Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Esch's 2nd District poll

Don Walton alluded to it and Swing State Project got more info. But now Real Clear Politics seems to have the most updated, albeit incomplete, info on the latest 2nd Congressional District poll done by Anzalone Liszt Research for Jim Esch's Congressional campaign. (Note in the RCP story he is referred to "businessman Jim Esch". We'll have to get info on just exactly what his bizness is...)

In any case, here is the breakdown of the Esch for Congress poll provided on RCP:

Lee Terry 47%
Jim Esch 38%

RCP then gives these Esch poll numbers as well.

Generic GOPer 42%
Generic Dem 37%

McCain 46%
Obama 42%

One should note that there are NO cross-tabs presented with this. We have already heard evidence of the "push for" and "push against" questions Esch used in his poll, so who knows what to make of these numbers.

One interesting note is that when the poll-ee gets Lee Terry's name over "generic GOP", he goes up 5%. When they hear Jim Esch over a generic Dem, he goes up just 1%.

RCP closes with this observation:
National Democrats have yet to name Esch to any of their top challengers programs, while Terry has already raised about as much as he did in the 2006 cycle.


".pdf him, Dano"

When is a book not a book?
That would be when it is a .pdf document of bullet points and repeated sections.

Kamp Kleeb put out Scott's manifesto to make glorious these United States. But instead of calling it a plan or a policy, Kleeb calls it his "Policy Book".

Oh sure, there's no actual cover, it hasn't been published anywhere, you certainly can't buy it on, and of course it is really just a .pdf document -- but calling it a book sounds much more like he put out "Faith of My Fathers" or "Profiles in Courage" or something.


But it is not the fact that it repeats sections verbatim over and over or that it wasn't exactly proofread before it went out ("paid for by Nebraskans for") ("give farmers the piece of mind they need") that made us snicker upon its release.

No what made us chuckle was WHERE the "Man of the People" unveiled his "book".

At Omaha's... The French Cafe'.

Hey Scott, did you pass out free samples of their famous Les Escargots Bourgignons with every copy? Did you and Jane share the Chateaubriand for two? We wonder if the members of the press got out of there for under $100 apiece.


Then in the AP story on Kleeb's "tome", the reporter asked him about Johann's experience and Kleeb's lack thereof. And Kleeb replied thusly:

"There's such a thing as bad experience."


That is a pretty ballsy thing for someone who just started his FIRST "full-time" job less than a year ago. And to say it about an attorney, former City Councilman, former Mayor, former Governor and former Cabinet Secretary. We're sure Mike would have been much better off finding himself riding around in a pick-up waxing nostalgic on the history of cow-punching.

And then Kleeb claims that Mike Johanns's positions were "flown in from Washington". This from someone who has been sitting drinking Rolling Rocks with his ultra-liberal confidants in Manhattan and pouring beers with the liberal blogger elites in Dallas. Oh, but wait, look at his real dusty boots!

Well, at least this race may get interesting now...


Anonymous said...

"Well, at least this race may get interesting now..."

Oh, Sweeper, you are forever the optimist.

Uncle Wiggily said...

Sooper Scott must really have a cluster of nimnuls working on his campaign.

I've seen better campaign whitepapers put out by a junior class candidate for Homecoming Queen.

Not much excuse for this kind of amateurish twaddle - especially since he's been involved in politics in one form or another since he was an undergraduate.

I'm beginning to think too much like you Sweeper ... I wrote about this today also.

Street Sweeper said...

And UW wrote about it first.

macdaddy said...

Hey, hey, hey. I like the Fench Cafe. They set off cannons in the restaurant on Bastille gotta love that.

I'm not sure where to begin about his book. The Energy section has a few misstatements and contradictions. He wants to make oil cheaper but wants to cut greenhouse gasses. He doesn't realize that "use it or lose it" is already federal law. He thinks we should get involved in the scam called cap-and-trade. He wants to saddle us with several billion dollars in transmission lines for all the wind farms. He wants to stop global warming yet makes no mention of importing ethanol from Brazil. (I guess his committment ends where Nebraskan pockets begin). Retrofitting E85 costs about $50 large per station and wants it financed through tax credits. What programs is he going to cut to pay for that? But the bottom line is that Kleeb's presence in the Senate makes it more likely that Harry "Oil is a sickness" Reid will prevent young Scott from delivering on his promise to lower prices at the pump.

