Ann Wagner Thinks Komen Should Have Chosen Politics Over Women's Lives

Ann Wagner, Andrew Breitbart's chosen candidate in Missouri's Second District, was upset that the Komen Foundation decided to reverse its decision to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood's breast screening services, services that have saved thousands of women's lives:

I understand if people have religious reasons for being against abortion. But if you think abortion should be illegal, there are better ways of going about it than cutting off funding for breast screenings. This was just a sad partisan attack on Planned Parenthood that demonstrated a willingness to punish thousands of women whose interactions with the organization had nothing to do with the thing Republicans find objectionable.

Twitter Reactions To Ed Martin Bailing From Another Election

Ed Martin, for the 2nd time this year, decided to switch elections after it became obvious that he was going to be destroyed by his opponent(s). He's now, hilariously, running for Attorney General. Here are a few of the reactions from Twitter to Email Ed's announcement:











My take: of course this shows pretty clearly that Ed Martin is a thoroughly unserious opportunist and, as the Beacon suggested, was not very good at raising money for his Congressional race. This, along with his history of well-documented unethical behavior, should be enough for moderates and independents to laugh off his election for Attorney General.

Though Martin will probably lose all credibility among sane people across Missouri during this election, and also quite a few Republicans, I actually can see why it's a smart move for him. The issue is that a certain group of Republicans refuse to believe plain facts when they come from anyone other than their trusted authority figures. So when Russ Carnahan says "No, I actually never agreed to that debate Ed Martin said I chickened out of," they call him a liar. But, when a Republican like Ann Wagner, and the GOP establishment figures who support her say, "No, I actually never agree to that debate Ed Martin said I chickened out of," all of a sudden they start taking the claim seriously. And likewise when Ed Martin's ethical problems are pointed out by conservatives, there's a group of people who believe it who wouldn't have if it had come from some other source.

And let's keep in mind what Martin really wants. He's a guy who loves to blather on endlessly about basically everything. He's going to be doing that anyway. So how nice would it be for him if he could be paid to blather on endlessly about politics? Being a politician or a perpetual political candidate is one way of doing this. Switching to a race where he's no longer being slammed and exposed by Republicans allows him to retain a base of supporters who will pay him to blather, even if he loses badly. So, despite the fact that he's amazingly managed to lose even more dignity with this decision, he's also wisely preserving a base of people willing to make sure he doesn't have to work at a real job.

One final note: of course, Martin's BFF Jake Wagman thinks that Martin will be "far more competitive" in his new race. One thing we can be relatively sure of is that Martin will be guaranteed endlessly positive coverage from Wagman, just like he received when he ran against Representative Carnahan. Such is the state of the world when our media shifts further away from informing readers and towards trying to entertain them with the wacky Jersey Shore antics.

Update: this tweet from Michelle reminded me of the funny pic from Sean at Fired Up Missouri:


Update #2: As an example of how Ed's clown show has alienated many of the non-die hard fans, consider this post by Jerry Berger where Berger refers to Martin as "unsteady Eddy." In Martin's contest against Russ Carnahan, Berger was in the bag for Martin. Now he's mocking him.

Correcting Roll Call: No, Carnahan was Not "Tipping His Hand"

Roll Call reported today, based on a KMOX story, that Russ Carnahan might have tipped his hand about running in the 1st Congressional District against Lacy Clay. Roll Call says that a Carnahan aide said that he'd be running "in the district he lives in," which would currently mean running against Clay. However, they actually left out a key part of the quote (which was included in the KMOX story); the full quote was: “Umm, I’m not trying to be flippant but he will run in the district he lives in.”

The "I'm not trying to be flippant" is a clue that the aide knew that the question wasn't actually being answered. According to Missouri law, Carnahan could move to a new district and run there, so "running where he lives" doesn't really mean much. And this has been confirmed in quotes from Carnahan's office who said that the quote was misinterpreted. Roll call also cites an anonymous "Missouri Democratic source" as saying that Carnahan has been "sniffing around the 1st District for a long time." I wouldn't be surprised if he's exploring his options, but please keep in mind that both Antonio French and the St. Louis American have pointed out that there are St. Louis political operatives who have a vested interest in pushing for a primary fight.

I suppose it's possible that saying he'd run "where he lives" is a way of testing out some messaging he would use if he decided to run against Clay, but reading too much into a quote from an aide who was clearly instructed not to reveal his decision would be a mistake.

What Does the State Supreme Court Decision Mean For Carnahan?

