Tuesday, September 09, 2008

Terry on Offense

Lee Terry has a new TV ad and a mailer out to the Second District. Let's take a look.

First the TV spot:


For those who remember Lee Terry sweating out his Election Night party in 2006, you will see why he has decided to not watch Jim Esch have at it this time around.

The TV ad hits at one of the main issues of 2008 and Terry frames the issues -- He is in favor of expanded drilling for oil and Esch is against.

Now, see Esch's response to Joe Jordan on KMTV:

Esch, echoing a theme from a recent interview calls the Terry ad, "Lies."

Esch says, " We've never said any of those things... I've said 'everything is on the table'".

Except that Esch's response is pure shenanigans. (Heck, if Terry wanted to go full bore he could have said, "Esch says he will consider kittens and puppies as a fuel source." We think he took it easy on him...)

In any case, it's a simple question: Are you, or are you not, in favor of drilling in ANWR? There are arguments to be made on either side. It would likely to be a Yes or No vote on the House floor.

Esch's problem is that if it's "maybe" coming from a Democrat, the answer is "No" to drilling. And that's what Terry has said.

Jim could have very easily come out and said, "That ad is flat out wrong. I am in favor of drilling in ANWR." And that would be that.

[Here's the best we could find from Jim:
"I don’t necessarily think ANWR is a great idea, but to be honest I haven’t researched it enough."
That's great.  But the election is in a month and a half.  Make up your mind.]

So instead it's a maybe, and Esch's spin goes nowhere.


Next is the Lee Terry mail piece:

Esch will no doubt give the same sort of response on this, and his answer here should be stronger, in theory.

The piece says, "Jim Esch is not Pro-Life." Esch has said he is against abortion, except for rape, incest, life of the mother. So many consider that to be a classic Pro-Life position.

Except that these days "Pro-Life" has many more variances. The biggie is embryonic stem cell research as spelled-out in the mailer.

Esch has said he is in favor of embryonic stem cell research. That position puts him out of favor (and out of an endorsement) with both Nebraska Right to Life and Nebraskans United for Life. Which is why Esch refused to answer either of their surveys on the issues.

Now you can argue about whether this is the "issue of the day", as Esch has done. But this is another example of where Esch is trying to have it both ways, by simply not providing his position.

In the mean time, Lee Terry continues to frame the issues of the campaign.


In this morning's OWH: "Esch said Monday that he no longer supports using any embryos for research. He said he now supports using skin cells and other types of cells for medical research."

This is a flip from 2006 when he said: "But after doing a lot of research on it, including visiting the UNMC, I favor us expanding embryonic stem cell research. You are going to have leftover embryos from in-vitro fertilization and no one's life is improved by just throwing away these cells."

And he says he answered NRTL's questionnaire...late.


Ronald said...

SS, you are right, Terry is framing the debate to the two issues Republicans have the overwhelming advantage: energy policy and abortion. I suggest the Esch camp try to wrestle the debate towards focusing on out of control spending, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and HEALTH CARE. If Terry has his way till November with energy and abortion, it is a election he will win.

Ronald said...

"Except that Esch's response is pure shenanigans. (Heck, if Terry wanted to go full bore he could have said, "Esch says he will consider kittens and puppies as a fuel source." We think he took it easy on him...)"

Didnt Terry say the exact same thing (all options are on the table) in the radio debate? Or somewhere else?

Ronald said...

and in the footage of Terry, was that his first acknowledgment of the fact that he might indeed lose this race?

OmaSteak said...

Isn't Joe Jordan still dead or on KMTV...which is the same thing???

Spin said...

Leave Joe alone. He does a good job covering politics and he is not a tool like that reporter on channel 6. Also you all know who is funding the Obama voter drive.>>>Susie Buffet!!!

asecurityguard said...

Esch is providing his position, you just have to go to his website to get it. He isn't "hiding" or avoiding it. He knows that he would not get that endorsement anyway, even if he was against stem cell research. How does he know it? Because in the words of Ms. Julie Schmit-Albin " if an incumbent has a good voting record/record of action in office and passes the survey and interview tests, that incumbent receives preferential treatment with a sole endorsement, even if said incumbent is challenged by other bonafide pro-lifers"

Anonymous said...

On embryonic stem cells, can we assume Jim has had an "immaculate conversion" two months before the election?

Anonymous said...

The sleeper issue here on the pro-life dispute is Esch's comment that pro-lifers are "extremist."

When people find out about that (as they are), Esch is toast.

Anonymous said...

The best part of the TV ad is Esch saying "there are good ideas" in Terry's plan.

Heck of a way to make a case for throwing out the incumbent, Jim.

Sweeper--I agree with you. Esch is trying to be measly-mouth on everything--people can spot b.s. a mile away, and that's what is happening here.

Anonymous said...

ABC/Washington Post Poll:

Like Voters--

McCain 49
Obama 47

millard repub said...

According to Lee Terry:

"Supports embryonic stem cell research even though this involves he destruction of a human embryo and is a form of abortion."


Let's not have a double standard, either Esch is pro-life or Stothert is not pro-life.

Ronald said...

regarding the Esch extremist quote, yea complete dumbass move. what votes is he going to with with his sociological analysis even if it is true (or not). He just is causing needless distractions.
A candidate should never play the role of a political scientist or sociologist!!

macdaddy said...

That's awesome that Esch is now against embryonic stem cell research. I say that with complete sincerity. It won't get me to vote for him, but I for one am glad he changed his position. Let's hope that if he's elected, he will vote against it when Nancy Pelosi brings that bill to the floor.

Welcome to the extremist side, Mr. Esch.

Anonymous said...

I saw Jim Esch eating waffles this morning at Village Inn.

Watch out! Look for Jim to waffle some more today--or flip on another big issue. Maybe he'll actually answer a question about whether or not he supports drilling in ANWR.

Anonymous said...

Interesting who is doing the push polls around NE: Esch (last month) and now someone connected to the Democrats.

Kleeb says it isn't him, but somehow I wonder...

Street Sweeper said...

[More on the Kleeb push-poll this afternoon... -SS]

Right Wing Professor said...

And he says he answered NRTL's questionnaire...late.

Now, be fair, Sweeper. If it had been answered on time, you would (properly) have suspected the answer of being a fake.

Anonymous said...

So....Jim was "for" embyonic stem cell research before he was "against" it 56 days out from the election?

Anonymous said...

$50 bucks says the only reason he changed his position is because the Priest wouldn't marry him and his sweetey in the Church.

Maybe Esch is paying himself back campaign donations from 2 years ago so he can by his girlfriend an engagement ring. I wouldn't blame him, he doesn't make enough money to afford to get married and I would hope his parents drew the line on what they were willing to pay for.

As for the candidate survey, if Esch had these feelings, he could have come out of the closet with them in time for the Primary and gotten the Endorsement then. True, it would not have been "good" for the General because of their policy, but he could have told everyone he was endorsed, JUST LIKE HE TRIED TO 2 YEARS AGO WHEN HE WAS PROCHOICE!

If this is the way Esch feels, why did he tell Todd&Tyler yesterday morning that there is "room for compromise" on the issue of embryonic stem cell research. He changed his philosophical belief on the sanctity of life in a few hours? Being "mealy mouthed" is the least of Esch's problems. He actually needs a psych evaluation!

You either destroy human life for embryonic stem cell research, or you don't. You can't almost destroy it or almost not destroy it.

BTW, let me know when Esch moves to SW Omaha to run against Jean Stothert. Will he do that before or after November 4th? What CC Dist is he in, anyway?

Who Cares Who I Am.

millard repub said...

No. He can't do that. Esch and Stothert will split the ultra-liberal vote.

red headed prophet said...

What the "H" does Jean Stothert's views on Prolife have anything to do with her professional abilities to sit on the City Council?

one out in the third said...

New push poll? I love push polls. Anything giving Speedey more than a 40 percent margin would be a lie. Rasmussen says Johanns is a lock with an 83 percent chance of winning. Las Vegas would jump all over those odds.

It probably won't be but another two or three weeks when Kleeb protests that someone with a monotone voice is making scratchy sounding "Kleeb for Senate" Robo calls at 2 in the morning.

No experience...isn't that the weakness the Dems say Palin suffers. Sorry I keep forgetting...Palin has CEO experience in government...Kleeb and his smoking buddy are the ones searching for substance.

A note to Johanns...you still have to earn it Mike...and suggest you listen to the "folks" and follow through. Don't be resting on your perceived laurels.

Anonymous said...

Woohoo! In the (paraphrased) words of Mike Johanns, in Nebraska whoever goes negative first -- LOSES! Hello private citizen Lee Terry, and HELLO CONGRESSMAN-ELECT JIM ESCH!!!

How much sleep ya getting these days Lee? Better start polishing up the ol' resumes Terry staffers!

Anonymous said...

So since Joe J. says an ad is "negative" that makes it so?

No thanks.

That ad is a classic comparative spot. Both Terry and Esch's stands--and accurate at that!

Now for the important part--don't like it, Eschies? Well, then put your own response ad up on the air.

You've got the dough, right? lol

Anonymous said...

Okay, you hard-core, pro-life people, please tell me what YOU think should be done with embryos that have been created for IVF that are slated for destruction? Please, someone explain it to me. If it's so morally incorrect to want them to be used for research to possibly help eradicate diseases and extend people's life spans and improve their quality of life, what should be done with these cells instead?

Anonymous said...

Here's a tip for Esch:

Respond to the ad immediately!

Order a few more bus benches--get another 500 cases of water and slap a response on the bottles.

And, drop another round of flyers in ValuePak--probably about 5% of which will actually be read by likely voters.

Hurry, Jim!

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Anonymous 12:08--ask Esch.

He's pro-life now on embryonic stem cells, right? lol

I know it's been a deeply held view since at least last week.

Anonymous said...

Gallup Poll (Sept 9):

Among Independent Voters:

McCain 52
Obama 40

Anonymous said...

No, anon 12:12, I'm asking you guys. You keep dodging this question, which all that does is show you for the hypocrites that you are.

I actually prefer a candidate who shows that he is thoughtful enough to look at new science and research and come to new opinions. If Jim has found in his studies that skin cell research is more beneficial, then good for him. I have limited time to research everything, so I elect my representatives to have the good judgment and knowledge to follow the things that I can't.

Do I want a representative who just follows the party line and sticks his finger in the air to see how he should think on every issue like Lee Terry? No way! He hasn't had an independent thought in his life!

Now, could someone please get their heads out of the RTL platform study guides and tell me what they really think about IVF and what should be done with the leftover embryos? Anyone?

Anonymous said...

Here's a tough one for Jim:

Are you in favor of or opposed to drilling in ANWR?

How about a yes or now.

Anonymous said...

meant "no"

Anonymous said...

Did the same firm that is doing Kleeb's push polls do Esch's recent push poll?

At least Kleeb wouldn't run into the problem Esch had of people being called who lived outside of the Second District. lol

Anonymous said...

What other positions will Jim change now that the election is nearing?

millard repub said...

No one will answer my question on here:

"Is Jim Esch is pro-life or Jean Stothert is not pro-life?"

I will not allow a double standard. Which is it????

askinga? said...

Hmmmmm, is being Pro-life an all or nothing approach?

Well, how many of you so-called pro-lifers are pro-death penalty? Then I guess you are pro choice.

Anonymous said...

Will Jim support drilling in ANWR--yes or no?

Anonymous said...

Disrespecting pro-life groups? Don't you have to have respect in the first place?

Max'sDad said...

Who gives a shiite if drilling starts in the land of Palin? The oil barons would just sell it to China anyway.

lnk said...

Max'sdad--you miss the point.

Even if that happened, the $$$ would stay here in America since it is domestic companies who would drill. The Chinese would be paying us.

But your scenario wouldn't, in fact, happen--we'd use the oil here and supplant what we now import.

ANWR has a proven reserve of 10 billion barrels of oil. There are 97 billion barrels offshore in the OCS.

The difference between Terry and Esch is the former wants to tap those resources while the latter does not.

Esch is dead wrong on this issue.

Anonymous said...

The ANWR oil would mostly go overseas. Right now the refineries on the West Coast are pretty much at max capacity. While they could refine a bit more, it would be nowhere near what would be coming form ANWR. Also, ANWR, according to a recent Dept. of Energy Report, would not significally reduce dependence on foreign oil, and the drop in cost (about 75 cents per barrel) would not be seen for 10 year and would be neglible. Got to keep putting out the real facts for the "drill baby drill" crowd.

lnk said...

Hey Anonymous--then we'll build more refineries. Ever thought of that? I bet Alaska would take one tomorrow.

We can also connect it to the Alaska pipeline--less new construction.

This issue is the same as the stimulus checks. It is really very simple.

Terry favors giving taxpayers back some of their taxes through stimulus checks. Esch does not.

Terry wants to drill in ANWR. Esch does not.

It's very simple. Voters in NE2 will agree overwhelmingly with Terry, not Esch, on these two major issues.

Anonymous said...

While the USGS and Department of Energy says we have 10 billion barrels of oil reserves in ANWR and 97 billion in the OCS.

I have a question - How much of that is in place. Meaning, how much of this oil can be brought to the surface?

Should we really believe the government?

Also, show me where Mr. Esch has said he is against drilling in Alaska or the OCS. I have not been able to find those comments.

What has Lee flipped on? I'm sure there are plenty of examples.

Hmmmmm, is being Pro-life an all or nothing approach?

Furthermore, the stimulus checks were borrowed money.

Anonymous said...

It would be nice if Congressman Terry would talk issues instead of running a constant barrage of negative attacks.

Must be scared.

Anonymous said...

"It would only be because Obama wins." What a childish response by Terry. And there are those spooky Arab guys again. Why does Lee hate Arabs? Why does he think those spooky images will get him votes? Why doesn't he hate Canadians and Mexicans the same way? And would he favor abortion if one of those spooky Arabs molested a teenage relative of his and a doctor diagnosed the fetus as having a disease so horrible that it would be a vegetable then die before age 5? Is it NEVER okay to have an abortion? Are Lee and the rest of you high and mighty right wingers positive your hard core radical stance is really the most moral? Says who? You?

Anonymous said...

Esch View, Roll back the Bush tax credit. This means your child tax credit will be reduced to $500 per child not the Bush plan and current tax break of $1000 per child. Way to go Esch, take money out of the hands of the people who need it most. I don't know about everyone else but I like the extra $500 back in my pocket.

Just as Esch said, we have to pay for it somehow, well that means you lose your tax credit. Great plan Esch, way to think it through!

Any other great economic plans Esch?

OmaSteak said...

Esch was on KFAB with Tom Becka yesterday. Since Becka hates Terry, he served up nothing but softballs to Esch and Jimmy still failed to connect. When asked what to do about "energy", Esch said "we" (meaning the Federal government) need to replicate efforts like building the transcontinental railroads and the telegraph system. What's wrong with this response??? Of course, both were done by private enterprise not the Federal government. Esch's other big initiative is for the Fed's to sell "energy independence bonds" similar to war bonds during WWII. The funds would be used to finance "innovation and infrastruture". Not able to completely hide his extreme liberals views, Esch did clearly state a major part of his "plan" is a dramatic change in the American lifestyle...presumably motivated/enforced by massive new Federal programs/taxes. This guy is a complete joke and as shallow as the Platte at the height of irrigation season. If I was a 2nd district dem, I'd be embarassed that such an empty suit was the best candidate my party could produce in a time period when a Dem with some substance might have a real shot at a RINO like Terry.

Anonymous said...

I've heard a rumor that the Terry website is in violation of it's own privacy policy.

Is that true?

Anonymous said...

Adoption of embryos. This would truly put life back in the hands of the person that gives it. It would make doctors and loving couples think twice about how many fertilized embryos they want, or need. If doctors couldn't sell or "donate", in exchange for expenses, the frozen embyos, maybe they would not encourage couples desperate for just 1 baby to create so many.

The Mexicans and Canadians do not support or harbor individuals and fugitives that want to KILL AMERICANS just because we are Americans! That is why we buy oil from them. However, if America tried to enter Canada and take oil, like Jim Esch has advocated for his friend up North (NW), I would suspect the Canadian government might consider rethinking our working relationship. FYI Jim, we cannot stake claim to oil in other lands.

Congressman Terry cannot have a discussion about the issues with an empty suit that is still trying to decide his positions on the issues. Esch spent most of his time 2 years ago "dittoing" Lee Terry and advocating for embryonic stem cell research of those up for destruction wasted embryos. In Jim Esch's last campaign, embryonic stem cell research or life, and, incumbancy or challenger, were Jim Esch's only challenge issues. "Just because" and "Pro stem cell research" lost last time. Thank God that Jim's Catholic Family and fellow Parishioners got through to him 2 days ago and he went back to his Faith and Core Beliefs on the Sanctity of Life. I am sure the ProLife community is thanking the Lord for Jim's change of heart and soul. I wonder who the ProAbortion community is praying to and what for this morning? It still worries me that a Politician could still waffle on this issue by being pro embryonic stem cell research in front of a ProChoice audience at 10 o'clock in the morning and by 5 o'clock that evening confess to the newspaper that he has changed his opinion on stem cell research "after much research on the subject"? How much research did he do in 7 hours that changed his opinion away from what he "learned" from UNMC 2 1/2 years ago?

Still waiting answers from Jim Esch, not Dennis or Joe.

lnk said...

Wall Street Journal/NBC Poll:

McCain 47
Obama 46


askinga? said...

millard repub - no one knows what the hell you are asking. That is why no one has responded to your insanity.

Anonymous said...

Ink/Dave - How ya doin'?

Anonymous said...

I would have to say that I have read that Jean Stothert has made statements in support of funding for abortion. I agree with Red that it doesn't really have a point in a City Council race, but if I had heard about it for School Board, it would have forced me to have a personal conversation with her and maybe leave that vote uncast.

She was not in my leg dist so I didn't pay much attention a couple of years ago.

Anonymous said...

How is the Terry site violating it's own privacy policy? I can't even get the privacy policy to load on the main homepage. I had to go to another page to read it. What section does it violate?

lnk said...

Anonymous 11:18--doing well--thanks for asking.

How are you? Here's something to brighten your day:

Gallup Poll (Sept 10):

McCain 48
Obama 43

Anonymous said...

Boomer/Ink, shouldn't you be apologizing for your behaviors and focusing on your boss (before he fires you) instead of worry about posting Obama-McCain poll numbers?

lnk said...

If the national spread on McCain and Obama is 5 (according to Gallup) then I bet it is at least double that right now in NE2.

aska? said...

Boomer/Ink, shouldn't you be apologizing for your behaviors and focusing on your boss (before he fires you) instead of worry about posting Obama-McCain poll numbers?

Street Sweeper said...

May I ask what it is you think Boomer should apologize for?

lnk said...

Maybe Towelhead Kyle and Hanna Montana should apologize for being hypocrites.

They attack pharmaceutical companies for "ripping off the public" with "obscene profits," then turn around and eat off Novartis' dime at the luncheon while in Denver.

They look absurd. Pigs at the trough.

BTW--the Towelhead reference is in response to Kyle's maligning Terry two weeks ago. You gonna apologize, Towelhead Kyle?

Anonymous said...

Ink, here's something to brighten your day.

Ink's an idiot 75%
Ink's fired 24%
We like Ink 1%

Street Sweeper said...

Thank you for that Esch-Family poll.
(Who is the 1% that likes Ink? Mom?)

Anonymous said...

If anyone should be fired, it should be the dumbass that told Jimmy he should go to Afghanistan. Or maybe the idiot that let him get drunk and miss addressing his base at breakfast during the DNC in Denver. How about the fool that let Esch go to a bar party at Club Nico after he couldn't pull it together and had to leave the DNC with his tail between his legs? Actually the sweety that forgot to footnote Jimmy's term paper on the mortgage crisis. Yeah, she's the one they oughta toss! I hope he didn't use her for any of his term papers at Creighton.