Thursday, May 13, 2010

Sakalosky endorses Terry

Republican Primary challenger Matt Sakalosky has endorsed Primary winner, Congressman Lee Terry.

Directly from the Terry for Congress release:

“My campaign was based on issues that I feel very deeply about such as the ballooning federal debt and out-of-control federal spending.  The voters face a very clear choice now—a choice between a conservative, Lee Terry, and a liberal Democrat, Tom White, who supports trillions in new spending on the federal stimulus and government-run health care programs. Our nation cannot afford liberal politicians like Tom White.
 “I am enthusiastically supporting Congressman Lee Terry today.  I will vote for him in November and I will ask all of my supporters to do the same.  As a conservative, I agree with Lee Terry on about 90 percent of the issues.  I agree with Tom White on about zero percent,” Sakalosky said. 
 Terry said he was “delighted” to have Sakalosky’s support.  “I congratulate Matt on his campaign and for the level of discourse and energy he and his supporters displayed.  Matt is a solid guy who has a great future in our party.  I value his endorsement today and look forward to having his involvement with our campaign this year,” Terry said. 
The unity being displayed today on the Republican side is “Tom White’s worst nightmare,” Terry said.  The Democratic nominee is counting on the Republican party to emerge from the primary fractured and divided.  “The opposite is the case—we are unified and energized about keeping this seat and having the Second District play a key role in bringing balance back to Washington, D.C.,” Terry said.   
Official statistics show that 28,968 Republicans cast ballot in the Second district congressional race, dwarfing the 12,288 Democratic voters who did so. 


Anonymous said...

The last sentence there is what is devastating: only 12,000 Democrats turned out? It shows a lack of enthusiasm for thier ticket.

Republcans seemed energized--Democrats, not.

Macdaddy said...

That was a very magnanimous statement from Sakolosky.

Anonymous said...

Matt Sak is showing a great deal of CLASS!

Anonymous said...

Ditto on prior two posts.

Sak is a class act and he has a great future in the Republican party.

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:41--agree.

Dem turnout is way down this year all over the country compared to the last non-presidential (06) cycle.

And, the lack of Democratic enthusiasm will grow worse for them when unemployment hits 10%--as it likely will in the next month or two.

NE Voter said...

Terry bagged Sak's support?

Never saw that coming.

Chris said...

NE Voter -

Shut up. No one cares.

Jamie said...

Well, I understand why Dems had low turnout. There were basically no contested primaries. Why would they show if they knew who was gonna win their primary? I don't think low voter turnout in the primary will necessarily mean low turnout in the general.

Just trying to be the realist.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Lee can get him to build a float and have a choir singing,"Oh Lord, kumbaya."

So much unity is making me misty when only 24 hours before the primary you'd have thought any vote Terry made was not to his opponent's liking.

Who ya goin believe?

Anonymous said...

Not Tom White or Ian Russell.

Deployed NE said...


It must be so nice to know everything. The only "contested" primary race on the Republican ballot in Omaha was the Treasurer race. Well, perhaps Krist's district as well. Care to enlighten me as to what else would provide an explanation as to why Reps would show up and the Dems stayed home?

Anonymous said...

Jamie--some reality for you:

In the May 06 primary, 21,321 Democrats turned out and voted for Esch. Why did they when he didn't have any competition?

This year is was 12,000 Dems voting.

Anonymous said...

Latest Fox/Opinjon dynamics poll said 2/3rds of Repubs are "very" interested in the off-year elections, while only 50% of Dems are.

Seniors--who vote--are favoring the Repubs over the D's 50-41.

Good night, Tom.

Anonymous said...

What is even funnier is that the Dems are celebrating the 30%+ vote that Sakolosky got.

They somehow believe that those voters will come over to White or won't show up.

They are kidding themselves...first of all those voters are the RIGHT of the Republican Party, so NO GO TOMMY

and secondly...if the race is close and even though they are to thrilled for Terry...they will come out and vote for Terry just to ensure that we don't end up with White...

TexasAnnie said...

Geez, guys. Don't you have a Libertarian or some third party candidate to vote for? Too bad you only get to pick between Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum. Are you all willing to 'settle' for the 'lesser of two evils?'

Nathan said...

Maybe a write in candidacy for Matt Sak!!!

TexasAnnie said...

Okay. But...Didn't he just endorse Terry Lee?

Nathan said...

That was 100% sarcasm TexasAnnie.

Jamie said...

Deployed NE and Coward 8:08:

Since I am not a Democrat I cannot account for ALL variables, but in 2006 there were two statewide offices with multiple candidates in the Democratic Primary. In 2008, there was even more.

Since only one candidate has filed and actually campaigned for each seat being voted on in 2010, it seems like Dems would find it less necessary to go out in vote than in previous years.

But to deduce that you would need to use, like, your brain and stuff, and maybe a little research. It's OK. You can go back to eating Doritos and watching South Park.

TexasAnnie said...

No, Nathan. It was not sarcasm. You misunderstood. I'm quite serious in my suggestion about fielding ANOTHER and BETTER candidate. When I lived in Nebraska, I found the people quite congenial yet noncommital. Get mad! Fight for what is right!!!

To pertinent commenters:
I'm reading along concerning your prognostic statistical voting analysis. I am impressed. I won't bother checking your facts, so please be truthful and correct! I am impressed because while I lived in Nebraska (brought there by one of your "economic developemnt tax incentive programs" whereby I pay the taxes and you reap the benefits) I was definitely under the impression that Nebraskans vote in ignorance of their own best interests...

Jamie said...

Oh, Deployed NE, a few points:

1) You won't make any friends on Leavenworth being a, er, jerk, like you just were. I never claimed to know everything. I was merely giving my two cents on a issue as an observer who doesn't even live in the district. Not to mention you are probably ideologically aligned with me. That is, I'm a huge Lee Terry supporter and life-long Republican. So pick your battles.

2) The only contested race was the Treasurer's race for Republicans? Treasurer, Governor, and Public Service Commissioner districts had several candidates filed... not to mention what this entire post was about... The primary for NE2. Research your stuff and try again to build your reputation here.

3) I'm never wrong, so don't ef with me.

Nathan said...

I know you were serious Annie, but I was 100% sarcastic.

Macdaddy said...

Texas Annie: a vote for a third party candidate means democrats stay in control. Ralph Nader in 2000 was the exception that proves the rule.

TexasAnnie said...

As distasteful as that outcome appears to be suggested by you Macdaddy, Democratic control is little different and no worse than Republican control. Right?

Anonymous said...

Uh, except stimulus 1, 2, and 3. Cap and Tax, Healthcare, Abortion, not extending tax cuts, outright raising taxes and more social programs.

But other than that, Annie, you are right, they are the same-they all breath air.

Anonymous said...

Compare apples to apples...

Look at the last non-pres. cycle (06). The Dems had no primary contests of note(Nelson for Sen.; Hahn for Gov, Esch in NE2--all unopposed).

Yet, 21,000 Dems came out and voted in the primary in NE2.

This week, only 12,000 Dems voted.

Looks like a lack of enthusiasm--which is happening to D's all over the country.

Macdaddy said...

Anon 7:03: and you left out Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Eric Holder, rank hypocrisy on the war against terror, opaque government, inept (or inane) foreign policy decisions that leave us weaker, throwing Israel to the wolves, gay marriage, refusal to uphold immigration laws, and just mind-blowing budget deficits without a care in the world.

I'd have to say they are worse, much worse, than Republicans.

Brian T. Osborn said...


Are you trying to become the new Glenn Beck?

LOOK OUT!! Hitler's under your bed!!!!!!

E. V. Debs said...

Have you ever considered a reality check macdaddy? Federal taxes are lower now than they have been since Harry Truman & the Dems. were running the government. An example of rank hypocrisy on the war against terror would be Bush's war in Iraq, where there were NO terrorists (or WMD's). The best example of opaque government would be Dick Cheney's secret energy policie talks that lead to Enron's rape of the electric utility markets on the west coast before their house of cards fell. Inept (or inane) foreign policy decisions that leave us weaker seemed to be George W. Bush's foreign policy plan, making the entire world despise the United States and endangering Israel. The U. S. Chamber of Commerece has supported skirting immigration laws and every administration all the way back to Ronald Reagan has granted them lax enforcement. And just mind-blowing budget deficits without a care in the world have been worse under Republicans than Democrats. Ronald Reagan trippled it from 1 to 3 trillion, Daddy Bush ran it up higher, Bill Clinton tried to decrease it and left office with budget surplusses, and Shrub Bush ran it through the roof while keeping his trillions in war spending off the books.

Solomon Kleinsmith said...

The big meme right now does seem to be not whether Republicans will gain some seats, but rather whether they'll take back the House or not. They've got the momentum for sure.

Anonymous said...

Let BTO settle the argument!

BTO--why do you think only 12,000 Dems came out to vote in NE2 this week?

Lib posters say it was because there weren't any contested races.

In 2006, there also weren't any contested Dem races in NE2--but 21,000 Dems still voted.

Why the slide?

Solomon Kleinsmith said...

@ E. V. Debs - Quick correction... they did find WMD, just not noo-kyoo-ler.

And Obama is, without a doubt, following Bush's example (and the example his campaign set) of being quite opaque in many ways.

And the only reason there was a surplus during the Clinton years is because of divided government. As every single modern example where one party has been in total power shows, when either Dems or Reps is in total control, they get drunk with power and overspend. Its happening now.

If Dems lose a majority in the House, it'll be all on them for going too far and not paying attention to the polls showing people not happy with how far they're going to the left, and how much they're spending.

Jamie said...

Problem with your argument- Hahn did not run unopposed. He ran against Glenn R. Boot, Jr. who received about 10% of the vote. Furthermore, the Dems tried to seize another statewide office, the SOS, and as such had two candidates for that office two.

I'm simply saying this is part of the reason. Perhaps the Dems are unenergized about the primary election. I don't really see what the primary matters.

For example, while only about 21K voted for Esch in the 06 primary, 82K voted for him in the general. That's about a 390% increase. About 53K voted for Terry in the primary, but 99K voted for him in the general. That's only about a 180% increase. (Not to mention the votes lost to Laird in the primary easily turned over to Terry, as they were not ideologically-motivated as some of the Sak voters who have pledged not to vote for Terry in the General)

Now, if the number of voters for Terry increases as it did in the 06 cycles, Terry ends up with around 34K votes in the General. If the Dems can bring about the same turnout in the General they did in 06, White ends up with just shy of 48K. Just some food for thought.

Anonymous said...

all of this discourse on why or why not D's showed up is taking the discussion way off track.

Sak did the honorable thing in endorsing Terry. Terry will include Sak in the process and the two will work to sway the Sak supporters ,(no pun intended) to vote for Terry in Nov.

White will lose.

Jamie said...

I should remind you I'm a Republican but you guys are simply pissing me off. Why don't you idiots look at your own numbers?

The Dems lost 8464 voters in 2010 in relation to 2006. In that same amount of time, according to the NESOS's website, the GOP has lost 34,302 voters.

Explain, and explain why White is boned in November, because I don't understand it.

Anonymous said...

Jamie, as to the reason why the Repubs lost 34K voters since '06 (in NE) while the Dems lost only 8K (+/-), could it be that ...

How many people died in NE since '06? Or retired to Florida?

Good chance those peeps were Repubs, I'm guessing.

Are you saying only that the Repubs went down in number or are you saying those voters switched?
If it's just that they went down in number, politics might not have much to do with it.

Deployed NE said...


You are neglecting many factors. From '06 to '10, there was a lot of flucuation. I wouldn't say the GOP "lost" 34k+. Given the mood of the electorate during this time period, I would say it is more likely R's re-registered as I's (or U's as reffered to officially), yet still voted R in most cases. Keep in mind Suzy Buffett and the Obama campaign spent MILLIONS of dollars on voter registration in '08. That certainly played into the numbers.

Lastly, in response to your attack, I've worked races well before '06 and am well versed in the political arena. In '06 you were what, 15?

Brian T. Osborn said...

A-10:26 - I'll break my rule of not replying to anonymi this time ... please at least TRY to use the Name/URL button so that we can tell you guys apart!

Democrats didn't turn out this time because they had no incentive to do so. The NDP has basically become the Sen. Ben Nelson party and there are a LOT of us Democrats that are sick and tired of that being the case. When we've only got one, or no, candidates on the ballot ... what's the point of showing up? We were more interested in whether Crystal Bowersox would be in the Top 3 on American Idol.

Personally, I'm having a serious moment of doubting faith. Not that I would EVER become a Republican, but I am questioning what the point of being a Democrat in Nebraska is. I'll give you some examples of what is bothering me:

• My latest LS rant on CENSORSHIP of the NDP blog said enough about that

• The recent decision by the NDP SCC to CENSOR the comments of party leaders on its own listerv

• The decision to CENSOR the recipients of the awards at the Morrison-Exon dinner this weekend. Fearing that some of the recipients might be critical of Sen. Nelson, the decision to prohibit them from speaking evidently was made. I questioned this on the listserv more than 24 hours ago and it has yet to be contested. For me, that is evidence that it is so.

• Following a nearly UNANIMOUS decision by the NDP SCC to support a public option on the health care bill, Sen. Nelson basically told us to go screw ourselves. Yet we are expected to kiss his ring.

• Sen. Nelson voted AGAINST financial reform, something a majority of Democrats support.

• Sen. Nelson has voted time and again against women's rights and he has voted against issues that support unions - two of the cornerstones of Democratic support.

Maybe once the Nebraska Democratic Party starts to listen to its own members, rather than fearing the wrath of Sen. Nelson, I might be more secure in my faith.

Anonymous said...

Jamie--here's the turnout in Douglas County in the 06 General:

Repub: 72,000

Dem: 58,000

Ind: 21,000

Bet it is very simiar to that this Nov.

Anonymous said...

Jamie--keep in mind also that NE2 still has a plurality of Repubs over Dems.

R 40%
Dem 39%
I 21%

btw--Terry split the I voters w/Esch last year. (Few Repubs in Obama-won districts did that.) I bet Terry wins them outright this year.

Anonymous said...

BTO = Democratic Tea Bagger

Find yourself a Sakalosky, you schmuck.

Anonymous said...

10:51--agree totally.

Sakalosky's quick move also has had the effect of silencing the Dem chatter about "disunity" in the GOP. There isn't any.

Sak could have held back on this--but stepping up and endorsing Terry this quick after the primary speaks well of his placing the country's interest above his own.

Good job, Sak!

Anonymous said...

Jamie--switch to decaf, guy!

You really lose cred if you are going to claim the 06 Dem primary races were truly 'contested'. They weren't and everyone knows it.

Face it, the ###s are stark.

9,000 fewer Dems voted this May as compared to 06. Why? There are probably a number of reasons, with many being discussed here in the thread.

Another reason why LS blows NNN out of the water. You don't get this kind of back and forth over there since no one posts at NNN. It is a real loser site.

Anonymous said...

I think Dem votere were motivated in 06--they wanted to show anger at Bush et al.

But now their party is in charge--and they are seeing the major problems (unemployment) just getting worse on their watch and under their policies.

They were venting and motivated in 06--but don't appear to be so this year.

Anonymous said...

Sakalosky made a ton of points yesterday with people all over the state. Good job, Sak!

Good line: "I agree with Lee on 90% of the issues. I agree with Tom White on zero percent." lol!

Anonymous said...

No interest in Vile?

Since primary day, NNN has put up three threads. All of 8 people have commented. Wow.

I feel bad for Kyle. He must have spent hours drafting a hit piece on Stenberg--yet, not a single comment was posted to it.

Brian T. Osborn said...


Coming from a coward like you, I will take that as a compliment. Thank you. Now go back to kissing Sen. Nelson's ring.

Oh, by the way, the proper phrase to recite while doing so is, "O'Vossia, bacciamo le mani."

Anonymous said...

241 to 8

# of comments on LS since Primary Day: 241

# of comments on NNN since primary day: 8

(Of note, big drop in NNN comments from the comparable primary week in 08.)

Anonymous said...


Maybe the war is one reason for the drop in Dem voting...

TPM notes Obama promised in the 08campaign to end the war in 16 months.

That would be this month.

Anonymous said...

Another good line from the release:

"Tom White's worst nightmare...". lol!

Anonymous said...

Smart and good move by Sakalosky!

TexasAnnie said...

Anonymous 7:03 and Macdaddy:
Whether Democrats are in power or Republicans are in power we always sustain national debt, deficit spending, illegal immigration, tax injustice and inept/inane foreign policies. Every election cycle we get lip service about these issues but they are never really addressed. E.V.Debs and Solomon Kleinsmith above express thoughts on these issues well enough and I stand in agreement with what they have written.

Cap and trade is not new. It is a stupid policy in my opinion and it's proposed expansion is egregious. If pollution is wrong, and I believe it is, then tax and fine the polluter. But don't lay this stupid policy solely on Obama. Remember the Bush and Clinton administrations?

Healthcare, educational and social programming have likewise been expanded under administrations previous to Obama. If you have any suggestions about how we simply stop ALL current social spending, I'm all ears. How do we get folks OFF Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Pell Grants, etc? Obviously folks who are paying for such programming to the benefit of others today, rightly seek such entitlements for themselves tomorrow. It's all or none with me. Either we provide for everyone or no one! That's fair. Too often I encounter REPUBLICANS who want THEIR social spending but deny responsibility in support of their neighbor. I note that I rarely encounter Democrats with such attitudes while conceding they usually WANT MORE social spending than we are able to sustain. Again, on these issues, it's ALL or NONE with me!

Abortion, rights of life and death, gay unions, and just about every conscionable thought or deed you may conjure in support and/or opposition of REPUBLICANS and/or DEMOCRATS are mere 'straw men' with no ligitimate place in national politics. But such issues do deliver votes, don't they! And herein lies my most critical objection to both major political parties: they ignore what they should be addressing and obsess about non-issues.

Now at the local level, okay, I can agree that states' are obliged to establish standard rules of conduct. But in my opinion they should do so advisedly. For example, the two new abortion laws your unicameral just passed, likely to be struck down, are perfect examples of "rank hypocrisy" as contrasted to the guilt ALL NEBRASKANS SHARE concerning the institutional killings surrounding the Beatrice State Developmental Center last year. Unless of course you believe fetuses are more important than developmentally disabled adults, I am left only to wonder why you don't even list this issue in criticism of your local Democrats and Republicans alike. And where's Julie on this issue?

