It’s looking as if Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., will lose his re-election bid Tuesday. Lieberman has been beaten up for being too chummy with President Bush and for supporting the war in Iraq. But Robert Kagan, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote in The Washington Post that the real issue is that Lieberman is too honest.
Unlike the other 28 Democratic senators who voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq, "Lieberman stands condemned because he didn’t recant," Kagan wrote. "He didn’t say he was wrong. He didn’t turn on his former allies and condemn them. He didn’t claim to be the victim of a hoax. He didn’t try to pretend that he never supported the war in the first place."
Meanwhile, there is a lot of speculation about what a Lieberman loss might mean for the Democratic Party and for the next presidential campaign. Here are two possible ramifications, per a Washington Post article: "One may be to signal immediate problems for Bush and the Republicans in November, but another could be to push Democrats into a more partisan, antiwar posture, a prospect that is already adding powerful new fuel to a four-year-long intraparty debate over Iraq."
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
When Wichita City Council members talk, the public needs to be in a position to listen. That’s why council member Sharon Fearey was right to call for council workshops to be televised on cable Channel 7, just like the regular Tuesday morning meetings televised from the council chambers. In theory, workshops consist of progress reports and informal discussion but no official action. But too often, the council’s big issues are largely hashed out in these regular workshops, making the final vote at the bench seem like an undebated afterthought. It’s also a problem that since 2004 the council has been giving its blanket approval to consent agendas at such workshops, without public comment or a TV audience. True, most of the items are routine. But last year, the council used such an untelevised meeting to approve a $75,000 settlement in a sexual harassment lawsuit. And rather than spend $50,000 to make the boardroom where workshops are held camera-ready, the workshops should be moved to the council chambers, where there is also plenty of seating. Yes, that might mean shots of council members at the bench chowing down on sandwiches. More important, it would mean more visible city government.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
The magazine Babytalk is getting a lot of complaints from readers for featuring a cover showing — gasp! — a baby breast-feeding.
The photo is barely revealing, but it prompted this response from a woman in Kansas: “I was SHOCKED to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine. I was offended and it made my husband very uncomfortable when I left the magazine on the coffee table.”
Poor guy — maybe he can escape to Hooters. And this from the mother of a four-month-old: “Gross, I am sick of seeing a baby attached to a boob.”
In all, about 25 percent of respondents expressed outrage, according to the editor. More proof that, despite all the official talk about breast-feeding being best for children, many Americans continue to have serious hang-ups about a mother providing nourishment to her newborn.
Get a life, for crying out loud.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
A Washington Post article last month about a secret biolaboratory at Fort Detrick, Md., was interesting but didn’t get much attention. Scientists there simulate bioterrorism attacks. This research could be critical in responding to a future homeland attack. But some critics worry that the lab could actually increase the risk of bioterrorism, because its excessive secrecy could lead other countries to pursue secret biological research. It would be better, the critics argue, to be more transparent so as to reassure the rest of the world that the work of the lab really is purely defensive. One biosecurity expert said that the philosophy of the lab seems to be: “Our intent is good, so we can do whatever we want.” Such an approach, she said, “will only lead to trouble.”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
For the first time, Americans for Prosperity Kansas has gotten involved in a local tax issue. The Topeka-based group, which as ties to Wichita’s Koch Industries, paid for a radio advertisement and sent a color mailer to Sedgwick County residents urging them to “contact your county commissioner and ask them to vote against the proposed budget and tax increase.” So why is AFP getting involved? Alan Cobb, AFP state director, told The Eagle editorial board that it was driven by local members — the advertising was by entirely by local businesses and individuals, he said — and because of the importance of Sedgwick County to the state. Raising property taxes on businesses and individuals is not going to create jobs, Cobb said.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
