The Loudons sure know how to pick em!
Showing posts with label John burns. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John burns. Show all posts
Monday, March 8, 2010
CBT: YOU'RE HELP MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!
The tea-party spawned astroturf group that calls itself Citizens for Better Transit is apparently neither for Better Transit nor for Better Spelling. Here's an exciting message from them on Facebook:
The Loudons sure know how to pick em!
The Loudons sure know how to pick em!
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Tea Party's Anti-St. Louis Rally was a huge failure
The St. Louis Tea Party, who have apparently decided that they hate jobs, the Cardinals, and the St. Louis region in general, held a rally today to protest a ballot initiative that would prevent the Metro from cutting services and pave the way for future public-transit expansion.
The good news is that the rally was a huge failure. Only a handful of people showed up, and no legitimate media outlets covered the event (although the right-wing propaganda outlet Globe-Democrat cut-and-pasted the press release without bothering to check any of the facts). You can see how sad the "rally" was from the Globe-Democrat picture.
Other interesting facts: the spokesperson for the group, John Burns, is the same person who organized multiple St. Louis actions with two of the four teabuggers who were charged with tampering with Senator Landrieu's phone lines. Burns' behavior at those events would be quite damaging to any campaign, and I will be all-too-happy to go into in more detail in future posts.
Also, there appears to be good evidence that familiar right-wing extremists Gina and John Loudon are behind the group:
The good news is that the rally was a huge failure. Only a handful of people showed up, and no legitimate media outlets covered the event (although the right-wing propaganda outlet Globe-Democrat cut-and-pasted the press release without bothering to check any of the facts). You can see how sad the "rally" was from the Globe-Democrat picture.
Other interesting facts: the spokesperson for the group, John Burns, is the same person who organized multiple St. Louis actions with two of the four teabuggers who were charged with tampering with Senator Landrieu's phone lines. Burns' behavior at those events would be quite damaging to any campaign, and I will be all-too-happy to go into in more detail in future posts.
Also, there appears to be good evidence that familiar right-wing extremists Gina and John Loudon are behind the group:
Why do the Tea Partiers hate the St. Louis Cardinals?
Question: what do the people in the following commercial have in common?
If you answered, "They're all radical communists trying to destroy the American way of life," sorry, wrong, please resume posting borderline racist comments on the Post-Dispatch website and leave this blog alone.
What all of these leaders actually have in common is that they all have a vested interest in the success of the St. Louis region. The President of the St. Louis Convention and Visitor's Commission and the President of Ameren UE are not doing commercials for public transit because they are flaming Marxists who love "big government." They know that if St. Louis is going to succeed as a city, it needs to have a viable public transit service that can help people get to work and take cars off the road.
Which is why, though I'm one of the least sympathetic people to the local tea party, even I was surprised to see that the local tea party has actually founded a new astroturf group to oppose Proposition A, the ballot initiative in St. Louis County to raise the sales tax 00.5 % in order to fund transit. The tea party site is full of misleading talking points and distractions, and is completely indifferent to the fact that failing to pass Proposition A would not only prevent the expansion of public transit, it would actually lead to massive cuts in service similar to what we saw last year before the state of Missouri helped St. Louis out (which would not happen again). In other words, hundreds of people would lose their jobs if Prop A doesn't pass, thousands would not be able to get to work, and Call-A-Ride services for people with disabilities would be massively scaled back. And yes, as the title of this post alludes to, failing to fund public transit will make it more difficult for people to get to Cardinals games in the future. Yet this new astroturf group proposes gutting the funding of Metro in the name of "better transit" without even explaining where any additional funding would come from. It's complete nonesense.
And, by the way, the head of this new organization is listed as John Burns. Is it this John Burns? Because, if so, that would be hilarious.
If you answered, "They're all radical communists trying to destroy the American way of life," sorry, wrong, please resume posting borderline racist comments on the Post-Dispatch website and leave this blog alone.
What all of these leaders actually have in common is that they all have a vested interest in the success of the St. Louis region. The President of the St. Louis Convention and Visitor's Commission and the President of Ameren UE are not doing commercials for public transit because they are flaming Marxists who love "big government." They know that if St. Louis is going to succeed as a city, it needs to have a viable public transit service that can help people get to work and take cars off the road.
Which is why, though I'm one of the least sympathetic people to the local tea party, even I was surprised to see that the local tea party has actually founded a new astroturf group to oppose Proposition A, the ballot initiative in St. Louis County to raise the sales tax 00.5 % in order to fund transit. The tea party site is full of misleading talking points and distractions, and is completely indifferent to the fact that failing to pass Proposition A would not only prevent the expansion of public transit, it would actually lead to massive cuts in service similar to what we saw last year before the state of Missouri helped St. Louis out (which would not happen again). In other words, hundreds of people would lose their jobs if Prop A doesn't pass, thousands would not be able to get to work, and Call-A-Ride services for people with disabilities would be massively scaled back. And yes, as the title of this post alludes to, failing to fund public transit will make it more difficult for people to get to Cardinals games in the future. Yet this new astroturf group proposes gutting the funding of Metro in the name of "better transit" without even explaining where any additional funding would come from. It's complete nonesense.
And, by the way, the head of this new organization is listed as John Burns. Is it this John Burns? Because, if so, that would be hilarious.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Is Bill Hennessy trying to frame the Young Americans for Liberty?
Gateway Pundit posted a message today from John Burns, the NON-STUDENT who built a gulag on the Wash U Campus to protest AmeriCorps (among other things). As was pointed out on the St. Louis Activist Hub blog, Burns loves free speech so much that he decided to try to disrupt a Show Me No Hate rally last Sunday.
Burns's letter complained that the Wash U administration was trying frame the Young Americans for Liberty for the hammer and sickle emblems that mysteriously appeared on campus exactly the same day that YAL put up their gulag. He claims that "The students had nothing to do with the spray chalking" and that the university is engaging in, "MALICIOUS, RETALIATORY ACTION AGAINST THE STUDENTS" (caps lock #fail from the original) Gateway Pundit claimed they were being blamed for "random grafitti."
But if that's the case, they why did Bill Hennessy include pictures of the hammer and sickle in his report about the "student" demonstration?
Is Bill Hennessy trying to frame the Young Americans for Liberty? Why would he suggest that the emblems had something to do with the display?
Notice the precise wording of Burns. He said no STUDENTS were involved in the spraying. So maybe he's saying some of the visiting horde of tea party activists like Burns, Hennessy, and Jim Hoft were the people who actually defaced the campus property.
And John Burns, noble person that he is, decided to stick up for the students. Except for that small part where he says who actually did it.
Burns's letter complained that the Wash U administration was trying frame the Young Americans for Liberty for the hammer and sickle emblems that mysteriously appeared on campus exactly the same day that YAL put up their gulag. He claims that "The students had nothing to do with the spray chalking" and that the university is engaging in, "MALICIOUS, RETALIATORY ACTION AGAINST THE STUDENTS" (caps lock #fail from the original) Gateway Pundit claimed they were being blamed for "random grafitti."
But if that's the case, they why did Bill Hennessy include pictures of the hammer and sickle in his report about the "student" demonstration?
Is Bill Hennessy trying to frame the Young Americans for Liberty? Why would he suggest that the emblems had something to do with the display?
Notice the precise wording of Burns. He said no STUDENTS were involved in the spraying. So maybe he's saying some of the visiting horde of tea party activists like Burns, Hennessy, and Jim Hoft were the people who actually defaced the campus property.
And John Burns, noble person that he is, decided to stick up for the students. Except for that small part where he says who actually did it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)