Wellington

Follow

Comment history

Ex-mayor given leadership award

Apparently you didn't read my comment, or maybe you only read what you want read. It was not about Mrs. hack it was about the World Company, and how they operate. The only FACT is they continue to cow-tow to the lowest common denominator, you are being used and you don't even know it. Those are the FACTS, you are just a World Company pond. I vote with my time and money and they will get none of mine.

April 28, 2012 at 3:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Ex-mayor given leadership award

The fact that the LJW allows people to publicly to smear others is the reason I stopped taking the paper and switched to uverse 2.5 years ago, before the world company sold off sunflower broadband. What a sad state of affairs for a company that is dying on the vine and the only way they can generate clicks and views for advertising is at the expense of people who actually care about this community. Shame on you Mr. Simmons, your business model is severly broken.

April 28, 2012 at 2:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Town Talk: Hugh Carter, Bob Schumm and the living wage question; League of Women Voters, Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods release candidate questionnaires

This is a copy of the email that Hugh Carter sent out in response to the Schumm mailer.

Dear Voter,

With the election less than a week away, I can't help reflecting on how the campaign has gone. Regardless of the outcome, this has been a wonderful experience for me. I'm so proud to have garnered the broad-based support that has allowed us to raise the most funds of any candidate. I'm equally as proud of the caliber of my campaign committee, steering committee, and the many volunteers that have stepped up to put out signs, hand out literature and help spread the "Carter for Commission" message.

Early in the campaign, Chad Lawhorn of the Lawrence Journal World asked if I would be open to "revisiting" the living wage. As with all issues, I expressed that I needed to learn more about the living wage and would be open to revisiting it on occasion to ensure that we are doing the right thing when it comes to increasing jobs and incomes for Lawrence residents. When the article came out, it implied that I was open to eliminating the living wage. I called Chad and clarified my position. I've also had the opportunity to do so at the Voter Education Coalition and every public forum since the question was raised.
To my knowledge, the living wage provision of the tax abatement policy has not prevented any company from moving to Lawrence. In fact, those that have received tax abatements pay well above the living wage. It is not something I think should be removed and, in my opinion, it is not even an issue. I look forward to learning more about how we define the living wage and what role benefits like health insurance and retirement plans play in establishing what the living wage should be, but that is the extent of my interest in this matter.

Many of you have probably received a flyer from Bob Schumm in the last day or two, implying that I am interested in eliminating the living wage. The cover of this flyer reads in bold red lettering "DANGER: LIVING WAGE IN JEOPARDY!". The back of the flyer goes on to say that a "candidate" recently said he would like to "revisit" the living wage and outlines how eliminating the living wage would cost you $8,000 per year.
I trust that the educated citizenry of Lawrence will see through this type of political scare tactic. But, I thought I'd take this opportunity to clarify and reiterate my support of the living wage.

My platform includes making Lawrence a more senior-friendly community to attract retirees and ensuring that our police department has the staff and resources necessary to do their job. But, I believe the most important thing our City leaders should be focused on is creating an environment that allows local businesses to thrive and grow while attracting new jobs and income for Lawrence residents.

March 31, 2011 at 2:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Candidate brings perspective on job creation

He has got a plan. None of the other candidates have a clear cut plan other than bashing city hall. Locally and nationally it is not the time to sit back and be judgmental, it is time to move forward together. Those who don’t want to come will be left behind, you know who you are.

I don’t know why anyone who has associations with the real estate business is painted as the bad guy. That is the only thing that we all have in common, the location of our real estate, which is Lawrence, that is it. For the most part we are all property owners, if you aren’t you still pay taxes through your rent.

Let’s move forward together and stop the bickering. Let’s talk about the facts, not your assumptions.

March 4, 2009 at 8:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Wireless company finances bulk of PAC

If your business is run in the same manner as your political venture, I am sure the World Company has nothing to worry about.

January 22, 2009 at 10:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Do you think dealing with the economic crisis is a legitimate reason for McCain to postpone participating in the first presidential debate?

If you would like to make comments, they would be better served by writing your congress man or woman. Enter your zip code in the upper left corner.http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/This is a lot more serious than most people realize. It is important that we get it right, no matter what side of the isle you are from. Best

September 26, 2008 at 12:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Palin introduces herself to American public

The democrats should be afraid, very very afraid!

September 4, 2008 at 8:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Store wins final OK

blackwalnut - "As for comparisons with the T, the ridership on the T has grown faster than any Wal-Mart."

As you will see in the coming weeks, ridership on the T is down this past year. Check your facts.

January 9, 2008 at 10:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

City seeks to delay Wal-Mart lawsuit

re: MJFarmermac

"Wellington (as in Beef?)..."

No, not as in beef, but as in a handle (fictitious name) to publicly hurl insults at people in our community. This is my god given cyber rite to be cloaked in a shroud of anonymity and say things about and to people that I personally would never say in public or to their face. I use this name because I know if my wife, children, parents, co-workers and friends would be embarrassed by my words.

It would be difficult for me to teach my children the importance of civility, charity, manners, and respect for others if they had any idea how hurtful I could be as my fingers danced across my keyboard. I hope this answers your question and sorry about the grammatical error (vial vs. vile).

April 13, 2007 at 3:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Previous