Rant and Rave

You probably have seen the news about the Chuck Hagel rant at the Council on Foreign Relations and his masticating with Mike Bloomberg. So what's Hagel's deal? Well, for one he probably believes what he's saying about the Bush Admin. Of course, they are also probably being outwardly hostile to him as well, so that will only irk him more. Sort of self-fulfilling at this point.

But by telling reporters that he would consider a Democrat VP offer, photo-opping with Bloomberg and shouting to the heavens about Bush, he keeps himself in the side-spotlight, particularly as an "independent" if the Bloomberg ticket someone comes to fruition. And he also gives himself a shot in a Democrat administration, which he must believe is the most likely. So, you know, good luck to him and all that. (Senator, should MJ save you a seat when the President comes to town?)

***

Interesting to see that Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey chose to alienate his core constituency over the "Sounding Stones" thing. Wonder if they'll remember during the next election? And Steve Brown has an interesting take about the whole controversy, noting that when Mayors such as Hal Daub and Mike Boyle floated a controversial issue, they stood up to the criticism and answered questions personally. Fahey has instead chosen to trot out de facto Mayor Landow and others while he's busy lighting Christmas trees.

***

As we all wait to see the results of the Democrat's Tony! Toni! Toné! Raimondo sweepstakes, it's interesting to see that the Dem leaders are willing to roll the dice with TR, but the rank and file hate the whole concept with a passion. We get a kick every time we see the Dem's lead blogger try to defend Raimondo ("he gives money to Dems!", "we don't know what he really thinks!", "Ben Nelson likes him!"), then the commenters simply point out that last week the guy was a running as a Republican.

Of course the simple fact is that many Dems are getting more and more of a feeling that Scott Kleeb is not interested in taking on Johanns, and they desperately want someone -- anyone -- to run. Oh, and Raimondo will give them some money too.

***

It's gotta be Turner Gill Pelini, right?

Who's Leading Who?

We want to clear something up.

Hal Daub and Jon Bruning weren't "forced" out of the Senate race against Mike Johanns.
Bob Kerrey, Mike Fahey and Tony Raimondo weren't either (though more on TR below).
But ALL of them realized that Johanns has a huge lead in the polls and in fundraising ability and that a race against him would be a steep uphill battle.

Daub realized that he couldn't raise the money he would need.
Bruning realized that a win would be very difficult and a loss would damage his political career.
Kerrey and Fahey realized that they couldn't cake-walk into the Senate and weren't willing to risk it all, in what would be a likely loss.
Raimondo said he couldn't beat Johanns after MJ was endorsed by Governor Dave Heineman.

And the favorite savior, Scott Kleeb, has been heard often to say that he doesn't think he can beat Johanns. Don't be surprised if you hear that Kleeb isn't willing to run for the Senate either. Of course it will be because he has other obligations, or wants to do other things, or his cowboy boots are to tight. You'll never hear a Dem say that they don't think they could beat Johanns. That would be the truth, you see...

***

But Tony! Toni! Toné! Raimondo now has confirmed that he is talking to the state and national Dems about running as a Dem.
Gee, sounds like something we heard on Leavenworth Street back in May.
So TR has met with national Dems (likely with BFF Ben Nelson in the room). And with state Dems (like with Nebraska Dem leader Steve Achepohl, who said he had no intention of speaking with Raimondo).

But now our sources report that Raimondo was seen yesterday walking out of...the Governor's Mansion?
Does Raimondo feel that he needs to explain himself to Dave Heineman? Get his blessing? Find out if he can switch his party affiliation in that state office? We really don't know. But it's intriguing, no?

(Update, 1:25pm : OK, OK, turns out there wasn't anything nefarious with TR's meeting at the Gov's McMansion. It was really just for a photo with some future-business kids. See here.)

