No Shortage Of Ideas
Posted by: John Hancock | 9:05am | Permalink

Once again, this year’s state legislative session has been defined by a flurry of conservative Republican ideas and standard Democrat invisibility. However, as the final day of session commences, Republicans will be tasked with passing a number of their top legislative priorities, which includes a sweeping crack down on illegal immigration, a rock solid property tax relief measure, broad pro-life legislation and photo ID. Hopefully, by the close of business today, these measures will be added to the already extensive list of conservative legislative accomplishments that have been ushered into law by Missouri Republicans over the past four years.

Self-Promotion Gets The Best Of Nixon, Again
Posted by: John Hancock | 8:50am | Permalink

“Nixon's an opportunistic swashbuckler, they say, who goes beyond the authority of his office to grab headlines and the political dividends that come with them. Critics include some former supporters who wonder if Nixon has come under some kind of spell. They suspect that the power of the office has gone to his head or that he's getting bad advice from his staff.”
- St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 7/2/1995

Nearly two months ago, Missouri Pulse was first to report (see “Rumors & Chatter” post) that red flags were going up in the state capitol regarding Jay Nixon’s authority, or lack thereof, to dole out $630,000 obtained by the state in a settlement with Caremark, a pharmaceutical benefits company. Yesterday, the Missouri Office of Administration announced an investigation into Nixon’s handling of the $630,000 at the request of House Budget Committee Chairman Alan Icet, who charges that Nixon bypassed legislative appropriation authority in his haste to spend the money.

Once again, Nixon has been called out for attempting to run roughshod over others in an effort to promote himself. However, his latest shameless act of self-promotion comes with a cost as he is now running for higher office under the cloud of a state investigation. A logical question that has been circulating in Jeff City: “How could a guy who has been running for governor for three years make such a careless mistake?”

The Art Of Self-Promotion With Other People’s Money
Posted by: John Hancock | 10:35am | Permalink

Yesterday afternoon, an envelope containing the latest mass mailed newsletter from Jay Nixon’s official office touting his so-called No-Call achievements landed on my desk. The newsletter, which is paid for by taxpayers but could pass for campaign literature, repeatedly reminds the reader how the Eternal General is single-handedly saving Missourians from dreaded telemarketers via the state’s loophole-ridden No-Call law. Not surprisingly, it makes no mention of how much taxpayers forked over to allow Nixon to stuff their mail boxes with self-promotional info months before the biggest election in his 22-year career as a politician.

An hour after the campaign literature from Nixon’s official office arrived, news came that his poorly disguised slush fund, the Missouri Foundation for Health, had released a “study” in which it went out of its way to lend credence to Nixon’s criticism of the 2005 Medicaid overhaul—criticism that has been the central component of his 3-year gubernatorial campaign. Not surprisingly, the press release that accompanied the “study” was penned by none other than Tony Wyche, the talented ex-press guru for many a prominent Democrat, and it even included commentary from Nixon donor and slush fund chief Jim Kimmey. While there is not yet word regarding what role Nixon played in the “study”, history has shown that he and his staff are quite privy to the daily doings at the foundation.

All in all, Nixon has to be emboldened by the fact that he can send self-promotional mass mailings to Missourians from his official office during an election year with nary a trace of media scrutiny, and he can watch with immunity as a foundation he created and oversees shamelessly buttresses his campaign message with a sham “study” promoted by a Democrat message man and one of his supporters. And to think none of it cost him a dime!

Link up: E-mail correspondence between a top Nixon deputy and the foundation re: Missouri Pulse scrutiny

Obama Knows Best?
Posted by: John Hancock | 10:10am | Permalink

In a recent interview on MSNBC (h/t: KC Star), Senator Claire McCaskill issued the following candid response to a question regarding her chances of becoming Barack Obama’s VP pick:

“No, he's too smart for that. He's way too smart for that.”

It is refreshing to hear McCaskill has finally concluded that her selection as VP would be a serious drag on Obama’s campaign a la Geraldine Ferraro. However, the Pulse is all for McCaskill becoming Obama’s VP pick as 1) her boundless political baggage would be strewn from Seattle to Miami, 2) voters aren’t nearly as enamored with her as the state media is and 3) four years is just too long to wait until McCaskill’s War & Peace-sized research dossier is put to good use once again.

Robin Carnahan, Meet Sam Reed & Dan Satterberg
Posted by: Jonathon Prouty | 10:20am | Permalink

Recently, Missouri’s all but invisible Secretary of State Robin Carnahan awoke from hibernation to clash with proponents of photo ID. In predictable fashion, Carnahan, legislative Democrats and the ACLU (see prior post) have unflinchingly come to the defense of the Democrat Party’s de facto foot soldiers in “advocacy groups” such as ACORN, which has long served as a common denominator of ongoing voting fraud troubles in Missouri and other states.

While Carnahan desperately attempts to maintain the status quo in Missouri for allies like ACORN, the state of Washington is two years removed from what non-hibernating Secretary of State Sam Reed deemed “the worst case of election fraud” in that state’s history. According to news reports, investigators concluded that ACORN employees submitted nearly 1,800 fake voter registrations, which resulted in guilty pleas and jail time for some. Following last month’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of an Indiana voter ID law, Reed and King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg, who were both at the forefront of the ACORN fraud investigation, discussed the necessity of photo ID statutes. Here’s what they had to say to Fox News on 4/29:

[ERIC SHAWN, REPORTER]: Sam Reed, the Washington Secretary of State, wants photo IDs for people registering to vote. Two years ago, ACORN submitted 1,800 new voter registration forms, but there was a problem. The names why made up. All but six of the 1,800 submissions were fakes.

This is how they did it. The ACORN workers admitted they came here to the Seattle public library, sat at a table, and filled out the voter registration forms. They would make up names, Social Security numbers, addresses, even pluck names out of the phonebook.

One worker said it was a lot of hard work making up all those names. Another said he would sit at home, smoke marijuana, and fill out the forms.

[DAN SATTERBERG, KING COUNTY PROSECUTOR]: The most secure way secure way to make sure that the who are people coming to register to vote are, in fact, who they say they are is to require a picture I.D.

[SHAWN]: King County prosecutor Dan Satterberg filed felony charges against seven of the ACORN workers. Five pled guilty and went to jail. The head of the Washington State's ACORN office, John Jones, denies ACORN was responsible.

Democrat-ACLU Alliance Lives On
Posted by: John Hancock | 11:55am | Permalink

For the past few years, Democrats in Jefferson City and other state capitols have shamelessly teamed with the unhinged liberals at the ACLU in an effort to stifle the progression of voter ID laws that seek to eradicate voting fraud concerns in each of the respective states. However, the anti-voter ID campaign of the Democrat-ACLU alliance suffered a huge setback last month when the U.S. Supreme Court dealt the liberal lovelies a crushing defeat in their legal challenge to an Indiana voter ID law.

While it stands to reason that the Supreme Court loss would have put the kybosh on the alliance, one need look no further than current debates in Texas and here in Missouri, where a rejuvenated voter ID measure (HJR 48) is on the move, to see that the alliance is very much alive and well. One can only imagine how a vulnerable Democrat legislator from out-state Missouri who voted against voter ID would respond to a question regarding the ACLU alliance with his or her caucus.

Excerpt from HJR 48 bill summary:

“Testifying against the bill were Office of the Secretary of State; Service Employees International Union, Missouri/Kansas State Council; American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri"

After The Fact
Posted by: John Hancock | 8:15am | Permalink

Now that Barack Obama has all but sealed up the Democratic POTUS nomination, maybe—just maybe—Jay Nixon will finally muster the courage to announce which Democrat he will support for POTUS. Apparently, neither Clinton nor Obama have stirred Nixon quite as much as his prior POTUS picks, which have included former NBA star Bill Bradley and Missouri’s own Dick Gephardt.

The Tax Man Changeth His Stripes
Posted by: Jonathon Prouty | 9:00am | Permalink

For the past 22 years, Jay Nixon has amassed a consistently deplorable record when it comes to taxing Missourians. From his criticism of renowned Reagan era tax cuts and his efforts to prevent the “largest tax hike in state history” from going to a vote of the people to his recent support for the massive federal tax hike that would have turned S-CHIP into a vehicle for socialize medicine, Nixon has rarely, if ever, encountered a tax hike he hasn’t liked.

Over a much shorter period of time, Kenny Hulshof helped craft the historic federal tax plans of 2001 and 2003 that triggered a whopping $1.6 trillion in tax relief, and he has pushed to make those cuts permanent. More recently, he opposed Nancy Pelosi’s effort to pass the largest tax hike in American history, and he continues to be an outspoken champion for the repeal of the heinous death tax.

Considering the glaring disparity in the tax records of Nixon and Hulshof, one can’t help but chuckle at Nixon’s attempt yesterday to suggest that he was somehow to the right of Hulshof with his property tax relief plan—window dressing that some Democrats have jokingly referred to as “Nixon’s first ever tax relief plan.” If Nixon actually believes a modest improvement in eligibility requirements for tax credits trumps Hulshof’s call for an outright freeze on the skyrocketing property tax rates that are impacting Missouri seniors, then we suggest he chat with seniors such as Frank Penn, a St. Louis County homeowner who wasn’t all that fond of Nixon’s plan when he rolled it out earlier this year. The last couple sentences say it all!

