Summer Lovin'...

Ah, the signposts of summer: The CWS ends. The July 4th festivities fire up. And and oily Ben Nelson is hauled out of the Gulf.

(record scratching sound)

See it here.



Well, that's what the SEIU and their brethren want you to see.

SEIU, the Sierra Club and various other left wingers have enacted another of their cutesy "Big Oil!" ads. This time they play off of the oil spill by blaming Nelson -- and using the exact same ad against Mike Johanns and various others -- for voting on an EPA bill completely unrelated to the spill.

Well, you know the Bill Clinton motto: "Never let a crisis go to waste!" You see, Nelson and Johanns accepted money from oil companies. And they voted to stop unelected EPA administrators from running amuck on "greenhouse gas" emissions.

So of course they're to blame for the oil spill. It's pretty simple, really. Math, and all that.

Anywho, we will be curious to see how many times this spot actually hits the air in Nebraska.

Oh, and note that Nelson is supported by "Bil Oil".

(Didn't Bil make a pledge to the Lakers campaign?)

***

Here is a nice new spot released by the Congressman Adrian Smith campaign that will air across the Third District.



Makes me want apple pie.

***

Congressman Lee Terry's campaign has this flyer being mailed and passed out and around.

Note the $2 Trillion reference to Tom White.

Don't worry White campaign. That's probably the last you'll hear that referenced... Maybe. Possibly.

***

Did you catch admission from Markos Moutlitsas of Daily Kos that their pollster, Research 2000, has likely been faking their polling for quite some time now?

Kos references Research 2000 quite often, and even based an entire book, calling Republicans "just like radical Jihadists", on a bogus Research 2000 survey.

We noted a poll they did back in 2008 on the Terry - Esch NE-2 campaign, a month before the election.

They had Terry up 10 points, 49% - 39% with 10% undecided.
The final numbers were 52.2% - 47.8%.

And the same date R2K said McCain 53% - Obama 40%, in NE-2.
Finals were, Obama 50% - McCain 49%.

Real polling results on that one?  Maybe.

***

Have a great 4th everyone, and per usual, we invite all the Nebraska office holders and candidates to send us their parade pics to post later!

We will also probably do as we have in the past and give "awards" for "Best Overall Entry", "Most Grueling Schedule", "Largest Float Presence" (volunteers in it) and "Most Creative Float".

Looking forward to your pics!

In the Red

The Mark Lakers for Governor campaign filed their most recent campaign finance docs with the NADC.

It doesn't look good:

Receipts from Individuals: $3,115

Receipts from the rest: $12,700

Receipts taken off the books after the recent scandal: $137,000 (so far, anyway)

Total Cash on Hand: $3,291

Just to contrast, Governor Dave Heineman raised over $100,000 this quarter and has $1.5 million Cash on Hand.

It is not clear to us how much longer the Lakers campaign can go on like this.

***

Congressman Lee Terry's campaign has a new web video featuring 2008 opponent, and now Terry advisor Richard Carter.

As you can see below, Carter takes a turn at the white board to tutor ...Tom White on economics:



While not experts on math, we are pretty sure that number is huge.

***

We were recently pointed to a purported nasty bill making the rounds in the Senate these days.

The Carried Interest Tax Hike (HR 4213 Baucus/Levin Bill) is coming up for a vote in the next day or so.

Opponents say that a proposed 150% increase on certain capital gains could cause a massive meltdown and potential bailouts in the commercial real estate biz -- much like the bubble bursting in the home markets did.

The bill, supported by the likes of Iowa's Tom Harkin, currently is OPPOSED by both Mike Johanns and Ben Nelson.

Worth keeping your eye on.

***

Looks like New Yorker Bob Kerrey may skip out on the Motion Picture Association lobbying gig.

Word has it that while the MPAA would like Kerrey to step in and begin defending their nonsensical ratings system sometime soon, Kerrey is sort of stuck in his New School job.

That, and Kerrey apparently is holding out for a lobbying position that pays more.  The MPAA only pays a million a year.

Guy's gotta eat...

Fremont voters make it so

Voters in Fremont, Nebraska passed the illegal-immigrant ordinance, 57% - 43%.

From here, there are likely to be court battles, possibly expensive rules in place and more issues to come, no doubt.

But the voters have spoken.

And many more around the state and country will keep an eye on Fremont.

Take me out to the ball game...

Say hey folks!

Between the College World Series, NBA Finals, World Cup (oh, and work) it had been tough to squeeze in the politico issues.

But we can always find some time for a few links.

First, we were looking for an excuse to post this Separated at Birth, and the Objective Conservative wrote an article on Jim Esch which you can read here.

So with that in mind, we give you...

The original Bad Boy of 2nd District Democrat politics (um...or whatever) Jim Esch, and the original Bad Boy of the (original) Karate Kid, Billy Zabka!

***

If you are well read on the Google machine, you may have noticed that the National Republican Congressional Committee came out with their nine focused races for Republicans for 2010. Lee Terry is on that list.

Of course while certain Dems are hootin' and hollerin' about this, please keep it in context kiddies. Lee Terry is on the list because the NRCC's counterpart, the DCCC, has Tom White on their list.  (Although lib blog Firedoglake is still convinced that Jim Esch is taking another shot at it...)

And why is Tom White on the DCCC's list? Because of the success of Barack Obama in the 2nd District on 2008.

Which didn't translate into success for Jim Esch in 2008.

And which 2008 success does not transfer to 2010.

And hence, doesn't translate (or transfer) to Tom White.

But hey, the DCCC can spend their money anywhere they want.
And the NRCC will counter it.

And the local TV and radio stations can light cigars with thousand dollar bills.

***

A Leavenworth Street reader, The Unicycle Guy, sent us the Esch-Zabka SAB above, as well as the pic below of a recent billboard up at 72nd and Pacific in Omaha:

Note this is the same "Rock N Roll" that put up this billboard a few months ago:

***

We were notified that while Dems such as Boyle and Hassebrook are abandoning Mark Lakers, there are other Dems who are providing outright support for Dave Heineman!

Gale Lush, is listed on the NDP website as a "Chair Appointee" to the NDP State Executive Committee.

Lush is also the President of the Nebraska Farmers Union PAC.

And the Famers Union PAC recently announced their endorsement of Heineman in the 2010 Governor's race!

Gale Lush of Wilcox, NEBFARMPAC President said, "Governor Dave Heineman has earned our endorsement based on his proven track record of achievement on the wide range of issues that impact rural voters.”

Can Vic Covalt be far behind?

***

And an Amen! to Tom Shatel's column today regarding the fence that has been put around Rosenblatt:

All this because the last CWS at Rosenblatt figures to attract a number of first-time visitors to our mecca (not MECA) on 13th street. Wait until they see the fence. Won't they be impressed?

Whatever the reasons, the timing couldn't be worse. This figures to be the most emotional CWS ever. Why make it harder? The CWS is all about memories. Will the obstacle course take away from these final memories?

Blame the City or the NCAA?  Either way, it ain't pretty.

What if? Governor Osborne...

On this Day of Days in the college football world (for those of you who dwell beneath boulders, looks like Nebraska will move to the Big Ten today/tomorrow - and upset the whole college football universe in the process), we look back to the Spring of 2006.

Remember when Congressman Tom Osborne was thought to be anointed the next Governor of Nebraska?

What if, eh?

What if Dave Heineman hadn't stepped up his game and snatched that office away from Osborne?

Well, (unfortunately for you haters) we're not looking on the Gov side right now.

Instead, think if TO wasn't there to be driving this wagon train as Athletic Director. Would the Huskers be making this bold move?

The answer could likely be "no", right? Osborne has bristled and fought against the Texas centric Big XII since its inception. TO is the kind of guy who can make a grand decision like this, and everyone in the state pretty much follows his lead. (Mainly, because they trust him and know that this is something that is firmly in his wheelhouse. Who would be better prepared for such a decision?)

And again, for you haters, there is something to be said for the guy in charge having the job in his blood. Heineman = government and politics. Osborne = Football and athletics.

Osborne has the gumption, clout and incentive to pull this off.

Nebraska football, athletics and the University and state as a whole should be thankful that Heineman won four years ago.

***

And it's funny how many quotes we've seen from the state Congressional delegation, the Governor and other states' elected reps on the question of Nebraska going to the Big Ten and in turn the rest of the Big XII blowing up, moving to the Pac 10 and elsewhere.

We're not sure what it means that the reflex reaction is to run to Congress to try to fix the woes of college football and other sports.

Then again, in the nanny state that has been created -- where we are told that the village is supposed to raise your child, that the government creates jobs and where the President talks about how wealth should be distributed -- maybe we shouldn't be surprised.

And we still won't be surprised if this all ends up in the courts.

***

FYI, Omahans (and non-Omahans) who have seen the proposition of the wheel-tax being increased: know that the question of whether you would accept the increased tax -- instead of, as presented, laying off police and firemen and having chuck holes go unfilled-- has been thoroughly polled lately (by Mayor Suttle's office?).

But apparently the Wheel Tax was a relatively minor point in the polling. The main questions involved increasing sales taxes and implementing occupation taxes.

You've been warned.

***

Oh, and Tom White is out in the field polling as well. He is apparently pushing the issue that he has fought for lower taxes while in the legislature.

So, know that any poll results you see or hear from his camp have been heavily pushed to get the results he wants.

And also remember that he would be a supporter of the President's and Nancy Pelosi's schemes in Congress. (Just a small detail, that.)

***

And finally, the guys at KLIN have put together a little ditty on the whole state Senator Kent Rogert flap, and his boat.

We got a chuckle.

Enjoy. Enjoy your weekend. And enjoy (hopefully) the Big Ten!

Suttle’s Campaign Pledges: One Year Later

The Platte Institute published their latest analysis on Omaha Mayor Jim Suttle today. We asked, and were given permission, to reprint the article in full. We hope you enjoy and are enlightened.
- Street Sweeper

Suttle's Campaign Pledges: One Year Later

By Alex West
Platte Institute

It's rather common knowledge among politicos and perceptive observers that when it comes to politics, details lead to division. That is why the successful candidate frequently seems to be the one who divulged the least about any particular issue during the campaign. For this reason, campaigns do their best to give as generic a message as possible, thus maximizing their appeal. This is not necessarily because more detailed political messages are too complicated for the casual observer, but rather that even in a room of the most like-minded people the small print tends to be divisive.

As a result, whenever a politician does venture to give some detail about how they will govern and what actions they will take, people listen. Over time these "details" have become known as campaign promises, and more often than not these promises help to get politicians elected. Consequently, reconsidering a politician's campaign pledges from time to time is an important aspect to keeping politicians responsible.

Campaign Promises: Where to Find Them

One excellent source for unearthing campaign promises is in the content of campaign television ads. Due to the high cost, sizable audience, and brief length of commercials, campaigns attempt to efficiently condense a candidate's message into a concise advertisement, limiting themselves to those credentials and issues that will best benefit their candidate. With the one year anniversary of Omaha Mayor Jim Suttle's inauguration approaching, the time seems right for an evaluation of his commitment to the plans laid out in his campaign commercials. There are about 12 campaign promises embedded in four campaign commercials ranging from reducing the dropout rate[1] all the way to keeping civility in city hall[2], but by limiting the evaluation to pledges that are verifiable and directly impacting the economic conditions in Omaha, the focus narrows to cutting waste,[3] [4] lowering property taxes,[5] [6] bringing clean energy companies to Omaha,[7] and acquiring stimulus dollars.[8]

Cutting Waste: What Waste?

Cutting waste in city government was a credible claim by candidate Suttle, whose two-term service on the City Council gave him the opportunity to become familiar with numerous yearly budgets. The image of Suttle as a penny-wise politician was also supported by the fact that he played a visible role in the effort to maintain Rosenblatt as the home of the College World Series and to forego a new, expensive downtown stadium. After becoming mayor, however, Suttle's message began to move away from cutting waste toward raising taxes. Instead of applying his specialized knowledge and gumption to lead to timely cuts and thus lifting the burden of wasteful spending on the city, the new Mayor painted a picture of an emaciated city government, already "stretched thin and struggling to get by with limited resources."[9] According to the Mayor's 2010 budget presentation, there was "little room left to make spending cuts" because the city had already been making slashes in staffing, deferring equipment purchases, and skipping regular maintenance of city property since 2001.[10]

Yet during the midst of this budgetary crisis, Suttle decided to hire a portion of his staff at substantially higher salaries compared to those in the previous administration,[11] and though the mayor made spending cuts in other areas, his efforts fail to reach the magnitude that he previously implied they would. We know this because Suttle said, "I'll cut waste in City Hall, modernize city services, and put more services online. That's how we're going to lower property taxes."[12] Logically, this means there should be enough savings among the three above-mentioned improvements to lower property taxes, but this has not come to pass.

