Statements and non-statements

Jefferson-Jackson 01Day 4 of the Nebraska Democrat Dirty Tricks Scandal.

Why the new moniker?

Well, has there been ANY public statement about who exactly is responsible for what Democrat Mayor Chris Beutler and Democrat…er…newspaper Lincoln Journal Star have called “despicable” dirty tricks?

A few anonymous tipsters have pointed at James Pauley — but there has been nothing official, especially from his former employers, the Nebraska Democratic Party, Gubernatorial candidate Chuck Hassebrook or Mitch Paine.

Not to mention, Paine has another person who was listed as one of his consultants — like Pauley — who now works for Congressman Brad Ashford. Was he involved, or did he know about this dirty trick? And if so, what is Ashford doing about it?

The Lincoln Journal Star will likely sweep this under the rug.
We won’t.

***

On other topics to discuss on this Carl Curtis Open Comment Friday…

A new study says there is “little evidence” that marijuana has medicinal value…but more study is needed.

***

Hal Daub repeated to Matt Hansen of the OWH what he said on the Wheels Down Politics Show a few month back: Omaha would benefit from a light rail system.

Here is a short excerpt from that show where Hal talks about what he thinks would be effective, what it might cost, and how Omaha would benefit.

***

A frequent reader posed THIS question in light of recent events:

Will Democrats be changing the name of their traditional Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner?
(They dare to break bread in the name of a slave owner and Native American killer?)

Republicans will likely continue to sup with their Lincoln Day dinners…

***

During her weekly call with the press (which, by the way, is a great service to the people of Nebraska), I asked U.S. Senator Deb Fischer about her thoughts on what some have said is the Supreme Court overstepping their bounds and legislating from the bench on the King v Burwell decision regarding ObamaCare (where the majority re-wrote the law for Congress).

Here is her full response:

That’s a judgment call. I think when I say I’m disappointed in the Court’s decision, that pretty well covers it.

I think Justice Scalia had a good statement when he said, “Words no longer have any meaning.

In my opinion, as a citizen of the United States, it is not the job of the Supreme Court to bow to what they view as public opinion.

They are the highest officers of the Court. It is their job to uphold the Constitution, to uphold the laws of this country. And when they start truly bowing to their interpretation of what is good for the public or bow to public opinion they do all of us a disservice.

***

And on today’s same-sex marriage ruling, here is U.S. Senator Ben Sasse’s full statement:

Today’s ruling is a disappointment to Nebraskans who understand that marriage brings a wife and husband together so their children can have a mom and dad. The Supreme Court once again overstepped its Constitutional role by acting as a super-legislature and imposing its own definition of marriage on the American people rather than allowing voters to decide in the states.

“As a society, we need to celebrate marriage as the best way to provide stability and opportunity for kids. As President Obama has said, there are good people on both sides of the issue. I hope we all can agree that our neighbors deserve the freedom to live out their religious convictions.”

(Of course President Obama held the same position up until about a year ago, which you always hear the main stream press mention never…)

Annnnd this email update from the Douglas County Clerk immediately following the ruling:

Same-sex marriages are now legal in the State of Nebraska. The Douglas County Clerk/Comptroller’s office is now issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

55 comments

  1. Henry Robert says:

    I think we should legalize cannabis to the medicinal level. This way we can legally research it and study it. We need to get it out of the Schedule Class 1 drug and into the FDA’s hands.

    On the ruling of Gay Marriage, love is love but I wish the Supreme Court ruled that it should be determined up to the states. I would love to see the legislature put it up for a vote. “The Second House of the People.”

  2. Let me get the responses rolling for you, Sweeper.

    You can’t believe anything the AMA says because Big Pharma. Pot is a sacred herb, and scientists can’t measure sacredness, er sacriditude, er, sacriousness. And the people down the end of my street know someone whose daughter had 3 seizures a day until they started treating her with hash oil. Now she’s a gymnast and Harvard Student. Here’s a cute picture!

  3. Jiggery-pokery says:

    Vince powers should cancel the Jefferson-Jackson dinner. Andrew Jackson was a brutal slave owner. AJ bought his first slave, a young woman, in 1788. and by 1794 his business included slave trading and he had purchased at least 16 slaves. In the 1820s Jackson owned about 160 slaves. The democrat bastard did not even free his slaves in his will.

  4. Interested Observer says:

    And DEB FI$CHER thinks we need to “uphold the laws of this country”??? WOW, I can think of a good place to start!

  5. The Grundle King says:

    After yesterday’s ruling on King v. Burwell, we pretty much had to see the gay marriage ruling coming. SCOTUS, who henceforth shall be known as the Socialist Club Of The United States, is holding their collective finger in the wind of public opinion, and ruling accordingly. Maybe a few of the inaptly named ‘justices’ are just too tired of having their widdle feelings hurt by the liberals and progressives following Citizens United. Roberts tried to assert his conservative bona fides, but he’s been exposed as a fraud. Twice.

    Sure, there’s the whole notion that when you write a law, the law means what it says in plain text. When the law says it’s illegal for me to drive in excess of 75 mph on the interstate, it doesn’t mean that it’s illegal for me to drive in excess of 75 mph on the interstate unless I’m in a really big hurry. Why is it that the judicial branch, charged with enforcing our laws (pfft!), gets to ignore what the law says, but the rest of us plebs do not? How can we achieve such exalted status that we, too, can enjoy all the perks of thumbing our nose at the law?

    Gosh. I just had a thought. I sure hope this isn’t too mean and nasty. I’d hate to offend the delicate sensibilities of those who seem to have just become aware of politics in the past 3 weeks.

  6. FWIW says:

    Just so you all know, the Nebraska Democrats don’t have a Jefferson-Jackson dinner. It’s called the Morrison-Exon dinner.

  7. MR. POWERS, TEAR DOWN THIS MEMORIAL! says:

    It’s unbelievable that in the new era we live in that Nebraska Democrats aren’t already on their way to DC to handcuff themselves to the White House fence, risking arrest, to protest the EXISTENCE of the Jefferson Memorial, honoring a slave owner who RAPED his slaves. They SAY they have advanced society by getting rid of a mere flag. If they don’t completely shun the names Jefferson and Jackson, they are totally two-faced. Mr. Powers, we expect to see YOU driving the bulldozer tearing down the Jefferson Memorial. If you don’t, you have no credibility whatsoever.

  8. Not Jane Kleeb says:

    What! I’m the ONLY Nebraskan who gets to be arrested handcuffed to the White House fence! Unless of course there are tv cameras.

  9. Macdaddy says:

    “I hope we all can agree that our neighbors deserve the freedom to live out their religious convictions.” Cute. There will be no such agreement. The First Amendment is officially dead.

  10. Ridiculous says:

    This is the third Leavenworthst.com post about James Pauley, who was a 22 year old intern when he worked for the NDP (and wasn’t re-hired for Mayor Beutler’s campaign or the NDP for the spring elections), meanwhile Pat McPherson sits on the State Board of Education and Bill Kintner is a State Senator.

    Seriously guys, let it go.

  11. The Grundle King says:

    “Seriously guys, let it go.”

    Right, because if we were dealing with a reversal of political affiliations between Lamm and Pauley, the Nebraska dems…especially Vince Powers…would TOTALLY let it go.

  12. KHDS says:

    Will the Douglas County Clerk issue a marriage license to me and my proposed three wives?

    We are Muslims and have strongly held religious beliefs. Two of the women are illegal aliens but I have a fundamental right to marry and a First Amendment right to practice my religion.

    Love is love. That’s right there in the Constitution.

    And by the way, we already have three illegitimate children. Kids will be hurt if we can’t do this marriage thing.

    Thank you five unelected Ivy League lawyers!

  13. TexasAnnie says:

    The Douglas County Clerk is now issuing same-sex marriage licenses! But, but, but…same sex unions are unconstitutional in Nebraska!!! What will Nebraskans do? Obey their Constitution? Or Obey the supreme law of the land?

  14. The Eye Ball says:

    Hal Daub is dead wrong on light rail. Denver and other cities have huge problems with it. The funds come from the Federal government but the city holds the bag on problems. Someone was killed by the Denver light rail earlier this year.

    He is also wrong about the housing crash. Omaha lost 40,000 people during that crash.

  15. Macdaddy says:

    KHDS, sorry, but you are not allowed to do that because you invoked religion. That’s the icky kind of alternative marriage. Don’t mention religion and throw in two goats and the next door neighbor and you’ll be fine.

  16. Hesdeadjim says:

    I’m out on light rail. Publication transit is very inefficient in total cost as numerous studies have shown. Money, especially taxpayer money, is better spent on maintaing our embarassing roads.
    It’s kind of funny actually, Omaha Mayors have been neglecting our existing roads and letting contractors build subpar roads for 30 years yet someone thinks were ought to spend money on a light rail to serve a tiny section of the city.

  17. Obama knew. says:

    There’s a picture on Faceboom of James Pauley wearing an Obama t-shirt. When did Obama know about the Bum website?

  18. Let’s not edit history, now. Pauley was field director for the NDP, and ran multiple training sessions for them. He went on to be field director for the NDP’s gubernatorial candidate, Chuck Hassebrook. That’s a little more than being an ‘ointern’.

  19. Let’s all recall also that Bob Kerrey, the last but one Democrat candidate for Senate from this state, fought against the racial integration of fraternities while he was in student government at UNL.

    He was then tossed out of ASUN in an embezzlement scandal.

    I love history.

  20. ouch says:

    I hope you weren’t enjoying a cigar and whisky when you said marijuana has no “medicinal value.”

    The word “value” is tied to opinion. Pot however has obvious physical pharmacological medicinal IMPACT. Everyone who opposes marijuana does so because it creates an analgesic psychoactive drunk feeling. Single malts and oxycodone do too. This is treatment not cure. Most medicine treats symptoms. Very little cures. Marijuana may not cure anything. But neither does an icepack “cure” a severed limb when an amputee applies it to a stump to reduce swelling and pain.

    Perhaps to some, the word “medical” in medical marijuana suggests pot promises to cure everything from cancer to baldness. I don’t see that but perhaps. Yet with its analgesic effects so apparent, I am not sure “cannabis treatment” or any other version of the phrase describes it more accurately. The term “compassionate care” is so saccharine it nearly gives you diabetes just reading it.

    Cannabis’ obvious analgesic effect makes it at once a crime of drunkenness to those who see it as a recreational drug, and yet a treatment some physicians would prescribe to suffering patients.

    Amazing hypocrisies spring up to oppose this, spanning from the implication that treatments for those suffering are somehow recreational, to the rather horrific hypocrisy of lawmakers demanding this be either crime-or-cure, while their own paychecks are full of taxes they gain from selling recreational tobacco and alcohol that they know gives their constituents lung cancer and liver disease.

    Marijuana is no gnat. However, when lawmakers are paid to give people cancer and then demand cannabis be proved to cure disease before the lawmakers allow physicians to prescribe it to suffering patients, that is one really big assed camel.

  21. OWH Rejoices says:

    The OWH is on the march with tons of Love is Love stories. I can’t wait for them to start running anti-Catholic stories for those that tow the line on gay marriage.

  22. Gerard Harbison - NDP Expert says:

    James Pauley was “Field Director” for the NDP when there were 3 paid staff, exec director, finance director, and field director. He was the lowest paid staff and was paid around $20K a year. He oversaw zero paid staff.

    He was “CD1 Field Director” for Hassebrook, meaning he was about the 15th highest ranking staff member of the Hassebrook campaign.

  23. Hesdeadjim says:

    I just realized that no matter how public we make this despicable act, carried out by democrats, no matter how much of an outrage it is, they will still hire Pauley and Paine in the future. Look at Matt Samp. That sicko was still getting checks from Jim Suttle’s campaign. The Democrats just DGAF about morality or a history of poor decision making in their staff. Maybe that’s why the best they can do is win a consolation prize election.

  24. Uumm excuse me hesdeadjim says:

    Let me know when James Pauley gets elected to the State Board of Education or the legislature like McPherson or Kintner.

  25. @ 1:36 pm. So you’re saying he wasn’t an intern. Good. A little honesty is a nice start.

    I can well see how you want to minimize his role, now he’s well and truly under the bus.

  26. Gerard Harbison - NDP Expert says:

    James was an intern, and paid field director for a few months. Let me know when he’s on the Board of Education or Nebraska legislature like McPherson and Kintner.

  27. Anonymous says:

    From Obamacare to Obamachurch. Amen.

    I’m not religions but isn’t there Freedom of Religion?

    In its most narrow interpretation, it says a President cannot tell you to change your religious belief. That’s why the right exists.

    So SCOTUS, just as you now make law, you can also get the ball rolling on impeaching this tyrannical ass hole.

  28. Anonymous says:

    Kintner’s words and Facebook musings are just as protected as Ernie Chambers’.
    The difference being that Kintner is never really wrong, he just puts things the way most of us think but are too polite to say.

  29. TexasAnnie says:

    Religious ‘freedom’ includes the choices of ANY religion and NO religion!

    So, if a Catholic (for example) believes it is a sin for two persons of the same sex to marry, then the Catholic better not marry someone of the same sex. Same-sex unions are not obligatory! They have simply become legal, nationally. On the other hand, if an atheist believes it is okay for any two people to get married, but the law prohibit(ed) persons of the same sex to marry, then the atheist cannot realize his/her particular ‘freedom.’

    For all you “religious freedom” doubters, fear not! Nothing has been taken from your “freedom to believe.” SCOTUS has simply granted everyone else in our country their freedom to believe…

  30. Anonymous says:

    TA, the outstanding question is whether the Catholic Church can retain its tax exemption for engaging in what some call “hate speech.” What say you?

  31. Norm Mal de Mer says:

    First ObamaCare, now ObamaChurch.

    I’m not religious but when Obama says American religions need to be convinced to believe that homosexuality is natural, he violates the core of the First Amendment. Not your iffy right to practice Thugee by strangling people but the Bill of Rights foundation that says no President will ever tell you what to believe ala religion. — Welcome to the new ObamaNormal.

    Of course, Obama thinks gayness is natural. His creepy childhood of serial abandonment and sexual abuse by socio-moral iconoclasts makes a Fellini freak film look like Mary Poppins. And for sure, gayness is old stuff. I have gay relatives. That’s fine. However, marriage is a government licensed contract. Marriage FORCES my dollars to tacitly endorse gayness as good. Likewise, New York State’s recent ruling allowing uncle-niece marriages is now law. Mother Nature says all this is unnatural, but so too are condoms for heterosexuals. The moment Man evolved awareness, he put his penis into women, men, siblings, animals and corpses. Natural is having babies. Everything else can be normalized.

    This isn’t really about sex. It is about money and power, freedom vs tyranny.

    Everything government touches is bent. — A few years ago, in Washington State, a man died from having sex with a horse. The resulting legal debate was about whether the horse had sex by consent. No kidding. — Marriage today is not about propagation. Parents are not getting married today but gays are. Marriage is a government tool for forcing people to behave. T’was ever thus.

    —The upside of ObamaNormal is that we get a free show. Watch as fudge packers and rug munchers newly imbued with official legal dignity morph into puritanical copies of Beaver Cleaver’s parents looking down their prissy noses in disgust at states like OH, RI and NJ that allow incest.

  32. Anonymous says:

    My gosh there are a lot of “ugly on the inside” people in the state of Nebraska. These comments are gross. Mind your own business and marriages. Isn’t it better if more people want to enter the wonderful institution of marriage? Our society is better for it. I’m way more concerned with all the infidelities and divorces going on than I am if two gay people want to join together in marriage. Good grief.

  33. It''s not about gay marriage says:

    It’s about things like marrying your sister, and p o l y g a m y. Well now, we’ve put the ugly things on the table for discussion.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Prehistoric marriage was a contract between families, then between tribes, then a church union, then a government sanctioned licensed contract. Today marriage is a government subsidized political status. Marriage is all about a profitable union. Marriage is about property. Think not? Talk to a divorce lawyer. –

    Love, you say, as in being lovesick? The texts say lovesickness is indistinguishable from other forms of obsessive insanity. Successful married people have trust, respect, esteem and sexual affection based on a mutually profitable union. Its profitable and today subsided.

    Arnold and Campbell calculate a single woman of the same income as a married woman over a lifetime would pay an extra $1,022,000 just for being single. Some of that is the simple saving of two paying for one roof but there are many other perks and subsidies federal, state, local, employers, etc. for being married.

  35. To: It''s not about gay marriage says:

    Who the hell do you think you are, talking about my sisters that way? Get them off your damned table!

  36. Attilailla the Nebraskan says:

    In the wake of a US court decision to force states to marry homosexuals and a US President telling Americans they need to change their religious beliefs, the Philippine Roman Catholic church says it stands firm against Gay marriage. It’s a church. No surprise there.

    However, “under (Phillipine) law, marriage is still between a man and a woman and only an act of Congress can change this, UNLIKE IN THE UNITED STATES.”

    What an innovation! Law made and changed by a legislature! What will they think up next!

    Here in America, Law is made by a panel of unelected unaccountable lifetime kings. — SCOTUS. They don’t just judge crimes and cases, they make law. They don’t just say “no”, they order actions and punish emotions. — This isn’t about sex or marriage. Subsidy is closer. Its about tyranny.

    This is about a court that orders people and states to act, behave, and think on any pretext that unelected court cares to invent, with zero check on that unbalance. This is not the court’s constitutional role but a usurped one.

    What keeps this court from making law, short of Thomas Jefferson’s recommendation that a people overthrow their own government and start over with a new format? Is that draconian? You bet. Is it possible? Of course.

    If there is no check on this unbalance, what then?

    What happens when those sworn to defend our “constitution” see the unelected guardians of the constitution violate their own judicial role by becoming lawmakers? Hmm?

  37. Attila the Nebraskan says:

    That’s odd. I was typing in my appellation in the “name” block when Leavenworth Street Blog suddenly swallowed my comment whole, without me hitting “Post Comment”.

    Do not think Attila stutters. That would be bad for my image as I sweep across the steppes.

  38. TexasAnnie says:

    Anonymous @ 9:30am, June 28th:

    “Hate Speech?” Like this: “Catholics are bigots.” Or like this: “Catholics should kill the justices!”
    (You get the point, I hope, about defining and punishing “hate speech!”)

    With regard to tax credits: No tax credits would be allowable in my ideal world. Not for being married, not for “creating jobs,” not for buying a house, not for “economic development,” not for having a baby, and most assuredly not for being a church! (You get the point, I hope, about tax justice.)

  39. Anonymous says:

    Bored at 9:08. You are one lazy stupid oaf.

    You demand Sweeper give you a new topic to discuss? Would you like him to type your comments too?

    This is discussion blog. Sweeper plants a few seeds. If they don’t grow, you can plant a few. Engage your brain, put fingers on keys and type.

  40. Anonymous says:

    I’d agree with 9:08 if I could stay awake. Wow it’s the Soup Nazi at 11:12AM disguised as a “stupid oaf” finder. Now where are my seeds? Can we talk about Governor Jessica instead?

  41. YOU LIE! says:

    From today’s LJS

    “What she does not do, Moenning says, is lobby state senators or try to shape the governor’s legislative agenda or manage the governor’s news releases.

    “I am very careful to draw a line,” she says. “I do not engage with the Legislature on specific bills. Once the governor has his own legislative agenda, I provide some strategic insight and thought.”

    So you never discussed the gas tax or death penalty with any Senator? Do you mind if the Attorney General looks into this Jessica? Do you want to retract your statement?

  42. Anonymous says:

    Kuehn is anything but an up and coming star. He is an iffy republican who peed his pants when he found out that an older Senator knew his name and asked him to raise the gas tax and abolish the death penalty.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.