The Missouri Supreme Court ruled today that the Missouri House would have to start from scratch on their state senate redistricting and that a lower court would have to revisit a previous decision to leave the new U.S. House districts intact. It's pretty chaotic since the election cycle is starting up and filing deadlines are approaching, but in general it seems like this might be good, though not perfect, news for Representative Russ Carnahan.

Most people had previously assumed that Rep. Carnahan would be stuck with bad pair of options under the current map, passed by a veto proof majority when three Missouri House Democrats sold their souls to Republicans. Carnahan could either run in Congressman Lacy Clay's safe Democratic district, thus setting up a potentially bitter primary fight, or he could run in the new 2nd District which leans Republican. This dilemma has been the subject of previous discussion on this blog.

However, this court decision potentially changes the dynamics of Carnahan's choice. Though many politicos suggested that the judge might rule that a strange "teardrop" in the Kansas City area would need to be changed but not mess with Carnahan's district, the decision in fact cites the new 3rd District (which contains some previous Carnahan territory) as being problematic in addition to the 5th District in the Kansas City area. Here's the language from the summary of the ruling:

The applicable standard of review for a court in reviewing an article III, section 45 claim is the language of the constitution itself: whether the General Assembly divided Missouri into districts of “contiguous territory as compact and as nearly equal in population as may be. As long as the districts comply with these constitutional requirements, the circuit court shall respect the political determinations of the General Assembly and allow for minimal and practical deviations required to preserve the integrity of the existing lines of our various political subdivisions. Yet the duty to draw district lines of a contiguous territory as compact and as nearly equal in population as may be is one that is mandatory and objective, not subjective.

Here, Plaintiffs have alleged that various districts, and the Map as a whole, violate the compactness requirement of article III, section 45. Districts 3 and 5 are alleged to be particularly suspect, as can be confirmed by any rational and objective consideration of their boundaries. However, it is a question of fact, yet to be tried, whether those districts are “as compact and nearly equal in population as may be.” Mo. Const. art. III, sec. 45 (emphasis added).

I'm not a lawyer, but this language doesn't seem particularly strong to me. So it seems that while this makes it likely that the boundaries of the 3rd district will change (which will change the dynamics of Carnahan's decision, for better or worse), it doesn't make it a foregone conclusion.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court did rule against the claims that the new maps should be changed because they unfairly stacked the deck against Democrats. Now, they probably did stack the deck against Democrats, but unfortunately (and undemocratically if you ask me) this in itself isn't something the courts can legally take action on. From the Beacon's analysis:

But the Supreme Court said that Green was correct in dismissing some arguments -- such as the assertion that the new 3rd was crafted to curb the congressional influence of the St. Louis area and that it unfairly targeted Democrats. The critics contended that the new map leaves the statewide congressional delegation skewed improperly toward Republicans by protecting the six GOP incumbents.

The court stated in its opinion that the U.S. Supreme Court's "inability to state a clear standard" regarding gerrymandering has made it difficult for the state Supreme Court to make a ruling on that argument.

So there's nothing forcing the lower courts to make the districts more friendly to Carnahan. On the other hand, the Supreme Court seemed to think that the 3rd and the 5th districts would need to be redrawn. Given that the last boundary drawings were done by a hyper-partisan crowd doing whatever they could to maximizing Republican chances, any possible changes will most likely result in a somewhat better map for Carnahan. I already think he should run in the 2nd against Ann Wagner or Ed Martin, but if that district shifts a little more Democrat then the decision hopefully becomes a lot easier.

Tea Partier Suggests Possible Foul Play In Wagner Campaign, But I'm Skeptical

Darin at Reboot Congress had some interesting observations earlier about Ann Wagner and Enterprise, where Wagner's husband is the Vice President of Government and Public Affairs:

Late last September, Missouri State Representative Sue Allen held a trivia night fundraiser. Sue's a solid conservative who's district has significantly changed in Missouri's recent redistricting. She needs to raise funds to increase her name recognition because of those new boundries--find out more about Sue Allen and donate to her campaign. To encourage donors to purchase tables at her September trivia night, any donor who bought a table would be allowed to read the trivia questions for one round.

On September 14th, Enterprise Holdings Inc. PAC donated $1,000 to Missouri State Rep Sue Allen. That's documented on page ten of Sue Allen's October Missouri Ethics Commission disclosure report embedded below. No one with the name "Wagner" is mentioned in that disclosure report.

As you can see in the picture below, Ann Wagner's reading questions at Sue Allen's trivia night. Reports from attendees at that fundraiser indicate that she read questions for four rounds. Is this the strategic vision of Ray Wagner: to buy a speaking platform in front of a room full of donors for his wife, a candidate for Congress, and finance that platform with Enterprise PAC money? I don't know if that rises to the level of using Enterprise stationary for Ann Wagner campaign solicitations, but it is an advantage other candidates around the country do not enjoy.

This set of facts potentially implies a serious problem. If Allen told people that they could read questions if they donated enough money to buy a table, and Ann Wagner read questions based on a $1,000 donation from the Enterprise PAC without reporting it as an in-kind donation from Enterprise, then it would seem that she might have run afoul of elections laws. However, that's based on the second hand information that this was how the event was set up, and I found some online evidence that seems to tell a different story.

The Young Republicans of St. Louis have a link to a google doc flier for the event. If you look at the flier, it lists Wagner as a "special guest" along with other Republicans like Tilley, Jones, Nieves, etc. Furthermore, it only mentions the cost of buying a table;there's no mention of being able to spend money to read questions. So without evidence that Wagner was allowed to read questions because of the donated money rather than because she was a special guest, it would be hard to produce any evidence of law-breaking. However, it certainly does reinforce the tea party bloggers suggestion that Wagner is a little too cozy with Enterprise to be viewed as an independent candidate.

I Agree With Antonio French (and mostly with the American) on Russ Carnahan's Options

Antonio French is back blogging at Pub Def for what seems like the first time in eons and offers a pretty strong argument that Russ Carnahan should not run in Missouri's First District against Democrat Representative Lacy Clay. French offers several important reasons for Carnahan to avoid a Democratic showdown including tarnishing the family name and the threat of constant primary challenges even if he pulled off a victory. But what I think is the most interesting point is this one:

Some people are encouraging Carnahan to run against Clay for very selfish reasons, such as to increase turnout in their own elections. A well-financed, racially charged Congressional primary fight is sure to bring out voters for lower profile races down ballot. Like the treasurer’s race, for instance. Carnahan shouldn’t allow himself to be a tool of self-serving people who care less about the Democratic Party and the principles it stands for (such as inclusion) than they do their own ambitions. And even if Carnahan squeaked out an Election Night win, he will have so divided the district and the city that there would be little to celebrate.

If you recall, in late December I reached a fairly similar conclusion with different arguments.

French also links to the latest Political EYE in the St. Louis American which also argues, as I did, that Carnahan should run in the slightly Republican leaning 2nd District rather than against Clay. While I agree with much of what is said in the American, some of it is a bit perplexing. First of all, the title is "The growing isolation of Russ Carnahan," which strikes me as needlessly antagonistic. Carnahan might be somewhat isolated if he decided to run against Clay, but he hasn't decided that yet, so there's no reason to use that terminology. The EYE then goes on, I guess in support of their "isolation" thesis, to say the following:

Carnahan’s increasing isolation in this legal battle was made most painfully evident when the three judges on the Supreme Court appointed by Democratic governors – Chief Judge Rick Teitelman (appointed by Gov. Bob Holden), Judge Mary Russell (Holden) and Judge George Draper (recently appointed by Nixon) – recused themselves from the case.

If the EYE were to look suspiciously for evidence of behind-the-scene power-playing by party giants, such as Nixon or U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill, this is the place to look. With these recusals, the EYE would conclude, the Missouri Democratic Party abandoned Russ Carnahan and all but doomed this legal effort to failure.

This claim doesn't make much sense to me. McCaskill and Nixon, as the EYE points out elsewhere, don't want a contested primary. So why would they tinker with the courts in a way to make a contested primary more likely?

But there's one part of the EYE that I think would be an especially good lesson for Democratic activists in the St. Louis area:

Democrats, both in Missouri and nationally, who do not want to see the black base antagonized by a primary challenge to Clay have pledged Carnahan all but limitless financial support to run against Akin, the EYE is told.

We need to remember that both sticks and carrots are important. Many people are spending their time telling Russ Carnahan about all of the bad things that will happen if he runs against Clay. But it's just as important for people to be committed to making good things happen if he decides to run in the 2nd. If Carnahan makes the right decision and engages the Herculean task of trying to win in the 2nd (while leaving Lacy Clay a cakewalk, and perhaps one he really doesn't deserve given the way the redistricting fight played out), then Carnahan should be rewarded with serious energy and money from St. Louis Democratic activists. He got screwed in this mess, but if he decides to do the right thing in spite of his raw deal, people should make sure that he gets the praise and support he deserves.

A RINO's Guide to Wooing Cranky Breitbart Editors (With Photos!)

What's that? You're a Republican politician who doesn't actually care about conservative values but likes using the government to further your business interests and personal wealth? Worried that conservative bloggers will tear you apart for pretending to be a conservative when you're actually not?

Fear not! Because here in the great state of Missouri we have the perfect example of how a GOP establishment candidate can easily win over the entire Breitbart operation just by showing them a little "affection" (if you know what I mean)!

Ann Wagner is the embodiment of the GOP establishment. She was appointed as the Ambassador to Luxembourg by President Bush. She was the chair of ultimate GOP insider Roy Blunt's successful Missouri Senate campaign where he defeated a more conservative challenger before trouncing Robin Carnahan. She was one of the finalists to run the Republican National Committee. And her husband is a registered lobbyist and Vice President of Government and Public Affairs at Enterprise, so her election would be the perfect example of the GOP establishment's favorite hobby: crony capitalism!

Not only that, but Wagner's opponent in the GOP primary is Ed Martin, a guy who was at the original St. Louis tea party rally and was on the tea party board before deciding to run against Russ Carnahan in the 2010 election. As a former Chief of Staff for Matt Blunt, Martin definitely is not a pure "outsider," but he also is not the embodiment of the national Republican Party as is Ann Wagner.

So you might think that Wagner would have a hard time wooing the "rebellious" "edgy" "unapologetic" "conservatives" who run Andrew Breitbart's sites. How wrong you'd be!

In fact, Wagner has not only charmed the Breitbart gang into avoiding attacks on her, she's actually gotten them to publish attacks on her tea party opponent! She's demonstrated that what they really care about isn't actually conservatism, but rather making sure that they get their piece of the pie.

But Adam, you're saying, it must be so incredibly hard to woo such iconoclast firebrands! No, it's really not! At least not if you are a wealthy, well-connected GOP fundraiser! Here are a few simple steps demonstrated by Ann Wagner that you can follow to ensure that the ever-so-principled "conservative bloggers" at Breitbart's sites will pretend that you represent the heart and soul of the Republican Party.

First, they really like to be taken to sporting events. See if you can arrange some VIP passes for them to make them feel special:

Andrew Breitbart and Big Government Editor Mike Flynn at a Cardinals game with Ann Wagner, Ray Wagner, and GOP operative Chip Gerdes.

Of course, a little alcohol never hurts an effort to help "grease the wheels" for some future positive coverage!

The especially red-faced & glassy-eyed Andrew Breitbart, Ann Wagner, and Mike Flynn in downtown St. Louis.

Formal events are a great place to schmooze!

Wagner with Breitbart editor Dana Loesch and "Gateway Pundit" Jim Hoft. Hoft wrote a post attacking Ed Martin on the Loesch-"edited" site Big Journalism. This was after Breitbart blogger Dan Riehl had sent a "warning shot" by attacking Martin on behalf of Wagner on Big Government.

Don't forget to introduce Breitbart editors to GOP celebrities so they can feel important!

Ann Wagner introducing New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to Big Journalism editor Dana Loesch.

And of course if you can get the manager of the radio station one of them works at to endorse you, you're as good as gold:

Ann Wagner is introduced by John Beck, the Senior VP at Loesch's home radio station KFTK, at a fundraiser hosted at Beck's home.

Are there any other secrets to wooing the Breitbart gang? Who knows? Wagner is a record-breaking fundraiser after all (and Breitbart did just raise $10 million for...something). And since Breitbart steadfastly refuses to release any information on who funds his site, Wagner can help him however much she wants without anyone being the wiser.

So, to summarize: it doesn't matter to Breitbart bloggers that Wagner is a "country club conservative" who perfectly represents the GOP establishment that the tea party fought against. It doesn't matter to Breitbart bloggers that Wagner's opponent in the primary is a guy who stood with the St. Louis Tea Party at their first rally and has been closely connected with them ever since. All that matters to the Breitbart bloggers is that Wagner promises to give them a little piece of the pie. And if you're a wealthy, well-connected GOP moderate, that's all that will matter to them about you too!

Jake Wagman Used Tea Party Research Without Attribution

Jake Wagman wrote an article last week documenting how Ann Wagner's congressional campaign is heavily dependent upon donations from Enterprise (where her husband was a lobbyist) and Enterprise-affiliated companies. The story is newsworthy and does include some original reporting such as a reference to an email sent out by Enterprise Holdings President Pamela Nicholson, but a big chunk of the article was directly based on information researched by tea party activists and already reported at tea party blogs.

For example, though the numbers differ slightly, Wagman reported in his January 2nd article that $255,000 of the money Wagner had collected came from donors associated with Enterprise. On December 30, a tea party blog reported that Wagner had raised $249, 750 from Enterprise. Other details, such as Ray Wagner's role as a lobbyist as well as donations from managers around the country and founder Jack Taylor have also been reported by tea party blogs prior to Wagman's story. Likewise for donations from the Podesta Group, Fleishman-Hillard, and Ogilvy. Both 24th State and Reboot Congress have made it very clear that the footwork on this research was done by St. Louis Tea Party members.

I can see two possible scenarios for what happened. The worst would be if Wagman directly used the research from these blogs without bothering to reference them. The other possibility is that someone from Martin's campaign passed on the research from the blogs and Wagman vetted it and then ran the story as if it was his own. Even in this case, I would think a good journalist would do a basic Google search to see if others had written about it before.

Ann Wagner's BFF Blames Tea Party for GOP Senate Loss

I wrote earlier in the year about Ann Wagner hosting a fundraiser for Dick Lugar, an establishment conservative facing a Republican primary challenge from tea party candidate Richard Mourdock. Now Lugar has taken it a step further, claiming that the tea party is the reason why Republicans didn't win control of the senate in 2008. Here's Mediaite quoting Lugar:

"Republicans lost the seats before in Nevada and New Jersey and Colorado where there were people who were claiming they wanted somebody who was more of their Tea Party aspect but they killed off the Republican majority.” He then added “this is one of the reasons why we have a minority in the Senate right now.”

I can we can see why the tea party would be in turmoil after a group of them chose to sell out and support Wagner.

Jeff Smith Is Using The Wrong Sense of 'Should' And Carnahan Should Run In Missouri's 2nd District

Hotline has posted a thorough analysis from Jeff Smith arguing that, with the newly redrawn Congressional district lines, Russ Carnahan should run for Congress against fellow Democrat Lacy Clay in Missouri's 1st District. Writes Smith:

So Carnahan shouldn't put too many eggs in his legal basket. Instead, he should be raising money and canvassing the new 1st CD.

As you would expect from a Political Science professor and former State Senator, the analysis is detailed and insightful. However, the fatal flaw in Smith's argument is that he's relying on a self-interested notion of 'should' where saying that a person should do action A is equivalent to saying that A is in that person's best interest. This certainly is a common usage of the term and one used to make many decisions. However, this isn't the correct notion of 'should' for a public servant like Congressman Carnahan.

As a Congressman, Carnahan ought to be making his decisions based on a moral 'should,' where saying that someone should do action A means that A is in the best interests of the country, in the best interests of the constituents, or in the best interests of the Democratic party, or better yet, that A is the right thing to do. And on any of these senses of the word 'should,' I think it's pretty clear that Carnahan should run for office in the Republican-leaning 2nd District. Yes it would be an act of altruism, since Carnahan's chances of winning might be slightly lower in the 2nd, but it nevertheless would be the right thing to do.

In fact, one doesn't even have to stray very far from Smith's own analysis to see this is true. First, as Smith has noted, the Democratic Congressional leadership is urging Carnahan to run in the 2nd. Now, Lord knows, the Democratic Party is not always the best judge of what's in its own interest, but the fact that they think Carnahan should run in the 2nd is at least solid initial evidence that someone has crunched some numbers and decided that the best thing for the Democratic Party is to put up a good fight in the 2nd District.

Second, as Smith acknowledges, there's no clear reason to think that Carnahan winning Clay's seat would make Congress any more progressive. Here's what Smith writes:

Although I've seen both congressmen in action, I don't have a strong opinion on who would be a more progressive or effective representative.

So while Carnahan might gain something by beating Clay, it's not at all clear what anyone else would gain (other than the pundits and insiders who would love to cover the race).

But finally, and most importantly, a heated primary between Clay and Carnahan could be tinged with racial acrimony and possibly jeopardize turnout in the general election. Again, here's what Smith writes:

It would be nice to have a high-minded debate about the direction of national policy in a time of gripping economic anxiety, but anyone who knows St. Louis politics or the two principals doubts the likelihood of that. It won't be a race between a modern-day Bobby Kennedy and Barack Obama. Instead, given both candidates' limited crossover appeal, observers should prepare for a racially polarizing campaign in the long, sad tradition of St. Louis politics.

Even without any intentional shenanigans, a bitter primary might turn off voters from a general election if they felt like dirty tactics were used in the primary. And in the reddish-purple state of Missouri, with important Senate and Gubernatorial races and a legislature that's on the brink of a fully veto-proof majority, we just can't afford to have people sitting at home during the general elections. And it's actually worse than that, because the reality is that there will be shenanigans, as sadly both people in the Democratic Party and Republicans have cynical reasons to stoke racial divisions among Democrats. A primary battle would very likely be a bloody fight, and that might be good news for pundits but would only create new scars in an already damaged St. Louis political landscape.

So while Smith is right that Carnahan's own short-term self-interest might be better served by running against Lacy Clay, it would be better for the citizens of St. Louis, for the Democratic Party, and, yes, for the country if Carnahan ran in the 2nd District against Ed Martin or Ann Wagner. He might be slightly more likely to lose in the Second, but at least he would be fighting for the right reasons.

Loesch and Hoft Demand To Be Taken Off Conservative Email List After Seeing Activist Hub Article!

At the end of a post documenting that members of the St. Louis Tea Party had criticized Gateway Pundit, I asked the following questions:

So, there are a lot of questions there, but my biggest one is this: will Hoft even acknowledge the criticisms? We all know he ignores arguments from almost anyone who disagrees with him, but will he be equally afraid of debate with his fellow members of the tea party? They also suggest that Loesch should give them a platform on her radio show or on Big Journalism to respond, and I think they have a strong point.

Well, I guess we now know the answer to these! A member of a conservative email list (that includes activists, politicians like Tim Jones and Susan Cunningham, and radio hosts like Loesch and Allman) sent out the version of that post that appeared on Little Green Footballs. Not only did Hoft refuse to answer any questions, he immediately demanded to be taken off the email list! Here's the text (forwarded to me anonymously):

That's a horrible dishonest piece. The fact that you sent that out in a mass email is deplorable and mean spirited.
Please take me off this list immediately.

Jim Hoft

I'm not sure what exactly was mean-spirited about it. The fact that conservatives disagreed with Hoft's claims?

Unsurprisingly, Dana Loesch was no less childish than Hoft. Here's her email:

I also ask to be removed from this list. Spreading Media Matters smears is hardly grassroots.

Dana

Haha, Media Matters? What does that have to do with any of this?

Why couldn't Loesch and Hoft simply respond to the points raised in the original article critical of Ann Wagner? Oh, that's right, because that would mean that they engaged in genuine debate, which is the thing they're most afraid of.

Did Ann Wagner Violate the Missouri Federation of Republican Women Bylaws?

According to a conservative blogger, Ann Wagner broke the bylaws of the Missouri Federation of Republican Women:

Ann Wagner was invited to be the keynote speaker at this year’s luncheon. She was asked to speak before she declared her candidacy for Congress. According to MoFRW bylaws, and as a club, at either the state level or local level, endorsing any candidates in the primary is not permitted. Once Ann declared she was running for Congress, I was told the woman in charge of the luncheon, she had called Ann to explain that her speech at the luncheon could not be a campaign speech. Following, Ann agreed to the terms and was kept as the MoFRW keynote speaker this year.

According to my friend, on the morning of the luncheon when Ann arrived in Columbia, she was again told that she could not use her address as a campaign speech. Again, Ann had agreed to the terms. But, as soon as Ann began speaking, my friend said it was painfully evident that she was going against MoFRW bylaws. Ann used her time speaking to further her own campaign for Congress.

My friend was dispirited that Ann blatantly disregarded the instructions given to her by the MoFRW board. As the MoFRW bylaws state, if one primary candidate speaks at a club meeting all the candidates must be invited to the event with each given equal time to speak. Obviously, Ann was the only candidate invited, it was impossible to give Ed Martin equal time and she knew that.

Furthermore, the blogger claimed that Wagner left the event immediately after speaking, not bothering to stick around for other women receiving awards from the group:

Disheartened, my friend told me that Ann left as soon as she was done speaking. Ann didn’t have the courtesy to stay long enough for the women to be honored and receive their awards. In addition, this was the first time a keynote speaker did not stay at the luncheon for the entire program.

Jen Ennenbach: St. Louis Tea Party Should Be Called "The St. Louis Ed Martin Coalition"

Former St. Louis Tea Party spokesperson Jen Ennenbach on her blog Cry Liberty:

It seems the Board of the St Louis Tea Party Coalition have hijacked the organization, and divided the movement, all in the name of a candidate. They should legally change their name to “The St Louis Ed Martin Coalition”...

(I guarantee you Darin [Morley] or Bill [Hennessy] doesn’t have the stones to pull this one over to the site!)

Is the Emmis Communications VP a "Money Man" For Ann Wagner?

97.1 FM host Dana Loesch is clearly supporting Ann Wagner against tea party favorite Ed Martin in Missouri's Second District GOP primary. And morning host Jamie Allman is privately defending Wagner from charges of crony capitalism. Could this have anything to do with the fact that the Vice President of Emmis Communications (which owns 97.1) John Beck has donated money to Ann Wagner and is hosting events for her?


My guess is that there are other reasons for Loesch throwing Martin under the bus, but nevertheless it's worthwhile putting this theory out there for future reference.

By the way, people who knew Loesch before she was paid to portray an "edgy goth tea partier" all said that she would throw the group under the bus as soon as it was convenient. It's starting to look like they were exactly right.

Missouri Record Asks Why St. Louis Tea Party Isn't Supporting Ed Martin

Over at the Missouri Record blog, in a post titled Weak Tea In St. Louis?, Patrick Tuohey asked why the St. Louis Tea Party isn't supporting Ed Martin:

Yet in St. Louis the movement has remained on the fence in the Congressional race between Ann Wagner and Ed Martin....

So why haven't they taken up his cause? If the Tea Party movement doesn't rally around candidates like Martin, what has been the point of the last three years? If the St. Louis activists staked a claim in party politics in New York's 23rd, why not in Missouri's 2nd?

Actually, many in the St. Louis Tea Party leadership (John Burns, Ben Evans, Michelle Moore,and I believe Bill Hennessy and Darin Morley) have put their support behind Martin. However, others, including Dana Loesch and Jim Hoft, see more opportunity for personal gain in supporting Roy Blunt campaign chair and GOP insider Ann Wagner. But Tuohey's basic point is a good one: why did certain people go wild fighting "the GOP establishment" in New York yet roll over for the GOP establishment in their home town?

Tea Party Blogger Laughs At Gateway Pundit's Defense of Ann Wagner

Darin Morley:

I saw a picture over at Big Journalism with the sub-title: "Ed Martin, left, talks with Roy Blunt" and I just had to laugh. Roy Blunt's popularity among Tea Partiers and conservatives is pretty low, so Ed Martin probably doesn't want to be seen with him and certainly hasn't been seen with him recently. In short, the photo was a nice, subtle attempt to associate Ed Martin with Roy Blunt.

Of course, there are several reasons beyond Blunt's waning popularity why Ed Martin doesn't want to be seen with Missouri's newest US Senator. First, Roy Blunt has endorsed Ed's primary opponent Ann Wagner. Second, Ann Wagner chaired Blunt's 2010 Senate campaign. And third, Roy Blunt's daughter, Amy Blunt, works for the Bespoke Group and they provided "FEC Compliance" to the Ann Wagner campaign as documented above.

He has a point. There's no question Wagner is closer to Blunt than Martin is, so Hoft's photo was pretty misleading.

MO-02: Ed Martin and Ann Wagner Attack Each Other Though Discredited Right-Wing Blogs

This is too funny. Ed Martin and Ann Wagner are all nicey nicey when they participate in debates and campaign events related to the GOP primary in Missouri's Second Congressional District. Martin, if you recall, even asked Wagner to sign a pledge to avoid personal attacks and focus on the issues. Of course, what that means for Martin is to use anonymous attacks and smears from supportive bloggers to attack his opponents, which is what he would do anyway.

Martin's campaign apparently sent an attack over to Tucker's Carlson's trashy site, The Daily Caller, claiming that Enterprise Rent-a-Car is trying to buy a seat in Congress via Wagner. The Caller claims that Wagner's husband, Raymond, is, "Enterprise’s government and public affairs vice president and a registered lobbyist." They further point out that Wagner has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars from Enterprise or Enterprise-related employees. Finally, for added effect, the author of the Daily Caller post linked to a Wall Street Journal article claiming Enterprise was among different rental car groups that had specifically asked for a bailout from the government.

In response to the Daily Caller carrying out a Team Martin hit job, Team Wagner responded with a post from Jim "Gateway Pundit" Hoft on the equally disreputable blog Big Journalism. Shockingly, for perhaps the first time in his long career, Hoft manages to locate a couple of actual facts to support his case. It turns out that the day after the Wall Street Journal article came out, the Post-Dispatch reported that Enterprise did not want any bailout money, specifically citing the WSJ report as incorrect. So, once again, we see an apparent example of Ed Martin's campaign pushing bogus charges to smear his opponents.

As for the other stuff, Team Martin might have a point. It's true, as Hoft says, that Wagner's husband resigned from being a registered lobbyist for Enterprise when her campaign started. But that technicality means very little; our government is full of examples of revolving door politics where lobbyists quit their day jobs to work for the government crafting rules to promote the industries they just left. So it's hard to imagine that Wagner would not do the bidding of Enterprise in congress, given her fundraising network through the company and her husband's close connections, at least if she follows the example of most other congresspeople.

Also, this has seemingly turned into a battle between the tea party members who have been successful (in publicity terms) and those that haven't. Jim Hoft and Dana Loesch have apparently taken sides with Wagner, and appear to be hoping to increase their influence on the national Republican party by abandoning Ed Martin and cozying up to a very connected fundraiser and political player. On the other hand, tea partiers who have comparatively not been very successful (Jonathan Burns, Ben Evans, Darin Morley, Bill Hennessy) are sticking with Martin out of loyalty and a false belief that Martin actually represents conservative values. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Ed Martin Beclowns Himself With Dirty Tactics, As Usual

Ed Martin's staff tried to send around an anonymous letter attacking Republican Gubernatorial candidate David Spence. Sadly for Martin, they're just not very good at the "anonymous" thing. Eli Yokley at PoliticMo caught the name of Ed Martin's political director on the pdf document's meta-data, and also notes similarities to a hit job on Sarah Steelman from a year ago, back when Martin was considering running for Senate.

Pretty amateurish, but nothing surprising from a guy who cheered his supporters burning photos of his opponents and hinted at "voter fraud" after losing to Carnahan two years.

Also: does this mean Martin knows he's going to get walloped by Ann Wagner in Missouri's Second District primary?

Todd Akin Refusing to Meet With Constituents About Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security

Message from Jobs with Justice:

Come join us at a community townhall meeting with Congressman Todd Akin.

After weeks of outreach and requests for meetings, Congressman Todd Akin still refuses to meet with his constituents and community about our concerns regarding Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. In the meantime, he has continued to take votes that would drastically cut those programs and cost Missouri jobs.
But we want to ask him, "Rep. Akin, Whose side are you on?"

So Missouri Jobs with Justice and allies have asked him to join us at a community townhall meeting just one block from his office.

The event will be Wednesday, August 24, 4pm at 300 Weidman Rd, Ballwin, MO 63011.

Why Won't Loesch Allow Ed Martin To Correctly Say He Was Part of the Tea Party's Leadership

After previously criticizing tea party founder Bill Hennessy for declaring that Ed Martin is "the tea party candidate" in Missouri's 2nd Congressional District primary, and attacking him again for defending Martin against a Big Government hit piece, Dana Loesch went on a mini-Twitter rant today about some unnamed candidate claiming that they had been involved in organizing the St. Louis tea party:

Unlike the time Loesch decided to publicly humiliate Sarah Steelman's campaign, this time she didn't mention the candidate's name, so I can't say for sure that she was criticizing Martin's campaign as she had done previously this year. However, she seems to be saying that no GOP candidates should emphasize their involvement in the St. Louis Tea Party, which is pretty weird considering that Ed Martin was an officer in the St. Louis Tea Party for the first several months of the group's existence. According to a post on the St. Louis Tea Party site in July of 2009 written by "admin;"

Since the first week of the St. Louis Tea Party movement back in February, Ed Martin Jr. has served as one of the organization’s officers. Ed is a passionate, intelligent, and inspiring speaker who delighted the crowds at Tea Parties in February, April, and July. Because of our non-partisan pledge, we must remove Ed’s name from our list of officers. We will welcome him back if he decides to leave to public life.

The post goes on to emphasize Martin's role in the Tea Party:

Please thank Ed for his significant role in launching the Tea Party movement in St. Louis. He has been a vital link in the chain holding our republic together.

So if Ed Martin was an officer for the St. Louis Tea Party for their first five months of existence and, according to the group, played a "significant role" in launching the group, why is Loesch declaring that he can't mention his previous roles in the tea party?