Wednesday, December 01, 2010

The “other” Nelson

We felt it necessary to bust out a quick post regarding the OWH’s latest anti-Recall column, prior to this morning's hearing on the issue.

This time instead of the OWH publisher writing an Op-Ed, or a reporter expressing their opinion, they actually got one of their columnists to write an anti-Recall piece.

So Robert Nelson summarized some undercover videos that the Anti-Recallers showed him of the Recallers collecting signatures.

(And hey Forward Omahaers.  How about posting those on YouTube for the rest of us to analyze?  This is all supposed to be public right?  What gives?)

Here are a few points Nelson makes (you have to buy the actual paper in order to read the whole thing):

The collectors said:
  • The Mayor put a 15% tax on restaurants.
  • The estimates about the cost of the elections are wrong.
  • Federal money would pay for the election.
  • Something something about how we may get paid.
OK folks, we don’t imagine that Noelle and Forward Omahaish held anything back from Nelson. Those had to be the money quotes.

And that’s it?

Here’s the deal: If you went to sign a petition, some dude holding a piece of paper ain’t the person with all the facts. Would you expect someone going door to door for a candidate to have all the facts on that candidate?  How about someone waving a sign outside the polls?  Hey, how about the candidate saying something that was untrue in their own ad?  If they were wrong or even lied, would that make the election illegitimate?

Of course not.  (But is there a method in the books on how to throw that person out?  Hmm.)

That’s why they have the statements from both sides there to read. (And the “it must be read” is an idiotic law, but we’ll let the Judge deal with that.)

And then the “breaking the law” part that Nelson alleges (oooh! here’s the state statute!), is anecdotal at best. “We’ve got to get, like, 10 signatures an hour.” OK, was that a goal? A requirement? A cutoff?

Judge Bataillon can get to the bottom of that super-interesting question. But if that’s the best the Anti’s have on that issue? Next.

So you really want the money quote from all of this?

See Election Commissioner Dave Phipps:
"We haven't seen anything that has been outrageously fraudulent or anything like that."
Keep counting kids.

**UPDATE**

As we suspected, this issue isn't yet ripe.

Judge Pete Bataillon told them to keep counting and, if the Election Commish says they have enough signatures, then he will decide if the Anti's argument has merit.

So he essentially gave the Anti's an additional two weeks -- December 20th -- to gather their arguments.

One thing that we will wait to see:  If they say they have the sigs on Friday, will the Pro and Anti forces begin their campaign for a potential January 25th election?  Otherwise it is an even shorter window.

We have a feeling it will be all systems go (if'n they get the sigs) after Friday.

**UPDATE UPDATE**

Well Joe Jordan swung that controversial video from the Forward Omaha folks, and oh my!

Let's just say that in comparison, the Zapruder film practically showed the mugshots and drivers licenses of the guys on the Grassy Knoll.

Take a look, for all of the twenty-six seconds of undercover camera glory:



My garsh, how could Judge Bataillon NOT throw out the Recall with that stellar piece of evidence.

Keep counting...

**UPDATEUPDATEUPDATE**

And here is the rest of the Anti's "case".



Note that "case" is in quotes.  If you were describing it to someone you would put your fingers up and use little "air quotes" to symbolize how ridiculous their "case" is.

Might there not be enough signatures?  Maybe.  (Mightly?)

But this recall ain't going to get thrown out based on those four videos.

We're convinced this was always a stall tactic to get additional time to knock out signatures, and nothing more.

Forward Omaha should have to pay the court costs for this heap.

68 comments:

NE Voter said...

Regarding the recall committee's lawbreaking, Robert Nelson nails it in his column today.

Money quote: "I called Jeremy Aspen, co-chairman of the Suttle recall effort, but he didn't return my calls by my deadline."

LOL. Jeremy Aspen has spent the last three months on KFAB, and in constant contact with OW-H and local television reporters, but now, when the lawbreaking and sleazy tactics are finally being exposed, this "spokesman" suddenly won't speak.

Jeremy, I hope you registered with Selective Service.

LOL.

Regarding Phipps' comment ("outrageously fraudulent"), that is the second time Phipps has articulated an incorrect legal standard (he previously said something about accepting all signatures unless he had "absolute proof" that something was amiss).

"Absolute proof" Really? We send convict to death row based on a reasonable doubt standard that is a lesser standard than Phipps seems to apply.

Can't wait to see if they can get Paul Jacob under oath. Not that the oath would mean much to a guy like that.

SS, sorry about the partial repost -- Had to bump my comment to your new story.

Street Sweeper said...

NE Voter,
No problem with the repost.

But why would Aspen talk with Nelson now? If I was their lawyer, I'd tell Aspen to keep his mouth shut and save all comments for the Judge. Arguing with Nelson at this point doesn't help their court case.

They either get the sigs, or they don't, and based on that go forward with the next step. Aspen's "non-availability" is no more proof than the junk Nelson offered in his column.

And thanks for reading!
SS

Anonymous said...

Buh Bye Suttle.

Look at it this way, you get to spend more time with the family starting this spring.

The Count said...

24,456 ah ah ah, 24,457 ah ah ah ah, 24,458 ah ah ah ah

Gerard Harbison said...

Nebraskans United tried this approach in court. It didn't wash. Showing a few isolated videos of petition collectors not obeying the letter of the law does not invalidate all the petitions, especially if (as I expect) they were video recording a large number of collectors for a long time, and cherry-picked a few incidents.

Nelson's column is behind a pay-wall, and I'm not paying.

Anonymous said...

And NE voter, I'll repost my response to you:

I hope Jeremy not only registered for selective service but also paid his garbage bill on time and doesn't have any library fines or parking tickets because, if he does, the Suttle camp, in keeping with the typical Dem playbook, will dig it up and publicize it and try to make that the issue rather than what a tool Suttle has been as mayor.

Anonymous said...

NE Voter says an oath wouldn't mean much to a guy like Paul Jacob.

Why? Because he refused to register for Selective Service 25 years ago? Good grief, ancient history, give it a rest.

Oaths don't seem to mean much to your boy Suttle and I base that on his conduct within the last 2 years as Mayor.

Everything your side is spitting out on this recall is a dodge. Just misdirection, trying to divert attention away from the real issue - which you obviously can't defend since you don't even try - and that is what a lousy mayor this guy has been since the word go.

Gerard Harbison said...

Paul Jacob did 5 1/2 months in jail rather than compromise his principles.

Surely even an unabashed partisan would admit that he's more rather than less likely to take an oath seriously?

NE Voter said...

No, Paul Jacobs served 5.5 months in federal prison for committing a FELONY against the citizens of the United States.

Anonymous said...

Assuming the OWH's analysis is correct (yes, I know you shouldn't assume things), does the fact that the majority of valid signatures came from those who did not vote in the 2009 mayoral race bother anyone?

I realize people have the right to sign the petition regardless, but this really irks me. We had the chance to vote and most people didn't take the time to do so. As the saying goes, in a democracy you get the government you deserve.

The damage is already done in my opinion. The recall will do little to help the city. In fact, I worry that if the recall election happens and Suttle wins, we have basically emboldened a Mayor who otherwise would have never won re-election or maybe even ran for re-election in the first place.

To NE Voter said...

So what do you get when you Bomb government buildings? Invited to speak at UNL for $10k, cushy prof job at the university of Chicago and be BFF with Barry Obama.

I know what you can try to get away with if your a Suttle Consultant or Chief of Staff!

Anonymous said...

People have a right to vote or not to vote. Just because someone did not vote in one election, it does not mean they are excluded from the political process. Everyone has a right to get involved at any point they choose.

A wise man once said "This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia."

Rhett said...

KETV has a good new story. Suttle wont take any further action against the recall.

Enjoy for yourselves.

http://www.ketv.com/news/25970632/detail.html

Seems to me that the mayor already knows his goose is cooked.

Anonymous said...

When I registered for Selective Service in 1984, it was only my Democrat buddies who were talking about refusing. My Republican buddies had no difficulty signing up.

That 22 yr old private who turned all those classified materials to Wikileaks? I'd bet he's a Democrat. A true Republlican would never do anything to harm his country like that.

It's only Democrats, people like Moochelle Obama, who would feel generally ashamed of this country. Paul Jacob is probably a changed man since yis youthful indescretion of refusing to register for Selective Service. At that time, I'd be really surprised if he wasn't a Democrat.

Anonymous said...

The more we uncover about the Recall effort the most shady it becomes!

Recallers - You Stink!

Anonymous said...

I wonder if any new evidence was submitted this morning? Wonder why this hearing wasn't over in 10 minutes because the evidence must be summed up in Nelson's column...

But then again no number of valid pieces of evidence will suffice because reason waved bye-bye to you loonies long ago. Hell, you can't even understand what it means to question how petitioners are paid. That would probably just invalidate one or two signatures, wouldn't it SS?

Keep counting those invalid signatures Davey. The truth will be told in due time.

Anonymous said...

SS, I'm no lawyer, but maybe the recallers should review the 5th Amendment! It looks like they're going to need it.

Anonymous said...

RWP- Paul Jacobs is a convicted felon and rightly so. Those of us like me who proudly registered for the Selective Service and stood at our nation's ready reserve while watching Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Tripoli, G1 and G2 on TV and Cable, did our duty. He shoud have too. What an idiot.

Anonymous said...

Da Judge said no stopping the recount! Woo Hoo

Anonymous said...

Buh Bye....... an early Christmas present for Omaha, and surrounding citizens.

Anonymous said...

And guess who comes out on top today - NOT YOU LS.

I guess there was a little bit more then a few signatures that are questionable.

Congrats Mayor Suttle. Thank you for holding the recallers to the letter of the law.

Anonymous said...

Noelle - -
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

Love, the public.

Anonymous said...

Get a clue. Get someone who was inside to give you all two cents of info about the hearing.

THERE IS NO CONTROVERSY YET. Once the count is done and IF there is a certification, then the judge is more than happy to see the evidence of wide spread fraud - because today it was made obvious to the judge that there are questions that the recall must answer. Apparently, there is more than one question :)

The headlines don't tell it all. They give you a glimpse of what went down today. One small step for Republican cheaters, one huge step for the law!!!

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:05

Please tell me that post is sarcasm. I'm a registered independent but admittedly I vote mostly for Democrats. However, I don't think Republicans are un-American or evil. Why do you feel only Republicans are true Americans?

Anonymous said...

So Bold Nebraska posters are now working for Scuttle. Great join the party trolls. I'm sure DiSilvestro will give you talking points as well.

Omaha Lawyer said...

What are they cheering about at Forward Omaha. Rarely do motions to dismiss get granted. What was more telling is that Suttle did not get any more time from the court. All they need is 27,000 valid signatures and the election will happen. I highly doubt the Recall won't reach its goal.

To: Noelle Both you and Vince Powers need to go see Professor Whitten on Civil Procedure. It seems you both need a refresher course.

Anonymous said...

Dim Jim is scared crapless that if the necessary # of signatures are validated, he has no chance of prevailing the actual recall vote.

AND HE'S RIGHT.

So he's using the courts to try and interfere in the process. Tool #1 of liberal 'Crats (see Gore, Franken, et. al.).

NE Voter said...

Anonymouse 1:08:

I rarely get personal in my comments, but you have proven yourself to be an idiot.

You accuse Democrats of resorting to the courts in election fights, and proceed to cite Al Gore and Al Franken.

You obviously have NO CLUE that Bush v. Gore was intitiated by Bush, who wanted the federal courts to order an end to the vote counting in Florida.

Oh, and in Minnesota, it was Norm Coleman (the guy Franken defeated) who brought suit in that instance.

I let a lot of slopping "facts" and reasoning slide around here becuase I don't have time to school every fool who has no interest in learning.

But this one just about takes the cake.

I still believe the GOP should change its mascot from the elephant to the ostrich.

Anonymous said...

...and I'm just fine with the Democrats' mascot being an Ass.

Anonymous said...

anon at 12:06, I don't think ALL Democrats are un-American. However, I think people who are patriotic and truly LOVE this country are more likely to be Republicans. People who tend to feel ashamed of this nation are more likely to be Democrats.

Just look at the words of the Prez and First Womyn. He says "yeah, Americans think they're 'exceptional.' The French probably think they're pretty exceptional too." (No, wait, we ARE exceptional. I don't just think it; I know it.) Moochelle says "In my adult life, I was never proud of my country until Barack ran for President." Wow. Just wow.

I never worried why the terrorists don't like us like all my lib friends did after 9/11, as though the terrorists might have had any good reason. Libs always obsess about how we use up all the worlds resources, how badly we treated this group or that group. One regular lib poster on this very blog likes calling people who love America "Hatriots" in tacit recognition of the fact that conservatives (whom this poster presumes to all be bigots) are more likely to be patriotic.

I'm not saying Democrats are un-American. But I'd guess at the time this Jacob guy refused to sign up for selective service, he was probably a Democrat.

Gerard Harbison said...

No, Paul Jacobs served 5.5 months in federal prison for committing a FELONY against the citizens of the United States.

Please explain how Paul Jacob's refusal to register with Selective Service hurt the interests of the citizens of the United States, considering that we had then, and still have 25 years later, an all-volunteer military.

In my opinion, by refusing to collaborate with pointless Federal Government collection of personal information (conducted in a sexist manner, I might add) Jacob did his fellow citizens a service.

Anonymous said...

RWP: You might wanna go back to your Posse Comitatus Group therapy sessions. You are a whacko

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
The Count said...

Thank you Judge Batallion, I get to continue count things. 25,672 ah ah ah ah, 25,673 ah ah ah ah.

Grundle King said...

Anon 11:23,

Yes, failing to register was probably not the smartest thing he could do...but he's served his time. Seems like a lot of you folks think he needs more punishment. And here I thought the left was all about rehabilitation and 2nd chances....guess not.

RWP brings up a good point...when will women be required to sign up for selective service? I mean, it's been quite awhile since our country allowed women into the military, and women have proven themselves to be as capable in serving their country as men...so why, in the age of equality, are men the only ones required to register?

I'm sure one of our resident Obamabots will be able to answer that question.

Anonymous said...

Congratulations to Tom Becka!

Congratulations to Jim Cleary!

Congratulations to Nicole Jesse!

Congratulations to Hal Daub!

We are the champions my friend...

Anonymous said...

You heard it here folks. Gerard Harbison thinks that refusing selective service is a "service to our country". The same man who said FDR was "weak" on national defense. Is this guy for real?

RWP how about you apologize to our brave men and women in uniform for comparing his cowardice to their service?

Anonymous said...

anon at 3:40, can you read? I mean without moving your lips, of course. You completely misrepresent and distort what RWP said. He didn't *compare* the two things. You did. I'm not going to retype everything to make the point. Go back and reread it and try again.

Street Sweeper said...

Be sure to read the latest update kids.
-Ed.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the update.

A 6-year old can make a better video off their cell phone.

Anonymous said...

Cheap shot 2:39. Real cheap shot. He writes a good column whether you agree with it or not. How your kids doing lately, making cheap shots at recess at the kid who isn't his twin in thinking?

Anonymous said...

Actually Robert Nelson is better than Rainbow Rowell...that's not saying much

Street Sweeper said...

5:33,
Frankly I didn't catch it.
2:39 is coming down.
-Ed.

Anonymous said...

Boy, you can really make out the face, location, voice, and time of day in that video, can't you? And that shot of the recall petition is so clear! I like how he identified himself as a recall petitioner as well. Yeah, the Anties really have their smoking gun here, yessiree bob.

Gerard Harbison said...

RWP how about you apologize to our brave men and women in uniform for comparing his cowardice to their service?

I hereby apologize to every draftee currently in the uniform of one of the armed services, and to every man and woman who was drafted and served after Selective Service registration was reinstituted by Jimmy Carter.

(nothing more comical than an indignant moron)

The Pip said...

Why the big hub bub over a recall? Seems to me he won the election. Why didn't the anti-Suttles do something about it then? Sour grapes by the losers.

No one ever said a democracy picked the right person, it just picked the candidate with the most votes. What gives you the right to take away my vote, and his election?

I don't know the guy, and I could give two hoots in hell for the Big O, but he won the election. Get over it!!

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

A few things.
-This is really fun to watch. Taunting on this blog is currently about a 6th grade level. It's not as snarky as avclub.com, but it's getting there.
-I've made a few professional mistakes during 35 years in the workforce. (Yes Virginia, there are people who are not Republicans that hold down jobs!). I've learned from my mistakes. Suttle has probably learned from his. I will vote against recalling him because I don't want another rookie on the job.
-Why shouldn't the petition have to be read to potential signers? It's a big decision, and deserves some thought.
-When this is all said and done, we're going to have some big challenges to solve in Omaha. How is all this name calling going to balance the budget, get the streets fixed?
-Do local Republicans realize they are alienating a substantial bloc of voters or do they just not care?
--Independent in Omaha

Super Power said...

Now wasn't Suttle a newbie when he was elected? So ya get another one. What's the issue. So the new one only serves a couple of years, what's the problem with that?

As far as making some people upset...... can't make all the people happy all the time.

Not to mention with the 2012 Obama re-election gearing up...... not much of a choice out there.

So..... ya get rid of Suttle, and then Obama. Cut services and state sponsored debt/poverty and financial dependence, and maybe the dollar will be worth something. Maybe people will get a job and take care of themselves. Once the state sponsored poverty is licked and people start to enjoy the benefits of earning their own way the country will once again regain it's proper status on the globla scene as the leader.

Meanwhile the liberal/progressive cancer will be cut out of the body politic and civility will take root once again.

All because Suttle is gone:)

Anonymous said...

Super Power,
-Newbies make mistakes, no matter what party they're from. We don't need another mess to clean up. (or another freaking auditorium, stadium, or athletic team, but I'm off topic)
-Republicans seem to think that if they just cut enough spending, a miracle will occur and the economy will be healed. It's not that simple. Here's one example. A lot of the jobs people had are now gone and will not come back. It seems to me that spending some money to re-train those folks might make more revenue in the long run. Republicans don't want to spend that money. In the short term, they look good. Hey, if I quit paying my car insurance and bought a new suit, I'd look good too! In the end though, it's going to come back to bite me, and unsophisticated budget slashing is going to hurt us.
Economics problems should be solved with math, not theology.

--Independent in Omaha

Anonymous said...

langwell, why are you so obsessed with Prof Harbison? You've gone to the trouble of looking up the voting status of his wife? And where her polling place is? That's a little creepy. Check that. It's a lot creepy. You're creepy, langwell. Does your parole officer know where you are right now? Stay away from my kids, OK?

Anonymous said...

It's not sour grapes to want Suttle removed. It's buyers' remorse. There's a big difference. If you can't understand what the difference is, then you're too dumb to cast a vote and should stay away from polling places for the benefit of the rest of society.

Anonymous said...

It's not buyer's remorse when you weren't the ones who were buying in the first place, were second guessing the decision the moment it was finalized, and started talking about a recall before he even took office.

That's the very definition of sour grapes.

Suttle hasn't made it easy to dismiss this, but the motivation isn't about his policies. If he'd have cut services, they'd have tried to recall him for that too. Or for not solving the pension crisis because he couldn't reach a deal with the unions and it went to CIR.

Really quite brilliant. Set yourself up with no alternative solutions so no matter what he comes up with, you'll criticize it as either the wrong choice or "not good enough."

Anonymous said...

Here's an exercise for all you lawyers out there:

Try to do what Jeremy Aspen's lawyer did in court today, at least according to the media accounts, and see if the judge doesn't smack your argument down.

According to KETV:

The group read from state statute [32-1308], which states: "regardless of the technical defects in the recall process, the court should not interfere."

Of course, that's not what it says. What it actually says is this:

If a majority of the votes cast at a recall election are for the removal of the official named on the ballot, he or she shall, regardless of any technical defects in the recall petition, be deemed removed from office unless a recount is ordered.

Well, that's quite different, isn't it? The statute in question quite clearly refers to a recall that has already reached the election stage, and votes have been cast and counted. But it hasn't reached that point yet. We don't even know whether or not they will have enough signatures to force a recall election.

But what about that second part of the quote? The one that says "the courts shall not intervene." Nope, that's not in the statute at all.

Anonymous said...

Democrat, Republican, pro-recall, anti-recall, can we all agree on one thing?

Nobody gives a crap about RWP's voting record.

Super Power said...

So the answer to budget concerns isn't to be found in cutting spending? Hmmm while I only took the "req" courses in econ in college, run a business, and a household without any bankruptcies I would still say you are so wrong.

That being said, what country in all of history has ever spent their way out of a deep recession? How did Canada reverse their fortune from a debt level of 125% of GDP in the mid 90's to having over 11yrs of surpluses? You got it, cuttng spending. Oh and their National Health Plan sucks. It makes the Veterans healthcare system look like Gold!

Any time you want to demonstrate when massive (debt) spending has taken a country out of a deep recession/depression feel free to post it.

TexasAnnie said...

Yes, Anonymous 12:51. I agree.

Y'all got big problems with your initiative, referendum and RECALL rights up there. Hopefully, whether or not this mayor is recalled, this experience will get you to thinking about restoring those rights.

As I was packing to leave the state now five years ago, then Senator Schimek at the Unicam was working overtime to strip you of your rights. I guess she got her way, with petitioning regulations. So sad.

Next time you vote for a candidate, any candidate, realize this: If you want honesty and integrity, don't vote for the Democrats, nor the Republicans...

Anonymous said...

If Fahleson, Ricketts, and Mcgrain aren't able to recruit a candidate for Lincoln Mayor they all need to go. The second highest ranking Democrat in the state runs unopposed? Come on people.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 12:34, you are so wrong. The recall was motivated by anger over the things Suttle did while in office. He wasn't very popular prior to the whole restaurant and employment tax thing due to a widespread belief that he had misrepresented himself and his views during the campaign. But that's not sour grapes either.

When you are unhappy because what you got is less desirable than what you were lead to believe you would be getting, it's not sour grapes. I don't see how you can't understand that.

I'm sorry, but it's just asinine to suggest that the recall was initiated nearly two years after the election by the losing side for no reason other than that they lost. Where was the effort to recall Fahey at the outset of either of his two terms?

Anonymous said...

anon at 8:29, why do you keep obsessing about the mayor of Lincoln? My guess is you are trying to present yourself as a concerned Republican but you are really a democrat just thumbing your nose at the fact no Republican has stepped forward to challenge your guy yet.

The fact of the matter is that there's not a strong desire. Aftter two abysmally horrible Democrat mayors (who weren't recalled even though they should have been) the guy we have now is really pretty decent. He hasn't been uber-partisan and he's been fiscally conservative.

If Suttle had governed more like Chris Beutler, he wouldn't be facing a recall right now.

Anonymous said...

7:18, you need to study macroeconomics. It's not the same as personal economics. Just look at the deficits run by Roosevelt and Truman during the Great Depression and WWII for an example of "spending has taken a country out of a deep recession/depression". In fact during 1937 when an attempt was made to balance the budget, we fell into a recession. Historically it's been shown that you don't balance budgets during a recession if you want the economy to recover. But history always takes a backseat to ideology with you Republicans.

Anonymous said...

9:47, and stupidity always takes a front seat with you Dumbocrats.

Prez Obama: "Gee, I guess there's no such thing as a 'shovel-ready' project afterall. Oops."

(And, of course, ideology didn't drive ANY of the decisions on where to allocate spending stimulus money. Just as ideology wasn't involved in determining which GM dealerships lost their franchises under Obama's car czar.)

Anonymous said...

Typical (10:06) rebuttal on this blog. Call names and don't address the post. And you call me stupid?

Anonymous said...

10:17, now I'll call you stupid. Before, I was calling Dumbocrat policies stupid. (The fact you couldn't figure that much out suggests you lack basic reading comprehension skills, which makes you look, well, stupid.)

Policies like spending trillions on an ill-conceived stimulus for "shovel-ready" projects only to figure out later on that there's no such thing as "shovel-ready" projects. Republicans were trying to tell you that from the very beginning but you (Obama) refused to listen.

But, I guess there was the part where you imply that only Republicans are driven by ideology. That's actually laughably stupid. So, while I wasn't specifically calling you stupid, the shoe appears to fit you pretty well.

And speaking of not addressing the argument, how about all those Democrats on here attacking RWP's voting record or perseverating on that Jacob guy's run-in with Selective Service 25 years ago. Pot, meet kettle.

Anonymous said...

5:36 PM on 12-1 is right. Rowell is a joke and a self-hating Omaha North grad.

Anonymous said...

Boy, 11:04, that's some serious parsing! "stupidity always takes a front seat with you Dumbocrats" is close enough to calling me stupid. I responded with an answer to your post, and you called names instead of agreeing or disagreeing with me. You continue to prove my point. I agree with you on the irrelevancy of Jacob's SS prison sentence, but there's plenty of other dirt on this guy. And RWP's voting record keeps coming up because he claims to vote, but is not in the state's voter database, at least not under the name Gerard Harbison. It's a credibility test. People who lie or distort aren't credible, and neither are their opinions.

Anonymous said...

12:08, you are confused. I'm not the poster at 7:18. I am the one who responded to your post at 9:47. Now, your knickers are in a twist because you say I didn't respond to your point. Oh, but I did. I responded to where you said, "But history takes a back seat to ideology with you Republicans."

My comment in respones paralleled yours, wherein I said, "And stupidity always takes a front seat with you Dumbocrats," a comment you now claim was a personal insult to YOU, even though I gave a specific example that had nothing to do with you personally. You claim that me saying "stupidity takes a front seat with you Dumbocrats" is, in your words, "close enough to calling (you) stupid."

Well. If that's true, then you claiming that history takes a back seat to ideology with Republicans must be a personal insult to me, then, right? Which means you started it. And then you complain at 10:17 about people calling names. In the future, try to remember when you start something before you complain about someone responding in kind.

Gerard Harbison said...

And RWP's voting record keeps coming up because he claims to vote, but is not in the state's voter database, at least not under the name Gerard Harbison. It's a credibility test. People who lie or distort aren't credible, and neither are their opinions.

I have never raised the issue of my voting record, except to defend myself against lying sleazeballs like yourself. And, in defending myself, I have never lied about or distorted my voting record. Your incompetence as a stalker does not require me to supply you with personal information. You've already started stalking my wife, out of desperation. Now you had damn well better stay anonymous, because you just escalated to a level I don't think you can handle.

But it's really funny an anonymous coward like yourself mouthing on about 'credibility'. How much credibility do you think you have, given you seem to be afraid you'll pee in your diaper if someone knows who you are?