Is Bob Kerrey the Godfather of the Cornhusker Kickback?

It has been an exciting Senate race in Nebraska this year. And of course down to the wire, the candidate and the press are talking about the REALLY important single issue of the campaign:

A fence in Cherry County.

Yeah.

So let us back up a few months to a year to get back to a question that has NEVER been answered by Bob Kerrey:

Did Kerrey suggest the concept of the Cornhusker Kickback to Ben Nelson?

Nebraska GOP Chairman Mark Fahleson brought this up back in July and Deb Fischer even alluded to it in a question to Kerrey at their first debate. But to our knowledge, the question has never been flatly asked to Kerrey and he certainly has never answered.

But we also don’t think anyone has laid out the dots for you to connect either, so we will do that for you now.

***

We were watching the video of Kerrey talking to Tom Daschle where Kerrey uttered the now infamous line,

“It isn’t just because I live in Greenwich Village now. The longer I’ve been here, the further left I get on healthcare.”

But when you watch the rest of that public chat, you see how wound up Kerrey is about pushing the “public option” “single payer” health care plan. And you see Kerrey talking on and on about Medicaid and how states should be handling it.

Kerrey says:

“If you’re a Governor, you want to federalize the payment system. Because if you take Medicaid off your books… I mean you could propose a 40% tax cut in the state of New York and still have ten billion dollars left over to spend.”

Hmm. Taking Medicaid off the state’s books…

You mean like, oh….The Cornhusker Kickback, where Politico described it as, “a permanent exemption from the state share of Medicaid expansion for Nebraska.”

Oh, and by the way, Kerrey’s discussion with Daschle was in September of 2009, a full three months before the Cornhusker Kickback was hatched — on the public anyway.

***

You can see where one’s mind starts spinning on this issue.

So when the whole Kickback bargain took place, we were a bit surprised to hear that Ben Nelson had come up with it in the first place. Sure Nelson was known for being Mr. Sit on the Fence. But we had never heard of him being some sort of big-time idea man for something THIS original. So we kept waiting to hear WHO it was that came up with whole plan, and the numbers behind it.

You may remember the interview with Nelson and Greta Van Susteren back in April of 2010. (Gotta love those internet archives!)

In the interview, Van Susteren asked Nelson point blank:

Greta: “Who came up with the idea that $100 million would go to Nebraska? Was that your idea?
Nelson: I think it was the idea — someone’s idea to put it in.
Greta: Someone?
Nelson: There were various people involved at various times.”

Now ain’t THAT interesting. At the time, we just wondered why Nelson wasn’t stepping up and taking credit. So it was digging at us for a while WHO could have been the one who really came up with the idea.

***

And then when Kerrey got in the Senate race this year, there were more stories on whether he supported ObamaCare — and his discussions with Nelson pre-ObamaCare vote.

And there it was. The New York Times reported that when Nelson was thinking about how to vote, he had discussions with… Bob Kerrey and Tom Daschle.

***

Now. Is this all circumstantial? Yup, sure is.

But let’s just lay out those bullet points for you:

  • September 2009: Kerrey has a public discussion with Tom Daschle about how Medicaid is killing the states and wouldn’t it be great if the Feds took it over.
  • December 2009: After meeting with Daschle and Kerrey, Nelson hatches the Cornhusker Kickback where the Feds take over payment for Nebraska’s Medicaid recipients. (And in return, Nelson votes for ObamaCare.)
  • April 2010: When asked about who came up with the Cornhusker Kickback plan, Nelson can’t give a straight answer.

Why throw that last one in there? Well, it shows that Kerrey has that Cosmic brain that will come up with screwy plans and hatch them on the public as some great idea, even though no one else thinks so.

Hmm.

Cornhusker Kickback

“Nonpartisan” Congress

Screwy Plan

X

X

Meant to flatter Nebraskans

X

X

Nebraskans think it actually stupid and unworkable and are insulted by its obvious sucking-up to them

X

X

And of course to date Bob Kerrey thinks the Cornhusker Kickback was a great idea and can’t imagine why Nebraskans didn’t think it was an awesome plan.

***

Now for all we know, maybe the Cornhusker Kickback was still someone else’s idea.

Maybe.

But here is what we DO know:

If you were Columbo (or someone from C.S.I. for the youngsters reading) and you were trying to solve this case, the clues would lead you to Bob Kerrey’s doorstep. (Of course trying to figure out just WHERE Kerrey’s doorstep actually IS would be a whole ‘nother adventure, but that would fill out the chase scene at the end of the show.)

And if you were a REPORTER, you might actually try to pin Kerrey down on this little issue. Seeing as it only ended Ben Nelson’s political career. And seeing as ObamaCare has been at the forefront of every political discussion.

Or you could continue discussion about a fence.
Up to you, we guess.

***

Yes, we saw that the OWH endorsed Deb Fischer over Bob Kerrey. And this only shows that the OWH can read the writing on the wall, and sees that Kerrey has no chance.

And they may see that NE02 Democrat candidate John Ewing has no chance against Congressman Lee Terry either. But they may also figure that Terry is up again in two years. Chip, chip, chip.

***

Remember when you’re buying that Halloween costume on Amazon.com, you can click through our links up top!

83 comments

  1. Lil Mac says:

    Sweeper’s hypothesis suggests that but for Kerrey’s convincing, a normally careful Nelson might today be a shoe-in for reelection. I find that a useful political point compared to others wallowing in Kerrey’s war record or Fischer’s fence.