Excerpt from AP story, 1/7/2008:

“Frank Penn, 67, of Hazelwood, said after the Nixon news conference that he considers Missouri's property tax credit programs to be just bandages on the much larger problem of homeowners struggling to keep up with their property taxes.

He paid $17,890 for his home in 1966. Today, the former McDonnell Douglas employee and retiree said he pays more than $2,000 annually on it, just in property taxes.

He wants property taxes to be capped for senior citizens and didn't believe property tax credits provided the solution. ‘They don't fix the problem,’ he said.”

VEEPSTAKES: Jindal on the Brain
Posted by: John Hancock | 4:30pm | Permalink

If governors represent the farm team for the GOP’s future POTUS hopes, then it appears the future will be bright following John McCain’s tenure in the White House. Most discussions of prospective McCain VP choices include references to Charlie Crist, Mark Sanford and Tim Pawlenty, but no governor seems to be generating the buzz that surrounds Louisiana political wunderkind Bobby Jindal, who is the subject of a must-read story in today’s Washington Times.

AM Levity
Posted by: John Hancock | 9:00am | Permalink

A timeline of liberal intransigence on ANWR courtesy of Investor’s Business Daily:

Nixon, MDP Might Be Dancing On The Fault Line
Posted by: John Hancock | 10:30am | Permalink

It would be an understatement to say that African-American voters have displayed some serious disillusionment with Jay Nixon through the years. From the public tongue lashings he has received from Democrat leaders to the myriad and dubious monikers (i.e. the “reincarnation” of George Wallace) that have been bestowed upon him, Nixon’s woes with black voters are enough to make Hillary Clinton feel good about her present situation.

Considering Nixon’s track record in this area, one is left to ponder why the Nixon-led MDP would become entangled in a heated political dispute in St. Louis County that has resulted in an African-American State Representative accusing the MDP of conspiring to prevent her from challenging State Senator Tim Green in a primary. According to the P-D, State Rep. Juanita Head Walton plans to be in federal court today to contest her removal from the primary ballot as a result of an alleged tax issue. She and her husband, who are both influential politicos in the county, are accusing her would-be primary opponent, State Sen. Tim Green, and the MDP of conspiring to prevent her from challenging Green. Legal issues aside, the political fallout from this situation could resurrect some familiar headaches for Nixon and his crew at the MDP.

Excerpt from the Political Fix account:

“Walton accused Green and the state Democratic Party of being in cahoots, and asserted that racism was involved. Green and a state party spokesman denied any collusion, and rejected any accusations of racism.”

What Could They Possibly Want?!
Posted by: John Hancock | 2:4pm | Permalink

In 2005, Governor Blunt rescinded Bob Holden’s controversial executive order that unionized state employees to the benefit of deep-pocketed public sector labor unions aligned with the Democratic Party. Now, those unions, AFSCME and the SEIU, are helping bankroll the war chests of the Missouri Democratic Party (MDP) and the Democratic Governor’s Association (DGA)—two committees that will spend millions of dollars to try and put Jay Nixon, who defended Holden’s order in court, in the Governor’s Mansion.

Below is a snapshot of nearly $1 million in AFSCME and SEIU donations that have been made to the MDP and the DGA since 2007. One thing is certain. These unions aren’t pumping this kind of early money into party coffers for a Jay Nixon bumper sticker!

AFSCME and SEIU donations to the MDP:

AFSCME and SEIU donations to the DGA:

I Can’t Quit You
Posted by: John Hancock | 9:40am | Permalink

“Well, I can’t quit you baby. But I got to put you down for awhile.”
- Lyrics from “I Can’t Quit You Baby” by blues master Otis Rush

Yesterday, for what seemed like the 35th time, Barack Obama attempted to sever his 20-year bond with his incendiary pastor and mentor Jeremiah Wright. While many pundits and reporters believe Obama has finally ridded himself of Wright, the National Review’s Byron York is not so certain the damage inflicted on his campaign won’t resonate with voters until Election Day. In his latest column, York hits the nail on the head with his argument that Wright believes Obama has tried to denounce him not because he disagrees with his outlandish world view, but because he has to solely for political reasons. If Obama’s honesty is drawn into question, what does that say about his greatest asset—words, just words?

Excerpt from York’s column:

“Politicians say what they say and do what they do based on electability, based on sound bites, based on polls,” Wright told the Press Club. “Preachers say what they say because they’re pastors. . . . I do what pastors do. [Obama] does what politicians do.” A few days earlier, in an interview with PBS’s Bill Moyers, Wright said Obama, in his Philadelphia speech attempting to calm the controversy created by Wright’s sermons, had said “what he has to say as a politician.”

That, not Wright’s wide-ranging social theories, is what forced Obama to denounce Wright at a hastily arranged news conference Tuesday. By questioning Obama’s honesty, Wright was striking at the heart of the Obama campaign. The most damaging thing Wright could ever say is that he knows, based on his long personal relationship with Obama, that Obama agrees with him but can’t say so publicly for political reasons. Put another way, if voters believe that Obama fundamentally rejects Wright’s views, they might question Obama’s judgment in remaining close to Wright for 20 years. But if voters believe that Obama secretly agrees with Wright but is putting on another face to win an election, then all is lost.

Obama, ACORN & Voter ID
Posted by: John Hancock | 11:30pm | Permalink

While some reporters continue to mistakenly refer to the scandal plagued lefties at ACORN as “a community group that helps register poor voters”, the Wall Street Journal’s John Fund isn’t having any of that. Instead, Fund has penned an analytical piece that details the history between ACORN, Barack Obama and voter ID. And wouldn’t you know it! ACORN used to be an Obama legal client, he sat on the board of a non-profit that directed grants to the group, he helped train ACORN’s staff and more recently he joined briefs with the group in opposition to the Indiana voter ID law that was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday. Oh yeah, ACORN has also endorsed Obama for POTUS and the group is planning to use its controversial voter registration practices to put him in the White House. And to think some folks in the media still believe ACORN is nothing more than “a community group that helps register poor voters.”

Excerpt from Fund’s piece:

“In 1995, then GOP Gov. Jim Edgar refused to implement the federal ‘Motor Voter’ law. Allowing voters to register using only a postcard and blocking the state from culling voter rolls, he argued, could invite fraud. Mr. Obama sued on behalf of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, and won. Acorn later invited Mr. Obama to help train its staff; Mr. Obama would also sit on the board of the Woods Fund for Chicago, which frequently gave this group grants.

Acorn's efforts to register voters have been scandal-prone. St. Louis, Mo., officials found that in 2006 over 1,000 addresses listed on its registrations didn't exist. ‘We met twice with Acorn before their drive, but our requests completely fell by the wayside,’ said Democrat Matt Potter, the city's deputy elections director. Later, federal authorities indicted eight of the group's local workers. One of the eight pleaded guilty last month.

In Seattle, local officials invalidated 1,762 Acorn registrations. Felony charges were filed against seven of its workers, some of whom have criminal records. Prosecutors say Acorn's oversight of its workers was virtually nonexistent. To avoid prosecution, Acorn agreed to pay $25,000 in restitution.

Despite this record – and polls that show clear majorities of blacks and Hispanics back voter ID laws – Mr. Obama continues to back Acorn. They both joined briefs urging the Supreme Court to overturn Indiana's law. . . .

Acorn's national political arm has endorsed Mr. Obama. And its ‘nonpartisan’ voter registration affiliate has announced plans to register hundreds of thousands of voters before the November election. An election in which Mr. Obama may be the Democratic candidate.”

Fighting With Words, Not Votes
Posted by: John Hancock | 1:30pm | Permalink

For the past couple weeks, House Democrats have repeatedly voiced displeasure with Republican-sponsored measures that seek to combat illegal immigration and challenge the wasteful allocation of tax dollars to subsidize illegal immigrants. Yet, when it comes time to vote, most Democrats are either voting with Republicans or not voting at all on the very measures many in their caucus, including their leaders, have publicly castigated. Last week’s vote on HB 1626, a bill that would prohibit illegal immigrants from public assistance, is the latest example of that (see vote tally below).

According to a Vote Smart survey (pg. 9), Jay Nixon supports prohibiting states from denying illegal immigrants access to taxpayer funded services, which one might think would make reporters curious about Nixon’s thoughts on HB 1626. While the Pulse holds little hope in a reporter actually grilling Nixon about the measure, we’re willing to bet he would probably echo the sentiments of his legislative allies, who toss red meat rhetoric to appease their liberal base but vote with Republicans in order to appear tough on this hot-button issue. After all, what’s one more flip-flop for Nixon, who has been all over the map on a litany of issues for the past 22 years?

From the State House Journal, 4/24/2008:

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Indiana Voter ID Law
Posted by: John Hancock | 10:50am | Permalink

Now that the Supreme Court has weighed in on the side of Indiana’s voter identification law, it will be very interesting to hear the stuttering, stammering and excuses that will emanate from the mouths of Robin Carnahan, Jay Nixon and the Missouri Democratic Party—the parties responsible for deep-sixing Missouri’s voter identification law.

AM Levity
Posted by: John Hancock | 8:40am | Permalink

Courtesy of Investor’s Business Daily: