Advertisement

streetman

Follow

Comment history

Editorial: Arrogant attitude

Ma'am -- if you truly cannot see (or refuse to acknowledge) the obvious parallels between the two "approval" processes, then you qualify as a "low information voter."

June 6, 2013 at 10:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Editorial: Arrogant attitude

Replace a few words in this editorial, and it describes the Obamacare passage process.

June 6, 2013 at 8:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Do you think people who are homeless should get a discount on bus fare?

I wonder what the response would be if the question were posed: "Do you think people who are homeless should get a discount on bus fare if you had to make up the difference?" Of course, we already do -- I believe I read in the fine print -- we're not suppose to know this -- that the mT costs the taxpayers $3 million a year. On the other hand, letting folks get on for free might lead to the illusion that the system actually gets used!

June 5, 2013 at 8:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Editorial: Tax impacts

Please supply a source(s) backing-up this assertion.

June 4, 2013 at 9:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Looking at Kansas

I, too, would like to see a source supporting the last sentence of Wagner's letter. I doubt that folks in Virginia (or Montana, or Arizona, or . . .) pay any more attention to what is going on in Kansas than Kansans do about those states' daily activities or politics.

June 4, 2013 at 9:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

KU faculty, staff push for improved tuition benefits for themselves and their families

Well I'm not afraid to ask the obvious (and probably politically incorrect questions): why should KU's, or for that matter any state-supported school's) faculty receive this tax-payer supported perk? I had to manage my education funding, and that of my kids -- why should they get it at my expense?

May 13, 2013 at 1:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Rabies data

It is important to point out that any attempt to draw conclusions about the incidence of rabies among different species based solely upon submissions to the K-State rabies diagnostic lab, as Mr. Caron has done, is completely invalid. The species numbers are based upon what is submitted, not actual relative populations of animal species. (Submissions are generally made for one of two reasons: 1) an animal was observed exhibiting abnormal behavior and someone wanted to know whether it was due to rabies, or 2) there was actual or potential human or domestic animal exposure to a wild animal (that may or may not have been exhibiting abnormal behavior) and it is necessary to help determine whether potential treatment is warranted). Some species are more likely than others to be seen in the wild (e.g. skunks vs. bats) and/or tested (e.g. cats vs. opossum) regardless of their likelihood of being infected or diseased. Further, the species with the highest number of "positives" varies from state-to-state, and for the entire US, rabies positive raccoons far out number skunks.

Take home message -- please use "facts" carefully.

May 13, 2013 at 1:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

School board studies 'critical race theory' in work on equity issues

A conclusion that there must be some type of discrimination because there is an achievement gap would never stand up to scientific scrutiny.

May 4, 2013 at 4:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

School board studies 'critical race theory' in work on equity issues

It's incredible that school officials and others bemoan cuts in state funding to public education, and then school administrators turn around and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on something like this. Now that the wider community -- that is paying for this -- knows about it, maybe it can be stopped, and education can focus on basics rather than social engineering. How about it Lawrence parents and taxpayers -- is this what you want your kids taught in school, and what you want your tax dollars spent on?

May 4, 2013 at 4:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Menard's project highlights city rule on vacant space; a look at how Lawrence ranks in state retail report

Nasty little secret: stuck between the KC metro area and Topeka, Lawrence is not a "draw" for anything except the occasional KU game. What is there to draw Douglas Co residents from running to Olathe or Topeka? The mall we don't have?

We better be careful about reflexively saying "no" when a business wants to make an investment here -- especially a retail business that, not only giving a service/choice to Lawrence residents, will help draw from the surrounding area (small towns and rural folks). And we'll reap some jobs and tax money in the process.

(I'm relatively new to the community, but I suspect that the reasons officially given for killing these proposals are a bogus cover-up for unstated (elitist/ vociferous minority) reasons).

April 23, 2013 at 7:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal )