Left Brain Kansas

Left Brain Kansas merges with new Kansas blog

2008-11-21T17:18:00.003-06:00

Everyone has always said we behaved like jackasses, so we decided to make it official.

That's right, LBK has decided to merge with the newest Kansas blog, Kansas Jackass.

Check us out frequently to get your LBK fix as well as the best left-leaning bloggers in the state.

Pat Roberts and Ron Thornburgh duke it out.

2008-11-03T11:30:00.003-06:00

Two Kansas Republicans enter the Thunderdome, only one shall leave.

Pat Roberts and Ron Thornburgh are spending the waning days of the election arguing over who deserves credit for the increase in the total number of Republicans registered to vote in Kansas.

Roberts, predictably, credits himself. Whereas Thornburgh, a Republican who is already running for Governor, credits Barack Obama.

See our post from Friday or Boyda Bloc's excellent post from the other day.

Here is Roberts' self-aggrandizing press release.

TOPEKA, KS, — Senator Pat Roberts today said the Roberts for Senate campaign’s
comprehensive grassroots registration and advance voting program has increased
numbers for Republicans in all areas.

“Our campaign has run a technologically advanced grassroots operation across the state working with our local candidates to produce a large increase in Republican advance voting,” Senator Roberts said. “I am proud of my team and despite Democratic momentum on the national level, we have been able to build a sophisticated advance ballot program that has already achieved results in Kansas .”
Roberts’ comments come today as the Secretary of State released new voter registration data.
As of today, over 106,000 Republicans have requested advance ballots and over sixty-seven percent of those ballots have already been turned in. Republicans requested 30,000 more ballots than Democrats. Republicans maintain a large advantage in voter registration with 287,000 more registered Republicans than Democrats. Due to the Roberts for Senate field operation efforts, Republicans gained 32,000 registrants from June to October of this year.

“As I said when I announced my run back in January of 2007, I am the top of the ticket in Kansas and I intend to help all Republicans up and down the ballot. I am proud to say we have done just that. I look forward to Election Day as our turn out operation will provide positive results for Republicans in Kansas .”

Senator Roberts has set in-state fundraising records for a federal election since announcing his intention to run for re-election in 2008. Senator Roberts is running for his third term in the U.S. Senate.

Now, as we pointed out, the problem with Sen. Roberts' tooting his own horn is, you know, the facts don't back it up.

Truth: There are more registered Republicans in Kansas in 2008 than there were in 2004.

Also truth: The percentage of Republicans in terms of overall registration has DECLINED - from 46% to 44% - whereas the percentage of Democrats and Unaffiliated voters each went up by 1%.

Good work Pat, way to help Republicans.

BREAKING NEWS: LBK still exists and Christian Morgan is an idiot

2008-10-31T14:32:00.002-05:00

Ok, maybe only one of those things is really "breaking news." Sorry about the absence guys. All of our collaborators sort of informally decided that getting out and knocking on doors and turning out Democratic voters was more effective and more important than staring at this computer screen. However, we had to take a break to make fun of Christian Morgan some more.

First, Professor Obvious posts about John McCain and Pat Roberts leading in the polls. In a state that has only twice sent it's electoral votes to a Democrat, hasn't sent a Democrat to the Senate in like 80 years and where Republicans outnumber Democrats 2:1, congratulations, you're winning and winning big in those two races. Unfortunately for Christian (and his job prospects) those are really the ONLY competitive races where Republicans have reason to brag.
Curious that Christian doesn't brag about Lynn Jenkins' chances in this post. Or Nick Jordan. Maybe it's because while he was surfing the Survey USA website, he saw this poll. Not looking good for Nick Jordan in the "Republican stronghold" of Johnson County.

Then we have today's post, where he brags about Republicans having 30,000 more advanced ballot requests than Democrats (in a state where there are 287,000 more Republicans than Demcorats.)

Yet in the very same Survey USA poll Christian linked to only a day earlier, we find this nuget.

In Kansas, McCain Up 25 Among Those Likely to Vote ... But Up By Just 4 Among
Those Who Have Already Voted:

Among those that have already voted, Obama is beating his overall performance by TWENTY-ONE POINTS. Yet Christian Morgan still wants to claim that the Republicans are winning the battle of advance voting?

Then, he brags that Republicans have registered 32,000 new voters. Interesting that he doesn't mention how many new Democrats have registered.

From the Wichita Eagle.

In 2004, 46 percent of Kansas voters were registered Republican while
independent and Democratic voters each made up 26 percent of registered voters,
Thornburgh said. In 2008, registered Republicans dropped to 44 percent and
independent and Democratic voters each made up 27 percent of registered voters.

Just more proof you can make statistics say whatever you want -- if you leave out half of them.

Jenkins campaign refuses to take stand

2008-09-17T14:02:00.003-05:00

The Lynn Jenkins campaign has attacked Nancy Boyda for her vote yesterday on a comprimise "Drill baby, drill!" bill.

But wait, I thought Lynn wanted to drill? She would support this bill too then, right?

“I cannot tell you specifically the bill she would or would not have voted for since Lynn's not in Congress, but what I sent you before is the criteria she would follow,” said Josh Hersh in an e-mail to the Lawrence Journal-World.

Oh, I see. You're willing to criticize others for voting for the bill, but not willing to say you would've voted against it. Brilliant.

Hersh did say that Jenkins would vote for a similar bill, as long as it was a compromise.

“Lynn would have voted for a compromise, bipartisan bill that was crafted by Republicans and Democrats. She would not have supported a political gimmick that's been declared dead on arrival by a Democrat senator.”

But this bill IS a compromise!

The original bill called for allowing drilling 100 miles off the coast. Republicans wanted 25, so the bill was amended to 50. If this isn't compromise, I don't know what is.

Will Christian Morgan criticize Sarah Palin for going to a basketball game?

2008-09-10T10:57:00.002-05:00

In a recent AP story, it has come out that Sarah Palin charged the state a per diem allowance on Thanksgiving Day 2007 so she could attend the Great Alaska Shootout, a college basketball tournament.

Will Christian Morgan criticize her like he did Kathleen Sebelius for attending major sporting events involving the University of Kansas and Kansas State University? Or is this just a Governor acting in her ceremonial role?

I think we all know the answer. Don't you hate it when you're idiotic partisan attacks come home to roost, Christian?

Pat Roberts: Don't blame the Senate Intelligence Committee for faulty intelligence

2008-09-10T08:21:00.004-05:00

At what appears to be a rare debate between US Senator Pat Roberts and his challenger, former Democratic Congressman Jim Slattery, Roberts said that he shouldn't be held accountable for helping usher the US into the wrong war at the wrong time using faulty intelligence.

Just because he was the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee in charge of overseeing all of that nonsense, doesn't mean he should be responsible for matters relating to intelligence oversight, apparently.

You see, Pat says that since his committee released a report (a couple of years after they were supposed to) that sort of kind of admitted that we screwed up, he should get a pass on being the one in charge when the screw-up happened. No joke, folks.

Roberts countered that the world, not just the U.S., got the intelligence wrong -- and once that was realized it was his committee that made the information public. Several audience members laughed at Roberts' statement.
Unfazed, Roberts continued: "Jim, you wouldn't even know about this information except for the fact I released it."

OK, first of all, EVERYONE knew the intelligence was faulty, it was only a matter of those who were willing to admit it. Second of all, Roberts should not get a pass for admitting he was a worthless chair, especially when it took him so long to do it.

Memory Pills Roberts has got to go. Forty years is long enough.

More lies about Obama

2008-09-09T08:05:00.004-05:00

I received the latest email spewing lies about Barack Obama from one of my college buddies. It proports to be written by a man named Chuck Green, who apparently is a "journalist."

Like you, when I heard that John McCain had selected Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, I said, “Who?”

As the details emerged over the next couple of hours, I was even more puzzled. Barely two years into statewide office, former mayor of a town of fewer than 7,000 citizens, caribou hunter, hockey mom, commercial fisherwoman, former pageant winner, PTA mother of five.

Had McCain lost his mind?

But, as the hours passed and dusk turned to dawn, other aspects of her life started to surface, and the surprising choice started to become more sensible.

Could Sarah Palin actually be more qualified than say, Barack Obama, to become president, should something tragic happen to the 72-year-old McCain? The comparisons of Palin and Obama started to come into sharper focus.

They both have only one house - although his is a $1.8 million mansion, and hers is a standard family house worth about $160,000.

Let's not pretend these two numbers are directly comparable. Something tells me the same house in Wasilla, AK is not going to be "worth" the same amount as it would be if you transplanted the same house to Chicago, IL. Also, I don't think the McCain camp wants to use the value of one's real estate as a measuring stick by which we determine if one is fit for office.

As a member of the Wasilla City Council, she didn’t vote “present” on any issues, while Obama voted “present” about 160 times while he was a legislator in Illinois. She hasn’t been afraid to take stands on tough issues, then face the consequences on the Main Street of Wasilla the next morning.

Voting present is a symbolic gesture. The end result is not changed. This is a weak argument. Sure, 160 times is a lot, but I don't care. Also, something tells me that Ms. Palin wasn't subjected to votes with the same level of importance when she was on the governing body of her village.

One of her first acts as mayor was to fire the town’s trouble-making police chief. Obama found it heart-wrenching to fire his racism-spewing, hate-mongering pastor.

Pray-tell, what trouble did he make? She also tried to fire the "trouble-making" librarian because she wouldn't let her pull books from the shelves that offended her Christian sensibilities, an act that damn near got her re-called before her first term was up. The official reason for these terminations? Failure to cooperate with the administration. No lie, check it out.

She resigned her post as an Alaskan oil and gas commissioner because she thought her Republican colleagues were too cozy with the executives of oil and gas companies. Obama hasn’t even denounced his self-acclaimed friend, William Ayers, the radical leftist who helped bomb U.S. facilities in the 1960s and who continues to advocate anti-American sentiments.

First off, politicians call everyone their "dear, dear friend." If they remember your name and you're a supporter, you're friends. Secondly, if we held every politician accountable for the 40 year-old actions of their political acquaintances, no one would be in office. McCain was a member of the Keating 5 and his father-in-law did business with the mob. Mr. Palin was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a radical secessionist organization. Hell, Sarah Palin even did this video for them.

She campaigned, and won, the governor’s seat in a scrappy fight against a powerful Republican incumbent in her continuing crusade against corruption and unethical practices in Alaska. Obama has rarely even cast a vote against members of his own party.

Of course, he authored landmark campaign finance and ethics reforms his first year in office, but that doesn't really fit with your strategy in this column, does it Chuck? Palin's "crusade against corruption" is almost as much of a joke as McCain's. Palin secured $720 million in earmarks for Alaska in her first 20 months as Governor. When she was mayor of Mayberry, she hired a lobbying firm that brought in $27 million in earmarks for her tiny little village. She supported the bridge to nowhere, she was endorsed by indicted Senator Ted Stevens and she even ran his shady 527 PAC. But, I guess it's not like she was a member of the Keating 5 or anything.

She has successfully governed a state with enormous environmental, economic, strategic and corruption issues. Obama has never governed anything; he has simply cast votes, one among hundreds of others who have no accountability for their actions.

So, let me get this straight, when Palin was on the Maybery City Council, she showed leadership and earned valuable experience. When Obama was in the Illinois and United States Senate, all he did was cast votes. What did John McCain do in his nearly three decades in Congress?

There is a big difference between someone making daily decisions as an executive, and one among hundreds who voices an opinion.

Are these the same "daily decisions" that Mayor Palin made that took the town of Wasilla from being almost completely debt free to being tens of millions of dollars in debt? That caused a village to build a multi-million dollar ice-skating rink when they didn't have sewer or storm water treatment? Or to break ground on said ice-skatin rink before you even had the deed to the property, resulting in millions of dollars in legal fees to fight litigation?

Palin has said “no” to hundreds of millions in federal handouts to Alaska; Obama has never turned away federal money and advocates spending billions and billions more.

See above. This isn't even just flawed logic, it's an outright lie. I'll tell myself that Mr. Green is just a lazy journalist and not a partisan hack promoting something he knows to be untrue.

Palin has governed a state that borders the former Soviet Union and Canada. Obama has served in the legislature of a state that borders Iowa

.LOL. If I wasn't so jaded, I'd be outraged by this statement. But I just can't help but laugh. Where do I begin. First, Alaska does not share a border with Russia, and hasn't for, you know, eons. Back during the days of Pangea, it probably shared a border with Africa too, does that make Palin uniquely qualified to solve the AIDS crisis?

Second, the Soviet Union no longer exists. Could you guys try a little bit harder to prove you haven't gotten over the Cold War mindset.

Also, to be fair, Illinois also borders Indiana and Wisconsin. And Canada is practically on the other side of Lake Michigan (OK, it isn't really, there's that pesky Upper Peninsula of Michigan, but if Alaska can be said to border the ~~Soviet Union~~ ~~Commonwealth of Independent States~~ Russia, I can say Illinois borders Canada.

Even if this argument mattered, I say we elect baseball player Curt Schilling President. He's from Alaska, and he won a baseball game with his Achilles tendon exposed. One word: hero.

Palin has been to the Middle East and has a son in the Army who will be deployed to Iraq next week. Obama visited Iraq for two days a few weeks ago.

See Biden, Joe. Next.

Palin has governed a state twice the size of France, with rave reviews; Obama has governed nothing.

WTF? Since when was the total acreage of your state a determining factor in your competency and ability to govern. Perhaps we should elect Vladmir Putin to be head of the UN. I mean, Russia is the biggest country in the world, so he

Chew on this, Alaska has about 760,000 people. The greater Kansas City metro-area has about 1.9 million people.

Palin has worked the last couple of years on the job, earning her salary as governor. Obama has spent the last couple of years collecting a salary as U.S. senator, but spending most of his job running for the Democrat nomination for the presidency.

Again, not a fight John McCain wants to start. His attendance record is even worse than Obama's.

Palin’s spouse has spent his life working the hard tasks of an Alaskan commercial fisherman and oil pipeline supervisor; Obama’s spouse has worked as a hospital public-relations executive earning more than $200,000 a year.

How is a spouse's income/employment relevant? I don't begrudge John McCain for marrying hot rich girls, I just pray for Cindy's sake she doesn't get in a car accident.

The Obama's worked hard, they got a good education and they made themselves some money. Sure they were the least rich of all 50 people running for President from both parties, but let's paint them to be rich elitists anyway (says the man who married into a beer-distribution fortune worth nearly $100 million)

Palin has made the agonizing life-and-death decision over whether to abort a Down Syndrome baby and now faces the challenge of helping her 17-year-old daughter through a pregnancy; the Obamas have the blessings of two healthy, beautiful daughters with the difficult years still ahead of them.

I'll let Samantha Bee answer this one.

The contrasts go on and on, and in each instance Obama seems to be on the short end of experience and tough decisions.

America is no longer asking, “Sarah Who?”

You're right, they know who she is, and know she isn't fit to be Vice President.

Email Chuck at chuckgreencolo@msn.com and let him know you're tired of people spreading lies.

Lynn Jenkins: more of the same

2008-09-03T14:40:00.004-05:00

Another day, another example: Lynn Jenkins is Jim Ryun 2.0. (Like upgrading from Windows XP to Windows Vista, sure it's an upgrade, but is it really any better?)

Remember when the DCCC dropped some money into the Kansas 2nd and Christian Morgan and Lynn Jenkins got their panties in a bunch, blaming Boyda even though she has no control over who spends money on her race?

Well, Boyda proved her independence by telling the DCCC to get out of her race - and they decided to listen.

So one would think that Jenkins, in her quixotic effort to bring about "new Republican leadership," would do the same when the national Republicans dropped money into her race.

Wrong.

First she did nothing when Freedom's Watch, a shady 527 with ties to Dick Cheney and his fellow White House cronies, ran misleading advertisements in the 2nd District.

“It’s free speech,” Jenkins said. “Let anybody come tell their story and let the voters sort it out.”

Now, the NRCC has announced that they're going to spend $580,000 on ads in Kansas during the final two weeks of the election. (See here, here and here)

Who does Lynn Jenkins think she is?! She's screaming "foul" and playing dirty at the same time!

Jenkins is trying to trick us, but she's the same old politician with the same old Washington buddies who spend the same old K Street dollars so they can pull the puppet strings come January.

Move over John McCain

2008-09-03T07:57:00.000-05:00

Old, Grizzled Third-Party Candidate May Steal Support From McCain

Mommy Palin failed US History

2008-09-02T14:51:00.004-05:00

From a 2006 survey by the Alaska Daily news...

11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?

Sarah Palin: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.

Praytell Mommy Palin, to which "founding father" are you referring?

You see, the Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 by a socialist minister named Frances Bellamy. Moreover, the phrase "Under God" wasn't even included in the original pledge, it was added much later, in 1951....by the Knights of Columbus.

Country First, right Mommy Palin?

Thoughts on Mommy Sarah

2008-09-02T07:35:00.004-05:00

After Grandpa John's pick of former small-town mayor and less-than-half-term Governor Sarah Palin has had a few days to percolate, we thought we'd offer a few random thoughts on the selection.

1) It is the most shallow selection of a running mate we have seen in our years of following politics. It's clear that Palin was selected for 1 1/2 reasons. She was selected because she's a woman, plain and simple. She is one-dimensional. Though she may carry Alaska's whopping three electoral votes for McCain (which he might have won anyway), it's clear by her announcement speech that her purpose is to target so-called disaffected Hillary voters.

Will some Clinton supporters vote for McCain? Probably, maybe even because of this selection. But the pick shows just how stupid McCain, Rove and his team think women really are. We think most women out there are smart enough to realize who agrees with them and who doesn't, and your average Hillary supporter is going to take one look at Mommy Sarah and realize that she is anti-choice (no exceptions), pro-assault rifles (no exceptions), anti-evolution (no exceptions) and pro-abstinence only sex education (how'd that work?).

2) How experienced is she? It amuses me that Republicans said Kathleen Sebelius didn't have the experience to be VP. You know, like 10 years in the Kansas House, eight years as Kansas Insurance Commissioner and six years as Kansas Governor. Now these very same people are clamoring about what a "great pick" mommy (or should I say grandma?) Sarah is and how her "executive experience" makes her the most prepared of the four candidates. Then why isn't she on the top of the ticket?

Sure, she's spent more total years in elected office than has Barack Obama, who spent seven years in the Illinois State Senate before being elected to the United States Senate in 2004, but does any of her past experience translate to being Vice President, a weak heartbeat away from being the leader of the free world? She was a city councilwoman and then mayor of a village, not a city, not a town, but a village, in ALASKA! A tenure marked by hiring and firing controversies for which she's had to hire a lawyer.

3) She fought corruption. Right. She asked several city employees, including the LIBRARIAN, to resign for "not supporting her administration. In her announcement speech, she made it seem like she single-handedly slay the infamous bridge to nowhere, which was actually stripped by Congress. But in fact, she worked for corrupt/indicted Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens (author of the earmark) from 2003 - 2005, serving as a director of his 526 group.

4) She's a crazy right-winger. She supported Pat Buchannan's Presidential run in 1996. 'Nuff said.

5) Is her family really off limits? Probably. But it bothers me when candidates use their family for political points and say "Look at how wholesome and pure our family values are" and then when it inevitably comes out that they are anything but, families become off limits. This applies to both parties. Ultimately, the fact that her family-values-abstinence-only fiefdom of seven includes a kid who got knocked up doesn't have anything to do with her ability to be Vice President, but if she wants to paint herself as pro-family and morally superior, as the Christian Right does, then she better make sure she can back it up.

6) What kind of mother with a five-month old special-needs child and a pregnant daughter thinks now would be a good time to get thrown into the national limelight? "Now Bristol, I know you're pregnant, but mommy has political aspirations, so you're just going to have to be made to feel like a whore by the media for awhile, OK?" I'm sure the nanny they hire if she becomes Vice President will be great with the baby too.

7) I wish the media would figure out how they're going to pronounce her name and stick with it. Is it Pal-lin? Pay-lin? Pay-leen? Puh-lynn? I don't care if it's correct, can we just make it uniform?

Liberal Media? Hardly.

2008-08-29T13:54:00.002-05:00

Yet another study shows McCain gets more positive press than Obama.

This is evident today when CNN raved about how Mayor Palin (who is currently under investigation for interfering in personnel matters relating to her ex-brother-in-law) is "just like John McCain" because she "fights corruption."

I guess they're both alike in that they fight all the corrupt politicians...except themselves.

Campaign irony

2008-08-29T08:49:00.003-05:00

Does it ever dawn on McCain and the Republicans that before they attack Obama they should think about if the attack could be applied just as well (if not better) to them?

Like Pat Roberts, who's been in Washington since the early 60's, criticizing Jim Slattery for being a "Washington insider" or McCain saying that Obama's rhetoric doesn't match his record, now we hear word that John McCain is going to select Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as Vice President.

Her experience? She served two terms on the Wasilla City Council, served as mayor of the town, lost an election to be Alaska Lt. Governor and attempted in vain to be appointed to the United States Senate. She then served two years as Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission before resigning and has now served two years as Governor of Alaska.

So, she's been in city politics, in Alaska, of a town less than 9,000 people, and she's been Governor for two years.

Is the Vice President's experience as important as the President's? Is the President's experience important at all? Well, John McCain obviously thinks it is.

Let's be honest here, at 72, the chances of John McCain surviving two terms ain't so good. Crass? Maybe, but because of his age his choice of Vice President becomes even more important. If John McCain wins the Presidency, his Vice President has a pretty darn good chance of ascending to the Presidency.

I'm sure all that "executive experience" she learned in Wasilla, Alaska will help her immensely. Then again, maybe McCain is just picking her so he can bag Alaska's three electoral votes.

So, if it's Sebelius' fault when jobs are lost, it must also be to her credit when they're created, right?

2008-08-28T09:28:00.003-05:00

If you ask Christian Morgan, anytime a private company makes a decision to either cut jobs or not to create them in Kansas, the blame lies at the feet of Kathleen Sebelius. Not the Republican-dominated legislature, not Congress, not the President, but Kathleen Sebelius.

So, one must expect a post over at the Trunkline commending Sebelius for Spirit Aerosystems recent decision to build a new plane in Wichita, creating nearly 700 high-paying, permanent jobs in Kansas, right?

Wrong.

Honestly, we don't know what role if any Kathleen Sebelius played in this decision. But that's the point. These decisions are made by private companies. It'd be one thing if a government entity decided to ship Kansas jobs overseas without any help from the people in whose districts the jobs should be (see: Boeing; Roberts, Pat; Tiahrt, Todd).

Here at LBK, we think the pro-business climate created in Kansas by Sebelius and her Lt. Governors John Moore (a former executive at Cessna, who will work with Spirit to build the planes) and Mark Parkinson certainly didn't hurt.

Intentionally ironic, blissfully ignorant or willfully hypocritical?

2008-08-26T12:22:00.006-05:00

Which is it GOP?

The Republican National Committee has launched a new feature on their Web site where they countdown the time until the next "gaffe" from Joe Biden, complete with a video of him calling Obama "Barack America."

Seriously? The party of George W. Bush wants to make gaffes an issue. The sitting President from their party has contributed a new word to our political lexicon referring to his repeated gaffes.

Or how about John McCain? The supposed expert on foreign policy isn't sure which factions of Islam are fighting against each other (but somehow thinks he is better suited to protect us against them) or even that Czechoslovakia is no longer a country.

So, would you rather have a Vice President who in a major speech transposes words, or a President who is an idiot. When Biden misspeaks, its a gaffe, when McCain forgets that Czechoslovakia split into the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic, you know, 15 years ago, what is that?

New poll shows Boyda wins, drilling loses

2008-08-26T07:11:00.004-05:00

As seen on Boyda Bloc and Swing State Project, a Survey USA poll commissioned by the Washington D.C. newspaper Roll Call shows Nancy Boyda beating Lynn Jenkins, CPA 50-43.

We'd like to dig a little deeper into some of the cross tabs of this poll.

1) The poll posed the question "If two candidates were running for Congress, and one says that offshore drilling is the best way to solve America's energy problems ... and the other says that America needs to identify and promote alternative sources of energy ... which candidate would you vote for?" and 56% of the people chose the candidate who wanted to identify and promote alternative resources. Once again, Kansas Republicans are on the wrong side of an issue.

2) McCain is beating Obama pretty handily, but not keeping pace even with George Bush's 2004 performance. We've said on this blog before, in all likelihood McCain will win Kansas, but if he wins it with 50-55%, that 5-10% drop could send people like Jim Slattery and Donald Betts to Washington.

3) 46% of voters have a favorable opinion of Nancy Boyda compared to only 36% of voters who have a favorable opinion of Lynn Jenkins. A staggering 45% of voters have either a neutral opinion of Lynn Jenkins or they just flat out don't know who the hell she is. Given the fact that she has been elected to statewide office twice and just won a pretty contested and well-covered primary, this ain't so good for Jenky.

4) Remember how Lynn Jenkins is so "moderate" and Nancy Boyda is so "liberal"? Well, among self-identified moderates, Nancy Boyda is winning 47%-42%. Conservatives side with Lynn 85% of the time. Only 28% of moderates have a favorable opinion of Lynn Jenkins. Don't worry Lynn, you've got George Bush coming to town...

5) The poll shows Kansans have a 36% approval rating of George W Bush, slightly higher than the national average, but pretty abysmal for a "deep red" state. Bush's approval rating among moderates? 24%.

6) Though the Ryun/Jenkins primary didn't feature the kind of fireworks many thought it would, it is clear there have been some lingering affects. Jenkins garners the support of a mere 70% of Republicans, compared to 88% of Democrats supporting Nancy Boyda.

In the end, it's hard to find any positives for Jenkins in this poll. Yes, she's only 7% down, but with this data unless she changes her strategy some (see Bush, drilling) you have to think she's pretty much at her ceiling. Her best hope is that some of the right-wingers will come to realize she is one of them, and Bush swooping in should help in that regard, but Jim Ryun can tell you how that worked for him in 2006.

The poll was conducted August 19-21 and includes 620 likely voters. It has a margin of error of +/- 4%

Obama/Biden 2008

2008-08-23T13:54:00.002-05:00

After all the hoaxes and speculation finally subsided, it came out late last night that the Obama campaign had settled on Deleware Senator Joe Biden as their veep over Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh, Virginia Govenor (and Kansas native) Tim Kaine and our own Gov. Kathleen Sebelius.

Here at LBK, were reasonbly pleased with the pick. Though we would've loved to see Sebelius and are slightly worried that Biden's 36-year career in the Senate might undermine the "change" theme somewhat, in the end his foreign-policy experience easily balances out any possible negatives he could have.

The McCain camp doesn't even use that argument however, instead deciding to use the selection of a veep with unquestioned policy credentials to...attack Obama for not being experienced.

John, we get it. Obama hasn't been in the Senate very long. Everyone knows, and the ones that care enough to vote for you were probably going to vote for you anyway. Let's move on, shall we?

But beyond that, is it really all that remarkable that Biden said those things about Obama? He was, after all, his opponent in an election.

I'm sure that if you pick Mitt Romney, as many believe you intend to, your differences from the past election are irrelevant.

Also, you definitely don't change your position on issues.

Or on which candidates you support.

Obama/Bayh

2008-08-22T17:11:00.000-05:00

A Lenexa print shop is reportedly printing Obama/Bayh bumper stickers.

We'll keep you posted.

WTF?

2008-08-21T13:57:00.000-05:00

The Kansas Republican Assembly has officially lost their marbles.

Double Standard?

2008-08-20T16:22:00.002-05:00

Where is the blog post from Christian Morgan complaining about how Sen. Sam Brownback's decision to speak at the Republican National Convention is an example of him skirting his duties as an elected official?

I'm sure they won't make any such claims about Gov. Sebelius.

Riiiiiiiiight.

Jenkins and Jordan: More of the same

2008-08-20T12:10:00.004-05:00

Lynn Jenkins and Nick Jordan are starting to look awfully alike. Both are former members of the Kansas Legislature of whom no one has heard. Both are campaigning to "fix Washington" and "bring in new Republican leadership." And both can't help but surround themselves with the same tired old Republican cronies who they fume about on the campaign trail.

Jordan has already brought in George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to raise money for his longshot campaign against Dennis Moore. Now NRCC chairman and Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole has graced our state with his presence. But Nick, I thought you were campaigning to change Washington? If so, why bring in all the GOP bigshots? Oh, right, because your campaign is a sham.

And Lynn Jenkins? Remember her "New Republican Leadership"? Well, word on the street is Bush will bring his old Republican leadership to campaign for Lynn. Boyda Bloc did a wonderful job of pointing out how the "moderate" Lynn Jenkins couldn't even wait a week after Jim Ryun lost the primary to hob knob with the GOP elite in Kansas.

Jenkins and Jordan offer one thing and one thing only: more of the same failed policies and misplaced priorities.

Kansas Board of Education

2008-08-14T08:06:00.000-05:00

Sometimes, races like the State Board of Education get lost in the shuffle. With 165 legislative seats, four seats in the US House, the US Senate, the President and competitive DA races in Shawnee and Johnson County, the media and political parties and activists only have so much attention to go around.

However, here in Kansas, the BOE's low profile races can have high profile consequences. Therefore, here at LeftBrain, we will try to keep you all informed with regular updates about the board races here in Kansas.

District 2: Mary C Ralston (R) vs. Sue Storm (D):

Ralston was able to defeat uber-conservative blogger Brandon Kenig in the primary. Storm is a former legislator. This seat was formally held by moderate Republican Sue Gamble, who went on to lose to nutter Mary Pilcher Cook in a state Senate primary. Obviously, we prefer Democrats, but at the end of the day either of these candidates will maintain the pro-science majority.

District 4: Carolyn Campbell (D) vs. Bob Meissner (R):

Meissner is a crazy, plain and simple. Check out Carolyn Campbell's web site, send her some money or volunteer for her campaign. Meissner hates Darwin.

District 6: Christopher Renner (D) vs. Kathy Martin (R, inc.):

If you look up radical right-wing Christian nut job in the dictionary, Kathy Martin's picture will be next to it. She ousted a moderate Republican incumbent in 2004 and hasn't looked back. She got a scare from a mod in the primary, winning by only a couple points, so this seat is winnable and Chris Renner is a credible candidate, but Martin always seems to pull it out, so Chris will need all the support he can get. You can check out his web site here.

District 8: Walt Chappell (D) vs. Dennis Hedke (R)

Same song, different verse. Chappell will support the teaching of science in science class, Hedke won't. Chappell's Web site is here.

District 10: Paul Casanova (D) vs. David Dennis (R):

Dennis is a pro-science candidate, but even after his opponent "decided not to campaign," his primary was still very close. This is not a good sign. Either way though, it looks like this seat is a guaranteed pro-Science vote.

The truism of the moderate Lynn Jenkins

2008-08-13T07:27:00.003-05:00

Normally, we don't like to blame things on the media. Reminds us too much of Phill Kline, however, a few things have begun to bother us about the local media's coverage of the 2nd District race.

First, without any real reason, Lynn Jenkins has been anointed a moderate. Tell me, on what issue is Lynn Jenkins moderate? Just because she isn't as conservative as Jim Ryun, who was ranked the MOST conservative member of Congress by the National Journal.

Does that mean folks like Duncan Hunter and Tom DeLay are moderates too? They were in the House at the same time as Jimmy, so apparently since they're less conservative than he is, they're moderates.

Of course they're not, and neither is Lynn Jenkins. I challenge any Jenkins supporter reading this blog to post in the comment section ONE ISSUE on which Lynn Jenkins could truly be considered a moderate.

People call her pro-choice, but in reality she supports exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother. You know, like EVERYONE ELSE WHO ISN'T COMPLETELY INSANE.

In reality, as Blue Tide Rising and Boyda Bloc have both correctly pointed out, and Lynn has even stated herself, Ryun and Jenkins have just about the same positions on nearly every meaningful topic.

Both want to deport everyone with a hint of brown in their skin. Both want to make the irresponsible Bush tax cuts for the super-rich permanent. Both refuse any kind of meaningful withdrawal from Iraq until we "win," whatever that means.

Beyond that though, the media seems to be obsessed with Lynn's victory in the primary. Understandably, it was a major upset and Lynn and her campaign deserve some credit for getting the job done.

But let's be honest here, Lynn Jenkins did not win that primary so much as Jim Ryun lost it. She still has a major name recognition problem. Jim Ryun was just SO BAD during his 10 years in Congress, Republican primary voters just wanted him to go away. This isn't a sign of some major shift to the center in Republican primary voters (remember, Lynn is still a conservative) it just means they're sick of Jim Ryun.

Shocker: favors, corruption and cronyism in the Bush administration

2008-08-12T11:45:00.003-05:00

Word has come down that Flora, Miss., has been selected by the Department of Homeland Secruity as a finalist to receive the National Bio-and-Agro Defense Facility.

No biggie, right?

The problem is Flora received the 3rd lowest favorability rating of the 17 potential sites by consultants hired to study the matter.

Leavenworth, which received a 92 compared to Flora's 81, was eliminated as a finalist.

Obviously, this stings more because Leavenworth is in Kansas as is Manhattan, another finalist for the facility which received a score of 91, but it would be troubling even if it didn't affect our home state.

It's troubling because a bureaucrat in Washington ignored the opinions of professionals and experts based on what are at least somewhat political calculations.

Homeland Security’s Undersecretary Jay Cohen chose Mississippi to be in the final group. A department spokeswoman, Amy Kudwa, told the AP that the agency’s internal committee reviews “did not appropriately consider the unique contributions certain consortia committed to make in their proposals.” Mississippi, for example, promised to work closely with Battelle Memorial Institute, a Homeland Security contractor that already manages some national labs elsewhere for the Homeland Security and Energy departments.

Anytime the word "contractor" is in there, it should be cause for concern. Even more troubling, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee on Homeland Security is from, you guessed it, Mississippi. The ranking Republican on the Senate committee charged with funding the project? You guessed it, from Mississippi.

We here at LBK would love for the project to go to either Leavenworth or Manhattan, but in the end we just want a process free of corruption (or at least as free as can be expected in Washington) and for the site that is truly the best fit to be selected.

Maybe it's too much to ask, but you would think that of all places, Homeland Security should be the last place where politics trump prudence.

Primary results thread: How'd we do?

2008-08-06T08:02:00.006-05:00

We had a bit of everything yesterday; some shockers, some races that were quite literally as close as you can get and some laughers. Here's our self-promoting/self-deprecating results thread.

Jim Slattery def. Lee Jones, 69-31: Correct. Jones got more votes than I think some people predicted, but Slattery still won comfortably. There were undoubtedly some anti-Slattery votes in there from people who have seen nothing but Pat Roberts' slanderous ads, but much like Hillary Clinton supporters eventually going with Obama, the majority of these voters will still vote D come November.

Lynn Jenkins def. Jim Ryun 51-49: WRONG! If they were being totally honest, We think even Jenkins' team would have told you they were concerned heading into election night. No one, and I mean no one, saw this coming. Nancy Boyda's upset of Jim Ryun in 2006 was a shocker, but this is even more surprising than that race. Perhaps there were private polls that indicated Jenkins was surging, but we haven't heard of them. We suspect there was a great deal of "Who the hell is Lynn Jenkins. Oh well, she isn't Jim Ryun."

Nick Jordan def. Paul Showen, 76-24: Correct. Maybe a little bit of anti-Jordan sentiment in the 3rd District? Showen was even less known than Lee Jones and he didn't do a lick of campaigning, so 24% seems a little high, but it's all academic and won't have a substantial affect on the November race.

Kelly Kultala def. Mark Gilstrap(i), 61-39: Correct. And the first incumbent goes down. Some people were saying Gilstrap was safe, and while we predicted Kultala, we have to admit we didn't expect the margin to be this big. Democrats in the 5th Senate District sent a clear message that Mark Gilstrap is not one of them. This will be a race to watch come November.

Tim Owens def. Ben Hodge, 60-40: Correct. Let's all just hope and pray this signals the end of Ben Hodge's brief yet annoying political career.

Mary Pilcher Cook def. Sue Gamble, 57-44: Correct. A rare win for the conservative wing of the Republican Party on this night.

Bob Marshall def. Jacob LaTurner, 55-45: Correct. This will be another race to watch in November.

Dwayne Umbarger(i) def. Iris VanMeter, 63-38: Correct. Another big win for a moderate over a conservative. Not a good day for conservative candidates at all.

Mark Taddiken(i) def. Paul Barkey, 81-19: Correct. Wow, Barkey did even worse in a primary than he did in the 2004 General Election for the 66th House District. Again, conservative loses and loses bad.

Pete Brungart(i) def. Tom Arpke, 51-49: Correct. This one was MUCH closer than we expected, but Brungart pulled it out.

Oletha Faust-Goudeau def. K.C. Ohaeboisim, 71-30: Correct. A solid win for Faust-Goudeau, moreso than we expected.

Steve Abrams def. George Leach, 60-40: Correct. Former KS BOE members are 1-for-2.

Ruth Teichman(i) def. Andrew Evans, 57-43: Correct. Another race that was surprisingly close, but in the end another loss for conservatives.

Bill Otto(i) def. Sheila Lampe, 65-35: Correct. Repeat of 2006 primary.

John Skubal def. James Walker, 54-46: Correct. Moderate defeats conservative. Does anyone detect a pattern?

August Bogina def. John Crabtree, 58-42: Correct. A lot of people liked Crabtree in this race, but Bogina was able to pull it out. Conservatives take one.

Andy Sandler def. Mike Slattery, 50-50: Incorrect...for now. For those of you who don't believe every vote counted, as of right now these two are three votes apart. Expect a recount, we'll keep you posted.

Sean Gatewood def. Dustin Hardison, 52-41: Incorrect. After doing so well in the state senate, we're struggling somewhat in these house races.

Don Schroeder(i) def. Mitch Powell, 70-30: Correct. Not to sound like a broken record, but another conservative challenger gets crushed.

Peggy Mast(i) def. Tony Trimble, 57-43: Correct. An incumbent getting only 57% in a primary is never a good sign, but in the end she won by a comfortable margin.

Peter DeGraaf(i) def. Jeri Anderson, 51-34: Correct. Ah the power of several hours worth of incumbency.

Gail Finney def. Inga Taylor, 57-43: Incorrect. A solid win for a candidate who was drastically outspent.

Virginia Beamer(i) def. Don Hineman, 50-50: Incorrect...for now. Another amazingly close race, Beamer held off her very well-funded challenger by five votes. Again, expect a recount.

Mary Ralston def. Brandon Kenig, 54-46: Correct. It's disturbing that Kenig managed 46%.

Kathy Martin(i) def. Bill Pannbacker, 52-48: Correct. Another win for the conservatives. Martin looked to be in danger for much of the night as Pannbacker had it within a few hundred votes late, but as the final precincts came in, Martin was able to expand her lead.

Steve Howe def. Phill Kline, 60-40: Incorrect. As much as we'd love to see Phill Kline in another election, at the end of the day the risk of him still being an elected official was just too great. We're glad we were wrong on this one. Unfortunately, we're not convinced we've seen the last of ol' Phill.

Eric Rucker def. Bob Hecht(i), 64-36: Correct. One of only two incumbents to lose in the major primaries (assuming Beamer's recount holds up), Hecht was in trouble from the word go. Kline will be able to focus his energy on electing his protege Rucker.

Chad Taylor def. Jerry Berger, 70-31: Correct. A solid win for Taylor who will draw the entire conservative machine. Given today's results, we're not convinced he should be too worried.

25 out of 29, not bad if we do say so ourselves :)

Thoughts from the peanut gallery?

Primary predictions: cleanup edition

2008-08-05T10:28:00.003-05:00

It appears we forgot two very important legislative primaries.

Kansas Senate, District 14, Republican:
Dwayne Umbarger(i) vs. Iris Van Meter: Van Meter is another first class nut A former member of the state BOE and one of the architects of all the nonsense that body has been up to over the last several years. Thayer is in her 70s, but she has a pretty solid history of winning these primaries. Umbarger has spent nearly $30,000 and still has $40,000 left so it'll be a tough race. Umbarger.

