Comment history

Statehouse Live: Committee to consider resolution condemning United Nations Agenda 21

I am continually amazed at what happens in the Statehouse. Most of the Kansas people are nice folks. How and why do they send these muddleheads to govern the State?

March 14, 2012 at 12:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Democrats seek to end corporate personhood

The problem is quite simple. People were created by natural forces (God, if you prefer). Corporations were created by people through enactment of laws by their Government. So, Corporations exist only as long as the the Government allows. How then do they deserve the "inalienable rights" "endowed by our Creator" or the freedom of speech embodied in our Constitution? Obviously they do not!

Some people believe that Corporations should control Government (as they do now to a large extent). Others of us believe that Corporations should be controlled by the Government that allows them (their Creator). Isn't that simple?

March 2, 2012 at 3:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

House panel approves bill cutting income tax

When are Kansans going to understand the fact that tax breaks (or tax cuts) for the rich do not mean any more in-state jobs or any improvement in the State's economy. When the wealthy get that extra cash, it leaves the state. It is spent on world travel, fine art, a condo in Aspen, European cars, investment in New York banks, etc. The hard working middle to lower income citizens tend to spend what they have locally. Their extra money goes to the grocer, the lumberyard, the hardware store, the sports arena, area medical service, etc.

So, which group should get the tax break? It's obvious that it should not be the 1%. Instead of swallowing the right-wing propoganda, study the facts and think about the better answer.

February 21, 2012 at 4:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Proposed abortion ban blocked by abortion foe

They tell me that the Republicans want a less intrusive government. They preach about the need to respect human activities and decry government "interference." What then could be more intrusive than transferring selective religious dogma into state law and criminalizing a woman's choice? She has to make that choice, which willl probably be influenced by her health, her spiritual advisor's guidance (if she has one), her religious beliefs, her family situation, her doctor's advice and other quite personal factors. Her decision is no business of the State of Kansas. She needs to be at peace with her God; not with Crusader Brownback.

February 10, 2012 at 4:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )