moderationman (Bruce Bertsch)


Comment history

Letter: Smear campaign

I am no fan of Sam Brownback, but we need to get past the last election and realize that whatever the reasons, he is the Governor for four more years.

November 25, 2014 at 7:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas has lower private-sector job growth than U.S. as a whole

In what alternate universe do you live. NY still has CORPORATE INCOME TAX and one of the highest person rates in the US. The also expanded Medicaid and take care of their poor. NY also spends much more per pupil than Kansas could ever imagine.

November 24, 2014 at 10:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lawrence commission takes blame for defeat of police headquarters tax

1. Rock Chalk Park is KU, not the city. The Rec Center is the city's. At least with use fees the city will make back some of the cost of the center. A point that seems to be lost amidst the hatred for the Fritzel family.

2. Wrong location, wrong price, wrong method of finance. Sorry Mayor Amyx, but sales taxes are the wrong way to finance this project. They land more heavily on the poor and lower middle class.

3. If the city is going to purchase land put the police station in a high crime area, not next to the turnpike.

November 12, 2014 at 9:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Editorial: Football search

So now, besides being butt-hurt about not being a Regent, Dolph is apparently upset about not being on the committee. Boo fricken hoo. Neinas is paid for by KU Athletics, Inc. NOT the University.

November 11, 2014 at 12:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Wicked concerns

I have been a subscriber of Wicked for some time now. I have experienced none of the issues listed in Leslie's comment...none. Please keep in mind that the city is not being asked to loan Wicked the money, but to guarantee payment. If the proposal works, the city is out absolutely nothing. I have had service from Sunflower, AT&T Uverse, and Wicked. Wicked has been the most reliable of the three.

November 11, 2014 at 12:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

New study suggests Lawrence may be the capital of part-time employees; city issues $46 million in debt

David - Businesses are created to meet DEMAND. Jobs will follow. The idea that progressive politics is somehow to blame for the large number of part-time workers is absurd. Lawrence happens to be centered between the state capital, providing guvmint jobs for professionals and Kansas City. Guess where the demand is? Its not in Lawrence.

September 10, 2014 at 4:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Editorial: Spending restraint

Geesh Scott...Its actually quite simple. It will attract more non bar patrons to the downtown area, especially during the holidays. That means more tax revenue for the state and city which is a good thing. Its also one more reason for people to visit Lawrence. I know this is hard for those of you who can only cry and whine about government, but sometimes you have to stand back and look at the overall picture. The city wants a more vibrant downtown. Now they will have one more perk to help make it happen.

September 4, 2014 at 1:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Brownback: Davis not credible on water issues

This is the same guy who wants to let a power utility pump huge amounts of water from the aquifer to supply steam to create power for other states. Brownback has zero credibility.

September 3, 2014 at 4:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

"Speakeasy" open in downtown Lawrence; more on school boundaries near Rock Chalk Park

Why should USD 297 reconsider? This same scenario is true in Wichita where it has grown into the Goddard, Maize and other districts.

August 27, 2014 at 11:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Plan questioned

As much as I hate to agree with Heckler, there is precedent for having more than one Police station; its known as neighborhood policing. By using this model the police have more interaction with residents. What the letter did not address was why the City finds it necessary to buy land that apparently no one else was interested in when the city already owns land that could serve for building a headquarters. In other words, who profits from building on the land purchased from Hallmark? I am guessing it is not the local taxpayer.

August 26, 2014 at 8:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal )