Advertisement

Archive for Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Critical vote

Elections offer opportunity to rein in President Obama’s agenda of change.

October 27, 2010

Advertisement

Every election for public officeholders is an important event, whether for a school board position, county commission, state or national office.

The outcome of those elections can have important and significant consequences.

The Journal-World believes next Tuesday’s elections are particularly important because of the role those elected to the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives can play during the Obama presidency.

Those elected to national offices have the opportunity to support or oppose the policies or edicts of the president. Obama has said he is intent on making “fundamental changes” in our country and he has followed through in his commitment with massive changes that affect millions of Americans and their lifestyles. His administration also has created a record debt that will negatively affect future generations.

In most elections, citizens are urged to judge each candidate on his or her own credentials, not on whether they are seeking office as a Democrat, Republican or independent.

In this election, however, due to Obama’s extremely serious and damaging actions and policies, it is the opinion of the Journal-World that it is in the best interest of the country to vote against any candidates who would strengthen and enhance the Obama agenda. This includes not only candidates for national office, but also key positions in state government that can sway national policies.

The next two years are critical for the United States. If Obama is able to jam through more damaging legislation and place more individuals in his hip pocket by providing federal funds and/or assistance in one form or another, he increases the chances for his re-election in 2012. That would be a disaster for the United States.

The Journal-World urges the election of Rep. Jerry Moran to the U.S. Senate. Moran has represented Kansas well during his tenure in the House and has earned election to the Senate on his personal merit; the fact that he is a Republican only makes him a more attractive candidate in this election. The Journal-World also urges the election of Republican Kevin Yoder to the U.S. House to provide another GOP voice in that chamber, and also retaining the Republican voice of Rep. Lynn Jenkins.

Both these individuals are honest, smart and knowledgeable and will do a good job in representing the wishes of the majority of Kansans.

The Journal-World also endorses Sam Brownback for governor. As governor, Brownback, who is stepping down as a U.S. senator, can also play a part in opposing the dangerous policies of the Obama administration.

The state’s attorney general likewise has influence in helping or hindering a president’s agenda. The Journal-World likes both candidates for this position, Democrat Steve Six and Republican Derek Schmidt. Six is a native of Lawrence and son of Fred Six, a distinguished former judge of the Kansas Supreme Court. Schmidt, of Independence, is recognized as a leading member of the Kansas Senate. Both men have compiled good records but Six, as a Democrat, may be more inclined to support Obama.

There will be those who say this approach to endorsing candidates is wrong and arbitrary, and maybe they’re correct. However, this country cannot afford a second term for Obama. His efforts during the next two years, during which he could force whatever he wants down the throat of the country, mislead citizens, weaken the nation and take away guaranteed freedoms, must be stunted.

lll

There are, of course, other election races on local ballots.

The Journal-World favors the re-election of Rep. Tom Sloan to the Kansas House. He has served his constituents and the state well.

And the question of whether to approve a tax increase to pay for a public library expansion has generated considerable interest.

A good library is an important asset for a community, and Lawrence should have a good, up-to-date library. However, there is reason to question the timing of this project, the location, the use of funds, and whether other interests have played a role in this effort.

The Journal-World has always supported library efforts, but in this case does not favor the particular proposal and the tax hike to finance it.

Be sure to vote!

Comments

WilburM 3 years, 10 months ago

Dolph strikes. How is a vote on Steve Six in any way a referendum on the President? How about a referendum on 3 years of service and an actual record (and a good one) as sitting Attorney General.

And nice public-regarding choice re not funding an over-stretched library.

0

texburgh 3 years, 10 months ago

"His administration also has created a record debt that will negatively affect future generations."

And the more than $1 TRILLION spent on a war created by REPUBLICAN George W. Bush had no impact on the deficit? At least the Obama stimulus plan is spending in America on infrastructure and education. Subsequent posters I am sure will demonstrate their ignorance and allegiance to Dolph by blaming Obama for Bush's bailouts but the truth is the truth whether Dolph wants you to believe it or not.

The partisan hackery, lying, and BS of Dolph's LJW are exactly why I dumped my subscription years ago and why I dumped Sunflower Broadband as well.

0

grimpeur 3 years, 10 months ago

"His administration also has created a record debt that will negatively affect future generations."

The author is a liar. This column is full of deliberate lies of omission, and lacks a single example to back up the author's claim.

Carry on.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

Keep those blinders firmly fixed, and enjoy another tall glass of kool-aid, grimpy.

0

salad 3 years, 10 months ago

Hi pot! I'm a kettle....you're black.

0

gogogirl 3 years, 10 months ago

When you were composing your biased and hateful "editorial," you forgot to endorse the sterling virtues of Chris Kobach. What is the matter? Is he just a bit too much dead sea fruit for even you to chew on? BTW - what kind of great plan have you and your Republican buddies come up with to ease the recession and get people back to work? I have not heard of one yet. At least, President Obama is trying to do something and not just cave in to the "status quo mess' left to us by George Bush. You should read up on history- your kind of thinking went out with Herbert Hoover (who also left a big mess when he was succeeded by FDR).

0

avoice 3 years, 10 months ago

While this editorial is very strong and very pointed, there is no hate here. Editorials are, by definition, biased. You can disagree and counter the points made, but please do not reduce yet another valuable debate opportunity to a 6th-grade-level "my feelings are hurt by this" argument.

0

greenstrings 3 years, 10 months ago

"valuable debate opportunity"

That's good for a laugh! How about this...

"If Obama is able to jam through more damaging legislation and place more individuals in his hip pocket by providing federal funds and/or assistance in one form or another, he increases the chances for his re-election in 2012. That would be a disaster for the United States."

So that comment is not hateful? I must be crying to much to think straight then! Albeit, the part about receiving support by assisting those in need with federal funding, and thusly, getting there support in return is potentially true. But is it not true for anyone elected? This is some fear mongering hate right here, better believe it. Calling it a "disaster for the United States" is a hateful comment when no good reasons are provided to back it. I'm sick of this mindset. It's not worthy of debate, it's pathetic political support tactics. And many people are sick of it. How is this even remotely effective to build favoritism for an anti-Obama movement? It's pure gibberish straight from the mouth of nonsense approaches that put a hindrance on progressive thinking. I sure don't want those types of influences running our country. Maybe you do, too bad so sad.

0

cato_the_elder 3 years, 10 months ago

Steve Six has done an exemplary job in handling issues that affect Kansans directly, and deserves re-election. Since he is a Democrat, he may be tainted by the image of Obama, as many other red-state Democrats have been (e.g., the Senate race in West Virginia), but that should not blind voters to the fact that he has erased the memory of his disgraced Democrat predecessor and has accomplished much good for the state he serves.

0

somedude20 3 years, 10 months ago

LJW WTF? Tom Shesomething always says that you are ultra lib so why you hatin this A.M? Tom, buddy, please tell the (almost always right LJW) to get back to the liberal agenda that you seem to think they have! "Obama’s extremely serious and damaging actions and policies" It just came to me Tom She(something) works for the paper and wrote this...tomfoolery

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

Good editorial. One thing he didn't mention was the importance of elections for state offices to the upcoming redistricting (which may not be as important here in Kansas as in some other states).

0

meggers 3 years, 10 months ago

I see Glenn Beck has a fan at the LJW. So much for journalistic integrity.

0

salad 3 years, 10 months ago

"due to Obama’s extremely serious and damaging actions and policies,"

Right........cause it would be better if we were in a repeat of the Great Depression. Oh yeah, and those poor insurance companies have every right to make a fat profit off collecting sky-rocketing premiums and then denying our claims. Heck, they shouldn't even have regulations, since they're only weeding out the old, sick, and weak among us, right? I also forgot how awesomely AWESOME the giant tax cuts to the rich have worked at creating all these jobs the past eight years and expanding the middle class. We should do that stuff again, except with some tea-party CRAZY thrown in to make it really really work.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 10 months ago

Sadly, the stupidity and ignorance displayed in this column will likely prevail in the coming elections.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

Happily, the stupidity and ignorance displayed by the liberal whining posted to this message board will be irrelevant in the upcoming elections.

