Monday, May 17, 2010

New ratings in Terry - White race

Congressional Quarterly has come out with a new analysis of all the races in the U.S. House of Representatives.

And here is their latest take on the Congressman Lee Terry vs. State Senator Tom White match up:
Nebraska’s 2nd District: Likely Republican (was Leans Republican)

Omaha-area Democrats hoped to continue the momentum they built in 2008, a year in which Obama narrowly carried this district and businessman Jim Esch held Terry to 52 percent, the low point in his six House victories.

The challenging party went all out with its successful recruitment of state Sen. Tom White, who had been thinking about running for governor, who is relatively well-funded for this year’s election.

But with the national Democratic Party faces fights to hold on to dozens of seats targeted by the Republicans, it’s hard to envision how they could go all out for this one.
Note that CQ changed the prospects on the race from "Lean Republican" up to "Likely Republican" (just one notch below "Safe Republican").

Leaving Terry plenty of time to move up.


And Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson has also taken a step back from voicing any support for Tom White.

On Saturday at the Nebraska Democrats' premier annual fundraiser, Nelson stated,
"If there is an anti-incumbency backlash, I don't think it's showing in any material way in state races."
Note Nelson watching out for his own hide here, instead of backing up White and potentially citing Terry's primary numbers.

With friends like Nelson...right Tom?


In his fight to get the Nebraska Democrat Party to change its rules and allow free-posting on their blog, Phelps Co. Democrat Chair (and frequent commenter on this blog) Brian Osborn has invoked Ronald Reagan.

In an open letter to Dem Chair, Vic Covalt, Osborn demands...

Mr. Covalt, Tear Down This Wall!

Osborn goes on to say,
Democrats are notorious for their opinionated stances on any number of issues.
Democrats are famous for their tendency to argue, often vehemently, amongst themselves.
Democrats thrive in an atmosphere of freedom and they detest limitations to be set upon them.
That said, I urge you, Mr. Chairman, to restore the NDP Blog to the way it was before you clamped the ignoble chains of CENSORSHIP on it. I urge you to demonstrate to the State of Nebraska, and the world, that we Democrats in this state do not fear the unfettered exchange of opinions and ideas. I urge you to give the Democrats of our state their due.
The NDP Blog belongs to the Democrats of the State of Nebraska, not just to you, nor just to the NDP State Executive Committee, nor just to the NDP State Central Committee. It is OURS, Mr. Covalt and we want it back.
Brian T. Osborn
Chair - Phelps County Democrats

Fight the good fight, BTO.


Anonymous said...

If Ben Nelson distanced himself from me and my name was Tom White, I'd consider it a huge favor.

Anonymous said...

So other than Nancy Pelosi, who else is endorsing White?

Anonymous said...

I haven't read the NDP blog ever so I don't know what the censorship amounts to that Brian is complaining about. Did they not allow him to call everyone over there idiots, morons or imbeciles? With the way Brian attacks with insults rather than arguments, I can't imagine why they didn't like him hanging out around there.

Has he accused them of "acting like Republicans" for censoring him yet? If not, I'm sure it's coming.

Brian T. Osborn said...

Thanks for posting that, Sweeper.

We disagree on a lot of things, but one thing that I think we can agree on is that politics belongs to the people, not just those in the back rooms. The internet, and blogs like Leavenworth Street, serve to allow true democracy to spread.

Too many politicians would love a return to the old days when they could control all of the media. The ability of the common people to raise their voices and be heard is a threat to the old guard. We're seeing that on the right and the left.

The days of powerful individuals having total control of political thought in this country are over. With blogs, email, Twitter, Facebook, etc., expanding the possibilities of people to share their ideas, any attempt to stifle them is a fool's game and is counterproductive.

The NDP blog was shut down in large part due to my posts excoriating Sen. Ben Nelson. Thanks to your blog, and others, my message still got out there, proving that you cannot stop the free flow of ideas. Democrats, Republicans and Independents all have the RIGHT to criticize those that represent us, whether they are a powerful figure in Washington, or the mayor of our town.

I want those of us that are the grassroots to let our political representatives know just who the employer and the employee is in this relationship between us. I would hope that someone in the NEGOP would step up and serve as my counterpart in their organization, for I am certain the same problems exist over there.

