Open thread

66 Comments

  1. Garyc.
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 1:02 am | Permalink

    Hows it Going Everybody?

    As I was driving down Kellog the other day I realized that most of the buildings in downtown just need a fresh coat of paint. That and if we added some neat lighting we could have ourselves a little city. Also wouldnt it be nice if we could paint the Grain Elevators in North Wichita. I seriously think these aesthitic improvements would do wonders for the citys image.

    Tell me what you think.

  2. TRACY
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 6:03 am | Permalink

    No thanks, I’ll stick to my usual childish posts without substance.

    Oh, and let’s not forget those ’snappy one-liners’ bashing Bushie, I JUST LOVE THOSE.THEY HAVE SUCH A TRUTHINESS ABOUT THEM.

  3. TRACY
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 6:44 am | Permalink

    Evidently Kansas lefties really liked the Tiahart post.

    See: ‘Thoughts from Kansas’ post.http://jgrr.blogspot.com/

    Keep up the good fight here and maybe we’ll take #1 before mid-terms.

  4. TRACY
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 6:49 am | Permalink

    And now for another dispatch from the culture war, courtesy of Pat Hayes:

    Last February, before the elections were really on the horizon, Connie Morris mailed out a newsletter to constituents — at taxpayer expense of course — in which she described evolution as an “age-old fairy tale.”

    Connie had some nasty things to say about moderate board members in her little missive, as well, but we’ll leave that for another day.

    Today, with a tough primary election just around the corner, Connie has changed her tune, if not her mind “Evolution needs to be taught. It’s an important theory, and there are aspects of it that are credible, but it is a theory in crisis, and it needs to stand up to criticism.”

    http://redstaterabble.blogspot.com/

  5. heartlander
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 7:15 am | Permalink

    Newt Gingrich has opined on Meet The Press that the spreading Middle East conflicts represent the early stages of World War III.

  6. TRACY
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 7:30 am | Permalink

    Yep, I saw that eight days ago on Sunday Morning. Then I opined that if he were prez we’d already be there.

  7. heartlander
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 8:24 am | Permalink

    Is controlling oil THAT worth it?

  8. Joe Williams
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    GaryC I agree with you 100%. I”m glad you see the potential and not just rag Wichita down.

    If I were running for Mayor, I would run a campaing of “going back to basics”.

    Although most of what the City Council does is mundane work, like zoning request and etc. I wouldn’t focus too much on the cultural centers that tend to get the most attention in our media.

    I would focus on just making sure the infrustructure is kept up and that Wichita is beautified.

    I would make the Public Works department, really work. Let’s deweed the underpasses and overpasses, lets make sure street markers and crubs are cleaned and freashly painted all the time. Lets cleaned up all the cigeratte butts collecting in intersections.Lets clean up the graffiti on the canal route. There is no need for graffiti to be there for years and not doing anything about it. Lets fill pot holes and silly seal cracks, lets make sure every street light is lit. Nothing makes me “sigh” more than coming into Kellogg from the west to go back home to the East side at night and seeing the same street lights that haven’t been lit for months or even a year or so.

    Sandblast the on ramp to Mid-Continent to take the rust off from the rails. Repaint or replace the railing. I know they recently did this to the Ridge Bridges, but that’s because they did a lot of concrete work. But those rusty rails and rust stains on the concrete have been there every since I was a small child and could remember. The on ramp hasn’t been touched. Let’s clean it up.

    Make sure street signs are kept up and replaced right away if somebody hits them. I would see road signs that somebody hit all bent over and they would be like that for months before somebody finally replaces it. Uncalled for.

    The new Kellogg underpass between Edgemoore and Amour is already starting to chip and fall apart. And seeing black and auto paint marks on the side of the concrete from somebody sidswiping it never gets cleaned up or freashly painted to cover it up. Just remains there forever. Lets clean that up.

    Large projects are important to Wichita, but the small things are grossly neglected. Let’s clean it up, let’s get the things that people need, and lets make sure our infrustructure is kept up, even the simple stuff.

