THERE'S A FESTERING SORE FROM
O'FALLON THAT NEEDS ATTENTION

Posted 7/2/09

Republican, Missouri State Representative Cynthia Davis has gone national. Has she become famous for the intelligent and well reasoned plans she has developed as the Chairperson of the Special Committee on Children and Families in the Missouri House of Representatives? If you answered “no” to that question you are correct. Davis has become infamous because she is a buffoon and is quite willing to put that trait on public display.

It has been apparent for some time that Davis may be a couple of bricks short of a load. However, such representatives are the rule rather than the exception on the Republican side of the aisle in Missouri, so no one gave it a lot of thought. A prime example of the odd things going on in the playground of her mind is the support she gave earlier this year to a lawsuit alleging that President Obama is not an American citizen. The suit actually alleges that his real name is Barry Soetoro and that he is Indonesian.

The allegations against President Obama are way out there, but it is her most recent statements that have really launched Davis as the face of the retarded right. For those that may not be aware, the Republican Party is made up of three separate groups: moderate; the far right; and those that have fallen off of the ledge of all reason, the retarded right. Cynthia Davis is quickly emerging as a leader of that select group.

Davis has taken issue with Missouri's Summer Food Service Program. The program is designed to supply food during the summer to low income children across the state that would, during the school year, receive reduced price or free meals at school. The goal is to attempt to make sure these children receive nutrition necessary to “grow and learn all year long,” according to Ann McCormack of the Missouri Health Department.

Davis has responded with the following mind bending remarks: “Why have meals at home with your loved ones if you can go to the government soup kitchen and get one for free? This could have the effect of breaking apart more families.” “The problem of childhood obesity has been cited as one of the most rapidly growing health problems in America. People who are struggling with lack of food usually do not have an obesity problem.” “Can't they get a job during the summer by the time they are 16? Hunger can be a positive motivator.” “Tip: If you work for McDonalds, they will feed you for free during your break.”

To summarize the opinions of Davis: the family that starves together stays together; however, no one is starving because we are all becoming obese and not eating will cure that problem; but, apparently we can remain obese if we will just go to work at McDonalds. Folks, you cannot make this stuff up. Davis truly believes the tripe she is spewing.

Her comments have garnered her the honor of being named “Worst Person in the World” by MSNBC's Keith Olbermann. In fact, he has now featured her on three separate occasions. For her part, Davis has not backed away from her comments.

Democrats and Republicans alike must band together to rid the state of this festering sore from O'Fallon. Missouri House Democratic Leader Paul LeVota has issued a letter to Republican Speaker Ron Richard, demanding that Davis be removed from the chairmanship of the Special Committee on Children and Families. So far Richard has not done so. And people wonder why we are Democrats. With Republicans like Davis, how can you be anything else?

(Russ Purvis is chair of the Platte County Democratic Central Committee and can be reached at russp842@yahoo.com)

PUSHING FOR A SALES TAX DURING AN ECONOMIC CRISIS?

Posted 6/26/09

“Where O' Where have the Platte County Republicans gone? Where O' where can they be?” Well, I can tell you one thing, they are certainly not currently sitting on the Platte County Commission. The current commission, if you have been following The Landmark’s reporting recently, is fully supporting the half cent sales tax for parks appearing on the Aug. 4 ballot.

To say that the current Platte County Commission spends money like a bunch of drunken sailors shows a great deal of disrespect--for drunken sailors. Where are all of you supposed conservative Republicans on this issue? Didn't you pitch Michael Short out of office and out of the Republican Party over crap like this?

Supporters of the park tax argue that during its first run it has allowed Platte County to add parks and amenities. That is great. However, the citizens of Platte County passed a tax of a limited duration. To assume that it should simply be renewed without thoughtful consideration shows that the Platte County Commissioners lack an understanding of purpose and a true lack of leadership.

Every Republican should have known Commissioner Dusenberry was a fiscal train wreck. But Republicans sowed the wind with that one and are now reaping the whirlwind. Plunkett? Well, he has simply gone AWOL.

What about the so-called leader of the Platte County Commission, Presiding Commissioner Betty Knight? It seems like Knight has been a commissioner since the beginning of time, or at least before Missouri was a state. During her tenure, I cannot recall a single issue on which she has really carried the water for Platte County. That is not to be confused with her always being there to take credit if something is accomplished. She is like former congressman Tom Coleman, only on the county level.

A perfect example of her lack of leadership is the county roads issue. Platte County still operates under an outdated system that fails to provide adequately surfaced roads throughout the county. I grew up on a gravel road in northern Platte County that was supposedly going to be paved thirty years ago. To this day it is still gravel. Of course such an issue requires thoughtful discourse and a great deal of time and energy. The current commissioners simply draw a check and move on.

Knight is supposed to have an economics degree of some sort, or home economics, the record is muddy on the issue. In any event, she has been on the commission long enough to understand the economic reality of pushing for a half cent sales tax during an economic crisis, when your county already has one of the highest, if not the highest, sales tax rates in the state. People will shop elsewhere, especially for bigger ticket items. In turn general revenue will be reduced.

As Platte County Democrats, we no longer can be labeled as the tax and spend party. The Platte County Republicans now own the title. I am issuing a simple challenge to the leadership of the Platte County Republican Party: Prove that you are conservative by opposing the tax now and by pushing Betty Knight out of office in 2010. Platte County Democrats will run a nice, fiscally conservative candidate, and we can all debate the real infrastructure issues facing the county. We Democrats will not be holding our collective breath that you are up to the challenge.

(Russ Purvis is chair of the Platte County Democratic Central Committee. Reach him at russp842@yahoo.com)

HEALTH CARE VOUCHER SYSTEM IS THE ANSWER

Posted 6/19/09

Since last week's column addressing the health care debate, Republicans have offered nothing and President Obama has publicly stated that those opposing the government takeover of healthcare are “fear mongers” and “naysayers.” In other words, neither side has done anything constructive, but I digress.

Last week I offered my proposed solution--a Universal Health Care Voucher System (UHV). Under a UHV all Americans, including those currently on Medicare and Medicaid, federal employees and even elected government officials will be covered under one system. The federal government will issue a health care voucher in the name of every American citizen and anyone else residing in the country legally. With the voucher a person can obtain medical insurance on the open market that provides a guaranteed benefit similar to what federal employees currently receive. The insurance carrier will then receive the voucher as payment. Carriers can turn no one with a voucher down for the basic benefit. If an individual wants more extensive coverage, he or she can buy it. However the additional coverage will not be subsidized and the market will set the rate and decide whether to issue such coverage to particular individuals.

The system will work because of the pooling of risk created by insuring the entire population. By spreading the risk in this way the private insurance industry will be able to offset those that consume the largest amount of medical care with those that consume the least. The government itself will insure no one. With over 1300 carriers providing health insurance, the system will foster competition among the carriers and it is likely that most will offer a package containing more than the standard benefit guaranteed by the voucher to obtain and retain customers.

Under the UHV, there will be no need for employer based healthcare. The money employers are currently spending will either be used to provide pay increases or other benefits to employees, or will go toward the employer's bottom line. Either way, the money saved, approximately $700 billion per year, will find its way back into the overall economy. Additionally, there will be no need for the 2.9% “Medicare tax,” half of which is paid directly by the employer, the other half of which is deducted from every employee's salary. Here again, the money will find its way into the overall economy either by way of payroll and benefit increases or increased business profits.

The UHV will be funded by a national sales tax on goods and services. The money will necessarily have to be segregated from all other government accounts and the government should not have the ability to borrow from it as it has with social security.

Because such a great percentage of health care costs are caused by preventable diseases, a higher tax should be placed on goods that carry the greatest risk for creating health problems. For example, ninety percent of obesity is preventable and is caused by what a person eats. Place a higher tax on items such as soda, candy, and highly processed foods. Anyone can still make the choice to consume those goods; however, they will be paying a little more now toward the likelihood of consuming more health care later. The same goes for liquor and tobacco.

Such a tax, contrary to popular belief, is not regressive. Everyone will be insured and everyone will pay, including those that are here and not citizens, something toward the privilege depending on the consumption of goods and services. Those who make less generally consume less and will, therefore, be covered without as much out of pocket expense as a person that makes more and buys more goods and services.

The UHV is the best option available. For more information, I encourage you to read A Comprehensive Cure: Universal Health Care Vouchers by Ezekial J. Emanuel and Victor R. Fuchs.Much of the information provided in this column was drawn from that article. The bottom line is that under a UHV everyone will be insured.
Medicare and Medicaid will no longer be necessary. A dedicated funding mechanism will maintain the system. And, most importantly, the government will not socialize health care.

(Reach Russ, chair of the local Democratic Central Committee, at russp842@yahoo.com)

GOVERNMENT-CONTROLLED
HEALTH CARE IS A FLAWED SYSTEM

Posted 6/12/09

To steal a line from the late, great Johnny Cash: “I hear a train a coming, it’s coming around the bend.” The train is named Universal Health Care and it is definitely coming. The only question is what type of train will it be when it arrives.

