Right Wing, Republican Party Extremism Coming Out of Jefferson City Lately

Have you seen some of the headlines lately, coming out of our very Republican, Right Wing, wackjob state capitol and government? Here are just a few and from the past few days.

Missouri lawmakers approve Bible class in public schools

"A bill passed by the Missouri House would allow school districts to offer the Bible as an elective class."

Clearly not familiar with church and state being "separate", for starters. They'd be the first to criticize some Middle Eastern, Muslim country for having religion in government but boy howdy, do they want theirs in ours.

And this is just the beginning of their Right Wing insanity.

Missouri Senate Votes to Nullify Federal Gun Control 

They need to Google the Supremacy Clause. (Link below).

All the "good old boys" got together for this one. Every Goober for 200 miles. And it shows. But wait...

Missouri Lawmaker Files Bills Requiring Some Residents To Own AR-15s, Handguns

A law.

Requiring--REQUIRING--Missourians to own a gun. Required to BUY a gun. Required to buy an AR-15, a semi-automatic weapon.

Insane.

Keep in mind, of course, this is all from the political party that says it's for "small government." God forbid they had any restraint.

And God help us.

Better yet, folks. Vote. Vote and never miss a vote. And vote these people out.

Link:

Supremacy Clause

Suddenly, People Caring About the East Side

We all know now what happened on the City Council this week.

Kansas City Council Renames The Paseo For Martin Luther King

Kansas City Council votes to rename The Paseo

The City Council of Kansas City, Missouri voted this week to have the name of The Paseo changed to Martin Luther King Boulevard, of course.

Stunningly, all of a sudden, people, lots of white people, who are never over there, are suddenly lamenting the name and name change.

We segregate an entire race on the East side of the city and for decades, at least, and by very discriminatory laws, make sure they go to crappy schools, are paid less and don't have good access to  better-paying jobs or transportation but by God, suddenly name a street over there something else and people start getting bent out of shape about something not in their own area.

Those people over there.

How dare they?

Treasonous Trump Coming to Town

So President Trump is reportedly coming to Kansas City on July 24 to host a luncheon for Republican Senate candidate Josh Hawley. 

President Donald Trump coming to KCMO 

for Hawley fundraising

Hawley is running against Senator Claire McCaskill for her seat in Congress. The luncheon reception costs $1,000 per person, $2,000 per couple. A couple can pay $10,000 to attend the luncheon reception and get a photo with Trump. If they still want one, that is, after today's rather treasonous events.

Let's get out there and protest, folks.

Whatya' say?

Happy National Cheeseburger Day!

Yes, indeed, Happy National Cheeseburger Day!

How will you celebrate?

Here are some ideas!

Where to celebrate National Cheeseburger 

Day in KC

Get ready to celebrate National 

Cheeseburger Day

Kansas City on the Cheap

9 Must-Try Burgers in Kansas City

Best Burger Freebies & Deals for National Cheeseburger Day

Go! Enjoy!

And have a great weekend!

So much Catholic news popping up lately

Really, the stories are hitting all over--mostly good ones, for the people and children.

First there was this in The New York Times Sunday from op/ed columnist Frank Bruni:

The Church's Errant Shepherds

Mr. Bruni rightly points out that yet more extremely damaging but sadly predictable documents are coming out from the Catholic Church on their sex scandals, this time, from Milwaukee:

BOSTON, Philadelphia, Los Angeles. The archdioceses change but the overarching story line doesn’t, and last week Milwaukee had a turn in the spotlight, with the release of roughly 6,000 pages of records detailing decades of child sexual abuse by Roman Catholic priests there, a sweeping, searing encyclopedia of crime and insufficient punishment.

The one thing that has to be kept in mind foremost at all times are the children and their families that are hurt and affected, just as SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, always insists.

Behind that, however, are the many millions of dollars spent on covering up the Catholic Church's transgressions because, in the first place, the sexual abuse of their students occurs and then the Church compounds the gravity of the situation by covering it up, time and again, and trying to protect the priests that commit these acts, instead of protecting those same children, both the ones already abused and the ones who might be, in the future.

The article goes on:

"...over the last few decades we’ve watched an organization that claims a special moral authority in the world pursue many of the same legal and public-relations strategies — shuttling around money, looking for loopholes, tarring accusers, massaging the truth — that are employed by organizations devoted to nothing more than the bottom line.
      

In San Diego, diocesan leaders who filed for bankruptcy were rebuked by a judge for misrepresenting the local church’s financial situation to parishioners being asked to help pay for sex-abuse settlements.

      

In St. Louis church leaders claimed not to be liable for an abusive priest because while he had gotten to know a victim on church property, the abuse itself happened elsewhere."

And here, ladies and gentlemen, is where it gets REALLY good, at least for Kansas Citians and what we've been exposed to and seen in the last few decades:

       

In Kansas City, Mo., Rebecca Randles, a lawyer who has represented abuse victims, says that the church floods the courtroom with attorneys who in turn drown her in paperwork. In one case, she recently told me, “the motion-to-dismiss pile is higher than my head — I’m 5-foot-4.”

And, for me, the clincher, since Bishop Finn still holds his office, even though he was found guilty in a court of law:

      

Also in Kansas City, Bishop Robert Finn still inhabits his post as the head of the diocese despite his conviction last September for failing to report a priest suspected of child sexual abuse to the police. This is how the church is in fact unlike a corporation. It coddles its own at the expense of its image.

Can you say "Travesty of justice"?

It's beyond disgusting, besides being deeply, deeply immoral and out and out ugly and wrong, in so many ways.

Yet these are the people who are supposed to be "Godly" and moral. 

And they still don't "get it."

 Finally, at least today, there's the breaking news this week you may already have seen:

Diocese settles suit alleging abuse by priest led to suicide

KC Diocese Settles Sex Abuse Death Case On Trial Eve

And of course, this is both good and bad news. There wouldn't be anything good about it at all but the Church is being held accountable yet one more time, if only financially, for transgressions of their male hierarch (read: priests).

Once again, we all have to ask--Catholic, non-Catholic, all of us--when does this end?  When do these people learn? When will there stop being if not any physical or sexual abuse acts and reports of Catholic children and students, at least far less?  And then, when will they begin truly not covering up for the abusive priests and transferring them to other parts of the country or world?

Five decades ago would have been too soon.

The excuses by them and for them, by others, have to stop.

The abuse must end.

Happy 81st birthday, Alvin Brooks!

And thank you for all you've done for Kansas City and Kansas Citians, all these years.

Links:  Happy Birthday Mr. Alvin Brooks - NBCActionNews.com - KSHB-TV

Ad Hoc Group Against Crime

The latest on the airport

Yesterday, the City Council downtown voted to go forward with a study on a new, single-terminal airport for Kansas City and the region.

That's the bad news.

Here's the good news:

Three councilmen voted against it--John Sharp, Scott Taylor and Scott Wagner. To them I say kudos and thank you.

More good news, really: "Mayor Sly James admitted he is not completely sold on the current proposal" according to KSHB 41 News.

I'm thinking that, with good information gotten to the Mayor and the will of the people to not throw away our existing facility for all the reasons available--financial, environmental, practicality on so many levels and sheer fondness for and appreciation of the existing airport--I think he can be shown this new single-terminal airport idea is a poor one that should itself be abandoned.

I think the City Council can--and will--be shown and convinced this walking away from our existing airport and building a new, single and very expensive terminal, expensive in so many ways, is a patently bad idea, effort and investment.

Here's hoping.

Link to story:  City council approves single-terminal plan at Kansas City

The outrage that is one new airport terminal

Well, here it is.

The airport authority finally made something of their behind-the-scenes plans public today, as most of us know:

Needed: About $1.2 billion for a one-terminal KCI Airport

Besides the fact that I'm patently, strongly, nearly vehemently against this whole debacle boondoggle ripoff plan, here are a few notes:

First--it's going to cost us--you and I, the people of Kansas City and region who use this thing--$1,200,000,000.

That's 1.2 billion dollars.

Sure, we already have an international airport and we like it fine and it works and everything, in fact, it's very convenient, but no, the Kansas City Airport Authority has a jones for a new airport, a new group of buildings.

And do you know why?

They want to walk away from our existing airport because THE AIRLINES DON'T LIKE THE EXISTING LAYOUT.

With three different terminals, there is the requirement for far more security personnel and checkpoints. They want to cut their costs. This way, if they get a new single terminal airport, they cut their costs. Of course it's easy for the airlines to request--if not demand--this new terminal because hey, you and I, THE PEOPLE END UP PAYING FOR IT. Not the airlines.

Second note--Check this out from the official release today:

"Going forward, the three terminals at KCI do not make sense financially or environmentally..."

Can you believe they would have the chutzpah to say it doesn't make sense environmentally to keep the existing airport?

How do you walk away from an entire airport and all it's main buildings, all the requisite sewage and electrical and all other lines, everything, including the tower and its building and then all the additonal, supporting buildings and structures and construction, including the parking facilities, car rental companies, everything, only to build all new and say that's good environmentally?

In what bizarro, parallel universe does that hold true?

Third note--the Airport Authority claims a new terminal will be "Economic Development and Jobs Catalyst" because "Construction of a new terminal at the airport will be the LARGEST construction project in Kansas City and will create 1,800 new construction jobs."

Seriously, they claim that.

Could we stop this, please? Could we stop with the nonsensical thinking that just because some short-term construction project (like the Keystone XL oil pipeline, for instance) will very temporarily create some construction jobs for a little window of time, that it's a great idea to go forward with a big, honestly stupid, destructive construction project? Please?

Here's something that would create a lot of construction jobs--How about we KEEP THE CURRENT, ALREADY-BUILT KCI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, MAKE TERMINAL B THE ENTRANCEWAY FOR SECURITY AND THEN CREATE RAMPS OUT TO, AGAIN, EXISTING TERMINALS A AND C WHERE WE WOULD BOARD OUR PLANES?

Problems solved.

There's your solution, folks. This way, we have the one-entrance we need for security, we create our oh-so-important, if temporary construction jobs and we DON'T THROW AWAY AN ENTIRE AIRPORT AND ALL THE RELATED BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION ALREADY EXISTING, AS WELL AS CREATING A HUGE, MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR, NEW COST THE PEOPLE HAVE TO PAY?

More empty points the Authority claims today, with their paper:

We'd get "The single terminal will attract more and better dining and retail amenities..."

Who's zooming who here? A) People aren't going to go out to the airport just because we built a new 1.2 billion dollar facility and B) again, more importantly, why couldn't those "more and better dining and retail amenities" not be added to the existing structures?

Answer: they can and should be. There's no reason the Airport Authority can't market the existing facilities for these "more and better dining facilities and amenities now, as is. Heads up: they'd have to work.

They also promise "More and Better Parking" with today's announcement.

Uh, hello? Why?

If we need, in fact, "more and better parking", why wouldn't it already be set to be created around and near the existing facility? It makes no sense at all to start all over again, at a virtual "ground zero", building "more and better parking" at some new facility, miles away. Can you imagine the huge waste of the existing facilities, were this to take place? It's already there, Airport Authority. If we need it, the market will surely already build it. It will come. And it will come as is just as surely, if not more so, as if we start all over again.

The next one is just a sheer, bold-face lie:

Increased Travel Options

The new terminal will include common use gates and open possibilities for additional domestic, international and direct flights that KCI currently can’t accommodate.

Right.

How is that? This isn't just a matter of being skeptical or even cynical. Again, if there are markets needed for "additional domestic, international and direct flights," they will most surely be added. How is it, exactly, Airport Authority, that "KCI currently can't accomodate" these flights? It isn't for lack of space because that's surely up there right now. I call nonsense.

Next up, the Authority says we should spend this 1.2 billion dollars on a new facility--and again, walk away from the existing structures--because of the "Innovation" it will bring.

You want to talk "innovation"? Go to the existing KCI Airport, with its beautiful buildings that we already like so much and that are so convenient, thank you very much, and retrofit them with these walkways, as I mentioned above, and then do very "green", environmentally wise and intelligent, cutting edge technology for the energy, electricity, heating and cooling, everything. THAT, ladies and gentlemen, would be "innovative." And you also wouldn't throw away untold millions and billions of dollars worth of facilities that are already there, existing.

Which brings us to the next big, bogus claim by the Authority. They say a new KCI would be wise environmentally.

This is the one that really makes my blood boil. Well, along with the fact that they're basically sticking the huge price tag on the people, for the airlines benefit.

HOW IN HELL DO YOU WALK AWAY FROM AN EXISTING, FUNCTIONING, VERY EFFICIENT AND APPRECIATED AIRPORT, PROPOSE TO BUILD A NEW ONE, BASICALLY THROWING AWAY THAT FACILITY AND ALL THE ONES NEARBY, SUPPORTING IT, BUILD A NEW ONE AND CALL THAT WISE, ENVIRONMENTALLY?

Answer? You can't. Not in this universe. Not anyone who's connected to this reality. That is insane. Insane and a lie.

Here again, they're saying the new airport would be "built to LEED standards."

Great.

You know those 1,000 construction jobs they promised us with the new airport they jones for?

Here's your 1,000 construction jobs: Again, retrofit the existing terminal so it's LEED certified. Make the existing facility that much more efficient. THAT makes sense. Huge win, all around.

Then, they save the biggest lie for last. The last reason they give as reason to build a new KCI and walk away from all the existing buildings is...

Wait for it...

Cost Savings

The new terminal will save money.

Now that, ladies and gentlemen, is chutzpah of the highest order.

They're saying that building a new, 1.2 billion dollar airport--when we already have one, mind you--and walking away from the existing airport and all its surrounding, auxilary facilities and buildings, is going to cost less than working with the existing facility.

Once again, in what weird, twisted, exotic, bizarro universe is that possible?

Imagine this--you have a beautiful home. (Maybe you already do). You like it and it works well but you want to make improvements. And I don't care if you're a billionaire (we're not), how is it you could walk away from your existing home, build a brand new one and "save money"? Where is that possible? On what planet or in what dimension of existence is that so? I'm not aware of it.

Oh, yeah, these people just got me started. I've covered a bit of the insanity here, now, today but rest assured, I'm going to keep on this.

This is insane.

With thanks to Tony at Tony's Kansas City Blog, check out this link to reporter Mike Mahoney, trying to speak to new airport supporter and City Councilman Russ Johnson:

http://www.kmbc.com/news/kansas-city/KMBC-s-Micheal-Mahoney-goes-after-answers-on-KCI-Airport-study/-/11664182/19623654/-/rewfhw/-/index.html

This is irresponsible to the point of stupid.

Parts of it are boldface lies.

It's extremely wasteful and it's an environmental, ecological nightmare, too, looking to happen.

We need to make sure that this doesn't go forward.

I remember, years ago, when a law firm wanted to buy a beautiful old apartment building on the Plaza. They wanted to raze it and build their own new headquarters.

Not only that, they wanted TIF money, mind you, ON THE PLAZA, no less, to do it. They wanted you and I to foot a significant part of that bill to do it.

That was crazy and selfish and expensive and stupid, too.

But the people stood up, raised heck and said no and it didn't happen.

That's what we need to happen here, on this, now.

Let's get busy, people.

It's hugely expensive, it's environmentally irresponsible, it's wasteful, it's unnecessary and there is no good reason--not one--to do this. it would cost us, the people, in many ways. We shouldn't let this go forward. We must stop this.

Contact your City Council member now:

http://www.kcmo.org/CKCMO/CityOfficials/CityCouncilOffice/index.htm

Make it clear we--you--don't want this.

Thank you, in advance.

Links:   http://fox4kc.com/2013/04/04/needed-about-2-billion-for-a-one-terminal-kci-airport/

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2013/04/04/kci-single-terminal-plan-passes.html?ana=RSS&s=article_search&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+bizj_kansascity+%28Kansas+City+Business+Journal%29  

http://www.kshb.com/dpp/news/local_news/city-leaders-in-kansas-city-mo-to-discuss-single-terminal-plan-for-kci-airport    

http://www.kctv5.com/story/21882383/building-new-kci-airport-moves-closer-to-reality

Conclusions you have to come to about Kyle James

Okay so, once again, Kyle James--son of Kansas City Mayor Sly James--is in jail. This above, is apparently his latest arrest photo, too.

Who cares what the reason is. (Well, other than the his parents, anyway).

With this, with him being arrested and put into jail once again, it seems easy and obvious to come to at least a few conclusions about him.

First, he must not learn lessons.

Second, he must not care a fig about his father's political career or personal reputation, let alone his own.

Third, he just can't seem to grow up, mature and take responsibility for his own life and actions.

Sad, very sad, as well as unfortunate and totally, utterly, completely unnecessary.

On Mayor James speech today

Can we now get the kind of security for the mayor of Kansas City that we ought to already have?

Thank goodness nothing more serious--or worse--happened.

Because it certainly could have.

We're lovin' it

 

Bring it on...

Sporting KC changed the name of the team?

 

 

Since when was Kansas City ever called "Ivy Funds"?

Link:  Sporting's new jersey design bridges the two Kansas Citys