Letters to the Editor

Editorial insult

November 7, 2010

Advertisement

To the editor:

The Nov. 4 Journal-World editorial was misinformed and insulting. Journal-World: “regardless of what the majority of citizens … may wish.” In polls, 40 percent of Americans support Republican policies, 43 percent Democratic policies. J-W: “House of Representatives with the GOP holding a strong majority.” The Democratic majority was 75 seats. The Republicans will be 45 or so. The Democrats’ majority was not enough to keep the party of “no” from emasculating many things they tried to do.

J-W: “Lawrence and its voters are off on another planet — not in the same constellation as the rest of the state or nation,” “a community that once had a bright future … has seen its best days as a thing of the past,” and “it may be too late to make any corrective actions.”

Your readership is primarily liberal. Don’t lecture us. “Off on another planet” is insulting, we are not out of step with half the nation (see above). That we are out of step with the rest of the state has long been a point of pride. Perhaps the editorial board of the Journal-World is out of step with its (declining) readership? We could say the J-W is a newspaper that once had a bright future becoming one that, by its actions, has seen its best days as a thing of the past.

Get in step with your readership. Or perhaps we need a more liberal newspaper in this town? To return the favor, what is the color of the sky in your world?

Comments

Daniel Dicks 4 years, 5 months ago

There were millions more voting in 2008, so were the voters of 2010 "out of step" with voters of 2008? In 2008 Douglas county went with the poular vote of the nation, so the rest of Kansas was wrong? The winning side always the right side? Three other larger Kansas Newspapers endorsed the Democrats running in Kansas, so is JW on another planet? How does this work exactly? Times flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana? But I guess everything makes sense in hypocrisy land. JW editorials are joke and not in tune with Lawrence. But that is just me believing my lying eyes.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"In polls, 40 percent of Americans support Republican policies, 43 percent Democratic policies."

The only poll that counted, however, was taken last Tuesday night.

How'd that turn out for the Democrats, BTW?

"The Republicans will be 45 or so."

CNN's latest projection (there's still a few in doubt) is 51 (and BTW, that should be "The Republicans' will be"). Quite a shift, the biggest since - when, again? In any event, the Republicans have (as the Democrats had) a comfortable majority that allows for a few members not voting with their party, they do not have (as the Democrats did not have) a veto-proof majority. Both pretty much in that middle range. Oh, with one exception:

"The Democrats’ majority was not enough to keep the party of “no” from emasculating many things they tried to do."

A 75 seat majority was quite sufficient to keep anyone from "emasculating" anything they tried to do. Provided, of course, they could agree among themselves. They couldn't. The Republicans had no power to stop the Democrats, Doug, they managed to "emasculate" themselves quite nicely without any help. The Republicans have shown themselves to be much better at party unity. That should more than make up for the slightly smaller margin.

"Your readership is primarily liberal."

So they should only tell you what you want to hear. Big surprise there.

"we are not out of step with half the nation (see above)"

I get a better idea: See below.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/results/main.results/#val=H

"That we are out of step with the rest of the state has long been a point of pride."

In this case, of course, "pride" meaning "pseudo-intellectual elitism".

"Get in step with your readership. Or perhaps we need a more liberal newspaper in this town?"

So that, again, you only have to hear what you want to hear.

Great letter, Doug. Enjoyed it.

sweatybutcher 4 years, 5 months ago

You said "pseudo-intellectual elitism"! That is funny.

justmytwocents 4 years, 5 months ago

You are missing the point of the letter. But you probably enjoyed the editorial. The fact that Lawrence votes differently should not be a disappointment to the LJW. The LJW editorialist is a typical Republican who throws cheap shots at his readers, which is stupid if he wants to stay in business, and doesn't seem to understand that in this country, we can all vote individually, and not as everyone else does.
And one more thing, I have Republican relatives and they are, well, uninformed and believe any unsubstaniated rhetoric thrown out there. why would I want to be them in the first place?
And in 2008, the voters in Douglas County voted Democratic, as did many in the nation. What does that say for the republicans in Douglas County then? Maybe if they had "gone with the flow" then, the Republicans wouldn't have fought tooth and nail for Obama to fail (which by the way, I dont think he has).

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"And in 2008, the voters in Douglas County voted Democratic, as did many in the nation."

A broken clock is still right twice a day.

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

All of the statistics stated in this letter and the replies above state to me that no party has a mandate. The fact that polls shifted to the minority party in a midterm election is something that happens every four years opposite a presidential election. The real message is that neither party has a clear advantage and is indicative of the vast schism in this country that has been present for well over a decade. However, I agree that the editorial is insulting. So this city is out of step "with the rest of the state". Nota wants to call the LTE "elitist" for being insulted. I say the editorial writer (of course there is no byline) is"elitist" for taking this city to task for being "out of step". They made it personal and that "personal" is insulting, victory crowing just one step short of school yard name calling. And obviously, as the editorial writer felt that he/she was coming from a position of power as the "winner", it was only two steps short of outright bullying. Personally, I want a "fair and balanced" newspaper that reports news rationally and without bias. I have had a belly full of Fox "fair and balanced" news and frankly this editorial would be perfectly at home there.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"Nota wants to call the LTE "elitist" for being insulted."

Nice try. Perhaps if you had looked at the sentence I quoted before calling him an elitist, it might have cleared things up a little for you. The LTE writers "pride" in voting differently than everyone else carries the clear implication that he, and the small minority that voted as he did, are the ones who got it 'right', that the people of Lawrence are superior to those in the rest of the state who don't agree with his views. And that HIS vote was based on personal preference and values, but everyone else just made a bad choice.

If you're going to take issue with what I said, please try to do based on what I said, not on what you think I said.

ignati5 4 years, 5 months ago

You are correct that the Demos may regain House majority in 2012. Although that result would please me, it would confirm a fickleness on the part of the electorate that precludes any type of meaningful legislation being passed in the near future. We need a party in power for several terms that can enact a consistent program, not the current game of musical chairs. Or, as in the case of the Eisenhower and even the Reagan administrations, a divided government with enough cooperation between the president and congress to achieve a modicum of change. Not likely under the current circumstances. BG

jafs 4 years, 5 months ago

Amen.

Any who are excited about these swings are missing the bigger picture, imho.

In order to make real progress as a nation, we need some stable, long-term policies that make sense, work, and reflect more of the nation as a whole, not just whatever small majority happens to win the latest election.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 5 months ago

In reality, economic policy has been relatively stable ever since Reagan. And that's why we are where we are. Stability is not a good thing if the policies are bad.

jafs 4 years, 5 months ago

Not sure that's true.

Also, that's why I said "that make sense, work".

I don't want bad stable policies either.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 5 months ago

Agreed. But economic policy since Reagan hasn't been based on what works or what makes sense. It's been based on what transfers wealth from the bottom 80% to the top 1%. And it's succeeded magnificently.

Dan Eyler 4 years, 5 months ago

Although, Kansas did vote republican for the most part in this past election cycle, and the Journal World, considers those who didn't out of step, I say this. With all of the economic problems in all sectors of the nation, none are more pronounced that those in liberal sectors of the nation. This cannot be blamed on George Bush or the Republicans. California, Michigan, Ohio, New York and Nevada are in extreme trouble. The failing economy hurts badly but the level of state spending and union control clearly demonstrate to a lot of us that this is not the path we should consider. Lawrence has the worst economy of any major city in our state and something we are doing is causing that. I look forward to new state leadership that focuses on a policy that drives business and investment in our state. I also look forward to a discussion about reducing taxes. Interestingly we have seen a little bounce in our tax revenues in Topeka, but for the most part it is only because of the 300 million we took in from our sales tax increase for the purpose of funding government services and some of the other from the stimulus spending that is going to dry up very soon leaving us with many suggesting we need additional tax increases to support government. Wont be so easy this time to support new taxes unless it comes from growth in business. That makes total sense to me.

mrf3114114 4 years, 5 months ago

Lawrence of course does not have the worst economy in the state. Why make up this stuff?

Rank of Kansas cities by unemployment Oct 2010: Liberal 4.7 Garden city 4.8 Manhattan 5.3 Hutchinson 5.7 Salina 5.8 Lawrence 5.9 Emporia 6.3 Topeka 7 Kansas City 7.1 Winfield 7.1 Pittsburg 7.8 Atchison 7.9 Wichita 8.2 Parsons 9 Coffeyville 10 Of the states you mentioned, California has a republican governor and has a state constitution that restricts revenue collection (Prop 13). It has in fact cut spending dramatically over the last 10 years or so. Michigan has a republican upper house and recently a republican governor. Ohio, has more registered republicans, has a republican senior senator, an almost evenly split congressional delegation, and during the last decade until 2006 it was completely dominated by republicans.Nevada has republican governor and one house and is republican in makeup as well.

It's true that the rust belt has a number of states that lean democrat and have high unemployment. This is a historical trend that began with the huge loss of manufacturing jobs overseas. Both red or purple states (Indiana and Ohio) as well as traditionally democratic (Michigan) fall into this category.

If you are arguing that state spending is the main cause of unemployment, Nevada and Alaska were 1 and 2 in deficits in 2009 and Nevada, Arizona, and Alaska were tops this year. Texas saw a 3.3 billion deficit in 2010, by far the largest ever in that state's history under an overwhelmingly republican government. Florida was not far behind.

What about poverty? States with most people below poverty line:# 1

1 Mississippi: 21.6%

2 Louisiana: 19.4%

3 New Mexico: 19.3%

4 District of Columbia: 18.9%

= 5 Arkansas: 17.9%
= 5 West Virginia: 17.9%

7 Kentucky: 17.4%

8 Texas: 16.6%

9 Alabama: 16.1%

10 South Carolina:

Income by state 40 New Mexico $43,028 $43,508 $41,452 $40,827 41 Louisiana $42,492 $43,733 $40,926 $37,943 42 South Carolina $42,442 $44,625 $43,329 $40,822 43 Montana $42,322 $43,654 $43,531 $38,629 44 Tennessee $41,725 $43,614 $42,367 $40,676 45 Oklahoma $41,664 $42,822 $41,567 $40,001 46 Alabama $40,489 $42,666 $40,554 $38,473 47 Kentucky $40,072 $41,538 $40,267 $38,466 48 Arkansas $37,823 $38,815 $38,134 $37,420 49 West Virginia $37,435 $37,989 $37,060 $37,227 50 Mississippi $36,646 $37,790 $36,338 $35,261

The point is not that these statistics are all the result of the current sitting governing bodies in these states. These are historical trends that span many years and many administrations. Why must people on the right make these silly accusations without any foundation and without even a modest attempt to address the complexities that factor into issues like this.

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

Those are way to many facts for them comprehend. You need to use smaller words and preferably write in crayon.

booyalab 4 years, 5 months ago

Isolated statistics prove nothing about something as complex as the state of an economy, especially the way you present those. How did your source define poverty? And what about the cost of living in your low income states? San Francisco and New York City have very high average income levels and obscenely high cost of living, thanks to very "progressive" economic regulations like rent control and open space policy. San Fransisco is so bad that people who work at basic and necessary jobs like nursing and law enforcement can't afford to live in the city and in many cases have to commute an hour or more.

mrf3114114 4 years, 5 months ago

Did you read my comment? My point was exactly that! You can't prove anything by the statistics without addressing the complexity. Jeez. At least read before commenting.

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

Folks in most communities would be financially responsible enough to prioritize needs, and expanding a library wouldn't make the top 5.

People are losing their homes, they're struggling with over-extended budgets and we've got far too many unemployed.

But, let's just ignore all that and make everyone pay to fix up the library anyway; because if it's not fixed immediately our city as we know it will be utterly destroyed.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

The repub clean up =

A. Clinton had to come and clean up after the Reagan/Bush home loan scandals against the Savings and Loan Institutions.

This fraud:

  1. Wiped out retirement plans connected to savings and loan institutions

  2. Put millions of formerly retired people back into the job market who were 60's and older. The job market at this time was no better than today.

  3. Taught millions how to appreciate Social Security and Medicare

B. Then Obama had to come in and clean up after a repeat performance by Bush/Cheney only on a much grander scale.

C. Jeb Bush defaulted on a $4.56 million loan from Broward Federal Savings in Sunrise, Florida. After federal regulators closed the S&L, the office building that Jeb used the $4.56 million to finance was reappraised by the regulators at $500,000, which Bush and his partners paid. The taxpayers had to pay back the remaining 4 million plus dollars.

D. In essence what we have is democrats cleaning up fraudulent financial disasters republicans leave behind and needing to create huge numbers of new employment for Americans who were screwed by republican party activity.

The problem is not a missing link verifying whether or not our stimulus money is creating new jobs. The problem lies within the republican party that which destroys families by the millions.

Again these white collar crimes under republican watch are teaching millions how to appreciate Social Security and Medicare under rather unpleasant circumstances. WE do not want to turn Social Security and Medicare over to white collar criminals.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

The USA voters were not very smart this election period. Republicans have not balanced a budget since Dwight D. Eisenhower with a democrat dominated house and senate.

Republicans have substantially destroyed our economy twice in the past 30 years which is operating more like a crime syndicate rather than sticking with sound economic policies.

These are about corporate and political fraud not sound economic polices:

  1. The Reagan/ Bush Savings and Loan Heist( millions out of work) "There

are several ways in which the Bush family plays into the Savings and Loan scandal, which involves not only many members of the Bush family but also many other politicians that are still in office and were part of the Bush Jr. administration.

Jeb Bush, George Bush Sr., and his son Neil Bush have all been implicated in the Savings and Loan Scandal, which cost American tax payers over $1.4 TRILLION dollars (note that this was about one quarter of our national debt").

The Reagan/Bush savings and loan heist was considered the largest theft in history at the time. George Herbert Walker Bush then took $1.4 trillion of taxpayers money to cover the theft. http://rationalrevolution0.tripod.com/war/bush_family_and_the_s.htm

  1. The Bush/Cheney Wall Street Bank Fraud on Consumers(millions out of work) Yes, substantial fraud was involved. For example, mortgage companies and banks used deceit to get people to take on mortgages when there was no possibility that the borrowers would be able to meet the payments. Not only was this fraud, but this fraud depended on government authorities(Bush admin) ignoring their regulatory responsibilities." http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2009/0709macewan.html

  2. Only 3 major Financial Institutions were at risk in spite of what we’re told ? "There were just a handful of institutions that were terribly weakened. AIG the insurer, Bank of America and Citigroup, Those three were clearly in very weakened form. Many of the other big banks simply were not. http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/10/good_billions_after_bad_one_year

Flap Doodle 4 years, 5 months ago

Woo hoo! Haven't seen this set of links in a couple of days! I'm sure everybody will read all that stuff this time.

kernal 4 years, 5 months ago

If I get Alzheimers, then I reckon I'll read Merrill's posts as I will have forgotten I already read or heard it before.

uncleandyt 4 years, 5 months ago

I'm too comfortable with my ignorance. I have no problem complaining about the unknown. I know what I like, and I like what I know. Don't go changin', to try to please me.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

Has anyone heard from merrill today? Seems like he should have been posting by now.

cato_the_elder 4 years, 5 months ago

A whole lotta liberal Democrat panties got in a bunch as the result of this election, and the letters and comments on this forum show it. Liberal Democrats cannot abide the fact that America is a center-right country in which liberal Democrats are found primarily in college and university communities and urban enclaves like Hyde Park in Chicago.

jafs 4 years, 5 months ago

Just as the Republicans did last time.

The winners always like the outcomes of elections, and the losers never do.

cato_the_elder 4 years, 5 months ago

Especially this time, when the "transforming" of America has been stopped dead in its tracks.

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

Enjoy it while it lasts Cato, cuz it ain't gonna last forever. Numbers don't lie and all the demographics show old white people, the conservative base, dying. Meanwhile we, the young, educated, "elite" are reproducing and so are our young, Latino and African-American allies. I feel like I've made this point over and over, yet none of the conservatives here or elsewhere have a response. Why is that I wonder?

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

I've got plenty of time, and more importantly, so do my children. Peace.

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

I've got plenty of time, and more importantly, so do my children. Peace.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"Meanwhile we, the young, educated, "elite" are reproducing"

Actually, birth rate is negatively correlated with education. Women with the least education reproduce the most.

But thanks for playing anyway.

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

But we still replace those that die and the younger and more educated you are, the more liberal you tend to be. Regardless, Latinos are the fastest growing demographic and they tend to see conservatives as racists who want to deport them all. Peace.

