Sunday, September 28, 2008

Esch TV: Make believe

Jim Esch has an ad out. See it here:


We're informed that for this ad, Esch bought $34,000 on broadcast and $6,000 on cable, for a total ad buy of $40,000 for the week.

It's also worth pointing out that for Esch's first ad of the season, he ignored doing an intro ad -- who is Jim Esch, what is his experience, where is he from, etc.

Hmm, we wonder why Esch would skip an ad about his experience...


A few other things that caught our eyes:

First, the "experts" that Esch rolls out. Namely, these people:

Admittedly, at least the first two may be employed, so they've got that going for them. (Sort of reminds us of The Onion's American Voices...)

Now you can take the word of these three about what Lee Terry has done on energy issues, or you could take the word of this crotchety old dude:

He commends Lee Terry for addressing the energy crisis.
And who is he?

Just the DEMOCRAT Chairman of the House Energy Committee...


And then, what the heck is with Democrats and inflating actual gas prices???

Take another look at the gas prices in Jim Esch's ad:

$4.49 and $4.38 per gallon? Interesting, except that anyone who drives a car knows that prices aren't close to that.

Furthermore, gas prices were never that high in Omaha. Take a look at the historic prices, with the highs coming this past July, according to

They max out at $4.09 per gallon ($4.14 in Lincon):

Of course this goes along with alleged gas prices in Scott Kleeb's ads, which are alternatively:

$4.29, $4.99, $6.63, and (the big one) $8.78 per gallon!

Then there's The Reader, which, after some time working PhotoShop, suggests that the actual price of gas is $6.52 / gal.

Maybe when all of these Democrat are done making up the price of a gallon of gas, they'll realize the actual price and vote Republican...


Finally for Jim's ad, let's take a look at all of those stock quotes that go rolling by.

We see KaQ is up 1/8
QHJ is up an 1/8 as well.
NAW is up a 1/2.
VAN is down an 1/8.
VSA is down 3/8.

Um, except that those stock names are about as real as the gas prices.

Oh well. No sense using actual companies and prices when you can have pretend ones!


Well, at least The Reader has seen the light. In the correction section, you can note where they admit the mistakes from their front page story on Lee Terry:

And be sure to look to the corrections section in the next edition of The Reader.

In that one they'll note that Lee Terry is a Representative, and not a "Senator"...

Bookmark and Share


Anonymous said...

I have to give you credit, that is a lot of water you carry, post after post. Pretty impressive stuff. No debate update? Come on.

Street Sweeper said...

On the Prez debate? What more is there to say that hasn't been said?

macdaddy said...

So my 401k is in the tank because of the financial markets and now Esch wants to ruin my IRA, which I was wise enough to put into energy funds, by putting the oil companies in the tank. Thanks, Jimmy! Let me rush right out there and vote for you. BTW, how are you going to get gas prices down? I don't quite follow how increasing taxes on business decreases gas prices.

Anonymous said...

How will Esch put the oil companies in the tank? Sarah Palin's big oil windfall tax brought in more than $5,000,000,000 in just one year. Mac - I suppose you are a Palin supporter? And I suppose you know economics better than Warren Buffet, who admits the tax system in this country favors the ultra-rich. You're right, MAC, let's not tax the oil companies, they'll just do the ethical thing I'm sure. And they'll reinvest all that money. And they'll use that money to hire new workers. Have you read a newspaper the last couple of weeks. Trickle down economics is being disproved in front of your greedy right-winger eyes.

macdaddy said...

I'm sure Warren Buffett has nothing but my best interests at heart. Oops! I don't own any Berkshire Hathaway, so I guess he doesn't really give a shit about me. See, here's the problem. Warren Buffett is greedy. You don't get $55 billion giving it away. And he's been successful at it. The Obama's are pretty greedy, too. And they are getting pretty successful at it. So's Al Gore. So are the Clintons. So why should I be any different? Unfortunately, I don't have Congress bending rules for me, or convicted felons like Tony Rezko to help me out, or green friends in high places to throw patronage my way. I have to save and invest. And some of what I invest in is oil. And when their profits go up, the worth of my stock goes up. It's really quite simple. It's called capitalism. AMillions upon millions of us in America practice it, even Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and I'm sure Scott Kleeb. I'd bet Jim Esch owns a stock or two. Unfortunately for me, though, Esch wants to target the only thing in my portfolio that's made any money. Doesn't really motivate me to vote for him.

And BTW, the people of Alaska own the oil and so Palin delivered for them. If Esch said he wanted to tax the oil companies and send me a check for my share, then maybe we can do business. As it is, he wants to throw it down that rathole called the federal guvmint.

Anonymous said...


The Reader Prints The Truth About Jim Esch:

He is unemployed! In the Reader Candidate Questionaire, provided by the League of Women Voters, Jim Esch admits that he has no job, that he is still just a "Candidate".

The funny thing about this, is we have known all along that you are, were, and have always just been a "Candidate". It was you, your staff, and your family (by paying you and stating that you were), that thought you were employed for the last couple of years. And the Omaha World Herald, but they are used to being lied to by you, your staff, and your family.

Funny, I guess you treat everyone with the same respect, the OWH, the Pro-Life Community, and the Voters of the Second Congressional District-LIKE WE ARE STUPID!

I guess the only folks that believed you were employed were the folks in the Department of Agriculture that have been sending you Ag Subsidies for your Esch Family Farm and your Jim Esch Family Farms for the last couple of years.

PS: Thanks Street Sweeper for going the extra mile to tell the people of the 2nd District the truth about Jim Esch, whether they want to hear it or not! Good research.

Anonymous said...

Macdaddy, I couldn't have said it better myself. Well put, and carry on!

Anonymous said...

Let us see if Republican Terry will vote for the Wall Street Bail-out.
I predict if he votes "aye" he will lose the election.

The winds are at the back of Obama and the Dems.

Ricky From Omaha

Anonymous said...

So Ricky Bobby,

Just how do you think Obama is going to vote, "Present" or not at all? He is already on the record as being in favor of the Bailout, where does he go from there?

How do you think Jim Esch would vote? Or does he even understand it? What position did the "Other Oracle of Omaha" tell him to take? Maybe we should just wait for the next commercial to see how Jim tries to spin this one?

The Democrats are the ones that spent the last week trying to figure out how to provide cover and vote for the Bailout. Why else would Nancy Pelosi spend the week and the weekend trying to convince the American public that there aren't enough Democrats in the House and Senate to pass this on a Party line vote? Do the math, they don't need a single Republican vote to pass this, they just need them as an excuse to "help working Americans".

Give me a break!

Street Sweeper said...


Though some kids on another blog seem to think that the actual title of Esch's ad is "Make Believe", uh... that's just our little jab at Jimbo. (And yes, it was uploaded to Leavenworth Street's YouTube page...

We don't know what Camp Esch titled the ad (we just called it "First ad"). But in any case, we'll just note that a "hat tip" from other blog is usually appropriate in this situation...


Anonymous said...

I guess this just goes to show that they do no homework over at NNN!

Good job, Sweeper

asecurityguard said...

Not a bad ad overall, message was delivered cleanly and straight forward. Much better than last election

BB said...

Yes, much better than the last time. But that is not saying much, considering last time it was Jim in a T-Shirt trying to look hip and expecting voters to take him seriously. When all is said and done, voters won't take Jim much more seriously than last time.

Anonymous said...

Anyone know how Lee Terry voted on the bailout?

Street Sweeper said...

All three in the Nebraska House delegation voted "No".

macdaddy said...

For the record, I wish the Republicans had voted for the bill oi overwhelming numbers. Pelosi could only deliver 60% of her side of the aisle. If some things like the ACORN give away had been stripped out, I'm not sure why the Republicans couldn't vote for it. They could have been seen as coming to the rescue of America. As it stands now, they will get blamed for the stock markets tanking, McCain's gambit blew up in his face, and Obama gets a pass by doing...absolutely nothing.

I predict that exact sentence will be used on one of the evening news shows today. Except without the part about Obama getting a pass. They'll leave out that part.

asecurityguard said...

I think the bailout will pass eventually, if the market tanks this bad for a few more days there will be far to much pressure not to. In a way this effects everyone in the country, even if you dont have stocks or a 401k or even work for oe of these banks. Repubs are receiving most of the blame for this "economic downturn". The pressure will mount and somethings got to give, before the election there will be some sort of relief bill passed.

macdaddy said...

ASG: I think you're right. Another day like today and SOMETHING MUST BE DONE! The outrage against the bailout must have been impressive if Pelosi couldn't strong-arm 13 out of 95 Dem reps.

Anonymous said...

-777.68 - $1.2 trillion loss today on the DOW. Largest 1 day loss on record. Only 162 stocks rose on the NYSE — and 3,073 dropped.

Oil came down because of the disaster on Wall Street and in Congress.

Gold was up $23.20 to $911.70 on the Nymex.

The Standard & Poor's 500 index declined 106.85, or 8.81 percent, to 1,106.42.

The Nasdaq composite index fell 199.61, or 9.14 percent, to 1,983.73.

The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies fell 47.07, or 6.68 percent, to 657.72.

The evidence of the credit markets' ills could again be found in the Treasury's 3-month bill; investors were stashing money there, hoping to take the tiniest of returns simply to be sure that their principal would survive in what's considered the safest investment. The yield on the 3-month bill fell to 0.15, down from 0.87, and approaching zero, a level reached last week when fear was also running high of the upcoming economic meltdown.

What is Lee going to do to save our retirement savings? What is Lee going to do to save our economy? What is Lee going to do to save our jobs? Does he believe this is something to be partisan on? Is he scared that he would lose his job if he voted yes?

I thought Lee was going to vote yes? Did he have a change of conscience?

Anonymous said...

Alaskans own the oil. What planet are you on? Do you have stock in Anchorage or something? And you don't think you have any convicted felons working on your side? Ha! You ever heard of Jack Abramoff? Halliburton? You've got plenty of crooks on your side Mac...that's one of the biggest reasons why your portfolio is shrinking as we speak. And you say Buffett doesn't get rich by giving money away? Wow. Great argument there. Except that he is giving his money away...oops...there goes your greed argument. And you call the federal government a rathole? What joke. You're the type to slam obama for not wearing a flag pin and support the war in iraq because you're easily fooled by a little jingoistic nonsense from a loser like Bush. You think the federal government's a rathole? Well right now, without the federal government, you're portfolio is going to be worth as much as your right wing Reagonomic failed policy is worth - nothing. You can put lipstick on a stupid republican, but it's still a stupid republican.

Anonymous said...

I am just curious. Should Sarah Palin leave the ticket?

macdaddy said...

Anon 5:41:

As for the rest of your post...whatever.

Anonymous said...

I think the 3 congressmen from NE and Steve King all voted no because this was a bad bill. Yes the economy needs fixing, but not something that is incomplete that is rammed down our throats in a matter of a few days. They made the right decision, now the pressure is on super hag Pelosi to get it together and come up with a plan with the right stuff. 40% of Dems voted NO today. Good for them.

Anonymous said...

John McCain claimed this and said he was the one who led and brought people together on this bill. He claimed "mission accomplished" before it was done, and then it failed because, according to Eric Cantor, some Republicans got their poor little feelings hurt.

So, since Boehner, Cantor, Blunt, and McCain supported this bill, they're all right up there with "super hag" Nancy Pelosi, right?

asecurityguard said...

Apparently 12 repubs were going to vote 'Yes' but didn't after the speech by Nancy Pelosi because there feelings were hurt. Whether or not you agree with the bailout i think we can all agree that that is the worst reason ever to change your vote on something. I say next time this bill comes to a vote, andit will come to a vote sometime, we include an earmark for a 12 backbones.

Anonymous said...

When you have an entire body going to the box to vote for something that is contrary to their beliefs of how government should be involved in people's lives and the activity in the markets, it wouldn't take much to make them vote their conscience, rather than the way they were whipped.

Pelosi is too partisan to lead the House and I predict this mess will lead to a new Speaker in January. The Congressional Black Caucus voted unanimously for her to be Speaker. They voted overwhelmingly against this Bill according to news analysis of the vote. I say she is toast and Hoyer probably gets a shot at being a better leader, like he should have been chosen to do in the first place.

As for what happens to the wealth of upper middle class America, time will tell and we can only hope that the 300 billion dollars the the FED infused into the banking system Monday morning will begin to be released in the form of loans and credit lines to businesses in the Ag arena and to other businesses that need it to have their goods transported to the consumable market.

Go America!

asecurityguard said...

Then the entire body should not be voting against their beliefs. The mere fact that some peoples feelings were hurt by a speech from someone that they probably dont like anyway is amazing. I wish these 12 names were publicized so they would be shown to the world as the cowardly lions they really are.

Anonymous said...

Who says it was just 12 people that went back to there belief system? Maybe it was good that Pelosi opened her mouth wide enough for the Conservatives in the Chamber to see that the fangs were still there. Maybe it saved them from a whole different kind of Hell, one that they can't ever get out of because they turned their backs on their values and morals? Time will tell.

Anybody know how the Markets are this a.m.?

OmaSteak said...

The failure to pass the "bailout bill" yesterday was a good thing. There are other ways out there to deal with the "credit crisis" more effectively and more economically than just throwing $700 billion or more after bad home loans, car loans, student loans, home equity loans, etc., without some consensus that we wouldn't be faced with another demands for another $700 billion in a year or less. Congress could easily pass legislation letting the FDIC raise insured deposit limits to stem the flow of cash out of banks into Tbills. Make it $500k or more for individuals and unlimited for businesses. People don't realize that medium to large companies are moving their cash holdings out of banks and into Tbills at a very high rate. That's what is driving some of the bank failures we've been seeing. As the cash on deposit flows out and holdings of mortgage-backed securities or Freddie/Fannie stock get written down, the banks are running out of cash...and that means no lending. Getting cash to move back into banks soon is crucial and taking action through the FDIC would cost taxpayers almost nothing. Suspending mark-to market accounting rules is a stopgap measure which is really only an accounting trick meant to forestall further asset writedowns. No one is going to believe a bank's financials during such a suspension. Put more money into the current program meant to assist those who could avoid foreclosure by converting subprime ARMs into fixed rate 30 year mortgages. That will help to slow the fall in housing prices. Offer a 5-10% income tax credit on the purchase price of residential housing...whether it be for owner occupancy or as a rental property. That will help remove the excess home inventory. Let's just not resort to giving $700 billion to the same finance and government...that produced the current crisis in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Talk about hypocrisy. Obviously Street Sweeper neglected to see any of Lee Terry's ads using fraudlent numbers in his gas pump pricing.

High price in his advertisements: $4.50


Street Sweeper said...

Well, Terry has 3 ads out now.

Of those, there is one ad -- the first one -- that shows a rolling price ticker.

In that the prices go to the $4.40s. But then Terry says, "Gas prices go up, and these guys [Opec ministers] benefit."

Which is true. The difference is that those generic numbers that go flying by could just as well be on a "Price is Right" tote board.

They're not on a fake gas pump or on a fake gas station price sign.

And it's "fraudulent", not "fraudlent".

Anonymous said...

Hey SS,

At what point are all of these people going to quit calling you names and actually call Jim Esch one, LIAR?

He lied to the Pro Life people.
He lied to Democrats.
He lied to the FEC.
He lied to the Press.
He lied to the Creighton Students.
He lied to the voters.

Which one of these lies would Jim Esch like to deny?

Anonymous said...

I meant to say I was ProLife, but those guys over at that radio station are so cool that I forgot. I am ProLife, again, now!

I didn't mean to run again, it was all those darn Obama people. They looked like they were having so much fun and they said that they liked me, soooo...

I know I told them that I was not going to run again and I know that they think that I forgave all those loans to myself, but again, it was all those Obama people. As far as the address thing, well, it worked, didn't it?LOL

I know that my dad told the reporters that I was in New York City when I was really in Afghanistan. You see, that is where my dad thought I was, it worked in High School, I figured it was worth a shot again!

Yeah, it probably wasn't very nice of me to tell all those Catholic College kids that I went to see the Troops in Afghanistan. The thing is, I might have been able to see some on the streets, but those stupid Generals won't let the guys come into town to play so I didn't get to see any real soldiers. Good intentions though, right?

I bet if the voters drove to California on vacation this Summer they saw $4.50 gas at the pump! I am sticking by that one.

See, I have good excuses, I mean reasons for everything.

I am sorry that I am a liar,
Love, Jim

FYI, Jim Esch did not really write this, but you probably figured that out by now since it includes an apology.

Anonymous said...

Saw one of the esch adds yesterday on cable. Have to wonder who is advising the guy? Let's see the intended target audience at 3 in the afternoon is?

And he wants to have a say at the national level. Heck he can't hold a job, can't hire quality peeps to prop him up, and is a habitual liar. Now if that isn't a strong resume I don't know what is.

If I were a liberal I would be offended at how he tries to represent the cause. Esch is clueless and only brings down the movement.

Lib lost in space