Go read Kyle. That’s all I’ve got to say.
If you want to debate more about the debate schedule (yes, that seems redundant), then the comments are all yours.
Archive for August, 2006
Jeff Lamberti’s got the first TV ad of the season for the 3rd CD race on the air and at first glance, I agreed with Krusty that it looks pretty good (keep reading and you’ll realize just how bad I think it is though). But where does Republican candidate Jeff Lamberti get off calling for a change? He’s the Republican (though he never says it in the ad) who has campaigned with Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, John Boehner, Dennis Hastert, and many other Congressional Republicans and Washington Republicans who are part of the status quo that is the DC leadership. They’re the ones who won’t pass meaningful ethics reforms. They’re the ones who tried to block a debate about stem cell research. They’re the ones who helped create the donut hole in Medicare Part D. They’re the ones who want to privatize your Social Security. They’re the ones who have yet to vote to implement the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations. They’re the ones who have brought disgrace to this country’s government institutions by holding secret conference committee meetings, destroying integrity in our elected officials, and who have helped make Congress the least effective it has been in decades.
Jeff Lambert is still scared to run as a Republican. How long do residents of the 3rd CD have to keep listening to Lamberti talk about change when he’s campaigning with the same guys who helped screw everything up while they’ve been in power?
But here’s some critical analysis of the ad. I’ve got no problem with scripting an ad (because all of them are and should be — it makes for good ads) but this one goes over the mark. The ‘rally’ on the steps of the state capitol is entirely set up, you hear fake whistles in the crowd, and the pauses are completely unnatural as we wait for the words to flash up on the screen and then for them to show another awkward pose and movement from Lamberti. The more times people see the ad the more they will get tired of its fake-ness. In terms of content, its all key phrases and one-liners: “I’ll fight for this and will do that.” Where’s the meat?
Boswell hasn’t aired ads yet (but I can guarantee he will be soon — its always wise to let the challenger go first) but I hope when he does they’ll have content. In the governor’s race, Chet Culver’s been able to talk about real plans that he’ll be going forward on. Leonard Boswell has a college affordability bill ready to go forward as soon as Democrats take over the House. Jeff Lamberti’s got some talking points about pork-barrell spending and an idea for a bill that would introduce a program that already exists.
Is this the kind of leadership Iowa’s 3rd CD residents need? A man who is afraid of party titles, of giving new ideas, and of even debating his opponent in his hometown? Like Leonard Boswell said during the first debate they had, it isn’t time for on-the-job training.
Let’s work hard to send Leonard Boswell back to Congress so that he can keep protecting Iowa’s families at all ages!
During my busy-ness last week with everyone moving back to Drake, I wasn’t able to talk about Jim Nussle’s statements last week in favor of mandatory school consolidation, something he immediately started back-tracking on the day after he said it. Here’s the Culver release criticizing Nussle for his comments and here’s the Register story after Nussle made his comments. Culver opposes mandatory school consolidation and favors the local school boards tackling the issues that face their districts because they know what is best to help out their children and students. Here’s another release from Monday explaining more about Culver’s position on consolidation and explaining why Jim Nussle is wrong. (Ed. Note: If you’re wondering why I link to so many releases it is because I don’t speak for the candidate — I’m giving you the ability to hear the direct goods from the campaign source).
Jim Nussle’s goal of consolidating rural districts in Iowa by fiat from the state just isn’t going to sell with Iowans and educators who recognize that when it comes to decisions like this, the local communities and school boards know best. Not to mention that Jim Nussle has a terrible record on education while he’s been one of Iowa’s Congressmen in Washington. His abysmal record and his desire to force consolidation prompted the Chet Culver Committee to release this radio ad talking about the Jim Nussle Hustle — saying one thing in Iowa and doing another in DC. You can listen to the mp3 here on the Culver website.
And that’s not even the worst thing that Jim Nussle is saying about education. He’s downright misleading and misinforming Iowans about the facts regarding education funding. He keeps telling audiences — and is quoted in the Register — as saying that only around 50% of the dollars spent on education in the state actually make it to the classroom. That’s just bogus. The State of Iowa Department of Education’s “Annual Condition of Education” makes it clear that 70% of state money spent on education goes to the classroom. How long will it take for Jim Nussle to quit lying at tell the truth?
Education is critical and Chet Culver has plans to take education to a whole new level with his education plans including his senior year plus program and other private-public ventures to make sure Iowa remains competitive and educated. He needs your vote on November 7th.
