Showing posts with label Rep. Bob Titus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rep. Bob Titus. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 21, 2025

How the Christian County Cabal Selects Candidates

CABAL: A cabal is a group of people who are united in some close design, usually to promote their private views or interests in an ideology, a state, or another community, often by intrigue and usually without the knowledge of those who are outside their group.” Wikipedia

In September 2023 when Missouri state representative Brad Hudson announced he would run for the state senate, local Republican leaders in Christian County began casting about for a candidate—even though the 138th District is composed of only 25% voters in Christian County, and 75% in Stone County. The announcement may have caught the local political machine off guard as they scrambled to find a candidate they would later present to the voters.

At the venue of Hudson’s announcement for the state senate seat, numerous attendees including Steve Stewart who was in leadership at the Christian County Missouri Republican Assembly (MRA), approached Burt Whaley and asked him to run for Hudson’s seat in the 138th District. Whaley was very active in local politics. Christian County Republican Central Committee Chair Don Carriker was present when Stewart asked Whaley to run.

 
A month later in early October, a local businessman, Tom Franiak, announced he would enter the Republican primary as a candidate for state representative. Even though he lost in a landslide against Whaley in 2024, Franiak is again running to unseat Whaley in 2026.

Stone County 2024 primary results
Christian County 2024 primary results
While Franiak asserted he had “helped put together the Young Republicans” (see the latest issues with the national Young Republicans) there seems to have been almost no political involvement before his entry into the race in 2023. He rarely, if ever attended political meetings, was not a member of any local political organizations, and apparently did not even know in which district he lived (there was recent redistricting).

Representative Bob Titus
Rep. Bob Titus
Franiak publicly announced it was Rep. Jamie Gragg (140th District) who urged him to run for Hudson’s seat. According to a 2024 voter guide for Stone and Taney counties Franiak stated, “I have regular conversations with many of the current Missouri House of Representatives including Brian Seitz, district 156, Taney County, Jamie Gragg, District 140, Ozark, Jon Patterson, incoming speaker of the house, Alex Riley, incoming House Floor Leader and Chad Perkins, candidate for speaker pro-tem.”

Note that Franiak did not mention conversations with his own representative Brad Hudson or his senator Mike Moon, or Rep. Bob Titus (139th District). Titus, who is a strong conservative and well liked by his constituency, is currently facing a primary opponent in Sandy Karnes. Karnes, who is vice chair of the local central committee and the committee chairwoman of the 7th Congressional District for Christian County, recently announced a primary challenge against Rep. Titus.

Karnes was involved in helping to shut down voting of the grassroots platform at the 2024 state GOP convention. Her husband, Jack, signed one of two challenges to overturn the grassroots slate of officials who had been voted in at the convention. (Lots of background on the events surrounding the 2024 GOP Convention debacle HERE and HERE and HERE, HERE and HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE and HERE.)

Locke and Smith's Legiscore

PRIMARY CHALLENGES AGAINST TWO POPULAR  INCUMBENTS

Ponder for a moment why local GOP leadership would run primary opponents against respected and popular conservative incumbents like Representatives Titus and Whaley. Titus has a 100% rating with CPAC, and is ranked 7 of 163 in the Missouri House of Representatives with the conservative Locke and Smith’s 2025 Legiscore scoring. Whaley, having just finished his first term, is ranked 6 of 163 with Legiscore.

Back to Tom Franiak’s candidacy in the 2024 primary. Some time in September or early October of 2023, Rep. Gragg, central committee vice chair Sandy Karnes, and Les Overall, president of the local MRA in Christian County, interviewed Franiak as a potential candidate to replace the departing Brad Hudson. Also, and this is very important, not one of those who were involved in interviewing Tom Franiak as a candidate for the 138th District actually live in the 138th. Not Don Carriker, not Jamie Gragg, not Sandy Karnes. Yet they were the individuals advocating for one candidate right from the start.

In fact, it was central committee Chair Carriker who asked Gragg to interview Franiak as a potential candidate. Very soon after that interview, Franiak filed papers. Essentially, Christian County political leaders--independently from Stone County--promoted a candidate who would have been the only voter choice on the primary ballot if not for Burt Whaley’s decision to enter the race. Notably, Franiak was also presented as a candidate in Christian County before he was presented in Stone County.

Franiak later spoke at the Stone County MRA’s meeting in October. According to sources, Franiak announced he was doing citizens a favor by running to represent them. It was after this meeting that Burt Whaley was again approached by others and asked to consider running for the 138th District. He continued to mull it over and after prayerful consideration and discussions with Leah, his wife, he announced his candidacy on Dec. 1, 2023.

WHALEY’S LANDSLIDE VICTORY

In a video (HERE), Franiak notes he didn’t need “two months” to consider his run, but knew that God had chosen him to run. Incidentally, Burt Whaley, who did take two months in prayer and consideration, ended up winning in a landslide in both Stone and Christian counties.
Rep. Burt Whaley
Whaley has a long history of public service, from his 20-year career in the U.S. Army to a 28-year career as a teacher, as well as the founder and principal of a successful alternative school.


Whaley was also involved in local Republican politics as a founding member of the Stone County Missouri Republican Assembly (MRA) as well as interim chair of the Stone County Republican Central Committee. As interim chair, Whaley conducted the local Stone County GOP caucus in 2024.

In the same voter guide Whaley had this to say, “I visited [Brad Hudson] in Jefferson City multiple times over the last four legislative sessions. He introduced me to various legislators and staff, several of whom I have built a working relationship with...In 2022, [Congressman] Eric Burlison asked Brad and me to start a Missouri Republican Assembly (MRA) Chapter in Stone County…”

Whaley stood his ground against the internal party opposition and went on to win the election in a landslide. But what happened behind the scenes in 2023-2024 is illustrative of how state and local party politics affect who runs for office. Watch how the Texas grassroots campaign of Theodis Daniel is being systematically undercut by his own party:

These are not isolated incidents, but are being replicated in districts all across our nation, including Missouri. The GOP establishment, which is one wing of the Uniparty that ultimately controls both sides of the aisle, is fighting to maintain dominance. Much like when the establishment infiltrated and destroyed the Tea Party, we are seeing a national attack plan to remove grassroots conservatives and replace them with establishment office holders.

Like Texas, the Uniparty rules in Missouri. It is why a “Republican Super Majority” still manages to be “helpless” while statist and globalist policies across the state and in local areas are implemented. The Uniparty is comprised of the powerful and the rich, and those they seek to place in elected positions.

Bills introduced in the legislature are written by lawyers and lobbyists whose loyalty lies with their paymasters in business and politics. They advance the interests of the powerful and wealthy and most legislation has little to do with advancing freedom or preserving liberty. The legislative games played are for another article, however.

THE LOCAL CABAL
 
Back to local politics. As soon as the largely unknown Tom Franiak announced his run in Oct. 2023 (MEC papers were filed on Oct. 9), he was being promoted by the establishment. In fact, after Burt Whaley announced his candidacy he spoke with central committee Chair Don Carriker, who urged him not to run against Franiak. The exact same talking points he used were later used by other politically-aligned activists who spoke with Whaley and urged him not to run.

In fact, both Titus and Whaley were integral members of the conservative contingent called the Brave Ten, who defied the GOP establishment in Jefferson City to support Justin Sparks for House Speaker, rather than RINO Jon Patterson. And now both conservative incumbents are facing primary opponents who are closely identified with the GOP establishment.

When Carriker could not talk Whaley out of running, he asked Whaley to consider paying Franiak for his campaign costs up to that point if Franiak dropped out of the race. Whaley declined.

Again, few politically active people had heard of Tom Franiak. The first time Whaley heard of him was in Oct. 2023 when he got a call requesting he invite Franiak to the October meeting of the Stone County MRA. Also, it was Whaley who first introduced Franiak to Sen. Mike Moon at that meeting.

Tom FraniakSpringfield Business Journal
REPUBLICAN BONAFIDES

It is interesting to go back and note who Franiak said he regularly spoke with, including representatives Jamie Gragg and Jon Patterson, incoming speaker of the house. Who put Franiak in touch with Patterson, widely considered to be an establishment politician? One connection may be Axiom Strategies, a Republican organization that helps plan and execute campaigns for political candidates.

How and why did Christian County political leaders settle on Tom Franiak who was mostly unknown in local political circles before his announcement? He had little to no active engagement with local grassroots groups or political organizations, although he was active in community life. Franiak’s candidacy would have caused few waves, except for the way he was promoted by the local cabal over grassroots candidate Whaley. Why oppose voter choice for the best candidate when there was no incumbent?

WHEN LIFE BEGINS


At a February 13, 2024 CCMRA meeting, Franiak and Whaley both spoke. One of the questions revolved around when life begins. It became apparent that the candidates were divided. Although Franiak stated that life begins at conception, he elaborated by saying, “[Life] begins at conception, yes, for my religion. But there is no way to detect it medically so I will be very transparent here and say if Missouri was to pass a Morning After Pill I don't see it being much different than any other contraceptive, because we cannot detect a heartbeat. We cannot tell whether the cell has been divided, um, I believe that in order to be a great legislator you're going to have compromise. I can plant my feet in the ground and I can say absolutely no compromise, but we'll never win that battle. The liberals will come after you every time. So, in order to be a great legislator in Jeff City you're going to have to be open to some compromise. But one thing I will do is stand up here and tell you exactly where I will compromise and that's one of them.”

Whaley, who taught biology during his career as an educator, stated that life begins at conception, which is typically between 12 and 24 hours. Whaley would not compromise on that point.

At that same meeting, Don Carriker complained that Whaley had too much power in Stone County because he was president of the MRA and was the temporary chair of Stone County central committee (until a new chair could be elected). In light of primary challenger Sandy Karnes and her influential positions with the local and 7th Congressional District’s committees, this concern of Carriker is interesting.

Soon after that meeting, Rep. Gragg invited Franiak and Whaley out to the restaurant Rosie Jo’s in Ozark to resolve any possible division that may have occurred. It was also at this meeting that Gragg noted to Whaley it was Carriker who asked him to confer with Franiak, Karnes and Overall about a possible run for representative of the 138th District.

THE MOU IS DOA

When it came time for candidate endorsements the Stone and Christian County MRA chapters met to come to an agreement for the 75% of the voting populace who resided in Stone County. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was hammered out to give the endorsement responsibility to the Stone County MRA. This MOU was written and approved by the 7th District MRA for the March endorsements. Make note that Sandy Karnes voted against the MOU at that time.

Sandy Karnes
However, the MOU was rescinded in a Feb. 16, 2024 MRA memorandum sent by 7th District Second Vice President Ronnie White. Stating the MOU  "...may not be fully aligned with the State MRA Bylaws," the rescission came three days after the February meeting at which Carriker complained about Whaley wielding too much power.  
 
There was a Board meeting but it is not clear how the decision came about at the State level--whether there was a vote or simply a discussion and decision. According to sources, Carriker made an issue of the MOU and was supported by Steve Lampley, who was MRA President at the time. It was believed that Whaley would win the endorsement of the MRA, and it seems obvious there was establishment opposition to it.

That is not all. The 7th District’s Convention occurred on March 23, 2024. During the convention, local MRA leaders Ron Sanders and Ronnie White proposed a procedural change for endorsements to allow the MRA to do what the MOU would have done. The proposal passed. The Stone County MRA members in the 138th could now vote on the endorsement, and indeed Whaley was overwhelmingly endorsed at the next meeting on April 18, 2024.

Note that Tom Franiak’s wife, Donni, had just become a brand new member of the Christian County MRA. It was Donni who nominated her husband for endorsement at the Stone County MRA. Donni Franiak currently serves as the secretary of the Christian County central committee.

THE VETTING QUESTION

At an April 2024 patriot group meeting in Barry County, Don Carriker questioned Whaley on the vetting of candidates. Carriker was wearing a Tom Franiak campaign shirt at that meeting while Chair of the central committee at the time. During the question-and-answer portion of the meeting, central committee Chair Carriker asked central committee Temporary Chair Whaley why Stone County did not vet candidates like Christian County.

That turned out to be a great question, considering that Carriker and his father originated the vetting survey for REPACCMO, the Republican Association of Central Committees of Missouri. There have been many questions to date about the “survey” used to vet local candidates: who was carrying out the vetting, whether the actual questions constituted a professional survey or a test (two distinct things), and how the survey was prepared.
 
VETTING USED AS A WEAPON?
 
On June 27, 2024 the Christian County central committee, through Chair Don Carriker, filed suit against Christian County Clerk Paula Brumfield for allowing Christian County Highway Superintendent Brent Young to file as a Republican on the ballot for the upcoming election for Western County Commissioner.

What may not be well known is that Carriker and Young, in his capacity as highway superintendent, reportedly had a conflict over bridge construction that happened to impact some of Carriker’s property.
 
 
Yet Young was still forced to go to Carriker’s home for the vetting process instead of a neutral location. He was told he failed to make the benchmark scoring as a Republican. He was called in to a meeting with central committee members, who later determined Young “was not Republican enough.” This, even though Young had been vouched for by a member of the central committee and was a lifelong Republican. At the time, not all of those members themselves had taken the test or were vetted.
 
When Young filed with the County Clerk’s office anyway, the Central Committee "by and through Don Carriker, Chairman" sued. The suit, which also named Susan Pathkiller (a public administrator in Christian County) was dismissed after Carriker and his attorney failed to appear for a court date. A later motion by Carikker to set aside the dismissal was denied
 
Young later lost a close race to Johnny Williams.
From: Missouri Ethics Commission


Meanwhile, back in February 2024, Whaley was not allowed to have someone other than Carriker vet him, even though it was clear to Whaley that Carriker was supporting Franiak, indeed had contributed to his campaign (see above). Whaley was well conversant with how a survey should be written and conducted. He asked Carriker a series of questions about surveys, and found that the survey was not properly formulated.

Carriker admitted that he did not have 50% Democrats beta-testing the survey, which would have been needed in order to validate it. The vast majority of beta-testers were Republicans—taking a Republican test. There was no control group, no variable group to test against. Carriker controlled the vetting process in Christian County and was unwilling to allow another individual to vet either Whaley or Young, even though there were obvious conflicts of interest. 

 
In a a strange twist of events, Carriker was kicked out of REPACCMO's chat group in early 2025 after some apparent divisiveness. David Rice, of Hick Christian, shared a text message from Carriker, complaining about Rice.
 
GRASSROOTS VS ESTABLISHMENT

The type of maneuvers and strategies the political parties engage in can be disheartening to citizens. Some politically active individuals consider themselves operators and power brokers. They toady up to moneyed interests,  seek their own self-interests, and forget that civic action should benefit all the citizenry and not just a few individuals and groups. The GOP has an entrenched establishment cabal, even in Christian County, that seeks to wrest control back from two actual grassroots conservatives who have servant hearts (listen to both Titus and Whaley on a recent radio show).
 
 
The local cabal is desperate enough to attempt to unseat two popular representatives who rank high for their conservative voting records. Most of all, they count on the average Missourian to be ignorant and too busy to see what is going on.

And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Sunday, October 19, 2025

Sam Britton's Missouri Liberty Radio Tonight: 6-9 p.m.

 

Off The Cuff with Sam Britton 

Representatives Bob Titus (139th District) and Burt Whaley (138th District) will be guests during the 8 o'clock hour at Missouri Liberty Radio. Tune in to find out what is happening in SWMO.

Tuesday, February 18, 2025

Cross Post: The Shell Game: Missouri's Latest Tax Reform Proposal Bundles Distractions with Tax Increases

 By David Rice

This is unconstitutional, threatens grassroots and free speech, packaged with special favors and libertarian fever dreams about gold and silver in the hope everyone will close their eyes and vote yes.

Multiple Issues Bundled Unconstitutionally

 The revised proposal (SCS/SJR 31) attempts to bundle multiple constitutional changes into a single amendment they will pass on to the voters as a Ballot Initiative. If this is such a great idea, why won’t they go on record and vote on it as the illustrious Senate and House and have Kehoe sign it? Why should they propose it to the voters using deceptive language?

1. Tax System Overhaul:

  • Eliminate income tax
  • Add new sales taxes
  • Create a complex fund structure

2. State Investment Policy:

"Moneys in the strategic gold and silver reserve fund shall be kept in an account and expended each year solely for the purpose of purchasing gold or silver...such gold or silver shall be physically kept within the borders of the state of Missouri."

According to Ballotpedia, multi-issue ballot initiatives violate Missouri's requirement for single-subject amendments passed in 1998, which appeared designed to distract from the tax burden with appealing but unrelated provisions. They have the same Missouri Constitutional restriction on passing single-issue bills, but they do it all the time. Our Super majority conservatives, follow-the-law Republicans, never seem to follow the Constitution.


The Numbers That Don't Add Up

In their fiscal analysis, they expect a budget shortfall to occur when they drop the income tax. They state they will lose over $8B in revenue from not having Income Tax. However, we currently collect $13B in income tax. If they are correct, the additional sales tax (VAT Tax) will generate a $5B loss between what Missouri collects and what Missouri currently collects in Income Tax. They expect their extra 3.75% sales tax will somehow generate $8B when I showed how difficult it would be to generate over $5B in my article last week. I was generous with my predictions in a way that would be hard for Missouri households to follow through on purchases.

To generate this Sales Tax (VAT Tax) revenue, every Missouri household must buy brand-new cars and appliances yearly and spend every dime from the Income Tax they don’t have taken out of their checks. They do not expect you to save your money and invest it wisely in yourself, but for you to be a market consumer that will give more of your money to them through their sales tax (which is essentially a Value Added Tax on all services and goods, including utilities which they plan to also raise the prices through Senate Bill 100.)

Source: Official Fiscal Note, January 9, 2025*
Source: Official Fiscal Note, January 9, 2025*

After they raise corporate taxes, which means you pay more taxes on goods and services on top of their Sales Tax (VAT Tax), you’ll have less money every time you leave the store. Don’t worry; it is all voluntary spending. You don’t have to purchase groceries, gas, or other goods. We only want to charge you for consumption, not for earning.

Sorry, people, but this isn’t better. They are both regressive and until they get their spending under control, there’s going to be no end to bleeding from your paycheck one way or another to pay the cost to cover special interests for their political allies and donors.

The Phantom Lobbying Tax

  • The current proposal includes a 6% tax on "lobbying services" but fails to:
  • Define or describe that constitutes lobbying services
  • Establish collection mechanisms
  • Address tracking/reporting requirements
  • Specify enforcement procedures

The text from the Ballot language on the bill:

"An additional state sales tax is levied for the rendering of lobbying services in this state. The tax shall be at a rate equivalent to six percent."

As taxpayers, we should know how lobbying service is defined. Will they tax a lobbyist whenever they attack journalists for telling the truth on social media on behalf of the Representative who’s too scared to do it himself? I doubt it. Who will be considered a lobbyist? Will they tax grassroots lobbyists out of existence so only wealthy lobbyists can afford to speak to your representatives?

  1. What will happen to Free Speech?
  2. What about pro-bono lobbying?
  3. How are mixed services (legal/lobbying) treated?
  4. Who tracks/reports/collects?

The General Assembly is creating a system rife for abuse here where there will be kickbacks to wealthy lobbyists. This system will readily cover the costs of these new taxes. Guess who pays for the taxes? You—the taxpayer. Your Representative will help pass bills.

The lobbyist writes the bills for the representatives and senators they don’t read because, as Shield Maidens stated, “they are too busy attending parties and photo ops.” 

These bills benefit lobbyist employers/donors/crime syndicates. I’m not exaggerating. This Hadean plan is designed to shut up grassroots and small firms trying to speak to the general assembly. If you can’t write checks to their PACs, you can’t afford the taxes. So, the message is clear: Stay out of the Capitol.

The new political environment forces individuals to join large corporate lobbyists whose mission doesn’t have individual freedom at the center of raison d'être. We would be faceless—just as the General Assembly wants us to be. 

Feel-Good Provisions Without Teeth     

Gold and Silver Fund

 "Gold and silver within the possession of the strategic gold and silver reserve shall not be sold, liquidated, or transferred to the custody of any entity that is not the state of Missouri without a constitutional amendment modifying this subsection."

This provision:

  • Has no fiscal impact on the tax burden
  • Creates no enforcement mechanism
  • Provides no funding source
  • Distracts from core issues

 Silver and gold reserves are the third issue on this ballot initiative. The law writers (Lobbysists) designed it to scrape together the votes of Conservatives and Libertarians who want a gold and silver standard. It sounds great on paper, but it doesn’t accomplish anything. It’s constructed to be a flashy honey trap to get votes from desperate Libertarians. Politicians promise Libertarians much—this is an empty promise to them.

Spending Limits

From the bill:

"The spending limitation on the appropriation authority of the general assembly under subsection 2 of this section may be raised if the general assembly authorizes an increase in the appropriation authority..."

But:

  • Federal funds explicitly excluded
  • Multiple override mechanisms
  • No actual reduction requirements
  • Easy legislative workarounds

Again, they find a way to look like they are trying to reign in spending. Still, the General Assembly has created workarounds in the bill's language to keep accepting federal funds and to have multiple override mechanisms—with no language stating how much they plan to reduce spending. They allow the General Assembly to say “No” to cuts in expenditures. 

Spending limits, silver and gold, and no income tax look good on paper, but it’s a legal three-card Monte game. The lobbyists who wrote this bill want you to think you can win at this fraud, but the Queen of Hearts was never on the table.

The Real Numbers vs. Their Projections


When you examine their data and the accurate data (the actual income tax revenue is $13.35B), you can see that they don’t consider how much spending has increased by nearly 100% in the last 5 years. They calculate that sales tax will only be a large portion of the actual revenue loss ($8 of the $8.5B needed). If they can generate $8B in sales tax, decidedly generous predictions will make it difficult for Missouri households to achieve that level of taxation without a punitively aggressive tax policy. 

Even if they are right and break even as they wrongly project, they are telling the taxpayer we’ll cancel your taxes of $100 over here. Still, we’ll make sure you pay your taxes of $99.50 over here, plus some hidden corporate taxes we won’t tell you about, which means we’ll be taking $101.50 from you when we distracted you because you listened to our word and didn’t look at our hands. 

Hidden Access to Information

As of February 13, 2025, accessing the entire bill text returns:

 

This restriction of public access to legislative text while promoting feel-good ballot language suggests a deliberate strategy to control information. After I published my articles on Feb. 10th and 11th, they hid the bill's original language, and their agents of chaos went on a campaign calling me a liar on social media or accusing me of misrepresenting the bill.


 

The House website routinely hides information on their website, as I covered with Jeff Farnan and his support of gun control.

I saved the bill’s language and still had access to it when Senator Ben Brown sent me the “revised” language. I compared it with the original bill, used my previous articles, and added the fiscal note above.


Here is what else hidden by the website. The bill's sponsors include two local Christian County representatives: Bob Titus and Jamie Gragg. We also have Bishop Davidson from Republic (Green County). Jonathan Patterson, the Democratic Majority Leader, also supports this bill. 

Oops. Sorry. I heard Patterson identifies as a Republican when he holds the gavel.

Ballot Language vs. Reality


Your taxes will go up in places you won’t expect. Your paycheck will have less coming out of it from Missouri Income Tax. However, your groceries, gas, goods, utilities, services, and even your dry cleaning will increase in cost. They will take you to the cleaners.

They will nickel and dime you because they refuse to get their spending under control and back to 2020 levels. 2020 was only five years ago. We’re not talking about returning to 1970, but we could. 

Conclusion

The revised proposal:

  1. Violates single-subject constitutional requirements
  2. Uses gold/silver provisions as a distraction
  3. Creates unenforceable feel-good measures
  4. Hides inevitable fiscal crisis behind voter approval
  5. Maintains or increases spending throughout
  6. The failure to generate enough Sales Tax (VAT Tax) will likely result in both tax systems remaining in place

Rather than honest fiscal reform, this appears to be a sophisticated ballot initiative to fool the taxpayer voters in the state into voting a new tax burden onto themselves that can be expanded incrementally by our Uniparty government. Do you think Democrats in charge could do any more damage than these Uniparty Republicans? 

As Missourians, we know this spending crisis will overwhelm us sooner rather than later. Especially if Donald Trump gets spending under control in DC and stops the wasteful spending we have seen in the Federal government. 

Kehoe’s Supermajority of Crooked Republicans will continue to steal from the coffers of families to throw money at lobbyists without a care about the burden on single mothers he talks about in his speeches. We do not have too few taxes in Missouri. 

The income tax is a heavy, regressive burden passed onto us by progressive liberals. It is time for us to remove it. However, the solution to eliminating it must come with reducing the size of our state’s government to the minimum needed to function. Any less than that, and every tax is theft and a burden on families struggling to survive, much less save and thrive.

 This bill expands government revenue while using unconstitutional bundling and information control to obscure its true impact.