All that jazz and stuff

A little late Friday morning. (It would be so much easier to get posts out if people bought their Amazon stuff via Leavenworth St’s Amazon links. At no extra charge to you!)

So first, a special Separated at Birth for ya!

Democrat state Senator Amanda McGill’s Facebook profile picture and Liza Minnelli from Cabaret!

***

Congressman Lee Terry is out with his FEC numbers.

Terry has raised $555,326 for the cycle. He raised $197,227 for the quarter and has $320,332 cash on hand.

These numbers are higher than Terry’s contributions at the same time for the last (2010) elections — which he won by 21%.

Also significant for Terry as fundraising has been tough across the country AND there are many other campaigns with their hands out this election season.

***

We thought we were out and PPP pulled us back in.

One last lump of polling info from PPP.

PPP notes that Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman has the third highest approval rating of any governor in the country, at 57% (according to their polls). They do note that Heineman dropped 10% from their stratospheric January numbers for him.

Senator Mike Johanns is also at a very high 52% — but it down from 59%. They did a statewide breakdown of the House members and found the statewide “favorable/unfavorable” numbers (as opposed to “job approval” — which we’d like to get to the bottom of…) as follows:

Jeff Fortenberry: 33/26
Lee Terry: 32/33
Adrian Smith: 30/26

Their breakdowns by district, for favorable/unfavorable (again, as opposed to “job approval”) are…

Fortenberry: 45/31
Terry: 43/42
Smith: 52/28

And then for some reason they polled on Chuck Hagel and Bob Kerrey (44/30 and 39/34 respectively). No word on whether they polled on Roman Hruska or Nobby Tiemann.

***

We have prepared our signs for the Occupy Omaha march (which won’t actually occupy anything, or march by any corporate headquarters like, say, Gorats). We may first stop by the Occupy Lincoln march (also not occupying anything). Of course the Lincolnites on any other football Saturday would just be confused with Husker tailgaters (except Husker fans bring their own food).

No one has said just what it is we are protesting. So we were just going to stick with our “Bring back Twin Peaks!” theme. But then we really liked that show “Profit” before it petered out. But a “Bring back Profit!” sign would probably confuse our fellow marchers.

So we saw this guy at “Occupy Wall Street”, and think he is REALLY onto something. He wants free tuition to college because…well, see why:

Now THAT kid knows what he wants!

***

Have a beautiful weekend and Go Bye Week!!!

46 comments

  1. Ivy Harper says:

    @ SS: The last line of your Post illustrates quite well why State Senator Deb Fischer will become Nebraska’s first female U.S. Senator if she can secure the GOP nomination:

    “Tagged as: Adrian Smith, Ben Nelson, Bob Kerrey, Chuck Hagel, Jeff Fortenberry, Lee Terry, Mike Johanns.”

    Multiply these Men by 49 and voila: The United States of a Mess!

  2. Kortezzi says:

    I saw the Occupy Omaha people at McFoster’s last weekend. It was a beautiful day outside and there were maybe 75 people gathered amidst the “Windmills Not Oil Spills” signs.

    However organized or disorganized they are, I seriously doubt we’ll see more than 200 folks walk the grueling 3 blocks from the Civic Center to the Federal Reserve. Their signs should be entertaining though!

    Better be on good behavior, hippies. Lots of security cameras outside the Civic Center, the downtown Wells Fargo Bank, and of course the Fed. I happen to know the guards at the Fed have their own pistol range in the building, and they practice a lot – – they are the best marksmen of any Fed guards in the US (yes, they have won competitions).

  3. Really? says:

    Kortezzi,
    That’s your answer to dealing with people you disagree with – murdering them? What a wonderful American you must think you are.

  4. Cornhusker Cheerleader says:

    Senator Nelson’s July FEC Quarterly Report reveals that someone on his campaign spent nearly $5,000 dollars on computers etc. from Overstock & a controversial California-based company called Newegg that has recently been sued by three former employees for unfair labor practices; plus Newegg was forced to admit in Feb. 2010 that it had (unwittingly) sold 300 counterfeit computer parts.

    It appears that the $5,000 “disbursement” to a California company was for the purchase of computers in the Senator’s then-newly-opened West Omaha campaign office.

    But my question is: Why not spend that $5,000 dollars for computers and office supplies at home-grown Nebraska-based businesses like Computer Concepts out of Grand Island and Eakes Office Equipment, also a privately-owned Grand Island business, or Lincoln’s legendary office store that was founded 94 years ago: Latsch’s; all companies that service what they sell. (Or even Omaha, Lincoln, or G.I. Best Buy stores as that at least pumps money into chains/franchises that employ actual Nebraskans.)

    Senator Nelson is, after all, the Senator for the state of Nebraska not California.

    Sure, a slew of his 2011 contributions have emanated from the great Golden State but wouldn’t it behoove the Good Senator to direct his Louisiana-based Campaign Manager to spend campaign money in Nebraska where, according to economic studies, it would turn around seven more times in the state’s economy.

    Seriously, Senator Nelson votes against the President’s new jobs bill, pontificates about the private sector, and then sends $5,000 – in just three months – to CALIFORNIA which helps Newegg hire additional employees but that move, for sure, does not help out small businesses in NEBRASKA.

    Imagine a world in which politicians’ rhetoric matched reality.

  5. shrinkwrap says:

    11:07, Kortezzie didn’t say that. You accuse him of encouraging “murder” because he advocates that guards should guard. Our troops and police also guard. They are not murderers but they are ready.

    You act like liberal protestors are incapable of violence. As Obama’s friend Ayres knows, more than one marching Liberal protestor has in the past ended up on the FBI’s most wanted list for blowing human beings to pieces. That is a fact and it is worth guarding against.

    No protest, however, comes risk free.

    Physical protest (leftwing, rightwing, etc.) is a serious active step beyond voting, volunteering, campaigning, contributing and running for office to change things. Marching with a wooden club with a sign attached to it, intent on interrupting other people’s routine, getting in their physical way, denying them access, and screaming your slogans into their unwilling ears, isn’t armed rebellion but it is meant to physically confront others.

    If someone should murder you while you are marching, I will be happy to sit on the jury to convict that person of your murder. But you chose to march instead of blog, vote, run or whatever, so keep that in mind. If you want to get all “in my face”, I won’t punch it but someone else might. That’s life.

  6. Kortezzi says:

    To Shrinkwrap – – thanks for having my back.

    To “Really?” at 11:07
    If I wanted the Occupy Omaha marchers to get shot, I would NOT have warned them about the Fed’s sharpshooters.
    I’d have written that they have $100 million + in cash inside, and no guards on Saturdays.

  7. Hardy Haar? says:

    @La La La: Rep. Fortenberry has been nothing but a gentleman every time I’ve met him.

    Speaking of, as you put it, The “Fort,” an astounding S.A.B. would be Fortenberry and District 21 candidate Mike Hilgers (whom I am not, BTW).

  8. Who Knew says:

    I didn’t realize Glamour Shots was still in business. Or maybe she’s just getting ready for Halloween. Is that the costume for Joker’s girlfriend? The Jokette? (Which is fitting for her.)

  9. The FEC Factor says:

    In just four election cycles from 2004-2010, Rep. Fortenberry has “officially” amended his FEC campaign reports a whopping 76 times.

    Rep. Fortenberry’s campaign repeatedly receives standard FEC Request for Additional Information letters wherein he is cautioned to “amend” his in-FEC-violation reports or he will face fines. His campaign invariably “amends” his reports to the FEC’s satisfaction.

    The latest inaccurate FEC report that Rep. Fortenberry filled out centered on $200 and the “Jimmy Field Campaign, LLC” which is based in: you guessed it, Baton Rouge, Rep. Fortenberry’s home town.

    Between Jan. 18th & June 16th, 2011, Rep. Fortenberry and his wife received “Disbursements” from his campaign for nearly $1,700 dollars worth of “mileage” and “babysitting.”

    This on top of the $87,000.00 dollars in salary the American taxpayer paid to Rep. Fortenberry during that period which, generally speaking, is a down time for Congressional campaigns.

