Linkin’, Nebraska

He’s still in the news, and we have many many new readers here on L.St., so here is a blast from the  Separated at Birth past:

Jon Bruning and John C. Reilly:

***

Don Walton of the LJS followed up, as promised, with Jon Bruning.

Not a lot of new info, except that Bruning says he is actually worth more like $ 3-4  million, rather than the $ 17-61 on his filed net-worth statement.

One interesting note is that Nelson’s campaign manager Paul Johnson takes to defending and explaining the Bruning caricature newspaper ad.  Gee, could have sworn the NDP paid for that.  Good to know there is no real difference between the party and the campaign.  Noted.

***

Governor Dave has endorsed Hal Daub in his campaign for Nebraska Regent:

Hal Daub has my enthusiastic endorsement. His lifetime of experience and able leadership as a dedicated public servant would be invaluable to the Board of Regents.

But when it comes to Senate candidate Bruning, Heineman is a bit more reserved.  When Joe Jordan asked the Gov if Bruning has been “on the up and up”, he responded:

That’s for the voters ultimately to decide. That’s what primaries are all about. I think there’s going to be a healthy discussion and there should be.

You may remember that Bruning was a Tom Osborne supporter back in the 2006 GOP primary.

***

The Mayor of Omaha throws up his hands and says, “Feh!”

Huh.

Nothing says “leader” like a good “OK, then YOU do it!”.

***

The Big “O” listed #8 for “Best Cities for Families” by Parenting Magazine:

This quaint Midwestern city with the Missouri River winding through it has strong roots in Native American culture, as well as a historic African-American music scene, with a vibrant jazz presence.

Quaint?  Is there a flyover city that isn’t, for the East/West Coasters?

Strong Native American culture?   Um, not to be “insensitive” but if  it is much more than “minor”, we have somehow missed it our entire lives.

“Jazz presence”?  Sure there’s the “…on the Green” part, and a few spots in the Old Market.  But, “vibrant”?

Well, nice listing anyway…

***

Bummer about the East Stadium side this season, eh?

***

Here’s a Q:

If you are voting in the GOP primary, and you HAD to pick either Perry or  Romney, who do you pick?

(Yeah, we get it, you think neither!  You say, aren’t all racists the same!  They’re so dumb!  Save it for another day, ‘K?)

***

For tomorrow…an interesting look at Nebraska’s Campaign Finance Limitation Act (CFLA), and those involved.

49 comments

  1. Romney. While I admire Perry’s enthusiasm, I don’t think he’s cut out for the gig. And while Obama’s approval rating has continued to slide, don’t think all those independent voters out there who were duped into voting for Obama are suddenly going to swing 180 degrees and vote for someone like Perry.

    I’d like Perry as Nebraska’s governor or as a Neb Senator…but not as prez.

  2. RWP says:

    Romney. Perry is a dumb populist; he’s an ignorant dolt even by Texas standards.

    The Governor is clearly weighing in on the pipeline route this for his own political protection. That doesn’t mean it’s forgivable; it’s not. I won’t support him for dogcatcher from here on in.

    Same problem as there is with Perry. The existing pipeline route is cheaper and a careful scientific analysis showed it to present fewer hazards than the alternate route (which contrary to Heineman’s stupid statement, still goes directly over the NHPAQ.) The Gov. sold out for the populist value.

  3. Resigning? says:

    Um, I think Perry is serving it up quite well to Romney,

    Oh and just read in the previous thread there is going to be changes in the Legislature? Who is dropping out and for what reason? Is it Howard, to run against Terry? (no way), Or is it Council because Ernie wants the seat back?

    C’mon Sweeps what’s the scoop here?

  4. the Bruning nod says:

    Bruning’s going to DC, Fischer’s going back to Valentine and Stenberg is going to yet another parade.

    You’d think Stenberg would get sick of constantly campaigning since 1978. Give it up Don…

  5. Buh Bye Jon says:

    Dave Pankonin (R), LD2, has tendered his resignation.

    Oh, and thanks for pointing out perhaps the most damning strike against Jon Bruning of them all, Sweeper – he pissed off Gov. Heinemann by supporting his 2006 gubernatorial opponent, Tom Osborne. I do believe the Governor will have plenty to say privately, in the right circles, to ensure that Jon Bruning, like Icarus, goes down in flames.

  6. Macdaddy says:

    I’d vote Perry. Romney is always a day late and a dollar short. He always seems to err on the side of government and will quickly get co-opted by the bureaucracy in DC. Perry, on the other hand, has had numerous opportunities in the last 10 years to “grow” in office and yet he has been reliably conservative. Romney, on the other hand, doubled down on Obamneycare, despite the glaring evidence of being an abject failure. He’s not somebody who can be relied upon to undo Obamacare.

  7. NE Voter says:

    I’ve been saying for six months that Perry will win the Republican nomination. Consider this: Every Republican elected president since 1968 has been from either Texas or California.

    Of course, Ford doesn’t count since he was not elected to the office.

  8. Kortezzi says:

    Perry gets my vote over Romney. Besides being more genuinely and thoroughly conservative, he’s an anti-elitist and will drive the liberal news media and the Democrats crazy (like GW Bush & Palin).

    I like Romney and think he could be a good SecTreas. But he’s not reliable enough on issues like global warming, gov’t health care, gay marriage, etc., to be Prez.

    Very disappointed in Heinemann’s announcement today on the Keystone XL. I didn’t think he would cave in to Jane Kleeb and Darryl Hannah. Maybe he figures Hillary will approve it anyway and it’s a letter with no real economic consequences but gives him political cover. Not a proud moment for our otherwise excellent Gov (who happens to be a Romney supporter).

  9. Nebraska Tea Partier says:

    PERRY. Big Gov’t Romney is the new McCain.

    Johanns held 18 public townhalls this month. Nelson held…well, none. The BOLD folks were out in full force for the Johanns townhalls. Is it possible Johanns called in a favor to Heineman re: the pipeline since it was a constant at Johann’s townhalls? Heineman is on the WRONG side of this pipeline issue, and this morning’s press release was a surprise to everyone.

    By the way, BOLD, your own savior Obama’s State Dept’ released a study saying the Keystone XL Pipeline was safe for the environment. If Obama says “it’s environmentally safe”, and you disagree, well…maybe you should look into replacing him in 2012. Quit drinking the Obama Kool-Aid, Jane & pals.

    StreetSweeper – Why are the post confirmation codes so environmental? “Save the Rainforest”? Really?! 😉

  10. Dennis says:

    Apparently, Bruning told Walton that his net worth is anywhere from $3 million to $6 million. That’s still a lot of money for a guy who has been on a government salary most of his life. Bruning’s remarks are puzzling because he indicated that his net worth was anywhere from $12 to $61 million in the legally required financial disclosure paperwork filed in connection with his Senate bid. Did Bruning lie to Walton? Or did he lie in legally required paperwork he filed with the FEC?

  11. Daedalus says:

    Anon @12:07,
    Icarus was my headstrong son that, given the opportunity to fly, chose to ignore my warnings and soared too close to the sun, melting the wax that held the feathers on the wings I fabricated for him. He fell from the heights to his ultimate downfall.
    Jon Bruning’s hubris will, no doubt, achieve for him a similar result. He should have stayed in the nest.

  12. RWP says:

    $ 3 million isn’t that much these days. A couple of properties and a decent 401 k will put you over a million; add in a couple of moderately successful investments, and you’re there.

    I’m amused how many people are completely unashamed of what looks like naked envy.

  13. A. VanHelsing says:

    By all means we must support Gov. Perry for the presidency. It is time we drove a stake through the heart of this failed experiment called democracy. Americans, with their yearning to replace level-headed leaders with wild-eyed and irrational representatives have demonstrated their desire to cast off the yoke of freedom and to liberate themselves of the constraints of reason.

    Gov. Perry is the best one to lead the United States of America away from two centuries of unity, and shared purpose. He alone has the audacity to set a course into the morass of internecine conflict that will finally allow us to dissolve this union and expose ourselves to the cleansing experience of being dominated by our foreign foes – economically, militarily, and socially.

  14. Anonymous says:

    $ 3 million isn’t that much these days.
    RWP, I really hope you can get your fellow Republicans to run on that platform. Shows how out of touch you folks are. Only the top 10-15% (depends on the year; probably even smaller strata now) of the population has a net worth of at least this amount.

    Funny how you can’t see “conflict of interest” but can see “class envy”. Warren Buffett made his money an honorable way. Don’t envy him a bit. I do have a problem (not envy) with a public official who appears to have made money through people who will expect a quid pro quo.

  15. To RWP says:

    It ain’t class envy causing me to wonder why Bruning tries to help his Nelnet buddies avoid penalties one day, and the next day is buying a shared vacation home with them. Any lawyer should know that it’s important to avoid those kinds of conflicts of interest–even if they’re apparent ones only–and especially the AG! Bruning lacks the integrity for his current position, much less to be a Senator. If we are serious about replacing gentle Ben, we need a better candidate. And we need a better slogan than this stuff about the Cornhusker kickback–only the very politically-minded Republicans were embarrassed by that. Everyone else probably thinks it’s high time our politicians tried to do something for Nebraskans, who are always getting the short end of it! The details will remain hazy, and it won’t hurt Nelson. Most of this state and its leaders are GOP, and you’re telling me Bruning is the best we can do for Senate? My concern about Fischer is that she won’t fare as well in Omaha and Lincoln, and Stenberg is already marked as a loser. I think Heineman is the one who should be running for Senate!

