Stothert will run for Omaha Mayor

Jean Stothert

As we Tweeted Sunday night, we have word that Omaha City Councilwoman (Councilperson?) Jean Stothert has alerted GOP insiders and others that she will indeed run for Mayor of Omaha in 2013.

She joins Omaha Mayor Jim Suttle, State Senator Brad Ashford and Mayoral re-call leader Dave Nabity as those who have announced their intentions for Omaha’s top office next year.

Stothert’s announcement is not a big shock to anyone running in those circles, but it makes it (semi) official, and will start making supporters begin to choose sides. Some would argue that Stothert has the best chance among Suttle opponents and may be the leader in the pre-season GOP polls. (You know, if “they” took such a poll.)

One last name among the conventionally wise is that of former councilman Dan Welch. Welch told the OWH that he would be deciding within the next three weeks. He would be an interesting name in there, and could split traditional GOP supporters of Stothert as well as those who battle the unions with Nabity.

And with at least three relatively strong candidates with some natural constituencies, there is certainly room for someone else. Someone well funded could potentially break into that group and pull out a second place (with the assumption that Suttle takes the primary lead).

This will be an interesting campaign in the background of the ’12 election cycle.

***

Bob Kerrey went to the Nebraska Democrat Convention over the weekend and announced that he believes in picking the winners and losers in the American economy. (Some call that the “S” word.)

Kerrey, speaking to his choir of Democrats, stated that he is for “Economic Justice”. Interesting term, that. It is certainly a popular slogan among the Occupy crowd, and no doubt among his former students at The New School in New York.

And what do those in favor of “economic justice”…favor? Well, in order to have “justice” you have to have a judge, yeah? You decide that someone picks the winners and the losers. Or will take off the blindfold and put their thumbs on the scales of justice.

So who does Cosmic Bob think the judge should be? Him? Congress? The President?

See, America has been successful specifically because there is no one one picking winners and losers. It is the markets that control this. The system works because individuals are allowed to take risks and succeed — and/or fail! — according to their effort, skill and whether those in the marketplace are interested in what they are selling.

But Kerrey, and the occupiers and their brethren think that is is not “fair” that those who are successful…are successful. Someone else needs to be standing over them, making sure their version of “justice” controls the marketplace.

And once again, we really are not surprised about this coming out of Kerrey’s mouth. He is a Leftist Democrat, and has grown comfortably into that characterization especially over the last 12 years. We do not doubt he could comfortably make that proclamation in NYC. But in NE, people understand the code of “Economic Justice”. It means higher taxes, more regulation, and government deciding how to spread your wealth.

And one more reason to elect Deb Fischer.

***

Oh, and apparently Kerrey and Ben Nelson (more on him below) have polled on the Fischer grazing land issue and figure that is Kerrey’s path to victory!

And they mock (ho, ho, ho!) Fischer for her suggestion that the question of grazing rights should be considered. Why does she not take action on it now, they ask!

Which is interesting. Because, for one, if Kerrey doesn’t think people should get something for nothing, we hope he is giving The New School back the $3M he got for leaving, while the school is losing money and raising tuition.

Oh, and if he has a beef with Deb not moving fast enough on her opinions about grazing rights, then he should immediately, voluntarily, start paying the higher taxes that he has promised to push through if elected.

And by the way, nice that Kerrey is using Nelson as his attack dog. Leave it to Kerrey to trot out a surrogate who is even more unpopular than he is.

***

And speaking of The Benator, uh, this does not look good.

From the Washington Post, in a story entitled, “Lawmakers reworked financial portfolios after talks with Fed, Treasury officials”, we give an extended quote.

In late 2006, Congress started crafting legislation to overhaul Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, a major effort to stem a rising tide of defaults on risky loans given to home buyers with poor credit.

As Congress worked to rein in the two government-sponsored lenders, Fannie and Freddie pushed back with aggressive lobbying campaigns, stalling the effort in early 2007.

Paulson started working the Hill, trying to break the deadlock and win support for the revisions. He called and met with a number of members of Congress, including Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), on this and other reform efforts.

Paulson and Nelson spoke on Jan. 10. The next day, Nelson sold between $250,000 and $500,000 in Lehman Brothers certificates of deposit. (Congressional financial disclosure forms list only approximate ranges.) Nelson also purchased between $100,000 and $200,000 in Treasury notes, a safer investment.

On Feb. 12, Paulson met at 4 p.m. with Nelson in the lawmaker’s office in the Hart Senate Office Building. That day, Nelson bought $50,000 to $100,000 in Treasury bills.

That year, Nelson had only one other call with Paulson and no other meetings, records show. He made 103 other trades during the year, eight of which exceeded $100,000.

Nelson declined to be interviewed. A spokesman said that the senator discussed only policy matters related to disabled veterans during the call and meeting with the Treasury secretary and that the senator learned nothing that would have influenced his trades.

“Like everyone in Congress, Senator Nelson is bound by the laws, rules and guidelines established for members of Congress,” Nelson spokesman Jake Thompson said in a statement. “He carefully follows both the spirit and intent of them. He has not, and would not, have conversations with Executive Branch officials about matters affecting his personal finances.”

Under congressionally imposed ethics laws that cover Treasury secretaries, Paulson and Geithner would have been prohibited from making the same investments. Congress prohibits Treasury secretaries from investing in financial institutions or Treasury securities.

Nelson “has often sought and had one-on-one conversations with numerous cabinet secretaries under both President Bush and Obama on dozens of issues before Congress,” Thompson said in an e-mail. “That’s what good legislators do, they seek dialogue and understanding at the senior level about local, state and federal policy matters, as well as foreign policy issues.”

Paulson, through a spokeswoman, declined to discuss his conversations with members of Congress during the financial crisis.

No idea on any further details, but…whoa. Seems like the sort of thing that gets investigated.

***

And back to Kerrey, it seems that Mrs. Bob Kerrey, Sarah Paley has done what anyone who is trying to keep a low profile as a political spouse does: She wrote a six page essay in the national magazine “Vanity Fair” “Vogue” (funny that Politico got it wrong, or maybe it’s in both?), posing in a full photo in her Manolo Blahniks, about how she is dealing with the hicks in Nebraska while her husband runs for Senate.

Now should we discuss a political spouse? Aren’t they “off limits” and all that? Well, usually that is the case — until said spouse decides to write her own article on the process, taking on Karl Rove, abortion protesters and the average Nebraskan.

A few outtakes:

Bob’s opposition likes to point out as often as can be pointed out that we reside in Greenwich Village (translated: Sodom and Gomorrah). They seem unaware that this part of Manhattan is not that different from Dundee.

Translation: Try visiting a city bigger than Kansas City you hayseeds!

Oh, and for those of you who have never visited the Village (or “the West Village” as Kerrey corrected his interviewer a few weeks back), here is what Greenwich Village and Dundee have in common: they both have paved streets.

But Palley doesn’t stop there. She needs to throw out a little shocker to show her hipness (and keep in mind, this isn’t an interview. This is an article she wrote. She is a writer by trade and chose her words very carefully):

Yes it’s true we can walk to our local sex-gadget emporiums, but we natives are not the people crowding the Sex and the City tours that include those shops.

Translation: I am REALLY hip. Did you see how I referenced “sex-gadgets” there? Super hip. Oh and once again, I am so hip that I wouldn’t be caught dead on one of those TV tours. For hayseed tourists. From Nebraska.

More:

My love of anonymity is why I perhaps overreacted when huge cooler of frozen Runza sandwiches was delivered to our house in Manhattan.

And if you REALLY love your anonymity, there is no better place to flaunt it than on the pages of Vanity Fair. With a full color photo of you and your son.

And if a true New Yorker can’t guffaw at the word, “Runza”, well then they can just head over to Jersey.  (And again, why the denial of the West Village?) But, on to Nebraska!

Midwesterners even have their own language: They say “pop” for soda, “sack” for bag, “billfold” for wallet.

You would think they at some point they could start speaking correct English like everyone in the West Village…er, Manhattan.

And by the way, for a somewhat successful writer (Ooh! Namedropping fellow SNL writer Al Franken! Have to mention this at the next dinner party with Lorne), is there anything much more hackneyed than the, “they have different words for things in other parts of the country!” schtick? Is it really that baffling? And what, no mention of the “hotdish”?

Leaving Omaha, you drive through farmland and behold what Nebraska is supposed to look like. Mesh silos that you can see through if they aren’t full of corn, red barns with copper roofs, and fields of yellow soybeans.

Well, at least that is what Nebraska is supposed to look like to someone who is used to the friendly streets of lower Manhattan. For some of us, Nebraska looks like the Old Market and Rosenblatt and South 24th Street and “O” Street and the Haymarket. But, you know, even though she obviously has been there lots of times, it is better to tell her New Yorker friends reading this what their untraveled eyes will want, right?

Oh, and she ends with the hayseeds, probably gripping their guns and their Bibles, heading to Lincoln in droves for a “foot-ball” game. And she emphasizes as she ends her piece, with a final F-you:

“I do not like football.”

Which is fine. Hey, we here in the L.St. offices have never met Ms. Paley. She may just be the Salt of the Earth type, and a wonderful person. And our intention to support Kerrey or not would have nothing to do with what we thought of her. A pol’s spouse really does not influence us either way on either side of the aisle

But we REALLY tire of these bullshit, “I went to that place where most people fly-over, and here’s what I saw” articles from those on either coast. The fact that Ms. Paley is a politico wife is just her “in” for writing in Vanity Fair Vogue. (Hmm, either works.) And we don’t care if it is her, or some dude from the Boston Globe, or another from the sports pages of the L.A. Times: write a stupid piece on Nebraska, prepare to be critiqued.

Oh, and New York smells.

144 comments

  1. Gary and Ace says:

    To Bob and his wife: We have a list of “toys” we want you to bring back. We looked all over Dundee and could not find a shop anywhere.

  2. Run Jean Run says:

    We knew there was a reason Nabity announced all of a sudden. Dave just saw his mayoral dreams go up in smoke.

  3. Lil Mac says:

    Kerrey’s wife Sarah Palley is a lying sack of East Coast doo doo. I can say that because she hit at all Republicans and Conservatives and Nebraskans publically, and that makes her a legitimate political target. She wrote a six page essay, posed for the photo, and yet says she wants to be anonymous, so she is also a liar. She makes fun of Nebraskans and actually said “I do not like football.” Wow. She stopped just short of putting up her middle finger and saying “F*ck you Nebraska”.

    If her article is pasted outside Bob’s Cherry County campaign office, eggs supplies in Valentine will drop overnight.

    Vanity Fair? You bet. Nebraskans hate East Coast vanity and that seems fair enough.

  4. Goober Natorial says:

    So, uh, I’ve been all over Nebraska and been through most every county. Spent a lot of time in rural parts of this state. Can anyone tell me where to find a red barn with a copper roof? Never seen one here. Is there such a thing in Dundee?

  5. Macdaddy says:

    Vanity Fair was had. That article was written by Karl Rove. It was too stereotypically New Yorker to be written by a real person.

  6. Macdaddy says:

    BTW, what Nelson did was 100% legal even if Paulsen said “Tomorrow, company X is going to get indicted, you should short them.”. Congress lives by different rules. Now Kerrey was in the Senate for 12 years, and we see that he likes money. Perhaps he made some of those trades that the rest of us would go to jail for.

  7. To MacDaddy says:

    Most rich liberals from New York are not real persons. They are very fake indeed. I’m waiting for Paley to say she has a special connection to Nebraska. She once had Corn on the Cob at a cook out and thought the experience “quaint”.

  8. NIFA says:

    Kerrey was a “Welfare Businessman” He took a subsidized NIFA loan for his businesses at a 4% point discount from the state of Nebraska while he was governor. I wonder why the OWH doesn’t discuss this.

  9. Interested Observer says:

    I just re-read each article in here since before the primary election. Deb is mentioned in most of the articles, but usually in regard to polls, whether she’s up or down and by how many points. The only article that actually discussed Deb at all is the one on May 16, 2012, titled, “How Deb did it”. But that article only touched on how she did it and not at all on who she is, what she’s done and where she stands on matters of public policy, with specificity.

    There have sure been lots of articles on her opponent, but none on her.

  10. BkDodge42 says:

    I’m from New York originally. I’m familiar with Greenwich Village. The sex emporiums are not all that is there, it’s funny that should even been mentioned. While I was born in New York, Ive lived in Nebraska for the last 21 years. I met Bob Kerrey at a parade last week, mentioned to him that I don’t think there is any thing wrong with being from New York City. I don’t buy Pace picante sauce because of their anti New York ads.

    As far as Deb Fischer’s “welfare rancher” and the subsidy for grazing rights, it appears that Bob is out of touch with reality again. The ranchers that take advantage of these “subsidies” are not receiving any money from the government, they are paying the government to use the Federal lands, yes below market value and only those who have property adjacent to the Federal lands really have the most advantage to use that unless you want to truck your cattle to the Federal lands. But if you want to charge these ranchers market value, then they would still pay that, but the cost of your hamburger and meat at the grocery store will go up as the added cost will be passed on to the consumer.

  11. Senator Snowplow says:

    Bob Kerrey is a bona fide war hero and he will trounce that draft-dodging welfare queen in November. Hat tip to Interested Observer on the whole welfare thing. IO, did I get a chance to meet the real you at the Dem convention this past weekend?

  12. Goober Natorial says:

    IO went back and read all the posts since the primary, huh? A little light reading between checking cows and fixing fence, prolly.

  13. Kerrey for NYC Mayor says:

    “They seem unaware that this part of Manhattan is not that different from Dundee.”

    I have spent a good deal of time over the years working in Greenwich Village and living in NYC and this statement just shows how ignorant these people truly are. What she is trying to insinuate here is that Dundee is the “cool” part of town – much like people from Greenwich Village think about their little secluded place on Manhattan. The “they” she is referring to are the so-called hayseed ignorant Nebraskan’s who are not as privileged and enlightened as she to live in such coolness.

    I too would normally care little about what a spouse has to say but the reality is she is speaking publicly about Nebraska and Nebraskan’s in a way that most liberals from NYC would commonly do and it shows her level of ignorance and elitism. I hope she has found a good place to find an arugula in Dundee…it would be a shame to have to leave her secluded nest and venture out into Indian country for food.

    Good think Bob found his intellectual match…

  14. SoWhat??? says:

    It’s good to see actual confirmation that the Benator is as big a sleaze-bag as always thought. Nothing like having the US Treasury Secretary giving you a heads up that the banking system is about to collapse so you can sell and move your money to US Treasury bonds for safety. Way to go Senator Nelson!!! You’re going to make a great turkey rancher in between your influence peddling post-retirement consulting shakedowns.

  15. Goober Natorial says:

    If the SCOTUS decision on the Arizona immigration case is any indication, we might expect to see a split of the baby on Obamacare this week.

  16. Nabbity's campaign says:

    Trust us! We were successful in that recall effort! right?

    Let’s face it Dave is nothing more than an opportunist and a failed political hack. Jean is a fresh of breath air compared to 3 time looser Nabbity.

  17. Macdaddy says:

    Kerrey’s wife doesn’t know NYC much less one tiny part of Omaha. Charitably, Dundee is much more like the Upper West Side. Or Queens.

  18. Lil Mac says:

    Lots of funny coments here. And by funny I mean rib tickling funny. Kerrey and Kleeb. Written by Karl Rove. Bravo Dad. — And at 12:37… a car elevator? The question is, can Bob and Sarah recognize a grain elevator?

  19. Interested Observer says:

    Goober Natorial at 12:41 PM said, “IO went back and read all the posts since the primary, huh? A little light reading between checking cows and fixing fence, prolly.”

    Actually, yes it was and now everything’s checked and all in order. Thank you!

    I also noticed that I didn’t actually see any Goober Natorial comments posted between May 9 and June 6, I believe it was. Not sure if that makes you an old timer in here, a chameleon with a new name or just some particularly bombastic, outspoken, rude, new poster sent here specifically to harass me? Anyway, whatever . . . I have pretty thick, leathery skin and can handle whatever you have to dish out.

    I always did think that Gomer Natorial was the brighter, better looking and far more intelligent member of the Natorial family.

    Senator Snowplow at 12:35 PM, No, I’m sure you didn’t meet me at that Democrat convention. I haven’t been to Omaha in ages. I spent the whole weekend pretty much right here at the ranch.

  20. Anonymous says:

    Hey Nabity, how do you reorganize government? I know it might be hard for you, considering you’ve never held office before….

  21. Anonymous says:

    Lil Mac, Yup, Mittens’ “little” beach-house in La Jolla, near San Diego, features elevators for his four car garage. They’re for the cars, not just to lift people. Google it.

  22. Gomer Natorial says:

    Mom always did like me the best. She never did like the fact that Goober braided his nose hairs to look like a mustache. And he’s been doing that since he was eleven!

  23. ricky says:

    Ms Stothert is popular in her district in Millard and with some wealthy G O P businessmen, but that’s about it. Omaha has never had a woman mayor, and has not had a Republican Mayor for 3 terms now.
    That spells trouble for her election bid, but at least she can spend some of the money the fat Burger King guy gave her to help Omaha’s economy.

    ricky from omaha

  24. Goober Natorial says:

    IO, you really think highly of yourself if you think I’m here to follow you. I’m just a poster who is here for the conversation and figured out pretty quickly what a disingenuous troll you are. And there’s no gomer. Just me. The wife divorced me when I decided to run for governors on the dem ticket a couple of years ago. Smart woman she was.

  25. Goober Natorial says:

    IO, I don’t recall when I started posting as other than generic anonymous. But I do remember I gave you the benefit of the doubt at first. There’s no longer any benefit, though, because there’s no longer any doubt.

