The criminal terrorist organization Operation Rescue West (self-proclaimed Operation Rescue despite no ties to the founder Randall Terry) has shamelessly plugged their support for the re-election of Phil Kline for District Attorney.
Phil Kline, who is running for District Attorney of Johnson County, is going to have a difficult time maintaining his seat. He was appointed to the position following a massive defeat for state Attorney General at the hands of Paul Morrison. Kline barely won the majority vote of Johnson County Republican precinct members because many level headed Republicans (i.e. those who didn't vote for Kline) found him abhorrent, ineffective and plain looney based upon his record as Grand Inquistor of the state of Kansas.
As a result of his difficult bid for office the criminal terrorist group Operation Rescue has once again thrown their support behind him. Previously, in order to maintain their tax-exempt status, they hid behind a PAC called Kansans For Truth in Politics which was staffed solely by Operation Rescue members. However, since losing their tax-exempt activity by illegally campaigning for pResident Bush against President elect John Kerry, they have been more forthcoming with their political agenda.
Operation Rescue wants Kline to finish his persecution of Planned Parenthood which he had started while Attorney General. Much like their case against Doctor George Tiller (who underwent a wasteful taxpayer paid grand jury trial) there is no evidence to prosecute Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood is suing Kline for Kline's misuse of private patient medical records which he took home after being voted out of his Attorney General position.
I highly doubt Kline will keep his seat following this next election. Being backed by a criminal terrorist organization isn't going to help matters. When one is trying to be portrayed as the pinnacle of law and order and sides with a criminal group then the message is effectively lost.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Democrat to raise funds for Republican
In my previous post one reader took issue with my claiming members of the city council and the mayor were Republican for supporting Reagan supply-side economics with spending $7 million in corporate welfare for an unnecessary theater. As it turns out, "Democratic" mayor Carl Brewer is attending a fundraiser for rubber stamp Senator Pat Roberts (R-torture).
Slattery, a moderate Democrat, is Roberts challenger and polls have him running close to Roberts. Perhaps Brewer ought to be a little more mindful to the party that helped him get into office by helping his fellow Democrat to unseat Roberts. Or is Brewer going the Lieberman route and turning his back on his party and going to announce he's an "independent" now?
Slattery, a moderate Democrat, is Roberts challenger and polls have him running close to Roberts. Perhaps Brewer ought to be a little more mindful to the party that helped him get into office by helping his fellow Democrat to unseat Roberts. Or is Brewer going the Lieberman route and turning his back on his party and going to announce he's an "independent" now?
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Nero and the Wichita government
What do Nero and the Wichita government have in common? It has nothing to do with musical instruments but more with a bread and circus form of government. Nero was a lousy leader. To make up for his incompetence he relied heavily on financing entertainment with taxpayer dollars to the point that Rome's coffers dried up. The Wichita government hopes to follow in his lead by entertaining the city of Wichita to the point of economic ruin.
The Wichita government, all converts to Republican supply side economics, figures it can create demand for a product simply by creating it. It is bound to be as successful as Soviet shoe manufacturers that manufacture only one size of shoe. The government has approved the $6 million dollar interest free loan (which will eventually cost the taxpayers over $7 million) to Bill Warren to invest more in his failing Old Town movie theater.
The belief by the government is that if there is a theater in Old Town then people will flock to Old Town. Never mind the fact that the Old Town theater is more expensive and there are numerous other theaters around town that don't offer the milieu of drunks. It is expected that simply having a supply of a product will instantly provide a demand. If that Reagan economic policy works then we can create a horse and buggy manufacturing empire and draw in millions of dollars.
The fiasco that is the taxpayer financed private theater follows on the heels of a similar disaster, the taxpayer financed arena which won't be too far away from Warren's theater. The arena is also expected to create demand simply by being there. The leaders in our government believe that people will be willing to spend money at the arena then follow with spending money at a theater then spend some more money at local eateries.
Perhaps someone failed to tell our elected officials that America is going through a recession right now. America has an unemployment rate of 10-12% and inflation in double digits. Companies like Starbucks, which appeals to luxury spending, is closing 600 stores, and auto manufacturers are closing down development of SUVs and trucks in favor of more economical cars. This is a sign people are being more thrifty with their spending. If people can't spend four dollars on a carmel macchiatto, then they aren't going to spend $8 on a ticket to watch Home Alone 12: The Retirement Years, nor are they going to spend $50 on seeing some cookie cutter teen idol.
However the Wichita government has this grand plan that their multi-million dollar investments into entertainment are going to pay off big time. Let's add to the problem that the government of Sedgwick County is planning on raising the sales tax in order to give a property tax break to companies and those people living in McMansions they can't afford to live in. They know the people are willing to pay an extra 1% in sales tax after we paid it to pay for the arena. So now that movie or arena ticket is going to cost a little bit more, further discouraging people from attending these venues.
Kiss that corporate welfare goodbye, you won't be making anything back from your investment. The only ones profiting are those picking up their welfare checks that you worked hard to put into their hands.
So maybe I was wrong, there is a good analogy about Nero fiddling while Rome burns. Our elected officials won't be playing a fiddle while our economy burns, they may just take in a movie.
The Wichita government, all converts to Republican supply side economics, figures it can create demand for a product simply by creating it. It is bound to be as successful as Soviet shoe manufacturers that manufacture only one size of shoe. The government has approved the $6 million dollar interest free loan (which will eventually cost the taxpayers over $7 million) to Bill Warren to invest more in his failing Old Town movie theater.
The belief by the government is that if there is a theater in Old Town then people will flock to Old Town. Never mind the fact that the Old Town theater is more expensive and there are numerous other theaters around town that don't offer the milieu of drunks. It is expected that simply having a supply of a product will instantly provide a demand. If that Reagan economic policy works then we can create a horse and buggy manufacturing empire and draw in millions of dollars.
The fiasco that is the taxpayer financed private theater follows on the heels of a similar disaster, the taxpayer financed arena which won't be too far away from Warren's theater. The arena is also expected to create demand simply by being there. The leaders in our government believe that people will be willing to spend money at the arena then follow with spending money at a theater then spend some more money at local eateries.
Perhaps someone failed to tell our elected officials that America is going through a recession right now. America has an unemployment rate of 10-12% and inflation in double digits. Companies like Starbucks, which appeals to luxury spending, is closing 600 stores, and auto manufacturers are closing down development of SUVs and trucks in favor of more economical cars. This is a sign people are being more thrifty with their spending. If people can't spend four dollars on a carmel macchiatto, then they aren't going to spend $8 on a ticket to watch Home Alone 12: The Retirement Years, nor are they going to spend $50 on seeing some cookie cutter teen idol.
However the Wichita government has this grand plan that their multi-million dollar investments into entertainment are going to pay off big time. Let's add to the problem that the government of Sedgwick County is planning on raising the sales tax in order to give a property tax break to companies and those people living in McMansions they can't afford to live in. They know the people are willing to pay an extra 1% in sales tax after we paid it to pay for the arena. So now that movie or arena ticket is going to cost a little bit more, further discouraging people from attending these venues.
Kiss that corporate welfare goodbye, you won't be making anything back from your investment. The only ones profiting are those picking up their welfare checks that you worked hard to put into their hands.
So maybe I was wrong, there is a good analogy about Nero fiddling while Rome burns. Our elected officials won't be playing a fiddle while our economy burns, they may just take in a movie.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Tiahrt takes credit for bill he opposed
In today's Wichita Eagle's Letter to the Editor section Rep. Tiahrt (R-oil companies) had a letter published praising himself for co-sponsoring a bill that increased education benefits for veterans.
As a co-sponsor of H.R. 5740, a bipartisan bill that provided the base concepts for the expanded educational coverage, I am very pleased these benefits were included in the GI Bill expansion. And unlike previous versions of the provision, these much-deserved GI benefits are not linked to a tax increase on small businesses.
