Monday, August 04, 2008

Be the Blog

It has been crazy here on Leavenworth Street lately, Politicos. Unfortunately, we have not found the time to properly post here on the wiiiiiide variety of topics. So we're just going to throw out a few, add a few links and let you commenters have at it. We hope to update with proper posts soon...


First, while we've been meaning to give an update on all things FEC report-wise, Uncle Wiggly at the Heartland Notebook has done an outstanding job of crunching the numbers on his spreadsheet to give you a view of the Scott Kleeb finances. The OWH did that as well this morning, but they don't use nearly the outstanding prose of U.W.

One thing we haven't seen mentioned however, when the Kleeb camp was tooting their horns about "out-raising" Mike Johanns in the second quarter was the effect of the Millionaire's Amendment. When this, now unconstitutional, amendment was invoked because of Tony Raimondo's self-financing in the Democrat Primary, Kleeb was able to raise TRIPLE the usual amount of $2,300 from donors. (Our analysis of his fundraising notwithstanding.)

Therefore, the likes of super-liberal zillionaire George Soros (above) were able to donate $6,900 to Kleeb in the Primary, thereby inflating his numbers, by oh, say $24,000 -- when Kleeb bested MJ by around $16K. How about that...


We had just sort of a chuckle when we saw Nebraska's chief left-wing liberal blogger coming down on the Kleeb campaign after the latest poll showed him still getting crushed by Johanns.

But then KMTV's Joe Jordan jumped on it, and led a story about the "attack" by the blog. Molehill, meet mountain, and all that. Nonetheless, it's interesting that the lefties are just itching for Kleeb to go negative.


On "Meet the Press" yesterday, NBC political director (and sometime Leavenworth Street reader) Chuck Todd made a startling prognostication:

TOM BROKAW: Who's going to be the keynoter at the Democratic convention?

CHUCK TODD: Oh, my money's on Chuck Hagel. And I, I think it would be a Republican. That's the message that Obama wants to send. I mean, the whole idea of the Democratic convention, I think, is going to be two parts. One is you are going to see them be more aggressive on McCain than John Kerry was on Bush. I mean, I talked to an Obama person, and I asked them what they thought of that 2004 convention as a whole, was it too soft on Bush? And immediately said, "Oh, absolutely." So expect--in fact, don't be surprised if Obama starts ratcheting up rhetoric against McCain this week. Forget the convention. But I've always--my money's always been on Chuck Hagel as the, as the keynote. But it's not--you know, technically Hillary Clinton may dominate that night because she's, she's the, she's the big speaker that night. But you send a message with your keynote, and I think we may have seen the other keynote on this, at this desk.
Place your bets commenters! Place your bets!


Finally, we went beyond a chuckle to a full-on SNORT, when we saw Joe Jordan's suggestion that the loser of the 2nd District Congressional race become the de facto Omaha Mayor. Obviously this wouldn't be beyond Lee Terry's realm (though he'd have to lose first...), seeing as he was on the Omaha City Council and has now extensive legislative experience.

But Mayor Jim Esch??? C'mon Joe. That's fire and brimstone, cats and dogs living together, Hal Daub becoming a Democrat kind of talk. Get back to us on those odds...


Anonymous said...

Talk about misguided. You said Soros "could" have donated, but the fact is he, along with anyone else, were clearly not asked to donate double the limit. He only donated $2100. As it is, he could have donated $4600 without the millionaires amendment: $2300 for the Primary, $2300 for the General. But LS has to "suggest" (another word for attemping to lie) something that never happened. Why do Republicans feel the need to lie all the time?

Street Sweeper said...

Hey Angry Guy.
Yeah, YOU!

Try looking at the FEC report, that KLEEB filed, Pages 61 and 62 of 362, where it says, on 5/13/2008, George Soros, of New York, gave "Nebraskans for Kleeb" (oh the irony) $4,600 and $2,300, which were receipts for the Primary.

As of the filing, Soros had given Kleeb $6,900.

What else ya got there, cowpoke?

One Out In The Third said...