  26. Gomer Natorial says:

    Goober, Mom’s going to be really mad at you for denying that her favorite son is your brother. But, then again, you’re used to your Dad not claiming you, whoever he was.

  27. Anonymous says:

    With 4 people already running for mayor (and possibly 1 or 2 more looking to get into the race), who wants to bet that Franklin Thompson is wanting to jump in as well?

    In a way, it could make sense. With no one candidate being able to get the majority of republicans with Nabity and Stothert in, Thompson might just be able to attract those voters who are turned off by those two and get through to the general election.

  28. Anonymous says:

    Interested Whatever, just because you piqued my curiosity, I went back and reviewed a few of sweeper’s blog posts BEFORE the primary and, as expected, there you were, complaining about Deb Fischer like a dog incessantly barking at the wind. You are someone who clearly harbors an unhealthy obsession with Deb Fischer. You’re like the Ivy Harper of District 43. And, in case it wasn’t clear, that’s not a compliment.

  29. We Need Buescher says:

    Nothing against John Orr. He’s a great guy. But the Nebraska GOP needs someone like Brian Buescher at the helm.

  30. Please! says:

    John Orr? Brian such and such? What Tyler Mahood has done with the UNO GOP is nothing short of spectacular. Young or not I will vote for Mahood.

  31. Anonymous says:

    Now doggone it Sweep why do you have to go and delete posts? Understand you have a fairly weak constitution but not all things that call out the Libs are bad, and there were no links either. Oh well your prerogative, just thought better your you all.

  32. 10:32 says:

    I never saw the post, but SS you’re a joke. For someone with conservative values you sure are quick to shut down the freedom of speech.

  33. Heh. Yup I’m “The Man” allright.
    In the mean time, I’m pretty sure you can still create your own blog and make war injury jokes all night long, with no one deleting them.
    -Ed.

  34. NDP State Convention goer says:

    If you want censorship, look no further than the NDP’s Vic Covalt. The guy actually shoved through a resolution at our convention that allows him to decide whether or not anyone that wants to make a motion can or not. There’s not much difference between him and a lot of middle east dictators.

  35. What!?! says:

    If Kieran McCarney wants a throw down with Mahood I’m sure he’s up for the challenge. He’s been challenging them to a debate for awhile.

  36. NDP State Convention goer says:

    Many of the people that I talked to at the convention, mostly rural folks like me, got the feeling that they weren’t welcome in Omaha. This was my second convention and it seemed the only folks that had any influence were from Lancaster, Douglas or Sarpy counties because there were a lot of them there, not so many from the rest of Nebraska. It probably didn’t help that they scheduled a convention in Omaha right in the middle of the CWS and the Olympic swimming trials. Then the hotel they had us staying in was under construction. What a mess!
    Chris Link wrote that it doesn’t look like Bob Kerrey really wants to win his race. I’d say it looks like the NDP doesn’t want to win any races now or anytime in the future. I am thinking of registering as an Independent and if those bastards call me asking for money or help on anybody’s campaign in Lincoln or Omaha, they can kiss my ass.

  37. Don Kuhns says:

    So, Street Sweeper, you say justice cannot exist without an arbiter? You’re a strange one. BTW, what commie hippie freeloader said this? “Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”

  38. UNO Math Dept. says:

    Good luck with Mahood. That guy is one sandwich short of a picnic. McCarney will dominate Mahood in a debate.

  39. Anonymous says:

    From the comments section of Politico on the Vanity Fair article:
    Gerard Harbison · Trinity College, Dublin
    Ms. Paley seems unaware that Bob Kerrey grew up in the Bethany district of Lincoln, not the Dundee neighborhood in Omaha. Though I expect to a New Yorker it’s all just West Jersey.

    Golly, Gerard, ashamed to associate yourself with Nebraska?

  40. Anonymous says:

    I think once people realize that Franklin Thompson is a RINO who voted to ask the legislature for the increased sales tax and voted to increase property taxes, they’ll desert him

  41. Anonymous says:

    Brian T Osborn wasn’t at the convention because he was supposedly at his class reunion. That didn’t stop people from gossiping about him and telling stories. There was a lot of sympathy and discussion about how to deal with someone who is clearly mentally ill and needs help, not ridicule.

  42. Goober Natorial says:

    OK, I had always thought that Interested Observer was some Democrat hack who was trying to hit Deb Fischer with this grazing thing as a partisan attack. Oh, but now that I see from anonymous at 9:07 that IO has been on here ranting about Deb Fischer before the primary election, BEFORE she was the nominee (and, from my own digging now, it looks like even before she started making her run in the polls) this is looking far less like a partisan attack (by IO, that is — its clearly partisan when Ben Nelson repeats it) and much more like a creepy obsession by someone who’s a little (or a lot) off balance. IO is out there constantly telling anyone who will listen about his animus toward Deb and her family. I even saw him clogging the comment section of the journal star yesterday. This is a bit beyond unsettling. Like love letters to Jody Foster unsettling. Get help, IO. This isn’t normal.

  43. Clint says:

    John Orr will make a great NEGOP Chair! He is very capable of uniting the different views of the party for the common good. I wish him the best.

  44. Tom Becka says:

    If you want to hear what John Orr has to say again listen to Crash. But if you want to hear it first listen to my show during the 4 O’Clock hour when he’s on the Mighty 1290 KOIL!

  45. Interested Observer says:

    I just want to hear what Deb has to say. Where in the world is Deb anyway? Yesterday, a guy on the Lincoln Journal-Star said he saw Deb’s picture on a milk bottle in the grocery store.

  46. SHUT UP ALREADY says:

    John is a good guy, BUT this is not the the candidate of the Governor. Mr. Orr had better explain to the Governor why he didn’t seek his endorsement. This is an off the reservation move by Mr. Orr and the Scott Peterson crowd.

  47. Clint says:

    Yea, I forgot we are all supposed to do as we are told and follow the orders of our superior. Everyone needs to shut up and do exactly as the governor says.

  48. Goober Natorial says:

    IO, you once claimed that Deb’s and Bob’s political views were virtually indistinguishable and you crowed that you were going to enjoy watching everyone’s realization of that fact unfold over time if she got elected. But you’ve never supported that claim with any details nor offered any explanation in spite of requests to do so. It’s time to fish or cut bait, IO. I’ll ask again. When you say they’re politically the same, how so? You want people around here to take you seriously? Then answer a simple question about a claim YOU made.

  49. Political Genius says:

    It looks like Jean is going to get a full week of coverage on her possible announcement. I think Nabity needs better consultants and he got beat in his first act as a candidate.

  50. anonymous says:

    Deb Fischer = Brand X. We know what we’ll get with Bob Kerrey, but who knows what in the hell we’ll get with Deb? I guess we could vote for her and hope for the best. After all, that worked out really well for their Hope and Change guy, didn’t it?

  51. Goober Natorial says:

    Way back in, oh, say, January, there were posters on this very blog who were very critical of Deb Fischer for running what seemed to be an invisible campaign. She wasn’t running ads, she wasn’t out meeting people. She was being pretty quiet for someone down so far in the polls. Some suggested she wasn’t running a serious campaign. But May rolled around and a funny thing happened. She won. So now, the Dems keep wondering where’s Deb Fischer. And the answer is that she’s where any smart candidate in her position with such a big lead would be — keeping her powder dry. She doesn’t need to respond to Kerrey or anyone else. And its driving the democrats nuts.

  52. Exposing Lying Idiots says:

    Anonymous @ 8:13 AM,

    Why do you morons continue to lie when the truth would do the job? BTO sent out an email that said the reason he would not be at the state convention was that the engine in his vehicle was blown and he lacked transportation. It looks like the only source for your “class reunion” crap is the voices in your head.

    BTO isn’t even active in the NDP at this point. What kind of morons were debating BTO at the state convention? GET OVER IT. It would be a lot more productive if you jerks just ignored him. Why don’t you concentrate on finding a county chair for one of the 20 to 30 counties that lack one at this point?

    Instead of drawing up enemy lists within the party it would be more productive if you morons could harness some of that energy to try and build up the party.

  53. Anonymous @ 2:04 says:

    Yes, you are correct that we know what we will get with Bob Kerrey. And what we’ll get is exactly what we don’t want.

  54. Hey Scott Petersen says:

    When are you going to admit that Mitt Romney IS the Republican nominee for President? Or are you still hoping for Rand Paul in 2016?

  55. Goober Natorial says:

    Some musings in advance of Thursday’s judicial atomic bomb. When the court is split 5-4 along ideological bounds, why is it that the conservatives are the ones always accused of being political? Does anyone suppose that any of the liberal justices will find that Congress overstepped its Constitutional authority in passing any part of Obama care? If this thing holds up, is there any limit to the commerce clause? There would be virtually nothing Congress couldn’t do. Yet, if the law is struck down on a 5-4 vote, you just watch. It will be the conservative majority accused of partisanship.

  56. Omaha man says:

    Mitt won the election and is our candidate. Lets have an election between John Orr and Brian and also see who is our candidate. We do not hand pick people, we elect them through an election process then rally behind the winner.

  57. Anonymous says:

    @Hey Scott Petersen, this story was about the Omaha Mayoral race not Romney, you should really be asking why Mr Petersen isn’t backing Nabity or Stothert or Welch.

  58. anonymous says:

    Macdaddy, You already have plenty of X-crement in the Congressional Delegation with Johanns, Terry, Fortenberry and Smith.

  59. Hey Scott Petersen says:

    @ @Hey
    Just because Scott told you to respond on here doesn’t mean it isn’t still an issue. He still has not said that Mitt Romney is our Republican nominee for President, and I haven’t heard any attempt to distance himself from cheering for Rand Paul in 2016….which would mean he hopes that Mitt fails in this election or 4 years from now. Great party loyalty Scott…

  60. Garden Cafe says:

    Pat McPherson must survive or we will not survive. Although our decor and menu is stellar, McPherson is the linchpin in our survival. Our gravy slathered pork chops are not selling as well as our gravy slathered hot cakes.

  61. Anonymous says:

    I think you used the wrong word there Great DCRP event…instead of conservatives, we all know that you mean Paulbots

  62. Great DCRP event says:

    I was there and there was great energy! Young and old! Let’s get conservatives across the state elected!!! I am very encouraged!

  63. Anonymous says:

    Scott Petersen can keep dodging the question for only so long, who does he support for president: Mitt Romney or Ron Paul?

  64. Goober Natorial says:

    Musings while waiting for Obamacare to hopefully be struck down tomorrow. So, if you play in the NBA and are a public thug and jerk in general, its no problem. But if you play in the NBA and privately call someone a fag, they fine you $50,000. Presumably, Amare Stoudemire could have called the guy any other pejorative, no matter how offensive, and he would have been ok.

    And George Zimmerman had injuries consistent with his version of what happened, passed a lie detector the police asked him to take, cooperated fully with the investigation, there’s a witness who saw the guy with the hoodie on top of the other guy beating on him … And the prosecutor has Trayvon Martin’s girlfriend. Who was maybe on the phone with him shortly before he was shot. Yeah. That’s justice going on down,there.

  65. Goober Natorial says:

    Sorry, almost forgot. The Zimmerman prosecutor also has a former Zimmerman co-worker from four years ago who didn’t get along with him. That’s the lynch pin, right there.

  66. anonymous says:

    Yeah Goober, let’s lynch them black boys! We aren’t the least bit racist around here. Just string ’em up, let God decide!

  67. Goober Natorial says:

    Who said anything about lynching anyone? Not me. In fact, I’m the one hoping that justice prevails and that this Zimmerman guy doesn’t get lynched.

    And who brought race into it? Not me. I know the kid who was tragically shot after apparently initiating the confrontation and beating the other guy was black. The guy who pulled the trigger is Latino. What does any of that have to do with lynching black people?

    Your side is really good about ignoring facts and getting hysterical over false narratives, ya know it? No, obviously you don’t.

  68. anonymous says:

    My side? What have you got against Republican conservatives, Goober?
    I just happen to believe in justice. I would like to know how you would have reacted if you were walking down the street, minding your own business, and some big guy comes up and starts getting in your face without ever identifying himself as a neighborhood watch, or anything similar. The kid felt threatened and he defended himself. If he had a gun, he would have been within his rights to kill Zimmerman.
    Zimmerman did not do what the police told him to, that was to back off and let them handle it. Face it. Zimmerman just wanted to be a tough guy and couldn’t wait to kill someone. Why else would he be stalking people while carrying a loaded gun?
    So tell me, Goober, what is illegal about wearing a hoody, eating Skittles and drinking iced tea? If I see you on the street with your belt hiked up to your nipples, shuffling along in your white shoes and wearing one of those goofy golf hats, and I assume you are “suspicious,” can I plant a couple of caps in your ugly ass?

  69. Goober Natorial says:

    Hey, IO, here’s your chance to say some conservative stuff and not have to bring up grazing!

    And, anonymous at 10:54, whoever said hoodies, skittles and iced tea were illegal? Not me.

    And what evidence is there that Zimmerman got in Martin’s face? Or that Martin felt threatened and defended himself?

    Looks like we have another football lib on here claiming to be a conservative Republican. And the other one just so happens to post something right in between the two by Mr. Anonymous, here. Coincidence? You be the judge.

  70. Goober Natorial says:

    Darn the autocorrect function on my phone. That was supposed to say “goofball lib” not “football lib.”

  71. Interested Observer says:

    I think that if Leavenworthst.com were compared to “Twelve Angry Men”, that Goober Natorial would be “Juror 10”, the Ed Begley character. That’s the one near the end of the movie who rants on and on in a rage. That so offends all the other jurors, that one by one, they each turn their back on him.

  72. anonymous says:

    So, Goober, who controls your thumbs that you have to blame your incompetence on “autocorrect.” I suppose Zimmerman could say his gun lept into his hand and fired itself if your excuse for being an idiot is valid.

  73. IOU says:

    Goober: And, anonymous at 10:54, whoever said hoodies, skittles and iced tea were illegal? Not me.
    Zimmerman thought it was suspicious enough to murder a teenager. And you defend his killer.

  74. Goober Natorial says:

    Anonymous, Zimmerman doesn’t have to say the gun leapt into his hand. He doesn’t have to say anything. The prosecution has the burden of proof. But, what Zimmerman has said is that Martin instigated the confrontation, punched him in the face, knocked him to the pavement and began pounding his head into the ground, telling Zimmerman, “You’re going to die tonight” and putting Zimmerman in fear of his life. What evidence have you seen to contradict this?

  75. Goober Natorial says:

    IOU, Zimmerman didn’t see the skittles or the ice tea. What he stated to the police was that someone was walking around his gates community at night, in the rain, without any apparent purpose for being there. He said that seemed suspicious. So he called the cops. Keep in mind that Zimmerman’s neighbor’s home had recently been broken into. So, what do skittles and ice tea have to do with it? Why do you people keep on bringing up what Martin bought at the convenience store?

  76. Goober Natorial says:

    And, IOU, its not murder if its self-defense. If Martin had shot Zimmerman and the only eye witness account was from Martin claiming self-defense, we’d both be defending Martin.

  77. Anonymous says:

    Google the detective’s report.

    “Investigative findings show that George Michael Zimmerman had at least two opportunities to speak with Trayvon Benjamin Martin in order to defuse the circumstances surrounding their encounter. On at least two occasions, George Michael Zimmerman failed to identify himself as a concerned resident or a neighborhood watch member to Trayvon Benjamin Martin. Investigative findings show the physical dimension of Trayvon Benjamin Martin, and that of George Michael Zimmerman, coupled with the absence of any specialized training in hand to hand combat between either combatant, did not place George Michael Zimmerman in an extraordinary or exceptional disadvantage of apparent physical ability or defensive capacity.

    “Investigative findings show the physical injuries displayed by George Michael Zimmerman are marginally consistent with a life-threatening violent episode as described by him, during which neither a deadly weapon nor deadly force was deployed by Trayvon Martin.”

    There is plenty of documentation disputing your view, GN, but since it contradicts your mind’s ravings, you don’t want to see it.

  78. Anonymous says:

    IOU, your side is trying to make up with emotion what you lack in evidence. And what you lack in evidence is everything and that leaves you with nothing but emotion. This confrontation had nothing to do with skittles or ice tea. That’s just fodder for a bunch of protest signs and slogans. There’s only one person alive today who knows how that altercation started and his account is uncontroverted. Complain all you want but there’s no adequate evidence to convict. And that’s why the prosecution has resorted to finding former co-workers who didn’t like Zimmerman in an effort to paint him as an aggressor. But, again, that’s not evidence that a jury will ever see. So, got anything else? Other than emotion, of course.

  79. IOU says:

    Goober: And, IOU, its not murder if its self-defense. If Martin had shot Zimmerman and the only eye witness account was from Martin claiming self-defense, we’d both be defending Martin.
    No we would not. If Zimmerman hadn’t snuck up on the kid in the dark of night and scared the crap out of him, a kid that had every right in the world to be where he was, at the time he was, Zimmerman would not be charged with murder today. If Zimmerman had followed the instructions given him by the police, he would not be charged with murder today.
    You seem to think that anyone that “feels” threatened has the right to commit murder. You are a sick person Goober. Tell me, Goober, what is “suspicious” about walking to a convenience store to buy some candy and something to drink, even if it is raining, or late at night. Suspicious minds should stay locked up in their basement fortresses with their tin foil hats on – not drive around looking for someone to shoot.

    Anonymous, Emotion has nothing to do with it, unless you are talking about a scared kid that felt he was being stalked by a big guy in the dark of night with evil intent. The kid defended himself and died because Zimmerman just had to place himself in a confrontational posture. If the survivor is always to be considered innocent, then we’d better start emptying out our jails.

  80. Anonymous says:

    Goober says someone was walking around his gates community at night, in the rain, without any apparent purpose for being there. That someone, as viewed by the kid, was Zimmerman.

  81. Goober Natorial says:

    See what I mean about emotion? And yes, the survivor certainly is always considered innocent. Until PROVEN guilty. Where’s your proof? You say Zimmerman jumped out at Martin. There’s no evidence of that. You say Martin defended himself. There’s no evidence of that either. Martin had bloodied knuckles, consistent with punching someone. And Zimmerman had wounds consistent with being struck and having his head slammed into the pavement. Just like Zimmerman claims. Zimmerman says Martin was the one who instigated a physical confrontation. Where’s your evidence to the contrary?

  82. IOU says:

    Where is your evidence, Goober? You would have us believe that everything went down the way you say it did without offering any evidence. My view, from hundreds of miles away, is just as good as yours.
    If Martin had scraped knuckles, and Zimmerman had wounds, then hell yeah Martin defended himself. What was he supposed to do, just hold his Skittles in front of his heart and dare the asshole to use them for target practice?
    If I murdered a kid in cold blood and didn’t want to take the rap, damn straight I’d be bashing my own head on the sidewalk, enough to make an alibi for myself.

  83. Goober Natorial says:

    In other words, IOU, ya got nothin’.

    Zimmerman doesn’t have to prove shit. Notwithstanding this, Zimmerman …

    * voluntarily gave a statement
    * had wounds consistent with his statement
    * passed a lie detector administered by police
    * is the ONLY eye witness to what happened when the altercation started and says that Martin came from behind him and started the physical altercation. There is no evidence whatsoever to dispute this because no one else saw the fight start.

    Other witnesses saw the fight play out, including …

    * a neighbor who told police the night of the shooting that he heard a commotion, looked out and saw a black male with a dark hoodie straddling on top of an hispanic male and throwing mixed martial art style punches on the hispanic male on the ground
    * a neighbor whose cell phone call to police recorded multiple calls for help by the person being beaten before the gunshot. Martin’s own father listened to the recording at police HQ and determined the voice crying for help was not his son.

    So, I ask again, whatcha got? Or, more accurately, what do you think the prosecution has? Because they’re the ones who have to prove the case.

  84. Goober Natorial says:

    Also, IOU, I should add, since you obviously don’t know much about the facts of the case (though you have the emotion down pretty well) the police arrived on the scene within moments of the shooting and neighbors who witnessed from the shooting until the police arrived and there was no time or opportunity for Zimmerman to injure himself. Nice theory, though. Just doesn’t hold water.

  85. IOU says:

    How damned many minutes would it take for me to f*** up your face? It would take you even less, and I’m sure that Zimmerman had ample time to do so.

  86. Anonymous says:

    So, IOU, your evidence that Zimmerman is guilty is the fact he might have had time to self-inflict his wounds? Any witnesses see him do this? That doesn’t sound like a very strong prosecution case.

  87. IOU says:

    The prosecution case is that Zimmerman had intent. He was told not to get involved but he pressed on. He approached Martin, who was minding his own business, and evidently presented himself as a threat.
    How would you react if some big guy came after you on a dark street, and without identifying his purposes, started harassing you? Wet your tighty whities and whimper, “Don’t hit me!”

  88. Anonymous says:

    How many fake lawyers and psychoanalysts are there on Leavenworth Street anyway? It seems everyone that has an asshole also has an opinion.

  89. Anonymous says:

    OK, great, Zimmerman had “intent.” How many elements are there to 2nd degree murder?

    IOU, I don’t think you understand how this all works with prosecutors having to prove every element of the crime charged.

    You’re also making some presumptions that aren’t supported by any evidence whatsoever. “He approached Martin, who was minding his own business, and evidently presented himself as a threat.”

    You’ve made three major assumptions in that one sentence and NONE OF THOSE ASSUMPTIONS ARE SUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE IN THE CASE. I’ve read the police reports. I’ve read the investigator’s summary of what all the witnesses said. There isn’t a soul on the face of the earth who observed the altercation between Zimmerman and Martin when it started. No one saw anything until Zimmerman was on the ground and Martin was on top of him hitting him.

    You have no evidence of who approached whom or who presented himself as a threat. None of that. So, to the extent you think the case relies on that evidence, you have no case.

    There’s only one witness to how the altercation began and that’s George Zimmerman and he says Martin confronted him, not the other way around. So, you better go back to the drawing board and come up with a new theory. Or manufacture some new witnesses, like this Dee Dee person.

  90. IOU says:

    So, let me get this straight, according to your perception of what happened. This Martin kid went to a 7-11, bought some Skittles and Iced Tea, then headed home. Along his way he spotted this Zimmerman character just standing there on the sidewalk and decided to assault him and threaten his life rather than just saying, “Good evening,” and going on about his business.
    Got it!

  91. Anonymous says:

    Well, first of all, I don’t think skittles and ice tea had anything at all to do with this confrontation. The bottle of ice tea wasn’t discovered on Martin’s person until after he was dead and neither were the skittles, which you’d know if you’d read the police report.

    Second, I don’t think your supposition of how the encounter occurred is remotely likely. My best guess is that you had a guy in Zimmerman who was a bit on edge about crime in his neighborhood because his wife had recently seen someone break into a neighbor’s home. You might not have realized that but it’s in the written statement to the police.

    Then, you have a guy in Martin who is walking around, at night, in the rain, for no reason that’s apparent to Zimmerman. And Zimmerman, being a guy who’s a little on edge based on his recent experience, decides to stop and check things out. And call the cops.

    Martin is as much young angry kid as Zimmerman is paranoid homeowner and I’d imagine Martin sees Zimmerman stop and check him out and figures Zimmerman is only suspicious of him because he’s black and, again, my guess, thinks to himself, man, I’d love to rearrange that guy’s face.

    Have you seen the pictures of the area? These are townhomes, and privacy dividers separate the patios of the adjoining townhomes. Martin’s walking down the sidewalk with Zimmerman following. Martin turns a corner and then ducks behind one of the dividers to hide from Zimmerman. Zimmerman passes, doesn’t see Martin anymore, so turns to walk back to his vehicle.

