Objective Conservative

Reflections on Current Issues

2012-01-29T10:44:00.000-08:00

There is just so much out there to comment on that our unpaid staff just can't deal with everything in detail. So here is our brief consensus on some of those issues:

Our applause goes to Mike Groene of North Platte for the effort he and others have started to roll back the numbers of signatures required on statewide petitions. Requiring 115,000 signatures to put a issue before the voters is unrealistic. It used to be 49,000 signatures until the Nebraska Supreme Court looked at the unintended consequences of legislation at that time that prompted the change. In a single house state, the voice of the people should be heard without overcoming onerous hurdles.

Despite the opposition by most of Nebraska's county boards, it's time to eliminate the inheritance tax. Nebraska is one of the few states in the country that still punish the dead and their families who've already paid taxes on assets. Governor Heineman is right to want to end this. A phase in over five years could end this archaic tax and give counties time to adjust.

Good riddance to the failure of Lake Lautenbaugh (formerly Lake Daub) to advance. Yes, it would have been nice to have our own Lake of the Ozarks near Omaha, but the money to study it would have been wasted because there is no way it could have overcome the environmental and financing challenges it would have faced. This might have been a good idea in 1958. It might have been doable in 1935. It isn't today.

Warren Buffett should quit whining about the 'undue' publicity his secretary is getting. HE IS THE CAUSE OF THAT. He has made her the poster girl for his guilt-driven need to pay more taxes. Maybe if 47 million Americans who pay no taxes and in many cases get someone else's money back (Unearned Income Tax Credit) paid a little and had some ownership in their government his secretary's taxes could be reduced along with everyone else's.

We've opined on it before, but it's time for Senator Fischer's LB 745 bill on occupation taxes to be passed. The egregious misuse of such needs to be stopped--Can you say Jim Suttle's 2.5% restaurant sales, oops, occupation tax? It's time to let citizen vote on new occupation taxes.

Mulligan's Fund Raising Efforts

2012-01-29T08:36:00.000-08:00

In the last two days we took a look at the stellar fund raising effort of City Councilman Festersen and the mediocre one of Councilman Gernandt.   Today we thought we'd look at the effort of neophyte liberal appointed councilman Tom Mulligan.

Actually, Mulligan had a pretty good year given he started it with zero dollars in his campaign fund.   He finished the year with $38,600 on hand, having spent about $6058 in expenses.

Most of his funds came from those who sponsored an October event at the Champions Club (invitation below). Names on that invite and on his contributors' list that catch our eye are Robert Bates ($1000), Dennis Hogan ($2724), Dick Holland ($1000), Donald Klein ($300), Walter Scott ($500), Michael Yanney ($2682) and Jim Young ($1000).   Lots of Democrats.

From businesses, Mulligan collected most of his donations from those who will likely need his vote in the future. They include Big Red Keno ($1000), Burlington Capitol Group ($1000), Cox Communications ($2000), Fullencamp law firm ($400), Kutak Rock ($500), Union Pacific ($500) and the Metro Omaha Builders Association ($2500).

Mulligan will need every dollar he can extort from donors in the coming year as he prepares for 2013.   He's told folks that he is a shu-in and that he is so popular (in his own mind) that he could run for mayor.    Frankly, given his liberal orientation he will be hard pressed to successfully get re-elected in former Councilman Sigerson's conservative Republican district given his RINO (Republican in name only) orientation. And, we know that he will be opposed by real Republicans.

Denny Hogan

and

Roger and Suzanne Arney Don and Kim Kleine

Senator Brad Ashford Elizabeth Kleine

Clayton and Irma Byam Larry and Cynthia Kritenbrink

Joe and Rose Byam Greg and Mary Jo Logsdon

Brenda Clark John Marchant

Bob and Shirley Corn Jim and Jeanne McGowan

Henry Davis Jerry and Colleen Morrissey

Jerry and Pat Davis William and Betsy Mulligan

Dennis and Ruth Duffy William Nolan

Nick and Rosemary Elsener John and Terry Paladino

Joe and Pam Grier Steve and Sue Scholer

Doug and Nancy Glass Walt and Joan Slobotski

Fr, Lloyd Gnirk Greg and Mary Lynn Schwietz

Roger Helgoth Tom Wurtz

Andy Holland Mike and Gail Yanney

Dick Holland Jeff Young

Tom and Karen Jacobi Jim and Shirley Young

Dennis and Betty Jacobson

please join us in support of
OMAHA CITY COUNCIL
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
5:30 pm to 7:00 pm
Champions Run Country Club
13800 Eagle Run Drive * Omaha, Nebraska
$200,00 Per Person
Reply Card Enclosed
mulliganforcitycouncil@gmail.com
Responsible
Leadership For Omaha

Obama's Growing Euro-Socialist State

2012-01-29T08:10:00.000-08:00

There is an interesting article by John Merline in the January 26, Investors Business Daily, "Is President Obama Creating a Nation of Dependents?" We've talked about he huge increase in food stamp dependency in the past but we thought the article was worth sharing given some of the other information he provides. It doesn't exactly make one feel good about the future of our country or the mindset of our president......

"If the Republican primaries are any indication, one big debate in the upcoming election will be whether President Obama is pushing the country toward a European-style welfare culture.

Mitt Romney, for example, argues that "over the past three years, Barack Obama has been replacing our merit-based society with an entitlement society."

Newt Gingrich has taken to calling Obama "the best food-stamp president in American history."

Obama, in contrast, says the government must play an increasing role — what he likes to call "shared responsibility" — to ensure a society that is fairer.

So is Obama turning the country into a welfare society and away from one focused on opportunity?

While it's true that the country has been headed in this direction for many years — with the explosion in entitlements since the 1960s and the aging of the population — Obama has, in fact, greatly accelerated the trend. Examples:

Direct payments. The amount of money the federal government hands out in direct payments to individuals steadily increased over the past four decades, but shot up under Obama, climbing by almost $600 billion — a 32% increase — in his first three years. And Obama's last budget called for these payments to climb another $500 billion by 2016, at which point they would account for fully two-thirds of all federal spending.

People getting benefits. According to the Census Bureau 49% now live in homes where at least one person gets a federal benefit — Social Security, workers comp, unemployment, subsidized housing, and the like. That's up from 44% the year before Obama took office, and way up from 1983, when fewer than a third were government beneficiaries.

Food stamps. This year, more than 46 million (15% of all Americans) will get food stamps. That's 45% higher than when Obama took office, and twice as high as the average for the previous 40 years. This surge was driven in part by the recession, but also because Obama boosted the benefit amount as part of his stimulus plan.

Disability. The number of people on Social Security disability has steadily climbed since the 1970s, thanks mainly to easier eligibility rules. But their numbers jumped 10% in Obama's first two years in office, according to the Social Security Administration. That sharp rise was due largely to meager job prospects since the recession ended in 2009. When employment opportunities are scarce, experts note, many who could otherwise work sign up for disability benefits instead."

Councilman Gernandt Fundraising Efforts -- What Efforts?

2012-01-28T11:22:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, we looked at Councilman Festersen's extraordinary fundraising efforts.   To be fair we look at Councilman Garry Gernandt's efforts today. His efforts are certainly less extraordinary given the fact he actually spent more in 2011 than he took in..

Gernandt closed out the year with $23,114 on hand after starting it with $26,928.   So he spent $4,119 last year and took in NO DONATIONS.

We've often reflected upon Gernandt's lack of competence when he was president of the council.   It seems that the same level of competence has spelled over into his fundraising.

While the next primary election is more than fifteen months away, there are at this point no other declared candidates.    We suspect that at some point, however, Gernandt will wake up and start writing fund-raising letters to some of Councilman Festersen's donors since he is an easy vote for any of them.

'nough said......

Let's Audit Senator Mello's Purchases

2012-01-28T08:58:00.000-08:00

We wonder where Nebraska State Senator Heath Mello's television and appliances were made?   We wonder if he has looked at the labels in his clothing? We're sure they are all made in America. Right? Yeah.....

Well, in his hypocritical liberal Democrat-minded, 'progressive' appeal to his union base, he wants Nebraska State government to build its infrastructure, its roads, its bridges, its airports, its railroads and its buildings with only American made steel, iron and manufactured goods. Thus he is proposing LB 923.

Like his mentors, the president, Senator Avery and even Senator Schumacher he wants to do this because it apparently feels good, not because he has the slightest idea of the statistics or the validity of them.   He doesn't know how much the state government currently spends on non-American manufacturing products.   He doesn't know how many more millions of dollars his law will cost Nebraska taxpayers.   Like the president he says his 'infrastructure bill' will create jobs, but like the failed president's efforts, Mello doesn't even have an estimate of how many.

Various Nebraska governmental entities and state departments have already estimated that Mello's bill would cost tens of millions of dollars. Mello says his bill would make an exception if buying domestic products would drive up the cost of the project by 10%.   We're glad he's so interested in protecting the citizens who elected him. Forget that they have to pay the taxes that build the project and pay his salary.

The effort which Mello has fallen for is "Buy American", a campaign sponsored by manufacturers, unions and their lobbying groups.   What it is is an admission that those businesses can't compete (because of their out-of-line labor costs) and thus need more protectionist legislation to save their butts.   Mello's proposed law would just be a cave-in to that mentality that would punish Nebraska taxpayers.

If Mello is truly serious about his effort, why doesn't he go all the way? Prohibit the purchase of any foreign made product by Nebraska government.   No laptops, no autos, no oil, no nothing not manufactured in the U.S.

And, of course, maybe the hypocrite liberal union-owned Mello ought to start by promising to spend his money only on American made goods. No more of those cheap made in Laos suits, shirts (check your labels, Senator) and shoes.

P.S. Given the ludicrousness of his proposed legislation, we are pleased to award him the coveted "Bill Avery Court Jester Fool Award".

Ben Nelson: A Grumpy Old Loser

2012-01-28T05:00:00.000-08:00

Judging from Judas Ben Nelson's Wednesday attack on Governor Heineman, one can only assume that the reality of his 'loss' of the U.S. Senate seat is beginning to set in. And we did say 'loss' because his forthcoming retreat to his turkey farm is simply a loss without being on the ballot, a loss that saved his over-inflated ego an even greater shock had he not been talked into not seeking re-election.

One might have thought that Ben was thinking of running for governor or afraid that Heineman might decide yet to run for the senate given Nelson's acidic rhetoric. He criticised the governor on the Beatrice Development Center, the C.I.R. and the Keystone Pipeline. To suggest that Heineman, "offers no ideas to address the major issues in the state" is at best an admission that Nelson is totally non compos mentis or simply an angry man about to see his political career come to an end through no one's fault except his own through his betrayal of those Nebraskans he pretended to but misrepresented.

Omaha City Council Member Festersen Bringgin' in the Big Bucks

2012-01-27T11:21:00.000-08:00

In the next few days all Nebraska most Nebraska office holders will be required to file their year-end financial summaries, showing how much cash they have on hand and where they got it from over the last year or since the last filing.

We've taken a look at the Omaha City Council members and as of today we've reviewed the reports for Councilmen Festersen, Gernandt and Mulligan. For this post, we'll stick with Councilman Festersen.

We were struck by the size of the war chest that Festersen has accumulated. For a guy that we've often heard doesn't much enjoy being on the council he has done an extraordinary job raising funds. He started 2011 with $38,024 on hand and raised $57,909 during the year bringing his cash on hand to $90,678!!!! That's pretty impressive more than a year away from the next city council election and one can assume that if he, in fact, chooses to run for re-election rather than mayor or something else that he will be sufficiently financed to discourage other candidates. It might even discourage the fire union from going after him....And he's got yet another year to raise money!

Festersen got his money from the traditional Democrat liberals you'd expect for the most part. They include Susan Buffett ($1000), Keith Edquist ($500), Mike Fahey ($1000), Tom Fellman ($1000), Richard Holland ($1500), and Willie Theiesen to name a few. Other prominent names, some Republican, include Trea Brashear ($500), John Kotouc ($500), Frank Krejci ($1000), Dainel Neary ($1000), Jay Noddle ($1000), Walter Scott ($1500), Jerry Slusky ($500) and Ken Stinson ($1000). Some of these, obviously have business before the council and wouldn't want to offend Festersen by not supporting him...

Festersen has also done a solid job of 'tapping' lots of business entities, many of which come before the council fairly regularly.   They include the Crocker/Huck law firm ($1000), EHPV Lottery Services ($1000), First National Bank ($1000), Fraser Stryker law firm ($1000), Fullencamp law firm ($1000), Hawkins Construction Company ($500), HDR ($1000), Holland Basham Architects ($500), Kiewit Corporation ($1000), Kutak Rock ($500), the Lund Company ($1000), Lyman-Richey ($500), Pansing and Hogan law firm ($1000), PDM Inc. ($500), Union Pacific Railroad ($500), the Nebraska Realtors PAC ($500) the State Health PAC ($1000) and the Steamfitters and Plummers Labor Union 464 PAC.   Again, it's not a stretch to say the latter have lots of interests before the council.

While we've seen folks raise large amounts of dough well in advance of an election we have to say that Festersen has obviously been working hard at it and done so successfully.    With that said, it's also clear that many, if not most, of his contributors will appear before the Omaha City Council at some point, many points in some cases, looking for a favorable vote from Pete.   Likely, they will get it.

We don't begrudge Festersen his efforts and we'd acknowledge the same generosity extended to Republicans and probably will shortly.   It's easy to see how such contributions could impact (euphemistically speaking) one's judgement, but such is political reality.

Frankly, we'd like to see an ordinance that would require every council member to acknowledge any donation of $250 or more for any contributor who comes before the council.   We think it would be instructive to the citizenry of Omaha and would also acknowledge what could be potential conflicts of interest for the sake of transparency.   Sorry, we're sounding like some of those liberal groups.

Until then, good work councilman.

Bachman Rises from the Ashes

2012-01-27T08:41:00.000-08:00

From our friends at Roll Call we're told that Michele Bachmann has announced her candidacy for re-election. We knew it wouldn't take long from the time she left the presidential race. We hope she prevails as it is nice to have someone in Congress say what they believe.

Here's what Roll Call said:

"After a failed bid for the White House, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann said she will run for a fourth term in Congress this year.

"I'm looking forward to coming back and bringing a strong, powerful voice to Washington, D.C.," the conservative Republican said in an interview with the Associated Press.

Depending on the final map — Congressional redistricting in Minnesota still remains uncertain — Bachmann will likely have a good shot at joining the 113th Congress.

Sabato's Crystal Ball: The Republican Newt-mare

2012-01-27T04:23:00.000-08:00

We follow Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball pretty closely because we think he provides a fair appraisal of what is going on in the political environment He has an interesting post this week, now in video, about what he describes at the Newt-mare. It looks at likely electoral votes for Newt and likely electoral votes for Romney against Obama. We think it is incisive and worth thinking about:

Obama Gets the Finger

2012-01-26T15:10:00.000-08:00

Well, he did.   In a heroic effort Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona took no guff from the Nobel Laureate Prince of Peace President of the World of Equal Nations Barack Barry Soetoro Hussein Obama when he landed to continue his lying State of the Union diatribe in her fair state.   Seems he made it clear upon meeting the governor on the tarmac that he didn't like what she wrote in her book about their last meeting in the Oval Office back in 2010.

Although she will no doubt be accused of some heinous crime--we're surprised the Secret Service wasn't instructed to shoot her on the spot--it's nice to see someone in a political capacity that doesn't tolerate his lying crap.

Our congrats to Governor Brewer!   If the lying excuse for a failed presidency can't stand the heat he should get out of the kitchen!!!!

The Kerrey Chess Game and Sacrificial Lambs

2012-01-26T14:52:00.000-08:00

The longer it takes for Bob Kerrey to decide whether he is going to run for the U.S. Senate the more confusing things become, or do they?

We pretty much expected Kerrey to tell us his decision by now. Because he hasn't we can only conclude a few things:

His ego is such that he really wants to run and hasn't faced the need to say "no"
He's made a decision to run and he is getting together with Paul Johnson who has run his and Nelson's campaigns to craft a 'hit-the-ground" announcement
He is waiting for one of the other potential candidates to put together his/her campaign announce, plan, etc.
He's playing a chess game with the governor. If Kerrey wants to wait until after February 15, that will prevent the governor from filing as he is regarded as an incumbent and can't file after that date while Kerrey or a non-office-holding Democrat could wait until March 1 to file.

We think it would have been nothing short of politically naive of Kerrey, which he isn't, to come back to Nebraska on a 'listening' tour and immediately announce a run for the senate seat. He would of course want to talk to his and Nelson's previous consultant Paul Johnson and get things in line as to a campaign plan, formal announcement plan, etc. Kerrey is too smart to just come back and say, "I'm going to run." without working out the details. And, he wouldn't do so without doing a poll. These things take time.

On the other hand, if he has told his party big-wigs that he isn't going to run, he would want to give them a little time to recruit a candidate and give that candidate time to put together a campaign plan.

It would appear that the longer Kerrey waits the more likely it is that he will run since by making no announcement he prevents a Democrat from filing and initiating a campaign, unless of course Kerrey already knows who that person is and is just going to let him/her make their announcement prior to his announcement that he won't run.

This is turning into a chess game. At this point, we think Kerrey has already made his decision and is just waiting for an ally to announce or waiting out the governor as he puts his own plan together.

Our bet, is he won't run and we'll be hearing something soon from another sacrificial lamb......

Dollars for Freshmen

2012-01-26T14:22:00.000-08:00

At the risk of sounding somewhat cynical (we'd never do that would we?) the folks at Politico provided the following information regarding the Republicans in the Class of 2010 congressional elections as to the funding they've received from big business P.A.C.s. At this rate, it probably won't take these freshmen long to forget who they work for.....

"EXCLUSIVE: WHO OWNS THE FRESHMAN CLASS? Corporate America spent big to get to know the 87 freshman House Republicans in 2011. The top 50 contributors doled out $8.7 million in 2011, according to numbers compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Honeywell International topped the list of companies and trade groups, contributing $469,000 to GOP freshmen. Honeywell's Rob Ferris told PI that the company's PAC 'supports those who support the policies that are most important to our business' and will help the economy grow and grow jobs.

National Beer Wholesalers Association ($331K), National Auto Dealers Association ($300K), PricewaterhouseCoopers ($273K) and American Bankers Association ($267K) round out the top five downtown PAC contributors.

NBWA's Mike Johnson said that building a relationship with new lawmakers is important to forward the industry's agenda. 'With this many new freshman, there certainly was an education challenge,' Johnson said, noting that many of the freshman got to Congress by being anti-regulations. 'When it comes to alcohol, we don't share that viewpoint. An effective, balanced regulatory system is important to a marketplace that is fair and competitive.

SO WHICH MEMBERS GOT THE MOST $$? Rep. Patrick Meehan (R-Pa.) took in about $212,000, the most of all GOP freshman. Reps. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.) and Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.) both got just over $200,000 in PAC money. Reps. Francisco Canseco (R-Texas) and Nan Hayworth (R-N.Y.) round out to the top five."

Call a Rat a Rat and a Fraud a Fraud

2012-01-26T08:48:00.000-08:00

We couldn’t help but be amused at the editorial lead by the local daily on Tuesday, “Don’t bet on it’s passage.” The cutesy headline was supposed to be about Nebraska State Senator Schumacher’s gambling proposal, LR 375 CA, the constitutional amendment resolution, the number not even cited.

While some may have hoped that the new editor of the page might show some occasional guts in calling a spade a spade, the editorial was tepid and euphemistic,

As you might recall, we recently opined on the senator’s bill (Senator Schumacher: Who Does He Think He Is Fooling? ). Unlike the local daily we weren’t as unduly polite. Here are some of the phrases used in the editorial:

The proposal "is a genuine head-scratcher"
"This curious legislation"
"A novel concept....But not exactly convincing"

That’s about blunt as the daily got although to its credit it did say:

“It is remarkable that the Legislature is being asked to take up its time considering such an idea.”
“The vagueness of the proposed amendment is another problem.”
“Should this proposal be approved, casino legalization could take place in Nebraska without the casinos having to spend a dime.”
“The Nebraskan who called in 2003 for a statewide vote was Paul Schumacher, a lawyer and keno representative from Columbus heavily involved in promoting the 2004 casino proposals.”

In its final iteration the editorial opined, “Schumacher is an energetic lawmaker who offers constructive ideas on a lot of issues, but on this one, he should fold his cards.”

So much for cuteness, the local daily picked euphemism over a tough stand. What it should have said is:

This bill is a sham to get around a real debate on legalized gambling.
It’s not a “head scratcher”, it’s a fraud pepetrated on the citizens.
On the surface, if you were to believe the earnestness of the proposal, it’s extortion
Its “vagueness” is intended to confuse and hide the real purpose, legalize casino gambling in Nebraska
Schumacher is not just the guy that proposed the 2004 casino proposals, he is a self-enriching slime ball whose legislation was proposed then and now to further enrich himself and his cronies in the casino business.
This is a pure case of a conflict of interest and Schumacher should be ashamed of himself.

We’d suggest that both Schumacher and the local daily ought to be ashamed of themselves: Schumacher for his continued efforts to foist casino gambling on Nebraskans under an unethical guise to enrich himself, and; the local daily for its refusal to call a rat a rat (Schumacher) and his bill a fraud.

Terry Leads on Energy

2012-01-25T08:04:00.000-08:00

His critics are quick to criticize, but we think Congressman Terry has done an outstanding job representing not only those in his district but also all Nebraskans when it comes to his leadership in getting the Keystone XL pipeline built. While other Republican leaders in the state (Heineman, Johanns) just gave the president fodder to turn down the pipeline, Terry led and pressed.

In today's "The Hill Overnight" we received the information below which shows that Terry isn't about to led the issue die, even if the president somehow failed to mention his veto of the pipeline while trying to convince Americans last night in his State of the Union speech that he cared about energy and jobs.

Here, according to "The Hill" is what Lee is doing today:

"State of play: House Republicans are holding their first hearing Wednesday on President Obama’s decision to reject the Keystone XL oil pipeline, giving the GOP a high-profile opportunity to attack the administration for killing the project.

A panel of the House Energy and Commerce Committee will hear testimony from Kerri-Ann Jones, the State Department’s Keystone point woman, about the decision.
Lawmakers will also examine legislation authored by Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) that would put the final verdict on the pipeline into the hands of the independent Federal Energy and Regulatory Commission (FERC), not the State Department. The bill instructs FERC to issue a permit and limits its discretion to reject the project.
Terry told The Hill Tuesday that he plans to press Jones on the State Department's reasoning for rejecting the pipeline, arguing a report justifying the decision did not offer enough detail.

"I thought the report to Congress was really vague," Terry said. "It didn’t say anything about national interest, which was the only basis for turning it down. So as far as I am concerned they violated the law unless there is a clearer reason than what was issued in the report, so I think we will have some questions about what their real reasoning was."
Obama, who denied the pipeline last week, had faced a Feb. 21 deadline to make a decision about Keystone under the two-month extension of the payroll tax cut enacted in December.
GOP leadership is eyeing Terry’s bill, among other measures, in its effort to overturn Obama’s rejection of the pipeline, which would carry oil sands crude from Alberta, Canada, to refineries along the Gulf Coast. Kentucky Rep. Ed Whitfield, a top Republican on the committee, said Tuesday he plans to move Terry's legislation through the panel.

"The administration had more than enough time to review the pipeline and make a decision," a GOP committee staffer said in a statement. "Since politics prevented the president from saying yes to the pipeline and yes to tens of thousands of jobs, we are taking politics out of the equation by relieving the president of his decision making authority."

Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), the chairman of the committee, said last week he hopes to include a measure aimed at forcing approval of the pipeline in upcoming legislation to extend the payroll tax cut for the rest of the year. House GOP leaders are weighing that approach, and Terry also said Keystone provisions could find a spot in separate infrastructure legislation."

Republicans Go On Record Opposing National Popular Vote Compact

2012-01-25T05:58:00.000-08:00

You may not have heard about it but there is an effort known as the 'National Popular Vote Compact' which would drastically change the way our presidents are elected. It would eviscerate the Electoral College Process through a questionable maneuver by changing the rules of presidential elections via a compact between as few as 11 states rather than the 38 required to amend the U.S. Constitution.

Such a compact would undermine the authority of states and give more populated media markets the power to determine who would become president.   In fact, if implemented a non-member state's electoral votes would become irrelevant because member states' electoral votes would number greater than 270 and would simply award their votes to the national popular vote winner.

Can you say Al Gore?   Can you say who cares about Nebraska and Iowa? Can you see that New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Boston, Atlanta, Dallas and other large urban liberal cities would decide who would become president? Can you say only Democrats?   Can you say only a plan liberals could love?

The Nebraska Republican Party went on record against the compact notion at its meeting on January 21 although the mindless un-inquisitive reporting of the local media apparently didn't think the issue was worth reporting.   Can you hear us Robynn?

So why worry about it?   Well, maybe because there is a bill before the Nebraska legislature to joint such a compact! Yes, LB 583 was introduced last year by Senator Ken Haar, another liberal Democrat.   It is rests before the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee chaired by none other than liberal Democrat Bill Avery (the kissing senator).

According to the "Introducer's Statement of Intent",

"LB 583 adopts the Interstate Compact on the Agreement Among States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote.   The compact will become effective when states cumulatively possessing a majority of the electoral votes have enacted this compact.

Currently (Feb. 2011) the compact has been enacted by six states, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Washington and the District of Columbia representing 73 electoral votes or 27% of the 270 needed to bring the compact into effect.   When the National Popular Vote compact takes effect it would assure that the person elected President of the United States has won the most popular votes nationwide."

Did you notice the states that have approved?   They are all liberal Democrat states that would like to take away the input guaranteed smaller states by the U.S. Constitution.   These liberal populated states would benefit by virtue of having the candidates skipping over others as they went to their population centers to win, and only the liberal would win!

If the Democrats want to enhance their ability to steel elections they should at least do it through a constitutional amendment.    In the meantime we hope some of those 33 'non-partisan' Republicans (including Lydia Brasch who is enamored with Bill Avery) will have the good sense to not drink any more of the Kool Aid being served by LIBERAL UNAPOLOGETIC DEMOCRATS such as Senators Haar, Avery, Mello, Nordquist, etc.

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Utopia -- Doug Patton

2012-01-24T09:39:00.000-08:00

My wife was four months pregnant with the first of our two sons when the infamous Roe vs. Wade ruling was announced. Overnight, the world changed. On the 21st of January 1973, she had no legal right to do anything but carry him to term. The following day, January 22nd, the United States Supreme Court handed her the power of life and death. Had she been so inclined, she could have snuffed out his life — and the life of his younger brother two years later — and I would have had absolutely no legal say in the matter.

Today, we cannot imagine what life would have been without them, even with all the challenges that inevitably come with raising children, and now we are blessed with grandchildren. But it did not have to be so. At a crucial moment in their lives, the women who bore our grandchildren also had to make the decision to grant life or bestow death. We thank God they chose life, but in fifty million cases over the last 39 years, that was not the choice, and the heartbreak that has resulted is almost beyond calculation.

Seven men on the U.S. Supreme Court gave this power to American women, a power many are discovering they should never have had. With the sweep of their pens, these men cast a vote for death on a scale that dwarfs most of the atrocities of the 20th century. The decision has been compared to the Nazi Holocaust. In many ways, it is worse, both because of its scale and because of its voluntary nature.

Roe was supposed to create an atmosphere where every child was a wanted child. However, the reality never matched the theory. The notion of "unwanted" children was a lie from the beginning, for even though the number of abortions performed each year is staggering, it has always been outpaced by the number of parents desiring to adopt babies.

Instead of becoming the liberating event utopian feminists touted it to be, Roe became an albatross around the necks of millions upon countless millions of sad, depressed women who bought the lie and suffered the consequences. Consider the lament of one woman, who had an abortion because her baby had been conceived as the result of a rape:

"I have confessed to God, repented for my actions, and felt forgiveness," she says, "but actions have consequences. I've never stopped wondering who that child was and what the now-23-year-old would be doing as an adult. These thoughts slam my conscience as strongly as a fist to the face. I wish I'd known that a temporary situation did not require a permanent solution...Even in my case of calculated rape, the trauma passed just as the pregnancy would have passed. Life would have gone on. I traded one kind of trauma for a longer-lasting one. What I do know no with hindsight is that children are completely innocent. They do not choose their parents. They do not deserve to die...Better a baby on my knee (or an adoptive mother's knee) for a few years than on my conscience forever."

A funny thing happened on the way to Utopia. For the first time since Roe was decided, more young Americans identify themselves as pro-life than pro-choice. According to a Gallup poll in 2009, 51 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds in the United States said they were pro-life, while 45 percent called themselves pro-choice. There is a reason for this. These young people understand that fifty million members of their generation were sacrificed on the altar of radical self-indulgence. They also know that it will be they who will be tasked with changing it.

______________________________________________________________________________

Doug Patton describes himself as a recovering political speechwriter who agrees with himself much more often than not. Now working as a freelance writer, his weekly columns of sage political analysis are published the world over by legions of discerning bloggers, courageous webmasters and open-minded newspaper editors. Astute supporters and inane detractors alike are encouraged to e-mail him with their pithy comments at dougpatton@cox.net.

______________________________________________________________________________

Stenberg Touts Conservative Beliefs

2012-01-24T08:56:00.000-08:00

Our correspondents were at the Republican Luncheon at the Rockbrook Cafe yesterday where State Treasurer and candidate for the G.O.P. senate nomination Don Stenberg spoke.

Stenberg continued to talk about his endorsements from talk show host Mark Levin, Red State, the Madison Project and, of course, Jim Demint's Senate Conservatives Fund.   In regard to the latter, Stenberg bragged of the $300,000 or so Demint's group has already contributed to his campaign through its independent advertising.   As we've noted a couple of weeks ago, Stenberg has said that he expects Demint's group to spend up to $1 million throughout the campaign. Although Stenberg has never raised significant funds for his campaigns, he seems to have struck gold with the Demint endorsement.

Stenberg's rhetoric was pretty much what we've heard over the last months.   He said he wanted to deal with four major issues.   Those are the massive increases in regulations, Obamacare, energy policy, and earmarks.    On regulations, Stenberg said he would introduce legislation to repeal every regulation passed by the Obama administration and would introduce legislation requiring congress to vote on every major new regulation.   Stenberg said he would repeal Obamacare, noting that Nebraska's Governor Heineman has estimated that it would cost Nebraska taxpayers more than $100 million per year.   He called energy a national security and economic issue and said the country can't continue to rely on unstable Middle East oil. He also indicated he would oppose any earmarks or bailouts.

In a commitment we haven't heard from any senate or congressional candidate for some time, Stenberg said that he would eliminate the Department of Education and the Department of Energy, neither of which have worked or accomplished their goals.   He did note that the Nuclear Regulatory Agency would have to be retained and placed in some other agency.

Stenberg indicated that if elected he would work with senators to establish and build a conservative block, those senators mentioned being Demint, Paul, Toomey, Lee.

When asked about the Keystone Pipeline, Stenberg seemed pretty much in sync with Governor Heineman and Senator Johanns in wanting it built but not through the Sand Hills or over the Ogallala Aquifer.

Asked about what he would do after repealing Obamacare, Stenberg suggested tort reform and allowing health insurance to be purchased across state lines, suggesting free market principles of competition.

Further revealing his conservative viewpoint when asked about Social Security, Stenberg suggested that young people should be able to opt out and contribute to a private plane if they so desired.

Lastly, on his primary competition (excuse the pun) Jon Bruning, Stenberg continued his harangue that he, Stenberg, was the true life-long Republicans and that he had not used his office as an opportunity to become a millionaire.

We like Don Stenberg.   There is no doubt about his conservative credentials although we also believe his primary opponents possess the same basic conservative values. At this point, we are not nearly as inclined to dismiss Stenberg's electability as we were prior to his gaining Demint's endorsement and funding.   While Bruning still has much more money to use as he deems appropriate (Stenberg can't do that), having a constant barrage of radio and television ads can't but help Stenberg's chances.

Is Gingrich Goldwater 2?

2012-01-24T07:37:00.000-08:00

We don't disclaim that we like Stu Rothenberg and generally respect what he says. We think he has a good sense of reality for the most part which is why we share the following column with you. We particularly like Rothenberg's musings as to whether this is an election that is a referendum or a 'vision one'. The 'red' is our highlighting>

Will GOP Risk Goldwater II With Newt Gingrich in 2012?

"In 1964, an angry Republican Party threw caution to the wind and nominated conservative Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater for president. Eight years later, Democrats rallied behind South Dakota Sen. George McGovern, an unapologetic liberal.

In each case, the party’s rank and file embraced what it thought was a truth-teller who reflected the core values of its party and promised to lead a movement. And, of course, both candidates lost badly, though Goldwater’s defeat did have a positive long-term effect on his party.

It isn’t yet clear whether Republicans are willing to roll the dice on a risky nominee this year, but after three nominating contests, it’s impossible to discount that possibility.

The difference between 1964 and 1972, on one hand, and 2012, on the other, is that the incumbent president this year is weak and extremely vulnerable in the general election.

Throwing away a nomination to make a statement is one thing when the nomination probably doesn’t matter. It’s another thing when that nomination looks valuable.

Whatever his weaknesses, former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) is getting plenty of mileage from his strong debate performances and attacks on the establishment and the liberal elite media.

His populist message makes conservatives feel good, much as former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean’s angry message of change resonated with Democrats in late 2003 and much as Goldwater’s “in your heart, you know he’s right” message won over conservatives almost 50 years ago.

Republican grass-roots conservatives unquestionably are angry — at President Barack Obama, at the national media and, most importantly, at their own party leaders, who they believe have been too willing to compromise on core concerns. They might be so angry that they are willing to overlook Gingrich’s character flaws — character flaws they would scream about in a liberal Democrat.

Looking forward, there were two particularly interesting things to glean from South Carolina exit polls.

First, a majority of GOP primary voters who said that the ability to defeat the president was their top concern voted for Gingrich.

Gingrich almost certainly won the electability argument in South Carolina because of his debate skills and combativeness, but it also isn’t unusual for people to assume that the person they prefer is also the strongest general election candidate. It’s an easy rationalization to make.

The reality of the situation is different, at least so far. Gingrich’s personal ratings have been worse than Romney’s nationally, and polls to this point repeatedly have shown former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney running far better against Obama than does Gingrich. That means future general election trial heats could affect the GOP race’s outcome.

Second, self-identified evangelicals and those who said the candidates’ religious beliefs mattered “a great deal” or “somewhat” were willing to overlook Gingrich’s adultery and the charges coming from his second wife that he proposed an “open marriage.”

For evangelicals, past behavior is less important than what “is in your heart” — at least when it comes to self-professed conservative Republicans. Gingrich’s acknowledgement of past errors and talk of his turning to God was enough for evangelicals who were motivated either by populist anger or by Romney’s Mormonism.

But that’s where evangelicals are different from nonevangelicals.

Republican insiders are so worried about Gingrich at the top of the GOP ticket because they doubt his ability to win the presidency, don’t believe that the former Speaker’s character and behavior will be so quickly forgotten by general election voters and are worried that he would be a horrible president, even if he were to win.

The former Speaker likes to say that he will present a strong contrast to Obama in what will be an election offering two very different visions.

He could be right about that, but an election of “visions” is not what Republicans should want or need this year. They should want the election to be a referendum on the president’s performance. The more the 2012 presidential contest is a “choice” rather than a “referendum,” the better it is for the president and his
re-election campaign.

Gingrich sees himself in such historic terms that he won’t allow the election to merely be about Obama. He’ll want it to be about his vision — which will automatically make it about him. And that’s politically dangerous, given Gingrich’s ego, his lengthy record in Washington, D.C., his personal life and his tendency to over-dramatize and exaggerate.

Unfortunately for Gingrich (and for his party, if he is the nominee), the larger electorate is less religious than Republican evangelicals, and they are less likely to excuse Gingrich’s personal failings simply because he says he has asked for divine forgiveness.

Most swing voters are likely to see a man who dumped two wives (the second while he was lambasting the Democratic president for cheating on his wife), who claimed Freddie Mac hired him as a “historian,” who was reprimanded by the House and who pushed the envelope in who knows how many other ways — and they will start to wonder about his values and judgment.

Romney is still more likely than not to be the GOP nominee — most members of the media have a tendency to overreact about the last primary, and Gingrich isn’t on the ballot in Virginia — but the increased nervousness among party insiders, from elected officials, strategists and party leaders, is both understandable and warranted.

Stuart Rothenberg is editor of the Rothenberg Political Report.

Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste!

2012-01-24T05:10:00.000-08:00

We're beginning to think that Ron Paul has taken the Rahm Emanuel playbook to heart by never letting a crisis go unused.   Yes, within hours of Ron's son Rand being 'detained' by the TSA, we've received an e-mail from Congressman Paul asking us to send him money, another 'money bomb', a mini-money bomb', so he can win the presidency and get even, err eliminate the TSA.

Whether you appreciate Dr. Paul or not he will be with us to Tampa and probably beyond and you can bet he will never miss an opportunity to ask for money.   In this case, he really did learn from the Obama/Emanuel machine!

Here's his e-mail:

"Dear       :

Earlier today, the internet was buzzing with the rallying cry “Free Rand Paul!”

And this image was at the top of the Drudge Report:

What happened to set off such a firestorm?

My son, Senator Rand Paul, simply stood up for his right not to be the latest victim of the TSA’s disgusting full body pat-down.

I’m writing today to ask for your help in fighting back against the out-of-control TSA, but first, let me tell you what happened.

After an “anomaly” turned up in his body scan as he was trying to board a flight in Nashville, Rand showed that he was clearly no threat and asked to go through the scanner a second time.

Instead of tolerating this common-sense idea, TSA officials demanded he undergo a full body pat-down.

Rand stood up for his rights and refused – and was then detained by the TSA and prevented from getting on his flight.

Though the TSA finally caved after Rand didn't back down for two hours - and allowed him to go through the scanner again- Rand caught a later flight but missed his commitment to speak at the March for Life in Washington, D.C.

As soon as word got out that Rand was being detained, grassroots Americans responded in outrage over this latest abuse of power by the TSA.

Which leads me to a critical point.

Rand was able to speak up for liberty today thanks to the platform he has as a U.S. Senator.

I’m proud of my son’s stand, but just imagine those who receive this kind of treatment every day in our nation’s airports and can’t fight back?

The elderly. The disabled. Little kids.

All victims of an out-of-control police state that, while doing nothing to make us safer, is working overtime to strip away our freedoms, our rights, and our basic dignity.

Thanks to your support, I have a chance to stand up for all those who have been assaulted by the TSA and END these abuses once and for all.

As President, I pledge to do everything in my power to strengthen our national security by ending the theatrical sham that is the TSA.

I know it’s short notice, but we’ve put together a mini-Money Bomb to bring even more attention to this critical issue tonight and tomorrow.
Will you help me win this race and fight back for our civil liberties by making your most generous contribution right away?

You see, not one of my establishment opponents – and certainly not the incumbent, who stands idly by every day while this disgrace operates in our airports –will lift ONE FINGER to stop the TSA, stand up for our Constitution, and preserve passengers’ dignity.

I have led on this issue with my Plan to Restore America, which, along with cutting $1 trillion during the first year of my presidency, abolishes the TSA!

My Plan will take the responsibility for security from this reckless bureaucracy and return it to the private property owners who will do everything possible to keep their customers safe.

Whether it’s honoring our promises to our veterans, or securing our borders, or ending the policies that keep our troops under the thumb of the UN, not one of my opponents measure up to the standard we need when it comes to this nation’s defense.

Sure, they’ll talk a good game on the campaign trail, but every one of them ignores the simple truth that national security begins at home.

Let’s follow “Free Rand Paul” with another rallying cry – “End the TSA!”

And this election gives us a better chance than ever before to do just that.

Please, give whatever you are able right away to our End the TSA Money Bomb to help us keep the spotlight on this out-of-control organization and restore respect for freedom and common decency to the White House.

For Liberty,

Ron Paul

P.S. Earlier today, my son, Senator Rand Paul, was detained by the TSA in Nashville, prevented from making his flight, and missed his commitment to speak at the March for Life in Washington, D.C.

All because he refused to be the latest victim of the TSA’s disgusting full body pat-downs.

I’m proud of my son’s stand, but there are many more who receive this kind of treatment every day – and never have a chance to speak out.

My Plan to Restore America stands up for the rights and privacy of every traveler by abolishing the TSA.

Please, make your most generous contribution today to myEnd the TSA Money Bomb so I can have every possible resource to win this race, abolish the out-of-control TSA

Democrats Want Our Help in Encouragine Kerrey to Run

2012-01-23T16:29:00.000-08:00

In our "we get e-mail' category we got one from our friends at the Nebraska Democrat, oops, Democratic Party. They seem upset at that meanie Karl Rove and those nasty ads he is running in an effort to discourage Rockin' Bob to run. Somehow, we don't think our response will make much difference.

We actually think Cosmic Bob is smarter than trying for an encore run for the U.S. Senate given his liberal past and even more liberal current views, i.e., Obamacare and global warming....

Here is what we received:

"I'm writing to you today because Bob Kerrey needs your help. You've watched as Karl Rove and the Koch brothers spent hundreds of thousands attacking Ben Nelson last fall.

Now they're at it again, attacking Bob Kerrey with some $135,000 in negative ads before Kerrey even announced whether he was going to run for the U.S. Senate.
That's why we need you to sign our petition to show that Nebraskans will stand with Bob Kerrey. Sign our petition asking Senator Kerrey to run for the U.S. Senate and give us an independent voice in the Senate instead of a lapdog for the radical right.

Here's what just two Nebraskans who signed our petition in the last few days said about a possible candidacy from Bob Kerrey:

-He would be an independent level head in the Senate. He would not be there as a career politician whose only interest is political partisanship.

-Let's start the defeat of the Koch Brothers' money and Karl Rove's dirty tactics right here, right now!

It's clear that Karl Rove and his allies are running scared. Why else would Rove's SuperPAC and his friends have already bought $135,000 in attack ads?
Sign our petition and tell Senator Kerrey that you will stand with him and want him to run for the U.S. Senate to stand up to Karl Rove, the Koch Brothers and their radical friends.

Thanks for all that you do,

Brandon Lorenz

Communications Director,
Nebraska Democratic Party"

Why Giffords Leaves Now

2012-01-23T15:52:00.000-08:00

We don't want to in any way demean Rep. Gabby Giffords who has certainly suffered by virtue of her elected position, but politics are still politics.

We're sorry that she found it necessary to resign and wish her well in her continued recovery process. But some might wonder why it took until now for that decision to be made. Well, could it just be that in order to qualify for her federal pension she needed to complete five years of service in the House? Could it be that today marks the culmination of those five years? If anyone deserves compensation for the cost of serving it is Giffords, but for those of us who happen to be a little cynical it's not a surprise that her retirement comes on the day that it does.

On a different issue, Politico notes that Giffords has lots of campaign money (nearly $900,000) to do with what she chooses within prescribed limits. Of course, it's not as much as Nebraska's own Judas Ben Nelson who has nearly $3 million to dispose of. Of course, both Giffords and Nelson could continue their financial largess infinitum just as the late Nebraska Senator Jim Exon whose campaign donations continued to be doled out post mortem. But there we go being cynical again.

Local Daily Gets it Wrong on Recess Appointments -- Gerald (Jerry) R. Florine

2012-01-23T15:17:00.000-08:00

Recently, three letters to the World-Herald Public Pulse have challenged a January 10 Pulse letter regarding President Obama's "recess" appointments to the NLRB and the chairman of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, where the original letter described the appointments as not only questionable, but unconstitutional, and asks for a Congressional response.

The proponents of President Obama's appointments argue that recess appointments are, in fact, constitutional, and used by Presidents of both Parties. No one argues the Constitutionality of recess appointments. However, these recent appointments were made during what is technically a "pro-forma" Congressional session, where Congress is technically in session so that ongoing business can be conducted via "unanimous consent".

The recent payroll tax reduction extension was thus passed into law under this procedure.

The President's appointments are in question, and, in fact, constitutionally questionable, because Congress must be legally in recess for such appointments to be legal. President Bush refrained from making such appointments during his term in deference to the Democrat controlled Senate.

One writer erroneously argued that the appointments were made because "Congress has decided not to act upon anything." In fact, the NLRB appointments were made only on 12/15, and the Democrat controlled Senate had not even had time to schedule hearings.

There is legitimate concern that President Obama has acted outside of constitutionally accepted norms in these appointments. Perhaps next he will choose to do recess appointments over a standard weekend when the Congressmen are visiting constituents.

Democrats often challenged President Bush 43 over the powers of the Presidency. There are legitimate concerns regarding the balance of powers between the branches of government, and attempts to break precedent should not go unchallenged! In fact, the appointments are being challenged in court, and, as with two recent Supreme Court decisions regarding Obama administration actions, could very well be overturned.

The World-Herald finally, published a Pulse response, as of 01/19, that at least attempted to partially explain the issue, raising the point that Congress, not the President, determines when Congress is legally in "session".

However, all three letters published supporting the President's decision to make the appointments completely misrepresented the issue, comparing the President's actions to mundane recess appointments. One has to wonder why it was necessary to publish three consecutive letters, all essentially from the same "playbook", that were complete misrepresentations of the issue!

Nebraska Republican Party Officially Endorses Congressman Terry and others

2012-01-23T08:36:00.000-08:00

At Saturday's meeting of the Nebraska Republican Party Central Committee, held at the Paxton ballroom in Omaha, members went on record endorsing and dedicating party resources to re-electing Congressmen Lee Terry, Adrian Smith and Jeff Fortenberry. While the endorsement process continues to draw some questions from members the vote easily exceeded the two-thirds majority required.

For those of you who read the local daily you would never have known this given the fact that the reporter present for it was only looking for a headline, in this case the comments of one G.O.P. senate nominee candidate about another.

In addition to endorsing the re-election of the congressman, the party also endorsed and committed itself to support the following:

Public Service Commissioner Frank Landis (District 1)
Public Service Commissioner Tim Schram (District 3)
State Board of Education Member Mark Quandahl (District 2)
State Board of Education Member Jim Scheer (District 3)
Board of Regent Member Bob Whitehouse (District 1)
State Senator Paul Lambert (District 2)
State Senator Scott Price (District 3)
State Senator Charlie Janssen (District 15)
State Senator Dav Bloomfield (District 17)
State Senator Colby Coash (District 27)
State Senator Les Seiler (District 33)
State Senator Mike Gloor (District 35)
State Senator Galen Hadley (District 37)
State Senator Beau McCoy (District 39)
State Senator Ken Schliz (District 47)

In addition, after passing a new amendment to its constitution the party went on record supporting the following first-time candidates for the legislature:

Mike Hilgers (District 21)
Acela Turco (District 31)
Richard Carter (District 45)
John Murante (District 49)

Save a Tree, Stifle a Senator

2012-01-23T08:12:00.000-08:00

To be clear, we've not fallen under the spell of Al Gore and his global warming folks. You won't see us demonstrating on Earth Day. But, there is nothing wrong in opposing the waste of paper, and ultimately trees, if done to make government more efficient.

With an effort being made or suggested by various state senators to reduce the amount of paper created, our senators continue to author useless resolutions that simply take time and money, as we noted in our Friday post: Nebraska's Unicameral: Wasting Time and Paper. But, of course, they've issued even more of their resolutions as evidenced below:

LR 366 Brasch: Congratulate Brendan Gepson for earning the rank of Eagle Scout
LR 367 Brasch: Congratulate Jake Albrach for earning the rank of Eagle Scout
LR 368 Brasch: Congratulate Alex Norton for earning the rank of Eagle Scout
LR 369 Brasch: Congratulate Aaron Hughes for earning the rank of Eagle Scout
LR 370 Brasch: Congratulate John Lierman for earning the rank of Eagle Scout
LR 371 Heidemann: Congratulate the Palmyra Volunteer Fire Department on its 100th anniversary

Acknowledging new Eagle Scouts and anniversaries is a waste of time, effort and paper. It's unfair to those other Eagle Scouts and anniversaries who/which aren't important enough to recognize. We think our senators have more important things to do.....

The Unintended Consequences of Being Duped By Jane Fonda Kleeb

2012-01-23T07:11:00.000-08:00

We received an e-mail release from Trans Canada this morning indicating that it intends to continue its efforts to build the Keystone XL Pipeline. In part it reads:

"TransCanada's new Presidential Permit application will make use of the exhaustive record and reviews compiled and conducted during the last three years and conducted during the last three years – the most extensive regulatory review ever applied to a crude oil pipeline project in the U.S. During the three-year review period, DOS issued three environmental impact statements, all of which concluded Keystone XL would have a limited environmental impact and that the pipeline would be subject to the most stringent safety standards and practices ever applied to a pipeline in the U.S.

The Obama Administration and DOS indicated it could not issue a decision until concerns about the pipeline’s proposed route through the environmentally sensitive Nebraska Sandhills were addressed. TransCanada will continue to work with the State of Nebraska’s Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ) to develop a new route for Keystone XL that avoids the Sandhills."

However, given the governor's recent comments about how the state will proceed, whether it can use the two million dollars approved by the legislature, etc., we aren't quite sure how Trans Canada is going to work with Nebraska if Nebraska isn't sure how it can work with Trans Canada.

More unintended consequences brought to you by Jane Fonda Kleeb and associates Dave Heineman and Senators Johanns and Nelson.

Putting Spending and Deficits into Perspective

2012-01-21T13:31:00.000-08:00

Our friends at the Platte Institute had an interesting 'Platte Chat" commentary earlier in the week which puts the country's spending and debt problems into an interesting perspective. It's a fairly short read which we think is worth passing on:

The Federal Budget:
A Household Perspective
By Jordan Cash

This week, the Platte Institute will be taking a look at money brought in and spent by the federal government and how it affects its debt and deficits, from the perspective of the average American household. Admittedly, this is not a unique approach and has been presented by several different groups.[1] Yet this type of illustration personalizes the fact that the current path of government overspending and mountainous debt is not sustainable and will be disastrous if drastic measures are not taken to put our fiscal house back in order.

The way we can easily relate the massive federal expenditures and revenues to the average American household, is simply to remove a few zeroes. With numbers in the trillions and billions thrown around every day we can become desensitized to exactly how tremendous these numbers are. As a starting point, here are the actual numbers of what the federal government received in revenue and paid out in expenses for the year 2010:[2]

Revenue: $2,162,700,000,000

Expenditures: $3,456,200,000,000

This means that the federal government overspent by about $1,293,500,000,000.

Now let us take a look at the national debt as of January 19, 2012:

National Debt: $15,250,793,000,000[3]

Interest on the debt for Fiscal Year 2011: $454,393,280,417.03[4]

Give or take a few million dollars.

These numbers are incomprehensibly large, and it is difficult to get a grasp of the amount of money the government owes and spends.

By taking off eight zeroes we can examine the federal revenue, expenditures, and debt like a household budget and help people wrap their minds around our debt problem. With this method, the household would have an annual income of $21,627 while spending $34,562 a year. On top of this, the household must pay interest on its outstanding "credit card" debt of $152,507, which amounts to $4,543 a year.

In short, this family, who makes a little over $21,600 a year, overspent by $12,935 even when they already have a massive debt of $148,587 and have to pay the interest on said debt, which makes up almost a fifth of their income. To give further perspective, if one wanted to apply this household test to the budget cuts made in August 2011 as part of the debt deal, then this family would have cut a whopping $385.[5]

Looking at the federal debt from this perspective, it should become clear that the United States is on the edge of a fiscal cliff. Unless drastic steps are taken, this situation will only grow worse over time. Indeed, the national debt is now more than the nation's gross domestic product.[6] The United States government has a spending problem, and just like a family that overspends, the only way to achieve fiscal sanity and allow for prosperity, is to live within their means. The federal government must begin to live within its means soon, before the debt creates another unavoidable crisis that would destroy the American economy.

If one wishes to gain more perspective on how to wrap their heads around our massive debt, there are two websites that could be useful. One, by State Budget Solutions, imagines the federal debt as pennies, noting that from our nation's founding to 1910 the debt was only $3 billion-three pennies-and in the last year the federal government added $15 trillion to the debt-1,500 pennies. Another imagines the debt and unfunded liabilities as stacked $100 bills, the end result is taller than the Empire State Building and the Twin Towers. Those two demonstrations may be found here and here.

[1] Perry Chiaramonte, "Tea Party Group Casts National Debt as a Household Budget." September 27, 2011. Accessed October 21, 2011: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/27/tea-party-group-casts-national-debt-as-household-budget/.

[2] "Summary of Receipts, Outlays, and Surpluses or Deficits(-) in Current Dollars, Constant (FY 2005) Dollars, and as Percentages of GDP: 1940-2016 [in Billions of Dollars]" Tax Policy Center, March 25, 2011. Accessed October 21, 2011: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200.

[3] US Debt Clock. Accessed January 19, 2011: http://www.usdebtclock.org/.

[4] United States Department of the Treasury, "Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding." Accessed January 19, 2012: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm.

[5] Chiaramonte, September 27, 2011.

[6] "U.S. Debt Reaches 100 Percent of Country's GDP," August 4, 2011. Accessed October 21, 2011: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/04/us-debt-reaches-100-percent-countrys-gdp/.

Will Bain Capital Contributions be the Bane of The Democrats?

2012-01-21T04:45:00.000-08:00

While his Republican friends are criticizing him for his relationship with Bain Capital and the Democrats are preparing to go after him should he become the G.O.P. nominee, Mitt Romney might take heart in some information gathered by "The Hill" newspaper. Seems that the Democrats are at least as greedy as ol' Mitt. If they intend to criticise Romney for his contributions from Bain Capital, perhaps they will all decide to give their donations back or to charity???? Yeah.

Here is what "The Hill" found:

"The Hill reviewed contributions made from the 2008, 2010 and 2012 cycles.
Romney has collected more money from Bain Capital employees than any federal candidate since the beginning of 2007, amassing more than $166,000 in contributions. He took more than $84,000 from Bain employees in the first three quarters of 2011.
But President Obama received a sizable share as well. He has accepted more than $80,000 from Bain employees since the beginning of 2007. Bain Capital employees gave $27,500 to Obama during the first three quarters of 2011.

The donations were reported to the Federal Election Commission and culled in a database created by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that tracks federal campaign spending.

Obama does not accept money from lobbyists, but does accept donations from Wall Street executives. Campaign finance records show that Democrats collect more money from Wall Street than does the GOP."

Nebraska's Unicameral: Wasting Time and Paper

2012-01-20T12:02:00.000-08:00

In reviewing a partial list of bills and resolutions introduced by our esteemed state senators we can't help but comment on the resolutions that simply shouldn't be introduced, ones that take time and paper and have nothing to do with running our fine state. Some of these make the Congress' approval of post office names look legitimate.

LR 356 Langemeier Congratulate the Aquinas High School football team for winning the 2011 Class C-2 state championship
LR 357 Karpisek Recognize B.J. Lawrence for his outstanding accomplishments in track and field
LR 359 Wightman Recognize Bill Kloepping for his seventy years of service to 4-H clubs in Dawson County
LR 360 Wightman Congratulate the Sargent High School football team for winning the Class D-2 state championship
LR 361 Congratulate the Hartington one-act play production team for winning the 2011 Class C-2 state play production championship
LR 362 Recognize January 5, 2012 as the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Nebraska Unicameral Legislature and honor the lifetime achievement of George W. Norris
LR 363 Congratulate the Norfolk Catholic High School football team for winning the 2011 Class C-1 state championship
LR 364 Congratulate the Elkhorn High School football team for winning the 2011 Class B state championship

Seems to us that too be fair, every senator should be required to introduce a resolution recognizing every accomplishment of every high school in their district......

Johanns' Finger Pointing Continues

2012-01-20T07:42:00.000-08:00

On Wednesday we discussed Senator Johanns' finger pointing in blaming everyone other than himself, Ben Nelson and Governor Heineman for the Keystone XL Pipeline turn down by the president.    The senator continued his blame-game finger pointing this morning on K.F.A.B.'s Good Morning Show.

This morning, Johanns said that he has been against the Sand Hills route for two or three years and that he told Trans Canada they should reroute it two or three years ago.   Pointing his finger at Trans Canada. he said it admitted last summer that it wouldn't be difficult to reroute it away from the Sand Hills and the Ogallala Aquifer which ultimately it agreed to do despite the fact that the proposed route through the Sand Hills had been okay'd by the E.P.A.

Certainly, if Johanns had made any real early effort, if he had any clout as a U.S. Senator, he would have convinced Trans Canada to change the route or simply told them he would oppose it.   He didn't and in the end all his finger pointing should begin with the guy he sees in the mirror every morning.    He abetted Jane Fleming Kleeb and her anti-oil and fossil fuel agenda by giving the president a reason to turn down the permit.

The ambiguity of Johanns, fellow senator Nelson along with that created by the vacillation of the governor, which led to his flip-flop calling of a special session, created this mess.   As a result, job creation, energy independence, national security and Nebraska economic development have all been put on hold if not at risk altogether.

The Federal Income Tax: Mitt Romney and Warren Buffett, Two Peas in a Pod? -- Patrick McPherson

2012-01-20T06:33:00.000-08:00

There are a lot of things that I don't care about when it comes to Mitt Romney, although I believe he will be the G.O.P. nominee for president and will be the president of our nation at noon in 365 days.   With that said, one of the things I do not dislike about Romney is the fact that he is a successful capitalist. Capitalism is what has built this country into the great one it was until it became quasi-illegal about three years ago when a devoted European-socialist-type president took over the reigns of government.

I personally don't care whether Mitt Romney pays 15% of his income or 0% of his income as long as he is following the silly 40,000 or so pages of rules promulgated by a bunch of ninny's in the form of the tax code.    I am thankful people like Romney and Warren Buffett (who is a nice guy because he is a Democrat and friends of the current president) take risks, create jobs (or destroy them when necessary for the survival of a company that still employs people) and create capital that can be invested to create more jobs, more companies and the dividend retirement income that many of those downtrodden rely on.

The problem (there is no fault for following the law) is not Romney, not Buffett.   It's the tax code.   And if Buffett's secretary pays more than her boss in income taxes, that's the fault of the tax code.   In fact, it is what is wrong with an federal income tax. Forgive us if we sound libertarian or appear to be succumbing to some notion that the 16th Amendment is illegal. That's not us.

The truth of the matter is that no corporation pay taxes--they just hire folks to minimize them so they don't have to pass any more costs than necessary on to perspective buyers of their products or services. They fight to minimize taxes or take 'advantage' of the tax code because it reduces the competitiveness of their products and exports, which results in less jobs in America and more imports from overseas.

The truth of the matter is that Americans shouldn't pay taxes on any savings or any dividends.   Those investments finance capital growth.   Those investments are at risk whether it be capital loss or reduced income from safer ones. Those investments create more jobs!

The income tax in inherently unfair.   It's not because Mitt and Warren pay just 15% of their income.   It's not because some secretary pays 25%.   It's not because some high earner pays 35%.   But it certainly is unfair when those folks pay and some 47% of our population pays NO federal income taxes at all!!

Every one should pay some federal taxes (not just F.I.C.A.) and have some OWNERSHIP in their country.   Folks who make more shouldn't be punished simply because the earn more--this is an "opportunity" society not a "fairness" society. Equal opportunity, not equality of results is guaranteed.

So if you are unhappy or feel oppressed because Mitt and Warren pay a lesser tax rate than you do (you can bet they pay a lot more than you!), do something about it.   Work hard, make more money and investments, start your own business (if your brave enough given the anti-business, regulatory environment of our country).

If you are still unhappy do what this nation should have done years ago.   Throw out the whole federal income tax.   It is unfair.   It costs our country productive jobs and exports. Establish a flat tax where every one pays a set percent of his income exclusive of any deductions.   Or better yet, establish the Fair Tax which would not only eliminate the federal income tax, but also require that every one pays the same % of his purchases in sales taxes.   It would also give every one ownership in his country.    Maybe then citizens would be less desirous of getting something for nothing from their government since they'd be paying for it.  It would create more capital, more jobs in America and more exports and most of all equity for all citizens.   And it would eliminate a costly government bureaucracy that creates no product and no jobs.

Until then I applaud Mitt and, yes, Warren for paying the paltry % of their income that they do.   Regardless of their income they take risks, create capital and jobs.   What's wrong with that and why should they be punished?

__________________________________

Patrick McPherson is a member of our editorial staff and an occassional contributor to the Objective Conservative.

National Nightmare Ends in One Year

2012-01-20T04:34:00.000-08:00

We'd be remiss if we didn't take note that in just 365 days the long national nightmare of Barack Obama will come to a well-deserved and ignominious end as he and his failed presidency leave Washington, D.C.

American will reject his European-socialist government orientation and his anti-American exceptionalism on November 6.

Goodbye Governor

2012-01-19T23:01:00.000-08:00

We weren't surprised to see Governor Perry saddle up his horse and head home for Texas although we did think he'd stay for the South Carolina shootout after initially running from the fight only to reconsider.

Readers will recall that we were originally excited about his candidacy much as we were about Fred Thompson's four years earlier.   Like Thompson, Perry's Republican effort sored momentarily, crashed and burned almost as quickly.   We pointed out that he was not ready for prime time, that he was a doofus.

Even so, we believe that Perry is a good man and a well-meaning conservative.   He's done a great job in Texas. He is governor material but he just isn't presidential material.   In a way that's too bad as he might have made a good president if only he would never have been exposed to the press and had to make public statements.     Of course, unlike the man he wanted to impress he didn't have a tele-prompter to read from as he traversed the first of the 57, or is it 58, states?

Goodbye, Governor Perry.   Thanks for trying. We wish you well.

P.S. With only 4 candidates remaining we'll venture to say that only three will go to Florida.    Santorum will probably not make it. That will leave Gingrich who is a wreck, Paul who is a disaster and Romney who whether we like him or not will be the only hope to replace the current occupant of the White House.

Racist Councilman Gray's Discrimination Nightmare

2012-01-19T11:25:00.000-08:00

We knew it was coming so it's not a surprise that Omaha's most racist city councilman, Ben Gray, intends to introduce a city ordinance that will only enrich a bunch of liberal lawyers while driving businesses out of the city.   Sadly, his ordinance which would ban discrimination against homosexuals and transgender people will probably have the support of six of Omaha's council members, Councilwoman Stothert being the only one of the seven that has an ounce of brains and recognizes the unintended consequences of the ordinance.

Gray has a habit of looking for discrimination where ever he can find it, except in himself. His proposal would be a nightmare for businesses and religious organizations.   It would be a nightmare for the city's legal staff to defend and most of all it would solve virtually no real discrimination issues.

We only hope that Senator McCoy's LB 912 is passed by a reasonably rational Nebraska legislature such that ordinances like Gray's can be prevented from causing havoc throughout communities and for businesses across the state.

Murder, Mayhem and Tinkling on Terrorists -- Doug Patton

2012-01-19T10:31:00.000-08:00

The story is told of General John J. "Black Jack" Pershing fighting Islamic terrorists in the Philippines in 1911. It seems that his troops had captured a number of the enemy. Knowing of the Muslim fear of even coming in contact with pigs, the story goes that Pershing forced the prisoners to dig their own graves, then stood all but one of them up in front of a firing squad. He ordered his men to slaughter several pigs and to dip their bullets in the pig’s blood. After the terrorists were executed, their bodies were thrown into the graves and the pig blood and guts were buried with them. The terrified lone survivor was turned loose to return and tell his compatriots what he had witnessed. Rumor has it that Pershing had no further problems with the Islamic population of the Philippines. While the veracity of the story is undetermined, it strikes one as the sort of tale that should have happened even if it didn't.

Can you imagine Black Jack Pershing working for the likes of Barack Obama, Leon Panetta and Hillary Clinton? Can you picture General George Patton (no relation to yours truly), the man who proclaimed that "Americans love to win and can’t stand to lose" taking orders from this crowd of wimps? Try to visualize Pershing or Patton’s response to all the feigned outrage coming out of the Obama White House, Defense and State Departments over a video of four U.S. Marines urinating on the corpses of a group of Taliban terrorists they had just killed. Obama, Panetta and Clinton, the three stooges of American foreign policy have expressed their outrage at this act because the U.S. is in the midst of trying to negotiate with the Taliban.

Of course, a spokesman for the Taliban concurred with the administration’s outrage. (I know it was a spokesman because any woman who attempted to speak on behalf of these savages would be stoned to death.) At any rate, I can certainly understand Obama’s reluctance to upset the Taliban. After spending the past three years bowing before Islamic radicals and cozying up to South American tyrants on his globetrotting apology tour, the president wouldn’t want to anger the people who aided and abetted Osama bin Laden in the killing of nearly 3,000 innocent Americans. That would be wrong. In fact, in the words of liberal pundits Juan Williams and Kirsten Powers on Fox News, what these marines did was "despicable." Really? Annoying, maybe. Stupid, certainly — especially for allowing it to be videotaped in this YouTube age — but despicable isn’t even in the ballpark.

Synonyms for despicable: appalling; dreadful; contemptible; wicked; shameful; disgraceful; vile; loathsome. Sorry. This doesn't even come close. Despicable is what the Taliban and their ilk did to us. Despicable is what happened in New York City, at the Pentagon and in a field near Shanksville, PA, a decade ago. Despicable is what the Iranians are trying to do with their newfound nuclear technology. Despicable is what Kim Il Sung, his son, Kim Jung Il and grandson, Kim Jung Un, have done to North Korea and its people. Despicable is what Hugo Chavez has done to Venezuela. Despicable is what Hitler and Stalin and Pol Pot did to the innocents who got in their way. Tinkling on terrorists is in another category altogether.

Like General Pershing, our military should have the authority to do whatever is necessary to win against whatever enemy we ask them to fight. Our enemies should always know that no matter what happens, when we go to war, it's not going to be pretty or dignified or sporting. As Ronald Reagan once said, the strategy should be a simple one: we win, they lose, period.

______________________________________________________________________________

Senator Schumacher: Who Does He Think He Is Fooling?

2012-01-19T04:54:00.000-08:00

Senator Paul Schumacher's latest effort to enrich himself, LR 375 CA, is nothing but a veiled attempt to open Nebraska to casino gambling. Basically his bill says that if adjacent states with casinos don't ante up millions of dollars of their state gambling/casino revenue, the Nebraska legislature without a vote of the citizens could pass legislation allowing casinos and casino gambling in Nebraska.   Schumacher says that gambling revenue that he would extort from the other states could total $50 to $100 million a year.

This slime ball, self-enriching senator who already obtains much of his income from keno operations throughout the state would have voters believe that other states are just going to relinquish their tax revenue to Nebraska.   Maybe someone ought to ask Schumacher if he thinks the Nebraska legislature would give up millions of dollars of tax revenue to adjacent states if it had legalized casino gambling?   Yeah, sure.

So this state senator who has gotten rich from his relationships with gambling and wants to further enrich himself with casinos knows well that adjacent states would never do this and that their failure to do so would provide a carte blanc for the legislature to approve gambling without the consent of Nebraska's citizens.

Yes, Nebraskans would get to vote on a constitutional amendment but even the least intelligent of Schumacher's constituents would know that their vote was one to ultimately approve casino gambling.

Schumacher can't hide his selfish ambitions to enrich himself by this bill.  If he had any integrity at all and didn't believe Nebraskans are a bunch of gullible dupes, he would simply re-introduce one of past failed bills to legalize casinos and give Nebraskans a chance to vote it up or down as they have in the past..    He wouldn't try to hide what he was doing.

Schumacher's self-serving conflict of interest attempt to promote gambling through this ploy is an embarrassment to himself and all Nebraskans.

Schumacher should be ashamed of himself.

Johanns Shouldn't Point his Finger

2012-01-18T14:50:00.000-08:00

We received the following message from Senator Johanns pointing his finger at the president for failure to approve the pipeline:

Senator Johanns e-Update
January 18, 2011

"I'm deeply disappointed in President Obama’s decision today to deny the Keystone XL pipeline permit. Last November, our state worked with the necessary parties to responsibly reroute the pipeline in Nebraska, allowing the Administration to approve the overall pipeline permit and create thousands of jobs. There is no reason for continued delay, and the President missed a real opportunity to put people back to work and bring a reliable oil supply to the U.S. Instead, he wrongly chose to not rile up his political base, putting his reelection ahead of our country."

Senator Johanns should think twice before blaming Obama. Had Johanns and his fellow senator and Nebraska's governor not opposed the sandhills routing, prompting the special session, the decision might have been different. Johanns and group simply abetted Jane Kleeb in her efforts to stop the pipeline forever. Whether the decision might have been made otherwise we won't know but we do know that Johanns and associates were duped by Jane Fleming Kleeb.

Lindstrom Wants to Audit the Federal Reserve

2012-01-18T11:52:00.000-08:00

Would-be challenger for the Second Congressional G.O.P. nomination, Brett Lindsrom's campaign issued a statement last week attacking Congressman Terry and calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve, a typical Tea Party/Libertarian plank.

It seems that the efforts by Terry's opponents are centered primarily around his tenure in Congress. We aren't believers that folks should just continue to get raises or promotions simply based on tenure. However, in politics, seniority gets things done and does constitute clout. One can hardly believe that Lindstrom, Freeman or Heidel could begin to accomplish anything close to their objectives in their first term, second term or third term if elected. Unfortunately, that's not the way Congress works. Freshman are told to shut up and do what they're told lest they and their re-election hopes be totally dismissed. So were any of Terry's opponents elected, they would be coming back to the Second Congressional District in 2014 saying they needed to get re-elected to fulfill their promises.

With that bit of personal commentary, we thought we'd share Lindstrom's press release of last week:

"Omaha, NE – January 11, 2012 – With the national debt skyrocketing above $15 trillion, our 2nd District representative, Lee Terry, astonishingly insists that Nebraskans must be punished for Congress’s ineptitude. In a recent World-Herald article, Mr. Terry tepidly asserts that, because Congress has failed in its duty to reach a budgetary consensus, consequences must be felt. “Otherwise the message to the people is: Failure has no consequence” (http://www.omaha.com/article/20111122/NEWS01/711229905#some-lawmakers-not-fighting-cuts). Coming from Congressman Terry, this statement is somewhat perplexing – not to mention hypocritical – given that he voted to bail out those financial institutions that were deemed “too big to fail” back in 2008 to the tune of more than $700 billion. Why must the people invariably suffer while corporate lobbyists and big banks line their pockets with taxpayer money? It is shameful that Lee Terry places his narrow self-interests ahead of his constituents. But, it is not surprising given the congressman’s long tenure in Washington.

While Congressman Terry is one of many Washington insiders that has contributed a great deal to this country’s economic malaise, the Lindstrom campaign recognizes that other entities are also at fault. In particular, we take issue with the Federal Reserve and the remarkable lack of oversight that Congress has chosen to exert over this body. In a limited GAO audit (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11696.pdf), it was determined that, over the course of the last four years, the Federal Reserve has doled out more than $16.1 trillion in taxpayer funds to banks that were “too big to fail” – an amount that exceeds our current national debt by more than $1 trillion! Even more shocking is that close to $3.1 trillion of this bailout money went to foreign-owned banks. And, to add insult to injury, according to a recent Bloomberg article, the Fed provided short-term, 28-day loans to these institutions at a rate of 1.1 percent – well below the standard rate of 3.8 percent that banks were charging each other to make similar monthly loans at the time (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-21/wall-street-aristocracy-got-1-2-trillion-in-fed-s-secret-loans.html).

If this information was found in a partial audit, just imagine what might be discovered in a full and complete audit of the Federal Reserve. We need representatives in Congress that favor full financial disclosure – not representatives who like to spend our money with little to no oversight. We must get our financial house in order, and this starts with voting out the current batch of status-quo politicians and replacing them with a new group of representatives who possess courage, conviction, and leadership. Brett Lindstrom is the only candidate in the 2ndDistrict who has the requisite financial and leadership experience to usher in this new era of transparency. Brett opposes all government bailouts, and he will sponsor legislation that calls for a comprehensive audit of the Federal Reserve. Congress has ignored the American people for far too long. Isn’t it time to restore some fiscal transparency and bring some sanity back to Washington?"

No Pipeline: Congratulations to Governor Heineman, Mike Johanns, Ben Nelson and Jane Fonda Fleming Kleeb

2012-01-18T09:07:00.000-08:00

The State Department will shortly announce that it will not approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. We want to say thanks to Governor Heineman, Senators Mike Johanns and Ben Nelson and, of course, Jane Fonda Fleming Kleeb for their efforts which may now prevent any building of the pipeline. Your efforts to abet Jane Kleeb will prevent the creation of thousands of jobs and further exacerbate our country's dependence on foreign oil and those who use our tax dollars to terrorize America.

Oh, yes, we will also spend two million Nebraska taxpayer dollars to come up with a 'rerouting plan' that will probably never be approved.

Congrats all.

Senator Brasch Follow-up

2012-01-18T07:15:00.000-08:00

In fairness to Senator Brasch and our readers after reviewing our notes from her Monday night appearance before the Washington County Republican Party Central Committee, there are some things pro and con that we left out.

First we failed to mention her introduction of LB 775 at the request of State Auditor Mike Foley.   That bill would eliminate unnecessary paperwork requiring him to go to three different state entities before getting permission to go to a law enforcement agency when he finds potential criminal issues.   This effort makes good sense.

Brasch also seemed supportive of Governor Heineman's effort to cut state tax rates and the inheritance tax.   On that note, however, it appeared that Brasch was being heavily lobbied by county board members to not vote for elimination of the inheritance tax.   The inheritance tax is an anachronism and should be eliminated and we hope Brasch will not be deterred by folks like her mentor Bill Avery from voting its elimination. It's time to quit taxing the dead....

When asked about voter i.d. laws and Senator Janssen's bill which was recently withdraw (temporarily we understand) she seemed a little ambiguous.   Yes, as she noted in small counties and cities most who show up at the polling place are known by the workers there.   She needs to recognize that such is not the case in big cities. Those present made it clear to her that virtually all of them support voter i.d. legislation.   We again hope she listens to her constituents and some of her fellow conservative lawmaker colleagues rather than Bill Avery.

700 Million For A Bridge

2012-01-18T06:54:00.000-08:00

In a project that Jim Suttle would love and would hire as many lobbyists as were available, the folks up in Minnesota and Wisconsin have come up with a bridge project that will cost some $700 million dollars and at least $160 million will come from the federal government.   You know, your taxes.   Oh, and guess who one of the big supporters is???? None other than former G.O.P. presidential nominee aspirant Michelle Bachmann. Yep.

The famous West Dodge Street bridge cost a meager $70 million.

The folks at Taxpayers For Common Sense brought this boondoggle to our attention.   We thought we'd share their 'Weekly Wastebasket' report with you for kicks.   If you have the time you might want to watch the fancy fourteen minute video to see what $700 million will buy:

"Bridge on the River (St.) Croix

Volume XVII No. 2: January 13, 2012

Several lawmakers want Minnesota and Wisconsin to spend upwards of $700 million to build a bridge that will carry just 18,000 cars a day when it opens. To put this in some perspective, the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis --- which collapsed in August 2007 --- cost $234 million to rebuild, crosses the Mississippi River, and carries 140,000 cars per day. The proposed Stillwater Bridge is the zeppelin of bridge projects. Like the German-made air transport of the early 20th century, the Stillwater Bridge would get you from point A to point B; but just as airplanes have become the mode of choice for flying the friendly skies, a better (and less expensive) alternative exists for rebuilding a bridge in Stillwater. The proposed bridge is a relic from a bygone era; the scale and cost of which are far out of proportion to the project at hand.

Nearly everyone agrees that a new bridge is needed to replace the aging, deficient lift bridge that currently carries traffic over the St. Croix River between Stillwater, MN (a St. Paul suburb) and tiny Houlton, WI (population: 386). They also agree to ignore that western Wisconsin is no longer the booming housing center it once was; that traffic over the existing bridge is declining; and that Houlton lies just eight miles from a major new bridge over the St. Croix on I-94.

Disagreement arises over the size and scope of the new bridge. To quell debate, a stakeholder consensus process was convened several years back. The result is sadly predictable: a plan to build the biggest, most expensive bridge alternative. We say predictable because trying to make everybody happy often turns into spending a lot of cash. A few years ago -- before the country had a $15 trillion debt and state governments were struggling to balance the books --- building the most expensive bridge possible would hardly get a second glance. But reality has shifted. If a less expensive bridge can accomplish the job, then the choice should be easy.

In another surprise, the bridge boondoggle enjoys bipartisan and bicameral support. The biggest bridge boosters are Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN). Contrary to her "Tea Party" rhetoric, Rep. Bachmann is full speed ahead on wasting tax dollars on this bridge. One preposterous claim she's made is that bringing home the bacon on transportation projects isn't really earmarking: "Advocating for transportation projects for ones district in my mind does not equate to an earmark." If you believe that, we've got a non-earmark "Bridge to Nowhere" to sell you. This convenient fiction enables her to fight for a bill that not only allows a bridge to be built (it needs an exemption because the St. Croix is a protected river under federal law), but also enables previously earmarked dollars to be spent and dictates the exact style of bridge to be built. People can dither over the minutiae, but this bill walks and talks like an earmark.

This may seem like a local issue, but federal taxpayers will be on the hook for $160 million (possibly more if cost overruns become an issue). Furthermore, wasting cash on the boondoggle bridge delays the repair of thousands of other deficient bridges in Minnesota and Wisconsin, increasing future costs. The new mantra of a nation that is swimming in debt has to be doing more with less. Another bridge alternative exists that would cost barely half of the current proposal and be much closer to the scale of the existing lift bridge. Our current debt crisis will only be solved when we work together to find cost-effective solutions to our problems. In an acrimonious year between the political parties in Washington, we cannot afford bi-partisanship that only occurs only when it comes to wasteful, parochial projects."

Breaking News: Unions Get Votes to Have Recall Election on Governor Walker

2012-01-17T13:19:00.000-08:00

Breaking News from Politico:

"One million signatures were submitted in the effort to force a recall election of Gov. Scott Walker, the Wisconsin Democratic Party announced Tuesday.

That total exceeds the number of required signatures by 460,000.

Wisconsin Democrats also turned in more than the required number of signatures to force recall elections for the state's lieutenant governor, and three state senators. All signatures will be subject to inspection by the Wisconsin elections board."

Needless to say the unions have not forgotten Governor Walker and his efforts to ameliorate their influence. It's hard to imagine getting one million signatures and it may be hard to imagine how he and his conservative comrades can avoid recall. On the other hand these guys boldly went where few before have gone and we should all be grateful for their efforts to diminish the unbridled influence of these unions.

Heidel Says His Focus is on Reducing Deficit and National Debt

2012-01-17T11:47:00.000-08:00

We listened to Jack Heidel on the K.F.A.B. Scott Voohries show today and found his discussion to be intelligent and for the most part conservative.   Heidel iterated that his "math background was a real plus" in his campaign effort.   He said that baseline accounting has to be replaced and that big spending cuts are necessary in order to balance the federal budget and eliminate the national debt.   He said he would begin with a 10% across the board cut of every department, and more in some.

Heidel said that Medicare needs to be reformed, that the age eligibility needs to be raised, that richer people should pay higher premiums and that legislation should provide for combining fee for premium with premium support.

In regard to Social Security, Heidel said the ceiling on income subject to taxes needs to be raised faster to keep receipts equal to expenditures.   He also said it was important to avoid extending the much talked about tax holiday as that further weakens the solvency of the program.

Heidel said that tax loopholes must be closed and rates reduced, inferring that capital gains and the highest rate should be reduced to one rate.   He said that corporate taxes need to be cut because they are out of sync with the rest of the world.   He said that after this was done it might be necessary to seek more revenue (taxes).

Asked why he is running against Lee Terry, he said that his (Heidel's) sole focus was to eliminate the deficit. He said Terry isn't serious about addressing the debt and the deficit problems, that he is more worried about going back to Washington and becoming a committee chairman.

Heidel, an elected member of the Learning Community and a math department head at U.N.O. has been taking his effort seriously.   We know that even on very cold days he has been walking his district. Heidel and Terry's other opponents for the nomination are sincere but naive and most importantly lacking in funds to even begin to compete. When the votes are counted, Lee Terry will be the re-nominated and re-elected.

Fahey Doesn't Deserve Award

2012-01-17T10:15:00.000-08:00

Seems that the Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce intends to induct former Mayor Mike Fahey into its Business Hall of Fame at its April 24 event.    Now we can understand the chamber folks sucking up to Fahey but, really, this guy has had more of a detrimental affect on Omaha than any of the so-called accomplishments the chamber takes note of.

Fahey virtually gave away the city to the firefighters' union and the police union over his term in office.   Instead of making tough decisions he kicked the can down the road leading Omaha to a fiscal crisis and new taxes and put the city in a position where it couldn't resolve a police contract until last year and still hasn't resolved one with the firefighters.

If you happened to be Mike's labor representing brother or one of his cronies you may have been among the few that benefited from his two terms as mayor.

Giving Fahey such an honor may have been a politically correct move by the chamber but in truth the only award Fahey should win is a ticket to his estate in the Ozarks!

Terry Tells it as it is

2012-01-17T08:12:00.000-08:00

Lee Terry authored a letter to The Hill on the Keystone XL Pipeline and the pending decision (non-decision) by President Obama as to whether to build or not build the pipeline. We think it is worth sharing with our readers because we believe that Terry is the one Nebraska elected leader who has had the guts to stand up for energy independence, jobs and national security.

Time to decide on Keystone pipeline
By Rep. Lee Terry

“I’m the decider, and I decide what is best.”
It’s a shame that former President George W. Bush caught so much flak for those now-infamous words, because there is a great deal of truth in them. We want our country’s chief executive to be capable of making tough decisions. Unfortunately, we don’t have a decider in the Oval Office these days.

Our current president is the complete opposite — he’s more of a procrastinator. During his time in office, President Obama has put off decision after decision. He delayed Arctic offshore oil lease sales until 2015, he pushed back reviewing the smog standard until 2013 and he put off his verdict on the Keystone XL Pipeline until 2013. Because the president refused to step up and make a decision on Keystone XL, the House and Senate forced his hand. We approved a bill requiring the president to authorize Keystone XL by Feb. 21, 2012 — unless the president decides that Keystone XL is not in our country’s best interest.

There’s that word again. “Decide.” It’s well past time for a decision on Keystone XL. While similar pipelines are regularly approved in 18 to 24 months, Keystone XL is still sitting on the shelf at month 40. If Feb. 21 comes around and Obama has decided that the Keystone XL Pipeline is not in our country’s best interest — or if he hasn’t decided anything at all — he will have some serious explaining to do to the American people. Job creation is certainly among our country’s best interests. With our economy struggling to recover, job creation might just be our top priority.

Americans want to work, but while the president twiddles his thumbs in the White House, employment opportunities grow fewer and fewer. Yet, here sits Keystone XL, promising at least 20,000 direct on-site jobs in construction, operations and supporting industries. That is not a number simply plucked out of the air. Each of those 20,000+ jobs has been accounted for by TransCanada, the company that proposed Keystone XL. TransCanada’s vice president recently broke down Keystone XL’s anticipated job creation as follows:

•Construction: 17 pipeline “spreads” x 500 workers/spread = 8,500 workers
•Operations: 30 pump stations x 100 workers/station = 3,000 workers
•Manufacturing (pipes, hardware, etc.): 7,000 workers
•Oversight/Management: 1,000 workers
•Assembly camps: 600 workers

These are more than 20,000 real jobs for Americans — jobs that cannot be outsourced. Yet, Americans still wait for these jobs, for these opportunities, and for the president to make a decision on Keystone XL. But the Obama administration continues to drag its feet on Keystone XL, just as it has for three long years. During this time, the president, like other great procrastinators, has continued to rationalize his inaction.

He has claimed that the State Department’s initial environmental review wasn’t good enough and that he would ask the State Department — and the same biologists, engineers and environmental analysts that completed the first review — for a second. For one reason or another, he wasn’t satisfied with the final Environmental Impact Statement released in August 2011 by the State Department. The president didn’t like the State Department’s conclusion that the preferred course of action with Keystone XL would be to proceed with the project as originally proposed. In the wake of the State Department study, the president stalled, citing the supposed risk that the pipeline poses to Nebraska’s environment.

But I’m proud to say that Nebraska state representatives didn’t want to risk having Obama take his sweet time to reroute the pipeline around Nebraska’s Sand Hills region, so they are now plotting the new route themselves.Sometimes the most risky decision is not making a decision at all. By stalling on the Keystone XL Pipeline, Obama is playing dice with our economy and gambling with the lives of hardworking Americans. The longer he waits, the clearer it becomes that Americans will not tolerate inaction in uncertain times. The fact is, making a decision this close to the election — even a decision that stands to create tens of thousands of desperately needed jobs — could hurt the president politically. Do we really need another leader who is willing to put his own political life before the lives of the American people? I don’t think so.

What we need is a decider.

GET THE LATEST UPDATES
To get the latest updates and give feedback on what is going on in Washington and the 2^nd District visit my website, Facebook or sign up for my Twitter feed or MindMixer.
Your Friend,

Lee Terry

Senator Brash Drinking the Kool Aid???

2012-01-17T07:49:00.000-08:00

Our correspondents were at the Washington County Republican Party Central Committee Meeting held Monday night in Ft. Calhoun.    Senator Lydia Brash, who represents the area, gave a legislative report which we found rather revealing and frankly somewhat disappointing.   In other words, we were less than impressed.

Senator Brasch was friendly and showed a willingness to listen and discussed the bills she had or hoped to introduce.   For the most part those bills don't appear ready to go anywhere. One in particular, one that would allow cities to determine whether golf carts could be driven within city limits appears to need lots of works given the many questions asked of her which she appeared at a loss to answer.

More concerning to us is the 'unicameral brainwashing' that inflicts many state senators when they come under the spell of George Norris' non-partisan myth and their Democrat 'colleagues'.   The fact that Brasch talked about how brilliant her former professor and current colleague Bill Avery was nearly gave us indigestion.   She seemed to get her sense that partisanism shouldn't play a part in a senator's deliberations from this idiot who happens to be among the most liberal senators to ever occupy the chamber (kissing bills, anti-fat obesity departments, etc.).

When asked about Senator Krist's efforts to require non-secret balloting for committee chairmanships she said she initially agreed but subsequently demurred.   She noted Senator Krist was not very friendly while Avery was amiable.   In disagreement with virtually every central committee member and guest in the room she noted that the legislature is non-partisan and that partisan politics aren't appropriate. When asked how many Republicans serve in the legislature she said 30. There are 33. She noted that Democrat members caucus but Republicans don't.   Yet, she said it was appropriate to be non-partisan since there are lots of rural/suburban issues that partisanship could interfere with.

We suppose at this point we should issue a disclaimer of our political philosophy. We believe that the legislature should be partisan. In fact, we support a two-house legislature.   The George Norris legislature was supposed to be open and assure that every bill got a public hearing.    But that's not the way it works.   Lobbyists control much of what happens.   Bills may get a public hearing but that doesn't mean good ones aren't stifled and held in committee nor does it assure that bills on which there are hearings are passed with appropriate public input.   The winner-take-all and the learning community are examples of the former, respectively.    We might remind the senator and our detractors on this point that there are 49 two-house partisan legislatures in the country and they all seem to get their work done of passing bills and balancing budgets (at least where required by law as in Nebraska).

Brasch seemed truly surprised by the sentiment for a two-house system expressed by the group, for her Senator Avery 'Kool aid' induced non-partisan approach and for the sentiment toward open voting for committee chairs.

While we are certainly glad that Brasch has taken the place of the slime ball tax-cheating former senator Kent Rogert we can only hope that Brasch really begins to listen to her constituents and finds a better mentor than Senator Avery.   If she doesn't there will be lots of unhappy constituents and active Republicans in District 16 that might just replace her as they did their last senator after the initial four-year term.

Senator Bill Avery Court Jester Fool Award Established

2012-01-16T09:50:00.000-08:00

We already have a doofus award we give, based on merit, called the Joe Biden Foot in Mouth award (see below right) which for some reason seems to be dominated by none other than Joe Biden. Given that and the absolute foolishness shown by Nebraska's own State Senator Bill Avery, we simply feel that the Biden award doesn't do him or potential other fools justice. So we've decided to establish the Senator Bill Avery Court Jester Fool Award which of course he will be the first recipient of. Now we don't do this lightly and we think that it is only fair to let our readers know the criteria for winning this esteemed award in the future, criteria that we believe Senator Avery has well established by his legislation and by his example.

Criteria for Awarding Senator Bill Avery Court Jester Fool Award:

The recipient must introduce legislation that makes himself and the State of Nebraska look like absolute fools, idiots.
The recipient must do so with serious, if laughable, intent
The recipient must introduce legislation/resolutions/ordinances that are totally unenforceable or will be totally ineffectual
The recipient's legislation/resolution/ordinance must reflect the nanny-state belief that government can solve all problems
The recipient's legislation/resolution/ordinance must reflect the belief that for any problem there is a new law that will cure the problem
The recipient's legislation/resolution/ordinance must be based on belief that people are not capable of being responsible for their lives or those of their offspring.
The recipient's legislation/resolution/ordinance must represent an absolute waste of time and printing expense for the the governmental entity charged with making serious cost-effective decisions
The recipient's legislation/resolution/ordinance must reflect the belief that government makes better decisions and spends its money, the citizens' money, more wisely than the governed can.
The recipient will be given special consideration if his/her legislation/resolution/ordinance reflects alleged racial or sexual inequality or perceived insensitivities or cultural injustices
The recipient need not be adjudged to be suffering from delusions of grandeur, insanity, Alzheimer's, etc., although those characteristics may be present in the case of the recipient or future ones.

Of course at this point it is hard to believe that this award will ever be awarded to anyone other than the liberal nanny-statist recipient for which it is named, but we believe there are others in various divisions of Nebraska government that have the potential to ascend to Avery's level of foolishness and certainly will appreciate nominations from our readers.

Of course in establishing this award, our staff did an onerous search of the definintion of fool and found the following, obtained from Dictionary.com which seems fitting:

noun

1. a silly or stupid person; a person who lacks judgment or sense.

2. a professional jester, formerly kept by a person of royal or noble rank for amusement: the court fool.

3. a person who has been tricked or deceived into appearing or acting silly or stupid: to make a fool of someone.

4. an ardent enthusiast who cannot resist an opportunity to indulge an enthusiasm (usually preceded by a present participle): He's just a dancing fool.

5. a weak-minded or idiotic person.

verb (used with object)

6. to trick

verb (used without object)

7. to act like a fool; joke; play.

8. to jest; pretend; make believe: I was only fooling.

Verb phrases

9. fool around,

a. to putter aimlessly; waste time: She fooled around all through school.

b. to philander or flirt.

c. to be sexually promiscuous, especially to engage in adultery.

10. fool away, to spend foolishly, as time or money; squander: to fool away the

entire afternoon.

11. fool with, to handle or play with idly or carelessly: to be hurt while fooling with a

loaded gun; to fool with someone's affections.

Idiom

12. be nobody's fool, to be wise or shrewd.

Origin:
1225–75; Middle English fol, fool < Old French fol < Latin follis bellows, bag; compare follis

Related forms

un·fooled, adjective

un·fool·ing, adjective

well-fooled, adjective

Synonyms
1. simpleton, dolt, dunce, blockhead, numskull, ignoramus, dunderhead, ninny, nincompoop, booby, saphead, sap. 2. zany, clown. 5. moron, imbecile, idiot. 6. delude, hoodwink, cheat, gull, hoax, cozen, dupe, gudgeon.

Antonyms
1. genius

How Liberals Remember Martin Luther King, Jr.

2012-01-16T08:33:00.000-08:00

From our friends at the Patriot Post: It simply wouldn't be right for us to overlook this important day in American History although we seem to have forgotten most of the 180 some years prior to his appearance as a national figure. So here is their commentary:

Martin Luther King Jr.

"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --Martin Luther King Jr.

Today the once-noble Democrat Party has turned the wisdom of MLK, one of their most revered iconic figureheads, on its head. Perhaps King's most remembered words are these: "I have a dream that my children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." However, Democrat Leftists now interpret this as, "I have a dream that my children will one day be judged by the color of their skin, not the content of their character."

To read more of what Martin Luther King has come to symbolize for the Left, click here.

Random Thoughts

2012-01-15T20:31:00.000-08:00

It's such a topic rich environment for cynical conservatives that we just can't keep up so rather than our extensive bloviations we thought we'd just deal with a number of topics with unusual brevity.   After all, tomorrow is a national holiday celebrating Martin Luther King and we have lots of events to attend so we need our rest today--it is Sunday after all....

1. When Governor/Ambassador Huntsman officially suspends his race for the G.O.P. presidential nomination tomorrow morning we wonder whom he will throw is 400 or 500 votes to???   If he were smart, he'd endorse Romney and maybe ultimately get appointed Ambassador to China....

2. For those who read the local daily on Friday they were tantalized by the potential of an independent candidate in Nebraska's U.S. Senate race, Jim Jenkins.   Of course had the writer of that news bit had any intellectual curiosity perhaps she would have questioned whether Jenkins was qualified to run as an independent--which he wasn't, thus necessitating an article on Saturday noting that because he had re-registered in 2012 rather than 2011 he wasn't eligible to run as an independent.   Keep up the good work Robynn....

3. Apparently one of the 'unintended consequences' of Jane Fonda Fleming Kleeb's pipeline success (rerouting or perhaps no routing at all) is that poor beetle that Jon Bruning talked about having to be put in buckets containing carrion. Yes, that poor endangered species was going to benefit from some $4.5 in a trust fund from the folks who wanted to build the pipeline through the far eastern edge of the sandhills.    Now the beetle will be dependent on the meager $25,000 a year that Nebraska receives from your federal government and YOUR TAXES to keep it from becoming extinct.....

4. It's nice that our legislature will now have one day a week when it opens it session with the Pledge of Allegiance.   We think it should open every day with he pledge and a prayer. In fact, we hope Senator Fulton follows through with his plan to introduce legislation requiring all Nebraska public schools to begin each day with the pledge--he should include the legislature.

5. We've been wondering about all those 'green jobs' and new jobs our incompetent Mayor Suttle has created.   One firm took its jobs from North Omaha and added about 100 more in Red Oak, Iowa.   Now, Omaha Casting is moving it's jobs to Wahoo. Good work, mayor.   Oh, by the way, Jim, nice job of getting that North Omaha crime situation under control.   We're sure you're getting lots of help from Councilman Gray...

6. Seems American petroleum companies will pay the the U.S. Government some $6.8 million in penalties because of their failure to mix a particular biofuel into gasoline last year.   The only problem is that the particular biofuel wasn't available.   Now, who do you suppose ultimately pays those fines?   The oil companies? No, you do every time you put gas in your car.    Elementary economics, corporations don't pay taxes, they just pass them on to you in everything you buy from plus of course the costs associated with paying them.

7. We think Governor Heineman's idea to eliminate the inheritance tax is a great idea, but you can bet all 93 counties will be using your tax dollars to lobby against it and threatening to raise your property taxes.   But then why shouldn't Nebraska be one of only eight states that still have this confiscatory tax?   If we wait long enough maybe we will be the only one, just like we are the only one with a Unicameral....

Governor Not Duped Twice

2012-01-15T18:43:00.000-08:00

The governor will probably tell you he wasn't duped the first time but we're glad and like everyone else not at all surprised that he didn't appoint Jane Fonda Fleming Kleeb to fill the legislative seat of Dennis Utter who recently passed away. Kleeb obviously applied for the job just to pique the governor. And and at least this time he wasn't duped.

We continue to believe that he and Senator Johanns (Nelson too, although that would have gone without surprise) were both duped in supporting the rerouting and special session of the legislature. Jane Kleeb, as we've noted, has never intended for any pipeline carrying fossil fuel (tar sand oil) to be built across Nebraska or anywhere else in the country. That has been obvious again and again from her communications.

Evidence of Kleeb's intent, as well as the reason her liberality escaped the appointment of the governor, came to us once again on January 9 in the form of the following e-mail. Unfortunately, by acceding to her on the pipeline issue the governor and our U.S. Senators and the legislature have made her more than a cult figure and we believe at some point will regret it whether it be the failure of the building of the pipeline or something else.

Jane's e-mail:

"This week we unveiled our promises for a Bold 2012. We’re focusing on sustainable energy, healthy communities and government accountability. We’re already digging in, rolling up our sleeves, and asking you to join us.

President Obama will make a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline in the next 40 days, a bill that threatens our constitutional right to vote is coming up for a vote in the Unicameral and Randy is getting his auction voice ready for our first-ever fundraiser in Omaha.

We have lots going on. Here are 3 ways you can roll up your sleeves and help out:

1. Thank the President in Advance
President Obama has until February 20th to make a decision on Keystone XL. Just as we told Governor Heineman, “Thanks (in advance) for calling a special session,” we want to tell President Obama, “Thanks (in advance) for denying the pipeline.” Our strategy worked with Governor Heineman, so we hope your letters and your pictures will encourage the President to stand up for our families and deny the pipeline.

We’re asking you to do two things to thank the President (in advance): 1. Send Obama a handwritten letter thanking him for standing with our families. 2. Send us a picture to include in a group art piece that we’ll deliver to the White House and the Obama campaign office in Chicago.

2. Protect Our Vote Lobby Day
January 11th, 9am, State Capitol
Voting is one of our most basic constitutional rights, but State Senator Janssen is trying to keep 130,000 Nebraskans from the ballot box. He’s claiming that his bill will end the problem of voter impersonation fraud in Nebraska. The problem with that is, there is no problem. Sen. Janssen can’t cite a single Nebraska case of voter impersonation fraud. Still, he wants to throw as much as $6 million of our money at a problem that doesn’t exist.

We need you to help us protect our fundamental freedom to vote (and our money) by coming to the Capitol for a lobby day. We can defeat Janssen’s bill by telling state senators face-to-face that we value fair and accessible elections, not throwing money at a mythological problem when we have real issues like child welfare to tackle.

3. Bid Green to Keep the Aquifer Clean Fundraiser
January 14th, 7pm, New BLK in Downtown Omaha
Join us for an evening of art and community as we auction off everything from local art to local beer, guided trail tours and signed cowboy hats from Randy. We’re going to have a silent auction and a rousing live auction led by Randy himself who used to be an auctioneer. All the proceeds will go to stopping the TransCanada pipeline and getting Nebraska on a path to sustainable energy.

Keep being pipeline fighters, Sandhills lovers and Bold Nebraskans,

Jane Kleeb
Executive Director"Bold Nebraska

P.J. Morgan Discusses Douglas County Challenges

2012-01-13T14:14:00.000-08:00

On Monday we covered P.J. Morgan's address to the Republican Luncheon Group at Rockbrook Garden Cafe.    For some reason our staff has been a little dilatory in reporting back on that event but we thought it was of enough interest to do so even if somewhat belatedly.

While some in the Republican Party may question Morgan's conservative bona fides, he came across, with the potential of one issue, as being a solid conservative working for fiscal restraint in his position as a Douglas County Board member.

Morgan talked of being convinced that one can do something and mentioned he had been told it would not be possible to raise the retirement age at the county from 50 to 55, but said because he just didn't take that as a given it got done.

Morgan addressed a number of challenges the county faces.   He noted that although there were 2350 county employees three years ago and that there were now approximately 2250 employees, payroll costs have increased by over $1 million a month!   He noted that benefits were also way ahead of three years ago as well. Morgan further noted that he had been in the minority in a 4 to 3 vote opposing a 1% salary increase for this year.   He said the argument had been that if employees didn't receive an increase they might have even more reason in some cases to organize (there are apparently 17 county unions already).   Despite the increase, the non-management attorney's in the County Attorney's office chose to organize just last week even after the pay raise.

Morgan also noted a fact that a lot of citizens don't know, that many employees get 'step' increases at certain tenure levels, ranging from 3% to 7%, for just being employed by the county a year longer. Noting that many folks in the community are just happy to have a job and the county's anticipated budget shortfall of $5 million dollars, Morgan said he couldn't justify the vote for an increase.

In regard to the budget shortfall, Morgan noted that he had authored a resolution that the county would take every step possible to not increase its mill levy.   We've learned that fellow board member Marc Kraft had initially agreed to support the resolution, than decided to make changes to it in order to support it and decided to postpone the vote on it entirely when it actually came up.   Knowing board member Kraft, we're not surprised.

Morgan said he supported the consolidation of the Register of Deeds Office and the County Assessor's Office, which was postponed on Tuesday--no doubt because of the whining and scare tactics (our thoughts) of Diane Battiato who wouldn't be qualified under state law to run the merged office.

Morgan such that hard choices need to be made and that mergers are part of it. He said he will not run for the mayor's office again but if he were to his primary effort would be to merge city and county governments. He noted that many of the so-called inter local agreements between the city and county, such as the purchasing departments, are simply window dressings.   If he were to have his way, he'd have the people vote for a merger that would take place in 2016.   The local daily has noted that some of his fellow board members, Pam Tusa for one, would rather delay such until 2020 or beyond in order to let folks have a chance to find different jobs.   On the topic of mergers, P.J. noted that if Warren Buffett were to buy the city and county, there would be major reorganization and merger of activities.

Morgan also talked about the inequities of assessment.   He noted that non-profits are renting space to for-profit businesses and yet many aren't paying appropriate property taxes.   He also noted the disparity between taxation on commercial properties noting that his offices near 78th & Dodge are valued at $110 per square foot while much more saleable properties such as Regency Fashion Court are assessed at only $45 to $65 per square foot.    Morgan suggested that since home property valuations aren't likely to rise over the next few years that the county has to clean up the inequities in assessment and taxation of commercial properties.

Continuing on a fiscal note, Morgan said that the county has to look hard at what the legislature mandates it to do verses what it is actually doing.    He said that the county is paying for drugs for somewhere between 1250 and 1350 although it is only mandated to do so for 150 to 200 folks.

As we noted, Morgan seemed to impress most in attendance with his fiscal bona fides although he did engender some antipathy on his stand on whether the county should support voter i.d. legislation.   After listening to the majority sentiment of the room in support of voter i.d. requirements, Morgan said he appreciated the input and would relook the issue.

Morgan displayed a sincere, low-key approach in his presentation and was well received.

Omaha Tea Party Alive and Well

2012-01-13T10:50:00.000-08:00

Kerrey, Nelson and Obama Unfit for Duty Cake

Last night our reporters attended a Tea Party celebration of Ben Nelson's upcoming retirement at the West Omaha home of some prominent Omaha citizens.   There were more than 70 folks in attendance.   Most of them have been involved in efforts to either make sure Nelson didn't run or in efforts aimed at defeating him had he decided to run for re-election.   This was truly a group of tea partiers, many of whom we have met in the past, but also many new faces.

What was true of everyone in the house was that there would not have been one vote for Ben Nelson had he chosen to seek re-election.   Just as telling, there wasn't one vote in that West Omaha home for Bob Kerrey should he decide to become a candidate.

These folks remain energized.   They are looking for their next challenge and although the event was primarily social, those in attendance certainly appeared ready to take on the next challenge.

So while the local daily and some local politicos may be wondering where the Tea Party folks are, we can attest that they are alive, well, energized and very much viable.

Ron Paul Financed All the Way to Tampa

2012-01-12T09:54:00.000-08:00

Some things won't go away, diseases, pests, etc.   Such seems to be the case with Ron Paul who obviously is going all the way to Tampa to the Republican National Convention.   He'll be there when only Romney is left.

Now, we think Paul serves a purpose of reminding Republicans that there are certain conservative values that they should spend more time thinking about.   On the other hand, we think his ideas on drugs and American involvement overseas are closer to the liberal ideas that motivate much of the Democrat Party.

In any event, Paul isn't going away.   He has the ability to raise as much money as he needs from his supporters.   And with that said, he has now e-mailed us a request to once again donate our dollars in his 100th or so 'Money Bomb'.

Here is what he had to say this time:

"Dear John,

                     The results are in, and my campaign's incredibly strong second-place finish in New Hampshire has the national media stunned!

Add that to my top-tier showing in Iowa, and it's clear I'm the one Republican candidate who can take on and DEFEAT both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.

The race is becoming more clearly a two-man race between Mitt Romney and me.

That means there is only one true conservative choice.

I urge my opponents who have been unsuccessfully trying to be the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney to unite behind my candidacy.

I have the bold plan to cut spending. The dedication to protecting life. The lifelong dedication to the Constitution and limited government. And the necessary support to campaign nationwide against Mitt Romney.

So I'm going to try my best to spend a few hours relishing this great finish. But the truth is, I'm already thinking about South Carolina, Florida, and beyond.

I am in this race for the long haul. And I am ready to fight.

I believe I can ride this momentum to the Republican presidential nomination – but I'm going to need your help to do so.

My campaign is holding a Money Bomb this Saturday, January 14. Can I count on you to IMMEDIATELY pledge to contribute?

My staff is already busy implementing an ambitious plan for South Carolina, including hard-hitting voter mail and TV ads.

In fact, I instructed them to add to our South Carolina activities tonight after seeing my top-tier finish in New Hampshire.

And I'm headed there tomorrow to begin a feverish round of campaigning.

But I need to be able to pay for it all.

Unlike my opponents, I don't have Wall Street banksters lining up to write fat checks to my campaign.

I'm grateful I've been able to count on the generosity of good folks like you.

The great news is, because of your past support, we're racking up one success after another.

But with my opponents attacking me as hard as they can every chance they get, your support has never been more important.

So please pledge to contribute IMMEDIATELY.

Every dollar you can give is absolutely critical.

So please be as generous as you can!

For Liberty,

Ron Paul

P.S. After my incredibly strong showing tonight in New Hampshire, it's clear I'm the one Republican candidate with the resources, volunteers, and organization to take on and DEFEAT both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.

With your help, I'm hoping to ride this wave of momentum to the Republican presidential nomination.

So please help me capitalize on tonight's success by pledging right away to contribute to my campaign's January 14 Money Bomb!"

Senator McCoy Gets it Right

2012-01-12T09:42:00.000-08:00

State Senator Beau McCoy has got it right with his proposed legislation (LB 912) to standardize protected classes across the state of Nebraska. He speaks logically when he states that discrimination doesn't have a border in Nebraska and that if some form of discrimination exists in one community it must also exist in others across the state. He also speaks logically when he said that such a bill standardizes definitions for businesses and cities across the state.

We know his bill won't find favor with liberal racist Omaha City Councilman Ben Gray who believes that anything and everything constitutes racial discrimination. We understand that he is about to reintroduce his silly legislation making everything but a nematode a potential discriminated class in Omaha, an ordinance which will cause absolute havoc and flight by Omaha businesses.

Here is the actual wording of the changes to the statute contained in LB 912:

Sec. 3. (1) It is the purpose of this section to improve

15 intrastate commerce by ensuring that no county, municipality, or

16 other political subdivision will subject businesses, organizations,

17 or employers operating in Nebraska to varied and nonuniform protected

18 classifications in nondiscrimination laws, ordinances, resolutions,

19 rules, or policies. Further, it is the purpose of this section to

20 focus and thereby improve the effectiveness of the efforts of

21 counties, municipalities, or other political subdivisions to punish

22 and eliminate discrimination based on the protected classifications

23 identified in laws enacted by the Legislature.

24 (2) A county, municipality, or other political

25 subdivision shall not adopt or enforce a local law, ordinance,

1 resolution, rule, or policy that creates a protected classification

2 unless such classification is contained in the Age Discrimination in

3 Employment Act, the Nebraska Fair Employment Practice Act, the

4 Nebraska Fair Housing Act, or sections 20-126 to 20-143 or 48-1219 to

5 48-1227. This subsection does not apply to a law, ordinance,

6 resolution, rule, or policy that applies only to the employees of the

7 county, municipality, or other political subdivision.

8 (3) Any local law, ordinance, resolution, rule, or policy

9 adopted before the effective date of this act that violates

10 subsection (2) of this section is null and void.

Welcome Back Bob

2012-01-12T08:26:00.000-08:00

Well, that's what American Crossroads, a conservative group is saying in an ad playing on the radio.   They've joined the Nebraska Republican party in pre-emptive attacks to let Kerrey know that any decision to run for Nebraska's senate seat won't go without lots of reminders of his history as well of as his current stands on issues like Obamacare. You can listen to the radio ad by clicking on: http://youtu.be/vDHx6RtKNIo

For our part, we're not sure this kind of ad will work with Kerrey.   If he is truly inclined to run this sort of stuff will probably only get his dander up.   We don't think he wants to run any.   He's already given his reasons and when he told K.F.A.B. that wouldn't repeal Obamacare earlier this week, that statement was simply toxic to a successful campaign.

So 'Rocking Bob' will spend a few days here, go home and announce next week that he isn't running.   We wouldn't waste a lot of money on him.

For the record, here is what the Nebraska Republican Party had to say about Bobby:

BOB KERREY'S GREATEST HITS:

AN INDEFENSIBLE RECORD ON ABORTION

LINCOLN, NE - As former Democrat Senator-turned-New York City resident Bob Kerrey returns to Nebraska to consider another run for Senate, voters will surely remember that Kerrey abandoned his so-called pro-life beliefs in the 1980's and quickly became a strong proponent of abortions under any and all circumstances.

During his tenure in the Senate, Kerrey supported pro-choice nominees for the Supreme Court and worked to legislate abortion rights and oppose parental notification laws.

While running for President in 1992, Kerrey vowed to create a government-run healthcare system that would use taxpayer dollars to fund abortions - something he would later have in common with Senator Ben Nelson.

However, even liberal democrats like Sen. Nelson and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have consistently supported a ban on the grotesque practice known as partial-birth abortion. Not Bob Kerrey. He voted against a partial birth abortion ban in 1997 and later voted against overturning President Bill Clinton's veto of the ban in 1999.

NEGOP Chairman released the following statement today on Bob Kerrey's abysmal record on abortion:

"Between his support for taxpayer-funded abortions and his repeated votes against a ban on partial birth abortions, Bob Kerrey is clearly out of touch with our state," Fahelson said. "Ben Nelson alienated pro-life Nebraskans with his 60th vote for Obamacare, and Bob Kerrey's equally indefensible record on abortion will not soon be forgotten."

A Statewide Tour for the Governor

2012-01-11T08:13:00.000-08:00

Governor Heineman just sent us an e-mail noting that he will deliver his State of the State Address tomorrow and will follow it up with a seven-city tour of the state by himself and Lt. Governor Rick Sheehy. We know he's done this before but one can't help but wonder if this isn't just another 'pre-senate-run-decision' move by Heineman to further confuse potential Democrat opponents?????

Here is the Governor's message:

Governor & Lt. Governor to Visit Seven Communities during State of the State Tour

(Lincoln, Neb.) Gov. Dave Heineman is scheduled to deliver the annual State of the State Address on Thursday, Jan. 12 at 10:00 a.m. CT from the Legislative Chamber of the Nebraska State Capitol in Lincoln.
Following the address and the introduction of the Governor's mid-biennium budget recommendations, Gov. Heineman and Lt. Gov. Rick Sheehy will visit several communities across the state to highlight priorities identified in the 2012 State of the State. The schedule is as follows. All times are Central Time unless otherwise noted.
On Thursday, Jan. 12, Gov. Heineman will speak at the following times and locations:

12:30 p.m. – Leo Johnson Conference Room of the North Platte Regional Airport Terminal, located at 5400 E. Lee Bird Dr. in North Platte
2:00 p.m. – Kearney Aviation Center of the Kearney Municipal Airport, located at 4845 Airport Rd. in Kearney (Please note location update)
3:15 p.m. – Central Nebraska Airport, 3743 SkyPark Road in Grand Island

Lt. Gov. Sheehy will deliver remarks during the following visits on Thursday:

11:45 p.m. - City Council Chamber at City Hall, located at 1615 1st Ave. in South Sioux City
1:15 p.m. – Karl Stefan Memorial Airport, located at 4100 S. 13th St. in Norfolk
2:40 p.m. MT - Western Nebraska Regional Airport, located at 250023 Airport Terminal St in Scottsbluff
5:30 p.m. - McCook Regional Airport Terminal, located at 1100 Airport Rd. in McCook

The Governor's speech will be broadcast live on the NET2 television channel, on NET Radio, and will be streamed live online via NET's Nebraska Capitol Live site. Video of the address will also be archived on the Governor's website, www.Governor.Nebraska.gov.

Let's Have Rush Limbaugh Moderate a GOP Debate

2012-01-11T06:58:00.000-08:00

Twice in a span of 12 hours this past weekend, in what have laughingly come to be called “debates,” the six remaining Republican presidential candidates — Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Rick Perry and Jon Huntsman — prostrated themselves yet again before the mainstream media. As usual, the network celebrity talking heads gathered the GOP candidates together and dared them to attack each other, and once more there was a clear winner: Barack Obama.

Controlling the agenda on Saturday night were former Bill Clinton mouthpiece George Stephanopoulos and the soft-spoken, ever-patronizing Diane Sawyer of ABC. On Sunday morning it was even worse, with NBC’s hyper-liberal host of Meet the Press, David Gregory, directing the questions. As with most of the moderators in the previous 987 debates since last spring, these people could barely conceal their disdain for the candidates lined up before them, especially when the issues on the table were of a social nature, such as abortion or the defense of traditional marriage.

This has become a huge problem for the candidates and for the Republican primary process, because with the network elites in charge of these debates, the real issues are never discussed. Newt Gingrich still gets in a zinger now and then when he attacks the media or verbally assaults Obama, and Rick Perry called the president a socialist (he was being kind). Otherwise, who holds Obama accountable when his fiercest defenders are asking the questions?

It has been no secret at least since Watergate four decades ago that the mainstream media is overwhelmingly populated with Democrats, most of them extremely liberal snobs living in a Manhattan or Georgetown cocoon. However, since Barack Obama’s election in 2008, those who claim to simply report the news have become openly hostile to conservative thought in a way heretofore unseen in American politics. It’s as if they all see themselves as keepers of the “progressive” flame, crusaders for the memory of every liberal president and every big government program of the last one hundred years. And Barack Hussein Obama is the living embodiment of that flame. His philosophy of government is closer to the socialist European model they all admire than any president in history.

Consider the questions that have never been asked during these debates: What is your opinion of the president arbitrarily taking the property of General Motors stockholders and giving it to the United Auto Workers union? What about the GM dealerships that were closed because they were owned by Republicans and those that were kept open because their owners were Democrats — some of them donors to Obama’s campaign? What should be done about Operation Fast and Furious? What do you believe were the real motives for the program? Was it stricter gun control laws? Should Attorney General Eric Holder be fired over this scheme? Should the president be impeached? What about the bankrupt company Solyndra? Who should be held accountable for the half-billion dollars in taxpayer funds that were given to this company, at least some of whose executives were bundlers for the president’s election campaign? Whatever happened to the $20 billion the president obtained from BP after the Gulf oil spill? What should Congress do to stop the president from naming recess appointments when the Senate is not in recess? You have all been accused of holding extreme positions on abortion and same-sex marriage. Is the president’s opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act an extreme position? What about his administration’s refusal to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, which is the law of the land? Is this extreme?

There is not a mainstream media journalist on the planet who would ask such questions. But there is one man who would, and it may be that his input is what is needed to inform Republicans, Independents and Democrats alike of the truth about Barack Hussein Obama. Republicans should ask radio king Rush Limbaugh to moderate their next debate. He would ask the right questions and it would be informative, unlike the circular firing squads hosted by Obama’s lackeys at the networks.

______________________________________________________________________________

Citizens to Maintain Oscualtory Freedom: Nanny-State Liberal Senator Avery Withdraws "Kiss and Tell" Bill

2012-01-11T06:39:00.000-08:00

Kisses

Kisses kept are wasted;
Love is to be tasted.
There are some you love, I know;
Be not loathe to tell them so.
Lips go dry and eyes grow wet
Waiting to be warmly met.
Keep them not in waiting yet;
Kisses kept are wasted.

~ Edmund Vance Cooke

Pucker Up! Don't throw away the Mistletoe! Throw away those, "Go to first base, free kiss cards" and those pre-date 'its okay to kiss' affidavits.

The poor pathetic so-called Nebraska State Senator Bill Avery apparently has given up on his 'unwanted kiss' bill. Yep, this nanny-state liberal apparently has suffered so much derision for his bill that he has withdrawn it. Actually, we're kind of sorry that this protector of osculation did so as it would have been fun to watch him advocate for it during the legislative process. He might have even got some unwanted pre-illegal kisses of support from the one or two folks in the state who agreed with him.

In any event, now Avery can go back to more of his other frivolous nanny-state initiatives such as establishing a Nebraska Department of Obesity to monitor poor little fat kids whose parents don't have enough personal responsibility to do so and he can use that department to let the state solve that problem just as government statewide and nationally has solved so many other problems, like poverty, energy, etc.

Given his penchant for crazy legislation perhaps Avery should consider some new laws to incarcerate loony senile state senators in some state run home.....

Welcome to Greece

2012-01-10T04:38:00.000-08:00

We're going in the direction of Greece and many of the other failed European economies and there isn't much expectation for anything to get better. This is really serious and when folks (politicians) talk about the debt we should listen. Unfortunately, some/most who talk about it aren't serious given their voting records which seem to be oriented more toward giving their constituents instant gratification than worrying about the mess that will be left for their children and grand children.

Here's an article that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent us that appeared in U.S.A. today. It's worth the read and some serious reflection.

"U.S. debt is now equal to economy
January 9, 2012
USA Today
Richard Wolf

WASHINGTON – The soaring national debt has reached a symbolic tipping point: It's now as big as the entire U.S. economy.

Supporters of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney stand next to a national debt clock during a rally Sunday in Exeter, N.H. The debt is projected to surge.
The amount of money the federal government owes to its creditors, combined with IOUs to government retirement and other programs, now tops $15.23 trillion.

That's roughly equal to the value of all goods and services the U.S. economy produces in one year: $15.17 trillion as of September, the latest estimate. Private projections show the economy likely grew to about $15.3 trillion by December — a level the debt is likely to surpass this month.

"The 100% mark means that your entire debt is as big as everything you're producing in your country," says Steve Bell of the Bipartisan Policy Center, which has proposed cutting nearly $6 trillion in red ink over 10 years. "Clearly, that can't continue."

Long-term projections suggest the debt will continue to grow faster than the economy, which would have to expand by at least 6% a year to keep pace.

President Obama's 2012 budget shows the debt soaring past $26 trillion a decade from now. Last summer's deficit reduction deal could reduce that to $24 trillion.

Many economists, such as the Brookings Institution's William Gale, say a better measure of the nation's debt is how much the government owes creditors, not counting $4.7 trillion owed to future Social Security recipients and other government beneficiaries. By that measure, the debt is roughly a third less: $10.5 trillion, or nearly 70% the size of the economy.

That is still high by historic standards. The total national debt topped the size of the economy for three years during and after World War II. It dropped to 32.5% of the economy by 1981, then began a steady climb under President Reagan, doubling over the next 12 years. The combination of recession and stimulus spending caused it to soar again under Obama.

Among advanced economies, only Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan and Portugal have debts larger than their economies. Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Italy are at the root of the European debt crisis. The first three needed bailouts from European central banks; Italy's books are monitored by the International Monetary Fund.

The White House and Congress agreed in August to cut about $1 trillion from federal agencies over 10 years. An additional $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts looms beginning next year if lawmakers can't agree on a better way to do it.

Economist Mark Zandi of Moody's Analytics says reaching the 100% mark shows "the grave need to address our long-term fiscal problems.""

Breaking News: Fortenberry won't run for Senate

2012-01-09T09:12:00.000-08:00

After our review of the likelihood of Congressman Fortenberry's potential run for the U.S. Senate, we're glad to see that Jeff has come to his senses. Certainly, Jon Bruning is probably happy and Don Stenberg disappointed. The good news is that there will be no potential open race for the house in the First Congressional District and no potential for a loss there. So, beginning January, 2013, Nebraska will have a 100% conservative (Republican) delegation in Washington for the first time since Adam and Eve.

Here is what Rothenberg had to tell us about Fortenberry?

""Cong. Fortenberry Declines Senate Run in Nebraska" from "The Rothenberg Political Report"

In a "significant shift" over the weekend, Cong. Jeff Fortenberry (R) will not run for the open U.S. Senate seat in Nebraska and is expected to seek reelection, according to Nebraska sources.

Late last week, Fortenberry was coming to the brink, laying the ground work to enter the crowded Republican field, but according to a well-placed source, the congressman had a change of heart over the weekend."

Daub Starts Out Regent Race With Strong Finances

2012-01-09T08:46:00.000-08:00

Hal Daub, at this point, is the only filed candidate for the Nebraska Board of Regents District 8 position to replace Randy Ferlic who has chosen not to seek re-election.   Ferlic's daughter has indicated she would run and has filed with the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission but has yet to file officially with the Secretary of State.   There is also a young attorney who has indicated a desire to file.

Daub's financial report shows that he has raised $41,400 over the last year--all of it since September.   The report indicates he has $36,299.84 on hand as of December 31, 2011. Given his fund raising ability, Daub can probably raise whatever is necessary to conduct a successful campaign.

Yes, we are partial, but it's hard to believe that anyone could possibly bring the dedication, hard work and energy to the campaign and to the Regent position that Daub can.

p.s. From his lits of donors, obviously lots of others believe in Daub.   Donors include three members of the Hawkins family, Larry Courtnage, a Kotouc family member, Norm Riffel, Gail Robertson, Mike Simmons, David Sokol, Mike Yanne, Derly Hamann, Bill Grewcock, Joe Moglia, and John McCollister just to name a few.

A 'Fortenberry' Mess? Maybe for All But Stenberg

2012-01-09T08:29:00.000-08:00

We've heard the rumors about Congressman Fortenberry entering the U.S. Senate race to replace the failed Judas Ben Nelson.    Rothenberg Reports ran a snippet on Friday (see below), which would certainly make it seem that Fortenberry is seriously considering entry into the already crowed five-person field.   We think that Fortenberry's entrance would be a mistake for everyone other than maybe Don Stenberg who has always operated under the axiom that the more candidates in a race against him the better.

Fortenberry has some money, about $600,000 to start a run.   He has not made every constituent totally happy with his conservative bona fides although for the most part he is conservative.   But like a lot of politicians Fortenberry probably has a higher estimate of his state-wide popularity and electability than might be reality.   Frankly, we doubt that his name is much known outside of his district so unlike Jon Bruning and Don Stenberg, lots of folks don't know much about him.

We've felt all along that the Republican senate nomination belongs to Bruning who has done a admirable job raising money and despite Stenberg's assertions about Bruning not being a 'life-long conservative' has demonstrated a solid conservative record as a state senator and Nebraska's Attorney General.   The only thing that cold stop Bruning at this point would be the entry of Governor Heineman into the race--which would probably end the aspirations of all the current Republican senate seat seekers. Barring that, the nomination should be Brunings.

However, as we noted on Friday, Stenberg's conservative ally, Senator Jim Demint and his organization have started a $200,000 media buy for January in support of Stenberg.   Stenberg said that he anticipated Demint, etal. would spend up to $1 million on his behalf in the primary.   Would that beat Bruning? Probably not given Brunings abilities to run a sophisticated campaign and given his fund-raising advantage. Of course, again that depends on Heineman as noted above.

But things could change with Fortenberry in the race.   Stenberg has traditionally demonstrated strong support in the third district and traditionally can be counted on to win about one-third of the Republican vote if his name is just on the ballot.   Fortenberry's entry into the race could just take away enough votes from Bruning and others to give Stenberg's base the opportunity to prevail.

Obviously, Stenberg must be waiting with great hope the entry of Fortenberry and, like the other declared candidates in the race, hoping Heineman really does love his current job!

Here is what Rothenberg had to say:

"Cong. Fortenberry Poised to Enter Nebraska Senate Race

Cong. Jeff Fortenberry (R) is actively considering a bid for the U.S. Senate in Nebraska and is likely to enter the race, according to multiple sources in the state and in Washington.

Given Sen. Ben Nelson’s (D) retirement announcement over the holidays and questions about the current GOP field, Fortenberry appears to see an opportunity to make the jump to statewide office.

According to sources, Fortenberry is making calls and making staff changes in what looks like an effort to lay the groundwork for a Senate run.

The congressman would join Attorney General Jon Bruning, state Treasurer Don Stenberg and state Sen. Deb Fischer in the GOP race. Bruning would start with a financial advantage, but Fortenberry had a considerable $568,000 on hand in his congressional account at the end of September, which would place him well ahead of Stenberg and Fischer.

According to GOP sources, there is always a chance the congressman could change directions until he officially announces his decision, but Fortenberry is definitely leaning toward a Senate run. A number of Republicans in Nebraska are already making plans to run for Fortenberry’s congressional seat, yet another indication that he will run for Senate.

The dynamic of the race would change if Gov. Dave Heineman (R) decides to enter the race. The popular governor has shown no interest in coming to Washington but, according to some insiders, has not completely closed the door to a run.

Democrats don’t have a candidate yet in the wake of Nelson’s announcement."

Bob Kerrey Supports Obamacare

2012-01-09T07:10:00.000-08:00

For those who missed it, former governor and U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey told the K.F.A.B. folks this morning (8:20 a.m.) that he supports Obamacare.   When asked whether he would vote to repeal it he said, "NO".   He went on to say there were significant flaws in Obamacare that need to be changed, "even if you implement every detail.

Apparently, 'Rockin Bob' hasn't paid much attention to what more than 60% of Nebraskans think about Obamacare.   It is precisely because of that and its correlation with not-to-soon-to-be-former-senator Judas Ben Nelson's popularity that drove Nelson to the realization that he couldn't beat any Republican next fall.   Kerrey will be hard pressed to run and win any campaign as a supporter of Obamacare.   He may think he can use his charm to 'reeducate' Nebraskans, but that won't happen.

We were glad to hear Kerrey admit that, "America is headed in a dangerous direction" given its national debt reaching the level of GNP.

Kerrey went on to say he wouldn't let a possible entry into the senate race by Governor Heienman deter a possible candidacy.   He said that since he no longer has responsibilities as a college president he intended to spend more time in Nebraska where he "probably pays more taxes than any of the Republican candidates." He went on to say that being a senator and spending 240 days a year in Washington was somewhat paradoxical and that not being in an elected position gave him more time to be a father (he has a ten-year-old) and grandfather.

Some may recall Kerrey's 60th vote to save Bill Clinton's presidency.   Given the probability of that coming up and now his support of Obamacare, a successful senate run by Kerrey seems highly improbable should he make a decision to do so.

Kissin' and Tellin'

2012-01-07T08:26:00.000-08:00

Yesterday we commented on Senator Avery's nanny-state mentality effort to tax soda pop so that he could finance a new department to deal with obesity in the state.    It seems that the senator believes that raising taxes and inserting government into the lives of citizens is the solution to every problem.   For every problem the senator believes there is a need for a new law.   In his Democratic liberal mentality, personal responsibility and common sense apparently play no role.

Avery has now become the laughing stock of Nebraska and no doubt will bring Nebraska to the same national attention and ridicule that Ernie Chambers brought when he filed suit against God.    His latest example of his extreme foolishness and nanny-state mentality is LB 797 which would make an unwanted kiss some form of sex crime.

Remember the five year-old kid on the east coast who was recently suspended by his principle for the crime of planting a kiss on a little girl?   Now that absurd bit of political correctness could be construed as a sex crime that could follow him all his life.

We don't know about Avery, but he apparently doesn't attend a lot of political functions or maybe just doesn't have a lot of political friends, but our staff gets many un-asked-for kisses from many of the women in the crowd.   If we happen to be in a bad mood could we declare these septuagenarians and octogenarians sex offenders?   And how about all those teens?   Will they need to get notarized 'feel-free-to-kiss' affidavits in order to prevent living with the sex offender classification for the rest of their lives?   Will it need a rescission form in case the would-be recipient changes his or her mind? Where does it end?

Avery may have one example of a couple whose family was distressed by one event. That's unfortunate for the family, but it doesn't require a law.

Earlier in the week we came across an article noting that some 40,000 new state and federal laws took effect the first of the month in this country.    While some laws may be necessary, does the senator and his ilk of nanny-state liberals not realize that every time a new law is passed the freedoms of the citizenry are reduced? We hate to sound like Ron Paul, but the mentality we see is one that will someday lead us to behave like robots programmed to get up at a specific hour, go through a morning ritual of hygiene and eating a prescribed breakfast, going to work in a uniform unoffensive to others devoid of cologne which might offend, driving a specific route home in micro-mini solar powered car where we are prescribed what we can eat and where we can go.

Let's be clear, whether it's setting up obesity departments with our tax dollars or passing laws to punish unwanted kisses, Bill Avery is simply a nanny-statist who values government solutions for any problem that exists rather than personal responsibility.    Sadly, in doing so, he brings justifiable ridicule on himself and embarrassment on his state.   This bozo should be shown the way to retirement by his constituents assuming they can overcome their laughing attack in time to get to the voting booth.

P.S. After reading the lyrics of "Kiss and Tell" sung by Justin Bieber, perhaps the good senator should consider having the song banned as part of his legislation since it obviously could incite someone to perform an illegal act.....

Justin Bieber's Kiss and Tell

Yeah
J-J-J JB
Yeah, whoa,
No, noo,

Now I can see it girl,
You ain't gotta say nothing
Your lips are callin me,
Like they wanna do something,

I feel the chemistry,
With everything we make,
A little kiss is a definite possibility,
Seen you a couple times,
Had a couple conversations,
Since you’ve been on my mind,
Made a couple observations,

Like you’re a fly chick,
You could be my chick,
Play by the rules and
You could get what I get,

Just keep it quiet,
Keep it on the hush
(Yeah, yeah)
And what we do keep it just between us,
(Yeah, yeah)

I don't want to see tweet about JB,
Cause the only people that you know,
Is you and me so,

Baby, I know that you’re cool
With rockin with me,
But I can't have you tellin everybody
You got me all twisted with your lips
Like this,

So tell me, tell me,
Are you gonna kiss, kiss and tell,
Tell me are you gonna kiss, kiss and tell
Tell me are you gonna kiss me
Then tell everybody,
That you got me twisted
With your lips girl,
Are you gonna kiss and tell,

Its called a date short,
No one has to do with it,
Just you and me girl,
Tell em' we’re doin it,

Don't need that TMZ,
All in our privacy,
Use em' lips for kissin girl,
If you wanna ride with me,

And if you wanna tell somebody,
Then we can call the whole thing off,
(No Problem)

You can go your way,
And I'll go mine,
But I rather spend a little time with you,
Yeah,

Just keep it quiet,
(Yeah, yeah)
http://www.elyricsworld.com/kiss_and_tell_lyrics_justin_bieber.html
Keep it on the hush,
And what we do,
Keep it just between us,
(Yeah, yeah)

I don't wanna see tweet about JB,
Cause the only people that you know,
Is you and me so,

Baby, I know that you’re cool
With rockin with me,
But I can't have you tellin everybody
You got me all twisted with your lips like this,

So tell me, tell me,
Are you gonna kiss, kiss and tell,
Tell me are you gonna kiss, kiss and tell
Tell me are you gonna kiss me
Then tell everybody,
That you got me twisted with your lips,
Girl are you gonna kiss and tell,

Tell, said are you gonna kiss and tell,
Tell, said are you gonna kiss and tell,
Tell, said are you gonna kiss and tell,

Oh,
Don't tell your homies,
Don't tell you mama,
Don't tell your girlfriend,
That’ll start some drama,

Stay off that facebook,
I'll treat you real good,
You keep this private,
And you can get what I get,
(Ohh)

Baby, I know that you’re cool
With rockin with me,
But I can't have you tellin everybody,
You got me all twisted with your lips like this,

So tell me, tell me,
Are you gonna kiss, kiss and tell,
Tell me are you gonna kiss, kiss and tell
Tell me are you gonna kiss me,
Then tell everybody,
That you got me twisted
With your lips girl,
Are you gonna kiss and tell,

Whoa,
Kiss and tell,
Whoa, whoa

I’m not about that,
If you’re gonna kiss and tell
Noo, no, no
If you’re gonna kiss and tell,
If you’re gonna kiss and tell,
That’s not me

Freeman Kicks Off Congressional Campaign

2012-01-06T13:28:00.000-08:00

Yesterday morning at 10:00 at the Omaha Press Club Glenn Freeman announced that he was officially a candidate for the 2nd Congressional District Seat Republican nomination, the seat held by Lee Terry. In his speech, Freeman proved to be both articulate and quick to respond to questions. Despite his assertions that he would not run a negative campaign against Republican incumbent Lee Terry, Freeman was vocal in his criticism of the congressman.

Freeman summarized his candidacy as dedicated to reducing income taxes, fixing Social Security, reducing the national debt and restoring state sovereignty

Freeman was introduced by Tim Lonergan and Bill Ramsey. Freeman told the group of about 30 that "District 2 has not had the best reputation", that he lacked the financial connections and resources of the incumbent, that we, "need common sense and solid judgement in Congress", and that his campaign would be led by the feeble light of the Constitution. He said he wouldn't base his campaign on the short comings of the incumbent, otherwise he would not have time to acquaint the voters with himself.

Some of the comments made to various questions asked of Freeman:

He isn't in race to help Lee Terry divert attention from other candidates or to somehow help Lee. That was evident from his overall comments toward Terry.
He will give people the dedication that the congress is following the Constitution.
With regard to a question asked by would-be-congressional candidate Gary Odum, Freeman said there was nothing unconstitutional about the Federal Reserve (a Ron Paul tenet) but rather that "those who stole the money should go to jail."
Congress ought to be held to same 'insider trading' laws that everyone else is.
Freeman said that the Constitution does not allow children born in the United States of illegal aliens to be citizens, citing the 14th Amendment. He said if folks didn't have a legitimate passport to be in the U.S., there children shouldn't be citizens.
Suggested that you couldn't trust Lee Terry given his broken promises on term limits, saying that "We call that (Lee's response) lying."
Said that he learned from his mother, who had a 3rd grade education, that you can't borrow yourself out of debt.
Suggested that the House has the ability to impeach and that there are reasons to impeach the president given Obamacare, Hillary Clinton's appointment as Secretary of State in violation of the U.S. Constitution and the president's appointment of Timothy Geitner as Treasury Secretary when he owed $30,000 in back taxes.
On the recess appointments just made by the president Freeman said that those appointments were the job of the senate, that the senate was in session and those appointments were illegal and that "We did away with the king" when we declared independence.
Freeman considers himself a constitutional scholar and suggested in answer to a question that the 16th Amendment is illegal and should be repealed as it compels individuals to testify against themselves in violation of the 5th Amendment by providing tax information to the government that can be used against them.
Freeman said that the only legitimate tax the government can collect is a sales tax, i.e., The Fair Tax.

One can't help but be impressed with Freeman, age 76, and his zeal and love for his country.   He has a meritorious background of serving his country in the U.S. Air Force for 30 years.   He spent 12 years working for Senator Hagel and should probably get an award for keeping his mouth shut as Hagel turned into an egotistical self-serving trader to his party.   In the interest of intellectual curiosity, however, it might have been or be appropriate for those in the media to ask Freeman if he actually supported his boss's polices. Freeman has and continues to serve on numerous other community and national organizations.

With that said, Freeman has little name recognition and limited resources to compete for the nomination.   Additionally, despite his claim to be a constitutional scholar, he has some questionable views on it.   In his book, A Republic If You Can Keep It, he describes the 16th, 17th, 22nd and 23rd Amendments to the U.S. Constitution as "unconstitutional" and should be repealed.

We've noted before that Freeman is a good man, a good family man and a patriot.   While we respect him, we believe that in the end he will simply ameliorate the impact of votes cast against Terry by further dividing them.

2012-01-06T10:23:00.000-08:00

Looks like it's the beginning of a Don Stenberg for Senate media blitz.   The likely G.O.P. Senate nominee, Jon Bruning has already kicked off his media campaign and now he is being joined not by Stenberg himself but by Jim Demint's Senate Conservatives Fund organization.

Last night, Stenberg told the Sarpy County Republican Central Committee that Demint would spend $200,000 this month in ads supporting him.   But Stenberg went even further and said that he expected Demint's organization to spend $1 million dollars on his behalf in the primary campaign.

Jon Bruning has well over $1 million in his campaign coffers.   We don't know what the year end figurse will be for Stenberg or Fischer.   If in fact, Demint and crew spend that kind of money on behalf of Stenberg, who is not a good fundraiser himself, there will be an impact on the campaign.   Exciting times ahead.

Fischer Bill Should Be Passed

2012-01-06T10:19:00.000-08:00

Whether you support Deb Fischer for the U.S. Senate or not, folks across the state should be grateful that she has introduced LB 745 which would require a vote of the citizens of any community before any 'occupation' taxes are foisted upon them.    If you recall, such was the case when the liberal members of Omaha's city council saddled their citizens with a 2.5% occupation taxes on restaurants.

You can expect lots of opposition from cities, towns and their lobbying groups.    Omaha's mayor will probably become unhinged.   He's probably already contacted his 'sales tax' lobbyist John Lindsay to assure him of another contract financed by tax paper dollars to fight Fischer's bill.   As you know, Suttle doesn't think the city's $100,000 lobbyist is competent enough to handle the city's lobbying needs.

Cities like such taxes because they can levy them on hotels, rental cars, just about any thing you can think of as an alternative to raising property taxes or cutting spending. And they can do it without the vote of the people!

Yes, it will make it a little harder for them to pick out certain segments to help offset their spending.   But given the egregious tax-and-spend mentality of some mayors and city councils across the state it is time to let those responsible for paying for the spending to have a voice.

Good work Senator Fischer!

Let's tax Soda Pop

2012-01-06T08:13:00.000-08:00

Yes, we said that.   Why not tax soda pop? It's food isn't it? Well sort of.   Like coffee, tea and other beverages,  like orange juice and shakes.

Yes, we think it might be a good idea to tax soft drinks.   But not because of Senator Bill Avery's tax and spend nanny state mentality.    Taxing soft drinks because they aren't good for you isn't the reason to tax these beverages.   Taxing soft drinks because you want the revenue to establish an anti-obesity program isn't a good reason to tax them.   Taxing soft drinks because you want to change some one's eating habits isn't a good reason to tax them.

On the other hand, not taxing soft drinks because the Nebraska Grocery Industry Association and the Nebraska Beverage Associations are against doing so isn't a reason to not tax such beverages.   Taxing soft drinks because some 'hire-for-dollars' lobbyist like John Lindsay (who, incidentally is pocketing thousands of Omaha taxpayer dollars for trying to add a half-cent to their sales tax) says it's a bad idea is not a reason to to not tax these drinks

Those reasons mentioned above are neither valid reasons to or not to tax soft drinks.   So why would we tax soft drinks?   We would tax soft drinks (we'd also add the unrelated entity known as newspapers) and we'd tale the estimated $11.3 million of revenue and use it to reduce Nebraska's state income tax by exactly that amount by adjusting it's uncompetitive tax rates.    It probably wouldn't be much of a reduction but it would be a start in the right direction.

Nebraska's income tax rates are too high.   They need to be lowered. That can only be done by achieving revenue surpluses (not likely in near future) or by cutting programs (again, not very likely in the near future, but certainly desirable) or by shifting between tax sources which in this case we support.

Senator Pahls has already published a list of literally hundreds of sales tax exemptions in state code.   Some of those are necessary to encourage commerce, to not-create what is essentially double taxation. Many aren't.

So to get to the bottom line, so to speak, Senator Avery's LB 753 is a stupid, loony, nanny-state, tax and spend idea.   But removing the soft-drink sales tax exemption might just make sense if the additional revenue was used to reduces Nebraska's high income tax rates.

P.S.. We are thinking about establishing a special award category for Senator Avery given his two-day display of doofus ideas.   Stay tuned.

Disingenuous Self-Serving State Senator Schumacher Wants to Line His Pockets

2012-01-04T07:42:00.000-08:00

Today begins the 60 day session of Nebraska's Unicameral legislature. So Nebraskans will have until about April 30 to hold on to their wallets and freedom.

With that said we happened to hear the K.F.A.B. radio interview of Nebraska's true slime ball State Senator Paul Schumacher this morning who would rather satisfy his owners (the gambling community) and his own pocketbook, despite obvious conflicts of interest, by indicating he is likely to introduce legislation, "allowing the legislature to determine to allow use (of gambling revenue) for education, roads and the 'rainy day' fund." In other words he wants a constitutional amendment passed by voters to give self-serving scumbags like himself the ability to okay virtually any kind of gambling as opposed to the current system requiring voters to make that decision.   Of course, like politicians of his ilk, he uses scare tactics inferring that if the state doesn't do this it will be faced with new taxes or more draconian cuts.

In response to a question about what the voters of Columbus might think about his proposal, Schumacher said they knew where he was on the issue when they voted for him and that Columbus' horse track needs financial help (a casino?) to survive.

In a comment that reflects his self serving attitude Schumacher said that he had a 'responsibility to raise the issue for thoughtful conseration because of the potential of more draconian cuts."    APPARENTLY THE SAME THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION ISN'T DUE THE LEGISLATURE OR THE CITIZENS OF NEBRASKA ON THE WINNER-TAKES-ALL ELECTORAL VOTE ISSUE, the advancement of a bill he is holding up in committee.

Schumacher claims that his bill would allow the legislature to bring back some $60 to $120 million dollars a year from Iowa, although as we've noted in the past Schumacher has no bona fide support for that number.

We frankly think that Senator Schumacher is nothing more than a disengenuous self-serving scumbag.   Given his stance on the winner-take-all issue and on the gambling issue, he certainly is not a conservative or a Republican. At least Senator Ashford has the intellectual honesty to admit that he is no longer a Republican.   Schumacher should join Ashford as an independent or maybe Ron Paul as a libertarian.   Regardless, his motivation is to serve his pocketbook, not the citizens of Nebraska.