Steelman Has A Good Idea - Hulshof Agrees

Sarah Steelman has announced her plan to repeal the state law that allows St. Louis's (and Kansas City's) 1% earnings tax.  (See Post-Dispatch article here.)

This idea is a great one whose time has come.  Repealing the earnings tax would benefit the City immediately, possibly at the short-term expense of other parts of the region, but the City is the vital nucleus of this area.  In the long term a thriving City is a benefit to us all.

There can be no doubt that the tax is one significant reason that people prefer to live outside of the City limits and businesses prefer to locate in St. Louis County.  Why live in Dogtown and pay one cent of every dollar you earn to the City when you could live in Maplewood and keep that penny?  Why open your office downtown when the City will take 1% of all your wages and all of your employees wages when you could open your office in Clayton?  

People and jobs have fled the City in the past few decades at an alarming rate.  It does not take a genius to see that the earnings tax is one cause.

So, does Steelman's plan sway me to vote for her in the Republican gubernatorial primary?  Nope.  Kenny Hulshof also supports a repeal of the city earnings tax.

No word from Democrat candidate-in-waiting Jay Nixon.  But has a liberal ever supported the repeal of any tax?

MO Voter I.D. Update - No Help By November

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Indiana requirement for photo identification of voters.  In my post on the subject, I called for action in Missouri before the November elections.  Unfortunately, no action appears possible.

Missouri's Supreme Court ruled in 2006 that photo i.d. requirements violated the state - as opposed to the federal - constitution.  And the state Supreme Court is the final authority on the state constitution.  Unless the MO constitution was amended, no photo i.d. requirement would be allowed here.  Amending the constitution by November simply isn't possible.

So here's the real challenge to the Missouri General Assembly . . . get the amendment process started.  Let's end voter fraud as soon as we can, even if we can't do it in '08.s

Misleading Democrat Ad Against McCain

In courtrooms across the country, witnesses are sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.  If Democrats were required to do that, we probably wouldn't see them advertise at all.

Take the latest attack ad produced by the Democratic National Committee ("DNC") against John McCain.  The ad, which can be viewed at this link, talks about President Bush's comments that American troops might be in Iraq for 50 years then cuts to a clip from McCain saying, "Maybe 100."  Then, after a bad edit, McCain continues, "That'd be fine with me."

This despicable ad pulls the words it wants from a McCain statement about a continuing U.S. presence in Iraq (like we still have in Germany and Japan).  What McCain actually said, as reported by Yahoo News, is:

"Maybe 100.  As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, that'd be fine with me, and I hope it would be fine with you, if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where al-Qaida is training, recruiting, equipping and motivating people every single day."

The DNC conveniently edits out all context from what McCain actually said.  Their ad implies that McCain favors a continuation of the status quo in Iraq for another century.  That's a ridiculous implication.  And it certainly isn't the whole truth.  Heck, it isn't even the whole phrase or sentence.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean is quoted as saying that "there's nothing false" about the attack ad.  That may be true - depending on what the meaning of "is" is.  But the ad certainly isn't the whole truth, though Dean claims otherwise.  He stated, "We deliberately used John McCain's words.  This isn't some ominous consultants voice from Washington.  This is John McCain's own words.  And we've been very upfront about everything that he's said."  

Everything he's said?  Clearly not.  Howard Dean . . . you're a liar.  And that, sir, is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Indiana Law Requiring Photo ID's to Vote Upheld

Today's decision by the U.S. Supreme Court upheld common sense in the face of liberal political machines efforts at election fraud.  By a 6-3 decision, which included liberal John Paul Stevens in a rare but laudable vote with the conservative majority, the Court upheld an Indiana law requiring voters to present a photo i.d. in order to vote.  

Missouri had a similar law but it was recently struck down by a lower court.  In light of this decision, it is time for the Secretary of State or the state legislature to act as need be to enforce a photo i.d. requirement by the November elections.

Descriptive or Not, Jeremiah Wright is Divisive

Barack Obama's former pastor and spiritual advisor Jeremiah Wright is back in the news claiming that he's not divisive.  I'm surprised when people who speak publicly for a living say something that dumb.  Wright implies that somehow describing a situation cannot be divisive, as if description and division were mutually exclusive.  They aren't of course.

Wright's latest comments reminded me of Kevin Slaten, a local radio sports pundit recently fired by KFNS.  When Slaten worked for KTVI, he ran commercials claiming that although people called him controversial - he didn't buy it.  Why not?  Because controversy was a good thing.  Huh?

Rev. Wright's recent comments got the same "Huh?" from me.  His views of the world and this country are most certainly dividing Americans.  Whether they are descriptive or not has nothing to do with whether they are divisive or not.

Unfortunately All 3 MO Governor Candidates Support Ethanol Mandates

Agricultural interests are powerful in Missouri.  Powerful enough that our state is one of just three to require ethanol in our gasoline.  And it looks to stay that way.  Even though food prices are skyrocketing, Jay Nixon, Kenny Hulshof and Sarah Steelman all support continuing the mandate that we burn food in our gas tanks instead of stocking it on grocery store shelves.

So much for ethanol being a defining issue in the governor's race.

Red Light Camera Update - Alderman and Lawyers Say Don't Pay the Tickets

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch got into the debate over red light cameras with a Sunday cover story about the difficulties that municipalities have if those who receive tickets don't just pay them voluntarily.  The moral of the story seemed to be . . . if you get such a ticket, ignore it.

St. Louis Alderman Freeman Bosley, Sr., put it bluntly saying, that "if you threw [the ticket] in the trash, nothing would happen."  Individuals are also reporting that lawyers are giving them legal advice to ignore tickets from red light cameras.  Attorney Herman Jimerson is quoted saying that since the camera doesn't show the driver of the car, he's told his client that the municipalities can't prove that he violated the law.  He suggested not paying the assessed fine.

The fact that these tickets are so unenforceable should have prevented them from going up in the first place.   Now that the Post-Dispatch has picked up on it and basically told everyone in town to ignore the tickets without consequence maybe the trend will shift away from these cameras but I doubt it.  They're too big of a moneymaker for municipalities and too many gullible folks are paying their tickets without a fight.

Hulshof Appearance on KMOX

This afternoon Republican candidate for governor Kenny Hulshof appeared on The Mark Reardon Show on KMOX.  The interview covers background biographical information, stories from his days as a prosecuting attorney, political philosophy, issues facing Congress during his time in Washington, issues facing the state now, Hulshof's primary battle and the looming race against Jay Nixon.

The interview can be found at kmox.com.

Greenpeace Founder Admits No Evidence That Humans Are Causing Global Warming

Though he's still supporting the mission of "true believers" in global warming to wean the planet from burning fossil fuels, Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore now admits that "there is no proof global warming is caused by humans."  This according to an article published today in the Idaho Statesman.

If Greenpeace's founder can admit that the global warming hype is baseless, how can the rest of the liberals continue to claim "consensus" with a straight face?

Remarkable Honesty from Obama's Pastor

Rev. Jeremiah Wright says that he's never heard Barack Obama repeat any of Wright's controversial statements.  Why?  Because Obama "goes out as a politician and says what he has to say as a politician."

Of course he does.  Obama says whatever he has to say to try and please whatever audience he's speaking to.  As his pastor implies, he won't tell us what he actually believes because if he did there's no way that he would get elected.  

Wright's comments, by the way, come from an interview with Bill Moyers set to air tomorrow night on PBS (9:00 p.m. on Channel 9 in St. Louis) and reported in a New York Times political blog - The Caucus.

Hillary Can't Stop Telling Tall Tales

It is becoming a regular feature of this blog to highlight Hillary Clinton's latest whopper.  Today, Newsday reported that she's claiming that to have been completely out of the loop and knew nothing about her husband's 2001 commutation of the prison sentences of two leftist radicals serving time for a 1981 Brinks Truck robbery that resulted in the deaths of two police officers.

This issue was a hot button issue in New York throughout 2000, when Hillary was running for her New York senate seat.  It was in the newspapers and on "60 Minutes."  It was an issue that Clinton's political ally, the other New York senator, Chuck Schumer, fought to oppose.  He vowed to take his opposition to the highest levels of government.  But Hillary wants us all to believe today's tall tale that Schumer never even mentioned the issue to her, though she was married to the guy who would decide the issue.  She simply cannot be believed.  Hillary wants it both ways, she claims credit for all the "good" that Bill Clinton did in office but disavows knowledge of anything bad.

This campaign has proven that Hillary will say or do anything to achieve her purpose . . . a return to the White House . . . including lie through her teeth.  In fact, doing that now seems to be as natural to her as breathing.  She can't be allowed to succeed.  Conservatives, be prepared to hold your noses and vote for John McCain . . . there will be no other choice.

An Convenient Lie in An Inconvenient Truth

Al Gore's 2006 film on global warming, "An Inconvenient Truth," won Gore an Academy Award and a Nobel Prize.  The Oscar came in the Best Documentary category but it turns out that the film should have been nominated for special effects (though the effects used were actually stolen from another movie).

In his "documentary," Gore shows footage of the Antarctic ice shelves collapsing into the sea.  But the footage is actually the computer-generated opening sequence from the 2004 science fiction film "The Day After Tomorrow."  You can view a comparison of the two films at newsbusters.com.

Don't believe everything that you see on film - even one called a documentary - especially if that film is produced or directed by a liberal.

More Lies From Hillary

In yet another not-so-surprising development, Hillary Clinton has been caught fudging once again.  Today, she hyped a "double digit" victory over Barack Obama in Tuesday's Pennsylvania primary.  I guess she's counting digits after the decimal point because she only won by 9.33%.

A double digit win was important to Hillary because pundits claimed before the vote that she needed that margin to carry on her campaign.  She didn't get it - but why let the facts get in the way.

But that isn't the only misleading that Mrs. Clinton was doing today.  She's also claiming that she is winning the total popular vote from the combined Democrat primaries.  She's actually about half a million valid votes behind Obama but is choosing to count the Michigan and Florida primaries - which violated party rules - which don't count - and which Obama didn't campaign in.  

Again, it makes a good story . . . but it sure is misleading and definitely isn't the whole truth.

We've come to expect lies and obfuscation from the Clintons over the years.  Hillary seems to be true to her husband's political legacy.

Where are your websites?

This is a serious question for Kenny Hulshof and Sarah Steelman, the two Republicans running for governor in Missouri . . . where are your websites?

I know that you've only been running for a few months but how long does it take to get a website going?  It isn't that hard.  Really.  

So far at kenny08.com and sarahsteelman.com all you get are messages asking you to come back later.  This is 2008!  There is much political hay to be made out here on the internets (as our president would say).  Get with the program guys!  Your Democratic opponent in November has.

Hope to Repeal Ethanol Mandates

Last month I blogged in opposition to a Missouri Senate bill mandating biodiesel.  That measure passed the Senate and will be debated by a House committee this week.  That same House committee is also considering a bill to repeal Missouri's current requirement that all gasoline sold in the state be blended with 10% ethanol.  

As reported in today's St. Louis Post-Dispatch, some state legislators (including Mike Dethrow, R-Alton, and Rodney Schad, R-Versailles) are rethinking their opinions on ethanol mandates in light of higher food prices worldwide.  Both Dethrow and Schad voted for the mandates in 2006 but want to repeal those mandates.  Kudos to them both for showing the courage to admit mistakes when given new information.

With the price of food on the rise worldwide, we should be eating our food not burning it as fuel - despite what the farm lobby or environmentalist crowd might say.  The Missouri House should vote NO on biodiesel mandates and YES to repeal ethanol mandates in gasoline.

Steelman's Campaign Finance Reports Misleading

In her recent campaign finance report, Republican gubernatorial candidate Sarah Steelman reported raising more than $1.1 million in the first quarter of 2008.  This placed her ahead of GOP rival Kenny Hulshof's $900,000 plus first quarter contributions and would seem to show Steelman's strength and viability as a candidate.  

If only you could believe the numbers . . . 

But you can't.  As reported in the Belleville News-Democrat, (of all places) Steelman's fundraising number includes $120,000 in donations from the month of April (which last I checked is not in the first quarter).  The figure also includes a $500,000 loan that Steelman gave to her own campaign.  In reality, therefore, Steelman raised about $600,000 compared to Hulshof's $900,000.

Steelman is quoted as saying that she included the $120,000 in the report simply because her campaign had the money on hand.  She continued, "I don't believe there was any calculated reason for that other than that we had them."  Yeah, right.

The reality is that Steelman wants to continue this fight against Hulshof and needed to show viability in fundraising.  To boost her numbers, she loaned her campaign some much needed cash and extended her own reporting period.  Hulshof is looking more and more like the GOP's candidate of choice but Steelman seems more than willing to play the role of Hillary Clinton in this primary fight.

Waiting for the winner of this Republican contest is Jay Nixon and his sizable war chest.  Too bad his rivals are spending their time and money fighting each other rather than focusing on him.

Diplomacy, Jimmy Carter Style

-From the Christian Science Monitor, always a good source for cartoons.

Lethal Injection is Not Unconstitutional

Today, the United States Supreme Court handed down an important decision ruling that lethal injection as a method of execution does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment.  The practice, therefore, does not violate the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and may be imposed.

The key to the decision is, of course, the determination of whether or not lethal injection is "cruel and unusual."  Chief Justice John Roberts concludes the lead opinion of a 7-2 majority stating:

Throughout our history, whenever a method of execution has been challenged in this Court as cruel and unusual, the Court has rejected the challenge.  Our society has nonetheless moved to more humane methods of carrying out capital punishment.  The firing squad, hanging, the electric chair, and the gas chamber have each in turn given way to more humane methods, culminating in today's consensus on lethal injection.  The broad framework of the Eighth Amendment has accommodated this progress toward more humane methods of execution, and our approval of a particular method in the past has not precluded legislatures from taking the steps they deem appropriate, in light of new developments, to ensure humane capital punishment.

Lethal injection is the most humane and least cruel method of execution that mankind has invented so far.  It is also not unusual in that at least thirty states use the method for their executions.  Lethal injection is by no means "cruel and unusual."

Chief Justice Roberts and the current court seems appropriately deferential to the will of the people as expressed through elected representatives, rather than appointed judges.

Capital punishment is, no doubt, controversial and subject to political debate.  But that debate should properly be held in Congress and the legislatures of the states.  The debate should not be undermined by backdoor legal attacks.  Thanks to the Supreme Court for closing the back door.

Free Speech - Not in France

Hold your liberties close America.  Some other western democracies don't allow citizens to speak their minds.  Let's take France, for example.  It is apparently a crime to make comments critical of Islamic immigrants threatening traditional French culture.  Film star Brigitte Bardot is on trial and charged with "inciting racial hatred."

Bardot is unhappy about what she terms the "Islamisation of France."  She's already been convicted and fined four times for negative comments about Islam.  This time, she's on trial for stating, "I am fed up with being under the thumb of this population which is destroying us, destroying our country and imposing its acts."  One of those acts is the ritual slaughter of animals, which Bardot (an animal rights activist) particularly abhors.

Whether Bardot is right or wrong, nationalistic or xenophobic, doesn't really matter to this discussion.  What matters is her lack of freedom to say what she thinks.

Thankfully we still have the right to say what we think in this country.  We should stay vigilant so that we always will.

Old Liberals Never Die . . . And Carter Won't Fade Away

In an disgusting slap at his country's current foreign policy and its sitting President, former President Jimmy Carter met with leaders of the Islamic terrorist group Hamas today.  Carter is a private citizen, of course, and has every right to hold whatever opinion he chooses and talk to whomever he wants to talk to but this public spectacle with Hamas had all the bells and whistles of an official state visit.  The visit aids Hamas and hopes to veil it in undeserved respectability.  It also hurts America's image.

Democrats and liberals may not like it much but George W. Bush is the the President of the United States and foreign policy is in his hands.  Jimmy Carter clearly doesn't like it at all.  The country cannot present itself to the world as schizophrenic.  We must speak with one voice in foreign affair - the president's voice - no matter who holds the office.

Traditionally, politics ended at the water's edge.  What happened to that tradition?  Jimmy Carter like anybody else can argue, debate and fight for changes in foreign policy here at home but to act against the wishes of the current administration and to visit terrorist leaders abroad is overstepping his bounds.

Douglas MacArthur famously stated that "old soldiers never die; they just fade away."  It is too bad that this old liberal can't seem to fade away.