caughtinthemiddle (Greg Cooper)


Comment history

Davis rejects GOP call to step aside from voting rights case

Too, the law prevents one who took part in making the law from protesting it "because of error in the legislative process". The only error in the legislative process was that this law was passed in the first place, but it was at least passed under the rules of Kansas legislative process, hence, he can fight it til the cows come home and is on legal ground. Read the law again and maybe it will become clear that the Republican party is interpreting it as they wish, not as it is.

And, Clara, I find it fascinating that you defend the quashing of this suit because of "Another case of laws being disregarded." Perhaps you might want to look up the number of cases Kansas has spent gazillions of dollars defending that have been ruled unconstitutional or otherwise illegal. Another case of someone protesting that which they do not understand.

October 7, 2015 at 4:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Davis rejects GOP call to step aside from voting rights case

You're tilting at windmills, Greg. Your original question, "How could you possibly prove that there was an impact if you don't know who are legal voters?", is loaded so that it can not be answered, but the real question should always be, "Why are people in Kansas being treated as illegal voters before they actually vote?" In point of fact, numerous studies have shown that voter registration laws, as they are written in Kansas, affect the poor and "minorities" of several kinds far more than the average voter. From there your argument goes even further south. Quit trying to uphold an illegal law just because you hate brown people or poor people or young people or people who move into Kansas (God help the all!), or whatever your personal excuse is.

October 7, 2015 at 3:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Brownback spokeswoman blasts Medicaid expansion

"Topeka — Gov. Sam Brownback's office has indicated that the administration will not expand Medicaid and bring coverage to 150,000 uninsured Kansans, calling the plan "morally reprehensible."

There is just so much wrong with this paragraph. First, Sam can't give this gem of stupidity to us and has to foist it off on an aide? Second, 150,000 voters aren't important to him? (Of course, few elderly, poor and uninsured have much reason to vote or him, anyway, so I'll take motions to remove that one from the list.) Third, under what "moral" system is allowing, no, forcing, those least able and most needing these services, to go without? Fourth, why do these people have to pay be the ultimate victims of failed, ridiculous, selfish economic policy when all that has to be done is to pony up to the bar and accept the Federal dollars available to alleviate this system of punishment on those who can not defend themselves.

I'm sure there's more, but I'm aghast at the temerity of the governor in his outright statement that he does not give a damn about anyone but those who can help him in his "morally reprehensible" climb to stardom in the Koch-like libertarian honor roll.

October 7, 2015 at 3:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas Gov. Brownback not looking at cuts, taxes to balance budget

But not from the Feds: too many strings attached.

October 7, 2015 at 3:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas Gov. Brownback not looking at cuts, taxes to balance budget

All of us but the million and a half or so who voted for the crook.

October 7, 2015 at 3:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Same-sex couples take birth certificate cases to federal court

Ummm, M, the birth certificate makes no provision for "biological parents". While it may ask for "mother" and "father", no biological representation is made. And, now, birth certificates may be altered to ask for "parent" and "parent", just as certificates of adoption make no issue of biological heritage. Basic biology has no meaning in this situation.

October 7, 2015 at 10:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Abortion protest

Except, I'm not aware of a whole lot of reported Muslim abortion provider killers. Straw man.

October 7, 2015 at 10:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Davis rejects GOP call to step aside from voting rights case

"Brad Smith", thanks for joining this forum to comment on one issue.

Now, in answer to your questions, the right to vote is guaranteed by the United States Constitution to all citizens. The right to be considered a citizen is abridged only by immigration law, which makes provision for becoming a citizen. No part of Federal government makes picture ID a requirement for anything related to voting. These are facts.

What you are advocating is simply assuming that a person is lying about his citizenship unless he proves it by presenting a picture ID. No portion of Federal law makes any provision for the assumption of guilt before innocence is proven, and is, in point of fact, forbidden by written as well as customary law. That is fact.

The issue of non-citizen voting is nothing but trumped up racial bigotry. Federal and Kansas law make provision for the prosecution of illegal voting, even before the passing of present picture ID statutes in four of the most regressive states in the nation. Voter registration and verification are already addressed in Kansas law and provisions are made for verifying, WITH CAUSE, suspected instances of voter ineligibility. The instances of such investigations actually proving illegal voting are somewhere far to the north of rare. My first sentence in this paragraph is my opinion. The rest are facts.

You may bring up any straw man argument you like, "Brad Smith", but they are just that, and do not address this issue in any way. And, too, it might be interesting to see your bona fides, "Brad Smith", as only real individuals are allowed to comment on this forum. Sound like a challenge? It is. Make you feel a bit outraged that I might question your personhood? Good. Now you know how others who are in every way qualified, BY LAW, to vote, feel when some overblown Secretary of State and bought and paid for legislature demand that they jump through hoops to exercise a constitutional right and duty feel. Kinda puts the shoe on the other foot, now, doesn't it, "Brad Smith"?

October 7, 2015 at 9:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Same-sex couples take birth certificate cases to federal court

Again, rule of law means nothing to Kansas' legislature. Rule of faux-religion means all.

October 5, 2015 at 6:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Dispute over Kansas judicial funding moves to federal court

As if the current regime cared about that, Lawrence. It seems to me that what they do care about is control, control by them over everything and everyone else.

Whatever happened to government working for the people rather than the reverse?

October 5, 2015 at 6:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )