superwizbang (Ken Schmidt)


Comment history

EPA foe Pruitt confirmed to lead agency over environmentalists' objections

Shockingly ignorant, driven by political games, and manipulated by the highest bidder. The biggest victims of this move will be our children...but proponents of this nomination don't care. They get to spend a few more years influencing the corruption of our environment. The Ogallala Aquifer is going dry. Why should folks such as Pruitt care to try and save it? Take as much as you want. Magically, it will figure itself out. It will be hard to get the votes you need from voters in Florida when the state is 2/3rds of its size today after the ocean re-claims the shorelines.

February 17, 2017 at 2:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

As Trump slams judges, Supreme Court pick describes comments as 'disheartening'

I always find it interesting, as an independent who reads roll-calls and votes with candidates on each side of the isle who most closely voted as I would have on listed issues, how some folks point fingers at Democrats as being obstructionists over the last 8 years. Ok, you don't agree with what they and President Obama tried to do in (most specifically) last 6 years of office. The problem is, many legislators just went to a corner, refused to participate and pouted. There was no debate. A great example was the SC nomination last year. The message was, I don't agree in principle, I'm not doing it. Ok. I applaud your conviction. But guess what, in making that decision, you now lose your chance to blame the other side for being an obstructionist. There are many, many more examples but that one is fresh. Time to stop pointing fingers, start working and debating in a positive and effective manner and move forward. The reason we have each side calling the other the "party of no" as you label, is our beliefs in this country are diametrically opposed and neither side is willing to listen to the other. There are no concessions and it all stems from big money donors and folks selling themselves, not to the people, but the biggest deposit in re-election funds.

February 9, 2017 at 10:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Some GOP lawmakers in Kansas looking to cut school funding

Greg and Dave, why are we beating around the bush. The term is vouchers. Greg, I believe Dave answered your question, but not in the manner you wanted because you provided the subjective term, monetary preference. That indicates you felt that preference existed---and I agree, probably rightfully. It gave Dave a moment to interpret your question however he wanted.

Because I am interested in his argument also, I will ask in a manner which was used most in the congressional hearings this week, do you believe in the voucher system? Do you believe it truly gives all students equal access to the education they want? I am interested in how YOU would answer Senator Hassan's question to DeVos regarding how a child with a disability, covered by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, would get a good education if the funding the school currently receives is pulled and used for a voucher? If that funding is collectively needed to enable that program, and pulling it causes financial hardship for the school to maintain it, where does the parent turn? One of the large improvements in the 1980s was the process, spearheaded during the Reagan administration and Nancy herself, of moving children with needs out of segregated, "Island" schools where they could not interact with other children their age, and back into the school rooms of non-disabled children. There were fewer "special" schools and more public schools with better resources to give attention to these kids who needed it most. What's to stop schools, public and private, from selectively not serving this population if they see greater profits from such a stance? Who will force them if the people simply say, "that's not right" and our lawmakers choose to ignore the words? Isn't the most likely scenario, returning to "island" schools again?

Your stance of "trimming the fat" (my own generalization) is not entirely unmerited in every case. I see examples at every business, school systems not excluded, where the lights are always on, the thermostat is in the mid 70s, to cherry pick a few issues. But to systematically suggest a change, a la repeal of the Kansas LLC tax before fully studying and anticipating it's effects is reckless and wonting. Dave, you have a history of disappearing when the questions become difficult. I hope that is not the case here...

January 22, 2017 at 4:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sale of Lawrence cable TV, internet operations finalized; new owner says changes in store

Hi Michael, I do share your disdain for seeing the local cable company sold, yet again, to another small and regional outfit. You do make a good point regarding increased price change, right! All the same, very soon, most of your "television" will be delivered al-la-carte over the internet and the cable industry is fighting this tooth-and-nail while trying to hold together an antiquated business model. Innovation is moving away from that model and soon, you will want to have that internet connection just to receive your normal shows. I would say take your well-placed anger and not be upset with the gigabit offering, but place it in our city council who continues to drag their feet when allowing open competition in our area for the 30,000 subscribers who would prefer a choice in our provider. AT&T is not a choice since thier service is IPTV and already internet based service. They throttle your speed if they find you are streaming live television in conflict to their offerings.

January 14, 2017 at 10:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

U.S. Supreme Court won't review suit on Kansas science standards

Not likely, no matter the court makeup. There is a term, stare decisis, which speaks to the stalwart nature of precedence. I find it comforting that irregardless of which side has power (lib/conserv) and the personal opinions of pocket interests, the most important parts of our law and constitution cannot be changed by the shifting winds of a temporary movement.