Property Taxes: Going Up

The idea that Suttle ever intended to cut enough waste and streamline city services to the point where he could lower property taxes is hard to imagine. This is not because he has yet to fulfill that pledge in this term, but because he pursued a property tax increase in his 2010 Budget Presentation to the City Council less than two months after his inauguration. Despite fighting elements of opposition on the City Council, the Mayor eventually got his tax hike[13] at the expense of his own word just a few months before.

Clean Energy Companies: Growing Business

Suttle also said he would bring clean energy companies to the city, and he has followed through with this general commitment to all things green. Through neighborhood grants, public awareness, and a new Sustainability Coordinator, the mayor continues to demonstrate a willingness to commit time and resources to making the city sustainable.[14] More directly related to the pledge, under the Mayor's watch a new clean energy-related venture is now in the city -- a wind power training facility -- which hopefully represents a down payment on expanding Omaha's share of the emerging clean energy industry.[15]

Stimulus for Omaha: Overstated, So Far...

The acquisition of stimulus funds was also a key guarantee of the Suttle campaign and, since the passage of the stimulus package, Omaha's share has grown upwards of $28 million-much of it secured under the Suttle administration.[16] Unfortunately for the city, this sum is substantially lower than the amount of money the Suttle campaign suggested could be secured. In one of his campaign commercials, Suttle himself said that he would "fight for our share of the President's economic stimulus package so we don't have to pay for the unfunded mandate to rebuild our sewer system."[17]

The project Suttle referred to is estimated to cost $1.7 billion,[18] which is significantly more than the $28 million in stimulus cash directed towards Omaha. Of that $28 million, only $15 million is marked for sewer, and nearly $13 million of that is in the form of loans that must eventually be repaid. Thus, the stimulus contribution up till now is a far cry from covering the expenses of the sewer rebuild project, covering less than 1% of the projected cost.

However, the story is still unfolding. With $168 billion in stimulus grants, loans, and contracts left to be paid out[19] and Mayor Suttle's recent selection to a Mayor's Council charged with lobbying for stimulus cash to pay for unfunded federal mandates across the country, the status quo could change.[20]

Tallying the Score

Suttle's record of fidelity to campaign promises over the past year shows mixed results on the economic front. For instance, while he abandoned his campaign stance of lowering property taxes by cutting waste and modernizing city services, Suttle followed through with his commitment to attracting new clean energy companies. Another ambiguous portion of the evaluation is Suttle's commitment to securing enough of the federal stimulus package to pay for the unfunded mandate to rebuild Omaha's sewer system. The process for which, though bleak, is still unfinished. Finally, consider Suttle's inconsistencies in maintaining his commitment to campaign promises. In view of those pledges where Suttle has fallen short, the cynical might say hyperbole is just part of the electoral process, while others might contend that times change and therefore so do the solutions. In any case, voters will need to find contentment in the pledges that are fulfilled, and judge for themselves those incomplete or negated assurances.


[1] Jim Suttle For Mayor: Same. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBfgzG0eDso (May 13, 2010).

[2] Ibid. 1

[3] Jim Suttle: Nothing Subtle. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY0pHz8Q3Ok (May 13, 2010).

[4] Jim Suttle: Yard Signs. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GF50S1qYH34 (May 13, 2010).

[5] Ibid. 4

[6]Ibid. 3

[7] Ibid. 3

[8] Ibid. 4

[9] Suttle, Mayor Jim. 2009. "2010 Budget Demonstration." July 21. http://www.co.douglas.ne.us/omaha/mayor/images/
stories/2010%20Budget%20Presentation.pdf (May 27, 2010).

[10] Ibid. 9

[11] Cordes, Henry and Maggie O'Brien. "Scant sacrifice seen in finance director's salary - A city councilman questions the higher pay when the city is making cuts elsewhere.." Omaha World-Herald, 18 Jul. 2009.

[12] Ibid. 4

[13] Brennan, Joseph. "Mayor extends olive branch after property tax hike riff - Suttle says he never intended to raise the tax rate without the City Council's OK.." Omaha World-Herald, 16 Aug. 2009.

[14] http://www.cityofomaha.org/mayor/
mayors-office-home/archives/category/green-initiatives (May 27, 2010).

[15] "Omaha Windmill Training Facility Opens: Center to Become Hub for Wind Energy Industry." KETV.com. 16 October, 2009. http://www.ketv.com/money/21310621/detail.html?taf=oma (June 1, 2010).

[16] This figure is constructed from data on the Mayoral website as of June 1, 2010. In some cases, the figures are in conflict with those available from the federal government on Recovery.gov. For instance, a $4 million grant listed on Recovery.gov goes unlisted on the Mayor's website while other grants and loans mentioned on the Mayor's website are not immediately available on Recovery.gov while searching under grants, loans, and contracts for the "City of Omaha."

[17] Ibid. 4

[18] O'Brien , Maggie. "Suttle goes in search of sewer-upgrade funds-Omaha's mayor has been named to a group trying to get federal cash for the costly project." Omaha World-Herald. March 30, 2010.

[19] Recovery.gov (June 1, 2010).

[20] Ibid. 18

Lakers and White

The only thing that will be discussed starting today and going into the weekend and likely through next week will be Nebraska's potential move to the Big Ten. Therefore, it is probably best to get any political discussions in now, because there is a good chance that everything else will be ignored.

(On that note, keep an eye out for potentially explosive and/or embarrasing announcements completely unrelated to Nebraska football tomorrow afternoon. If Mike Johanns wants to state that he is now a Rastafarian and is on a steady diet of puppies, no one will hear it and it will be business as usual on Monday.)

***

So we want to follow up on Joe Jordan's great post on how the Mark Lakers scandal may affect Tom White candidacy for Congress.

Jordan asked "what do Democrats have to be excited about" without a Top of the Ticket race to bring them to the polls?

Excellent question.

Think about the whole basis for the "excitement" (and that word is in quotes) for the Tom White candidacy. Two words:

Barack Obama.

National Dems looked at the 2nd District and said, "If Obama can win there, we can win the Congressional seat too!" They saw Jim Esch as a weak candidate, and figured with the right tough guy, they could pull it off.

Well, all of that first depends on the same or at least a similar scenario as in 2008. Pull out the same Dems who voted for Obama to come in and follow White.

Oh the flaws in that hypothesis.

There is no cult of personality candidate in 2010. Tom White sure as heck ain't him. Even if he was "him", the bloom has fallen from the Obama rose, dried up and is in the compost bin.

And, with Lakers "out", that is one more reason why Dems may not even bother to go to the polls.

White's campaign business plan is difficult. With Lakers screwing everything up, it is even that much more difficult.

***

So...what about the whole Anne Boyle thing?

Some have argued that Boyle got into this so that she could either shame Lakers out of the race, or at least get Dems to focus on White, since Lakers is done. Let's look at that second point first.

Boyle, and Chuck Hassebrook, have gotten Nebraska Dems to look anew at the Lakers scandal. They no longer blame Jon Bruning or Dave Heineman. They blame Lakers himself. And Boyle has asked that Dems "disavow" Lakers. (If they disavow him three times in the public square are they divorced?)

OK, so if Lakers stays in the race, what do Dems do? Well, they may just stay home.

Face it, many 2nd District Democrats do not like Tom White. He rubs many people the wrong way and some just don't like his politics, for various reason. Now if they were coming out to vote for Lakers, they would probably hold their nose (or whatever) and vote for White as well.

Now? Meh. Skip the polls. Anne Boyle told us to.

Nice move there, Anne. You may have single-handedly killed two Dems with one stone.

***

So what about Anne Boyle and Chuck Hassebrook's other plan: Get Lakers to quit.

So what would happen. As we understand it (and we're open to correction), the Democrats would then select a new candidate at their state convention. Hmm. OK, fine.

WHO?

Chuck Hassebrook? Mike Boyle? Ooooh, the Dems are on fire now!

What, not so much?

Oh.

Does that drive Dems away from the polls, like above? Maybe not.

But maybe.

What if there is a contentious nomination battle? What is east and west don't get along? What if they select someone nuttier or worse in whatever way than Lakers?

Here's all we're saying: If Boyle had been silent on Lakers, at least it wouldn't have a had as much of a negative effect on Tom White. Now, even if Lakers get out, who knows?

And what about the circus that would occur at such a nominating convention? It would have been Tom White's coronation in front of the Dems and the media that attended. Instead, White would be a side note to the hoopla of the new Gov candidate.

Of course there also would be the issue of that new candidate needing campaign money as well. Another bundle of dollars NOT going to the White campaign.

***

Mark Lakers certainly screwed up, but could it have been handled any worse than it was?

Consider this: When the ump made the horrible call to wreck the perfect game last week, what did he do?

