If Jon Bruning’s goal was to have no one talk about anything other than Twitter accounts and how you can or can’t follow someone, then mission accomplished.
But let us lay it on the line and discuss the things that apparently NO ONE else wants to put out there.
(Seriously, pass this around when you’re done reading, because it frustrates us to no end that none of the main stream media outlets, as well as the internets, can address some of these issues. Thanks.)
We have it through second and third hand accounts that this was ALL Jon Bruning, and wasn’t calculated by his staff or anyone else. So why did Bruning let loose with the Twitter accusation (or whatever you want to call it)? We go back to our original statement that Bruning was tired of getting hammered by Stenberg on every issue under the sun. Bruning was tired of saying that his political views have changed since Law School. Even though he gets accused by the Left of being to the right of William F. Buckley, he was tired of Stenberg’s peeps like Jim Demint saying he isn’t conservative enough. Basically, he was tired of taking the high road every time.
So he lopped Stenberg off at the knees. He did it at the end of the debate. He brought it out of nowhere. And he did it on a subject that he was confident Stenberg would have no idea about, let alone have a worthwhile response. Now you can question why Bruning thought he needed to do this. But we believe it is more of a “he WANTED to do this” more than a need. We really don’t believe the, “oh he must be afraid of Stenberg” or “the polls must be closer than we think!” sort of responses. It was more of a calculated, “F*ck you” to Stenberg (that’s why you don’t see this sort of analysis on TV), than any sort of strategy.
And it is also a bit visceral kind of a natural reaction by Bruning. We don’t doubt that Bruning’s daughter brought this up to him. And it’s sort of a natural reaction of a father to his daughter being brought into a campaign, to say “Hey, what the f*ck! Get away from my daughter, you creep!” (once again, real analysis you won’t find in the papers).
Now when anyone analyzes it, most would say this is just a pretty much automated process the his daughter got caught in. But…it is still a question that can be asked — and should be asked, at this point, of the Stenberg camp. “Did you purposefully follow her, in the hope that you’d find something out?”
The Stenberg camp says no, and we do not have any reason to not believe them. Unless it was an underling who is really stupid. Which happens, by the way. But otherwise, getting an email from “STENBERG CAMPAIGN” saying “CAN I FOLLOW YOU?” isn’t exactly undercover.
So it is either completely innocent, or remarkably stupid.
Pick one or the other, folks.
We lean toward the former.
So now the big response story seems to be, “Well Jon Bruning follows teenagers too!!!!!!!!!”
Really, advanced Twitter people? After you get done telling us that Stenberg is innocent, you throw this out? Because you know and we know that it is not the same. Though, of course, the 70 year old grandma in Ord doesn’t know what the hell you’re talking about anyway, so it’s all a blur.
But the fact that Bruning or Stenberg or anyone else follows teenagers or wannabe porn stars or Nigerian businessmen is not something to be shocked about. Most Twitterers follow in order to be followed and vice versa. They also do searches to follow certain people. Both campaigns likely do that.
The difference, OF COURSE, in the Bruning accusation issue, is that there MAY have been a nefarious (as it were) reason to follow Bruning’s daughter. There is potential information to be gained. There is no information to be gained from 16 year old Brittany who loves unicorns and rainbows and hates mean people.
Now the kicker in all of this is that Bruning used the word “creepy” to describe Stenberg’s attempt to follow his daughter — and talked about the 62 year old to 14 year old dynamic.
Yeah, Bruning should apologize for that implication. That is over the top.
He can feel free to follow it up with an implication that the Stenberg camp may have been trying to spy on his family, if he wants to continue that line (we are being politically realistic here, kids). But the “creepy 62 year old” stuff should stop. A quick press release does the trick, and absolves them from further criticism.
And what of Bob Kerrey in all this, you ask?
Well, he is chuckling in his latte…er, coffee… as he reads this. (What? They get the internet in New York.)
And if you are curious who is most happy here, note that the ones passing along all the helpful Twitter info and the “rest of the story” are the Nebraska Democratic party, and Jane Kleeb, and all their subordinates and followers.
Which is fine. November is a loooong way off. But all the GOPers should keep in mind that if they want to beat Bob Kerrey, gashing open wounds in the party will not help matters.
Unless you are just trying to help us out. In which case, please fire up the lie detector tests now. Because a campaign without them is, frankly, boring.
Very, very interesting interview of Lee Terry about finding his Jewish roots, and his views on America’s support of Israel. Yes, you read all that correctly.
Terry has a Jewish grandmother in his family tree, who he found out about around ten years ago. If he has talked about this before, we either forgot about it or missed it.Click here to read the whole story, and also see Terry speak on the national issues that you don’t always hear about.
There is more to talk about, including immigration, the legislature, talking head appearances.
But we are in a bit of rush, so this will have to do for now.
Maybe update later.
And buy some stuff on Amazon.com through our links!