We’ve been driving across the country visiting congressional and senatorial candidates. Our 1996 Volvo is our transportation, our office, our closet and often our dining room. The result is Sam and I have way too much time together. As my friend Sally McDaniel says, “You married him for better or for worse . . . not for lunch”.
 
Sam does the driving, all the driving.  I am by far the better, safer driver, but I do the writing (as the first part of this sentence reveals).  I also do the navigating, the note taking, and the nagging and complaining about the driving. My view is there should always be two hands on the wheel -- apparently, an insupportable position. Sam believes it’s important for one hand to be either resting on the gear shift (a vestigial instinct for men of a certain age), holding a cup of coffee, or cradling a mobile phone; so that, in case of emergency, that hand is thoroughly rested and ready to leap into action. Don’t get me wrong, Sam does use an earphone; but still, he holds the cell phone in his resting hand in case another call comes in. With remarkable frequency, it does. He also tailgates, which is particularly dangerous at high speeds with just one hand on the wheel.  He claims the speed limits -- 75 in Nebraska -- are some effete snob’s idea.  Clearly God intended that you should be able to go from Colorado to Omaha in three or four hours.  Max. Next to him -- in the death seat -- I do a lot of gasping and shrieking.  Sometimes Sam has neither hand on the wheel because they’re both around my throat.
 
In any case, we made it to Nebraska –- in record time, I might add.  We met Scott Kleeb (pronounced Klebb), the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate, at a Starbucks in Omaha. The consensus is that there are 10 Senate seats in play.  The Republican seats that are generally considered competitive are:  NH, NC, VA, NM, CO, OR, AK, MN, KY, and TX.   At the moment, Nebraska is a longer shot, but we would make it number eleven.
 
Two years ago Sam and I supported Kleeb when he ran for Congress in Nebraska’s 3rd CD.  He lost by ten points in a district that, in the 2004 election, was carried by the Republican congressional candidate by 89/11.  Yes, 89/11.  In the last days of the 2006 campaign, The Club For Growth and the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee put serious money into the race against him, indicating they thought he was a threat.  (We loved that, because even though Scott lost, the Republican Party had to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in a district they always take for granted).
 
This year there’s an empty Senate seat in Nebraska due to the retirement of Chuck Hagel. Because of his congressional race, Kleeb has good name recognition.  However, it isn’t as good as his opponent’s, Mike Johanns, a twice-elected former governor of Nebraska and Bush’s Secretary of Agriculture.  Nonetheless, the 1st and 2nd CDs in Nebraska are much more evenly matched between Republicans and Democrats than Kleeb’s congressional CD.  Kleeb figured if he could run strong again in the 3rd, and then use the margins he thinks he can build in the 1st and 2nd, he can win the Senate seat.  We think he has a shot.  Bush is hugely unpopular.  A recent Rasmussen poll reports that only 17% of Nebraskans think the U.S. is “on the right track”.  If Kleeb can tie his opponent to Bush and capitalize on the new registration and energy of the Democratic primaries, he has a real chance.
 
The overwhelming reason for our enthusiasm is the candidate himself.  If you were picking a candidate from Central Casting, you couldn’t ask for anyone better.
 
Kleeb is a fourth generation western Nebraskan who has worked as a ranch hand and been a rodeo bull rider.  He grew up on military bases overseas where his parents were teachers, spending his summers working on his grandparents’ ranch.  For his doctoral dissertation in history at Yale, he focused on the history of American cattle ranching. Most of his research was done from the back of a pick-up as he traveled through every state west of the Mississippi, listening to the stories of farmers, ranchers and small-town workers.
 
Kleeb, who is married with two young girls, has a style and look that is a cross between the Marlboro man and a young Jimmy Stewart; rugged good looks mixed with an easy laugh and self-effacing persona.  When asked if he didn’t find bull riding scary, he replied “not half as scary as being a Democrat in western Nebraska.”   It’s worth taking a look at his website for the visuals: http://www.scottkleeb.com
 
I forgot to mention that Kleeb was driven to our meeting at Starbucks by one of his volunteer drivers.  Recently he lost his driver’s license after accumulating a fistful of speeding tickets and won’t qualify for another one until September.  I guess when he was campaigning in western Nebraska, he thought 75mph was for wusses.  It’s just one more reason why Sam likes him so much.

Hold on a minute.  There is an issue here that is simply not getting its fair share of press attention. There are those who would have us not bring this to the attention of the American people but I deplore obfuscation.  I know some will hold me in contempt; however, I’m a patriot and journalist (of sorts), and so I must address this topic in spite of my fear of repercussions.  As I’m sure you’ve already surmised, the issue is the misuse of the word loan, which hasn’t been a verb since sometime in the 17th century.
 
Let me state this once and for all.  Hillary Clinton did not loan her campaign money, she lent it money.  She made a loan to it.  She and her husband have lent the campaign some $11.5 million.  If others are willing to give her money in the future (so that she can repay her personal loan and not be left with a mere $90 million) then one contribution of the continuing Clinton campaign will be to have moved 11.5 million dollars back into their pockets; money that might otherwise have gone to elect congressional and senatorial candidates.  But I digress.
 
Constant change is one of the strengths of the English language.  But I prefer to have it change because of the influence of new ideas and other cultures; not because of under-educated, overly made-up TV newscasters earning so much money that they are the ones who should be making the loans and doing the lending.  There.  I’ve cleared the air on this issue and I feel much better.

One more thing, I also detest the word “butt”, so I propose keeping the language controls away from aerobics instructors too.  (And my brother, Topper, would like you to consider future action on the transitive verb 'to lay' (lay-laid-laid) and the intransitive verb 'to lie' (lie-lay-lain).  It's a serious mistake and one he's not willing to accept it laying down, . . . that is, lying down, or, well, you know, without a fight.
 
Now I know that the minute I push the “send” button, I am entering a minefield.  If you are one of those grammarians who are going to tell me "loan" was an acceptable verb in England before the settlement of America and was then imported to America by English settlers, whereupon it died out in England itself and was replaced by "lend" and that Webster’s accepts it as a verb as well as a noun, then I will tell you, you are not elitist enough, you don’t eat enough arugula and you’re probably packing a gun.
 
So lend me your ears please because the next blogs are about which congressional and senatorial candidates deserve your support.
 

There are multiple theories about when this campaign will end.  Like many of you, I believe the primaries will continue well into 2010 and that ultimately, it will all be decided by South Dakota as was intended by the founding fathers.

It’s imperative for Hillary to stay in the race, leaving it only when and if she wants to.  Here’s why:
First, she is certainly going to win West Virginia and Kentucky -- and by big margins.  It would be disastrous for Obama to lose in those primaries to a withdrawn candidate.
Second, in order for the bitterness to subside, her constituency must feel she lost fair and square, not that she was in any way forced out of the contest.
And third, she should be given a chance to restore herself with the liberal and African American Democratic constituencies.  Healing that rift and re-establishing her reputation with them is good for her and good for the party and can be accomplished by a change in tone and message from her during the next several weeks.

On the other hand, it’s crucial for Hillary to get out of the race at once. And here is why:
First, she seems unable to take the high road.  (See point 3 above).  Her insistence that she is the only person who can win because she alone can attract the white male vote, does not serve either campaign, the Democratic Party or the country well.  Perhaps she has forgotten that Bill Clinton did not carry the white male vote in 1992 or 1996. 
Second, because she seems not to have the self-control to stay on the high road, she strides along hurting herself, her future and her legacy.  Better to get out before she hurts herself even more. 
And third, she and all her supporters are throwing good money after bad.

It’s essential for the two campaigns to come to some sort of compromise.
First, because Hillary’s campaign might be able to get some sort of help with their financial sinkhole.
Second, she can retain a shred of dignity by getting Obama and others to say nice things about her as a result of that compromise.
And third, we can end this silly reality show and go back to watching Dancing With the Stars.  My feet get all tingly from the very thought of it.

______________________________

If you want to help turn vision into reality please contribute at http://my.barackobama.com/page/outreach/view/main/sambrown

HOT FLASHES FROM THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL
Alison Teal

We’re back on the road again or at least on the banks of the Wabash.  
I’m still having Hot Flashes and my husband Sam is still causing 
them.  We weren’t sure about doing this again.  Those twelve months 
were pretty exhausting and depressing four years ago, even with the 
successes of two years ago.  But it’s that time of year when you can 
almost feel the sap rising in your limbs.  And, “after taking several 
readings, I discover my mind’s still fairly sound” (thank you Willy 
Nelson). So. . .

MAY 2, 2008
The polls in Indiana, North Carolina, and the head to head polls with 
McCain all show severe losses for Obama in the last few days.  There’s 
a major momentum for Clinton.  The Wright stuff was a disaster.  It’s 
that simple.

Immediately after Wright’s speech at the National Press Club, the 
Indiana phones were jammed with concerned supporters.  Our friend, Ann 
Beaudry, answered a call from a crying woman who could barely speak 
between sobs and gasps.  “What should I do?  What can I do?  I’ve been 
sending him $14 a month. . . as much as I could afford. . . I’ve never 
been so hopeful. . .and is it all lost now? Tell me it won’t be. . .”

But the next day in Indianapolis, the Obama Headquarters was filled 
with young people as soon as it opened and they were not talking about 
Rev. Wright.

By the end of the week, Obama seemed to have escaped the embrace of 
his poisonous pastor, not without considerable losses and probably not 
for good.  Snake handling is not part of his religious tradition.  
He’s likely to be bitten again and again.

However, there is still great reason for Obama supporters to be 
hopeful here.  I mean it.  Part of it is the pure raw energy. 
Campaigners seem feistier since Obama’s denunciation of Wright.  Their 
spirits are way up from where they were on Monday.  But, yes, it’s 
really close.  And maybe voters will buy into Hillary’s claim that he 
is not “seasoned”; that he hasn’t shown he can survive being thrown on

the grill and soaked with a hot sauce from hell.  (Remember, too much 
seasoning can make a dish unpalatable.)

The Jefferson Jackson Day dinner is this weekend in Indiana; good 
timing for the campaign.  This is not a Democratic machine state, and 
that should work in Obama’s favor. Having just traveled across Iowa, 
Nebraska and Colorado, there is one thing we can say for sure: 
Democratic leaders in these states feel certain they can win new 
congressional and senate seats in the fall if Barack Obama is at the 
head of the ticket.  We heard this over and over again, from 
candidates, even from uncommitted super delegates. That message needs 
to get out this weekend. If it does -- and it must -- it may stop the 
hemorrhaging.

“Obama offers an attractive vision for the way things could be. 
Clinton offers a clear-eyed view of the way things are.”  That’s the 
Indianapolis Star’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton yesterday.  “There 
are those that look at things the way they are, and ask, ‘Why?’  I 
dream of things that never were, and ask ‘Why not?’” Bobby Kennedy.  
The America I long for belongs to those who ask “Why not?” – to the 
visionaries.

It’s unseasonably chilly outside.  The Indiana towns are squeaky-clean 
from spring rains and the grass is turning green though the fields are 
still brown and unplowed.  The roads seem as smooth as butter after a 
winter of DC potholes.  The driving could loll you to sleep if it 
weren’t for a series of Burma-Shave type signs:
“Here’s A Thought For You To Ponder . . .  An Armed Citizen . . .  As 
First Responder . . .  Gunssavelives.com”.

Yes, it’s chilly outside.  The lime green shoots on the trees and 
occasional dazzling splashes of purple buds brighten the heavy leaden 
skies.  And once again, that promise of new life keeps us going.