    You cannot convince Nebraskans that Bob’s medals are worthless or that there is political justification for attacking Fischer’s family. You just can’t.

    The big picture here is isn’t subtle. A smart girl beat the tar out of two formidable GOP attorney generals and now is beating the most powerful Democrat that could be sent against her. A Medal of Honor Navy SEAL, Governor, Senator who ran for President; a University President; a guy so cool he dated movie stars, has never even remotely approached being equal to, let alone ahead of, Fischer. That is remarkable.

    Also, jet lag sucks.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Kerrey be nimble, Kerrey be quick, Kerry couldn’t jump the fence…….as Kerry is just so partisian he stayed on one side…..,the left.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Ben Nelson straddled a rail fence. Kerrey climbed up on Fischer’s barbed wire fence and just keeps hanging there. I don’t think anyone is going to confuse him with Jesus. Voters in NYC might like him kicking her family but voters in Nebraska will hate him for that.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Just in case this post from last night/last thread gets missed due to a new blog post going up, I thought I’d cut and paste it here. For those who might find it interesting.

    From last night (and from me):

    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.

  5. Anonymostly says:

    Bob may be down but he’s not going to go down without trying to land some hits. They want to harm their opponent. Do her damage. I’ve read comments that suggest that people in Deb’s “neighborhood’ if you will, have learned things about her through this election that they didn’t know about before and it’s made them angry that she pursued this lawsuit. They didn’t know about it before, in other words. And so, yeah, it seems like these people on the other side of the aisle are intent not just on winning but on causing harm. The politics of personal destruction that was supposed to end with the election of Obama. Supposedly. Or so we were told. Local dems evidentlly didn’t get the memo.

  6. The Coward known as Bob Kerrey says:

    Go google the video in which Bob basically runs from a reporter when asked by a reporter about the Thahn Phong incident. He was at some book signing and took off after getting asked some questions. What’s more relevant to Nebraska voters, some squabble over a fence or the allegations of a massacre of unarmed women and children made by one of Bob’s troops?

  7. Macdaddy says:

    Kerrey can try to damage Fischer all he wants, but it won’t matter when she wins. If you throw mud and you lose, you only damage yourself, but I doubt it will harm the resale value of Kerrey’s house. I find it laughable that none of Fischer’s neighbors knew about this lawsuit. If there is one thing that IO proved, it’s that in Cherry County people love to get in each others’ bidness. In addition, apparently this was the greatest miscarriage of justice since the Kansas Border War and how it didn’t end up in bloodshed is a Festivus miracle. My guess is that most Nebraskans also find it laughable.

  8. Citizens United says:

    Remember when this sight was relevant and just a bit witty and snarky? SS you have become no better than posters and yes that includes me.

  9. Anonymous says:

    Anonymostly,
    So you want us to believe that you don’t tear into everyone you can, with everything you can, every chance you get. It seems to me that Bob is supporting your values. You should vote for him.

  10. Asswhacker says:

    This blog is a “site” as in website, not “sight”. If you are going to criticize others for being witty and snarky, learn how to write intelligibly so you don’t end up looking stupid like Bob.

    Anonymostly does not “tear into everyone” as I am in fact unscathed. It appears the tearing is restricted to members of the jackass party. That is admittedly one sided of Anonymostly. But from the viewpoint of everyone who isn’t a jackass, and most Nebraskans aren’t jackasses, it is entertaining. So quit your braying and take your beating like the consummate political ass you aspire to be. No one is keeping you here. Feel free to fly back to New York with Bob when he leaves.

  11. Anonymous says:

    It seems that all of Sweepers intelligent commenters have gone away now that he isn’t monitoring the playground much anymore. It is unfortunate to see a once fine political blog degrade into the sticky mess this one has become. It is dominated by self proclaimed geniuses that need a change of diapers. There’s not much to read here other than a handful of fools tossing insults at one another.

  12. Anonymostly says:

    It took about 2/3 of the debate but Romney has finally stopped agreeing with Obama and started to criticize what he’s done and offer specifics. There were plenty of opportunities and I wish Romney would criticized the President’s policies more and been more detailed when he did so.

    It makes me wonder how well Romney was prepped. There should have been a laundry list of foreign policy failures that Romney could tick off on any region of the world. He did bring up the withdrawal of missile defense from Poland (finally) but didn’t really explain the gravity of that unilateral action and how the Poles perceived us as abandoning them.

    And then there are apparently some areas where they agree with each other and I disagree with both of them. One would be the way the administration’s response to the Arab spring was something that caused destabilization in the area and has actually created issues that we’re now having to deal with. Sure, Mubarak was a dictator but: a) are we getting a government in Egypt that’s any better? Obama won’t even say that the new Egypt is an ally. That doesn’t sound like progress. And b) Egypt WAS stable and that stability was valuable.

    Now, Egypt is volatile. And we had a chance to reinforce Mubarak and instead Obama jumped the gun and said publicly that Mubarak should step down. I think that was a mistake. And I think it was a mistake to take military action in Libya in support of the rebels. Again, we don’t know that we’ll get a better regime in power than the one that was there and the one that was there was at least not a threat.

    The spread of the Arab spring to Syria and the violence and bloodshed that’s occurring there is an offshoot of what happened earlier in Libya and Egypt and elsewhere. And THAT is why his foreign policy is unravelling. And Romney said SOME of those things but not enough.

  13. Anonymostly says:

    Anonymostly,
    So you want us to believe that you don’t tear into everyone you can, with everything you can, every chance you get. It seems to me that Bob is supporting your values. You should vote for him.

    I don’t care what you believe, but the fact of the matter is that I’ll meet you on your terms. If you’re willing to debate reasonably, I’ll debate you reasonably. And if you come in here like Spike with elbows swinging, I’m not above mixing it up. But one thing I’ve found over the last dozen years or so is that it’s pointless to debate on-line and try to be reasonable with people who just want to be a-holes.

    And so many times on this site, I’ve tried to engage in reasonable debate on an issue and the response from the people on your side has been to just call names. Go back in the archives and you’ll see it. The leftists who typically post here aren’t capable of formulating an argument and seem to think that “you suck” or “you’re stupid” or “how much cocaine have you done today” is an effective substitute for argument.

    Listen, I’m willing to throw elbows back. And if you can bring an reasonable rejoinder to the table and all you can do is name calling, don’t expect me to treat you with much respect. As Sweeper sometimes says, have a take and don’t suck. Unfortunately, too often the libs who come here have no take and suck to high heaven.

  14. Macdaddy says:

    What did we learn from tonight’s “presidential” debate? Obama is a d*** who likes to channel his inner George Costanza.

  15. Anonymostly says:

    One thing about you, Anonymostly. You sure do know a lot about sucking.

    Now, see, this is exactly what I’m talking about.

  16. Anonymostly says:

    Hate to say it, Macdaddy, but I thought Obama did a better job at least through the first 2/3 of the debate tonight. If that had been Obama’s performance at the first debate, I doubt we’d have seen the Romney surge. I can’t believe he wasn’t prepared to criticize Obama’s policies and give specifics. Last 1/3 of the debate, he started to kick it in but I was just very disappointed. Thought Romney could have done a lot better job. And I hate to say it but it’s possible that performance may have cost him the election.

  17. Macdaddy says:

    Anonymostly, I obviously disagree. Obama’s condescending attitude highlighted his ignorance. The whole bit about the “80’s called and wanted its foreign policy back” was exhibit A. Obama thinks Russia isn’t a major threat to us? Who does he think has been blocking him in Syria? Who has been helping Iran with its nuclear weapons? Who got him to make sure that Europe remains wide open to a nuclear missile from Iran? Putin is playing Obama like a fool and has just doubled their defense expenditures. In the meantime, Obama is pledging Putin more flexibility which means that Putin is going to bend him into a pretzel before sodomizing him. Obama is too stupid to see that Russia is 5 moves ahead of us. But Obama got that zinger from Seinfeld in.

  18. chuck says:

    And who, the very day of the foreign policy debate, was reported to have just engaged in the largest strategic nuclear forces exercise since the fall of the Soviet Union, with TU-95 and TU-160 running simulated missile strikes against city-sized targets? I would liked to have seen Romney reinforce his Russian threat argument with that fact during the debate.

  19. TexasAnnie says:

    Neither candidate “won” the debate from my perspective. We still have warfare under Obama which we had under Bush and which we will still have under Romney, should he pull off his campaign.

    And under either Romney or Obama, we will still have tax injustice. And they will both be supporting crappy legislation like TARP whenever they deem a bank or auto manufacturer “too big to fail.”

    And there’s that pesky “Patriot Act,” —a Republican ideal roundly supported by Democrats, and it’s “Defense Reauthorization Act” now denying and defying our constitutional liberties. Both Obama and Romney will not hesitate to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens without trial. Both will use failed drug laws to imprison our neighbors. And both will send the incarceration bills to us, the infinite taxpayers.

    A vote for Obama is the same as a vote for Romney is the same as a vote for Bush was…

    But there’s a better way. Vote GARY JOHNSON for President!

  20. Chris Scott says:

    9:44- Great questions! First I was not asked to promote anything but KFAB does a great job at debate parties so I felt I would pass it on. In regards to podcasts, I am happy to report both my KFAB and KLIN Drive TIme Lincoln Podcasts from yesterday are both up on their respective websites. Thanks for asking!

    Cheers!

  21. Anonymostly says:

    Well, I guess my criticism of Romney last night would have echoed my criticism of him after the last debate. While he sits there stoicly and lets Obama get off these zingers, he could come back at him with factual rebuttal.

    For instance, last time when Obama claimed that he called it a terrorist attack right off the bat, Romney could have nailed him with the fact that he sent Susan Rice around on all the talk shows denying it was terrorism and claiming it was backlash against that youtube video about Mohamed. And if Obama knew it was terrorism in the Rose Garden the next day, then his Secretary of State was lying at Andrews AFB when they greeted the caskets and she condemned the film again.

    When they talked about Syria, again, Romney could have — and in my view should have — taken the discussion back to what Obama said about Russia and reminded the President that it’s been Russia that has been propping up Assad and Ahmedinijad (sp?) and which has been frustrating our attempts at stabilizing the middle east. There were all kinds of opportunities for Romney to give detailed criticisms of Obama’s foreign policy. Instead, I kind of agree with the way Obama characterized it. It sounded like Mitt was saying, “I’d do the same thing, I’d just yell louder.”

    He needed to draw distinctions between himself and the President. And he needed to show command of the facts and an ability to relate details as to why he differs from the President, not just that he differs from him. It might have been just that I expected better and that’s why I feel critical of Romney’s performance. But this was not the kind of show I was hoping for out of Mitt Romney.

  22. Interested Observer says:

    Bruce Fischer stated in his deposition for this failed lawsuit, that he had a conversation with Mrs. Betty Kime a few weeks prior to actually filing the lawsuit and said to Mrs. Kime, “I really think is where it needs to be and I would be willing to survey it and build the fence there . . .”, but that offer was contingent on Kime’s acceptance of the land trade.

    So, why didn’t Bruce and DEB FISCHER just go ahead and hire a surveyor on their own? Bruce offered to have the survey done on the existing fence out in the middle of Kime’s pasture in order to take the 105 acres between the legal boundary and the existing fence, so he and DEB FI$CHER obviously could have hired a survey to determine the actual legal boundary but they didn’t. That PROVES this lawsuit was never a dispute over the actual boundary, but was ALWAYS an attempted land grab.

    FI$CHER’S were willing to survey the land grab, but not the actual legal boundary. Why is that? That’s the only question that matters and DEB FI$CHER refuses to answer that question.

  23. Lil Mac says:

    Some Republicans continue to demand that Romney kick Obama over Libya. That would have momentary given Romney a debate point but thereafter would have allowed Obama to refocus the press coverage to Romney being a snarky wannabe making hay out of an Ambassador’s death.

    In this final debate, Obama twice tried to draw Romney into criticizing Obama on Libya. If Republicans are too shortsighted to see why Romney was right to avoid this trap, they might at least consider that anything Obama wants Romney to do is probably bad for Romney and good for Obama.

    Every time Romney failed to mention “Libya” in a debate, the news media spent the following week talking about how Romney didn’t mention “Libya” in the debate and went on to explain over and over again Obama’s horrible failures. By taking the high road, by not attacking as everyone expected him to, Romney left a vacuum into which otherwise sober individuals made his case for him by them avidly attacking Obama over Libya. That is political elegance, the kind of strategic visioned thinking that wins in business and in battle. It is a brilliance we see lacking when Obama disadvantages us against our competitors and enemies.

  24. Anonymous says:

    IO, may we talk about your spouse here by name. Is that okay? I hope you don’t mind us picking your loved ones apart. After all, its only politics.

  25. Interested Observer says:

    Anonymous at 10:05, DEB FI$CHER stated in her deposition that she agreed with everything her husband had just stated. The only exception was the date of one conversation and the number of friends who visited the river. Deb agreed with everything else that Bruce had just sworn to.

    So, Anonymous, my loved ones are not in question here. Bruce’s sworn statements are relevant because Deb swore that she agreed with all of them, excepting the 2 just mentioned, therefore Bruce’s statements ARE Deb’s statements! It’s that simple.

  26. Spike says:

    Poll: Is Rummey as DUMB as Bush or more so??

    The Kerrey camp needs to get a TAX Audit done on the Fischers before the election as I’m sure the F’s have been doing some very creative TAX FRAUD! Course all you DIM Cornholers would vote for her anyway because it’s Not about what’s best for NE or intelligence but EGO!!

  27. Anonymous says:

    Romney won the debates, and will win the office.

    Fischer will win, and Kerrey can go back to NY, please go.

    Feels good to know this.

    Good Day.

  28. Macdaddy says:

    Well there ya go. Once again, liberals are calling for the state to abuse their political opponents. I sure wish you guys would just be honest about your totalitarian fetishes.

  29. To To Chris Scott says:

    Listen to the Pod Cast or on KLIN……lol. This guy suffers from Catastrophic Ego. He is no insider and he has never stated what qualifies himself as an insider.

  30. Chris Scott says:

    Sorry for the delayed response. I was putting together notes for my interview today. If you get an opportunity, please listen the podcast from the Chip Maxwell show from Sat. He had a particularly good guest at 7:30 ;)

  31. Anonymostly says:

    Interested Observer October 23, 2012 at 9:11 AM

    Bruce Fischer stated in his deposition for this failed lawsuit, that he had a conversation with Mrs. Betty Kime a few weeks prior to actually filing the lawsuit and said to Mrs. Kime, “I really think is where it needs to be and I would be willing to survey it and build the fence there . . .”, but that offer was contingent on Kime’s acceptance of the land trade. Etc. etc. Ad nauseum.

    You know, if the quality of the discussion on this blog has declined and there’s anyone to blame, I present to you Exhibit A as to the culprit. We’re having this nice discussion on the Presidential debate last night and, out of the clear blue sky, IO brings up Bruce Fischer’s lawsuit against Les and Betty Kime, a topic which anyone who has followed this blog would have thought had run its course weeks ago.

    But, no. Here is the insufferable Interested Observer bringing it up yet again.

    Dotty, let me ask you this: Do you have anything new to say? I mean something really new. And subtle little digs at Deb Fischer in the midst of a discussion about something else don’t really qualify.

  32. Anonymostly says:

    Apparently I’m not the only one who wishes that Romney had been more pointed and specific last night in discussing Obama’s foreign policy failures. However, it also appears to be the, case that his approach was something that, while it might not have appealed to partisans, apparently did appeal to the undecideds, which is a far more important group of voters at this point.

    So, Lil Mac and Macdaddy, perhaps we’re both right. But he did what he did and it appears to have worked, so who am I to question it?

  33. Anonymostly says:

    Spike October 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM

    Poll: Is Rummey as DUMB as Bush or more so??

    Well, Spike, the way I see it, in terms of intelligence …

    Romney > Bush > Kerry > Pelosi > Debbie Wasserman Schultz > Kelly Ripa > President Obama > a half-eaten baloney sandwich > plankton > Spike.

    Now, go fetch my slippers. Good dog.

  34. Anonymostly says:

    Is there enough time for someone to turn this into a billboard?

    “The last 4 years, for every one step FORWARD
    we’ve taken TWO STEPS BARACK!”

  35. Slightly Younger Guy says:

    After reading their posts, and given the amount of time they have to post, especially during the middle of the day, I’ve come to the conclusion that Anonymostly, MacDaddy and LilMac are old, retired, angry white guys who watch too much Fox News and hate change as it’s always bad and scary. Thankfully, most young kids are more progressive and rational when it comes to their worldview, so the passage of time will eventually result in a better country.

  36. Lil Mac says:

    Anonymostly, well said. Since the liberal media today chides Romney for “playing it safe”, usually an incumbent’s powerful role, and praises Obama for attacking like a worried novice, then it doesn’t much matter at this point what Republicans think. It is not as if they will stay home on Election Day.

    As you and others have pointed out, Romney didn’t tell Obama in debate that Obama abetted the murder of our ambassador by stripping away his security forces. Romney didn’t say that. But every Republican knows it. And so too now do the non partisan and undecided voters who will decide this election.

  37. Slightly Younger Guy says:

    Every hear of a lunch break? Being retired, you might have forgotten what that is. In any case, I post about 1% of what you folks do.

  38. Citizens United says:

    SS, I apologize for my earlier statements. The posters have you beat. I just not sure that is a good thing.

  39. Macdaddy says:

    You’re pretty funny, SYG. I’m not old, but I sure would like to be one day, without the IPAB telling me what I can and cannot do with my healthcare. I’m not retired, but I would like to be able to one day. Obama is making it harder for that to become a reality. I’m not angry unless I think about how the Democrats are looting the country for the benefit of their cronies and turning the US into an unworkable version of the EU. I never watch Fox News. News shows are boring and inefficient. It’s much faster to visit several different websites for my news. As for your delusion that you are welcome to change and progress, almost every idea that you and your friend Obama have is over 100 years old, many of them tried, almost all discredited. People way more ruthless and powerful than Obama were not able to pull them off. He won’t be any more successful. Since you are too young to pay attention to anything, there are a couple sayings that I would leave you with: “Those who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it” and “There is nothing new under the sun.” That last saying was written thousands of years ago.

  40. Macdaddy says:

    Anonymostly, I also wish Romney had been more forceful and called Obama out on his lies, however, I still think he helped himself with his performance. Obama was an insufferable prick. Winning is the best comeback.

  41. Slightly Younger Guy says:

    Be specific, MacDaddy. What sites do you get your news from? Are there links on those sites that factually back them up? Democrats looting the country? You really have to twist and exaggerate to back up that view.

    If you really studied history, you’d see that Republican and Democratic (i.e. liberals/conservatives) were not that far apart on the issues backs in the 80’s. Since then Democrats have moved to the right, and Republicans/conservatives have moved so far to the right they’ve about fallen off the scale. This is not just my opinion. You can find plenty of polling that backs this up. Since I have a full time job that actually requires me to work, and not spend my day posting on blogs, I’ll let you do the searching.

  42. Anonymostly says:

    Since we can’t post links, I’ll post an entire (short-ish) article that should help illustrate something to Slightly Younger Guy about Democrats looting this country. It’s an article about San Berndardino, CA and the fiscal cliff they’ve encountered there. A sobering story, to be sure. Shows what happens when you let Democrats run things — Democrats who’ve gotten into power with the help of unions who want their backs scratched in return. Enjoy. And, as you’re reading, think about Omaha and see if you notice any parallels.

    Three interconnected forces brought the working-class, inland Southern California city of San Bernardino to insolvency: a burst housing bubble and lethargic economic growth; high police and firefighter salaries mandated by the city’s charter; and compounding pension obligations. Bankruptcy should give San Bernardino leverage to deal with the last two, but the big, structural changes required will not be easy or pleasant. Absent such changes, though, salaries and pensions will continue to grow faster than the city’s revenues, crowding out most other government functions and services. San Bernardino offers a telling illustration of austerity’s causes and effects: a tragic failure to think beyond the short term eventually necessitates painful reforms.

    We already know something of what San Bernardino’s government will look like in the age of austerity. The city, with a poverty rate equivalent to Detroit’s and a homicide rate that has quietly surpassed Chicago’s, declared a fiscal emergency in early July and officially filed for bankruptcy on August 1. Deferring payments to bondholders just to make payroll, the city has been forced to trim its budget radically.

    As a bridge to the bankruptcy proceedings, interim city manager Andrea Miller attempted to reduce the deficit by proposing a new budget called a pre-pendency plan. Her austerity budget, which passed with only a few changes after much haggling, will form the basis of the plan submitted to the bankruptcy court. The city projects a $45.8 million budget deficit, which the pre-pendency plan would reduce to $7.5 million by making “draconian” and “catastrophic” cuts, in the words of some city council members. Even then, the budget wouldn’t be balanced, and the plan doesn’t address an $18 million cash deficit from the previous fiscal year. Approximately $7 million in deficit reduction comes from transfers, either from special funds—for, say, road work or sewer repair—to the city’s general fund or from the federal government. The city would save another $9.4 million by continuing a 10 percent pay reduction for some municipal workers. The remaining $21.9 million in reductions comes from drastic cutbacks to services or deferred payments, mostly to the pension fund.