A woman came home to find her husband in bed with another woman. The husband non-chalantly crawled out of bed...dressed...and as he exited the room he told his distraught wife..."Don't believe your lying eyes."

That seems to be what some Dems would have us believe...even though you have proof positive...if they say it ain't ain't so. It's a tired old tactic they've used for years.

Brian T. Osborn said...

Uhhhhhhhh - 1/3rd,

A tactic the DEMS have used for years? Take a look at all the prevarications promoted by the Republican Party over the past several years. It would take a complete disregard for reality and immersion in another dimension to substantiate what they have been passing off as the truth.

Eddie Murphy said...


Wasn't me.

Anonymous said...

Well, I guess Soros beats having a donor who is a current us Senator and being brought up on charges. Go Mike Johanns and Ted Stevens!

macdaddy said...

Keynote speaker will be none other than...Scott Kleeb! Either that or Brangelina. Seriously, who else could have any hope of being seen within the shining envelope of That Which is Obama? All Hail Obama!

Brian T. Osborn said...

Good Grief! You folks will swallow any tripe they spoon feed you, won't you? If Rush Limpbough starts claiming that Obama is acting like the Messiah, you are all ready and willing to proclaim him the Antichrist. Is there a one of you capable of independent thought?

one in omaha said...

Too bad it was Obama who compared himself to Paris Hilton 1st in 2005.

Anonymous said...

Oh man. I want Lee Terry defeated in November as much as the next guy, but if that means the possibility of him as mayor of Omaha next year?? Ugh.

Luckily, there is no way he could beat Hal Daub.

'sker said...

Mr. Osborn,

It is difficult to ascertain whether you should be taken seriously in your postings. Was your 2:43am posting a piece of sarcasm? Or are you serious? Enough said.

Thus far there has been one post of any substance, and that was conducted by the esteemed author of this blog. In it, SS mopped the floor with an anonymous blogger (9:16pm). Ostensibly that blogger was an apologist for Scott Kleeb.

Kleeb's fundraising numbers indicate weakness in his campaign when compared to those of Mike Johanns, and that is the premise of this thread. If you have substance to repudiate the premise, then by all means...

Anonymous said...

Energy Relief Rally
Be there, bring a friend, bring a sign. Send a message to Speaker Pelosi we need an energy plan NOW!

Brian T. Osborn said...


No sarcasm intended, merely my astute observation. Strangely enough, I agree with you on the "substance" issue you raise, including your own missive . . . and mine.

I can't argue with the fundraising issues. You see, I am one of those oddball believers in the power of the people - grassroots and all that - that believe elections are won by who gets the most votes, not by which candidate has the most money.

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:16 --

I thought we already had an energy plan -- Lee Terry's plan. Are you saying his plan means nothing?

Anonymous said...

Oh, I get it. Lee Terry can come up with all the plans he wants....but he will get nothing done. BECAUSE HE ISN'T EFFECTIVE PEOPLE!!

macdaddy said...

Brian T Osborn,
Obama is beyond parody. "We are the ones we have been waiting for." People will look back at this moment (when he clinched the nomination) as the day the rise of the seas began to slow and the earth began to heal. These are Obama's own words. I don't need Rush to point out the obvious. Obama has done a great job pointing them out himself. Obama has issues and they aren't political, they're psychological. But, you know, whatever, dude. 'Cause it's all about change you can believe in.

lnk said...

Just have two words for the Esch trolls here:


The most significant measure passed in decades on conservation, and Terry co-authored it with a Democratic Rep. last year.

Totally destroys your argument about Terry's effectiveness.

Also, what's Jim's claim to fame? Getting fired from Creighton Prep last year after one month on the job?

lnk said...

Hey Esch trolls--

How much in 'loan repayments' is Jim planning to take this week from the campaign?

I hear he's up to $15,000. True?

Anonymous said...

Um, okay, Ink. Just keep tellin' yourself that.

Seriously. The biggest topic discussed in the news (and everywhere just about) is energy and conservation. If Lee was so tantamount in "the most significant measure passed in decades", why isn't his name mentioned ever in the national news? I mean EVER?

Again, seriously. You've brought up his "energy plan" for months now. Have you noticed nobody cares what he has to say at all?

OmaSteak said...

Is Joe Jordan still alive???

lnk said...

Anonymous 12:57--google Hill-Terry or check CQ, The Hill and Roll-Call.

Plenty of mention of Hill-Terry.

Again, while you clowns do nothing other than talk--and attack each other on NNN--Terry acts.

Interesting how you don't dispute the components of Terry's plan. Maybe that's because your boss himself said "there are good ideas in there."

Terry might say the same about .223's plan, but there's nothing there. Just like your campaign.

Anonymous said...

Ink, again you ASSume. I don't know Jim Esch, have never met Jim Esch, and don't know anyone that works on his campaign. I also have never posted on NNN.

I am a registered Republican in Omaha. I will never vote for Lee Terry again. (And believe me. I am NOT the only one.)

'sker said...

Mr. Osborn,

Then am I to surmise you agree with the assessment of SS? Judging from fundraising, Johanns is the stronger candidate. Fundraising, after all, is a major premise of this thread.

You speak condescendingly toward me implying that I somehow don't believe the top vote-getter wins in politics. Look at your words. Do you understand why I inquire whether you are speaking sarcastically earlier? After SS offers a cited rationale demonstrating his point, you respond with some missive about Rush Limbaugh and "spoon-fed" conservatives on this blog. You come off arrogantly whether you realize it or not.

While fundraising is not the solitary means by which one can judge a campaign, it is a means. Looking at the two candidates' numbers, I would say Johanns has broader support and a stronger campaign. It seems polling data back that up. Believe what you will, but at least lend substance to what you believe. With respect, I've seen none of that.


BB said...

Looks like Esch is dissed by his own party again:

lnk said...


Aug 5, 6:15 AM EDT

Omaha Democrat joins Terry's campaign

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) -- Another Democrat has joined the Lee Terry Camp.

The Republican congressman says 73-year-old Chuck Maxwell, a lifelong Democrat, will direct the campaign's outreach to "pro-life Catholic voters."

Maxwell's son, Chip, is a former state senator and current member of the Douglas County Board of Commissioners.

Maxwell will volunteer his time to work for Terry. He's a former Creighton University administrator.

Last month, Esch's primary opponent, Democrat Richard Carter, endorsed Terry and joined his re-election campaign.

Anonymous said...

The DCCC isn't going to target a candidate who has only $100,000 in the bank--which is the amount I hear Esch has, after paying bills on 7/1 and taking loan repayments.

asecurityguard said...

And George Bush proclaiming that he won because its "Gods will" is nothing? Every candidate points to themselves as the agent and being of something better. come up with a bterr argument

asecurityguard said...

wow my typing is atrocious today, i meant to spell 'better'

Anonymous said...

Chuck who? Richard who?

Anonymous said...

Ya if you give money to Esch it is going right into his own pocket. He's paying himself back from last time around. Seriously, who would want to give money to a guy who is using this election to pay himself back...are you using the money to buy drinks Jim? Using the money to have someone spice up your resume so you can get a job? While his staff works for little or nothing, Jim is laughing all the way to the bank.

Brian T. Osborn said...


You can surmise what you will, but you're wrong. Judging by one criteria (fundraising) is hardly sufficient to declare a victor in a race that is yet to be run. Big Brown won the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness but failed at Belmont. He had the hype, but the winner is the one that crosses the line first and in elections the winner is who gets the most votes, not who has the most money.

I'm an arrogant, demeaning, snarky S.O.B.; that is my nature. Ask some of my Democratic colleagues that have fallen within my sights. they'll tell you, I spare no one. When you're wrong - you're wrong.

You want substance? In politics? Are you kidding me? Politics is all about ephemeral, intangible things. It is about emotions, perceptions, feelings. Ask Karl Rove, he'll tell you.

macdaddy said...

So Obama = George W. Bush? Is that the kind of argument you were looking for? And really, if you're going to criticize Bush for thinking his Presidency was ordained by God, you might want to start blasting Obama for thinking that his Presidency is ordained by Obama. Which is scarier? Someone who thinks he's doing God's will or someone who thinks he IS God?

ed said...

Which is scarier? Someone who thinks he's doing God's will or someone who thinks he IS God?

I'd say you folks that think you can speak on God's behalf are far scarier than either one of those. Do you honestly believe that God is a Republican?

I believe Jesus was a Socialist.

Anonymous said...

Doggone it Sweeper, Joe Jordan is a bozo, and not worthy of your blogging.

NO BODY cares what he thinks or says.

pol observer said...

Joe Jordan does a good job. I miss his old Sunday show.

Street Sweeper said...

Here's the thing about Joe Jordan:

Sometimes he's over the top. Sometimes he likes the "gotcha" moment too much.

BUT... he's one of the ONLY reporters who is willing to discuss pure politics in Omaha and Nebraska.

He asks a lot of the questions no one else is asking and finds some original points of view. And he's interesting.

There is an awful lot of bland vanilla news in Omaha. Jordan at least puts a little spice into politics, and he gets people talking.

More and more I've come to appreciate his stories.

lnk said...

Thanks to everyone who came to Lee's energy rally last night!

A real success. Good press coverage!

The best part was, as usual, Jim (uh, ummm, uh, duh, ummm, uh) Esch was MIA and got zippo coverage.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I loved how the Omaha paper mentioned the 50 people that were at that rally. If you consider about 12 people from his congressional office and 12 people from his campaign office -- and then they each brought one family member....uh, not that great.

And, again. No substance, just for show. Where has Lee Terry been the last 10 years when our energy crisis has gotten so out of control? Oh yeah. In Congress. On the Energy Committee. Nice results there Lee.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 9:24--you obviously didn't attend--if you had, you would have heard alot of good info and facts about Lee's plan.

The same plan Jim (uh, umm, duh, ummm, uhhh)Esch said had a lot of "good ideas" in it.

We did notice the two Esch trolls across the street. Impressive. lol

macdaddy said...

I know. Let's get this settled. Why don't Esch and Terry have a debate? Then maybe we can find out some particulars from Esch such as what kind of "incentives" does he advocate to get consumers to conserve? Negative or Positive? What about nuclear power? Wasn't clear from his EASI proposal whether he supports it and will try to get more plants on line. How about getting rid of the tariff on ethanol from Brazil? Does he actually support the McCain-Hilton plan that includes new drilling? Does he think that our already stringent environmental standards are NOT being enforced? Did he get fired from Creighton Prep? For Lee Terry we'd like to know if he has any other legislation in the hopper like the Hill-Terry bill that tries to get more Americans killed on our highways because of lighter cars needed to meet the new CAFE standards. Why'd he stop at 35mpg? Why not 36? What was it like to work in a bipartisan fashion in Congress? Is it hard work to get a bill with actual details put together? Is it harder or easier than a white paper? Also, has he done any training to take on Jesse Jackson, Jr's challenge?

I think it'd only take about a half hour. But it needs to get done before August 30th.

OK. I was the blog.

Anonymous said...

Eureka! The identity is revealed!
Street Sweeper = Mrs. Joe Jordan

Okay, perhaps not, but it seemed plausible given your complimentary remarks of Jordan's reporting style, not to mention the amount of space you devote in your blog at times to Jordan's stories and comments.

Keep up the great work, S.S.

Street Sweeper said...

Geez, so sue us for giving props to anyone.
I'm happy to hear issues with anything I wrote about him.
Maybe we can do a post sometime later on it as well.

OmaSteak said...

Before he died, Joe Jordan was well known for his "creative editing" of candidate images/remarks. One candidate I know of had a scheduled interview with the late Joe Jordan and upon Joe's arrival, informed Joe that his staff was going to videorecord the interview too in its entirety. Joe and cameraman left the campaign office in a huff. I would advise all local candidates to make a complete audio/video recording of any interchange with either the late Mr. Jordan or the OWH's chief political "reporter" tends to keep their editorializing a little in check.

Anonymous said...

Fahey is super pissed at Esch ... developing.

Anonymous said...

Jim Esch calls pro-life families "extremist".

Read the details at

Anonymous said...

Oh come on, anon 3:54, that's not what he said. He never said "pro-life families" are "extremist." He said, according to YOUR website is, "the Right to Life side is a little more extremist...."

I'm a Republican and I agree with him. Some of those right-wingers ARE extremists! It's their way or no way.

Wouldn't Lee Terry say that those people killing abortion doctors are extremists? Or those nutjobs hanging out on the side of the road showing dismembered fetuses to every man, woman, and CHILD driving past extremist? Or are those people just mainstream according to Lee?

Please stop spinning things to TRY and make some kind of point. We get it. You don't like Jim Esch and you want to keep your job. Just stop these stupid political ploys -- PLEASE! They just make yourself look stupid.

Anonymous said...

Anon--look, no one forced Jim to say it. The quote is devastating.

I know you like Jim, but you look foolish trying to defend this one.

If Esch has any brains, he'll apologize.

Anonymous said...

Oh please. Devastating? Really?

Anyone with half a brain can understand what he was saying. And anyone with a quarter of a brain can see what Lee and his campaign is trying to twist it to mean.

Believe it or not, most people are more moderate on the life issue -- even if they classify themselves as pro-life. Most people hate the extremist actions of those few that take it all too far.

This is what is killing the Republican party. Can't you see that?

BB said...

Esch put his foot in his mouth, imagine that. These things happen (frequently) when the candidate and his campaign staff are all amateurs.

Anonymous said...

And obviously these things happen (frequently) when you have the Karl Rove of Connecticut (dirty) politics running the Lee Terry campaign.

macdaddy said...

We can debate whether it's smart to insult so many potential voters, but it's really, really stupid to insult your future boss. Esch just called Nancy Pelosi's Congress a do-nothing Congress. I happen to agree with that, but given the way the House of Representatives is set up, the blame for something not getting done falls squarely on the Speaker of the House. Esch might want to be aware of that before he ends up with the janitor's closet in the sub-basement for an office. I also liked the comment that he hasn't been afraid to drink. That's a winning campaign slogan: "Jim Esch. Because real men drive drunk." Great article. Where do the Dems get these candidates?

Anonymous said...

Honestly, I just think Nancy wants to keep her majority (and even make it a wider margin of Dems). She doesn't really care how they get there. She'll be happy with any Dem candidate who knocks off a Republican.

lnk said...

Jim Esch had a week to correct the quote. He didn't.

He didn't say "some" or "a few" or "a number of" pro-life supporters are extremist. He referred on a collective basis to the the "right to life side" in those terms.

His choice of words, not mine.

And, we're calling him on it.

Esch just lost 25% of the Democratic vote.

Anonymous said...

Whatever. Those Dems that ARE pro-life will agree with Esch more than anyone. There are very few on the very far fringe-right that agree with the extremist ways of the pro-life lobbying groups.

Most Nebraskans are more independent in thought and hate the extremist tactics that try to scare and label people....not to mention murder doctors.

lnk said...

Anon 5:50--most Nebraskans are also honest citizens who don't insult an entire category of people like Esch did.

Please continue to defend Esch--you look more foolish by the minute.

Anonymous said...

Let Esch keep on talkin' he is digging his grave so fast. And it is funny, some of you slammed the energy rally when Lee got 3 TV stations the paper and radio there. What did Esch get for his energy announcement, no paper, no radio and only two TV stations. Energy rally even had live shots from JJ at 5 & 6. The media knows a serious candidate...that's Lee Terry folks. Not the unemployed bumble Jimmy boy.

Anonymous said...

I wonder how many times since Esch has been an adult his daddy has had to stand in for him and explain his behavior. I wonder if his dad explained "things" to the Judge at DWI sentencing, too?

Only a child would send his dad to do a man's job. Just more of the same, Jim blows off the Press and sends his campaign manager to deal with it one day and his dad the next. BTW, I wonder how many of those poster size black and whites they have of Jim sitting around the campaign office. OMG, that guy really does love himself, doesn't he?!

Anonymous said...

Lee Terry is a complete and utter tool. How about concentrating on real issues that matter to people like, the economy, taxes or something other than social issues.

Oh yeah, I forgot, Lee has the Karl Rove of Connecticut running his campaign. Nasty, negative, etc.

BB said...

Does Esch even have a campaign manager? I would much rather have "the Karl Rove of Connecticut" running my campaign rather than what amounts to a bunch of unpaid interns. Keep calling him that, I'm sure you flatter him every time you do.

lnk said...

Who's gonna speak for Jim in the next interview? Mom?

Anonymous said...

What's sad is that I'm sure that Lee Terry's campaign manager, Dave Boomer, IS proud of his work in Connecticut working for the known felon, John Rowland. I'm sure he got great pleasure from trying to spin things to try and make Rowland look like less a criminal. Too bad Rowland ended up in prison anyway.

lnk said...

I hear Jim (uh, duh, ummm, uh, ummm, uh, ummm) Esch has been in New York trying to collect PAC contributions.

I though PACs "corrupted" you--or at least that's what Jim said in 06.

What gives?

Anonymous said...

Well, it must be hard to counter the constant "loser newsers" from the opponent, Lee Terry, where all Lee ever does is grandstand about things he has no power to change or completely twist Esch's words and take things out of context to try and make people forget how completely worthless Lee is.

lnk said...

Anon--we've quoted Jim word for word.

Not our problem that he can't frame a simple sentence on abortion without slandering pro-life families in NE2.

Is mommy holding a 1 pm newser?

Fed Up said...

Ink, I've been reading you on here and on NNN for some time now, and you've made it clear you're paid by Lee Terry's campaign. If you're an indication of Lee Terry's ethics, I refuse to vote for him. I was already having doubts about him, and this just seals it. I'm mean, seriously...."mom" jokes?!?!

Bad thing is I don't like Jim Esch either.

Basically, we're stuck between two completely juvenile, immature, unprofessional little boys with staff to match.

In other words, we're all screwed.

Anonymous said...

Fed Up = a paid Esch staffer.

macdaddy said...

Fed up,

There's nothing stopping you from not voting or writing in someone else. The fact of the matter, though, is that Lee Terry will continue to represent NE2. Not Jim Esch. How the Dems thought Esch was a better candidate than Carter to take on Terry shows an utter lack of awareness of their neighbors. I suggest that from now until 2010, they step outside the echo chamber and find out how the rest of us think. Perhaps you don't like how we think, but if it really bugs you, move to Iowa. In the meantime, all you guys can come up with are insinuations of something that happened in Connecticut and assertions that Terry is a nothing. Other than the Connecticut thing (and what does CT have to do with NE? Was Terry in CT?), the rest of the charges against Terry are what's known in psychological terms as "projection." The problem for Esch is that the only record he has to go up against Terry isn't all that flattering. You have to give people a reason to vote against the incumbent other than strengthening Nancy Pelosi's grip on the do-nothing Congress. But I will say that the comments on this site can be very entertaining.

Fed up said...

Anonymouse - Never worked for Esch, never would consider it. I'm sorry that people like you can't fathom that a Republican could dislike Lee Terry. Like I said, I can't stand Jim Esch either.

McDaddy - the reason I have turned away from Terry (who I voted fore before) is because he hasn't worked for the 2nd. Just last time, he immediately broke several promises. I've given him several years worth of chances, and can't in good conscience give it to him again.

I don't like Richard Carter because he can't seem to decide what his positions are.

Maybe I'll write in Hal Daub and give him another shot.

Anonymous said...

Fed Up--just go hang at NNN--where all the lib bloggers (3-5)agree with each other all the time. Nice homogeneous postings by a few that you will undoubtedly agree with.

Fed up said...

In other words, you want me to leave here, and never come back, so you can have nice homogenous posts from people who always agree with you.

What....don't like people who don't automatically fall in line?

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I'm another Republican who has voted for Lee Terry in the past, but will not vote for him again. I know you Terry people would like to think we're all the same person on this blog, but we're not. I have no idea who fed up is -- but I agree with him/her. Jim Esch isn't great, but let's at least get Lee Terry out so we can have a real Republican run in 2010.