    As Zimmerman passes by again, my guess is Martin sizes him up — short, kinda fat, slightly older guy than Martin — and figures he can take him.

    Zimmerman’s statement to the police said that as he was walking back to his vehicle, Martin comes from behind him and Zimmerman sees him. At which point Martin says, “You got a problem?” to which Zimmerman responds, “No, I don’t have a problem.” Whereupon, Martin, who has a bit of angry kid in him and sees no witnesses, decides to open a can of whoopass on Zimmerman and says to Zimmerman — again, according to the only witness available — “Well, you have a problem now.”

    Martin then strikes Zimmerman in the face, breaking Zimmerman’s nose (see the hospital report confirming a closed fracture of Zimmerman’s nose) and knocking Zimmerman to the ground. Martin then climbs on top of Zimmerman, straddling him (see neighbor/witness statement that black male with dark hoodie was on top of other guy with red shirt raining punches down on him “MMA style”) and delivering blows to Zimmerman’s head and slamming his head into the sidewalk.

    Zimmerman then begins yelling for help (see police report describing recording of 911 call in which a male voice can be heard yelling for help multiple times; see also police report confiming Martin’s father said it wasn’t his son’s voice calling for help.) Martin continues to punch and slam Zimmerman’s head into the sidewalk. According to Zimmerman, at this point the gun on his hip becomes exposed and, fearing that Martin has seen and it will take it and use it on Zimmerman, Zimmerman then unholsters the weapon and fires a single shot into Martin’s torso.

    Martin collapses and dies.

    So, no, I don’t think Martin just decided to assault some random person. I think he decided to kick the sh*t out of someone that he figured was tailing him just because he was black. He just didn’t count on the fact that the guy he was going to beat up was packing. And the only reason an altercation occurred was because Martin started it. And he’d be alive today if he’d just have let Zimmerman walk on back to his vehicle.

    At least, that’s consistent with THE ONLY EVIDENCE IN THE CASE.

  92. IOU says:

    The Skittles and iced tea serve only to indicate that Martin was just going about his business, walking in an area he had every right in the world to walk through. Zimmerman is the one that went looking for trouble, and he found it because he instigated it despite being told by the police to back off. So he put himself into a dangerous position of being perceived as a threat to a citizen going about his own damned business and feeling he needed to defend himself against a sicko stalker. Unfortunately, for Martin, the bastard was also packing heat.
    Murder, she wrote.

  93. Goober Natorial says:

    Wow, you guys were up late. As I anxiously await the repeal of Obamacare, let me just say to IOU that you have a precious lack of evidence. Skittles and iced tea are a red herring. They don’t show that Martin was just going about his business because you’re talking about prosecuting Zimmerman for what he did and what he understood. And he didn’t know Martin just went down to the store for some skittles. He just knows that there’s a guy walking through the neighborhood in the rain at night whom he doesn’t recognize. Not a lot of people walk around at night in the rain just for leisure so its certainly understandable how that might arouse some suspicion. You act like Zimmerman shouldn’t have been suspicious because, afterall, Martin was only out buying skittles. Except no one knew that until after Martin was dead.

  94. IOU says:

    So, American citizens don’t have a right to walk around on public sidewalks whenever the mood strikes them? Martin wasn’t tresspassing, he wasn’t acting suspiciously except in Zimmerman’s fantasies, and he was breaking no laws. Who are you to decide that an American citizen must be white and walk only during the daylight hours or face a judge, jury and executioner? What of the Martin’s Constitutional rights, or does Zimmerman’s 2nd Amendment rights trump all of the rest of them?

  95. Goober Natorial says:

    There’s IOU setting up straw men again. Try to follow along here, IOU. Martin’s conduct is not at issue here. No one is saying he didn’t have the right to buy skittles or walk on the sidewalk. And no one has injected race into this except you. It’s about what Zimmerman did, knew, thought or understood because Zimmerman is the one charged with a crime.

    And Martin is free to buy skittles and walk on sidewalksi, but as soon as he starts beating on someone, they have a right to defend themselves.

    Still no evidence on your end.

  96. Goober Natorial says:

    I think I get IOU’s point on skittles now. Imma go buy me some skittles and then go beat up some healthcare clown and claim I had the right to do it because I just bought some skittles. Awesome.

  97. Goober Natorial says:

    Hey, IOU, I’m just going off what you’re saying. Martin had a right to buy skittles, ergo he had a right to stop and beat someone up on his way home from buying skittles. That’s basically what you’ve said.

  98. Anonymostly says:

    Well, give it credit, this discussion is less depressing than talking about Obamacare and how it’s going to wreck our country. Anyway …

    Don’t know how the prosecution has any hope of obtaining a conviction. This case reminds me a lot of the Duke Lacrosse rape hoax from a few years ago. The media goes off on a politically correct narrative of white on black crime that turns out to be false.

    Now, I do think that Zimmerman probably followed Martin for a period of time and shouldn’t have. Once the 911 operater told him they didn’t need him to follow Martin, he should have gotten back in his vehicle. But, following Martin was not a crime. Martin had a right to be on the sidewalk that night but so did Zimmerman.

    What was a crime was Martin beating up Zimmerman, and there’s an independent eye witness who confirms that Martin was beating up Zimmerman. That’s a crime. And the only eye witness testimony of what lead up to that is from Zimmerman himself. And according to Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin was the attacker.

    I don’t see how the police explain away the witness who says he saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman beating Zimmerman up. That’s a totally independent witness with no dog in the fight, so to speak. And I further don’t see how they explain away the 911 call from the neighbor where you can clearly hear someone in the background yelling for help followed by a gunshot. Both Zimmerman’s dad and Martin’s dad say the voice yelling for help was Zimmerman and not Trayvon.

    So, I think Zimmerman probably walks. And probably should walk. There are people (like IOU) who want to see Zimmerman convicted but there’s just not evidence to support a conviction. Zimmerman may, in reality, be guilty, but there simply isn’t evidence to prove it. There just isn’t.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.