The debate over the issue is heating up in Washington. Like most political matters it has begun with both the Democrats and Republicans posturing. Some Democrats are pushing for a single payer system. In laymen's terms, a single payer system means that the government directly controls healthcare. It does such a wonderful job with Medicare, Medicaid and the alphabet soup of subparts to such programs, I cannot imagine why anyone would oppose such action.

In the other corner, some Republicans, the followers of Limbaugh, are demanding that Republicans oppose any and all attempts at healthcare reform on philosophical principle. What principle this group is alluding to is questionable. It cannot possibly be the “principle” of smaller, limited government. The Republican Party abandoned that “principle” under George W. Bush.

The real principle at work here is power. This crowd wants to be able to argue it had nothing to do with passing health care reform and then attempt to pick apart any flaws, real or made up, for political gain. So much for Republicans of that ilk caring about the American people.

For Republicans to refuse to engage on the issue is simply short sighted. There is going to be change and all voices need to be heard. I disagree with the administration's assertion that legislation has to be passed immediately. Any health care reform must be done right, that does not equate to right now.

Single payer is a terrible idea for many reasons. First and foremost, the federal government is not equipped, nor should it be, to manage the health care of every American properly and in a cost efficient manner. Countries where versions of such a system are in place have been less than a rousing success. Long waiting periods and large gaps in care are the norm.

Second, Medicare demonstrates that government controlled health care is a flawed system. Always on the verge of insolvency, it is driving doctors away from it in droves. It under pays for services and when it does pay, it first requires a rain forest to be cut down to complete the billing paperwork. It is a typical government bureaucracy at work.

Finally, single payer will all but destroy the insurance industry as we know it, creating even greater strain on our financial markets. Thousands of workers in that industry will be put out of work and the profits made by health insurance carriers will disappear, contracting the economy when we should be looking to expand it.

I submit that there is a better way. We can provide universal coverage to every man, woman and child in the United States. It can be done using our existing free market structure. As an added bonus, Medicare and Medicaid will disappear under this plan.

By magic you ask? No. The answer is Universal Health Care Vouchers. How do they work? Why will they work? Where can I get one? All of these answers and many more will be provided in next week's column.

(Russ Purvis is chair of the Platte County Democratic Central Committee. Email him at russp842@yahoo.com)

GOVERNMENT HAS NOW CREPT INTO THE
BACK SEAT OF YOUR CAR

Posted 6/5/09

And Ford stands alone. Yes, there is now only one truly American automaker: a private company, profit driven that is not a state run operation. “Buy American” now really means buy Ford.

Pushing GM into a government crafted bankruptcy plan has finally accomplished what the cold war could not, the socializing of America's private industry. What was good for GM used to be good for the United States. That is no longer true.

President Obama stated that he was confident that the government's action “will mark the end of an old G.M. and the beginning of a new G.M.” His statement is true and it should scare the bejusus out of anyone that believes in a free market system.

D.C. not Detroit will now be in charge of strategic thinking for both G.M. and Chrysler. You may ask yourself if the politicians can do any worse. After all G.M. and Chrysler went broke on their own. Ask yourself that question again, keeping in mind that now they are playing with our tax dollars, $50 billion to G.M. alone, with more undoubtedly to come.

To be fair, President Obama stated emphatically on Monday that he has no interest in “running G.M.” The statement surprised me. I did not realize that the administration had employed a comedy writer to punch up Obama's speeches. There is simply no truth to the statement. The government now owns 60% of G.M. The Obama administration will be replacing G.M.'s board and the administration already fired Rick Wagoner, the former chief executive of G.M., and replaced him with Fritz Henderson.

In addition to all of that “not running the company,” the government has been very clear that it expects G.M. to produce small, “green” cars. Given the lack of a market for such a vehicle in the United States, doesn't that certainly sound like a sound business model to be followed by a private, profit driven company? Of course not! But with Uncle Sugar behind the wheel, profit is not the object, just government interference into our lives.

Even if President Obama truly did not want to run G.M. and Chrysler, the government's action has made it politically impossible not to do just that. Chrysler and G.M. are now two fat government pigs and every slack jawed politician on Capitol Hill is going to come running for his or her piece of pork. Plant closings, even individual dealership closings, will be subject to political debate because every decision will impact a congressional district in some part of the company. In fact the grumbling is already under way. Several Chrysler dealers are alleging that the fact that the dealerships were owned by Republicans led to their being closed while other, less profitable dealerships, remain opened.

The government will not be able to extract itself from this mess any time soon, if ever. Not because it may not eventually be able to find a buyer, assuming there is something left of value, but because the government will never give this business up. It is another tool of control. Government is not in the business of shrinking. It is in the business of creeping forward and growing ever larger. It has now crept into your backseat. The only possible way to rid ourselves of this problem is to simply refuse the government's product. Buy American, buy Ford.

(Russ Purvis is chair of the Platte County Democrat Central Committee.
Email him at russp842@yahoo.com)

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY 2009: WHO WILL SURVIVE?

Posted 5/28/09

As I write this column late Monday evening, contemplating my weekend of fun, food and drink, and my wicked sunburn, I once again want to give thanks to all of those that came before us and made the ultimate sacrifice so that we can live in this great nation.

I am also contemplating the exciting summer that lies ahead. Every year Hollywood rolls out its summer blockbusters. This year is no different. A new Star Trek movie has already appeared along with a new Tom Hanks flick, Angels and Demons.

But the real excitement this summer, that will be sure to have every political junkie in the country glued to the internet and listening to the talking heads on television and radio, is the Republican Party Reality Series: “The Republican Party 2009– Who Will Survive?”

It is being carried by every television network, radio station, internet site and newspaper in the country. Starring the horsemen of the Republican Apocalypse: Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich, and General Colin Powell, it may not be nominated for any awards but is sure to be full of violence and mayhem.

Rush Limbaugh was the early star of the series with his calls for a ritual cleansing of the Republican Party to purge it of those that he did not deem to be Republican enough. Because special effects are not budgeted for this series, we were all left to conjure up images of goose stepping little Republicans marching lock step and saluting with a “DITTO RUSH!” rather than a “HEIL HITLER!”

Much to the chagrin of Limbaugh and the dittoheads, a vocal splinter group quickly emerged. This group is arguing that the Republican Party did not lose its way by failing to adhere to a rigid set of ideals handed down from on high by Limbaugh and his ilk. This group feels that the Republicans have failed because of the rigidity and lack of intellectual honesty contained in that set of ideals. This group wishes to broaden the scope of the Republican Party and is looking to a leader like General Colin Powell to do so.

Limbaugh quickly began hurling verbal brickbats at Powell. He questioned Powell's Republican credentials, and suggested that he should leave, or had already left, the Republican Party. Then out of an act of petulance, and to add a little drama to the series, he announced that he was resigning as the titular head of the Republican Party.

Dick Cheney, sensing that Limbaugh did not have the gravitas to bounce Powell from the Republican tent, entered the fray. To those paying close attention, you will notice that Cheney resembles the Penguin from the old “Batman” series more and more, in both look and demeanor. The Penguin or an aging Richard Dreyfus, either way it is hard to take him seriously. He is the emerging star on the series, appearing on every political show that will have him, arguing the validity of the failed policies of the Bush administration and telling everyone that will listen that he thought Powell “had already left the party.”

For his part, Powell has thus far played a limited role. He has responded to both Cheney and Limbaugh that he is a Republican and that he will not be leaving the Republican Party. He has also called for an “after action review” by Republicans to figure out where they went wrong in 2008. Like any good reality series, there has to be the character around which all of the tension swells. Powell is that character.

Then there is Newt Gingrich. Newt has stated that Republicans cannot adopt a small tent view and that a national party requires “internal tension.” Yes, he is riding the fence. He is Brutus, knife in hand. Newt just has not yet decided who it will be more beneficial for him to stab in the back.

It is a great bit of summer entertainment. If we are lucky it will be renewed for the fall season and even more characters will appear in political career ending episodes.

(Russ Purvis is chair of the Platte County Democratic Central Committee. Contact him at russp842@yahoo.com)

PELOSI SHOULD STEP DOWN AS HOUSE SPEAKER

Posted 5/21/09

Pelosi Gate? That may be a little strong; however, our Speaker of the House has, at the very least, created a situation which distracts from the administration's agenda and provides opportunities for the Republicans where none should exist.

Pelosi created the present situation when she first denied being briefed on the use of water boarding in September of 2002. She later added to that statement and said she was told of the use of water boarding in 2003 by a member of her staff. She then pitched the CIA under the bus and said that it lied to her in 2002. She did all of this while acting like a cranky, petulant school girl caught in a lie.

But I believe that every dark cloud does have a silver lining. The Democratic Party must use this issue to cleanse the party of this festering sore. The Republicans would like nothing more than to have Pelosi hanging like an albatross around our necks in 2010. Pelosi hurts us in places like Missouri's 6th District. Here is my bold prediction: Short of self-inflicted political suicide, Sam Graves will hold his seat in the 6th as long as Pelosi is the Speaker of the House.

In 2008, Graves effectively tied his last opponent, Kay Barnes, to Pelosi with a series of very negative ads. Graves won that election going away. There is no reason to believe that Pelosi will be viewed any more favorably in 2010, especially now.

If Pelosi were simply viewed by the general public as liberal she might be tolerable. Unfortunately, with every utterance, she solidifies the opinion of most that she is a self-important, self-interested, Marxist nut. She does not know the meaning of the word compromise and has used her position to unnecessarily punish those she views as political opponents, or potential challengers to her authority within the Democratic Party. Democratic Representative Jane Harman is a prime example of being Pelosied.

Harman and Pelosi became enemies when Harman dared disagree with Pelosi on intelligence matters. When the Democrats took over the House in 2006, Harman was in line to chair the Intelligence Committee. Pelosi did not even allow her a seat on that committee.

Pelosi is now twisting in the wind on a rope of her own making. What did she know and when did she know it? The Democratic Party does not have time to be distracted by her answer to those questions. As Democrats, we are on the cusp of greatness. The Republican Party cannot derail us. Leaders like Pelosi, however, can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

With Pelosi in the picture we are branded by many to be a bunch of super liberal hippies. There is a limited block of voters that fit that profile. With Pelosi gone, the Democratic Party will appear to be what it truly is, a center left political party. Pelosi should be given the opportunity to step down as Speaker of the House. If she refuses, she should be removed. The Democratic Party and the nation will be better for it.

(The Landmark is made better by The Convenient Truth column. Email Russ at russp842@yahoo.com)

AUDITOR BUSY TRACKING STATE'S STIMULUS MONEY

Special column by Susan Montee, Missouri State Auditor

Posted 5/15/09

Hundreds of millions of dollars of stimulus money are flowing into Missouri. For the most part, it is sitting, unspent, in state accounts. You can be sure that will change soon, and that it will flow hard and fast. Missouri taxpayers deserve to know, in detail, what is happening with their hundreds of millions.

The hope is that all of that money will, as they say, stimulate the economy. We want the money to support projects and programs that generate jobs, creating a multiplier effect that will get our state and national economies moving in the right direction.

How do we know if the money is being spent wisely? Who has the data that will allow us to make informed decisions as we move forward?

That's where we in the Missouri State Auditor's office enter the picture. The Auditor's office is Missouri's financial watchdog. Our entire mission is to pay attention to how taxpayer money is being spent and to let you know what we find, whether the news is good or bad.

Being Missouri's financial watchdog includes keeping an eye on federal dollars that flow into Missouri--it is, after all, our money. From the day the first dollar of federal stimulus money hit a State of Missouri bank account, we've tracked it coming in and we've tracked it going out.

It's not enough for us, here in Jefferson City, to know how the money is spent. You need to know. Every Missouri citizen needs to know. Every Missourian needs to know what is happening just as soon as we know it here in your State Capitol.

That's why, before that first stimulus dollar hit a State of Missouri bank account, we established a Web page that tracks the movement of the money on a day-to-day basis. You can find that page at www.auditor.mo.gov. There, you can see where we are today and even a historical accounting of the money since it first started flowing.

As of this writing, you'll see that almost all of the money -- $353,430,063.02--is exactly where we deposited it, waiting to be allocated by the Missouri State Legislature.

What is the state going to do with all of that money? No one knows for sure, but those decisions are being made right now. Literally, they are being finalized as this article is rolling off of the presses.

Your elected representatives are deciding what will happen with the money, and now you know where to go to see what they are doing with it. Every day, you'll be able to see changes in the amounts we receive and the amounts we spend.

From there, it is up to you.

That's one of the great things about being state auditor. My job is to make sure you have the information you need to make informed decisions. Then you and your elected representatives have the opportunity to make good decisions, based on hard facts.

In this case, we are going to make sure you can know how your federal stimulus money is being spent. What you do with that knowledge is up to you.

(The Landmark thanks Susan Montee, state auditor, for pinch hitting for Russ Purvis this week. Russ returns in our next issue).

ARLEN SPECTER IS SIMPLY A WALKING EGO

Posted 5/8/09

A Republican friend once told me that he would vote for Beelzebub if there was an “R” in front of the name.
Why? Because, as my friend said: “Numbers matter.” We Democrats have now inherited one of the Republican devils in the form of Arlen Specter.

Make no mistake, like my Republican friend, I believe that numbers matter. However, with regard to Mr. Specter, I am firmly convinced that he has not switched political parties. He is, was and will always be a party of one. He is not a Republican, Democrat, or even an Independent. Specter is simply a narcissist of the first order.

Specter, speaking with perhaps a bit more candor than he intended, allowed the self love flag to fly high, when he stated that he was “unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate.” Mr. Specter seems to have forgotten that it is the Pennsylvania electorate that has repeatedly returned him to office. He admits that his own party will not re-elect him. If he no longer represents them he should consider bowing out gracefully.

Specter certainly does not represent the Democratic Party. He has even said that if he disagrees with the Democrats he will filibuster. But hey, as the song goes, “if you can't be with the one you love, love the one your with.” The problem is that Specter does not appreciate the fact that the Democrats have allowed him to join the club. Just this past Sunday on Meet the Press, he demonstrated truly how soft in the head he is.

When questioned about keeping his Senate seniority, an important thing to all of the smug jackasses that run our country, Specter confirmed that he was going to keep his seniority and said “That's an entitlement. I've earned the seniority. I will be treated by the Democrats as if I'd been elected as a Democrat.” Specter just does not think that it matters that he was not elected as a Democrat.

Specter really wants to have his cake and eat it too. He went on at length on Meet the Press about being independent and willing to cross party lines. If he truly had any core beliefs then he would have left the Republicans and declared himself an Independent.

Specter is simply a walking ego. Not only does he feel that he is entitled to keep his Senate seniority, he feels that he is entitled to keep his seat. To that end he will move heaven and earth, switch parties, sell his soul, take a wide stance in an airport toilet, you name it he will do it.

As Democrats, we should not look a gift whore I mean horse, in the mouth. Use Specter for his vote but do not do him any favors. In fact, Specter should face a Democrat in the Pennsylvania primary in 2010. With the Republicans undoubtedly running a very conservative candidate, a moderate Democrat, a real honest to God, I did not change parties to get here, Democrat, can take the seat. Specter will then have time to hang out with the person he loves the most, himself.

(Chairman of Platte County Democrats, Russ Purvis can be reached at russp842@yahoo.com)

THE ENTIRE STIMULUS BILL WILL ALWAYS BE A DEBACLE

Posted 5/1/09

The Missouri legislature has accomplished next to nothing during the nearly four months that it has been in session. However, an issue is now winding its way through the legislative process that may actually lead to something good.

The Republicans have proposed using $1 billion of the federal stimulus funds that Missouri is slated to receive, to lower the Missouri income tax from 6.0% to 5.5% for two years. I believe that this is a great idea. After all, the federal government has demonstrated, on an almost hourly basis, over the course of the last four months, and for generations prior to that, that it does not have clue when it comes to stimulating the economy.

It is time to give all of us taxpayers back a portion of our money and give us a chance to put it to work. Never forget that it is our money. The federal stimulus package is simply a shell game, stealing from each and every one of us, bundling up the stolen funds and, like some low rent Robin Hood, sending the money hither and yon.

If the Missouri legislature actually passes the plan, we will all get at least a small portion of our money back. According to an article in the Kansas City Star, the tax cut will result in a savings of roughly $155 per year to a person with a taxable income of $40,000.

Inexplicably, Senator McCaskill opposes the tax cut. In a press conference held last Saturday and covered by the Springfield News Leader, McCaskill said that Washington knows best. McCaskill stated that she does not think that tax cut will “create the same number of jobs in Missouri as the program we passed in Washington.” She went on to say: “I know this: Nobody in Congress, nobody, thought that we were going to do 40 percent of the bill in tax cuts and 60 percent of the bill in job creation, that the states were then going to take the job creation money and say, 'Well, we're going to decide that we know better and we're going to do 100 percent in tax cuts.”

I will agree with McCaskill on a small part of one of her points: Nobody in Washington thought. The entire stimulus bill is, was and will always be a debacle. Very little stimulus is even contained in the bill. True to their nature, the politicians simply piled on all manner of pork and expected the general public to be happy that they had taken action of some sort.

During the press conference, McCaskill also accused Missouri Republicans of pandering, playing from the cheap seats and pulling a political stunt to garner national attention. Those accusations actually apply more accurately to what the federal government, under both Bush and Obama, has done in response to our current economic crisis.

We kick around the term bipartisanship all of the time. Well, as Democrats, it is time we act in a bipartisan manner and pass the tax cut. If you don't want your money you can always donate it back to your federal government to waste.

(Russ Purvis is chair of the Platte County Democratic Central Committee. Email him at russp842@yahoo.com)

HEAD LOCAL DEMOCRAT FAVORS MAKING MARIJUANA LEGAL

Posted 4/24/09

The world is going to hell in a hand basket. Republicans and Democrats alike agree that we all need something to mellow us out after all of the job losses, watching the stock market tank and being forced to bear witness to our elected officials selling out and mortgaging our futures. Alcohol is an option; however, drinking leads to hangovers, weight gain, liver problems and the possibility of a bad outcome in a bar fight.

Pot, on the other hand, possesses none of previously mentioned, negative attributes. Seriously, ask yourself this question: Have you ever seen anyone that was baked start a bar fight? If the Obama administration really wants to help the American public, legalizing marijuana should be a top priority.

Politicians as diverse as Republican Ron Paul and Democrat Barney Frank agree. Last year the two teamed up to propose legislation that would have decreased federal penalties for possession of marijuana and provided greater access to those wishing to use the drug for medical reasons. Some cities are even considering becoming distributors of medical marijuana.

Marijuana is not lethal. If it were, Willie Nelson would have been dead years ago. In fact, unlike alcohol, humans cannot overdose on pot. Marijuana has been shown to help individuals suffering from glaucoma and has been used to successfully provide relief from the nausea, lack of appetite and the crippling pain suffered by cancer patients.

Studies have also shown that it is less addictive than alcohol or tobacco. The argument that it is a gateway to other drugs is simply a sham. If such a thing as a “gateway drug” exists, it is alcohol. But alcohol remains legal and more readily available to people of all ages, and in greater quantities, than pot. Because alcohol is socially accepted, it also contains less stigma and adults are more likely to allow younger people to experiment with it.

The current laws governing marijuana are costing the country money. Marijuana could be helping reduce the nation's budget deficit and even helping to finance one or more of the government's pet programs such as healthcare or fighter planes. Legalizing marijuana and taxing it will not only save money by decreasing the stress and cost to the criminal justice system, it will also provide a large additional source of tax revenue.

In 2007, more than 750,000 people were arrested for marijuana possession. The cost in money and time to deal with these individuals in the criminal justice system could have been more effectively used to provide services to the less fortunate. In fact, legalizing marijuana will also lead to less gang violence in this country and less violence along our border with Mexico.

If marijuana is legalized, there will be no demand for the product on the black market due to the fact that the free market will provide a better product at a more competitive price. Gangs and border wars will decrease, at least as they relate to turf wars over marijuana. Legalizing cocaine and other drugs will only help to decrease the problem more.

Missouri--Platte County in particular--should take the lead in the fight to legalize marijuana. A county famous for its “ditch weed,” Platte is in a unique position to immediately profit from the marijuana's legalization. Fields that once produced bumper tobacco crops will produce an outstanding marijuana product. As Cuba is to cigars, Platte County could be to marijuana. Marijuana is America's largest illegal cash crop. It is time to legalize it, cash in, turn on and tune out.

(Russ Purvis is chair of the Platte County Democratic Central Committee. Ask him what he’s been smoking via email to russp842@yahoo.com)

THE RELIGION OF GLOBAL
WARMING IS DANGEROUS

Posted 4/17/09

If Maureen O’Hara was correct in Miracle on 34th Street, and “faith is believing in things when common sense tells you not to,” then the blind faith in global warming by those who should know better is not as crazy as it sounds. Without a shred of reliable, verifiable evidence, thousands of otherwise intelligent people are following the modern Pied Piper of Panic, the Chicken Little of Environmentalism, Al Gore, on faith.

Global warming is the latest new age religion and Al Gore is its High Priest. Like all religion it is based entirely on an article of faith with so many holes in its gospel that it resembles Swiss cheese. To attempt to argue otherwise demonstrates ignorance, or intentional misrepresentation, by the faithful. There is only one fact that cannot be disputed: there is no consensus among the scientific community that global warming is occurring.

I hesitate to call any religion dangerous, but in the case of the religion of global warming I will make an exception. The religion of global warming is dangerous because it threatens not only the activities of our daily life, but because it threatens the very existence of our nation as we know it. To appease the Gods of Greenhouse Gases, the global warming evangelists are willing to sacrifice this nation's entire infrastructure, sovereignty and probably a couple of virgins just to be on the safe side, all because Al Gore says it is necessary.

Untold billions are set to be spent without any explanation as to how or why. And it is only a matter of time before we enter treaties that will undoubtedly entangle our nation in international commitments over which we will have little control. And our leaders are attempting to do all of this in an effort to control something that has not been proven to exist.

The whole thing would be really funny, like an old SNL skit, if so many otherwise bright people did not buy into it hook, line and sinker. Keep in mind that it was a little more than 30 years ago, when it was not global warming, but the “new ice age” that was threatening the planet.

The religion of global warming relies heavily on “predicted outcomes” based on computer modeling. Like all models, the outcome received is largely dependent upon the information that is used in preparing the model. A researcher's bias and agenda will almost always produce a different outcome from that of a researcher with different views. Using a ginned up model, and relying on scare tactics like the lie that polar bears are facing extinction, they are, in fact, at near record levels, the true believers are attempting to convert the undecided and persecute the nonbelievers.

The soft headed among us, most notably our elected representatives, are acting like lemmings leaping from a cliff in support of this idiocy and willingly spending our hard earned tax dollars. President Obama has even appointed a global warming czar--so much for separation of church and state.

I am sure most of the global warming zealots have their hearts in the right place. It is their heads that I am worried about. With so many real problems facing the nation from the economy to health care, we do not have the time or extra money to place such a high priority on a popular fad.

So to all of those nonbelievers out there, speak up and let your voices be heard, and the next time you are faced with ridicule by a soft-headed, new age, Al Gore following, polar bear worshiping greenie, simply tell them to kiss your big, fat, SUV driving, carbon footprint.

(Kiss Russ’ carbon footprint via email to russp842@yahoo.com)

MISSOURI ON WRONG SIDE OF GAY MARRIAGE ISSUE

Posted 4/10/09

Missouri may very well have to resort to deficit spending due to a new and mounting danger to our north. God forbid, the gays can now marry in Iowa. Right wingers and evangelicals everywhere are on high alert. Rumor has it that they have all put away their porn collections and are racing to block Missouri's border with the new “rainbow” state.

Seriously, it is about damn time a Midwestern state decided to give equality a chance. While our redneck Republican leaders in Missouri (our own illustrious Senator Charlie Shields for one) have been busy refusing to grant a courtesy resolution honoring The Heartland's Men's Choir, a nationally known men's choir from Kansas City, that just happens to be made up of gay men, the Iowa Supreme Court has correctly ruled that same sex couples must be allowed to marry.

Last week, in Varnum v. Brien, the Iowa Supreme Court struck down a state statute banning same sex marriage. The Court found that “for purposes of Iowa's marriage laws, which are designed to bring a sense of order to the legal relationships of committed couples and their families in myriad ways, plaintiffs (the gay and lesbian couples that brought the suit) are similarly situated (to heterosexual couples seeking to marry) in every important respect, but for their sexual orientation.” From there the court went on to find that the Iowa statute in question violated the equal protection clause of Iowa's constitution.

In a thoughtful and well-reasoned opinion, the Court addressed each of the tired old chestnuts that the homophobic crowd is so fond of offering when opposing same sex marriage. With regard to the “traditional marriage” argument, the Court concluded that such an argument “can allow discrimination to become acceptable as tradition and helps to explain how discrimination can exist for such a long time. If a simple showing that discrimination is traditional satisfies equal protection, previous successful equal protection challenges of invidious racial and gender classifications would have failed.”

With regard to the best interest of children, the Court found that there is no legitimate argument to be made that same sex parents are not just as good at parenting as a man and a woman. The Court did agree that there were opinions to the contrary but found that “these opinions, while thoughtful and sincere, were largely unsupported by reliable scientific studies.”

With regard to procreation, the Court rightfully concluded that there is absolutely no evidence that allowing same sex marriage will decrease the number of children born or, conversely, that excluding same sex marriage will increase procreation.

With regard to religious opposition to marriage, the Court pointed out that marriage is, under the law, a civil contract. Therefore, the Court found “civil marriage must be judged under our constitutional standards of equal protection and not under religious doctrines or the religious views of individuals.”

Iowa got it right. Unfortunately, Missouri is squarely on the wrong side of this issue. With a statute and a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage, we fly our narrow mindedness and wrongheadedness like a banner, for all to see. Everyone that truly does believe in the sanctity of a marriage between two individuals that are committed to each other, no matter what their sexual orientation, must work to change Missouri. It is the moral thing to do.

(Russ is chair of Platte County Democrats. Reach him at russp842@yahoo.com)

SCHAFF DESERVES TONGUE-LASHING FOR SLAVERY COMMENT

Posted 4/3/09

Republican Rob Schaaf is a little known and unimportant state representative from St. Joseph. Why am I bringing him up and why should you care? In part because he plans to replace Senator Charlie Shields, who represents both Platte and Buchanan County, after he is term-limited out of office in 2010, but more importantly because Schaaf's recent statements indicate that he is an intellectually challenged bigot that dislikes poor children.

In a floor debate in the House of Representatives last week about Governor Nixon's proposal to increase Medicaid funding, which will allow more poor children to be covered under the State Children's Heal Insurance Program (SCHIP), Schaaf said that such government action will turn the taxpayers of Missouri into slaves.

After attempting to shield himself from criticism by wrapping himself in the mantle of Abraham Lincoln, who could reportedly be heard screaming from his grave, Schaaf accused Democrats that support state-sponsored health care for poor children of attempting to become slave masters. Schaaf said “there are families …. on the program that are willingly paying the premium… they (all of us evil Democrats) want them to stop paying it….they want them to stop paying it and expect all of the other taxpayers to pay it… and Mr. Speaker that is slavery.”

No! Paying for healthcare for the poor may be many things but it is not slavery, Representative Schaaf. Slavery was, in the United States of America, the ability of a white man to legally own a person of color. Being a slave was to be treated as less than human. Being a slave forced a person to watch as a wife, husband, child, mother, father, sister or brother was dragged away in chains to be sold, beaten or otherwise violated, while being powerless to stop it. Being a slave meant back-breaking labor for no pay and inadequate food and shelter. Being a slave meant knowing the taste of your own blood, or the feeling of scars across your back, after a fist to the face, or the snap of a bullwhip, by someone that viewed you as mere chattel. Being a slave meant never knowing freedom.

Above all, slavery was wrong. It left a long shadow over this nation from which we all still struggle to escape to this very day. Schaaf's disgraceful performance on the floor of the Missouri House of Representatives has lengthened that shadow. Schaaf's comments were not only wrong, they are unforgivable. Providing healthcare to poor children, on the other hand, is right and just.

Schaaf must be held accountable for his actions. The honorable thing would be for him to resign from office, beg forgiveness and apologize to Lincoln. But honor is a precious commodity, and not likely found in the makeup of a man of such distorted views. Civilized society has moved away from the bullwhip as a weapon to extract a pound of flesh; however, each and every one of us should give Schaaf a tongue lashing and then do everything in our power to guarantee that he is not elected as the next state senator from the 34th District.

(Email Russ, chairman of Platte County Democrats, at russp842@yahoo.com)

ACCESS TO THE MORNING AFTER PILL IS A GOOD THING

Posted 3/26/09

When it comes to sex, to steal a line from Cole Porter: “Birds do it, bees do it, even educated fleas do it.” Often times it has little to do with “falling in love” and more to do with falling in lust, or simply being drunk. In any event, contraception may not be considered until after the fact, especially by younger participants. That is why easy access to Plan B, also known as the “morning after pill,” is so important.

Plan B is a contraceptive. It reduces the likelihood of pregnancy if taken within three days of having sex by working to prevent the implementation of a fertilized egg. It has been available without a prescription to women over the age of 17 since 2006.

I know---abstinence! abstinence! Well, this column is discussing reality, and the reality is that sex happens, a lot. Many of the participants are young, and although they should remember to use a contraceptive prior to having sex, they should also be allowed the opportunity to use a contraceptive after the fact, without governmental intrusion, to avoid an unwanted, unplanned and unnecessary pregnancy.

Finally, after years of litigation, the FDA has been ordered to allow this to happen. On this past Monday, U.S. District Court Judge, Edward Korman, a Reagan appointee for those of you keeping score, found that the FDA had been compromised by the politics of the radical right's anti-choice agenda. Judge Korman's order will allow 17-year-old women to obtain Plan B without a prescription, and requires the FDA to address the efficacy of allowing younger women to also obtain the drug in the same fashion.

Why was litigation even necessary? Because the FDA became a political tool and abandoned its scientific role. The FDA got so far off of the reservation on this issue that Susan Wood, the top FDA official on women's health, resigned over the agency's handling of Plan B in August of 2005. In October of the same year, Dr. Frank Davidoff, a member of the FDA's Nonprescription Drugs Advisory Committee, also resigned. Dr. Davidoff's reason for resigning was that he felt that the FDA was playing politics and ignoring science.

In his ruling Judge Korman stated that “political considerations, delays, and implausible justifications for decision-making are not the only evidence of a lack of good faith and reasoned decision-making. Indeed, the record is clear that the FDA's course of conduct regarding Plan B departed in significant ways from the agency's normal procedures regarding similar applications to switch a drug product from prescription to non-prescription use.”

Early on in the litigation, the FDA even tried to hide agency discussions and correspondence about Plan B. It took a court order to pry the information loose, once again proving that governmental agency overreaching and political corruption are a major Republican problem.

The anti-choice crowd claims that Plan B is the same as an abortion. Following that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, masturbation amounts to the same thing. Honestly, it is time to have an honest conversation about this issue: Plan B does not constitute abortion; the Pope is wrong about condoms, they can and do prevent the spread of AIDS; and abstinence among teenagers is an ideal to pursue, but so is world peace. We have about as much of a chance of achieving one as the other. So, in the meantime, a little protection will not hurt a soul.

(Contact Russ Purvis, the local Democratic chairman, at russp842@yahoo.com)

TAXING HEALTH CARE BENEFITS WOULD BE COMPLETE LUNACY

Posted 3/20/09

Have you heard the new Obamanomics anthem? “If you drive a car, I'll tax the street; if you try to sit, I'll tax your seat; if you get too cold, I'll tax the heat; if you take a walk, I'll tax your feet. Cause I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman.”

Taxman, the Beatles.

It is here a tax, there a tax, everywhere a tax with this administration. Of course it is all in the name of helping us. The most recent tax and spend outrage involves the so-called “overhaul” of the healthcare system. The New York Times reported last Sunday that Obama has changed his position as it relates taxing employee healthcare benefits, those healthcare benefits provided by employers to employees. When John McCain mentioned such a tax during the campaign, Obama called it “the largest middle class tax increase in history.” In one Obama campaign ad it was called “a multi-trillion dollar tax hike.” Now it is just the cost of socialization.

Obama's administration is trying to have it both ways on this issue. According to the New York Times, several Obama advisors stated that “while he will not propose changing the tax-free status of employee health benefits, neither will he oppose it if Congress does so.”That is simply a very clear message to Congress that Obama believes the tax increase should be in play. At the same time he will get to have political cover, arguing it was the Congress, not him, that proposed the increase. Sadly, there has been no change; it is business as usual in Washington, D.C.

Some Democrats, such as Representative Pete Stark of California are calling it “a dumb idea.” I disagree. The word dumb is not sufficient to describe this lunacy. It is a monumentally stupid idea. Government estimates indicate that 177 million people receive at least a portion of their healthcare benefits through employer based plans. This proposal puts the health insurance coverage of 177 million people at risk in an attempt to provide some, yet undefined, health insurance benefit to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans.

The only foreseeable outcome of taxing healthcare benefits is that certain employers will drop the plans; some employees will not be able to afford the increased taxes, or simply will not want to pay them, and voluntarily drop their coverage and opt into whatever healthcare debacle government cobbles together; and, no employer is going to raise employee salaries to cover the cost of the tax. How can any logical person believe that such a tax increase is a good idea?

Logic simply does not apply here. In the ‘government can always do it better’ world, employer based healthcare is to be discouraged. Again from the New York Times: Obama advisors, including Jason Furman, deputy director of the White House Economic Council, believe that “not taxing benefits encourages inefficient, costly demands for health care and discriminates against those who do not have employer-provided coverage.”Democratic Senator Max Baucus has stated that not taxing employee healthcare benefits is “too regressive” and “It just skews the system.”

I had high hopes for this administration. So far, I have been left seriously disappointed. Obama and his advisors have to realize that they cannot afford to keep acting like coffee shop communists, discussing ideas for some utopian society, without having to give consideration to real world cause and effect. Unless and until that happens, to quote John, Paul, George and Ringo: “My advice for those who die, declare the pennies on your eyes, cause I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman. And you're working for no one but me.”

(Here’s hoping opinions aren’t next on the list to be taxed. Email our Democratic columnist at russp842@yahoo.com)

OBAMA MAKES RIGHT CALL ON STEM CELL RESEARCH

Posted 3/13/09

I just love revisiting Ronald Reagan with Republicans. In this week's edition of “What would Reagan do?” we explore stem cell research. As you all know by now, on Monday President Obama issued an executive order allowing federal funding to be used in the development of new lines of embryonic stem cells. President Bush had restricted federal funding for research into any new embryonic stem cell lines developed after August 9, 2001.

The “have the baby but don't expect me to help you out with it” crowd is predictably up in arms. But what would Reagan do? Well, if he were not dead, and if he listened to his wife, he would be applauding President Obama's decision.

In a statement made following Obama's executive order, former first lady Nancy Reagan said' “I'm very grateful that President Obama has lifted the restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. These new rules will now make it possible for scientists to move forward. I urge researchers to make use of the opportunities that are available to them, and to do all they can to fulfill the promise that stem cell research offers. Countless people, suffering from many different diseases, stand to benefit from the answers stem cell research can provide. We owe it to ourselves and to our children to do everything in our power to find cures for these diseases, and soon. As I've said before, time is short, and life is precious.”

Obama made the right call. With stem cell research, some of the most horrific diseases and injuries faced by human beings the world over may be cured. Everything from cancer to spinal cord injuries will be impacted by this research.

Critics argue that the embryonic stem cells are not necessary for stem cell research to move forward because there has been some success with adult stem cell lines. What the critics ignore is the fact that adult stem cells have to be reprogrammed from their original purpose to do a different task. The early evidence indicates that such modification may produce unwanted and unpredictable results. Embryonic stem cells are a blank slate and do not require reprogramming.

Critics also argue that embryos are people. They are not. Michael J. Sandel, put it best in an article in the New England Journal of Medicine in July of 2004, entitled, Embryo Ethics- The Moral Logic of Stem Cell Research, when he stated that “the fact that every person began life as an embryo does not prove that embryos are persons. Consider an analogy: although every oak tree was once an acorn, it does not follow that acorns are oak trees, or that I should treat the loss of an acorn eaten by a squirrel in my front yard as the same kind of loss as the death of an oak tree felled by a storm. Despite their developmental continuity, acorns and oak trees are different kinds of things. So are human embryos and human beings.”

This anti-embryonic groups argument is even more out of touch when one considers that the group making this argument is, by and large, the same group that favors capital punishment and supports Missouri's Republican controlled legislature's refusal to provide health insurance coverage to an additional 20,000 Missouri children at no cost to the state. This “punish the children” attitude is truly astounding when considered with the uproar surrounding the embryonic stem cell issue.

With everything going wrong in the world, Obama's decision on embryonic stem cell research is one shining example of something going right. Hopefully we will all reap the rewards of this decision sooner rather than later.

(Reap the reward of reading Russ each week, only in your Landmark. Email him at russp842@yahoo.com)

REPUBLICANS WON'T BE OUT OF THE DITCH ANYTIME SOON

Posted 3/6/09

The stock market is still falling. Job losses are still mounting. And, as if that were not enough, we were just forced to suffer through the largest snowfall of the season, on a weekend no less. We all need a reason to smile. How about the fact that Republican Party is in an ideological ditch? A couple of tow trucks are attached to each end of it, one driven by the Republicans’ “defacto leader,” prescription drug abuser extraordinaire Rush Limbaugh, the other by Republican National Committee Chair Michael Steele, a man with so little influence or appeal most of you would not have known the name if I had not mentioned it here.

Meanwhile, loudmouth radio host Sean Hannity sits inside the wreck talking about being a “great American” while crazy Annie Coulter is in the back seat with her legs in the air playing slap and tickle with any Republican desperate enough to seek some solace there. Elected Republicans can be found standing on either side of the ditch like slack jawed morons, believing that saying they “oppose Obama” somehow qualifies as a new and original ideology.

All of this came to a head for the Republicans over this past weekend. Limbaugh was the keynote speaker at the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) annual meeting, where he gave a stem winding speech essentially reiterating the overripe, reactionary rhetoric that he serves up on his radio show. His main point being that he, and all Republicans, must want President Obama to fail. Never mind the fact that if the Obama administration fails, the country may well fail. No new ideas were offered, no solutions, just a failure first platform.

Steele also spoke at the CPAC meeting but without the Limbaugh fanfare. His speech called for Republicans to apologize for past mistakes, no real detail as to the nature of the mistakes, maybe a war here and there and the destruction of the economy, who knows. After apologizing, he believes that Americans will give the GOP another chance. Not exactly an upbeat speech but maybe you had to be there.

Following Limbaugh's diatribe, Steele appeared on CNN and when questioned as to whether Limbaugh is the Republican Party's defacto leader stated, “Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Rush Limbaugh's whole thing is entertainment. Yes, it is incendiary. Yes, it is ugly.”

In typical fashion, Limbaugh attacked Steele during his radio program on Monday. Also, in the fashion typical of Republicans that get crossways with Limbaugh, Steele quickly backed off of his statements. So on the one hand Limbaugh preaches a failure first platform and on the other Steele demonstrates a spineless willingness to retreat in the face of adversity. With this kind of leadership the Republicans will remain in the wilderness for decades.

The problem appears to be that Limbaugh, Steele nor any other Republican has the ability to be forward thinking. Limbaugh is a reactionary, rarely attempting to offer a solution and when he does it is a simplistic response to a complex problem. Other Republicans attempt to invoke the “What would Reagan do?” mantra. I am frankly surprised that they have not all replaced their WWJD bracelets with one that reads WWRD.

The problem for today's Republican Party is that it cannot invoke Reagan. It has long since abandoned that set of principles. Reagan would not be a member of the Republican Party as it exists today. He would have left when the evangelicals took over and it became a rite of passage to spend tax money like a drunken sailor.

So rejoice, my fellow Democrats. The Republicans are not going to get out of the ditch any time soon. I am sure they will keep trying so, like Limbaugh, just keep hoping that they fail.

(Rejoice with Russ, not Rush, via email to russp842@yahoo.com)

CONSPIRACTY THEORY: STEELMAN-GRAVES TEAMING UP?

Posted 2/27/09

Last week, Roy Blunt, the current congressman from Missouri's seventh district, announced his candidacy for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Kit Bond. The silence surrounding support for his candidacy by members of his own party was deafening. Criticism, however, was not hard to find.

Roy Blunt is “just another white guy in a suit.” Such high praise for the newly minted Republican candidate for the United States Senate comes not from me, but from a member of his own party, former Missouri Treasurer, Sarah Steelman. Although, I might add that he also sports a really bad haircut.

Steelman clarified her statement in an article in the St. Louis Post Dispatch last Saturday. It is Steelman's opinion that Blunt will be a weak candidate to take on the likely Democratic nominee Robin Carnahan because he is among the Republicans that have "led this country to the brink of disaster.”

Steelman is correct. Blunt is a Washington insider's insider. He was part of the Tom Delay cabal. His wife and one son are both lobbyists. And of course another son is Missouri's own e-mail sensitive former governor.

It appears that there will be a Blunt/Steelman primary. The split in the Missouri Republican Party has already become apparent. Steelman was not invited to speak at the Republican Party's Lincoln Days held last weekend in Kansas City. Keep in mind she is the former Missouri Treasurer and the most recent female Republican to hold a statewide office.

Besides the Democratic Party, who will benefit from this intra-party squabble? The other congressman that I still believe, although he has been silent on the subject, will run for Bond's seat: Sam Graves.

Like it or not, Graves is the best fit for the Republicans if they really want to hold Bond's seat. The Republicans cannot compete in the urban areas of Kansas City and St. Louis so they have to win outstate Missouri. Graves controls the largest rural district in the state and has a proven template for winning in those areas. So why is he not in the race? Maybe he is.

I am not generally a conspiracy theorist, but I believe one may be underway in the race to replace Bond. Could it be that Sarah Steelman is a not really serious about running for Bond's seat, but is in reality acting as an attractive hit woman for Graves? It makes sense. Jeff Roe is still acting as Sam Graves' campaign brain. He also acted in that capacity for Steelman in her run for Missouri Governor.

Steelman, who fell out of favor with her party when she decided to run against Kenny “I withhold evidence to get criminal convictions” Hulshof in the Republican primary for Missouri Governor in 2008, can stand out front and inflict a death by 1000 cuts on Blunt. If the plan works, he will become so weakened that he will appear vulnerable to the big money donors. Of course Steelman will hurt her own chances by appearing to simply be a naysayer with no original ideas. Graves then comes in on a white horse to rescue the Republicans.

What is in it for Steelman? She helps Graves take Bond's seat and in return, he helps her run for Missouri Governor in 2012.

At the end of the day Carnahan still becomes the next United States Senator from the State of Missouri. But the road to get her there should be very interesting.

(Russ Purvis is white but he’s not just another white guy in a suit. Email him at russp842@yahoo.com)

JFK WOULD NOT BELIEVE THIS LEVEL OF BUREAUCRACY

Posted 2/20/09

It is no secret to those of you that follow this column that I have opposed all of the alleged bailouts. I have been especially outraged and disgusted by the $787 billion dollar pork bill that was just rammed down our throats by a government more concerned with projecting an image of action than it is with the consequences of nationalizing our once free market system.

My criticism has been met with many vocal objections. I have received telephone calls and e-mails from individuals that have questioned my right to criticize the new administration, and others that have actually told me that based on my criticism of Pelosi, and the Obama administration, I cannot possibly be a Democrat. To all of those critics I simply say, I disagree.

I belong to the Democratic Party of John F. Kennedy, not the party of those that believe the federal government should force McDonalds to provide increased benefits to anyone that happens to work there while a college student, and provide tax rebates to individuals that do not even owe taxes to begin with. John F. Kennedy, in a speech from 1960, defined for me what it is to be a Democrat when he said: “I believe also in the United States of America, in the promise that it contains and has contained throughout our history of producing a society so abundant and creative and so free and responsible that it cannot only fulfill the aspirations of its citizens, but serve equally well as a beacon for all mankind. I do not believe in a superstate. I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well.”

Our elected Democrat representatives either forgot, or simply do not believe in the principles set forth by JFK. In one bill, given less consideration than the naming of a local airport, our government has expanded federal bureaucracy to a level Kennedy would not have believed possible. Individual effort would have resolved the current economic crisis. There would have been pain, but that pain would have been nothing compared to the pain and hardship we will all collectively be forced to endure as a result of the pork bill that was just passed. Our future has been mortgaged for the sake of the pet projects of disconnected politicians.

As a fellow Democrat you too should be outraged. We are Democrats not socialists. Our President ran around the country like Chicken Little screaming about the sky falling, knowing full well that type of rhetoric only served to make matters worse for the economy. Democratic members of the House and Senate, enamored with their own inflated sense of self importance, decided that we, the general public, are just too stupid to get deal with this crisis, and made a power grab of historic proportions.

Throughout this race the hog trough, the mantra was “we are the government and we are here to help.” If you can read this article, you are too old to believe that. If you do believe it, let me be the first to congratulate you on your optimism - comrade.

(Email The Landmark’s Democratic columnist at russp842@yahoo.com)

DON'T LET LITTLE MINDS MORTGAGE YOUR FUTURE

Posted 2/13/09

“Just a spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go down in a most delightful way.” The lyrics of that Mary Poppins song have been running through my head as I have followed the bailout fever that has taken over Washington, D.C. Both parties are attempting to load up the plan with something for everyone just to make it palatable. The problem is that the plan is now long on sugar with very little medicine for the economy.

Every American agrees that the economy is hurting. The agreement ends there. The Democratic Party leadership argues that you must buy into its plan lock, stock and pork barrel or you are not a Democrat. The Republicans argue that you must oppose the entire plan or you are not a Republican. Both arguments are wrongheaded and do nothing to address the economy.

Like all of you, I consider myself an American first. Party affiliation ranks somewhere after that. I am offended at the action taken by both parties in allegedly attempting to address the current economic crisis. Arguments that the sky will fall, and we will all face a financial Armageddon if Uncle Sugar does not get something done by an arbitrary, self-selected, February deadline ring hollow with me.

There is an old saying among carpenters: “Measure twice, cut once.” The problem with the bailout fever is that no one has even bothered to measure once. Congress has decided to build a rescue ship without a plan, using tired shopworn ideas of questionable merit. The plan is simply a hodgepodge of special interests.

Before we allow our market system to become nationalized, we must demand that there be some meaningful discussion regarding the state of the economy, what is needed to stimulate it immediately and what needs to be done in the long term. All of those issues should be coordinated with the use of the remaining $350 billion in TARP funds that have yet to be allocated.

A few things are certain: The economy, whether the government intervenes tomorrow or next month, or not at all, is going to get worse before it gets better; nothing the federal government might do is going to decrease job losses in the short term; and, finally, the federal government has never efficiently managed any quasi-business enterprise, even when it has held a monopoly.

If the current plan is rushed through it will be deeply flawed and has a better than even chance of doing more harm than good. And you can bet that every politician that supports the plan will, two months or two years from now, whenever waste, abuse and failure are evident, start talking about “hindsight.” They will all say that they would have done things so differently if only there had been time.

There is time. In fact we cannot afford for our elected representatives to respond to this crisis with any thing less than measured reflection and that takes time. Unfortunately, our representatives in the House and Senate are acting consistent with past performance, agreeing to impetuous spending with little regard for cause and effect. Such foolish consistency is truly, to quote Ralph Waldo Emerson “the hobgoblin of little minds.”

Do not allow these little minds to mortgage your future. Contact every elected official from Missouri and express your outrage before time does run out.

(Landmark columnists, like our own Russ Purvis, would never mortgage your future. Contact Russ at russp842@yahoo.com)

THESE ACTS OF PARTISANSHIP MUST STOP

Posted 2/6/09

It has been a very interesting week on the political front. Not much of anything of substance was accomplished during the last seven days but we now have a very clear understanding of the new political landscape. For all of the ink spilled and words spoken to the contrary, the political reality on the ground in Missouri and in Washington, D.C. is that extreme partisanship still rules the day.

A perfect example of the fact that Republicans have no desire to work together with Democrats in finding solutions to the serious problems we face as a nation is Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder's response to Governor Nixon's State of the State address. Nixon met the financial realities facing the Missouri head on. He went so far as to propose eliminating 1,329 state jobs. Rather than applaud the effort and extend a hand a cross the aisle, Kinder carped about the fact that Nixon proposed using expected federal stimulus money to balance the budget. And of course Kinder proposed no solutions.

In Washington D.C., the Democrats in the House of Representatives passed the stimulus package without a single Republican vote.The Republicans are attempting to spin this action as a victory for the American people and principles of sound fiscal policy.

In reality it is an action designed to do nothing more than shore up the hardcore base of the party. House Republicans will now be able to nit pick every failure associated with the stimulus and say that they would have voted for the parts that turn out to be successful, if only the parts that turn out to be failures had not been attached.

The United States Senate will now take up the stimulus issue. Based on the posturing it appears that the vote will fall mostly along party lines. So it is the same old song. The politicians posture, as the right wing talking heads chirp on about how great it is that the Republicans are returning to the principles of Reagan, while the common man, woman and child are left to wonder who really cares about fixing this mess.

The Democrats have also shown themselves not to be above a little partisan brinksmanship this past week. Our own Claire McCaskill stoked the age old class warfare furnace a few days ago when she proposed capping the wages of executives that work for companies receiving bailout funds. Sure it is a great sound bite and it appeals to most of us on some level. Unfortunately, it makes absolutely no sense and simply widens the divide between Republicans and Democrats.

In theory the companies receiving bailout funds are essential to our economic recovery and cannot be allowed to fail. If that premise is true, then the companies need to be led by the best people. The best people will not work under a salary cap when they can go to other private companies and make ten or twenty times as much money.

One act of Democratic partisanship that must quickly be abandoned is backing Tom Daschle for Secretary of Health and Human Services. Daschle's failure to report and pay taxes on over $120,000 in taxable income is simply not excusable. To make matters worse, he failed to initially disclose the issue to President Obama. The Democrats need to cut this guy loose and demonstrate that real change is coming to Washington, D.C.

(Russ Purvis is The Landmark’s official Democratic correspondent. Reach him via email to russp842@yahoo.com)

TAX INCREASES WOULD BE THE WRONG WAY TO GO

Posted 1/29/09

Nancy Pelosi is not my favorite Democrat. In fact, I am not sure she is a Democrat as those of us in Missouri define the term. Socialist, communist, power hungry nut case are descriptions that come to mind when describing Pelosi. One thing I am sure of is that she knows spit about economics.

President Obama has been in office for little more than a week and Pelosi has already expressed her public support for two actions, both of which will make the economy worse, and one of which will all but turn the United States economic system into a glorified version of Venezuela.

First, Pelosi supports a tax increase in the middle of a recession. She wants to see the Bush tax cuts rolled back. The Obama team, wisely, has decided that is a very bad idea. Pelosi, actually stated last Sunday on Fox News, I think they have her on for comic relief, that “Nothing contributed more to the budget deficit than the tax cuts for the wealthiest people in America." This statement is simply not true. Nothing has contributed more to the deficit than wasteful government spending, a great deal of which has occurred on her watch.

Pelosi has backed off this stance a bit. She now claims that she will not hold up any stimulus package over this issue but does not want the tax cuts renewed when they expire in 2011.

The second action which Pelosi supports is the nationalization of at least a part of the banking system. In a recent interview on ABC discussing the possibility of bank nationalization she said “if we are strengthening them, then the American people should get some of the upside of that strengthening. Some people call that nationalization…

Would we have ever thought we would see the day when we'd be using that terminology? 'Nationalization of the banks?' ”

No one in his or her right mind believes we have yet seen the day when we should discuss nationalizing the banking system. President Obama's team is certainly not discussing it. Nationalizing the banking system really means that you have nationalized the economy. Do you really want to have to go to Uncle Sam for a loan to buy a car, to finance a home or to start a business? Consider how complicated the tax code is. If the government can make paying your money to it that difficult, how hard to you think it will be to get the government to allow you to get some of it back, especially in the form of a loan?

Access to capital is key to a free market. In a market economy, banks lend capital to businesses with the expectation that the businesses will repay the loans with interest, profit will be realized by the shareholders, who will be free to reinvest in the bank or some other business endeavor and the entire economy grows. If the government controls even a part of the banking system, it will undoubted introduce its own interests, many of which will compete the need to realize a profit. Less profit will mean less economic growth.

If profit is no longer the key component of the banking system, it becomes a riskier investment and capital will move to other markets. The government will be forced to invest more heavily and, eventually will become the bank.

Free markets work. Government control does not. President Obama has said that he will consider any advice on how to handle the current economic crisis. My advice is ignore Pelosi. There are things that can do more harm to the economy than good and tax increases and nationalizing the banking system are two such actions.

(Russ Purvis provides the Democratic perspective on this page. Reach him at russp842@yahoo.com)

TRUE LEADERSHIP FROM OBAMA COULD CHANGE THE WORLD

Posted 1/22/09

The sun rises, the sun falls and the weather is still cold enough to recognize that winter has not given way to spring. But the world has changed. Even before Jan. 20, you could sense it. Now you can feel it in your bones. The free world now has a true leader.

Like most presidents before him, President Obama has been sworn into office carrying with him the hopes and dreams of the citizens of the United States of America, and of the millions of individuals around the world that look to this country as a beacon of hope and freedom. No matter the race, gender, age, nationality or political affiliation, there are three age old inalienable rights all people hope to enjoy - life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. As citizens of the United States, we have been lucky enough to have founded our nation on these principles but must work to make sure we do not forfeit them for any reason. To other people in the world life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, or any combination of the three, remains an ideal to be reached.

Unlike most presidents before him, President Obama takes the reigns of power at a true crossroads in our nation's history, a time when many feel that life, liberty and pursuit of happiness are in jeopardy in this country and simply not attainable by much of the rest of the planet. On inauguration day President Obama stood in the present. The past was clearly set forth, marked by grave stones of failure and lights of success. The future stood off in the distance, a perfect blend of hope and confidence, as yet unmarked by the bumps and bruises of the passing of time. President Obama stood in the present and charted a path for our nation's future, based on the hard lessons of our nation's past, and asked us to follow him in the ongoing pursuit of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness for ourselves and others all around the world.

To those of us that have supported President Obama since he was candidate Obama, he is perfectly matched for the challenges that lie ahead. He is not God. He is not a king. He is a unique. He is a true leader of people. True leadership can change the world.

Like any true leader President Obama is humble enough to recognize that the course he has charted will not be easy. In his inaugural address President Obama acknowledged the difficult nature of what lies ahead when he said “In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given.It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted - for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame.Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom”.

Whether you profess to be liberal, conservative or something else, Obama's success or failure will be your success or failure. As a people we can overcome any obstacle. If you are a Democrat, stand firmly behind your new president. As a Republican, or a member of some other minority party, if you cannot find a way to support the efforts of the new administration to renew the success and spirit of this great nation, please have the courtesy to stand aside and let those who do get on with the business at hand. You see the world has changed, you can be a part of it, or you can be left behind.

(Our Russ Purvis is The Landmark’s true community organizer. Email him at russp842@yahoo.com)

DEMS NEED TO TAKE OFF THE GLOVES, ENGAGE ENEMY

Posted 1/16/09

The theme of Governor Jay Nixon's inaugural address was “A New Day for Missouri.” That theme certainly fits the current political climate in the state. One old warhorse has finally reached the pinnacle of his career, Governor of the State of Missouri. Another old warhorse, Senator Kit Bond, has decided to put himself out to pasture by announcing that he will not run again for the United States Senate. So it is a new day, a scary new day.

Both parties are busy issuing enough sound bites about a new tone of bipartisanship and peace, love and understanding to make your average freaked out hippy puke and your average evangelical throw away his or her Bible in disgust. But all of the platitudes have about as much value as a bucket of warm spit.

The national economy is in chaos and Missouri's economy is not in much better shape. It is estimated that the State of Missouri will have to find a way to close a $342 million budget deficit in 2009 and a $1 billion budget deficit in 2010. Governor Nixon needs a new tone of bipartisanship to accomplish that task. Unfortunately, the political calculus simply will not allow it.

Right now, every elected Republican in this state, from dog catcher to lieutenant governor, believes that he or she is the next Kit Bond. There is a power vacuum in the Missouri Republican Party. The only rule for success in the party is that you absolutely cannot appear to sympathize or, God forbid, agree with a Democrat.

If one of these would-be Bond replacements cooperates with Governor Nixon, how will that play in the race for U.S. Senate? If you are a Republican state representative or a Republican state senator and work across the aisle, those elected to national office, such as Sam Graves and Roy Blunt, will be able to question whether you are truly a Republican, or simply an opportunist.

Peter Kinder should step up and at least act the part of a statesman and put political differences aside for the good of the people. Do not expect that to happen. Kinder is also focused on the big bicycle race that is the 2010 race for United States Senate. He is not about to help Governor Nixon save the state and risk having the tires on his bike flattened before the 2010 starting gun is fired. Expect Kinder to talk about how much he is attempting to work with Governor Nixon while he stabs him in the back at every opportunity.

The Republicans still control both the houses of the state legislature. They will use this session to do everything in their power embarrass Governor Nixon. It may not be good for the people of Missouri, but this is not about the people, it is about the accumulation and use of power by the Republicans.

Democrats who brag about their ability to cross the aisle and work with the Republicans better wake up. Unless they are prepared to literally walk across the aisle and beat the opposition into submission with a brick bat, crossing the aisle will only demonstrate an ability to be a useful idiot.

It is a new day for the State of Missouri and the Democratic Party. It is a day that requires all good Democrats to take off the gloves and engage the enemy before the enemy wrecks Missouri in the name of Republican ideology. It is no time to be a pacifist. Turning the other cheek only provides your opponent a new target.

(Turn the page to Russ Purvis every week because he won’t turn the other cheek. Email him at russp842@yahoo.com)

SENATE HAS BECOME A COMEDY WRITER'S DREAM

Posted 1/9/09

2009 has barely begun and the United States Senate has already distinguished itself as a comedy writer’s dream come true. It is too bad that the issues the senate has to deal with are so deadly serious.

On the Republican side of the aisle, the gift for irony and great comedy timing presented itself for public ridicule this past weekend, when the Republican leadership in the senate spoke out against President-elect Obama's proposed tax cuts. How funny! This is the group that has argued that nothing short of massive tax cuts can save the economy.

In the “Let them eat cake” world of Republican politics, a tax cut that might benefit the poor is simply wrong. The funny thing is that if the tax cut was aimed at the Republicans' target audience, the rich and otherwise bailout worthy, it would be just fine. Apparently, only rich Republicans know how to properly spend the nation out of a recession. Poor people, Democrat and Republican alike, are simply too stupid to be trusted.

On the Democratic side of the aisle, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is always good for a few chuckles. The world is quite literally falling down around us but Harry has time to do a stand up routine about why it would be wrong to seat Roland Burris, President-elect Barack Obama's duly appointed successor in the United States Senate.

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich appointed Burris to fill the seat vacated by Obama. As everyone that does not live under a rock knows, Blago, prior to appointing Burris, allegedly attempted to profit from his power to appoint Obama's replacement. Although not yet indicted, calls have been made for Blago's resignation and his power to make the appointment has been questioned. The problem is that legally Blagojevich does have the power to appoint.

But Reid, a self professed “old trial lawyer,” the operative word being “old,” doesn't get it. I am guessing that he went into politics because he was not a very good trial lawyer. Because every good trial lawyer knows that your case needs a decent theme. The theme the Democrats should be using is “Change.” Unfortunately, Reid seems to believe that the theme is “Harry Reid is powerful and must be obeyed.”

Senator Reid's argument against Burris is that he is tainted by Blagojevich. If the senate had a no-taint standard, the chamber would be empty, save for the newly-elected senator from Minnesota, Al Franken.

After a long recount, Al Franken outpaced his opponent, Republican incumbent Norm Coleman, by 225 votes to win a seat in the senate. He did it because he is good enough, he is smart enough, and doggone it, people like him! Talk about comedic gold. It does not get any better than Senator Stuart Smalley being elected to the senate. Of course the Republicans are crying foul and claiming that the election has been stolen by Franken.

If Franken is that good of a criminal then he is certainly qualified to be a senator. The ironic thing is that the Republicans went nuts when Democrats accused the Shrub of stealing the 2000 election from Al Gore. Now that the shoe is on the other foot it is all about justice, democracy and the American way.

In this case, the American way involves Republican lawyers initiating frivolous lawsuits in an attempt to steal the seat from Franken. Keep in mind that these are the same Republicans that constantly yammer on about there being too many lawyers and lawsuits and that spend an inordinate amount of time pushing for tort deform and the creation of partisan judges.

Jon Stewart, Mad Magazine, and even the humorless Sean Hannity should be laugh-out-loud funny for the next several months thanks to the senate. The hilarious 100 may destroy the country, but at least we will all die laughing.

(Russ Purvis is chair of the Platte County Democratic Central Committee. He can be reached at Russp842@yahoo.com)

For columns from 2008