New Nebraska Network Libeled in Omaha World-Herald

I'll admit it. I'm pissed off. In Thursday's Omaha World-Herald, the state's most powerful newspaper published a letter to the editor that had no other purpose but to undermine me and to delegitimize the work we've been doing for almost 2-1/2 years at the New Nebraska Network.

What's most appalling is that the letter I'd written last week to which this responded was published by the World-Herald with all criticism of the World-Herald's biased and self-serving coverage of the 2007 legislature censored. Yet, they've now published a direct, libelous assault on this website without even having the common courtesy of providing its name or its Internet address that readers might judge its merit for themselves.

Shameless cowards! See for yourself:

Public Pulse, OWH 06/14/2007

CONSIDER THE SOURCE
In his June 8 letter, Kyle Michaelis called Republican state senators partisan "puppets" and implied that Gov. Dave Heineman is so devious that his arm of influence could "threaten the independence of our Legislature as a separate branch of government."

Kyle Michaelis is lecturing us on partisanship? That's rich. For those unaware, Michaelis is president of the Young Democrats of Nebraska and runs a very liberal blog, which he uses to make destructive and personal negative attacks on Republican elected officials.

In my opinion, Michaelis is exhibiting unprincipled hypocrisy. The next time he considers giving a sanctimonious lecture about the perils of political partisanship, I think he ought to first look in his own mirror.

Lloyd J. Smith, Lincoln

So, let's get this straight - because I'm politically active and have a blog, I shouldn't be allowed to express a personal opinion? I've never been anything but upfront about my partisanship at NNN, but I've also never been anything less than absolutely respectful and supportive of the nonpartisan ideal in Nebraska politics.

The political reality of our near-total Republican domination demands a viable Democratic alternative for the good of the state, and I will fight like hell to see that Nebraska's middle-class and working families have that alternative. But, I have never allowed this site's purpose to be clouded or manipulated by purely partisan machinations.

In fact, in terms of honesty with my readers that is the true stuff of that mythical journalistic integrity, I will put my record up against that of the World-Herald any day of the week.

This liar Lloyd J. Smith, as well as the Omaha World-Herald, can both go to hell for this inexcusable insult to this website and myself without any recourse or possibility of correcting their outrageous accusations.

"Destructive and personal negative attacks on Republican elected officials" - are you kidding me? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? This website has always been dedicated to the ideas, the votes, and the policies affecting Nebraska's future. I can't even say what a slap-in-the-face it is to be maligned and demeaned like this after years of working so hard to avoid the easy temptations of personal attacks on those officials with whom I disagree politically.

I stand by my record, and I am prouder than ever of the work we have done and the work we will do. This state's insufferable slaves to the Republican status quo are not used to being challenged - they're not used to being called out on their hypocrisy. So, they'll use strategies and baseless accusations like those you see in this Letter to the Editor to avoid facing the truth and to keep the wool pulled over the peoples' eyes. They couldn't be more obvious, with a local Republican blog just expresssing its delight at using precisely these underhanded tactics to attack me and this site because they are so morally bankrupt and incapable of competing in the realm of actual ideas.

I can handle their nonsense. I expect it and have gladly suffered their pathetic previous attempts to kill the messenger. But, now the World-Herald has given them voice in what's probably the widest public arena in the state. This has to be one of the most unprincled and hypocritical acts imaginable - allowing this site and its publisher to be attacked baselessly while editing any criticism of the World-Herald's own bias from my letter that offered actual concrete evidence of their one-sided spin and distortions.

This is what we're up against, Nebraska. In the media, as in politics, the powers that be have had their way for so long that they can't even imagine a world where they're not calling the shots behind the scenes and controlling the public's perceptions.

I have no delusions about this site's reach or even its quality, but I do know that sites like this and voices like ours are very real threats to the status quo. And, those who serve that status quo and have benefitted so much from it - at expense to the people and our democracy - are scared as hell.

And, you know it as well as I know it - they damn well should be....because change is coming and there's not a damn thing they can do to stop it.

Stay strong. Talk hard. They ain't seen nothing yet.

Go to full text...

Quietly Disproving a Republican Lie

Sorry, but this post isn’t timely because this information isn’t news... except maybe to the Republican hacks, who aren’t listening and probably don’t care. But if not for their sake then at least for the record, allow me to briefly revisit last year’s race for NE-03.

In December, Scott Kleeb posited that the most effective attack on his candidacy was “the claim that was, on its face, the easiest claim to make, but the one that I actually think was the most wrong. Which was... not being from here.” I happened to agree, and so too did the state’s conservative bloggers, who couldn’t seem to cover this race in any capacity without some gratuitous attack on Kleeb’s heritage and identity:

“enough of the indignation about his family being from Nebraska. His parents are. He’s not.” “he has no legitimate ties to western Nebraska”, “I consider him a carpet-bagger, and nothing I can find out about the man changes my mind....”

Not content with merely slashing and rehashing Kleeb’s past (you know, the awful sins of growing up on a military base and attending school at Yale), the conservative attack dogs offered a glimpse into the future, informing us helpfully that Kleeb “already has his saddlebags packed and the stagecoach tickets bought” in order to flee the state after losing the election:

“Don’t cry for Scooter Kleeb, Argentina - by sun-up this morning he was doubtless humming “I’m Leaving on a Jet Plane” while thumbing through his Rolodex in search of what he hopes this time will be a real soft spot in the underbelly of the great American Body Politic.”

So successful was this attack in the blogosphere that by fall the fantasy of a Kleeb exodus had reached more legitimate partners in the “vast rightwing conspiracy”, with the Grand Island Independent suggesting “it will be interesting to see if Kleeb stays on as a highly-educated ranch hand or vanishes like tumbleweed on a high plains wind if he loses this contest.”

It’s difficult to overestimate the nastiness of this attack or its devastating impact on the state as a whole. This was not a policy difference or a shot at Kleeb’s resume and experience. There was no suggestion of either professional or personal wrong-doing, no gaffe-induced feeding frenzy… no attack on anything Kleeb had ever said or done.

No, this was a coordinated effort to rob a man of an identity he’s held his entire life. An identity as a Nebraskan. And in doing so, the conservative blogosphere and its mainstream allies have helped rob this state of a "Husker Nation" that extends far beyond the number of Nebraska ballots or driver’s licenses. A community that includes a great number of people seeking a path that may wind its way around the world but always (hopefully, always) finds its way back home.

Before you make an argument like that, you’d better be damn sure. But on this matter our would-be punditry was damn wrong:

Former Democratic congressional candidate Scott Kleeb turned down a chance to return to his alma mater, Yale University, but says staying in Nebraska doesn't necessarily mean he's decided to run for office again...

This week, Kleeb took his name out of consideration for a job directing the Yale-based World Fellows Program, a training program for young leaders.

Kleeb was a fellow in the program in 2002 and three times has hosted fellows on an educational tour of his relatives' ranch near Dunning, Neb. That is the ranch where Kleeb worked during breaks between studies at Yale and the University of Colorado and where he established his residence.

Kleeb said the Yale job was hard to turn down, but Nebraska "is home. This is where I need to be. This is where I belong."

Kleeb recently married Jane Fleming, the outgoing executive director of Young Democrats of America, whom he met during the campaign. The couple reside in Hastings.

Kleeb has been hired to teach an introductory course in American history at Hastings College, said Rich Lloyd, academic dean of the school. Currently, Kleeb is working for a Nebraska ranch to build its international beef sales and helping form a coalition of agricultural and environmental groups on climate-change issues. (Omaha World Herald April 14, 2007)

Scott Kleeb is a Nebraskan... not just by heritage, but by choice. His journey has brought him halfway around the world. It could've brought him back to Yale, or at least (for those cynics out there) to greener political pastures. But instead it brought him back to Nebraska, the one place that always was and always will be "home".

The least he deserved for making that decision was to be taken seriously as a candidate, to be allowed into a dialog of ideas and to be heard. That's the least Western Nebraska deserved as well. They didn't get it in 2006.

Unfortunately, I think the only thing the attack dogs learned from this ordeal is that such "below-the-belt" strategies work, that they might even be their only weapon against the inevitable erosion of our rural one-party system. Already it seems they're gearing up for the next election, this time turning their rhetorical guns on Kleeb's wife, another (new) Nebraskan by choice.

What can I say? Some things never change. But for the sake of our politics and the future of this state, some things must. We can no longer afford this despicable attack, this self-defeating notion that a man can't cross our borders and remain a Nebraskan at heart.

The Husker Nation deserves better. Scott Kleeb deserves better. And we sure as hell deserve more.

Go to full text...

A Sad Day for Nebraska Blogs

Leavenworth Street Embraces A New Low in Local Online Politics

Today is a very important day for blogging in Nebraska. I would propose that it is a sad day as well. Although sites such as SmithWatch, Paging Power, Leavenworth Street, the UNO Democrats Blog, and New Nebraska Network each have their respective political agendas, they have always seemed works of passion, reflecting on who their contributors are and what they honestly believe.

But, our Republican counterpart at Leavenworth Street has changed all that with the anonymous Street Sweeper's allowing his site to be used as a tool of shameless, outright political manipulation. Some might contend that Leavenworth has always been such a tool, but - in our own way - the same could have been said of the other sites mentioned above as well (including NNN).

That changed today. With no pretense of fairness, objectivity or public service - without even the author's identity that there might be some measure of personal accountability - Street Sweeper has crossed a line from which I fear there will be no turning back. The world of online Nebraska politics just got ugly, folks, and that ugliness is probably here to stay.

Below, you see a personal note published this morning at Leavenworth Street. It is from homegrown corporate giant David Sokol - CEO of MidAmerican Energy - to U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel, expressing Sokol's continued support of Hagel in whatever decision he might make for his future political career.

With Sokol having allied himself with upstart Hagel challenger Jon Bruning - not only paying for Bruning's statewide opinion polling but also recently announced as the Bruning campaign's Finace Chair - the above note might seem a statement of outright hypocrisy that would be relevant to interested political observers. But, this is politics, and a careful reading of Sokol's qualified statement reveals only continued support and "friendship" for Hagel, along with a promise of future contributions. The note does not swear any particular allegiance or fidelity to Hagel that would preclude Sokol's pursuing other options and lending his support to other potential candidates.

Regardless, I don't really care who some Omaha multi-millionaire is hedging his bets with in the 2008 Republican primary. Sokol isn't an elected official. He's a guy with money, and he should be able to do with it whatever he damn well pleases within the confines of the law. If there's some suggestion of corruption here, there's a story to be told. But, if Sokol just wants to play games with Hagel and Bruning - pretending to be buddies with both while playing one against the other in the real world of electoral politics, it's hard to see how that justifies turning the tables on a private citizen in so public a forum with no concern for the principles at stake.

Here's what's probably most disturbing - this correspondence could only have come from Sokol's people or Hagel's. And, considering the tone of Leavenworth's commentary and the site's history of publishing inside information directly from the Hagel camp, it looks to definitely have come from the latter. In fact, Street Sweeper might very well be a paid Hagel lackey.

In my mind, release of this note can only really serve two possible functions - (a) embarrassing Bruning for over-stating Sokol's support or (b) reminding Sokol that politics is a two-way street and that an experienced politician in a free fall makes for a very dangerous enemy. In either event, this is a leaked document that is strictly private in nature. By publishing it, Leavenworth Street has gone beyond the pale. This article is nothing more than an instance of raw political manuevering, making a private citizen a pawn of an anonymous blogger's (not-so) hidden political agenda.

Of course, Leavenworth Street has always been suspect. Despite its first introducing itself as a site for humorous, middle-of-the-road, independent political commentary, it was obvious from the start that Street Sweeper only took the part about being funny seriously. Other than that, the site has proven itself little more than an occasionally amusing online weapon of Nebraska's Republican establishment.

But, no matter how ugly things have gotten in the Nebraska GOP, no matter how quickly, this latest post simply goes too far. Leavenworth has gone beyond the free-for-all world of politics with an attack on a local business leader's integrity that is very, very personal. For this, I don't feel much sympathy for Mr. Sokol, but I am very worried by the precedent it sets across the spectrum of Nebraska politics.

When this sort of private correspondence is fair game for leaking to local bloggers who are without principle and accountable to no one, there is no logical end to the ugliness and stupidity that will eventually result. This day has been a long time coming. From this point forward, I'm afraid we are likely to see more of the same - even if I expect it to be quite amusing should two powerful factions of the Nebraska Republican Party engage in the full-on, open warfare that seems to be developing.

Their loss could be our gain. What troubles me is the just-as-likely scenario in which, quite simply, we all lose.

Go to full text...

Blogger Brawl 2007

Welcome to Thunderdome! What began as a simple note of appreciation for Sen. Bob Kerrey's latest contribution to the debate of the Iraq War has quickly evolved in that article's comments section into a broader and much more heated discussion of where our nation's Iraq policy truly should go from here between myself and two highly-regarded contributors to Nebraska's liberal blog community.

As much as I appreciate the views of TedK and Dave Sund - both with whom I have worked in the past and look forward to working with in the future - I see little evidence of progress in our deliberations - meaning that, as much as I might have hoped otherwise, the solution to the international crisis in Iraq won't be coming from the New Nebraska Network (at least, not yet).

Still, I'd be very interested in any third person's perspective (or fourth person's, as the case may be). Comment away. I'm going to be away from the computer until tomorrow afternoon, but will look with great curiosity to see if any further discussion develops.

Also, consider this my call for reinforcements in case Dave and Ted decide to gang up on me in my absence.

Go to full text...

While We've Been Away.....

NNN's production has slowed down of late. I hope to recommit to the site for these last remaining weeks of the 2007 legislative session, but I can make no assurances in terms of quantity or quality. Amdist my distraction and neglect of this little corner of the blogosphere, I am happy to see that the UNO College Democrats and Paging Power have been doing some really excellent work picking up my self-perceived slack.

I occasionally disagree with the writers on both sites about a few issues and may have a somewhat different approach to politics. But, I'm just glad there's some progressive online discussion and criticism going on in my absence because I know there is an audience and there is a need if the prevailing mindsets in Nebraska politics are ever going to be challenged and be changed for the better.

My thanks to both sites, with sincerest hopes that they will keep up the good work.

Go to full text...

NNN Special Report: "Nebraska Politics in the New Media"

The following is a speech I presented to the Nebraska Associated Press Broadcaster's Association at their annual awards banquet on Friday, April 13th. It was an honor and a pleasure to have the opportunity - as a humble blogger - to address some of the most powerful and respected people in Nebraska television and radio news. The thrust of my 15 minute remarks, followed by another 10 minutes of Q & A, was the role of the blogger and the future of Nebraska's traditional news media.

I have done a lot of complaining about the media in Nebraska since NNN was founded more than two years ago. Understanding that this was my first - and perhaps last - real chance to deliver a call to action to those whom I have faulted and held responsible, I spoke more bluntly than was probably expected by those attending to receive an award for the quality of their journalism. But, the NAPBA was a better than gracious audience, and I certainly appreciated that its members seemed to take what criticism I offered in stride - hopefully without taking offense.

That being said, I'm proud to present:

Kyle Michaelis on
"Nebraska Politics in the New Media"


[After some brief attempts at humor in introducing myself]....

Ladies and gentlemen, I am a blogger.

That isn’t always easy for me to admit. I have a background in journalism and – first and foremost – I consider myself a writer. If I had to choose a title, I would call myself a citizen journalist. The work I do is unpaid. The site is free-for-all, has no budget, and has spread entirely by word of mouth. And, to those of you who have never seen the New Nebraska Network, I’ll be perfectly honest that it really isn’t much to look at.

Why do I sometimes bristle at being labeled a blogger?. It isn’t that “blogger” is any great insult, but it does suggest a certain flippancy that undermines my every purpose. That’s not a problem when a blogger is using his or her site as an online diary. But, when I write about Nebraska politics, which has been the sole focus of the New Nebraska Network since it began, I am not writing for personal satisfaction. I am not writing to amuse my friends. I am writing to make a difference.

My words and my ideas are all I have. They are my only source of credibility, and each time I write I stake my reputation and my readership upon them. People don’t tune into a website like they do the radio on their way to work or television while sitting down for supper. Now, there’s a pretty good chance my readers are just wasting time at work, but at that desk - on that computer screen - my voice is one in a backdrop of millions. The competition may not be as fierce as that between newsrooms in the same market, but it’s global in scale and infinite in number.

The one thing I have going for me is that I do have a fairly specific niche. Nebraska’s blog community has been relatively slow developing, and the number of bloggers who actually focus on Nebraska politics with any regularity can probably be counted on one hand. But, even with these other sites – whether they lean Republican or lean Democrat - I like to think the New Nebraska Network stands apart by offering substantive and insightful commentary that readers aren’t going to find anywhere else.

Now, that’s a bold statement, and I don’t make it lightly. It’s also a statement I wish I didn’t feel compelled to make. Still, after years of following the Nebraska media – the last two with an almost ridiculous level of intensity - I do feel there is something essential that we are undeniably lacking. Mainly, the Nebraska media – and those of us in this room - have failed the people of Nebraska by not asking more tough questions that challenge the status quo.

It’s easy to put myself on a pedestal. I’m accountable to no one – I have no advertisers, no editors, and no station managers I need to keep happy. My audience is limited to those strange people with enough passion for Nebraska politics that they’re going to read a website dedicated entirely to the subject. I also don’t have to worry about the appearance of political bias because I’ve never been anything but up front that I am a progressive and I am a Democrat. I do not deny that this shapes my thinking and colors my articles. So, there’s no doubt this affords me certain freedoms that allow me to be more openly critical of our elected representatives …. who just happen to be mostly Republicans.

But, let’s not forget one more important thing – I’m not getting paid to do this. Asking questions and informing the public isn’t my job. It’s yours, and I’m begging you to take it more seriously.

I’m not here alleging any great political bias in the Nebraska media - just a general complacency that might be even more dangerous and disastrous for our democracy.

For instance, let’s take a moment to consider the tax cuts that are all the rage in the Nebraska legislature this year. Governor Dave Heineman presented his tax plan in LB 331 with promises of simplifying the income tax and providing relief to the middle class. But, where were his claims and his numbers actually subjected to even the most basic scrutiny?

Why was it never reported that the most basic structural change Heineman proposed – reducing the income tax brackets from 4 brackets to 3 – would have been accomplished entirely by eliminating the lowest tax bracket? Heineman had just proposed a higher tax rate for Nebraska’s poorest population and no one said so. At the same time, it didn’t take an economist to point out that Heineman’s proposals to eliminate the estate tax and to phase-in a massive rate reduction for Nebraska’s wealthiest taxpayers weren’t intended to help the middle class.

The numbers were out there, but no one challenged Heineman on them. When he testified on behalf of his tax plan before the Revenue Committee, only one state senator even asked him a question. Heineman is a smart enough politician to have stayed on script with his answer – as he’s done whenever the cameras are rolling and microphones are in his face. The man is a walking, talking soundbyte – I’ve got to give him credit for that. But, the Nebraska media should be ashamed for letting those soundbytes so completely set the tone of their coverage.

This is not about whether Heineman’s original tax cut plan was a good or bad idea – even if I personally found it appalling. This is about the fact that Heineman’s statements and Heineman’s press releases completely dominated the media’s reporting on the issue. I don’t doubt that there was some independent fact-checking, but that’s not enough. When Heineman is armed with cherry-picked numbers to put his plan in the best possible light, it’s not enough to say that his numbers are accurate. What this state needed was independent analysis that might actually portray the proposal in an honest and complete light that a good politician like Heineman will do every sort of dance to avoid.

Honestly, who can blame them? If the media is willing to let itself be manipulated by regurgitating selective figures and well-rehearsed soundbytes, you’d be a fool not to take advantage of that fact.

A politician can save you the trouble of doing research. He can save you the expense. He can save you the time. But, he’s not doing your job for you. Your job isn’t getting done. The truth isn’t being reported. Suddenly, the public is getting nothing more than secondhand press releases, and – too often – that’s exactly what’s happening in Nebraska.

This isn’t a result of bias. This is the result of laziness, and I’d go so far as to call it the prevailing characteristic of Nebraska’s political press corp.

Which brings us to blogs and this hard-to-define concept of “the new media.”

There are many people who believe that we’re witnessing the dawn of a new age in politics and in journalism. There are many who believe that the rise of the blog and online communities will radically transform not only the relationship between politicians and voters but also the relationship between the media and its audience.

While I don’t doubt that new mediums and new means of communication will change these relationships, I’m actually quite skeptical that these changes will result in a more democratic society or a more informed public. The potential is there – God, there is so much potential – but so far, when I step back and look at this online universe in which I inhabit and invest so much of my time, all I really see is a new playground for the same games.

Now, I may not fit the bill, but there is a certain “coolness” factor surrounding blogs at the moment. They’ve been around for years, but the news media - both nationally and locally – have really embraced them in the last year or two – particularly in the realm of politics.

There are blogs dedicated to every subject under the sun, so it does seem odd that political blogs receive as much attention as they do. They’ve got their own corner of Newsweek. They’ve got their own segment on CNN. Just here in Nebraska, I’ve personally been interviewed on TV, cited in the newspapers, and even asked to speak at this dinner. Not bad considering that many people in our state have never and will never read a blog – let alone one about Nebraska politics.

So, why do people care? Why do blogs receive this attention? Again, why am I here?

The beauty of blogs is that they do have a way of leveling the playing field. They might be the purest example of the marketplace of ideas that our country has ever seen. There is little-to-no cost of entry. There is no corporate censorship and, for better and worse, there isn’t much in the way of self-censorship either. It’s an emerging form of communication without any specific bounds or standards, so there’s still the perception that anyone with something worthwhile to say who’s able to say it effectively can find an audience.

Still, the question of why the news media seems so fascinated with blogs is a legitimate one. For some, I think it’s an admission that they haven’t done enough to integrate diverse viewpoints and perspectives into their reporting. For others, I think it’s a simple matter of following the hype and giving the people what they seem to want.

It might just make good economic sense. The audience for traditional media – whether the people in this room want to hear it or not – has been stagnant for years. It’s understood that, in the coming years, increased emphasis on more engaging online content is probably going to be essential just to maintain a market share foothold. From an advertising standpoint, who wouldn’t want to attract those who read blogs and watch video clips on YouTube – they’re young, they’re tech-savvy, they’re educated, and – whether to an ideology or just to John Stewart – they already tend to be loyal. They may not reflect the larger population but that’s still a demographic any advertiser wants on board.

The problem is that this idea that the new media can serve as a supplement to the traditional media seems to underestimate that the online world really is a new medium that needs to be thought about in new ways.

Then again, I wasn’t asked here to offer my thoughts on the 21st Century marketplace. That I have opinions on the matter and am only too happy to share them without invitation, however, is very reflective of my role as a blogger.

Basically, the only requirement for blogging about politics is an abundance of opinions. Writing skills come in handy. Being informed is generally a good idea. But, by and large, we are commentators.

Despite my pretenses to the contrary, bloggers are not journalists. Many of us adopt a vaguely journalistic, truth-seeking mission. Some of us do our best to uphold journalistic standards of form and objectivity. But, the only real checks are the ones we impose upon ourselves, and those can change day-to-day or as the situation dictates.

Maybe I’m projecting my own faults and my own weaknesses onto the blog community with that assessment. But, from what I’ve seen and from what I’ve written myself, there’s a critical stage of fact-checking essential in journalism that is not expected of a blogger. For lack of resources – mindful that this isn’t a job – a blogger has the latitude and might even be encouraged to rush to judgment and jump to conclusions.

Speed is a factor, but not in the same marking your territory sense as scooping your rivals. No, on a blog, the speed with which you respond is essential to the relationship with your readers. There is an intimacy born of blogging’s instantaneous and immediate nature. Bloggers are not in a position of authority. They stand in the place of the reader, the viewer, the listener – except they don’t do so passively.

Personally, I write when I hear something on the radio, read something in the paper, or see something on TV and feel the real story has not been told. When some critical bit of context has been left out, when there are obvious questions that remain to be asked – that’s when I log-in to the New Nebraska Network and share my two cents with the world.

Blogs can flesh out a story. They can provide the context that most people will not piece together themselves because they’re busy living their lives and have other priorities. Now, I think the best journalists do a good job of building that context into their own reporting. This may invite charges of bias, but it’s called informing the public. What could be more unethical and in greater violation of the public’s trust than remaining silent on an important point just to avoid the appearance of bias.

Blogs are less concerned about appearance. We’re expected to be biased, and there certainly isn’t any pressure to be polite.

While these are all strengths, they aren’t without their drawbacks. As much as it pains me and insults my fellow bloggers, I’m very concerned with the parallels between blogging and what’s become of cable news. There is definitely a level at which Bill O’Reilly serves as the televised template for what many people consider good blogging. There’s a point at which every blogger seems to declare his or her own personal “No Spin Zone” – where a single truth prevails and the fools who disagree will no longer be suffered. I find this ironic because, like O’Reilly, spin is all most bloggers really have to offer. Spin is what we do.

The difference is that your average blogger is not presenting his or her work as something that it’s not. They’re partisan and proud of it. Their readers come for the spin that caters to them or challenges them from a perspective they might not otherwise consider. This spin is not an active attempt to mislead in the worst sense of the word, but it does require that one be willing to go out on limbs and not shy away from innuendo.

I’ll be perfectly honest that I take comfort in the fact that I can be wrong and can be misled because, like anyone else, I’m relying on the news media for the facts that inform what I write. If you don’t do your job providing unbiased, in-depth, investigative reporting, the bloggers of the world will still have their opinions, but they’ll be a whole lot more ignorant and ill-informed – just like the public at large.

The people in this room, you have legitimacy. You have credibility. You have the people’s trust – whether it’s deserved or not. Take that responsibility seriously, or it will be no time at all before the talking heads, the talking points, and the worst excesses of our dueling political dichotomy have completely taken over.

Blogs can be part of the problem, or they can be part of the solution. Regardless, I think it goes without saying that blogs are here to stay. Eventually, the topic won’t be so trendy, but the medium itself will continue to develop. How much good they’ll do – what size of audience they’ll actually reach – I can’t really say. But, they’ll be around. And I expect certain voices will emerge online that become quite credible and influential – probably even here in Nebraska.

They’ll criticize bad reporting. They’ll claim bias from the left and from the right. They’ll mock our politicians and try their best to hold them accountable.

The traditional media will do what it can to co-opt the new media – to make a buck, to broaden its audience, and to keep a check on the competition. Meanwhile, politicians and their staff – who are so obsessed with image and message control – will no doubt find new and evermore creative ways to manipulate the online community for their own purposes. It’s already ridiculous now, and it will only get more ridiculous with time.

As for me and the New Nebraska Network, I’m not sure how much longer we’ll be in the blogging game. The only reason I’ve stuck with it as long as I have is because I truly believe those who share a progressive vision for this state have been horribly under-represented and their issues under-reported by the media. Also, there are important debates about Nebraska’s future that simply aren’t being discussed or even acknowledged as they should.

I have no delusions that the New Nebraska Network is going to single-handedly change Nebraska politics. But, I’m happy to have been in on the ground floor as this new medium develops, and I hope – when I’ve finally gotten sick of the sound of my own typing – there will be a few other voices to step up and follow in the New Nebraska Network’s footsteps.

There are so many important things to be said and no one way to say them – just so long as someone believes enough in the power of ideas and the strength of democracy that they’re at least willing to try.

Go to full text...

Special Event - Blogging vs. the Mainstream Media

Sorry to be so last minute, but Lincoln readers who don't have to work afternoons might still be able to make the following event, the details of which I've known for a few weeks but forgot to post. Don Kuhns suggests that you attend:

Blogging vs. Mainstream Media - "The Daily Howler" Comes to Nebraska
Tuesday, April 17th; 1:30 - 2:30 pm
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA-LINCOLN, City Campus Union

Bob Somerby, editor of THE DAILY HOWLER (www.dailyhowler.com), a prominent political blog that de-constructs the New York Times, will discuss the mainstream press coverage of recent White House elections, especially the history-altering 2000 campaign which sent George W. Bush to the White House. Somerby will also discuss the mainstream press coverage being extended to candidates in Campaign 08. He will focus especially on the coverage of Hillary Clinton and John McCain....

Don further suggests:

Somerby has probably done more than any one person to encourage liberals and Democrats to embrace full-time media criticism as a necessity for fighting back against conservative propaganda and anti-Democrat MSM "scripts". Before Atrios, before Media Matters, it was Somerby's Daily Howler that reminded us every day that so-called "liberal" pundits and other screwballs of the elite Washington press corps are not doing us any favors. Liberal media criticism is playing a vital roll in today's politics. Anyone who is happy with the outcome of the 2006 election owes Bob Somerby a big debt of gratitude, and a listen.

I haven't read much of Somerby's work, but I'm willing to take Don's word that this is a great opportunity for local blog readers to get a taste of the national blog scene.

I must say, blogging really seems to be coming of age in Nebraska. This last weekend, I had the honor of delivering the keynote address at the Nebraska Associated Press Broadcaster Association's annual awards dinner. The topic of my speech was the the similarly-themed but more locally-flavored "Hope vs. Hype: Nebraska Politics in the New Media." The text of those remarks should be posted at some point this week (if I can find time to edit what was a 20-minute speech).

Regardless, I'm hoping to make Somerby's talk at UNL Tuesday afternoon. Maybe we'll even get the chance to compare notes. New Nebraska Network Meets the Daily Howler - sounds like an old Abbot & Costello film or an episode of Scooby-Doo. I could dig that - most definitely.

Go to full text...

Svoboda Results Reveal Republicans Unhappy With Nebraska GOP

I am so used to Nebraska Democrats criticizing their party's leadership with zeal and reckless abandon on the Nebraska Democratic Party's blog, at party gatherings, and in private conversations that it's really quite shocking - in the wake of Republican City Councilman Ken Svoboda's surprisingly poor showing in Lincoln's Mayoral primary - that these same sorts of criticisms are suddenly being leveled by Nebraska Republicans against their own party.

I'll probably never say this again, but I can't recommend highly enough the latest discussion at the Leavenworth Street blog. Leavenworth - whether intentionally or not - has opened up a real can of worms for the Nebraska Republican Party by inviting readers to offer substantive commentary about the Lincoln city elections.

Considering State Sen. Chris Beutler's outright dominance over Svoboda, the GOP's supposed golden boy, it shouldn't surprise that years-old questions about the competency of the current Republican leadership have come to the forefront. This is particularly the case because of the Nebraska Republican Party's going zero-for-five in their targeted legislative races during the 2006 election cycle. And, Sen. Ben Nelson's landslide victory over that bald guy with lots of money - what was his name, again? - certainly plays a role in the prevailing dissatisfaction as well.

Public criticism? Self-reflection? These are not Republican Party traits, here or nationally. It's a demonstration of just how demoralized Republicans are - across the country, largely thanks to the disastrous course of George W. Bush's Presidency - that we're even seeing this sort of discussion. Needless to say, Nebraska Republicans might be especially demoralized with their being torn by the desire to label Sen. Chuck Hagel a Benedict Arnold while knowing full well that their party has lost its way and their President has gone off his rocker.

While Beutler is a great candidate with an almost peerless record of service to the city of Lincoln - who has not only been working harder on the campaign trail but also speaking with a clearer message - it seems only natural that the turning of the tide against Republican politicians has hurt the over-confident and cocksure Svoboda. All politics may be local, but that doesn't mean local politics exist in a vacuum.

After 12 years in the Congressional majority - the last 6 with a Republican President - the empty heart of the Republican Party has been pretty much laid bare for all to see. Iraq shows all the signs of being the Republican Party's own personal Vietnam, except they are nowhere close to coming to grips with the disaster they have wrought - neither personally, politically, or internationally. And the last remaining principle that any Republican can claim with a straight face is that the GOP truly does stand for the economic elite, the corporate fatcats, and the war-monger$ against the interests of the American people.

Nebraska has been slow to feel this effect, which is quite understandable. We are a majority Republican state that has bordered on one-party rule for the last eight years. We have little independent media of which to speak. We are relatively rural, traditional, and - to be quite honest - sheltered from the the moods and trends that might be sweeping the nation to our east or west.

Of course, Leavenworth's comments do sport their share of Nebraska GOP apologists. Acknowledging their continued dominance in state politics, I can't help but agree that some of the Chicken Little-hysterics are a little bit over the top. But, in the Republican Party, it's not so much the weight of the dissent that matters - just the fact that there is any dissent whatsoever speaks volumes in a political organization that has become totally reliant upon and an absolute victim to its own groupthink, egomania, and feedback loops.

In other words, Republicans have lost the capacity for self-criticism and long ago started valuing blind party loyalty above all else, so there's bound to be some pain, discomfort, and hopefully some further losses as they wake to the consequences of their having violated every campaign promise and every trust imaginable.

Chris Beutler is a great candidate for mayor of Nebraska's capital city, but Svoboda's coming in with only 35% in the primary against Beutler's 48% is an absolutely dreadful performance. Anyone who has been a party to Lincoln politics the last three years, witnessing the negativity directed at Democratic Mayor Coleen Seng in the media and across the city, has to admit that this sort of performance suggests a total failure by Svoboda and the Republican Party to connect with voters on any level.

Some of that failure is local. Some of that blame certainly does rest with local and state GOP leaders. But, the blame also lies with the Republican voter - even those right here in Nebraska - who ever let their party become this monstrous, power-mad entity that for so long has cared about nothing but winning elections with no concern at all for their choices' consequence.

Guilt, remorse, and shame do not make for an excited base. I'd contend that Svoboda and the Nebraska Republican Party are learning that the hard way in this race - easily 2007's most important in the state. Whether or not this works to the long-term benefit of Nebraska's Democratic minority remains to be seen and to be earned. But, an opportunity does seem to have presented itself - evident even on a Republican blog in a vastly Republican state.

For now, Beutler and the city of Lincoln reap the reward but - played correctly - it might soon be shared by all Nebraskans .... change taking hold within our own borders and at our own kitchen tables with the same force and magnitude that have been seen across the country.

Go to full text...

Media Spins Stories (About Bloggers Spinning Facts) To Fit Own Agenda

The New Nebraska Network received mention in Tuesday's North Platte Telegraph in an article surveying Nebraska's political blogs and our respective coverage earlier this month on the confusing reports of more than $140,000 in payments from 3rd District Congressman Adrian Smith's 2006 campaign to his father, Neal Smith.

Honestly, it's a pretty fair report with a mostly accurate depiction of the events. It's only the unfortunate headline - Bloggers Can Spin Data To Fit Own Agenda - that needlessly (and so hypocritically) challenges the integrity of sites such as this and SmithWatch.

See for yourself:

Political pundits blog opinions about elected officials and sometimes, putting out information leads to criticism or kudos. The story isn’t always complete before it gets posted for the world to see, as one Nebraska blogger, Lisa Hannah, found out....

Some choose to be public with their names, like Hannah, who started SmithWatch, and Kyle Michaelis with New Nebraska Network. Others like BeatriceFiddler are anonymous, as is Uncle Wiggily who hosts a pro-Rep. Adrian Smith blog....

Nebraska Democrats are vocal about the actions of Nebraska’s elected officials, and post opinions discussing information found in newspapers, on-line news resources, and on other Web sites, like OpenSecrets.org.

OpenSecrets.org is the Web site of the Center for Responsive Politics, which claims it is a “non-partisan, non-profit research group based in Washington, D.C. that tracks money in politics, and its effect on elections and public policy.....

Hannah’s SmithWatch blog picked up on more than $116,000 that was paid to Smith’s father, Neal, for payroll processing. She quoted the source as OpenSecrets.org, which listed amounts paid to individuals and vendors for services during the election campaign.

Hannah admits she is keeping an eye on Smith; she voted for his opponent, Scott Kleeb. Michaelis blogs at New Nebraska Network, generally on the Democratic side .... However, even the information from OpenSecrets.org can be skewed, depending on the blog site.

The expenditures listed for Smith were totals, with no additional comments, memos or disclosures. Hannah and Michaelis picked up on the disclosure posting the totals to their blogs and other blogs picked up Hannah’s posting.

Smith supporters were quick to challenge the disclosures, and Smith detractors praised Hannah for telling the story....

Hannah blogged shortly after that other FEC documents showed the salaries listed in order...The salaries paid from the amount given to Neal Smith equaled the amount paid out to Smith’s employees as wages.

Although some bloggers are fielding comments that Neal Smith was paid that amount, he did not receive the money as a salary payment. And, the Smith’s did nothing illegal by paying salaries this way. Unusual, perhaps, but not illegal.

Although I was careful not to outright accuse Smith's campaign of any wrong-doing, I'll be the first to admit that I probably still overreacted to the underlying story. I've also expressed my regrets to the author of SmithWatch for helping to put her in a tough situation where she continues to be held responsible for little more than relaying to NNN and to AmericaBlog what OpenSecrets.org had already reported.

We're the ones who ran with the story and put it in the headlines, but she was left holding the bag. And, it was she who - the very next day - did the follow-up on the story that largely clarified the situation. Through it all, she never complained or attempted to blame anyone else for the confusion even though she would have been well-justified in doing so. For that, I can't possibly commend SmithWatch highly enough.

Still, I'm not going to apologize for NNN's original response. Recognizing that there are very obvious limitations on this site's resources - and that blogging/citizen journalism is a different medium with separate standards and expectations from its counterparts in the traditional media - I trust most readers would agree.

The New Nebraska Network asked a question - Did Adrian Smith's Family Cash-In on [the] 2006 Campaign? Thanks to SmithWatch, we have since received an answer that was immediately reported. The situation may not have been so suspect as it first appeared, but it remains disturbing that the press would turn a blind eye to these suspicions - or use them to undermine bloggers' credibility - rather than analyzing all the very legitimate issues and potential for impropriety raised by Adrian Smith's campaign's activities.

Payments made to a candidate's family members in such massive sums - more than $140,000 - damn well do deserve to be brought to light. Creative and still-unexplained accounting practices by politicians and their campaigns also demand investigation and disclosure to the public. Yet, it's unlikely that there would have been any sort of scrutiny whatsoever were it not for Nebraska bloggers.

This may not be our finest moment, but it's absolute proof of just how much of a need there is for the independent and progressive voices we provide that are otherwise so lacking in our state. The media won't do their job, and it's our democracy that has paid the price. So, here we are doing what we can to pick up their slack.

Our methods are somewhat different. Our motives are a hell lot more clear. And - damn it - we're not going anywhere. Deal with it.

Go to full text...

Announcing: NNN Tagging

It's going to be a bit of a long-term project, but the last month's worth of articles at the New Nebraska Network have been marked with a tag/"label" (see below). This allows readers to conveniently browse past articles by topic rather than relying on our imperfect search feature or daring to read through the full archives month-by-month (even I get scared by that much text).

Time-willing, I hope to have NNN's more than two years' worth of material updated to take advantage of this new feature within the next couple of weeks. Please be patient. Considering the tediousness of this particular project, I'm darn well counting on readers finding this a useful change that will improve their NNN experience.

Any suggestions or words of encouragement are certainly welcome as comments to this post.

Go to full text...

Follow-up: SmithWatch Clarifies Confusing Payroll Practices

Anyone interested should read SmithWatch's follow-up on the mysterious $116,000 in "payroll processing" fees paid to Adrian Smith's father from his 2006 campaign.

Check it out, and - again - continued thanks to the SmithWatch for the excellent work it's been doing in Nebraska's Third District.

Go to full text...

Welcome to Don Walton and Readers of the Lincoln Journal-Star

Thanks to long-time political reporter Don Walton for his (half-)mention of the New Nebraska Network in his Monday column. A nice surprise only one day removed from what is technically NNN's 2nd birthday.

The site isn't much to look at, but - please - take some time to read a couple of articles and check out the archives by searching your favorite Nebraska political topic on the right side of the page.

See for yourself what the New Nebraska Network is all about - http://NewNebraska.Net.

Easy to remember, isn't it? The name says it all. Leave a comment or two. Let your voice be heard. Hope you like what you read and that you'll join us again real soon.

Go to full text...

Hypocrites, Hatchetmen... and Hope

Dismayed that Mike Fahey has somehow weathered scandalous charges that his administration (*gasp*) refuses to raise taxes, former OWH publisher/current Republican hatchetman Harold Andersen took the Mayor to task on Sunday for daring to dream of a career outside city hall:

Omaha's genial mayor, Mike Fahey, is definitely showing signs of "politicus incurabilis." The two term mayor has indicated that he is pondering not so much whether he should run for office again but rather whether he should run for a third term as mayor or possibly seek to become a U.S. Senator.

In regard to the Senate seat, Fahey's comments seem to indicate that if he doesn't run for the Senate, his decision will be based not on lack of desire but on the practical consideration that no incumbent U.S. senator seeking re-election in Nebraska has been unseated since 1942.

Of course, Andersen offers no such diagnosis for Senator Hagel, despite the appearance of this quote in the same edition of the World Herald:

[Hagel] said he won't run unless he's confident he could win, but it's even more important to him that he feels passionately about the race.

But enough of that nonsense. Pointing out these logical inconsistencies might be fun (and it is, believe me, it is), but it's also rather useless. Andersen is nothing more than a partisan hack, and like any partisan hack he lacks the ability to distinguish virtue and vice absent party labels. This is a fact, a perhaps immutable part of human nature, and not the sort of thing a humble young blogger is likely to change with blockquotes and hyperlinks.

Asinine as Andersen's commentary may be, it is possible to extract from this column a question worth asking: why are Democrats so willing to give Hagel a free ride? More importantly, why are we, the "progressive blogosphere", apparently resigned to roll over and play dead if this Hamlet on the Platte decides to stick around for another term in the Senate?

Andersen's criticism of Fahey is unwarranted because candidates -all candidates- naturally have concerns about getting mixed up in races they can't win. Why spend all that time away from your family, groveling for dollars and scrambling from one city to the next if Election Day promises little more than a shot to the ego and a kick in the ass? Similarly, parties, PACs and 527s have to worry about protecting limited resources and reassuring dubious donors. The whole system might grind to a halt tomorrow if it weren't for that one magical component that separates politics from so many other endeavors: hopelessly irrational, starry-eyed optimism.

It's the belief that miracles can happen, that it is possible to effect real change through this convoluted system of democracy... it's that dream that convinces qualified and talented individuals to give up promising careers in the private sector to pursue public life. It's that irrational, illogical, indefensible belief that keeps those coffers filled (well, maybe not filled...), those volunteers plentiful (well, maybe not plentiful...) and those voters lined up.

If the blogosphere -we who can dream without suffering the pains of electioneering- can't supply that hope, can't find it in ourselves to produce that one element capable of lubricating the cogs of doubt and despair, then we're pretty damned useless ourselves.

Can Hagel be defeated? Hell yes he can. Senator Hagel has the misfortune of serving in a field where he can be dismissed for any reason or no reason at all. It's possible to defeat a Goliath with a David... Hagel did it himself in '96, coming out of nowhere to win in a landslide over a popular sitting Governor. But you just can't kill a giant with an empty ballot line.

Let's leave the worry and the practical considerations to others. At the very least, let's leave it to later. If hopeless (even losing) Senate campaigns against powerful incumbent Republicans can lead to a Democratic renaissance in Montana and Virginia, why not here? We need to be bold so others can be brave. Brave enough to give up a promising career in the private sector. Brave enough to weather a shot to the ego or kick in the ass. Brave enough, at least, to stand up to the Harold Andersens of the world and remind voters that virtue knows no party.

Go to full text...

Announcement: Triple-N Transition

Readers may have some difficulty accessing the New Nebraska Network over the next 24 hours, as the site transitions to "NewNebraska.Net" as its main page. Blogspot has been wonderful over the last 2 years, but in the interests of growth and progress this move is an essential next step for NNN. I have assurances that the "NewNebraska.blogspot.com" address will still direct people to our new online home and that our archives will remain accessible and intact.

Here's hoping this transition goes as smoothly as promised. Cross your fingers, folks. And see you on the other side.

Go to full text...

An opeN iNvitatioN to Adrian Smith

The anonymous "Uncle Wiggily" of Kearney writes in his Heartland Notebook blog:

I received a pleasant email the other day from Rep. [Adrian] Smith’s press secretary offering to make himself or his boss available for “e-interviews” , as well as background information and regular updating from the heady D.C. atmosphere. At first I congratulated myself on making such an impression on the biggies in D.C., then about twelve seconds later realized that probably every other blogger in the Cornhusker state got the same offer. At any rate, I declined the interview opportunity but invited him to send along whatever information he saw fit.

So far I have received a professionally done piece of partisan rhetoric from the research arm of the RNC detailing the latest Hilary [sic] hypocrisies, and a copy of a White House talking points memo synopsizing President Bush‘s remarks at the Caterpillar plant in Peoria the other day. Not exactly the kind of hard-hitting and open-minded political analysis I might have hoped for, but interesting nonetheless. And if nothing else, it at least demonstrates a modicum of interest from Smith’s office about what is being said and thought out here in the flatlands.

As a fellow "Cornhusker state" blogger, let me assure Mr. Wiggily that the New Nebraska Network has received no such offer of an interview with 3rd District Congressman Adrian Smith. As a skilled writer who is clearly dedicated to his beliefs, it's unfortunate that Wiggily does not take advantage of this opportunity, as I'm sure it would make for a worthwhile read. Even if slanted-as-hell (as I'd expect), it would be nice to see a Nebraska politician speaking for himself and answering some actual questions.

Although I don't know what precisely Smith would have in mind for an "e-interview," I hope he and his office know that they're always welcome to join us at the New Nebraska Network. I'd be happy to ask them some questions. In fact, I'd be quite honored and can promise that our coverage would be respectful and fair.

And, aware as I am that politicians and their staff are all-too-keenly aware of what gets said about them in the press and on the Internet, I would like to extend this same offer of availability to Jeff Fortenberry, Lee Terry, Dave Heineman or any other Nebraska politician who might have something to say to our readership. This is especially the case if the New Nebraska Network's criticism is ever unwarranted or just plain wrong. By all means, please do us the benefit of correcting me and enlightening my readers.

My soapbox is your soapbox if you want it - the only thing I'd ask is that you answer a few questions and provide some straight answers in the process. That's not asking too much, is it?

NewNebNet@gmail.com - your people should contact my people. We'll work something out. That's a promise.

Oh yeah - Adrian - there's also a woman (and 3rd District constituent) from Grand Island who's probably gotten your attention with her own blog the last couple of weeks. In fact, I suspect she's the reason you're so eager for an online platform. If you aren't interested in reaching NNN's statewide audience, I've got a pretty good feeling Smith Watch would love to talk with you as well.

So, how's next week look on your schedule?

Go to full text...

Nebraska's Progressive Blogosphere On the Rise

In the last month, I've been very heartened to see the emergence of a number of bold new voices in Nebraska's online community. For starters, the UNO College Democrats have re-established their website as one of the best in the state with a flurry of activity. At the same time, the Nebraska Democratic Party's "Blog for Nebraska" has found renewed purpose not only taking the lead on the issues important to voters but also using its voice to build an organization about which we can all be proud.

Even more exciting than either of these more institutional developments, though, has been the arrival of two independent blogs - different in purpose but similar in focus - that have the potential to really contribute something special to those interested in Nebraska political debate and discussion. These websites are Paging Power and Smith Watch, both to which I offer my highest possible recommendations for their short but so-far superior efforts.

Paging Power has offered a wealth of political commentary since kicking-off in December, but its real strength and appeal lies in the extensive coverage it's provided of the Nebraska legislature. In particular, I suspect readers would take some enjoyment from Paging Power's many video offerings of oftentimes unreported but no less important (sometimes extremely amusing) highlights from the floor of the State Senate.

Right off the bat, I'd suggest everyone watch or listen to at least the first ten minutes of State Sen. Ernie Chambers' hour-long scolding of the legislature for its improper and dishonest handling of the state's tax policy, especially with LB344's proposed extension of the do-nothing Tax Policy Reform Commission. Sure, Chambers falls back on many of his familiar rants, but that doesn't change the fact that Nebraska would be well-served by every citizen in the state listening to what he has to say (at least, in this instance).

Smith Watch, on the other hand, is an exciting local example of what was a national trend in 2006 towards distict-specific, online watchdogs dedicated to holding a particular represenative accountable for his votes and for his record. Here, the Congressman in question is none other than the Nebraska Third's freshman Republican, Adrian Smith.

Smith had an undistinguished-to-embarrassing career as a State Senator. If he's going to do any better as a Congressman - or if the voters are going to have the knowledge and the ammunition to rid themselves of him in the next election - a site such as Smith Watch could serve an essential function and prove an incredible resource. Already, I'm impressed by the author's letter to Adrian Smith asking Smith to explain his thus-far insulting votes and pointing-out the continued influence the controversial Club for Growth holds over his every position. I also commend Smith Watch for its challenge to readers and voters of the Third District, reminding them of the role we must all play as citizens to make our democracy what it can and should be.

I am grateful for all the work that has been done by both of these sites. It's my sincerest hope that they will be able to maintain the energy and momentum they've already built - no doubt benefitting our entire state in the process. The New Nebraska Network simply can not devote the time and focus to the legislature and to Adrian Smith that both, respectively, deserve. I trust readers will enjoy the work done by Paging Power and by Smith Watch, generously offering them the active readership and encouragement it sometimes takes to feel our continued efforts are truly worthwhile.

The New Nebraska Network won't be around forever. This state needs more dynamic voices - more discussion - more challenges to the status quo. That requires helping one another out and acknowledging each other's work. If Nebraska's progressive community is to ever be anything more than a collection of disparate voices in the wilderness, it will take real effort at building that community into something worthy of the interests and ideas it claims to represent.

Consider myself and the New Nebraska Network dedicated to this cause - this building of something greater - for as long as we are able. We don't all have to see eye-to-eye on every issue. But, together, we will do a lot of good for this state we love - standing side-by-side, looking to and fighting for a better future.

Go to full text...

Fortenberry Responds as Supporters Play "Kill the Messenger"

The Lincoln Journal-Star has a fairly active website when it comes to readers' comments, and it's fun to see how much feedback a simple "Letter to the Editor" can generate. Unfortunately, while there was much relevant discussion of Rep. Jeff Fortenberry's record - especially his vote against raising the minimum wage - many of the comments on my most recent foray in this peculiar art of press-savvy citizenship demonstrate a disturbing tendency to attack me personally just for having questioned Fortenberry's votes.

As a testament to my egotism and self-amusement, allow me to share a few of the highlights:

Gerard Harbison: "If the Nebraska Young Democrats are going to be using the letters column of the LJS to issue partisan press releases, shouldn't they be labeled as such? Here, let me help you, LJS. Kyle Michaelis is the first district chair of the Young Democrats. That will give your readers a little better perspective on where his letter is coming from."

Seems like "The Right-Wing Professor" is keeping tabs on me (see his similar attempt to discredit me last July). Don't know whether to be flattered or scared for my well-being. Although far from a celebrity, I suppose this is the price of a none-too-common name and a digital paper trail available for all the world to Google.

SupportFort: "...Fortenberry, Smith and Terry...certainly support me and most folks I know and they do it well. Sounds like they don't support your viewpoints so you have resorted to character assasination instead of rational, logical dissent. I suspect you are a Democrat."

Character assassination? Huh? I called Fortenberry's votes "out of touch." If anyone cares to explain to me how that's character assassination, I'd love to hear it. Seriously, how does this sort of reflexive denunciation do anything but stifle the "rational, logical dissent" this reader supposedly desires? Is that even a question worth asking or are the inherently contradictory motives behind this response just as apparent as they seem?

Hey Michaelis: "If Fortenberry is so out of touch with America and Nebraska, why did 59% of the 1st district re-elect him?? Maybe you are out of touch with Nebraska. Please move away. Thank you."

At least that's an honest comment. Polite as well....beyond the whole bit about asking me to move away from the state (and the Congressional District) in which I've lived my entire life. But, I really appreciate the reminder that it only takes a change of opinion in less than 10% of the population to swing this state's politics in a bold, new direction. Maybe not a short-term project but certainly a worthwhile goal.

Who?: "Kyle Michaelis is the same college student who attempted to turn the congressional campaign into a race war. I checked him out and found that he is a college student, Democrat activist, and really scary liberal blogger. Perhaps when he gets a job and starts paying taxes, he may have less time to criticize his doubly-elected congressman."

"Really scary liberal blogger" - that's some ego-strokeage right there...especially since I generally fall prey to accusations of a too measured, too moderate approach on the issues. Need to look into having that put on some business cards and a t-shirt - maybe even a line on my resume.

Of course, the real pay-off comes in today's Journal-Star, with Fortenberry responding personally to my letter. He writes:

A recent letter on this page mentioned my vote on a proposal in Congress to increase the minimum wage.

I support a minimum wage increase. Almost a decade since its last adjustment, an increase in the wage is socially just. However, it must also be economically responsible. An increase, mandated without consideration of its effects on American small businesses, would have implications (reduced employee hours, increased prices, job layoffs) that would in effect harm those the policy seeks to help.

That’s why I co-sponsored the Working Families Wage and Access to Healthcare Act. This legislation proposes a $2.10 increase in the minimum wage. At the same time, it provides small business assistance that helps small employers and entrepreneurs shoulder the new demands of a wage increase. One of the ways it does this is by opening the door to new ideas to pay for employees’ health care, a significant expense to small businesses.

Unfortunately, the legislation proposed by Democratic leadership neglected to address these concerns, and proposals to help make the bill better were not allowed to be heard. As the U.S. Senate undergoes its deliberation of the bill, I am hopeful that these provisions will be included.

Then Congress will have crafted a minimum wage increase that is both socially just and economically responsible. That is good public policy, and it is the right thing to do.

Rep. Jeff Fortenberry

In other words, Jeff Fortenberry supports increasing the minimum wage but voted against the bill that would have done just that. Just like he supports making college more affordable while voting against cutting the interest rates on student loans.

At least, he's consistent in his hypocrisy, if nothing else. And, in that, he's not alone. As the UNO College Democrats point out, 2nd District Congressman Lee Terry "just voted against a bill that would allow the government to negotiate lower prescription drug prices - to keep prescription drug prices low."

Clearly, Fortenberry and Terry deserve each other. But, the people of Nebraska deserve so much more than their shared tendencies to partisan double-speak. Games of message control and kill the messenger won't prevent the dawning of this realization. The truth may be delayed, but it will not be contained.

Go to full text...

Targeting Lee Terry

I know they've got a link on the sidebar, but I want to take this opportunity to praise the UNO College Democrats - especially Dave Sund - for getting their blog back up and running and - again - making it one of the online hotspots for those interested in Nebraska politics.

Sund has done one hell of a job over the last week taking 2nd District Republican Congressman Lee Terry to task for his hypocrisy and hyperpartisanship. Terry hasn't responded well to his new place in the House minority and has put on a pretty good display of pettiness in his floor statements and a total lack of principle with his first votes in this young Congress.

Now that the shallowness of Terry's support has been exposed in the 2006 election, he's been forced to make a choice between continued "Republican-First" extremism or providing the independent leadership that Nebraska voters expect. Clearly, he's chosen the former, revealing himself as a tired rubber-stamp with lots of ambition but only vision enough to read the scripts and play the games laid out for him by his party masters.

On ethics, earmarks, and, now, even on national security, Terry has failed to represent the values and interests of Nebraska's 2nd District voters. In fact, he's made a damn strong case for his being one of the most targeted Republican incumbents across the country in 2008 if he dares to seek re-election after a full decade of failed leadership.

Unsurprisingly, the 3rd District's Republican pool boy, Adrian Smith, has kept close to Terry and seems content to follow his pathetic example on the above issues. But, the 3rd District offers a much different dynamic than the 2nd that likely affords Smith more room for incompetence. With the emergence of what could soon prove a new 2nd District, however, Terry might just be writing his political career's obituary.

One could read into Terry's conduct that he's writing off seeking re-election and is already aiming for Hagel's Senate seat, positioning himself with his party and its base for a statewide primary battle. Otherwise, he's just being a damn fool, unable to break the habits that have served him and his constituents so poorly over the last 8 years.

So, keep up the good work, Mr. Sund. Keep holding Terry's feet to the fire - an uncomfortable position that will only become more unpleasant and, ultimately, more dangerous if he persists in these foolish partisan shenanigans that the embarrassed voters of the 2nd District will not and should not stand for at their next opportunity to be heard at the ballot box.

Go to full text...