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's Identity Crisis

Nebraska Republican Party's Standard-Bearer Tells Audience, "I don't know what party I belong to any more."

Much has been made of Sen. Chuck Hagel's Hamlet-like ruminations of his political future that have become deliberately more vague and indecipherable as his day of reckoning approaches.

Understanding Hagel's position of pre-eminence in the Nebraska Republican Party, longtime observers of the Nebraska political scene have had a hard time taking seriously rumors of Hagel leaving the Republican Party. Although he's been quite open with his displeasure at the current state of the GOP - admitting to Newsweek that this is not the Party he originally joined during the Vietnam War - talk of Hagel actually changing affiliation has always seemed the stuff of Internet hype and raw speculation . . . until now.

The Washington Post's political blogger, The Sleuth, reports (with thanks to Leavenworth Street for the heads-up):

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) returned the love last night to his good friend Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.), helping the underdog Democratic presidential hopeful kick off his book tour.

Biden, during the CNN-YouTube debate last month, said he would pick Hagel if he had to choose any Republican to be his running mate. So it was fitting that last night Hagel introduced Biden at a book party hosted by a nominally bipartisan group of senators.

Looking out over a sea of Democratic faces, Hagel, according to attendees, joked, "Hell, I don't know what party I belong to any more."

Of course, the report suggests that Hagel may have been speaking in jest, but I don't think a lot of Republicans are likely to find this particular "joke" very funny. In fact, it's hard to imagine how Hagel's statement could be taken as anything but a clear indicator that he really has though about leaving the party in which he is Nebraska's titular head.

Every joke has a hint of truth to it. When asked point blank earlier this summer whether he would leave the Republican Party, Hagel seemed dimissive of the notion - although he refused to completely rule out an independent bid for the Presidency or Vice Presidency. Now, one almost has to take this comment as crossing over from keeping his options open to active consideration.

Still, the idea of Hagel leaving the Republican Party remains almost utterly ridiculous for those of us in Nebraska who know his voting record and who witnessed the way he pushed for cookie-cutter Republican Pete Ricketts' election in 2006. If he isn't happy with the direction of the Republican Party, how could Hagel have ever campaigned so vigorously for Ricketts - a man whose entire campaign was waged in defense of protecting the Republican status quo that Hagel now claims to be raging against?

This is why it's hard to take Hagel seriously. Still, he's an intelligent man who seems to understand which way the winds are blowing politically. The fact that he'll talk so openly - even making jokes - about leaving the Republican Party is a very bad sign for its future fortunes - certainly on the national level and perhaps even here in Nebraska. A Republican Party that doesn't have room for Chuck Hagel - a man who won re-election in 2002 with over 80% of the vote - has to have lost a lot of those voters along the way.

Jon Bruning and other pretenders-to-the-throne are making their moves for Hagel's Senate seat by going after the hardcore Republican base that feels betrayed by Hagel. But, what of all the Nebraskans who aren't simple-minded partisans? What of the voters who have voted for Hagel in the past and share his concern about the monstrous and soulless state of the the modern Republican Party? What becomes of these voters in 2008? They already rejected Pete Ricketts in 2006 - who had Hagel's complete backing. Why would Nebraskans now flock to another generic Republican for whom the only appreciable difference is a fuller head of hair and a smaller bank account?

Chuck Hagel doesn't know what party he belongs to any more. Politically, that's a fascinating statement that opens a world of possibilities. But, probably the most important question is not what this foretells of Hagel's political future but rather how well it reflects the sentiments of the majority of Nebraska voters.

If Hagel doesn't know where he belongs, there's a lot of Nebraskans out there who have recently been voting Republican who feel exactly the same way. They've already proven their independence from the simple politics of hyper-partisanship in 2006 - by overwhelming numbers. Why shouldn't we expect them to demonstrate the same level-headed common sense in 2008?

Nebraska voters might just be waiting for a reason to vote Democratic in 2008. How foolish of us would it be if we didn't give them that chance because we failed to see Hagel's political frustration not as a personal dilemma but as representing an entire voting bloc that is up for grabs and looking for a better way?

The true power and true potential of Hagel's statement isn't what it says of his intentions. No, what's important to remember is that Chuck Hagel doesn't know what party he belongs to any more . . . and he isn't alone.

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...

Chuck Hagel vs. George W. Bush

With President George W. Bush's approval rating below 30%, you'd expect the Republican Presidential candidates to be putting a little more separation between themselves and Bush's record of incompetence and corruption. But, they are so fearful of offending the Republican base that stands by Bush in defiance of reason and reality that they are hopefully dooming themselves in the general election.

Sen. Chuck Hagel, on the other hand, is speaking as one freed, position himself as Bush's harshest Republican critic even though his votes reveal him as the U.S. Senate's most consistent supporter of Bush's agenda. It's an interesting, perhaps unprecedented niche - that of a man uniquely aligned with the principles for which Bush has stood who's watched in horror as Bush's arrogance and incompetence have done untold, inestimable damage to their shared agenda.

Hagel undoubtedly sees himself as the Defender of the Republican Faith from destruction at Bush's hands. This role requires no small degree of arrogance itself, but he's a politician so - seriously - what did we expect? What's ironic, though, is that Hagel's putting first what he considers the long-term interests of his party has invited such outrage and scorn at the hands of his party's activists, who would prefer to see loyalty to their president, marching lock-step with him into political oblivion.

Loyalty? Marching lock-step? Well, that's just not Chuck Hagel. And, as far as the Bush Administration is concerned, I say thank God for that.

Let's take a look at some choice quotes by Hagel from his Tuesday townhall forum at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (which can be viewed courtesy of the Lincoln Journal-Star):

On Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez – “I’ve called for his resignation. I think he’s a disgrace to this country.”

On the Bush record - ”History will not be kind to this Administration.”

While the frontrunning Republican Presidential candidates also rallied around Bush's outrageous and insulting commutation of White House aide "Scooter" Libby's felony conviction for leaking classified information in an act of political retaliation, the LJS reported:

Sen. Chuck Hagel said...he disagrees with President Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence. Hagel described the president's action as "unfortunate"....

I'll admit that I think Democrats are very lucky that Republicans haven't heeded Hagel's warnings, embracing him and rejecting Bush. The easy appeal of their claimed "conservativism" backed by a voice that actually projects some measure of accountability, strength, and competence would be a formidable challenge in 2008 despite the American public's low opinion of its standard-bearer for these last seven years.

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...

Bruning Cashes In as Hagel Considers His Options

From the Associated Press:

Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning said Monday that he had raised $721,200 by the end of June to prepare for a possible campaign against incumbent U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel.

Bruning’s campaign said more than 80 percent of those donations came from Nebraskans, including a few prominent donors like legendary Nebraska football coach Tom Osborne and billionaire Walter Scott, retired CEO of Omaha construction giant Peter Kiewit Sons’ Inc.....

Bruning’s campaign released preliminary fundraising figures on Monday even though his quarterly report to the Federal Election Commission isn’t due until July 16....

Hagel has said that he will make an announcement about his political future later this year.

Hagel’s political director, Kevin Chapman, said Monday the campaign won’t report its fundraising figures until the deadline, “but we’ll be well beyond $700,000.”

There's no doubt about it - that's a hefty chunk of change Bruning has managed for himself, quite impressive indeed if major Republican donors are still under the impression that Hagel might actually run for re-election.

Still no word on how much Omaha businessman and Bruning Campaign Finance Chair David Sokol has given to each candidate after last month's leak of Sokol's letter on personal stationary promising Hagel his financial support on whatever course he decides. More even than the somewhat dubious claim that Hagel's fundraising figures will be "well beyond $700,000," this silly little anecdote in the early days of the 2008 campaign is all the illusration one needs of Hagel's desperation and lack of confidence at the prospect of a Bruning challenge.

Although some are claiming quite assuredly that Hagel will not be running for re-election, my own not-particularly-insightful reading of the situation suggests he hasn't yet made up his mind what he's going to do. Rather, I suspect Hagel is keeping those cards close to his vest and his ear close to the ground still looking for the angle that best serves his interests and his ambitions (in his mind, probably even his country).

Rest assured, none of these options include getting beat by Bruning in a primary battle, but Hagel might be forced to commit earlier than he'd anticipated just to keep a potential Hagel-free race with Bruning competitive....unless plans are already in place for former Gov. Mike Johanns to step in and assume control of "the Hagel faction" in a seamless transition. In fact, it wouldn't surprise if Johanns had privately committed to deferring to Hagel's decision and, at our most fantastical, perhaps even waiting in the wings to assume a Senate appointment from Gov. Heineman should a jointly elected Senator and Vice President Hagel need to relinquish the former post.

Like it or not, Hagel is going to be a solid V.P. consideration for most any Republican candidate who gets the presidential nomination because of his singularly mainstream position on the Iraq War that would offer a near immediate balancing of the hardline stance each candidate is likely to maintain through the primaries. His actual combat experience and mostly undeserved reputation as a maverick would also likely be held assets to any of the potential Republican nominees.

If Hagel is angling for the V.P. slot, though, a high-profile primary challenge could alienate him even farther from the Republican base, making him a less attractive option. But, so too might Hagel's resigning himself to lame-duck status in the Senate if he foregos a re-election bid and just sits in the Senate with his fingers crossed hoping his prince shows up with his glass slipper. If Hagel looks like he was spooked away from the Senate by a primary challenger or like he's lost his drive for public service, his movement towards retirement could prove deadly to his own ambitions.

But, again, what the hell do I know. I'm just tossing hypotheticals out there. Honestly, what do you think?

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...

Jon Bruning: Stupid Is As Stupid Does

Desperate for all the media attention he can get, Attorney General Jon Bruning has resorted to tossing any pathetic and hypocritical complaint he can muster at sitting Senator Chuck Hagel to boost his declared challenge for Hagel's seat in 2008. There's just one problem - along with the kitchen sink, Bruning has already tossed out all logic and principle.

See for yourself, as reported in the Lincoln Journal-Star:

Attorney General Jon Bruning criticized Sen. Chuck Hagel Tuesday for his vote to revive comprehensive immigration reform legislation.

“Unfortunately, Chuck Hagel’s vote gives new life to a bill that the people of this country have soundly rejected,” said Bruning, a 2008 Republican candidate for Hagel’s Senate seat.

Hagel, a Republican, has not yet announced whether he will seek re-election next year.

Bruning said he supports improved border security and opposes any proposal that would grant amnesty to the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants already living in the United States.

Hagel was one of 24 Republicans who voted to revive the immigration issue.

Nebraska’s Democratic senator, Ben Nelson, also voted with the majority on a 64-35 vote.

Now, here are the absurdities and inconsistencies that don't get reported in Bruning's cry for relevance:

(1) Jon Bruning is criticizing Hagel for merely re-opening debate. That's a world apart from voting for the legislation's final passsage. For instance, Ben Nelson also voted to re-open debate but there seems to be zero possibility of his voting for this legislation in its current form.

(2) Jon Bruning has built his young campaign on being more loyal to President George W. Bush than Chuck Hagel has been. Yet, Bush has declared that those who opppose building a comprehensive compromise on immigration "don't want to do what's right for America." Immigration reform is probably Bush's last chance at a legacy not wholly tainted by his mangling of the Iraq War and America's stature around the world, and Bruning has abandoned his President on the issue just to score political points with the most rabid fringe element of the Republican base.

(3) Jon Bruning declares "the people of this country have soundly rejected" comprehensive immigration reform - except he couldn't be further from the truth. Polling numbers show that the American public overwhelmingly supports a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants already in the country - the so-called "AMNESTY" Bruning opposes and about which we hear so much fear-mongering. If Bruning is looking for an issue "the people...have soundly rejected," he should look to our current policy in Iraq. But, for some reason, there he doesn't seem to care what the American people (or the majority of Nebraskans) think.

Jon Bruning - he's flying blind with nothing to guide him but his own ambition. I hope he keeps it up. If so, we're in for some very amusing and very pathetic moments of pure pettiness and political pandering in the months ahead.


[**Update, 1:30 pm - On today's vote for cloture, Hagel supported putting the above legislation to a final vote. Nelson was on the prevailing side in opposition, likely killing comprehensive immigration reform until after the 2008 elections. Hopefully, the debate over sane and reasonable border security measures will continue and find greater success, so we can eventually move forward with comprehensive reform that finally respects the plight of those in our midst stuck in a sorry state of legal limbo.**]

Go to full text...

Bruning Goes National

Sorry this post is so late, but having recently ditched my daily dose of conservative radio for some good ‘ole classic rock, I missed Jon Bruning’s appearance on the Laura Ingraham show and had to wait for the podcast. It took a couple of days. And no, it wasn’t worth it.

Begging for a caption contest?

A repetition of Bruning’s standard strikes against Hagel (his stance on immigration, his position on Iraq), the interview is notable only because someone was talking about Chuck Hagel on a national news talk show, and this time it wasn’t Chuck Hagel.

Personally, I’m skeptical that conservative weariness of the Sunday Morning “Hagel Show” has produced any real appetite for Bruning’s “Anti-Hagel Show”. Bruning could’ve brought this campaign (and the issues of the day) out of the long shadow cast by Hagel’s ego and public image. Failing to take that opportunity makes him vulnerable to the same impatience and fatigue that’s slowly sinking the Senator.

And then what happens if Hagel decides to jump ship? Does Bruning really want to be the only person left in the race that still thinks it’s “all about Chuck”? Hey, that’s the bed he’s made. I hope it’s comfortable.

Bruning’s early and persistent attacks on Hagel have earned him the endorsement of the conservative RedState bloggers, an item that apparently impressed the people over at jonbruning.com. It’s not clear this endorsement means anything substantively, but rhetorically it has given weight to progressive blogger’s claims that this race has become a sort of Lieberman-Lamont in reverse, or one part of an even larger movement to eliminate anti-war dissent in the national Republican ranks.

It’s a good story, but one that seems a tad over-sold. Yes, this is a primary battle based almost entirely on the single issue of Iraq. And yes, the Lieberman story was portrayed unfairly as some unprincipled purge of Democratic dissent, a charge this story has somehow managed to escape.

The difference is that liberal bloggers were way ahead of the Conneticut Primary, actively seeking a liberal challenger long before Lamont expressed any interest. The conservative bloggers in this case are Johnny-come-latelys, activists seeking to capitalize on a homegrown fight that’s dominated by ego and personality.

But ego and personality only go so far. This story might continue to grow in national prominence as Hagel slugs back and Bruning finds new lines of attack. But it’s a story we Nebraskans have heard before, one we’ve heard maybe one time too many. And, believe me, it doesn’t end well for either candidate.

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...

Chuck Hagel vs. Jon Bruning: Guns a'Blazing

ROUND 3

Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning took the big step today of offically announcing his candidacy for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by two-term Republican incumbent Chuck Hagel.

This move has, of course, been expected for some time. Although it was only March when Bruning declared himself "a Hagel guy" who would only run if Nebraska's senior senator decided not to seek a third term, Bruning has since become convinced that it's time to go for the Nebraska Republican Party's king-maker.

What's probably most surprising is how upfront Bruning has been with his accusations of apostasy. In Thursday's press conference, Bruning used every angle he had to portay Hagel as out of touch with Nebraska and as a traitor to his party and president at a time of war.

This went above and beyond attacking Hagel's half-hearted impeachment talk and his siding with the Democratic Party in opposing Bush's "stay the course" rhetoric and escalation of the war in Iraq. Bruning actually accused the sitting Republican Senator of being a carpetbagger from Virginia more interested in making a name for himself on TV than serving the people of Nebraska. He also went after Hagel for talking about an independent bid for the Presidency as yet another betrayal of the Republican Party.

When challenged with Congressional Quarterly's report that Hagel was more loyal to Bush's agenda than any other Senator in the country in 2006, Bruning bet the questioner "a nickel" that no such report existed. Besides owing that reporter a nickel and looking a bit unprepared and ignorant about Hagel's actual record, Bruning was still able to save some face with the suggestion to “Call the White House and ask them how they feel about Senator Hagel.” Considering the Bush Administration's vindictiveness and Vice President Dick Cheney's outright denunciation of Hagel, it's hard to believe there isn't some behind the scenes support for an anti-Hagel insurgency here in Nebraska (which Bruning appears to have tried tapping with a fundraising trip to New York last weekend).

Considering that Hagel's 1996 Senate victory is rightfully understood as the foundation on which Nebraska Republicans built their position of outright dominance in Nebraska politics, Bruning comes across quite like Robespierre declaring "Louis must die, so that the country may live." (i.e. "Hagel must fall, so that the party may live.")

If history is any indicator, Bruning might just get his way. . . but he's also likely to get his soon thereafter.

It would be one thing for Bruning to have announced that he couldn't wait any longer for Hagel to make up his mind. . . that he's running because it's his time, he's the best candidate for the office, and refuses to be constrained to decisions and time tables outside his control.

Rather than that more respectful approach that would have allowed Hagel to walk away from this race with his dignity intact, Bruning made quite clear today that - besides his own out-sized ego - this campaign is mostly about getting rid of Hagel. Bruning could have left Hagel an out but has instead chosen to define himself as "the anti-Hagel," essentially slapping Hagel in the face and daring him to do something about it.

This might appear to back Hagel into a corner but one can't help wondering if it isn't truly a reflection of the corner into which Bruning had already been backed. Whether or not Hagel was going to seek re-election, the institutional, inner-party forces at his disposal were likely going to work against Bruning and for another candidate no matter what.

In essence, every bit of influence Hagel has (most importantly, that behind the scenes) was probably going to someone who wasn't Jon Bruning. I suspect Bruning realized that and is now taking Hagel on and making him the issue not just as an attention-grabbing strategy but also as a matter of his own political survival. What's impossible to know is whether division in the Nebraska Republican Party made this conflict inevitable (with Bruning permanently wait-listed to make the next step) or whether Bruning's raw ambition simply wouldn't allow him to wait his turn any longer.

An intriguing dynamic any way you look at it. For now, this is a two-man race. But, we don't know if it's Jon Bruning vs. Chuck Hagel or Jon Bruning vs. himself. Bruning is trying very hard to make this a race about Hagel in hopes that Hagel's perceived weakness will play to his benefit whether or not Hagel ever appears on the 2008 ballot.

As Hagel and his people are concerned, Bruning's is pretty much a scorched earth strategy, which suggests divisions in the Nebraska Republican Party even greater than we might have previously imagined. Either that or Bruning just doesn't have the agenda to back up his ambitions and plans to win this race on negativity and personal attacks.

After attacking Hagel with every weapon he had, this latter possibility became especially evident in the delight Bruning showed at suggestion of a general election showdown with potential Democratic candidate and former two-term U.S Senator Bob Kerrey. With perversely little concern for winning an election based on ideas, Bruning's campaign strategy was succinctly revealed in his confidently dismissing Kerrey as "so easy to assail."

For now, Bruning gets points for going on the offensive with such reckless abandon. But, it's very, very early, and there's a lot of fight left - not to mention plenty of other potential challengers waiting in the wings.

Scorecard Through Three Rounds
Jon Bruning 09 - 10 - 10
Chuck Hagel 10 - 09 - 09

Go to full text...

"NoHagel.com" Places Republican Senator In Own Party's Crosshairs

The following Letter to the Editor appeared in last week's North Platte Telegraph, calling on fellow Nebraska Republicans to rise up in protest of Sen. Chuck Hagel's false promises and his supposed distortions of the situation in Iraq:

An open letter to Senator Hagel

In February of 1994 a member of your campaign staff contacted me and inquired if I would meet with you for lunch in Stapleton, Nebraska. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss your need for a campaign representative in Logan County and determine if I should serve in that capacity. During our lunch you offered a synopsis of your conservative political philosophy and your desires to bring that philosophy to the United States Senate. You stressed that, if elected, you would serve no more than two terms. You added that your central campaign strategy would be to emphasize Governor Nelson’s failure to honor his public commitment not to seek the 1994 Democrat Party nomination. Impressed with your statements I eagerly got on board. Your plan worked and you are now a United States Senator, twice over.

I have wondered for some months what your decision would be concerning another senate bid. Somehow, I must have missed your announcement that you would not seek a third senate term. Regrettably, I have determined that your credibility is no better than that which you ascribed to Ben Nelson.

My disappointment in your decision not to keep your word is dwarfed by my disgust for your public comments concerning the conduct of the war in Iraq. You know the history of the conduct of the Viet Nam war; you experienced it first hand and bear the scars of a wounded warrior. Do you not know that the fundamental tenant of the North Vietnamese was to defeat the United States at home? To demoralize the American people to a point where we would simply leave the fight? To encourage campus leftists to create the illusion that we were being defeated on the field of battle? Of course you know, and that is what makes your utterances so egregious....

I learned several weeks ago that you broached the possibility of impeachment of President Bush and that you cautioned him that he was not a monarch. I can’t describe to you the level of my rage at your statement. In discussions with other Nebraska Republicans I have learned that many agree with my assessment of your conduct. So many, that I believe you will not be re-elected to a third term, a third term that you told me you would never seek.

I am under no illusions that you will be honorable, or that your conduct in the US Senate is helpful to this country, this state, or the Republican Party that you claim to be a member of in mind.

I have, at my own expense, established a website that Nebraskans can visit to add their names to the legion of voters who will not support you for any future elective office. It is my most fervent hope that potential conservative senatorial candidates will be encouraged to challenge you in the 2008 primary. Like-minded Nebraska Republicans can logon to www.nohagel.com to express their lack of support.

Joe Shown
Stapleton

For the sake of Mr. Shown's credibility, I cut his sad attempts at fabricating some sort of victory from our four year occupation of Iraq. I won't ridicule him further because I feel far more pity than contempt for those who adhere to this "America can do no wrong" (and make no mistakes) fantasy.

Besides, I'm just highlighting the grassroots resistance to Hagel in his own party - I'll leave it to Republican primary voters to decide whether that resistance is warranted by the facts. Not my fight, but it's definitely one we'll all be watching with a keen eye in the months ahead.

More than 50 Nebraska Republicans from Central and Western Nebraska have already joined the "NoHagel.com" chorus - declaring "We Do Not Support Hagel in 2008!" Who knows - if the word got out in Republican circles, maybe the site would catch like wildfire? Regardles, this is a rare opportunity, indeed, to see just what sort of appeal this sort of insurrectionist action will ultimtely hold in a party that is defined by its deference to power.

Where do Nebraska Republicans' true loyalties lie - with King George or with Lord Hagel? That is the question, and it's one to which I do not have a ready answer. I suspect, though, the Republican Party's limitless capacity for self-delusion and hypocrisy will ultimately protect both men from facing any true inner-party resistance.

Go to full text...

Does "Hagel for Prez" Still Have a Shot?

I have finally given up hope that Senator Hagel is going to make his political intentions clear anytime soon. He's made it perfectly clear that he has no intentions... at least, not any that he's pursuing with any consistency or logic.

Since he recently used a fundraiser apparently intended to shore up a Senate re-election campaign as a forum for a message the presumably illustrates his interest in an independent candidacy for President, I think it's safe to say that we can't safely say anything about what Hagel intends to do. But, since the stories currently dominating the headlines feature some combination of Hagel v. Bruning or Bloomberg/Hagel '08, allow me to explore the less likely but still real possibility that Chuck Hagel might throw his hat into the ring for the GOP presidential nomination.

And let me start with this new poll of Iowa Republicans:

5. Do you favor a withdrawal of all United States military from Iraq within the next six months? (Republicans Only)
Yes 54%
No 37%
Undecided 9%

Not to belabor the point, but these are Republicans only. The same Republicans who express a dissatisfaction with the current crop of GOP candidates (51-29%). The same Republicans who will cast the very first ballots (figuratively speaking... theirs is a caucus system) in this overlong presidential election.

And yes, the same Republicans who give current non-candidate Chuck Hagel a mere 1% in the polls.

But considering Ron Paul is the only other candidate attempting to capitalize on the growing unpopularity of the war in Republican ranks, is it so ridiculous to believe Hagel might make a splash even (or especially) after entering this contest so late?

One thing that's gone unnoticed in all the talk of Hagel's anti-GOP rhetoric is that the Senator hasn't rallied against the Republican Party so much as he's rallied against the Republican Party of George W. Bush:

I am not happy with the Republican Party today. It's been hijacked by a group of single-minded almost isolationists, insulationists, power-projectors...

It has drifted from the party of Eisenhower, of Goldwater, of Reagan, the party that I joined. It isn’t the same party.

Call me crazy (please don't), but isn't that exactly the kind of message that might appeal to a GOP desperately trying to claw its way out of Bush's second term slump?

I mean, we have a Republican electorate in Iowa that doesn't believe Bush represents "a conservative Republican in the mode of Ronald Reagan", and apparently can't find a proper standard bearer in an already crowded field of ten white guys.

Does that leave an opening for an anti-war conservative outsider like our own Senator Hagel? I think so. And I think there's a chance, just a chance, that Hagel might take a second look and see that for himself.

But am I gonna go back out on that limb and actually predict it? No way, man. No way.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel Says Lincoln Will NOT Support Ken Svoboda

After Lincoln's Republican mayoral candidate Ken Svoboda embarrassed himself and the city he hopes to lead with his idiotic plan to cut off roads funding for the western two-thirds of Nebraska, the hits have just kept on coming.

First, the Lincoln Journal-Star sensibly endorsed Svoboda's opponent, longtime State Senator and proven Nebraska visionary Chris Beutler, as Lincoln's next mayor. Then, in today's print edition, the Omaha World-Herald delivered a harsh rebuke to Svoboda, condemning him for confirming rural Nebraska's worst "negative perceptions" of the state's urban leaders. The World-Herald rightfully accused Svoboda of being irresponsible with his blatant pandering to local political interests.

Unfortunately, the World-Herald forgot to include the Nebraska Republican Party in its rebuke after Nebraska Republicans splashed Svoboda's plan across their website - insulting taxpayers and citizens across the state just to help win an election. It should come as little surprise that they have quickly changed the site's front page - replacing one insult with another, now attacking Beutler by distorting his record on taxes.

It does make sense - when their candidate has just made such an ass of himself - that they should suddenly try to turn people's attention away from Svoboda. Besides, there was never any question that the Republicans would go negative in this race - resorting to the same sort of desperate and dirty tricks they've used in past Lincoln city elections.

I just hope Beutler was right in his two-part NNN Interview (I, II) last month when he promised his campaign was "prepared for anything and everything" the Republicans might throw at him.

But, back to Svoboda, his worst move yet might be the way he's been drawn into the inner-party skirmish between Sen. Chuck Hagel and Attorney General Jon Bruning. In the race to prove who's the most conservative and most loyal Republican of the two (who's got the biggest elephant's trunk?), a Hagel spokesman responded:

Nebraskans will not vote for a chameleon.

When Bill Clinton was president and the Democrats controlled Congress, Jon Bruning was a card-carrying pro-choice, pro-tax Democrat. After a Republican Congress was elected in 1994, he transformed himself into a pro-life, anti-tax Republican.

Surprise, surpise...guess who else besides Bruning was also a Democrat until after the 1994 elections. That's right - Mr. Ken Svoboda.

You heard it here first, folks. Chuck Hagel says Nebraskans will not vote for a chameleon. So, according to Chuck Hagel, Nebrakans will not vote for Ken Svoboda.

As published by the Lincoln Journal-Star and NealO.com

Talk about a tough week. Ouch. But, don't feel sorry for Svoboda. He and his party have brought this on themselves and will hopefully get what they deserve.

Go to full text...

Good News for Jon Bruning Is Bad News for Nebraska Republicans?

Chuck Hagel vs. Jon Bruning - Round Two

Attorney General Jon Bruning has released a poll of 404 likely Republican voters in the 2008 Nebraska primary to bolster his case as the front-runner in the Senate race, whether incumbent Chuck Hagel seeks re-election or not. Bruning's numbers show him beating Hagel in a head-to-head match-up 47 - 38%. They also show Bruning with a head-to-head advantage of 55 - 16% over former Congressman and former Omaha Mayor Hal Daub . . . which would be quite impressive if it weren't for the fact that they pit him against Hal Daub.

But, while Bruning might find lots to celebrate in this poll, the picture is not so rosy for Nebraska Republicans as a whole. For starters, when asked about the direction of the country, with more than 20 months left in George W. Bush's presidency, a full 55% of Nebraska Republicans say the United States is on the "wrong track." Only 30% said the country was moving in the "right direction." That's a remarkable level of pessimism that speaks to a deeply divided and demoralized Republican base that knows it has no one to blame but its own elected officials for the failures, the corruption, and the partisan excesses of the previous six years.

In terms of raw favorability, Nebraska Republicans were still able to rally behind Gov. Dave Heineman - who led the pack with the favor of 82%. Meanwhile, 61% thought highly of Bruning - better than Hagel's startlingly-low 52% favorability or Daub's 39% (which still seems a little bit high if you ask me).

But, it's the unfavorable ratings that are the real story here. 18% of Nebraska Republicans have an unfavorable opinion of Daub, with twice that many - a full 36% - having a negative opinion of Hagel.

The real kicker, though, might be the fact that more than a quarter of Nebraska Republicans (26%) have an unfavorable view of Bush - their own president. I'm guessing there's not a whole lot of cross-over between the 26% who dislike Bush and the 36% who dislike Hagel, painting a picture of a Nebraska Republican Party in which more than 60% of its voters are practically at war with themselves.

There's also evidence of a serious disconnect with reality in the Nebraska Republican Party rooted in its self-imposed, reactionary ignorance in all matters concerning the Iraq War. Of those voters who were so disfavorable towards Hagel, 16% said it's because "he's critical of the Bush Administration," and 12% said it's because "he's not loyal to the Republicans." Clearly, that's a whole lot of Republicans who are so consumed with the desire to believe what they want of the Iraq War that they'll also believe whatever they want of Hagel - whose 2006 voting record rated him as the most loyal Republican to President Bush in the entire U.S. Senate.

So, really, that 60%-plus of Nebraska Republicans who've found so much to dislike about Hagel or Bush might still be able to find some common ground realizing they dislike Hagel AND Bush.

Now, that's a Republican Party I could get behind!

By the way, there's one other measure that should either really worry Nebraska Republicans or at least call into question the methodology behind Bruning's poll results. Looking at the demographics of those polled, only 12% were under the age of 40, while 34% were ages 65 or older.

I know Nebraska has an aging population, but that's going to quite the extreme. Maybe Bruning's baby face goes over especially well with the nursing home crowd, who might also be more inclined to bristle at Hagel's Iraq War criticism. Either way, it sounds like Bruning has his work cut out for him. If he runs, not only does he have to get his voters to the polls, he also needs to keep them out of the grave.

Scorecard Through Two Rounds
Jon Bruning 09 - 10
Chuck Hagel 10 - 09

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel vs. Jon Bruning - Round One

While our anonymous GOP counterpart at Leavenworth Street has set his sights on Jon Bruning for having been a Democrat in his college days - publishing statements he made as a columnist at the Daily Nebraskan that suggest Bruning's either a secret liberal in conservative's clothing or an unprincipled political opportunist - it's amusing that Bruning's supposedly controversial remarks (i.e. “Homosexuals should have the same rights as everyone else” - GASP!!!) have only come to light as Bruning attempts to establish himself as the loyal Republican and the "good" Republican in a potential 2008 primary challenge to Sen. Chuck Hagel.

Nevermind that Bruning's statements have been readily available for as long as he's been in Nebraska politics. Nevermind that I'd personally read his columns in the Daily Nebraskan archives four years ago. Nevermind that Bruning's statements have about as much relevance as his run-ins with the police as a frat boy in college. Bruning's gone on the attack against Hagel, so certain powers that be in the Nebraska Republican Party have decided that Bruning is fair game.

Aside from the amusement factor, I don't much care about Hagel, Bruning, and their respective camps going to war with one another on something so trivial. I am, however, happy to see that Hagel is standing up for himself and for our troops in Iraq as the new wave of Republican BS that supporting the troops means letting them die in vain finds Bruning its new champion in Nebraska.

The Omaha World-Herald reports:

Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., said Thursday that Iraq is "worse off than it's ever been" and that he will continue to press President Bush to change his war policy.

Hagel made his fifth trip to Iraq last weekend, visiting Anbar province and Baghdad's highly fortified Green Zone....

The U.S. military is doing an outstanding job, Hagel said, but it's up to elected officials to guide the development of the mission in Iraq.

"We're not playing with a set of dominoes here," Hagel said in a conference call with reporters. "We're not playing with budgets here. We're talking about real lives. We're talking about the most real and fundamental aspects of the world, our position and security."

Hagel was asked about a possible challenge from Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning in the Republican Senate primary next year....Bruning said Wednesday that he might run regardless of what Hagel does. He criticized Hagel for supporting a timetable to get out of Iraq, saying it could hurt troop morale.

Said Hagel: "I don't accept that. I just don't agree with that. Those who make those kinds of statements maybe should go to Iraq and spend a little time (there) like I have.

"Maybe if they understood a little about the military, had any experience in the military, it might help them understand this better," added Hagel, a Vietnam veteran.

Who is the "they" of which Hagel speaks? Well, about 90% of Republicans in Congress - as well as our Republican President and all announced Republican Presidential candidates - would certainly seem to qualify.

To our discredit, Nebraska's entire House delegation has also adopted the Republican talking points suggesting that, after 4 years of increasing disaster, all our military leaders really need is more time.

Most recently, 3rd District Congressman Adrian Smith declared, "We have a long way to go. There is tough and difficult work ahead, but we are making progress." Of course, this progress is never defined as Smith's far-from-expert opinion flies in the face of Hagel's assessment and the facts showing the last 6 months in Iraq being the deadliest for American forces since the 2003 invasion.

So, Jon Bruning and Adrian Smith have their talking points while Chuck Hagel is left talking from experience that may or may not be colored by his own ambitions. Either way, they may all inhabit the same party but not the same reality - not on this issue. It's still politics, though, so one suspects they're all playing the same games.

Round One Score Card:
Jon Bruning - 09
Chuck Hagel - 10

Go to full text...

Has Hagel Lost His Hold?

Congressman Lee Terry Ready to "Get On Board" with an Actual Presidential Candidate

Sen. Chuck Hagel has been the dominant force in Nebraska Republican politics for the last decade. From recent headlines, though, one can only assume his Hamlet-like ruminations on his political future have resulted in an army of would-be Macbeths sick of waiting their turn in Hagel's shadow.

As Ryan notes below, Attorney General Jon Bruning has all but announced his intention to challenge Hagel if Hagel seeks re-election. That's quite the change from Bruning's March 15th press conference, when he not only vowed that he would not run against Hagel in the primary but also declared "I'm a Hagel guy" who wants "to be there right behind him" supporting Hagel's bid for the Presidency.

So, Bruning would support Hagel for President but not for re-election? Is that a flip? Or, is that a flop? Either way, it's a sign that Hagel is no longer the golden boy above reproach in Nebraska Republican politics - even though he's played a big role in every major Republican victory in the state since 1996 and gave up much credibility as an independent voice on the national stage with his flagrant partisanship supporting Pete Ricketts' money-flush but inherently flawed 2006 Senate campaign.

Just goes to show that you really are only as good as your last campaign - even when it wasn't your name on the ballot.

Honestly, though, the size of Bruning's ego has made him a poor fit for the Team Hagel crowd from the start. Far more telling in terms of Hagel's newfound weakness is the report in Thursday's Omaha World-Herald that Congressman Lee Terry doesn't seem to be waiting around for Hagel to make up his mind before finding a candidate to support for President:

If Sen. Chuck Hagel waits too long to decide on a presidential bid, he may find his fellow Nebraska Republicans on Capitol Hill have already signed up with another candidate.

The state's three U.S. House members attended a meeting Wednesday with former senator and potential presidential contender Fred Thompson, who was pitching his conservative philosophy to lawmakers.

Rep. Lee Terry of Omaha said he was impressed with Thompson's desire to return the GOP to its roots - pushing for limited government and fiscal responsibility.

Thompson is still in the "listening tour" phase and is not officially running, but that could change.

"I think I need to start finding a candidate to back," Terry said. "I have some level of enthusiasm about Fred Thompson, so if he came out tomorrow, I could see myself getting onboard with him."

It's interesting to note that the online edition also includes the following, which was not reported in print:

Terry said he gets the feeling Hagel will ultimately decide not to jump into the race.

"Some of the vibes that I'm (getting) are that Chuck is not going to run for president," Terry said.

"I can't answer for my colleagues, but the fact that they were there listening to Fred Thompson means that they might be feeling some of the same vibes and that it's time for us to start looking."

So, what exactly is going on here? Has Hagel's continued criticism of President Bush's Iraq policy so completely destroyed his relationship with the Republican base that his fellow GOP politicians don't really care about offending him? Does Terry know something we don't - that Hagel has ruled out a Presidential bid? That Hagel is angling for a rumored indepedent campaign for the Vice-Presidency with billionaire New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg? That Hagel is retiring? That Hagel is resigning himself to seeking re-election....much to Bruning's chagrin?

Hell, I don't know. I'm just a dude who asks questions. But, clearly Hagel is no longer the end-all-be-all in Nebraska Republican politics. Although he served as something of a king-maker for Dave Heineman and attempted to do the same for Pete Ricketts, his national ambitions have left an open flank at home that others are proving more than willing to exploit.

Should be an interesting couple of months ahead.

Go to full text...

NE-Sen: Huh? What? and How come?

Today, the 2008 Senate race left Chuck Hagel's hands. Unfortunately, it also left a whole lot of us would-be pundits and prognosticators scratching our heads. There is no other race in the country in such a state of flux. Here's what we know:

* Attorney General Jon Bruning is willing to enter the Republican primary even if Hagel runs for re-election. He stopped short of announcing a run, but his statement leaves little to the imagination:

Senator Hagel voted with the Democratic leadership against President Bush on the most important issue facing our country... It's extremely counterproductive. I'm very concerned about the morale of our troops and the potential comfort given to the enemy, who knows now that they can wait us out.

Simply put: you don't declare war unless you're ready to fight. It just doesn't make any sense for Bruning to start hurling these bombs unless he sees an opening in this race. And for those of you keeping score at home, that's one point for Harold Anderson, nada for me. Oops.

* Bruning's announcement comes on the heels of Hagel's completely unimpressive first Quarter fundraising: a haul of $143,663 (not exactly a presidential sum) for a Cash on Hand total of $230,214 (compare that with COH total of $113,911 for the late Jim Exon, who hasn't been in the Senate for 12 years and hasn't been on this Earth for the last two).

* Meanwhile, Mike Fahey isn't exactly sounding like a Senate candidate. While careful not to rule out a statewide bid, he's been busy ramping up a mayoral re-election campaign, complete with a $100,000 fundraising dinner earmarked for a third term in City Hall (and not transferable to a hypothetical federal campaign).

I'd hate not to be around to see some of the projects through," Fahey said. "I don't think there has ever been a better time to be mayor of this city.

* Finally, this bombshell from Don Walton about some mystery organization conducting a poll for former Senator Bob Kerrey... who hasn't expressed any interest in the race and doesn't even live in this state anymore.

So where does that leave us? Scratching our heads and waiting to see the pieces fall into place. But first, a few thoughts:

I'm not yet convinced Bruning is an easier target for Nebraska Democrats than Hagel would be. True, it would be possible to run to Bruning's left on the war, but it's the very unpopularity of Hagel's Iraq rhetoric which has made him vulnerable in a Republican constituency that constitutes over half of the state's electorate. Bruning has the advantages of any statewide incumbent in terms of name identification and fundraising, but he's still a relatively fresh face who has managed to avoid isolating large sections of his idealogical base.

Then again, I just got schooled by Harold Anderson, so what do I know?

And Bob Kerrey? Seriously? The man was a terrific public servant who is still rather beloved across this state, but we've just seen similar goodwill dissipate in an instant when former Senator John Breaux tried to return from Maryland to Louisiana to run for the governor's office. Senator Kerrey has demonstrated a certain wanderlust throughout his career (retiring from the Governorship after only one term, announcing for the Presidency only a few years into his Senate career, retiring from Congress when he was nearly assured re-election), and it wouldn't be surprising to hear that he's considering a return to public life. But does that mean a run for the Senate in Nebraska? Doubtful, very doubtful.

For the moment, the Democratic nomination remains in Fahey's hands. Though not my first choice, Mike Fahey has been a terrific administrator for the City of Omaha and would make a formidable candidate against whomever the Republicans decide to nominate. But will he decide to run? Will Scott Kleeb, or Hal Daub for that matter? I don't think any of them know just yet. They're all probably just scratching their heads and waiting for the pieces to fall into place.

Who could blame them?

Go to full text...

Catching up

* Following up from my post on Friday, I'd like to thank the World Herald for their Sunday morning cover story about poverty in Omaha's black community. This is exactly the sort of discussion that should have to endure the 24/7 "Imus cycle": Why does Omaha, home of five Fortune 500 Companies, have the third highest rate of black poverty in the nation? Why does the 19th best city for business -the largest city in the 10th best state for business- have the highest rate of black children in poverty?

Fortunately, as the OWH also reports, there is no shortage of possible solutions: "A coordinated effort by government, schools and the business community...", "reduce the isolation of blacks...", "jobs", "homes", "public transportation", and of course, "education." But all of these efforts start with political will, and that will only come when the rest of us stop being satisfied with "cleaning the airwaves" and start tackling the real problems, the ones that can't be solved with a memo from a radio executive. The problem isn't on MSNBC, it's next door. It's in all of us.

But as I've said before, this problem is bigger even than public policy. I've asked why these problems persist in a business friendly state. Now I ask: why does the state with the second highest rate of volunteers have such a large and largely isolated community of impoverished blacks?

There's a statue, just inside Boy's Town, of a little boy on another kid's shoulders. The caption reads "He ain't heavy... he's my brother." Omaha needs more brother's keepers. We all need to invest in a community that is less segregated, less isolated, and richer in ways beyond any dollar amount. In that spirit, the OWH has a list of organizations that would love to have your time and money (and yes, this goes to the preacher as well as the choir).

* We can all breathe a sigh of relief: Adrian Smith has been to Iraq, and he assures us that "progress has been made".

* Harold Anderson is gunning for Hagel's Senate seat:

Don't overlook the possibility that U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel, the increasingly controversial Nebraska Republican, will face potentially strong opposition next May in the Republican primary....

I do not suggest that the following report of a recent conversation involving eight Nebraska Republicans approaches a comprehensive survey. But it was typical of almost all of the comments I have been hearing in recent day's when Hagel's name comes up. And it is coming up with increasing frequency.

The consensus of the conversation was strong dissapproval of the nature of Hagel's campaign of criticism over the way President Bush is conducting the war in Iraq.

I don't doubt the sincere possibility that Hagel could face a right-wing primary challenge next year. Sometimes this anecdotal evidence is ahead of the polls in revealing underlying vulnerabilities, and it isn't necessarily wise to dismiss a growing murmur just because it hasn't been recorded in a survey (then again, this is coming from the man who claims to get floods of e-mails begging to know what his wife and dog are up to).

I still think it's unlikely that a big name like Daub or Bruning (the two mentioned in Anderson's column) will get the ball rolling, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's a Dave Nabity out there waiting to take a swing at it (Speaking of which... why not Nabity? What's he been up to?).

As always, I can't provide a link to this column because the largest paper in the state won't put their opinion page online. Just saying.

Go to full text...

Hagel:The Next Chapter and other stories

Unfortunately little is moving me towards a full blown rant today, so let's take a quick look back on some of the headlines we might've missed:

*Washington Whispers reports that Senator Hagel is hard at work on his new book, America:The Next Chapter, "a collection of practical—and reportedly nonpartisan—policy prescriptions" due for release early next year (as the article helpfully points out, that's around the time of the Iowa caucuses). Quote Hagel's publisher:

He's said over and over again that this book is his legacy ... it's what is most important to him right now."

Now I'm not one to cast doubt on the power of the written word -believe it or not, at times I've even fancied myself a writer. But Senator Hagel isn't a blogger or a columnist, he's a public servant, and one would think his legacy might be built around that service. The man's been in the Senate for a decade now... did that not seem to him the proper forum for introducing these "nonpartisan policy prescriptions"?

*Now this is old news, but it's worth noting that NE-03's Adrian Smith was one of only 39 Congressman to vote against tougher penalties for people who promote animal fights. As Smith Watch noted (in a much more timely fashion):

To vote against this bill was, as I said, essentially Smith saying he hates your dog. I can’t even begin to imagine the reasoning behind voting against such a bill!

*Yesterday was Lincoln's first general election mayoral debate. Svoboda, desperate to overcome an abysmal primary showing, tried to address the median care controversy with a mea culpa ("That’s accountability, people"). It seems both candidates remained pretty positive.

*The Grand Island Independent favors an outright ban on the death penalty:

That public safety can be assured with a life in prison sentence rather than the death penalty, that millions of dollars are spent without benefits to the public can and should convince us to consider the abolition of this law in Nebraska.

Now that's another inexcusably old story, but considering this issue will almost certainly dribble into next year's session it's a nice reminder that it isn't the fringe opinions of some Omaha liberals driving this debate. A minority opinion it may be, but it's a growing and sizable minority. A mainstream opinion that will no longer be ignored. The Unicameral's thoughtful consideration of this issue was an outstanding triumph for all of us who desire a true political dialogue in this reddest of red states. Let's keep up the good work, fellas.

Go to full text...