Stemburger combo to go

by Street Sweeper on February 22, 2012

From my stem cells to your plate

Did anyone catch the story the other day that scientists have figured out a way to grow beef from cow stem cells?
It apparently takes forever, they cannot make much and it is crazy expensive.
BUT, it apparently is possible.

So that go us thinking…

You know those “Meat is murder!!!!!” PETA types? So, suppose McStemys starts selling a 100% stem-cell grown burger. No cow’s life was taken to create said burger and you can get it with or without soy-cheese. It tastes in every other way just like a regular murdered-beef hamburger. And it is good for you and has no other health consequences expect that maybe it is less likely to clog your arteries.

So, would the average non-meat eater chow down on said StemBurger? Would there be a problem? We know certain vegetarians who do not like anything that even tastes like meat. But we also know others that will eat a veggie-burger, especially if it DOES taste like meat. So would they eat actual murder-free beef?

We are just throwing this out there. It is a Brave New World, eh?

***

Few probably noticed by an interesting non-development in the Nebraska U.S. Senate race when newly-christened Independent Jim Jenkins decided NOT to run as an Independent.

Jenkins is a former Democrat, but because of a recent party switch, he was going to have a giant hassle, or possibly a lawsuit in order to enter the Senate race. And the kicker of all that was that Jenkins has a fair amount of personal money he could have thrown in to jump-start a campaign.

We aren’t sure how many votes he could have ultimately leeched from either side, but it is possible he could have added an interesting element to the race.

Alas. You can read more about Jenkin’s story in this article from the Sand Hill Sex Press. (what?)

***

The Senate Conservative Fund notes that they raised over $60K for Don Stenberg from February 5 – 11th. They are gung-ho to elect “a” conservative to the Senate (read, “their” conservative) and have been raising lots of money outside Nebraska to spend to convince Nebraskans to vote for Stenberg.

And Stenberg will be visiting Washginton, D.C. next week for a soiree put on by South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint to raise money for the Stenberg campaign. It costs $2,500 for a Political Action Committee to host the event, and a cool grand for a PAC to “attend”.

Which is fine. Just about every candidate has a DC fundraising gig or two.

But then it is this line from DeMint’s Senate Conservatives Fund PAC that always kills us:

“Stenberg is not an establishment candidate so he doesn’t have access to the kind of money others do.”

Nope, the former 2000 party nominee for U.S. Senate, 2006 candidate for U.S. Senate, 12 year Attorney General, and present State Treasurer is practically an outsider! DC get togethers thrown by Senators? Meh. And that $200K that DeMint spent on TV ads for Stenberg? Uh, well, that was nothing too!

When will Stenberg finally get a break and be allowed into the establishment that is Nebraska and national politics?

***

Boy, we did not see THIS one coming: The White House press secretary says that President Obama did not cancel the Keystone XL Pipeline deal! Why no, it was the state of Nebraska, which has not approved a new route for TransCanada’s pipe!

Seems the Feds had already approved a perfectly good route that got sidetracked by Nebraskans for zero scientific reasons.

If ONLY we could have predicted such a result!

***

Hey Lent begins today! And you know what that means?! Only 40 days until Easter! So start your holiday shopping now, by buying that Easter stuff you were going to buy anyway at Amazon.com! Click on Leavenworth Street’s Amazon links, and you will give a little anonymous Easter love back to L.St. — at no extra cost to you!

(What? You can’t buy stuff for Easter? Just go to Amazon already and buy a book or a Kindle or a flat screen TV or something. Free shipping!)

{ 10 comments }

Poll – Bruning up by almost 30%

by Street Sweeper on February 21, 2012

Jon Bruning

A new poll out of the Jon Bruning camp shows Bruning up by almost 30 points over his nearest competitor, Don Stenberg.

The poll by Wenzel Strategies shows…

Jon Bruning …………….. 47.5%
Don Stenberg …………….18.5%
Deb Fischer ………………10.2%
Pat Flynn ……………………2.8%
Spencer Zimmerman ….. 1.5%
Not Sure …………………….19.6%

Of course, the first think you should note about this poll of 817 likely GOP voters over February 17-19 is…holy crap, 12 people voted for Spencer Zimmerman? (Just think how well he would do if he changed his name to Spencer Dylan!)

The other point is that, wow these numbers are MUCH different than those from Don Stenberg, which showed Bruning at 32% and Stenberg at 24%

We will note a few things:
1) This is an auto-phone poll. Like it or not, there are news organizations that will not even publish the results of these types of polls, because they claim they are not as trustworthy as a person to person poll. Part of the reasoning is that they would not know if, say, the person answering the phone was a child, or somesuch.

We get the issue there, but we also doubt it. The papers that don’t accept these polls are in a bit of the dark ages still. They are avowed tree-killers and have been known to buy barrels and barrels of ink. (We still are unsure why.) But the fact of the matter is that these auto-polls have been shown to be as close to the real vote as person-calling polls. There is an argument that they are even better, because people are less likely to lie to a machine than a person.

2) But if we really want to verify these, we would like to know the questions asked — i.e. was this a message-type poll like Don Stenberg ran?

Stenberg’s recent numbers were likely as a result of first using a number of, “If you knew that Jon Bruning wears the same socks two days in a row, would you…” type questions before asking vote preference. You want that sort of campaign information to gauge how you should advertise, etc. But to then publish those results as a valid poll, gets questionable.

As we noted after Stenberg’s last poll, we do think his numbers moved. Just not to that extent.

Also consider that this poll was taken AFTER Governor Dave Heineman was officially OUT of the running.  With the field nearly set (unelecteds still have until March 1st to file), voters are probably more willing to commit.  So Stenberg’s numbers moved a little, but Bruning’s a lot.

So is this poll more valid?

We are waiting for further information about the poll to be published today. When we get that information, we hope to get a better stance where the voters rank the candidates right now.

Check back for updates.

{ 28 comments }

Ricketts for Mayor?

by Street Sweeper on February 20, 2012

Pete Ricketts

Leavenworth Street is getting word that there is very serious interest in the 2013 Omaha Mayor’s race from….none other than…former Senate candidate…Pete Ricketts!

Pete is the current GOP National Commiteeman from Nebraska, and has stayed very involved at a policy level with the Platte Institute.  He is also part owner of the Chicago Cubs (FWIW).  It is also, of course, well known that he was willing to put up his own money to help fund his last campaign for U.S. Senate. His entrance would immediately affect any race and any candidates.

At this point, we would be looking at Mayor Jim Suttle, state Senator Brad Ashford…and then who knows? Would someone like Ricketts clear the Republican field, if they couldn’t go up against his cash? Would they be happy to cede to him from a party and policy standpoint? Would someone who has raised a good chunk of cash, like City Councilwoman Jean Stothert, back off this race?  Would Ashford stay in?

Ricketts has not announced anything, and this could all be just another trial balloon. But if he is interested, this changes a great deal.

***

On the campaign front, we had noted the other day that Bill Protexter was going to be running Brad Ashford’s Mayoral campaign. Well, looks like Protexter has had a change of heart. Things are early, and it is not unusual for a camp to have changes like this early on.

But when someone, like Ashford, leaves the party, it means that campaigners have to think long and hard about who they take on as clients. If you are a campaigner, you work for non-party candidates at your own peril. It can be a tough business.

***

On the campaign front, A.G. Jon Bruning is continuing his run of law enforcement endorsements, by adding one from Maricopa County, Arizona “America’s Toughest Sheriff” Joe Arpaio.

Bruning has also collected a slew of endorsements from Nebraska law enforcement. He is going head to head with Don Stenberg for the out-of-state endorsements as well, it seems.

***

Last week we wrote a post criticizing whoever holds the keys to the Douglas County Republican Party (DCRP) website for a post they made regarding establishing a state health care exchange. Our reasoning for the criticism was twofold:

1) We stated our position that we believe Nebraska is better off establishing their own exchanges instead of defaulting to a Federal model. There has been a spirited debate on this subject in the comment section — and we are convinced that this is not a clear cut issue. We are comfortable with our position, but we certainly see the other side of it, and have no ill will towards those who take it. And we are proud to be hosting a forum for this type of discussion, which we have not seen anywhere else.

2) But our real surprise was that whoever does run on the DCRP website, put up that post. The post suggested that it was the party’s position to be against a state run exchange, even though there are certainly many Republicans — and arguably the Governor — who are either for establishing a state-run exchange instead of defaulting to a Federal model, or simply have not not taken a position.

Also a bit of a strange factor in the DCRP’s post was that it seemed to be cut and pasted from an Americans for Prosperity talking point. Which is fine, except we have not seen a post like that before — again on a relatively new issue that the party does not seem to be squared on.

So why did this go up? Well, maybe the Party Chair, Scott Petersen, — who seems to have taken ownership on this — felt that this was a done deal as far as being a “party position”. Or maybe it had been cleared by whatever party committee may decide such a thing. Or maybe it was just “one of many” positions being made available to the party faithful. Or maybe Scott simply felt it was the right position to take and put it up, damn the consequences, if any.

Well, suffice it say that Scott and some of his friends and colleagues did NOT like ANY criticism coming from Leavenworth Street on this issue. They do not like the position that Leavenworth Street has taken on the exchanges, and they DO NOT like the fact that we questioned how they decide about postings on the party’s website.

So apparently DCRP Chairman Scott Petersen attempted to post a comment on Leavenworth Street that did not go through. We have had this happen before on this WordPress hosted site. Recently we had a long-time commenter email us, stating that he was unable to post comments. We looked at it on our end, and could not find any issues. We suggested he look at it from his end, and it was apparently fixed, because he started commenting again that same day.

From a technical point, if you, Commenter, do not see a comment go up almost immediately, there is some problem. In general, we suggest copying your comment before you hit “post”, so that if there is a problem, you can simply re-post it. That is especially the case if you type something VERY long, and then it disappears. We know that frustration, so if you want it to last, type it somewhere else first where it can be saved.

The other day a commenter typed 600+ word comment. In it, he had a number of URL links — so WordPress auto-rejected it. However, because it was obvious that he put a lot of effort into his comment, we edited out the URLs and posted it for him. Point being, we do not reject or deleted comments simply because someone disagrees with a position we have taken.

So why bring all this up? Well, because of a bit of a snarkly/snippy comment from DCRP Chair Petersen regarding a comment of his that did not get posted, for whatever reason. We do not think it was because of links. So, we are inserting it into this post so that he can have his say. (Petersen CC’d us on an email which contained the comment he said did not post on Leavenworth Street.

FYI, I tried to post a comment of my own after getting a chance to catch up on my reading. Evidently, Leavenworth has chosen not to post my comments:

Wow! Where do I start? Sorry, I haven’t been able to join in on the fun. I have been kind of busy volunteering my time the last couple of months trying to help the Douglas County Republican Party become a more effective organization (fundraising with Elephant Remembers, Candidate Recruitment, etc.). Finally caught up on some sleep and now had a chance to read LS and the comments. A few notes and observations:

1) 2012 Elephant Remembers. A big thanks to Vice Chair Arlene Steier, Sarah Weir and Rebecca Weber for putting their heart and soul into making this years event a huge success. Mission accomplished in both attendance and fundraising! And, a special thanks the many folks who donated their time and money to make that happen…..

2) News Flash: Leavenworth Street acknowledges that there is a Douglas County Republican Party. Should be a good thing, but not quite. SS accuses the DCRP of going against Governor Heineman on the Health Care Exchange. Nice try. If you know of a state that has better leadership at the top, let me know….

3) Health Care Exchange. My first thought….LS / SS must be on someone’s payroll pushing for the Health Care Exchange. Interesting, did you notice the Advertisement: Nebraska Health Care Alliance on the LS blog? And drill down into the NHA ad…..and “click below to contact Sam Fischer” and join the Alliance….does that smell “fishy” to anyone but me?

4) Candidate Recruitment. Wow….they took a few pot shots at us there. Anyone notice that the Democrats control most of the offices in Douglas County? Or, that they control the City Council and the Mayors office? I think that happened before I was elected in January 2011. FYI, we are getting new people and new energy into the candidate recruitment process…..might take some time to show results, but stay tuned. (also, quite interesting that some of the “old guard” Republicans are sitting on their hands hoping we fail……..brilliant strategy).

And, in closing…..we appreciate the LS acknowledgement that there is a Douglas County Republican Party. Anytime you brave souls want to come out from behind the curtain and have a conversation, feel free to contact us.

Scott Petersen
Chairman, Douglas County Republican Party

First of all, readers, note that Mr. Petersen numbered his comments, thus making them easier to reply to. Very good. So, let us hit them, one by one:

1) Sounds like it was a great event. We never received any information on it via a release or an update.  But that’s neither here nor there, we suppose. Except that…

2) Petersen here seems to be complaining that we do no feature them enough. We would only say that it is much easier to do so when you are on someone’s email list. And interesting non-sequitur between our questioning Petersen’s position on the exchanges, versus the Governor’s. We think Governor Dave is great. And that has what to do with you….?

3) Yup the NHCA bought an ad on Leavenworth Street last Friday. If you do not see it, reload the page until it cycles up in the box on the upper right. And they bought that ad AFTER we argued in favor of the exchanges last week. Now what else is “fishy” there — other than another non-sequitur by you? And are we to understand that YOU are on the AFP payroll since you quoted AFP directly on the DCRP website?

4) Uh, read our posts again Scott. We never said word ONE about candidate recruitment. But it is interesting that you specifically separated out that point. Is it a sore spot? It must be, since you brought it up to criticize us. And then you go about hammering “old guard” Republicans???

You go on a blog and start to hammer those in your own party because they are not toeing your line? Really? That is the plan, huh?

Hey look, it is not as if you are the first to criticize us for being anonymous. That is the way we decided to operate this blog from the start. If you do not like it, please do not feel any obligation to read or comment (or buy something via our Amazon.com links — where you get great deals).

But strangely enough, there are those who have enjoyed reading Leavenworth Street and support our goal of discussing politics in Nebraska — even intra-party politics!

We will say this: We would not have been surprised if you had sent a comment or an email stating something to the extent of, “This is our position, that we believe most Republicans agree with. We understand that others may disagree, but we believe ours will be most effective for our country. As Chairman, I have certain leeway to take positions on the party website, and to the extent that others disagree with those, we give certain opportunity for them to express theirs. We hope there was not misunderstanding, and we will continue to fight for the best of all Americans.”

Or some other statement.

But instead, what do we get out of the box? Accusing Leavenworth Street of not publicizing your events enough. Accusing Leavenworth Street of not following the GOP’s agenda (or something). Accusing Leavenworth Street of its own agenda. Accusing Leavenworth Street criticizing something about candidate recruitment, when we have not commented on it. Accusing Leavenworth Street of not being “brave”?

We took issue with the way the DCRP Chair put up a post, and this is what comes back?

Heh.
OK.
That is new to us. We have not had that sort of relationship with a party person, or a campaign or an elected official before. We usually get that from liberals and Democrats, but apparently this is what we should get used to from you, and your minions who have decided to attack us on the comment boards.

That’s fine. Free blogosphere, and all that.
Interesting strategy, DCRP Chairman Scott Petersen.

And, as usual, thanks for reading.

{ 69 comments }

Debating PayGo

by Street Sweeper on February 17, 2012

Happy Friday afternoon!

I hope you find this post while balancing on an uneven bar stool and trying to wipe Buffalo Wing sauce off of your smartphone, while on your 3rd smart cocktail or macrobrew (we’re in a down economy, ya know!).

***

Don Stenberg has a new web video up.

And by “web video” we mean, literally, shot with an iPhone and posted on the YouTubes. See it here:

We kind of like these short spots talking about whatever… mainly because it gives us something to post here. But, come on Don and Dan. A camera phone vid? You know, you can really go whole hog and shoot it using a Canon point-and-click digital camera and improve the quality about a 3000%. And then you can go outside, use natural lighting and improve it another 1000%.

“Low budget” doesn’t have to mean “cheap”.

(We chuckled when one emailer said “The only thing missing in this thing is him screaming ‘Watch me!’ at the end. It took us a while to get it…)

***

We want to say that we have appreciated all of the input on the healthcare issue that has dominated the last few posts. It is not only a confusing and debatable issue, but also one fraught with emotion and vitriol (and you just can’t argue with a word like “fraught”).

On that note (more or less) we would like to say a few words about the “Pay-Go” issue that has become intertwined with all things budget and taxes in Washington:

We hate the term “PayGo”. And when we say “hate”, we are fully aware that we are in danger of disobedience of the Omaha City Council resolution outlawing hate. We don’t care. We have hate in our souls!

Why? Because it doesn’t help anything! Is there a real problem with the term, “Pay as you go“? Everyone uses it. Everyone understands it. And it is only four words!

It is not as if it was, “Pay for the outstanding debt you may or may not have accumulated in the prior quarterly terms by advancing certain funds towards eliminating said debt or payment shortcomings on the forward time that may…go.” Turn THAT in to Pay-Go? Fine. But “Pay as you go” works perfectly, and there is no reason to turn it into the moronic PayGo, any more than the Huffington Post needed to become the “HuffPo.”

Otherwise we really do not have a strong opinion on “Pay As You Go”, other than it seems like a wonderful idea that no one in Washington ever has or will go through with.

Feel free to bloviate (or is that boliviate?) on it. (And call it “PayGo” at your own peril…)

***

For you party animals out there, Congressman Lee Terry is having his campaign kick-off this Sunday at 1:30pm at the German-American Society on 120th just south of Center.

There will be giant pretzels, an oom-pah band and kegs of Spatten flowing!*

***

You know what gets people really fired up here on Leavenworth Street?
Unicameral races!

So because it’s only getting later on this Friday afternoon, we are just going to start yelping things, and let you, the Commenters, carry the ball.
With that…

Chambers vs Council!
Hilgers vs Haar!
Howard vs Davis!

As far as we know those are not schools playing in bracket-buster games this weekend.
But you can never be too sure.

*OK, probably not. But one can hope…

{ 51 comments }

Commenting on comments to comments

by Street Sweeper on February 16, 2012

If you print stuff and carry it in boxes it looks like you have more!

Our post yesterday regarding the Douglas County Republican Party’s website post, using AFP’s talking points about opposing proposed Nebraska Health Care Exchanges, stirred up a lot of emotion on the comment boards here.

A few follow-ups:

1) On the purely political issue we found it “interesting” / strange / huh? that the DCRP would cut and paste something from AFP onto the party website. Mainly we find this unusual because the concept is essentially contrary to the stated objective of the Republican Governor. Not to mention calling it “Pro-ObamaCare legislation”.

We are not really sure how these things work. We suppose the party chair has pretty much complete latitude to post whatever he wants on the party website. In theory, he could state his 100% support for open borders and free silver without consulting anyone. But could the county central committee reign him in? Or vote him out? Not sure how that works — and certainly not suggesting that what was done was worthy of such drastic measures.

There are those who feel that what was written is the way to go. But this is hardly the consensus of the party — considering, again, that the Republican Governor has stated that he will do the opposite of what was suggested on the site.

The rest — below — is arguable, though we will restate our position. But the above part is what we are more curious about.

2) The basic argument against a state-run Health Care Exchange seems to be, if you support it you’re FOR ObamaCare!!!!

(We probably did not put enough exclamation marks there.)

We just do not follow that argument. If the law says, “Make your own state exchange, or you will have to submit to the Federal exchange,” what is unclear about that?

The counter is that if you create a state exchange you will have the power to create something that suits Nebraska, as opposed to what suits Chicago, that Nebraska has to go along with.

Some on the comment board argue, “Oh you rube! Obama will reject your Nebraska board, and make you submit to the Chicago style whether you like it or not!!!!!!!!!”

Again, we do not follow that. Now it may be true. May. But what if it is NOT true. Then you have flushed your opportunity to set up your own exchange to spite your face. So where did that get you?

The “argument” also goes that if you set up an exchange you are showing support for ObamaCare. How is that again? Reluctantly following the law shows support for a law you disagree with? So the plan is some sort of civil disobedience? Yeah? OK, well when that fails, then you have just been stuck with the Federal exchange.

Hey, if there is an actual plan to prevent ObamaCare, we are all for it. But this Occupy-esque “plan” of resistance does not seem to add up to anything to us.

***

We got a chuckle out of the LJS story / opinion piece Sunday that Mike Hilgers’ campaign for the legislature “raised speculation” because he has — gasp! — raised lots of cash. Moreover, some of that cash came from — doublegasp! — out of state!

Hilgers went to college not at “the University” — consider that strike three Hilgers! — practiced law and moved back to his home state.

But the thing that really caught our eye in this story was this line:

But there has been speculation on Internet comment boards and elsewhere that Hilgers, who is Catholic and pro-life, was brought to Lincoln to oppose Haar, who is a pro-choice candidate and voter in the Legislature.

Oh yeah? “Internet comment boards” huh? Which ones?

Not ours. Hasn’t come up here.
Not the NNN, where it would be most likely.
Not the OC or the OWH.

The only one we could point to would be….the LJS’s comment section on their December 15th story which essentially published Hilger’s campaign announcement.

And here are the 2 comments:

frost said on: December 15, 2011, 5:31 pm
Obviously, Julie Smug-Albin and the Bishop have been out beating the bushes for candidates and turned up this guy.

and

Richard D. said on: December 15, 2011, 7:32 pm
Heard he just moved into Lincoln to run.

And then, as the LJS notes in their recent article, Julie Schmit-Albin responded

I have never met Mr. Hilgers nor did I or anyone with NRL have anything to do with his entry into the LD 21 race.

So, just so we are following:
The LJS says, “Nebraska Democrats have questioned Hilgers’ contributions.” Yet they don’t quote a single Democrat.

Then they source, “Internet comment boards” — without noting that it was THEIR comment board (singular, not plural) from which a total of TWO anonymous comments came.

And then they throw in the “…and elsewhere…“ Elsewhere? Where, elsewhere? Out on the loading dock? At your coffee shop? In your head, JoAnne Young? Do tell us the source of this conspiracy, so that we may root it out.

So look, if the LJS wants to take a hatchet to a candidate, hey go at. But how about you do it on the Editorial pages which show your true colors. Please spare us with the “sources say” or “internet boards say” crap in what is supposed to be a “news” article, yeah?

***

Congressman Lee Terry will be holding a “Twitter Townhall” this afternoon from 3:00 to 3:30pm…on Twitter! Enter the hashtag #NE02 or #Omaha with your question, and you can then follow his answers on his Twitter feed at “twitter.com/leeterryne“.

And for those of you who are not on the Twitter, you can write an email and send it to Bold Nebraska, who then will chop down a tree and carve your message into the bark, package it inside an elephant tusk and drive to Washington, D.C. in a jumbo jet, up to Terry’s office door.

See because it sends a better message that way.

***

Nebraska’s 1st District Congressman, Jeff Fortenberry, has taken the lead on fighting against President Obama’s war on church-based charities, universities and hospitals.

Fort is leading the effort in the House bill which would grant waivers to any employer that objects to the birth-control mandate for either religious or moral reasons.

***

Hey! If you’re buying something on Amazon.com, that you were going to buy anyway, howsaboutchoo first click LeavenworthSt.com’s Amazon link, then purchase away.

You’ll support our little DAILY blog here, anonymously and at no extra cost, when you do so. We appreciate all your support. And tell a friend (and/or an enemy) to read Leavenworth Street!

{ 48 comments }

“Hope” is not a strategy

February 15, 2012

Three relatively big issues to talk about today, so instead of jamming everything into one post, it will be broken into three separate posts. Please take a look at all three (at your leisure). *** As we were perusing the internets, we came across this item on the Douglas County Republican Party website: Pro-Obamacare Legislation [...]

Read the full article →

Job pipeline

February 15, 2012

Three relatively big issues to talk about today, so instead of jamming everything into one post, it will be broken into three separate posts.  Please take a look at all three (at your leisure). *** News about the Keystone XL pipeline continues to flow, as Members of Congress, lead by Rep. Lee Terry, continue to [...]

Read the full article →

Hassebrook to your rescue

February 15, 2012

Three relatively big issues to talk about today, so instead of jamming everything into one post, it will be broken into three separate posts. Please take a look at all three (at your leisure). *** Yesterday Democrat Chuck Hassebrook announced his candidacy for the U.S. Senate. This was after Ben Nelson dropped out. And then [...]

Read the full article →

Occupy Lyons

February 14, 2012

Democrat Chuck Hassebrook is announcing for U.S. Senate today in his hometown of Lyons, Nebraska. No idea how he comes out of the gate, but we don’t see him on the conservative edge of many issues — as you could certainly argue that Ben Nelson is/was. From NEGOP Chair Mark Fahleson: “(Hassebrook is) more liberal [...]

Read the full article →

Shoulder to shoulder

February 13, 2012

Interesting debate put on by Nebraska’s Ron Paul contingent, the RLC-NE, in Kearney on Saturday morning. Well, interesting that they jammed all four of the participants onto one tiny table. And interesting that there were pretty much NO questions that provided any separation on views between the candidates.  And interesting that there were zero attacks [...]

Read the full article →

FLASH: Hassebrook is IN

February 10, 2012

The LJS’s Don Walton is Tweeting (remember when reporters just reported stuff?), that Democrat University of Nebraska Regent Chuck Hassebrook will announce his candidacy for the U.S. Senate on Tuesday. No word from Democrat state Senator Steve Lathrop. OWH’s Robynn Tysver tweeted yesterday that Lathrop sounded like he was not going to do it, and [...]

Read the full article →

← Previous Entries