Even this guy…

Attorney General Jon Bruning has his first ad — a web ad — of the 2012 U.S. Senate campaign.

See it here:

Assuming this isn’t all stock footage, this spot had to cost a few bucks — actors, sets, animals!

It certainly goes a long way to say, “Even a dumb guy knows the Cornhusker Kickback was wrong.” It does seem that in the end it could have been selling anything, right? Car insurance, discount furniture, mufflers.

But maybe for web pieces like this, the point is to get people talking about the spot itself, and the message comes along with it.

We will keep an eye on the national blogs and sites to see how viral this becomes.

It’s the first slug in a long bout, in any case.


  1. Kyle Michaelis says:

    This really is a terrible campaign ad. Even disregarding the mountain of cash that was obviously burnt on its production, let’s think about its central message – that it’s idiots who believe everything they’re told who are still pissed off about Ben Nelson’s vote for health care reform. If you’re gullible enough to buy into the right-wing’s insurance-company funded fear-mongering, then Jon Bruning is the candidate for you!

    This may as well be an ad FOR Ben Nelson’s reelection. What a complete waste of money by the Bruning campaign. I look forward to its going viral.

  2. Joan of Arc says:

    Kyle is half-right. It IS a terrible ad and it IS a waste of money. As for the rest of his rant, right-wing, fear-mongering – blabber blabber, somebody listen to me… YAWN.

    If Nebraskan’s were just looking to be entertained by elected officials (they are not) – this isn’t even entertaining. It’s expensively produced, but it’s stupid. You would think Dresner Wickers could do better.

    Jon’s problem is that he thinks he can just run against Nelson and that’s enough to win. But he’s wrong – and what’s worse, Nelson has already started defining Jon. And not because he’s scared of Jon’s hollow campaign rhetoric, but because he wants to face him in a primary. What could that mean?

  3. Anonymous says:

    If people stop to think about what this ad cost, there could be backlash against Bruning for wasting donor dollars on something that is not straight-forward and more economically-produced. Nothing against Bruning; he’s as good as the next guy to beat Ben but I don’t like obviously slick, over the top ads. I think most Nebraskans will find this ostentatious and will wonder why Bruning has so much money to burn.

  4. Great Ad says:

    That ad was great. Funny how the other posters can only talk about the cost and not the message of the ad. It looks like Bruning has a well run campaign that is attracting talent.

    Onto the message. Ben Nelson sold out Nebraska, everyone can see that.

  5. Anonymous says:

    The ad is good. Bruning has position and name rec. He doesn’t need to sell himself at this point. All he needs to do is remind Nebraskans of the Kickback that most Nebraskans hate. Even many who like Nelson have trouble justifying the visibility of his deal. It was like pooping in public. It’s impossible to ignore.
    Let’s be clear. Nelson’s kickback doesn’t stink because he’s a Democrat. Nobody is surprised that Democrat Nelson voted for Democrat legislation, despite his waffling leading up to it. Everyone expects waffling and partisan loyalty. The problem with Nelson is the guy thunk himself into a corner.
    Nelson calculated that by making Nebraskans lucky recipients of his very visible deal, he thought he’d be applauded by every Nebraskan not on the GOP central committee. To his horror, he found damn near everyone in Nebraska felt he was making them an accomplice to a crime. He didn’t imagine what it would be like for Nebraskans being called tax thieves by angry Americans in all 49 other states. Nelson made a political calculation without thinking it through and those who support him pay the price for his error.
    If Bruning gets some real primary competition, he will need to shift gears. But insofar as putting some traction on the initial footwork at this point in time, the ad is effective.

  6. MacDaddy says:

    So Nelson helped that guy see the error of his ways. See all the good that Ben Nelson does? What a saint. Somebody ought to erect a statue to him, in his hometown or something.

    Overall, I’d give the ad one thumb up and a shrug of the shoulders. I’m reminded of the Ricketts turkey ad. Bruning shouldn’t get cute. He needs to be a grown-up, even in his ads. These are some serious times and the stakes are big. Show that you understand this. Let somebody else crack the jokes.

  7. Rob says:

    I will not be voting for Ben Nelson even if he is running against a ham sandwich. With that said, this piece is horrible. It was like a bad sitcom that couldn’t get past the pilot episode.

  8. Dan Brown says:

    I support Jon Bruning, but that ad did remind me of the Ben Nelson shooting Turkeys ad. He could have run a better, shorter ad three time for the same money. Get new advice Jon.

  9. MacDaddy says:

    Really, Jonathan? President Obama took it upon himself to nullify a law passed by Congress and previously signed into law and declare the same law unconstitutional, which, as far as I know, is the purview of the courts. For a constitutional law professor, his expansion of the executive branch powers is quite breathtaking. I am quite confident that had Bush done this, the screeching would have been deafening.

    Unfortunately for homosexuals, this means that the courts will now appoint lawyers interested in defending the law rather than allow the Justice Department, which has proven to be the most political Justice Department in the history of this great country, to commit legal malpractice by intentionally throwing the case. DOMA is not dead.

  10. Another Anon says:

    If I wasn’t interested in politics I never would have stayed through to the end. It was long and not all that entertaining. if someone knows it’s about a candidate and they are not into politics they’ll be gone before the first 15 seconds.

    I hope they don’t edit it down and make us watch it nonstop on TV for the next month or two.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Agreeing with MacDaddy: Bruning shouldn’t get cute except this “ad” isn’t even cute in selling the product or service. It’s more of the same junk that voters get insulted with that Bruning should be above by now as the marketing genius he alleges to be. That’s what you get when you shop on the coasts for firms that generate the same old garbage and try to call it….advertising. As a lawyer he should know he was baited of the promise of an “ad” and his consulting firm switched to the same stupid and tired yawn.

    Quick: Name three things that Bruning has done to make him our best Senator possible ever and leader from our state? I’m waiting.

  12. Anonymous says:

    2:00 pm Keep waiting genius.

    There you go again, demanding that Bruning convince you to vote for him, when you’d not vote for Bruning if your hair were on fire. He’s up in the polls, Nelson is down, and you expect Bruning to defend Bruning’s record? That would be as stupid as, say, Nelson thinking his kickback would be loved by Nebraskans. Get a grip.

  13. Anonymous says:

    Thanks for pointing out my genius 2:20PM. You’re wrong, however, you don’t defend your record when not attacked, but rather it contributes to the reason voters buy your message when you show it as something of value. Get a grip? A good “ad” sells. This one didn’t. It was a long boring romp to nowhere and I’m thinking Bruning has more to offer and that’s without my hair on fire.

  14. anon says:

    That ad might have been good for someone else, but not Bruning. With all the underhanded stunts Bruning has pulled it becomes an opening to question his past performance…Bruning was for posting false gas prices before he was against them…he was for letting NELNET rip off tax payers before he was against it…if this ad developes legs, Nelson’s machine will turn Bruning into “This Guy.”

    I want Nelson gone. This ad isn’t going to do the job.

  15. Don says:

    Juvenile. Sophomoric. Cartoonish. Convoluted. Poorly written. Reminds me of the Pete Ricketts Turkey Ad. Sadly, this doesn’t portray Bruning as being very Senatorial and for the life of me I can’t figure out why it took them to 1:30 mark to get to the point. Sorry, Jon, but this ad was a complete waste of your money.

  16. Oh Mander says:

    Jesus Christ people, you’ve had a year to analyze this bill. Only an idiot would still think that Obamacare amounts to a “government takeover of healthcare.” Bruning is just exploiting this widespread stupidity. How are public figures still getting away with this kind of rhetoric?

  17. Anonymous says:

    So far everyone I talked to, loves it. It’s meant for the web. It makes the straightforward point: Ben Nelson sold out Nebraska. Perfect for the web, it’s meant to be entertaining and easy to pass around. I passed it around the office and some friends. I haven’t met anyone that hasn’t enjoyed it. They’re passing it around to their friends. He’s getting the message to them in a way that speaks to many people. Mission accomplished.

    Some of you may need to lighten up a little bit. Bruning is a great choice for Senate. His work on opposing the Obamacare Law has been outstanding. He’s clearly articulated his stance on the issues, he’s a strong conservative choice for Nebraska in the 2012 election.

  18. Anonymous says:

    No “sillymander”, its not goverment taking over healthcare. Its goverment interferring in healthcare at any level. What you need is a colonoscopy from federal healthcare workers, like the thousands risking AIDS infection, for example. That’s goverment at all levels. Its artificial life. It has no skin in the game. It loses nothing by you dying or suffering. It has nothing driving it to succeed but only appear to succeed to perpetuate its self. That’s what goverment does, it exercises power and manages things ineptly. But you don’t see that. So my guess is, you aren’t getting federal colonoscopies, you are giving them to other people.

  19. NE Voter says:

    Bruning received $5,000 from Koch Industries, the company owned by the billionaire Koch brothers who are bankrolling the national Republican campaign to smash the public employee unions.


    Wonder what Jon would say if he was punked by a crank call from a phoney Koch brother?

    Koch Industries also contributed $5,000 to “Citizens for a Better Nebraska.” Citizens for a Better Nebraska donated funds to Jean $$$stothert. Hmm, I wonder where $$$tothert stands on the public employee unions?

    Connect the dots, folks.

  20. Butt Pittygrew says:

    You right wingers shuld stop getting all you’re noose from faux noose They lie about unions I.n 1865 union solders helped end slavery by fighting against the evil republican corporations B.sides, what do you care how much public employee unions get paid they are paid by the government not you so what do you care. Quite acting like its you’re money. You right wingers.

  21. MacDaddy says:

    That’s awesome that Bruning received money from the Koch brothers. I agree with their efforts to smash public employee unions. They need to be smashed because they are at direct odds with me, the taxpayer. Even FDR didn’t like them and thought they would corrupt the government. I guess he was right about that.

  22. RWP says:

    Bruning received $5,000 from Koch Industries, the company owned by the billionaire Koch brothers who are bankrolling the national Republican campaign to smash the public employee unions.

    You write as if that’s a bad thing.

    Michelle Malkin in the last two days alone has two videos of union goons hitting people who were simply filming them. One was a 5′ 7″ girl.

    American unions are legal, organized gangs, in my experience containing a large number of stupid, violent cowards.

  23. Butt Pittygrew says:

    There you go RWP being a right winger again S.ince you don’t no history I have to explain because you only watch Fox news and don’t vote the American laber movement has a long history of being very intelligent violent cowards. Shows how much you no.

  24. Oracle says:

    RWP, as a scientist you should know better than to use anecdotal evidence to support your union bashing. Pretty strong correlation between middle class household real income decline and union membership decline since the late 70’s. Don’t you believe in a balance of power between corporations/government and their workers? Or would you rather have all power concentrated in one entity like the old Soviet Union? (and in this case the entity would be large corporations and their politician stooges).

  25. MacDaddy says:

    Sorry, Oracle. You must be getting magnetic interference from the windmill on your roof. The government says household income for everyone but the bottom 10% has gone up since the 1970s. That’s in constant dollars.

    As far as the one entity thing, you actually think that all business is just one big conspiracy to get money from you? Do you have any idea how business works or what constitutes a business owner? And in any event, you think public service unions are vital for sticking it to The Man which is actually you, the taxpayer, assuming you pay taxes? You’re The Man. And politicians, who work for you, are in collusion with unions, whose members work for you, to exact salary and benefits from you without your input. And when your input is to elect a politician who says, “No more!,” the unions along with their corrupt politician friends, whom they have given millions upon millions of campaign cash to, use extra-democratic (running to another state) and fraudulent means (using sick days to demonstrate rather than doing the job you were hired to do) to make sure that your vote is nullified. I’m beginning to believe your nom du cyber is a misnomer.

  26. politician says:


    We politicians resent being called stooges. We prefer to think of ourselves as rent-a-buddies.

    In a free market society, goods and services are allocated based on consumer demands. Corporations have demonstrated a willingness to pay a better price for the services legislators offer than unions are willing or able to pay. In a global economy there is no reason to maintain a middle class. Workers rights are as out-dated as buggy whips and bat-winged rug beaters.

  27. RWP says:

    Oracle, you really aren’t in any position to say what I know as a scientist. But I will tell you two things I know. One is that correlation does not equal causation. Another thing I know is not to accept made-up garbage somebody just pulled out of their ass as fact. Since 1967, median household income in the US has increased by 31% in real dollars. The main reason the growth has not been even larger is the increase in the number of single-parent households.

    Government unions don’t balance the power of government. Very often, via political contributions and GOTV, they choose the government. They have very successfully at the state and local level been able to put their chosen candidates in power, and those candidates then dole out largesse, paid for, of course, by the taxpayer. There is no ‘balance’. Look at Lincoln and Omaha; in both cases, the mayor is the chosen candidate of the public employee unions.

  28. Anonymous says:

    To 9:24PM yesterday: ….and that boys and girls is what is called spin. Either that, or the writer has been hanging around a Bruning family reunion for their focus group.

  29. Oracle says:

    MacDaddy, would you support a ban on political donations by both labor unions and corporations? I sure would and not just because corporations gave 27 times more than labor in the 2008 election cycle. And that was before the Citizens United ruling. Maybe you ought to more concerned with Wall Street and their incestuous relationship with the SEC which won’t prosecute the crooks that nearly destroyed our economy. Matt Taibbi has a great article in Rolling Stone on this.
    Do you support the provision of the Wisconsin bill that Gov. Scott Walker is pushing that would allow the Wisconsin state govt to sell publicly owned power plants without putting out bids? Coincidentally the Koch brothers who gave nearly $100,000 to Walker’s campaign (including $65,000 from the Republican Gov. Association which received a $1 million donation from the Koch’s; nice skirting of the rules) are heavily involved in the power industry. Democrats proposed an amendment to strip this out, but the Republicans voted to keep it.
    MacDaddy, I understand business very well having started one and working for one for close to 40 years. However you make the mistake of thinking all businesses are the same. Large corporations and Wall Street operate with a different set of rules (or no rules) as they are able to effectively buy politicians. Do your ideological blinders prevent you from seeing this?
    Don’t know why I added “household” to my statement. It is real weekly wages that have declined since 1973. When I was a kid most families had one income earner. Now it generally takes two, and that’s with the inflation-adjusted cost of many items including food, appliances and clothing declining. In any case unions will probably continue to weaken along with the middle class until income disparity becomes so large that people will quit buying the lies and propaganda that spew from most of the media.

  30. Oracle says:

    RWP, you accredit too much power to public unions. They alone did not elect Suttle and Beutler. If your premise was correct, how would Republicans ever get elected? I doubt that the Lincoln city unions believe they have been “doled out largesse” considering that under Beutler the city retirement match has been reduced.

    I do know that correlation is not causation, but in my example this are plenty of scholars that can point to causation. Just because you can write “correlation is not causation” doesn’t disprove my contention and many others more learned than either of us that union decline -> middle class wage decline.

    And I did correct my erroneous income statement in my response to MacDaddy.

  31. MacDaddy says:

    Labor gave $400 million during the 2008 election cycle. Are you really claiming that corporations spent almost $11 billion in the 2008 election cycle? I have never seen that number tossed around.

    As far as political donations, I have no problem with corporations such as Common Cause or the Sierra Club giving money just like I have no problem with Walmart or the Steelworkers giving money. I do have a problem with people who work for me spending my money to shake me down for even more money. And most of them aren’t all that great at what they are supposed to be doing but there’s no way I can make any changes to better my employees. As a business owner, you should recognize what a crappy situation that is.

  32. MacDaddy says:

    Sorry, Oracle, I didn’t respond to all of your question. I don’t have an opinion on Wisconsin selling its power plants. I do know that’s not why all those people are stomping around their capitol singing like it’s 1969. Maybe the Democrat legislators that ran away could come back and make their case for why that’s a bad idea.

  33. Oracle says:

    MacDaddy, the bill is being debated in the Wisconsin House, not the Senate where the Dems left. Do you have a problem with the provision that allows the state to sell public assets without bids? The Dems left to slow down the process that would allow a very bad bill to be passed without any meaningful examination by the public and the legislature.

    Where did you get that $400 million figure? From OpenSecrets.org I found 2007-2008 donations of $1,964,870,224 by business and $74,773,481 by labor.

  34. RWP says:

    Oracle: the last Republican elected Mayor of Lincoln was Mike Johanns in 1995. Since then city and school employee unions have backed a series of Democrats, and they’ve won.

    You need to post a legitimate source for your claim that weekly wages have declined since 1973. You’ve already made one bogus claim, then claimed you meant something else. The burden of proof is now on you.

  35. Oracle says:

    Geez, use the Google RWP. My point that real wages have declined since 1973 is backed up by data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Unlike you, I’ll admit and correct my mistakes (should have said personal not household wages).

    Lincoln has had Democratic mayors since 1999. Johanns and his replacement (when he left office) served from 1991 – 1999. 9 years R, 11 years D, which pretty much debunks your statement that union backing = victory. I’d also refer back to your own statement that correlation does not equal causation, especially when there is no correlation.

  36. MacDaddy says:

    From Opensecrets under 2007-8 donations I found over $200 million in union donations on the first page. Perhaps you were looking only at federal races or only at union PAC contributions. If you go to the national donors profile, you will see the NEA leading the list at $55 million. Guess how much of that money went to Democrats? Which party is currently hiding out in another state, shirking their duties as elected officials?

  37. Oracle says:

    Don’t know what page you are looking at MacDaddy, but if you type in the main URL for opensecrets.org and follow it with /bigpicture/blio.php, you’ll see the data I’m referencing. A link (or partial one as to not upset SS) would help me to verify your claim.

  38. RWP says:

    Geez, use the Google RWP.

    You misspelled “I made it up and am going to try to bluster my way out of it”.

    BLS will do. Find me where the BLS claim that weekly wages in 1973 are above what they are today. You made the claim (actually, you claimed something different entirely, then changed it). You back it up.

  39. Oracle says:

    RWP, it’s pretty hard to point you toward the BLS data when I can’t post a link, though it was pretty easy to debunk your claim of undue union influence on Lincoln elections. data.bls.gov has quite a few options for generating reports from their data. I found the data covering 1964 – 2004 on a couple of sites indicating their source as the BLS. It would have been more precise for me to have said that real non-farm wages have declined from 1973 – 2004 in constant dollars as I hadn’t seen any data beyond 2004.

    Generally I find that people who make accusations are often guilty of said accusations. What have you made up lately? Your blustering is obvious.

  40. Macdaddy says:

    Sigh. Go to influence and lobbying tab, then national donor profiles. The data they lay out is for state and local donations for the 2008 cycle. You aren’t accessing the Internet through the DailyKos portal are you?

  41. Outside the Beltway says:


    In Milton Freedman ‘s smack down of Phil Donahue when he attempted to extol the virtues of socialism (the ultimate collective bargaining) over ‘greedy’ capitalism, Freedman noted that greed is ubiquitous, comes in various forms, and is easiest to control through market forces.

    To borrow from Freedman, I’ll take a ‘greedy’ Wall Street CEO who can be removed at the next annual share holders meeting any day over public unions that are insulated from voters through the CIR.

  42. Oracle says:

    MacDaddy, follow the link I gave you. It lays out the business / labor donation split. Since the data is from the FEC, it may be federal races only, but I doubt the ratio changes much. Business donations are many times greater than union donations. That’s an undeniable reality. (The URL string I gave is pretty straightforward, but you can also access from the main site through Politicians and Elections -> Historical Elections -> Special Interests -> Business-Labor-Ideology Split)

    You never indicated whether you were fine with the Wisconsin provision in the Republican bill allowing no-bid sales of state power plant assets, ironically a key component of the Koch brothers’ businesses.

  43. Oracle says:

    OTB, how about an example of a Wall Street CEO being removed by shareholders? I can’t recall a case of this happening even after Wall Street practically destroyed our economy. The SEC won’t even go after these crooks. And since when is bargaining socialism? I thought bargaining between buyers and sellers was a key component of capitalism. Oh, I guess when workers are involved the same concept miraculously becomes socialism.

    The key is balance, and fixes are required, but too many on your side want to completely destroy unions. Study history, please.

  44. Dennis says:

    IMO, the ad was too long. It won’t keep the attention of the your typical voter who doesn’t care very much about politics. Bruning wasted his money.

  45. Primary? says:

    Whether or not the video is well produced or not misses the point. Has Bruning forgotten that he must first appeal to primary voters to make it to Nelson? What about this video makes a compelling argument for why Jon is better suited than another Republican? Or, does he, like Hillary, believe himself the ‘heir-apparent’ and the primary a formality?

    Second, what happens when Nelson finally lets it sink in that a disapproval rating of over 40 pct is nearly impossible to overcome retires and lets someone else run? Beating up on Nelson and the Kickback won’t propel you to victory in the General. For the sake of getting rid of EBN, I hope the content and timeliness of this video is not a reflection of Bruning’s strategy for this race.

  46. Macdaddy says:

    I don’t care what they do with their power plants, as I stated before. Since you are so interested in the Koch brothers’ interests, are they getting the contracts for the power plants or this just another distraction? I do know that wasn’t the reason thousands of teachers ditched school to protest.

    The main reason I am interested in Wisconsin is the possibility that Governor Walker will blaze the trail in breaking public employee unions. The same thing needs to be done in Nebraska and around the rest of the country.

  47. RWP says:

    RWP, it’s pretty hard to point you toward the BLS data when I can’t post a link

    Yes, how did anyone survive before html?

    Yawn. Let me save you the time. “I posted an idiotic claim. You called me on it. So now I’m blaming anything else I can think of for my own inadequacy”

  48. Oracle says:

    Ah, RWP, generally in a discussion one presents facts or observations, or maybe a hypothesis. If someone disagrees, they present a contrasting set of facts and argue for their veracity. Instead you just throw back a snark which you consider witty. Not sure if you are just lazy or don’t know how to use the Google effectively. Possibly you don’t have the time, but in my experience university professors have a lot more free time than the average Joe.

