Tone it down
Like everyone else, I hold opinions on political issues. It seems to be an American addiction.
However, I do not harbor hatred toward anyone in either political party. It is not only an unreasonable emotion, but a self-consuming one. Hatred damages us more than the target of our emotions. It can damage relationships with family, friends and neighbors. It can result in being labeled as a person to avoid.
Because of modern technology, we are immediately aware of political news, as well as the reactions from many people, most whom are no more qualified than ourselves to analyze political implications. We are better served by stating our opinions clearly based on sound logic rather than emotion. Few people are inspired by political rantings and obvious hatred.
Never miss a local story.
We are certainly entitled to our convictions, but focusing on professional and personal relationships will gain us more satisfaction. As the British say, “Stay calm and carry on.” Good advice.
Well, the gun debate is making headlines again after another mass shooting, and no one mentions the elephant in the room. Sixteen years of perpetual wars in the Middle East have to affect a nation. I know nine years of Vietnam did — until those affected by it ended it.
Now this debacle has escalated to the point where no one knows where we are going. If we want a kinder, gentler nation, we have to be a kinder, gentler people.
The Star’s lead editorial March 7 asks, “Why won’t Gov. Colyer commit to protecting LGBT workers?” (10A)
The answer? Because he’s a Republican.
It’s all hate
I bet if Fredrick Demond Scott were white and killed six black people, this would have been labeled a hate crime in seconds. (March 3, 1A, “Man indicted in 3 more trail killings”)
How about we treat all crime as hate? If you are a criminal, you have hate in your heart, no matter what color.
On March 2, I witnessed what I can only describe as a sham of a basketball game. The dictionary defines sham as “to make a false show or pretense.” That is exactly what occurs at the sub-state level in Kansas as small high school teams classified 4A are matched with powerhouse private schools such as Bishop Miege.
It almost seems as if these private schools that attract or recruit highly talented athletes are given a free ride on the backs of small schools as they ascend to state competition. The small teams go in knowing they have no chance but make a brave showing nonetheless as they are sacrificed to the “Romans.”
Why Kansas continues this practice is a mystery, but nonetheless it continues this extremely unfair practice. It’s way past time for the Kansas State High Schools Activities Association to take a serious look at this and make a change for all Kansas high school athletes, whom they say they value.
Jonathan Shorman’s article in Sunday’s Star seemed mostly fair and balanced. (4A, “Kansas Dems clash over most electable candidate”) Each of the seven(!) gubernatorial candidates spoke for about 12 minutes. Each delivered an opening and closing statement and answered a question to which the other six responded. Getting to know our candidates better was easily worth a mediocre $75 lunch.
The article accurately reported that 17-year old Jack Bergeson supports legalization of both medical and recreational use of marijuana. I guess space limitations ruled out mention of Bergeson’s knowledge, poise and confidence, which far exceeded what my college-bound friends and I exhibited at his age.
One example: On health care, he spoke calmly but passionately about his father’s loss of a good job and the insurance that went with it. Ultimately, the paucity of comparable employment opportunities led to the family’s opening of a restaurant, where Bergeson works to support a business where providing good food is the easy part. The real keys to success are good service and even better management.
Bergeson is not going to get the Democratic nomination this time, but the winner should find some way to use this young man’s impressive talent and energy.
The Star’s recent editorial recommending expanding the streetcar is concerning. (March 6, 10A, “Vote ‘yes’ for an expanded streetcar line”)
With the expense of expanding the line, and with technology changing so fast, why would the city not look into autonomous vans and buses, which require minimal infrastructure?