The bill, the creation of Democratic Senator Jim Webb expanding GI Bill benefits to help veterans deal with the rising costs of a college education. The bill would retroactively benefit those veterans who served at the beginning of the illegal Iraqi occupation. Tiahrt opposed the bill because it would require a 1/2% tax on those earning more than $50,000. Tiahrt figured the veterans weren't worth it and that people shouldn't be taxed to pay for a war. The revised version which Tiahrt support just takes the funding out of the general war fund, for which we are still taxed for but it will simply mean more deficit spending so we get to pay for the education benefits plus the interest on the money we borrow from the Chinese.
Back when the bill was called H.R. 2702 Tiahrt voted against it. If Tiahrt believes what he says, that we should support veterans with educational benefits, then why did he vote against such benefits and later support them? It's obvious. The bill was so overwhelmingly popular and would have passed whether or not he voted against it he might as well jump on the backwagon and take credit for something he opposed. Tiahrt doesn't want to look like someone who hates veterans right before an election. Trust that Tiahrt will vote against veterans the day following a successful re-election.
Tiahrt takes the 4th District voters for suckers. Then again, McCain is pulling out the same tricks claiming he supported the bill he opposed all along.
As a co-sponsor of H.R. 5740, a bipartisan bill that provided the base concepts for the expanded educational coverage, I am very pleased these benefits were included in the GI Bill expansion. And unlike previous versions of the provision, these much-deserved GI benefits are not linked to a tax increase on small businesses.
Helping veterans more quickly integrate into the private sector following a tour of duty is something we should all support.
One problem, Tiahrt originally voted against the bill.The bill, the creation of Democratic Senator Jim Webb expanding GI Bill benefits to help veterans deal with the rising costs of a college education. The bill would retroactively benefit those veterans who served at the beginning of the illegal Iraqi occupation. Tiahrt opposed the bill because it would require a 1/2% tax on those earning more than $50,000. Tiahrt figured the veterans weren't worth it and that people shouldn't be taxed to pay for a war. The revised version which Tiahrt support just takes the funding out of the general war fund, for which we are still taxed for but it will simply mean more deficit spending so we get to pay for the education benefits plus the interest on the money we borrow from the Chinese.
Back when the bill was called H.R. 2702 Tiahrt voted against it. If Tiahrt believes what he says, that we should support veterans with educational benefits, then why did he vote against such benefits and later support them? It's obvious. The bill was so overwhelmingly popular and would have passed whether or not he voted against it he might as well jump on the backwagon and take credit for something he opposed. Tiahrt doesn't want to look like someone who hates veterans right before an election. Trust that Tiahrt will vote against veterans the day following a successful re-election.
Tiahrt takes the 4th District voters for suckers. Then again, McCain is pulling out the same tricks claiming he supported the bill he opposed all along.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Kansas Dems sell us out
To my dismay the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the FISA bill which gave immunity to the telecom companies that illegally spied on us, thereby giving the Bush regime immunity for asking them to break the law. The bill allows the government to disregard the 4th Amendment to the Constitution and wiretap us without a court order.
The Bush regime and his talking heads argued that they didn't have the time to bother with a warrant because they were fighting terrorism. Never mind that the current law allows the government agency to get a warrant after the wiretap has begun, but the NSA got the telecoms to spy before 9/11, the very act we'd think they were trying to prevent. The only reason not to get a court order is because they had no legal justification to spy on people, like Nixon having his staff break into the Democratic offices in the Watergate Hotel.
Well it appears Boyda and Moore decided to stand with the Republicans to excuse Bush's illegal behavior and grant him executive powers not permitted by the Constitution. They claimed giving Bush everything he wants is a "compromise". The only thing compromised are Democratic values and the Constitution.
There can be no defense that such broad powers are needed for national security. Since Bush has been appointed to office vegans, peace groups, anarchist bookstores, environmental groups, Quakers and Democrats have been spied on merely for political reasons. Are we to trust the Bush regime with these new powers and to believe they used them for honorable purposes in the past? Boyda and Moore seem to think so.
