Kansas GOP Insider (wannabe)

Friday, July 29, 2016

Is Dr. Marshall Pro Abortion? This Clinic PAC Says Yes then NO.

Update: Minutes after creating this post, the link was broken and a new voter guide appeared at the Trust Women website. The new guide calls Marshall, "anti-choice." Below, you'll find a screenshot of the previous voter guide. I also managed to track down the original download. Here is a link to the original. (It's a link I made of a download. So it's a copy of what I initially saw.)

The original link was at http://www.itrustwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/2016-Trust-Women-Primary-Voter-Guide.pdf. 

The second link (now dead) simply added a '1.' 

http://www.itrustwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/2016-Trust-Women-Primary-Voter-Guide1.pdf. The second link called Marshall, "anti-choice."  

There is no longer any mention of a Trust Women voter guide (that I can find) on the organization's website. 

I guess it's possible that Trust Women made a huge mistake the first time, corrected it a second time and then took it down when they realized that most Kansas voters are revolted by pro abortion candidates, and the group's endorsements were damaging the candidates they intended to help. It's also possible, but I think unlikely that some campaign, campaign staff, or supporters somehow hacked and doctored that organization's website to spread false information. I doubt it and here's why: I saw the links live on the Trust Women website. That's quite a hack job, and it would require more than just Photoshop skills.

Second, to my knowledge, Trust Women has issued no press releases explaining either their mistake in calling Marshall 'pro-choice' or reason for changing the voter guide and then deleting it.

At this late hour in intense campaigns, it's very difficult to separate fact from fiction. I do  my best. Perhaps I got it all wrong, but I really don't think so.

You'll have to make that determination on your own.

Dear Pro-Life Voters in the Big 1st--

According to Trust Women, a PAC connected to the clinic that was once Kansas' most notorious third-trimester abortion house of horrors, physician Roger Marshall is NOT pro life.

Marshall campaigns otherwise. On a campaign website, Marshall lists himself as a staunchly pro-life candidate who "will oppose any efforts ever to use taxpayer funding for abortions."

That's not the story Trust Women is selling. The clinic's foundation, according to its website is a "leading pro-choice and reproductive justice foundation based in Wichita, Kansas." It's "about us" section is signed by Dr. Julie Burkhard, the abortion provider who replaced the late Dr. George Tiller. 

The organization boasts a network of physicians across the country willing to perform abortions. 

"Many clinics in smaller or hostile markets rely on doctors who travel to clinics to provide care...We help clinics and physicians fight legal challenges, provide them with messaging, communications and advertising support and help with administrative staff support... We use a door-to-door program to identify supporters in our area. One of our biggest challenges is finding new voices in these communities. Face-to-face outreach is the most effective way to garner new support...we create and implement a community outreach through events, phone banking and canvassing in all the communities in which we do work." 

Handily, the Clinic PAC has created a voter guide so voters can choose the candidates most likely to continue the vile practice of ripping innocents from their mothers' wombs. 

There's an awful lot to swallow in this voter guide. First, the guide describes other organizations it uses to craft its voter guide.

So about Kansas National Education Association--you know, that lovely organization dedicated to THE CHILDREN? The abortion foundation says, "KNEA is typically aligned with Trust Women and the pro-choice stance." 

Conservatives have always known this fact, but it's nice to see someone actually admit it. They're for educating children, but ONLY the children who make it through the birth canal intact. Noted.

Second, and of critical importance to Big First voters, the PAC lists Obstetrician Dr. Roger Marshall as "pro-choice." Seriously, it's right there in bold letters. Don't take my word for it. You can read the entire thing here for yourself.

As you do that, please Big First voters, consider that in Congressman Tim Huelskamp, you have a proven pro-life conservative. In Roger Marshall, you have a guy who says he's pro-life, and a PAC dedicated to increasing access to abortions--a PAC that specifically works with doctors--calling Marshall, "pro-choice."

This late in the game, it's difficult to know who and what to trust. You've got one candidate you know you can trust on this issue, and a question mark. Mark your ballots accordingly.

Thoughts on KS JoCo House Campaign Finance Reports

Looking through Kansas House campaign finance reports, I’m mostly just confused.

Honestly, the big money in the Johnson County races appears to be related to liquor laws, construction, and of course, the Kansas NEA—teachers union, donated to quite a few races. The teachers and contractors are big government types. If you see KNEA or the Heavy Contractors or a lot of construction companies listed on a campaign finance report, you can bet these folks are supporting massive tax increases.

The liquor money is trickier. HyVee donated quite a bit this cycle. The grocery chain, based in Iowa, wants to sell liquor in its stores. UnCork is advocating for looser liquor laws as well. Meanwhile, groups like the Association for Liquor Laws are advocating for the status quo. These donors didn’t appear to donate along ideological lines. Craig McPherson and Mitra Templin don’t strike me as birds of a feather.

One thing almost all media is ignoring in its coverage of the political race for cash is that money raised this period is only part of the picture. So, while Yael and others are reporting that challengers or so-called moderates are winning the campaign finance race, he ignores that most incumbents started with substantial war chests. Take for example the race in the 8th District. The seat is currently held by Craig McPherson. He raised more than $4,300 this period while his primary challenger Patty Markley raised $22,700. At first glance, it looks like she outraised him almost 4-to-1. In reality, McPherson started with $28,000. Perhaps he spent more time campaigning and a lot less time attempting to raise money this period than Markley did.

You can read campaign finance reports for yourself here.

Of interest:
  •  Of Johnson County House incumbents, Erin Davis raised more than anyone else. She was outraised this period by quite a few challengers in other districts. In her own race for the 15th District, she outraised her opponents by a healthy amount.
  • In the 43rd District, my home district, the challenger Don Roberts raised a ton of money from very few donors. Specifically, he raised almost $15,000 from a variety of addresses for Riley Entertainment. This outfit owns sports bars and pubs. Most notably in the JO, they own Saints bars. Overall, he raised $22,000 this period to add to the $15,000 he raised in the prior period. That’s an awful lot of money for my little district in the poorest part of Johnson County. I can’t help but wonder what on earth they want. I do not trust this filing. I do not trust this candidate. That said, I’m not voting for the other guy either. When you hang with a bunch of people who literally brag about shooting stray, friendly dogs that wander into their yards, sorry, I just can’t. There's a lot more to it than that, but not all of it is fit for publication! Bill Sutton, the incumbent, raised $4,900 this filing period and started with $4,600. Though he’s been outspent and out raised, I still think Sutton wins. Whichever candidate takes the race will do it without my vote.
  •  Owen Donohoe, a former state Representative challenging incumbent Charles Macheers in the 39th District , appears to be self-financing. Donohoe has written checks worth $20,000 to his own campaign.  Macheers started with $18,000 and raised $8,100 this filing period. There’s a third candidate in this race; it’s one of those teacher-y, spend-more-money types. She raised more than $10,000.
  •  Off topic, but I can’t believe Republicans couldn’t find someone to run against Nancy Lusk, a Democrat running unopposed in the 22nd.
  •  It doesn’t cost much to be a player in Kansas politics. If you’re a private individual looking to buy access, I recommend donating $200 to 5 candidates per cycle. That’s $1,000 every two years, or $500 per year.

Stop Telling Girls They Need Hillary to Follow Their Dreams

Moms, if your daughter didn't think she could be President before Hillary Clinton won the Democrat nomination, you're doing it wrong. That's your fault.

It took me a few days to put my finger on why all of the "glass ceiling shattered" posts just rubbed me so wrong. And I woke up with the answer this morning: Parents, it's your job to raise strong, confident sons and daughters.

When I was a kid, a biracial child in Kansas in the early 1980s, I told people I was going to be President. I haven't wanted the job since about third grade, but as a woman and a  minority, it never crossed my mind that I couldn't be anything I wanted to be, including President of the United States. I understood that becoming President meant working hard, getting good grades, and chasing my dreams. What other people thought I could do or couldn't do never entered the equation. 

If you're telling your kids they have to wait until society or someone gives them permission, you're raising a child who probably isn't equipped to become President in the first place. 

And all of these posts and the commentary about the glass ceiling being shattered are telling children that they somehow need everyone else's permission to follow their dreams. 

We should be telling our children they can be anything they want to be if they put their minds to it and work hard. And when they are discouraged, we should tell them there will be set backs, but keep working at it. 

It's lovely to have a mentor or to see your dreams in action in someone else. However, there might not be a mentor at the top of the ladder offering you a hand, and that's OK. You can make your way up the ladder yourself, especially when you know you've got friends and family and supporters cheering you on down below.