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

But the younger and better educated you are, the more liberal you are likely to be. Young, well educated people like myself are doing more than enough to replace the older, conservative population. The demographic that should strike fear into your heart Nota is the Latino one. So go ahead conservatives, keep race baiting on voter fraud and immigration reform. I'm sure that will work out for you in the long run.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

How old are you, anyway?

Have you given any thought to the fact that the Eisenhower era "older, conservative population" is gone? The Nixon era "older, conservative population"? To a large extent the Reagan era "older, conservative population"?

If these posts are any example, I wouldn't be making any grandiose claims to being better educated. Younger is self-evident.

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

Not sure why age has anything to do with an ability to understand demographic facts. Yes, of course old white people have always been dying. The difference is the people who are replacing them. Do you think it's purely coincidence that Harry Reid won 90% of the Hispanic vote against a woman that couldn't tell the difference between Hispanics and Asians, while she was speaking to a Latino student club? My age, and I'm pretty sure I'm a lot older than you think, are completely irrelevant. Numbers don't lie.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

Uh, oh, libra - I think you're right, numbers don't lie:

http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2010/nov/02/young-voters-give-nod-brownback/

"In the state’s gubernatorial race, Kids Voting students like their parents, would have elected Sam Brownback over Tom Holland by 4,975 votes to 3,601. In the attorney general’s race, Derek Schmidt would have been elected with 2,421 votes to Stephen Six’s 1,904."

If you're a lot older than I think, libra, you'd better watch out for those growing up behind you.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

Uh, oh, libra - got another little problem here with your 'better educated theory':

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/results/polls/#USH00p1

In the nationwide exit polls for the House, only post-grads and those without high school voted more for the Democrats (and the margin for post-grads was only 51-47). College grads, and those with any college at all, voted more for the Republicans. So while you might make an argument that the most-educated voted Democratic, the group they had the most in common with was the least-educated.

And it's true that younger voters favored the Democrats - up to the 30-and-up age groups. Every group from age 30 voted more for Republicans.

You might have a long wait, libra. Oh, wait - let's not forget the kids' poll. Why, by the time all those 30-and-up voters have kicked the bucket, those kids will be voting.

ignati5 4 years, 5 months ago

Although I think your characterization of the Demos' constituency is too narrow, I do agree that ours has been a "Center-right country" for at least the last 30 years - ironically, perhaps, since the Republican statist Nixon was turned out of office.The Obama administration might signal a turn to the center-left, but no more than that. The problem with the current GOP is that their personnel, and to a greater extent, their rhetoric, seems to be moving into territory occupied by the "right" in european countries. I doubt that all this big talk will translate into policy as long as conventional politicians like Boehner are at the wheel, and, if his leadership is rejected, we will see an insurgency that will destroy the party's chances to establish a new concensus altogether. BG

uncleandyt 4 years, 5 months ago

Them darn liberals, what with all their learnin' and book-smarts !!, They can't find the Center.

Jimo 4 years, 5 months ago

I, for one, look forward to further spit-in-your-face editorials describing how pathetic downtown is, poking fun at KU's football team, laughing without control when KU's basketball team falls short, and a week-long spread on "'Lawrence High' vs. 'Free State High': Which one is more stupid?" Surely such a newspaper can expect enthusiastic subscription increases and loyal advertising support?

Maybe this is ownership's psychiatric need to seem wise by going with the flow. I'd suggest they seek counseling for their unresolved juvenile pain.

Politics in Lawrence is barely distinguishable from politics elsewhere in the U.S. however stark the contrast with the rest of Kansas. I would anticipate an "arrogant Obama" to be planning his "Morning in America 2012" campaign while the Congressional freshman adjust from the Palin-ite isolation of modern politics (speak only to friendly audiences and press) to the rude awakening of fact that the GOP myth of 10 minus 2 plus 3 equals 0 is false, uncorrectable by specious, tell-em what they want to hear campaign slogans.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"Politics in Lawrence is barely distinguishable from politics elsewhere in the U.S. however stark the contrast with the rest of Kansas."

Uh huh.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/results/main.results/#val=H

George Lippencott 4 years, 5 months ago

Mr. Burger'

Please take a breath before you have a heart attack!

Mr_B9 4 years, 5 months ago

"The Nov. 4 Journal-World editorial was misinformed and insulting" Quite frankly, I feel insulted by everyone of you who was/were duped and wasted your votes on Obama's "Hope and Change". Then, turn around in the next election and voted for a straight liberal party line in Douglas County. Truth is in the pudding (you're out of step with the rest of the nation) and voters across the country just showed you what is clear. Your president doesn't get it and neither do you. I think the only reason anyone would take this article personally is because you are so grossly misinformed.
It is time for you liberals to wake the flock up and use this election as an example to point you in the right direction. It is clearly obvious you personally need some reform in your own beliefs. There is no need to leave your party as we do need checks and balances but good grief be informed when you vote and vote for what is right for all Americans instead of your own special interest pork filled agendas. Let me tell you a secret. There is no money tree folks and the reason voters voted the way they did is simply because this is our country not the political machines country. One more thing for you liberal loser cry babies. Go back and reread a huge portion of the recent posts and see just how hateful you were . Calling your opposition bigots, birthers, racist, etc. is a personal insult in its own right. Do you really have the audacity to slam the JW for simply stating the facts?

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

Pointing out that the documents Kobach wants to require aren't satisfactory to some on the question of Obama's birth place, is not the same as accusing a person of birtherism. It is pointing out the fact the documents Kobach wants to require aren't satisfactory to some, re. Obama.

Pointing out the fact that some on the right will resort to trickery, legal or otherwise, to discourage voters from certain segments of the population turning out, is not the same as calling someone a racist or a bigot. It is merely pointing out that some on the right will resort to trickery, legal or otherwise, to discourage voters from certain segments of the population from turning out.

See how this works? Merely pointing out facts, however unpleasant some may find them, is not the same as assigning motives to those who oppose said facts. I fully cop to the opinion that reading comprehension is clearly not a strong suit of those on the right, on this forum and elsewhere, though. I guess that makes me an "elitist."

Mr_B9 4 years, 5 months ago

Rikki, The only point you have made in your post is you think of yourself as an elitist. Go ahead, pat yourself on your back and while you are doing so I will give you something to ponder. It is obvious reading comprehension is not your strong suit and spinning others posts for your own agenda does not lend to smart posting. BTW, the only trickery, legal or otherwise has come directly from the liberal camp. Plain and simple. See how this works? With that said, if you want to self title maybe you should think of yourself as a "spinning elitist wordsmith".

camper 4 years, 5 months ago

The word elitist is getting thrown around here and seems to be the fashion of the day. Kool Aid is another one. LOL another. I always thought of an elitist as one who sits at a country club and sips a drink with an umbrella to stir it with, while maybe watching his old money rise and fall in the stock market. I guess people who read books are the elite nowdays.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"I guess people who read books are the elite nowdays."

No, but your comment to that effect demonstrates that you are one of the elitists people are referring to.

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

And what would that trickery be? Robo-calling voters with incorrect info? Posting fliers in minority neighborhoods with incorrect polling times and places? Phone jamming party headquarters to prevent GOTV efforts? Right, the liberals did all of that.

Here's some reading material for this beautiful Sunday afternoon. You may not like the sources, but they back it all up with links. I assume you'll be able to provide links to your assertions as well. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Vote2008/story?id=5963751&page=1

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/10/misinformation-fake-flyer-houston-black-vote

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/voter_suppression_incidents/

Of course none of this actually touches on the point of my post. Pointing out a fact is not the same thing as making an assertion. Even when the facts suck.

Mr_B9 4 years, 5 months ago

Rikki, We have already discussed the point of your original post and I stand tall on that. I could post opposing links to you all day long but I won't. If your sources are correct and there has been illegal activity concerning this election by either party then they shall be prosecuted and held accountable just like all American Citizens. I believe the laws of this country pertain to all and not some. Thanks for the links and I agree, it is a beautiful Sunday afternoon.

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

No you haven't addressed the point of my original post. Do you know the difference between stating a fact or making an assertion, not backed up by the facts or not?

Mr_B9 4 years, 5 months ago

Wow, how is it up on your high horse today Rikki? Are you having philosophical difficulties in determining the difference between my facts, assertions or opinions? If you need the facts spelled out for you I recommend you look up narcissism. I believe you will find that it is sometimes used to denote elitism. Did you not self title yourself an "elitist"? Tell you what I think. In my humble opinion I simply believe you're a young educated inexperienced woman that thinks she is smarter than the rest. As you grow into a more mature older woman you will find that you were not so smart and it will be a humbling moment for you and when that day happens you will reflect and remember me. One more thing, it is a FACT that money tree's are not real. Trust me......

libra101 4 years, 5 months ago

Huh? Me no understand. Mommy, why that man not answer my question?

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

You need mommy to explain a lot more than that to you, little one.

Bassetlover 4 years, 5 months ago

Mr. B9......Amen, Amen, Amen! Ditto, ditto, ditto a million times! I love you!!!

bruno2 4 years, 5 months ago

Facts, you want facts? Go on line and look up the budget deficit by administration in the last 100 years. Your right wing dandies sell the country down the river each time and the dems come in and clean up the mess and lower the deficit again. Talk about not voting in your own interest or belief!

camper 4 years, 5 months ago

I thought the editorial was insulting, because I felt that the writer lumped in "the American voters" all into one category who are disatisfied with President Obama's policies. In fact those policies were so watered down by trying to compromise with the Blue Dog democrats and Republicans that we basically did not get a chance to see if a stronger agenda could have happened and gotten to see if it helped.

Health care reform is being played out by the Republicans as a massive move toward socialism, when in reality only a few things were reformed like pre-existing conditions and extended dependent coverage. Little was done and really, the same insurance power holders are still in place, and arguably stronger. Obamacare = Socialism, give us a break.

The only fault I have with President Obama's first two years is: 1) He should have pushed harder for a public option and not have been willing to bend. Everything else should have been left alone. A public option could have been drafted on one piece of paper rather than thousands of pages of technical insurance and leagal jargon that few can even attempt to understand. 2) I know he promised it in his election, but I disagree with expanding efforts in Afghanistan. Both Iraq and Afghanistan are sunk costs, and no matter how much more money we throw into that pit, the more wasteful it is. Comparing this as wasted money is harsh. I leave out the worst.....cost in human suffering and lives. Other avenues should have been explored before dropping bombs.

Other than that, I do believe President is concerned about rising debt, but is aware that stimulus is necessary to maintain economic output until the private sector can recover. Much of the stimulus has gone to support state budgets the last two years. The TARP program is already yielding returns to taxpayers, and currently we are selling back about 1/3 of the GM stock, because ultimately the Gov wants to get out. Though the stock is going to be sold at a loss, we did get back something, we did help GM remain afloat and gave them a chance to recover, and it further proves that the US does not intend to socialize GM.

In my heart, I believe Obama is doing his best to weather us through the depression with the tools he has. He has been willing to compromise, but perhaps too much.