It's sad that in an election year some Democrats want to run as if they are a Republican. If a voter has a choice between a Republican and a Republican they tend to vote Republican. If a Democrat thinks voting like a Republican is necessary to keep their seat in Congress then I'd prefer they lose it for doing what's right rather than keep it and mock the letter 'D' that comes after their name.
For his part Democratic candidate for President Barak Obama is hinting that he'll sell out the Constitution as well. He says he'll work to strip the telecom immunity from the bill but if he's not successful I'd like to see a filibuster like Senator Dodd did last time FISA came up for a vote. I was planning on making a donation to his campaign, but if Obama votes for immunity then I'll just forward it to the ACLU if he decides to vote in Bush's favor.
The Bush regime and his talking heads argued that they didn't have the time to bother with a warrant because they were fighting terrorism. Never mind that the current law allows the government agency to get a warrant after the wiretap has begun, but the NSA got the telecoms to spy before 9/11, the very act we'd think they were trying to prevent. The only reason not to get a court order is because they had no legal justification to spy on people, like Nixon having his staff break into the Democratic offices in the Watergate Hotel.
Well it appears Boyda and Moore decided to stand with the Republicans to excuse Bush's illegal behavior and grant him executive powers not permitted by the Constitution. They claimed giving Bush everything he wants is a "compromise". The only thing compromised are Democratic values and the Constitution.
There can be no defense that such broad powers are needed for national security. Since Bush has been appointed to office vegans, peace groups, anarchist bookstores, environmental groups, Quakers and Democrats have been spied on merely for political reasons. Are we to trust the Bush regime with these new powers and to believe they used them for honorable purposes in the past? Boyda and Moore seem to think so.
It's sad that in an election year some Democrats want to run as if they are a Republican. If a voter has a choice between a Republican and a Republican they tend to vote Republican. If a Democrat thinks voting like a Republican is necessary to keep their seat in Congress then I'd prefer they lose it for doing what's right rather than keep it and mock the letter 'D' that comes after their name.
For his part Democratic candidate for President Barak Obama is hinting that he'll sell out the Constitution as well. He says he'll work to strip the telecom immunity from the bill but if he's not successful I'd like to see a filibuster like Senator Dodd did last time FISA came up for a vote. I was planning on making a donation to his campaign, but if Obama votes for immunity then I'll just forward it to the ACLU if he decides to vote in Bush's favor.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
City Council approves of corporate welfare
For background on this story see the previous post.
Sadly the City of Wichita has approved of the idea of giving a corporate welfare handout to multi-millionaire Bill Warren. A $6 million interest free loan to reward Bill for poorly running his business. In an article in the Wichita Eagle John Rayburn repeated what I mentioned in the previous post which should be common sense to anyone on the City Council,
1) Corporate welfare to Gander Mountain which has a history of losing money without taxpayer support
2) Corporate weflare to Airtran despite a history of airline companies losing money
3) Corporate weflare to construction companies, etc to build an unnecessary arena in the middle of the city exactly where a new arena would be a bad idea and drive business away from other businesses in the area.
4) Corporate welfare for Lowe's and other companies by destroying the wetlands in Western Wichita and putting Wichita at higher risk for flooding, then using taxpayer dollars to create an artificial, and therefore worthless, wetlands elsewhere.
Remember this the next time the city complains about budget shortfalls and a need to increase taxes. I'm sure they'll create some claim for needing to raise taxes for the common good when the end result is sending the money into the hands of the wealthy.
Sadly the City of Wichita has approved of the idea of giving a corporate welfare handout to multi-millionaire Bill Warren. A $6 million interest free loan to reward Bill for poorly running his business. In an article in the Wichita Eagle John Rayburn repeated what I mentioned in the previous post which should be common sense to anyone on the City Council,
"I just don't understand why you're discussing this," he told council members."
It makes you wonder how much money is flowing into the pockets of the City Council to approve of the fleecing of the Wichita taxpayer. This decision follows on the heels of previous decisions to hand out taxpayer money to corporations including:1) Corporate welfare to Gander Mountain which has a history of losing money without taxpayer support
2) Corporate weflare to Airtran despite a history of airline companies losing money
3) Corporate weflare to construction companies, etc to build an unnecessary arena in the middle of the city exactly where a new arena would be a bad idea and drive business away from other businesses in the area.
4) Corporate welfare for Lowe's and other companies by destroying the wetlands in Western Wichita and putting Wichita at higher risk for flooding, then using taxpayer dollars to create an artificial, and therefore worthless, wetlands elsewhere.
Remember this the next time the city complains about budget shortfalls and a need to increase taxes. I'm sure they'll create some claim for needing to raise taxes for the common good when the end result is sending the money into the hands of the wealthy.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
The Warren Scam
Republican Bill Warren wants a government handout. Warren, the multi-millionaire theater chain owner (which bears his name) ran for mayor and was granted a sizeable defeat against the victor Carlos Mayans and also received only have the votes of write-in candidates. Warren, who didn't even have the decency to reside in Wichita ran on the platform that he was going to stimulate the economy and provide more jobs. How has he done in his private life?
He's done pretty well. Recently he opened up a new theater in Oklahoma. The guy is pretty wealthy having dominated their theater market in Wichita with his gaudy theaters and underpaid employees. However his theater in downtown Wichita, located in the Old Town area isn't doing to well so he's asking for a handout.
Taxpayers paid $4 million to upgrade the Old Town district to create an attractive venue for locals. I believe the old Coleman factory was located in the place that was torn down and redeveloped into a small park surrounded by restaurants and small shops. A new parking garage was built and Bill Warren was granted this premo spot.
But Bill is whining that he's not making enough to pay off his debts so he wants a $6 million dollar loan, interest free for the first five years then granted the ultra low interest rate of 1.25% after. He also wants parking fees to be reduced which will cost the city $7,500 in lost revenue.
So why is this a bad deal? Simple. With that sort of interest rate Bill never needs to pay back the loan. He can simply put the money into an offshore account with a higher interest rate and pocket the earnings from the interest. After the first five years he can keep on making money even when he is paying off the interest to the city. He won't have to drop a single dime into his theaters for upgrades as the interest will more than make up for the loss of revenue at the theater.
Bill gets richer at taxpayer expense. That's how the rich get richer and you get poorer. If Bill can't run the theater then let the city foreclose on it and turn it into a casino. That'll bring in the cash and casino jobs pay a lot better than crappy minimum wage theater jobs.
He's done pretty well. Recently he opened up a new theater in Oklahoma. The guy is pretty wealthy having dominated their theater market in Wichita with his gaudy theaters and underpaid employees. However his theater in downtown Wichita, located in the Old Town area isn't doing to well so he's asking for a handout.
Taxpayers paid $4 million to upgrade the Old Town district to create an attractive venue for locals. I believe the old Coleman factory was located in the place that was torn down and redeveloped into a small park surrounded by restaurants and small shops. A new parking garage was built and Bill Warren was granted this premo spot.
But Bill is whining that he's not making enough to pay off his debts so he wants a $6 million dollar loan, interest free for the first five years then granted the ultra low interest rate of 1.25% after. He also wants parking fees to be reduced which will cost the city $7,500 in lost revenue.
So why is this a bad deal? Simple. With that sort of interest rate Bill never needs to pay back the loan. He can simply put the money into an offshore account with a higher interest rate and pocket the earnings from the interest. After the first five years he can keep on making money even when he is paying off the interest to the city. He won't have to drop a single dime into his theaters for upgrades as the interest will more than make up for the loss of revenue at the theater.
Bill gets richer at taxpayer expense. That's how the rich get richer and you get poorer. If Bill can't run the theater then let the city foreclose on it and turn it into a casino. That'll bring in the cash and casino jobs pay a lot better than crappy minimum wage theater jobs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)