Point his finger at the other umps? Note his years and years of experience in making good calls? Point out that the rules are specific on what is an out and that it all depends on his eyes and not some instant replay? Blame the politics of the other coach?

No. He said, "I screwed up, bad." He felt awful about it. He went and made personal apologies. He wept.

Think if Mark Lakers did that?

"I screwed up bad. I took some half gestures and turned them into pledges when I shouldn't have. This is my first time in politics, I'm not an expert on campaign law and I messed it up. I am going to personally contact all those listed, apologize to them, take their names off, and forge ahead. I believe Nebraskans are forgiving people, and will consider this when they will hopefully support me, continue to give financially, and ultimately vote for me."

Oh sure, he still probably wouldn't beat Heineman, but he would be in a much better position now.

And so would the party.

And so would Tom White.

Instead, you've got Anne Boyle, Chuck Hassebrook, bagging on scheduled radio interviews with the largest station in the state, and the potential of a circus to continue through the summer and fall.

Good luck on that, Democrats.

Just don't ever admit you screwed up, right?

Boyle on Lakers' back

We have a few thoughts on the Mark Lakers finance scandal, and all that has gone on in the past seven days or so.

* Before we let someone else's rendition be given any credence... let us first point to the Nebraska Democrats' blog, where they complain that Mark Lakers was going over and above on his finance report, because he was listing "pledges".

Just so that we are all clear, it is the fact that Lakers NEVER HAD THE PLEDGES that is the problem (and possibly, the crime) here. We don't know what the final call will be from the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission or the Attorney General's office -- but we won't be surprised a lick to find that NONE of the pledges were actually made.

* Where the hell did Anne Boyle, and now Chuck Hassebrook, come from on all of this? This hit the news almost a month ago, and they're just coming out of the woodwork now? Where were they when the story broke, and all of their fellow Dems were piling on Heineman and Bruning?

And why now?

Here's the funny thing. The NADC and Attorney General's office said, "There are serious problems on the filing, and these need to be investigated." So, they are (as far as we know). But no one that we know of on the Republican side (check us if we're wrong) called for Lakers to get out of the race.

But now Anne Boyle and Hassebrook think that Lakers doesn't meet their moral code? Based on what new information? On what conversations?

Or is this all some sort of sour grapes that her hubby got edged out of his swan song campaign? That he didn't get one last chance to "take one for the party"? That maybe someone else told Mikey to sit down, while another (newcomer!) strode to the podium?

Democrats, we're waiting to hear from you!

And Hassebrook? Nice that the OWH essentially called him out in their article, as having a past rivalry with Lakers.

Don't get us wrong: Lakers filing is a major F-up and could possibly be criminal.

But is it Anne Boyle's place to come out against him here? When she could have simply sat on her hands and made the same point?

Something else is going on here.

* And now on to the media coverage of "Lakers' Boyle".

So the OWH writes an Editorial on Saturday on "The importance of public trust."

In it they say, "If Boyle’s claims are correct, they would reflect a gross deficiency in Lakers’ judgment...Boyle’s claims raise a legitimate, serious concern."

If whose claims are what???

Anne Boyle's claims?

Uh, OWH, this is an investigation by the NADC and the Attorney General's office.
This isn't about Boyle or her claims that Lakers should be "disavowed", whatever the hell that means.
No one answers to Anne freaking Boyle.  (And if Lakers caves to her, well, that's just pathetic.)

This is a potential criminal investigation. That started a month ago.
Do you read the papers?

* And finally on our old pal Don Walton of the LJS: We appreciate Don's perspective and analysis of all things political in the Cornhusker state...but...that last article on Lakers? Really?

It started as a review of the Anne Boyle dust-up, then turned into the Mark Lakers free-for-all potshots at the Governor.

So when the hell did Mark Lakers' political opinions about Dave Heineman have anything to do with Lakers making up hundreds of thousands of dollars in pledges and potentially breaking the law?

So if Lakers robs several downtown banks, does the jailhouse interview include his calls for Heineman to commit to three debates at the State Fair this fall?

Is this where we are in coverage of the "Lakers campaign"?

Because if so, we might have to suggest that Governor Dave open up some iguana fighting rings, so that he can get his opinions on economic development in the LJS.

Celtic vs Lakers!

Nebraska (Irish) Democrat "Grande Dame" (OWH words) Anne Boyle says that Democrats should "disavow" their Gubernatorial nominee Mark Lakers over his finance filing scandal.

Says the OWH:

Boyle contends that Lakers "fabricated" donors on his financial reports and she says he risks "disgracing" the entire party.

Boyle sent a letter Wednesday to about a dozen party leaders, saying they should work together to get Lakers out of the race against Republican Gov. Dave Heineman. She said in the letter that Lakers lacks the "integrity" to serve as governor.

"Public silence is tacit approval of Lakers and his continued deceit," said Boyle, a former chairwoman of the Nebraska Democratic Party.

Well then.

All we would add is that when we looked at the false "pledges" Lakers had listed on his report, we sort of gave a pass on Nebraska "Democrat" attorney Dave Domina's "pledge", figuring it was probably good.

Nope.

Again, according to the OWH:

Domina, an Independent, says he never made a promise or had a conversation with Lakers about campaign donations.

Huh... (not smirking...not smirking..)

Nelson and Lakers and White (oh my!)

Over on his blog, Joe Jordan is getting every drop of milk he can out of Ben Nelson's recent meeting in Millard with 75 people.

Well, we will help Joe out by following up on Senator Nelson's recent "defense" of his infamous Cornhusker Kickback.

Nelson says:

"...this so-called 'Cornhusker Kickback', let me explain what that was all about..."



He then goes on about unfunded mandates and blah blah blah blah.

Lest we forget, let us focus on what pissed people off about the the Cornhusker Kickback. And to do that, we will go to the half hour Nelson had with Greta Van Susteren to defend himself:

Greta: "When was the first time you heard...that Nebraska would get ... a $100 million provision?"

Nelson: "Probably during the discussions on how we would get an opt-out."

...

Greta: "Who came up with the idea that $100 million would go to Nebraska? Was that your idea?

Nelson: I think it was the idea -- someone's idea to put it in.

Greta: Someone?

Nelson: There were various people involved at various times."

...

Greta: "Is (Majority Leader) Senator Harry Reid wrong when he says you wanted this (the Cornhusker Kickback), that you got it for yourself?"

Nelson: "I don't know what he means by 'got it for myself'".

...

Greta: "Whose idea was it for the $100 million? ... By whom?"

Nelson: "I didn't draw the bill so I don't know the answer."

Just so we remember, it was all about the $100 million that got set-aside for Nebraska.

So, look at it this way: Nelson has gotten hammered like no other time in his political lifetime on the Cornhusker Kickback. Yet, Nelson claims he doesn't know who put in the Cornhusker Kickback provision.

So doncha think...doncha think... that if Nelson REALLY DIDN'T KNOW who was responsible for his potential political downfall, he'd be screaming to the high heavens that it wasn't him, and dammit, he was going to find out who it was, and when he did find out there'd be hell to pay?

In other words, Nelson is out on the golf course instead of looking for the real killers.

Hey, he brought this up, not us.

***

Speaking of looking for the real killers, note that Democrat Gubernatorial candidate Mark Lakers is still promising that he'll fix that minor little snafu of a couple hundred thousand dollars in pledges that he lied about mistakenly placed on his campaign finance reports.

Lakers told 10/11 last week:

"If there are errors in the report, we're going to make the allowed amendment to the reports...we now have a full staff..."

("If"?)


Well Mr. Lakers, that was THREE WEEKS AGO when this all broke.

Good thing there's not a oil pipeline gushing up under your campaign office. Lord knows when you'd plan on fixing that...

***

Congressman Lee Terry is asking again for his opponent, Democrat state Senator Tom White, to give his position on a recent vote in Congress.

Terry voted against HR 4213 that provides additional spending for a number of programs and raises taxes on businesses and entrepreneurs.

Terry's position was that while there were some good provisions in the bill, it simply added $54 billion onto the national debt.

And said Terry, as quoted by the New York Times, "This is not a time to raise taxes on investments in business. That’s a sure way to kill jobs."

The question: How would Tom White have voted?

And really, shouldn't the MSM require that White -- or anyone challenging an incumbent -- tell them how he would have voted on every bill that comes down the pike? Aren't we supposed to be comparing the two candidate? Then White should be on the record.

And it's not like there isn't plenty of staff to assist on that at the DNC, DCCC or where ever else he wants to get his info.

These two candidates have major differences -- particularly on how they support the Democrat agenda in Congress. It's time that the Democrat candidate take a stand and let the voters know.

(Oh wait, that might let the cat out of the bag, huh?)