Ads! Ads! Ads!

Deb Fischer has a new spot out. See it here:

Your basic refutation of the recent Kerrey drivel.

But that’s not all! AmeriTrade founder Joe Ricketts has a discussion of Bob Kerrey’s record as well. See the TV spot here:

And hear the radio spot here:

These are the most basic discussions of Kerrey’s record, and the Kerrey camp’s only response is, “We don’t like Joe Ricketts!” (Translation: Pay no attention to that Voting Record behind the curtain!)

Oh, but they have a poll that says they’re only 5 points down! Riiiiiiiiiight.
(And isn’t it funny how those who doubted Deb Fischer’s 25 point lead, now cite it as the number Kerrey’s “coming back” from? Hmm.)

We believe Tom White had one of those polls against Lee Terry 2 years ago. How’d that work out again?

***

Lee Terry and John Ewing went head to head again. Once again, Ewing spelled out how he would vote to raise taxes, fight with Congressional Republicans and help to boost ObamaCare.

Terry would do the opposite, while likely being a Committee Chair.

You really can base your vote on that that.

Oh, and Ewing also has a poll that shows him just neck and neck with Terry. Yeah.
Once again, Tom White’s polling should let you know the reality of such stuff.

But hey, if that inspires you to help out and get to the polls, all the better.

***

Getting exciting, yeah kids?
As we noted yesterday, the Presidential race is in lots and lots of flux. And if you are skeptical of the above polls, you can just imagine what pollsters are doing with the Presidency is on the line.

So take a look at the daily changes to the Electoral College map, and make sound judgements yourself.

68 comments

  1. Macdaddy says:

    I finally got around to the BWH today. It’s shocking that they endorsed John Ewing. Shocking. Especially after he puffed up his record in the debate (aka lied), lied about Lee Terry’s record, and at one time, had a warrant out for his arrest. The most important thing that they left out, however, was that John Ewing will vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House. Pelosi has shown time and time again that she is interested only in growing the size of the government, debt be damned. She is only interested in lining the pockets of her cronies. John Ewing is going to vote for that. It will be his very first vote. Any vote he casts after that will be meaningless. It is unbelievable that the BWH is that naive about how Congress works. It is almost unbelievable that they are still so in love with divided government. Sometimes I wonder if they are rooting for America to fail. Pelosi sure has no interest in stopping it.

  2. To Vince Powers says:

    You are a unapologetic Liberal hack. I hope over the next 6 years you have to eat the “Welfare Rancher” crap you have spewed for the last 6 months. Your inability to chastise Brenda Council’s criminal actions shows you have no credibility!

  3. On Brenda Council says:

    Not only did Vince not hold Brenda Council accountable, he volutes red to be her attorney. Ohh but it is a sickness not a crime! Lol

  4. Anonymous says:

    Brenda Council should have been indicted for the felony she committed. Nebraska State Attorney General, Jon Bruning, is just as guilty of covering up for her crimes as NDP Chair, Vince Powers is. The should both be brought up on charges of aiding and abetting a felon.

  5. Interested Observer says:

    Now Anonymous at 9:05, be careful talking about people who DIDN’T get indicted for the felony they committed! Certain other people have also committed felonies and were not charged either.

  6. ricky says:

    Gotta be a special sort of Republican slug to actually click on the above ads. Who wants to go out of there way to see them when they are all over the place?
    I think Ms Fischer has found out just how good of a campaigner Mr Kerrey is.
    And I am surprised how amateurish the Terry campaign has been run this time.
    Both Fischer and Terry are pretty nervous.

    ricky from omaha

  7. Anonymous says:

    You know what is best about Leavenworth Street? They don’t pretend to be fair and balanced like FAKE news. They are TEA PART NUTTY all the way to the core.

  8. Anonymous says:

    My prediction for this year’s election is that Mitt Romney will be elected to the White House – Deb Fischer will go to the Senate – Terry, Fortenberry and Smith will all be re-elected.
    My prediction for the folloowing two years? America will continue its faceplant into the cesspool and many Nebraskans will be suffering from voter’s remorse.

  9. Anonymostly says:

    “You know what is best about Leavenworth Street? They don’t pretend to be fair and balanced like FAKE news.”

    Well, since Leavenworth Street has never claimed to be “news” (as opposed to “opinion,” a distinction which has long escaped the lunatic left) I’m not sure why they would have an obligation to be fair or balanced.

    As far as this “FAKE news” you speak of, would that be the network that creatively edited the George Zimmerman 911 call? Or the network that used fabricated military records in a hit piece on a now-former President? Or the network that used explosives to blow up a chevy pickup in a story about the pickup’s gas tank crash worthiness?

  10. Anonymostly says:

    Anonymous at 12:46, I know what liberals like you consider to be the “cesspool.” It’s a world with a strong America serving as the foremost superpower and where traditional values like honesty and self-reliance and modesty/chastity formed the bedrocks of strong communities. Where deviant behavior was considered to be … deviant. Where there existed a notion of shame and where avoidance of shame was strong enough motivation to keep people from doing shameful things. I’d be OK with a return to that particular cesspool. The other cesspool we’re in now (and into which we continue to sink deeper) is quite a bit worse.

  11. Anonymostly says:

    Annie of Texas, I’m calling you out. In the event you missed it in the prior thread, I want you to back up the following claim that you made about me:

    “Interested Observer: Your digging into old comments from … Anonymostly … do reveal their early discontent with Deb as senatorial candidate for Nebraska. Isn’t it just grand how each now defends her rabidly? I’m pretty sure that’s the way each feels about Mitt now, too.”

    Show me the quote that shows that I’ve changed positions on Deb Fischer. Back it up or take it back.

  12. Anonymostly says:

    Don’t look now, but Todd Akin is surging in Missouri. Part of it is that Claire McKaskill polls even worse for likeability. But if Akin comes back to win this thing, I’m going to be serving up some crow. Just sayin’.

  13. Anonymous says:

    Anonymostly, again – you are completely wrong about everything. America is not now, nor never was, the Mayberry R.F.D. that you believe it to have been. You live in a fantasy world.

  14. Anonymous says:

    And, Anonymostly, keep in mind that Missouri has more than enough hillbillies to explain why guys like Todd Akin do well there.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Congressman Lee Terry is amateurish. So says “Ricky” with much gravitas.

    Do you have to pass a stupid test to become a Democrat?

  16. Anonymostly says:

    “Anonymostly, again – you are completely wrong about everything. America is not now, nor never was, the Mayberry R.F.D. that you believe it to have been. You live in a fantasy world.”

    Really? Zat so? Don’t think I called it Mayberry but I get your point. Although it would be nice if you could back up that bald-faced assertion with some actual data. Unfortunately, the data wouldn’t support you. Let’s take some examples, shall we:

    1. Marriage. Let’s look at roughly the top quartile of the white population (in terms of socio-economic status) and the bottom quartile. In 1960, 94% of upper class white adults were married; 84% of lower class — no more than a high school education, working in blue collar employment — whites were also married. In 2010, 83% of upper class white adults were married while only 48% of lower class whites were married. So, the marriage rate has dropped precipitously among those on the bottom end of the socio-economic spectrum. (I daresay that particular segment would include a lot of the denizens of Mayberry RFD.)

    2. Illegitimate Births. In 1960, just 2% of white babies were born out-of-wedlock. In 1970, when we first started recording the education level of mothers, only 6% of births to women with no more than a high school diploma were out-of-wedlock. In 2008, that number had risen to 44%.

    3. Crime Rates. Coincidentally (or NOT) just as the illegitimacy rate has skyrocketted since the 1960s, so has the rate of violent crime. Among the higher socio-economic classes, the crime rate hasn’t done much since the 1960s. In upperclass neighborhoods, the crime rate remains low. However, among that lower quartile (where Mayberry resides) the rate of violent crime from 1960 to 1995 went up BY A FACTOR OF MORE THAN SIX!

    So, in Mayberry of 1960, if there was such an actual place, the crime rate would have been low; the rate of marriage would have been high; and out-of-wedlock births would have been practically non-existent. In 2010 Mayberry, the rate of marriage has been cut in half while illegitimate births have gone up more than twenty-fold, and in spite of a slight drop since 1995, the crime rate is still 5 times what it was in 1960.

    So, stick your unsupported assertions up your ass. After you’ve pulled your head out, of course.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Anonymostly,
    1. Marriage is an outmoded institution. What’s love got to do with it?
    2. You’re showing your racist side very openly today.
    3. The upper class criminals are all “white collar.” They steal billions at a time to satisfy their own greed, and their neighborhoods are “crime free” because they hire private security. The lower class people commit crimes to feed their families because the upper crust curs stole everything and shipped their jobs overseas.
    So Anonymostlyanidiot, you still are wrong.

  18. RWP says:

    Marriage is an outmoded institution. What’s love got to do with it?

    Mainstream stuff here.

    their neighborhoods are “crime free” because they hire private security

    Gosh, does this mean the private sector once again is doing better than the public sector?

    The lower class people commit crimes to feed their families

    Not usually. Read the crime reports. Most crime is depressingly stupid and selfish.

  19. Anonymostly says:

    See, this is how liberals earn the nickname “libtards.” Clearly “progressives” need to come up with a different label for themselves. Like “liberal.” Higher crime rates, higher illegitimate birth rates, lower marriage rates. Doesn’t sound like progress to me.

    So, first you said there never was a Mayberry. Now you say marriage is “outmoded.” So, which is it? If marriage/Mayberry is outmoded, then at one time it must have been moded, right? For something to cease to exist, it must have first existed. So, either Mayberry is outmoded or Mayberry never was. But it can’t be both. And, actually, it’s neither.

    And for an “outmoded” institution, marriage kicks single motherhood’s ass all over the place. The children of single moms are more likely to have all kinds of social problems than children of married couples. By virtually any measure of development you can think of, children of single mothers do worse in life than children of married parents. Among many, many other things, they’re more likely to grow up in poverty and less likely to develop the tools to escape it. If government stopped funding judicial mechanisms to track down and enforce child support obligations, we’d see just how quickly marriage would become moded again.

    Also, you appear to be one of those libtards who cavalierly throws around accusations of racism. I confined my data to one race and said nothing disparaging about any other race. Similar data exists for blacks and other demographic groups. Go find it if you want to know the numbers. I figured if I brought up the rates of unwed motherhood in the black community, you’d accuse me of racism for mentioning it. Instead, you accuse me of racism for leaving it out. Go figure.

    As far as crime, you obviously missed the point. Violent crime has risen six-fold in the last 50 years in lower income areas. SIX TIMES the rate that it was in 1960. It’s not about stealing a crust of bread to feed a starving child, so spare me the Victor Hugo drama, Jean Val-Libtard-Jean. They were poor before too but the crime rate was lower. Dramatically lower. It’s because the baby mamma isn’t teaching her kids right and wrong. Because she isn’t around. And her kids are raising themselves. With the help of the gangbanger who lives around the corner.

    Man, it’s discouraging to think that there are actually people who think like the libtard at 7:18. Please tell me there’s a Darwin award somewhere in his near future.

  20. Anonymous says:

    80% of the increase in crime was perpetrated by the current administration and it’s minions……..gun running, tax evasion, etc….. The rest was in North Omaha, where Ben Gray and his posse are cleaning up….at the public trough.

  21. Interested Observer says:

    Anonymous at 5:07 PM said “America is not now, nor never was, the Mayberry R.F.D. that you believe it to have been. ”

    I disagree. Valentine, Cherry County and the Sandhills were a lot like Mayberry R.F.D. for years and years, until people from the city moved out here and started to cause problems, like increased crime rates. I don’t remember back when I was younger that anybody went around and tried to take hundreds of thousands of dollars, perhaps as much as ONE MILLION DOLLARS of their neighbor’s land!

    Anonymostly said “It’s not about stealing a crust of bread to feed a starving child”

    I DO agree with this. It’s not about stealing a crust of bread, it’s about trying to steal a million dollars of your neighbor’s land!

  22. Interested Observer says:

    Anonymostly said “It’s because the baby mamma isn’t teaching her kids right and wrong.”

    I agree. It’s because the baby mamma is teaching her kids a sense of entitlement, teaching them to live off the government with WELFARE, teaching them that if they want something, they don’t have to actually work hard to earn it, all they have to do is just try to take it from the people who already worked hard and own it, teaching them that they don’t have to follow the rules and laws that everybody else has to follow.

  23. Anonymous says:

    Valentine Nebraska is a hotbed of crime with drug addicts in assless chaps stabbing their mothers for dope money. Did I say Valentine? I meant to say New York.

    Is it possible for you to get your head any father up inside Bob Kerrey’s rear end?

  24. Anonymous says:

    Yes, I can be more crude. I have been watching Biden and Kerrey.

    By the way, INTERESTED OBSERVER, I didn’t mention you by name. Yet as soon as I mentioned someone having thier head up Kerrey’s butt, you stood up seemed to say “Who me?”

  25. Anonymous says:

    The difference between Jane Fonda and Grundle King and RWP is that Jane Fonda has apologized for her attacks on Vietnam veterans. They aren’t real Americans anyway, in fact RWP isn’t even registered to vote.

  26. Interested Observer says:

    Well, let’s see. I posted comments number 28 and 29. Then one of the many Anonymous posters added comment number 30, which reflected on people’s kids and completely unnecessarily included the crude word “asshole”. Then comment number 31 was posted which specifically referenced Valentine twice. So, naturally, it was the obvious understanding that Anonymous #31 was also referring to me and included, completely unnecessarily, someone’s “read end”.

  27. RWP says:

    I’m actually voting today, Anonymous Coward at 8:07. I like to vote early at home so I can go right down the ballot and check out on the web even the natural resource district candidates.

    .And I haven’t attacked veterans. I’ve attacked one veteran, for his murderous attacks on civilians. You don’t believe that our armed forces should disembowel young girls, surely? Or that most of those who served in Vietnam were guilty of such atrocities? Well, you’re evidently a lib., so maybe you do.

    Yes, atrocity is the word Kerrey used, referring to his own squad’s actions.

  28. RWP says:

    I don’t remember back when I was younger that anybody went around and tried to take hundreds of thousands of dollars, perhaps as much as ONE MILLION DOLLARS of their neighbor’s land!

    Hell, why stop there. Maybe trillions. When you make up a number, make up a big one.

    It’s not about stealing a crust of bread, it’s about trying to steal a million dollars of your neighbor’s land!

    Yeah, that’s what most thieves do. File a lawsuit.

  29. RWP says:

    Valentine Nebraska is a hotbed of crime with drug addicts in assless chaps stabbing their mothers for dope money.

    Last time I was up there, lady at the hotel advised me to lock my bike, on account of ‘thieving injuns’. It’s an enlightened place.

  30. Macdaddy says:

    And the desperation continues. Two and a half weeks and slime ball Kerrey and his minions will go back to the East coast. Actually that will happen even if Kerrey wins.

  31. Spike says:

    Political Media rule #1; Never have your client make a TV Spot to deny an accusation coming from the opponent especially when you have an incompetent director behind the camera!

    In this ad by Fischer, # 1 she looks as guilty as SIN. # 2, although she reads a teleprompter fairly well, she’s Reading about 6 sec of copy. Now anyone that is so dumb that they can’t remember a oneliner, I don’t think should be put in a place of public trust! # 3; She looks like Hell. Like she’s really worried that the Hounds are getting really close to some of her real dirty/corrupt dealings and she’s losing Sleep over it. What these corrupt dealings are, who knows but Fischers on-camera body language, oh those lying eyes, tell a tale of more to come.

    One interesting thing in her favor is, is that most GOPER NE Vidiots are braindead anywayso…

    Bottom line; I’d pull that crap off the air ASAP and not do the competition any favors by reinforcing what they are saying! You hicks should know the old saying, “Let Sleeping Dogs LIE!!”

