Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Cranley Prefers Big-Box Development

Many people have forgotten, but John Cranley was a big supporter of putting the Big-Box retail into Oakley 10 years ago. The residents of Oakley very opposed to putting a big box style strip-mall in their neighborhood.   John Cranley's answer to their concerns of suburban creep in their neighborhood and the waste of land for a bland and dysfunctional development:
"Beggars can't be choosers."
Yeah, Mr. Neighborhood is all about doing what he thinks is best (or what benefits him), not what the neighborhood thinks is best.

Council Race - One Week Out

This year's Council Race has many unknown variables to it. Turnout will drive who wins and who loses as much as how well a particular candidate has run their campaign. Conventional wisdom says that 2011 was an outlier year, where Dems won big.  This year when the GOP could have picked up seats, they only endorsed two credible candidates.  The battle will be along the varied voting fault lines in the city.  How deep will Republican voters go, will they vote a short ticket of five or six?  Will the conservative African-American vote rally around Charlie Winburn and Chris Smitherman and build a bridge to the GOP or with other more liberal/moderate African-American voters?  Will  African-American voters in general stay home?  Will the moderate GOP/Dems support the Charter backed group pushed by the Enquirer or will they splinter?

The biggest question this year will be how much will the Streecar & Parking issues out weigh traditional party based voting? Secondarily: will the average number of votes per ballot drop this year below six?

Here are my gut feelings on who stands the best chance of winning next Tuesday.  This breakdown is based on my review of the candidates: strengths, weaknesses, and performance thus far. In 2011 I was way off.  This year I generally followed similar logic as used two years ago and gave much deference to incumbancy, which threw off my predictions back then.  If things turn out differently, there is not much out there to predict the results.  The turnout question likely could affect this most, with low turnout favoring the both the incumbents and the Republicans.

P.G. Sittenfeld

Strong Position:
Greg Landsman
Laure Quinlivan
Chris Seelbach
Yvette Simpson
Charlie Winburn
Wendell Young

In the Mix:
Michelle Dillingham
Kevin Flynn
David Mann
Amy Murray
Christopher Smitherman
Pam Thomas

Outside Shot:
Shawn Butler
Kevin Johnson
Sam Malone
Mike Moroski
Melissa Wegman
Vanessa White

Also Rans:
Angela Beamon
Timothy Dornbusch

My take is that there is only one candidate who will breeze into a victory and that is Sittenfeld.  There are 12 others with varied levels of significant possibility.  Who makes it from that group is up to the campaigns, the voters, and the weather.  The rest of the candidates have large hurdles to over come to win.  Several of the them are first time candidates who normally would be paying their dues this year as a set up for another run in two years.  With the unwise change in the length council terms, we are losing out on our ability to create new candidates.  I hope those candidates can hold on and run again in four years with more experience and resources.

Cranley Company Delinquent on 75K Loan From Non-Profit

Mr. Cranley seems to have forgotten to mention that his company is over two years delinguent on a 75,000 loan from a non-profit made as part of the Incline District development. The loan was originally due to be paid off in 2011.

It appears that Cranley has made arrangements to get the loan paid off, but Mr. Transparency isn't disclosing what those terms are. He could have agreed to pay the loan off in 10 years or only when he gets elected. We just don't know since he will not release the detailed agreement to the media.

So, how can we trust Cranley to pay the bills for the City and balance a budget legally, if he and his company can't be trusted to pay back the money he got from a non-profit organization? Cranley helped get the City in the current budget problems we are in. He failed to fully fund his increase in police 10 years ago and he failed to do anything but starve the Pension fund. He thinks everyone will forget his past record of magic tricks to balance the budget, and punt the bill down the road. Those paying attention remember and won't let the rest forget.

Monday, October 28, 2013

Proof John Cranley Lied, AGAIN

I really don't know why John Cranley lies so often.  I also really don't know why he or someone on his campaign staff decided to produce the following false statement on a Cranley mailer that I happened to get in the mail today:
For those of you who might have problem reading what is shown in in the photo, here is the text:
"I have been, and I always will be, against the streetcar and privatizing our parking meters and garages." - John Cranley
Since this is in quotation marks, I am taking this as a direct quote from John Cranley and therefore why it can so clearly be declared a full on Lie.

There are no dances around this.  There are no dodges.  There is no doublespeak that can untie the clear lie John Cranley and his campaign have disseminated to the people of Cincinnati.

Sure, Cranley will likely blame this on his campaign staff, but he can't claim it is not dishonest, if he didn't say what is quoted.  So either John Lied, or someone on his staff lied.  Let's face facts, if Cranley hired a liar, then that provides yet another example of his bad judgement of character.  I would bet that this is instead something he's said often on the campaign trail.  If you've heard this from his or one of his supports lips, please chime in on comments below.

Oh, might want to know how I know this a lie?  Well of all days to get this in the mail Cranley chose to send this to me on the day I WROTE A STORY ABOUT WHEN CRANLEY VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE STREETCAR.  If I were Alanis Morissete, I might find this ironic.

Cranley Supported Streetcar Before He Became the Tea Party Candidate

While a member of Cincinnati City Council and Partner in the City Lights Development company, John Cranley found time to sponsor a motion, along with his right hand woman Laketa Cole, to support building the Streetcar.  He later voted in favor of said motion.

I hope you aren't shocked, but he did and then he flip-flopped.

Yes, this is the same John Cranley out bad mouthing the progress Cincinnati is making.  He changed his tune on the Streetcar the second he decided to run for Mayor of Cincinnati.  He changed his position because he knew then, as he knows now, that the only way he can win is if he gets ALL of the GOP support.  The GOP is dead set against development in OTR and the Urban Core of the City, so John's got to dump progress in favor of a chance to win. The GOP and the Tea Party are deadset against urban development in general, they see Suburban/Exurban expansion as the only future.  Anyone with any foresight can see that model as the past and the cause of many of our current economic and environmental problems.  America and Cincinnati in particular, would have continued to grow as a metro-area in a far greater manner if we had not fell into the trance of the suburban sprawl barons over the last 50+ years.

Cranley's attacks on the streecar have rested mostly on the operating budget.  He doesn't think we can afford the approximately three million dollar a year price tag.  Where was his concern for that five years ago? At that point, he was more concerned about how we spent TIF money.  I wonder why??? Is it possible that he didn't want TIF money used for public projects over private development deals? He couldn't stand for that precedent, could he?  If Cranley had a concern about the operating cost he should have voted against the plan back then, but he didn't.  He will say what ever it takes to get elected, no matter who how many times he lies or flip-flops on an issue.

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Cranley Attempts to Smear Opponent, Ends Up Getting Burned

John Cranley will say anything to get elected. This has been demonstrated by the number of lies he says about the value of the Streetcar and by the many times he promises to use the money for the Streetcar for someone's neighborhood, whiling knowing damn well he can't do that, legally.

This time Cranley and his minions decided to undertake a coordinated effort (COAST and Mary KKKuhl were on board too) to smear Qualls. Well after a press conference and an email exchange with the Ethics board Cranleys was proven wrong.

What is so troubling about this latest instance is the Cranley should have known better. He should have know that the actions Qualls was taking were fully within the ethics rules. He knows what idea that the articled quoted:
“It would be unreasonable to hold that lawyers, accountants, insurance agents, and other professionals have an interest in the contracts of their business clients.
John knows this. He was a lawyer while working on council. He has not come forth with any documents saying that the business deals he worked on as a lawyer were clear of ethics violations.  Additionally, the information on the property sales, are public documents.  His claim of her hiding these actions is preposterous.  He's the one who keeps his business dealings in private, hidden from the public.

More to the point, he only came forward with one document, after sitting on it for months, that covered the company for which he as an owner and that he was working on getting funding from a TIF entity that he help create and voted to enact, all of this while being a sitting member of City Council.  Instead of being investigated, he appear to think it over, waited nearly six months and then resigned.  No one ever fully and officially reviewed his actions in office and John never came forward to demonstrate that none of his prior actions violated the ethics rules.

As long as John wants to champion transparency, why doesn't he submit to questions from an enterprising journalist and answer about his past.  Here are few questions that could be asked: Did John ever vote on zoning in any area of East Price Hill?  Did John vote to recognize the Incline District or did he leave that to his associate, former Council member Cole?  When did John begin conversations about joining the company he later resigned from Council over, was it before or after he introduced the motion to establish a TIF entity for East Price Hill? How much money did John have to invest in the company in order to become an owner?  How much money has John's business partners donated to his political campaign?

John has gall, I give him that, but he's a dishonest and hypocritical politician.  That's often assumed in politicians, but in John's case he is acting out that dishonesty.  It is a small victory that he is being called on the carpet for it.  The problem is that he and his surrogates won't back down.  I expect to hear these same claims repeated over and over again, likely via word of mouth on social media.  Each time they are repeated, they are clear lies, especially when they come from Cranley's supporters who are current and former elected officials. They know better, but will backing up John's say anything to get elected mantra.

Sunday, October 20, 2013

ICYMI: COAST and the Tea Party Lose Again

In case you missed it, COAST and the local Tea Party lost in their effort to try and deny a Streetcar supporter his right to vote.

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Chabot and Wenstrup Vote for Default and Financial Ruin

If you have any question on the lack of leadership and the lack of sanity of the members of the U. S. House of Representatives covering Cincinnati, you need to know little more than a report that both Steve Chabot (R-OH1) and Brad Wenstrup (R-OH2) voted to allow the Federal Government to Default on the Debt. That default would have sent this country into financial ruin the likes we have never seen.

Additionally, for all you and I can say about John Boehner, you can't say he is as extreme as Chabot or Wenstrup. Boehner voted to raise the debt limit.

Cincinnati needs some candidates who can blunt the social conservatives and run for the House in the 1st and 2nd. Why doesn't John Cranley test his Republican support and run for Congress again? He has to have the GOP votes to win the Mayorship, so if he keeps on trying to be a Republican for Republicans and at the same time pretending to be a Dem for Democrats, he might get elected to the House.  For Cincinnatians this would be a win, since he wouldn't be any worse than the fools we have in office now, and he could leave the Mayoral race and support a candidate for Mayor who will move the City forward, like Roxanne Qualls, not backward into a Tom Luken 1970's stupor.

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Cranley Still Being Deceptive About Smitherrman as Vice-Mayor

Don't Trust John Cranley. That should be obvious by now, but you can add to it when you read the Business Courier article reporting that Cranley says he’ll appoint a Democrat to be Vice-Mayor. The article is taking Cranley much farther than his comment warrants. Read this part:
Asked if that meant a Democrat would be appointed his vice mayor, Cranley said, “Yes, I intend to.”
Clear intentions are not commitments. Cranley can intend to feed the poor with cheese from the Moon, but face facts, that's not going to happen. He has no plan for Vice-Mayor and more importantly has not been supporting most (if any) Democratic Council Candidates, something that would help indicate who he might appoint. He has no connections with anyone but Republicans, so this comment by Cranley is pure political deception. Cranley (if elected) would be able to deny he "lied" when he appointed a Republican as Vice-Mayor because he "intended" to appoint a Dem, but none elected agree with him.

The other way this is bullshit is simple: Chris Smitherman is a registered Democrat.  So he still could claim he wasn't lying.

Cranley's statement of intentions doesn't change anything. He can pretend to be a Democrat as a way to gain votes, but when collects money from the GOP his base of support is clear.

Furthermore, Cranley isn't denying the rumor about Smitherman.

Friday, October 11, 2013

Cranley Continues His Deception, His Support Relies on the GOP, COAST

John Cranley can deny being a dues paying member of COAST until he turns purble, but his entire campaign is based on getting the support of COAST, the GOP, and the Smitherman vote. He gets what clearly is coordinated support from COAST via its Twitter feed, website and newsletter in the form of attacks on Cranley's opponent, nearly every day  This type of support is what Cranley wants and needs to win. He has to rely on the GOP and COAST to win and he can never deny that and be believed.

