There's a man with a gun over there, telling me I've got to beware.

Bus riders: have you ever heard of Gregg Hartley?

He describes himself on his twitter page as a Republican policy advisor.

Opensecrets.org, however, sees it another way and The Washington Post reports that "He (Hartley) has reorganized the firm and turned it into a predominantly Republican operation."

The firm with which he is, for now at least, Chief Operating Officer of, Cassidy & Associates, is one of the largest lobbying firms in D.C. One of their clients is City Utilities of Springfield, MO.

According to their website, Cassidy & Associates has "helped businesses, non-profits, and political figures navigate their way through once-in-a-lifetime crises that resulted from federal action."

Hartley also understands social media. His Twitter name, GreggLHartley and lists his location as "The Shady Side", clocks in this morning with over 4,000 tweets.

Earlier this month, The National Journal's Jeremy Jacobs reported:

Former Missouri Treasurer Sarah Steelman picked up a big endorsement for her Senate bid on Thursday: Gregg Hartley.

Hartley is one of the top lobbyists on Capitol Hill, currently working for Cassidy and Associates. He has deep ties to Missouri, having served as Sen. Roy Blunt's (R) chief of staff as he was ascending the leadership in the House.

In an email to his personal email list -- obtained by Hotline On Call -- Hartley threw his weight behind Steelman. The email had the subject, "Steel Magnolia from Missourah," and in it Hartley wrote that he is ready to back Steelman even though it is unclear whether there will be a contested Republican primary.

"Too early to know for sure if there will be a serious primary or to predict winners," Hartley wrote. "But supporting a solid candidate isn't always that big of a choice. I've made mine."

Hartley also encourages the recipients of the email to visit Steelman's site and to consider making a contribution.

Talent this week announced that he would not seek the senate seat he lost to a Mccaskill in 2006.

Hartley, who supported Gary Nodler in the August primary, quickly shifted his allegiance to Billy Long and frequently tweets about it.

This morning, after I finished reading the print edition of the Springfield News-Leader (I love the smell of newspaper ink in the morning, it smells like...home), I switched to electronic media.

There I tumbled upon a series of twitter exchanges that started several days ago between Bungalow Bill (remember him? he's Christian County blogger who got a visit from Greene County Sheriff Jim Arnott and the F.B.I. for being critical of Billy Long.) and Hartley -- back in the day, we'd call it a 'pissing contest'.

Does anyone else wonder why Gregg Hartley, the COO of one of the most, if not the most powerful lobbying firms in Washington D.C., Cassidy & Associates, is allowing himself to get ruffled by a constituent of Billy Long's who asks tought questions and who was labeled by the Springfield News-Leader as a "thorn"?

The F.B.I. agent who, with Sheriff Arnott sitting on the couch next to him, conducted the interview, said to Bungalow Bill, the blogger in question, "You are absolutely in your to do just that (question Long)and more power to you. That's what you're supposed to be doing: holding people accountable. Because that's the people we elect and they are supposed to be accountable to us. And somebody's got to do it and more power to you."

Yesterday, Hartley retweeted this from JamesMNHarris (as Bus riders may or may not know, Harriswas part of the Billy Long campaign team with Jeff Roe. Harris also achieved some sort of notoriety, I guess, caused by some stuff that went on in Washington MO during the election-- another pissing contest?): Amazing how individuals w/ no journalism training, but email or blog now think they are now reporters. Self proclaimed importance.

Sure looks like somebody is ruffling some feathers!

Getting back to what started this post, also on Hartley's twitter feed this morning is this:

Hill COS agreed this week to help with efforts for Veterans in Defense of Liberty..... about 6 hours ago via web from Shady Side, MD

I don't know who the "Hill COS" refers to, but I sure do know who the "Veterans in Defense of Liberty" are: That's the group formed earlier late last year by Scott Magill

They have a website and a member of the board of directors is Sam Paredes.

VIDOL also endorses candidates. Their website boasts "75% combat efficiency with 2010 endorsements".

Ah, angry people who are mad at the government and guns.

Janet Adams Is A Liberal?

Who is Janet Adams? She must have been some powerful candidate that Shane Schoeller raised in excess of $169,000 to defend his seat against her.

In a letter sent this week to Schoeller supporters, Roy Blunt said, "Unfortunately Shane had to spend $10,121 more than he raised to retain his seat."

WHAT? According to a report Schoeller filed with the Missouri Ethics Commision 8 days before the election Schoeller reported raising $169,000 and spending $112,030 on the race.