Stifling the voices of the rank-and-file members of a political party is a recipe for that party's certain failure. Freedom is a principle ingredient for democracy's success.

Brian T. Osborn said...


Yeah, I probably have tossed an insulting bon mot their way in reaction to the silencing of Democratic voices. But none has been so deserving as the "coward" that I love to throw at those, like you, that are so chickenshit that they hide behind the name of "Anonymous." Get a nom de plume, it doesn't take a genius to come up with one. Well, maybe in your case ...

GeosUser said...

In actual fact, blogs do have owners and what/who/when/how gets posted on them is up to the owner. Street Sweeper owns this blog and controls who posts and what gets posted, as it should be since it's his blog. BTO should start his own blog, maybe the Free Nebraska Democratic Party or something similar. I'm sure Bold Nebraska will welcome him with open arms...LOL!

Anonymous said...

GeosUser is right on. Osborn should get his own blog. He has no idea SS is simply using his attacks on the Dem Party to further her own purpose. Then, he thanks her for it.

I had no idea BTO is the Phelps County Chair of the Dem Party. You'd hope that before someone shoots at the party establishment that he'd be able to point to some of his own accomplishments. Come to think of it....Phelps County Democrats....hmmmmmm, not many elected Dems in that County are there?

Oh, and to spare us another one of your drivel posts BTO, I'm a chicken s anon poster--- boy the name calling really hurts...would someone pass me a tissue...

Street Sweeper said...


After I blew out my scented candles and finisehd calling in my Dancing with the Stars vote, I posted the stuff on BTO b/c it's interesting. And it's political.

Parties have disagreements all the time (see just about every Primary election) and those disagreements let us decide who or what the party is and if we want to be a part of that or change it. It is, frankly, healthy.

(And BTO's point about picking an "identity" when commenting, is one that I have been asking for ever since this blog was started.)

Now, back to my Twilight reading...

Anonymous said...

It gets worse for White...

CQ's new "Election Preview" has just been posted.

Speaking of NE2: "But a drop-off in Democratic turnout and a stepped-up enthusiasm in GOP ranks will complicate White's effort to unseat Terry."

Looks like CQ noticed that only 12,000 Dems voted in the NE2 primary, versus the 21,000 that did so in May 06.

Brian T. Osborn said...

Geos, my point is that the Democrats of Nebraska own the NDP Blog. The problem is that they are not allowed to use it. When the hierarchy of a political party prohibits its own party members from using party resources other than for "authorized" support, then the leaders have lost their legitimacy.

Anonymous said...

More CQ

"White will largely be on his own against Terry and will run with little or no aid from national Democrats, whose top priority is shoring up the party's many vulnerable incumbents."

Anonymous said...

Boooo Cullen!!!!!!

One Out In The Third said...


Not that it means anything...but I support what you are going after. Dems and Reps are notorious for censorship...I believe Dems are the worst offenders - strongarm thugs.

I also think the NDP should get rid of the ridiculous ass caucus. I wrote and called Ben Nelson and members of the NDP to tell them of how the how the process denies our troops out of state a fair voice in selecting a candidate and how it can be intimidating to others. Keep it on a ballot and keep it secret. I don't want to be Iowa.

Also of note...I believe Nebraska and other states are going the wrong way with voter registration requirements and voting regulations...weakening the voting process.

I wonder if White asked Nelson not to endorse him. I sure as hell wouldn't want his endorsement.

Anonymous said...

Third, what universe are you living in? Has the Nebraska GOP blog EVER allowed comments? Is there really even a blog? The whole site is top-down. Here's what you should think.

One Out In The Third said...


Believe me Fahleson censors...not to the degree of Dems...he can't take criticism...and it was mild.

Brian T. Osborn said...

1/3rd, I liked the 2008 Democratic Caucus because it brought a lot of Democrats out of the woodwork. A lot of things went wrong with it, but it was the first time we ever tried it. It was a great opportunity for Democrats throughout the state to realize that they are not alone. It isn't a perfect format, but if we do it again in 2012, I'm certain we can get a lot of the bugs out, especially if those new people that came out in 2008 get involved again this year and in 2012.

I attended the NDP-SCC meeting in Bellevue and the Morrison-Exon Dinner in LaVista this past Saturday. There seems to be an undercurrent of dissatisfaction amongst many Democrats about the way our party is being run, despite the outward appearance promoted of "All is well in Donkeytown."

Congressman Tim Walz, an unapologetic Liberal, was without a doubt the best speaker at the event and the most well received. He actually exhorted the Democrats in attendance to stand up for the principles that our party claims to believe in. I think a lot of Democrats are yearning for our party to begin doing just that.

Of course there were the usual platitudes supporting Sen. Ben Nelson, as though he were actually working towards the same goals as are contained in the NDP Platform, even though he probably doesn't even know what's in it. Many, including me, sat on their hands when he was introduced. Sen. Dick Durban was evidently seeking Ben's support for a higher Senate leadership position and praised Ben's half-hearted efforts in that body to support the Democratic agenda.

While CD2 Congressional candidate, Tom White, was given free rein with the microphone, CD1 candidate, Ivy Harper, and CD3 candidate, Rebekah Davis, were both snubbed. Bad move on the part of anyone seeking support from women in the party or the rural counties in this state. Many other candidates were forgotten, only to be introduced later in the evening as they made their presence known. The ball was definitely fumbled.

I picked up the Morrison-Exon award on behalf of Lincoln County Democratic Party Treasurer, Tom Brown. Knowing that Mr. Brown is an outspoken critic of Sen. Nelson, and given the opportunity to speak a very limited number of words while accepting his award for him. I fixed Sen. Nelson with my gaze and said, "If and when I ever grow up, I hope to become a Democrat just like Tom Brown." I think Mr. Brown will be satisfied, and I hope Sen. Nelson needed a Tums.

Anonymous said...

SS, if you really believe using “anonymous” is wrong, then get rid of it as a choice on this blog.

One Out In The Third said...


If I recall correctly the caucus had something like a 10 percent turnout state-wide...38,000 caucausers vs 371,000 registered democrats...a success??? Grand Island/Hall County had less than 300 people show up and the few people I talked to that did attend felt it to be a dog and pony show. At the end the leadership was asking for "political contributions" to pay for an after-caucus pizza fest.

How can a caucus represent our troops overseas and out of state? The numbers would be small albeit...and they had one chance at a selection and then they were out of it if there was a split. No representation. How many of our service men and women overseas and out of state at the time actually participated in the Phelps County Caucus? Did you know that the NDP had a form for out troops to participate?

What about the homebound and elderly or those that had to work that day...did they have the same equal chance to participate as those that showed up to caucus? No they didn't.

Ask me why I have been a "non-partisan" most of my life...because both parties are corrupt. Why can't a non-partisan in Nebraska vote both sides of the ticket in a primary? Isn't it about picking the best man or woman?

Julie Schmit-Albin said...

For a 12 year old girl, Sweeper has an uncanny grasp on the Nebraska political scene.

One Out In The Third said...

I thought she was 8. That's funny.

Jamie said...

BTO got mentioned in a post? Damn... Is there anything ridiculous/dangerous I can do to get mentioned in one? I'm willing to commit crimes with penalties up to nine months in jail or $1000 in fines.

Brian T. Osborn said...

1/3rd, I'm a partisan Democrat (albeit, at times, of flagging faith due to the lack of support some of our "leaders" have for my party's principles) therefore anything that gets more people involved in building up my party is a positive thing. The caucuses did just that; they got more people active in my party.

Certainly, the caucuses aren't a perfect answer to the problem of selecting our candidates, but the one thing they do is get people involved in the selection process. When all we get to do is choose between those candidates that a bunch of guys in the back rooms put on a ballot for us, where is the benefit to that? If you can't make the caucus because of work, or whatever, you get involved with your neighbors that ARE going and ask them to speak for you.

So, our troops overseas don't get as great an opportunity to participate as we here on the home front? I wouldn't say that I had such a wonderful opportunity when I served overseas for four and a half years ... and I had a ballot, not a caucus. My answer to that is to bring the troops home! In 2008 they did have an opportunity to participate by a mail-in ballot. As I said, it was far from perfect.

You made some valid points; however, the current political system in the U.S. is basically a two party system. If you want to change that, you have to get involved. As an Independent, you have made the CHOICE to be left out of the process. Sign up as a Republican or a Democrat, then run as a delegate for your party, get on the inside and become a pain-in-the-ass to the powers that be. That's what I've done.

Jamie - The squeaky wheel gets the grease. If we all sit back and try not to stand out, then we have to be content with the status quo. I'm not content ... so I make noise.

Sen. Ben said...

BTO is right. I've been a bad boy. I'll try to do a better job from now on.

One Out In The Third said...


A ten percent turnout...that's what I call "great opportunity." For whom? Has there been a lower turnout by the Dems in Nebraska voting history? The Iraqi people turned out 6 times that percentage in their most recent election...some districts in the north had an 80 percent turnout.

What a bunch of dullards Americans are. We have lost our taste for freedom and half of this country wouldn't know what freedom was if it bit them in ass. All they want a handout.

With a ballot you have a choice and everyone is equal...with a caucus you have "caca" (Mexican for small poop) that is manipulated by your backroom pals. They crave poor turnouts. ?

I and other vets are starting to get the feeling that our service might have been a waste of time.


"If there is an anti-incumbency backlash, I don't think it's showing in any material way in state races." - Just wait for your turn in the barrel in're guaranteed to see a backlash must be totally blind as well as a clueless jerk.

Street Sweeper said...

I would rather you have to make up a name in order to comment. But the best I could do is require people to sign up, and I don't want to do that. So I'm stuck with requesting.

Frankly, it's not a huge deal, but it would make discussions b/t two people on the comment board more readable.

Jamie said...

BTO, you are a bleeding heart liberal and are opinionated into oblivion... but I have the most respect for you than any poster on this blog.

Sen. Ben, federal crime to impersonate a Senator? Might be.

Jamie said...

BTO, just reading your statement, I have a few thoughts-

1) Are you worried about this being detrimental to your career in the NDP? Are you worried about Covalt backfiring?

2) This is why I don't give to the GOP. I give money to candidates. They're more accountable. Because when it comes down to it, the site is owned by the NDP, not the people who are registered or own it.

3) Would it be wise to allow dissent on a blog run by a political party? To me it seems there is no professional way to combat that kind of thing. I suspect the blog isn't meant as a debating forum, but as a way to utilize media to simply inform.


4) Is it wise to invoke the imagery of the most famous speech of the most influential Republican of the 20th Century in a protest to the Chair of the NDP? :)

My two cents.

Brian T. Osborn said...


As I said, I'm a partisan Democrat. Whatever helps to get more Democrats out of the woodwork, I'm OK with it. The larger the grassroots numbers become, the less influence those guys in the back rooms have. Whether we caucus or we mark ballots, without getting more people involved, the oligarchy rules, and we have little say in how the party is governed. With little say in how the parties are governed, we have little say in how our nation is run. Only by getting MORE people involved, in both parties, will democracy in the United States ever stand a chance.

I've said it before, when you register as an Independent, or if you adhere to some little 3rd party, you're basically pissin' into the wind. It is best to get involved, vigorously involved, in one of the two major parties. The alternative is what is happening in Britain, or worse yet, what I saw in Italy when I lived there; it took a coalition of five different parties to form a freakin' government! I agree with you that it is shameful that too many Americans take so little interest in the one thing that has more influence over their day-to-day lives than any other single thing ... politics.

In a state like Nebraska, where agriculture is our principle economic driver, there are plenty of farmers and ranchers that line up to get their share of the welfare handouts, only they call it "subsidies." That way they can feel good about themselves when they complain about the "welfare queens" in the inner cities. Heck, even Sen. Nelson has his "turkey farm" that allows him to dip ever deeper into our pockets.


Yup! I am an unapologetic bleeding heart, highly opinionated Liberal.

I have no aspirations to ever have a "career" in the NDP. If I fail to effect change in the party from within, I will strive to effect it from without, perhaps even more aggressively. As Vince Powers likes to say, "It's better to have 'em inside the tent pissing out, than it is to have them outside of the tent pissing in."

I respect Vic Covalt, in many ways, but I decry his decisions to censor those of us that would criticize Ben. Not that it has worked out very well for him, I can still say pretty much what I want here on Leavenworth Street and elsewhere. What bothers me the most is the lack of response any of us get from the hierarchy in our party. They rarely respond to criticism with anything other than greater threats of censorship, or outright expulsion.

I don't believe the purpose of a political party should be to support candidates financially. That is what the candidates' own campaign organizations are for. Political parties should exist more for the purpose of promoting their agendas, their principles, and their ideals. They should use their clout to cause those who run under their banner to support their platforms. Instead, we get candidates that impose their will on their parties, as Sen. Nelson has done to the NDP for the past twenty years, pretty much to the exclusion of every other candidate we have had. The NDP has become the Ben Nelson party and I believe it is time to change that.

It is wise for a party, one that puffs its chest out and declares to support the voices of its adherents, to allow dissent - absolutely! The NDP blog was originally designed for exactly that purpose. It has devolved into a system for merely distributing pre-approved propaganda, and it isn't doing a very good job of that. If you are a Nebraskan that is looking to find out anything about the party, such as who your county chair is, or who sits on one of the party's committees, good luck with that. It doesn't matter whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, that info is hard to find. It shouldn't be!

Words are powerful, it matters not to me who first uttered them, so long as they are effective.

Anonymous said...

haha.....BTO left out the part where the crowd started to clap and stand up for Tom Brown, but as soon as it was said BTO was getting the award for Tom, the clapping stopped, people immediately sat down and there were audible groans around the room. (That's compared to the loud, enthusiatic greeting for Sen. Nelson.) He wasn't the only person to accept an award on someone's behalf but he was the only one to get that reaction. Btox is on his way out anyway - cue the violin music as he plays the tortured victim - and this forum has provide him a new home to be that center of attention he so loves to be. You can have him. We don't mind one bit!

Brian T. Osborn said...

A-946: You must have been sitting at Ben's table. The scene appeared a bit differently from the dais. Tell us, did your name tag have "Anonymous" written on it there as well?

Jamie said...

BTO, I guess I'm perplexed as to why you're so anti-Nelson. Seems like a typical Nebraska Democrat from the outside looking in. I think the votes he's made are in-sync with the votes any other federal-level Dem would from our state.

Brian T. Osborn said...


There are a lot of reasons why I have had a belly full of Ben Nelson. It began in 2006 when he voted to let the U.S. join the ranks of nations that allow torture. It was exacerbated by the way his "coordinated campaign" was run from within the NDP (questions raised about that have YET to be honestly answered.) The fact that Ben never supports any of our other candidates unless they have worked for him and his total disregard for the NDP's platform has shown me that he has no party loyalty. Then, his votes against core Democratic principles, time and again have irritated me. But the "Ben was our 60th vote on the health care issue" mantra spewed by so many within my party just gets under my skin. A true Democratic leader would be ashamed to be praised for being the very last one to shore up one of the most important Democratic issues of the past century. Ben came on board only when it looked like he was going to get a gift for his corporate sponsors.

There's more, but that'll give you something to chew on.

One Out In The Third said...


You are missing the point...your caucus had a 10 percent turnout...statewide. Even with it being a first time failed miserably...poor turnout...disgruntled and a few intimidated people in attendance...denying our troops...probably for a reason. It did not light any fires in the belly...or provide a warm tingly feeling running down anyone's leg except your dream-on leadership suffering visions of grandeur. Can you imagine the power of a 70 percent Dem. turnout every time there was an election?

And you wonder why I am non-partisan. I have voted both sides of the ticket thoughout my life...even became a RINO on one occasion. Give me a choice to pick a good Democrat to push up the ladder and I will. There's no swinging door on the Hall County Admin. Building so I can run down and change my status everytime I feel a warm tingly. I am tired of the political B.S. on both sides of the fence...and I guess when it comes down to the final wire I will use the power of my vote and a little cash. Capiche?

Brian T. Osborn said...

Wow 1/3rd!,

Go down and take advantage of happy hour somewhere! The Democrats that turned out at the caucus we held in Holdrege seemed, for the most part, pretty happy to finally have a chance to be involved in the political process. So there was a turnout of less than 10%, at least they got together, found kindred spirits, and had cookies and coffee. That is the kind of thing that gets people involved. Just mailing it in doesn't have the same effect.

Listen, I am a veteran too. I was in the military during two presidential elections and two more as a civilian working overseas. I had less opportunity to "participate" then than our troops had during our caucus. The only problem was .... you had to pay attention. Sure, wouldn't it be loverly if we could just hand ballots to everyone on a silver platter. Maybe we could even fill in their votes for 'em so that they don't sprain their wrists.

As an Independent, you had no choice anyway. So what's your beef? You CHOSE not to participate and now you're bitching? And quit wrapping yourself in the flag! Thanks for your service and all that, but you weren't the only one that served.

I'd love to see a 100% turnout for every election. In some countries, you can't get a drivers license unless you do your civic duty and vote. Maybe that'd get everyone's attention. I'd be for it.

If your tired, go take a nap. But if you don't get involved on one team or another, don't bitch about how the game is played.

One Out In The Third said...


Your caucus still was a failure and the concept stinks...but if you want to go on believing it was Woodstock all over again then I guess it's your dementia so keep on smiling and believing. Look where we are after less than 300 years...are you happy? I'm sure as hell not...the last 50+ have been damned ugly for America...and 3/4ths of this nation sits around on their hands and drool all over themselves every time an eleciton comes up because they either don't know or care what they have lost or are losing...while at the same time the other 1/4th skulks around to see what they can get out of it for themselves.

And I don't wrap myself in the flag any more than you...I was taught different just like you. I do fly it 24/365 outside my door. I respect it and the men and women who keep it flying...not suckass dogs looking to leech off the system.

Brian T. Osborn said...


I never claimed that the caucus was anything at all like Woodstock, but I'm not willing to condemn the whole thing just because it wasn't. It did do some positive things ... for my party. Sorry that you Independents chose to remain outside in the cold.

I'm certainly not happy that we live in a nation that knows more about Lindsay Lohan and Brittany Spears than they do about their own representatives in Congress. I share your disgust with those that use politics for personal gain and the part-time patriots.

I'm a vocal S.O.B. that gives crap. For all my efforts I get accused of being an egomaniac, or worse. Many in my own party just want me to sit down, shut up, and let others decide everything for me. You know that that's never going to happen. As long as I'm pissed, I'm going to be complaining.

TexasAnnie said...

I, for one, am enjoying reading the comments. I'm not sure what a "suckass dog" is, and I don't know why Independents need remain "out in the cold." (Just get one of your chosen forty-nine to sponsor a law that opens up your primaries.) But I'm glad to read of your discontent or malcontent as the case may be. And your example, as I see it, is the essence of the "tea partiers."

E. V. Debs said...

Nebraska Democrats would have been happy to have held a primary early in 2008, but the Republicans who control our State Government wouldn't allow it. The only way Nebraskans were going to have any influence on the Presidential candidate selection was through the early caucus process. If you don't like Democrats holding their caucus, then try to get the Republicans who control our state to move the primary date up in the season so that voters have a choice. What was the point in voting in the Republican primary in 2008? John McCain had already won the nomination before the first vote was counted in Nebraska.

Anonymous said...

Put a chain on your poo slinging monkey.

Anonymous said...

Let's be clear, BTO does not speak for NEBR democrats, especially those of us out in the third district.
He must have been smoking something pretty potent Saturday night for his scene from the dias to be so differnt than what the rest of us saw.
Another reason to never believe a word he says.

Jam said...

so it comes to pass, the National Dem Party has been called out on their ability to support an all out race for the 2nd.

Tom you are toast.

Brian T. Osborn said...

Well, A-8:46, I guess Sweeper's readers can believe me, or they can take the word of ... hmmm, there seems to be something missing there ... oh, yeah ... your integrity backed up by your identity.

I think I'd trust anything that Glenn Beck says before I'd trust you. At least that miserable nincompoop puts his name to his lies.

Daily Nebraska said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Street Sweeper said...

This isn't the place for you to pimp your blog.

If you have a blog you'd like L.St. to link, email it to me and I will consider it -- along with all the other requests we receive.


Mike Careless said...

Kyle, Leavenworth Street already handles the whole spectrum of Nebraska politics. Stick to your NNN, otherwise you might lose both of your readers.

Bob Loblaw said...

EV Debs,
The Dem nomination was far from determined in May. Nebraska would have been way more important to Clinton & Obama without a caucus. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

I'm not busting your balls, and I don't have any clue as to the inner workings of the NDP, but do you feel like your tactics have made any real improvement in the party? I am just saying many dems had a problem with Bush's "Cowboy Diplomacy" with us or against us attitude, but that is exactly how you act. I'm not saying to compromise your beliefs, but if you were more diplomatic and built a coalition of people you may be able to enact some changes that you seek. Instead you seem to have a policy of attacking anyone in the party who doesn't agree 100% with you. I just think there may be another way.

E. V. Debs said...

Well, Bob, rant away. By May of 2008 the only one left doubting who the Democratic nominee was going to be was Bill Clinton's wife. Our late primary has eliminated any chance that Nebraska would help pick the nominee for either party for decades. Nebraska's Democratic and Republican voters would both be better served if the primary was early enogh to make a difference.

Brian T. Osborn said...

You see, Bob, when you say that I attack anyone in my party that doesn't agree 100% with me ... that's where you and a lot of other people are dead wrong. I have stated it here, and elsewhere, countless numbers of times what my goals are, and believe me I am pragmatic enough to know that Nebraskans, even Democratic ones, are never going to agree 100% with me on the issues. I'd be lucky if I got 30% of them to do so.

Let me state it once again. My goals are for the Nebraska Democratic Party to live up to the principles that the ELECTED DELEGATES to the NDP State Convention set forth in the NDP Constitution & Bylaws and the NDP Platform. What I'm always bitching about is that a FEW people within the party manage to purposely ignore and violate those rules and principles. Then, the S.O.B.s have the gall to say that anyone who disagrees with THEM is "damaging the party." I also believe that when the resources of our party (dollars and manpower) are dedicated to electing someone, then those candidates SHOULD be more cognizant of the will of the Democrats that worked to get them elected.

Do I feel my tactics have been effective? Well, they sure as hell have gotten at least SOME of my fellow Democrats off their dead asses and they're paying more attention to what is going on than they were. The way it was before, with people getting together, forming coalitions, and enjoying their freaking afternoon socials, is exactly what got us into the mess we're in already. When I became involved in the NDP I discovered a culture of apathy. I figured, maybe I'd try a different angle. It works for me.

Now, you have to be able to discern the difference of what I say concerning the NDP and what I say when speaking my own mind on issues. I have this oddball attitude that I still retain the right to voice my own opinions, even if I do hold a position within the NDP. The important thing is, I don't voice my own opinions when chairing a meeting. That's abiding by Roberts Rules. Several other NDP "leaders" ignore that part and that's when I let 'em know they're screwing up.

When I DO speak my own mind, there's always some bozo like A-8:46 that wants to shut me up. If they had the balls to confront me face to face, maybe I'd listen to 'em. But it's usually cowards hiding behind "anonymous" that do that. I don't know how many times I've told 'em, "If you don't like what I'm saying ... drown me out." If everyone was as outspoken as I am, all my ranting would be heard as but a whisper.

And, truth be known, I wish all of Nebraska's Republicans would be just as critical of their leadership as I am of mine. People always talk about the rights and freedoms that we have in this country, but they are afraid to take 'em out for a walk an get 'em some fresh air. Personally, I don't like the smell of stale freedoms.

John Smith said...

Right on, Bob. What Btox doesn't recognize is that there are Dems constantly telling him what you did, but he just acts like he does on here. He doesn't listen. His opinion is the only right one. He'll be kicked out and he'll blame everyone but himself. He doesn't accept that he can have the right to an opinon, but can't cry when the behavior has consequences. Btox could run his own blog and rant away. He doesn't do it. Probably because no one will pay attention. But he can come on here and other places and become that center of attention he is so desperate to be. But he's a joke and a laughing stock. And he he doesn't represent Nebraska Democrats.

Anonymous said...

BTO--keep posting here and keep telling the truth about the NDP!

Anonymous said...



Brian T. Osborn said...

Yeah, right "John." What is it with people like you that, rather than present a valid counter argument, would prefer to SILENCE any voices of dissent? What is it about the right of people to freely express their opinions that threatens you so? If you can't win arguments with people like me, you threaten them with expulsion. You make me laugh you sorry little excuse for a human being.

"Johnny" boy, it isn't up to you to decide what Sweeper will let me post here, that is up to Sweeper. But don't let that get in your way. Go ahead, threaten to marginalize me from here too. You'll be just as successful as you have been in your attempts to get me tossed from the NDP.

