the state. I think that’s a good thing. Uh, if we were down to zero abortions I think that would be a positive thing. Uh, and so for those reasons, uh, I will vote to, to, uh, override the veto….

….I do believe in the case of rape or incest that, that abortion should be allowed. Uh, not all folks in the pro life community feel that way, but I do….

[….]

Still another constituent: Would you just address why seventy-two [hours] opposed to twenty-four [hours]?  What is the purpose of that?

Senator David Pearce (r):  Well, uh, both, uh, South Dakota and Utah have adopted that.  Uh, so we would not be the first state, we’d be the third. I think these are important life and death decisions and so the longer [crosstalk] that a, that a person has to reflect that.

Still another constituent: Do you think women make it frivolously?

Senator David Pearce (r):  What’s that?

Still another constituent: Do you think women make that decision frivolously? Because I don’t think they do.  I think they go through a lot of torment before that twenty-four hour counseling. I’m sorry, just my personal experience with people I know….

Still another male constituent: And now you’re making it for them….

[….]

Still another constituent: You didn’t answer why the seventy-two was better than the twenty-four.

Still another male constituent: Yeah, you didn’t answer that.

Still another constituent: And then it’ll be a week and then it’ll be a month. I mean, what is the point of this?

Senator David Pearce (r):  I, I fundamentally think these are life and death decisions. And the more that, that people can reflect and, and ponder on this I think it’s, it’s better. Uh, if it will decrease the number of abortions, uh, I think that’s probably a good thing. Uh, I just think it’s fundamentally something we’re gonna disagree on.

Still another male constituent: So, expand it to nine months.

[….]

“…So, expand it to nine months…”

That’s the goal.

Uh, if no republican voted against the bill and a small number of Democrats joined in to support it, it’s still a partisan issue. You know, there used to be pro choice republicans in the Missouri General Assembly. They were purged.

Uh, offering a “compromise” of thirty-six hours rather than seventy-two hours when you have a  twenty-two to nine advantage to begin with is no compromise. Further that says a lot about the “core value” of those remaining “compromise” hours. One hour, nine months, it makes no difference, does it?

“…went to the Democratic leadership in the Senate and offered to go down to thirty-six hours. That was rejected. Uh, went back and said, can we go forty-eight hours, that was rejected. …”

Think about that for a second. The republican majority offered a “compromise” which was rejected, and then subsequently they offered a worse “compromise”. Accepting the second “compromise” would be gross malfeasance on the part of the Democrats in the Senate. The republicans expected acceptance on the second offer? Idiots.

Interestingly, Senator Pearce’s (r) interpretation of republican dogma on the imposition of seventy-two hour waiting period appears to be that the opposition was too clever by half in allowing the overwhelming republican majority to impose the full seventy-two hour period. Idiot.

“…And when you take a life, you take a life…”

“…I am not god, and when we’re talking about how many people should populate this Earth, that’s not our decision. Uh, and so I fundamentally think that somebody needs to stand up for that baby…”

Evidently, with your vote, it is your decision.

Kirk: What does God need with a starship?

If you’re for the death penalty and against Medicaid expansion in the State of Missouri (that intransigence on the part of the right wingnut controlled General Assembly is costing lives) and you’re against abortion you aren’t “pro life”. You’re against women controlling their own bodies. Period. If you’re a republican office holder in Missouri and you’re against the death penalty, you know that Medicaid expansion is the right thing to do, and you haven’t done anything about it then you’re nothing but a coward. Period.

“….I do believe in the case of rape or incest that, that abortion should be allowed. Uh, not all folks in the pro life community feel that way, but I do….”

That’s okay. Since they don’t appear too interested in promoting accessible health care for all and ending the death penalty it’ll fit nicely under their label.

Why seventy-two hours? Interestingly, we didn’t hear a rational explanation on that.

Senator David Pearce (r) is supposedly what passes for a “moderate” in the modern republican party. We haven’t seen any daylight between him and his party. He’s no “moderate”. In reality all he is for the republican majority and republican dogma in the Missouri General Assembly is a useful idiot.

Previously: SB 519, HB 1307, HB 1313: wait, wait, wait (January 12, 2014)

Governor Jay Nixon delivered a message about the situation in Ferguson, Missouri:

Governor Jay Nixon: Ten days ago, a police officer shot and killed Michael Brown, in broad daylight. Since then, the world has watched a community become engulfed in grief, anger, fear, at times, violence.

For a family mourning the loss of a son, it has been a profound personal tragedy. For Ferguson and our entire nation, it has ripped open old wounds that have festered for generations, and exposed difficult issues that communities across our country must still resolve.

But amid all the pain, distrust and anger, we’ve also seen tremendous acts of grace, courage, and kindness as the people of Ferguson try to maintain peace while they call for justice for the family of Michael Brown. In Ferguson people of all races and creeds are joining hands to pray for justice. Teenagers cooking meals for law enforcement officers, community leaders demonstrating courage and heroism throughout the night in standing against armed and violent instigators, volunteers coming out to pick up littered neighborhoods. They are the faces of Ferguson. They are the faces of this region. They are the faces and soul of Missouri.

For them, for the family of Michael Brown, for all the parents who have had their sons taken from them much too soon, and for all the children dreaming of a brighter and better future, we have a responsibility to come together and do everything we can to achieve justice for this family, peace for this community, and have the courage to address the problems that have divided us for too long. Real problems of poverty, education, and race.

So how do we do that?

First, we must protect the people of Ferguson. The officers of the Missouri Highway Patrol, St. Louis County, St. Louis City, and other jurisdictions are united in working valiantly to protect the public, while at the same time preserving citizens’ rights to express their anger peacefully.

As we’ve seen over the past week it is not an easy balance to strike. And it becomes much more difficult in the dark of night when organized and increasingly violent instigators take to the streets intent on creating chaos and lawlessness.

But we will not be defeated by bricks and guns and Molotov cocktails. With the help of peaceful demonstrators, pastors, ommunity leaders, Captain Johnson and law enforcement will not give up trying to ensure that those with peace in their hearts are not drowned out by those with senseless violence in their hands.

Second, a vigorous prosecution must now be pursued.

The democratically elected St. Louis County prosecutor and the Attorney General of the United States each have a job to do. Their obligation to achieve justice in the shooting death of Michael Brown must be carried out thoroughly, promptly, and correctly. And I call upon them to meet those expectations.

Finally, once we have achieved peace in Ferguson and justice for the family of Michael Brown, we must remain committed to rebuilding the trust that’s been lost, mending what has been broken, and healing the wounds we’ve endured.

This is hard. Nothing about this is simple. We won’t always get it right, but we’re gonna keep trying. Because Ferguson is a test, a test not just for the people of this community, but for all Americans. And it’s a test we must not fail.

Last week I met with and prayed with the mother of Michael Brown. She’s lost a son who she can never bring back. But what we can do is work together to ensure that Michael Brown’s death is not remembered as the tragedy that sparked a cycle of violence and distrust, but rather marks the beginning of a process of healing and reconciliation.

So I ask that we continue to stand together as we work to achieve justice for Michael Brown, restore hope and peace to the streets of Ferguson, and march together toward a future of greater opportunity and understanding for all of us.

Yesterday, at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

C001135 08/19/2014 A BETTER MISSOURI WITH GOVERNOR JAY NIXON MACO Development Company, L.L.C. P.O. Box 68 111 North Main Clarkton MO 63837 8/18/2014 $10,000.00

[emphasis added]

Governor Jay Nixon signed an executive order [pdf] calling up the National Guard.

The press release:

Following coordinated attacks on civilians and law enforcement, Governor Nixon signs executive order directing Missouri National Guard resources to Ferguson

August 18, 2014

Jefferson City, MO

Gov. Jay Nixon has signed an executive order directing additional resources through the Missouri National Guard to help restore peace and order and to protect the citizens of Ferguson.

“Tonight, a day of hope, prayers, and peaceful protests was marred by the violent criminal acts of an organized and growing number of individuals, many from outside the community and state, whose actions are putting the residents and businesses of Ferguson at risk.  I join the people of Ferguson, and all Missourians, in strongly condemning this criminal activity that included firing upon law enforcement officers, shooting a civilian, throwing Molotov cocktails, looting, and a coordinated attempt to block roads and overrun the Unified Command Center.  These violent acts are a disservice to the family of Michael Brown and his memory, and to the people of this community who yearn for justice to be served, and to feel safe in their own homes. Given these deliberate, coordinated and intensifying violent attacks on lives and property in Ferguson, I am directing the highly capable men and women of the Missouri National Guard to assist Colonel Ron Replogle and the Unified Command in restoring peace and order to this community.”

A tweet by Governor Jay Nixon on Wednesday:

Governor Jay Nixon ‏@GovJayNixon

Situation in Ferguson does not represent who we are. Must keep the peace, while safeguarding rights of citizens and the press 10:22 PM – 13 Aug 2014

A reply by state Senator Maria Chappele-Nadal:

MariaChappelleNadal ‏@MariaChappelleN

@GovJayNixon @DKSheets You don’t know shit bc you never communicate. FUCK you, Governor! 10:43 PM – 13 Aug 2014

That was retweeted 333 times and favorited 199 times.

Previously:

Tomorrow morning’s Governor’s Ham Breakfast at the State Fair is gonna be really interesting (August 13, 2014)

Gov. Jay Nixon will be in the St. Louis area today, not at the State Fair (August 14, 2014)

This morning’s Governor’s Ham Breakfast at the State Fair in Sedalia took place without Governor Jay Nixon. Governor Nixon was in Ferguson, Missouri as was/is Senator Claire McCaskill. No statewide Democratic Party office holders were in attendance at the breakfast.

Senator Roy Blunt (r), Representative Vicky Hartzler (r), Representative Blaine Luetkemeyer (r), State Auditor Tom Schweich (r), House Speaker Tim Jones (r), and former Speaker Catherine Hanaway (r) were at the State Fair. We also covered a republican press conference at the Farm Bureau building going after the EPA on water regulation. Senator Blunt, Representative Hartzler and Representative Luetkemeyer spoke. Not a word about Ferguson, but the were all pleased about the “right to farm” amendment.

Serenading folks in the Home Economics Building.

The band also performed in the big tent for the ham breakfast crowd. They were quite good.

Senator Roy Blunt (r).

Politicians weren’t the only ones on display and being judged.

Representative Vicky Hartzler (r).

The Democratic Party tent at the Missouri State Fair.

They were open and active long before the republican tent opened up.

Former House Speaker Catherine Hanaway (r).

State Auditor Tom Schweich (r).

Judging pie.

Representative Vicky Hartzler (r).

Representative Blaine Luetkemeyer at the republican press conference in the Farm Bureau Building.

Interestingly, all three purported republican candidates for Governor in 2016 attended the breakfast. There was no tear gas.

On Twitter tonight:

Kevin Horrigan ‏@OldSport

If @GovJayNixon does tomorrow’s state fair ham breakfast and doesn’t get some smarter policing in #Ferguson, could be a new low. 9:10 PM – 13 Aug 2014

Tony Wyche ‏@tonywyche

Gov Nixon, NOW is the time to step up. In the absence of leadership we get chaos. National aspirations or not, here’s your chance. #Ferguson 9:42 PM – 13 Aug 2014

Tony Messenger ‏@tonymess

Every ounce of leadership legacy earned by @GovJayNixon after #Joplin tornado is being sucked away by the #Ferguson vortex. Engage dammit. 9:46 PM – 13 Aug 2014

Philip Rucker ‏@PhilipRucker

Gov. Jay Nixon had been itching to expand his national profile, even eyeing 2016 run. His being AWOL tonight prob won’t help. #Ferguson 9:40 PM – 13 Aug 2014

Jay Rosen ‏@jayrosen_nyu

Where is the governor of Missouri? @GovJayNixon.10:00 PM – 13 Aug 2014

Joy Reid @JoyAnnReid

You can’t just suspend the constitution in an American city. Who’s in charge in #Ferguson?? 9:48 PM – 13 Aug 2014

Oh, my.

A press release from Governor Jay Nixon:

Gov. Nixon asks U.S. Department of Justice for an independent investigation of fatal shooting in Ferguson

August 11, 2014

Jefferson City, MO

Gov. Jay Nixon today announced that he has requested that the U.S. Department of Justice conduct an independent investigation of the fatal shooting of Michael Brown by police in Ferguson, Mo. on Saturday.

“This morning, I notified St. Louis County Executive Charlie Dooley that I would be making a formal request to the U.S. Department of Justice to conduct an independent investigation into the fatal shooting in Ferguson this past Saturday,” Gov. Nixon said. “It is vital that the facts about this case are gathered in a thorough, transparent and impartial manner, in which the public has complete confidence.  Our thoughts and prayers go out to all those affected by this tragic event, and I ask St. Louis County residents to exercise patience and respect for their neighbors as federal authorities work to get to the bottom of what happened through this comprehensive, independent review.”

This morning, the Governor spoke with St. Louis County Executive Charlie Dooley and St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar, who agreed on the importance of ensuring a comprehensive inquiry is completed in an impartial and expeditious manner.  Gov. Nixon has also been briefed by Col. Ron Replogle of the Missouri State Highway Patrol.

Previously: SB 656: legislature of the gun (May 16, 2014)

[….]

…they make it illegal for you as parent to know if your kid’s teacher is carrying a gun, or qualified to do so. That’s insane…

[….]

Governor Jay Nixon (D) vetoed [pdf] SB 656 today:

GOVERNOR OF MISSOURI

[….]

July 14, 2014

TO THE SECRETARY OD STATE OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI

Herewith I return to you Conference Committee Substitute for House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 656 entitled:

AN ACT

To repeal sections 21.750, 84.340, 571.030, 571.101, 571.107, 571.111, 571.117, 575.153, 590.010, and 590.205, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof sixteen new sections relating to firearms, with penalty provisions.

I disapprove of Conference Committee Substitute for House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 656. My reasons for disapproval are as follows:

Conference Committee Substitute for House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 656 would allow Missouri school districts to designate teachers or administrators as “school protection officers,” who would be authorized to carry concealed firearms within those districts. I have consistently opposed the arming of teachers as a means to keep schools safe. It is is simply the wrong approach, and one that I do not support.

The safety of Missourians [] especially children – has long been a priority of mine, both as Governor and as the former chief law enforcement officer of our state. I have supported, and will continue to support, the use of duly authorized law enforcement officers employed as school resource officers in schools. This bill, which would create a new mechanism for the arming of teachers, would not make schools safer. Consequently, I am returning it without my approval.

In accordance with the above stated reasons for disapproval, I am returning Conference Committee Substitute for House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 656 without my approval.

Respectfully submitted

s/

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon

Governor

That’s sanity.