Street Sweeper said...

I will toss in that The French Cafe is fantastic, but also one of the more expensive places in town...

Anonymous said...

"Use it or lose it" is not law. Attempts were made to get legislation passed this year, but so far Republicans have blocked it at every turn - they want to instead just vote on drilling more than what is already leased instead of forcing oil companies to use what they have now.

Anonymous said...

If the numbers from the Esch poll are after people got hit with the negatives on Terry and then the positives on Esch, the real margin probably is 20% or more for Terry.

What I see is that Terry is rolling--with a great TV ad--meanwhile I don't see or hear anything from Esch.

Anonymous said...

As to repeating in sections - it shows that some issues crossover under multiple areas and have an impact. It's than Johanns cause he just used GOP talking points with no actual depth.

And by the way, it was a women's group meeting at the French Cafe, they asked Scott to speak at their meeting, and he chose that meeting to release his policy book. Got a problem with that?

Seriously, just admit you want all Dems to die in a horrific accident and be wiped off the face of the earth. You really can't stand their very existance, and even if a Democrat (like Scott) showed their ability to have main-stream views (which he has, and some could be be called "republican"), you'd still find a way to hate their very existance. it's pathetic.

Street Sweeper said...

Hey, I've heard you before, Hater. You really need to relax. Sit down. Have a drink. Maybe a nice french onion soup and a Bordeaux. I know a nice little place down in the Old Market. There's a guy there trying to give away "books"...

Anonymous said...

Well, well, Lee Terry polling below 50%. Good news.

Uncle Wiggily said...


Check your site meter for the ISP of Anonymous 4:14. Betcha a steak dinner I can tell you what it is.


Anonymous said...

Anonymous 4:14, I hope that John Lindsey is not in that accident, or my Grandma, I also like the Mayor in Ralston, Harold Anderson is nice, Dan Cullan helped a lot of people. There are a lot of other Dems that I like and admire (and I love my grandma). Then there are others that I can't stand, but I would not want their families to be sad and therefore, I just wish they would move away, maybe to China where they could be happy with all of the Government control.

Anonymous said...

Rolling Rock makes you a liberal? Is that made in Latrobe, PA? Please go back there and tell them it's an liberal sissy beer. I'd pay to watch that ass kicking. Let me guess, you have to drink an American beer, Budweiser to be conservative? One more corporation the Repubs sent abroad by tax codes favoring the rich owners. I drink the "Beer that made Milwaukee famous", and you guys can all KMA. What beer does Iron Mike drink? I'm guessing which ever one Bush tells him to drink, as long as its courtesy of a Pro-Republican PAC.

pol observer said...

Sweeper you forgot Mike was a County Commissioner as well in the80's...and he served his full term!!!!

Anonymous said...

Plus, the Esch poll was taken before he insulted pro-life families by calling them "extremist." As word of this gets around, his support is evaporating--even though he is desperate to mention his Catholicism every 2 minutes.

Right Wing Professor said...

I wrote to Reid Wilson of RCP and pointed out to him the Anzalone poll was probably a push poll. He replied "Not at all. Anzalone is a very reputable firm."

This strikes me as a non-sequitur. There's nothing disreputable about doing a push poll. It tells you how much the margin can be shifted, if you are 100% effective at getting your message across. What's disreputable is to leak a push poll to the media in the guise of a regular poll, and I doubt Anzalone did that -- but maybe Esch did.

Right Wing Professor said...

Let me guess, you have to drink an American beer, Budweiser to be conservative?

Budweiser is a Brazilian-Belgian beer. Please try to keep up.

Anonymous said...

Sorry right winger. It was an attempt at satire which missed its target. Anyone who knows anything about Bud knows that. Will they be replacing the Clydsdales with Belgians, and consider it outsourcing? I suppose next they will be replacing the Dalmations with some Belgian Malinois? As far as I can tell, the Republican Party has held the door open for companies to leave America, I can't stand another four years of Republican "Peace and Prosperity"

jim said...

What is with Kleeb's vacant prozac speak? He acts like he has had one too many shock treatments.

Anonymous said...

With football season upon us, I need some Over/Under about # of counties that Kleeb carries in the General??

I'll take the under at 4.

I can maybe see Burt County, that might be it. I really don't think he will win 1 NE-3 County. If that happens, you might as well get the pitchforks out and start digging. That is what those mundane, backyards, anti-environment farmers use to dig holes isn't it? Pitchforks?

Street Sweeper said...

For those of you confused about the Rolling Rock reference, see the New Yorker article:

"Kleeb stood off to the side, his thumbs hooked in the front pockets of his Wranglers. He had on a striped cowboy shirt and dusty boots. He opened a bottle of Rolling Rock with a lighter."

Anonymous said...

If by "allowing" business owners to sell to the highest bidder. If by "allowing" business owners to make a profit for their investors. If by "allowing" business owners to not cave in to every Labor Union demand that comes along. How about I "allow" you to sell your house, or your car, or even your old jean jacket in your garage sale. You are so typical of the way government should work. Government should incent businesses to our Country, our State, and our Community. If the Government ever gets into the business of "allowing" businesses to develop, expand, or even sell and retire rich, then we will be living in a SOCIALIST Country!

macdaddy said...

First of all, when a company leases land from the government, it is not forever. Otherwise it would be called buying it. What do think happens when the lease is up? Now, if you want to talk about the length of the lease period, currently about 10 years, fine, but you're going to have to grandfather that in, otherwise it's called socialism. The "use it or lose it" bills you are probably referring to were attempts by Dems to force oil companies to spend money, whether or not it was a smart thing to do. They wanted to inflict penalties on companies who were not drilling, regardless of whether there was any oil there. You know what's that called? Forming a monopoly. Only the big oil companies would be able to afford such a lease. But then, I guess that makes it more convenient when Lord High Obama with his sidekicks Scotty and Jimmy nationalize the oil bidness.

Secondly, let's get to the real issue: beer. To quote Homer Simpson: " The cause of and answer to all of life's problems." I can't believe Kleeb used a lighter to open the beer. A real cowboy would have used what's left of his teeth. Or his belt buckle. Guess Kleeb was wearing a nice belt he got from Dillards.

Anonymous said...

"A real cowboy would have used what's left of his teeth. Or his belt buckle. Guess Kleeb was wearing a nice belt he got from Dillards."

Okay, now that's funny! :)

Anonymous said...

On the Esch-Terry Terry leads by almost 10 points before any real hard core campaigning and advertising and if you saw the questions in Jim's poll, which some of them were incorrect, then you'd see it was a push poll, which means, yes Terry leads by much more. I heard the R poll done by the state had a much bigger margain. Shocking. While Jim is prepping today for $1 drinks at the blatt, Terry is most likely prepping for the debate on KFAB tomorrow morning. Terry has also spent all of his district work period meeting with constituents, while Jim is visiting other countries. Maybe he could join Pelosi on her book tour, that is when he pays himself back enough money to afford another trip. Good thing drinks tonight are only buck for Mr. .223

Anonymous said...

$1 drinks. Really? WOW! I'm voting Esch all the way, the whole second district would just be a better place with a buzz.

Anonymous said...

Update on Drilling:

Here's an interesting tidbit today from the Associated Press:

"Democrats are unlikely to admit that the GOP's floor show has pushed them into changing their tune on energy, but there has been considerable publicity surrounding the minority's demonstration. More importantly, the oil drilling debate has come to dominate the campaign trail."

So, the informal Republican House sessions worked--thanks to Terry and others!

Anonymous said...

I'm sure the DCCC staffer who Jim says is coming into NE2 this weekend will be interested to know that his campaign is blowing money on $1 drinks for the volunteers at Rosenblatt tonight.

Also, they'll be interested to know that Esch is repaying himself 'loans' he made to the campaign. $8,000 was reported in July but the total he's taken back supposedly is now $20,000.

Opening your wallets still, Esch contributors?

Anonymous said...

Jim should be careful tonight as to how many $1 drinks he imbibes at Rosenblatt. The debate's at 10 a.m. tomorrow, right?

Does the DCCC staffer know that Jim was convicted of D.U.I. in 2001 but never disclosed that fact to the voters in 2006? And couldn't some people die from a .223?

Anonymous said...

How long do you have to be a volunteer to get those dollar beers? Can we sign up at the stadium?

Anonymous said...

DCCC Staffer's Itinerary:

9 am Sat. Arrive in Omaha

9:30 am. Meet at Esch campaign on campaign's finances

10 am Staffer heads for the hills and gets the first flight out of Eppley

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 9:25--no ID or proof of volunteering needed. Just hang with Jim--he's buying. Tell the crowd in the stands too!

Anonymous said...

What does the DCC staffer think about Esch's campaign referring to Muslim people as "Towelheads"? It's over at New Nebr. Net.

Anonymous said...

So, tell us Terry people, what was Lee Terry trying to imply with the image of the Muslim men in his ad? Did he show their images because he has so much respect for them? Because they're his friends? What?

Anonymous said...

I guess if NNN is suddenly now ran by "Esch Staffers", then Leavenworth Street is the clearly hiding because they are actually the leadership of the Nebraska GOP. Come on....let's just go ahead and take that leap since Republicans seem to go to extremes with everything. Yep, said it, you're extremists!

OmaSteak said...

Esch better have a clear head for the debate tomorrow on KFAB...or at least as clear as he ever has. Voorhes is very interested in Jim's personal and campaign finances...and there will be questions. While I'm no huge fan of Rep. Terry, Esch is a complete joke and how anyone could take anything he says seriously is incomprehensible.

Anonymous said...

Interesting article in today's Omaha World Herald.

Esch has done it again: he files a finance report that certifies he was paid just $2,000 for 'loan repayments. But when you look at the disbursements for the same period they show three checks were cut for loan repayments to Esch totaling $8,000.

If they can't get it right or tell the truth on something so simple, what else aren't they telling the truth on?

lnk said...

It is pretty obvious why Jim has not complied with the law and listed the specific loans for which he now repays himself: it lowers his cash on hand.

Most of the political observers will back out any loans as a debt. So, they'd say Jim's $140k in cash is now really just $30,000.

That's why he hasn't listed them even though he is required to do so by law.

The fact the debt is owed to himself is not the point. Also, there could be a lien attached or security pledged for the loans. That makes it more likely a candidate is going to repay themselves in whole or part for the dollars.

Anonymous said...

There are two questions (at least) that the Terry people haven't answered yet that I would like to see answers for.

1) What was Lee Terry implying with the image of the Muslim men in his ad? What was he trying to convey about them?

2) If McCain chooses a pro-choice running mate, will Terry still support McCain?

Anonymous said...

Perhaps, Scott Voorhees will ask one of those questions, but in the meantime, I'll offer my analysis, and how I will vote in the Presidential race.

Commercial: Let's stop sending our money to the Middle East for Oil. Not, let's stop sending money to Muslims that dress funny and practice a different religion than I do. I buy my furniture at NFM, I do not mind doing business with people of other religions. I would not, however, drive to Iowa to go to the Mart, even if my pastor's brother owned it. I also don't go to Iowa for concerts or to gamble. I prefer to spend my money in Nebraska or go on a real vacation when I want to relax.

McCain VP Pick: The VP has no policy authority. While I, personally, would be dissappointed if McCain chose a ProAbortion VP, I would still vote for McCain. Since Obama is ProAbortion and his running mate will be ProAbortion based on the lists that are floating around, I would get nothing I want by voting against McCain. Therefore, I would vote for McCain even if he picks Tom Ridge instead of Condoleeza Rice (I would love to have a Powerhouse of International strength and knowledge sitting together in the Whitehouse). I will pray that McCain stays healthy so I don't end up with a President Ridge!

Plus, I fugure if Cindy's husband is President, then those foreign guys that talk funny won't jack up the price of Budweiser, too much.

lnk said...

Anonymous 1:21--please read this for the answers:

Everyone should look at the new campaign finance filings Esch made yesterday (after being confronted by an OWH reporter).

On the detailed summary page (which is what reporters and political observers look at) Esch lists personal loans to the campaign of $5,000 (line 13a).

But then look at the full Schedule C--"loan information". He lists four loans totaling $103,511 he's made to the campaign.

Why isn't that number in line 13a?

Because Esch is trying to hide from the public the full amount of loans he's made.

This violates federal law. Refile the report, Jim.

Anonymous said...

Ink, how in the world did that answer the questions of anon 12:21?

Anonymous said...

You Terry staffers really need to get a life. Yes, they made a mistake and didn't transfer over the loan info from the other FEC committee, but it was all there. They filed it yesterday and it shows the loans now under the present committee, with $8000 in loan repayments. All legal. All correct. Now, what are you doing to actualy deal with real issues instead of sitting in Terry's basement arguing on the internets?

macdaddy said...

Well, I wish Lee would get some better beer down here and do something about the smell in the far corner. I don't think his sump pump is working very well.

Anonymous said...

Loans don't matter. So he loaned his campaign $5000, $111,000 or the actual amount of $141,000.

I want to know where he got the money since he only got paid $10,000 to work for the Family in 2007. Am I seriously suppose to believe that Jim Esch extended a loan to his campaign committee in 2007 that was the equivilent of 50% of his annual pay? Or how about the loans from the last election? When has Jim Esch ever worked anywhere long enough to have amassed a piggy bank with over $100,000 in it before he was 29 years old-especially since he says he is paying back student loans for CU Law School and he is buying up useless farmland in Colorado and North Omaha as quickly as the Jim Esch Family Farms can?

Eschies, it is not about the "personal loans", it is about where the money is coming from and why does Jim want to hide that?

lnk said...

Sorry Esch staffer (Anon 3:07) you're wrong.

Esch lists $5,000 in loans on the "detailed summary page". That's what most people read.

Then he slides in the fact that he actually has loaned $115,000 to the campaign--but hides it in one of the attachments (schedule C).

Why is he doing it that way?

To try and hide them and jack up his cash number.

Get ready to receive yet another letter from the FEC.

Anonymous said...

So what's the big deal--it's just a law.

Anonymous said...

First off, Ink, I'm no Terry Staffer. I don't even live in the 2nd. Second, I can read FEC reports. The amounts are the amounts loaned his campaign in 2006. You know that. You've brought it up. It's the same amounts when you look at when that account was closed and the 2008 was opened.

Loans are perfectly legal from a candidate to their campaign. Paying them back as new money comes in are also perfectly legal.

Where did it come from? Some have said he got a trust fund. Maybe it came from there. Hell, he could have saved it up from other work you know nothing about (and he wasn't required to report because he wasn't running at the time). Seriously, you Republicans have got to get a life. You have no problem with the fact that Adrian Smith's whole life has been paid for by his daddy and he only made about $12,000 a year, yet had all kinds of money. The only one with real money seems to be Fortenberry.

If I was in the 2nd, I'd be asking Lee Terry what he's going to do about things that matter to me, because he certainly has a long record of doing nothing for me or anyone else like me. He's a party hack. But you can't let anyone focus on that, so you get petty and childish.

Anonymous said...

I'm still waiting for answers to these questions:

1) What was Lee Terry implying with the image of the Muslim men in his ad? What was he trying to convey about them?

2) If McCain chooses a pro-choice running mate, will Terry still support McCain?

lnk said...

Anonymous 4:24--of course a candidate can have his campaign pay his loan back. Please re-read my posts--I never said anything contrary to that.

What I did say is if Esch wants to repay himself for a loan he made, the FEC requires that he list the loans in his report.

He didn't.

That's why the FEC nailed him.

Yes, Jim refiled the report yesterday. It is still wrong--and the FEC will nail him again.

To recap--Esch is listing on the summary sheet total loans of $5,000. But in schedule C, the loans total $115,000.

Why doesn't he list the full $115,000 where everyone can see it?

Because he wants to hide them.

People would then ask "how can this guy who doesn't have a job lend all this dough to the campaign?"

Also meant to answer the two questions: google "November 2007 OPEC Summit". You'll see who the individuals are. On the McCain running mate, let's see who he picks. I'm sure it will be an outstanding choice. Any other questions?

Anonymous said...

Loans need to be forgiven or paid and that documentation must be provided to the FEC. Esch staffers, read the letter the FEC sent your boss when he pretended that he was done running for Congress. They want to know what has become of the loans to the 2006Committee. They authorized the closing of the committee, but they want to know who forgave or paid back the loans. One can only guess that the reason they sent him a letter asking for that information is because they require it by law. This level of transparency is necessary in today's politics because of people like your boss that can't seem to account for their spending habits and they want to make sure that an "outside source" is not illegally funding a political campaign. What I can't figure out is why anyone that is not related to Jim Esch would run the risk of jail to fund his campaign through forgiven loans, unless they are beholden to him because he knows a secret about them. Here I go with accusatons and innuendo again. See, transparency shuts down accusations and innuendo. Isn't Jim Esch for transparency in politics and elected office?

As far as why he closed the old committee, it is beginning (actually has looked like for a while!) to look like the reason he did that was to allow his campaign to run "under the radar" for an extended period of time, thus hiding his finances from his Primary opponent. Giving the FEC the wrong mailing address? I cannot accept the idea that Creighton University not only accepted, but graduated with a Law Degree someone that is not even bright emough to fill out a simple address form to the Federal Government. I have to guess that he put the wrong address on in the first place to buy time with the FEC and the U.S. House of Representatives Office of the Clerk.

Jim Esch is a sneak that seems to be in search of a backdoor to every venture. I wonder if he is the Managing Partner in the Family business that came up with buying Ag Land and sucking off the government for subsidy checks every year?

America does not deserve Jim Esch's brand of politics and Jim Esch is no leader. I used to advocate for him to run for local office and build a name for himself. I no longer think he should serve in elected office anywhere, and he already has built a name for himself-Mud!

Anonymous said...

If Obama picked the college buddy that he did coke with to be his VP, would you still support him?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 5:10

I'm sure you know that everything you said will go right past the Esch people.

After all, we're just talking about the law here.

Anonymous said...

Why would you think the Esch campaign would give a sh**?

These are the same guys who didn't file the July 15 2007 report until January 2008--almost five months late.

Hey, it's only the law. Who cares.

Anonymous said...

There is a letter of acceptance under the 2006 campaign from the FEC. They new one was then opened at around the same time. The FEC knew well aware what was going on and that the loans transfered. The Esch report didn't contain that portion, but was resubmitted. That's what the paper trail shows.

And Ink you've had all kinds of issues with him repaying the loan. don't try to pretend you haven't.

Again, all of you are being the extremists you've shown yourselves to be, and quite frankly, no one outside this little virtual world, really cares. Get out of mommy's basement and get a life.

Anonymous said...

Oh yes, it is very extreme to want someone running for Congress to follow the law. How unfair.

This issue is Esch's doing.

If he wants to repay himself back for loans (we hear he's taken $20,000 now), then just list them. As of yesterday, he didn't do that.

But now he only lists $5,000 worth of loans on the main detailed summary sheet when the real total is $115,000.

Explain that, please.

Those pesky little things called laws ...

Anonymous said...

You can correct his flawed report now or wait a few weeks until the FEC writes you yet again that you are violating the law.

Meanwhile, everyone knows that the reason Esch won't list the $115,000 in loans:

1) he is taking money back as quickly as he can since he knows it ain't looking good this fall; and

2) he doesn't want his cash on hand ($140,000) to be compared to loans that he is taking back ($115,000).

How's fundraising lately?

We know . . . people are really excited about giving Jim $$$$ when they know he'll just pocket them.

Anonymous said...

I'm wondering if lnk and the other terry supporters here just have trouble reading or what...

The reason Esch's $115,000 in loans from 2006 aren't listed in the "Total Election Cycle to date" column in the summary, is because they are from 2006, not 2008.

I have to wonder if you're just being intentionally obtuse or if you really don't understand the difference between election cycles.

Anonymous said...

I have repeated multiple times that I don't give a "rat's a**" if Jim Esch is paying himself back in the 2008 race for loans that he gave himself in 2005,2006 and 2007

What I want to know is who at the FEC gave him permission to reopen his old debts after he closed out his old committee. There is a reason that candidates never close out old committees. Once they are closed, then they and their debt are closed and must be paid back or forgiven, immediately. This is why the FEC asked Jim Esch how he repaid the loans and for a signed document requesting the name of the person or people forgiving the $111,000 in loans. Heck, maybe it was his mom and dad, maybe not. But whoever it is, the FEC wants to know.

Check the mail, Jim. Maybe the U.S. Postal Service has forwarded you some unwelcome mail from the FEC.

AND, the reason these loans are SOOOOO important is because Jim Esch is trying to make you believe that he is just like you. The same way John Edwards wanted you to think that-while he was driving to his Estate in North Carolina. Jim's got it easier though, he just has to drive to his "Loft above the Slowdown" in the ritzy newly redeveloped downtown. What does a loft fetch per month, anyway?

I can't even imagine having spent almost $150,000 and then treating it as an after thought. Must be nice to be rich.

Anonymous said...

Funny reading about this FEC reports. So I went through them. Terry has over 40 requests for additional information, over 15 2nd requests for additional information and couldn't get his statement of candidacy correct. If he cannot get his statement of candidacy correct, why should he even be allowed to be a candidate?

One Out In The Third said...


Been out of town the past two days and I bet I can name that name anony 4:14 without the aid of a site meter.


And where is the best french onion soup found in Omaha? I am always in search of the perfect bowl.

Street Sweeper said...

Absolutely The French Cafe. Just bring your wallet.

Anonymous said...

Anony 8:52,

The requests were all complied with and the FEC wants you to declare your candidacy the day after you have been elected. In fact, if someone sends you a check the day after the election, based on a committment 30 days prior to Election Day, then that check must be given to the next election cycle-whether you will be running or not. Who knows, you might have a life altering event or get appointed to a prestigious position in an administration. None the less, the FEC and the State of Nebraska are in competition for when you should file for your next office, apparently the Feds want you to file for office before you complete the accounting for your previous race-kinda weird, isn't it, file for reelection before you even get sworn in?

The point of the previous question was not how many or why Jim Esch didn't comply with the FEC, it was when is he going to answer their question as to who will be forgiving the loans on his closed out campaign committee. It is like Jim thought closing his committee was like filing for bankruptcy. It is, sort of, but just as with bankruptcy, you still have to tell the judge what is going to become of your DEBT to others.

It is only the law afterall, Jim Esch, J.D.

Anonymous said...

SS, are you going to do a post about this morning's KFAB debate? I am sure there are a lot of people who want to comment on Esch's comments.

Anonymous said...

Wow, Lee. Defensive much in this morning's debate?? He sounded like a scared kid trying to talk his mom into letting him have ice cream after dinner when he didn't do anything earlier in the day to deserve it.

Anonymous said...

Lee's mom passed away in February, you ass.

Street Sweeper said...

New post on the debate coming in a few minutes.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, I'll start caring about Lee's family when he starts caring for mine.

Street Sweeper said...

Anony at 1pm
I'm leaving your comment up just so people can see what a complete a-hole you are.
Feel free to never come back here, you jerk.

Anonymous said...

Interesting that Esch's latest, latest FEC report states he made loans totaling $5,000.

If that is so, why did he repay himself $8,000?

Anonymous said...

It is because he is going to try and recoup as much of the loans as he can.

The FEC told Esch he can close out his last committee and either forgive all the loan repayments or keep them active.

If he keeps them active, he needs to list them in the new committee (which he finally did late Wednesday night after being confronted by a reporter from the Onaha World Herald).

They need to be listed in the "cycle to date" line in the front of the report.

Esch is trying to hide the loans he made--he doesn't want people to know their $$$ to him will just be pocketed.