Last night, my fraternity house got a phone call into our direct line, which I answered, and the caller immediately went into asking questions. The first question asked if I was in favor or opposed to removing “the death tax.” I, of course, answered that I was opposed to removing it which seemed to surprise the man asking the questions. The next question was what I thought the most pressing issue in governance and politics was today. The third question was asking whether I was in favor of cutting taxes on working families and middle class Americans. I subsequently began asking information about the type of research being done and was told that the information about the company providing the poll as well as who was requesting it and any other general information was confidential because it would either 1) upset the sample and hurt the poll or 2) because the client wished to remain confidential. I never got a name from either the original caller or the supervisor. Both were men who spoke with slightly heavy accents.
To me, the phrasing of the estate tax as the ‘death tax’ and the blatant subjectivity present in the third questions seems to be pushing respondents to consider conservative beliefs by elminating the estate tax and continuing to cut taxes. I’m not sure if the poll was trying to target folks in the 3rd CD or across the state to try and give sagging Republicans some support by screwing with the electorate. All I know is that this was a decent-sized poll because you could hear several other people in the background asking the same questions on the phones.
Please let me know if you’ve hearding anything else about polling in the area. I know that a commenter noted last week that he had received a push poll he thought was coming from the Boswell folks (I haven’t heard anything about that poll from anyone else). Gordon Fischer reported on a push poll earlier in the summer (that Mystery Pollster then picked up on as well). If you’ve received similar phone calls or took the survey the full way through, please provide an example of all the questions you were asked. I’d really like to get to the bottom of this. Thanks for your help.
Jonathan Singer of MyDD offers up his own Governor’s Race forecast, to add on to Chris Bowers’ House Forecast. He classifies Iowa’s race for the governorship to be the number one Republican target for a pick-up on November 7th. Here’s what he writes:
“Term-limited [Ed. Note: I left a comment for Singer informing him that Iowa governor’s are not term-limited] Democratic Governor Tom Vilsack has a passable approval rating, but that hasn’t abated the anti-incumbent party feeling from hitting Iowa this year as Democratic Secretary of State Chet Culver takes on Republican Congressman Jim Nussle. For a state as closely watched as Iowa, there is a surprising dearth of polling on the gubernatorial race, but the data currently available indicates rather clearly that this race could go either way at this point. It is noteworthy that this, a toss-up, is the Republicans best pick-up opportunity when several seats currently held by the GOP are leaning towards the Democrats.”
The biggest point he makes is about the dearth of polling. Zogby and Rasmussen are the only two actively and continually polling this highly contested gubernatorial race — one that’s had a primary already and has been a one on one campaign for over two months. Hopefully Survey USA or some other firms will actively start polling a race that so many pundits and reporters view as being so close. I think it is important to remember that in even the primary polls during the race, Culver is the one candidate who kept up the advantage against Nussle. Not to mention that when looking at the generic congressional ballot where Democrats continually have the edge, if you keep hammering away on ‘Republican Congressman’ Jim Nussle, you get the advantages that come from the displeasure with Republicans in Congress — not to mention that two highly contested congressional races where turnout will favor the Democrats. Or at least that’s what it seems to me.
Oh, and if you’re out there and know any kind of internal polling that’d be worthwhile noting (not only in the governor’s race, but House races as well) go ahead and let me know.
Myself and fellow Drake Democrats have been essentially blessed to have had the opportunity to host or meet two 2008 Democratic Presidential candidates in a 24 hour period. Yesterday afternoon, Senator Joe Biden and Congressman Leonard Boswell held a townhall discussion on college affordability with about 100 students. This afternoon, former governor of Virginia Mark Waner attended an event for Secretary of State Candidate Mike Mauro. About 60 people attended the event at The Plaza in Des Moines, mostly folks outside of the college age.
Both Governor Warner and Senator Biden were quite receptive to the students and the audiences at their events and were able to hold the attention of the audiences quite well. Senator Biden stayed for almost an hour after Congressman Boswell left for another event to get to know students and to keep answering their questions. I think he was able to really impress the students with his talk about education particularly, and then his knowledge on foreign affairs always impresses folks. He unequivocally stated that he was running (putting him as the only officially declared candidate or exploratory candidate beyond Christopher Dodd and Mike Gravel) and talked as if he were pretty sure that he would get the Democratic nomination for president.
Governor Warner on the other hand wasn’t so enthusiastic or strong in his talk about his potential run in 2008, but make no doubt about it, he’s going to run in 2008 and wants to be the candidate who unites all Americans — Republicans and Democrats — beyond a message of working for progress for the future. That’s how he frames the policy debates we’ll be having, as the past versus the future. And he points out that every time that has been the situation in previous times, the Democratic Party has been the party to step up and lead us into the future. He again re-emphasized his support for redeployment of forces in Iraq but only did so in passing. Iraq wasn’t his focus, but he made sure to mention the failures of Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense.
The one thing that still irks me about Mark Warner is that when he talks about his plan to unite us to fight for the future, he points out that, according to him, Democrats only are good at criticizing what Republicans and Bush have done but haven’t offered a plan. I think that’s wrong of him to do, particularly since he’s offering somewhat of a plan for unity and fighting for the future. Why not just talk about what you can do instead of accusing your party of failure? It is what gets us articles like this from Mike Glover of the AP (and then picked up in the Washington Post) where it seems like all Warner is doing is criticizing the party that he wants to lead. Now, I’m frustrated by Glover’s title and the theme of the piece which isn’t an overall criticism of the party but Warner attacking the 16-state strategy used in 2004. Warner supports the 50-state strategy of Howard Dean and that’s been amazing for the party across the country.
I think Governor Warner should work on looking at the 6 for 06 Plan released by the House Democrats and, if he wants, mention a past inability to talk about offering solutions and plans, but hype the fact that we have one today and it is being spread across the country by our congressional leaders and passed out at events across the country. He’s got the potential if he quits bashing the party he supposedly loves and wants to lead.
This morning Jim Nussle resorted to luanching the first attack ad of the general election gubernatorial race, attacking Chet Culver on his IPERS plan. There isn’t a story on the ad yet, but it definitely distorts things.
Here’s what David Yepsen had to say about Culver’s plan in this morning’s Register:
“Chet Culver is getting a bum rap on part of his economic-development plan for Iowa.
The Democratic candidate for governor has suggested using more of the Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) pension fund’s venture capital money to invest in high-tech and manufacturing business start-ups in Iowa.
It’s something other states do. It would help start more new businesses in Iowa. It might even bolster the soundness of the fund by improving the Iowa economy. Republicans are attacking the idea, saying it might make the fund unsound.
They’re wrong. Culver’s right.”
Its a good piece, and one I think you should read.
I think the best explanation against the attack ad comes from this Culver Camp press release:
Sagging Nussle Campaign Resorts to First Negative TV Attack Ad of the Campaign
Nussle Continues Attempt to Hide His Support for Privatizing Social Security by Misleading on IPERS“(Des Moines) Trailing in the polls and forced to defend his record of failure in Washington – even against fellow Republicans like Jeff Lamberti – Congressman Jim Nussle has apparently already reached a desperation point. This morning, Congressman Nussle launched the first television attack ads of the gubernatorial campaign, clinging to scare tactics and misrepresentation of Chet Culver’s positions as a way to shore up his sagging campaign.
“This ad says a lot more about Jim Nussle than it does about Chet Culver,” said Culver spokeswoman Taylor West. “It’s pretty telling that it’s not even Labor Day, and Jim Nussle has already run out of positive ideas. The latest polls show Iowans aren’t interested in bringing Jim Nussle’s Washington mess to Iowa. I guess their only choice now is to try to tear Chet Culver down with negative, misleading attacks.”
The ad rehashes Congressman Nussle’s earlier attempt to cover his own record of assaulting pension security in Washington by misrepresenting Chet Culver’s proposals for boosting small businesses in Iowa and protecting and strengthening IPERS. Nussle’s scare tactics have already been discredited, most recently by David Yepsen in the Des Moines Register, who said simply, “They’re wrong. Culver’s right.” [Des Moines Register, 8/29/06]
In fact, it is Congressman Nussle who will be forced to explain his record on pensions. In Washington, Nussle voted to weaken pension laws and allow corporations to raid employee pension funds. He’s also been an outspoken proponent of privatizing Social Security, a plan that puts everyone’s pensions at risk and results in reduced benefits or higher taxes. [Vote #743, 10/26/95; Vote #117, 4/2/04; Washington Post, 4/3/04; Des Moines Register, 2/10/05; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 6/2/05]
It’s not surprising that Jim Nussle would see going negative as his only option so early in his ad campaign. A Wall Street Journal/Zogby poll released yesterday shows Nussle trailing Culver despite having already spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on television and radio ads across the state. This was the second straight poll to show Nussle behind, following a Rasmussen poll released earlier this month.
Nussle’s fund-raising has also lost momentum, with Culver outraising him nearly 3-to-1 in the last reporting period.
“Iowans are responding to Chet Culver’s vision and plan to lead Iowa forward,” said West. “They know that Chet shares their Iowa values and common sense. Jim Nussle’s Washington record is the exact opposite, and he’s being forced to resort to negative, misleading attacks to cover that up.””
And here’s a break-down of the facts that you should know:
NARRATOR
“Chet Culver’s plan to quote redirect some IPERS retirement funds to invest in high tech startup companies.”THE FACTS
Chet Culver is an IPERS member himself and would never put our state’s pensions at risk He has proposed a plan that will help IPERS grow with no more risk than our current investment strategy. Culver’s plan is fiscally sound, following IPERS’ June 2005 Private Equity Investment Strategy, which concludes: “long-term expected returns from private equity markets are substantially greater than from public equity markets.”NARRATOR
“Culver thinks they’re a good place to invest the pensions of Iowa employees and retirees.”THE FACTS
Jim Nussle doesn’t understand how Iowa invests its public pension dollars. IPERS currently invests 7.5% percent of its holdings in private equity, some of it in venture capital – with a target of 10% in private equity. Chet Culver has proposed finding a way to keep a portion – up to 1% - of that investment here in Iowa, instead of using Iowa worker’s funds to help grow businesses elsewhere.Culver’s plan is not a mandate. Current law allows IPERS to invest in venture capital, and Culver’s plan would simply urge the IPERS board to look more closely into investing in Iowa companies, instead of sending all of it to companies in California and New York.
Culver’s plan does not usurp the strict fiduciary investment responsibility the IPERS board maintains, and its simply wrong for Nussle to suggest that. Companies that receive IPERS investment would have to meet those high standards. This is about Iowa competing, plain and simple.
NARRATOR
“Can we trust politicians like Culver with their hands in the pension cookie jar deciding how to invest your retirement money?”THE FACTS
Chet Culver has his own money invested in IPERS and would never do anything to put pensions at risk. The plan Culver has proposed is not a mandate, does not require IPERS rule changes, and would not take investment decisions out of the hands of the IPERS board. On the other hand, Jim Nussle has a history of allowing corporations to raid employee pensions and decrease their contributions to pension plans. Nussle is also a strong advocate for privatizing Social Security, a plan that would put everyone’s pensions at risk and result in either reduced benefits or higher taxes.Nussle Voted for Republican Budget That Would Allow Corporations to Raid Employee Pension Funds. Nussle voted to ease restrictions on corporate raids of private employee pension funds. [vote #743, 10/26/95]
Nussle Voted to Allow Companies to Reduce Pension Contributions. Jim Nussle voted to allow companies to reduce contributions to their pension plans by temporarily altering the formula used to calculate whether those contributions are sufficient to cover liabilities. [Vote #117, 4/2/04; Washington Post, 4/3/04]
Des Moines Register Headline: “Nussle Touts Bush Plan for Social Security.” [Des Moines Register, 2/10/05]
2005: Nussle Appeared with Bush at Social Security Event. The Des Moines Register reported in June 2005 that, “[Nussle] appeared with President Bush at a Cedar Rapids event where Bush touted personal accounts.” [Des Moines Register, 6/22/05]
Nussle Supported Private Account Investment Managed by Private Firms. According to a Project Vote Smart survey, Jim Nussle supported: “Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts managed by private firms contracted by the government.” [Project Vote Smart, 2004 National Congressional Political Awareness Test]
Nussle Planned Privatization of Social Security. In February 2001, the Des Moines Register reported that, “Nussle also is planning changes in Social Security, including some kind of program allowing some investment in the private sector.” [Des Moines Register, 2/8/01]
Waterloo Courier Editorial: Nussle Supports Privatizing Social Security. The Waterloo Courier published an editorial in October 2000 saying, “Nussle, like the top of his ticket, Texas Gov. George W. Bush, supports privatizing a portion of Social Security.” [Waterloo Cedar Falls Courier Editorial, 10/29/00]
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities Concluded Benefit Cuts or Higher Taxes Would Result from Privatization. The CBPP reported in June 2005 that, “There are two general ways to fund the transition costs [to social security privatization] if payroll tax revenues are diverted from Social Security to private accounts.
- Cut benefits for current retirees. If transition costs are financed by cutting benefits for current retirees, younger workers would indeed receive higher rates of return when they retired. But in that case, the younger workers would be benefiting from a redistribution from current retirees, who would see their rates of return go down sharply.
- Raise additional resources to pay for current benefits. Alternatively, benefits for current seniors could be maintained and be financed by providing additional resources for Social Security through general revenue transfers that are financed through government borrowing (to be repaid by imposing Social Security benefit cuts on future retirees) or through higher taxes on current workers.”
[Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 6/2/05]
Nussle is misleading and distorting and attacking. Don’t let him get away with this bullshit. I’ll have more on IPERS later, but these are the facts.
Today’s new WSJ/Zogby gives Culver a 5.2% swing into the lead over Congressman Jim Nussle. Nussle led in the last interactive poll.
Culver: 47.7%
Nussle: 44.8%
There are reasons to doubt the veracity of the interactive polls but if Krusty is going to cite them (as he’s done in the past) and hype them, then I’ll do the same thing. Remember, the more accurate and previous Rasmussen poll put Culver in the lead as well. Culver has the momentum and there is no doubt about it (especially considering that the poll was in the field while Culver supposedly made his ‘disastrous’ IPERS announcement).
Below the fold you can read the full IDP press release:
Culver Seizes Lead in Second Straight Poll
5.2-Point Swing in Latest Wall Street Journal Poll Places Culver on Top by 3“DES MOINES – The latest Wall Street Journal/Zogby, released today, shows Secretary of State Chet Culver seizing the lead over Congressman Jim Nussle in the race for governor by a 47.7% to 44.8% margin. This is the second straight poll showing Culver in the lead, following a Rasmussen poll released August 1st, which tracked Culver on top by 41% to Nussle’s 38%.
The August WSJ/Zogby Battleground States Poll indicates a 5.2-point swing for Culver since the last version of the poll was released in July.
The new poll is particularly bad news for Jim Nussle, as he has already launched radio and television ads across the state intended to boost his sagging numbers.
“This Wall Street Journal poll shows that no ad blitz can hide Congressman Nussle’s sixteen-year record in Washington of record budget deficits, cuts to education, and massive handouts to special interests,” said Iowa Democratic Party Chair Sally Pederson. “Iowans are looking for a governor who shares their Iowa values, experience, and common sense. As these last two polls are beginning to make clear, Iowans don’t want to bring Congressman Nussle’s Washington values and Washington record to the State Capitol.”
Culver, a former Des Moines public school teacher, recently completed a 21-city “Back to School” tour across Iowa, sharing with Iowans his teaching experience and his plans to improve education in every corner of the state.
“Iowans have a choice between Chet Culver, a candidate with Iowa values and first-hand experience in the classroom, and Jim Nussle, who’s spent sixteen years catering to special interests in Washington,” added Pederson. “These polls reflect what we’re seeing across the state – that Iowans are finding this choice increasingly clear.”
Tamyra brought this up at last week’s Central Committee meeting, but here are all of the details for a huge canvass that will be taking place on Saturday, September 16th:
Please join us for a large canvass on September 16th, 2006. The election is just over two months away and we have alot of work to do still. One of the most important of these is to continue gathering absentee ballot requests, and one of the best ways to do this is face to face.
The areas in House District 65 and 66 are predominantly Democratic, but they traditionally have a low turn out. We need to increase turn out in areas like this to help all our candidates up and down the ticket.
Four hours a week of your time can make a big difference in this election year!
Coordinated campaign canvass
September 16, 2006
10:00am
Davis Park, 16th & Forest, Des Moines
Followed by a hot dog BBQ for all canvassers back at the park
If you’re planning on attending or if you want more information, call Tamyra at 515-285-1800.
Here is just a bit of a round-up on last week’s news in the race for the Iowa 3rd CD where incumbent Leonard Boswell faces challenger Jeff Lamberti:
- Boswell was endorsed by Iowa Corngrowers Association. You can find the full list of who they endorsed in this release. There seemed to be a bipartisan slant to their endorsements.
- Jeff Lamberti was a no-show at Iowa Farmers Union Debate — but was able to make to it to the same parade Boswell was in earlier in the day. For as much as conservatives continually lament about Boswell avoiding debates (which seems to be pretty much untrue as far as I can tell) this is a pretty clear case of Lamberti ignoring a chance for a real debate in front of real constituents under a particularly important issue. You can see pictures from the solo debate here and here.
- As WHO-TV first reported, the DCCC has decided not to put money into Boswell’s race in the form of ads and other media because of how well he’s been doing in this race and his overall position. As Professor Arthur Sanders just said in class, Boswell’s going to run away with this and he thinks it’ll be a couple of weeks before the NRCC pulls their money as well. Hotline On Call says this:
“IA 03: This is big: the DCCC has cancelled ads planned to boost Rep. Leonard Boswell (D). Why? Because the DCCC is satisfied that Boswell will win. The news comes as Speaker Dennis Hastert appears with GOP challenger Jeff Lamberti (R).”
Oh, and Krusty tries to spin this news into something positive for Lamberti. He fails. Everyone who’s anyone in politics knows that the DCCC’s pulling of cash is a good thing for Boswell.
- Here is a nice LTTE from Sunday’s Register on Boswell’s help for veterans.
- Kari Gronemeyer is a Drake student and member of the College Republicans here on campus, has no basis on which to write this LTTE since she wasn’t at the debate (I was) — I’m sure being fed a letter to write from the Lamberti campaign makes it easy. And anyway, if Lamberti was all about “new ideas in Washington” then he wouldn’t be campaigning with the status quo Republicans like Majority Leader Boehner and Speaker Hastert.
- Speaking of Hastert, he was in town campaigning for Lamberti last week and thinks he still has a chance to win. Not likely, considering that since the majority of folks here in the 3rd CD are registered as Independents and all the generic polls show Democrats with the advantage, this race is Boswell’s to win.
Well, that’s about all of the news that I can find to write about for now. Make sure to leave your thoughts.
It is beginning to seem like Tom Beaumont of the Register writes the same piece about Governor Tom Vilsack’s presidential aspirations. Granted, today’s has a bit of substance regarding his annual trek across Iowa, but the focus is on 2008 and what will happen if he decides to run. That’s fine. But how many times can you write that article before it begins to get really redundant?
Biden’s been here in Iowa for the past several days but they’ve only written one piece about him. Seems like Beaumont’s going for overkill here. Give the man a break.
Ok, this is going to be a long day of catching up on lots of political news, but I’ll do it. Forgive me if I talk about stuff that you don’t care about. I might try a big link round-up or not, who knows yet.
Big news for the first day back to class at Drake! Delaware Senator Joe Biden (likely 2008 candidate for the presidency) and Congressman Leonard Boswell will host a town hall discussion with students and faculty at Drake about college affordability. Details below:
WHO: Congressman Leonard Boswell and Senator Joe Biden Talk to Drake Students, Faculty and Staff
WHAT: Town Hall Discussion on College Affordability
WHEN: Monday, August 28 - 4:00 to 5:00 PM
WHERE: Cool Beans (Second Floor of the Hubbell Bldg, above Spike’s Pizza)
If you’re looking for good parking and want to make it to the event, you’re going to want to park in the Olmsted Parking lot, which is east of 31st right off of University Avenue. We’re looking for a great crowd, so if you’re a Drake student you better be there!
Oh, and yes, I’m pseudo back to blogging for real. Less often than this summer, however, because of class.
Sorry I’ve been out of service but these next couple of days will be intermittment posting, if any, as we continue to move freshmen in as well as do major work on the fraternity house. I’ll try to get back to regular postings by Satuday some time. Thanks for sticking with me.
Oh, and if any of you commenters of the liberal variety are interested in guest-blogging, let me know and I can try and set something up for the next 24 to 48 hours.
Chet Culver’s got a new radio ad out and it addresses the IPERS policy from his “Iowa Means Business” plan and Jim Nussle’s shoddy records on pension protection and investment. Gordon has the audio hosted here on his blog. I really wish I had the time right now to get into an in-depth and critical debate about the IPERS plan which I believe is a good policy idea, but with freshman move-in this week, house work projects at the fraternity house, office work, and other campus committments, I’m afraid that the short little tid-bits that I pump out each morning are what you’re going to have to stick with over the next several days until classes begin and I have some blogging life and time in me again. And trust me, I want to write and talk about it.
Oh, and make sure to note as Gordon does here that in Nussle’s new TV ad there is absolutely no mention that he’s a Republican Congressman or his experience from that position. He’s running from the title because he knows just how unfavorable the current environment is to Republicans. Culver’s ads, on the other hand, tout his pride in being a Democrat.
I guess that Nussle is just as scared as Jeff Lamberti is to run as a Republican.