***

Did you know that yesterday State Treasurer Shane Osborn was selected by the Aspen Institue to be in their Aspen-Rodel Fellows Program in Public Leadership? This is a fairly big deal. The Aspen Institute is, to quote Wikipedia, "an international nonprofit organization dedicated to fostering enlightened leadership." It has a bipartisan board of trustees (made up of such folks as Madeleine Albright and Michael Powell), and it's new class of Aspen-Rodel Fellows is made up of twelve Democrat and twelve Republican national "true rising stars". Congratulations Shane!

***

So compare State Treasurer Shane Osborn's honor to the goofy editorials we saw in the OWH this past wekeend.

First on Saturday Mike Nellis, owner of the political web design consulting company "Design Progress" who put up the "Draft Scott Kleeb" website, was given over seven hundred words to try to spout that Scott Kleeb is a "leader" (the headline was "Leadership of Kleeb can make difference"). We won't bother trying to analyze the logic that a former ranch-hand who just started his first full time job teaching a few days a week is a leader, but you get the drift.

Then in Sunday's OWH Editorial, they went with the headline, "The need for leaders", in their convoluted plea for someone (with no direct mention of Kleeb) to challenge Mike Johanns since, "Republicans shouldn’t waltz into office unchallenged".

Boy the headlines for those two editorial pieces sure are similar, ain't they? Why, if we were of the conspiracy theory vein, we'd even guess that maybe the OWH encouraged Mr. Nellis to take that angle when he wrote his little piece. But hey, we would never accuse the OWH of doing such an unethical thing to further their goal to push Kleeb's career. They're above that, right?

Anywho, when we were looking at the these forays at nothingness, we were struck by the comparisons of Scott Kleeb and Shane Osborn. Let's take a look.

Kleeb is 32 years old. After growing up on an Army base in Italy, Kleeb graduated from University of Colorado, then got his advanced degree in a study of cattle ranching (we think) from Yale, in Connecticut. He then decided he was the man to represent Nebraska's third district, but lost by 10%. He now is teaching history at Hastings College. Democrats think he is a leader and is now qualified to be Nebraska's Senator.

Shane Osborn is 33 years old. After growing up in Norfolk Nebraska, he received an ROTC scholarship to, and graduated from, the University of Nebraska. After that he flew spy planes as a lieutenant in United States Navy. During a mission, his plane was hit by a Chinese fighter jet, but he saved his twenty-three person crew by landing the crippled aircraft. He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross. After he left the Navy, he worked for a financial services company in Omaha. In 2006 he was elected Nebraska State Treasurer. As noted above, he was recently selected as an Aspen-Rodel Fellow.

Now. Looking at those two resumes and accomplishments, who comes off as more of a "leader" for Nebraska? The one with Navy medals and actual work experience who went for a "lower level" elected state position, is slowly making a name for himself and is comfortable biding his time? Or the one who has the Ivy League degree and a pretty face and believes he is entitled to a represent Nebraska in Washington right now?

And by the way, we haven't even mentioned Nebraska's reps in the House, State offices, and Legislature with keen resumes who have bright futures in Nebraska politics.

Just so it's all in perspective for you.

***

Now, back to the Husker message boards...

Post-Bruning

There's plenty to say about Jon Bruning's candidacy, but it will probably have to wait X number of years.
Will he run for Senate in 2012? Governor (like he's really always wanted) in 2010?
Will the polar ice caps melt before then, pushing forward a run for Senator of the Island of New Canada?
We'll make that post on our wrist computer from our flying car.

In the mean time, Mike Johanns appeared with Bruning at his going-away gig, and KMTV Ch 3 has a pretty funny video, where Bruning tells Ch 3's Dave Roberts to F-off, in so many words.

Dave: "When you told us last Wednesday that 'I am running hard and running to win,' were you already considering leaving the race when you said that to us?"

Bruning: "Yeah sure. Absolutely . Yeah I am not going to inform you every step of the way what I am thinking, my deepest inner thoughts, you know. You're not my psychologist right."

We will all sorely miss the Bruning Campaign.

But since the Johanns Juggernaut© continues to force out all comers, we can now set our sights firmly on the Dem side of the aisle to check out the true goofiness that's going on over there.

Scott Kleeb is the Dem's current Hamlet in the "To Be or Not To Be A Candidate" sweepstakes. But Kleeb has made it known during his travels that he has no real desire to be the Dem's sacrificial lamb at the Altar of Johanns. Does that mean he'll take on Smith again? Maybe -- though losing twice to Adrian Smith isn't exactly a feather in his cap either. Don't be surprised if he simply runs for the Legislature and bides his time. (And for a fully insightful analysis of the Kleeb Conundrum, check out The Rothenberg Political Report's view here.)

So that leaves...Tony Raimondo? They laughed when Leavenworth Street suggested this a while back! Oh, they laughed!
Tony himself sneered, "Only Leavenworth Street is talking about that..."
So who's sneering now, seeeeee?

The Huffington Post recently did a review of the Raimondo Riverdance, wherein, if you didn't know, Tony now wants to run as a Democrat. Why? Well, because he couldn't beat Mike Johanns for the nom as a GOPer. So, you know...other party.

Let's just spell it out here. If the Dems have no one to challenge Johanns for the U.S. Senate, that is a sad state of affairs for the Dems.

But if they allow Tony Raimondo, a Republican, to take the nomination, they are worse than sad.
They are a complete and utter joke of a political party.
The Greens are a MUCH more respectable party than the Dems, if that happens.
Heck, the Nebraska Party is way more respectable.

And don't think this is lost on the Dems. Over on their party's default blog (the NNN ), there is a virtual shoving match going on over this.
But hey, Tony's got some cash to throw around, and maybe Mike Johanns will push Tom Osborne down a flight of stairs on camera. Then, voila! Senator Tony! And he and Ben can fly around on Tony's jet together. Just like old times.

But, in the mean time, Happy Turkey Day.
We're humbled and thankful that you keep coming by to read.
So get some extra whipped cream on that pie. You deserve it.

Will Bruning Drop Out?

In her Sunday OWH article, Robynn Tysver asked what many have been speculating for a number of weeks now:

Will Jon Bruning drop out of the U.S. Senate race?
(State Republican hear Senate contenders - OWH - 11/18/07.)

The most recent evidence is Bruning's appearance at the GOP State Central Committee meeting.

• No criticism of Johanns.
• Didn't address the entire group.
• Talking about running a kinder,gentler campaign.
• And when directly confronted, Bruning campaign manager Jordan McGrain appeared to choose his words carefully:

"We're prepared to go to the end."

Well, yes, they're prepared to. But that's very different from, "We will go to the end..."

Frankly, we're a little bummed that the fire-breathing, carpet bombing Bruning didn't show up. But we shouldn't be surprised.

Bruning may be a lot of things, but he's not stupid. For one, he has obviously realized that constant attacks on the political equivalent of Mr. Rogers are not going to endear him to Republican voters. And if he loses with that strategy, where does it put him? Would he get full party support for the next office he would run for?

We're not saying that we think Bruning should get out. Or that he would definitely lose to Johanns.

But we do think that HE's thinking that very hard.

And where will that put Leavenworth Street?
Well, with very little to write about...

Surprise! Kleeb would get smushed!

The Daily Kos has published its poll results for the Nebraska Senate race.
Here’s what they’ve come up with:

If 2008 election for U.S. Senate were held today, for whom would you vote for if the choices were between Scott Kleeb, the Democrat, and Mike Johanns, the Republican?

Johanns (R) 59%
Kleeb (D) 28%

If 2008 election for U.S. Senate were held today, for whom would you vote for if the choices were between Scott Kleeb, the Democrat, and Jon Bruning, the Republican?

Bruning (R) 55%
Kleeb (D) 29%

(Results are +/- 4%)

Now Kos would like to spin this starting with the numbers that show over 60% of Nebraskans have no opinion of Kleeb. (59% have a favorable view of Johanns and 38% have a favorable view of Bruning.) He wants to say that once people learn who Kleeb is, and get to know him…blah blah blah.

Nice idea…in a vacuum. But considering that the Republican nominee will also be able to shape himself – not to mention shape Kleeb – these numbers confirm what everyone already knows: a liberal Democrat, with zero experience doing anything, loses badly to either the former Governor or the Attorney General.

Of course the other interesting question is why Kos would bother spending the money involved to do such a poll to find out that a guy who lost by 10% to Adrian Smith, loses badly to a Mike Johanns.

All we can come up with is that Kos (Markos Moulitsas Zúniga) must be smitten with Kleeb and his wife, Fox talking head Jane Fleming. Kleeb was at the Yearly Kos deal and the photo of Kleeb standing in the field of flowers in his jeans makes the Kossack men and women swoon. So, hey, free poll for ya’ll…

We’d post the crosstabs, but the formatting is a headache. So, as much as it pains us to suggest you follow a link to the drivel on Daily Kos, you can click here to find out what you probably already know.

Farmer Nelson offers amendment to stop Cowboy Nelson

Lets all jump into the DeLorean and re-live a little episode known as “Farmer Nelson”.

You don’t really need Doc Brown’s help, though do you? That Pete Ricketts ad is still stuck in your head! (Ah, just for the heck of it, here’s the YouTube link.)

So just to refresh, Farmer Ben Nelson claimed on his tax break application that he was farming land out on his Platte River compound. He claimed he was a farmer because he had some wild turkeys out there that he kept around just long enough to kill. Except that in reality, none of the land was actually being used for farming.

Nelson (an attorney and member of the Senate Ag Committee) claimed ignorance to this confuuuusing paper…but, never paid the back taxes for which he was given a break. (“Yes Your Honor, I robbed the bank, but seeing as you didn’t catch me then, I’m keeping all the money I got.”)

Well, guess who has authored an amendment to the Senate Farm Bill on pretend farmers! Yes, Farmer Nelson now wants to stop people from benefiting for pretend-farming!

Except now, instead of saying he wants to get rid of “Pretend Turkey Farmers” he says he wants to get rid of “Cowboy Starter Kits”.

Let’s let Farmer…er…Cowboy Nelson office explain it:

"These are former pieces of farm land that have been subdivided into large residential tracts that have yards big enough to, for example, keep a horse on. In these cases, you might have a house on one acre of a ten acre parcel and the residential owner is getting payments for the other nine acres. Of course, none of the land is actually being used for farming."

(Nelson to end USDA's paying non-farmers farm payments – Aglines – 11/13/07 – emphasis added).

Just to repeat that, he wants to stop cheaters when “none of the land is actually being used for farming.”

In-freaking-credible.

Next thing we’re going to hear Nelson is writing a bill to ban people from using Brylcream and getting bad dye-jobs.

We’re looking forward to the “Cowboy Nelson” ads soon. Maybe Nelson can pay for them with the tax breaks he kept.

Droppin' like flies…

A little math…

Chuck Hagel made his non-announcement announcement (the "NAA") on March 12, 2007.

Bob Kerrey said he wouldn't decide until Hagel decided and if Chuck was in, he was out. Mike Fahey said he wouldn't decide until Kerrey decided and if Bob was in he was out.
Scott Kleeb said he wouldn't decide until Fahey decided, and if Mike was in, he was out.

182 days after Hagel's NAA, Hagel officially decided not to run for reelection to the Senate.

44 days after that – 227 days after the NAA, Kerrey finally decided not to run.

20 days after that – 246 days after the NAA, Fahey finally decided not to run.

So now, 246 days, a full eight months after Chuck Hagel gave the initial "heads up", it's all hanging on Scott Kleeb whether or not to run for the U.S. Senate. And what do we hear?

He needs another seven days (253 days since the NAA). Or fourteen (260). Or fifty-six (302). ( Omaha Mayor says no to Senate run – OWH – 11/13/07.)

Now we suppose Kleeb is waiting to see if there's any chance that the Mike Johanns Juggernaut © will blow up against Jon Bruning.

See, Kleeb and the rest of the Dems think Kleeb, a former ranch-hand and present adjunct History professor who has never held an office of any kind, nor worked in government and currently is working his first "full time" job of teaching class a few times a week, could have a chance against a former Nebraska State Senator, and twice statewide elected Attorney General. And, you know, good luck with that.

Now as we've noted here, Kleeb is going full bore raising money for his campaign. What campaign you ask? Maybe he'll tell you and maybe he won't. But beyond all that cash he gets from ActBlue, most of which is likely not from Nebraska and he doesn't have to itemize, he seems to have another great "in-kind" contributor.

Over on the Daily Kos, the pre-eminent blogger of the Left and King of the "Net Roots", the site's founder Markos Alberto Moulitsas Zúniga stated that :

"I've got polling being conducted in Nebraska right now, so we'll soon have baseline numbers to gauge the current status of this race. Whatever those numbers might say, I suspect a Kleeb candidacy graduates this one to top-tier status before all's said and done."

Kos says that the polling will be released "later this week" and will show, "little difference in the numbers between Fahey and Kleeb". (I guess we'll see which apples are compared to what oranges…) But will we see this as an in-kind contribution on the Kleeb FEC report? Most likely not, since this is simple sharing between like minded Libs, right?

But if you're wondering about the general sanity of "Kos", look no further than his analysis that Kleeb's campaign will be a "top-tier" one. That's right, Markos believes, Johanns-Kleeb would practically be of Lincoln-Douglas, or heck, even Hagel-Nelson proportions. Nebraska pol watchers know better.

***

Joe Jordan reports on his blog that State Senator Tom White has officially said he won't run against Lee Terry in 2008. Calling R.J. Brown?

***
And if you want some real comedy, check out the comments the Kos-sacks have regarding Kleeb's blue-jeans photo (ex: "Wow, sure, I'll draft him. What a pic. ;)"). It's pretty clear they like him for all the right reasons…

***

Finally, kudos for Robin Tysver of the OWH for her accurate characterization of the Scott Kleeb campaign against Adrian Smith ("spirited"), while being a reporter who will note that Smith WON by ten points. And to quote Kleeb:

"I do think it's time for a new generation of political leadership here in Nebraska."

Yes Scott, and the 3rd District voters agreed with you when they elected Smith…

Loyal Republicans

A few notes about the impending visit from President Bush for Mike Johanns.

It was certainly interesting that Omaha City Councilman and Bruning supporter Chuck Sigerson decided to get out in front of this one on behalf of Bruning, using the “don’t meddle in our primary, Washingtonians!” line.

Except that you don’t use that when talking about the President of the United States (from your party).

Not to mention that the President will likely choose his words very carefully when talking publicly about Johanns. Count on him to say something along the lines of what he said at Johanns’s retirement announcement like “Mike would make a great Senator”. He’s not going to say, “Nebraska Republicans should vote for Johanns” or “Jon Bruning sucks eggs.”

The more level headed (official) Bruning camp had a better response when Jordan McGrain said, “Lets’ wait and see what the President has to say.” They will then likely pounce on the non-endorsement, for what that’s worth.

But look at the big reasons Bush is showing up for Johanns in the first place. First, Johanns was his Secretary of Agriculture. He was a loyal cabinet member and didn’t make waves.

Second, and very importantly, the entrance of Mike Johanns into this race kept out Bob Kerrey.

You can argue all day long about whether Kerrey would have been the favorite in the race (as Bob Novak wants to), particularly if it had been a Bruning-Daub match up in the GOP primary. But make no mistake that Kerrey would have made it a difficult fight for Republicans. The Bush trip may have even been a promise Johanns got out of the national party if he entered the race. The visit isn’t so much an endorsement (even though it is) as it is a “thank-you” to Johanns for getting in and scaring off the Democrats.

And while Bruning supporters may want to cry foul on this visit during the primary, Bruning may also have brought a bit of this on himself. Remember when the wrath of Bruning came down on Chuck Hagel for not supporting the President on Iraq? Well that same wrath came down on Hagel…and Johanns…for supporting the President’s immigration bills.

And then there was the line from Bruning about Johanns being the President’s “lap dog”. These are the little things that can come back to haunt you when you’re not being judicious in your language.

Of course the biggest boost Johanns will get from the visit will be cash into his campaign coffers. Any advantage that Bruning had money-wise will soon dissipate. Can the Bruning campaign counter this? What will their strategy be? We wait.

***
And for Creighton basketball fans, 2 ½ words: P’Allen Stinnett.

Confidence Man

"Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson is confident the Democratic Party will offer a quality candidate for the 2008 Senate race."

(KOTA Televsion, Scottsbluff, Gering, 11/8/07.)

Really Ben?
“Confident”?
“Quality“?

Well, since the rest of us don’t seem to have your inside information (hey, Tony Raimondo is still waiting to be “approached”), and no one else seems to be working at it very hard, we here at Leavenworth Street thought we’d toss out some suggestions.

Since you Dems seem to really like the “used to live in Nebraska, yet still want to live somewhere else” types, here’s who we think could make a good Dem Senate candidate:

1) Marlon Brando

Pros:

Born in Omaha; exudes power, in that patriarch of a powerful family way;
Cons: “Last Tango in Paris”; deceased.

2) Nick Nolte

Pros: Attended Westside High in Omaha; “Rich Man, Poor Man” shows he understands both sides of the tracks; brooding, gravelly voice.
Cons: Uh, this...

3) Dick Cavett

Pros: Ivy League grad (Yale, just like Scott Kleeb!); was the “voice of Nebraska” in those UNL ads during Husker games; fits in well at elitist cocktail parties.
Cons: Kind of wussy; signature song is called, “Glitter and be Gay” (not that there’s anything wrong with that…)

4) Chris Klein

Pros: Millard West grad; already has campaign experience from movie, “Election”;
Cons: Technically, not old enough; Went a little cuckoo after ex-Katie Holmes married Tom Cruise.

5) Larry the Cable Guy (a/k/a Daniel Lawrence Whitney)

Pros: Man of the people; Has skybox at Husker games for fundraising; Has built in slogan “Git ‘er done…in the Senate!”
Cons: Probably a Republican; smelly.

So there you go Dems! Pick one of these four gents, or please leave a suggestion of someone yourself! (No Green Party members, please.) Your suggestion has gotta be better than, well, nobody.

***
On the 232nd anniversary of the creation of the U.S. Marine Corps, The NRSC has put up a splash page with a thank you video to our nation’s troops and a link to be able to send our troops a thank you note (there is no email capture or fundraising ask – simply a way for Americans to express their thanks to our troops this Veterans Day weekend). Take a look.

It’s not easy being Green

Finally, the left-wing, pro-environmentalist, anti-war candidate is getting into the U.S. Senate race in Nebraska.

No, not Mike Fahey or Scott Kleeb.

We’re talking about the Green Party candidate, Steve Larrick. The Green’s press release says that Larrick, who ran for the 1st District House seat in 2004 and for State Auditor in 2006 and got about 3% of the vote each time, says that he will announce on Sunday at the State Capitol in Lincoln.

So beyond our fear of seeing Larrick’s welcome video in an office next to a plant, what is the point of this announcement?

Well, we first give a Tip of the Lid to our comrades at the New Nebraska Network, official un-official blog of the Nebraska Democrat Party for noticing this story in the LJS. But we see this next line from them:

Larrick doing any better than that in the Senate campaign is probably dependent upon the total failure of Nebraska Democrats to recruit a legitimate candidate. If that's not reason enough to root against Larrick, I don't know what is....though he'd be perfectly welcome to run in the Democratic primary. (Emphasis added.)

Couple this cry for someone - ANYONE! - to run as a Dem, with the word that Scott Kleeb is much more interested taking another shot at Adrian Smith than losing badly to Mike Johanns (should he win). We sense an increased sense of desperation among the Nebraska Dems.