  16. RWP says:

    Warren Buffett made his money an honorable way.

    Hahaha. Yep, selling tobacco to addicts. As honorable as lung cancer.

    BTW, Berkshire has an outstanding bill of $ 1 bn. to the IRS.

  17. RWP says:

    None of you have the slightest evidence of a quid pro pro. All you have is ‘gee, he seems to have made a lot of money, that can’t have been honest’. He’s recused himself from cases involving companies in which he has an investment.

  18. Leatherface says:

    Yeah, the same thing happened to me! Just because I was standing over a ripped up body with a blood soaked chain-saw, they thought that I’d killed someone! Nobody seen me do it! Maybe they were already dead.

  19. Anonymous says:

    Thanks 2:04 for your insight. It was Greek to me. Wasn’t he trying to escape from Crete? That’s where I was born and I can see why.

  20. curbfeeler says:

    Perry and Romney are experienced in running governments, which isn’t something Senators like Obama or McCain are. Had Obama inflicted his ineptitude on Illinois as its Gov before, he’d not be inflicting it on America today. Governors have records. And only a record of governing can be trusted to show how one will actually govern.

    Romney gave MA pre-Obamacare. Perry gave TX a belt they could tighten. All the hot air that flows out of them and others is inconsequential. It is what they do that counts.

    Perry seems a bit stupid. So did Reagan. Perry is now getting ripped for his government-as- inconsequential comment. That comment gains him traction amid the hard core tea party-ish primary voters. Yet the last half of Perry’s comment, i.e. that government be less consequential in each person’s own life, suggests an approach to general voters not as a flaming anarchist but as a Reaganesque liberator of the power of the individual (as opposed to Obama embracing government that inherently stultifies). A strategy like this seems more than dumb luck. Reagan understood the value of being underestimated. Standing up too early gets your head cut off unless you appear weaker than you really are.

    Anyway, Mitt is basically Hillary with a penis. Even her husband is less moderate than Romney. Romney is a shark eyed son of polygamous cannibals who scares the bejezus out of more than a few people. And yet, Mitt is still less scary than Barry.

  21. I agree that Perry’s stance resonates well with the Tea Partiers and other hardcore conservatives…BUT, those folks won’t comprise >50% of the American voting populace…and Perry is not going to resonate well with the fence-riding independents.

    Thus, a primary vote for Perry is likely a November 6, 2012 vote for Obama. It’s not that I dislike Perry, he’s probably a really swell guy…but I don’t think he’s the guy to take down Barry.

  22. Nebraska Tea Partier says:

    Anyone who has walked precincts with walking lists knows Independents don’t vote. Not very often, anyway. Finding any 4×4 or even 2×4 Independents (in Nebraska at least) is almost impossible. Forcing Republicans to become more moderate “in order to win” is a myth. If it was true, Independents would have shown up to vote for McCain in ’08, and Reagan would have never been elected in a landslide.

  23. Interesting says:

    Grundle is right–63% of NP voters voted in 2008 in Douglas County. They went 2:1 for Obama. I wonder if that will hold for 2012

  24. More Interesting says:

    I’m sure it pains many on this site, but “Nebraska Tea Partier’s” annecdotal observations are more accurate than the last two posts (despite attempts to conjur up some statistics).

    Independents in Douglas turned out at 58% in 2008, while just under 75% of R’s and D’s in the county voted. While I can’t offer any evidence for the margin by which Obama carried I’s in Douglas, the last poll I saw prior to the election in the 2nd District showed them favoring Obama by just over 10%.

  25. More Interesting is less accurate says:

    Do to the Douglas County Election Commission website and look at the turnout in the 2008 General Election. Their chart shows 60,903 Non-Partisan registered voters; 38,432 voted, and they show a voting percentage of 63.1%.

  26. This is more interesting than what 'more interesting' posted says:

    OK, folks. How about this scenario– Obama got 116810 votes in Douglas County. McCain got 106291 votes. BO’s plurality was 10,519 votes.

    Assume McCain won all the Repubs who voted (94586) and Obama won all the Dems who voted (94471).

    38432 NP voters then voted.
    That means NP votes split the following: to Obama=22339; to McCain=11705, to Other=4388.

    Obama-58% of NP; McCain 30% of NP and Other=12%.

    I bet Prof. Adkins would give me an A for this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.