I have no explanation about the fluctuating D and R voter turnout there and I am actually depending on the comments above for understanding. I will say this: I was a Republican when I was delivered up to Nebraska's economic development policies.

Thus I took up the Libertarian philosophy in earnest (but in view of Bob Barr, can't recommend the Libertarians now). Home in Texas, I'm now Independent all the way. We do have open primaries and usually, politicians not quite so destructive of individual pursuit in deference to corporate pandering, as in Nebraska. Don't you ever get tired of paying taxes in support of Nebraska corporations? How's all that money you spent building up an ethanol industry working out? The public cost was substantial. And wind turbines are coming, which is fine, but soon they will be at taxpayer expense, too, I suspect... Enjoying the conversation, I wish you a good day!

Julie Schmit-Albin said...

Hello TexasAnnie, I won't use your real name since it appears you like this moniker. I can really only vouch for LB 1103 as the main lobbyist on it. The Neb Catholic Conference worked LB 594. I think LB 1103 has a good chance of surprising all its naysayers re: constitutionality. It is an innovative approach that seeks to create another standard for Nebraska; that of documented fetal pain. Just as the Roe Court had no way of knowing that a new way of killing unborn babies would be launched in the early 90's (partial birth abortion); the Roe Court had not the extent of knowledge of fetal pain that is present today through in-utero surgery and 4-D ultrasound. Are the deaths of the vulnerable and innocent at Beatrice a travesty? Of course they are. But to expect Nebraska Right to Life to take up every battle where human suffering occurs is to expect something that cannot be delivered. I would invoke our adherence to single issue principles here but you've heard it before whenever you would talk about the services not provided to your disabled daughter and ask why NRL was not involved in your quest for justice for the disabled. There are supposed to be disability advocacy groups but I confess that due to my single issue tunnel vision I don't reach out to network with them. During the institutional killing of Terri Schiavo the disability rights groups came alongside the pro-life groups in advocating that Terri be released to the care of her family. That was a case of active euthanasia which is under our single issue purview.

TexasAnnie said...

Julie I am honored by your response! Truly. I hope you are wrong about the constitutionality of LB1103 and that it will be struck down sooner than later. But if you are right, I'll be first in line to congratulate your tireless effort in pursuing this matter of conscience.

As to BSDC, I most definitely EXPECT your organization to take up that banner (as I did when I lived there). You and I both know that if you won't, no organization and no one in Nebraska will, as evidenced by the decade after decade and Republican after Republican after Democrat after Republican gubernatorial administrations I witnessed while living there... Somehow Nebraskans never get around to providing for the TURLY MOST VULNERABLE: those taken into the custody of the state!

I do need to correct one statement you made. When I talked and wrote about services not being delivered to the disabled I never invoked my own daughter. Julie you know me well enough to know that my daugher got everything, and I do mean EVERYTHING she was ever entitled to in the public school, at the doctor's office, from the insurance carrier, and most importantly, from her family! She still does. And we're using that annual ten thousand or so which we had to surrender to Nebraskans in the form of income tax, plus more, to her happy benefit here. It feels so good to be able to support her rather than the State of Nebraska. (For being such a conservative, Republican state, you sure do have a lot of taxes there! Hypocrisy?)

But I did speak incessantly for the wards of the state while living there. I freely admit my failure in doing anything to alleviate the social neglect they suffer. I wish I had had your strength and wisdom. I wish I had been as successful for them as you have been in the protection of fetuses (whom I still believe have no right of birth unless granted by the mother). Alternatively, I wish the developmentally disabled simply have a right to die. Can't you understand that when the state takes such persons into custody and then neglects them unto death, the effect is "social sadism?"

But we digress farther than readers of Leavenworth Street likely care to consider. Let me say this in closing: $10 million of the appropriation to "fix" the BSDC situation has been retracted (during the November special session). When Nebraskans begin wailing about budget cuts coming,
---due to outspent stimulas funding (which I note Nebraskans take, while complaining about the Obama administration for giving???), will the developmentally disabled again be the last cared for?

Shoe Salesman said...

Hey TA
did you know that the EPA set up a cap and trade program as part of the clean air act enacted in the 1970's? This system, in place for more than 30 years, has fostered innovation in the manufacturing industry, essentially eliminated "acid rain" and restored our air quality. If the power manufacturers can comply and in fact thrive under that system why cant they do the same under a new carbon based cap and trade?

All the right wingers are on message but defy reality, history and fact in order to misrepresent the cap and trade concept.

Anyone realize that most of the private utility companies and half the oil companies support this policy? People like Lee Terry, in the pocket of big oil and other polluters rant about taxes and killing jobs.
Rality is that federal taxes today are at their lowest point since 1950. The bitching and complaining is manufactured by insincere leaders like Terry who spout mindless talking points. Hence his war on Millard schools.

Anonymous said...

Robyn Terry is now entering into the practice of banning books??? I am outraged! I am a parent with kids in the Millard school district. It is NOT her job to decide what my children are taught. Since when did Robyn Terry get a degree in education? Or environmental science? Or any degree which makes her qualified to decide for THE REST OF US what our children should learn? If she doesn't like the curriculum, she has many options for HER OWN child. Homeschool him, ask the teacher to give him another lesson, teach him her own values or facts at home, but she does NOT have the RIGHT to ban anything for my child. This is outrageous!

Anonymous said...

And comments about Robyn Terry should not be automatically deleted from this blog anymore. She put HERSELF in the news this time.

Anonymous said...

That is, unless Robyn Terry is FOR banning comments on here too.

Anonymous said...


Charlie Cook's latest political report (5/15) focused on the recent primaries. Here's what he said:

"A vote cast in a GOP primary against a GOP incumbent is not a general election vote for a Democrat."

Anonymous said...

Cooked pt 2

He went on to predict that EVERY Republican incumbent wins in the country except for Cao, who represents heavy Dem. New Orleans.

Street Sweeper said...

I'll speak up here for a moment:

If you can read (which seems part of the gist here), you'll note that Robyn Terry suggested that the book in question be placed in the library for checkout, instead of on the curriculum. This way kids would not be forced to read what many consider to be a piece of political correctness gone to print.

As a parent she is absolutely right to question what is being force fed to her kids. I would hope every other parent would do the same. However, it won't be her decision in the end what is actually taught.

Oh, and 10:11, I, and I alone, decide what gets deleted and what does not. I may delete your comments if I don't like the cut of your jib. (So you better watch your jib.) Though I think I have pretty clearly stated what goes and what doesn't.

Thanks for reading.

Anonymous said...

Charlie Cook's latest political report (5/15) focused on the recent primaries. Here's what he said:

"A vote cast in a GOP primary against a GOP incumbent is not a general election vote for a Democrat."

11:58 AM, May 15, 2010

I will go one step further, it is probably not a vote for the Democrat. Possibly, a vote that will stay home and disenfranchised Republican/Teabagger.

Anonymous said...

So, Robyn only wants one point of view taught. She doesn't want opposing views to her own being taught to anyone.

If she so objected, did she go to curriculum night? Is she a member of the PTO?

She could have stopped at the request of only having her precious son not read the book. But NO - she had to go further and and asked for it to be banned!

Do we know if the opposing view was taught to the students? Do we know the teachers side?

Do you want to see Catcher in the Rye not taught? To Kill a Mockingbird? Tom Sawyer? Evolution? Intelligent Design?

Another Skeptic said...

In defense of Robyn Terry: She's not talking about banning books-- that'a a lie. She's saying, as I understand it, that the jury is still out on man-made global warming and whether and how we should respond, and the book her kids are forced to read at school is one-sided at best, and she doesn't want her kids force-fed enviro-extremism. As to her lack of a degree in education or environmental science, I believe that puts her on a par with the author of the book in question-- Laurie David, former talent booker for David Letterman, and current 'activist". I'd probably trust Robyn first.

Anonymous said...

Texas Annie: I'm glad to hear your daughter is thriving in Texas. It's not the same without you at legislative hearings (that goes for Ernie too :)

Julie Schmit-Albin said...

Texas Annie: Anon 3:20 was me; it posted before I added my name.

Anonymous said...

She said she e-mailed school officials, who cooperated with her request that her son be allowed to read an alternative book. After reviewing the video, she asked for its removal, she said.

Also, how do we know what the hell was taught?? Do we know the teacher who used this material? Do we know how they presented the material? Do we know if they used other reading materials to show the other point of view?

Anonymous said...

Last time I heard of Robynn Terry was when she ran for school board and came in fourth in a field of four with three advancing to the win column. Thought that was Elkhorn. Now she's cleaning up Millard for all those impressionable minds who need to have them controlled to the right way of thinkin and stinkin.

Anonymous said...

Glad to join the discussion. I do have a degree in Education with an endorsement in ECE, I got it before I had children and even posted on my facebook that I should have gotten a degree in psychology because it would be more helpful in raising our children..

It is obvious that you don't have to be a scientist to have an opinion, based on a variety of sources, on global warming. Al Gore is not a scientist, Laurie David is not a scientist, Leonardo DiCaprio is not a scientist and I would be surprised if any of the folks posting here today are scientists either. If they all get to have opinions on gw, then so do I-especially when one person's opinion is being presented to my children as fact.

There was no other side of the story taught and it was made clear to me that there would be no other side of the story taught. There will be no unteaching of what the 12 year olds learned in those classes for the last READING unit of the school year-yes, I said reading unit. I can see many places where a book like this belongs-the library or in a display during an Earth Day Unit in social studies or environmental science. It is bright and colorful and has very sad pictures of dogs that look like they are dying because of heat exhaustion. I am sure that a number of kids would choose this book to look at and use if they were writing a report on global warming. I do not believe a single scientist would ever reference this book other than anecdotally in reference to how misinformation can screw up scientific positions.

If it's science, then prove it(not anecdotally, which includes just supplying trends). Until it is proven, no book on the subject should be labeled non fiction and be required reading for a classroom reading unit.

As for the video, view it and then tell me what it has to do with a unit on reading text features and when it even shows the book during the video.

BTW, I am sure that DiCaprio is thrilled with the hits his little website is getting because of this. He should send me a thank you letter.


Anonymous said...

Anon 3;35
The school board election loser you are thinking of is Mark "Bernie Maddoff" Lakers. Dead friggin last.

Anonymous said...

2:57--we'll obviously have to see in Nov.

That's why Sak's early and unequivocal endorsement of Terry is so important. He's on board and so are his top people. We've seen in other states where anger etc. lingers from a primary. That's not happening in NE2.

Truly, Tom White's worst nightmare.

Although he probably is now even more worried about the lack of enthusiasm being displayed by members of his party.

There is no explaining away the huge drop in Dem turnout in the primary compared to 2006. Dems were energized then and wanted to send a message to Bush. Now they seem deflated, with the continuation of the Iraq War (that Obama promised to end by May 2010) and the economy (with the stimulus program failing to keep unemployment at 8% as the Dems promised).

Anonymous said...

Robyn Terry is dead spot on.

If you want to take a position on this and take it to the voters in CD2, I'll bank on RT's position every day, all day long.

Ricky said...

This just in from Leavenworth Street; tomorrow the sun will come up in the East.

Albert said...

I am a scientist. I earn my living by working with known facts. The propaganda broadcast on Fox News, and assimilated by far too many Americans, has poisoned the minds of too many otherwise good citizens.

Mrs. Terry will probably be refuting the science behind flight and encouraging our schools to quit teaching about the Wright Bros. After all, if God had meant us to fly, He would have given us wings.

Anonymous said...

Nope it was Elkhorn. Dead last and out in four

Anonymous said...

Wrong again, but she got 21% of the vote after living in the District for less than a year.

This is an easy one and you are showing your ignorance or laziness.

Anonymous said...

Actually it was Valley --
Vote for up to 3
Thomas E. Grimm . . . . . . . . 972 28.94
Mark Feldhacker . . . . . . . . 850 25.31
Beth Ginger. . . . . . . . . . 810 24.11
Robyn Terry. . . . . . . . . . 712 21.20
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 15 .45
Total . . . . . . . . . 3,359

Anonymous said...

I agree with Sweeper 90.1436% of the time.

Chairman Mark Fahleson said...

I've enjoyed the debate, but Robyn Terry is not on the ballot this November. Tom White is. And what we know about Tom White is:

-- He would have voted in favor of the HOUSE VERSION (i.e., public option) and Ben Nelson's version (i.e., Cornhusker Kickback) of the health care legislation;

-- He supports cap-and-trade legislation and the increased taxes that go with it;

-- He supports Union "card check" and eliminating secret ballot votes for Union elections; and

-- He has accepted money from and will vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House.

See you in November.

Papio Dem said...

For those wondering about the low democratic turnout: there was hardly anything for us to vote on. (Click my username if you want to see our sample ballot.)

In Papillion, everybody on the city council is running unopposed.

Our current mayor is doing a fantastic job and stomped everybody else with 88% of the vote. There were seven school board candidates on the ballot, six of which move on to the general election.

The three hotly-contested races in Sarpy County (Surveyor, Assessor and County Commissioner) were all Republican vs. Republican.

Other than the race for LD14, Democrats really had no reason to come out -- and they did. Teresa Whitehead (D) came in second to Jim Smith (R) by a margin of 12 votes. You can bet that'll be invigorating to both sides in the primary.

macdaddy said...

Albert, did you major in non-sequitors in college? It certainly wasn't logic or current events. And it certainly wasn't science if you think that global warming has been proven.

Anonymous said...


Did you major in spelling, punctuation and grammar in junior high school?

The answer is - obviously not. Go back to getting your information from Glenn Beck. Maybe he will share some of his "toot" with you.

Anonymous said...

You may not realize it because fiscally conservative and socially conservative seem to be the norm in NE-2, but environmental issues are very big in Omaha, and if you think Robyn Terry's position is the majority in NE-2 you'd be dead wrong. There's a reason even Lee Terry was talking about alternative energy.

Anonymous said...

An there is a big difference between efforts toward being a conservative user of our energy resources and joining the Church of Al Gore.

Resources are not infinite. Money can eventually be spent, oil fields eventually dry up, the depths of coal reserves will eventually make them impossible to mine.

I do not have to teach every child that they and their ancestors are evil bastards trying to destroy the earth in order to teach them to turn off a light and put a sweater of sweatshirt on when they are chilly.

From what I have read, Congressman Terry has taken a common sense approach to using more of our own country's resources to supply our energy needs. His fuel standards bill was an great example of compromise in the face of extremism. Too bad John Dingle support of Terry's bipartisan bill cost him his Chairmanship to extreme liberal Henry Waxman.

I read in the OWH yesterday that either a Department head or by Executive Order, those fuel standards have been increased to an unattainable level. The only way to reach the numbers they want is by eliminating vehicles from the fleet

Bye, bye large pickup trucks used by farmers and ranchers and bye, bye suburbans used by large families.

Maybe they won't have to eliminate them, maybe Henry Waxman and the rest of the Church of Global Warming could just charge a carbon tax for over use of resources. I wonder how many kids they'll let you have until they say you are using too much of our country's resources-hmm, maybe that's not actually a bad idea-FOR A SCIENCE FICTION NOVEL!

Danielle J. said...

I want to thank Robyn Terry and the other parents in the Millard School District who raised concerns about the book. As was stated, the author of this book is not a scientist. There were no other opposing points of view presented. This book belongs in the library, or as Robyn stated, in an Earth Day display/educational unit.

Although my daughter is not yet old neough for school, someday she will be and I plan on paying close attention to curriculum and reading material selection. More parents should follow th lead of Robyn and other parents and look at what their children are being taught.

Anonymous said...

Papio Dem--did you vote last
Tuesday or were you part of the other 9,000 Democrats who voted in the 06 primary but stayed home this time?

Again, there weren't any contested races in May 2006--but 21,000 Democrats voted in the NE2 primary.

This year, only 12,000 Dems did so. I think that massive drop reflects a lack of excitement and intensity by the D party this cycle. You had that excitement in 06, but not any longer it appears.

Anonymous said...

She may not be on a ballot,but she knows how to get the "Lee Terry" name out there for the media.

Call me lazy and ignorant, but 21% is not a win.

Macdaddy said...

Anon 12:37: apparently you're still in junior high school if you thought I had misspelled any words or used bad grammar. But, whatever, dude.

The Grammar Nazi said...

macdaddy said...
"Albert, did you major in non-sequitors in college? It certainly wasn't logic or current events. And it certainly wasn't science if you think that global warming has been proven."

-10 points for spelling "non sequiturs" incorrectly.
-10 points for hyphenating "non sequiturs."
-5 points for skipping the comma after "And" in the third sentence.
-3 points for starting the third sentence with a conjunction. While permissible, it is still considered by most editors to be poor form.
While I won't take points off for the last sentence, it is a rather confusing phrase. I would suggest, "The theory of global warming has not been proven by scientific research."

Your overall grade for this post is a C-.

Anonymous said...

Ummmmmm, let's think about this --- THERE IS A CURRICULUM NIGHT in ALL Millard Schools and I for one have attended and know throughout the school year what is being taught to my children. I constantly talk to my child's teacher at her school and I belong to the PTO. Also, if you want to work on the next Strategic Plan, then you should volunteer and place your input into how you want the School District funds spent and what our children learn.

Chairman Fahleson - Duh, Robyn may not be on the ballot, but she put her nose and herself in the news. So, she has every right to be blogged about whether you like the issue or not.

More parents should be involved in their child's education from the start of the year rather than a convenient point of the year and especially to make a political point.

Anonymous said...

Sak is just like the rest, he should his real colors.. On election night.. And lied to his supporters, most sak supporter can’t stand Terry, Terry goes against everything Matt stood for but Matt fell in line rather quickly.. SAD he is his weak and spineless they gave hype about a future in the party it a lie… we see who he really is now..

Anonymous said...

Friday paper work started for a guy named Jerry Odom to run as a Nonpartisan candidate he is a Constitutionalist.. We will have real choice.. Regardless of the media spin about it, all the usual crap they will say.. we should be sick of that nonsense by now..
off a post in the meetup group..
TIRED of being lied to! Tired of not having a real choice in who represents you and your values in Congress. It’s time to send a forceful and potent message to the Democrats and Republicans alike “We The People” will no longer be ignored. We will no longer tolerate dishonesty and disdain from weak and sniveling politicians whose first loyalty is to their greedy and corrupt parties. Come and support a man of the people whose first and only loyalty is to serve American’s First.

Join us at