The 1st District Infighting You Didn't Hear About

Progressives who, like me, are slightly dispirited by the nasty fighting going on between Representative Carnahan and Representative Clay in the 1st District Democratic Primary might be interested to know that the other side (the one that has no chance of winning whatsoever) has also been busy stabbing each other in the back in a nasty primary election between Republicans Martin Baker and Robyn Hamlin.

One caveat before I go further: most of the info I'll be posting is from "Gateway Grassrootser" Jen Ennenbach's blog and, as a general rule, you shouldn't believe anything Ennenbach says unless you have independent verification.  But Martin Baker is posting Ennenbach's blogs on his campaign facebook page, and if he takes her seriously, well then....

Anyway, here are the gory details.

First, the tea party got mad because Hamlin referred to Martin Baker as "the establishment candidate." Ennenbach responded by posting a screenshot from "Kill the Clairebear" Scott Boston and saying that Hamlin was not actually a Republican, but a Libertarian.   Baker was desperately trying to get Hamlin to debate, and according to Ennenbach, Hamlin responded by saying that Baker needed to pay his child support, a claim that Ennenbach disputes:

Baker, again, contacted Hamlin, seeking a response to which Hamlin not only stated that Baker would need thousands of dollars to promote the event, but that the money would be better spent by Baker dealing with his child support legal matters.

Ennenbach says Baker's ex-wife disputes the charges.  But she encouraged people to look it up on Casenet!  According to Ennenbach, Hamlin also brought up allegations of Baker not paying the rent:

But this isn’t the first time Hamlin has attempted to smear Baker, only to have it fly back in her face. In 2010, Hamlin accused Baker of defaulting on payments to his landlord. What actually happened? Baker had moved out of the property ahead of schedule and had to work out payments to the property owner. At question was whether the remaining rent was to come out of Baker’s security deposit, or if the deposit would be returned in full and he would issue remaining contracted payments on the due dates.
This issue was settled between Baker and his former landlord.

Ennenbach also claimed that Hamlin accepted an invitation to a debate, then retracted.  She claims that a Baker staffer has screenshots, although I haven't seen them.

Now at this point, you might think that Hamlin was the one engaging in all of the dirty tactics.  But Ennenbach being Ennenbach, she had to drag it down even further by posting a letter from a "friend" calling Hamlin a "sloppy, unkempt, bag lady:"

Here is what popped up in my inbox first thing this morning:
Has anyone in the GOP ever actually met Hamlin?
I’d like to say ‘not to be rude’… but… I’m actually all for being rude when it’s the best way to express what’s true – she looks like a friggin’ bag lady!
She & Martin both came to the After-Party tonight. Martin, as usual, was neat, clean & professional looking; she, looked like a sloppy, unkempt, bag lady.

Then, to top it off, Ennenbach wrote another post acting offended that Hamlin's campaign was deleting her facebook comments just because she used her blog to call Hamlin a "bag lady."  This prompted a response from Hamlin's campaign claiming that Ennenbach was deleting their comments.

So anyway, next time you get discouraged seeing Carnahan and Clay fighting over a Congressional seat, just remember that Republicans in the district are doing the same fighting over nothing.

Fact Check: Rep. Clay Did Not "Stand Up To The Tea Party" More Than Rep. Carnahan

I've mostly been trying to stay quiet about the 1st Congressional District Democratic primary between Lacy Clay and Russ Carnahan, but I have to take issue with one thing.  I don't claim to be an expert in much, but one thing I think I can legitimately say I'm an expert in is is the subject of the St. Louis Tea Party and who "stood up to them."  While a lot of safe St. Louis Democratic politicians stayed quiet as the tea party was busy making up ridiculous lies, engaging in disturbing antics like burning effigies and carrying a coffin to a politician's house, and executing James O'Keefe-style smear campaigns against local institutions, myself and other activists were taking on the lies and pushing for the passage of President Obama's monumental health care reform.  As a result of criticizing the tea party, tea partiers have pestered my employers, accused me of "libel" and "copyright infringement" and all manner of other stupid charges, claimed I was secretly being paid by liberal organizations, and even seriously suggested that I was abused as a child.  So, yes, I do claim authority on the matter of the local tea party.

And what's gotten me irked is Congressman Lacy Clay's suggestion that he "stood up to the tea party" and that Congressman Carnahan is "linked" to the tea party. As someone who was paying close attention, I can say that Clay was depressingly quiet about many of the tea party's nasty tactics, and as far as I know never took a stand in the tea party's attacks on local people or institutions.  What makes it worse is that it would have been easy for Clay to take a stand; it's not like he was going to lose an election in his district for criticizing the tea party.

To be fair, this behavior was hardly limited to Clay.  Mayor Slay also was in an incredibly safe St. Louis voting area with a perfect bully pulpit, and he also largely remained on the sidelines for the fights over healthcare reform.  In retrospect, it really was amazing how unwilling many St. Louis Democrats were to call out clearly dishonest and extremist tactics while activists were doing most of the heavy lifting.

But there was one area where Clay deserves special criticism, and Carnahan special praise, and that is Carnahan's willingness to hold townhall meetings to defend healthcare reform.  A big reason Carnahan was targeted with effigy-burnings, coffins carried to his personal home, being stalked at movie showings, etc., was that he had the guts, in a somewhat dangerous district, to hold townhall meetings and engage his constituents on the issue.  The tea party savagely attacked Carnahan, but he still was willing to be out there and defend his reasoning.  On the other hand Clay, in as safe of a Democratic district as you could ever ask for, did next to nothing to fight the tea party messaging in the St. Louis area.  Carnahan was on the front lines, while Clay sat back and let him do all the work of trying to persuade people.

So I'm not sure how much I want to get involved in the 1st district primary bickering, but I couldn't bite my lip on this one.  Lacy Clay may have voted the right way, but like many St. Louis politicians, he did anything but "stand up to the tea party."

Gateway Pundit Angry About the Government Assisting the Elderly and Sick During a Heatwave

While he's not attacking people who died of cancer or getting angry at the idea of Joplin residents working together, birther Jim "Gateway Pundit" Hoft also likes to get angry at the government saving people's lives by providing cheap air conditioning units to the elderly and sick.  Media Matters has the story.

Gateway Pundit Jim Hoft Attacks Woman Whose Sister Died of Cancer

Birther and horrible person Jim "Gateway Pundit" Hoft attacked a woman who recently thanked President Obama through tears for passing the Affordable Health Care Act and told him her sister died of cancer after not being able to afford health insurance.  Politico reported the original story:

After Obama's speech in Sandusky, he encountered a sobbing Stephanie Miller, who later told reporters about her encounter with Obama.
"I thanked him for the getting the Affordable Health Act passed," Miller said, referring to the health care overhaul the Supreme Court upheld last week.
Miller said her sister passed away from colon cancer four years ago — partly because she could not purchase health insurance. 
"Even after she was diagnosed with cancer, she was told her income was too high for Medicaid," Miller said.

Then creepy Hoft wrote about the event with the following headline: "Oh Brother. Sobbing Ohio Woman at Obama Campaign Stop Just Happens to Be 'Obama's Best Fan' "

This disgraceful behavior actually isn't a first for Hoft.  Two years ago, he attacked tireless St. Louis activist Melanie Shouse immediately after Melanie passed away from cancer after not being able to afford preventative care.  In the days following Melanie's death, Hoft wrote: 

It’s just too bad this woman didn’t call St. Anthony’s Hospital in St. Louis. They offer free breast exams to women who are in need of assistance. I suppose that’s Bush’s fault, too.

And:

There really is nothing they won’t do or say to get this nationalized health care bill rammed through Congress.

Nothing is beneath these people.


h/t Eric Boehlert. 

Chris Loesch So Bitter He Can't Help But Retweet Homophobic and Misogynist Stalker

I've documented the disturbed behavior of Quincy Illinois Republican operative Parker Lee "Chip" Gerdes on many occasions.  Gerdes has threatened to slash my tires, obsessively directs unsolicited homophobic attacks on me, and misogynistically attacks when my friends ask him to chill out. In short, he's someone that any decent person would steer far clear of.

However, Chris Loesch, apparently so blinded by bitterness and hatred, can't help but retweet the nasty attacks from Gerdes, even after ridiculously claiming that he "never attacks" on Twitter.

A couple days ago, I pointed out that Loesch has a history of throwing unsolicited stupid insults at me and then running away, pretending to be "above the fray."  Here's what he said in response:

A few days later, Chip Gerdes was doing his characteristic obsessive homophobic tweets, and even bragging about being a creepy stalker who threatened to slash my tires by linking to the posts documenting it:

And of course Loesch, consumed by bitterness, couldn't help retweeting Chip Gerdes' attacks:

It's really too bad that the Loeschs are so consumed with bitterness and can't just move on with their lives after their lies are called out, but I'll continue to document the disturbing behavior of creepy right-wing operatives when I see fit.

Congressman Clay Blasts Partisan Witch-hunt Against Attorney General Holder

Kudos to Congressman Clay for delivering a verbal smack-down against the Republicans' nasty partisan smear campaign targeting AG Eric Holder.

The press release:

Clay Calls Contempt Citation Against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder Partisan

Says Committee Action Exploits Tragedy

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Wm. Lacy Clay (D) Missouri blasted a partisan contempt citation issued by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee today.  In his opening statement Mr. Clay said:

“With sensational charges, reckless accusations and by exploiting a tragedy, the Majority tried to create the scandal they were looking for.When one starts out with the presumption of guilt, of a cover-up – as the Majority did when they began this investigation – it’s extremely difficult to admit when one is proven wrong.

And that’s how this began: with the presumption of guilt on the part of the Administration, and in particular on the part of the Attorney General.

Not because of any evidence of wrongdoing. Not because of any facts that would warrant such an aggressive and partisan “investigation.”

But because the Majority came into this Congress accusing the president of being the “most corrupt president in history.

They majestically promised seven investigatory hearings a week.  

They predicted scandal after scandal after scandal would be uncovered and examined and confirmed. 

And, one by one, the Majority held hearings on these so-called scandals.  

And, one by one, these so-called scandals turned out to be anything but.”

The full text of Congressman Clay’s statement appears below. 

OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM COMMITTEEHOLDER CONTEMPT CITATION BUSINESS MEETINGJUNE 20, 2012 10 AMWM. LACY CLAY (D) MISSOURIOPENING STATEMENT(as prepared for delivery)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.We in Congress, and especially those of us who serve on the Oversight Committee, can get pretty passionate about our responsibilities.We take our duties seriously, as we should.When that passion increases to fervor, however, our interest in overseeing the federal government can sometimes get the better of us.We can become so focused on what we originally wanted, that we can lose sight of the point of our inquiry.And we have all experienced, I am sure, how our staff can sometimes become overzealous in their attempts to help us do our jobs.When we take the time to investigate an allegation, and we spend money examining the issue, naturally we want to see results.We want to get to the bottom of the problem.And, of course, we often feel the need to show that we weren’t wasting our time, or the taxpayers’ resources.But the test of leadership isn’t about sticking to the plan no matter how badly it goes wrong. It isn’t about seeing something through even though it’s clearly a failure.Successful leaders re-evaluate. They recognize when it’s time to change course. When it’s time to give up a plainly incorrect theory.When it’s time to admit one was wrong.I was encouraged when the Majority, correctly, significantly narrowed the scope of the documents they demanded of the Justice Department. It would have been illegal for the Department to produce wiretap applications, grand jury testimony and information about confidential informants.However, when one starts out with the presumption of guilt, of a cover-up – as the Majority did when they began this investigation – it’s extremely difficult to admit when one is proven wrong.And that’s how this began: with the presumption of guilt on the part of the Administration, and in particular on the part of the Attorney General.Not because of any evidence of wrongdoing. Not because of any facts that would warrant such an aggressive and partisan “investigation.”But because the Majority came into this Congress accusing the president of being the “most corrupt president in history.”They majestically promised seven investigatory hearings a week.They predicted scandal after scandal after scandal would be uncovered and examined and confirmed.And, one by one, the Majority held hearings on these so-called scandals.And, one by one, these so-called scandals turned out to be anything but.Grants weren’t politicized. Waivers weren’t granted inappropriately. Regulations weren’t job-killing. Government employees weren’t creating deficits. The NLRB wasn’t a “rogue agency.”  The Administration really is for an “all of the above” energy policy.But the one charge, the one allegation, the one so-called scandal that seemed to take hold, at least in the press that is favorable to the Majority, was Fast and Furious.With sensational charges, reckless accusations, and by exploiting a tragedy, the Majority tried to create the scandal they were looking for.They put all of their efforts into making this the smoking gun that would, once and for all, prove the Chairman’s initial charge of a corrupt – no, the mostcorrupt – president in our history.But in hearing after hearing after hearing, we have learned the opposite.We have learned that the operation began in the Bush Administration, and that Attorney General Holder ended it.We have learned that the Justice Department was not improperly withholding documents, but in fact were properly safeguarding our documents according to the law.We have learned that instead of the wrongdoing, of the corruption, of the cover-up, that the Majority had promised to deliver, there was nothing of the sort on the part of the Attorney General.And so, after being brought down this blind alley, we come to a decision point.Will the Majority admit, or even accept, that they were wrong? Will they re-evaluate? Will they truly lead this Committee?As I said, I was encouraged by the narrowed scope of the documents being demanded. That was a good first step towards bringing us out of this alley.I urge this Committee to continue the re-evaluation of what has clearly turned out to be in fact not a scandal, not a cover-up.I urge my colleagues to reject this citation.”

Loesch Troll Chip Gerdes Moves From "Homophobic Jerk" to "Obsessively Creepy"

A couple months ago, I wrote about how the Loeschs' friend and collaborator Chip Gerdes, a Republican operative from Quincy, Illinois, was leading a charge of vulgar homophobic slurs being thrown in my direction. If someone says something vulgar like "Adam loves d**k" one time, I would consider them to be a jerk.  If they say it a couple times, I'd start to think they're kinda strange.  But when Gerdes keeps saying the same homophobic comments over-and-over for the past several months, I think it starts to move into the category of "seriously disturbed," especially when Gerdes has previously threatened to slash my tires.

Here's just a small sample of the bizarre sexual comments from Gerdes.  Keep in mind this isn't some random guy on the internet: this is a Republican operative who works with the Loeschs, with Gateway Pundit, and worked as recently as a few months ago as an assistant to Jack Roeser, the president of the Family Taxpayer's Association. For point of reference, my name is Adam and they refer to me as "ponytail."

Reminder that blocks of tweets read from bottom to top:

Keep in mind the "ponytail" meme comes from Loesch::

Not only is Gerdes homophobic and obsessive, he's also a misogynist. When my friend Sarah called him out on his comments, he responded by idiotically attacking her looks.

As for the Loeschs, they continue to direct people to creeps like Gerdes and Brooks Bayne and will absolutely never, ever criticize anything from the Right unless it interferes with their career plans.  

Even conservatives have contacted me to let me know how disgusting Gerdes behavior is, which I am grateful for. I know memory is often idealized, but I continue to believe that there was a time when people who behaved so disgustingly would be shunned from political discourse or at least asked to modify their behavior.  Yet the amoral thugs driving the right-wing blogosphere celebrate indecency, immorality, and hatred.  If they ever have any influence on the operation of the government, anyone who disagrees with them should be very afraid, since they have literally no moral standards when it comes the people they disagree with politically.