When I say rely upon, I mean that's 80 to 99 % of who he must have vote for him to win.

Cranley is trying to deceive Dems and Moderates into thinking that he is not doing the bidding of the GOP and COAST. He's trying to forget the amount of campaign money he is getting (and has historically gotten) from Republicans. He is trying to use the same type of deception that Chris Smitherman uses within part of the African American community, when Smitherman just out right lies about what his support from COAST means.

Cranley is a charlatan. He promises magic to everyone, but really he is only in this for himself and the few who help him. Just look how much his business partners give to his campaign to know the people John values.

The most interesting thing about the COAST Endorsement going public is that it scared Cranley into publicly trying to claim he doesn't want it. He is not even bothering to claim it wasn't an endorsement. He knows it was, but is pissed they made it public. He desperately needs to keep his reliance on the GOP and COAST the worst kept secret. Spread the word, believers! Cranley's is the COAST candidate! Say it loud and without hesitation.

Wednesday, October 09, 2013

COAST Endorsed John Cranley For Mayor, No Question Mark Needed

The biggest game John Cranley and COAST have been playing during the campaign is akin to a couple of people who work together and are having an affair. They have great praise for each other and do everything they can to help each other, but if asked, NO, they are not dating! Well, yesterday COAST came as close as anyone needs to hear to know that they are datingendorsed John Cranley For Mayor.

The worst kept secret of this Mayoral campaign is that John Cranley is the candidate of the Republicans and the Tea Party. Cranley has a long tradition of getting backing from Republicans and he is the 'wink candidate' for the Right Wing. The Hamilton County GOP knows that the Republican endorsement will hurt with the Smitherman vote, the third and unpredictable leg of Cranley's trilateral hope to win. So they wink at him, letting the Republicans in the City know who to vote for, but avoiding giving the media the means even an editor can't deny to label Cranley the Republican candidate and thus hurting his chances to get elected.

John Cranley's hopes for winning are based on deception, ignorance and Republican money. That's the kind of character who creates a public revenue source and then joins a private company to take advantage of that public money to finance a private development. Yeah, we call that a shady character.

Tuesday, October 08, 2013

Farwell to Each Note Secure

Local music blog Each Note Secure is calling it quits after ten years. I say thanks to all of the writers, but give a big shout out to Joe Long. Thanks to you Joe for adding much to Cincinnati's music and blog scene. I hope you continue to contribute to both in some capacity in the future.

Saturday, October 05, 2013

Is the Cincinnati Beacon Finally Dead?

If you head to the Cincinnati Beacon website (www.cincinnatibeacon.com) one finds nothing of the old website and instead a graphic for IIS7 (an "internet information services" entity) shows up.  I guess the Beacon is finally dead.

Political blogging is not an easy thing, no matter how many may think what I do is easy (or just drivel.) This blog has been rather un-prolific as of late.  I'm never going to return to daily blogging, but I plan on keeping this 11 going on 12 year endeavor going.

Wednesday, October 02, 2013

Did the FOP Endorsement of Sam Malone Stem From Familiarity?

I was thinking why in the world would Sam Malone get an endorsement for City Council from the FOP? Could they have been confused as to why they recognized him?
His arrest record for child abuse wouldn't have anything to do with it?

If you are wondering what I am talking about and don't remember things that happened 8 years ago, here's my blog post on Malone's arrest for beating his son with a belt.  I'm wondering how many FOP members actually knew this.  If they did and don't care, then I wonder how many of them also beat their kids with belts.  Then I wonder why people are not more concerned with Cincinnati Police brutality more often.

Also, No, Republicans, I don't care that Malone was 'acquitted.'  He admitted to beating his son with a belt, so what ever technicality exists, if Malone did this to anyone other than his son, and didn't appear in front of a Republican Judge, he would have been found guilty of assault.

The fact that the police union endorsed him is an insult to victims of crime everywhere.