Terry on TV

Congressman Lee Terry is up on TV in his race against Brad Ashford.

See it here:

This is a nice piece by Terry, touting his work for veterans.

***

This follows up on Ashford’s contention that Reps should spend more time in Washington.
Yes, MORE time.

On the face of it, you’d think, “Yeah, they should work a longer week and blahdidty blahdity blah.”

And Terry even agreed that they should have longer sessions.

But that’s not what Ashford wants.
He wants Members to spend more time in DC hobnobbing (that’s right HOBNOBBING!) with each other so they can get more cozy and scratch each other’s backs more often, and the like.

Said Ashford: “We need to spend more time in Washington, and we need to build relationships.”

To his credit, Terry gave the perfect response (per the OWH):

Terry said he agreed with Ashford that Congress needs to spend more time in session, but he didn’t agree that they needed to spend more time in Washington, D.C.

When Congress is in session, Terry flies home on Thursday or Friday and returns to Washington on Monday or Tuesday. During his days in Nebraska, he spends time meeting with constituents in his district.

“The reality is that I need to spend as much time with the people I represent and not out there socializing for the sake of it,” Terry said.
Terry also argued that four days a week in Washington is enough time to get to know colleagues — Republican and Democratic.

This is interesting to see, right out of the gate, that Ashford is putting his foot in his mouth and saying dumb things that he thinks is “common sense” and folksy.

This is Ashford’s reputation. He’ll fire off whatever’s on the top of his mop, Sense Be Damned!
We all look forward to it.

***

And in the mean time, the OWH also reports that the DNC will be supplying ten (10!) people for Ashford’s campaign.
That’s an entire staff. (Be interesting to know what they’re paying.)

But hey, no one thought this race was going to be easy.

Duke it out.
And may Gaia help you if you think Bard Ashford is your guy.

***

Here’s a good one.

Carol Blood is running for the Unicameral.
And she wants to let you know who her role model is.

None other than…Kathleen Sebelius!

Carol Blood 01

Yes, THAT Kathleen Sebelius!
The architect of ObamaCare!

Well, how about, the the architect of the ObamaCare website!
The, sorry we can’t work that right now site.
The, sorry we can’t give you any numbers right now website.
The, sorry, yes we canceled the insurance you liked website.

Yeah, because when you think “Trust”, you think Kathleen Sebelius!

Good on ya, Carol.

We’re guessing Retired Col. Tommy Garrett might be inspired by others than Kathleen freaking Sebelius.

You know, like Eisenhower.

53 comments

  1. Ricky says:

    Speaking of the campaigns for the Nebraska Legislature I see Dave heineman and Mayor Stothert are endorsing Joni Craighead in District 6, my district. Boy with friends like that who needs enemies; we saw what happened to Jon Bruning she those two had a press conference to endorse Bruning for Governor. Anyway Heineman will leave office before the next legislative session so why does he care who gets in the Unicameral?
    I hope that Stenaker guy wins my district. We don’t need a tea party puppet of heineman in the legislature
    Ricky from Omaha

  2. Hesdeadjim says:

    Darn good commercial from Terry. Much better than the throw the football in the back yard and pass the lemonade we’ve seen before. High quality production value, too.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Nice streeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetch trying to say Mitt Romney was the “architect” of Obamacare and its website. Good to know we have a representative who is trying to shore up his only base in Sarpy County instead of trying to win back voters he has lost with no attention all these many years. Too bad this same representative wakes up to literally save his seat when it is in jeopardy of being lost.

  4. Sounds good to me says:

    I think it would be great if Adrian Smith did as much hot-tubbing with his fellow House members as he did lobbyists. Same with Lee Terry and his cocktails with female lobbyists. It’s more than just a little disingenuous for Street Sweeper to bring up cronyism when what Ashford is really seeking collegiality. What’s next? You find fault with the way he ties his shoes? Geez. You should pick your battles more carefully.

  5. Julie Schmit-Albin says:

    Thanks for putting up the Carol Blood /Sebelius info. I will be communicating with Carol as she filled out the NRL PAC survey, pro-life. I agree, why of all people would you quote Sebelius? Aside from her baggage with Obamacare she was the rabidly pro-abortion Governor of Kansas, taking money from late term abortionist George Tiller’s PAC. Interesting..

  6. Anonymous says:

    If you watch the video of Lee Terry doing the ALS ice bucket challenge, it is plain to see there is no freakin’ ice in the bucket! I bet the water wasn’t even cold. Oh, and why all the Lee Terry stickers, bumper stickers and t-shirts? Way to make it all about him. Dumb ass. It’s supposed to be for victims of ALS.

  7. Nebraska Right to Life says:

    Well I admit there is nothing much left of me now. Nobody to carry my torch in the Unicam and anyway Ernie is there to sway anything down the tubes.
    We admit that women have always had abortions and always will; and we guess that safe and legal abortions is better than the other way around.
    So if we seem irrelevant in this day and age in Nebraska it’s because we are; but if you want to send us money we will take it.
    Thanks and Happy Trails.

    ricky actually

  8. To NRL..errrr. Ricky says:

    Safe and legal?
    •In 2009, 8 women died as a result of complications from known legal induced abortion; From 1973-2009, 411 women have died as a result of legal abortion (CDC).
    •In 1972 (the year before abortion was federally legalized), a total of 24 women died from causes known to be associated with legal abortions, and 39 died as a result of known illegal abortions (CDC).

    In 1978, the “American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology” stated the legalization of abortion “has had no major impact on the number of women dying from abortion” since the results of a study they completed showed that over 90% of all illegal abortions were performed by licensed physicians.The biggest influence on the number of women dying was the introduction of penicillin in the 50’s.

    Groups such as NARAL will try to lead you to believe that hundreds, if not thousands of women died from illegal abortions. The truth is, they lied. At least according to Dr. Bernard Nathanson, one of the founders of NARAL. According to Nathanson, he and his friends lied about the number of women who died each year from illegal abortions. Their pitch to voters, lawmakers, and judges was that women are going to seek abortion in roughly equal numbers whether it is lawful or not. The only effect of outlawing it, they claimed, is to limit pregnant women to unqualified and often uncaring practitioners, “back alley butchers.” Did some women die from illegal abortions? Yes. But not in the numbers they claimed.

    So, it’s “safe and legal now”…but yet we still have women dying from it.

    Dr. Nathanson, oversaw 60,000 abortions as Director of a Medical center and personally performed around 6,000. It was in about 1980 that he switched from pro-choice to pro-life based on science. In 1985 he produced the documentary “The Silent Scream” which used fetal monitoring technology to show a 12 week fetus being sucked out during an abortion.

    By the way, Dr. Nathanson was an atheist. Several years after he became pro life he decided to become a Catholic. Not because of their pro-life views, but because of their witness.

    Later on, he revealed that he and other abortion supporters used dubious, if not dishonest strategies to achieve the goal of unresttricted abortion. First, they promoted the idea that abortion is a medical issue, not a moral one. This required persuading people of the rather obvious falsehood that a normal pregnancy is a natural and healthy condition if the mother wants her baby, and a disease if she does not. The point of medicine, to maintain and restore health, had to be recast as giving health care consumers what they happen to want; and the Hippocratic Oath’s explicit prohibition of abortion had to be removed. Second,

  9. Anonymous says:

    Why should I care what some guy named Dr. Nathanson is doing, saying or becoming. As long as men don’t have a governmental body comprised with a majority of women telling them what they can and can’t do with their body parts, they’ll keep flapping their lips as pro life. When it comes to a question of what happens for the other part of the equation that led to the life by their contribution of sperm, there’s little to be heard.

  10. Obamacare says:

    is the creation of the Heritage Foundation, which pushed for universal coverage as a means of saving the rest of us about $1,000 on our hospital bills from all the deadbeats who don’t pay. Can’t believe GOP sides with the deadbeats on this one. Why don’t we just drop the requirement that people have liability insurance on their cars if the no-insurance thing is so great?

  11. Hesdeadjim says:

    Funny that someone who undoubtedly disagrees with Heritage about everything, nearly all the time, wants to die on that cross right now.

  12. Macdaddy says:

    Because, Obamacare, people can choose whether or not to drive and thus whether or not to be subject to the mandate. Most people choose to be alive and don’t want to have to die to escape the Obamacare insurance mandate, er penalty, er tax. Besides, has anybody saved any money by the lowering of the uninsured numbers from 50 million people to 50 million people? Where was that $2500 in savings Obama promised us?

  13. Lil Mac says:

    Ashford promises to make Congress grind out more law. He actually measures Congress by how much law it produces or fails to produce. That’s like measuring a surgeon’s success by how much of you he amputates.

  14. Shadow Watch says:

    Is there any validity to the claims the Iraq veterans are making against Lee at local VWFs? And he voted to cut military pay in a time of war. Typical politician lies and BS.

  15. To Lee Terry says:

    I was at first not a fan. Now I realize how tough your job is. I will gladly vote for Lee again because he is 90% of what I want and Brad is 90% of what I do not want.

  16. Anonymous says:

    I generally don’t comment, but I don’t think Sweeper has ever stated that he (it’s definitely a male) is a registered republican.

  17. Brad Ashford solicited perjured testimony from the Unicam to try to get illegal aliens prenatal tretment, and then, when confronted with it, argued it didn’t matter if you lied, as long as it’s for a good cause.

  18. Anonymous says:

    If Israel got weapons from any other US President who then said he didn’t know about it, everyone would assume the guy was lying, a ploy to distance himself from his own covert deal.

    Israel gets weapons today and everyone assumes Obama really is abysmally, stupidly unaware what his own cabinet is doing.

    Everyone seems to be okay with Obama being as dumb as a lump of shit.

  19. Macdaddy says:

    More like sexist. In any event, take it up with Chuck Norris, Jason Statham, or Ron Swanson since they are in charge of handing them out.

  20. perspective says:

    Terry’s ad all but says Military-Service-Creates-Bums. That likely reflects 99% of Congressional thinking. The homeless crazed Rambo PTSD panhandler myth, however, is simply not true. By every reliable statistical measure, veterans are statistically more home-owning, less homeless, better employed, less incarcerated, better adjusted, and less mentally unstable than average Americans. That makes sense because stresses you endure make you stronger not weaker.

    So why the myth? Because it is profitable. It pays to say military service turns veterans into bums. That lie is incentivized in many ways and everyone profits from the lie except veterans, who are thereby not respected. For you cannot respect what you pity. The myth demands profitable pity.

    Congressmen obviously get mileage out of it. Anti-war advocates are justified if war weakens warriors. Everyone who avoided serving in uniform feels themselves presciently wise for not serving if serving ruins people. And every pro-Veteran fundraiser for every vets group from VFW to Legion etc., they all discover that nobody donates a penny to veterans who are stronger than average. Plus our federal government is in the business of perpetuating the myth. Federal researchers for the VA admit they poll indigents (bums) on the street without demanding to see proof of service, and so much inflate “homeless veteran” figures simply because nearly every panhandling beggar seeking a handout says they are not only a veteran but a war hero. — Similarly, the VA in 1980 made PTSD a payable cash cow for veterans on their own say so, with no proof of trauma, even if he fears combat he never saw. So the worst of veterans are also coopted by the lie, paid to play the part. — The lie of the broken veteran profits everyone except veterans.

    The Broken Black Myth is another profitable myth. Everyone profits from that lie too. Congressmen afraid to appear uncaring, Non-Blacks who don’t like Blacks, Non Blacks who are color blind but feel compelled to act like race matters, Blacks themselves who loath being descended from slaves, race advocates who fundraise for thousands of Black organizations that obviously haven’t uplifted Ferguson MO’s blacks much, and Politicians who empower themselves by encouraging Blacks to believe they can and should as Blacks, not as Americans but as Blacks, be both Pitied and Respected as both weak and strong, at the same time.

    Again, everyone profits from the myth except the myth’s victims it purports to “help”. In this case, an entire group of Americans who have gone from being owned as slaves, to being Jim Crowed from voting, to being Affirmative Actioned into reliable vote slaves and profitable pity objects. Whereas MLK’s Equal Opportunity sought to empower Blacks to strength as Americans, later Affirmative Action pushed by Liberal Democrats (and abetted by Republicans), saddled Black Americans, not Asians or Hispanics but mainly Blacks, with a uniquely crippling crutch made out of self-loathing and boiling hate, the object of which is to turn Blacks into a separate citizenry of angst ridden Perpetual Adolescents, a profitable role for all but Black Americans.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Myths get help from Liberals who bait and switch words to spin issues. Like the “Immigration Reform”. Immigration laws work fine. The only reform needed is Obama’s arrest for not enforcing them. But as you say he is Black so he gets to loot that situation too.

  22. Anonymous says:

    WHAT? How do the veteran and black myths profit “everyone” except veterans and blacks? Of course we all know successful veterans and blacks. And we all know some who are not so successful, just as within the general population. But to say it is a myth that veterans and blacks are legitimately stressed or oppressed as a result of military service or blackness is a false “perspective.”

    I do get your point, I think. Here’s my better example of myth-making:
    Rolling back the taxes on selected business enterprises will create jobs and yield more tax revenue!

  23. Anonymous says:

    The veteran and black myths that profit people are exactly as #35 explained it. Of course there are successful vets and blacks and some unsuccessful. But that has nothing to do with institutionalized and societal incentives of victimization aimed at those groups, of which they as individuals may or may not choose to stoop.

    I am a VA patient and my family is racially mixed. I not only get #35’s point but I have rarely I seen anything as accurately said. There is a great wave of division, victimization, largess and pity dragging this nation down.

  24. This country started celebrating victimhood over strength and self-reliance about the time of the sixties and the civil rights movement. I think it was an unintended consequence of peaceful civil disobedience, where the goal was to endure as much as possible and still continue. That’s not to say I oppose either the civil rights movement or civil disobedience. But even good things often have malign effects.

    I sometimes wonder if we invented arm wrestling in 2014, would the winner be the guy whose arm was slammed down first.

  25. @37 says:

    Actually, the “myth” of which you write is no myth at all. It is economic law that lower taxes will less discourage job growth and revenue will, in the long run, increase. Stop being unscientific.

  26. TexasAnnie says:

    “Economic law,” yes, because lawmakers are making those laws. But there is absolutely no scientific proof that tax inequities promote job growth and increase revenue. We only have speculation, as indeed, all scientific inquiry regarding economics IS.

  27. Anonymous says:

    TA, you’re wrong again, as is par for the course. Law of e economics are a lot like laws of physics in that they cannot be broken.

    Taxes discourage jobs growth. A decrease in taxes will discourage job growth less than keeping taxes constant. These are the facts of the case, and they are without dispute.

  28. Anonymous Idiot says:

    During the greatest period of economic growth this country has ever seen came during a time of high federal taxation on corporations in the 1950s and 1060s. Taxes were higher during the Clinton administration than they are now, but Clinton brought us another economic boom. What’s the difference? Globalization. Post-war America was a place where people were eager to build their nation and their institutions. All that economic patriotism vaporized in the global economy. Why pay for schools in America, when you can hire a highly educated worker from anywhere in the world? Why produce the high-quality products America wants, when the world will buy crap? Finally, there are no “laws” in economics because, unlike physics, economics are not a science. All those great theories, like the “free market” and the “invisible hand” are theories because they can not be replicated in the real world. There has never been a free market, and nobody can prove the invisible hand. Before you calls someone wrong, you need to do a fact-check on yourself. You think high taxes discourage job growth? You’re wrong. Demand creates jobs, and a lack of demand kills jobs. We don’t have demand because of stagnant wages and Americans’ post-2008 desire to live more within their means.

  29. To Anonymous Idiot at 4:16 says:

    And, Anonymous Idiot, who was it that cast the single and deciding vote for the largest tax increase in history under Clinton? Why yes of course, is was Senator “living in my sister’s basement” Bob Kerrey. Kerrey and Ben Nelson were responsible for more harm to this nation than any other pair of politicians since World War II. Makes you proud to be a Nebraskan doesn’t it!

  30. Cisman, the movie says:

    44 is full of shite. There was a huge recession in the 50s despite massive defense spending.

    As for the rest, the rantings of an idiot,

  31. TexasAnnie says:

    Anonymous #43:
    Wrong? Not me! Please re-read what I wrote at #42: “…there is absolutely no scientific proof that tax inequities promote job growth and increase revenue.” And what was your response? That taxes decrease job growth.

    You have set up a straw man, claiming that as my creation, and then knocked it down. Methinks you are the one in error. Now I could insult you, in your style of communication…

  32. Anonymous says:

    Carol Blood is as Liberal as they come. It’s too bad that Sharon Brown has passed, as she would be able to talk about how strange it was that Sharon Brown signs ended up in Blood’s back yard?

    Blood already knows how to use her office too, why she had her 50th birthday party at the Sarpy County Museum, and it’s been said she let the folks in City Hall know about…..via city email. Hmmm yep a real winner for the Liberals in Nebraska!

  33. Sick of Crazy says:

    What a crock of crazy! This smells of a poor sport like Pat Shannon. Sharon Brown signs in Carol Blood’s back yard? Have you seen Blood’s back yard? You can see it on Google Maps. It’s open to the entire neighborhood. By the way, signs don’t vote. What lies you people have to tell to try and make somebody who is obviously conservative, yet doesn’t fit your description (because she isn’t crazy enough). I called the museum. She paid to rent the museum as anyone else in the community can do. Keep spreading your crazy gossip because you don’t know what to do with somebody who is pro-gun, pro-life, fiscally conservative and doesn’t waste her time spreading lies around town. Our party would win more races if they quit trying to discredit others because they can’t seem to beat them. Try supporting our party and not trying to tear others down in the process. Look at the polls. Your partisan rants are only making people hate both parties.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.