There, fixed that for you.

0

greenstrings 3 years, 10 months ago

I'm not a liberal and believe just_another_bozo to be right on point. It would not bother me one bit to see Obama's agenda slowed, although i would prefer to see it in action given more time. I would love to see all these magnificent changes that the anti-Obama movement brings. Just can't wait....oh yea....what are those again?

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

If they do nothing more than reverse the damage already done by Obama, it's a step in the right direction. Heck, even if all they do is keep him from making it any worse, it's still a step in the right direction.

0

greenstrings 3 years, 10 months ago

That is an unfortunate mindset displayed. The idea of damage done? When did making efforts and pushing through legislation to better a country, not just democrats, but a country, become a step in the wrong direction. The notion that anti-Obama is the way to succeed is quite rediculous and becoming redundant banter.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

"The notion that anti-Obama is the way to succeed is quite rediculous and becoming redundant banter."

As is your belief that's he's done anything whatsoever to "better a country".

Oh, I'm sure he means well. I'm not one that really believes he's the anti-christ, and I do believe that Democrats, just as Republicans, really want what's best, disagreeing only on what constitutes the "best" and/or the means to get there.

So what?

If my eight year old daughter wants to help daddy out with the cooking, and starts a camp fire in her bedroom to roast some hot dogs, she means well. But you know what? I really don't have to have a better menu plan for dinner to know it's probably a bad idea to give her more time to see how things turn out, and probably a good idea to put out the fire and prevent her from starting any more.

0

greenstrings 3 years, 10 months ago

Wow! I am coming to find you like to point to examples to back your thoughts. I once had a friend whom did this often. Obama is standing up for change to better a nation. Here is now my time for a example to better my opinion.

Let's say I am taking my dog for a walk to get him exercise. A good agenda to do. Suppose my dog goes to the bathroom on someone else's lawn. And I do not pick up my dogs leftovers. So they come outside yelling and screaming at me. When in all actuality my plan was to go home and get my pick up bags for the dog, come back, and alleviate the mess. It is easy to say that the intentions of someone are to "ruin the lawn" when it takes time to make things happen. What should the dog owner do? Flip the bird to the person, pick up the leftovers, then come back later and smear them on there car windshield? I do appreciate the attempt to put things in perspective through that of life comparisons, but it's kind of easy to do it and have it be twisted in your favor. Maybe another avenue would better serve to get out the point. It's quite disappointing to use misconstrued tactics, much like the generic anti-Obama followers, to make a point on my point, resulting in a pointless debacle of nonsense. Trust in that I am a master of nonsense. Continue if you must, desperation is not working for the Jayhawks...oh wait your...notajayhawk....hardyharhar!

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

"It is easy to say that the intentions of someone are to "ruin the lawn" when it takes time to make things happen."

It would be nice to assume you'd have the common sense not to let your dog go on the same guy's lawn the next day - and the day after that - and the day after that - and/or remember to bring bags with you. If you keep doing the same thing, day after day after day after day, the guy probably has a legitimate gripe.

I never said I expected Obama to have all the world's - or even the country's - problems solved after 21 months. But he's been trying long enough to see what direction he's heading in and what methods he's using. So yes, the sooner he's stopped, the better for the country.

0

thelonious 3 years, 10 months ago

notajayhawk is a troll.....I suggest you all ignore him/her/whatever, it's the only way he/she/it will go away. I've tried to engage him/her/it in dialogue or exchange of ideas, but there is no point. So let's quit feeding him/her/it - as an example, he/she/it will almost certainly respond to this post with some long-winded, misquoted reply with things I have supposedly said, whatever. When he/she/it does, I am going to ignore it.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

Of course, in this particular case, "troll" is defined as anyone that doesn't buy thelonious' bullcrud.

But hey, he did get an A in microeconomics, so I'm really really really impressed.

(By the way, monk - did you have anything to say about the subject, or just about the commenter? You might want to actually look up the definition of "troll".)

0

greenstrings 3 years, 10 months ago

Sounds good, what exactly will be this new enlightenment brought upon on Tuesday? Oh yea, it's not being spoken of, very hush hush. Or is it only based on getting rid of Obama. Awesome platform dude, really convincing stuff. I'm excited to see how the ant-Obama movement carried out too! However, if the anti-Obama movement fails, I will refrain from taking on your mindset. I for one, apart from any political belief, will not stoop to these tactics. What a shameful display and representation for whom you believe to "better" this nation.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

"Or is it only based on getting rid of Obama."

As opposed, of course, to the Democrats' platform two years ago, which consisted of nothing more than getting rid of Bush - who wasn't even running. There are still Democrats campaigning on the 'The other guy is a Bush crony' platform.

0

greenstrings 3 years, 10 months ago

That is a very good point. And I would have to agree it is no better. I was sick of that when it was happening. I took the anti-Palin approach. Although Sara Palin did not do much to help her own situation. Not that Joe Biden is "the man" but an obvious poor choice was made when Mccain choose Palin. Bush downfalls were not too good. I think he was a decent Prsident, but failing to act with Katrina, that really hit me hard. And he lied to us to go to war. However, I have always said that it would have been a lot worse if they actually had WMD's! Rather a Pres lie than allow nukes to go off.

0

scott3460 3 years, 10 months ago

Actually I heard a rumor that you were storing WMD at your place. You'll understand if we just take the safe route and blow you off the map, right? Rather a Pres lie than allow nukes to go off, afterall.

0

greenstrings 3 years, 10 months ago

Yes, well spoken. Somethings are taken so far past the extreme resulting in tragic events. Just didnt know when to pull out...

0

scott3460 3 years, 10 months ago

Not really true.

President Obama and the Democrats ran on the platform of enacting health care reform, reform of the financial industry, encouraging investment in national infrastructure and changing the management of the economy to favor the middle class. You can hold an opinion that the actions taken were bad or misguided, but an honest person cannot seriously argue that the President and Congress ran on a platform of getting rid of bush. They ran on a platform of changing the right wing policies.

Now, after a two year campaign of obstruction, obfuscation and delay it appears (if the corporate media is to be believed) that the right wingers will be partially successful in halting progressive policy implementation. This LJW editorial perfectly demonstrates the right wing contribution to the political process at this point in our nation's history. Partisan interests and the interests of the corporate backers of the republican party trump the interests of the American people.

0

olddognewtrix 3 years, 10 months ago

This editorial is a primne example of biased and distorted thinking. It had to be written by Dolph Simons Jr.,or someone on staff trying to curry his favor . Steve Six is a great public servant deserving wide spread support over a professional politician.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

It's an opinion piece and a political endorsement. Duh.

0

Orwell 3 years, 10 months ago

You have this exactly backwards. If the law is held to be unconstitutional, it will be unconstitutional everywhere. Six recognized that any state's court challenge to health care reform would, if successful, apply to Kansas equally. By not joining the suits, Six merely saved Kansas taxpayers the expense of litigation.

0

greenstrings 3 years, 10 months ago

ObamaCare is not all bad in case you are unaware. I would be shocked if any government system could whip out perfect legislation over something so extensive. It is going to help reduce/control the cost of Medicaid by preventing the unnecessary treatments performed. The problem is with private insurance costing more money for employees and lots of people. So companies are not excited about it costing employees more to cover or pay for insurance cost. This coupled at a time when the price of medicine and care is so high. So the idea was to provide a "public option" that would potentially allow for greater competition amongst insurance providers by directly lowering the cost of services from healthcare providers. Insurance providers hate the idea of loosing revenue, like any business would, and counter this by hiking up prices. In my opinion a very weak response to helping a failing system of unnecessary treatment and too high cost in the first place. Politicians are worried about loosing there jobs over this and they need support from the lobbyist insurance providers. I actually think repealing this could be a good effort to better ObamaCare. Bottom line is that something needs to happen where the ultimate goal of providing healthcare for more Americans at an affordable cost is readily available and sustainable to all entities involved. Which is very difficult, but saying that the answer is to oust Obama, well, that's just ignorance. And a waste of time to find real solutions. At least they're trying to make things happen, instead of wasting our time on Earth bickering. ObamaCare will succeed and I believe it will succeed only when we have found a way to work together. Opposing views bring about the birth of new ideas, ideas that hopefully, we all prosper from.

0

greenstrings 3 years, 10 months ago

She also mentioned how the current system is unsustainable. Also that pre-existing conditions will not be denied, nor will people feel job-locked because of health care coverage. The idea is to reform the system and create a better one. When you take that quote out of context it looks good to serve your misguided purpose. Her intention was to inform people of more to be unveiled and see it in action when it's passed. Then the people can know more about the details and process so that the work can begin. I would probably say that with such a massive reform it will offer times of pain for many, and others great joy to see their child with a pre existing condition cared for. It is intended to make health care accessible for more Americans and improve the system into, as said by Pelosi "preventative care that does not cost through deductibles out of pocket".

I agree 100% that it is not perfect legislation. The concept of all Americans being required to have health care is probably not going to happen. It seems to be this legislation is a dog fight with insurance companies. Perhaps the bill should have been directed as Health Insurance Reform. But ya know it's stirring up discussion and were moving in a direction to improve the health care system.

Now that reform is happening Insurance Companies are frantically looking for ways to maintain their existing financial structure so that they continue to perform the only way they know how. Thus, they are passing on higher cost to companies and thus individuals. That is unfortunate considering the backers of this legislation claimed it would reduce costs, create accessibility, expand access, and so on. The change will not come easily or overnight, like I said, it's massive legislation. All paths to greatness get bumpy, and become challenged by outside elements. The issue is money and sadly the dollar is a cost of living we need to afford when paying for health care. Give this time, don't repeal, work together to improve and perfect. Not giving a chance to fully blossom could result in more trouble down the road. Heck, we can always go back to the way it is, but honestly, that's not for me.

0

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

If the requirement to purchase insurance is not enacted, then the bill loses one of it's basic purposes, and the idea that premiums will not rise too much because we have more young and healthy people in the pool will fail.

Given the massiveness of the bill, don't you find it somewhat odd that it doesn't require insurance companies not to raise rates too much, given that that is one of the basic goals of it?

0

greenstrings 3 years, 9 months ago

Yea, like I said, improve and perfect. They need to fix these things. That does not justify throwing it out completely and calling the Obama administration and supporters of Health Care Reform the ant-Christ. Bottom line is that I read an article yesterday about a young child receiving affordable medical care because now the pre-existing condition is covered. That child will live to have a chance at a better life now. That's far from being the anti-Christ or Hitler if you ask me. So it's working, it's not perfect, it has flaws, but the momentum must keep going. I think it is good to point out the current legislation flaws. But let's not focus on repeal, focus on improving the current legislation. The process has started, now we need to work out details, and finish strong. Improving health care for business's and people by taking control out of the hands of Insurance Companies is the ultimate goal. Check this out....http://www.speaker.gov/legislation/

0

greenstrings 3 years, 9 months ago

Do you mean like the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act in California?

0

salad 3 years, 10 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

0

jimmyjms 3 years, 10 months ago

Dear Journal-World: this is the straw that has final broken the camel's back.

"The company's goal is simple: to provide fair, accurate and honest information to the community in the quickest and most dependable manner."

What complete and utter BS.

I will be canceling my newspaper subscription and changing cable providers today.

Dolph, you should be ashamed, but we know you're not.

0

ronwell_dobbs 3 years, 10 months ago

Uh, perhaps you haven't been reading your subscription newspaper? Dolph couldn't care less if you find a new cable company.

As was stated above, editorials are supposed to take sides and provoke. This one certainly did that. However, if a newspaper goes for the simplistic endorsement of all candidates that oppose Obama then it really has cheapened its journalistic street cred.

Man up, Dolph and crew. Spend the extra few minutes to list out those for whom you agree and those for whom you do not agree. And while you list your agreement on their pro-rich taxes, please explain how you support their (oftentimes) crazy-ass positions on social issues.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

"I will be canceling my newspaper subscription and changing cable providers today."

Can we hope you'll also stop posting?

0

jimmyjms 3 years, 10 months ago

True, but Sunflower sucks, so I'll just make a clean sweep of things.

But seriously, LJW has zero journalistic integrity.

0

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

This is nothing but another right-wing shill piece from Dolph, coming from the same paper that twice supported Bush and actually believed that Sarah Palin was a good pick to potentially be a heartbeat away from the presidency. What an absolute joke.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

Still ranting about our former president, as usual. (Soon to be followed by yet another denial.)

0

scott3460 3 years, 10 months ago

As opposed to ranting about unknowable future indignities? Please!! The past is all any of us can rant about notajayhawk.

0

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

So just mentioning a former President qualifies as a rant? You really don't understand the meaning of the word "rant," now do you?

0

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

I have an etiquette question: Once the Republicans gain control of the House, how long must I wait before I start whining that they haven't fixed everything instantly? Can I do so immediately after the election as I've witnessed many doing around here after the last election, or must I actually wait until the very day they are sworn in? After all, I'd hate to whine and whine and whine all day every day like a true sore loser and it not be taken seriously.

0

scott3460 3 years, 10 months ago

I plan to begin January 31, 2011.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

"I have an etiquette question: Once the Republicans gain control of the House, how long must I wait before I start whining that they haven't fixed everything instantly?"

When did you stop?

0

NewbieGardener 3 years, 10 months ago

The Journal World does not represent the Lawrence population, as evidenced by this ridiculous editorial. Vote for Brownback, vote for coal. The only interesting endorsement is for the 'no' on the library tax, which I agree with. Perhaps the overwhelming majority of liberals and independents in Lawrence should start their own newspaper...one that doesn't sell out its local roots to large corporations in other states.

0

Flap Doodle 3 years, 10 months ago

To steal a phrase from a recent speech by Dear Leader, the democrats are going to be sitting in the back after the new congress is sworn it.

0

greenstrings 3 years, 10 months ago

Oh no you didnt! Maybe they have better vision and would like to help others see better!

0

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

Remember who you are asking to speak in specifics.

These are the people who believe our President wasn't born in the country and is a Muslim or the Anti-Christ, who on these boards refuse to call the President by name, instead using childish put downs like "Dear Leader," "Anointed One," "Weasel in Chief," etc..., and have made the claim that "Whites are without power now," all because of the election of one non-white man to office. This is who you want to speak in specifics about what they don't like.

Um, good luck with that.

0

greenstrings 3 years, 9 months ago

Abso-freakin-lutely! Right on!!!! Finally some truth and logic comes out!

0

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

You must know that you just proved my point, don't you?

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

Of course, bea, because you never showed anything but the utmost respect for his predecessor. How many sides of your mouth can you speak out of at once?

0

beatrice 3 years, 9 months ago

There is a wide gap between "utmost respect" and calling someone the Anti-Christ or your favorite, "weasel in chief." I'm glad I don't stoop to your level of daily childish name-calling.

0

Flap Doodle 3 years, 10 months ago

Speaking of voting: “Today the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association notified the Los Angeles Unified School District and the Los Angeles Board of Education today that, in abject ignorance of California state law, the political campaign of Senator Barbara Boxer has openly solicited teachers employed by LAUSD to urge their students to volunteer for her campaign. HJTA's letter to the school district urges LAUSD to immediately inform all its personnel, credentialed or otherwise, that it would be a clear violation of law for teachers to recruit their students on school property during school hours to volunteer for a specific political campaign. Pursuant to both case law and a specific provision of the California Education Code, what Boxer wants would leave LAUSD subject to both civil and potentially criminal sanctions. Common sense should also tell her that seeking public resources and classroom time from teachers to do her political bidding is just wrong. Barbara Boxer should know better…." See the letter at: http://www.flashreport.org/blog0a.php?postID=2010041210072414&post_offsetP=0&authID=2010041122500346

0

OzD 3 years, 10 months ago

"Obama’s extremely serious and damaging actions and policies"? This line might have more zing if it was more (or at all) specific. Other options that would have been better suited to the USA's situation would be a helpful part of the critique as well.

"His efforts during the next two years, during which he could force whatever he wants down the throat of the country, mislead citizens, weaken the nation and take away guaranteed freedoms, must be stunted." Um, again, could you be more specific? As for forcing whatever he wants down the throat of the country...a civics lesson may be due. He's the ELECTED head of the executive branch. He is not the head of the legislative branch nor judicial branch, that whole checks and balances thing. He was ELECTED to a four-year term by a majority of voters, and will face a job performance review in 2012. He does not possess super-powers, and is not entitled to serve as despot-in-chief for the rest of his life. If he is the worst thing to ever happen to the US, I'm guessing his employers will not be extending his contract. Some perspective, please (though yes, if he is going to be the ruin of our easily-destroyed-by-one-man country, opposing him 2010-12 would be a logical strategy).

Lastly, this unfocused, baby-having-a-tantrum approach to critiquing the president (who could use a good critiquing...but this op ed ain't it) makes me want to ask Dolph the following:

If John McCain had been elected in 2008...

What would be the unemployment rate right now? Please provide some figures to back up your estimate.

What would the size of the national debt right now. Suggestions on areas where more AND less might be spent than under the Obama administration are encouraged.

How many US troops would be in Iraq and Afghanistan now? Which countries not currently contributing to the effort in both places would have participated under Commander-in Chief McCain?

What efforts would have been made in the first two years of the McCain administration to deal with health care and entitlement costs?

My personal opinion is that this downturn would have made either candidate look like a lousy president, and a potential one-termer. There's not much I can think of that would have made our current situation considerably better OR worse with McCain instead of Obama, though I will admit I do like the pre-existing condition portion of the health care reform, and I had a fear during the election as to the influence of Randy Scheunemann, lobbyist for Georgia, on the McCain campaign, as really, two military conflicts at a time is plenty.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

"What would be the unemployment rate right now? Please provide some figures to back up your estimate."

Why don't you ask our president the same question? He's the one claiming it would have been worse if not for him, and he didn't provide you with any figures to back up his estimate. Yet you swallowed it all, hook, line, and sinker, without asking him to back up his claim that unemployment, the debt, etc., all would have been worse had he not been elected.

0

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

Non-partisan economists have concluded that we would be in worse trouble without the steps that were taken.

That's what the president refers to in order to "back up" his claim.

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 9 months ago

A theory that can not be proven or even tested.

0

jafs 3 years, 9 months ago

But that's what you think about all political analysis, pretty much, isn't it?

0

notajayhawk 3 years, 9 months ago

Is it a true statement or not, regardless of whether I think that about all political analysis? If it wasn't a true statement, then please explain how you are going to prove that the economy would be worse.

0

jafs 3 years, 9 months ago

I don't know.

I understand the idea that these things are not testable in a scientifically controlled double-blind study.

But I'm not sure that means we can't learn anything at all from watching politics and our economy.

And, your own statements are somewhat at odds with your philosophy, when you ascribe various positive outcomes to the Bush tax cuts.

0

OzD 3 years, 9 months ago

Um, I don't need to ask the president the same question, as the unemployment rate doesn't need to be assumed or devined at this point of his presidency...since it is actually known and calculated. The Bureau of Labor Statistics says it was 9.6% in September.

This disgruntled Republican (putting two wars on the country's credit card, Medicare Part D, sending everyone $300 checks saying it's the people's money, when it was actually a cash advance someone in our families will have to repay someday) is just tired of everyone talking about how Obama has ruined the country, as though McCain's election would have led to a balanced budget in 18 months, an unemployment rate of 5% by now, and a unicorn in every driveway. Neither candidate would have had the US "back to normal" by now, unless it really hadn't been the worst economic downturn since the Depression. So, once again, lets hear what would have been done differently that MAY have made things much better by now in a McCain administration.

As a percentage of GDP, federal expenditures went up from FY2001 to FY2009 18.2% to 24.7%. Federal revenue went down in the same period from 19.5% to 14.8%. Yes, we need to wrestle spending down (can we trim back the 6.5% to get us back to 2001 levels? It'd be a start). I just don't see how we can further reduce revenue from 14.8% and hope to ever get our books in order. How about we get spending down to the 17.5% range and revenue up to the 18.5% range for awhile?

Both parties are woefully short of senators and reps that could pass KU's Math 002 at the moment. I don't know that things are likely to improve much regardless of who controls each of the two houses. I'm cautiously optimistic that Rob Portman might be able to bring some basic numerical literacy to the Senate.

Just remember, it was the small government folks that passed Medicare Part D, unfunded, last time. Bashing Obama for cutting $500 billion from Medicare (a charge from the US Chamber of Commerce...when did they become such fans of the program?), and promising to root out fraud and waste and eliminate earmarks just isn't going to get the job done.

0

lllwll 3 years, 10 months ago

Blame the Bushes" Obama has left this country in total disgust.

0

ksb 3 years, 10 months ago

This editorial disappoints me.

0

jayhawklawrence 3 years, 10 months ago

These are sad times politically.

It is obvious that our health care system is broken but if you try to fix it you are labeled:

Pick one:

Left Wing Socialist Bolshevik Maoist Communist Satan Marxist Idiot

It is possible that Obama is one or more of these. I left out Alien Hybrid because Area 51 and Rosswell is still too controversial. But I have looked for a plug in the back of his neck.

The obvious sin of the Republicans is that they are liars and unrepentant of their mistakes in the past. Their ego still leaves them in denial that they are at least half of the problem in our government today.

Why would I still vote Republican? That is the question I am pondering. If only to restore balance in the Congress and lessen the dominance of one party over another because arguing idiots are better than idiots with too much power and too much of my money to spend.

It might be enough but I might not vote at all.

0

jayhawklawrence 3 years, 10 months ago

Recently, I asked a friend of mine from England who immigrated about his perspective on a number of issues in the US. His comment on public health care was interesting.

He said that his father waited 3 years on a waiting list to get an operation to save his life. One week before the letter with permission for the operation was received, he died. His brother is now on a list. He said, "Don't talk to me about health care." He explained that the incentive in a public health care program become economics. It is better to spend the money on a younger person than someone like his Dad.

So this is the negative side of the issue and it is real. But if we stop at this point and say we cannot come up with a viable system, then we accept failure because 50 million people have no health care, costs are increasing astronomically, and many more of us will lose to well funded lobbyists for gigantic companies with 100s of lawyers.

I believe we have to fix the problem and there has to be a way but solutions will only be found if we learn how to work together and stop the insane political fighting we are witnessing today. As long as we have partisan politics, this will only continue which is why I object to Dolph's columns most of the time.

It is simply more of the same partisanship. A lot of rhetoric and nothing of substance.

0

Thats_messed_up 3 years, 10 months ago

Can't wait till tuesday! Gotta get some beer, pay my 8.85% sales tax from the Democraps, and sit down and enjoy the Blowouts.
Imagine the Democruds are KU football and the Republicans are the team playing them...............................................................get the picture? lmao

0

llama726 3 years, 9 months ago

What a joke of an editorial. Do people think anyone cares who newspapers endorse?

0

irvan moore 3 years, 9 months ago

so this is a surprise that the journal world folks are capitalist pigs? (but i do appreciate the fact that you allow me to express my opinon on your forum)

0

jhawks360 3 years, 9 months ago

I have generally been impressed by the thoughtfulness of the LJWorld editorial board. I have also been a frequent critic of Dolph's Saturday KU-bash columns.

I'm going to assume that Dolph shoved this article 'down the throats' of the Editorial Board.

Either way, I'm disappointed. If this continues, I will (very regrettably) pull my subscription.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.