snowLight Snow Fog/Mist and Breezy, 31.0°

RFellows

Comment history

RFellows (Anonymous) says...

Gary, the big myth is that there is a "liberal" media bias. The right likes to claim some wild conspiracy of the media at large that disfavors conservatives and is trying to forward the agenda of the left. It's idiotic garbage. The media is often bias, but generally in the service of profit motive. And negative stories about Trump vs. Clinton have much more to do with the fact that Trump is actually President and Clinton has more or less zero authority and almost zero public profile right now. Where is your contempt for the horrible, bias coverage of Bernie Sanders during and since the election? Where is your concern about slanted and limited coverage of the FCC's gutting of net neutrality? The truth is the media doesn't unfairly vilify the right. It's that the right is more sensitive to criticism and scrutiny because their lies to the public are more fragile and ill conceived. The right does not like media criticism because it makes it harder for them to sell the snake oil they are selling. And it hurts their feelings.

RFellows (Anonymous) says...

If journalism is going to be our savior, it will have to be journalism that is better insulated from the editorial voice of a corporate media agenda. Currently "main stream" media is dominated by corporate executives who determine what stories get coverage and how they are reported. Viewers (read "voters") just tune into whatever slant on the news they find most palatable. Even organization traditionally immune to reporting based on profit motive, such as NPR, have changed their coverage to appease big money donors. Mr. Pitts fails to call out the primary issue with the credibility of news today. If some stories are slanted or pulled from air, how can we trust anything from that source? Trump and his ilk are just exploiting our legitimate skepticism to undermine confidence in virtually all sources of news. The media, in it's abandoning of strict journalistic standards and unwillingness to do the hard work involved in objective coverage, has made it easy to promote distrust in news coverage.

RFellows (Anonymous) says...

I will believe the legislature is interested in openness and transparency when they actually make some significant changes. Until then, I continue to believe the majority of those in the legislature are sneaky dishonorable weasels who love the secrecy and would rather most of what they do be cloaked. Kansas laws and legislative procedures are largely designed to allow law makers to shield themselves from any scrutiny. Now that some light is being case on that fact, legislators are coming forward with some lip service, but I don't think they have genuine interest in action. They are hoping a little time and a token gesture or two will allow this mood to blow over. I'm afraid that might be the case. If we really want to see change here, we have to make more noise about it and for longer than a couple months.

RFellows (Anonymous) says...

What is the process by which companies are removed from consideration for acting in bad faith in previous dealings with the city? Are there means to keep bids out when previous arrangements have been exploited for tax fraud, for instance? Are there provisions for dealing with companies who use "non profit" status to receive preferential treatment, then steer business through a (same ownership) for profit company while using the non profit entity as a shell? My big concern is that the city seems to repeat mistakes in dealing with contractors because the city seems to have no memory of bad faith behavior. There seems to be zero consequence for companies who act unreasonably.

RFellows (Anonymous) says...

No, Jake, but the impetus should be on the police to show there is good cause to withhold a video. And in cases where there are not obvious and compelling privacy issues the videos should be released immediately. The logistics aren't super simple, but if we start with a presumption that everything is public and officer's are not afforded privacy themselves, we can work backward from there. Maybe a civilian review board. But police should NOT have final say on what gets released and the courts are already stacked against public good, with idiotic laws allowing police to sit on virtually everything indefinitely, so we need a municipal policy that clearly states this footage is, in general, open public record.

RFellows (Anonymous) says...

Since Kansas law is so disturbingly awful about allowing law enforcement to withhold records that should be public, we need a city policy that clearly and decisively compels police to video as much as possible and to have to release video on demand without relying on the courts to compel the disclosure. Else the cameras will only serve to vindicate police action because we will never see any footage that does otherwise.

RFellows (Anonymous) says...

There is a "magic" solution Greg. The solution is to take money out of politics. We need real campaign finance reform. With publicly funded elections and politicians who actually represent constituents instead of donors, we can have tax policy that doesn't carve out huge revenue opportunities to favor the super rich. We can have corporate taxes that both force industries to pay their fair share and incentivize behavior beneficial to workers and our country. We can have single payer health care and reasonable limits on drug pricing. We need to stop scrambling around arguing about wedge issues and address the obscene power grab of the oligarchy.

On Letter to the editor: Tax truths

Posted 10 January 2018, 11:35 a.m. Suggest removal

RFellows (Anonymous) says...

Wow Ed, You certainly are enthusiastic about a plan that will grow our national debt by well over a trillion dollars. And the fact that the modest breaks for the middle class expire after 8 years but corporate tax breaks are permanent doesn't seem to bother you either. The Republican rationalization of this plan is to deny that any of the problems with it exist and also pretend that economic growth and spending will cover any shortfall and the wealthy will share their profits with those who have less. It's such a shamefully stupid and disingenuous lie that I can't see how politicians can repeat the lie without felling that they are losing a little piece of their souls each time they repeat it. This tax "reform" was crafted and implemented to appease wealthy donors. The vast majority of benefit from this change goes to the extremely wealthy. It's that simple. And, I hate to break it to you Ed, the wealthy have no plans to share the new wealth they will accumulate.

On Letter to the editor: Tax truths

Posted 10 January 2018, 9:23 a.m. Suggest removal

RFellows (Anonymous) says...

"Halford said. The deputies told him they were there to secure the property. When he refused to leave the office, five deputies watched over him at his desk for three hours until the warrant arrived, Halford said." - Rev. Halford claims the warrant did not arrive for 3 hours, so if that is true, the deputies (unlawfully)? occupied the church without a warrant for three hours. And if one of the deputies pointed a shotgun at him while they were there without yet having a warrant, it seems like that would mean they were illegally on property and illegally assaulting a legal occupant. I'm not a lawyer, but I thought law enforcement needed to have the warrant before they could storm the property and waive their weapons around.

RFellows (Anonymous) says...

Looks pretty good to me. When can it be finished? I am a little disappointed in not having a good route around downtown included in the plan, but the part that is included is crucial to being able to ride the whole loop. Let's get this built while we raise our voices to get a downtown plan moving forward. What we have so far is terrific for biking. But it will be incredible once it's goes all the way around the city.

Full LJWorld.com site