  32. Anonymous says:

    “Latin for asshole!” Bob Kerrey said that as a Senator about a fellow Senator. Interested Observer is here working for Kerrey. Bob Kerrey and Interested Observer both attack Fischer with a regularity one typically gets from an enema bag. Nice job you got there.

  33. Anonymous says:

    Anonymostly, somehow you think you’ve proved your case by throwing out statistics, but they don’t tell the whole picture. For example, you seem to think higher marriage rates in 1960 were a good thing. How many of those marriages existed because the woman had no means of support if she left the marriage? Or no way to raise any kids she had? She had to stay in the marriage even if she were being beaten, or abused. 1960 was a great time if one was a white male.

  34. So wait a minute, liberals think that marriage is outdated, but then they simultaneously support the right for gays to marry?

    IO, you have crudely and viciously attacked Deb Fisher and her family repeatedly on here. Except for Bruce of course, because ‘everybody loves Bruce’. And while I suspect that your simultaneous hatred of Deb Fischer and love of Bruce Fischer is due to the fact that Deb married a man you had set your eyes on, that’s neither here nor there. Your repeated vile and vicious attacks are worse than anything anybody here has said about you…and to tell the truth, if you weren’t such a classless and crass person, most of us here would probably pity you.

    Anonymoron @8:07 wrote: “The difference between Jane Fonda and Grundle King and RWP is that Jane Fonda has apologized for her attacks on Vietnam veterans.”

    Jane Fonda SHOULD have apologized, because she made generalized attacks on all manners of veterans who had done nothing despicable and served their country honorably. Why should I, RWP, or anybody else apologize for the truth about what Bob Kerrey did? As far as me not being a real American, whatevs…I was born here, I’ve built a life here, and I’ll die here. Your opinion of my ‘Americanism’ won’t change that fact.

  35. Anonymous says:

    Anonymous October 20, 2012 at 3:08 PM

    Anonymostly, somehow you think you’ve proved your case by throwing out statistics, but they don’t tell the whole picture. For example, you seem to think higher marriage rates in 1960 were a good thing. How many of those marriages existed because the woman had no means of support if she left the marriage? Or no way to raise any kids she had? She had to stay in the marriage even if she were being beaten, or abused. 1960 was a great time if one was a white male.

    Hmmm.

    Anonymostly: Stats; Anonymous at 3:08: What ifs

    Anonymostly wins by TKO.

    Anonymous at 3:08, that was the lamest non-rejoinder rejoinder I have ever seen.

    Hey, what if you’d actually said something intelligent?

  36. Anonymous says:

    “I was born here, I’ve built a life here, and I’ll die here. Your opinion of my ‘Americanism’ won’t change that fact”. Sound like something Meal of Honor winner Bob Kerrey would say.

  37. Anonymous says:

    #45, if you’d been alive in 1960 or even picked up a history book you’d understand my post was true. Amazing how many idiots don’t understand what happened even 10 years ago.

  38. Anonymous says:

    Grundle, we liberals want the same rights for everyone. Gays have just as much right to be miserable in a marriage as we heteros do.
    Jane Fonda has apologized – several times. What’s holding you back?

  39. Some Thoughts says:

    Two things I can’t understand. One is why Brenda Council is not sitting in jail right now, or at least resigning her office. This is an embarrassment, and I hate to say another “I told you so”, but this is why I never supported Jon Bruning. What is wrong with Bruning that he cannot hold Council accountable for her misuse of campaign money? Is it only because they prefer Council to Chambers, so they’re willing to turn a blind eye to her actions until she’s re-elected? I can’t think of any other reason why she is getting away with this. Why are people not outraged about this?

    The other thing I can’t understand is why people aren’t outraged over Kerrey’s gutter-scraping effort to shame Deb Fischer for her eminent domain lawsuit. I don’t know the details of what happened, but I know it was resolved legally and has nothing to do with whether Fischer would be a good Senate representative. Kerrey must really be down in the polls. I cannot imagine that Chuck Hassebrook would have run such a negative campaign.

    I’m not surprised that the World Herald endorsed Ewing. I don’t think he will win, but let’s be honest, Terry is not accomplishing anything for all his time served, and Ewing has credentials as a fiscal conservative. Terry kept voting to raise our deficits before the recession hit, and some of us don’t forget that. It would have been easier to tighten the belt then than it is now.

  40. TexasAnnie says:

    Anonymostly at 1:46pm, Oct. 19th regarding my post at 6:37am, Oct. 19th:
    Can’t find a specific “quote” so upon your request, I’ll “take it back” about your early discontent with Deb. My accusation that you defend her rabidly still stands. And in view of your continued comments on the 19th, above, I can see why you usually resort to name-calling when posting on Leavenworth St.

  41. Anonymous says:

    Those voicing anti-GOP candidate sentiment should hold on to something firm. A blast wave is coming your way as this Democrat Administration implodes. It’s not the Republicans. It’s Obama screwing you.

    President Obama watched our Ambassador die and did nothing. He, who is so cripplingly inept in domestic fiscal policy, has for sake of his reelection abetted the murder of a US Ambassador.

    Americans see terrorists favoring Obama’s reelection. This is going to end ugly and mostly for the DNC. The GOP will win big, but not nearly as much as America has lost under Obama. You can say it isn’t so, but it sure looks like its going that way.

  42. Anonymous says:

    “President Obama watched our Ambassador die and did nothing.”
    George W. Bushed watched thousands of our children die and did nothing.
    I’d say we must be about even.

  43. Macdaddy says:

    Well, well, well. I guess Kerrey’s and IO’s Herculean efforts at flinging monkey poop couldn’t even pay off with an endorsement from the BWH. I guess the editors were more interested in the issues. Ouch.

  44. Anonymostly says:

    Annie, it’s because I don’t suffer fools gladly.

    And, speaking of fools, I give you Anonymous at 3:08 yesterday, who said:

    Anonymostly, somehow you think you’ve proved your case by throwing out statistics, but they don’t tell the whole picture. For example, you seem to think higher marriage rates in 1960 were a good thing. How many of those marriages existed because the woman had no means of support if she left the marriage? Or no way to raise any kids she had? She had to stay in the marriage even if she were being beaten, or abused. 1960 was a great time if one was a white male.

    Aw, c’mon, really? Is that the best you can do? This response is so pathetic, it’s difficult to decide how even to begin. Is this what passes for “critical thought” in today’s colleges and univerisities? I’m guessing you got that claptrap from some “womyn’s studies” professor somewhere.

    I’m sure there were some women who found themselves stuck in bad marriages. And that would have been sad. But what’s even more sad is that you think that an assertion that such things might have existed qualifies as a legitimate indictment of the entire insitution of marriage. Yes, let’s throw the baby out with the bathwater. And, while we’re at it, let’s get rid of bicylces because some people have been injured while riding them. Let’s get rid of dog ownership because some people have been bitten by them. And let’s get rid of marriage because some women in the 1960s found themselves in marriages with which they weren’t happy.

    Y’know, anonymous libtard, the data (actually numbers and stuff) on kids raised outside of marriage is sufficiently compelling that I’m willing to defend marriage as an institution. Yes, EVEN IF some women in the 1960s didn’t particularly like theirs. (Read back through what you wrote and tell me you don’t see how stupid it was.)

  45. Anonymous says:

    People who do illegal drugs gravitate to the Democratic Party. Same with “teabaggers” in the true gay sense. Same with women who kill their fetuses. These people are by every statistical measure more Democrat than Republican. So as long as you aren’t risking anyone else, by all means please do overdose, get AIDS, and murder the next generation of Democrats. It is a gruesome way to view your personal freedom but a genetically healthy thing in the long run. Very Darwinian.

  46. Anonymous says:

    So where was Kerrey when the legislature was working on LB 35 in 2009; 34-301. Disputed corners and boundaries; court action to settle; procedure, or in 1923 when the laws governing these issues was created? Hmmm? The issues surrounding fencing law has always been contentious. BUT here comes New York BOB and all of a sudden there is a new found interest. Must mean the New Yorker has no substance to his campaign, and he is flailing about looking for any traction he can find. So he lands on a rural issue and hopes to make hay in the urban areas. What a jack ass, and typical liberal. Always trying to pit people against one another instead of working to get things resolved.

    Bob Kerrey’s attacks are nothing more than an old ploy to divide and conquer. He wants city folk to think one thing while rural people who know he is full of it. He is betting some of the people in the large metro areas will buy his divisive bs and score a few more points, always divisive and tearing down. The same problem with DC now.

  47. Anonymous says:

    Kerrey, er, The Nebraska Democrat Party, has come out with the biggest campaign mailer on behalf of Kerrey that I think I’ve ever seen. It’s a booklet. Must be a dozen pages long. Gives a left hand/right hand comparison of the two candidates, albeit a very biased one. But, hey, they’re paying for it, so they can write whatever they want to, I guess.

    Kerrey is portrayed almost as some kind of fiscal conservative while Fischer is portrayed as someone who raises taxes on everyone but the top 1%, right? And spends. They have this nifty bar chart where they show the annual budget deficit during the Kerrey years and thereafter where the deficits continue to diminish into a surplus during what’s labelled as the “Kerrey” years. Then, during what they’ve labelled as the “Rove” years (didn’t realize Karl Rove followed Bob Kerrey as Senator from Nebraska) they show increasing deficits.

    Now, conveniently, they’ve left the last 4 years off their chart for some reason. Probably because they didn’t have large enough paper to show how big the deficits during the Obama Administration (which, I suppose, should be labelled the “Axelrod” years) have been.

    Obviously, the point of the chart is that Bob Kerrey is a fiscal conservative and, through his wise stewardship, our nation went from having a budget deficit to having a budget surpluss. But then when Karl Rove was elected to replace Kerrey in the Senate (that must have been what happened, since that’s how the Dems designed the chart) the budget spiraled out of control.

    Maybe if we bring Kerrey back, he’ll help us get our fiscal house back in order after these last 4 years of Democrat rule (6 if you count the years that the House has been under Dem control). Yeah, that’s the ticket.

  48. Anonymous says:

    Anonymous @ 9:11,
    On the one hand you pout about divisive bs and scoring points, then you turn around and do the same by putting all liberals in the same basket. Hypocrite!

  49. Anonymous says:

    Seriously, this Kerrey mailer must have cost a fortune. It’s 16 pages, 4 color. And, by virtue of the fact that I received one, they aren’t just mailing it to Democrats. It’s addressed to “Our friends at … (my address).

    Front cover is divided into red and blue halves with Kerrey on the red half and Fischer on the blue half. (Strategic symbolism to make uninformed people think Kerrey is the Republican?) Under Kerrey’s name it says, “Country first”. Under Fischer’s name, it says “Billionaires first”.

    The booklet contains their version of side-by-side comparisons of Kerrey and Fischer on the next 7 pairs of facing pages. So, for example, the first one is “Their Personal Stories” and it proceeds to predictably detail how Kerrey was born and raised in Lincoln, attended the University here, joined the Navy and etc. It details how, each time he decided to run for office, it was because the government was drowning in debt. And each time he left public office to return to private life, it was because he’d accomplished what he set out to do. And that was to balance the budget, either at the State or Federal level.

    So, then it says, “Balancing a budget doesn’t always make you popular, but it has to be done. THAT IS WHY BOB KERREY IS RUNNING FOR SENATE IN 2012. BECAUSE OUR NATION IS IN PERIL.” (Emphasis added.)

    Did you get that? Bob Kerrey is running for Senate because the last 4 years of trillion dollar deficits during the Obama administration has put our nation in peril. That’s what the Democrat party is saying. The Obama administration’s spending spree has put our nation in peril. The State Dem Party says so. And that’s why Kerrey feels compelled to run for Senate.

    As for Fischer, her “personal story” appears to have been written by Interested Observer. Welfare rancher, blah blah blah, etc. Ad nauseum. Oh, yeah, and Koch brothers’ secret committees and ironclad pledges to never raise the taxes of her billionaire backers (that’s not exactly the pledge but why quibble with details, right?)

    Next set of facing pages is “The Deficit” and, of course, Kerrey is the fiscal conservative here. I still get a kick out of how they labeled the period from ’89-’01 as “Kerrey” and the period from ’01-’07 as “Rove”. That’s just laugh out loud funny. For some odd reason, though, they don’t label any period after 2007. Wonder why that is. And they don’t show any deficit info for the last three years where we’ve continued to have trillion dollar deficits under whoever it was who followed “Rove”.

    The next set of facing pages is called “Tax Fairness” which, of course, Kerrey is all for. Fischer, OTOH, supports raising taxes on the middle class and cutting taxes for millionaires, right? Oh, and she voted for a $325 million “tax-on-a-tax for a metro Omaha utility and sewer replacement project, which also threatens the loss of 1,900 food processing jobs.” Now, someone correct me on this, but wasn’t that Mayor Dunderhead’s deal? The sewer thing had to be done. Is anyone arguing that it wasn’t necessary? But the question of who should shoulder the cost was at issue and Mayor Halfwit decided to nail businesses, threatening the food processing jobs. That wasn’t Deb Fischer’s call. Am I right on this? I wonder if Nebraska Watchdog will do some sort of fact check on this claim. #notholdingmybreathonthatone.

    So, anyway, it goes on like that for 9 more pages. Give ’em credit, it’s well done. Brutal. Not particularly honest but you wouldn’t have expected that, would you? And there are some amusing moments in there. For instance, where they call the TEA Party “extremist.” And where they call Fischer “too extreme for Nebraska.” And where they imply that Bob Kerrey is in favor of tort reform and, therefore, Deb Fischer’s calls for tort reform are really redundant, right? Because Bob Kerrey already passed tort reform in Nebraska. Hahahahaha. That’s another laugh out loud moment.

    Anyway, it’ll be interesting to see if anyone is swayed by this thing. There will be some people who read it, certainly. I did. My guess is that most everyone who reads it will either be a partisan Democrat who will read it and cheer or a partisan Republican who will read it and sneer. Those not particularly invested in one side already will probably pitch it in the trash can as just another piece of political noise that made its way to their mailbox.

  50. Anonymous says:

    I’m sorry, one more guffaw moment from the Democrat’s Fischer hit piece and then I’m off to bed. According to our friends in the Democrat party, it was the “Tea Party radicals whose no-compromise extremist agenda has led to … a downgrading of the U.S. Government’s credit rating.”

    Yeah, the TEA Party. Their radical agenda has led to the downgrading of the U.S. Government’s credit rating. Yeah, I thought that one was pretty funny too. Do you think they really believe this stuff?

  51. Macdaddy says:

    I haven’t been lucky enough to get the Kerrey catalogue, but then, I live in a Republican area, aka Nebraska. It sounds like it’s yet another piece of evidence that Kerrey is living in the past and is out of touch with Nebraskans. He just took every tired and discredited talking point from the Obama campaign and tried to fling it at Deb without realizing that there’s this thing called the Internet, and new media, and that lies get shot down in record time. He also should have paid attention to the primary race Deb Fischer ran and realized that people are not in the mood for politicians wasting their time with scurrilous personal attacks and distortions of one’s record. We also realize that Democrats have zero interest in controlling our debt. Kerrey happens to be one of those. Says so right on the ballot.

  52. Anonymous2 says:

    Anonymostly, don’t know how you took my post as an indictment of marriage. I strongly support the institution and have been married for over 20 years. I am indicting your use of statistics to prove that 1960 was such a great time for all. There are plenty of studies that back up what I said.

    The OWH had an interesting article on the 1966 Omaha Tech vs Westside football game. Yeah, those North O kids had it made back then.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.