Desperate Times, Desperate Measures
Posted by: John Hancock | 5:20pm | Permalink

Leave it to the Missouri Democratic Party (MDP), which touted “the integrity” of ethics reform champion Kenny Hulshof in 2006 cycle attacks on Jim Talent, to desperately lash out at Hulshof on ethics now that he is running for governor. It seems a bit early for the MDP to be getting this desperate, but, then again, they do have the unenviable task of trying to defend the 22-year record of scandal magnet Jay Nixon over the next few months. Speaking of Nixon, why is it that after three years of campaigning for governor he has yet to utter a peep about his plans for state license offices? Maybe his handlers will allow him to discuss the issue at some point.

LINK UP: For a quick reference point on the chasm that separates Hulshof and Nixon on ethics, check out the Pulse’s 3/6 post on what each gent was up to in March 2006.

Campus Lefty Blasts McCaskill
Posted by: John Hancock | 5:15pm | Permalink

It has been more than a week since Sen. Claire McCaskill starting taking flak for her controversial remarks in the wake of the Jeremiah Wright imbroglio, but some folks are still piling on. In today’s Philadelphia Inquirer, Sean Wilentz, a leading liberal historian at Princeton and a long-time Clinton apologist, had this to say:

“Since the Philadelphia speech, the candidate and his surrogates have sounded tone-deaf on the subject of race. On March 20, Obama described his Kansas grandmother to a Philadelphia radio interviewer as ‘a typical white person.’ The same day, Sen. John Kerry said that Obama would help U.S. relations with Muslim nations ‘because he's a black man.’ Another Obama supporter, Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, called him the first black leader ‘to come to the American people not as a victim but as a leader.’ Her history excluded and conceivably denigrated countless black leaders, from Frederick Douglass to Rep. John Lewis. Obama remained silent, refusing to take Kerry and McCaskill to task for their racially charged remarks.”

THEN & NOW: Mathewson Speaks Of Nixon
Posted by: John Hancock | 12:15pm | Permalink

So, former Democrat State Senate chief Jim Mathewson now believes Jay Nixon is not only “the greatest press hound” he has ever known, but is a “big goofy guy” to boot. While the Pulse does not dispute Mathewson’s assessment of Nixon, those aren’t the kind of sound bites Nixon wants floating around from one of his top supporters and mentors.

Mathewson on Nixon, KC Star, 7/2/1995: “He's the greatest press hound I've ever known.”

Mathewson on Nixon, Sedalia Democrat, 3/29/2008: “I was in the Senate minding my own business, which I don't normally do, when this big goofy guy came through.”

BONUS: Mathewson reflects on a $456 million tax hike supported by Nixon and other Senate Democrats, P-D, 3/15/1991: “It's a historic day. It's the biggest package that's ever been voted through the Missouri General Assembly in either body.”

AM Levity
Posted by: John Hancock | 8:30am | Permalink

From Townhall.com’s Glenn McCoy:

Same Old, Same Old
Posted by: John Hancock | 2:10pm | Permalink

Yesterday, Democrats in the Missouri legislature engaged in their annual ritual of griping and complaining that the prospective state budget was not big enough to their liking and was too conservative for their liberal taste in government spending. Noticeably absent from the news coverage of the boohoo session was a reference to an actual structured alternative that would not only serve as a repository for the Democrats’ big spending fancies but would quantify exactly how much those fancies would cost state taxpayers and which taxes would have to be raised to make them a reality.

Say what you will about the staggering tax-and-spending plans put forth by Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and the Nancy Pelosi-led Democrats in Congress, but at least they have the backbone to propose that which Missouri Democrats can’t summon the courage to propose—massive tax hikes to cover their big government fantasies.

“GI Joe” & Hillary’s Bosnian Fish Story
Posted by: John Hancock | 9:25am | Permalink

This week, bloggers, pundits and late night talk show hosts have had a heyday with Hillary Clinton’s Bosnian fish story. However, no one has managed to encapsulate the Clintonian predictability and sheer craziness of her debunked claims quite as well as “GI Joe”, the blogger who wrote this widely circulated post on The Politico site earlier this week (typos included):

“Actually Mrs. Clinton was to modest. I was there and saw it all. When Mrs. Clinton got off the plane the tarmac came under morter and machine gun fire. I was blown off my tank and was exposed to enemey fire. Mrs. Clinton without regard to her own safety dragged me to safety, jumped on the tank and opened fire killing 50 of the enemey. Shortly after that a suicide bomber appeared within 5 feet of Mrs. Clinton, she stopped the guards from opening fire on him and took control of the situation. She talked to the man in his own language and got him surrender. She found that he had suffered terribly as a result of policies of George Bush 1. She defused the bomb vest herself and then helped me. Since there was no doctor around and I was in a desperate state she again took control. She stopped my bleeding and saved my life. Chelsea donated the blood. Thankfully we were the same type. I want Mrs. Clinton answering that phone at 3am.”

Gunned Down
Posted by: John Hancock | 3:36 PM | Permalink

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama aren’t the only Democrats who are currently at each other’s throats. Here in Missouri, PSC nominee and former Democrat State Senate candidate Kevin Gunn is getting raked over the coals by vengeful Senate Democrats still smarting over his decision to exit the open race in the 15th District for the PSC spot. As things currently stand, disgruntled Democrats have temporarily blocked Gunn’s nomination, but Senate chief Mike Gibbons has said he plans to reintroduce his nomination at a later date.

What’s Another $1.4 Billion In Tax Hikes?!
Posted by: Jonathon Prouty | 9:55 AM | Permalink

For nearly three years, Jay Nixon has campaigned to bring back a broken and fiscally unsustainable state health care system that would require a nearly $1 billion tax hike. However, it appears that hike may prove to be just the tip of the iceberg.

Yesterday, the Nixon-created Missouri Foundation for Health issued a Tony Wyche penned release on a fact sheet/ultimatum that asserted Missouri stands to lose $1.4 billion in Medicaid dollars over the next five years as a result of proposed changes at the federal level.  As far as the foundation is concerned, state leaders will be forced to either “make up” the lost revenues or “cut Medicaid services.”

Considering Nixon’s proximity to the foundation, it would be interesting to hear his take on its ultimatum. If Nixon’s tax-and-spend rhetoric over the past three years is any indication, it would seem that tacking on an additional $1.4 billion in tax hikes on top of the nearly $1 billion hike he is already proposing would not be out of the realm of possibility.

Deepening Dem Divisions Could Benefit McCain
Posted by: John Hancock | 2:05pm | Permalink

The latest from Gallup:

ADDENDUM (3/27 @ 12:20am):  John Fund of the Wall Street Journal weighs in on the Gallup numbers 

A Fly In The Ointment
Posted by: John Hancock | 9:10am | Permalink

Last week, House Democrat chief Paul LeVota proudly predicted Democrats will reclaim the majority in the State House this year due, in large part, to “smart” recruiting efforts. However, it looks as though LeVota may be forced to consider recruiting someone new to execute his prediction due to the rise of a potentially formidable primary challenge to current HDCC chair Rachel Storch.

Aside from Storch’s service as a state legislator, she chairs the HDCC and works as the state director for Hillary Clinton’s campaign in Missouri. The onset of a primary challenge from Mike Roberts, Jr., who hails from a family of Democratic heavyweights, is bound to reignite murmuring among Democrats who were already concerned she had too much on her plate to pursue the HDCC’s ends.

BELTWAY BUZZ: Zai Jian, McCaskill!
Posted by: John Hancock | 1:50pm | Permalink

Sen. Claire McCaskill’s departure for a trade mission to China could not come at a better time for Barack Obama’s camp, which bore the brunt of her rhetorical gaffes during last week’s imbroglio over the incendiary sermonizing of Obama’s longtime pastor and spiritual advisor Jeremiah Wright. McCaskill not only defended the indefensible hate speech of Wright but was roundly criticized for asserting that Obama was the first black leader to “come to the American people, not as a victim, but rather as a leader.”

According to Beltway sources, McCaskill’s once lofty standing within Obama’s camp began to erode earlier this month when she was blamed for forcing Obama to capitulate on his opposition to earmark reform. Last week’s round of blunders only reinforced and gave credence to the opinions of McCaskill’s critics, and resulted in the campaign publicly distancing itself from her following the first-black-leader flap. As far as some in Obama’s camp are concerned, McCaskill might as well stay in China until the Summer Olympics.

Tax-O-Rama
Posted by: Jonathon Prouty | 9:45am | Permalink

For whatever reason, Democrats at the state and national levels are campaigning for massive tax hikes in an election year. In the ongoing Democratic POTUS primary, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama continue to dream up new federal programs to be covered by their monolithic and archaic tax hike schemes. In Congress, Speaker Pelosi’s caucus, minus 16 Democrats with a grasp on fiscal sanity, recently passed “far and away the single largest tax increase in the country’s history”—a $683 billion boondoggle that would hammer taxpayers making as little as $31,850 annually.

Closer to home, the Missouri Democratic Party continues to attack Republicans for refusing to support a $71 billion tax increase that would have marked a major step toward socialized health care. Not surprisingly, Jay Nixon, who boasts a 22-year record marked by his support for an array of state and federal tax hikes, supports the $71 billion federal tax hike and has proposed a back-to-the-Holden-era health care plan that would require a nearly $1 billion state tax hike to implement.

Such a broad spectrum of tax hike proposals prompts the question, “Is it possible to contract tax fatigue just from the proposals of Democrat POTUS and gubernatorial wannabes?”

Another Week, Another Scandal
Posted by: John Hancock | 3:10pm | Permalink

A couple weeks ago, it was Eliot Spitzer. Last week, it was Jeremiah Wright. This week, Democrats have already been dealt another round of self-inflicted scandal thanks to the perjury charge that threatens to derail Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, who was formerly viewed as one of the party’s top up-and-comers.

As if Kirkpatrick’s woes are not enough, the ongoing corruption trial of Democrat power broker Antoin Rezko continues to hang over the heads of Barack Obama and Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Democrat voters in Florida and Michigan are reeling from Obama’s “consistent effort to disenfranchise voters” and a significant portion of Hillary Clinton and Obama supporters say they would not vote for the Democrat POTUS nominee if he or she is not their preferred choice.

And to think it’s only March!

Like Peas In A Pod
Posted by: John Hancock | 11:30am | Permalink

It is no secret that Jay Nixon, a card carrying member of the American Trial Lawyers Association, would be a sop for proponents of the status quo in the dispute over Missouri’s court plan. However, it is nice to see at least one media outlet, The Wall Street Journal, believes it is newsworthy to report on Nixon’s manifest ties to deep-pocketed trial lawyer members of Missouri’s Appellate Judicial Commission, which is at the root of the present controversy.

Excerpt from an editorial penned by the WSJ’s Colin Levy, 3/20/2008:

“One of the most heated battles has been in Missouri, where three of the judicial commission's seven spots are held by trial lawyers with specialties in medical malpractice, personal injury and product liability.

Missouri commission members have also been a prolific source of contributions to Democratic candidates at the presidential and state level, most notably Attorney General Jay Nixon, a darling of the trial bar.”

RUMORS & CHATTER: Aside from political donations to Nixon, Missouri Pulse hears a current member of the judicial commission and that member’s firm have handled a bevy of cases before the controversial Second Injury Fund, which Nixon has helped run into the ground. In typical Nixonian fashion, there is no evidence to show that he considers his defense of the fund against any such claims to be a conflict of interest.

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

Townhall.com’s Henry Payne offers his take on March Madness:

“Classic” McCaskill
Posted by: John Hancock | 8:55am | Permalink

After a week of rhetorical miscues, Sen. Claire McCaskill got the Geraldine Ferraro treatment yesterday when a spokesman for Barack Obama “distanced the campaign” (h/t: Combest) from McCaskill’s preposterous assertion that he was the first black leader to “come to the American people not as a victim, but rather as a leader.”

Things got so bad for McCaskill in the wake of the gaffe that she dispatched a spokeswoman to attempt damage control. The spokeswoman, who is a bit rusty from fielding softballs from the Missouri media for the past year, reeled off this leadoff nugget in a botched defense of McCaskill: “This is a classic case where Claire simply misspoke.” A “classic” (i.e. typical, characteristic, usual, common) case? Well, at least she’s honest!

On a separate note, the “McCaskill for VP” contingency has got to be worried when Obama’s camp is publicly distancing itself from her. After a week of controversial defenses of Obama’s incendiary pastor and now this “first black leader” flap, it seems McCaskill would be the last person we’ll hear defending Obama in the latest dust up over his “typical white person"  statement. It may be amateur hour in the Obama camp, but that hasn't stopped McCaskill’s stock from dropping faster than Bear Stearns.

McCaskill’s Mouth Continues To Burn Obama
Posted by: John Hancock | 4:35am | Permalink

Sen. Claire McCaskill’s mouth has gotten the best of her again. This afternoon, ABC News’ Jake Tapper pointed out in a Political Punch post the absurdity of McCaskill’s recent assertion that Obama is the first black leader who has “come to the American people not as a victim but rather as a leader.” Off the top of his head, Tapper rattled off the names of Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X and Doug Wilder before appropriately closing his post with, “Do I really need to make this list?”

Considering McCaskill’s recent spate of rhetorical gaffes as an Obama surrogate and Obama’s newfound polling woes in Missouri, one is left to wonder if the folks in his camp are beginning to consider placing a gag order on McCaskill.

Top Of The Morning, Nixon!
Posted by: John Hancock | 10:40am | Permalink

This is not the sort of ink the presumptive Democratic gubernatorial nominee wants to see in a leading African-American publication:

“You don’t see too many black folks or progressives getting their pulse up to vote for Jay Nixon. His recent ham-fisted tactics when a more progressive white Democrat began to show interest in taking him on were a depressing reminder about the kind of guy he is. Eliot Spitzer was less loved by colleagues in New York than Jay Nixon is in Missouri, but the degrees of dislike are comparable.”

So, Nixon, who has long been at odds with his party’s African-American base, now stands accused by the American of using “ham-fisted tactics” to stifle the short-lived gubernatorial considerations of a preferred candidate in Robin Carnahan. It sounds like what we have here is a divisive, ham-fisted, Spitzer-esque bully with a longstanding base problem. Translated: Nixon is the ideal gubernatorial candidate for today’s Missouri Democratic Party.

Kinder Leading on Post-Rebate Sales Tax Holiday
Posted by: John Hancock | 5:15pm | Permalink

On a blogger conference call this morning, Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder outlined his support for HB 2250, which proposes to create a sales tax holiday in conjunction with the distribution of federal rebate checks. Seems like a common-sense way of encouraging recipients to use the checks for their stated function: to stimulate the economy.

Of course, there are those that oppose this. For those who don’t get it, I offer this line of logic:

1. Congress wants an economic stimulus.
2. Congress mails checks for up to $600 per person.
3. Missourians get a break from state and local sales tax—encouraging then to spend locally.
4. The money goes into the pockets of other taxpayers, who spend it, benefiting other taxpayers, who spend it, benefiting other taxpayers, ad infintum.
5. Free markets work, and the economy is stimulated.

But the federal government’s belated recognition that citizens should be allowed to spend their money as they see fit, one wonders why money was taxed in the first place. Kinder himself agrees, saying, “If Congress is in it for a dime, I’m in for a dollar when in comes to stimulus.”

Policies that cut taxes and empower people are quintessentially Republican. The Sales Tax Holiday and the tax cuts offered by Republican leaders in Congress and right here in Missouri provide yet another reason why voters come November will be pulling the GOP lever!

Welcome Back To Earth
Posted by: John Hancock | 5:10pm | Permalink

If the latest polls from Reuters/Zogby and Gallup bear any indication, it appears the inadvertent tag team efforts of Barack Obama’s friends (Jeremiah Wright, Antoin Rezko) and enemies (Billary) have contributed to his freefall back to Earth. According to Reuters, Obama’s 14-point national lead over Hillary Clinton in February has “evaporated” into a statistically insignificant 3-point lead, while the Gallup numbers show Clinton with a 7-point lead over Obama. Not surprisingly, the nasty Democratic primary has resulted in both polls showing Republican POTUS nominee John McCain with an edge over both Democrats.

Even top Obama backer and Jeremiah Wright apologist Claire McCaskill is showing signs of being a bit flustered as evidenced by her ongoing attempt to parse words over the indefensible sermonizing of Wright. Missourians haven’t seen McCaskill this uncomfortable discussing an issue since she was last put on the spot about her Bermuda tax haven.

Link up: ABC News’ analysis of Obama contradictions on Wright

Missouri Dems Strike Out Again
Posted by: John Hancock | 10:15am | Permalink

The folks at the MDP have worked themselves into a frenzy over the settlement of an MEC case that involved the campaign committee of Gov. Matt Blunt, who isn’t even running for reelection. However, one can imagine how quickly the MDP would simmer down if they recalled how they and the federal committee of Jay Nixon, a guy who is now running for governor, were fined for campaign finance violations not by the MEC but by the FEC, the federal election authority. It might behoove the MDP to at least consider Nixon’s tarnished 22-year career as a politician before pouncing on Republicans who are not running for office with attacks that expose their presumptive gubernatorial nominee to a broadside.

Excerpt from a P-D story on Nixon’s FEC problems, 2/10/2004:

“The Missouri Democratic State Committee and Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon's 1998 failed campaign for U.S. Senate agreed to pay fines for campaign finance violations, the Federal Election Commission announced Monday. FEC records show that the committee paid both a $16,000 fine and $9,500 more on behalf of Nixon's campaign committee to settle the 5-year-old investigation. . . . The FEC found that the state Democratic committee spent $28,700 more on coordinated expenditures for Nixon's campaign than federal law allowed. And, the commission said, the state party collected 17 contributions totaling $19,285 that were ‘earmarked’ for Nixon - but failed to report them as such and failed to forward them to Nixon's campaign fund. Nixon's campaign was cited for receiving about $7,750 in contributions in excess of individual limits. In other words, people and committees that had already contributed the maximum allowed to Nixon's campaign fund also gave money to the state party committee but earmarked the extra for Nixon. In addition to the $9,500 fine, Nixon's campaign agreed to refund the excess contributions.”

A Look At Hillary’s Tax & Spending Schemes
Posted by: John Hancock | 4:30pm | Permalink

The Wall Street Journal’s Stephen Moore, a leading conservative economist, delves into the not-so-forward-looking tax and spending plans of Hillary Clinton in this video:

What Rock Does McCaskill Live Under?
Posted by: John Hancock | 9:55am | Permalink

Yesterday, Sen. Claire McCaskill became arguably the most prominent apologist for Barack Obama’s controversial pastor and longtime spiritual advisor, Jeremiah Wright. In an interview covered by the P-D and Pub Def, McCaskill downplayed Wright, whose church Obama has attended for 20 years, as a supporter who has simply said “dumb things.” Furthermore, the scandal surrounding Wright’s incendiary sermons was, according to McCaskill, not triggered by the man’s words but is part of an effort to inject racial politics into the heated Democratic primary race.

Well, the Pulse is not surprised by McCaskill’s mealy-mouthed attempt to gloss over the grossly indefensible sermonizing of Wright. After all, this is the same Claire McCaskill who in 2006 said, “George Bush let people die on rooftops in New Orleans because they were poor and because they were black.” Had Wright been in attendance when McCaskill made that controversial remark, he may well have been the first to scream, “Amen!”

A look at Wright’s sermonizing:

Addendum (10:30am):  The National Review's "Audacity of Hate" editorial

FROM THE BELTWAY: Pelosi’s FISA Folly
Posted by: John Hancock | 2:30pm | Permalink

U.S. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and subordinate House Democrats continue to obstruct passage of a Senate-approved FISA measure that would reinstate terrorist surveillance powers to our nation’s chief intel agencies. Not surprisingly, Pelosi’s intransigence is rooted in her decision to prioritize the interests of her caucus’ trial lawyer donors above national security. At the behest of trial lawyers looking to cash in on potentially lucrative lawsuits, Pelosi continues to seek the elimination of immunity for telecoms that assist agencies in the monitoring of suspected terrorists. As the National Review described Pelosi’s latest edict, “Terrorists plotting to kill Americans get protection from surveillance, while businesses helping to protect Americans from terrorists get ruined by litigation.”

AM Levity
Posted by: John Hancock | 10:00am | Permalink

While liberals cope with their rock star Barack Obama’s adherence to the hate-filled oratory of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, conservatives in the blogosphere are having a heyday with the brouhaha as evidenced by the Townhall.com cartoon below. This situation has really got to be rubbing liberals the wrong way, especially the secular types who have emptied barrels of ink attempting to belittle and demonize Republican electoral support from the “Christian right.” It is one thing to eat crow, but it is a wholly different matter to have the crow served to you by your newfound liberal icon courtesy of his certifiably whacked out pastor.

What’s The Hold Up?
Posted by: John Hancock | 5:05pm | Permalink

It took Republican gubernatorial contender Kenny Hulshof less than two months to set the course in the debate over the fate of fee offices when he said he would abolish the patronage system in a recent AP interview.

In contrast, Jay Nixon, a long-time defender of the patronage system who has been running for governor for a whopping three years, has yet to put forth a plan of his own. The scuttlebutt is that Nixon’s ongoing failure to produce a plan is due to the long-held belief among prominent Democrats that fundraising trumps fee office reform. From 1993-2004, Democrats ran the fee offices and raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for their campaigns via the patronage system. While some former Democrat era fee office operators have already donated to Nixon, it is their fundraising potential that is said to have stifled any zeal for reform in Nixon’s camp for the past three years.

Congressional Dems Push Historic Tax Hike
Posted by: Jonathon Prouty | 11:00am | Permalink

Believe it or not, Congressional Democrats are aggressively pushing a sweeping and his