Now go back and reply to your own damned blog. Nobody else is.

Anonymous said...

1:16--agree totally! If NNN was still a legit blog, they'd be posting there and not here. They aren't...

Bob Loblaw said...


I agree with your suspicion and distrust of both parties leadership. Now when you start talking about bylaws, central planning committees and roberts rule of zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Whoops, sorry fell asleep there. Boring.

I also guess you can appreciate the tea partiers as well. These people are not just toeing the line of the GOP but are actually trying to fight for our constitutional rights and freedoms. Although you may disagree with their views, you certainly have to appreciate their lack of apathy, right.

E. V. Debs said...

Bob, there isn't any doubt that liberals like BTO and I have a lot in common with the genuine Tea Party crowd. We all agree that it's time to do something about the corporate whores who are ripping us off in Congress. Mike Johanns and Ben Nelson would both like voters to think they are "moderates." The fact is they are both corporates.

Brian T. Osborn said...


Tell me, how would you run a meeting with around a hundred participants representing an organization with a budget of over a million dollars? Would you just invite the citizenry to pick up their torches and pitchforks and turn them loose? That's basically what you would have without all that zzzzzzz boring Roberts Rules stuff.

Another alternative would be to have what the NDP and the NEGOP have had going on for years - an oligarchy run by a bunch of attorneys from Lincoln and Omaha. All you'd have to do is show up for the public portion of the meetings, drink your coffee, eat your donuts, and nod your assent to everything the guys in the back room have already decided for you. Oh ... and don't even think about saying anything that contradicts them!

I wish I could agree with you that the Tea-Party was a populist uprising. I could really get behind something like that. Unfortunately, once you scratch the surface, all you find is Rupert Murdock's interests and the GOP. Its just a bunch of villagers marching to their corporate Pied Piper.

Anonymous said...

So, Tom White has time to post on Facebook on a variety of subjects but can't answer a simple question from a month ago asking whether or not he considers himself prolife. Kinda makes you wonder, doesn't it.

Anonymous said...

So, how about those Cubs?

Anonymous said...

So dems are you still having a fight to see who your state chair is? Covalt or Kleeb?

Anonymous said...

It's a sad day on Leavenworth Street when Brian T. Osborn is news. In 2006 he got fired from the David Hahn campaign for simply being 'too crazy.' He's been a loose cannon ever since and will never work for another political campaign ever again. Nobody cares what he thinks. He needs to find a new hobby other than stirring up trouble for Democrats.

Anonymous said...

You left Osborne out. He's still running, isn't he? Ha!

Nelson is upset with Cobalt for letting Btox pick up an award at the M-E dinner for a guy from North Platte that has publicly pilloried Ben. Vic was supposed to keep this kind of thing from happening. Ben wants to replace him with someone more obedient. Miss Jane is in the Achelpohl/Rubin camp and as long as they're picking up the tab for her Bold Nebraska, and funding her frequent trips to the Beltway, she'll do their bidding.

Rubin Fan said...

Yes! They're still mentioning the Rubin name. Cause that's timely and relevant...

Brian T. Osborn said...

Doofus at 10:16,

You should talk to David about that. We're still friends and we stay in touch. Same with his running mate, Steve Loschen. Steve will be here at my house this Friday - maybe you could stop by and tell him your fib. I'm sure he'd get a chuckle out of it.

As for my run for State Chair, I've decided against it. It's kind of like the dog that chases cars ... what would I do with it if I caught it?

SAB said...

as an aside, Vic Covalt is the goofiest looking guy I have ever laid eyes on. Like Kermit the frog bred with Steve Buscemi, freaky.

Brian T. Osborn said...

Well, nearly a week has gone by and my request for the NDP to stand up for the principles it CLAIMS to support have evidently fallen on deaf ears. All I've heard from the hierarchy, so far, is more demands to STFU!

I feel like one of the last donkeys being swallowed up in a flock of sheep. What's a guy to do? There's no way I'd ever be a Republican; being an Independent or a 3rd Party member is like peeing into wind; and, I refuse to belong to the cult of Ben Nelson worshipers.

I guess I'll just go back to having a life.

Move over Solomon K., make a little room for me, won't you?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Street Sweeper said...

Sorry, this isn't the place to pimp your website, no matter how virtuous you find your cause.