    In cutting overall expenditures nearly 25 percent, the city leaves virtually no department untouched—including city hall, which will operate with a skeleton crew. Since 2006, the mayor’s office has gone from ten employees to three, counting the mayor. The city eliminated six positions from its information-technology department, cutting to the point at which “core” functions would be threatened. The city has combined departments, contracted out services, and even closed down its successful Operation Phoenix program, an anti-crime initiative Mayor Pat Morris launched shortly after taking office in 2005. San Bernardino’s community-policing effort will thus lose its two headquarters, which also served as community centers. Three of the city’s four libraries will close, while layoffs will hit 32 parks department employees and one-third of the city’s code-enforcement officers.

    These savings, however, won’t be enough to erase the deficit. San Bernardino spends about three-quarters of its budget on public safety—meaning police and firefighters. Very little in the police budget is devoted to non-personnel expenses, so the cuts inevitably affect staffing levels. The new budget leaves the department with 320 employees, down from 379. Most of the reductions were to civilian support staff, not sworn officers. But the police will have a great deal more work, especially now that the department will pick up the slack from laid-off code-enforcement officers. Residents can assume that crime rates will continue to climb, especially given the demise of Operation Phoenix.

    The firefighters’ union has been the most stubborn and transparently self-interested in San Bernardino. The average firefighter earns about $150,000 per year, and the union has resisted making any salary concessions. The city manager’s initial proposal would have eliminated 20 positions and either closed down a battalion or implemented rotating brownouts (that is, temporary shutdowns) of stations. City council members, some elected with help from the firefighters’ union and many worried about angry constituents facing slower response times, postponed a decision to explore alternative proposals. According to the city, the San Bernardino Fire Department has among the highest call loads in the country for a department its size.

    San Bernardino’s austerity plan leaves an atrophied city government, but essential functions remain in place. Crime will likely go up, but it won’t necessarily skyrocket. Greek-style looting and arson appear unlikely. Closing three of four libraries isn’t ideal, but it isn’t the end of civilization, either. At the same time, however, the deep cuts do make San Bernardino an even less hospitable place. Businesses will be even more skeptical about moving to a city where the government can’t afford to fill potholes or respond quickly to crimes because it has been compromised by decades of poor decision-making. Much of the city’s deficit reduction is in deferred payments that have recently earned the ire of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the Securities and Exchange Commission; under a “best-case scenario,” the budget is unlikely to be balanced even with these cuts and deferrals. San Bernardino can balance its budget only by boosting revenues, which requires more businesses, not fewer. It’s not clear how long the city can continue on this unsustainable path.

    Perhaps bankruptcy will prove the ultimate salve, cutting away the structural inefficiencies (from pensions to high municipal salaries) that went unaddressed for years. The city’s options are now limited, because it waited too long to address these problems. The United States has many structural problems of its own—most notably Medicare—and, as San Bernardino shows, myopia is never recommended. San Bernardino is a tragedy—and a warning to the rest of the country.

  43. Anonymostly says:

    And, after you’ve read the article about San Bernardino, think to yourself why it might be a bad idea to raise corporate tax rates or otherwise attempt to punish the successful for being successful. No company HAS to reside in San Bernardino. They can always move to places where the economic climate is more conducive to their success. And no company HAS to reside in the United States. If you make it unattractive for a business to exist here, they’ll either cease to exist or exist elsewhere. In other words, if you don’t want them around, tax them more and increase the amount of regulations they have to follow. But if you do those things — increasing taxes and regulations — then you shouldn’t complain when they move elsewhere. Got that Barack?

  44. Anonymostly says:

    The firefighters’ union has been the most stubborn and transparently self-interested in San Bernardino. The average firefighter earns about $150,000 per year, and the union has resisted making any salary concessions.

    Boy, doesn’t that sound familiar? And they were stubborn and transparently self-interested even in the face of the city going bankrupt.

    So, who the hell would want to live in San Bernardino if city government is so broke it can’t do the things city government should be expected to do? Forget libraries. I can live without a library. What about fixing potholes and maintaining streets and roads so that I can get to work and my customers can get to me. If the city government of San Bernardino, which already can’t stay on top of crime, also can’t fix streets, it won’t be long before the only people who live in San Bernardino are those who have no options. And those are typically people who consume more in government services than they pay in taxes. And that’s not a recipe for a healthy community.

    But, get rid of all the old foagies like Macdaddy, Lil Mac and me, so that Slightly Younger Guy can enjoy the progressive utopia he’s sure will follow. For a preview of what that progressive utopia will look like, just take a trip to San Bernardino, California.

  45. Slightly Younger Guy says:

    Nice story. Are you trying to tell me that this is representative of all or even a majority of Democrats? Typical simplistic Repub argument of posting a juicy anecdote as “proof”.

    And how is San Bernadino’s situation the fault of Democrats? California’s problems began with Prop 13 in the 70’s which severely caps property taxes (supported by conservatives) . Here’s an informative post that should educate you:

    So, for the national partisans who wish to make hay of the bankruptcy vote to blame Democrats or Republicans? Voting for bankruptcy: Marquez (Democrat), Jenkins (Republican), Johnson (Democrat), McCammack (Republican). Voting against bankruptcy: Kelley (Republican) and Shorett (Unknown), and abstaining: John Valdivia (Decline to State). Not vetoing the bankruptcy vote: Morris (Democrat).

    In case you didn’t get it, San Bernadino is politically balanced, not a Democrat stronghold. You should have used Lincoln NE as a more representative example of Democrats running a city. Democratic mayor and a 5 – 2 majority on the city council. You might find a few cranks, but the vast majority of the city are happy with how it’s being run..

    Yes, we can agree that Medicare funding is a problem. But this a function of increasing health care costs, not the government. Obamacare is an imperfect attempt, based on conservative think tank proposals and Romney’s Mass. health care, to try and rein in these costs. It’s a start that you R’s are ready to scrap immediately. Your plan is to rein in costs on the backs of retired individuals. Give them a voucher which will not grow at the rate of health care costs, and let them make up the difference or die. We can do better than this.

  46. Slightly Younger Guy says:

    And those are typically people who consume more in government services than they pay in taxes. And that’s not a recipe for a healthy community.

    Were you aware that all “red” states except for one take in more from the federal government than they pay in? That’s welfare in my book, making Nebraska a welfare state.

    Conversely, “blue” states pay in more to the federal coffers than they receive back.

  47. Anonymous says:

    Romney wins, as does Fischer, Terry, Fort, Smith, McCoy, Price, Murante, Turco, Carter, Johnson, Coash. Hadley, Seiler, and so on……. Great being a Republican in Nebraska!

    Of course the libs still have Mello, Nordquist, & Snow-Plow

  48. Anonymous says:

    SYG has a “day job” and takes a “lunch break” at 2:34 pm and apparently spends the rest of the day looking at political blogs. Nice job.

    As for the multiple personalities that are Citizens United, who after all is plural, if you come here to complain about the content of political arguments of others without making a case for your favorite candidate, what is the point of that? Blogging is a participation event you know. You don’t want to be seen as staring at a radio and complaining that its video is bad.

    You seem to share SYG’s bitterness and lack of offering a proactive positive content for your candidates. In SYG’s case, an apparent bitter resentment of bloggers who earned a retirement while SYG plays at work, and also against disabled war veterans as some here are. But that’s okay, some things you cannot know. However, apart from a few honest proactive Liberals like Spike and BTO, this blogs sees Conservatives come here to state a positive case for why they think their favorite candidates’ policies are good and competitor’s bad, and then suffer Democrats like you to poke holes in that without you jumping in yourself. That is lazy and not very bold of you.

    You come to a political blog, so you must have some strong beliefs. So let’s hear you state your case in the positive for your chosen candidates. Be bold. Tell us why you are voting for Obama, Biden, Kerrey, Ewing, etc. Because if you don’t, then you appear more than just snarky and frustrated, you appear to be backing horses in which you lack faith.

  49. Anonymous says:

    Snarky=Liberal, it’s what they are, how they define substance . How else could you possibly defend the taking of private property, as a liberal does, without using a faulty emotion riddled argument? Snarky is Liberal logic.

  50. Anonymous says:

    How else could you possibly defend the taking of private property, as a liberal does, without using a faulty emotion riddled argument?

    Are you talking about TransCanada taking private property through eminent domain? Seems that more conservatives are defending this than liberals. Try again.

  51. Anonymous says:

    10:32, you must be talking about a new kind of ribbon pipeline, 100 miles wide and one millimeter high.

    It’s a pipe. Government may have pipes running under your yard along with other cables and transports. The Keystone argument isn’t over eminent domain. It is about environmentalists who care a lot about dung beetles that hate oil and Liberals who hate America so much they want us in a hammer lock by Arab oil interests. The only pipe problem here is the crack in yours. Try again.

  52. Macdaddy says:

    SYG, why do you want to know what websites I visit? Are you still trying to prove Rule 34?

    As for looting the country, look at Solyndra, look at Porkulus, look at the GM bankruptcy. The outcomes of all of those were hundreds of billions of dollars total taken from taxpayers and distributed around to Democrat cronies and political supporters. What I want to know, and what you big government types should be demanding is: where’d the money go? I know I don’t have any of it. Regular people don’t have it. Where did it go? What do we have to show for it? You are the ones who want government to be big. It’s your responsibility to be good stewards of the taxpayers money. Obama has abdicated that responsibility. Shame on him.

  53. Slightly Younger Guy says:

    Look at Bain Capital’s record. Even the private sector isn’t 100% on successful investments. You hold government to unreasonable standards that you would not impose on any other aspect of your life.

    …and distributed around to Democrat cronies and political supporters.

    That’s a figment of your fevered imagination.

  54. Bad Bob says:

    This is how Bob deals with political opponents:

    “The raids that Kerrey led during his short stint in the Mekong Delta were part of a secret CIA assassination program known as Operation Phoenix, which sought to exterminate the political leadership of the Vietnamese liberation struggle in the south. Targeted in the Thanh Phong raid was the mayor of the hamlet, who was known to sympathize with the National Liberation Front rather than the US-backed regime in Saigon.”

  55. Bad Neighbor says:

    Sounds like Bob Kerrey was not a good neighbor. Are political assassinations on non-enemy combatants legal?

  56. Operation Pheonix says:

    Michael Ratner a lawyer at the Center for Constitutional Rights stated: “Kerrey should be tried as a war criminal. His actions on the night of February 24-25, 1969 when the seven man Navy Seal unit which he headed killed approximately twenty unarmed Vietnamese civilians, eighteen of whom were women and children was a war crime. Like those who murdered at My Lai, he too should be brought into the dock and tried for his crimes.”

  57. Spike says:

    SYG; Don’t waste your words on these senile NE GOPERS as they would vote for a living, breathing, lump of shite if it were possible & running as a GOPER! Totally braindead, narrow-minded, self-serving, greedy, RADICAL, social parasites who really don’t give a shite about America!!

  58. Spike says:

    Bad Bob; Nothing has changed much in America since it’s days of Genocidal Colonization of this country now has it?? What’s the difference between raping & murdering Native Americans for THEIR land & Raping & murdering Viets for their ideology?? Kerrey was young, dumb, & FOC & doing YOUR bidding. So what’s changed in your EVIL soul that makes him BAD & what your love seeing going on in Iraq, Afghanistan & ever other country where America Murders, Rapes & Maims people? You & your sub-human ILK are the SCUM of the EARTH!!

  59. Macdaddy says:

    SYG, I cannot believe that you care so little about how taxpayer money is spent that you have done no research into where all the “stimulus” money went. I cannot believe that you don’t know that Obama used a novel bankruptcy method to give the UAW part ownership of GM while illegally freezing out teacher retirement funds, municipal pension funds, individual bond holders, and non union employees. I can’t believe you didn’t know that 22,000 GM employees and tens of thousands of car dealer employees were laid off at a taxpayer cost of $30 billion. But the UAW (big Obama supporter, BTW) was not only kept whole but given part ownership. Then again, you don’t sound very smart. I bet you can buy a latte with your smartphone, though!

  60. Goober Natorial says:

    When Obama’s car czar was allocating dealerships and deciding whose would be closed, your odds of keeping your dealership through the bankruptcy was significantly better if you were an Obama donor. Isn’t that interesting?

  61. Anonymous says:

    After a conservative blogger at 6:47 praised Spike saying, “apart from a few honest proactive Liberals like Spike and BTO…”, Spike at 12:25 said “Don’t waste your words on these senile NE GOPERS as they would vote for a living, breathing, lump of shite if it were possible & running as a GOPER! Totally braindead, narrow-minded, self-serving, greedy, RADICAL, social parasites who really don’t give a shite about America!!”

    That is how Spike returns a compliment. One must wonder what is like to suffer being related to Spike. And that is not meant as criticism but as true sorrow for his relatives who dare to disagree with Spike. MD suggested Spike is off his meds. That could be one answer. But the other is that courtesy is wasted in such people.

  62. Macdaddy says:

    What did I see in the BWH tonight but a letter to the editor condemning Kerrey’s ad about the Fischer lawsuit. More interesting was that it was written by someone from Valentine. Most interesting is that it was written by someone with the last name of Kime. I wonder if he is related to Les and Betty Kime.

  63. A Cherry County Resident says:

    Macdaddy @ 7:38 Yes, Duane and Les are both descendants of Levi Kime who settled in Cherry County in the 1880’s

  64. Anonymous says:

    Kerry is such a screw up he can’t even get a feud right. Well not to worry as he won’t be the next Senator from Nebraska, Senator Fischer will.

    Obama is so going to lose this race, I suppose after all his pardons and executive orders his last act will be to grant himself citizenship.

    It will be awesome to see how Iran, and other such rogue states, react to someone who will make a decision based on American Exceptionalism rather than on the dreams of his alcoholic, communist father.

  65. Macdaddy says:

    Wow, IO, that’s one more Kime on Deb Fischer’s side than is on your side. BTW, did any of the Kime family give you or Bob Kerrey permission to use Les and Betty Kime’s memories for your own political ends?

  66. Anonymous says:

    Duane Kime is not the brightest bulb in the light pole. Having him say anything in your favor is a big OUCH!

  67. Interested Observer says:

    I considered Les and Betty to be particularly good friends and I’ll continue to defend them from DEB FI$CHER.

  68. Macdaddy says:

    That’s not the point IO. You aren’t defending them from non-existent attacks. You are using them for your own personal issues. Bob Kerrey is using them for his political gain. It’s pretty sad you dragged them into this and for what? Deb Fischer is still going to be our next Senator.

  69. Anonymostly says:

    Anonymous October 25, 2012 at 6:36 AM

    Duane Kime is not the brightest bulb in the light pole. Having him say anything in your favor is a big OUCH!

    So, now it’s not enough for the Kerrey camp to attack Deb Fischer (and her husband and her sons.) Now, they have to attack anyone that dares to support her or defend her. Enter Duane Kime, the Kerrey campaign’s version of Joe the Plumber. It never ceases to amaze me how low you libs are willing to stoop to score a political point. To the point of destroying someone’s livelihood and business reputation. (Not talking about Fischer or Kime there; someone else who dared to run against a Democrat in this state.)

  70. Anonymostly says:

    Interested Observer October 25, 2012 at 7:18 AM

    I considered Les and Betty to be particularly good friends and I’ll continue to defend them from DEB FI$CHER.

    Dotty, I don’t know quite how to tell you this, but … Les and Betty Kime are dead. Yeah. They died years ago, actually. So, you really can’t defend them from anyone anymore. Although you can obviously exploit them if that’s how you roll.

  71. Interested Observer says:

    Obviously, I can steadfastly continue to defend Les and Betty from the insulting remarks made about them in this very site.

  72. What insulting remarks would you be referring to, IO?

    I haven’t seen anybody level any outright insults against them, though I personally did question what kind of people would be so unwilling to sell land that was too rough to be fenced, and that they weren’t actually using. And I still have to wonder why they were so unwilling to sell the land after multiple purchase offers. Additionally, if they counted a$$holes like you among their friends, then I REALLY have to wonder what kind of people they were. It would almost appear as though the KIME$ wanted more money than the land was probably worth. Sounds kinda greedy to me.

    (See…I can use dollar signs, too!!)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>