    In previous FEC reports, Rep. Fortenberry’s wife has been reimbursed for babysitting which, according to an FEC Advisory Opinion, is justified as long as the Congressman’s wife attends the campaign-related events for which the babysitting occurred.

    That period covers 21 weeks worth of campaign-related events so obviously in that time frame, the Fortenberrys spent quite a few hours driving throughout the 1st Congressional District as that’s a lot of gas money. Or did that include the trip to Austria? It’s hard to tell from the FEC reports.

    What’s really kind of a hoot is how someone on Rep. Fortenberry’s “campaign” was “reimbursed” to the tune of $1.94 for a cup of coffee on April 4th, 2011 at a 237 Pennsylvania Ave, SE, Washington, D.C. Starbucks.

    That’s so hilarious, truly, because the FEC Personal Use Rule, dubbed “The Irrespective Test” asks whether the expense exists outside of the campaign. If it does, then said expense cannot be considered “campaign-related.”

    I’m pretty sure coffee – like eating- exists whether or not a “campaign” is being conducted. Of course, leave it to the FEC to create federal coffee “loopholes.”

    Sure enough, the FEC also declares that Congressmen and (non-federal) staffers can be reimbursed for coffee, according to an FEC employee, “as long as they’re having a campaign meeting.”

    Okay. There’s a Rep. Fortenberry “campaign” meeting at a Pennsylvania Ave, Southeast Starbucks with only one attendee. Since there are no other “disbursement” to Starbucks that day from his campaign, does that mean everyone else just paid for their coffee themselves. (Let’s go wild and pay for our own coffee and not plan on being reimbursed by the campaign.) Or what.

    Does that lone little “reimbursement” on that morning mean that it was a campaign meeting of one. It’s just so confusing. And of course, the FEC reports don’t help.

  10. Lizzie says:

    FEC Factor. Yes, he could have had a campaign meeting and, for instance, been interviewing a pollster or strategist, etc., who DIDN’T have any coffee or those cute little vanilla scones. I cannot believe you used that much energy over 1.94. Holy crap.

    That is my favorite Starbucks on Capitol Hill, BTW.

  11. Just Sayin says:

    Cornhusker Cheerleader and FEC Factor: Thanks for the research and analysis! If only we could get the Congressional Reform Act of 2011 that someone posted yesterday.

    Congress will never pass it themselves, of course. Is there another way? A class action suit? An amendment?

    Just asking.

  12. FEC question for Street Sweeper says:

    Looking at FEC info it shows NO individual campaign contributions in july, aug, and sept and they ALL came from companies and PACs. Can that be right?

  13. A Green Tea Party...perhaps says:

    “United in one voice, we will let politicians, and the financial elites they serve, know it is up to us, the people, to decide our future…”

    From today’s Washington Post.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Looks like Lincoln and Omaha remained substantially unoccupied. A few hundred at each demo. Pathetic.

    Should have scheduled it on a weekday. The Faithful are too hungover on Saturday morning to be doing much agitation.

  15. IQ=47 @ 2:05,
    Nope. You still didn’t get it right. There is no “e” on the end. But then again, perhaps I shouldn’t be trying to correct someone who’s idea of fun is watching his own spittle drool down to his belly button.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Usually Brian, I take issue with your less than cordial expression, but that exchange was hysterical and whoever dared to be cute deserved your creative ridicule in the lovely pictorial image that came to mind of spittle and belly buttons. Thanks for the chuckle.

  17. Anony@3:09,
    I generally reserve my more ascerbic repartee for those that deserve it. I really shouldn’t pick on the handicapped, but I figure, if they’re functional enough to use their fourteen-year-old older brother’s laptop, it helps to humor them for the few seconds they can stay focused.
    I drove by the Occupy Omaha festivities in Memorial Park around 3:30 this afternoon (been out of town for a few days) and it looked like there were maybe 25-30 attendees. Judging by the overwhelming turnout, this one must have been organized by the Nebraska Democratic Party.
    Speaking of which, I heard from out west that the NDP held a training session for their upcoming caucus out in Scottsbluff over the weekend. It was advertised as offering all sorts of wonderful grassroots organizational training from 9am to 4pm with lunch included. Turned out to be some intern that showed up late, around 10:30 am, and left by 2:00 pm. She spent the morning explaining why SHE became a Democrat, they broke for sandwiches, then spent what little was left of the afternoon attempting to learn how to use the NDP’s fundraising tool … er … ahem … cough … cough … “Vote Builder.” I’m sure that went over really well for all nine computer illiterate septuagenarians that coughed up the $25 registration fee.

    I can’t wait to see how many more hilarious juxtapositions with others’ names my “little buddy” comes up with next.

  18. notagame says:

    Please don’t publically opine in op-eds or blogs under your real name. I know it seems fun and somehow heroic but some of us have written under our real names and as a direct consequence had our families attacked. I mean breaking and entering, homes ransacked, computers downloaded, physical assault, police taking fingerprints; that sort of attacked. I mean major officials calling your children in the dead of night to threaten you via them to silence. Some of us have been shot at in wartime but I assure you that when they target your home and your children, it is sobering.

    There are people here with valid political opinions who also offer indignant concern about their good name, which they hang out as a target to draw other bloggers into wrestling matches, plus irrelevant griping about how badly their party treated them, etc. These natural heartburns are shared by all of us, but to throw them out amid valid political criticisms of power suggests one doesn’t see substantial risk in taking political shots at power figures while writing under one’s name.

    If you have something to say that can threaten the powers that be, those powers will try to silence you. On the other hand, if you plan on your criticisms not being effective at challenging power, then go right ahead and write under your real name. None will care. However, if your criticisms are scathingly effective, the powers you criticize will come at you any way they can. Don’t make it easy for them.

  19. Julie Schmit-Albin says:

    Notagame: I’m sorry for your past troubles from posting under your real name. I do so despite having my home/office invaded by the police, my work computer siezed, fingerprinted, charged with a felony; all in the name of abortion politics. A trumped up political charge under a Republican county attorney. Go figure. Sometimes posting publically with your name attached also serves to protect you and your family. Read “The Franklin Scandal” by John DeCamp who was warned by his good friend, former CIA chief William Colby, to put it all down in writing as protection against anything happening to him and his family. Seems to have worked so far. Unfortunately, Colby ended up drowned in the middle of a lake outside his home, for no apparent reason.

  20. notagame,
    How much effect, and validity, do you think the Declaration of Independence would have had if our founding fathers had signed it with pen names? I suppose, rather than signing John Hancock, the President of the Continental Congress, could have signed it Johnny Handyman Cuckold – but would we still be celebrating the 4th of July with baseball and beer?
    Those of us that elect to use our real names feel that it validates what we have to say. We are well aware of the possible consequences. You stated, “Some of us have been shot at in wartime …” It is out of respect for those that made the ultimate sacrifice that I use my real name. I’ve never seen a tombstone in a war cemetery with “soldierboy” engraved on it.
    Pen names have their places; Samuel Clemens, Eric Arthur Blair, and Stephen King have all used them. Benjamin Franklin used Silence Dogwood and Poor Richard to mask his identity. I hardly believe that Street Sweeper is the given name of this blog’s author. I have been known to use a nom de plume, on occasion, for the very reasons you stated. But, when I want my words to stand on their own, I sign them with the name my mom and dad gave me.

  21. Brian "T-Pain Usborne book club says:

    You should not live in fear and should sign your real name like I do. BTW that reminds me I have to swing by PAMIDA and grab a sweet “No Fear” t-shirt

  22. RWP says:

    Please don’t publically opine in op-eds or blogs under your real name.

    I’ve been posting on the ‘net before you were weaned, child, and while I have been libelled, threatened, insulted, and reported to all manner of authorities, nobody has ever said boo to my face, or laid a hand on anyone dear to me. And that’s because 100% of the blusterers on the net are gutless cowards, who would be scared to face their antagonists in public. So grow a pair. You might get to like it.

  23. RWP says:

    BTW, somebody should do a Declaration of Independence using Internet pseudonyms.

    MonticelloDude, BostonBrewer1776, GeneralGeorge, DaGouverneur, and most unlikely of all, Caesar Rodney.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.