    Let me help you out. Just google “Wages and Benefits: Real Wages (1964-2004)” and from the first link you’ll see a chart based on BLS data. In constant 1982 dollars the average weekly earnings for private non-farm workers in 1973 was $331.39. For the final year on the chart, 2004, it’s only $277.57. I’m waiting for the apology. Or respond with something made up like your contention public unions have a huge effect on Lincoln mayoral elections which I easily debunked.

    It’s ironic that you have such contempt for unions. As a university professor you have one of the most protected jobs in the world because of tenure. All the union guy wants is a bit of job security in an increasingly uncertain world. But since you’re an elite with a P.H.D. you probably deserve that benefit. You’ve earned it unlike that public employee who works for the state.

    More parallels exist between you and that unionized public employee. My tax dollars goes to both your salaries. (UNL got even more of my money as my son recently graduated from there. Thank God he never had a class you instructed. I’m betting from your posts on this blog that you don’t treat students who disagree with you very respectfully.) Wages are negotiated on your behalf by another entity. (When I’ve wanted a raise, I’ve had to go to my boss and present my case. Even if I have a good one, I’m not always successful.) The Faculty Compensation Advisory Committee compares salaries to peer institutions, which tends to push salaries above the peer average, ala Lake Wobegon where everyone is above average. The CIR does the same thing with wage comparisons to peer cities (but they only become involved when an agreement can’t be reached).

    It’s hard to make sense of this unless one returns to the mantra of the righties: I’ve got mine, so screw you!

  49. RWP says:

    You’re kidding, right, Oracle? Your ‘source’ is the blog of the far left former president of the National Writers Union, (UAW Local 1981). And it’s ‘based on’ BLS statistics. Sorta like ‘Dracula’ is based on Rumanian history.

    Primary source, please.

    You obviously know nothing about how universities operate. We have had a 100% merit based raise system at UNL in the last few years (not that we’ve had much in the way of raises,). And if I get a better offer from another university, I take it to my chair, who either matches it or lets me walk. Pure market. The Faculty Compensation Advisory Committee is exactly what it says — advisory. All it can do is whine about how our salaries aren’t keeping pace; it has no power.

    You debunked nothing. Lincoln hasn’t elected a Republican in sixteen years. The city unions have a well-organized turn-out-the-vote effort for the Democrat candidate. Those are incontrovertable facts.

    When people tell me they’re glad they /their son/ their grandma never took a class I taught, I tell them not to sweat it; it’s doubtful they had the prerequisites, anyway.

  50. Oracle says:

    RWP, if faculty raises are now merit based, then that’s a great change! Maybe tuition will quit increasing at a rate far above inflation.

    Unions are only one component of a successful election. I speak from some experience. Money, county party efforts and good candidates are also important. You give unions too much credit. Considering they were stronger in the ’90s, how did Lincoln have a Republican mayor through the ’90s?

    I love how you assume that facts are somehow not facts when presented by a group or person you disagree with or have problems with. Hard to get anywhere with that attitude. Frankly I see more outright lies from your side than on the left. Rand Paul was recently on Good Morning America where he claimed Wisconsin teachers made an average of $83,000/year, and he wasn’t challenged. In reality their average wage is $46,390.

    In any case, you can find the numbers on the BLS site. I’ll let the readers of (not posters to) this blog decide who has presented a better case. Enjoy your tenure!

  51. Ripped Off Tax Payer says:

    When it comes to over paid workers, college instructors are at the top of the list. Most of them have never worked in the real world, and couldn’t survive if they had to. The legislature should consider cutting the budget for the university system in half, and give all the teachers in basic education a well deserved pay raise.

  52. Ripped Off Student says:

    There’s no place that affirmative action has proven to be as unproductive as it has in higher education. Universities are forced to bring in incompetent instructors, in the name of diversity, to maintain accreditation. The faculty is over run with foreigners with PhD’s who frequently can’t even speak or understand basic English. Students are forced to pay to take classes from these instructors who can’t teach. Chances are that RWP wouldn’t even have a job, let alone tenure, if it weren’t for affirmative action in higher education.

  53. NE Voter says:

    I finally got aroung to watching the ad — Terrible. Jon Bruning obviously thinks that Nebraskans are idiots.

    Big mistake, Jon.

  54. Sweetwater Woods says:

    I will vote for Jon, but if he runs that ad or any more like it, I will have to hold my nose when I go into the voting booth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.