Showing posts with label Race. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Race. Show all posts

Thursday, April 08, 2021

20 Years Later, Peter Bronson is Still Terrible.

 It is 20 years after a Cincinnati police officer killed an unarmed man, Timothy Thomas. The Enquirer solicited a wide set of opinions from people who dealt with much of the events in the days, months and years after that tragic night. 

The choice was made by the Enquirer to include Peter Bronson, former Enquirer columnist and Editorial Page editor, in this project. On the surface, it makes sense. He was part of the newspaper’s coverage back then and it is logical to think he would have a perspective that would have insights that add context from a conservative point of view. For all of Bronson’s right wing drivel he out out during his career,  he had a one on reputation to be a reasonable person, especially compared to the Republican media of today. Plus he’s prose and one might think he has learned something in retirement.

Well, instead of insight or reflection or evolved wisdom we got a pissant FOXNews type column (not going to link to it) filled with cheap shots, mistruths, and wannabe Tucker Carlson blather that appears to have written for the Dusty Rhodes cabal of Old Cincinnati. 

That cabal  filled with the crusty old men, mostly men, who are now mostly near death or retired from public life, as the new phrase goes, and held Cincinnati back from being a growing vibrant city 30-40 years ago. These are men that pushed self righteous hate on everyone they could.

That type of old mindset kept our country from learning from our mistakes and just repeated them, often out of spite. That Old Cincinnati is done and needs to not be heard from again.

Peter Bronson should retire from public life. He is not a good person. A good person does not write that column. A good person can gain some perspective. Bronson, like Rhodes is a bitter old man who has no value to society. 

I think puzzles and shuffleboard are the most we can expect from Peter. I expect he cheats at both as he has demonstrated he has no class.

The Enquirer should never print another word from him ever.

Saturday, July 20, 2019

Do Republicans in Cincinnati Know Latin? "Qui Tacet Consentire Videtur"

"Qui Tacet Consentire Videtur" is a Latin axiom that roughly translates to "He who is silent is understood to consent."  I am sure this phrase or a variation has come up in an Op/Ed you have read in the last week.  I say that assuming you are a person who reads Op/Eds from reasonable news outlets.  For the limited audience of my blog, I am going to make a reasonable assumption that you do.

Another bit of information that most people know is that Donald Trump is scheduled to hold a rally on August 1st here in Cincinnati. This will be a couple of weeks after Trump made his racist Tweets about four members of the House of Representatives. and then a few days later at another Trump rally in NC made horrific xenophobic chants, that are clear examples of fascism.

What is going to happen at the next Trump rally here in Cincinnati?  Will hoards of local racists, fascists, sexists, bigots, white nationalists, and xenophobic assholes show up?  You better believe they will.  There are tons of them in the tristate area and they are attracted to Trump and love to vent their hatred and blame on non-white people for all of their troubles.  Yes, that is currently the primary motivational strategy of Republicans for the 2020 election.

With this in mind, I am calling out all local Republicans officials to take a stand.  Do you oppose racism/xenophobia or do you condone it?  You have to take a stand one way or the other.  There is no wiggle room here.  I'm not looking for Republicans to change their party affiliation or anything, I am looking for basic humanity.  Simple acknowledgement that what Trump tweeted and a significant portion of his followers at the rally chanted were racist and xenophobic and that is wrong.  Or you could agree with both and come out of the closet, so to speak.That is it, just denounce the racism and xenophobia or embrace it.  There are not three sides to this.  So, those local Republicans out there, make your stances known.  Those people include the following list:

  1. Senator Rob Portman
  2. Senator Mitch McConnell
  3. Senator Rand Paul
  4. Representative Steve Chabot
  5. Representative Brad Wenstrup
  6. Representative Thomas Massie
  7. Prosecuting Attorney Joe Deters
  8. Treasurer Robert Goering, Jr.
  9. Engineer Ted Hubbard>
  10. Cincinnati City Council Jeff Pastor
  11. Cincinnati City Council Amy Murray
  12. Anderson Township Trustee Andrew Pappas
  13. Blue Ash City Council Jeff Cappell
  14. HCRP Chairman Alex Triantafilou
  15. Sheriff Jim Neil
  16. Cincinnati City Council Christopher Smitherman
How should they take a stand against the racism and xenophobia?  Well, two things everyone on this list should do are 1) not appear at the Trump rally on August 1st and 2) denounce Trump's tweets as racist and the chants at his NC rally (and him letting it grow) as xenophobic.  For the purpose of what I am asking, that is it.

IF you DO NOT do either of these simple and honorable requests in a reasonable way WITHOUT a "whataboutism" or WITHOUT attempting to shift the blame to something else, THEN I am going to forever believe that you agree with Trump and his hoard of followers.  He or She who is silent is understood to consent.  If you don't have the courage to go on Twitter or Facebook and denounce this racism and xenophobia, then you are condoning it, even if only as a means to get elected.  There is no difference between believing in racism/xenophobia and simply exploiting voters' agreement with elements and policies of racism/xenophobia as a means to gain support for an election.  The ends don't justify the means.  If you come out in support of it, well, you just might get more criticism, and face the wrath of your god at a later point.  I'll stay out of that fable and let your conscious deal with that.