  9. Mary Caruso
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 9:10 am | Permalink

    I’ll bet you have perfect grass in your yard, Joe.Seriously, I think everything you said is a good idea, we spend too much time debating what Wichita really needs and not enough time taking care of what we already have. I drive all over town as part of my work, I see a lot of areas that could look a lot nicer. It would be great to see more creativity, like cool murals painted on the side of buildings that you see in bigger cities. There are some good ones in old town, it would be neat to see that spread out a little bit. There are plenty of local artists that could do a great job.

  10. Posted July 24, 2006 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    For all you liberal defenders of the ACLU:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/22/AR2006072200643.html

  11. Mary Caruso
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    I don’t know why you or anyone would be surprised by this, Hank. The ACLU has always taken up causes that are unpopular to many citizens. At least they’re being consistant in what they believe, that freedom of speech shouldn’t be denied to anyone, no matter how unpopular or offensive they are.

  12. Julie
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    I know at least the ACLU is being consistant BUT there is a part of me that has special feelings for pharisee phred and they aren’t warm fuzzy feelings. I know it should be for the good of all people but there is a part of me that says…for the good of everybody except morons like phred.I’m only human after all.

  13. Rage
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 10:14 am | Permalink

    Hank, the ACLU has no problems with valid time, place and manner regulations on speech, of the type the Supreme Court has upheld since the 40’s (I forget the case). Here’s a nice summary of the issues:

    http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/timeplacemanner.htm

    In it current form, the Missouri law bans speech, period, which is why the ACLU opposes it:

    http://www.aclukswmo.org/About/opinion2.htm

    BTW, This is yet another example of how the ACLU takes cases based on principle and doesn’t play favorites. Having personally known a number of ACLU leaders, I can tell you that they dislike Phelps as much as anyone here.

    Perhaps this bit of amusing hyperbole from the Onion will–finally!–drive the point home (though keep in mind that it is–OBVIOUSLY!–just a joke!):

    http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39182

  14. Rage
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 10:18 am | Permalink

    P.S. I shouldn’t have to say it, but the author of the Onion piece clear “gets it,” and making fun of the ACLU critics who don’t.

  15. Mary Caruso
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 10:28 am | Permalink

    I loved it!

  16. Rage
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 11:21 am | Permalink

    Thanks, Mary!

    Oh, and not to pile on, but I couldn’t resist. . .

    http://grannygeek.us/?cat=18&paged=2

  17. Rage
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 11:23 am | Permalink

    Oops, I meant this:http://grannygeek.us/?p=512

  18. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 11:27 am | Permalink

    OMG, I am ROLLING on the floor laughing. Hank doesnt like the ACLU? I am shocked. Say it isnt so…

    The funny part is that people either get the first amendment or they dont. They either understand freedom of speech or they dont.

    Hank, why do you hate the constitution? Why do you hate freedom of speech.

    If you could do a bonedig, you would see that the very first time I posted about phelps I defended his right to say what he wanted, no matter how insane or vile it might be. I said I did not favor limiting his speech.

    And the fact that the ACLU is defending him says more about them than fred. ACLU defends PRINCIPLES, not people.

    A point that I am sure is lost on all those who HATE freedom, no matter what their military credentials might suggest.

  19. InfernalB
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 11:29 am | Permalink

    Thank God we don’t have to live only with the rights Hank thinks are important.

  20. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 11:29 am | Permalink

    Uh oh. That was on my screen during a phone call and after I posted it, I got to see the new posts.

    Sorry to be redundant. I see Rage and I are on the same track. I’m honored to be in his company!

  21. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 11:32 am | Permalink

    Julie, I get what you are saying about being only human. Imagine if you will how hard it is for gay people to fight their “human nature” to support fred’s right to tell us what pieces of crap we are.

    But, sarcasm off, that is what COULD make us a great nation if we only followed the principles.

    No one said it would be easy. Easy would be offing fred. Living with him and actually holding our noses and supporting him is much harder.

    And much more “christian”.

  22. raptor
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 11:35 am | Permalink

    It appears that the ACLU and fred the pharisee have forgotten something. Speech that is meant to inflame, provoke, or be intentionally disruptive is not protected.

    It is not legal, for example, to espouse your political views over a loudspeaker in a residential neighborhood at 3AM.

    The Topeka cult is not making religious comments, but yelling things that are designed solely to be disruptive or inflammatory. Attend a funeral sometime and listen to the filth that pours out of them.

    The ACLU is great for going after publicity if nothing else.

  23. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 11:36 am | Permalink

    …and I noticed very few people gave a rat’s ass WHAT fred said until he started picketing the funerals of dead soldiers.

    Too bad so few could muster that righteous indignation and take a stand against fred when it was ONLY the queers he was after.

    Our funerals = no big deal.

    Military funerals = VERY big deal

    From there, isnt a very far jump to:

    Gay lives taken = no big dealStraight lives taken = VERY big deal.

    More points which will no doubt be lost on the god, guns and gays crowd.

  24. raptor
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

    KFG–

    Well, why didn’t YOU start the response? Why did the gay/lesbian community just sit and take this garbage from that hateful cult?

    Patriot Guard is getting publicity not because it is veteran’s funerals, but because some people decided to stand up to that cult.

    I have heard more than one complaint that the Patriot Guard didn’t do anything about the cult when he was protesting gay funerals. Excuse the hell out of me, the Patriot Guard is taking care of its own, something the gay community should have done, rather than expect someone else to step in.

    DO SOMETHING…don’t expect others to do it. That is the story of founding of the Patriot Guard. It has captured the imagination of the public, true. But, if we were still just a couple hundred members without CNN coverage, we would still be there, protecting the families from the hatred of that cult.

    Try it. Get involved, do it yourself.

  25. JeffinKS
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

    Gary–I couldn’t agree more about downtown needing a fresh coat of paint. Right or wrong, a lot of people judge cities by their downtowns. I’ve had many friends visit from cities like Omaha, Minneapolis, Denver and even smaller cities like Des Moines who laugh at our puny, out-dated looking downtown. I think a downtown “facelift” would do a lot for the attitude of and toward our city.

    I thought the neon on the SC Telcom building added a nice touch, but that seems to have come and gone.

  26. Dingus
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    Actually speech that is meant to inflame, provoke or be intentionally disruptive is precisely why we have a 1st amendment, speech that every one agrees with needs no special protection. “Common Sense” by Tom Paine is a call for Revolution, The Declaration of Independence is an inflammatory document describing what an asshole that George III was. In Falwell vs Flynt justices Scalia and Renquist and the rest of SCOTUS sided with Flynt, not because they like what he does but because it the Constitution says he can. The 1st amendment does give Phelps the right to protest and spew hate but also gives the rest of us the right to say that Fred is a Worthless Piece of Shit Cocksucker. And yes the 1st amendment does have limits, you cant threaten others with violence and slander and libel aren’t allowed unless your a public figure, And using loud speakers at 3AM is prohibited not because of the speech but because of noise. If you wanted to use loudspeakers at 3PM you probably could.

  27. garyc.
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

    The SBC building should be painted a dark gray, midnight blue, or black with some neon lighting on the top.

    The Old Holiday Inn needs some window replacement, maybe an ocean blue color with a fresh coat of cream paint. Change the Neon lights from time to time.

    Raise the artwork by gander so the kellog drivers can see it.

    Make sure the arena sticks out.

  28. JeffinKS
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

    KFG–You are totally right! It seemed like nobody cared what fred was saying when his group was only targeting gays. And Raptor is correct that we shouldn’t just complain about it, but do something about it. But I if I remember correctly, there were several small counter protests against fred back then, but the media and people in general were very complacent about it. Lesbians, gays and transgenders are the last easy group to target for hatred and bigotry because there is no law protecting us against discrimination. I know that laws will not stop the hatred, but having a government that is against a particular group gives everyone “tacit permission” to discriminate.

  29. Posted July 24, 2006 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

    Dearest ksfarmgrrl,

    You and I need to sit down sometime and have a long talk. In the grand scheme of things I surely don’t think anyone else’s sins are greater than my own.

    I have always thought that Phelps was a dispicable person. Mainly because of his outrageous campaign against gays.

    As for the first amendment, I dare say I am as knowledgeable about the bill of rights as anyone on this BLOG. I’m not sure that the founding fathers attempt to protect political speech was intended to protect pornography or phelp’s obscene demonstrations.

    Hank

  30. Ed Friedemann
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

    Obviously Hank, But the problem, as always, is where do you draw that line.

  31. Posted July 24, 2006 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    Hey Ed,

    If only I could draw the line! Phelps surely would be on the other side!

    Hank

  32. Rage
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    There are already laws on the books against harrassment, disorderly conduct and breach of the peace. Apparently law enforcement officials have concluded that the Phelps’ invective doesn’t meet these standards. Call them on it.

    The bill’s unconstitutionality is a no-brainer.http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=337&invol=1

    The Phelps brood of lawyers will surely sue, and there is no question they will win. Such grandstanding accomplishes nothing but wasting time and taxpayer dollars.

    Instead:

    1) Enforce existing laws. Are their comments “fighting words”? Call the police.

    2) Consider “buffer zone” legislation, only not 300 feet away! I haven’t seen the revised Kansas bill–the one Doug Mays stupidly rejected–but it sounded to me like it would have passed muster.

    3) Screw with them every chance you get. By the way, Rap, once again, thanks for the Patriot Guard but. . .you never heard of Tiffany Mueller? From what I hear, the Topeka LGBT community has been taking him on for a LONG time!

  33. Jed
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 3:34 pm | Permalink

    Farm Gal,If it’s any consolation, I’ve been fighting Phelps for over ten years now, and I haven’t been alone. You are right that the media didn’t pay attention to him until he started picketing soldiers funerals; that’s why he had to picket them! His picketing funerals of AIDS victims, and those he thought might have been, wasn’t getting him much traction.The only defense against someone like him is to turn him into the world’s worst sick joke, and leave him there. He’s gotten a long way there by himself.

  34. Posted July 24, 2006 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

    Gentle people,

    You can study the Constitution and try to determine the intent of the founding fathers but if you want to understand the ‘Constitution’ and how it pertains to modern law you also must study 230 years of Supreme Court decisions.

    The founding fathers knew that the Constitution needed to be simple and straightforward to be useful. They also knew there needed to be ways to keep it relevant as times changed. To make significant changes there is the mechanism in place to amend the Constitution. However, major changes have been made to the original intent over the years by Supreme Court decisions.

    Decisions are good or bad I guess, depending on rather or not it’s your bull getting gored! I, like a lot of people, believe the ACLU has pretty much corrupted the original intent of the Constitution with many of their idiotic defenses of ‘civil liberties’. That is why having a conservative president to appoint Supreme Court justices is very important to me.

    The only reason that a woman has a Constitutional right to abortion is because of a very liberal interpretation of the 14th amendment by an activist Supreme Court. That right only exists as long as Roe v Wade isn’t overturned. Many of the ‘Constitutional rights’ the ACLU defends have standing only as long as the Supreme Court stays liberal.

    Hank

  35. Outlandish
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    I thought laws directed at the Phelps’ weren’t going to work — they have free speech rights.

    You limit their rights, and you have to limit the rights of unions on picket lines and anti-war protestors.

    Hank Price wants the law to be inconsistent, like when the Supreme Court repudiated not only equal rights but also its own conservative “state’s rights” beliefs by stopping the recount and declaring W. the winner.

    Unfortunately, you can’t outlaw the Phelp’s kind of free speech while at the same time maintaining free speech for the Price’s.

    Not unless you want to forfeit our birthright of democracy for the efficiency of fascism.

  36. Outlandish
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

    And what bizarro world are you living in, Hank, to declare the Supreme Court “liberal.”

    Only two judges are anywhere close to liberal.

  37. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 4:36 pm | Permalink

    “Well, why didn’t YOU start the response? Why did the gay/lesbian community just sit and take this garbage from that hateful cult?”

    Raptor, (sighing here) that was exactly the response you gave the LAST time we did this little two step. I could post a bone dig and save everyone the trouble, but it just isnt worth it since clearly, the facts mean nothing.

    Find in my post where I dissed the patriot guard.

    Really. Find it and repost it.

    Cant find it? NO shit. Because I didnt say it.

    Second, I DID attend funerals and HAVE taken part in protests against phelps. So did many other gay people and their supporters like jed. I told you THAT before too. Memory loss? Or just ignoring the facts?

    As Rage pointed out, people were taking on phelps before the patriot guard had a clue. Good on the guard for what they do, but dont act like you are the ONLY ones or the FIRST ones to take on demon fred.

    WE WERE doing it for our own when they were dying. We did it recently in Hill City. To imply otherwise shows an amazing lack of awareness of anything not involving you.

  38. J R
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 4:43 pm | Permalink

    HEY!

    Don’t fight about fighting Phelps! Save that energy for fighting Phelps.

    Raptor, I think the fair question kfg asks is if the patriot guard will show up at any and all funerals that Phelps disrupts with his sick antics……….now that more people know about them. My view is they should. We all should protest and laugh at that sick clown anywhere anytime he shows his face.

  39. raptor
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

    Nope, JR, ain’t gonna happen. PG shows up at lots of funerals where the sickos are not there, and will continue to do so. We take care of our own.

    Not disparaging anyone (except the cult, that is) at all. Just taking care of our own.

    Along the lines of ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’, I was proud to ride in the Gay Pride parade here in Wichita a couple weeks ago, and attended the speeches/entertainment. The G/L Alliance honored PG as organization of the year.

    We obviously have a common enemy in that Topeka cult. I just wish they would do the world a favor and drink some Jimmy Jones cool-aid!

  40. heartlander
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 5:14 pm | Permalink

    The ACLU has problems. I’ve been a member in the past. I’m not currently. Maybe in the future I will rejoin. They’ve muzzled their own staff and some directors, and canned some of their own people who have tried to exercise their First Amendment rights within the organization.

    On government, the Congress is supposed to be the MOST POWERFUL BRANCH. “Separate but equal” is a fraud. How do we know this? Read the Articles of the Constitution. Article I, the first article deals with Congress. It is the longest article. The Congress not only has sole power for raising taxes, and establishing expenditures, it is given sole power to audit and by controlling pursestrings, regulate other branches’ expenditures. For removal from office, Congress is given complete power to not only eject its own members before their elected terms of office are completed, but also the President, and nominally lifetime-term federal judges. The President and courts do not have the power to remove Congressmen from office, or members of the administration, or judges/justices.

    I realized a couple years ago that Congress should pass a law determining Supreme Court rulings. It has been corruptively allowed that a 5-4 ruling makes national law. But this is a political ratio. If the law is clear according to full legal analysis, justices should be able to vote unanimously, as they occasionally do. If you don’t get unanimity, it means the law is unclear. In this case, it is not the Supreme Court’s prerogative to MAKE law by a slim majority. For example, if we had a unanimous requirement, Al Gore would be president today. A lot of states would be allowing cancer and AIDs victims to use marijuana to alleviate their suffering. Abortion would be allowed in states whose legislators passed an abortion law. Gay couples could marry in some states. Under a unanimous-ruling law, some states and regions could do things differently from other states and regions. This is what Federalism promised.

    Our nation has been hijacked by plutocrats. Republican Congressmen have been made into rubber-stamping lackeys of the Republican Executive Branch, according to the plutocrats’ vision. But according to the Constitution, they ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE SUBSERVIENT TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH. Congress is the closest arm to the people. That’s why the 2006 mid-term election is really important. Tell Todd Tiahrt that when he beat Dan Glickman on the argument, that we needed fresh blood, as a basic principle, he was right. Now, he’s become another Beltway fixture. We need new blood. And if that’s a Dem, after 8 years, he should be replaced, and if it is by a Republican, fine. Why isn’t Tiahrt being challenged by a new Republican, who might have fresh ideas?

    If Mr. Tiahrt loses his seat, he can say “I’m not a carpetbagger,” and go back to his native South Dakota, or to Missouri and run from there, if he wants.

  41. Ian Santiago
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

    Quote of the Day:

    Why not retain and incorporate the blacks into the State, and thus save the expense of supplying by importation of white settlers, the vacancies they will leave? Deep-rooted prejudices entertained by the whites; ten thousand recollections, by the blacks, of the injuries they have sustained; new provocations; the real distinctions which nature has made; and many other circumstances, will divide us into parties, and produce convulsions, which will probably never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race. Thomas Jefferson

    Viva La Raza Blanco!!!