We had to chuckle when 2006 Democrat 2nd District House candidate Jim Esch concluded his statement about not running next year by conceding the 2008 race to Terry saying that in 2010 “you really could have a meaningful race.” Add to that Dem Chairman Steve Achepohl’s conversation with Joe Jordan where he says that while he hopes to find an opponent for Terry, “I’m not God.”

Congratulations on your victory, Lee – you know, unless St. Peter comes to run against you.

So the Dems don’t have a candidate for the 1st District, no one in the 2nd District (though State Senator Tom White apparently likes having his name thrown around), a one-time loser who wants to roll the dice to become a two-time loser in the 3rd, no one for the Senate and they’re now trying to recruit a Green Partier who received a total of 6% of the vote in the last two elections combined.

Someone check to see how many offices Kate Witek could run for at the same time…

***
Mike Johanns will be holding a fundraiser in Washington, D.C. on Thursday night, and the host list is a veritable who’s-who of the Senate Republican leadership: McConnell, Lott, Alexander, Cochran, Grassley, Hutchison, Stevens – among the fourteen Senators listed on the event. Of course the host-with-the-most will be Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, who is pushing hard for Johanns – and against Jon Bruning – these days.

Figuring that Bruning will end the next quarter with over a millions bucks in the bank, Johanns will need to concentrate his efforts on fund raising. One needs only to look at his bare-bones website to know that they will be conserving cash in order to not allow Bruning to get a competitive edge cash-wise.

Could Bruning compete with Johanns in paid media? Maybe.
Will he have a message that could challenge the GOP establishment-backed Johanns Juggernaut ©?
We will wait and see…

Bruning Video Sneak Preview

The Jon Bruning for Senate website will be featuring a new video (among other likely changes) and Leavenworth Street has the new vid below. (The vid below gets the last few seconds cut off, so you can see the complete version here.)

Nothing too striking really. The one line we noticed was where Bruning says:

I believe Republicans want a different kind of leader to shake things up in Washington.

This is what we've figured Bruning will do -- needs to do -- to differentiate himself from Mike Johanns. He needs to portray himself as the young go-getter who won't just be a quiet, behind the scenes person, which Johanns would likely be. Is this what GOP voters want? Who knows, but considering that how the two will vote will likely be the same, Bruning needs another theme. Look to see this one out front.

Now with that in mind...c'mon Bruning campaign! We're fairly certain we've seen the candidate, wearing a jacket, sitting on the desk, with a plant to his right somewhere before. Hmm. Where was it? Could it be...the Johanns video! The same Johanns video that was roundly criticized as dull and lifeless?

Come on guys! Is this that hard? Have him walking. Have video of him talking to people. Maybe some background music. The talking to the camera in an office has been played into the ground. Show that you've got something else in the bag of tricks.

If we don't see Pat Flynn talking to the camera while driving down I-80 on a Harley very soon, we're going to be severely disappointed...

Hillary’s Hockey Hair

Well, it seems the discussion on the previous post has died down a bit, but we still encourage you to check it out and comment.

In the mean time, while we here on Leavenworth Street usually restrict ourselves to Nebraska matters, this one has been bothering us since the Dem’s Presidential debate in Philadelphia the other day:

Did you catch the MULLET on Hillary? What the hell! And people have been harassing John Edwards about his haircut?

If I didn’t know better, I’d guess Hillary’s going on the “Blue Collar Comedy Tour” with Foxworthy, Larry and the boys. That doo is business up front and par-tay in the back!

And frankly her Neck Warmer puts Foxworthy’s to shame.

Of course, upon further research, we discovered that this is actually a “Femullet”.

But don’t fret Hillary supporters. Should she win (and T.O. help us all if she does), she won’t be the first mulleted Democrat to occupy the White House. Get a load of this Shorty-Longback on James K. Polk. The Wisconsin Waterfall was flowing in that Oval Office.

Dueling DREAMs in the Senate race

This site, as he name says, is about politics.