WW-150 said...

Jim Esch isn't great, but let's at least get Lee Terry out so we can have a real Republican run in 2010."

WTF? Who are you? You're no Republican that I know of. Who would you rather have who is MORE Republican than Lee? Also, how does it make sense to allow another seat in Congress go to a D, with the hope of ousting him in two years? That makes no sense!

Lee has been in Congress for 5 terms, four in the majority, 1 in the minority. That does not mean that he should own the place and pass a lot of bills. Do you guys have ANY idea how Congress works?
A wise man once said, "The best Representative is not the one who passes the most bills, but the one who tweaks just a little bit for the best outcome."
Often times amendments are more powerful than the original bill itself.

"You've got to go back to your school and insist that you be better prepared to go out in the world!"

Anonymous said...

I'm a Republican who has worked in Congress myself before. I don't need you to tell me how it works. Thanks though.

Lee is the brand of Republican that is killing the Republican Party. Where's the fiscal discipline? Since when have we become so judgmental on social issues? I thought Republicans were for balanced budgets and staying out of people's personal lives. It hasn't been that way for the Republican morons in Congress for way too long.

Since when is a "real" Republican one that will pick fights with one of their colleagues on the House Floor? Or picking cheap fights with someone who was supposed to testify before your committee?

I am so sick and tired of the grandstanders like Lee who like to boast loudly about nothing at all, but don't have any of the class or intelligence to actually work towards real solutions to help our country.

I'm embarrassed to call myself a Republican these days thanks to the likes of Lee Terry, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. What has happened to our country since those three have been running it?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 2:25--you're the one who seems to object to the free-flow of comments.

Given that, just thought you'd be more confortable over at NNN--where very few people actually post anything and, when they do, it resembles a bunch of trained seals waddling over the cliff.

But, definately, stay here with us! The more the better.

macdaddy said...

Anon 3:08. That's a great point about the GOP losing its fiscal discipline and I certainly agree with you. But I can't see how Jim Esch is even the beginning of the answer. If the GOP didn't learn its lessons after 2006, then there is no hope for America. The Dems will be no help. What might help is hammering Terry with phone calls and letters. Get other people who are fed up (sorry to intrude on your name, Fed Up) and stay after Terry to let him know that people don't like what he's doing. He's a politician and will respond to pressure. Unfortunately, Republicans have let their elected leaders off the hook. I am just as guilty as everyone else. I wholeheartedly agree that spending is way out of control. But I don't agree that letting the Dems screw things up even worse helps anyone.

BTW, I enjoy that the "opposition" has the guts to post here. Arguing is part and parcel of democracy.

Anonymous said...


We have to get rid of all the Republicans who are currently in, because they won't GET IT otherwise. I seriously am a Republican and have worked in Congress.

Calling and writing letters do not work. Oh sure, he may (MAY) change his mind on one issue because a lot of people call or write about something, but it won't change the whole culture.

I actually was glad to see the Republicans lose majority in 2006. I also won't be too sad if we lose big this year too. Republicans need to wake up and make some BIG changes. Fiscal discipline is where we need to focus. I am sick and tired of the religious right taking over our Party.

I am a Republican who doesn't care if two men marry each other and I don't worry too much about a private medical decision a woman makes with her doctor. You know why? Because neither one affects me!!

Lee Terry has done NOTHING in his ten years in office to warrant me voting for him in November. All he's done is embarrass me and our great State of Nebraska with his childish, immature, idiotic behavior.

fed up said...

Anon 3:10 - If you can point out where I objected to the free flow of comments, please do so. Pointing out someone is acting like an immature child (while representing a politician that is supposed to be representing us) does not constitute an objection to free flowing conversation. It's a criticism of a behavior that is unbecoming of a public figure and his staff, and informing that the behavior has a consequence - my vote. I'm hoping you're not too obtuse to know the difference.

Warren B. said...

I can't believe Suzie Buffet is running for mayor. She was wearing a Scott Hazelrigg disguise in today's World-herald. Don't worry Suzie, we know it's you running.