  42. GaryC.
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 7:09 pm | Permalink

    Proposed Walmart at 53rd/Meridian:

    I know plenty of people who live in the area, and have traveled extensively through that intersection in my time. First thought, WHY does every new walmart have to be a gigantic crazy obnoxious shopping center?

    Why cant they have just a basic Walmart w/o the grocery, bank, mcdonalds, hair salon, optometrist, cell phone kiosk, etc.?

    If they want to build fine, but I propose that they build a 40-50 yard tree line barrier with sidewalks down meridian and 53rd. Of course they can leave openings for the entrance and exits and put the signs near the road. How about scaling down the size of the store just a bit too.

    Sometimes progress looks like suburbia hell and I hate to see the VC area turn into a commercialized nightmare.

    Heck they should add a new county park near the area too.

  43. Posted July 24, 2006 at 8:59 pm | Permalink

    I’m glad someone finally mentined something about judge’s illegally placed signs. As a candidate me and my staff of volunteers know the laws, but to claim ignorance by placing the blame on a misguided volunteer doesn’t cut it, the buck stops at the candidate.

  44. Rage
    Posted July 24, 2006 at 9:59 pm | Permalink

    heart, I share many of your concerns, including Anthony Romero’s sometimes autocratic leadership style.

    What we have is a situation wherein the legislative and executive branch are working hard to produce monarchist government, and to appoint judges who will rubber-stamp their actions.

    Not a good situation.

  45. TRACY
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 6:40 am | Permalink

    I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally…………W. C. Fields

  46. heartlander
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 10:29 am | Permalink

    “I’m not a member of any organized political party, I’m a Democrat.” Will Rogers

  47. Darwin'sDisciple
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 10:37 am | Permalink

    Rice Seeks ‘Durable Solution’ to Conflict

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072500260.html

    The last time Rice was seeking a “robust” policy was the putative response to Al Quaeda right before 9/11. Makes ya wonder, doesn’t it?…

  48. Julie
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 11:19 am | Permalink

    surely this is a jokeRolling Stones, October 2, Cessna Stadium

    http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/15118486.htm

  49. Dingus
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 11:20 am | Permalink

    Holy Shit the Stones are coming to town?

  50. Julie
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    I just went to the stones website and it’s evidently for real. No KC, no Denver, no OKC, but they will play doo-dah.now how much are tickets? (I couldn’t find prices). I guess we really don’t need the arena to bring in big name acts, hmmmmmm.

  51. GMC70
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    Wow!!!

    According to the MSNBC story, the Stones will be here Oct. 2. Reuters confirms as well, but doesn’t list a date.

    Arena? We don’t need no stinking arena!

    Cross our fingers, folks. And get your wallets out.

  52. Jed
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 11:46 am | Permalink

    I can’t afford Stones tickets in Cessna Stadium; I really can’t afford them in the Arena I’m expected to help finance!

  53. kansassam
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    It’s OK everyone… you can come to my house… I’m pretty sure we will be hearing it all from a couple of miles away!!

  54. Mountain Man
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 12:18 pm | Permalink

    You know that God has to shake his almighty head everytime the Phelps gang and their bunch of dillusional miscreants gather to pass on their messages of hatred and stupidity. When are the religious fanatics going to realize that God is all about forgivness and love, not grudges and hatred. Having Phelps group preach the word of God is like having Marilyn Manson perform Shakespear. Our only hope is that one day we will be able to see the fickle finger of fate flick Phelps up side his and his families head.

  55. Jed
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 1:24 pm | Permalink

    MM,After seeing Marilyn Manson on Bill Maher, I’d have to say he’s much more qualified to perform Shakespeare than Phelps is to preach!

  56. RD
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 1:28 pm | Permalink

    Charlie Manson might be a better analogy.

    2 miles away, kansassam? I sat in the parking lot at LD and listened to Tiny Tim sing.

    Not a good comparison, huh? LOL

  57. heartlander
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 7:34 pm | Permalink

    For anybody who liked Freakonomics and The World is Flat will find an interesting read in ABC 20/20 telejournalist John Stossel’s new book “Myths, Lies and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel-Why Everything You Know is Wrong”.

  58. Mary Caruso
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 7:57 pm | Permalink

    When the Phelps clan came to Wichita to protest “The Laramie Project” I went to the counter protest. I thought it was a great time, all of us singing, chanting, and swearing at Fred’s family. There was great music and funny posters, people driving by, honking and flipping them the bird. Being with so many wonderful people who were willing to take a stand against bigotry and hatred was inspiring. Anytime Fred is around, it ought to be a great excuse to have a party like that.

  59. writerdog
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 8:53 pm | Permalink

    “WHY does every new wal-mart have to be a gigantic crazy obnoxious shopping center?”

    Gary the answer is that the move is to make every Wal-Mart a mega center. They are slowly phasing out the hometown stores and opening super centers.

    When Greenwich opened we thought it would kill us and effect Rock road being that close. The thinking is that if one store does two million in profits. And you open another super center down the road. the older store will lose some profits, but you now have another store that is making a profit. The old store may make only 150 million and the new store only make 150 million. But now instead of two million in profit you will make three million.

    Thank goodness our store did not die. In fact in a strange sense we did better in a profit margin then the super centers in the area. Who would have thought?

  60. Joe Williams
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 9:23 pm | Permalink

    Heartlander. I’ve read “Freakonomics”. Great book! Working on “The World is Flat”.

    I like John Stossel, so I’ll probably get that book soon.

    You work for Wal-Mart writerdog? I’m not saying there isn’t wrong with that, but isn’t that like being in the belly of the beast for you?

  61. heartlander
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 9:48 pm | Permalink

    Wal-Mart is a social phenomenon. A long time ago most states had “Fair Trade” laws that prohibited retailers from selling name-brand goods below “list” prices. So Sam Walton worked Arkansas, which didn’t prohibit underpricing locally-owned retailers. Other entrepreneurs like Sol Price (Price Club, now Costco) developed “clubs” that were legally member-owned and the clubs could buy directly from manufacturers and pass cost-savings on to members. Retailers like Penney’s sold private-label goods that were actually name-brand goods without the name-brand labels.

    Then when the Supreme Court voided state “Fair Trade” laws as a violation of the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution in the 1970’s, it opened up vast new markets for Wal-Mart. “List” prices became Manufacturers Suggested Retail Prices (MSRP).” Chains that could exercise lower-cost mass-purchase buying power bought goods for less, and sold goods for less.

    We’ve lost some things, including retailers whom we can talk to who really know their products, and can special order things not in the store, and repair goods.

    Poorer communities lose some selection, because even superstores don’t have the product replication of 30 local retailers. More-affluent communities still support local retailers. Wichita is a poorer community, which is why the local Wal-Mart to 50,000 population ratio here is the nation’s highest.

    Wal-Mart is also tagging into the loss of income of the blue-collar class. It is replicating, in a new, technologically-sophisticated way, the old Sears and Montgomery Ward, which were only feasible with the imporation of millions of brawn-labor peasants a century ago who could not afford name-brand goods. “The Wal-Mart Effect” describes how the company contracts with American manufacturers and then presses them to build factories in China to produce their goods cheaper.

  62. J M Walker
    Posted July 25, 2006 at 10:50 pm | Permalink

    MM,I’m thinkin’ that if you stood toe to toe with Phelps, he would melt like the wicked witch of the north. Hell, all you’ld have to do is smile!

  63. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted July 26, 2006 at 8:58 am | Permalink

    Yeah MM, I bet if you walked up to fred and said “Hi, I’m crusaderx” he would react a bit differently than I did….

    heheheheh

  64. Julie
    Posted July 26, 2006 at 9:11 am | Permalink

    Walker – no MM’s smile is very engaging. He does have this smirk and a glint in the eye that when I see I just leave – I don’t want anything to do with what he’s planning.

  65. Posted July 26, 2006 at 11:59 am | Permalink

    Joe Williams,”I like John Stossel, so I’ll probably get that book soon.”

    Why do you “like” someone who tries to con you with falsehoods? Do you like his tactics? Do you like the way he causes confusion on critically important issues, like global warming?

    ‘Criticisms of Stossel’s Reporting’http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stossel

  66. Dingus
    Posted July 26, 2006 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

    People have been standing up to Phelps for a long time. http://throwawayyourtv.com/2006/06/michael-moore-vs-fred-phelps.html this is actually pretty funny