So with that in mind, let’s look at an issue – at this point, the ONLY issue – in the nascent Senate campaign between Jon Bruning and Mike Johanns. But let’s look at the issue from the political, campaigning point of view.

Jordan McGrain, manager of the Bruning for Senate campaign, is making his best efforts to hammer Johanns on the immigration issue. The Bruning camp wants to tie Johanns to his support of last year’s failed immigration bill, which he campaigned for while President Bush’s Secretary of Agriculture. That bill contained the much debated “path to citizenship” which many claimed was “Amnesty!” for illegal aliens. As a member of Bush’s cabinet, Johanns argued for comprehensive immigration reform, but argued that the “path to citizenship” was not amnesty.

The recently rejected DREAM Act had similar provisions, but Chris Peterson, campaign manager of the Johanns for Senate campaign, said specifically that Johanns opposes the DREAM act and was “pleased with its defeat”.

The Bruning camp has countered that Johanns past statements as Ag Sec showed him “in favor of amnesty before he was against it,” using the line that Bush battered John Kerrey with in 2004.

Now here’s an interesting note: at this point no one in the Nebraska Main Stream Media has picked up on this discussion. Is this because 1) they accept Johanns’s statements for now; 2) they’re biased towards Johanns; or 3) they’re just waiting for the Bruning ads on the subject to discuss it? Hmm.

In any case, currently, Bruning and Johanns have similar, if not identical positions going forward on immigration. Johanns spelled his out as:

1) border security and that means stopping illegal entry across the southern and northern border;
2) no amnesty whatsoever;
3) verifiable workplace enforcement and sanctions for employers who fail to follow the law;
4) those who have come here illegally must go back to their home country and start the immigration process over without preferential treatment; and,
5) if you've come here illegally and have committed a serious crime, you lose your chance at becoming a citizen.

When asked, McGrain said the highlights of the Bruning immigration plan are:

Opposing amnesty and public benefits like in-state tuition…extending the fence and increasing manpower and technology, and empowering state and local officials to enforce existing laws and expeditiously detaining and deporting dangerous aliens and gang members. (He also encourages law enforcement to participate in) the 287(g) program, which would give local law enforcement access to DHS databases and funds for training.

Now we list these, not so much to argue about Johann’s position, but to show that the positions of the candidates are nearly identical. So the Bruning camp’s argument boils down to, “he argued for something different while he was Ag Sec – can we trust him in the future?”

And we’re not really sure where this gets the Bruning camp.

Everyone is looking back at the Governor’s campaign where the in-state tuition for children of illegal immigrants became one of the top two issues. But the difference there was that there was a real difference. Tom Osborne was for it, while Dave Heineman was against it. If TO had said, “I was for it while in Congress, but I’m against it now,” it would have been a much different, watered-down issue. And probably not a factor at all.

People mainly want to know what a candidate is going to do in the future. Voters most likely understand that Johanns was pushing his boss’s position, and are unlikely to hold it against him. But while people seem to have accepted Johann’s position on immigration for now, will things change after they’ve been subjected to a barrage of Bruning ads claiming Johanns favors “Amnesty!”? At that point, will Johanns listing his going-forward positions satisfy those who vote based on this volatile issue?

Of course, keep in mind that such ads won’t be in a vacuum, and you can bet that if (and when) Bruning presses this, the Johanns camp will pull out all of Bruning’s Daily Nebraskan columns, and it will simply turn into a pissing match of “yeah, well he said this.”

So where does that put Bruning? We don’t know, but at this time, he seems to be betting his campaign on that issue. Is that one issue enough to beat the Johanns Juggernaut ©. Are there any other issues out there that can separate these candidates? Are there issues where they believe, going forward, they’ll do things differently? (Definitely in style, but is that enough?)

So what say you, Leavenworth Street readers? Putting aside whether the DREAM Act is good or bad, is the Bruning campaign’s strategy worthwhile? Does it have a chance to get traction? Will it pull over GOP voters?

We can guarantee that both campaigns want to know…