Let's back up one more time to the statement Senator Ben Nelson made when he endorsed Jim Suttle the other day:
Last Monday when I was asked if I was gonna make an endorsement I said, "No. I... gonna stay out of ... out of a non-partisan race."So, let's look at the history of Nelson's non-endorsement, endorsements.
And unfortunately the partisan blogs and conservative talk show hosts tried to make something out of that to hurt, uhhh, our candidate, Jim Suttle. And, uh, that didn't seem fair to me and didn't seem right.
Back in February, Nelson attended a fundraiser for Suttle in Washington, D.C. -- where Nelson was listed as a "Special Guest".
The OWH went on to report that:
Nelson said he does not plan to formally endorse a candidate for Omaha mayor because he typically does not make an endorsement in local races.(Note: We don't have a link for this quote. It was provided by a Nebraska Democrat, and we're taking him at his word that it is accurate. He may have gotten it via Nexis. But the particular quote is no longer in the OWH story on the intertubes. Was the quote taken out for a reason, or by request? We don't know.)
He said, however, that he is supportive of Suttle and that his presence at Suttle's fundraiser speaks for itself.
So, there you have Nelson in a nutshell: I don't want to be public about what I really think, but -- wink-wink -- you know what I really think.
Then, on Monday this week, Nelson told the AP that he won't be endorsing anyone, because, well...
...he won't get involved because he has to work with whoever gets the job.So, which is it then? On the one hand, Nelson says that you can simply look through what he is really saying and know who he is endorsing. On the other, he says that you shouldn't look at what he really means, because, darnit, he's all about the good government.
So when Leavenworth Street pointed at him and said, "B.S!", Nelson called that "unfortunate".
Well yes that is unfortunate...for Ben Nelson.
It means that he isn't allowed to sit on the fence when it comes to politics.
It means he while he supports his Democrat buddy he can't sell the Republicans and Independents that he's just non-partisan about it all.
It means he has to get off the damn fence and take a stand.
What's unfortunate is that he had to be pushed.
It sure would be swell if he could be Senator All-Things-To-Everyone. Unfortunately, sometimes one has to actually take a stand.
Too bad, for Senator Nelson, it took a push from Leavenworth Street.
Hal Daub and Jim Suttle debated yesterday at the Omaha Press Club, and actually got into it a little.
They discussed crime, and Daub pointed to his published, detailed plans for fighting crime.
Jim Suttle, on the other hand has presented no plan said that the only way to fight crime is by getting everyone employed. (Oh, and remember that Suttle's "jobs" plan for all the gang-bangers is to build a bridge to Iowa and hope that a business grows out of a field.)
And then Suttle mocked Daub's suggestion that Omaha could use 100 more cops.
Here's Suttle's money question:
"Let me just ask a hypothetical question here. If each person in this room had five more police officers at their personal disposal, where would you put those officers?" asked Suttle.Silence? Here's an easy answer to Mr. Suttle's question: I'd put one in front of my house; one in front of my kids' school; one in front of where ever my kids hang out; one in front of the business I run; and one in front of YOUR house (to keep an eye on you).
"I want them to think about this because every time I ask it, I get silence. You see, we can put more and more officers here, there and everywhere, but it's back to the jigsaw puzzle (of creating more jobs)," said Suttle.
There. I feel safer already.
So yeah, fuuuuuullllll employment is a noble sort of quest -- but Suttle hasn't come up with any sort of plan to achieve that. And the suggestion that proper policing is not a deterrent to crime, is simply ignorant.
As Jesus said, "the poor you will always have with you." And some of those poor are going to resort to crime. And then some of the not-poor are going to resort to crime. And then some of the just pure deviant are going to resort to crime.
And may Jesus help you if you don't have the proper number of cops on the street to stop them.
There was one final zinger at the debate.
Along with Suttle's droning on about "civility at City Hall" crap, he has also been trying to hit Daub as a "professional politician".
Hal came back and:
...quizzed Suttle on how long he had served as public works director under former Mayor Mike Boyle.So apparently Suttle wants the Mayor's gig so that he can reach the "professional" ranks in four years, too.
Suttle served six years under Boyle and four years on the City Council. Daub has served about 14 years total in Congress and as mayor.
But, on second thought, maybe it would be best if Suttle stays an amateur. For the benefit of everyone.