Kansas House, District 76, Republican
Peggy Mast(i) vs. Tony Trimble: Mast is part of the "The Mexicans are taking over America" wing of the Republican party. She was the chair of the GOP's 50 Ideas Committee that went nowhere. But she's also a powerful incumbent with $10,000 in her warchest even after spending nearly $9,000 on the primary. Trimble has spent nearly $7,000, but he's out of money and still has a tough row to hoe. Mast.

HAPPY PRIMARY DAY

2008-08-05T08:50:00.001-05:00

Phill Kline/Steve Howe, Jim Ryun/Lynn Jenkins, Shawnee County DA, several incumbents being challenged for legislative seats. It doesn't get much better than this. This is your open thread. We've posted our predictions already, so let's hear yours! Also, please post comments, rants, anything you've got. Enjoy and don't forget to VOTE!

Primary predictions: Kansas House, KS BOE

2008-08-04T17:52:00.002-05:00

Though we skipped a few state Senate races in our previous post, we attempted to address each primary, even the one's that were a foregone conclusion. Obviously, with 125 seats up for election, there are quite a few primary races in the Kansas House of Representatives, and as such we have been more selective about which races we included. Again, nothing in this post is intended to be an endorsement of any particular candidate or to reflect our desired outcome. They are merely objective (well, sort of) predictions based, at least in part, on facts.

Kansas House of Representatives, District 9, Republican:
Bill Otto(i) vs. Sheila Lampe: Bill Otto is one of those representatives that makes you feel sorry for the people in his district. Not only are his politics out of step with...oh...just about everyone, he's also just flat out ridiculously weird. Unfortunately for the people of the 9th District, it doesn't look like Sheila Lampe, who is immensely qualified, will be up to the task. She lost to Otto in 2006 and though she is relatively even with Otto in the financials, past performance as well as the power of the incumbency don't bode well for her. Otto.

Kansas House of Representatives, District 19, Republican:
John Skubal vs. James Walker: Classic Johnson County Moderate v. Conservative showdown. In this case, Overland Park City Councilman John Skubal is the moderate and retired Marine James Walker is the conservative. On the money front, Walker has outspent Skubal 10 to 1, however Skubal filed his report showing nearly $9,000 cash on hand to Walker's 50 bucks. That money doesn't do him any good if it goes unspent, but we think that money left over for the final push as well as the name recognition he receives as a City Councilman will be enough. Skubal.

Kansas House of Representatives, District 23, Republican:
August Bogina vs. John Crabtree: Another day, another conservative v. moderate Republican primary in Johnson County. The winner will face 2006 candidate Milack Talia for the seat being vacated by Republican Judy Morrison. Take a look at the endorsements so far in this one and see if you can figure out who the con is and who the mod is. Bogina has received endorsements from the National Rifle Association and Kansans for Life, Crabtree is preferred by KNEA and Biz-PAC. We'll call the endorsement game a wash, since both candidates are receiving support from the big mobilizers in their respective movements. How about the money? They've each spent approximately $3,000, Bogina filed with more cash on hand, but also has substantial debts. Again, pretty much a wash. When it comes down to it, all things being equal, you have to go with the conservative in these low-turnout primaries. Bogina.

Kansas House of Representatives, District 24, Democrat:
Andy Sandler vs. Mike Slattery: This is one of only a few seriously contested Democratic primaries in the Kansas House with the winner to face Republican incumbent Ronnie Metsker. Sandler ran for the seat in 2006 and Mike Slattery is the son of former Congressman and Democratic US Senate Candidate Jim Slattery. Both candidates have spent a substantial amount of money, but Slattery can only benefit from the significant campaign organization being built by his dad. M. Slattery.

Kansas House of Representatives, District 57, Democrat:
Sean Gatewood vs. Andrew Fields vs. Dustin Hardison: Gatewood and Hardison are the only candidates in this primary who have spent any money, and Hardison has outspent Gatewood 6 to 1. Hardison, a former staffer for Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, has received financial support from several statehouse Democrats and looks to be in a good position to move on. Hardison.

Kansas House of Representatives, District 74, Republican:
Mitch Powell vs. Don Schroeder(i): Powell has received the endorsement of the National Rifle Association, but Schroeder has outspent him 6 to 1. As an incumbent, if Schroeder spends his money in anything even closely resembling an intelligent fashion, all the endorsements in the world won't help Powell. Schroeder.

Kansas House of Representatives, District 81, Republican:
Patsy Allen vs. Jeri Anderson vs. Arlene Burrow vs. Peter DeGraaf vs. Carlene Eye: This five-way primary for the seat formerly held by the late Ted Powers should be one of the more interesting races in all of Kansas come tomorrow. DeGraaf is technically the incumbent, having been sworn in during Sine Die after winning a special election. He and Anderson are the only two to have raised any significant campaign funds, but DeGraaf has raised $11,000 to Anderson's $4,000. DeGraaf won amongst the precinct committee persons and has a substantial money advantage. The winner will face Democrat Mark Hardison, father of 57th District candidate Dustin Hardison. DeGraaf.

Kansas House of Representatives, District 84, Democrat:
Inga Taylor vs. Gail Finney: Just like the 29th Senate District, this seat which was once held by Donald Betts (before Oletha Faust-Goudeau) faces a Democratic primary. Finney, an office-holder in the Sedgwick County Democratic primary, raised a respectable sum of nearly $6,000, but Taylor brought in a surprising haul of just a shade under $13,000. Both are fairly well known in the district, but a 2 to 1 fundraising disadvantage will be tough to overcome. Taylor.

Kansas House of Representatives, District 118, Republican:
Virginia Beemer(i) vs. Don Hineman: And the award for best-funded primary challenger of an incumbent goes to...Don Hineman!! Hineman, the chairman of the moderate, pro-evolution group Kansas Alliance for Education, raised $17,225.00, of which he has spent over $15,000 to unseat the incumbent. He has been a Dighton City Councilman and a Lane County Commissioner. Hineman is well-known, well-funded and has a message that sells in western Kansas. Hineman.

Kansas Board of Education, District 2, Republican:
Mary Ca Ralston vs. Brandon Kenig: Brandon Kenig is a 22 year-old, uber-conservative blogger from the Johnson County area. We're all for bloggers and young people getting involved in the political process, but Kenig is a little too much like Ben Hodge he only has a few hundred dollars to work with. Ralston.

Kansas Board of Education, District 6, Republican:
Kathy Martin(i) vs. Bill Pannbacker: Martin is as crazy as crazy gets. She ousted an incumbent moderate Republican in the 2004 primary, so she knows how to take out well-funded, well-liked pro-Science Republicans. Pannbacker does have a slight fundraising edge, $6,900 to $5,900 and has been modestly outspent $2,700 to $2,000. Pannbacker is a moderate who served four years on a local school board in Washington County before it was consolidated. As much as it pains us, Pannbacker may be on a fool's errand. Martin.

Primary predictions: Federal, DA, KS Senate

2008-08-04T14:38:00.004-05:00

Don't forget to vote in the primary election tomorrow. Polls are open from 7 am to 7 pm. Below are our predictions. They are just predictions and do not, in any way shape or form, constitute an endorsement of any particular candidate.

United States Senate, Democrat:
Jim Slattery vs. Lee Jones. Slattery just crossed the $1 million threshold and has been travelling the state for months. He has received substantial amounts of press exposure in all the major media markets and many people in the well-populated 2nd District remember him fondly from his days in the US House. The people who do know who Lee Jones is remember him as the guy who got his rear-end handed to him by Sam Brownback in 2002. This one won't even be close. Slattery.

United States House, 3rd District, Republican:
Nick Jordan vs...someone. What? You didn't realize there was a primary here? Neither did most people. This race isn't worth me looking up the name of Jordan's primary opponent. Showen or something. Moving on. Jordan.

United States House, 2nd District, Republican:
Jim Ryun vs. Lynn Jenkins: Early in the election season, many observers believed this race would be close. Then Lynn Jenkins started "campaigning." Ryun has loads of money and has been on TV all over the district for weeks. Though the race got a little negative in the end, the predicted fireworks never even materialized. The fact that Jenkins appears to be leaving a few hundred thousand bucks in the bank tells us she is mailing this one in. Ryun.

Johnson County District Attorney, Republican:
Phill Kline vs. Steve Howe: StayRedKansas points out a SurveyUSA poll which shows Kline trailing by eight points. Though we can't discredit this particular poll, never underestimate the power of mobilized, organized, right-wing fanatics in low-turnout primaries. Kline.

Shawnee County District Attorney, Republican:
Robert Hecht (i) vs. Eric Rucker: Hecht is a two-term incumbent who has never enjoyed overwhelming popularity. Rucker is a well-funded disciple of Phill Kline who has spent tens of thousands of dollars on the race, not including the outside money that has flowed in from a Johnson County PAC (where Rucker is Kline's top assistant) which has been running radio ads and sending out postcards. See the argument for Kline in Johnson County. Rucker.

Shawnee County District Attorney, Democrat:
Chad Taylor vs. Jerry Berger: Taylor is a well-respected but young lawyer in Topeka and reports indicate he has hands down won the ever-not-so-important sign war. Berger is a well-established attorney and business owner that some consider to be a little sketchy. Both are well-funded, both have been on the radio and both have hundreds of signs up throughout Shawnee County. This race may end up being one of the closest primaries in the state. Coin-flip. Taylor.

Kansas Senate, District 5, Democrat:
Kelly Kultala vs. Mark Gilstrap(i): In a race where Governor Kathleen Sebelius and Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley have endorsed a challenger over an incumbent, Gilstrap has spent tens of thousands of dollars defending his seat (though a substantial amount of that was to pay back a loan to himself), Kultala might be an upset candidate. The district is a strong one for Democrats and Gilstrap may be a bit conservative relative to his constituents. Incumbency is a powerful thing, but will it be powerful enough? Kultala.

Kansas Senate, District 8, Republican:
Tim Owens vs. Ben Hodge: A battle of two State Reps who wanted a bigger paycheck/ego boost, these two Republicans will battle it out. Owens has outraised Hodge 3:1 and outspent him 5:1 and the more people get to know Ben Hodge, the less they tend to like him. Owens.

Kansas Senate, District 10, Republican:
Sue Gamble vs. Mary Pilcher Cook: The race to fill ladder-climbing Nick Jordan's vacated seat. Gamble was a respected member of the State School Board and Mary Pilcher Cook is a nutjob who has already lost multiple statehouse elections. However, Pilcher Cook has spent nearly $30,000 to win this seat. Pilcher Cook.

Kansas Senate, District 13, Republican:
Jacob LaTurner vs. Bob Marshall: The numbers and the geography indicate that this seat is relatively safe for Dems, but these two candidates have spent an incredible amount of money in an attempt to pick up the Pittsburg-area seat being vacated by psuedo-Democrat Jim Barone. Altogether, these two candidates have spent nearly $50,000, but Marshall has almost a 2:1 advantage in the category. Marshall.

Kansas Senate, District 16, Republican:
Ty Masterson vs. Will Carpenter: Masterson is a former State Rep, but he faces a substantial deficit in dollars spent despite outraising Carpenter by $6,000.00. In the end, Masterson still has $17,000 on hand after the filing and much of Carpenter's money is his own. Masterson.

Kansas Senate, District 18, Republican:
Jim Zeller vs. Gary Parnell vs. Clarence Hinchy: These three battle for the right to play a potential David to Laura Kelly's Goliath. Zeller has raised nearly $20,000 and while Hinchy brought in a respectable amount, it doesn't look like it will be enough to overtake Zeller, who is a member of Huelskamp's army. Parnell hasn't raised a single cent. Zeller.

Kansas Senate, District 21, Republican:
Mark Taddiken(i) vs. Paul Barkey: Barkey was outraised by $10,000 in the recent cycle and didn't show a lot of ability to be successful when he ran against Democrat Sydney Carlin in 2004. He will be one of many members of Huelskamp's army to fall short on Tuesday. Taddiken.

Kansas Senate, District 24, Republican:
Pete Brungart(i) vs. Tom Arpke: Another Huelskamp challenger. Though Arpke has spent almost $10,000, Brungart is too well-funded (he has spent almost $17,000 and still has $65,000 in the bank) and too well-known to lose to an idealogue.

Kansas Senate, District 29, Democrat:
KC Ohaeboisim vs. Oletha Faust-Goudeau: This is Donald Betts' former seat. Faust-Goudeau is well-known in the district, having served as the Representative for the 84th District in the House. She is well-funded and although Ohaeboisim out spent her $12,000 to $9,000, we feel she is well-known enough to prevail. Faust-Goudeau.

Kansas Senate, District 32, Republican:
Steve Abrams vs. George Leach: The winner of this primary will challenge incumbent Democrat Greta Goodwin in November. Abrams is a former chair of the State BOE and a certifiable right-wing nut. Though he outraised his primary opponent 2:1, he has only spent about $1,000 more on his campaign. Abrams is well-known from his time on the board and has a dedicated base of wingnuts to carry him home. Abrams.

Kansas Senate, District 33, Republican:
Ruth Teichman(i) vs. Andrew Evans: Evans is a rural preacher and another Hueslkamp recruit taking on an incumbent Senator. Though Evans seems to be running a pretty good insurgent campaign, Teichman has spent $63,000 on her re-election so far and still has nearly 40 grand left. Teichman.

Anything to attack the Governor

2008-08-01T08:02:00.006-05:00

Christian Morgan and the KS GOP will attack the Governor for just about anything these days. It's almost sad. If she wore a jacket that didn't match her blouse, Christian Morgan would probably post a blog saying she was out of touch with Kansas fashion values.

Now, in typical fashion that sounds like it was written by a schoolyard bully with a college education, Morgan is attacking Sebelius for a written statement her office released in response to a bit on the Colbert Report.

Awhile back, Colbert was mocking John McCain's trip while Obama was speaking to 200,000 in Germany, and he said that he was in Canton and "not the Crappy Canton in Georgia, I'm talking about Canton Oh-hi-O". Well, the Canton, Ga. mayor apparently doesn't know how to take a joke. Here is Colbert's response.

Sebelius' office issued a playful response, inviting Colbert to Canton, KS. Morgan apparently takes exception to this.

Apparently the Governor has a lot of time on her hands considering she has been pretty busy these days campaigning for Obama, meeting with radical environmentalists in Colorado, speaking at fundraisers in San Francisco, posing for Vogue photo shoots, hanging out in Ohio, paling around in North Carolina, having tea in England, having more private meetings with the secret bilderberg conference and now, responding to a comedian's lame attempt at a joke.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Governor Sebelius didn't take time out of her day to sit down and write this herself. Moreover, Morgan isn't THAT dumb, he knows that, but he doesn't care if he makes it look like she did. (BTW, who the F cares?)

Also, apparently Morgan has about as much of a sense of humor as Mayor Hobgood. Anyone with half a brain in their head (or that knows anything about Stephen Colbert) should know that this bit is mocking the Canton, Ga., mayor for having the same reaction that Christian Morgan did.

I say, tip of the hat to Gov. Sebelius and her staff for playing along and wag of the finger to Christian Morgan for being a douche with no sense of humor.

Bob Dole weighs in on John McCain

2008-07-31T10:34:00.003-05:00

From the Kansas City Star's blog.

It's a wonder this guy didn't win the Presidency in 1996. Oh wait, no it isn't.

I know he's looking at [VP candidates] because...I talked with somebody who's sort of in the loop on that. They haven't got much time...I don't know who's being vetted, but you need to vet them very carefully.

Did it seriously take him 38 words including two ellipses and four contractions to say 1) he doesn't know who is going to be the veep and 2) it's important to vet the candidates? Thanks for enlightening us, Bob.

Does McCain have a message? "They said that about me (that I didn't have a message). If you're winning, you're a hell of a candidate, but if you lose, you're a bum...I think he needs to get the campaign a little more focused.

Not a good sign, for George W. McCain. As you all remember, Bob Dole's campaign didn't work out so well.

And our personal favorite...

This big trip overseas was a wash.. if I'm living out in Russell, Kansas, and a candidate is over in Germany with a couple hundred thousand Germans, and I can't get gas because I've got four bucks in my pocket, I'm not sure I get too excited about someone being all the way to Germany.

First off, Bob Dole hasn't seen Russell, KS in decades, so I'm not sure how he would know anything about what the people there feel. Secondly, John McCain went on a trip abroad a mere weeks before Barack Obama.

If McCain were in Germany, there would be approximately 20 people. If Bush was there, there would be about 500, but 495 of them would be burning American flags.

I don't see how the fact that Barack Obama isn't hated abroad is a liability, in Russell, KS or in North Carolina/Washington D.C. where Bob Dole actually, you know, lives.

Hey, maybe when his wife loses her Senate seat in North Carolina, they'll move back to Kansas. OK, probably not.

Slattery launches web site

2008-07-31T07:42:00.002-05:00

Jim Slattery posted this video on his official blog yesterday, hitting on the same theme we've hit on a couple of times (here and here). Pat Roberts is scared of his record and he's scared of a legitimate candidate like Jim Slattery.

The Slattery camp also launched a new Web site, 40 Years is Long Enough, detailing Pat Roberts many failings as a United States Senator.

Check out the video, the blog and the Web site and let's get Pat Roberts out of office.

The Kansas Republican Assembly is right

2008-07-30T09:01:00.005-05:00

Stop the presses folks, the nutjobs over at the Kansas Republican Assembly -- a shell organization which, in effect, runs the KS GOP -- have actually made a good point, though I don't think it was intentional.

In an effort to slander the "Red Star" (some people refer to it as the Kansas City Star, a Pulitzer prize winning newspaper) these radicals have said something intelligent.

A very wise politician once told me, “You’ll know when your opponent thinks you might win when they start attacking you by name.”

They were referring to an admittedly curious development in which Dave Helling over at PrimeBuzz has been specifically referencing The Kansas Meadowlark, the grandaddy of all crazy republican blogs in Kansas. Imagine if the folks at TKR were just a little bit more unstable, but actually did research. Ya, that's Meadowlark.

So, with this quote in mind, do you believe the Republicans when they say Slattery doesn't have a chance?

Neither do I. The worst part? This isn't even all of them. There have been two more TV ads and a radio ad attacking Jim Slattery. Please use our ActBlue widget at the right of your screen to help Jim Slattery fight back. Pat Roberts has millions and this onslaught is not going to stop anytime soon.

4th District numbers: Tiahrt surprisingly low, Betts surprisingly high

2008-07-24T16:42:00.004-05:00

The numbers out of the 4th District were quite surprising. Though he still has a very substantial warchest, Todd Tiahrt brought in a lackluster $170,236.82 since April 1. He didn't spend much though, dishing out only $55,850.16 and leaving his campaign with a healthy $1,256,651.59 warchest with which to slander Donald Betts.

Betts on the other hand, after posting a disappointing 2nd quarter, brought in a respectable (but still lower than we'd like to see) $81,413.20. After spending $41,209.72 (more than Garth McGinn raised in all of 2006), Betts was left with $62,814.89.

NOTE: Tiahrt's numbers are "pre-primary" and thus run through July 16. Betts' numbers are 3rd quarter and only run through June 30.

Betts has a tall task ahead of him, but his numbers are up substantially from the 1st quarter and with a strong third quarter and the expected Democratic surge, Betts is not out of this race. We encourage you to utilize the ActBlue widget on this page and help make sure that happens.

Jordan posts dismal numbers

2008-07-24T16:35:00.003-05:00

You hear that? That's the sound of Nick Jordan's campaign crashing to the ground.

Most people never though the man who makes 2000 Al Gore look like Mr. Charisma would actually mount a serious campaign against Moore. That is, no one except the KS GOP. But even Christian Morgan's head-in-the-ground optimism about his party can't deny Jordan got his ass whooped this quarter.

Here are the numbers.

Dennis Moore: $336,051.31 raised, $86,324.93 spent, $1,140,136.64 cash on hand.
Nick Jordan: $137,724.00 raised, $171,433.20 spent, $615,996.12 cash on hand.

Yes, you're reading that right, Moore raised 3x as much, Jordan spent twice as much, but Moore still has a 2-to-1 advantage in cash on hand.

Moore and his supporters should take nothing for granted, but if I were Nick Jordan, I'd be concerned.

Lynn Jenkins' personality problem

2008-07-24T11:55:00.005-05:00

First and foremost, we want to apologize for our absence the last 13 days. We know you all have been jonesing for some LBK, and we apologize for leaving your fix unfulfilled. No excuses, we'll be better, we promise.

Now, to the business at hand.

If you watched 2nd District Congressional debate the other night, I think you'll agree that Lynn Jenkins scored some pretty solid points on the issues, but as time passes from the debate, the consensus seems to be that she came off as condescending, rude and even annoying.

It's not just that annoying voice of hers. Anyone who has followed this race already knows about that, but her body language, including touching Jim's shoulder as she talked about him like he was a wayward child.

Then, about half way through, she called him BABE! She was telling him it was his (read: Congress') fault she was forced to raise taxes 12 times in the Kansas Legislature.

We were at your mercy, babe.

What the hell?

Jenkins campaign manager Patrick Leopold said that Jenkins says it all the time and meant no harm by it. Honestly, that wouldn't surprise me, but in the world of politics, perception is more important than reality. Jenkins won the debate on the substance, but her shrill, condescending tone and body language may have created a likability issue for her.

Jim Ryun on the other hand, came off as the wounded little boy being picked on by the meanie Lynn Jenkins. Anyone who knows the tactics Jim Ryun has exercised in the past knows that he is anything but, but that doesn't matter.

This isn't the first time she has done this either. At a recent campaign event, she inferred that a trained monkey could do Jim Ryun's job in Congress as well as he did. Not that we disagree, but seriously, that's hard core.

If you'd like to weigh in on Babegate, click here.

Tip of the hat to BoydaBloc.

Roberts: When I said I was going to play nice, I didn't REALLY mean it

2008-07-11T14:51:00.004-05:00

Pat Roberts has gone negative yet again. Curiously, his most recent ad isn't on his web site. Embarrassed of your new spot, Pat?

Maybe its because you remember that you said something back in August 2007, when you spoke with Rep. Dennis Moore at an event at Johnson County Community College. What was it that you said? Can't remember for sure Sen. Memory Pills?

Oh no worries, here's a video to remind you.

There is a difference between campaigning for the office, and campaigning against somebody else and I have always tried to campaign for the office…I will campaign for the office and I will not campaign against anybody.

We totally agree Pat, we totally agree.

A Republican and a lie, two peas in a pod

2008-07-09T14:13:00.004-05:00

Homer Simpson once said, "It takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen."

In this case, we refuse to take part in the Kansas Republican Party's latest mistruth.

In a Harris News story this morning, the Boyda camp rightly called the GOP's claims that Boyda voted for "the largest tax increase in history" "malarkey." (See Boyda Bloc's explanation).

The fact of the matter is, Boyda supports several aspects of the Bush tax cuts -- the ones targeted at the middle class, where they should be. The problem is most of the actual revenue is lost from the tax cuts on the uber-wealthy, which a Boyda spokesman even said she would support if the Republicans could find a responsible way to fund them (they can't, don't worry!)

So what smoking gun did the poster who goes by the name "Kansas Republican Party" (didn't Christian Morgan blast so-called "anonymous" blog posters awhile back? Just asking.)

An alleged quote from Boyda's MySpace page two years ago, a page that the GOP knows full-well was not run by the campaign or anyone associated with it.

If ever you needed proof that the KS GOP was run by adolescents, this is it.

"But, but, but...you said on your MySpace page!"

Something else worth noting in the Harris piece. Morgan claims that McCain will be a boon for the victor of the Ryun/Jenkins snoozefest.

Uh, perhaps you didn't see the poll commissioned by Sen. Roberts. McCain is polling under 50% in Kansas. There go those facts again.

Republican implosions

2008-07-09T07:50:00.003-05:00

This party will self-destruct in 30 seconds.

It's like watching sports bloopers or car crashes, you know its kind of sick, but you can't help but giggle.

The bombs?

First, we've got Phill Kline going against his word and staying in the Republican primary for Johnson County District Attorney. Forgotten how crazy Phill is? Just watch this video.

Then of course there is the drama of Sen. Tim Heulskamp recruiting primary challengers for several Republican leaders in the Senate.

And my personal favorite, former GOP executive director Ron Freeman's lawsuit against the party.

It seems his contract said he could be fired with 30 days notice. But expert lawyer Kris Kobach says that he COULD be fired with 30 days notice, not that he had to be given such notice. Everyone knows such clauses in employment contracts exist to give employers flexibility.

Anyway, Freeman is seeking 27,000 in lost wages and commissions. Hate to break it to ya Ron, but you can't get blood from a turnip.

Jim Slattery hits the nail on the head

2008-07-08T16:44:00.000-05:00

Roberts releases poll

2008-07-08T15:01:00.004-05:00

Pat Roberts released a poll, paid for by his campaign, that shows the "overwhelmingly popular" Senator barely has a majority, despite being in congress for decades.

The poll shows Roberts leading presumptive Democratic nominee Jim Slattery 54% to 34%.

As we've said on this blog since day 1, while this race will be difficult for Slattery, anytime you see an incumbent as entrenched as Roberts is hovering around 50% four months out, things could get exciting.

More than that, this poll was conducted June 27 - July 1. Which means Pat Roberts had already been on the air for weeks with three television commercials and a radio ad before any of this was taken into account, and still only 54% of Kansans are willing to add on to his 40+ years in Washington.

The poll also included numbers for the Presidential race. Like the Senate race, it shows a Republican who is winning, but with numbers that should be concerning. The poll has McCain beating Democratic nominee Barack Obama 49% to 36%.

Again, remember, George W Bush got over 60% in 2000 and 2004, so for a Republican presidential nominee to be polling under 50% in Kansas -- in July -- is HUGE.

In the end, both these polls show what most people watching these races already know -- Sen. Obama and former Congressman Slattery are facing tall odds, but they each have the advantage of running against thoroughly flawed incumbents and could be in position to mount challenges no one thought possible in a "red" state like Kansas.

As the Phill turns

2008-07-02T14:27:00.003-05:00

Some had thought Phill Kline had learned his lesson. Some thought maybe he has figured out that people are tired of him being so friggin' crazy and that maybe he would play nice this cycle.

Well, the soap opera has officially begun.

First, the good folks at the Pitch blog have a great post about Phill deciding it was time to buy a home in Johnson County (nearly two years after becoming the county's district attorney.

Kline's primary opponent Steve Howe has fired back on the subject, issuing a press release pledging to be a "full-time" DA.

This after word comes from the PrimeBuzz blog that someone has been making negative "push poll" calls to Republicans in Johnson County targeting Howe.

Phone calls were made to thousands of Johnson County homes in the last couple of days that can only be described as a push poll.

It begins by asking whether you have a positive opinion of Johnson County District Attorney Phill Kline. If your opinion was favorable, the automated voice asked whether you were a Republican, pro-life, and a conservative.

If you said you didn’t have a positive feeling about Kline, you were asked whether you knew that Kline’s Republican opponent, Steve Howe, almost let a murderer go and suggested that Howe had little experience as a prosecutor.

Keep in mind, the Kansas City Star's stated purpose is to defame the spotless character of Phill Kline, so all of this is probably fabricated by the pinko-commie-bastards at The Red Star.

The Star post also leads one to an interesting anti-Howe video posted, in an apparent attempt at satire, by someone using the namee "SteveHowe4DA."

The user has one other video about the DA race that is...well...interesting.

I have been telling you all along, cockfighting is going to be the major issue in this race.

Hello??? Is anyone in there? Earth to Lynn Jenkins, do you copy?

2008-07-02T10:31:00.004-05:00

Lynn Jenkins is a regular David Blaine, she can disappear before your very eyes.

One minute, she's running for Congress, albeit poorly, and the next minute it's like she wasn't even there.

Wait. What's that? You don't even know who she is?

Don't worry, lots of people don't. Anyway, Lynn is this smiley woman who served a term in the Kansas House and half a term in the Kansas Senate before bouncing up the political ladder to State Treasurer in 2002. Now she's running in the Republican primary against Jim Ryun.

Now that we're all on the same page as to who Lynn Jenkins is, it makes you wonder how the Hell people who aren't fortunate enough to read this blog are supposed to figure it out.

Her opponent in the primary, Jim Ryun, "served" 10 years in the seat before GETTING served by Nancy Boyda in 2006, so people already pretty well know who he is (which may end up being more of a liability than a benefit to Mr. Ryun) but even he has been on TV with for almost two weeks now in the two major media markets in the district.

So what of Lynn Jenkins, who's own campaign admits that name recognition is the biggest hurdle over which they must leap to have any chance in the primary.

Nowhere to be seen, that's where.

It almost makes you wonder if she's decided to punt this campaign and focus on 2010.

Good luck with that.

McCain outraised by Obama in Kansas; Roberts hires Mean Girl to campaign

2008-06-30T13:13:00.008-05:00

A couple of interesting notes in a Harris News story from this weekend.

First, we see that Sen. Barack Obama has raised more money in Kansans than has Sen. John McCain.

Obviously, it's early and this isn't necessarily a good method of predicting elections, but it was certainly unexpected and I think goes to show that a) Kansans are excited about the candidacy of Barack Obama and b) John McCain still has some work to do after losing the Kansas caucuses to former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.

Especially intriguing was the response by KS GOP Executive Director Christian Morgan...

"Senator McCain has a pretty big lead in the state of Kansas and he's not going to lose that lead to Barack Obama," Morgan said.

OK. Glad to know the KS GOP still thinks John McCain will win Kansas. Doesn't really address the fundraising numbers, but hey, it'll do.

Speaking of intriguing responses. Responding to Slattery's claim that Sen. Pat Roberts used your tax dollars to come back to Wichita and film a TV commercial, Roberts' camp had an especially venomous response that would make Regina George proud.

"Kansas is winning and Jim Slattery is whining," said Roberts' spokeswoman, Molly Haase.

Classy. Word is Tina Fey has contacted Molly about being cast in the sequel to Mean Girls.

Of course, Sunday's Topeka Capital-Journal shows even the mainstream media now realizes that whatever Kansas may have won from the recent GAO decision, it was in spite of, not as a result of, Pat Roberts, Sam Brownback, John McCain and Todd Tiahrt.

Kansas Republican Assembly lectures on party unification

2008-06-27T14:48:00.004-05:00

The folks over at the KRA have decided to share some wisdom with the Kansas Democratic Party on how best to unify a big tent party.

The complaint sent to Bartoshevich from the Wisconsin DP stated that she had violated Party rules by endorsing the opposing party’s candidate and that she failed to honor a pledge of intent to vote for the party’s presidential ticket in the fall. The resolution was passed by the state’s party at their convention to cheers from state delegates.

How very interesting that the Wisconsin DP is performing the exact same functions the KRP did when trying to rid itself of leadership that would rather see Sebelius reelected than the Republican.

Nothing from the KDP blog yet on what they think of the situation and I’m sure there won’t be any comment from any Kansas Democrat. Democrats like to call themselves the ‘big tent’ party but when it comes right down to it, they’ll throw you under a bus if it means getting a few extra votes. Just ask Joe Lieberman. Just ask Lee Jones. You’d better do what the socialist wing of the party says to do…or else.

They’re big tent as long as you’re a part of the circus, but don’t plan on spending the night with the clowns if you don’t feel like walking the tight rope they’ve set before you.

For those of you who are new to Kansas Politics, the KRA's very existence is the result of inter-party squabbling. They are the Right-Wing splinter group of the Kansas Republican Party (though not as far right as the splinter group from the splinter group, the Kansas Republican ACTION Assembly)

Kansans for a Traditional Republican Majority, the "moderate" wing of the Republican Party, is KRA's sworn enemy, so it's pretty rich for them to be lecturing the KDP about the importance of unifying a party.

Our thoughts exactly...

2008-06-26T09:57:00.001-05:00

James Dobson: Christian Police

2008-06-25T07:47:00.004-05:00

Folks, even though it's finally come out that Barack Obama is not a
MUSLIM (as if it should matter if he were), he is still not CHRISTIAN enough for James Dobson and the radical right.

First, Dr. Rick Scarborough, a Southern Baptist minister, decided to play doorman at the Pearly Gates.

When a man publicizes his 'Christianity far and wide, Christians have every right to check him out. Based on the record, one can only conclude that Barack Obama does not adhere to traditional Christianity.

Apparently St. Peter had the day off and tabbed this guy to determine who was and was not a Christian. Can we do the same to Dr. Scarborough, or is his salvation just assumed?

Last time I read my Bible, only God was in any position to judge who was and was not worthy of admittance into the Kingdom of Heaven. But what do I know, I'm just a person. I don't have a phd in psychology like James Dobson.

Dobson has apparently been called by God to grade the candidates piousness, and Barack Obama, he get's an F.

"I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional (read: Dobson's) understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology," Dobson said.
"... He is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter."

I'll pause for a moment while those of you familiar with Dr. Dobson's work ponder that statement. No. No. Stop! Stop pounding your head against the wall, he's not worth a cerebral hematoma.

Is he serious? Does he not understand the irony (or is it hypocrisy) of his own words?

Dr. Dobson has made a career out of picking and choosing various lessons from scripture and using them to further his own political and social agenda.

James Dobson is to the religious community as Dr. Phil is to the psychological community.

Obama's statement that drew the ire of Dr. Dobson is, in fact a very thoughtful one.

"Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?" Obama said. "Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?" referring to the civil rights leader.

The point being, reasonable, well-meaning Christians can disagree. Even the Bible, which many in the radical right believe should be taken literally, is riddled with contradictions. So which interpretation is "correct"?

I don't pretend to have an answer, but I do know that Jesus taught that loving our fellow man was the most important thing one can do, and I don't see a lot of love for our fellow man in Dr. Dobson's version of theology.

Does that mean he's wrong? I guess he'll find out one of these days. In the meantime, I'll leave you with some scripture I have selectively chosen to prove my point.

"Therefore you have no excuse, whoever you are, when you judge others, because in passing judgement on others you condemn yourself." Romans 2:1

"Do you imagine, whoever you are, that when you judge those who do such things you will escape the judgement of God" Romans 2:3

And last, but not least, from Christ himself.

1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye. Matthew 7

Ruh roh, Democrats read the Bible too.

Slattery hits Roberts on Buy American

2008-06-24T09:50:00.003-05:00

The Slattery camp today hit Sen. Pat Roberts for his reactionary "leadership" on the matter of the controversial contract awarded by the USAF to a French company.

This is an issue that we here at LBK have been all over since the first days of our existence, and something our Republican counterparts on the Net have pretty much ignored (coal is so much more sexy).

“Roberts had two chances to fight for Boeing and Kansas,” Slattery said. “First as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and then as a member of the conference committee for the 2006 Defense Authorization bill. On both occasions, Roberts failed.”

The Roberts camp had contended that the provision wouldn't have prevented the deal because Northrop Grumman -- an American defense contractor -- is partnering with AirBus on the contract. According to Defense News, that's not the case.

“The [Buy American] provision aimed at Airbus, a subsidiary of European giant EADS, is a narrowly written amendment banning the defense secretary from buying goods or services from any foreign company that receives subsidies from a foreign government that is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

The prohibition applies when the United States is engaged in an unresolved WTO dispute over the subsidies, or if the WTO has ruled that the subsidy is prohibited.

The language is tailor-made to keep Airbus from winning an Air Force tanker contract against its American rival, Boeing.”

NOTE: It is but a coincidence that the son of Pat Roberts, member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was a lobbyist for one of the biggest defense contractors in the country (Northrop) and he just worked on helicopters, so there is nothing unseemly going on there.

The Roberts camp is singing a different tune now. Now they're saying they voted against the Buy American Provision because it was "protectionist" and "irresponsible" and that it would have been vetoed by the President.

The problem is, if the provision was specifically tailored to prevent the very eventuality that happened -- AirBus winning the contract -- why is Roberts so outraged now? Does he no longer believe it's "protectionist" to prevent the outsourcing of military contracts to companies subsidized by foreign governments?

Also, don't forget the fight to kill the Buy American provision was championed by none other than Sen. John McCain.

Kudos to Slattery for holding Roberts' feet to the fire and saying what we've all been thinking since ol' Memory Pills started carrying the Bush Administration's water.

“It’s time Roberts put the best interests of Kansas ahead of old party politics,” Slattery said. “Roberts had an obligation to do his job and stand up to President Bush on behalf of Boeing and Wichita.”

...

Slattery said Roberts should be fired for failing to protect Kansas jobs. “It is time to replace Roberts with a senator who will care about Kansans and champions the issues important to them,” Slattery said.

I think Sen. Sam Brownback put it best.

"Thanks be to God and the GAO."

Someone had to make the right decision, because Brownback, Tiahrt, Roberts and McCain sure weren't in any mood to do it. Not if it meant standing up to George W. Bush and their EADS lobbyist buddies.

Cheese flavored lies

2008-06-19T12:38:00.002-05:00

Another post from The Kansas Republican, another lie. Or at least a blind assumption made in the absence of facts.

These clowns read a story on da int-ruh-netz that said a cheese factory decided to locate in Eastern Colorado as opposed to Western Kansas.

OBVIOUSLY this is Gov. Sebelius' fault. Not the Republican-controlled legislature. They eveen linked to the story!

The problem is, the story made no mention of anything even remotely political.

Leprino reportedly chose the location partly due to the quality and availability of milk in neighbouring Weld County. Moerover, in December 2007, FLEXNEWS had reported that Leprino had also considered other locations for the plant in north Colorado and in south west Kansas.

Leprino provides mozzarella cheese to companies such as Domino's Pizza and Pizza Hut and has 9 plants in the US, and 2 in the UK.

Apparently its Governor Sebelius' fault there isn't more/higher quality milk in Western Kansas.

Then, they repeat the same baseless accusations made by their cousins over at Stay Red Kansas, that 1) the recent GAO decision was the result of Roberts, Tiahrt, Brownback and Moran's hard work and 2) Jim Slattery is angry about the decision.

Meanwhile, thanks to tireless work by Senator Roberts, Brownback and the rest of
the DC gang, the GAO ruled that the Air Force's procurement process was not
handled properly.

What, no props for Reps. Nancy Boyda and Dennis Moore?

Nevermind the fact that Slattery released a press release praising the decision or that Roberts and Brownback actively created an atmosphere condusive to the decision while Tiahrt and Moran sat on their hands.

The casual relationship that TKR and SRK seem to have with "facts" and "truth" is starting to get annoying.

GAO tells us what we already know

2008-06-19T07:08:00.003-05:00

Breaking news out of the Government Accountability Office -- the decision to grant a contract to the French company AirBus was a bad one.

Thanks captain obvious.

Turns out the Air Force just made a bunch of crap up about how much it was going to cost Boeing to build the thing.

Our friends at StayRed are prepared to knight Sen. Pat Roberts and Rep. Todd Tiahrt for their tireless work in getting GAO to tell us what we already knew.

Of course, if Sen. Roberts would've told John McCain and George Bush where to stick it and opposed stripping the Buy American provision from the 2006 Defense Authorization Bill, Boeing would already be building the damn plane, but we digress.

Wethinks there is something fishy going on, though, now that it appears the bid process was unduly influenced by invisible hands to favor Airbus. Both Sens. John McCain and Pat Roberts have extensive lobbying ties to Northrop Grumman, AirBus' American partner, and AirBus itself.

According to a press release from the Jim Slattery campaign, Pat Roberts' son David lobbied the Senate for AirBus on issues related to the very Defense Authorization bill that would pave the way for this decision.

And we already know about McCain's ties to AirBus lobbyists.

If Sen. Roberts and Rep. Tiahrt had anything to do with this, which is debatable since the decision seemed to be pretty obvious, well, it's about damn time. Next time, how about you fight for Kansas jobs BEFORE they get outsourced to France. Then we won't have to worry about all this mess.

The Law of Supply

2008-06-18T08:52:00.003-05:00

The conservative advocacy group Freedom Watch -- which used to focus on national security issues but apparently now has no particular "cause" -- has announced that it will be making robocalls into a few dozen Congressional districts, including the Kansas 2nd (Nancy Boyda). The group said the ads will focus on gas prices and Rep. Boyda's vote against offshore drilling.

This obsession with affecting gas prices by increasing supply infuriates me.

I don't know if y'all remember Econ 101, but there are two sides to that chart that looks like an X. You've got the supply part down. In theory, increasing supply while demand remains constant will decrease the price (though economists believe IF such a theory were to work, it would take nearly a decade to see any noticeable affect).

The problem is, most economists believe any increase in supply will result in a corresponding increase in demand, thereby negating any downward pressure on price and perhaps even causing it to rise some. Not to mention increasing carbon output and ignoring our reliance on carbon-based fuels of which we have a finite supply.

I'm not going to go so far as to imply that its a poorly disguised attempt to increase oil consumption and thus increase the profits of oil companies, but it sort of makes you wonder.

That other line? That's called demand. On this side, the theory is if demand decreases while supply remains constant, prices will decrease.

The answer is conservation. Jimmy Carter hit the nail on the head in his American Malaise speech, though he was chastised for it, the only way to truly ween ourselves off of oil is to enact policies that affect demand, not supply.

We need to be focusing on designing and developing American cars that might actually be feasible to sell 10 years from now. The SUV, the 5,000 lbs car and the 6.5 liter V8 are dying, and it's time for Detroit to realize that.

We need to enact policies that make public transportation in the midwest a real possibility.

We need to start dedicating federal research dollars to developing wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal and any other non-carbon-based form of energy production. (Thanks for twice voting against those taxbreaks to encourage alternative fuel research, Sen. Roberts)

We need to start investing in ethanol that is not made from things that we might want to eat.

We need to stop promoting shortsighted policies that do nothing more than increase the profits of oil companies.

The truth is, no matter what we do, gas prices aren't going to be $2.00 a gallon anymore. The only real solution is taking steps to ween ourselves off of ALL oil, not just foreign oil.

Offensive rhetoric from the KS GOP

2008-06-17T15:54:00.005-05:00

Christian Morgan and the KS GOP have reached a new low.

In a recent blog post, Morgan and his cronies parrot a National Review story criticizing Sen. Barack Obama for supporting giving constitutional rights to detainees at Guantanamo Bay (the scoundrel!)

As if it wasn't bad enough that McCain called the decision“one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.” Ya, right up there with Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson. Or Roe v. Wade if you are so inclined.

Worse than that though, Morgan and the National Review call Obama the "September 10 candidate." This is nothing more than cheap, underhanded fear politics and Christian should be ashamed of himself.

People on both sides of the aisle should be able to agree on one thing, the thousands that died on Sept. 11, 2001 did not die so that people could use their deaths to score cheap political points and to do so trivializes the tragedy that was 9/11.

Not only that, but it's insulting and outlandish to insinuate that any candidate, Republican or Democrat, would ever do anything they felt would make an attack like the one of that fateful Tuesday more likely.

Supporters of Obama and McCain can debate the legal merits of extending the writ of habeas corpus to those incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay, but neither side should resort to accusing the other of promoting further terrorist attacks or being on the side of the terrorists.

Whatever your political leanings may be, we think we can all agree that this sort of political hackery is unconscionable. If you agree, call Christian Morgan and tell him the best way to honor those who were killed on 9/11 and those who have died fighting to protect those rights is to refrain from using their deaths to score cheap political points. The number is (785) 228-0353.

Conservative District?

2008-06-16T08:00:00.005-05:00

Jim Ryun and Lynn Jenkins and even the press have been arguing on the campaign trail that the majority of voters in the 2nd District consider themselves conservative. I haven't seen any polling to back this up, so I thought I'd take a look at the official polls - elections.

Obviously, the 2nd District would not be called "liberal." It went over 60% to George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004, but having lived in the 2nd District all my life, I question the argument that it is "Conservative."

First, let's examine how the district is represented in the Kansas Legislature. Of the 43 seats that lie either in whole or in part in the 2nd District, 22 are held by Democrats compared to 21 Republican-held seats.

State House and Senate seats are divided proportionately based on population, so that means the majority of the voters in the 2nd District are represented by at least one Democrat in the Kansas Legislature.

Admittedly however, the further down the ticket you go, the less significance party affiliation holds, so let's look at the 2nd District seat itself.

In the past 20 elections, Democrats have won the seat 11 times, Republicans have won it nine times. Republicans not named Jim Ryun or Sam Brownback have won the seat only three times.

To me, with the exception of Presidential races (which is more up for grabs this year than it has been in decades) the district is decidedly not liberal or conservative, but rather straight down the middle of the road.

So the next time you hear Lynn Jenkins or Jim Ryun call this a conservative district, remember, the facts don't back up that claim.

Disastrous politics

2008-06-13T07:56:00.004-05:00

First and foremost, the LBK team would like to extend our heartfelt condolences to those in the Heartland who bore the brunt of mother nature's fury in the past few days.

It seems, however, that Kansas bloggers and politicians think these disasters are a good time to make some political hay.

Appropriately, Sen. Pat Roberts began running a new campaign commercial, "Greensburg" this week. The commercial shows the good Senator and his wife, Franki, walking around touring the destruction in Greensburg.

Honestly, our hats are off to Senator Roberts for being quick to get to Greensburg and tour the devastation with the rest of the Kansas Congressional delegation, but it seems he was the only one to bring a camera crew along.

An entire town was destroyed, several people were killed and even more injured, and Pat Roberts uses it for his own political gain. Classy.

Now, after an E-F3 tornado demolished the city of Chapman and the same storm produced an E-F4 tornado that sliced through Manhattan and the campus of Kansas State University before moving on to Jackson County, the craziest of all crazy Republican bloggers decides it'd be a good topic to attack the anti-coal crowd again (don't worry, it doesn't make sense to us either).

Typically, we don't link to the Meadowlark. We have a policy that his neurotic (although well-researched) rants aren't worth responding to, but today we'd like to make an exception to prove a larger point. Natural disasters are off limits.

Meadowlark argues that the research reactor at KSU (which doesn't actually provide power for anything) is a microcosm of the coal fight. He likens the political backlash against coal today to the backlash against nuclear energy in the past, and apparently this storm is somehow supposed to make us realize we should build the plants in Holcomb. I told you, dude is crazy!

Anyway, even if that argument made sense, which it doesn't, natural disasters such as this one, which took the lives of two people in Dickinson and Jackson counties, are not fodder for political advancement. They're tragedies, and should be viewed as such.

Shame on you Pat Roberts, and shame on the Kansas Meadowlark.

Double Vision, One Name

2008-06-12T12:22:00.003-05:00

Jim Slattery (US Senate candidate) and his son Mike Slattery (KS Senate candidate) spoke about their visions for Kansas and the country on a live chat today. Check out the full chat here.

Here are some highlights:

Question: After the economy, the #1 issue for young voters is the War in Iraq. What do you think is the best way to bring the war to a close?
On June 12th, 2008 JimSlattery says:

I think it is disgraceful that we went to war in Iraq based on inaccurate intelligence data. Since then we have lost the lives of more than 4,000 of our best, brightest, and bravest men and women. The war continues to cost over $10 billion a month. I think that within the next year we need to begin to responsibly withdraw our troops from Iraq and refocus our attention on fighting a smart war on terror.

Question: What do you feel you would bring to your office that differs with most older leaders?

On June 12th, 2008 mikeslattery says:

Thanks for your question. I believe being raised in the technology age gives young candidates a more hopeful perspective on life. Watching technology do the "impossible" repeatedly in our lifetime gives us the ability to dream about changing our future.

Furthermore, I believe our generation is focused on the future much more than previous generations. We are focused on making peace across party lines to make a difference for the people we represent. Previous generations get too caught up in "big party" politics, as opposed to caring for their constituents.

Question: When you are talking to young voters what do you tell a young person that is not registered to vote and why they should register?

On June 12th, 2008 JimSlattery says:

Bottom line. If we are going to turn this country around, we can't do it if young people aren't involved in the process.

Every young American has the duty to register to vote and vote. We all have to assume our responsibilities as citizens if we expect to change our country.

The KSGOP: They really are that desperate

2008-06-09T14:35:00.002-05:00

In their most recent blog post, the KS GOP chastises the State of Kansas for not allowing the website flightwatch.com to post its flight itineraries for the Governor's plane. Never mind the fact that this decision was probably made without the knowledge or instruction of the Governor's office by her security detail, the assertion that this is somehow "secretive" is ludicrous.

While I don't know the tail number of Air Force One, I have a sneaky suspicion its itineraries aren't loaded into this web site. It's called security. For a party that supports George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, two of the most secretive politicians in American history, such a preposterous accusation is just laughable.

Post removed

2008-06-05T07:45:00.004-05:00

This post has been removed due to a factual error. LBK regrets the error.

How do you know Jim Slattery is legit?

2008-06-05T07:29:00.004-05:00

When the National Republican Senatorial Committee decides to use some of their precious few campaign funds to slander him.

It's official folks, not only do Republicans realize that Slattery is a legitimate candidate, methinks they may even be a little nervous. The NRSC is broke, they aren't going to spend one red penny in a race that they think is in the bag.

So what do we do? Well, for starters, donate to Jim's campaign using our ActBlue widget to counteract the national right-wing money.

Pat Roberts hasn't lived in Kansas for nearly half a century and has been in Washington since before man walked on the moon. It's time for him to retire.

Olathe GOP: Party like its 1899!!

2008-06-02T15:21:00.003-05:00

According to the KS GOP blog, the Olathe Republican Party is having a picnic!

Confirmed speakers include keynote speaker Sen. Nick Jordan, the Republican candidate for Congress, Rep. Arlen Siegfried, Rep. Rob Olson, Rep. Lance Kinzer, and Sen. Karin Brownlee. All local officials from the school board through the state house are being asked to attend and will be given an opportunity to speak. Candidates, local organizations, and statewide organizations will have information booths.

Nineteenth century children's games and stagecoach rides will be available free of charge.

The theme of the children's game was picked to match with the spakers' positions on social issues.

Will John McCain be the third Republican ever to lose Kansas?

2008-05-30T13:14:00.003-05:00

Poll numbers show this may not be as preposterous as it sounds.

In a poll released yesterday, SurveyUSA indicates McCain holds a 49-39 lead in the state with 12% of the electorate undecided.

In a state where Republican Presidential candidates routinely put up numbers north of 60%, it's significant that McCain cannot break 50.

It should be noted that Huckabee handily won the Kansas Caucus after McCain had already effectively won the nomination and, much like the Democrats who claim they won't vote for Obama or Clinton, many of these jilted Republicans will come back into the fold before it's all said and done.

Additionally, respondents were 42% Republicans, 40% Democrat and 18% Unaffiliated. Democratic registration in the state is on the rise, but this is probably a more Democratic sample than the population as a whole.

These quirks aside, SurveyUSA has been quite successful this cycle in predicting notoriously difficult to predict primaries, so it provides at the very least for some interesting discussion.

The second thing this poll provides is a counterpoint to the recent Rasmussen poll that shows more Kansans would be less likely to vote for Obama with Kathleen Sebelius on the ticket.

The poll showed, not surprisingly, that Huckabee would be McCain's strongest running mate. Among the Democratic pairs matched with Huckabee, Obama/Sebelius does the best by far at a mere +4 for McCain.

Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty is the only McCain running mate who causes Obama to lose ground (a whole point) with Sebelius on his ticket and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards is the only Obama running mate that does better than Sebelius.

As they say, the only poll that matters is in November, but this poll lends credence to the argument that Obama makes Kansas competitive. If McCain pulls in 55% instead of 60%, that spells bad news for Republicans and could mean Obama brings Nancy Boyda, Jim Slattery and Donald Betts along for the ride.

The lowest of the low

2008-05-30T08:13:00.003-05:00

As the title suggests, this is a blog about Kansas politics. Every once in awhile, we like to branch out. Just over the Missouri line is one of the most hotly contested Congressional races in the country, MO-06. This race pits incumbent homophobe -- nay -- Republican Sam Graves against Democratic challenger and former KCMO mayor Kay Barnes.

Having already checked racism off his list, is Barnes moving on to homophobia?

In his most recent ad, Graves attacks Barnes for having a fundraiser in California while the state Supreme Court was handing down the gay marriage decision. Obviously, this scheduling coincidence means Kay Barnes is a foot soldier in the Gay Army.

But what is truly reprehensible, if true, is a strange pronunciation of Barnes' name. Pay special attention to the part of the video where the narrator talks about the Kansas City gay pride

Um, did the narrator just call her "Gay Barnes?" You be the judge.

Republican legislators vote against 900 new jobs in Topeka

2008-05-29T15:14:00.003-05:00

The Kansas Legislature formally closed its 2008 session this morning, but not before Republicans got the chance to block legislation that would help bring 900 manufacturing jobs to the Topeka area.

According to Hawver, Rep. Annie Kuether, D-Topeka, proposed the adoption of a conference committee report that would have sent the issue to the Governor to be signed into law. However, Republican leadership voted against the procedural maneuver.

According to the Capital-Journal, Speaker Melvin Neufeld voted against the bill because he felt it was inappropriate to bring up new business during the ceremonial Sine Die session.

Uh, Mel, it's not as if Rep. Kuether proposed a brand new bill. All you were doing is approving a conference committee report. By it's very nature, if something is in a conference committee. both the House and the Senate passed variations of it.

We'll leave it up to you to decide if Speaker Neufeld is deliberately misleading us or is just completely oblivious to the process of lawmaking.

GOP leaders: Sorry Mr. President, we have to rearrange our sock drawer

2008-05-29T08:26:00.004-05:00

No members of Kansas' Republican Congressional delegation have gotten around to endorsing Sen. Nick Jordan in his quest to unseat popular incumbent Dennis Moore. They're very busy (though, not busy enough to keep them from endorsing a candidate for a county office in Johnson County, where neither of them live)

Those same busy schedules appear to be keeping Sens. Pat Roberts and Sam Brownback and Reps. Todd Tiahrt and Jerry Moran away from today's fundraiser with President George W. Bush.

Some of you might be saying, "See, this was a bad idea to bring the President and his record-low approval ratings."

Not so says Christian Morgan.

Kansas Republican Party executive director Christian Morgan said he doesn't believe the president's poll numbers are an issue.

"If the president's popularity really had something to do with it, then they would have stayed away from even putting their names on something with the president," Morgan said. "I don't think its a case of them skipping this event, it's a case of them having scheduling difficulties, especially when this thing was thrown together pretty quickly."

So, the fact that only 39% of voters in our Republican state support the President is of no concern to Christian. We're standing by his side because...well...why the Hell are we standing by his side?

In reality, this is just further proof that Christian Morgan, Nick Jordan and the Kansas Republican Party are so radically out of touch with everyday Kansans that they still think that George W. Bush has appeal to the average voter.

Speaking of out of touch, Pat Roberts had a perfectly legitimate reason to miss the event. He's going to be in California raising money.

Sen. Pat Roberts will be in California on a longstanding trip to raise money for his own re-election bid, campaign spokeswoman Ashley McManus said. She said Roberts was proud to be named an honorary chairman of the fundraiser and "he was proud to be with the president three weeks ago in Greensburg."

The part about Roberts supporting Bush despite the miserable failure that has been his Presidency and his awful approval ratings in Kansas should come as no surprise to anyone. Roberts has been George W. Bush's lapdog for nearly seven years. What shocked me is the cavalier manner in which his spokesmodel admitted to raising money in California.

I suppose this shouldn't surprise me either, since Roberts hasn't lived in Kansas since 1962, but I guess I always just thought since they've been trying to start a pissing match with Jim Slattery over who's more of a Kansan that they might try to downplay it just a little.

Guess not.

You're invited!

2008-05-28T11:51:00.006-05:00

Bush is in town tomorrow for Nick Jordan! Be sure to read the invite! Then, head on over to Dennis Moore's site and help keep Nick Jordan away from D.C.!

Larry Powell: environmentalist

2008-05-27T15:06:00.002-05:00

Rep. Larry Powell (R-Garden City) is in the news again.

For those of you who recognize that name, he's the one that said the tens of thousands of pounds of carbon dioxide emitted from coal plants was good for corn crops.

“One of the really good things about CO2 is that plants perform better under stress (drought, etc.) with increased levels of CO2,” Rep. Larry Powell, R-Garden City, said in a letter disseminated to the media.

Powell said a recent study shows that over the next 50 years, “atmospheric CO2 enrichment will boost world agricultural output by about 50 percent.”

For those of you who didn't finish the 4th grade, that statement is what we call "stupid."

Well, Rep. Powell has apparently decided he'd like to take his stupidity to the next level. In a recent story published by the Hutchinson News, Powell describes why he decided to change his occupation listed in the official state director from "rancher" to "environmentalist."

"I think I'm a true environmentalist, not someone who thinks everything is going to destroy the environment," he said.

If that makes your mind hurt, you just wait, Powell is just getting warmed up.

Powell also said his work has brought him much closer to nature than many urbanites who've embraced the environmentalist label.

"I've seen rattlesnakes make love, which probably isn't a pretty sight," Powell said.

For the love of all things holy, Rep. Powell, what the hell are you talking about!?

(Wait. If you've seen it, wouldn't you know whether it was a pretty sight or not? Is snake porn illegal?)

If this is the kind of venom (no pun intended) we can expect from Republicans as they attempt to use the Holcomb plant to their political advantage come November, I don't think there are many Democrats waking up in cold sweats.

An empty gesture from Todd Tiahrt

2008-05-27T13:35:00.004-05:00

On Sunday, the Wichita Eagle published a feel-good letter from Rep. Todd Tiahrt about supporting our troops.

As we make time to gather around the grill with friends and family this holiday weekend, let's honor the memories of those we know and love and those unnamed soldiers we never met who gave of their lives for love of country. This is the least a grateful nation can do.

Honestly, we here at LBK couldn't agree more, Todd. We just wondered, did you write this letter before or after you voted against the GI Bill?

Hopefully, next Memorial Day, Todd Tiahrt will have more than just hollow rhetoric to give our troops.

Betts goes national

2008-05-23T08:15:00.004-05:00

The netroots are beginning to notice Sen. Donald Betts and his race to retire seven-term incumbent Todd Tiahrt in the 4th District.

First, there was his interview with the MTV street team that got so many views it ended up on MTV's front page.

Now, Sen. Betts has done a liveblog at the national web site New Majority and was even featured in a front page story on DailyKos.

Betts is a great candidate and Tiahrt has a record that he should be ashamed of (like voting against the expanded GI Bill), but Tiahrt has over $1 million in the bank, so Betts will need all the help he can get. The good news is, it looks like he might be on his way to becoming a darling of the netroots, which will help him financially and hopefully increase interest in his campaign locally.

The more people that get involved, whether it be making phone calls, going door-to-door or donating money, the better chance we have of retiring Todd Tiahrt in November.

To volunteer or become involved, go to his website. To donate, just use our handy ActBlue widget on the right side of the screen.

Think about it, if Jim Slattery and Donald Betts could win in November, that would mean that four of the six congressional seats in Kansas would be held by Democrats with Sam Brownback's seat coming open in 2010. We're a long ways off still, but the mere fact that its possible is a herculean accomplishment.

TKR - Liars? Idiots? Or Both?

2008-05-22T13:37:00.005-05:00

Hey Kansas Republican Party. Just because Boehner says something stupid, doesn't mean you have to repeat it. Yes, I'm talking about this.

Washington Republicans (like Todd Tiahrt and Jerry Moran) really want to get away with voting against our Iraq war vets, but they can't find anything wrong with Webb's G.I. bill - so they're grasping for straws. And, of course, they aren't very clever. So they're recycling their favorite scary phrase: "small business tax."

The new half-percentage tax surcharge is being referred to as a "patriot tax" on individuals earning over $500,000 and couples earning over $1 million. But what they aren't saying is that this tax increase will also affect some 325,000 small business owners across the country.

WOAH! SCARY! EXCEPT...it still only affects millionaires...not your favorite local bar.

According to the Center for Budget & Policy Priorities:

Critics of the House-passed bill maintain that their concern is its impact on “mom and pop” small business operations, which they describe as the engines of economic growth and job creation. These critics should be reassured by the fact that the overwhelming majority of such enterprises will never generate enough profits to make them subject to the surcharge. Importantly, only business profits, not gross receipts, are potentially subject to the surcharge. Some critics have misleadingly implied that the surcharge applies to gross receipts over $1 million.

Moreover, even the “about 1 percent” figure likely overstates the impact of the surcharge on small business owner-operators. The Tax Policy Center data classify as a small business owner anyone who receives any income from an S corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, or various other types of businesses.[4] Many of these individuals, however, play no role in managing the business and are simply passive investors who contribute some capital to the enterprise and, in exchange, receive a share of the profits. Their ranks include President Bush and Vice-President Cheney...

Ah HA! So the truth comes out...in voting against education for veterans, Moran & Tiahrt aren't just trying to protect millionaires, they're protecting George Bush and Dick Cheney! WHY ARE WE NOT SURPRISED!?!?!

And the Kansas GOP staff...I mean..."secret bloggers" just spits it all out like it doesn't make them look REALLY REALLY incompetent. But it does. And they are.

Pass the mud, please

2008-05-22T09:18:00.004-05:00

I'm growing more and more disgusted with the Pat Roberts campaign each time his spokesmodel Ashley McManus opens her mouth.

Of course, Pat Roberts has always said he's tired of the way campaigns resort to slinging mud instead of focusing on the issues. After his first $50,000 ad-buy (in April), apparently the type of shoes Jim Slattery wears is considered an issue.

Now, in a recent story in the Washington D.C. newspaper The Hill, McManus is up to her typical underhanded, immature snarkiness.

Ashley McManus, a Roberts spokeswoman, said Slattery’s criticism of the war is “a bizarre thing for Jim Slattery to say, given that when he was in Congress he voted for us to go to war with Iraq [in Operation Desert Storm].

Are you serious? Is this woman really going to have us believe that voting for Operation: Desert Storm is the same thing as voting to preemptively invade a sovereign nation based on faulty intelligence (which her candidate would help cover up later on)?

Maybe that kind of stuff goes over in Virginia, Ashley, but here in Kansas, we're not buying it.

As the story went on, McManus continued to prove that she and the Roberts campaign have permanently waved bye-bye to reality.

“We look forward to a campaign based on the issues and the differences between Pat Roberts’s tireless service to Kansas and Jim Slattery, who stopped working for Kansas so he could enrich himself working for special interests,” McManus said.

Just because you heard Pat Roberts' voice at the beginning of the "gucci loafer" radio ad saying "I'm Pat Roberts, and I approved this message," that doesn't mean he...well...approved the message.

It's not just the Roberts campaign though that has separated themselves from reality. Republican consultants too seem to be basking in the false sense of security.

“I’m sure [Slattery]’ll be able to raise some money, and I’m sure that the senatorial committee will come in and spend some money too, because they’re definitely raising a lot, but I think Pat Roberts is very well-respected throughout Kansas, both in the eastern and western part of the state. And when the ads start coming up, I think that Pat Roberts will probably pull away,” [Republican consultant Aaron] Trost said.

As we've covered here extensively, the public polling data doesn't back up this claim of Roberts' popularity.

Though his overall approval rating is 54% as of 4/25, it is heavily propped up by a 70% approval rating in Western Kansas. In Eastern Kansas and Wichita, where the overwhelming majority of voters in the state live, his approval ratings are 52 and 48%. Hardly a slam-dunk for a guy who has been in Congress for 20-some years and has never got less than 62% of the vote in November.

For Roberts to win this race, he must do extremely well in Eastern Kansas and Wichita and he must pull a good number of moderates and independents into his fold. His numbers among moderates and independents? 51 and 54%.

But honestly, what does the public know about who the public likes.

Conservatives obsession with gay marriage

2008-05-21T13:35:00.003-05:00

At first I thought the conservative love affair with the issue of gay marriage was just a wedge issue played for political gain. Then, after the California Supreme Court decided that everyone should be treated equally under the law (those scallywags!) the "heterosexists" (sarcasm) came out of the woodwork.

Most especially, a piece by Dennis Praeger.

Another reason for this decision is arrogance. First, the arrogance of four individuals to impose their understanding of what is right and wrong on the rest of society. And second is the arrogance of the four compassionate ones in assuming that all thinkers, theologians, philosophers, religions and moral systems in history were wrong, while they and their supporters have seen a moral light never seen before. Not a single religion or moral philosophical system -- East or West -- since antiquity ever defined marriage as between members of the same sex.

Where to begin...

First, this is how the judicial system works. It's not activist judges, its juidicial review. Since Mr. Praeger isn't railing on about the fallacy of Marbury v. Madison, I'll assume this is just sour grapes because he doesn't like the decision. If it were 4-3 the other way, would his outrage be the same?

Second, whether or not same-sex marriage has been recognized by any religion at any point in time is completely and totally irrelevant, assuming it were even true. The court is only ruling on the definition of marriage in so far as state law is concerned. Whether an individual religion wishes to recognize same-sex unions is completely and entirely up to that religion. Whether states treat couples the same in terms of taxes and property inheritance and the likes is all this ruling affects.

If this verdict stands, society as we have known it will change. The California Supreme Court and its millions of supporters are playing with fire. And it will
eventually burn future generations in ways we can only begin to imagine.

Outside of the privacy of their homes, young girls will be discouraged from
imagining one day marrying their prince charming -- to do so would be declared "heterosexist," morally equivalent to racist. Rather, they will be told to imagine a prince or a princess. Schoolbooks will not be allowed to describe marriage in male-female ways alone. Little girls will be asked by other girls and by teachers if they want one day to marry a man or a woman.

The sexual confusion that same-sex marriage will create among young people is not fully measurable. Suffice it to say that, contrary to the sexual know-nothings who believe that sexual orientation is fixed from birth and permanent, the fact is that sexual orientation is more of a continuum that ranges from exclusive heterosexuality to exclusive homosexuality. Much of humanity -- especially females -- can enjoy homosexual sex. It is up to society to channel polymorphous human sexuality into an exclusively heterosexual direction -- until now, accomplished through marriage. But that of course is "heterosexism," a bigoted preference for man-woman erotic love, and therefore to be extirpated from society.

The above paragraphs are so ludicrous it's almost sad. The idea that by somehow saying to a same-sex couple that the law recognizes them in the same way it does a man and a woman will somehow make little girls grow up to dream of their princess in shining armor is proposterous fear-mongering. This ruling in no way makes it a social faux-paus to engage in heterosexual sex or enter into a heterosexual relationship. Something tells me that girls will still find a way to have sex with boys and somehow, someway the human race will reproduce enough to survive.

Any advocacy of man-woman marriage alone will be regarded morally as hate speech, and shortly thereafter it will be deemed so in law.

This just makes my mind hurt. Is hate speech illegal now? The existance Fred Phelps, recent court rulings aside, makes me question the validity of this statement. The KKK still exist post...I don't know, the Civil War...so something tells me even if this cockamamie anaology were accurate, Mr. Praeger and those of like minds would not need lawyers.

Companies that advertise engagement rings will have to show a man putting a ring on a man's finger -- if they show only women fingers, they will be boycotted just as a company having racist ads would be now.

Films that only show man-woman married couples will be regarded as antisocial and as morally irresponsible as films that show people smoking have become.

And this is bad because.......

The mere fact that Mr. Praeger and the rest of the radical right has a social or religious objection to this lifestyle is not justification for any kind of different treatment under the law. Once again, this is not the court trying to enforce a moral standard, quite the opposite. If anyone is guilty of presumptiously claiming the moral high ground on this issue, it is the right.

Anyone who advocates marriage between a man and a woman will be morally regarded the same as racist. And soon it will be a hate crime.

W....T....F!?

Indeed -- and this is the ultimate goal of many of the same-sex marriage activists -- the terms "male" and "female," "man" and "woman" will gradually lose their significance. They already are. On the intellectual and cultural left, "male" and "female" are deemed social constructs that have little meaning. That is why same-sex marriage advocates argue that children have no need for both a mother and a father -- the sexes are interchangeable. Whatever a father can do a second mother can do. Whatever a mother can do, a second father can do. Genitalia are the only real differences between the sexes, and even they can be switched at will.

Really? And all this time I thought all those "activist" wanted was equal treatment under the law. Silly me.

Anticipating reactions to this column -- as to all defenses of man-woman marriage -- that it or its author are "homophobic," i.e., bigoted and unworthy of respectful rejoinder, it is important to reaffirm that nothing written here is implicitly, let alone explicitly, anti-gay. I take it as axiomatic that a gay man or woman is created in God's image and as precious as any other human being. And I readily acknowledge that it is unfair when an adult is not allowed to marry the love of his or her choice. But social policy cannot be made solely on the basis of eradicating all of life's unfairness. Thus, we must love the gay person -- and his and or her partner as well. But we must never change the definition of marriage. The price to society and succeeding generations will be too great.

That's comforting. You're not a homophobe, you just play one in the newspaper. But, what praytell, is the goal of the justice system if not to obtain, you know, justice? The rule of law exists to preserve order and justice, not piety. It is not a tool to protect morality, nor should it be.

That is why Californians must amend their state's Constitution.

Ya, because amending the Constitution to define what the citizens can't do worked SO well the last time.

Tiahrt supports millionaires instead of our troops

2008-05-21T07:59:00.003-05:00

Recently, the House passed (with the support of Reps. Dennis Moore and Nancy Boyda) an expansion of the GI Bill that would allow more veteran returning from Iraq and Afghanistan to get a college degree. You would think those patriotic, flag-waving, troop-hugging Republicans who sent them over there in the first damn place would be the ones supporting the bill and chastising Democrats for not supporting our troops.

Well, apparently wearing a flag pin on your lapel is enough for them.

Numerous Republicans, including Kansas Reps. Todd Tiahrt and Jerry Moran, voted nay.

Why, you ask? Well, Tiahrt and Moran haven't bothered to explain themselves as of yet, but several Republicans have said the bill would discourage soldiers from re-enlisting. Perhaps if they weren't bogged down in an unjust war with no end, they would be a little more enthusiastic about putting off their education.

The other hitching point for Republicans? The bill would increase the personal income tax on individuals making at least $500,000 per year by one half of one percent. That's less than a penny on the dollar for the richest of the rich.

Unacceptable.

Sen. John McCain and President George W. Bush have both spoken out against this bill. It heads to the Senate this week, where we can only hope a veteran like Pat Roberts will support it.

We now know that Reps. Tiahrt and Moran, as well as Bush and McCain, are on the side of the wealthiest Americans, now the question becomes who's side is Pat Roberts on?

Some videos on the subject...

You gotta watch this from beginning to end...

2008-05-20T17:00:00.001-05:00

Hyperion Hype

2008-05-20T07:36:00.003-05:00

We'd like to congratulate our friends over at TheKansasRepublican for finally beginning to grasp one of the most basic principles of blogging: citing your arguments. In their most recent rant about Holcomb/Hyperion, the blogger known as "Custer" links to an "expose" in the Topeka Capital-Journal. Bravo, TKR, bravo. You have discovered a hyperlink. Of course, the story doesn't actually say what you claim it does, but that's OK. Baby steps.

You see, TKR would have you believe that, were it not for KDHE director Rod Bremby's rejection of the plant and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius' subsequent decision to thrice veto bills overturning that decision, Hyperion would be on its way to Pottawatomie County. Oh, and apparently gas prices would be like $0.30/gallon in NE Kansas. To prove this, they link to this story in the Capital-Journal written by James Carlson.

What should be noted about this story is that no one from the KDHE or from Hyperion is ever quoted as saying the Holcomb decision caused the plant to go to South Dakota. All the evidence that is given is from a low-level county board member and some vague references to the regulation in emails to government officials.

Obviously, Hyperion was concerned, but according to the story, Bremby did everything he could to land this refinery.

Phillips wrote to Kansas commerce secretary David Kerr on Jan. 22 asking for a commitment to approve the air-quality permit if Hyperion applied in Kansas. Bremby replied Feb. 11, "Kansas remains open for business."

Bremby wrote he couldn't commit to issuing the permit but said if Hyperion submitted the same application as they did in South Dakota, there "should not be a problem with issuance."

Doesn't sound very uncertain to me. Obviously, Secretary Bremby is not going to give them carte blanche by promising to approve a permit he hasn't even seen yet, but it appears to me that he is making it very clear that their chances are good.

This issue, however, is moot. The story confirms once again that, Holcomb decision or not, Kansas had next to no chance at getting the facility anyway. Before any of this happened, Hyperion had already purchased land in South Dakota and was in the process of getting it zoned.

In June 2007, after media speculation about a mystery company buying up land around Elk Point, S.D., Hyperion announced it was considering the South Dakota city as a location.

Soon after, RTP Environmental Associates Inc., a consultant for Hyperion, began work on the permitting process with South Dakota officials.

In September, Colin Campbell, the RTP employee in charge of the Hyperion project, e-mailed the Environmental Protection Agency, saying he would be submitting an air-quality permit application for the South Dakota location soon.

"A different site could ultimately be selected, but we can deal with that circumstance if and when it arises," Campbell wrote.

Carlson acknowledges South Dakota was moving ahead. "We were probably a little behind," he said. "(Hyperion was) renewing land options up there."

The Kansas Department of Commerce points to the South Dakota site announcement and the subsequent months of dialogue between that state and Hyperion as a clue that Kansas was a backup.

"All indications in the summer and fall were that the gears were turning in South Dakota and that South Dakota had emerged as the top candidate," said Joe Monaco, spokesman for the commerce department.

Next time boys and girls, read the article (the ENTIRE article) before you link to it and make sure it doesn't disprove your entire position.

This concludes today's session of Blogging 101.

Wow! McCain & LBK Agree on something?

2008-05-19T16:33:00.003-05:00

Oh...wait....

That was McCain 2000...BEFORE he sold his soul to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Sometimes, not all of the time, but sometimes...we really miss that guy.

BREAKING NEWS: Rasmussen poll shows Roberts is vulnerable

2008-05-16T16:25:00.002-05:00

HUGE news from the Slattery/Roberts race. An independent Rasmussen Reports poll shows Roberts leading Slattery 52-40.

That's right, Roberts, who didn't even have an opponent in 2002 (not had a weak opponent, had NO opponent) can only muster 52% before Jim Slattery has spent one red penny on advertising.

Moreover, the poll also indicated that 17% of respondents were undecided on Jim Slattery, if those votes break 50/50, that makes it a 48-44 race before a single Slattery TV commercial hits the airwaves.

Obviously Roberts has ample campaign funds, so this will still not be an easy race, but we're here to tell you that, come September, October and November, this will be one of the races the whole nation is watching.

Inspired by our friends at Kos and some of the other major liberal blogs, we'd like to take this opportunity to put forth a challenge to our readers. We're still a very young blog, so let's start off with a modest goal, say, $100 by the Sunday at 8 p.m. Use our ActBlue widget at right or head to our ActBlue page so that we can track donations.

Great video with Sen. Donald Betts

2008-05-14T12:07:00.004-05:00

Sen. Betts is a great guy and one of the most qualified candidates Tiahrt has faced since he rode the Republican Tidal wave into office in 1994. Tiahrt has millions of dollars so its an uphill battle, but Sen. Betts is right for this district. We ecnourage you to send Sen. Betts a few dollars using our ActBlue widget.

(NOTE: If the embedded video isn't working, you can also view the video here.

Kansas GOP misleads yet again

2008-05-14T11:25:00.003-05:00

Now that the Kansas GOP has started their own blog, it's become a lot easier for them to make stuff up (or at least so that people can read their lies).

These days, they're misinforming the public about Barack Obama's stance on gas prices -- specifically the gas tax holiday which economists EVERYWHERE argue is a horrible idea. Apparently the KS GOP isn't casting their lot with economists either.

Think about it, if the supply of oil remains constant, and the price rapidly decreases (nearly 19 cents a gallon if the federal gas tax is temporarily repealed) what do you think will happen?

Naturally, demand for gas, which has been going down lately, will increase. For those of you who haven't taken any economics courses, when supply remains constant and demand increases, price increases as well.

Economists believe that this spike in demand would at the very least negate the 19 cents per gallon saved by the repeal of the tax and maybe even surpass it. Meaning that instead of the 19 cents per gallon (approxmately $8 billion per year) going to build roads and bridges and highways, it would go to the pockets of big oil, who don't need it.

If you don't believe me, check out what Dartmouth and Oxford educated economist Robert Reich has to say in his May 4 blog. Reich served in the Clinton administration and is a personal friend of Bill and Hillary Clinton (who is also advoating for a gas tax holiday), so it's not as if he has an axe to grind.

If the KS GOP truly believed that Obama didn't have a chance to win Kansas, do you think they would waste their time spreading misinformation about him in mid-May? Me neither.

Why bring in the President?

2008-05-13T07:21:00.005-05:00

Yesterday, we were the first in the blogosphere with news that President George W. Bush was bringing his low approval ratings back to Kansas for the second time this month, this time to stump for 3rd District GOP hopeful Sen. Nick Jordan.

The GOP has been almost comically unable to wrestle this seat away from Moore in a solidly Republican district. Either they run a right-wing hack (Kris Kobach) or they have a bloody primary that leaves a hapless and broke candidate (Adam Taff and Chuck "Don't call me Maynard" Ahner).

This year, some thought it might be different. Some thought that Nick Jordan, who is still pretty conservative but not perceived to be amongst the likes of Phill Kline and Kris Kobach, might be the one to start pulling those moderate Republican Johnson County voters away from Dennis Moore.

However, the KS GOP has shown a penchant for losing lately, and it looks like they're in no hurry to reverse that trend.

The GOP already brought in Dick Cheney to raise money for Jordan, who faces a 3:1 fundraising disadvantage on top of relatively low name recognition. Now, they're bringing in Bush as well.

Which begs the question; Do they really think the moderate Republican and unaffiliated voters in Johnson County that swing that election time and time again to Dennis Moore are going to be swayed by the likes of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney? If they do, they should pass whatever they're smoking.

Bush carried Johnson County with 62% of the vote in 2004, but that was four long years ago. A recent Survey USA poll shows that Bush's approval rating in Eastern Kansas (the 3rd District probably makes up over 50% of the population of "Eastern Kansas," depending on how they define the region) was a meager 34%. Moreover, 64% say they disapprove of the job he is doing, leaving only 1% of voters who aren't sure how they feel about the President.

Perhaps more importantly than Bush's general numbers are his numbers among unaffiliated voters -- you know, the ones that Nick Jordan absolutely has to woo in large numbers to have even the slightest of prayers. Among unaffiliated voters in Kansas (Survey USA does not have a subsection for party affiliating within the regions) Bush's approval rating dips to 27%. It is only 30% among self-identified moderates.

While there is no polling available for Dick Cheney's job approval rating in our fair state, it's safe to say it's probably not much better than President Bush's.

As Democrats and proud Dennis Moore supporters, we'd just like to say thank you to the Nick Jordan campaign and the KS GOP for being so out of touch with Kansans that they still actually think it's a good idea to bring Bush and Cheney to town. (Ask Jim Ryun how it worked for him in 2006!)

Head over to our new ActBlue widget on the right side of our page and help Dennis Moore fight the Bush/Cheney machine that has decided they want him out of Congress.

Breaking news: Bush to stump for Jordan in KC

2008-05-12T15:17:00.002-05:00

Word from the KS GOP is that George W. Bush will bring his lowest-ever approval rating into Kansas City in the near future to campaign for Nick Jordan. Jordan has already brought Dick Cheney into the district to campaign on his behalf.

No word on if Sen. Jordan realizes that George W. Bush has a 34% approval rating in Eastern Kansas and only a 40% approval rating overall in the state.

We'll give you more deets as they become available.

Rough weekend for Mel

2008-05-12T12:14:00.006-05:00

Recently, a post of The Kansas Trunkline, the official blog of the Kansas Republican Party (e.g. the one Christian Morgan admits to authoring) asked why the Governor and Kansans might be upset with Melvin Neufeld and the Republican dominated legislature in Kansas. Recent commentary pieces in the Hutchinson Daily News and Kansas City Star shed some light on the subject.

First, the Hutchinson News.

Normally, leadership would be the pre-eminent quality of someone who ascends to the position of Speaker of the Kansas House of Representatives.

"Leader," however, does not describe Rep. Melvin Neufeld. Instead, the words that come to mind are irrational, bully and even hypocrite.

That's just the first two paragraphs. The piece touches on more than just the Speakers general unlikability.

The western Kansas Republican obviously will do just about anything to get his way in the Legislature, which this session is all about overturning the decision of the state's top environmental regulator who would not rubber-stamp Sunflower Electric's massive coal-fired power plant proposal for western Kansas.

That includes swapping votes and obstructing other - more important - legislation. It includes misinformation and expression of some downright bizarre viewpoints, such as saying he thinks carbon emissions are good for the crops.

Surely they're done, right? Wrong. On Neufeld's accusation that the Governor bought votes on the coal plant issue by permitting empty seats to be filled on the state plane (by Legisators who purchased their own tickets with their own money) ...

This bizarre behavior probably shouldn't be dignified with a response except that its nonstop outrageousness begs for expression of some relevant observations.

The free rides to the Final Four were easily explained. Some coal plant supporters as well as opponents went on the plane, and legislators paid for their own tickets. Sebelius probably figured it made sense to fill the seats. Now, taxpayers could quibble over the fiscal responsibility of flying a delegation of politicians to the Final Four, but it probably is an event the governor ought to attend.

And, besides, that debate is not about vote-buying.And Neufeld exposed himself as a hypocrite, because he has been accused of vote bribery himself, though of a more serious nature. Neufeld called the wife of a legislator in 1994 to say her husband had been found in a "compromising position" with two female lobbyists in a Statehouse lounge. That reportedly was the follow-through of earlier threats he made to the legislator in an attempt to convince him to vote Neufeld's way on a particular bill.

Maybe the Kansas City Star's Steve Kraske will have a more cheerful view on the Legislature's accomplishments this year.

You’ve probably never heard of Melvin Neufeld, but there’s one thing you might want to know about the Kansas House speaker: He goes well with jam.

Yep, he’s toast. Or, at a minimum, he’s so charred around the edges that hardly anybody will go near him.

Or not.

Get this: A Republican speaker in a chamber dominated by Republicans couldn’t cough up the single vote he lacked at one point on a test vote to see whether the House could override a Sebelius veto of the plants.

Talk about a canary in the mine. Good speakers keep five votes in their hip pockets just for sport.

Hell, even Nefueld's fellow Republicans blame him for the utter lack of any substantive accomplishments from this legislative session.

Disappointment typically soars at the end of any session. Lawmakers almost never get everything they want. But I was over there last week and I’m here to tell you: This session set a record for utter exasperation.

“Veterans are saying this is the worst legislative year they’ve ever seen,” said Rep. Pat Colloton, a Leawood Republican.

Lawmakers complain about Neufeld’s closed-door style, his lack of people skills, his unwillingness to accept ideas contrary to his own. His relations with Sebelius are described as uneven. He’s feuding with his second-in-command, House Majority Leader Ray Merrick of Stilwell, who agrees the speaker is in deep doo-doo.

Try as they might, the KS GOP can't even convince their own caucus that Gov. Sebelius and Democrats are to blame. How do they expect to convince the people of Kansas?

Obstructionist Todd Tiahrt

2008-05-11T09:32:00.004-05:00

A hilarious story came out in the Washington Post the other day highlightin Todd Tiahrt's leadership in the obstruction of important legislation to help Americans (including 23,000 Kansans) in danger of losing their homes.

The Republicans decided to rush a resolution honoring America's mothers. Obviously, this resolution passed unanimously. Who votes against mothers? The problem was, it didn't waste enough time, which was the point to begin with. Enter Obstructionist Todd.

After Tiahrt's temper tantrum, an open vote was cast (lasting 28 more precious minutes) and 178 Republicans (0 Democrats) voted no. Were they voting against mothers? Probably not, as Tiahrt's staff explained afterwards. It was a vote on whether to table the resolution.

Now, we don't hear such a motion in the above video, but we also don't care. Obviously, no one thinks Todd Tiahrt or any other member of Congress is anti-mother. The problem is the games they're playing.

Instead of getting meaningful work done, Todd Tiahrt and his pals are more concerned petty maneuvers to block Democratic bills out of spite rather than a legitimate policy dispute.

Todd sure was a bulldog in his fight to get that open vote. Too bad he couldn't have fought that hard to keep the tanker contract in the US. Guess you have to have priorities.

Email Congressman Tiahrt and ask him why he fought harder to obstruct debate on the housing crisis than he did for Kansas jobs. When you're done, donate to Sen. Donald Betts so we don't have to deal with Obstructionist Todd any longer.

Massive props to Rep. Josh Svaty (D-Ellsworth)

2008-05-08T14:30:00.004-05:00

Rep. Josh Svaty has penned a brilliant piece, outlining his opposition to the Holcomb bill. Rep. Svaty says it better than we could ever dream of saying it, so we'll just let his words speak for themselves. Tip of the hat to Peg at KansasPrairie.net. It's kind of long, but if this is an issue you are passionate about, it's well worth the read.

I am not opposed to coal. I want to see baseload generation built in Southwest Kansas. I do not take my orders from the Governor.

I have tried to avoid the discussion of coal, but this is truly what this session has become, and it deserves a great deal of attention. I want to start by saying this: I have never been more proud of the area I represent than at times like this. These past few weeks have been very difficult – I have been called names, my wife has been drug in to my issues, and we have received many very forceful comments from individuals. I am proud to say that none of those comments have come from this district. I know from your comments that many of you agree with me, and some of you do not. However, those of you that do not have been very respectful in your approach, and I cannot extend to you enough gratitude. Thank you.

I reiterate the points I made earlier – I am not opposed to coal and I recognize the role it will have to play as we transition to the future. However, as this session opened it became apparent that there was to be no compromising in terms of what the final legislation would look like. Hearings were rushed, amendments were pre-drafted and approved by a committee to which no one was publicly appointed. I made my stand; I tried to have them slow down and be more deliberate; but the groups interested in this bill were not listening to a broad swath of Kansans.

We now find ourselves with two basically identical bills. They have been vetoed by the Governor; one has already been overriden by the Senate and both await action by the House. Some of you have wanted me to support Sunflower and Holcomb, but we can never lose sight of an elected official’s job: as a legislator, I don’t vote for issues, I vote for bills. The two bills before me contain public policy so loosely formed and so dangerous in their effect that I can hardly call them “public policy.”

Some would say that there are very good “green” things in these bills – a renewable portfolio standard, net metering only for solar, etc. Those elements are both small and hardly compare to the underlying bill. Besides, they will always be nothing more than window dressing when they are used to bring votes rather than being a genuine policy shift. You could describe these bills this way – a smoker that smokes two packs of cigarettes a day has decided to quit, for the sake of his health. He therefore decides to start wearing a nicotene patch, and limits himself to only smoking three packs of cigarettes a day. He also makes no effort to exercise and be more active (which in the case of our little metaphor would be energy efficiency and conservation, two elements all-but nonexistent in these bills.) Now, he is not only paying for the cigarettes, but he is also paying for the patch, which does nothing for him.

Some would say that Secretary Bremby’s authority needs to be curtailed. That is for the courts to decide. When a cabinet-level Secretary makes a determination that someone does not agree with, they can go to court and seek an interpretation of that Secretary’s statutory authority. Sunflower has done this, and that case is pending before the Kansas Supreme Court. However, Sunflower also decided to preempt that decision and have the legislature change the law (and make it retroactive.) If there is ambiguity in the Clean Air Act’s language – if the Secretary did in fact overstep his bounds - by all means we should fix it. However, on an issue this big we should wait for an interpretation from the court.

Some would say that we need the access to cheap power. This is where I will have to stop for the week, because I do not have the space to devote to this issue. However, it is my humble opinion, after years of energy briefings, that cheap power will be hard to come by in the near term, and it will not likely be coming from coal. Cost of coal plants are skyrocketing, and that is without any monetization of carbon dioxide from the Federal level, which is likely. Every other utility in the state has shelved or postponed its plans for a coal plant until they find out what is going on federally. Kansas City Power and Light is halfway through construction of their new plant in Missouri, and they are already 700 million dollars over budget on a 1 billion dollar plant. To charge in now with the biggest coal plant this state has seen in decades would be foolish, and that foolishness would expose the ratepayers to all of that
risk. In the past that risk was tempered by the fact that the Kansas Corporation
Commission would oversee and approve all of the rate increases by Sunflower to
make sure they were “prudent.”

Oh yeah, one other thing these bills do: they remove the KCC oversight from Sunflower’s rates – that protection would now be gone.

Thanks to Gov. Sebelius, Rep. Svaty and the other legislators who were able to withstand the bullying tactics of Speaker Neufeld and do what is right for Kansas.

Ned Ryun...crazier than his dad?

2008-05-08T10:00:00.005-05:00

If you're interested in right-wing conspiracy theorist nutjobs and their blogs, I highly suggest Jim Ryun's son Ned's blog. He's no Brian Brown, but sometimes I think he figures the best contribution he can make to his father's campaign is proving that Jim isn't the crazy one in the family.

BoydaBloc yesterday had a humorous bit about Ned lamenting people who just can't keep themselves out of the limelight (like his dad), and now we have this.

Why don’t you (GOP members of Congress) police yourself better so that the Foleys and Cunninghams don’t get hung around every members neck?

A fair sentiment, but perhaps this "policing" should include keeping ideologues like Jim Ryun out of Congress. After all, Foley was legitimately hung around Jim's neck in 2006 after it came out that the two were neighbors on D Street (remember, the sweetheart townhouse that Jim still calls home) and even held a joint fund raiser in May 2006.

You'd think Ned would remember this event, since he played such a prominent role in it.

Rep. Jim Ryun (R-Kan.) was a late addition to the block party, dishing out coffee and black-and-white mousse cake to complete the guests’ culinary journey. Ryun’s wife, Anne, and son Ned stayed away from pricey planners to give the night a touch of the congressman’s folksy charm, including red- and blue-frosted elephant cookies handmade by a constituent.

“It’s very warm and inviting to have people into your home rather than in a public meeting place,” Anne Ryun said. “Among the congressional families, we do a lot of getting together among ourselves.”

Though Ryun's campaign first attempted to distance themselves from the pedophile Foley, they would later change their tune.

You know what though, crazy as he is, we can't help but agree with Ned on this one. We also wish the GOP leadership in Washington would keep better watch of the flock. But re-electing Jim Ryun would be putting fox in charge of the hen house.

Hey Mel, you're going the wrong way!

2008-05-07T13:40:00.005-05:00

Another day, another cockamamie attempt at passing a coal bill from House Speaker Melvin Neufeld.

This time the boys on the right decided to bundle the coal bill with some totally unrelated projects to stimulate economic development in Johnson County. In addition to needlessly putting these important projects at risk, but Senators on both sides of the aisle view it as an unconstitutional grouping of non-germane bills.

Nevertheless, the bill passed the Senate and was sent on to the house. Now, after getting 83 votes on the last bill, and then only 80 votes on the attempt to override the Governor's veto, Mel and his buddies managed only 76 votes today. A full eight votes short of the necessary 2/3 majority needed to override the Governor's likely veto.

Another failure in Melvin Neufeld's seemingly endless attempt to win this petty battle and another example that he will do anything and put any project at risk just to get another (or a first?) notch in his belt.

If you play with fire Melvin, you're gonna get burned.

Is this over yet?

2008-05-07T07:19:00.005-05:00

Dear Sen. Clinton,

We're writing you this letter today not as supporters of you or Sen. Obama, but as Democrats. We have made it a priority to endorse neither you nor Sen. Obama on this blog because we feel that lots of good Democrats wholeheartedly support both of you and in the end, we'd be giddy with an Obama Administration or a Clinton Administration.

With that in mind, we write you this letter today asking you to withdraw your name from conention for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.

We have known for quite some time, as I'm sure you have as well, that your road to the nomination was going to depend on seating Florida and Michigan's delegates and convincing a significant majority of the unpledged superdelegates to support you. However, after Sen. Obama won convincingly in North Carolina and took you down to the wire in Indiana, it's just impossible for you to secure the nomination without some sort of last second deal-making that in our estimation would be detrimental to the party.

Sen. Obama leads you by 155 delegates with only 217 delegates left to be awarded, and the demographics of the remaining states make anything but a split of those last delegates highly unlikely.

The scorched earth mentality that this primary has taken on makes continuing forward a suicide mission. As we continue to gash at each other's throats, John McCain is out on the campaign trail in the battleground states framing himself. He's telling voters that he's a maverick, when we know that the Straight Talk Express has had four flat tires for a few years now. Sen. McCain is telling voters in Ohio and Florida and Missouri and Colorado that he's a new voice, but we all know that he represents four more years of the same failed Bush policies.

It's time to put aside our own personal ambitions and do what's best for the party and for the country. While you would have been a great candidate, the voters have spoken and Sen. Obama came out on top. It's time to admit defeat.

Moreover, when giving your concession speech, please plead with your supporters to put aside all the animosity of the primary and unite behind one candidate, Sen. Barack Obama, so that we can send Sen. McCain out to pasture where he belongs. This is not about Hillary Clinton. This is not about Barack Obama. This is about the Democratic Party and the people of the United States. We are not endorsing Sen. Obama or unendorsing you, we are just pleading that you let the curtain come down on a valiant effort made by a great candidate and let this party and this country move on.

Sincerly,
The Left Brain team

That jolt you just felt was the Earth as it stopped spinning

2008-05-05T16:00:00.004-05:00

There's a new post up over at TheKansasRepublican. And we here at LBK couldn't agree more with it's premise (or at least what we think it's premise is).

Much has been written about Ben Hodge…most of it true. We all know Ben isn’t running for re-election; We all know he doesn’t care about beating Democrats; We all know that he really doesn’t care about anyone but Ben Hodge; We all know he doesn’t have a permanent address. We know all that.

But what we have finally determined is that Ben Hodge is possibly the worst State Representative in the state of Kansas. And that is not hyperbole. His behavior as a legislator has been embarrassing not only to himself, but to his District and to a large extent, the Kansas Republican Party.

Luckily Ben Hodge is not running for re-election. But us here at The Kansas Republican believe we have not seen the end of Ben Hodge. Rumor has it he may run for the House in a different district or run against an incumbent Senator like Barbara Allen or David Wysong. He has exhibited in the past an ability to pop up in any district to run for office, so we wouldn’t be surprised to see him pop up in the wealthy areas of Johnson County to run for office.

It’s too bad when elected officials push their own agendas at the expense of the people of Kansas. There appears to be a lot of that going around in Topeka these days.

Hear, hear, TKR. We couldn't have said it better ourselves. Bravo.

Melvin Neufeld is a sore loser

2008-05-05T13:27:00.006-05:00

Having been soundly defeated in his attempt to override Governor Kathleen Sebelius' veto of the Holcomb coal power plant bill last week, Melivn Neufeld and his cronies in the House have threatened to file a (frivoulus?) lawsuit against Governor Kathleen Sebelius for...well...we're not really sure. Disagreeing with them?

"[Lt. Governor Mark Parkinson] came out and said regardless of what we do we don't have any grounds to do
what we're going to do," Merrick said. "It's us saying there is a separation of
power issue, and we're going to take care of our interest and protect our
members because we are an equal body."

Uh, we're no political science majors or anything (oh wait, yes we are!), but this seems more to us like a case where the separation of powers has been markedly successful.

Merrick and Neufeld had a chance to override the Governor's veto (her check on the powers of the legislative branch) and failed. The fact that Neufeld and Merrick couldn't muster the votes to override the veto just means they were on the wrong side of the issue. The mere opportunity to do so is the separation of powers in action.

Nowhere in the Constitution, state or federal, does it say that the outcome of such maneuvering has to be to the liking of the majority.

The Wichita Eagle's Phillip Brownlee hit the nail on the head in his blog today.

The Kansas Supreme Court will decide whether Bremby followed the rule of law. It would be a waste of taxpayer money for the Legislature to go to court over the same issues.

What are they suing her for again? My head hurts.

Run, Roberts, Run!!!

2008-05-02T18:21:00.004-05:00

Before the Democrats even sort out who their nominee will be for the United States Senate seat currently held by Pat Roberts, Roberts and the KS GOP have already set the tone for how this election cycle is going to go. Dirty.

First, Roberts' camp launched a radio ad attacking Jim Slattery for living in Washington, D.C. since 1994. The ad claims that Slattery was a lobbyist "Gucci loafers and all." No word on whether Slattery actually wears Gucci loafers.

Then, the pimple-faced operatives over at the KS GOP found the YouTube.

These two ads show us two things. One, the Kansas Republican Party and the Pat Roberts' campaign have no intentions of talking about issues. Two, they're scared.

Thankfully, the Kansas Democratic Party has shown they're not going to let Pat Roberts voting record and dedication to the failed policies of the Bush Administration be swept under the rug.

Nothing like the smell of political mud in the springtime. At least one party and one campaign is more interested in issues than childish, personal attacks.

NEUFELD LOSES THREE VOTES: OVERRIDE FAILS

2008-05-02T07:09:00.006-05:00

Melvin Neufeld waited until exactly the right time.

He had threatened to keep the legislature in session indefinitely until the Governor's veto of two coal-powered, carbon-belching power plants in Western Kansas could be safely overridden.

So yesterday, ol' Mel finally unleashed the fury, holding a vote to override the veto, confident he had his 84 votes.

That confidence was misplaced. After holding legislators hostage for hours trying to find the votes, the override attempt failed, 80-45. Not only did he not get an extra vote -- the bill passed the house originally with 83 votes -- he actually had a net LOSS of three votes. All the arm-twisting, threatening and game-playing just turned people away.

Of course, it's only because Kathleen Sebelius bought people tickets to the final four.

Neufeld said after the vote that Sebelius allowed legislators to fly on state aircraft to The University of Kansas games in the NCAA Tournament to leverage her position on the coal fight.
"What else did the state pay for?" the speaker said. "I have no idea."

What soon-to-be-former-Speaker Neufeld fails to mention is that the individuals in question paid their own way. He also forgot that many of them were and still are in favor of the coal plants and that it's commonplace for a governor to bring legislators along on when traveling in their official capacity.

But I'm sure none of the special projects that he was promising to give people if they voted his way would have cost the state any money.

On a troubling note, Rep. Tom Hawk (D-Manhattan) voted with Neufeld and the rest of the Sunflower cronies. Rep. Hawk has been on the right side of this issue from day one, but yesterday there were some rumblings around the capitol that he had been seduced by Neufeld. We don't know the reason yet and we may never, but this blogger is shocked and saddened that a man who has been a very good legislator could flip-flop on such an important issue. We'll bring you more details as we get them.

Republicans voting yes: Aurand, Beamer, Bethell, Bowers, Brown, Brunk, Burgess, Carlson, Colyer, Craft, Crum, Dahl, Donohoe, Faber, Fund, George, Goico, Gordon, Grange, Hayzlett, Hill, Carl Holmes, Mitch Holmes, Horst, Huebert, Humerickhouse, Johnson, Kelley, Kelsey, Kiegerl, King, Kinzer, Knox, Landwehr, Light, Mast, Masterson, McLeland, Merrick, Jim Morrison, Moxley, Myers, Neufeld, Olson, O'Neal, Otto, Owens, Patton, Peck, Powell, Powers, Proehl, Rhoades, Roth, Schroeder, Schwartz, Shultz, Siegfreid, Sloan, Swanson, Tafanelli, Vickrey, Watkins, Whitham, Wilk, William Wolf and Yoder.

Republicans voting no: Colloton, Hodge, Huntington, Metsker, Judy Morrison, Pottorff, Quigley, Spalding, Swenson, Kay Wolf and Worley.

Democrats voting yes: Feuerborn, Gatewood, Grant, Hawk, Lukert, McKinney, Palmer, Pauls, Peterson, Phelps, Ruff, Wetta and Williams.

Democrats voting no: Ballard, Burroughs, Carlin, Crow, Davis, Dillmore, Faust-Goudeau, Flaharty, Flora, Frownfelter, Garcia, Goyle, Henderson, Henry, Holland, Kuether, Lane, Loganbill, Long, Mah, McCray-Miller, McLachlan, Menghini, Neighbor, Rardin, Ruiz, Sawyer, Storm, Svaty, Tietze, Treaster, Trimmer, Ward and
Winn.

Record Prices a the Pump = Record Profits for Big Oil

2008-05-01T12:25:00.006-05:00

Big Oil has been announcing staggering first-quarter oil profits this week:

Exxon Mobil: $10.9 billion
Shell: $9.1 billion
BP: $7.62 billion
ConocoPhillips: $4.12 billion
Chevron: announces tomorrow

And while these record profits help to line the pockets of Big Oil CEO's, those same CEO's line the pockets of rotten politicians like Pat Roberts and Todd Tiahrt.

And what are our pockets lined with? Well, mine feel about $50.00 lighter every time I fill up my gas tank. How about yours?

Wait...wait...what's this? I just found some complete bullshit in my pocket. I wonder who put that there?

“Any tax increase that Congress imposes on the oil companies would only be paid for by consumers through boosted prices at the gas pump.”

Thanks, Tiahrt. But a study by the Consumer Federation of America begs to differ:

The oil industry’s response to increased demand and higher prices suggests market manipulation. Rather than investing in additional refining and storage capacity to avoid shortfalls, the industry has systematically underinvested and there is thus a shortfall of over 3 million barrels per day in refining capacity. This is not the behavior of ordinary market participants in absence of collusion.

Thanks to Pat Roberts and Todd Tiahrt - who have been taking money from Big Oil for years and repaying them by voting for billions in tax breaks and incentives - we are stuck with empty pockets and no plans for a summer vacation.

Coal, coal and more coal.

2008-05-01T07:31:00.004-05:00

It's almost like this blog is turning into TheKansasRepublican only with facts and stuff. No matter.

First, the Senate overturned the Governor's veto as expected yesterday by a vote of 32-7. Mark Gilstrap, David Haley, Greta Goodwin, Janis Lee and Jim Barone have some explaining to do as far as I'm concerned.

Here at LBK, we are not such partisan hacks that we insist on a 100% Democratic voting record. The Senators mentioned above represent a broad spectrum of Kansans and in the process of representing their constituents, they're going to vote differently from time to time. No one agrees on everything. But sometimes, there a fundamental values of right and wrong that cannot be compromised. A few years ago it was gay marriage. Last year it was school funding. This year it is Holcomb. This is an issue around which Democrats (and Jim Barone) can rally.

The fact of the matter is, outside of Finney County, people are either against the coal plants or they don't care one way or the other. Janis Lee at least has the excuse of being from Western Kansas, where polling shows support for the plants is higher, but the rest of you have no excuse.

Props to Jean Schodorf and David Wysong for standing up to their leadership and voting for what is right.

---

On the House side, Speaker Mel didn't have the votes last night and as such no vote was held. Word is it will be first thing this morning. (Apparently StayRedKansas has somehow deduced this means the veto will be overridden...ya, it doesn't make any sense to us either) We again urge you to contact your legislators and give them some words of encouragement. Neufeld has promised not to close the legislature until the veto has been overridden, so there might be some "nay" votes out there that get a little uneasy as the days go by. Keep prodding them. We waited out Doug Mays (who, despite being a jerk, was twice the Speaker that Neufeld is) on school funding because it was the right thing to do and we can do it again with Melvin Neufeld.

Here are legislators that we feel need encouragement.

Democrats who voted against coal bill and need to stay strong:
Barbara Ballard (Lawrence)
Tom Burroughs (Kansas City)
Sydney Carlin (Manhattan)
Marti Crow (Leavenworth)
Paul Davis (Lawrence)
Nile Dillmore (Wichita)
Oletha Faust-Goudeau (Wichita)
Geraldine Flaharty (Wichita)
Vaughn Flora (Topeka)
Stan Frownfelter (Kansas City)
Delia Garcia (Wichita)
Raj Goyle (Wichita)
Tom Hawk (Manhattan)
Broderick Henderson (Kansas City)
Jerry Henry (Cummings)
Tom Holland (Baldwin City)
Annie Kuether (Topeka)
Harold Lane (Topeka)
Judith Loganbill (Wichita)
Margaret Long (Kansas City)
Steve Lukert (Sabetha)
Ann Mah (Topeka)
Melody McCray-Miller (Wichita)
Terry McLachlan (Wichita)
Julie Menghini (Pittsburg)
Cindy Neighbor (Shawnee)
Gene Rardin (Overland Park)
Luis Ruiz (Kansas City)
Sue Storm (Overland Park)
Joshua Svaty (Ellsworth)
Annie Tietze (Topeka)
Mark Treaster (Pretty Prairie)
Ed Trimmer (Winfield)
Jim Ward (Wichita)
Valdenia Winn (Kansas City)

Democrats who voted for the coal bill and need a change of heart:
Bill Feuerborn (Garnett)
Doug Gatewood (Columbus)
Bob Grant (Cherokee)
Dennis McKinney (Greensburg)
Shirley Palmer (Fort Scott)
Jan Pauls (Hutchinson)
Mike Peterson (Kansas City)
Eber Phelps (Hays)
L. Candy Ruff (Leavenworth)
Jerry Williams (Chanute)

Democrats who missed the last coal vote:
Vince Wetta (Wellington)
Tom Sawyer (Wichita)

UPDATE: HOUSE YET TO VOTE ON OVERRIDE

2008-04-30T15:21:00.003-05:00

The house is in session right now and has yet to vote on the override. Rest assured, if Speaker Neufeld had the votes, the vote would have already taken place. One thing we know, Neufeld has not given up yet. He is still whipping votes and threatening legislators. There is still time. Email your legislator IMMEDIATELY. Tell them to stand up to Speaker Neufeld's strongarm tactics and do what is best for the people of Kansas.

URGENT: COAL OVERRIDE VOTE SCHEDULED FOR 2:30 TODAY!!!

2008-04-30T13:41:00.005-05:00

Call your legislator IMMEDIATELY and tell them we don't need these giant, carbon-belching coal plants.

Call your legislator IMMEDIATELY and tell them to push for Governor Kathleen Sebelous' common sense compromise.

While you're at it, call Speaker Neufeld and tell him your sick and tired of him twisting the arms of legislators and holding important projects over their heads.

The future of Kansas is on the line at 2:30. Make the call.

House Roster

Find your legislator

George Bush and Pat Roberts heart oil

2008-04-30T07:20:00.003-05:00

This is not going to be a conspiracy theorist rant about the "true" motivations behind the boneheaded move to invade Iraq. However, sometimes politicians do things that just make you scratch your head.

Folks in Washington have trying to make political hay out of the rising gas prices, and understandably so, but it makes you wonder "Who's fault is it really?"

Does the blame lay at the feet of the oil producing countries? Economic conditions beyond our control? Our inability to ween ourselves off oil? Politicians who line their pockets with oil company money and then protect their interests over the American people's?

In the end, I think it's a combination of all of these factors, but it's the last one that really bothers me.

The Big Oil companies -- you know the one's that Pat Roberts is so dedicated to protecting -- would have you think their record profits are due to rising costs of doing business.

Anyone who has taken a basic economics class should be perplexed by this statement. The issue isn't that they've seen an increased revenue, which could be plausibly explained by an increase in costs. The issue is they have seen an increase in profit, which means either the increase in cost argument is crap or they have increased the price they charge disproportionately.

But curiously, when President Bush spoke at the rose garden yesterday, he addressed just about everything other than the activities of the major oil companies.

I've repeatedly submitted proposals to help address these problems. Yet time after time, Congress chose to block them. One of the main reasons for high gas prices is that global oil production is not keeping up with growing demand. Members of Congress have been vocal about foreign governments increasing their oil production; yet Congress has been just as vocal in opposition to efforts to expand our production here at home.

OK, fair enough. Demand is growing faster than supply. Can't argue with you here. But there are two ways to curtail that problem. Bush seems obsessed with increasing supply, which in theory would solve the problem. But where is the call to decrease demand? Oh right, that's the thing that's been in all your State of the Union speeches but you never actually did anything about.

They repeatedly blocked environmentally safe exploration in ANWR. The Department of Energy estimates that ANWR could allow America to produce about a million additional barrels of oil every day, which translates to about 27 millions of gallons of gasoline and diesel every day. That would be about a 20-percent increase of oil -- crude oil production over U.S. levels, and it would likely mean lower gas prices. And yet such efforts to explore in ANWR have been consistently blocked.

OK, other than "environmentally safe" drilling in ANWR, what exactly have you proposed to solve any of the problems you mentioned, Mr. President? BTW, ANWR doesn't have enough oil, environmentally safe or not, to have any positive impact on oil prices, but thanks for playing.

Another reason for high gas prices is the lack of refining capacity. It's been more than 30 years since America built its last new refinery. Yet in this area, too, Congress has repeatedly blocked efforts to expand capacity and build more refineries.

This one really gets me.

If a junky is addicted to heroin. All of a sudden heroin prices start skyrocketing. He comes to you and says "Hey man, I need some smack but I don't have a job and prices are a real bitch lately." You don't say, "You know what dude, if you started making your own heroin, you could put it in the market and drastically increase supply while demand stays relatively constant, then you could get your fix at a more reasonable price." You say, "Hey man, let's get you some help so you don't need heroin anymore."

Once again, all of Bush's proposals involve using more oil. He gives passing references to things like ethanol, but the solution to the energy problem in our country and in our world cannot be a band-aid approach. It has to be a wholesale change in our policy outlook.

You don't have to be a tree-hugger to realize that, one of these days, we're going to run out of oil. Obviously, this day isn't coming in the near future, but it seems to this blogger that it would be prudent to figure what the heck we're going to do next.

It seems the oil apologists are stuck in a 20th century mindset (just like they are in foreign policy). The same thing can be said for the coal apologists here in Kansas.

The solution to the oil issue isn't to figure out a way to bring down the price of gasoline and ween ourselves off of foreign oil, its to figure out a cost-effective way to ween ourselves off oil in general.

The NRC is runnin' scared!

2008-04-29T14:35:00.004-05:00

Whoa Nellie! The RNC is running around like headless chickens, trying to keep John McCain from looking like John McCain on national TV!!!

The RNC is threatening to sue any network television station who doesn't yank the DNC's new McCain ad, "100," from the air. They're running into just one small problem - both of their charges against the ad are completely untrue.

The truth is, the RNC realizes John W. McCain has made a huge blunder by admitting his indifference toward keeping us in Iraq for another 100 years. In fact, the DNC's ad does nothing more than play the video featuring only McCain and his own words.

Here's the ad:

You can help keep the ad on the air by going here. And, don't worry...

As for the RNC's threats to sue, Dean said, "Let them do it. I understand the RNC thinks it's illegal to criticize John McCain."

DNC General Counsel Joe Sandler said the spot was offered to FNC, too, and that he's gotten "no indication at all from the networks that they have any intention at all of pulling down this ad."

Note to the RNC: Try not to look so desperate. It's tacky...

When in doubt, lie, lie and then lie some more

2008-04-28T09:33:00.004-05:00

Remember when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility. Somewhere in the past decade or so they decided that it would be easier to just CLAIM to be fiscally responsible, but not actually, you know, do it.

We thought that was going to be part of Lynn Jenkins' campaign in the primary against Jim Ryun. You know the, "If ever there was a time to send a CPA to Washington..." line. Well, apparently she's decided she can't win by actually being fiscally responsible, because that takes a lot of work and requires sacrifices that you just don't have to make when you can simply lie about it.

So Jenkins and Ryun teamed up with Nick "The Tool-man" Jordan to perpetuate one of the NRCC's lies against Dennis Moore and Nancy Boyda.

(Dear TKR and SRK, the above letters in the pretty colors with the funny line underneath them, that's called a "citation" Readers can click on it to see independent confirmation of the claims being made)

Jim Ryun, Lynn Jenkins and Nick Jordan — all Republicans trying to unseat two Democratic congressional incumbents who represent Lawrence — say the Democrats voted for the largest tax increase in the history of the United States.

(OK boys and girls, the above lines with the messed up margins, those are called "block quotes." This is another method of providing verification and credibility to one's argument)

Zing. One point for the radical right. But wait, there's more. It turns out that their statement, powerful though it may be, is...how should we say this...not true.

On that day, the House on a 212-207 vote approved a budget resolution, which Boyda and Moore supported. No Republicans voted for it.

The bill title was: “Revising the congressional budget for the United States government for fiscal year 2008, establishing the congressional budget for the United States government for fiscal year 2009, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2010 through 2013.”

You see, the bill didn't actually do a damn thing to the tax code. So how, pray tell, can you carry out the largest tax increase in the history of the universe without making a single change to the tax code? The answer: you can't.

Sure, Reps. Moore and Boyda, along with other Democrats who are actually fiscally responsible, are willing to let some tax increases on the wealthiest Americans expire, because it was unwise fiscal policy in the first place. (Sorry billionaire oil tycoons, you may only be able to buy one Rolls Royce this year)

But the Republicans don't stop the lying train here. No sir. There are more lies to be told.

In his speech at Americans for Prosperity, Jim Ryun painted a horrifying picture of what might happen when all of the middle class tax cuts are destroyed by the above mentioned vote.

Just one problem, the resolution in question seeks to PRESERVE those tax cuts.

In a speech before the anti-tax group Americans for Prosperity, Ryun said the resolution that Boyda voted for will increase the taxes on millions of Americans, including many in the middle class.

But the resolution also includes policy language that calls for middle income tax relief, including extension of the increase in the child tax credit, relief from the so-called marriage penalty, and other deductions aimed at the middle class.

“Nancy has always believed that the middle class relief should be made permanent,” said her spokesman Thomas Seay. He said the sunset clauses in Bush’s plan don’t take effect until 2011. “Nancy has said again and again that when this issue reaches a vote, she’ll support extending middle class tax relief,” Seay said.

Oh right...the facts again. (NOTE: TKR and SRK...facts are things that are verifiable accurate. In addition to citations and block quotes, you should consider adding these to your blogs as well.)

Don't believe a politician on either side? I don't blame you. But typically you can trust the non-partisan research institutes. Not Center for American Progress or Americans for Prosperity, the actual research organizations that care about...research.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities says the budget resolution contains no tax increase, let alone the largest in U.S. history.

The resolution approved by the House assumed that the nation’s tax law would be amended to extend some of the expiring tax cuts, especially those affecting middle class families, according to the center, which is a nonpartisan group that works on policies and programs that affect low- and moderate-income families. The costs of those tax cuts would be offset by other changes in policy, which could include eliminating the tax cuts for the very wealthy, some Democrats have argued.

Of the allegations made by the Republicans, Aviva Aron-Dine, a policy analyst with the center, said, “Our view is that that claim is inaccurate.”

She added, “The language of tax increases is very powerful. It’s important to correct the record.”

Time and time again, I find myself think "Stephen Colbert was right." The truth really does have a liberal bias.

Tip of the hat to BoydaBloc.

Breakin' the Rules...

2008-04-24T16:25:00.002-05:00

John McCain is in hot water with the FEC for breaking campaign finance rules - the same rules he helped write in 2000.

Now, to prevent further scrutiny from the FEC, he's just finding people to break the rules for him.

His campaign was given a discount of about 80 percent off the standard booking rate for Rosewood Hall. In September, Jefferson County Democrats rented the same facility and were charged the full rate.

The McCain campaign was charged $250 to use two rooms in the hall, which normally would book for $1,200 on a weeknight. The campaign also was given free labor from Homewood City Jail inmates to set up tables and chairs for the event, avoiding a $100 set-up fee, but did pay a standard $50 cleaning fee.
...
Homewood Mayor Barry McCulley said the rental rate was discounted because the event was on Monday, a slow day for business. City Council members say they always vote on such discounts but didn't get a say in this deal.
McCulley said he and City Council President Ginger Busby agreed on the lower rate for McCain's event. He said minor policy changes such as this don't require council approval.

Busby says there was a miscommunication.

"The mayor asked me if the hall could be free for the McCain event, and I said absolutely not," Busby said. "He then asked if it was appropriate to charge a lesser fee for Mondays. I said as long as it didn't cost the city money, it could be considered."
Busby said she did not know what the charge was or that city inmates were involved. She didn't attend the event and was at a soccer game Monday night, she said.

City Councilman David Hooks said that the council typically debates and votes each time there is a request to discount or waive the rent, but that didn't happen this time.

"I'd be concerned with the legal ramifications of that, from the city's perspective," Hooks said. "It could be a problem for the city to have made in-kind donations to a political candidate by charging less rent or having inmates do work for the event."

Senate fundraising numbers

2008-04-24T16:08:00.004-05:00

Here at LeftBrainKansas, we continue to be your only source for campaign finance data (other than our friends at Boyda Bloc of course, but they're sort of limited in their coverage) Today, we bring you the US Senate numbers (save for Jim Slattery, who's report has yet to be posted to the FEC's web site). Obviously, Sam Brownback is not running, but he's spending money, so we decided to include him as well. We'll update this as soon as Slattery's report is posted.

Links: Lee Jones, Pat Roberts, Sam Brownback

Sucks to be John McCain

2008-04-21T16:03:00.003-05:00

Poor John McCain only made $420,000 last year. Compared to the millions brought in by Obama and Clinton, you almost start to feel sorry for the old guy. I mean, if he wanted to buy a brand new Ferrari, he might have to FINANCE it. *GASP* Obviously, living on such an income clearly means he's in touch with the common man.

Ok, back to reality. You see, while John McCain's tax returns may say he's made less than $800,000 over the past two years, that hardly paints an accurate picture of the the senator's financial means.

This is because Sen. McCain and his wife elected to file separately, meaning he doesnt' have to claim any of his wife's earnings on his tax return. In layman's terms, this means he can hide from the American people just how rich he really is.

But a recent Slate story sheds some light on the McCain's financial situation. The thing that stuck out to me is the McCain's spent more than $400,000 on "household staff" in 2006 and 2007. Man of the people alright.

Does it matter that John McCain has money? No. Being rich doesn't preclude you from being a good President. Anymore, just about anyone who has made it to this level in politics is going to be at least of above average wealth and both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are well-to-do. That part doesn't bother us, what bothers us is Sen. McCain trying to come off as a man of the people and not being entirely forthcoming about his own financial status.

Network TV War Analysts: Robots in Disguise

2008-04-21T15:54:00.006-05:00

The Bush administration lied to the American people about Iraq, and then spent seven years and billions of dollars covering up that lie.

I know this is no longer a surprise to anyone, but it still makes me angry.

And yesterday's story in The New York Times made me especially angry because it involves television network news and I HATE television network news. Fox, CNN, NBC - you name it, I hate it. And here's just another example of why:

In the summer of 2005, the Bush administration confronted a fresh wave of criticism over Guantánamo Bay. The detention center had just been branded “the gulag of our times” by Amnesty International, there were new allegations of abuse from United Nations human rights experts and calls were mounting for its closure.
The administration’s communications experts responded swiftly. Early one Friday morning, they put a group of retired military officers on one of the jets normally used by Vice President Dick Cheney and flew them to Cuba for a carefully orchestrated tour of Guantánamo.
To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as “military analysts” whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.
Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.

Reading on...

Internal Pentagon documents repeatedly refer to the military analysts as “message force multipliers” or “surrogates” who could be counted on to deliver administration “themes and messages” to millions of Americans “in the form of their own opinions.

We know the Bush administration flushed their ethics down the toilet long ago - but why these "journalists" allowed individuals - with not only known financial ties to contractors in Iraq but also close ties to the Bush administration - to act as independent voices on their "news" shows...well...it makes me sick.

In a Q&A related to this piece, NYTimes reporter David Bastow was asked if he discovered why the major network executives and news editors didn't vet their "analysts." Here's his answer:

Two networks, CBS and Fox News, declined to answer any questions about their use of military analysts, including what specific steps they took to vet them for business ties that could pose conflicts and what ethical guidelines they established for them. NBC would not allow any executives to be interviewed, but released a short statement saying it had “clear policies in place’’ to avoid even the perception of a conflict of interest. Spokesmen for CNN and ABC said that while their military analysts were expected to keep them informed of outside sources of income, neither network had written ethics policies governing potential conflicts of interest with their analysts.

But the question you raise – why didn’t the network news executives try to “close the gap’’ between what journalists were reporting and what some analysts were saying – is a good one. One possible answer: Several analysts said in interviews that network news officials tended to defer to their experience and expertise in military matters.

Are you as disgusted as I am?