Bow shot

In case you don’t read the Lincoln Journal-Star (“the what?”), Don Walton wrote an article today about how Omaha State Senator John McCollister’s district is now getting robo-called regarding votes McCollister has made that counter the positions of Governor Pete Ricketts.

The robocalls ask:

Would you be more or less likely to vote for Senator McCollister if you knew he voted to give taxpayer benefits to illegal immigrants in the Nebraska Legislature?

Would you be more or less likely to vote for Senator McCollister if you knew that he voted to get rid of the death penalty in the Nebraska Legislature?

Would you be more or less likely to vote for Senator McCollister if you knew that he voted for tax increases in the Nebraska Legislature?

In thinking about the race for Nebraska State Legislature in 2018, will you
vote for Senator John McCollister or do you prefer to give someone else a chance.

McCollister calls this a “shot across the bow,” from Ricketts.

Walton notes that McCollister has been, “exercising his own independent judgment on hot-button issues as a member of the nonpartisan Legislature for four years.”

That’s one way to put it.
Another way would be that McCollister has been voting against Republicans, and these are the breaks.

Feel free to “exercise your independent judgment” as a legislator, but don’t be surprised when you then incur the wrath of voters — or those whom you oppose.

 

Just hang on a minute…

You saw here last week that word was certainly down that Taylor Royal intends to run for Nebraska State Treasurer.

The OWH got wind of it — as well as his new campaign website:

Well, maybe he wasn’t ready to unveil what’s under the hood, at least not to the OWH.

Then again, they didn’t exactly compliment him on his mayoral run, so whadda you expect…

 

@Brad18

Hey and there’s Brad Ashford, recently with Mrs. Ashford (Ann Ferlic Ashford, to YOU) in DC recently.

And Brad seems to be getting feisty on the Twitter lately as well:

Sure kinda seems like the Tweet of candidate.

Then again, that Twitter handle doesn’t quite work, now does it?

 

Hey! You! Time to GIVE!

Omaha Gives! starts tonight at midnight (the Tuesday/Wednesday midnight) and then runs for the next 24 hours.

It is a day set aside to give to your favorite local charities, and then Omaha Gives! supports them with prizes, etc. etc. Very, very good cause.

So lots of folks have their favorite charities, and we have ours:

The Kamie K. Preston Hereditary Cancer Foundation.

To get an idea what the Hereditary Cancer Foundation does, take a watch of “Angie’s Story”, and hear her thoughts on what the Hereditary Cancer Foundation does.

Through genetic testing, the gene that causes breast cancer can be identified and the patient can be treated before all the other problems arise.

As Angie says towards the end, had she known about it,

“…I definitely would have had genetic testing…and I would not have had to go through chemotherapy, I wouldn’t have had to go through all the other surgeries. Had I known about genetic testing, I’d be healthy right now.”

Please watch “Angie’s Story”, and then please click this link to go to the Hereditary Cancer Foundation’s Omaha Gives! page and give $10 or $20.

(Heck, you never clicked my Amazon.com links for Gaia’s sake, hows about you give to this good cause, and we’ll call it even?)

Then give yourself an attaboy in the comments.

Thanks and thanks for being involved in Omaha Gives!

 

Follow @LeavenworthSt on the Twitter
Like Leavenworth St. on The Facebook

31 comments

  1. Brandi Preston says:

    Thanks for the shout out, Sweeper! It means the world to be your fave Omaha Gives charity!!

    I must say it was pretty awesome to hear former VP Joe Biden talk about Lynch Syndrome and cancer genetic testing today at UNMC. There is no doubt, this is the future of cancer prevention, detection, and treatment!

    Thanks to genetic testing, prevention has been my cure – and I cannot think of any greater blessing. Thank you for sharing Angie’s story. She’s pretty inspirational. And lastly, thank you for helping me keep my mom’s legacy alive… it means more than you’ll ever know.

    Regardless of political party, when it comes to beating cancer, we’re all on the same team!

  2. Anonymous says:

    You scoff at:
    Walton notes that McCollister has been, “exercising his own independent judgment on hot-button issues as a member of the nonpartisan Legislature for four years.”

    Yet, one could imagine Walton lifting that very phrase directly from last Thursday’s Leavenworth St., when you heralded:
    “Republicans, on the other hand, broke ranks left and right, voting to sustain and override the Governor.”

    But the real dilemma remains: What about Seth Rich?

    • The Grundle King says:

      I don’t see a contradiction. It’s a hat-tip to the fact that, while the local media loves to point out when the Republicans vote party-line, they rarely (if ever) point to those instances when the Democrats vote party-line…because it’s a non-partisan legislature, dontchaknow.

      A person can appreciate a senator’s willingness and ability to vote in a way that doesn’t mirror party beliefs, but also point out that doing so…consistently…may have consequences. If the people of his district want a registered Republican voting like the Democrats, then they’ll surely re-elect him.

  3. Bluejay says:

    Omaha Gives is a great new project. I’m sure my friends here will join me in giving money to Prep. We alums know the money funds scholarships for needy students.

    • Abraham says:

      It will be interesting to see who in the Republican Party actually supports McCollister next year. Most people I know that campaigned for him in ’14 won’t have anything to do with him this time around. Although he may have enough name recognition that it will be tough to oust him given the average voter has no idea how he has voted on issues in the past few years.

      • Anonymous says:

        “the average voter has no idea how he has voted on issues in the past few years.”

        But you can be certain Richey Ricketts will do his best to define McCollister for those voters.
        Or more aptly put – Richey’s money will buy the allegiance of more seedy bands of minions with illusory origins who will go to work against McCollister (and Krist and Kolowski), crafting yet another squalid campaign of misinformation.
        The kind of campaigning that defines the modern Republican party.

        There is nothing Ricketts and company pursue that isn’t driven by the singular goal of enriching the most privileged and wealthy of our state.
        Ricketts and Smith released their ALEC inspired tax plan. Are you people incapable of reading, or is it comprehension that fails you?

        No matter how egregious the assault on their welfare, the rubes applaud, bend over and demand some more.

      • The Grundle King says:

        Ricketts this, Ricketts that…the boogeyman strikes again.

        Welcome to politics. McCollister’s record speaks for itself, and from a conservative standpoint, it speaks rather poorly. Granted, he’s got a long way to the left to go to catch Paul Schumacher, but he also doesn’t seem to mind going there. It’s not ‘misinformation’ to point to a senator’s voting record as evidence that he/she is not acting according to how they said they would.

      • Anonymous says:

        But you can be certain Richey Ricketts will do his best to define McCollister for those voters.

        Yes. That tactic worked for HRC real well didn’t it.

      • Anon says:

        How about we check the objective ratings of our state legislators by one of the right’s very own standard bearers – The American Conservative Union, the oldest conservative lobbying organization in the country, chaired by the one and only Matt Schlapp (rhymes with fap).
        The most recent ratings of published are for the 2016 session, for which the identical cacophony of WHINING about McCollister and his fellow ‘RINO’s’ occurred.
        Here’s a sampling the ACU scores for a handful of NEGOP names you’ll recognize (the higher the score, the “better”, i.e. more extreme) –
        Roy Baker – 50
        Larson – 50
        Lindstrom – 53
        Gloor – 57
        McCoy – 58
        Nicole Fox – 58
        Sheer – 58
        Shiliz – 58
        McCollister – 58
        Uber Winger Murante – 60
        ALEC’s own Jim Smith – 62

        The average score for the 2016 session – 58

        Yep – that McCollister, the former Executive Director of the Platte Institute, by golly he’s WAY OUT THERE IN LEFT FIELD!!!

      • The Grundle King says:

        Leftists supporting Republicans for being conservative.

        What a time to be alive.

  4. Anonymous says:

    The Unicameral is nonpartisan. Yet that doesn’t turn party members inside the Unicameral into nonpartisans any more than going to a booze party turns a married person single.

    Except Ernie, all State Senators are registered members of a party. Every party member on earth is obliged to give loyalty to their chosen party because they chose it, it didn’t choose them. They volunteered and took its influence, name, and money. They can quit, switch or become independent. But as long as they remain a party member, the party will assess their disloyalty as its member.

    McCollister thinks he owes his party nothing. But that’s not his decision.

    For example, let’s say McCollister brings a woman home and makes out with her in his bed next to his wife. But there is no penetration so McCollister figures he’s still okay with his marriage vows. His wife’s lawyer would make clear, however, that McCollister entered marriage voluntarily and thus his loyalty in her marriage bed is judged by her not by him. Parties are like a group marriage, thus you can multiply the weight of judgement of his party “wife” many times over against McCollister. — He chose to join his party. His Republican party judges him to be a worthless shit.

    Ebke changed to Libertarian rather than be loyal to the GOP. Brad switched to Democrat while he still had cred. They chose to leave their GOP with some dignity. McCollister is being divorced by his GOP because he’s a pompous guy who thinks he can have his cake and eat it too. Same applies to disloyal Democrats. The party makes that decision. And rightly so. Don’t like it? Quit.

  5. anon says:

    McCollister has a vote, and whatever he happens to represent is happy, but I wonder in his circle the buzz is about what a joke he is.. Seems like a no-brainer for Ricketts

  6. Lil Mac says:

    The melons in Lincoln seem to be the same as the melons in DC. They cannot tolerate reform. Ironically, both are nonpartisan and too partisan.

    Officially nonpartisan NE Unicameral is 98% party members, the same percentage as the ultra-partisan United States Senate. The House even more so.

    What is nonpartisan however in both local and national systems is a thin façade of cooperation over a deeper façade of partisan noncooperation, over a thick shared core of self-interest bound to cowardice that encourages each to seek to wield as much public power as possible while taking as little personal responsibility as possible. The latter is the viscous malarial liquid that nourishes such political melons.

    • Anonymous says:

      “The latter is the viscous malarial liquid that nourishes such political melons’ – You write like my cat vomits.

      • Anon says:

        Spot on!

        Although, I’m not sure if the writing is more akin the actual act of vomiting, or to the often prolonged bout of heaving, retching and gagging that leads up to the concluding act.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Random observations about Trump’s budget:

    – No Congress has ever cared about a President’s proposed budget. This suggestion arrived on the Capital steps with a thud, like an unwanted phone book.

    – Its more than budget Obama proposed. Why?

    – The proposed budget is not in balance. Why?

    – The proposed budget is not part of a long range plan to reduce and eliminate the national debt. Again, why?

    – The defense portion of the budget is not about defense. It is about continuing an 80 year old jobs programming at state expense. Socialism, friends. Why are we tolerating this kind of socialist interference in the economy, the fruit of which is only 1 to 1.5 contractors for each major weapons system – ships, tanks, aircraft, missiles, light & heavy weapons, maintenance & logistics, radars & sensors, C^4I, you name it. Lack of competition stifles innovation and drives costs way, way up.

    – You have Republican senators and congresswomen/men in reliably conservative states pooping their pants over cutbacks to agriculture price supports & crop insurance, not to mention Medicare & Medicaid. Sorry, but if these politicians and their constituents can’t manage to do without they are no better than Reagan’s Welfare Queens. Can’t compete without government help? Tough rocks, you’re weak and you deserve to fail, but I digress.

    Trump is not a conservative. Hell, conservatives aren’t even conservative. When Pence takes office in January 2018 after Trump resigns or is impeached, he will have a Democratic majority in the House to work with. Swell.

    • The Grundle King says:

      “Sorry, but if these politicians and their constituents can’t manage to do without they are no better than Reagan’s Welfare Queens.”

      Actually, yes they are…because they’re out there trying to produce something that we all need and/or use. Do you not recognize the fact that the aid they receive in the form of insurance and subsidies keeps food and fuel prices low? Those artificially-reduced prices are a benefit to all, and especially for the low-income. If farmers had to price a product to account for all of the risks they face, on top of the cost of production and their labor, the products they bring to market would be SEVERAL times more expensive. Of course, we need willing buyers…and if the cost is too high for buyers, then there’s no one to sell to, meaning there’s little reason to produce, leading to reduced production. Sorry to all those 3rd world countries we export cheap/free ag products to…you get to starve now. Anonymous commenter says so.

      100 years ago, food accounted for about 40% of a family’s budget. Today, it’s well under half of that. If you wish to a return to those halcyon days, then by all means, let’s do away with such programs. Congrats…a whopping 13% of the $500 billion dollar, 5-year farm bill has been saved. Woot!

      • Anonymous says:

        That’s an old, interventionist argument. You sound like a socialist version of Earl Butz. Are your assumptions still true in the current economy? Maybe – maybe not. But I don’t appreciate the state taking money out of my own pocket for my own good. It is not the state’s job to prop up weak business people.

      • Anonymous says:

        Oh, this – “Congrats…a whopping 13% of the $500 billion dollar, 5-year farm bill has been saved” – the only way to save money is to stop spending it. No more free shit for farmers.

      • The Grundle King says:

        “No more free shit for farmers.”

        Um, they pay taxes, too…and I notice that you conveniently ignored where the other 87% goes.

        Come on…you can say it.

      • Anonymous says:

        But they don’t pay enough in taxes to offset their production costs. It’s out of balance. Too many corporate farmers are on the dole.

      • The Grundle King says:

        @Anon 4:05 – No free shit for anyone? Why do you hate poor people so much?! That’s not a rhetorical question.

        @Anon 5:06 – That may well be the case. I don’t know how the balance sheet works out on that…but again, if subsidies and crop insurance were eliminated completely, and farmers were able to charge AND receive a price for their product that accurately reflects their costs and risks, the balance sheet would obviously come out far better from a tax expenditure standpoint. BUT, would Americans be willing or able to pay the resulting prices on the goods? Sure, there are many who could afford to do so…but there are many who would not. I’m not an expert in this area, I freely admit…but I suspect that the 13% of $500b saved ($65b) would end up going right back into the SNAP program to make up for the increased costs…and it probably wouldn’t be enough.

        I also suspect there would be a sizeable ‘correction’ in ag production, where outputs would be cut significantly. As I pointed out before, we send a lot of free food overseas to aid struggling, developing nations. Sure, we’d save some money here…but people will starve to death overseas. I mean…if folks are fine with that, then so be it. As heartless as I can seem at times, I can’t stomach the idea of kids starving to death (pun seriously not intended).

  8. Yep says:

    Breaking –
    Democratic candidates flip two Republican Congressional districts that voted big for Donald Trump.

    It begins.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.