Comment history

Coalition of parents working to address underage drinking

Great, more moms who want to tell the rest of us how to raise THEIR kids to make good choices.

South Park had it right:

"We must blame them and cause a fuss before somebody thinks of blaming us!"

May 7, 2009 at 11:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

What would you more likely name your child?

"when you have one of the last two.. it gets annopying when people spell it wrong all the time."

How are people supposed to know that someones parents misspelled the name "Lisa". It's not Leasa or Lysa (the latter should be pronounced differently anyway), it's "Lisa".

If your parents give you a different spelling for a common name, that's not one's fault but theirs when people spell it correctly.

May 7, 2009 at 9:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

What would you more likely name your child?

I like the name "James" for a boy. I always have, though I'm not sure why. Maybe I'm just too big a Star Trek fan?

For a daughter, I really like the name "Artesia". I think it sounds nice, easy to spell, and unique without being weird.

May 7, 2009 at 8:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Gay marriage leaps ahead in Maine, New Hampshire

"Why must the right wingnuts always push the gay marriage issue into another territory?"

Because they have no argument otherwise.

May 7, 2009 at 8:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Right decision

The dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan was not purely intended to simply end the war.

After studying the issue of atomic weaponry in WW2, I think one could justify dropping the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, but not dropping the second one on Nagasaki. If you're goal is to make an enemy surrender, then you don't throw two knock out blows when just one would suffice. Had the United States just waited a few more days before dropping the second atomic bomb on Japan, or perhaps demanded the Japanese surrender or face more of the same, Japan might have surrendered then and there, without the need for further atomic bombs. If not, a second strike could be justified.

I should also point out that the original targets for the atomic attacks were places of deep cultural importance to the Japanese, such as Kyoto, their ancient capital. Fortunately someone Roosevelt/Truman administration who had visited Kyoto, vetoed the military's plans for such attacks. Make no mistake, the atomic attacks were originally planned to kill as many civilians as possible and strike at the deepest cultural senses of the Japanese people. They were an attempt to end the war to be sure, but end it through a last and final revenge strike against a hated enemy.

Dropping these bombs was additionally a strategic move against the Soviet Union, demonstrating the United States' military and scientific power. It was a multi-faceted decision.

Like most issues in history, this one is complex and has to be taken into context on a number of levels. It should not and can not be dismissed or justified with an off the cuff remark or sound bite.

April 28, 2009 at 10:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Alcohol may have been factor in death of KU student who fell from roof

I'm not a libertarian who suggests that we let everyone drink, but I will suggest that maybe we should try and change the culture surrounding youth and alcohol instead of just chalking this up to “kids being kids.”

Then the best thing you can do is to stop demonizing alcohol and treating it like a forbidden fruit. A huge part of the allure of drinking underage is that you're not supposed to and a feeling that you're opposing an unjust law restricting your freedom of choice as an adult.

April 28, 2009 at 9:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Transit group recommends biodiesel fuels for buses

"We must save the planet even if it breaks us! Typical tree hugging Lawrencians."

Feel free to pack up and leave if you don't like the way Lawrence operates.

I can't say what would be the best way to handle the cities public transportation system, as I suspect few people are able to do so, but that sure doesn't stop people from posting their comments as though there were obvious, simple solutions.

Maybe some of you should actually run for city commissioner or something that would actually make a difference. It's easy to criticize from the peanut gallery...

April 28, 2009 at 9:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Meat costs

It's too bad you have to read so far down the comments before you find people actually trying to use logic, reason, and evidence to back up their assertions. I wonder if the LJworld could start two different threads for comments. One for snide remarks and one for legitimate discussion for those of us who actually want to do more than troll someone's LTE.

Of course, it's also rare to find a LTE that actually takes the time to do a little research. Kudos to everyone involved in actually trying to intelligently discuss this issue.

April 17, 2009 at 10:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Thousands rally at ‘tea parties’

It's too bad more of the posters on the LJworld forums aren't running the country, since they clearly know exactly what is wrong with the world, how to fix it, and what the future holds. :P

Give me a break. Some of you people have amazingly inflated senses of self-worth and intelligence, most likely without the experience of actually leading or running ANY organization to back up your words.

Once again, we get to see the hypocritical face of the Republican Party. They get to be treasonous against the USA, chanting "secede", but if liberal crowds had done that, we would have never heard the end of it from these hypocrites.

Republicans have no right to criticize Obama after eight years of Bush. Seriously republicans, just pack it in and shut your mouths. You had your turn, and you failed. Now the democrats have to pick up mess and bring prosperity back to America, which in 4-8 years, you will somehow claim was the work of previous Republican administrations.

I had almost forgotten how whiny and annoying republicans could be out of power.

April 16, 2009 at 11:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Inconvenient law

Most things have already been covered here quite well. If you need to use your phone, pull of the road.

I would go one step further and advocate raising the driving age to eighteen and requiring a full blown driver's education course be passed before a teenager is allowed behind the wheel of a car.

Sixteen is just too young to be given such a massive responsibility. I've nearly been hit several times by very young looking kids too distracted to be driving. I promise if it ever actually happens, there will be a lawsuit in addition to whatever fines and punishments the state hands out.

April 16, 2009 at 10:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )