Bob Kerrey: Not a Big Fan of the Blogosphere?

Omaha World-Herald columnist Robert Nelson e-mailed Bob Kerrey for his response to the Nebraska Republican and Democratic Parties using their websites to attack potential candidates of the opposing party - himself and Mike Johanns, respectively.   Kerrey's reply to Nelson suggests he's not particularly fond of the effect blogs and the Internet have had on American politics. "In the old days (before the Web)... a 'name-caller' had to get a newspaper, radio, or television to include their insult in a story. Today the parties publish their own stories and the blogs add to the mix. "The fact that The World-Herald asks me to respond to a political Web site is evidence the world has changed. The tail is wagging the dog. "Couple this...with a decline in the number of radio, television and print reporters who cover politics and you have a lethal mix. The public drinks this stuff and something good dies." There's definitely a lot of truth to Kerrey's concerns. But, despite the polarization and raw partisanship with which Kerrey is right to take issue, it's unfortunate that he should fail to acknowledge the positive contributions to democratic discourse in our country made possible by the new media.

Also, it's worth noting that here we're talking about partisan attacks by political parties that are inherently - by definition - partisan. It's not very idealistic, but there's something to be said for this being their primary purpose. Either way, such attacks certainly didn't begin with the advent of the Internet - just one more outlet beyond the parties' traditional press releases, which have often tended towards ugliness and spitefulness over the years. If anything, the Internet has made it possible for political parties to bypass the middle men in the press and take their message directly to the people. This certainly changes the dynamics of modern campaigning, but it also heightens the dangers for political parties that go too far and run the risk of shooting themselves in the foot with voters when left to pursue their worst impulses unchecked. Such a system provides more information to the people and puts more power to hold politicians accountable directly in their hands. That can't be a bad thing - at least, not entirely. At the same time, there are sites like New Nebraska Network - which I like to imagine being above the fray...even while admitting we don't always live up to that standard. Still - despite his understandable comments above - I hope Kerrey recognizes our potential to serve the good rather than simply snuffing it out. As we look to 2008 and what is already shaping up to be a very contentious campaign season, I trust NNN will be a positive force in Nebraska politics - overcoming the cheap and the easy while still having fun in the process.

Go to full text...

A War of Rhetoric: 'New York Democrats' vs. 'Washington Republicans'

In 2006, the Nebraska Republican Party grasped desperately to the idea that 3rd District Congressional candidate Scott Kleeb was not a true Nebraskan - focusing on the years Kleeb had spent at Yale University and his successful out-of-state fundraising because their candidate - Adrian Smith - couldn't compete on the issues, by reputation, or with personality.

Now, looking to the 2008 Senate race, we already see the same sort of attacks revving up against potential Democratic candidate Bob Kerrey for living in New York City the last six years while serving as President of New School University.
What's funny is just how much hypocrisy it will require of Nebraska Republicans to attack Kerrey on this basis. For starters, Kerrey would be running to replace Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel - who was first elected in 1996 after spending two decades living in Virginia and Washington D.C.

Even more ridiculous, though, is the fact that two of the best-positioned Republicans hoping to replace Hagel have also recently declared Washington D.C. home. As most readers know and as cartoonist Neal Obermeyer has pointed out, Mike Johanns has been living in Washington D.C. since becoming Secretary of Agriculture for the Bush Administration in January 2005. In fact, Johanns is even reported to have gone house-hunting last weekend to reclaim his Nebraska residency.

Less well-known and less remembered is just how recently Hal Daub also called Washington D.C. home. The Omaha World-Herald (11/27/05) reported:

In July 2004, [Hal] Daub took a full-time job in Washington, D.C. He and his wife, Mary, sold their Omaha house and purchased one in the Georgetown area....

Daub never really put Omaha behind him during his 14 months leading the Washington-based American Health Care Association. Originally, Daub expected to spend three to five years with the national nursing home organization.

Of course, Daub didn't have a whole lot of say on his early return to Nebraska because he'd managed to alienate the AHCA leadership to the point that they couldn't wait to get rid of him. That shouldn't come as much of a surprise to anyone who remembers Daub's relationship with city officials when he served as mayor of Omaha.
 
Regardless, both Daub and Johanns have proven quite willing to adopt homes outside of Nebraska when it served their career ambitions. It's not my place to say whether these choices make them any less Nebraskan, but they make it downright absurd and hypocritical for the Republican Party to attack Kerrey on similar grounds.

Go to full text...

Nebraska Republicans Pay Tribute to Chuck Hagel

Neal Obermeyer presents:


"Et tu, Bruning?"

And, be sure to check out Obermeyer's most recent Omaha Reader cartoon as well. It's about time someone challenges the absurd suggestion that former Governor and two-term U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey would somehow be a carpetbagger should he return home to Nebraska and run for a third term in the Senate.

Go to full text...

Nebraska Republicans Don't Care That Their Votes Won't Count???

The rejuvenated Douglas County Democratic Party held a press conference yesterday touting the Nebraska Democratic Party's 2008 Presidential caucus, scheduled for Saturday, February 9th. The press conference was obviously quite successful, earning a front-page story in the Omaha World-Herald, not to mention across the dial coverage on Omaha television (KMTV, KETV, KPTM).

This is a really exciting development for Nebraska Democrats, who are certainly taking a risk with so massive an undertaking but who ultimately have little to lose after years of our state being less than an afterthought in presidential politics. Of course, there are no guarantees the caucus will prove a tremendous success, but I think the people of Nebraska will appreciate the fact that at least one political party in our state cares enough about its voters to give them the chance to have a say in choosing their presidential nominee.

The Nebraska Republican Party may have any number of legitimate reasons for not following suit, maintaining its own presidential selection during the May primary when the race is all-but-certain to be over. It may be a matter of tradition. It may be a simple (and quite practical) acknowledgment of Nebraska's low place on the presidential totem pole. It may even reflect plain old laziness on their part, not wanting to deal with the hassle when Nebraska's Republican majority is likely to rally behind whoever has the "R" by his name on the November ballot. Who knows - they might even sense that the current crop of Republican candidates is so uniformly unimpressive that it's just not worth having a choice between them.

Whatever their reasoning, I could probably respect it. What I can't respect, though, is the insulting mockery by the Nebraska Republican Party's Executive Director, Tiffany Carlton, directed towards Nebraska Democrats just for daring to be relevant on the national stage.

  The Omaha World-Herald reported:

Although the Democrats' caucuses will come four days after Super-duper Tuesday - when more than 20 states are expected to hold primaries or caucuses - several candidates have indicated interest in competing for Nebraska's delegates, state party officials said. "We are definitely a part of the process now. Even though there's a Super-duper Tuesday going on February 5, there are so many strong candidates that we won't end up with a definite winner on that date," said Chris Jerram, chairman of the Douglas County Democratic Party....  

[Tiffany] Carlton, the GOP executive director, said it's unlikely that a Feb. 9 contest will have any real impact, with so many states choosing a nominee on Feb. 5. "Unfortunately, because so many other states have moved their caucuses forward, their delusion of grandeur is not going to happen. By February 9, the decision will be made and the Nebraska Democrats will be left standing like the kid who got left out on the playground," she said.

Now, I realize that, as her party's executive director, it is Carlton's job to be partisan. But, I don't think that partisanship should extend to actively rooting for the failure of any effort to empower the people of Nebraska and to give them more of a say in who will be their next president.

According to the Nebraska Republican Party, democracy is the true delusion of grandeur. They decided for their own voters that Nebraska Republicans would have no real say in their nomination process. And, from this response, they clearly resent the fact that Nebraska Democrats are daring to be more bold, taking a risk that shows signs of life and true concern for Nebraska voters that will only make the complacent GOP look bad by comparison.

Then again, they already look bad from Carlton's statement above. I guess they might as well get used to it now.

***Addendum*** I just added a new poll on this topic. Please tell us what you think about Nebraska Democrats' plans for a presidential caucus.

Go to full text...

Bob Kerrey & Chuck Hagel: Best Friends Forever???

In Nebraska politics, we've all seen how ambition for higher office has driven Attorney General Jon Bruning from declaring himself "a Hagel guy" to making Sen. Chuck Hagel a target of any attack he could think of in just a matter of weeks. Unreported has been the similar flip-flop by Hal Daub, who went from announcing in December that he would not consider a U.S. Senate bid if Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel seeks a third term to now declaring "I don't care who runs." And, how can anyone forget the August fundraiser for the Nebraska Republican Party where praise for Hagel by the night's keynote speaker was met by nothing but silence from his party's faithful. With responses like these, you might expect Hagel to be feeling a little bit lonely. A little bit isolated. A little bit betrayed. But, then, of all people, there is Bob Kerrey - the lone voice in Nebraska politics defending Hagel, praising Hagel, and even encouraging him to run for re-election. What might distinguish Kerrey even more than the respect he continues to show towards Hagel, though, is that he's actually been consistent regarding his friend and former colleague. Well, if the following article from the Omaha World-Herald or the above picture are any indicator, it looks like Kerrey is still the one leader on whose support Hagel could actually count:

Sen. Chuck Hagel and former Sen. Bob Kerrey appeared together Wednesday, following the same script: Both smiled and both sidestepped questions about which, if either, of them may run for the Senate next year. The Vietnam veterans teamed up at a Capitol Hill press conference to voice support for the Omaha-based Wounded Warriors organization, which hopes to build a retreat for wounded service members, their families and relatives of those killed in combat on 80 acres near Crawford in northwest Nebraska. But neither Kerrey nor Hagel had much to say when the subject turned to next year's U.S. Senate race....  Before Wednesday's press conference, the two met behind closed doors in Hagel's office in the Russell Senate Office Building. Loud laughter could be heard outside....   "I just told him I knew it is a tough decision, since I went through the same thing seven years ago, and I told him I hope he goes for third," Kerrey said in an e-mail sent later in the day. "It will be a big loss for Nebraska and the nation if he leaves the Senate," Kerrey added. Admittedly, the New Nebraska Network has not always been so praising of Hagel, but I certainly appreciate his leadership and insight in foreign policy matters going well beyond his outspoken criticism of the war in Iraq. More importantly, it is heartening to see a politician of Kerrey's stature disregarding party lines and political games with the same independence and integrity for which he's always been known by the people of Nebraska. Of course, it's understandable why ambitious Republicans like Jon Bruning and Hal Daub would turn their backs on Hagel, hoping to appeal to all those silent Republican activists who don't care to face the truth about President Bush's failures. One wonders - one might even expect - that they will change their tune if Hagel announces he won't be seeking re-election - an effort to create a false united front, as if they hadn't just been preparing his political destruction. It shouldn't matter. However Hagel ultimately chooses to position himself politically, the people of Nebraska have seen these men's true colors for themselves - pandering to their party's extremists. At the same time, the people have seen Kerrey stand by Hagel, reflecting Nebraska's tradition of nonpartisanship. In doing so, Kerrey is also representing the vast majority of Nebraskans who overwhelmingly elected Hagel in 2002 and - looking to 2008 - have concerns far greater than protecting President Bush and the Republican status quo. Bob Kerrey is a man for all Nebraskans. He was as Governor. He was as Senator. Let's hope he'll again be the candidate for all Nebraskans very, very soon.

Go to full text...

Pete Ricketts: If At First You Don't Succeed - BUY, BUY Again

The Clown Prince of the Nebraska Republican Party Returns Hal Daub just resigned as National Committeeman for the Nebraska Republican Party, prompting the Lincoln Journal-Star to print the following story that shows our old friend Pete Ricketts re-entering the political scene: In a prelude to a possible Senate bid, Hal Daub resigned Monday as the Nebraska Republican Party's national committeeman.   Pete Ricketts, the party's 2006 Senate nominee, emerged as the most likely successor to Daub. Republicans will fill the vacancy at their state central committee meeting in Kearney Nov. 17. This calls for a quick history lesson. Probably the most inexcusable unreported story of Nebraska's 2006 elections was the money flooding in to the Nebraska Republican Party and its candidates from the multi-billion dollar family fortune of Senate challenger Pete Ricketts.   Ricketts was not content to spend more than $12 million dollars from his Ameritrade trustfund on his own laughing-stock Senate campaign - so fundamentally flawed that it saw him lose to Sen. Ben Nelson by nearly 30%, with 56% of Nebraska voters actively disliking him by the end of the race. He also dropped campaign donations in the thousands of dollars all across the state - as if they were nothing more than bread crumbs.  Most notable was the way Ricketts coordinated the funneling of close to $100,000 to the Nebraska Republican Party - with nine members of his extended family contributing the full $10,000 allowable by law. Also worth noting was the thousands of dollars Pete and his parents contributed to Don Stenberg to help pay-off Stenberg's campaign debt after losing to Ricketts in the Republican primary. That might be a nice gesture - helping a vanquished foe who's fallen on hard times - but this was at the same time that he was running his own multi-milllion dollar self-funded campaign. Could Ricketts have made it any more clear that money meant absolutely nothing to him? Honestly, is it any wonder that a guy like that would fail to connect with the people of Nebraska? That they would - in fact - end up hating him? Still, it makes sense that Ricketts would end up re-emerging in the Nebraska Republican Party's hierarchy. The people of Nebraska don't have to like him for Republican candidates to be very grateful when he writes them a check. For all of his own failures as a candidate, there's no denying that the kind of money he was dropping in Nebraska politics was bound to buy Ricketts some loyalty. Republicans up and down the ballot hardly even had to ask before having thousand dollar hand-outs thrust in their direction. And, that mentality didn't end with the 2006 election. Ever since, Ricketts seems to have been just as busy as ever writing campaign checks and buying his party's loyalty with cold, hard cash.

Let's just take a look at who Ricketts has been contributing to lately (since the 2006 election): $8,000 to Ken Svoboda (failed candidate for Mayor of Lincoln)   $5,000 to Jim Vokal (Ambitious Omaha City Councilman, not even up for re-election until 2009....additional $2,5000 contributed by Ricketts' father, Joe)   $1,000 to Jon Camp (independently wealthy incumbent on Lincoln City Council)   $1,000 to John Erickson (failed candidate for Lincoln City Council)   $2,300 to John Thune (U.S. Senator from South Dakota, up for re-election in 2010) $1,000 to Pat Roberts (U.S. Senator from Kansas, up for re-election in 2008)   $4,600 to Chuck Hagel (U.S. Senator from Nebraska who already received tons of free advertising from Ricketts in 2006)   $4,600 to Jeff Fortenberry (maxing-out to 1st District Congressman's 2008 re-election campaign)   $500 to Lee Terry (spare change from under Ricketts' sofa cushion for his own Congressman in Nebraska's 2nd District)   $5,000 to "For Our Republic's Traditions Fund", aka "Fort Fund" (Fortenberry's very own "Leadership PAC", i.e. mechanism to skirt campaign finance laws and buy influence in Washington D.C.)   $5,000 to Sandhills PAC (Chuck Hagel's "Leadership PAC")   $10,000 to Nebraska Republican Party (just another drop in the bucket) Are you starting to get a sense of why Ricketts is the favorite to replace Daub in the Nebraska Republican Party? Those are some heavy-hitters, and that is a lot of money. Not to mention, everyone knows there's more where that came from. Of course, what I find most funny is all the various occupations Pete Ricketts reports for himself on the above campaign filings. They range from Ameritrade Executive to Director of the "Platte Institute for Economic Research" (whatever that is). A few times, Ricketts even declares himself "Retired" (at, I believe, the ripe old age of 42). No, we haven't seen the last of Pete Ricketts in Nebraska politics, and I say thank God for that. Despite all the money in the world, with this guy calling the shots - so disconnected from the people of Nebraska and their real world concerns - the Nebraska Republican Party might be flush with cash but will only become further removed from the common people already struggling to find a reason to continue identifying with this party that has become so synonymous with greed, corruption, failure, and lies.

Go to full text...

Hal Daub Finishes His Magical Mystery Tour (w/new poll)

Former Congressman and Omaha Mayor Hal Daub wrapped up his statewide listening tour with a couple of events in Omaha this week, leaving the door open to his third campaign for the U.S. Senate.
 The Associated Press reports:

Daub said he's found overwhelming support across the state for Bush and his decisions about Iraq.... 

Daub wouldn't say Friday how much money he's raised for a possible run, or how much of his own money he's spent on the listening tour. He also won't say whether he'd run against Sen. Chuck Hagel, a fellow Republican whom Daub says he considers a friend...

But Daub did say he "won't be dissuaded by whoever the candidates might be."

If he decides not to run, Daub says he'll return the money he's raised with interest and will pass the ideas he's gathered along to elected officials.

Boy, I'm sure Nebraska's elected officials can't wait to have Hal Daub tell them what the people of Nebraska are thinking. I still refuse to accept Daub's exaggerated and illegitimate claim that Nebraskans support President Bush and his war policy. This demonstrates nothing more than that the kind of people who'd attend a Hal Daub event are just as fringe-worthy and out of touch with the mainstream as Daub himself. I'm curious what others think of Daub's claim, though, so please answer our latest NNN poll.

As far as Daub actually running for Senate, I'd love to see him get the Republican nomination, but that's just not going to happen. I know it's said that "the third time's the charm", but we saw how well that worked out for Don Stenberg in 2006. No, as proven by the choice of Pete Ricketts, Nebraska Republicans might still nominate a candidate who is a total loser - but not a proven loser like Hal Daub.

Go to full text...

For Your Viewing Pleasure: The Famous "Assface" E-mails

Remember those Republican staffers working for Sen. Tom Coburn who were out to get Sen. Ben Nelson. Well, we at NNN thought you might all like to see their artful displays of childish contempt for yourselves.

Note: A black Sharpie has been used to protect the innocent.

TAC is, of course, Sen. Thomas A. Coburn, whose staff seems to be prodding him to take this issue farther and farther for their own personal and political reasons. The hit piece being celebrated by these jokers is an August 2nd article in The Hill reporting Coburn's grandstanding against a single earmark for a Nebraska company in the Defense appropriations bill for not filing one particular disclosure form.

 

Whether hoping to embarrass Ben Nelson, make a name for himself, or just "shut that fucker up", Coburn completely fails to point out that, according to government watchdogs at the Sunlight Foundation, no defense contractors are filing the obscure forms he seeks. That's a damn shame because the lobbying practices they pertain to should be disclosed, but it also reveals the hypocrisy at the heart of this whole stupid situation.

Just another great moment in democratic discourse brought to you by our friends in the Republican Party.

Go to full text...

Childish Republican Staffers Target Ben Nelson in Earmark Battle

A story from last month that ended with Sen. Ben Nelson retracting a controversial earmark request for an Omaha-based company that employs his son found renewed life thanks to a series of e-mails coming to light that suggest the controversy and criticism directed at Nelson may have been quite personal and probably even partisan in nature. As reported by The Hill: A battle between the offices of Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) over a controversial earmark intensified earlier this month, displaying how debates on Capitol Hill sometimes can turn personal. The senators had been at odds over the matter for much of the summer, but it would reach a new level when John Hart, communications director for Coburn, forwarded a news article detailing his boss's request for an investigation of a defense contractor. The target of the would-be investigation, 21st Century Systems Inc. (21CSI), employs Patrick Nelson, the son of the centrist senator. Sen. Nelson had requested an earmark for 21CSI, triggering a heated battle between the senators that has raged for weeks.  "This will shut that fucker up," Hart stated in an Aug. 1 e-mail sent from his Senate account to several of his colleagues. "I can't wait to send an In Case You Missed It to Nebraska press that will be forwarded to assface".... Hart has since said that his missives were directed at Nelson spokesman David DiMartino, not Sen. Nelson. I wish I could hold this e-mail up as an example of Republicans' super-partisan mentality, but this seems to be more a case of simple stupidity. Why might Coburn's staff bear such animosity towards Nelson - or, even towards his spokesman Mr. DiMartino? I suspect it has something to do with the following article from July's Omaha World-Herald that proved Nelson's staff quite adept at putting their Republican assailants back on the defensive:

Sen. Ben Nelson had a message Tuesday for Sen. Tom Coburn: Take care of your own backyard before you attack other lawmakers' earmarks. The Oklahoma Republican filed an amendment last week to eliminate $7.5 million that Nelson, D-Neb., wanted to steer to Omaha defense contractor 21st Century Systems Inc., which calls itself 21CSI. A Coburn spokesman compared 21CSI military computer software to video games and criticized the project as classic pork barrel spending. Nelson's office staff responded by defending the earmark as important to national defense, but also decided to take a look at earmarks in the defense bill that would benefit Oklahoma. They came across a $5 million earmark for military simulation training in Oklahoma. The earmark was inserted into the bill by the other Oklahoma senator, Republican James Inhofe, who could not be reached. That simulation training program has involved the Institute of Creative Technologies, which has received millions through federal earmarks over the years, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense. One product of the funding was a video game called Full Spectrum Warrior that proved commercially successful but of limited military use, according to the group. "Senator Coburn's derided the research and development work done in Nebraska by mischaracterizing it as 'video games' and deemed it unworthy of funding, while ignoring and tacitly approving a $5 million earmark for his home state that actually does fund video game development," said Nelson spokesman David DiMartino. That's a pretty damn fine retort if you ask me. Regardless of the ultimate merit of the 21CSI funding, there's nothing quite like the revelation of this blatant hypocrisy to make Coburn and his staff look like a bunch of fools. Of course - as previously stated - Nelson has withdrawn his earmark request, but the actual spending remains in the Senate's appropriations bill. It faces a long road in the House, though, because Nebraska's Republican Congressmen are so uniformly lacking in stature and influence. And, I fear the same will hold true of every dollar Nebraska seeks back from the federal government until we elect some Representatives who are honestly worthy of their colleague's respect. Until then - to paraphrase Second District Congressman Lee Terry - if you want something done in this state, you should "just go talk to Ben."

Go to full text...

Did Chuck Hagel's Slap Down of Republican House Leader Even Get Reported by the Omaha World-Herald?

Seriously, five days ago, Sen. Chuck Hagel delivered as straight-forward and stunning a rebuke to the Republican Party's entire Iraq War noise machine as any that has been reported across the country. Without resorting to sound bytes - simply stating the facts - Hagel managed to single-handedly debunk every fantastical notion of success just around the corner that Congressional Republicans and the Bush Administration continue grasping onto in such sick desperation.
 
In particular, Hagel embarrassed House Minority Leader John Boehner with his merciless recitation of the cold, hard facts. At the same time, he shamed Nebraska's Republican Congressmen - who spent the week fundraising with Boehner across Nebraska, earning every blood-drenched dollar with their silent embrace of Boehner's and Bush's Iraq War fantasies.

Still, to my knowledge, the Omaha World-Herald managed to completely neglect coverage of Hagel's outright refutation of the party-line concocted by Boehner and his ilk. Did I miss something or is this oversight nothing short of outrageous on the part of Nebraska's supposed paper of record?

Even though Hagel's statements may have been made to the Lincoln Journal-Star, it's impossible to justify disregarding their importance or their implications for the national political scene and for Nebraska's stooge-like House delegation. A sitting U.S. Senator from Nebraska denounced his own party's leader in the House of Representatives - essentially calling him a liar or a fool - and we're left to assume our state's largest and most powerful newspaper somehow didn't find that newsworthy. Are you kidding me?

Once again, the World-Herald proves itself either incompetent or corrupt for keeping the people of Nebraska in the dark on issues and stories that are not convenient to its Republican political bent. Nothing we haven't seen before (or, failed to see, as the case may be). But, this is definitely a failure we must rage against if we're ever to put the World-Herald on notice that Nebraskans might - one day - expect better and find themselves seeking a more honest alternative.

Go to full text...

Public Pulse Taken Over by Republican Spin in Omaha Budget Battle

Ten days ago, Omaha Republican City Councilmen Jim Vokal and Chuck Sigerson attempted to embarrass Democratic Mayor Mike Fahey and to pin the blame on him for not doing enough to prevent Omaha's rash of gun violence this summer. To do so, they leaked a letter they'd sent last December recommending a temporary increase in property taxes to fund a temporary increase in the number of police officers. Leaving out the obvious but highly-relevant fact of who had released this letter in the first place, the Omaha World-Herald reported: Fahey's chief of staff, Paul Landow, said the...council members privately sent the letter to Fahey but didn't push the issue further. "If they were really interested in adding 50 police officers, why didn't they say it publicly at the time?" Landow asked.....   Landow also said Fahey has been steadily increasing the number of police officers, including adding 15 officers in 2007 and another 15 next year. But Fahey won't be calling for a temporary surge in police officers, Landow said.   In their letter, the council members suggested that the number of officers increase by 40 to 50, then decrease after three years, or after violence in north Omaha has lessened. Under the plan, the tax increase that would fund the officers would also be rolled back.   Landow said the idea of a temporary surge in police officers is unworkable. "What are we supposed to do at the end of the three years? Fire all the additional cops?" So, essentially, Fahey is planning a permanent addition of 30 police officers rather than the 40 - 50 temporary officers Vokal and Sigerson had recommended. And, Fahey is budgeting for these new officers without relying on the property tax increases Vokal and Sigerson had called for last December. It's rather ridiculous that they would even attempt to milk that difference for political gain, particularly when Omaha's Police Chief, Thomas Warren, had just told the Council, "I'm comfortable with the personnel allocation that we are proposing for the 2008 budget." Honestly, it's sad that the World-Herald even printed this sad bit of partisan spin attacking Fahey and playing on people's increased fears about local crime. But, having opened that door, it was only fair that Fahey's office decided to fight back:

Mayor Mike Fahey's chief of staff is accusing two City Council members of playing politics when it comes to addressing gun violence. Chief of Staff Paul Landow said Councilmen Jim Vokal and Chuck Sigerson have alternately advocated in letters to the mayor for both an increase and a decrease in the city's property tax rate....   Vokal and Sigerson...wrote Fahey last December that they would support a tax rate increase in 2008 to hire an additional 40 to 50 police officers. Then in June, Sigerson and Vokal wrote Fahey asking him to lower the property tax rate in response to what was projected to be a significant increase in property valuations....   "It's clearly disingenuous, political nonsense," Landow said. "One minute they are calling for a tax increase, and the next they want a decrease. Which is it?"..... Landow said the shifting positions were intended to bolster Vokal's possible mayoral bid in 2009. "This is all being done in the name of political ambition." Thoroughly established as opportunists and flip-floppers taking advantage of the surge in gun violence for their own political purposes, you'd expect Vokal and Sigerson to shut up. Instead, today's World-Herald ran three curiously-timed and similar-sounding letters in the Public Pulse that attempt one last time to shamelessly spin the fears and heartache of Omaha families to the Republican Party's advantage: Mayor Mike Fahey claims to want input from community leaders in an effort to solve Omaha's crime wave. But where was this concern in December when City Councilmen Jim Vokal and Chuck Sigerson offered to work with the mayor on addressing the sudden increase in gun violence in Omaha? Omaha has again seen a dramatic increase in violent crime this summer. Now, Fahey accuses the councilmen, through his Chief of Staff Paul Landow, of playing politics. If Fahey had been attentive to Omaha's needs and responded to the councilmen's ideas in December, maybe he wouldn't need to play politics now. Possible solutions already would have been in the works.   Joe Risko, Omaha ------------------- Landow called the efforts by Vokal and Sigerson politically ambitious. This is ridiculous. Landown's attempt to twist the facts of the situation and turn it into a political attack is abhorrent. In December, Vokal and Sigerson proposed increasing the number of police officers in Omaha by 40 to 50 and were willing to authorize additional funding to do so. But Fahey refused this offer. In June, Vokal and Sigerson responded to the de facto tax increase caused by property valuation increases by demanding a tax cut. These two positions are entirely consistent. Vokal and Sigerson are in favor of using additional funding to curb violence in Omaha with additional police officers. They are not in favor of raising tax revenues through higher assessments just to pad city coffers. It is time for Landow and Fahey to quit playing politics and start doing something to keep our children from dying on the streets of Omaha.   Scott Knudsen, Omaha ------------------- It seems to me that when these councilmen sent a letter to Fahey back in December, they were putting the interests of the people of Omaha above their own political futures. When it became clear to the them that their suggestion to add more police to stifle a crime wave was rejected, they were free to move on to resolve another increasing problem: Douglas County Assessor Roger Morrissey's desire to increase taxable property valuations. As a voter, I prefer leadership that is sensitive to the changing landscape of the city, not oblivious to it.   Pete D. Pedersen, Omaha I always hate to see the opinion page littered with these faux-letters pre-manufactured by party hacks and signed with the names of loyal Republican footsoldiers. It's sort of amusing, however, how each of these three letters contains its own carefully-crafted message attempting to obscure Vokal and Sigerson's hypocrisy while turning the tables on Fahey and Landow for who's really "playing politics." Of course, in this little skirmish, the real question of who was "playing politics" begins and ends with who first tried to use this issue for their partisan advantage. Clearly, that was Vokal and Sigerson. They simply got out-played, despite the World-Herald giving them every possible advantage. The facts speak for themselves. Sadly, the World-Herald appears to be concerned very little with Letters to the Editors adhering to those facts, instead allowing fabrication by repetition on its own opinion page.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel Delivers Devastating Blow to Republicans' BS

House Republican Leader John Boehner visited Nebraska this week to make appearances at a series of high-dollar fundraisers for all three of Nebraska's Republican Congressmen - who've each remained good little partisan lap-dogs despite the nationwide implosion of the Republican Party.

Taking advantage of a few news reports that suggested some minor progress in Iraq, Boehner fantasized to the Lincoln Journal-Star:

After "investing all their political capital on failure in Iraq," Democrats soon will need to adjust to signs of U.S. success, House Republican Leader John Boehner said Wednesday.... The Bush administration's surge of additional U.S. troops into combat in Iraq has been "very successful," Boehner said....  

While the Iraqi government needs to make more progress in meeting U.S. benchmarks for political accommodation and stability, Boehner said, "the Iraqi parliament has made more progress in keeping its promises than the Democrats in Congress."

I'll give Boehner credit for working in a couple of choice soundbytes. The trouble is that they're so far out of touch with reality that they can't even be taken seriously. And, who better to hammer that fact home than Nebraska's Republican Senator, Chuck Hagel:

Hagel took issue with House Republican Leader John Boehner's own assessment that the Bush administration's strategy has been "very successful" in Iraq. "Everyone is entitled to his opinion," Hagel said, "but the facts do not bear that out".... "On the same day Boehner was boldly proclaiming we were winning in Iraq, Basra was under siege by roving gangs and militias," Hagel said. "Shiite militias are in charge in the southern third of Iraq," he said. On the same day, Hagel said, as many as 500 people were killed in the north. 

"All Sunni cabinet members of Nouri al-Maliki's government are gone," he said. "There is no functioning government in Iraq." Five U.S. soldiers were killed that day, Hagel said, and the Green Zone was hit by 25 mortar attacks. "I'm not sure on what basis Boehner says the surge (of additional U.S. troops) is working," Hagel said.

Thank you to Senator Hagel for refusing to join Nebraska's Republican Congressmen in burying their heads in the sand to the harsh realities of the Iraq War. By continuing to stand with John Boehner and President Bush through four-and-a-half years of delusion and deception, Jeff Fortenberry, Lee Terry, and Adrian Smith have all proven themselves completely undeserving of the people's trust and the offices they hold.

The one point on which Hagel was wrong in his response is that Boehner is NOT entitled to say whatever he damn well pleases about the Iraq War - not when he's an elected representative with a responsibility to protect our men and women in combat and to speak the truth to the American public.

The fact that Boehner - as Minority Leader in the House of Representatives - continues selling this disastrous and failed war policy of the Bush Administration is an undeniable testament to the sad state of the Republican Party.

The fact that he speaks for Nebraska's Republican Congressmen when engaging in this deadly game of spin and deception- with their approval and with their support - should be the only call to action we need to clean house in 2008, replacing these mere Republicans with true leaders who won't betray their oath, sell their silence, and forsake our trust in the name of partisan loyalty.

Go to full text...

Partisan Sensationialism at the Lincoln Journal-Star?

Yesterday's Lincoln Journal-Star ran a Letter to the Editor that pretty well nailed the paper for framing the city's budget process as nothing more than a partisan showdown: I watched much of the City Council budget meetings Aug. 6 and 8. I found the seven members of our Council to be voting for themselves (or, rather, their constituents) more so than down their respective political lines.   Why, then, must Journal Star coverage mislead us where partisan politics are concerned? The Aug. 9 article on the budget mentioned the dreaded R & D words nearly 10 times. Might we remind the reporter that mayoral elections are not partisan and nowhere on the general ballot was there an R, D or any other letter by the candidates' names.   I wish the paper would report the news, not create it. That's why we have FOX News.   Barbara Arendt, Lincoln Maybe we should look at the article Ms. Arendt was talking about to understand the merit of her accusation: It came down to streets, police officers and firefighters Wednesday, as the Lincoln City Council spent several hours putting the final touches on the municipal budget. Campaign promises not to increase the city's property tax rate made for difficult decisions.....   As usual, the fire department budget provided fodder for controversy. In July, Councilman Jon Camp proposed cutting its budget by $175,000. Wednesday, he reduced that to $100,000. The four Republicans on the council went along with that, over the objections of the three Democrats....   Republicans rebuffed a last-minute attempt by Councilman Jonathan Cook to restore the money by using several revenue sources that materialized since the mayor prepared his budget - such as money from a new StarTran advertising contract. Instead, Republicans moved the unallocated money into the city's contingency fund.   Cook said later he was shocked they refused to restore money to the fire department after doing so for the aging and police departments. "What does that say?" Cook said. "I don't believe many councils nationwide would refuse to appropriate that money to its fire department"....   Democrats were unable to dissuade Republicans from cutting the Affirmative Action office in half and folding it into the personnel office.... Republicans on the council were dogged about diverting more money toward street construction and maintenance, and had succeeded in moving about $800,000 toward that end until the end of the meeting. But in a last-minute move, Cook convinced two Republicans to instead move a portion of that - the general revenue - to the police department. After the meeting, Budget Officer Steve Hubka said it amounted to nearly $328,000. In all fairnes, there does appear to be a partisan divide in Lincoln politics where the Fire Department is concerned - as their union has been an important source of support for local Democrats with Republicans frequently targeting the Fire Dept. because of that relationship. But, otherwise, the letter writer makes an excellent point. There seems to be a general trend in the Nebraska press towards over-emphasizing party labels at the local level in an attempt to make local politics (hence, local news) more sexy. While the subjective interpretation of local politics through the prism of partisanship sometimes has merit, this isn't the first time a reporter's laziness has resulted in some spin and manufactured conflict along artificial lines. Then, at the same time, reporters continue to turn a blind eye to the decade-old Republican political machine running our state government that derives its whole power from that label. Ironic, don't you think?

Go to full text...

The Power of Silence

Friday night, Nebraska Republicans held their "Founders Day" Celebration at the Omaha Hilton with featured guest Dick Armey, former Majority Leader in the House of Representatives. According to the following Omaha World-Herald report, Chuck Hagel's political future was the talk of the evening...although it sounds like he personally received a rather cool reception. One grand question filled the Grand Ballroom of the Hilton Omaha at a Friday gathering of 280 Republican activists: What will Chuck do? ...   [T]he crowd's talk centered on whether U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel would step down or run again and the political dominoes that would fall as a result. Hagel gave only the briefest hint when he told the crowd at the Nebraska Republican Party's Founders Day dinner: "There is no such thing as the status quo".....  Nebraska GOP Chairman Mark Quandahl said everyone expects him to know Hagel's plan, but he doesn't have a clue. "The fact is that the only person who knows for sure is Sen. Hagel," Quandahl said. The September timeline for an announcement is intact, Hagel said. It could be that he sees an opening to run for president or to seek re-election or to leave elective politics behind him. It all could come down to whether he wants to put in another six years in the Senate. "That's a big commitment," he said.   Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey described Hagel to the Republicans as "his own guy . . . He knows who he is." The line did not draw any applause from the Republicans, gathered to honor the party's most faithful volunteers. It's not a particularly good time to be a Republican - although, in Nebraska, they're still pretty well insulated from the worst effects of their party's many failures. Looking for someone to blame, it's rather ironic that Nebraska Republicans would choose Hagel, the only Republican to be elected to the U.S. Senate from Nebraska in the last 30 years. Of course, he deserves some of that blame, but only because he hasn't stood up to the disastrous course set by President Bush on more issues with greater force. If they're really looking for people to blame, though, we have three no-account Congressman as well who've enabled Bush and made mockery of their so-called "conservative values" every step along the way. Chuck Hagel may "know who he is," but it makes a certain sense for Nebraska Republicans to resent him for that fact when they have no idea who they are or what they stand for beyond holding onto power and the privileges that go with it.

Go to full text...

'Stay the Course' Alive & Well in Hearts of Nebraska Republicans???

In the same Omaha World-Herald article covering Hal Daub's statewide listening tour, what was far, far scarier than the prospect of Daub in the U.S. Senate was the feedback he reported from Nebraska Republicans - particularly on the war in Iraq: During the Fremont stop, Daub listened as those in a largely Republican gathering told him they hoped America would stay the course in Iraq. Two said they did not want this country to experience another Vietnam. Daub said that was typical of the response he's gotten from the more than 2,200 people he has talked to since May. Seriously, where is Daub finding these people? Is he just totally full of crap, or is there really such an impenetrable shell protecting Nebraska Republicans' ignorance and obliviousness? I don't believe in easy solutions to America's Iraq problem, but I thought we might finally be getting to a point at which we could all agree that 'stay the course' is nothing more than an empty slogan promising expanding chaos and more bloodshed. There is no strategy at its heart. It carries with it no purpose but to protect our president's foolish pride, making us a nation of proud fools.  Is it possible that Nebraska Republicans are really telling Daub they want our nation to 'stay the course' to even further disaster? Even if we believe recent reports of "military progress" in Iraq, these still offer little hope for the peace and political progress that are supposedly our ultimate objectives. 'Stay the course might' sound good coming from John Wayne in Rio Bravo, but it's the height of lunacy in terms of military strategy - as if resolve alone could guarantee success. To stand by so obnoxious a statement more than four years into this idiotic exercise in egotism and insecurity is a virtual embrace of outright insanity. Are Nebraska Republicans really so desperate and out-of-touch that they imagine different outcomes from our repeating the same mistakes? I can't believe that - even of the ones who would actually take time out of their day to listen to Hal Daub speak. Of course, there might be a few who have traded their reason for their Republicanism - and I suspect these folks would be well-served by either Daub or Jon Bruning. But, 'stay the course' is not a strategy - it's suicide in the name of partisan loyalty that confuses supporting our troops with letting them be slaughtered. If that's "typical" of the response Daub got on his listening tour, he would have been much better off staying home and paying attention to the actual news coming out of Iraq rather than surrounding himself with such a sorry bunch who've lost the ability to separate Bush's fantasy from our reality.

Go to full text...

Signs of Life in "Hagel for President"???

It may not mean a damn thing, but - after two months without a single update - the year-and-a half-old Chuck Hagel for President 2008 blog is up and running once again. Of course, that blog is an unofficial site, but it's unofficial in the same way as the Jon Bruning for Senate blog that recently went online.....meaning that it's not directly tied to the campaign but exists as little more than a feeder for its message and a generator of hype for its candidate.

So, what can we take from blogger "Charlie's" sudden resurgence of activity? He explains his absence as a result of "moving," but it's hard to disregard the stench of death that's surrounded Hagel's presidential ambitions which couldn't have allowed for much cheerleading and enthusiasm. But, suddenly, Charlie is back at it again - with a mostly fresh NY Times piece and a brand new Robert Novak Political Report trumpeting the possibility that Hagel might yet enter the race.

During my own hiatus, the NY Times reported:

[W]ith the Republican presidential field turned upside down, and a wide-open battle for the party’s nomination unfolding over the next six months, could there suddenly be room for a candidate who opposes the [Bush] administration’s war policy?

That’s what Senator Chuck Hagel is trying to conclude. Mr. Hagel, a Nebraska Republican, has long been among the loudest Iraq critics in his party, a position that he said was “very, very lonely over the last four years.” His conservative voting record has been overshadowed, in the eyes of many faithful Republicans, by his forceful criticism of how Mr. Bush has handled the war.

These days, Mr. Hagel is no longer feeling so alone.

As he walked across the Capitol, one day after the latest chapter of the Senate war debate ended, he said he is receiving fresh encouragement to consider a presidential candidacy. He intends to study the landscape and disclose his intentions “in the next few weeks.”

“There is no Republican presidential candidate with this point of view. There might be an opening for me on this,” Mr. Hagel said. “I’ve had three very significant Republican fundraisers come to me this week, all of whom said I should look at running.”

Of course, later in the same article, Hagel admits that he marched in July 4th parades in Nebraska expecting to get "booed and called names." It's hard to imagine that Hagel would suddenly find the faith he lacked in his own chances last spring just because his constituents refrained from throwing tomatoes and cabbage at his head.

Still, there definitely seems to be something here, with Novak telling readers:

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) is still considering the possibility of a presidential campaign as an anti-war candidate and soon will make his decision. He could make a splash in the primaries.

One can't help wondering if the splash Novak imagines isn't better characterized as a belly flop. It's certainly possible, however, that the Republican establishment for which Novak speaks is starting to wake to just how dire a situation they face in 2008 - to the point that they'd welcome a candidate like Hagel who could never truly be called an "anti-War" candidate but who might be able to pass himself off as "anti-Bush"...despite his being Bush's most consistent supporter in the U.S. Senate.

Assuming such an "anti-Bush" candidate could survive a primary, that would be a pretty strong credential to carry in to the general election when two-thirds of the country actively disapproves of Bush's job performance. Bush would quickly go from lame-duck status to the victim of ritual sacrifice by a Republican Party blaming him for its ruin.

In essence, Hagel might be considered "the Doomsday Option" for a Republican Party trying to get as far away from Bush as possible.

I'll be the first to admit that the Republican Party's current slate of Presidential candidates is a pretty lackluster bunch who are doing themselves few favors with their total failure to articulate any plan for Iraq that isn't rehashed from the Bush Administration's 4 year-old talking points. But, this most recent "Hagel for President" hoopla stretches the limits of political fantasy pretty damn far. One can imagine him angling for a V.P. slot as a Republican to temper another candidate's Iraq idiocy, but Hagel wouldn't be joking that he doesn't know where he belongs politically if he remained a serious contender for the top of the Republican ticket.

Do other opportunities exist on an independent ticket? Sure - in theory. But, more than likely, these recent articles, along with the renewed rumblings at the Hagel for President blog, are little more than Hagel's attempts at maintaining relevance and a place in the public eye to make himself more appealing when the casting call begins for running mates and cabinet positions.

Then again, Hagel's baffled before by doing the unexpected . . . and sometimes the downright idiotic (i.e. the non-announcement national press conference in March). Far be it for the New Nebraska Network to stand in his way if he chooses to provide more entertainment in our little corner of the republic.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel Calls for the "Nuclear Option" Against Senate Republicans?

The Republican minority in the U.S. Senate has effectively blocked most meaningful challenges to President George W. Bush's disastrous and unpopular Iraq War policy (strategy would be too kind a word) by closing ranks for a procedural filibuster that has prevented a host of bills from coming to a final vote.

Of course, it wasn't long ago that these same Republicans were decrying Democrats as obstructionists for employing these same tactics. The big difference here is that Senate Republicans are acting in direct defiance of the American people who long ago realized and rejected the Iraq War as a blackhole of money and lives unlikely to see any return but in heartache and suffering.

So far, the Democratic majority has avoided forcing a real showdown with Bush and Senate Republicans. Some suggest Democrats are too ineffective and too scatttered to carry a shared message that would truly take the GOP to task. On the other hand, they might just be giving the GOP enough rope to hang itself with in 2008.

Either way, Nebraska's Republican Senator Chuck Hagel continues to break farther and farther away from his party on Iraq, to the point where a man who just months ago talked about the possibility of Bush's impeachment now seems willing to lay the blame on his entire party for the continued mis-steps in Iraq.

The Lincoln Journal-Star reports:

The Senate’s inability to force major changes in Iraq policy because of a 60-vote supermajority threshhold is weakening confidence in government, Sen. Chuck Hagel said Thursday.

“It’s a frustrating process,” he told his weekly telephone news conference from Washington. “It paralyzes us. The American people have lost confidence in our leadership.”

Hagel’s comments came the day after two of his Iraq amendments commanded majority support among the Senate’s 100 members, but fell to the 60-vote requirement to stave off a filibuster by invoking cloture to end debate....

[T]he 60-vote cloture procedure comes with “a standard of responsible behavior we’re not paying much attention to,” he suggested....

Hagel’s two amendments would have mandated more leave time at home for soldiers following deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan and limited the length of time they could be deployed. One amendment attracted 56 votes for cloture; the other received 52 votes.

In singling out the Senate's procedural rules, one has to wonder whether Hagel isn't suggesting that drastic measures be taken to overcome continued Republican roadblocks to accountability and a change of course in Iraq. In essence, one could foresee from Hagel's statements an argument for resurrecting the Nuclear Option long-threated by Republicans to secure confirmation of right-wing judges.

Still, Democrats would have little to gain from such threats with a Republican President in office with veto power. Furthermore, these kinds of hard-ball tactics just aren't the modern Democratic Party's style and - besides - there's a lot to be said for letting the Republicans continue in their insanity as long they desire. Each day draws a clearer and clearer distinction for the American people. The only problem is that each day also brings new casualties that were never necessary in the first place.

Go to full text...

GOP: Desperate Already?

Sen. Tom White's barely into his first term in office, his promising Nebraska Leadership Project has only just begun, but already this titan-in-training has the Nebraska GOP running scared: whooping and hollering and trying every lame trick in the book to kill this revolution in its crib.

The source of their consternation? White's unsuccessful but politically brilliant effort to reframe the tax debate, challenging Governor Heineman's attempt to package regressive income tax reform as "middle class relief" by offering real relief to the real burden of Nebraska's middle class: property taxes. White's bill would've offered every homeowner a $500 tax credit to help offset the rising cost of local and county government, a plan Nebraskan taxpayers support by an overwhelming 85-13%.

How do you kill something that popular? A few boogeymen might help:

Sen. White, who is a high-priced trial attorney from Omaha and a long time Democrat activist, had every opportunity this year to put aside his partisanship and help eliminate the tax-and-spend mentality that has so brutally stifled economic growth in Nebraska. But rather than do what’s best for our middle-class, working families, Sen. White teamed up with Howard Dean and Ted Kennedy and assumed their nationwide Democrat strategy of unproductive negative criticism.

Sadly, that emphasis is theirs, not mine. Odd that they didn't bold "trial attorney" and "Democrat activist" as well, but maybe the names Dean and Kennedy have lost some luster since their unsuccessful deployment against Ben Nelson last spring.

Sloppy as these scare tactics may be, the NE-GOP remains a master at that other classic move: playing dumb.

Governor Heineman led the effort to eliminate the Estate Tax which Senator White believes only benefits the wealthy. Apparently, Senator White hasn’t ventured outside his comfy confines of Omaha to talk to middle-class Nebraska farmers who can’t afford to leave the family farm to their children due to the unjust and punitive Estate Tax.

Uh-huh, except White's proposal also included a provision to eliminate the estate tax. On this issue, the Republican "fact-checkers" weren't even close. This isn't just spin, this is lies.

A property tax cut was not “scuttled by the Governor and his allies.” This is a flat out distortion. Property tax relief was incorporated into the largest tax relief package in the history of the state. This package was permanent, lasting, and curbed uncontrolled government spending....

Senator White suggested an income tax credit for homeowners, not a property tax cut. So a homeowner would still pay the same amount in property taxes, but later get an income tax credit paid for by a surplus in the cash reserve. Sound confusing? That was Sen. White’s intent.

Sound confusing? Really? Does anyone out there really not understand the concept of an income tax credit for people who pay property taxes? I mean, anyone who isn't on the Republican Party payroll?

In fact, Sen White's proposal offered relief far more effectively and directly than Governor Heineman's plan, which repreated the tried-but-not-true tactic of diverting more state funds into county coffers in the hopes that rates will come down. Of course, that's exactly the same strategy that Heineman so vocally denounced as a "tax shift" and not a "tax cut".

Confused? That was their intent.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel: Casualty of War?

Sen. Chuck Hagel made some enlightening remarks in today's Lincoln Journal-Star that might just be the best indicator yet of where he's at mentally and emotionally looking at the 2008 elections:

Hagel said he willingly accepts whatever political price he may be asked to pay for opposing a president of his own party on the war.

“A senior statewide Republican politician berates me now around this state on Iraq and immigration,” Hagel noted.

Attorney General Jon Bruning already has entered the 2008 GOP race for Hagel’s Senate seat. Hagel said he still has not decided whether he’ll seek re-election to a third term.

“I may be a political casualty before people figure this out,” Hagel said. “I’m prepared to take that risk. I accept that. I couldn’t do it any other way.

“Your career could be ended,” he said. “But you’re here to do what you think is right.”

Hagel hasn’t ruled out the thought of a 2008 presidential bid. “Is there a place I could fit in nationally where I could make a difference,” he wondered, “maybe even be elected president?”....

No matter what he decides to do, Hagel said, he will not withdraw from the policy arena. “Whatever I do, I want to continue to have the opportunity to influence the world and the outcome of policy,” Hagel said. “That does not have to be within politics, as Bob Kerrey and others have demonstrated.”

Berated by Bruning. Still imagining the presidency. Ready to follow Bob Kerrey's footsteps, perhaps even trading places (Hagel's not heading into Academia, but you know what I mean).

As for Hagel's willingness to be martyred by the Republican Party over the Iraq War, it's impossible to know whether that's a genuine stand on principle or a calculated political risk, but it sure is a refreshing contrast from the silence of our Republican Congressmen and Bruning's pandering to the far right-wing.

If President Bush doesn’t change policy in Iraq, the Congress will force change through its appropriations power this autumn, Sen. Chuck Hagel said...

“The American people have left Bush on this,” Hagel said, “and many Republicans will not stay with him now” if he doesn’t change course.

“The political reality is coming down the track, and my Republican colleagues know it.”

On Iraq, the time of reckoning is at hand. Chuck Hagel knows it and hasn't been afraid to say so. The question is whether his fellow Republicans - especially those in his home state - have any real understanding of what's truly at stake, or are they so sheltered in their partisan bubble that even after 50 months they're still incapable of acknowledging this war for the disaster that it is.

And, for Nebraska's purposes, here's maybe the most interesting question of them all - just when Republicans seem ready to break from Bush on Iraq, does Jon Bruning really believe he can position himself for a Senate seat by riding Bush's tattered, lame-duck coattails straight into 'stay the course'-oblivion? When the tide has already turned, does Bruning really think it smart to condemn Hagel and make an enemy of him for having had both eyes open and daring to speak the truth?

Of course, this is Nebraska. Maybe the real question is just how far removed from reality and lost to their partisanship our average Republican voter truly is. For that answer, the coming months will be most telling as the fall approaches and our empty suit Congressmen meekly position themselves on the most important issue of our day.

What will our Timid Trio of Lee Terry, Jeff Fortenberry, and Adrian Smith have to say? How will their supporters respond? How will the rest of Nebraska respond? The time is now to stand up and be heard - to force the change of course that Hagel predicts. Where is the pressure? Where is the outrage? With these Congressmen, do we really expect them to take the initiative? Have we given up on reaching them? If so, have we given up on beating them? Or - despite all the polling data - at the end of the day, do we really just not care what happens in Iraq?

If so, the true casualty of this war will be a far more tragic loss than Hagel's political career but rather the loss of our faith in the character of the American people and the genius of democracy.

Have a safe and happy Independence Day tomorrow. Celebrate that patriotic spirit. Then, live it, and - by doing so - earn it.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel Lashes Out

From Friday's Omaha World-Herald, here are some choice quotes by Nebraska's Republican Senator Chuck Hagel on last week's brutal killing of the comprehensive immigration reform package that would have probably created as many problems as it would have solutions:

Three of the four U.S. senators from Nebraska and Iowa joined with a majority of their colleagues Thursday in killing a controversial immigration bill and likely putting off action on the emotional topic until after the 2008 elections.

With 46 senators supporting it, the bill fell well short of the 60 needed to clear a procedural hurdle.

The legislation, backed by President Bush, included a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, a large guest-worker program and increased border security and workplace enforcement.

Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., was the lone Midlands senator to vote in favor of keeping the legislation alive. Voting against it were Sens. Ben Nelson, D-Neb.; Tom Harkin, D-Iowa; and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

Hagel had harsh words for those who helped bring down the legislation.

"We walked away from a tough problem, and we failed America today," Hagel said....

Even supporters weren't in love with the bill that was before the Senate this week. Hagel said it was inferior to one the Senate passed last year.

But the country's immigration problems have to be addressed, Hagel said. "We continue to defer the tough choices," he said.

Hagel blamed TV and radio talk shows and "political hacks" for giving the public the impression that nothing was being done on border security when, in fact, the country has spent billions on such efforts.

He said the number of illegal immigrants — there are an estimated 12 million in the country — will continue to balloon before the matter resurfaces in Congress.

Hagel said the illegal immigrants will remain hidden, not pay taxes and not be as productive as they could be. He said unscrupulous employers will continue to hold workers' illegal status over their heads as a means to hold down wages.

"Most are decent people who came here for the right reasons," Hagel said. "We lose all the way around".....

Hagel's office...was getting plenty of correspondence. A spokesman said the office had received more than 3,000 contacts related to the immigration bill over the past few weeks.

"My phone lines right now are jammed — nobody can get in, people upset with me," Hagel said during a conference call immediately after the bill died.

I'm not for passing bad legislation just so Congress can show its accomplishing something. Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin call this bill "an unworkable mess." Even though he's gearing up for a re-election campaign and surely taking those considerations to heart, I'm inclined to agree. Still, I appreciate Sen. Hagel's apparent sense of moral duty on this issue and his calling out the rightwing talk show circuit for their shameless lies and fear-mongering about the present condition of our nation's borders. It's also pleasant to see Hagel speaking of our undocumented workers as true human beings who love and support their families rather than the law-breaking vagrants imagined by most Republican commentators (and whatever the hell Lou Dobbs qualifies as).

Still, even though an overhaul of our entire immigration system is long overdue, it now falls on Congressional Democrats to take charge of the border security debate by using their majority to pass practical and humane solutions that don't betray our national character. This issue has been left to fanatics such as Iowa's Steve King and Colorado's Tom Tancredo for far too long. Furthermore, it's time to make some headway on new security, identification, and enforcement measures so that questions of what to do about the 12 million-plus immigrants who are undocumented can no longer be dismissed by the likes of Sen. Nelson, who at least seems to have backed away from his previous progress-impeding rhetoric that drummed up opposition to any plan with a perceived Amnesty component.

By the way, an anonymous Republican Senator just denounced Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to Washington Post columnist Robert Novak because of McConnell's flip-flopping on immigration and his inability to rally the party faithful behind their President's agenda. Although it would be incredibly uncharacteristic for Hagel to say anything off the record - giving up the opportunity to get his name in the headlines - there is a definite air of familiarity to the statement below:

"If this were a war, Sen. McConnell should be relieved of command for dereliction of duty."

Hagel may still want to keep his options open for 2008, and a good way of closing those in a hurry would be his publicly attacking the only national party leader this side of John McCain (who doesn't have such a hot track record in Nebraska) who would actually came to Nebraska to campaign on his behalf. Still, that definitely reads like a Hagel statement, and the fact that it ran in the always Hagel-friendly Washington Post certainly doesn't dissuade from this quite reasonable inference.

Go to full text...