Bruning, Nelson and the OWH – Monday post Part 1

The OWH took their second “investigative look” at Jon Bruning on Sunday.

Look, if you want to defend or criticize Bruning for his job or his positions or for whatever the OWH is accusing him of in their recent articles, fine. Go at it.

But the problem is, What are the accusations? Spell it out.

Here were a few of our beefs with Sunday’s article about his “questionable” lake house:

Where’s the info on when he became friends with those Nelnet guys.
Isn’t that more to the point? And how? Are their wives friends? Do their kids play ball together? Same church? School buddies? What? We learned that in the previous story, but not here.

And does it really matter if he bought a house with them? Who cares if that purchase give the “appearance” of impropriety? How about any ACTUAL impropriety? This was four years ago. Was it improprietous, or wasn’t it?

The question is, was there a problem with his actions towards Nelnet? Well, was there? Because that is what any investigation should look at. Was he simply giving his buddies a special deal? If so, that’s a problem. If not, it’s not. And any lake house he may have is not going to affect that.

And then there’s the “his political critics say…” and they quote two direct political opponents and another Democrat side-opponent? That’s it? They couldn’t find a single independent to criticize the deal? Sheesh.


And OWH, What gives here? The NDP puts up their ad, asking lots of “questions”. And then you happily jump on board to answer all of them? So who gave whom the the notice on this? Was the NDP saying, “We are going to put this up, so get your Bruning stories finalized?” Or did the OWH give the go-ahead for the NDP to put up their ad when they were ready?

We are to believe this is all a co-inky-dink? Yeah?


So there are two issues set up on Bruning:

1) He made a TON of money investing with college friends while Attorney General

2) He is personal friends with the heads of Nelnet.

So, are those just the set-ups (sets-up?) or is that it?

Because if that’s it, then, frankly, What the Hell? Why print this? Was it all above board, or wasn’t it?

Is there a plan here? Let the whole story trickle-trickle out? Or is it just a meager cup with a few drops in it?

Apparently we get to wait and see.


And while we’re at it…

We will just throw out an idea:

Let’s just take it as a given that Ben Nelson and the OWH hate Jon Bruning. OK? Done.

So, What If, they both know that Ben Nelson, in fact, DOES NOT want to run for re-election? But neither wants Bruning, as the front runner, to slide into the seat. Or, maybe Nelson thinks that if Bruning is not there, a good Democrat could beat Stenberg or Fischer.

In any case, Nelson makes like he’s running, has Paul Johnson run the “show”, and attacks Bruning, along with the OWH, to either drive him from the race, or make him lose the primary.

That way it’s a win-win — either Stenberg or Fischer take it, or a Dem could have a shot against them.

It’s an interesting sneaky plan.
No idea if it is true or not.

But, for the grain of salt it is worth: Nelson has 2 Twitter accounts. One for his official office and one for his campaign.

The campaign account has not put out a single Tweet since May 31st — and only five total.

Now that is the thinnest of thin gruel to base something on. And we wouldn’t. But along with the rabid attacks that are coming in over a YEAR before the General Election, it indicates that something else is afoot in this super-early campaign season.


(Didn’t want to jam together two very separate posts today, so see Part 2 here.)


  1. anonymous says:

    Well said Sweeper. The reality is Bruning is the front-runner/likely nominee, and the Dems (and Don and Deb) had better get used to it. My guess is the collective reaction in Nebraska is going to be one giant yawn. While inherited wealth may be electorally irritating, the much smaller pie Bruning self-made is what we all hope for in our kids.

  2. Lil Mac says:

    Regarding the appearance of impropriety and actual impropriety, perhaps that question is better directed toward the vehicle of such accusations, the Omaha World Herald newspaper.

    How proper is it for one city newspaper to maintain a stranglehold monopoly on the “news” it chooses to present, as a for-profit vehicle of its owner’s viewpoints, which it freely mixes into and with news, to an entire geographical citizenry of Americans – Omahans – who are supposed to benefit from “Free Press” that is constitutionally safeguarded for the purpose of it keeping government honest. — This unaccountable newspaper will keep government honest?

    Government has some built in accountability. Government has Republicans and Democrats blowing whistles on each other and competing political individuals and interests keeping each other honest. But who keeps the Omaha World Herald newspaper honest?

    All tyrants see themselves as benevolent. The big tyrant in Omaha is the World Herald.

  3. Mike says:

    This is the start of Ben Nelson’s campaign against his strongest opponent. Their strategy is simply to put Bruning’s relationships into question, both personal and business, even if there isn’t anything actually wrong in those relationships.

    I think it would be actually incredible that you find someone who has the skills and abilities to be a Nebraska U.S. Senator that hasn’t invested in successful business opportunities in Nebraska. It would be more incredible to find some mythical ‘hermit’ that isn’t friends with business owners in a state that is as small as Nebraska.

    The big difference between Jon and me, is that I’ll hang out with my buds from college, drink beer and talk about what we could’ve done. It seems that Jon and his college friends, on the other hand, actually achieved what they set out to do. The only reason to demonize this, would be you’re looking for a reason to get elected… which is the case for both Ben Nelson and Don Stenberg.


  4. HS Classmate says:

    I went to HS with Bruning, and I know for a fact he worked at Burger King. Not exactly landed gentry or inherited wealth or the type of thing that irritates the voters. Evidently he earned it.

  5. Polly Tics says:

    Yeah, but SS, it still doesn’t look good no matter how you cut it. If they were friends since birth, that’s nice, but then as AG you should recuse yourself from the Nelnet investigations. Pass it off to an independent appointment and call it a day.

    I get the distinction between legal/ethical/and plain just looks bad, but we have a candidate that steps in it quite often.

    Now, then again, I wish the OWH would do some digging into E.Ben’s past/present as well. If they did that with Stenberg, they would be bored. Then again, he is what he is…yawn.

    Finally, is Deb Fisher still in the race? Just checking.

  6. anonymous says:

    Bashing a candidate for investing in Nebraska is ridiculous. Bruning detassled corn, worked at Burger King and made something of himself. The story should be hometown boy makes good.

  7. Never left the Neb says:

    Wow, haven’t seen this type of scorched earth since the Omaha Workd Herald took out Ben Nelson’s first opponent back in 1999. Come on, you all remember the front page plus a FULL page 3 expose’ on George Grogan?! Remember, they even got his bio son that was given up for adoption when George was 19 to come out and say that he has never helped him out. Pardon me?

    Oh, and the ex wife of the grown daughters that was upset that she divorced him before he was rich thus getting only child support-no alimony. Or how about the daughters that lied that he wouldn’t help them start businesses. Well, that was only a partial lie. He had helped them and their spouses start businesses-he just quit giving hand outs after they all failed.

    For some reason the OWH goes to bat for E Benjamin. God only knows why. He doesn’t deserve it and has lots of his own skeletons. I would offer specifics, but this post would probably get deleted because the family problems are that bad. Besides, most people reading this blog already know those skeletons. There is no need for me to roll in the mud to repeat them again. If Sweeper gives permission, I will post what we all have already heard for years. Then we can talk property taxes, multi state lawsuits and multimillion dollar fines.

    I support Bruning more now than I did last week. I will tell everyone what the OWH is proving with each scorched earth story about Jon and his family that they print. Jon is the only one that Nelson and the OWH know can beat E Ben. I pray that Jon, his wife, their kids and their parents can weather Hurricane Herald. The victory will be that much sweeter Next November. If they can’t tolerate it. I can’t blame them and this state deserves the pathetic representation it gets in the Senate.

  8. Anonymostly says:

    Well, the OWH sure can tell an appearance of impropriety when they see one, huh? Just not when they step in one. Amazing coincidence, isn’t it, that they follow-up a paid political ad with a “news” story investigating the subject of the ad … the day after the ad runs?

    Now, did the intrepid reporters at the OWH investigate all the claims made in the ads or only certain ones? I haven’t read the stories so I don’t know. But one of the claims made in the ad was that Bruning grew the budget of the AG’s office by 87% while claiming to be a small government fiscal conservative. Just curious if the OWH turned that stone at all. Because on KFAB this morning, Bruning explained that the increase was a function of bringing scattered state legal resources under the umbrella of the AG’s office. In other words, they didn’t increase spending; just changed where the items were listed in the state budget.

    That should be pretty easy for an investigative reporter to track down, no? And if they’re investigating allegations made in a political ad, shouldn’t they fact-check all of them?

  9. Never left the Neb says:

    Yes, it is funny how the OWH goes about “discovering” its news. They probably did “investigate” the office issue, but when it made sense fiscally, it was no longer news worthy.


  10. SS's Panties in a Bunch says:

    Street Sweeper: You seem awfully defensive of poor ol’ Jonny B. Let the guy take his lumps. If he can’t swallow them now, he won’t fare well in the general election. If he’s really this thin skinned, maybe he needs to go back to the frat house and fake bake with the sorority girls at Ashley Lynn’s for a few more years.

    Speaking of Ashley Lynn’s… it does seem a little shady for the chief law enforcer in our state to be purchasing a $675k beach house with the same dudes he was settling with out of court the year before. Imagine if Tom Casady made in investment or bought a lake house with the owners of the Night Before or one of the adult bookstores downtown. Totally legal, but really bad judgement.

  11. Never left the Neb says:

    You are illogical. You must be a Bold Dem. Good to know you wear panties though. Or am I wrong and they are in a bunch on the floor?

  12. In summation says:

    No one cares if there was an appearance of impropriety.

    Hey, there appears to be impropriety between Nelson’s campaign and the OWH….let’s talk about it!

  13. Brian T. Osborn says:

    I think it was an old Cheech & Chong routine where two stoners were walking down the street and saw some doggie doo-doo on the sidewalk (and I paraphrase since it has been years since I heard it):

    Stoner 1, “Hey, man! Look at that s—-!”
    Stoner 2, “That ain’t s—, man!”
    Stoner 1, “Well it looks like s—.”
    Stoner 2, “Smell it.”
    Stoner 1, “It smells like s—.”
    Stoner 2, “Feel it.”
    Stoner 1, “It feels like s—-.”
    Stoner 2, “Taste it, man.”
    Stoner 1, “It tastes like s—.”
    Stoner 2, “Well it’s a good thing we didn’t step in it then!”

    Let’s all hope that Nebraskans have tasted enough of both Jon Bruning and Ben Nelson!

  14. Anonymostly says:

    Ok, read both of the stories and see that, no, the OWH did not investigate (or report on) the claim that Bruning increased his budget by nearly double. But they were investigating this allegation that he’s a part-time AG. He sits on these boards and when does he have time to do his AG job? And the upshot, according to the Dems, is that with Bruning spending time making all this money, he’s neglected his official duties. And the proof of that, according to the ad, is that a criminal case the AG was prosecuting was dismissed because the AG missed a deadline. They blame this on Bruning. He’s too busy making money. What rubbish.

    A very quick look at the AG’s website reveals its a very large office with more than 100 attorneys and support staff. At any given time, they have more than 2000 open files. They have a whole criminal division and a whole civil division. And the cases are actually assigned to assistant attorneys general. Bruning isn’t actually handling these cases. But it would be easy enough for the OWH to figure out to which attorney the case was actually assigned. It’s not hard to imagine in an office that size that there would be the occasional missed deadline. Are we seriously going to try to blame Bruning for any mistakes made by other lawyers in his office? Really?

  15. Anonymous says:

    All this proves is what many, many people in Nebraska already know to be true. Jon Bruning is only in politics for himself. He only cares about the power and money — for himself. Why else do you think he announced he was running for Senate THE DAY AFTER he was just elected to his current post? Of course it is totally inappropriate for him to be buying a vacation home with Nelnet officials at the same time he is supposedly “investigating” their business dealings. Anyone who says otherwise is fooling themselves.

  16. Anonymostly says:

    Summation, the issue of Bruning’s conduct has been covered elsewhere. The question here is whether the coverage of that issue has been appropriate. Try to stay on topic.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Of course Bruning should be held accountable for all mistakes coming from the Attorney General’s office — he IS the Attorney General. The buck stops at his desk.

  18. Dennis says:

    What’s astounding is that Bruning has amassed great wealth while earning a maxium salary of $95,000.00. Moreover, Bruning’s net worth has nearly quadrupled since 2007. Either Bruning is an investment genius of the highest order or he got lots of help. IMO, the voters are entitled to know just who helped Bruning and if they received anything in return for that help.

  19. Brian T. Osborn says:

    For those that have a problem with the Omaha Weird Harold editorializing in their reportage, I remind you of the old adage, “Don’t argue with anyone that buys ink by the barrel.”
    Newspapers have no requirement to be “Fair and Balanced,” just as Fox News, MSNBC, or any of the other cable “news” networks do. If there were such rules there would be no Rush Limbaughs, no Keith Olbermanns, no Glenn Becks, nor Rachel Maddows. You, as a private citizen, get to choose which “news” outlet you purchase or tune in to. You don’t, on the other hand, have any authority over what they print or broadcast. You can bitch about it, but that is all, unless they commit an act of libel; then you can sue them.
    The alternative is to have a government Ministry of Propaganda that decides what is, or is not, appropriate for the masses to consume. If that is what you would prefer, then (here I will risk being clobbered by someone with Godwin’s Law) you would obviously prefer being governed by a fascist or communist dictatorship.
    I am a staunch defender of the U.S. Constitution. I defend the whole damned thing, unlike those that pick through it and chose as though it were a multiple choice test. I do have my favorites, and my preferred one is the first, the one that includes our freedom of speech. I have little use for those that would silence the voices of their opposition. That is the root of my conflict with the NDP’s State Chair, Vic Covalt. He has proven himself to be a censor, a damnable thing, given that he supposedly leads a political party that prides itself on the rights of others.
    As for the “stranglehold monopoly on the ‘news'” that the OWH chooses to present, it is their right to do so. If you don’t like it, invest in a printing press and buy some ink by the barrel. Or boycott it. You have the right to do that as well.

  20. Patriot says:

    Anonymous at 10:22 AM

    Have you ever met Jon Bruning? Have you sat down & had a conversation with him? Probably not. He is a good, genuine man. He truly cares about this country. It’s not about money for him. He could make way, WAY more money if he went into the private sector but he’s committed to making this country a better place for our children. Yes, he is ambitious – when did that become a bad thing in this country? He’s proven that he’s willing to stand up to the establishment and make waves. I stand behind him 100%.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Patriot, yes, as a matter of fact, I HAVE met Bruning. I also happen to know how long and hard he’s been fundraising and working towards higher office — completely ignorning the office he’s currently holding. Oh, and in the multiple times I’ve met him, I’ve never once heard him talk about “making this country a better place for our children…” I’ve only heard him talk about what fundraiser or PAC meeting he was setting up.

  22. dirty dirty Stenberg says:

    This type of negative campaigning and stenberg jumping on board makes me sick. He should be ashamed of himself, latching on to the Democrats hits its shameful.

  23. Anonymous says:

    Negative campaigning? So, are you of the opinion that the Nebraska public doesn’t have a right to know that our Attorney General is vacationing and making investments with the very people he’s supposed to be investigating? Seriously?

  24. Brian T. Osborn says:

    I have met Jon Bruning. I spoke to him in Holdrege after he made the idiotic “Goober” statement about 2010 Democratic gubernatorial candidate, Mike Meister. I thought he should apologize; he thought it was a perfectly normal thing to bring grab-ass, frat-rat humor into the political arena, and said something to the effect of, “Aw, c’mon, I was just having some fun.”
    As he is an elected representative of the citizens of Nebraska, I thought his “humor” out of place. Had he made the statement in private, over a beer with a pal, I’d have had no problem with that. But, as a representative, yes, MY representative (even though I didn’t vote for him,) I found his behavior boorish and uncivil. I don’t believe I would enjoy having the United States Senator that represents me in Washington behaving like one of the characters on the old TV show, “Hee-Haw.” Nebraskans are already thought of as rubes by many in the U.S. We don’t need to reinforce their biases.

  25. Help out a confused individual here…is Jon Bruning ignoring his duties as AG, or abusing his authority as AG. The two would appear to be mutually exclusive, but a few of the Bruning haters here seem to think he’s doing both.

  26. Anonymous says:

    GK, in the binary world of the right-wing, I can see how you view the two as mutually exclusive. However in the real world with shades of gray, it’s very possible for Bruning to do both to various degrees. For example, when he wanted to forgive the judgement against Nelnet he was both ignoring his duties and abusing his authority.

  27. Anonymous says:

    I felt he gave a great interview on KFAB this AM except perhaps for the absence of a little humbleness that comes so hard for many attorneys. He’s right when he claims that Benny is at the root of all this smear. It’s Nelson’s style though he packages himself as gentle and kind with good hair not to mention the smooth voice from the blather it often spins.

  28. Banker says:

    I love to give multimillion dollar loans to people who only make $95,000 a year. They always pay them back.


    TierOne Bank

  29. Anonymostly says:

    Banker, you of all people should know its the collateral that matters and not the income of the borrower when you’re talking about borrowing money to buy an income producing asset. You guys would probably even loan Dennis money to buy an office building if the rent would pay the note and the building was worth more than what he’s borrowing. Bruning’s employment income wouldn’t even be a significant consideration in making such a loan. But you’d know that … If you really were a banker.

  30. Burger King says:

    Great to see the Bruning staff promoting Jon’s work at Burger King as a sign that he’s one of us. What a well-rounded resume. A definitely vote getter east of 72nd street in Omaha!

    As a side note: Burger King is hiring in Lincoln.

  31. Frizz says:

    I don’t care what the last poster says Stenberg staff much more integrity than anyone at Brunings camp. Fischer’s people need to but out. Does anyone even know where Kay Orr or Valetine Nebraska is? A bunch of rank amateurs..

  32. Really?? says:

    Stenberg is a wood puppet devoid of a personality Stenbergs people need to shut up and focus on the issues. WE ARE ON THE SAME TEAM

  33. Brian T. Osborn says:

    I know who Kay Orr is, and I know where Valentine, NE, is. So that makes me a rank amateur because I see Deb Fischer as the most valid candidate for Senate out there at this point in time? Your statements demonstrate the kind of arrogance that those of us that live in the 3rd CD have come to expect from you folks on the eastern (now, since redistricting) 1/5th of the state.
    While it is true that CD1 and CD2 pack a lot of political clout, it is also true that nobody will ever be elected to a federal or statewide position in this state without getting the 3rd CD’s favor. Keep thinking of us as unimportant and we will support Deb Fischer as one of our own. There are a LOT of Democrats out this way that have had a belly full of Ben Nelson too.

  34. Anonymostly says:

    Brian, you said: “Newspapers have no requirement to be “Fair and Balanced,” just as Fox News, MSNBC, or any of the other cable “news” networks do. If there were such rules there would be no Rush Limbaughs, no Keith Olbermanns, no Glenn Becks, nor Rachel Maddows.”

    I’ve made the following point, I don’t know, maybe 1,000 times (probably half a dozen or so times in the last two years on THIS VERY BLOG), but Rush Limbaugh is not a journalist. He’s never claimed to be one. He makes no bones about the fact that what he shares on his program are his opinions. He believes he’s right, of course, and so, to that extent, he may claim that what he says is fact. But he makes no pretense of being neutral or objective.

    Neither does Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity or any of the other conservative talk show hosts. Olbermann, on the other hand (and maybe Maddow) pretends, or at least pretended, to be a journalist. In fact, he once named our very own E. Banjoman Nelson as the “Worst Person in the World” for having the gall to suggest that he, Olbermann, was a left-wing version of those conservative talk-show hosts. Because Olbermann fancied himself an heir of Cronkite and Murrow — a journalist whose very word was truth.

    And there’s the difference between Limbaugh and Ms. Tysver at the OWH. If you were to ask Ms. Tysver if she reports the news as opposed to opinion, I’m sure she’d say she reports the news. And if you asked her if she believes that a reporter should remain neutral and objective, I’m sure she’d agree to that as well. And if you asked the editors at the OWH whether they have ethical standards that they adhere to and demand of their reporters, they’d would certainly say that they do. And I’m sure one of those standards is that they must reveal potential biases or conflicts when reporting on a story. And I’m sure it would violate their own standards of journalistic ethics for them to partner with one political group in investigating someone from a competing political group.

  35. Anonymostly says:

    And speaking of E. Banjoman Nelson, what’s this I see in the letters to the editor of the LJS this morning? Why, it’s a letter from the President of the American Medical Association. Remember, everyone, when our Dem friends who would post on this blog would tout the support the AMA gave to ObamaCare as evidence that ObamaCare was a good thing? Evidently, we had to pass ObamaCare so that the AMA would find out what was in it, because this dude ain’t happy.

    Seems on January 1, the “Independent Payment Advisory Board” will go into effect. The AMA laments that this board will have no accountability and should be repealed. The problem, this guy says, is that this board will implement payment cuts to physicians that will cause them to … (wait for it) STOP TAKING MEDICARE PATIENTS.

    I tried to warn folks who would listen that ObamaCare wouldn’t provide EVERYONE with health care, as was promised, but would instead simply shift who gets it. (There’s only a finite number of doctors, afterall.) Nobody listened. Well, not E. Banjoman Nelson, anyway, and he had the last chance of anyone on this earth to stop this disaster from happening. But he blew it … for ALL Nebraskans.

  36. Fischer's camp is dirty says:

    Every time Deb’s cronies have a chance to say something about Bruning they jump at it. Have you know shame Deb?

  37. not a rich guy says:

    the fact that he made the money in the last four years is the craziest part of this story. i wonder if he would have made that much money if he wasn’t the AG?

  38. Macdaddy says:

    Anonymostly, it would defInitely violate their code of ethics, although that really has no meaning since there are no consequences. The OWH needs to come clean about any collusion between their newsroom and the NE Dems, specifically about any communications between the newsroom and the ad department. Did the Dems buy space contingent on these stories being run? Is the OWH up for sale? At the very least, I would think the newsroom would have enough professional pride that they would demand a little transparency to try to clear their names. As it looks like now, money changed hands for a political hit piece. It’s hard to come to any other conclusion.

  39. Dennis says:

    My educated guess is that Stenberg didn’t exploit his office as AG and make a fortune like Bruning did. Stenberg probably ( and justifiably) resents Bruning’s exploitation of his political standing for personal financial gain. I expect the gloves to come off.

  40. Brian T. Osborn says:

    Anonymostly and Macdaddy,
    Excuse me, but what is it that Faux News says every three minutes, “We REPORT, you decide?” They should change that to, “We lie out of our asses, you decide.” As for Limbaugh, he doesn’t practice truth in advertising either, he should come right out and tell people that he is nothing but a clown that laughs all the way to the bank with the money he makes by fabricating and prevaricating about “facts” on a daily basis.
    I can’t vouch for Olbermann or Maddow, since I was so fed up with all the idiots trying to shout one another down on all the so-called “news” shows that I went out and cut the cable with my bolt cutters years ago.
    As for the obligations of the Weird Harold to abide by any kind of “moral” or “ethical” standards? Hell, they’re a company owned by stockholders. They have no obligations but to turn a profit. Isn’t that the same thing as what Jon Bruning’s defenders are saying – as an individual, he has a right to make a buck (or several million of them) regardless of how he does it? The OWH has broken no laws, so what they do is hunky-dory. Right? It is a well known fact that newspapers have always printed the biases of their owners.
    If what Jon Bruning has done has actually crossed the line into illegality, I would hope that someone, or some organization, would have the cojones to report HIM to the appropriate authorities and have him arrested for it. I got on Nelson’s blacklist, and that of his cronies, because I wrote a complaint to the Nebraska State Attorney General’s office wherein I described what I perceived to be violations of the law in the way that Nelson was using the NDP as an extension of his campaign committee. In my opinion, I believed that money was being laundered through the party in a manner that violated federal and state election laws. Bruning chose to do NOTHING about it.
    And, PLEASE, stop confusing my voting registration as a Democrat with any presumed love for Benjamin Nelson. I feel the same way towards him, or worse, than you do.

  41. Anonymous says:

    Macdaddy, would you say there has been “transparency” between Jon Bruning and the Nebraska taxpayers on his friendships and dealings with the Nelnet folks while he was supposedly in charge of an investigation of them?

  42. Ivy Marie Harper says:

    @ Lil Mac, 6:24 a.m.; Polly Tics, 8:43 a.m.; Anonymostly, 9:05 a.m.; Anonymous, 9:07 a.m.; Brian T. Osborn, 1:33 p.m.: Many Nebraskans agree with you.

    Incontrovertible evidence abounds that the OWH:

    a) does not cover the news; it cherry-picks/manufactures/and even creates the news it wants.

    To the point where the OWH committed media malpractice in “creating” the “Marquee Match of the Midlands” between Rep. Lee Terry and Tom White. That “Marquee Match” – so desired by C.DK & R.T. – did not really exist.

    In-the-know Democrats and Republicans, on the ground & throughout the state, agreed that the far more interesting race was the remarkable Rebekah Davis’ wunderkind effort to unseat Rep. Adrian Smith.

    Did that matter to R.T. or the OWH? Apparently not.

    Robynn Tysver, who interviewed Rebekah at length, never published a single article on her although the 3rd District relies on the OWH to earn their “Nebraska’s Paper of Record” moniker by, every now & again, publishing articles on the 1st & 3rd Districts races. But wait, the OWH printed plenty of stories about Rep. Adrian Smith & Rep. Jeff Fortenberry. Just NOTHING on their opponents who had been duly elected by the voters of Nebraska.

    Even at the May 15th, 2010 Democratic Morrison/Exon Dinner when Rebekah Davis and her on-a-shoestring-budget-that-produced 16,000 votes (in Crimson Country, no less) in the Democratic primary to Tom White’s well-funded 12,000 Omaha votes and Rebekah’s newsworthy political-and-place-loop connection to the keynote speaker, Rep. Tim Walsh, who had been Rebekah’s Debate Coach in Alliance where the good Congressman taught for a while, Robynn Tysver – inexplicably – never even mentioned Rebekah Davis’ political odyssey that inspired so many, many Democrats in the 3rd District.

    Oh, but following the Dems big dinner, Ms. Tysver did publish a prominent OWH Midlands story that is entirely filled with quotes from the following politicians: Senator Dick Durbin; Senator Ben Nelson; candidate Tom White; Rep. Tim Walsh. And so on. No women quoted. No Rebekah. Not even her name as an attendee.

    Guess that green-eyed monster is alive and well with OWH’s political editors and reporters.

  43. Kortezzi says:

    Glad I stopped subscribing to Omaha’s Daily Newspaper long ago.

    They could save a lot of money if they stopped with the stupid red & white subscription sign-up postcards they’ve mailed me EVERY WEEK for the last 8 YEARS. Anybody else sick to death of these darn things?

  44. Brian T. Osborn says:

    So, RWP, I should not have assumed that the Weird Harold was owned by stockholders. But, being owned by its employees, and the Peter Kiewit foundation, makes it responsible only to them, and to ensuring that their investment in it produces profit. No one, but the Weird Harold employees, and the investors in the Peter Kiewit Foundation, have anything to say about whether or not the paper follows any ethical guidelines. Wouldn’t you agree?
    As for those of us out here in the hinterlands, we really don’t care too much about that paper, and I believe the feeling is mutual.

  45. RWP says:

    No argument here, BTO. If the dead tree media had anything but the most tenuous connection to reality, well, they wouldn’t be daubing carbon black on dead trees.

  46. Galikanokus says:

    Team Bruning,
    This is only the begining. You knew both the information and that the owh was running the story and did nothing to get out in front of it. Paul Johnson will destroy you. He thrives on weaknes…which is what you get when you build a team with no experience.

  47. Banker says:

    @12:29- that is why hundreds of banks across the county went out of business, they loaned money to entities that look great on paper. But when you go through an economic slowdown, those entities can’t pay the bills. So who comes in you ask? Guarantors. And in this case, your guarantor makes bubka to pay back his share of a multimillion dollar loan. So how did these entities make the payments on their own during a time when 99.99% of banks made way less money in 2009 and 2010? Go to the FDIC website and look up the holding company. Then look up what happens to the deposits of these banks after Frontier buys them. Deposits skyrocket and the percentage of uninsured deposits go up. So who is putting huge deposits above FDIC limits in Jon’s banks right after he buys them?

  48. Anonymous says:

    Mr. Bruning may soon have a great future in the license plate manufacturing business. He shouldn’t have stuck his neck out so far from his hole that it attracted the predators.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.