Daily Archives: Jan. 26, 2006

Hope for peace is fading fast

Hamas’ victory in Palestinian elections, the uncertain leadership picture in the wake of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s stroke, Iran’s threats to wipe Israel off the map — there isn’t much to inspire hope this week about the prospects for lasting peace in the region. And with President Bush repeating Thursday that Hamas “is a party with which we will not deal,” the United States’ role going forward is a big question mark. There’s always a chance that Hamas, having risen to power through democracy, will find its way to appreciate and respect the need for peace and cooperation with Israel. But the United States and the rest of the world shouldn’t count on it.
Posted by Rhonda Holman

No will to punish Wal-Mart

Kansas is a long way from Maryland in more than geography. Because of that, it comes as no surprise that a Maryland-style bill sponsored by Rep. Geraldine Flaharty, D-Wichita, to prod Wal-Mart into paying more of its employees’ health care costs is generating little enthusiasm in Topeka. But one related piece of information should give lawmakers and others pause: Many children of Wal-Mart employees are enrolled in Kansas’ HealthWave program, which provides health insurance for 37,000 kids in low-income families. “They’re threefold more than the second largest employer group, which is McDonald’s,” Robert Day, director of the Division of Health Policy and Finance, told the Lawrence Journal-World. In effect, that means those of us enjoying Wal-Mart’s low prices are also helping offset Wal-Mart’s limited employee benefits.
Posted by Rhonda Holman

A picture is worth a thousand denials

The Bush White House knows the value of a good photo-op. That’s probably why the administration is refusing to release pictures taken by the White House photographer of Jack Abramoff and President Bush together, saying they are irrelevant to the investigation. It’s true that a few pictures of the two rubbing elbows or shaking hands do not prove that they had a close relationship or that Bush did any favors for the lobbyist. But they would look bad — especially considering Bush has said repeatedly that he doesn’t recall meeting Abramoff.
Posted by Melissa Cooley

Comeback for the ‘I’ word?

Democrats can barely hide their disappointment at how little outrage Americans are showing over the White House’s warrantless wiretapping, which nevertheless is about to get a needed going-over in Congress. But a Zogby International poll this month found that a considerable “52 percent of American adults thought Congress should consider impeaching Bush if he wiretapped U.S. citizens without court approval, including 59 percent of independents and 23 percent of Republicans,” according to a Knight Ridder Newspapers article about the “I” word. Considering that George W. Bush won re-election with 51 percent, such a number could mess up Karl Rove’s sleep for a while.
Posted by Rhonda Holman

Was ‘Daniel’ dropped because of protests or because it stank?

The conservative watchdog group American Family Association is claiming that its protests are why NBC decided this week to cancel “The Book of Daniel,” the mess of a TV show about an Episcopal priest who has a dysfunctional family and face-to-face visits with Jesus. More likely, NBC dropped “Daniel” because it was a lousy show that got lousy ratings. That’s the way it should work. Rather than pre-emptively block the show, as AMA wanted, NBC aired it and let viewers decide with their remotes whether it was worth watching. It wasn’t.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee

The games legislators play

Rep. Jason Watkins, R-Wichita, has introduced a bill that would force teams from Kansas State University and the University of Kansas to schedule games against Wichita State University. Watkins said he introduced it at the request of a constituent. But like former Rep. Todd Novascone’s similar effort in 2004, this might be cute and amusing if it weren’t such a poor use of lawmaking time and tax dollars.
Posted by Rhonda Holman