Should the Republicans win all 3 branches, I would not prefer it, but I'd give them a chance to try it and let it succeed or fail on it's results. Sad that Obama is trying to do the same, but is not really given the chance.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"Health care reform is being played out by the Republicans as a massive move toward socialism, when in reality only a few things were reformed like pre-existing conditions and extended dependent coverage."

Well, you know, there was this thing called an insurance mandate. Apparently you hadn't heard about that part.

"The TARP program is already yielding returns to taxpayers, and currently we are selling back about 1/3 of the GM stock, because ultimately the Gov wants to get out. Though the stock is going to be sold at a loss, we did get back something, we did help GM remain afloat and gave them a chance to recover, and it further proves that the US does not intend to socialize GM."

There was nothing in the TARP bill about buying up private industries. And you're right - we're going to lose money on what we gave to the car companies, while the banks and insurance companies (who have paid back substantially more of what was borrowed than GM or Chrysler) are actually on track to pay us back with a profit. And, um, BTW - while the government is selling its stock, is GM going to get back the stock the government gave to the unions?

camper 4 years, 5 months ago

OK Nota, you are right. There is that issue of the mandate. I don't particulary agree with the mandate. Thanks for reminding me.

This is all the more reason for my support of a public option. The key word is "option". The individual would have had a choice to go with a private insurance (via his/her employer or buying it), or deciding to join government provided insurance pool.

It seems that the Republicans, the insurance biz, and the blue puppy democrats were against this. They were looking after special interest, not for those seeking an alternative to private insurance which is quite expensive. If a mandate were imposed even if the puplic option were accepted, I would have had a reservation about that.

So regardless, health care premiums and deductibles are going to continue to rise if the trend of folks falling out of the health insurance pool increases. This is going to continue to put pressure on both employers and employees. The kind of pressure that ulimately leads to exporting jobs overseas and outsourcing.

President Obama recognizes this, and he wants to do something about it. In this case, he may have listened too much to the writers of the reform bill, and the other groups he tried to compromise with. But I sincerely believe his intent was to increase the insurance pool to increase coverage, lessen the burden on employers and employees, and make those who were without insurance the chance to pay into the system that would spread this burden out and relieve pressure from the employer provided insurance segment. To me this is not socialism, rather something that was pro-business. Believe me, I work for a company, and I see some pretty healthy bank wires each week that go out to our insurance provider....wondering what better uses could be done with this cash outflow.

As it stands, if one is paying 6,000 to 12,000 dollars a year on health insurance, it is serious time to think about shunning this insurance alltogether and putting it inot your savings account (even better if the FEDS made these savings tax deductible).

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"I don't particulary agree with the mandate."

Glad to hear it.

You do realize that without the mandate, the rest of the legislation completely unravels, don't you?

"As it stands, if one is paying 6,000 to 12,000 dollars a year on health insurance, it is serious time to think about shunning this insurance alltogether and putting it inot your savings account (even better if the FEDS made these savings tax deductible). "

Now you're on to something.

camper 4 years, 5 months ago

"You do realize that without the mandate, the rest of the legislation completely unravels, don't you?"

Nota, frankly it would take me about 4-years minimum to sit down and digest this document. With the length of it, there must be many sections that contradict one another. Whenever you see a legal document, an IRS document, A FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) document, be prepared for a long and grueling read. These things are written by smart people who just might be too smart for their own good. And they allow too many cooks in the kitchen.

The Democrats should have proposed a simplified bill that we Americans could actually understand. It could have been this simple.....honestly :

1) Health insurance companies cannot deny a person eligibility because of a pre-existing condition and cannot subject those with pre-existing conditions to exorbitant charges. 2) Dependents having coverage under a parent or legal guardian's plan can remain eligible until the age of twenty-six. 3) Those who do not have coverage may participate in a publicly provided insurance plan that will offer benefits similar to those provided by private insurance at competitive costs.

This bill was a failure because it was not presented in a simple manner. The intention was good, but unfortunately politics and "the cooks in the kitchen" made an already confusing industry even more confusing.

I am middle aged, and recently got prescribed my first set of glasses. I had the choice of reading through my insurance coverage plan to see how much I was covered. When the total bill turned out to be 150 bucks, I said "you know what, I'm just gonna pay you cash here". I'd rather pay that than have to read a boring insurance pamplet. Best 150 bucks I ever spent in my life.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

I actually agree, at least partly, with everything you said. I have been saying for a long time (and I forgive you for skipping over my posts if you have, a lot of people do) that it would have been better to pass a series of small, targeted pieces of legislation. If the health care bill was a novel, it would come in second on the list of longest ones (possibly number one - 'Remembrance of Things Past' was actually seven volumes published over 14 years).

And I blame that on Obama. I don't think he would have settled for a set of little fixes designed to address people's specific concerns. He wanted something 'historic'. Everything he does has to be 'historic'. (Personally, I'm tired of seeing news headlines like 'President Has Historic Bowel Movement'.)

Unfortunately, even if they cut out about 2500 of the 2600+ pages, you still can't have the pre-existing conditions provision without the mandate. At least, not without allowing the insurance companies to charge higher premiums. Of all the inter-dependencies in that monstrosity, those two are the most closely linked. If you make insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions without a mandate, then people will simply wait until they have a major illness or injury before buying insurance. And what you have then isn't even something you can call 'insurance' at all.

jafs 4 years, 5 months ago

All those who think that a small majority of Americans is equivalent to the entire nation are simply wrong, regardless of who makes up that majority.

When Obama won with about 60% of the vote, that didn't mean that the 40% who didn't vote for him are suddenly somehow not Americans, or that his win was "America speaking" or anything like that.

It simply meant that a smallish majority of those who voted voted for him.

As does this election.

Mr_B9 4 years, 5 months ago

Jafs, Good post and I get your point. Here is a curious fact for you. Out of all the legal Americans who could vote, only 23% voted for Obama and he won. Sure is a lot of power given by such a small majority. What does that say about our country? Well Jafs, I think its a tell-tale for those who don't vote. Meaning, I don't care about America and I am just to lazy to be informed. One thing is for sure, voting may be a privilege but it also requires responsibility. I guess gaining responsibility for some Americans is just to much to ask. What a shame.

ralphralph 4 years, 5 months ago

I'm thinking that more than a few of those 23% who did vote for Obama "don't care about America" and are "just too lazy to be informed." Just saying.

jafs 4 years, 5 months ago

Thanks.

I agree - when about 50% of the population who is eligible to vote doesn't do so, whoever wins the election is actually elected by a minority of the population, as you point out.

It is a shame that so many Americans feel it's not worth their time, or doesn't matter either way, or just don't care.

jafs 4 years, 5 months ago

Then vote for a third party candidate.

Not voting does nothing at all to affect the outcome of elections in whatever direction you might like to see that outcome.

Also, although the two parties are more similar than I'd like, and both are inevitably corrupted by money, there are some basic policy differences between them.

Vote for the slightly better one, or the lesser of two evils, etc.

Stu Clark 4 years, 5 months ago

People not voting give my vote more weight. Hard to be unhappy about that.

Notajay, your statements about the LTE's use of the word "pride" are ludicrous. You said in part: "The LTE writers "pride" in voting differently than everyone else carries the clear implication that he, and the small minority that voted as he did, are the ones who got it 'right', ...".

Well, of course he thinks that. If he did not, he would have voted diferently. It is not elitist for me to think that my choices are better than the alternatives. If it were, we would all be "elitists".

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"Well, of course he thinks that. If he did not, he would have voted diferently. It is not elitist for me to think that my choices are better than the alternatives."

Well, no.

You could have had the courtesy to quote my entire statement, instead of cutting it off where you did. it went on " ...that the people of Lawrence are superior to those in the rest of the state who don't agree with his views. And that HIS vote was based on personal preference and values, but everyone else just made a bad choice." The problem is the superiority implied, and the implication that he had valid reasons for voting as he did but the votes of those outside Lawrence were somehow less legitimate.

Everybody votes for the candidates they believe best represent their interests, values, preferences, and priorities. I do agree, incidentally, that the editorial was a tad on the harsh side, that the whole 'this used to be a nice little town' stuff was a little out there. But he was correct that the interests, values, preferences, and priorities of the majority of Lawrence voters are out of step with the rest of the state, and, to a large degree, with the rest of the country. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. But believing that somehow makes you superior and everyone else's reasons for voting were less valid than your own is an elitist attitude.

jafs 4 years, 5 months ago

Unless those who didn't vote would have voted as you did, in which case their voting would have helped you.

Either way, unless the vast majority of Americans vote, we can't even know what the majority of the country would choose.

camper 4 years, 5 months ago

CAclarks. The word elite is getting thrown around these days. It is the latest way to place a label on people.

"The label is an act of mental Laziness, for it is easy to stick a label onto someone. It is difficult and challenging to see this person in his/her uniqueness"----Anthony De Mello.

Melinda Black 4 years, 5 months ago

The Nov. 4th LJW editorial was really odd. Insulting your readership because we think for ourselves doesn't seem like a very smart business move. It's pretty sad that our local paper would rather run down the citizens than celebrate what makes this town such a gem.

The fact that Lawrence votes differently than the rest of Kansas doesn't mean our city doesn't have a bright future. I can't follow the logic of that statement. If anything, it shows that Lawrence continues to be a haven for Kansans that are perfectly OK with thinking for themselves. I'd say our streak of individualism bodes well for our future prosperity.

I do have to ask: if it bothers local conservatives that this town is liberal, why do you live here? Honestly, you should have zero trouble finding an uptight, uninteresting town filled with citizens that feel exactly the way you do. You are surrounded by an entire state filled with them.

jafs 4 years, 5 months ago

It's even stranger.

Folks who don't even live here feel compelled to read the paper and berate liberals who post on the stories.

I wouldn't choose to go find a mostly conservative town in KS, read their online newspaper, and berate the conservatives on their comments section.

Especially if I had such enmity and dislike for conservatives (as TS does for liberals) that they make me want to "hurl" or feel "sick".

dontcallmedan 4 years, 5 months ago

Check out The Financial Times. It is delivered daily by the Star delivery guys, and can often be had for frequent flyer miles. International outlook and it's not just about finance. And no pinhead Saturday column.

Flap Doodle 4 years, 5 months ago

Will the NYT tell you what's on sale at Checker's?

camper 4 years, 5 months ago

No snap, but you can google "Checkers Lawrence". From there you can drill into the sales and coupon page. Hope this helps.

camper 4 years, 5 months ago

The editorial was also hypocritical because it railed against President Obama's stimulus efforts. The following link shows cable companies that applied for stimulus money to expand operations. Scroll half-way down on the attached link. You will find none other than guess who. No kidding.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCwQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fiercebroadbandwireless.com%2Fspecial-reports%2Ffiber&ei=Gm_XTPOnCoXAnAfq743qCQ&usg=AFQjCNGt0oDCPXVI2lRmb81jAzYqPe50Jw

camper 4 years, 5 months ago

Bad link, but if you google Broadband Stimulus requests, you will find some interesting stuff. Further proof that those who complain about government handouts, are normally the 1st ones in line to grab the money. Fascinating that one of the harshest critics in this town and the one who wrote such an insulting editorial is applying for stimulus money. I won't say how much, but believe me, it is a lot.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"Further proof that those who complain about government handouts, are normally the 1st ones in line to grab the money."

The same argument was brought up about several Republican candidates applied for stimulus money. Sorry, I don't see that as hypocritical.

Let's say the guys at the frat house or dorm are going to start a beer tax. Everybody pays every week, and everybody gets to drink the beer. I object, because I think there's better things to spend money on, and because I don't drink beer. I get outvoted, and they're going to collect the money from me anyway as long as I live there.

Lemme' tell ya', I'm gonna' start drinking beer!

llama726 4 years, 5 months ago

I think that the principled stand is to oppose the spending itself, isn't it? If enough senators and representatives decide not to spend any of the money, it won't be used on projects, so why use it?

I get the logic. I get that it's practical to use it. I'm just asking why so few (if any) Republicans took a stand and refused to "waste" this money - it's admission that the money is valuable to their constituents in the form of those projects, in my opinion.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

"If enough senators and representatives decide not to spend any of the money, it won't be used on projects, so why use it?"

Would that that were the case. One constant in government spending is that once money is budgeted, it will get spent. If our representatives didn't ask for money to build some road in Kansas, you can bet your life that some representative in Wyoming or Alabama or Tennessee would have gladly spent it instead.

"it's admission that the money is valuable to their constituents in the form of those projects"

I don't think so at all. In my tongue-in-cheek example, I may have thought it better to use the money collected to buy a new computer, or a new big screen TV, or even to donate it to charity. Or I might have preferred they didn't collect the money at all, leaving more money in my and my fellow residents' pockets for books, or tuition, or car repairs, or medical expenses, or pizza. But if I get outvoted and they're going to take my money to buy beer, I'm gonna' drink beer. That isn't an endorsement of the wisdom of the expenditure, merely my taking back some of what they're collecting from me.

camper 4 years, 5 months ago

In fairness, it looks like a lot of broadband companies applied for stimulus (several hundred). So if sunflower did not, I suppose this would put them at a competitive disadvantage.

But no doubt, these funds will help them generate more revenue, expand coverage, employee people making these upgrades, and in the end increase shareholder wealth. God forbid, but is this an example of stimulus working? And working for a very harsh critic of stimulus who is nonetheless attempting to take advantage of the very same thing being criticized.

No matter how you slice it, this is just wrong.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

Folks, vote for who you want. Especially since, with the exception of a few county measures, nothing you vote on effects me personally very much. I may not agree with you, actually I almost always don't. But I do, believe it or not, respect your right to vote for the candidate that best represents your personal values and priorities. I don't think you're stupid, I don't assume you're uninformed (as a rule, anyway - there are a few ... ), I don't think you made a choice that was 'wrong' - it was the right choice for you.

Just please allow me, and the others - many, many others - who voted differently the same courtesy. Stop thinking you're the only ones with a clue, that you're the only ones who knew the facts, that you're the only ones that understood the issues. Really. Believe it or not, but other people are entirely capable of being at least as intelligent, just as well informed, and possessed of an equal degree of understanding of the issues as yourselves, and yet still reach a different conclusion and/or hold a different preference.

I have no problem with those who vote differently than I do. When I use the 'elitist' label, it's on those who espouse the belief that the difference makes them superior in some way, smarter, more insightful, better educated, what have you. To those people, you might want to entertain the possibility, however, that when an awful lot of other people are in disagreement with you, it just might be you that isn't getting it. A little parable - which happens to be true.

Many of you know (and others have astutely surmised) that I used to live in Connecticut. I was still living in that area when a 100 foot section of I-95N plunged 70 feet into the Mianus River. Most people have heard of that, many know that 3 people died in the 4 vehicles that dropped through the gap, two tractor-trailers and two passenger cars. What most people don't know is that the last two people died for nothing. The last vehicle to go into the river wasn't even on the bridge when the section collapsed.

Seems this young man in a BMW was flying up the shoulder past the two lanes of stopped traffic. Those who had already stopped tried frantically to wave him off, flag him down. According to witnesses, the driver gave them the proverbial one-fingered salute, and flew off the end of the bridge. True story.

This little tale is not meant to imply anything about everyone. But to those elitists to whom I referred, hey, you're driving your own car, drive how you want. But if everyone else is slamming on the brakes, you might want to pause and ask yourself if it's it really a situation in which you should feel pride for flipping them off and plunging wildly ahead.

John Clayton 4 years, 5 months ago

I'm sad to say that I chose losers across the board in this most recent election. If only Mr. Simons had given me a call to tell me who to vote for before the election, he obviously knows better than most people in our wonderful, failing town on the down side...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/83731368@N00/5147423077/

gphawk89 4 years, 5 months ago

"That we are out of step with the rest of the state has long been a point of pride."

How exactly does that make you proud? Proud just to be "different" from the rest of the state? That's fine. Or is it all about being "smarter" than the rest of the state? That's... well, that's just pathetic.

bruno2 4 years, 5 months ago

Since KS has been a laughingstock for many things (Westboro Baptist, pseudo-science standards, ad nauseum) I would agree with the LTE on the point of pride. It feels much better than shame.

notajayhawk 4 years, 5 months ago

For a start, and this would be a very small step, but something that I think is easily accomplished, stop identifying the candidates' party affiliation on the ballot. If you don't know the frikkin' name of the person you're voting for, you probably shouldn't be voting for him.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.