Tell the truth

Bill Kintner 01“Few believe bare-knuckled politics are a substitute for principled governing. And does anyone doubt that many on both the right and the left now salivate for more of these radical tactics? The people despise us all. And why is this? Because we’re not doing the job we were sent here to do.”

This was a portion of Senator Ben Sasse’s maiden speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

According to press reports

“As he concluded his half-hour speech, the other senators applauded. Many approached him with an encouraging handshake and slap on the back.”

Now, if Sasse had given this speech on the floor of the Nebraska Legislature, apparently things would have been different.

Instead of kudos, he would have been told to get the hell out — or as the kids like to Text, “DLTDHYOTAOTWO“.

That was essentially Speaker Galen Hadley’s response to state Senator Bill Kintner, when Kintner suggested, in a written editorial, that things should change in the Legislature.

In his Op-Ed, Kintner suggested…

  • Changing the secret ballot to public ballots used to elect committee chairman
  • Being more conservative by cutting spending and taxes
  • Not listening to lobbyists so much

That was it.
That was the list. Don’t believe me? Read it here.

So it’s no wonder that Hadley told him:

“If you don’t like being in the body, leave. Get out.”

Did this hit too close to home for the Speaker?

 

Stupid or Liar?

And then lets look at the ridiculous press who, upon hearing ANY analogy, immediately jump up and declare that the one telling the story is making a one-to-one argument.

Kintner begins his Op-Ed by re-telling an old story of monkeys in a cage who end up doing something, “because that’s the way we’ve always done it.”

Click the Op-Ed to read it or you can watch Jeff Bridges tell the exact-same story in the movie “The Contender”. (You might note that this long-story ended up on the cutting-room floor, but was included in the DVD extras…)

Or if you don’t like Hollywood, here is a professor from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, telling the same story in a TED-like setting.

But what does your Nebraska Press do?
They accuse Kintner of calling the Legislature monkeys.
Yeah.

Martha Stoddard, OWH: ...Kintner column comparing senators to monkeys
Nebraska Radio Network: Sen. Kintner compares lawmakers to monkeys
Steve White, NTV: …Sen. Kintner column that compared lawmakers to monkeys
LJS: ...Senator Kintner for writing column likening lawmakers to monkeys in cage
Matthew Hansen, OWH: ...Sen. Kintner op-ed comparing senators to monkeys
JoAnne Young, LJS: Sen. Kintner went on for 29 paragraphs with his comparison between monkeys and senators.
Joe Duggan, OWH: …Sen Bill Kintner to task for op-ed piece comparing his colleagues with “monkeys.”

So here’s a game for you, members of the Fourth Estate:

Stupid or Liar?

Are you just that obtuse that you can’t understand a simple analogy used to make a point? Did you REALLY miss the point of “doing things the way they’ve always been done” and that the monkey story was just a vessel for that idea?

Are you REALLY that stupid?

Or are you just lying to your readers?

For instance, Matthew Hansen replied to my Tweet, saying , “I didn’t miss his point. A monkey wouldn’t miss his point, so long as Curious George didn’t nod off during extended analogy.”

Well, OK then. So, when Hansen Tweeted to his followers that Kintner was comparing Senators to monkeys, he knew that wasn’t true. (There’s a word for that.)

Just waiting for the rest of the press to speak up. Because of course, “Kintner wants to change Legislature rules” doesn’t get nearly the clicks that “Kintner accuses Hadley of having a tail and prehensile feet” does.

But then again, no one accused Sasse above of claiming that the Senate was full of drooling MMA fighters, did they?

Hmm. Maybe it has something to do with their personal feelings about Hadley.

 

Galen being Galen

And while we’re at it, Speaker Hadley REALLY took offense to a fellow Senator suggesting that he vote differently.

Told the guy to resign his office.

BUT…

Another fellow Senator compares police to ISIS…
Suggests that if he wasn’t peaceful, he’d shoot a cop…

In that instance Hadley says, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Apparently it’s just a good thing that Senator Chambers didn’t suggest that Hadley should cut taxes.

 

Ruth, Gehrig…Daub?

I had predicted that the expanding gambling amendment that I spoke with former state Senator Scott Lautenbaugh about would stir up some passion.

And look at the group it brought together!

Tom Osborn
Pete Ricketts
Hal Daub

That’s quite the Murderer’s Row of Nebraska Republicans to be up against.

And of course, the issue of expanded casino gambling has already devolved into one side claiming “deceit” and the other “outright lies”.

If this doesn’t end up with lie-detector tests, we’re not getting our money’s worth…

 

Mmmmmkay?

For fans of “Office Space” (the movie, not to be confused with the TV show, “The Office”), here is Ted Cruz’s latest funny against Hillary Clinton.

Cruz apparently has a group making a number of funnies for him. The above ad, one with a Donald Trump action figure, the Rubio remorse ad.

And here’s a Q: They dropped the Rubio remorse ad, because it starred a porn actress. But did they REALLY not know who she was, or was that intentional to get MORE people to watch the spot??? The plot thickens!

In the mean time, here are some reported tracking numbers from South Carolina this morning:

Trump 34%
Cruz 17%
Jeb 12%
Rubio 10%
Kasich single digits

The big shocker has to be Rubio below Bush.
If he doesn’t play better in SC, does that spell doom for his campaign?
Could make it very difficult…

 

..and I ain’t got nobody…

Another Saturday-night GOP debate!
I should be live-Tweeting it, so follow along @LeavenworthSt!

Have a great weekend!

31 comments

  1. Lil Mac says:

    If Trump is polling 44% nationwide, that means Trump is actually closer to 50%, because Trump under polls by at least 6%, as verified by IVR studies.

    Trump voters hesitate to admit they support Trump in any live polling encounter, such as a caucus (where party thugs look over shoulders), in live-voice polls, and live exit polls. But when Trump voters are polled anonymously, via online polling, or IVR (pushing button), or in the privacy of a normal Primary polling booth, Trump significantly outperforms the polls.

    Normally live polling is the most accurate type of poll. But Trump voters are openly threatened. The GOP Chairman condemned Trump (for saying what most polled Americans deem to be common sense). And newspapers today refer to Trump voters much like Hitler referred to Jews, as sub-human.

    Many Trump supporters keep their mouths shut but they all stick to Trump like glue when voting.

    Luntz finds Trump’s voters the most resilient in recorded history. When you show any other voter an hour of attack ads hammering their candidate, they become angry and support weakens. Yet Trump supporters belly-laugh at anti-Trump ads and the intensity of their support actually increases.

    In coming caucuses, Trump should reflect the poll predictions. But within primaries we can expect Trump to outperform his polled strength by at least 6 pts. 72% of state party selection is via primary not caucus.

    • This is really too bad. There is a very short list of GOP candidates I won’t vote for in the general, but Trump’s at number 1. I know I’m not alone,

      Gary Johnson’s looking better every day.

  2. Wild speculator says:

    WTF re your poll?

    Augusta Chronicle Poll has Rubio ahead of Bush 15% to 11%; Opinion Savvy also has Rubio at 15% and Bush at 11%. Are you reporting what Mike Murphy (sorry, mike murphy) tweeted without attribution?

    Whether these real poll numbers are accurate or last through the coming dirty tricks onslaught, who knows? But you should at least include the actual poll results being released.

    [Old man yells at cloud]

    • Wild speculator says:

      Whoops – Opinion Savvy conducted the poll for Augusta Chronicle, so that is one data point, not two, as I implied above.

  3. Anonymous says:

    News Flash… Ted Cruz cut an ad for South Carolina Conservative Christians starring a porn star who advocates for decency and for Ted Cruz. Caught, Ted says she was only a “soft porn” star.

    Google “Amy Lindsay” and you find her being googled by a guy in bed and her then googling his google. Poor Ted. If he was Bill Clinton he’d get a bump in the polls.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Oh yes, Sweeper, I see. Thanks. You are a peach. Twas buried a bit. But twas there indeed.

    What was your suggestion? That hiring a porn star might be a good way for Ted to get the positive attention of Christian Conservatives? You could be right. Then again…

    I rather saw this more like Cruz’s hubris that destroyed his university’s chance at a national debate championship. Better yet, the older brilliant Ted Cruz running for POTUS before it dawned on the guy that maybe, just maybe, he ought to quit being a Canadian citizen first. But to keep with the theme of porn stars, there was also Ted’s college room mate who said Ted would cruise the girl’s dormitory at night wearing a bathrobe. The creep factor of that is pretty high. Like I said, mild stuff for a Bill Clinton but if you want to be Mr. Tea Party, well, you need to keep your google in check.

    Sweeper, this blog, like Schindler’s List, is an “absolute good”. And in black and white too. Bravo.

    • Sparkles says:

      A 2014 study by Brock University found that America’s Bible Belt states indulge in more online porn than other less religious states.

      Based on two years of data from Google Trends across US states, researchers found that states that identified as religiously conservative and politically conservative indulged in more online pornography than other more liberal states.

      In addition, based on data collected by Pornhub, the nation’s leading online porn site, the Bible Belt leads the nation in consumption of gay porn.

      • Ah yes, Brock University, perhaps the most eminent center of scholarship in St Catherine’s, Ontario, Canada.

        Of course Sparky misreported the results, but he is perhaps not the father nof lies, but maybe the annoying younger brother of lies.

      • Sparkles says:

        There are half a dozen studies, all pointing the same results.
        Would you prefer a 2011 study by Benjamin G. Edelman of the Harvard Business School?

        Actually, you know my information is, for all intents and purposes, correct.

      • My working hypothesis is that everything Sparkles posts is either wrong or an outright lie. This latest claim is just one more data point. There is no such 2011 study. There is a 2009 study of porn use by zip code. So let see what it says about religion.

        “The fourth column reports that in regions where more people report regularly attending religious services (per National Election Studies 2004), overall subscription rates are not statistically significantly different from subscriptions elsewhere”.

        Perusing the raw data, there is a non-statistically significant *negative* correlation.

        So once again it says the exact opposite of what Sparkles claims it says (porn users are, as you’d predict, young, unmarried, urban, and wealthier than average, somewhat more likely to have a college degree but less likely to have a graduate degree. Not exactly a conservative demographic.)

        More…

        “I experimented with a number of other variables, but did not find statistically significant results. In the 13 states that forbade sodomy immediately prior to Lawrence v. Texas (2003), subscriptions to this adult entertainment service are more prevalent than in other states, but insignificantly so. Furthermore, I found no significant relationship between subscriptions to this adult entertainment service and presidential voting in 2004, based on poll data by congressional district.”

        A good general rule is that if Sparkles tells you the sun rose this morning, look out the window to check. Check out the post title, dude, and try to follow it.

  5. Sparkles says:

    What, nobody wants to the discuss the recent headlines about Rubio’s tax plan?

    You know, the one that adds an additional $8.1 Trillion dollars (with interest) to the debt over 10 years?

    Whew!! Now -THAT- is fiscal conservatism my friend!!

    71% of Rubio’s tax cuts would go to the richest quintile.
    And yes, we know the reflexive response. Even tea folk living on only Social Security have been trained to scream out in defense of this upward redistribution by reciting things such as – ‘but, but the rich pay all the taxes’. Or the equally inane, ‘but the rich are ones who do all the job creatin”.

    The fact is, under NoShow’s plan, the poorest quintile receive a measly 1.3% tax cut, or roughly $232 per year, while the top 1% are treated to an 8.9% tax cut, equal to $204,995 per year.
    And the top 0.1%?
    Glad you asked. They’re rewarded with a whopping 11.5% tax cut, meaning they’ll pocket an additional $1,122,110 per year.

    But in Marco’s defense, Jeb?’s tax is equally abhorrent.
    And Trump? Trump is the most cataclysmic of all – Trump’s tax plan would add $9.5 Trillion to the debt, $11.2 Trillion when you factor in the interest.

    In light of this non-partisan analysis, the Rube-io team’s defense of his tax plan has been laughable.
    For instance they say the $8.1 Trillion loss will be partially offset by the repeal of ObamaCare.
    A repeal which the CBO has declared, repeatedly, would actually INCREASE the deficit.
    They also claim they cut spending by, “Oppos(ing) corporate welfare like the New Deal-era Export-Import Bank”.
    Eliminating the Im-Ex bank would save a whopping $2 billion. So only $8,098,000,000,000 more to go, team Marco!!

    How in God’s name is it possible these moonbat tax plans NOT matter to Republican voters??

  6. bynd says:

    How in God’s name is it possible these moonbat tax plans NOT matter to Republican voters??

    Because the cost is till well below Hillary and Bernie. Whether giving free stuff to the poor or letting the rich, supposedly, have better tax cuts, it is the middle that ultimately pays the price. And by the way, I have been saying this is not a red state for many years. It is pink at best.

    • Sparkles says:

      “Because the cost is till well below Hillary and Bernie.”

      Based on what, bynd? Show me the analysis that supports your claim.
      I’ll grant you Bernie’s promises would cost trillions in the coming decade, but the Sanders camp claims they’ll raise taxes sufficient to support their programs.
      And if the choice is 2 years of free college or the neocon/Rubio/Cruz/Trump/Bush dream of plowing countless trillions more into our bloated Military Industrial Complex, I’ll go with free college all day long.
      I’m frankly of the opinion the Sanders campaign rhetoric is an amalgam of the glittery bits of Unicorn farts. Unless a legion of respected economists can prove otherwise, I would have to imagine his tax increases would likely wreck havoc on our economy. Which is why I can’t imagine ever voting for him.

      Honestly, I’m not sure why I’m even replying to you. Rarely are your proclamations based on anything concrete, empirical or verifiable.
      Nonetheless I respect you, and your right to express your opinion.
      And noble men like Chuck Hagel, Bob Kerrey, John Kerry, John McCain, Bob Dole and Charlie Rangle bled defending your right to babble. So by all means, babble away.
      After all, as someone famous recently declared; “Who am I to judge?”

      • Sparkles says:

        John Kerry has three Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star, with Valor, and a Silver Star for Gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States.

        But by all means, don’t let facts get in the way of your baseless ideological rant.

      • anon says:

        Of my last training before going to RVN, a slide show where the presenter showed a picture of a bunker where he said the MSGT and officer earned their medals

      • bynd says:

        Sparkles:
        And yours were based on?

        You answer because you spend all your time on lib sites that feed you what you want to hear and it makes you falsely confident that you are right.

        Since no one knows what is going to happen, to get your panties in a tight wad now is nothing but fear mongering. You know, like when you and the other libs stated the same about conservatives and the refugees from Syria. And the conservatives turned out to be right about that one.

        So the question is, how are Bernie or Hillary going to raise taxes with the Repubs in charge? Ohh, you never thought of that. LOL

        And if they give all the freebies they promised to give, without raising taxes first, then what?

        And can taxes be raised enough on the rich to pay for the tens of trillions of freebies promised HRC or BS. Ohh, they forgot to research that.

        How can you cut the taxes of the low earners more when most don’t even pay that much? Just a common sense question.

        Not all of us need to have others tell us what is what. Mainly, it is common sense. Something zealot partisans seem to be very short of.

        But once again, your suppressed Republican side is trying to get out by spreading fear and bigotry. You just can’t make up your mind who or what you are. Could Sparkles really be Brad? Or just a Brad clone.

  7. repenting lawyer says:

    SweeperI It was a comparison. Analogy and metaphor both have he was also saying they were not like monies. He would have aspects of comparison, particularly analogy in the Thomistic tradition. The press is not failing to tell the truth, though he also in using one of these figures he denied similarities in someway. Should have used your points and let it go at that. On the other hand the Speaker’s comments were a silly overreaction. Sorry your ability to see figurative speech does not reach Ernie’s remarks, but then maybe literary criticism is not you field.

    • Ohhhhhhhh Professor.
      Now.
      Do you REALLY think that Kinter’s comparison (that’s fine) rises to the level of Ernie’s “remarks”, suggesting that the police are LIKE Isis (I believe that’s a simile)???
      Feel free to dive right into that.
      Kintner told an interesting story about how things get done “because that’s the way they’ve always been done.”
      Chambers compared cops to terrorists.
      Oh, and then he capped it off by suggesting a different Ernie would murder them.
      But hey, tomayto, tomahto, right?

      But let’s do go back up to the “comparison”. Is there a “comparison” made? Well, if you want to say he was comparing scenarios of the cage and the legislature, they the scenarios, maybe.
      But to say he was “comparing them to monkeys” is at best intellectually dishonest.
      If he said, “they’re acting like monkeys” you would think he means they’re running around, screaming, hurling feces, etc. (I’m not saying that DOESN’T happen, just that that wasn’t what Kintner was saying…)
      But you would NOT think he meant that they were in a cage fighting over the appearance of a banana.
      So to simply say, “Kintner compares Senators to monkeys” not only misses the point, but is intellectually dishonest — i.e. lying.
      And as I pointed out, no one was suggesting that Sasse “compared Senate to drooling MMA fighters”. But we should also keep in mind that the local press thinks Kintner is a right wing jerk.
      And so they let everyone know what they think, via their misleading Tweets.

      But, again, you know all that.

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Sweeper, What Ernie said was he did not worry about ISIS, who were not in his neighborhood and the Omaha police gave him enough to worry about, not the comparison you suggest. He specially said he would not shot a policeman. Had I had a different upbringing I might have been a Trappist, is not a way of saying I am a Trappist. You were extending to Kinter a charity you did not extending to Chambers, and then complaining that the press did to your guy what the original news coverage did to Ernie as the LJS pointed out with regard to the original Chambers story by printing the transcript. Kinter did say a certain comparison between monkeys and the Unicameral was justified. Otherwise what he said made no sense. He might of course have drawn more offensive comparisons, but he did make a comparison, though not an identity statement.

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Sweeper, I had fun playing grump, thank you. What Kinter said was no big deal and the Speaker acted like a fool. Press goes for short and punchy, usually a half truth, but thetis the nature media that imitates TV and attention spans shaped by tv.

  8. buck turgidson says:

    Those “reported” tracking numbers were leaked by none other than Mike Murphy of Team Jeb and Right to Rise infamy, so please forgive me if I am skeptical of their veracity.

    For the onetime presumptive nominee to be leaking poll numbers indicating a third place finish in his supposed stronghold shows just how detached from reality Jeb has become.

    If the goal of his effort is to destroy once and for all any political capital or goodwill the Bush Family has left in the Republican Party, then Mission Accomplished.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.