Kansas.com: Opinion

LEONARD PITTS: ROCK HAS NO EXCUSE FOR USING N-WORD

Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:42 CDT

Dear Chris Rock: I apologize in advance for the language that will shortly follow. And, yes, there is a certain irony there, given that you are one of the most profane men on the planet.

Also one of the funniest. That's why I eagerly anticipated your HBO special "Kill the Messenger," even though I knew there would inevitably come a moment that made me embarrassed for you.

And sure enough, it came. During your routine, you noted how last year the NAACP held a symbolic "burial" of the N-word. "Well," you said, through that evil Cheshire cat grin of yours, "tonight is Easter." There followed a long and sometimes labored deconstruction of when, according to you, the word is permissible, all in illustration of your thesis that it is "context" that determines whether a word is offensive.

I was reminded of a quote that appears in the afterword of "The Slaves' War" by Andrew Ward, about the Civil War as seen through the eyes of black women and men. The speaker is an old woman, an escaped slave who had been reprimanded by a missionary for calling her fellow slaves the N-word.

She replied, "We ARE n------. We always was n------and we always shall be. N----- here, and n----- there. N----- do this and n----- do that. We've got no souls. We's animals. We's black and so is the Evil One."

DAVID BRODER: NEW PRESIDENT INHERITS A COUNTRY IN BAD SHAPE

Sun, 12 Oct 2008 01:43 CDT

The good news for Barack Obama is that the calamities in the financial world may have created an insuperable barrier to John McCain's White House ambitions.

The bad news is that Obama stands to inherit the leadership of a country in far worse condition than he could have imagined when he began this campaign almost two years ago.

It is now clear that even if the tourniquets applied by Congress, the Treasury and the Federal Reserve stop the bleeding of our capital and credit systems, this country will be paying the price for its folly for a very long time.

Americans' confidence in their economic institutions has been badly shaken, and the world's confidence in the American economy shattered as well.

For now, Obama can benefit from the plausibility of his contention that this is "the final verdict" on the policies of the Bush administration, supported for the most part by McCain and other Republicans.

DAVID P. RUNDLE: PALIN PUT DISABILITY ISSUES IN SPOTLIGHT

Sun, 12 Oct 2008 01:42 CDT

While the number of Americans with disabilities keeps increasing because of aging, accidents, illness and injuries encountered by servicemen and women fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, disability issues are the orphans in presidential campaigns.

In 1988 I tried to listen to Michael Dukakis' acceptance speech at the Democratic convention, but fell asleep. George H.W. Bush's speech, by contrast, kept me awake, particularly when he indicated that he wanted to replace "Hire the Handicapped Week" with the Americans With Disabilities Act.

He kept that promise, and it was his finest domestic achievement. But during the 1992 campaign, he didn't trumpet this fact. I'm not saying he would have won re-election had he done so, but it would have helped counter the notion that he was uninterested in the common people's struggle.

Since then, neither party has addressed disability issues in a major campaign speech.

I watched Democrat Barack Obama's convention acceptance speech in August. It was very inspiring and moved me. But I didn't hear any specifics on disability issues. However, his Web site has a video with many specifics, including screening children for autism at age 2 and a promise to hire more federal employees with disabilities.

TRUDY RUBIN: GATES WORTH KEEPING

Sun, 12 Oct 2008 01:42 CDT

In these deeply disturbing times, when the global economy seems out of control, there is a small piece of good news. Richard Danzig, a former Navy secretary and one of Barack Obama's top advisers, hinted that a President Obama might ask Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates to remain on the job.

Danzig said he hadn't discussed the choice with Obama, although many of Gates' policies were "things that Sen. Obama agrees with." But the Democratic candidate would be wise to make it clear that he wants Gates, too.

In these crazy times, when our foreign policy is in deep trouble, the public needs to know -- preferably before the election -- what kind of team the next president will build.

We need reassurance that the 44th president will choose and listen to experienced advisers with the courage to speak frankly, and that he will design policies based on reality, not wishful thinking. We need to know there will be calm, sensible figures in top posts at a time when the world seems off its axis.

Bob Gates fits that job description to a tee. He has made great strides in digging the Defense Department out of the mess Donald Rumsfeld made. A man without a hint of flamboyance, the Wichita native also has proved he can work across the aisle -- he has served six presidents from both parties, including as CIA director.

KATHLEEN PARKER: PUT THE GLOVES BACK ON

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 01:42 CDT

When Sarah Palin said she was taking off the gloves, she wasn't just whistling "Onward, Christian Soldiers."

Or was she?

In the wake of the vice presidential debate, Palin has trained her moose-hunting sights on bigger trophies -- Barack Obama and the media.

In Colorado a few days ago, she told fans that Obama pals around with terrorists. Later in Clearwater, Fla., she said, "This is not a man who sees America the way that you and I see America, as the greatest source for good in this world. I'm afraid this is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to work with a former domestic terrorist who had targeted his own country."

"Booooooooooooo."

RANDY NELSON: GIVE WHATEVER YOU CAN TO HELP OUR COMMUNITY

RANDY NELSON — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 01:42 CDT

In a time of financial uncertainties and economic downturns, no one could be blamed for feeling the need to hold on to every discretionary dollar. I think for many it's simply instinctive. We see what's happened to the stock market, the economy and the housing market, and we slip into survival mode.

However, I hope we don't forget about our neighbors who were living in survival mode, through no fault of their own, even long before this current crisis. This is not the time to stop giving to programs that will help them -- and our community -- live better.

In fact, I believe now is the most important time to give -- which is why, as campaign chairman for United Way of the Plains this year, I encourage you to give what you can to help your community.

Many years ago I started giving to United Way, because I thought it was the right thing to do. As I noticed more and more people I respected also giving, I increased my contributions. But maybe like you, I wondered exactly how my money was being used, so I volunteered to assist with the allocations process at United Way.

The allocations process opened my eyes in a twofold manner. First, I realized the awesome task that lay before us in the sheer number of issues needing to be resolved and the great number of people -- people like you and me -- affected by them.

ROD DREHER: MCCAIN SHOULD CALL US TO SACRIFICE

ROD DREHER — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 01:42 CDT

John McCain is probably going to lose this election. The economic crisis, which he is ill-equipped by training and interests to handle, threatens to wipe out his campaign. Though Barack Obama has shown no greater insight or skill in handling the looming disaster, McCain's personal deficit on economic policy redounds to his opponent's benefit.

But McCain has gifts that Obama does not, convictions and leadership traits that the country could very soon need more desperately than a policy expertise. McCain should risk that Americans don't want to be mollycoddled and manipulated. He would do well to buy commercial time on national television and deliver a speech that goes something like this:

My friends, I am neither young nor eloquent, handsome nor smooth. But I have lived a long life, much of it in service to America in war and in peace. And I have always stood for straight talk. There has been no time in our nation's recent history when the American people more needed to hear the plain truth from their leaders. A fundamental reason our country faces economic catastrophe is that we have built our lives around running from truths about the American way of life.

Washington has run from the truth. Wall Street has run from the truth. And if we're honest with ourselves, all of us have, in one way or another, run from the truth.

We have accepted the lie that we can live exactly as we want to live, with no concern for the consequences. We have taken the blessings of liberty and prosperity and turned them into a curse of debt slavery -- bondage that will be visited on our children and our children's children, if we don't change.

PAUL KRUGMAN: MCCAIN'S HEALTH PLAN MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:42 CDT

Most Americans under 65 currently get health insurance through their employers. That's largely because the tax code favors such insurance: Your employer's contribution to insurance premiums isn't considered taxable income, as long as the employer's health plan follows certain rules.

This system does a fairly effective job of protecting those it reaches, but it leaves many Americans out in the cold. Workers whose employers don't offer coverage are forced to seek individual health insurance, often in vain. For one thing, insurance companies offering "nongroup" coverage generally refuse to cover anyone with a pre-existing medical condition. And individual insurance is very expensive.

So what should be done? Barack Obama offers incremental reform: regulation of insurers to prevent discrimination against the less healthy, subsidies to help lower-income families buy insurance, and public insurance plans that compete with the private sector. His plan falls short of universal coverage, but it would sharply reduce the number of uninsured.

John McCain, on the other hand, wants to blow up the current system, by eliminating the tax break for employer-provided insurance. And he doesn't offer a workable alternative.

Without the tax break, many employers would drop their current health plans. Several recent nonpartisan studies estimate that under the McCain plan, about 20 million Americans currently covered by their employers would lose their health insurance.

DAVID BRODER: CANDIDATES REJECT REALITY

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:42 CDT

Something strange is happening in this strangest of all presidential contests. The longer it goes on, the less we know about what either of these men would really do if he were in the Oval Office next year.

John McCain and Barack Obama have been asked twice -- once in the Mississippi debate and again on Tuesday night -- what their priorities would be. McCain flat-out refused to choose, arguing that the United States can do it all. Obama mentioned energy, health care and education, but did not acknowledge that he might have to choose among them.

Similarly, they declined to spell out what sacrifices they might have to ask Americans to make, beyond moderating their energy use or easing their demands for Washington-financed projects.

It was a stunning rejection of reality. This nation is mired in two wars it does not know how to end. It is struggling to escape the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The federal government is staring at record deficits, with no plausible plan for financing the retirement and health care needs of a giant generation of retirees. Our transportation and education systems need help, and we are dependent on other countries for the energy we use.

In the face of all this, Obama and McCain are stubbornly repeating promises they made in happier times -- tax cuts for all, new health benefits, big government-financed projects.

CAL THOMAS: ARE YOU TRULY CATHOLIC?

Wed, 08 Oct 2008 01:42 CDT

When a high-profile Roman Catholic Democrat seeks high or higher office, the issue of abortion surfaces. As the pro-choice, non-Catholic Barack Obama makes a play for evangelical voters, conservative Catholics are asking their fellow believers to take seriously the church's teaching on abortion and not cast their vote for Obama and Catholic Joe Biden.

The split in Democratic ranks is along political as well as theological lines. Liberal Catholics claim that government programs advocated by Democrats more accurately reflect the teachings of Jesus about the poor and the weak. More "observant" Catholics, some of whom support anti-poverty government programs, point out that no program can help someone who is not given the right to live.

A group calling itself Faithful Catholic Citizens has produced two powerful television commercials that are running in Iowa and soon, it hopes, in heavily Catholic Pennsylvania. Both spots begin with a confrontational question: "Are you truly Catholic?" Then comes a sound bite from NBC's "Meet the Press" in which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., asserts that Catholic teaching on abortion has been inconsistent. "Utterly incredible," Cardinal Edward Egan is then quoted as saying about Pelosi's statement, which is followed by one from the late Pope John Paul II, who called abortion the "deliberate killing of an innocent human being." And then comes a reference to the abortion issue from Rick Warren's forum in August at which Obama said that knowing when life begins is "above my pay grade."

"Don't be misled," continue the ads. "Know the church. Know the truth."

Is abortion "intrinsically evil" and "a non-negotiable issue for Catholics," as Faithful Catholic Citizens president Heidi Stirrup asserts? If one is a Catholic and subscribes to the belief that the interpretation of Scripture and moral truth is the responsibility of the pope and the apostolic bishops, then one would have to say "yes"; and when faith and politics conflict, a politician should be required to choose one or the other.

NOREEN M. CARROCCI: ONE SIZE DOESN'T FIT ALL ON HIGHER EDUCATION

NOREEN M. CARROCCI — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 01:41 CDT

I read with interest The Eagle's recent articles on college costs, loans and alternative ways people have found to achieve their widely varying educational goals (Sept. 28 Eagle). Some folks want technical training for a skilled labor position; others a professional degree in areas such as nursing, teaching or business; and still others a bachelor's degree as preparation for graduate or professional school.

The articles demonstrated a most important point about postsecondary education -- one size does not fit all, and each person should seek the educational program that most fits his goals without regard to type of institution or its published tuition and perceived costs.

For example, readers may have been surprised that the average loans for Newman University and Friends University graduates were less than that of Wichita State University graduates, and that the average loan debt for Newman graduates wasn't appreciably more than that of University of Kansas and Kansas State University graduates. How is this possible when the tuitions for private institutions are so much higher?

Truthfully, we all do everything we can to provide access to those who choose to continue their educations at our institutions, whether it is on a part-time or full-time basis at our private or public campuses.

Still, the average of about $20,000 in debt load for Kansas college graduates may sound like a big barrier to seeking a degree. I have said for many years that a college loan is the best investment you can make, and this comes from my own experience.

RUSSELL ARBEN FOX: DELEGATION NEEDS TO EXPLAIN 'NO' VOTE

RUSSELL ARBEN FOX — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 01:41 CDT

With the passage Friday of the Wall Street bailout, the political part of the crisis that has filled the headlines over the past couple of weeks might appear to be over. But it shouldn't be. At the very least, it shouldn't be in Kansas.

Few other states have congressional delegations that were as unified in their opposition to the bill as ours was. Sens. Pat Roberts and Sam Brownback voted against the bill, as did three out of our four House members -- Reps. Nancy Boyda, Jerry Moran and Todd Tiahrt.

I don't write to criticize any of these five individuals for their votes. They may have had very good reasons for their votes, reasons that could be a part of an important political conversation. But we won't have that kind of conversation if we voters allow these individuals to trot out their usual campaign defenses and attacks.

Were their votes based on simple political calculation? Did our lawmakers take a look at where the votes stood among their colleagues and figure they could afford to rail against the bill for voters back home, confident that it would still pass?

But perhaps this is too cynical. What if the votes were honest expressions of conviction?

J. RICHARD COE: WALL STREET RESCUE PLAN SHOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER

J. RICHARD COE — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 01:38 CDT

There are 535 members in the U.S. Congress, and most have very little understanding of economics and financial markets. Imagine being one of the leaders and being told by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke that an unprecedented $700 billion rescue package needs to be passed within a week, or an unimaginable credit contraction and economic meltdown are unavoidable.

The Congress (which helped create the mess) was put in an extremely difficult "do this or else" position by a powerful man who hails from the investment banking world, which exacerbated the problem. A three-page plan morphed into a 400-plus-page document with lots of "goodies."

Despite the millions of Americans adamantly opposed to it, the Congress passed a massive, deeply flawed bill in record time. While those voting in favor may have believed they were putting the economy first, at least some of those voting against thought there must be a better way.

While the crisis compounded at breathtaking speed and time was clearly of the essence, it is tragic that other options were not allowed serious consideration. Financial institutions desperately need more capital. Investor Warren Buffett has provided capital by means of buying preferred stock newly issued by Goldman Sachs and General Electric. Our government could have provided capital the same way, or through subordinated loans.

Falling home prices, a primary trigger of the problem, are continuing and will compound the challenges. Martin Feldstein, a former Reagan adviser, has advocated that the government make low-interest rate loans to any homeowner with a mortgage to replace up to 20 percent of the mortgage, to a maximum of $80,000. This would make homeowners less likely to default on mortgages even if home prices keep dropping.

JAY BOOKMAN: PARTY MAY REALLY BE OVER

Tue, 07 Oct 2008 01:38 CDT

In the wake of the attacks of Sept. 11, you heard a lot of musing that our days of frivolity and cynicism had ended with the collapse of the World Trade Towers. Suddenly, it was time to get serious.

Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz wrote then: "Over the past 10 years, since the defeat of communism and the collapse of the various walls, we have been told that there is no more history and it was all right to indulge in fun and frivolity. A decade of unreality has been blown away."

It was a nice sentiment, but little of that change proved permanent.

Now, with the crisis on Wall Street and stern-faced warnings from Washington that we teeter on the edge of another Depression-like collapse, you're once again hearing talk of a cultural sea change under way. As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., warned Wall Street on Friday, "the party is over."

This time, it might be true.

LEONARD PITTS: EYEWITNESSES ALONE ARE NOT ENOUGH

Mon, 06 Oct 2008 01:38 CDT

The first time, Troy Davis came within 24 hours of death. The second time, he came within two.

Last year, it was a Georgia clemency board that stepped in to block his execution. Last month, it was the U.S. Supreme Court. Davis, the 39-year-old convicted killer of Mark MacPhail, a Savannah, Ga., police officer, was granted a stay to allow the court to consider whether to hear his appeal for a new trial. A decision is expected today.

When news of Davis' latest reprieve broke, MacPhail's family reacted as you would expect. His mother, Anneliese, 74, told the Associated Press, "I'm furious, disgusted and disappointed. I want this over with. This has been hanging over us for 19 years." She said she'd like to punch Davis in the face. She said she is angry at his entire family. She said her son will not have justice until Davis dies.

Your instinct, faced with such a rawness of agony, is to defer. To have a loved one ripped away as MacPhail's family did -- he was shot three times in 1989 while trying to break up a parking lot altercation -- is to enter into a confederation of suffering any one of us could join in the time it takes to thrust a knife or pull a trigger. Grief of such magnitude confers moral authority that trumps other considerations, and your heart, if you have one, will require you to yield to it as surely as subcompacts do to 18-wheelers.

This is human. This is compassionate. And it is also a mistake, at least where capital punishment is concerned.

TODD TIAHRT: BAILOUT THREW TAX MONEY AT PROBLEM, LACKED REFORM

REP. TODD TIAHRT — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 01:43 CDT

This past week we witnessed an unstable financial market agitate fears about losing our savings, our retirement investments and even jobs. With the fall in stock values on Wall Street, many Kansans watched helplessly.

The trouble has been stirring for years. From the way mortgages are sold to the way accounting rules are followed to the push for more families to buy houses they cannot afford, Wall Street was in over its head.

In Washington, D.C., the Bush administration and leaders of Congress were using fear to build confidence in a plan that was promised to put stability back in the financial market. However, it contained no tough reforms needed to correct the mistakes that got us into this mess, nor did it hold anyone accountable. Wall Street executives who practiced deceit could still make out with lavish compensation packages, while innocent taxpayers assume billions in bad debt. And it raises our national debt limit to $11.3 trillion.

Worse yet, the plan invited foreign financial institutions to participate in the bailout. This spends billions of dollars we do not have to rescue foreign lenders that invested in toxic loans.

Then entered the Senate, quietly adding billions in pork, such as half a billion dollars in tax breaks for Hollywood.

TRUDY RUBIN: WHICH CANDIDATE HAS BETTER FOREIGN POLICY?

Sun, 05 Oct 2008 01:43 CDT

The next president must be sufficiently agile and open-minded to adjust to a rapidly changing world in which America is no longer the dominant power. So who is the foreign-policy candidate of change?

At the foreign-policy debate, John McCain focused obsessively on Iraq. He still insists Iraq is the central front in the war on terrorism, and he slams Barack Obama for not agreeing. McCain doesn't seem to grasp that the biggest threats to America now come from elsewhere.

It's understandable that Iraq holds McCain's attention. He was formed by the Vietnam War and the belief that we could have won there had we stayed. But that was then, in a Cold War world, and this is now.

Even on Iraq, McCain seems strangely dated. Yes, McCain supported the surge and Obama didn't. And, yes, the surge worked because of Gen. David Petraeus' brilliant strategy, based on backing Sunni militias that had turned against al-Qaida. Without those Sunnis, the surge never would have succeeded.

Yet right now, Iraq's Shiite-led government seems poised to break up the Sunni militias and put many of their men in prison -- or kill them. Not much from McCain about that.

WHY BROWNBACK, ROBERTS VOTED 'NO'

Sun, 05 Oct 2008 01:43 CDT

The following are excerpts from statements by Kansas Sens. Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts explaining their opposition to the bailout bill:

Congress needs time to get this right. A rushed $700 billion bailout package is unlikely to produce the long-term results we need. Plus, $700 billion is a lot of money. You could buy all the farmland in the top 16 agricultural producing states in America with that amount of money. Or it could buy 4.4 million Americans a home at the median price in Kansas.

I applaud the hard work of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and their staffs. They are good people. But Kansans see this differently than they do. We didn't do much of the subprime mortgage borrowing or lending, and now we're asked to pay for it. If that is the case, then we want something that works for the broader economy to get us out of the recession rather than just bailing out a few bad actors and hoping it helps everyone else. For these reasons, I voted against the current bailout package.

I completely agree that we must act, but we must act right.-- Sen. Sam Brownback

I understand and share the concerns Kansans have about the turmoil in the financial market. Like all Kansans, I want to make sure we have stability in our markets and our economy.

DONALD BETTS: BAILOUT NEEDED TO PROTECT SMALL BUSINESSES, MARKET

SEN. DONALD BETTS — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 01:43 CDT

Why is the nation's financial system in such chaos? The answer is easy: because of the irrational and irresponsible push for unbridled deregulation by President George Bush. That push was notoriously fueled by the machinations of former Sen. Phil Gramm (and Sen. John McCain) --and uncritically and relentlessly supported by House members such as Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard.

With the frantic Wall Street bailout plan heavy on the hearts of Americans this past week, it is important to review the conditions that led to the historic destruction of financial oversight. After the stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt signed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 to protect our banking system with stringent regulations for investment and commercial banking.

But with McCain and Gramm leading the charge, and with the enthusiastic support of House members such as Tiahrt, Congress in 1999 passed the Financial Services Modernization Act (also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley bill), which allowed for the mega-growth of the largest banks and their subsequent risky lending practices. It chose to gut the sound legislative policies of Roosevelt in favor of shooting craps with citizens' lives and future.

As a result, our economy and Wall Street needed immediate help. If something had not been done, it could have severely damaged the American public's retirement funds, pensions and finances. With Wall Street gyrating crazily, jobs disappearing and the housing market in a frightening downward spiral, there is still plenty of danger in the deregulation's toxic fallout. Wall Street tumbled 777 points on Monday (effectively losing more than $1 trillion) and dropped 348 points Thursday. And on Friday the government reported that more than 760,000 jobs have been lost in 2008, the biggest drop since 2003 in employment.

The Senate bill that finally passed the House Friday paved the way for some good positive action: raising the FDIC insurance cap from $100,000 to $250,000; offering renewable energy tax breaks for individuals and businesses (including a tax deduction for purchasing solar panels); extending the research and development credit for businesses; allowing individuals to deduct state and local sales taxes on their federal returns; and capping executive pay.

KATHLEEN PARKER: PALIN SUCCEEDED BY AVOIDING THE QUESTIONS

Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:38 CDT

What did they do with the other Sarah Palin? I mean the one who bases foreign policy experience on the proximity of Russia to Alaska and who speaks cutely about Vladimir Putin poking his little head into American airspace. Where did they put her?

The Palin who performed so miserably in one-on-one media interviews was nowhere to be seen during Thursday night's debate with Joe Biden. Instead, the affable, tough, determined pit bull/hockey mom presented to the GOP convention was back with a jaw-jutting, happy-warrior vengeance.

So, yes, I am relieved. I had been concerned that she would stumble badly and humiliate herself. No fair-minded person wanted that. In fact, she managed to control the debate in many respects by bridging from the question asked to the talking point she wanted to hammer.

She was often too cute by half -- winking and gosh-darning her way through the debate -- but she did what she needed to do. Among other things, she declared a populist war of Us vs. Them -- everyday, honest, hardworking Americans against Wall Street, greed, corrupt politicians, liberals and, of course, the media.

Over and over, Palin skipped past moderator Gwen Ifill, as well as Biden, to speak directly to the American people. I am one of you, she told them. And these people -- Democrats and the media -- are neither of us nor for us.