The Source

Stouffer is Skelton’s Only Challenge to Re-Election

The Lafeyette County Republicans put up this great editorial earlier - it's worth a read.

The Way We See It: Stouffer Is Skelton's Only Challenge to Re-Election
Molly Teichman

To say Lafayette County has a unique perspective on Missouri’s 4th Congressional District race to unseat Ike Skelton is an understatement. As one pundit put it, Ike Skelton has been a part of our political scene since “baby Jesus was riding to school on the backs of dinosaurs.” Politics is a war of ideas, not personalities, and while we respect Ike Skelton as a statesman, we can no longer stand by and watch him vote with Nancy Pelosi 95% of the time.

Lafayette Co. voters appreciate Ike’s service, but it is now time for the lawyer from Lexington to be honorably discharged from Washington. After 33 years as our congressman, Ike has become part of the problem, not the solution.

In 2010, Skelton will have the first real challenge of his modern political career. His state senator, Bill Stouffer, will challenge him for his seat.

Stouffer is not a slick politician. He is a farmer. He shows up. He is honest. He is grounded.

The problem for Skelton in 2010 goes beyond the national climate. Bill Stouffer cuts at the heart of his base. He is a popular state senator in the three northern counties in Skelton’s district. His home county went for Ike with over 80% of the vote last year; Stouffer is the only Republican to get similar support on the same ballot.

...

(continue reading here)

It's Time to Move On

KMBC has been airing the following on City Manager Wayne Cauthen’s suspension (attached below). It makes some good points – Cauthen’s time has passed, and Troy Schulte will do a better job.

It’s time to move on. As much as people try to politicize this issue, Cauthen lost support in the City Council because of his own actions. Had he been more responsive to the Council’s concerns and performed his duties more diligently, this issue never would have come up.

So what is there to complain about? Focusing myopically on the processes of the Council’s vote ignores the larger issue at hand, which is preparing a budget for a city facing a national economic downturn. Cauthen wasn’t up to the job.

Almost completely absent from this debate (if you can call it that) is the argument that Cauthen was good for this city. He wasn’t. Opposition to his removal has been shallow and short-sighted.

Acting decisively now spared Kansas City a much bigger headache in the future.

The editorial follows:

Last week, with the support of six city council members, Kansas City Mayor Mark Funkhowser suspended City Manager Wayne Cauthen. Our question is why did it take so long?

The suspension follows news that the city is facing a budget deficit of at least $60-million. Council members had urged Cauthen to prepare a spending plan that assumed an economic downturn, but he has offered few new ideas about the way the city spends tax dollars.

Cauthen, along with former mayor Kay Barnes, were cheerleaders for downtown projects, including the power and light district. Cauthen said it would never cost taxpayers a dime. He was wrong about that too.

His problems managing capital improvement projects are legendary.

The Cauthen suspension should be permanent. And it should be a beginning and not an end. Instead of avoiding difficult decisions, city hall must begin to deal seriously and realistically with its finances.

This is a good first step.

Judge the Difference For Yourself

By Bill Arthur

If you have previously read my column, it shouldn’t be difficult to ascertain my belief that Barack Obama is the worst President this country has ever produced. I also believe he is destroying much of what has traditionally made America exceptional - all in the interest of creating a permanent power base for the Democratic Party.

It is easy to criticize this man; but if Conservatives cannot offer an alternative better than what Republicans gave the nation during the Bush years, then I believe we have nothing important to say. Therefore, I am going to point out some clear distinctions between Conservatives and the Obama radicals in order for you to decide which ideology appeals most to you, the reader:

1)        Conservatives will never bow to the leaders of foreign nations.
2)        We will not murder our babies.
3)        We will not abandon the battles of this nation until victory is achieved.
4)        We will not destroy our health care system without first attempting to fix the areas that will make care affordable for all.
5)        We will not tax Americans into poverty.
6)        We recognize that small business is the basis for employment and will not destroy it with taxes and regulations.
7)        We will not surrender our sovereignty to the United Nations. We will stand by our new allies in Eastern Europe.
8)        We will not allow men like Al Gore to profit from insane “chicken little” climate science.
9)        We will not attempt to indoctrinate your children. We will guarantee an honest appraisal of our history and government is taught.
10)    We will speak English in America.
11)    We will provide inexpensive clean energy to Americans, developed from domestic resources.
12)    We will only allow legal immigration, but be generous enough to make it easy for work permits to be granted during times of full employment.
13)    We will insist on honest elections by identified American voters.
14)    We will remember that we are a Christian nation.
15)    We will guarantee America’s Armed Forces will be the best equipped forces in the world.
16)    We will attempt to remove legislative earmarks that drive up the cost of government.
17)    We will see that corrupt politicians are driven from office.
18)    We will protect the other democracies around the world. Our foreign policy will be leveled in America’s best interest.
19)    We will encourage trade with the nations of Latin America, Africa and Asia.
20)    We will try to end hunger, poverty, and genocide around the world.
21)    We will not attempt to gain power by creating a dependent class.
22)    We will not be afraid for women to rise to the highest positions of our movement.
23)    We will not apologize for being Americans.
24)    We will not allow our enemies to hide behind the Constitutional rights we enjoy as citizens.
25)    We will not ration health care to any Americans, especially our most vulnerable citizens - the young and the elderly.

We will not be a big tent party. We desire only those Americans who still believe that our democracy is the greatest nation on Earth, and that we have been ordained by our creator to be a shining symbol to the rest of the world.

In the next year, you will be able to decide whether you align politically with Conservatives or the Obama radicals. Don’t waste the opportunity to decide the future direction of our nation. As David Axelrod says, “Elections have consequences.”

Jeff Smith's Fifteen Minutes Are Over

You broke campaign finance laws, wanted to blame a former campaign staffer who had committed suicide, lied to the FBI and now you're going to jail for a year. What do you do? If you're Jeff Smith, you do a media interview.

Jeff Smith making a statement after being sentenced.

    The decision defies all logical explanation, but so do the results.

    From the tone of the interview, he sounded pretty upset that his cohorts got off with probation. Tony Messenger writes, "But there's a difference, he maintains, between admitting wrong and facing the consequences, and taking it a step further and agreeing to wear a wire against his friends. . . That's what Goldsmith wanted Smith to do. It's what Brown did to Smith . . . Smith said no, and as soon as he made that decision he knew he was probably going to jail."

    We can't help but think that this is a really great time to take parting shots at your old colleagues. Smith could have turned himself in at any time and ended the charade, but he didn't want to. He has no one to blame but himself.

    The article continues, "He [Jeff] broke the law. He lied. He lost his career and best friend, all for covering up his connection to allegations he was willing to make himself anyway."

    Contrast that to one of Jeff Smith’s previous statements, in reference to a former campaign worker: “I'm alive and Artie's dead. Can we emphasize this was Artie's deal? . . . Artie would totally want us to throw him under the bus here.” What Jeff Smith did was disgraceful and morally repugnant – you can read a response from one of Artie Harris’ friends here.

    Smith didn’t get what the prosecutors were asking for (15-21 months), but 12 months in jail and a $50,000 fine is a world apart from what Steve Brown received. Smith’s betrayal of the public trust lasted for years, and if it’s any indication of his contrition, it didn't take him long to get off message once he was sentenced.

    Jeff Smith didn't use the interview to set the record straight or send a positive message to the community. He was using his last few minutes of media fame to slam his enemies.

    We're ready to see him get escorted out of the spotlight.

57th District Democrats Sink To New Low

After State Representative Talibdin El Amin pleaded guilty to federal bribery charges, one would think that fellow Democrats would carefully vet his replacement. But instead of avoiding the appearance of impropriety they embraced it, nominating a tax dodger to the seat.

(Source: St. Louis Post Dispatch)

            Before being nominated, Hope Whitehead had to go to City Hall to pay $1,155 in late taxes and fees to be eligible for elected office.
            Whitehead, an attorney who has previously been employed by the city prosecutor, claimed to only pay her vehicle taxes once every two years and offered an unrepentant “I’ve got to do that different now.”
            Other than being a legal reality, it doesn’t make much sense in terms of excuses. She was certainly notified every year of her tax obligations, but apparently decided not to pay them until she ran the risk of not being able to register her vehicle or run for public office.
            Paying your taxes on time isn’t normally a plus, but we have to wonder what local Democrats were thinking when they passed over a law-abiding candidate to nominate Whitehead. With so many of their peers being taken down on corruption charges, bringing tax dodgers into their ranks doesn’t sound like a winning idea.
            It just goes to show what happens in heavily Democratic areas where there is no competition to hold elected officials accountable. When you give them your trust they abuse it, and corruption ensues.
Whitehead’s future constituents have our condolences.
            On a side note… we can’t help but wonder how this whole affair went unnoticed by Jo Mannies of the Beacon, up until the Post-Dispatch decided to break the story.

Jack Miles: Professional Skelton Cheerleader?

Jack Miles is apparently trying to make a career out of getting Ike Skelton elected. His most recent editorial chides Republican candidates in the 4th District for spending too much time attacking Skelton and not enough attacking each other.

Some might remember him being on the opposite side of this argument a few years back, we can only suppose that he applies different standards to politicians he dislikes.

In either case it’s hard to take the article seriously, coming so soon after another editorial that might as well have finished with “Paid for by Ike Skelton for Congress.”

In the editorial, he approaches the complicated question of “Is Ike Skelton a Liberal?” by employing rigorous analytical methods. He ignores the vast body of Ike Skelton’s voting history and reduces it down to two votes. He concludes that Skelton is not a Liberal.

It’s not just that the argument is lazy or statistically invalid. It’s deliberate misinformation. One could just as easily focus on cap and tax or the other 95.8% of votes in the 111th Congress where Skelton voted with his fellow Democrats.

He also mischaracterizes the genesis of the argument. Skelton’s transformation into a Liberal began a long time ago, not just when he decided to avoid meeting his constituents on health care issues. Comparing Skelton’s votes along party lines (only 65% in the 104th Congress, for instance) shows how a once moderate politician abandoned his constituents to pursue leadership in the Democrat party.

All of this, apparently, is unimportant to Jack Miles. We disagree. It’s something the voters should know about, and journalists like Miles shouldn’t be trying to hide it from them.

Nixon Donor Gets (Yet) Another Fee Office

Paul J. Wrabec was awarded the Independence fee office today. That makes two for Wrabec, who is linked to $11,450 in contributions directly to Nixon's gubernatorial campaign.

The Independence fee office does over $452,000 in transactions per year, making it a very lucrative financial contract. Wrabec beat six other bidders, including several non-profit organizations.

When Nixon "reformed" the fee office bidding process, he assured the voters that politics wouldn't play a role in the process. But the results are identical to a system of political patronage, prompting widespread speculation that the process is being tampered with.

We don't see any other possible conclusion. Several of the most prominent (and successful) bidders have made claims to the effect that they knew how many offices they would be getting - before the bids were even evaluated.

A system that was designed to guarantee the success of Nixon donors would have produced the exact same results that we're seeing now, and the pattern is reinforced with every new fee office.

It's beyond random chance or mystical coincidence. The fee office bidding system is corrupt.