I applaud your convictions Justin, and hope you find everything you are looking for. The cases you allude to above, however, are likely never to reach the floor of the court. If they do, that typically takes three or more years. Plenty of time for both sides of our current party dichotomy to voice their thoughts equally--of course that is irrelevant if the case fails to show injury as noted above, and likely dies in district court.

November 14, 2016 at 11:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Free State's Piper commits to Santa Clara

Yay Madison! All the best in California and in this upcoming season. What a great chance and decision for you and your future...

October 5, 2016 at 12:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter to the editor: 3 lanes better

I continue to be confused by the reasoning offered for restricting vehicle flow in this town. What used to be a 10 minute trip from my home in west Lawrence, now has become 20 minutes if all the lights are red. My wife is a physician and has seriously considered taking K10 and the Interstate to get to the hospital during emergency call times as we have clogged all the arteries here in hopes of making every road have access to a major thoroughfare. The story might change if it is our own family member who needed such immediate help. There are many such workers in this town in all fields.

Stop. Close some of these intersections and have them feed the roads which can handle the traffic. Stop clogging the roads which are meant to transport people to the edges of town to the other with lights and potential hazards.

Tom, this is not a personal attack, please do not misunderstand. I must ask, however, how taking a road which is four lanes and removing a lane will increase efficiency. I do understand and agree with your argument for bike and pedestrian safety, yet must argue that this town is becoming increasingly business averse--should you have to do any type of travel during the business day. This is not a "me" problem, but a "we" problem and solutions need to account for all parties and not those who have a small vested interest.

August 19, 2016 at 11:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Multimillion-dollar Bob Billings Parkway traffic-control project starts this week

*shakes head* After hearing arguments that BBP had turned into a "raceway" (which, at times, may not be unjustified), I continue to be amazed that this town cannot fathom the idea of closing access to roads which have far too many exits as exists today. Truly, in most other cities in this country, the idea of right on, right off access is integral in road planning. A great example is Kasold drive. The city has chosen to place stop signs at key areas on the road to appease a few drivers at an expense of far many more. The reasoning? The road was never meant to handle that many cars and thus needs to be limited. The same has been argued for BBP. Unfortunately, you cannot limit growth. There are very few true N/S and E/W passages in this town. In response, I have heard it plainly stated, "we don't care!" Well, I should mention that I live at Bob White Dr. and do not deny that a need for change in regards for safety is founded. I will say that as a business person, I often need to get from one side of the city to the other for my job each day. Yes, the SLT will help, but only if I need to reach the south side of town, not central. Again, I have heard the argument, "that is not my problem." There are others who are physicians on call on this side of town who need a relatively and *reliably* expedient manner for getting from one side of town to the other (the hospital when on call). This problem is disregarded. One cannot count on how long you will be held at a light. It may take 10 minutes if the lights are all green, or now 20 with all the impediments we continue to place on movement. The problem exists for many other folks who travel these routes each day. *WHY* do we continue to consider slowing and/or stopping traffic at every corner rather than redirecting some feeder roads to intersections which were meant to properly feed cars? I get it. The truly amazing Mr. Corman has a great point that some of those intersections are very risky to manage and closing them is not an option since there is no alternative to re-route. Again, I must ask however, *WHY* we cannot consider right on, right off access. Yes it is an inconvenience to some but a greater good to all. John Locke, a major influence in the construction of our laws and constitution in this country, argued that natural rights to life, liberty, and property meant giving up some rights for the greater good of all. This country continues to move to an, "except for me" mindset.

June 28, 2016 at 7:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

50 slain at gay nightclub in Florida, worst mass shooting in US history

Without being lured into the debate you are trying to stir, I will say that even when in the army, our M16s--which were fully automatic as you mention above--produced a 3-round burst per trigger pull. If you consider a military weapon, able to disperse three or more rounds, fully automatic and an assault rifle, then yes, I might estimate the article is correct. I am not interested in entering the debate you allude to regarding whether these weapons, or their modification therein, are legal for the general population to own. That is for each individual to decide per law and the Constitution and us, as a general population to vote upon--if you are an American.

June 12, 2016 at 4:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lawrence public works placing barricades to keep cut-through traffic out of Schwegler Neighborhood

*is defined by Iowa Street to the east, Naismith Drive to the west, 19th Street to the North and 23rd Street to the south*

I believe you have your east and west directions a little backward. Might want to amend that.

June 8, 2016 at 8:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal )