A front page story in today’s Kansas City Star is all about the campaign consultant industrial complex. And that, of course, is tied into unlimited money.

There is this little gem within the bigger story:

….In the mid-1990s, consultants and strategists helped Republicans draft the Contract with America, a set of poll-tested policy positions that helped the GOP win control of the House….

Well, mostly no.

About that poll:

AAPOR Finds Frank Luntz in Violation of Ethics Code

Wednesday, April 23, 1997 — The Executive Council of the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) announced Wednesday that a 14 month investigation found pollster Frank Luntz violated the Association’s Code of Professional Ethics and Practices.

AAPOR found Luntz, who heads the Luntz Research Companies in Arlington,Virginia, repeatedly refused to make public essential facts about his research on public attitudes about the Republicans’ “Contract with America.” In particular, the AAPOR inquiry focused on Luntz’s reporting, prior to the November elections in 1994, that his research showed at least 60 percent of the public favored each of the elements in the GOP “Contract.” When later asked to provide some basic facts about this research, Luntz refused.

AAPOR holds that researchers must disclose, or make available for public disclosure, the wording of questions and other basic methodological details when poll findings are made public. This disclosure is important so that claims made on the basis of opinion research findings can be independently evaluated. Section III of the AAPOR Code states: “Good professional practice imposes the obligation upon all public opinion researchers to include, in any report of research results, or to make available when that report is released, certain essential information about how the research was conducted.”

Richard A. Kulka, chair of AAPOR’s Standards Committee noted that AAPOR’s investigation of Luntz began in January 1996, after receiving a complaint from a member. According to Kulka, “AAPOR tried on several occasions to get Luntz to provide some basic information about his survey, for example, the wording of the questions he used. For about a year, he ignored these requests. Subsequently, he provided partial information, but still refused to let us make any of the information public, arguing that the results were proprietary, even though he had been discussing the conclusions of the survey in public for nearly two years.”

AAPOR’s President, Diane Colasanto, adds “When researchers make public arguments based on their research data, then refuse to say how their research was conducted, that harms the public debate on issues and reduces he credibility of all survey and public opinion research.”

AAPOR is an organization of over 1,400 research professionals from government agencies, colleges and universities, non-profit organizations, and commercial polling firms. It is the primary professional association representing public opinion researchers, and has a strong interest in protecting and strengthening the credibility of survey research. The organization was founded in 1947 by such pioneers of polling as George Gallup, Hadley Cantril, and Paul Lazarsfeld.

Luntz is not a member of the organization.

And media repeated the spin.

From Rolling Stone:

How Wily Newt Pulled the ‘Contract with America’ Scam

By Rick Perlstein

….The Contract With America was a hustle from start to finish. It never really was about conservatism at all – practically the opposite….

….Gingrich devised a document micro-tailored to turn at least 70 percent of Perot voters, however fleetingly, into Republicans in time for November of 1994. “Republicans knew,” Stone and Rapoport write, “that the traditional Republican congressional campaign” – which is to say, conservatism – “would be insufficient to get this support.” This realization was the genesis of the Contract for America….

….Gingrich and Co. were able to get away with it because the plain facts of what the Contract actually was (a strategic erasure of Republican conservatism) almost entirely escaped the political press – at the time, and ever since….

[emphasis added]

It was a game in 1994. And people with short attention spans repeat the same media narrative almost twenty years later.

At today’s Blog Watch:

[underline emphasis added]

Yeah, we know, we’ve had typos, too.

Teresa Hensley (D) (left) and Vicky Hartzler (r) (right).

This past weekend in the Kansas City Star:

Posted on Sat, Oct. 27, 2012 09:39 PM

The Star’s editorial | Best picks on Missouri ballot

[….]

U.S. House, 4th District:

Teresa Hensley

Why? The Democratic challenger from Raymore has proven her talents as Cass County prosecutor. She is smarter and much more reasonable than incumbent tea party obstructionist Vicky Hartzler.

[….]

[bold emphasis in original][underline emphasis added]

In the Kansas City Star in 2010, from Yael Abouhalkah:

Just say ‘no’ to Prop A, Hartzler, Kobach, Eilert and Mason

….Hartzler, of all the local candidates I’ve interviewed this year, has the most vacuous answers on important issues. She offers little more than ultra-conservative sound-bite positions….

[underline emphasis added]

We’ve seen it twice. About the same republican candidate in two different elections.

No surprise here:

Susan Montee well-qualified to be lieutenant governor

Kansas City Star Editorial

Republican Peter Kinder spent his second term as Missouri’s lieutenant governor improperly spending taxpayers’ money for political travel, challenging the federal health reform law in a clumsy lawsuit and getting in trouble with visits to a bawdy nightclub.

No wonder Kinder was unable to put together a campaign for governor. But now he wants to warm the lieutenant governor’s seat for a third term.

Fortunately, voters have a much better option in Democrat Susan Montee.

As a former state auditor, Montee knows every nook and cranny of state government.

She would be eminently qualified to fill in for the governor if needed – which, after all, is the primary function of the office….

….Voters can expect Montee to carry out her duties in a responsible, conscientious way. The same cannot be said for Kinder.

This afternoon the Kansas City Star endorsed Teresa Hensley (D) in her 4th Congressional District race against first term teabagger Vicky Hartzler (r).

Cass County Prosecutor and Democratic Party Candidate in the 4th Congressional District Teresa Hensley

received the endorsement of the Kansas City Star this afternoon.

The Star’s recommendations for U.S. House in Kansas, Missouri

Kansas City Star Editorial

Congress is deadlocked, stymied by partisanship and a big target for voter discontent, expressed in record-low approval ratings. Yet area incumbents likely have the upper hand. It shouldn’t be so in all cases.

Here are The Star’s recommendations for local contested congressional races:

Missouri

4th District

Cass County Prosecutor Teresa Hensley, the Democratic challenger, far outclasses Republican incumbent Vicky Hartzler. Voters should evict Hartzler, who in her first term showed no interest in compromise or moderate views.

Hensley has a shot at accomplishing what voters often say they want: Beating an incumbent and offering a thoughtful approach to the nation’s ills. New boundaries stretch the district from Harrisonville to Columbia, and add the more progressive Boone County.

Hensley, of Raymore, emphasizes help for small businesses, including breaks on costly regulations, as the best way to boost job prospects in the largely rural district. Her record as prosecutor speaks well of her ability to pull people together. She’s created child abuse response teams as well as arson and DWI task forces. As she says, prosecutions aren’t partisan, and she pledges to keep that attitude in Congress.

She backs alternative energy efforts, public education improvements and reforms to the tax system, including higher taxes for those who earn more than $1 million.

Hartzler’s family is a long-time recipient of federal farm aid, yet she likes to bash U.S. spending – for others. She’s a tea party voter with no hint of compromising in her future. She’s ducked debate offers and avoids joint appearances. There’s a reason. Hensley’s thoughtful ideas would expose Hartzler’s weaknesses.

Hensley would effectively serve the district formerly represented for decades by Ike Skelton….

[emphasis in original]

“…Teresa Hensley, the Democratic challenger, far outclasses Republican incumbent Vicky Hartzler. Voters should evict Hartzler, who in her first term showed no interest in compromise or moderate views…”

Uh, we knew that a long time ago.

Previously:

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): “No answer given.” (October 19, 2012)

Teresa Hensley (D) in the 4th Congressional District: endorsement by the Columbia Daily Tribune (October 12, 2012)

In today’s Kansas City Star:

Posted on Tue, Aug. 21, 2012 11:13 PM

In politics, there is no black and white

By DAVE HELLING

The Kansas City Star

….Issues once considered relative, and subject to discussion and debate, are now considered absolute, such as abortion, and not subject to compromise. In this approach, Medicare isn’t insurance for the elderly, it’s socialism. Critics of President Barack Obama aren’t misguided, they’re racists. Taxes aren’t a way to raise money, they’re theft.

Finding compromise with socialists, racists, and thieves is pretty much as hard as compromising on abortion….

[emphasis in original]

The thing is, when it comes to abortion in Missouri, those militant absolutists are a small number, even smaller than the crazification factor (from Monday’s PPP poll):

[….]

Q6 Generally speaking, do you identify as prochoice or pro-life on the issue of abortion?

Pro-choice 40%

Pro-life 52%

Not sure 7%

Q7 Which of the following statements comes closest to your position on abortion: it should be legal in all cases; it should generally be  illegal with exception for rape, incest, or protection of the mother’s life; or should it be completely illegal?

Legal in all cases 33%

Illegal except for rape, incest, or the mother’s life 47%

Completely illegal 14%

Not sure 5%

[….]

[emphasis added]

So, in a statewide poll (with a sample that could be interpreted as skewing republican), 33% of the respondents believe abortion should be legal in all circumstances, 47% believe abortion should be legal in some circumstances, and 14% are militant absolutists (like Todd Akin) who believe that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. 80% and 14%. And exactly who is driving political polarization?

The questions that Dave Helling should be asking is, how and why does 14% of the population, militant absolutists that they are, so drive the current (and long time past) political environment? An environment which Helling now laments in his opinion piece. “All sides do it” doesn’t cut it, especially when a small single issue minority is so far out of the main stream.

The answer is simple. The republican party, a political institution which endeavors to attain and hold on to political power at all costs, can rely on that single wedge issue portion of the electorate to keep them in power. And everybody else in the republican establishment club goes along until it bites them in the ass.  

* The headline is from a line in John Adams’ opera, Nixon in China (1987).

Welcome to the party late:

….Hartzler does stumble occasionally. At a town hall meeting last month, she initially expressed doubts about President Obama’s birth certificate.

“You know, I have a lot of doubts about all that,” she said.

She also said something curious about China embedding microchips with detection or tracking capabilities in products sold in the United States.

“We need to have a new 007 James Bond movie with China as the bad guys,” she said, according to The Sedalia Democrat….

Yep, really late to the party.

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): the black helicopters will be dropping microchip infested toasters on us (April 8, 2012)

The stenographer continues:

….But Hensley will have to demonstrate that she stands with gun owners….

Done.

So much for stenographers doing their homework.

….or has major problems with Obama’s health plan….

And that worked so well for Ike Skelton (D) in 2010?

Never take political advice from a stenographer.

….Hartzler is a hustler. Something tells me she won’t be caught off guard.

Did a republican operative spin that to you? Just asking.

Democrats: President Obama heading to Osawatomie Tuesday

2 hours, 26 minutes ago

Steve Kraske

@stevekraske

A leaked e-mail to Prime Buzz states that the president will be in Osawatomie – of all places – on Tuesday.

Why Osawatomie? And why Kansas?

We’re scrambling to find out.

But note this from Wikipedia…

[emphasis added]

That prompted these responses:

@annievangsnes Annie Montemayor

Citing Wikipedia? Good job Midwest Democracy Project. Sometimes being a journalist means picking up a phone.[…]1 hour ago

@annievangsnes Annie Montemayor

@stevekraske @smontemayor Better question: Why do you think a tidbit from Wikipedia makes a good hypothesis for his visit. 1 hour ago

That left a mark.

And who is Annie Montemayor?:

Annie Montemayor

@annievangsnes Paola, KS

Graduate of William Allen White School of Journalism at KU. Reporter/photographer at the Miami County Republic….

Okay.

Update:

Oooh, we’re mean.

It turns out that President Obama will indeed be in Osawatomie, Kansas on Tuesday.

Heh. We’re still mean.

Heads or tails? In the universe of political stenography all stupid ideas or concepts have the same value as anything else.

Seriously?:

KRASKE: Where’s Bill Clinton? Why is Robin Carnahan so alone? Just talking with myself…

….Get this: Clinton, who now ranks as one of the country’s most popular political figures (who would have guessed that a decade ago?)….

[emphasis added]

I’ll answer that. Anyone who can read:

Presidential Approval Ratings — Bill Clinton

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Bill Clinton is handling his job as president?

2000

00 Dec 15-17

Approve – 66%

Disapprove – 32%

No Opinion – 2%

00 Dec 2-4

Approve – 60%

Disapprove – 35%

No Opinion – 5%

00 Nov 13-15

Approve – 63%

Disapprove – 33%

No Opinion – 4%

00 Oct 25-28

Approve – 57%

Disapprove – 38%

No Opinion – 5%

Or:

NBC  News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Bill McInturff (R)….

“Now I’m going to read you the names of several public figures, and I’d like you to rate your feelings toward each one as either very positive, somewhat positive, neutral, somewhat negative, or very negative. If you don’t know the name, please just say so. Bill Clinton.”

10/13-15/00 RV

Very Positive – 25%

Somewhat Positive – 26%

Neutral – 10%

Somewhat Negative – 11%

Very Negative – 28%

Not sure –

Heh. That 28% has got to be that nascent Faux News Channel watching teabagger core.

Gallup  Poll…

“Next, we’d like to get your overall opinion of some people in the news. As I read each name, please say if you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of these people — or if you have never heard of them. How about Bill Clinton?”

11/13-15/00

Favorable – 57%

Unfavorable – 41%

Unsure – 2%

10/25-28/00

Favorable – 54%

Unfavorable – 44%

Unsure – 2%

CNN/Time  Poll conducted by Yankelovich Partners

“Next, I’m going to read you the names of some people in the news today. Please tell me whether you have generally favorable or generally unfavorable impressions of each, or whether you are not familiar enough to say one way or another. Bill Clinton.”

10/25-26/00

Favorable – 57%

Unfavorable – 38%

Not Familiar – 2%

Not Sure – 3%

“…who would have guessed that a decade ago?…”

Having a memory helps, too. If you weren’t a stenographer you’d get the picture.

Flip you for the narrative…

…is so that some people have something to watch on television on a fall Saturday afternoon.

In today’s Kansas City Star:

Breaking up the Big 12 is a Powers play

…because Texas president Bill Powers, a Cal graduate, would rather be associated with the academic powerhouses of the West Coast.

This according to some close to the situation.

OK, just wanted to know where it stood. One man’s academic ambition wrecks multiple schools’ athletics. Check.

But finally, some sense may have entered the dialogue….

Evidently not.