Skip to main content

Kudos to Nebraska!

I was born in Nebraska and lived there for 26 of my first 27 years. Throughout my time there, I saw that my political views were at odds with a large majority of the state. Even though I voted there every opportunity I had, there were some years where I thought to myself, "Is there even a point? I know there's probably a better chance of me winning the lottery than of the candidates and proposals I vote for of getting passed," but out of principle, did so anyway. So from an election perspective, I gladly left the state in 2008 in favor of the battleground state Ohio. No matter how contrasting Nebraska's politics have been to mine through the years, though, I have been rather impressed with some of their legislative moves over this past year.

In 2014, then Governor Dave Heineman decided to not join the Republican governor voter suppression parade and signed a bill to make voting easier for the state's residents.

Following the tragic death of Omaha police officer Kerrie Orozco, Omaha volunteers blocked off the protests of Westboro Baptist Church members at Orozco's funeral, so her friends and family could mourn in peace this past Tuesday.

Later in the week, the conservative Nebraska legislature overrode two of Governor Pete Ricketts' vetoes, one which banned the death penalty and another which allowed DREAMers to obtain driver's licenses. With these two moves, Nebraska became the first conservative state (states which voted Republican in each of the past two presidential elections) to ban the death penalty since North Dakota did it in 1973, a full 42 years ago, and became the 50th and final state to allow DREAMers to obtain driver's licenses.

Many of my conservative Nebraska friends may disagree with the state legislature's moves this past week, but I personally think it's nice to see both sides of the aisle coming together to pass such bills, think that's an encouraging sign, and like to see my former state, as conservative as it is, be able to pass progressive bills when the time calls for it.

Self-described liberals have long been opponents of the death penalty, largely due to claims that the practice can be categorized as cruel and unusual punishment and that the justice system, being as imperfect as it is, has led to innocents being killed by the state. Also, while a majority of Democrats believe that the death penalty isn't a deterrent to crime, more Republicans appear to be going down that road as well, not to mention more self-described conservatives are starting to see that maintaining the death penalty is a lot more costly than people realize and it'd save the state money to abolish the practice and replace it with life imprisonment without parole. It'll be interesting to see if other conservative-leaning states follow Nebraska's lead on this issue and if, before too terribly long, the death penalty becomes a thing of the past in the United States, like it's been with most other developed countries.

As far as the DREAMers bill is concerned, as the saying goes, I guess it was better late than never. While stubbornness is at times applauded, when Nebraska is the lone remaining state to not allow DREAMers to obtain driver's licenses, in conjunction with our country becoming more diverse by the day, that very stubbornness goes from being admired to disparaged. It was high time for the state to pass the bill.

For most of my 34 years, I've shook my head and rolled my eyes at legislative moves in my original home state of Nebraska, but over this past year, especially over the past week, the Cornhusker state has made me proud! Kudos to Nebraska!

http://www.omaha.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140331/NEWS/140339749/1707

http://www.inquisitr.com/2122866/westboro-baptist-church-protest-at-omaha-officer-kerrie-orozcos-funeral-doesnt-go-as-planned/

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/how-nebraska-banned-the-death-penalty/394271/

http://www.ketv.com/politics/dreamers-to-get-driver-licenses-as-lawmakers-override-governors-veto/33264600N

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...