I can't dig deep enough to know where the money is going but he 2009 MEC reports appear to indicate that he is carrying someone on the payroll. Must be his full-time, paid Ponzi person. Ponzi comes into play because he took money from one source to pay to campaigns other than his own. to the tune of over $12,000. But the Schoeller Ponzi Scheme is legal.

Remember these posts from KY3's David Catanese?

January 22, 2009: Schoeller considering run for congress.

January 31, 2009: Site set up to draft schoeller for congress.

February 27, 2009: Schoeller: I will not seak the 7th Congressional Seat.

Goodman is said to have the support of the Blunt/Ashcroft machine.

Schoeller's pedigree is deep: Matt Blunt appointed Schoeller's wife fee agent for the Nixa License Plate Office. She has received almost $800,000 in fees since her appointment. Schoeller has been a staffer for the Homebuilders Association, Students in Free Enterprise, on the staffs of John Ashcroft, Kit Bond, Roy and Matt Blunt....and don't forget, he's another shining alumnus of Southwest Baptist University..Do you remember who used to be president of that University?...and now, a campaign finance money launderer trained by the masters.

One of the ways to get around the campaign limits prior to their removal, was this simple scheme:

Special Interest Group A maxes out their contribution to Candidate A who is in a tough fight. So Special Interest Group A maxes out their contribution to, say, Candidate B who is scored as safe to retain his seat.

Candidate B then takes that contribution and passes it though to Candidate A. Candidate B launders the money, obscuring its origins, so much for transparency in government.

Pretty slick, ain't it! And not only that, it is legal!

But wait!, There's MORE!

Candidate B is having a good campaign. His opponent is weak and not raising much money. Candidate B is having good returns from his fund raising efforts. Lots of people are giving money to candidate B because they believe in him.

Candidate B meanwhile gives cash to candidates who are cash strapped. He takes the money people gave to his campaign and gives that money to the campaign of Candidate A.

Again, all legal.

But getting back to Janet Adams, the 'liberal' who, according to Roy, caused Shane to spent all his money and an additional $10,121.00" I tried to verify this information on the MEC website but the website is giving out error messages like Ralph used to pass out silver dollars.

I can see it now-----Roy goes to Shane and gets Shane to drop out and support Goodman for the 'good of the party'. As a token of his appreciation, Roy will help Shane with his fundraising efforts in his district and maybe even help him go for Speaker.

Term limits really presents some opportunities that used to take years to fall into place.

We will see how this plays out as we get closer to 2010.

test

Kristin, who lives next door, has received some of those robo calls over the past week. Actually she has received more, but if she is not home the calls go to her answering machine and she erases them. I told her to keep them and forward them to David Catonese over at KY3 political blog.

Kristin doesn't like the robocalls. They are nasty, suggesting Obama pals around with terrorists and.... well, listen for yourself. This is the call she received:

These robocalls seem to be originating from FLS Connect out of St. Paul Minnesota. Here is their website.

"I know these guys well. They become partners with the campaigns they work with. From designing the program to drafting scripts; from selecting targets to making the calls in a professional, successful way they work as hard to win your races as you do."
—Karl Rove

Yeah, the same Karl Rove. Not only that, one of the principals of FLS, Tony Feather had his start with the Missouri Republican Party.

A former executive director of the Missouri Republican Party, Feather is known for his fierce campaign tactics on behalf of candidates like John Ashcroft and former Missouri Attorney General Bill Webster. Feather ran Webster’s 1992 campaign for governor; Webster not only lost but went to prison on charges related to misusing his office for campaign purposes. Feather is also a compatriot of Karl Rove, whom he first met in 1974.
Feather founded Feather Larson Synhorst with another GOP operative, Tom Synhorst, who is sometimes referred to as the "Johnny Appleseed of Astroturf."

FLS is responsible for many of those annoying robo-calls to voters that arrive during the days leading up to elections.

Do robocalls work? well, robo calls are cheap.

They have been used before in campaigns. One candidate really seems to like them. (Say, is that the same Tim Trower?)

How will the call be phrased? Will it be pro candidate or an anticandidate ad? Why do I get this gut feeling that I am going to be a target of robo calls?

Maybe because we look to the past to predict the future?

My Sister Has A Yard Sign In Front Of Her House.

A horse rider I am acquainted with was coming back from riding horses at Wilson's Creek Battlefield this morning when she saw a yard sign in right-of-way in front of my sister's house. She called me with his cell phone and told me I wasn't going to believe what she just saw.

I halfway expected it. Since my mother passed away last March, two of my sisters have stymied every attempt by the other eight children to settle Mom's estate and get on with our lives. It has not been easy.

You all know that old saying, blood is thicker than water? Well, there's a deeper level to that saying, money is thicker than blood.

Eight of the ten of us siblings communicate frequently, mainly via email. The other two siblings have refused our emails, phone calls and accept only registered letters and have demanded that any attempt to communicate with them be done through their attorney.

It is sad for us. I know Mom would be sad too. Dad wouldn't have tolerated it. He never tolerated this type of behavior, especially from his children.

Anyhow, I told my friend that I was not surprised to see the sign in front of her house. I felt it was a pretty good indicator of her state of mind and her opinion her brothers and sisters.

I was originially going to title this post, "Mom would kick her out of the will if she saw this sign" when I realized she already had. Oh, and that sign and that trailer for sale up there, they are on the right-of-way

test post debate

I watched last night's debate at the bus barn with my son-in-law, who is the only Republican in our immediate family. Now, if you don't think dinner table discussions are lively around here you got another thought coming. I enjoy a good political discussion with my son-in-law.

But last night we promised our wives that we would not comment on the debate while the debate was in progress but would save our impressions for after the debate.

How'd it go? Pretty good. No one's opinion changed. He is still a McCain supporter; I am still an Obama supporter. What we did agree on is this: McCain didn't make any mistakes and was tightly controlled, and Obama held his ground on foreign policy. McCain scored points on earmarks and spending and Obama did best when he tied McCain to Bush. McCain fumbled in his remarks on Pakistan."

Neither of us thought independents were moved by last night's debate. We think the big event will be the vice-presidential debate next week in St. Louis between Palin and Biden. Both of these candidates will be a heartbeat away from the presidency...their performance -and both are gaffe prone- may very well tip the scales of the election.

McCain seemed tense in last night's debate. Pundits commented on his body language and rigidity. I thought it was just classic McCain.

Obama appeared more relaxed and where he agreed with McCain, he said so. It is too bad that the partisanship of McCain's staff produced this ad:
In my world when you tell a political opponent that he is right or words to that effect, you are stating that you are willing to look beyond partisanship and recognize a good idea, or good plan, or good work for what it is: a good idea, a good plan, good work. To imply it is an endorsement or a sign of weakness is disingenuous and misleading and not fair to voters. It also indicates the sneakiness that most of us don't like to see in our political campaigns.

Why do I bring this up? Last Wednesday, I was at a candidate forum here in Springfield. The Greene County candidates for county commission, sheriff, public administrator and circuit clerk spoke. The county commission candidates and sheriff candidates, during their speaking time, touched on the jail overcrowding.

When it came my turn to speak, I also spoke about the jail overcrowding: on Tuesday there were about 589 prisoners in the jail which is staffed for 450 prisoners. Even though there is significant understaffing, the jailers are still doing a good job keeping the jail running efficiently.

Of those 589 prisoners, twenty-four have already been sentenced to prison and are awaiting transfer to Department of Correction facilities, but because the Circuit Clerk has not processed the final disposition of their case files, they (the prisoners) remain in the Greene County Jail. The cost to the county to keep these 24 prisoners in the Greene County Jail while they wait for the Circuit Clerk to process their paperwork is over $1,000 a day.

The current circuit clerk,who was appointed by Matt Blunt, when it came his turn to speak, said he was glad to see that his opponent (me) endorse the Republican candidate for Greene County Sheriff. I guess in his world saying someone is doing their job is taken as an endorsement.

He further went on to say that his office is understaffed and that is why the paperwork hasn't been processed yet.

The circuit clerk's office is about as non-partisan as you can get here in Greene County. To inject partisan politics into this race is extremely inappropriate. I have said all along that the issues in the Circuit Clerk's race accuracy, efficiency, competency, the ability to read and follow directions, and who has the capability to judiciously lead and manage the office.

I have avoided promoting my candidacy on this blog but I couldn't let this go unnoticed. Jim Lee

PS--this blog is a public service of blognet.com. Anyone can get a blog from blognet.com

video

Regarding Springfield City Council's Email Addresses.....test post

Yesterday, I posted about the Shoot-Out On The Public Square.
The last paragraph of that post:

(Did you ever notice that when you go to email city council from "The City" website, what the email addresses are? They all seem to have the same email address: CityCouncil@ci.springfield.mo.us.)

LifeOfJason has been kind enough to post the City Council members' personal email addresses in a downloadable file on his blog. I'm working on getting their cell phone numbers for you.