My belief is not much of a punishment, I know, but it is a question of honor.  There are honorable people on this list who know better, but are going along with this abomination out of a misplaced sense of fear and a lack courage.  Look to the former Governor of Ohio, John Kasich.  I don't agree with him politically on much, but I can consider him an honorable person for taking a public stance against Trump on his racism.

There are people on this list who don't claim to be Republicans, but they certainly act, vote in Republican primaries, appear at Trump rallies, or take GOP contributions like a member of the Party, so they get the same treatment.  Some on this may have already taken a stance, like Mitch McConnell, which fails on all levels, so I don't expect him to change.  Others may have already taken a firm stance against Trump and if they have, good, I hope they repeat it louder so I can read it.  They are included because of their chosen Party affiliation, and I won't give them a 100% pass for doing the right thing.  I've left off a bunch of other lower officials that I hope also will make a choice. 

My list also didn't include the many local conservative media blowhards or social media trolls.  I expect most of them either to embrace the hate or be silent like the cowards I believe they are.  Also, why give them any more attention, which they crave?

Among the few who read this, I am sure there will be criticism of me.  Fine, you can try, but I am not going to budge or falter in your attacks.  Yes, I am judging people based on their actions or inactions.  That is how we should be judged.  The only repercussion is my opinion of other people based on their actions or inactions. Nothing Earth shattering, but if one or two people are nudged to action, that's better than not saying a damn thing. I may call people racist or xenophobic in the future and I will mean it.  I will point to this and their actions or inactions and will be more than satisfied with my conclusion.  IF you don't like me exercising my 1st Amendment right to redress my grievance with my government representatives, then you have problem with the U.S. Constitution.  I am not not going back anywhere.  I am an American, love me or leave me alone.

Sunday, March 26, 2017

Passing the Ball to Yourself Isn't a Completion, It's More of a Recovered Fumble

The Enquirer sometimes reporter and sometimes columnist Jason Williams wrote a story this week about what would become the subject of his column PX: Yvette Simpson dropped ball on 'pale male' comment.  He created the issue by personally taking offense to the word "pale" being using against John Cranley.  Or it is possible he was fed the article by the Cranley campaign who wanted to play the reverse racism card.  Either way this was self manufactured outrage by Williams.  Then he writes the column and get's up on his soapbox and champions the fight against racism, against white people.  He even pulled in the opinion of former scandal ridden Hamilton County prosecutor Mike Allen who appears to be willing to play a newly minted white race card.

I didn't know those existed, but if any one locally would have one made for himself Mike Allen would be that guy.

Jason's sanctimonious column rings hollower with every Republican or Conservative Democrat he thinks to ask for comment on this topic.  He, and Cranley's camp, have contrived a slight that is so minor, that is so meaningless that NO ONE WOULD CARE ABOUT IT if he didn't bring it up.  Cranley wouldn't have cared about it if someone didn't bring it up to him.  If anyone other than a black woman used that phrase, Williams or Jay Kincaid or Cranley himself (who ever fed Williams the story) wouldn't have bothered to use it as a race based campaign tactic.

That's the Cranely goal here.  The Cranley camp is playing racial defense. They know they are not going to win the majority of the black vote for Mayor with two black candidates running.  That fear is exacerbated when a former Cranley ally (one very influential in the black community) defects after Cranley's actions.  What does that mean?  It means he has to win the white vote big.  The white vote, which is no more monolithic than the black vote, does have one segment that tends to think alike, the GOP vote, which is nearly all white. Cranley has to win the GOP vote, something he hurt his chancing of doing when he advocated making Cincinnati a "sanctuary city."  How better to draw in white outrage than creating race based outrage against a black candidate?  Well, there are other ways to be a legitimate candidate who pulls in votes of white people, but why would Cranley want to win legitimately when crass actions make it more likely he wins at all?

Jason Williams continues to be a poodle of the Cranley camp.  He has it out for Yvette Simpson and is willing to dump this type of bullshit column out there and hide behind the comments of Mike Allen.  I'd call it brazen if it wasn't just so biased.  It is biased on multiple levels: Pro-Cranley, race, and gender.  It is by far his worst column of this election season, but I am sure it earned him brownie-points within the Cranley camp. It won't 'earn' him a position in a Cranley administration, but it inches him that way.

As a case in journalism, this episode falls into the don't make your own news category.  Williams didn't make news in the sense that he became part of the story, but he sure did as a columnist.  His column is largely framed as him not liking how Simpson's campaign responded to HIM.  Add that to the the race based logistics I write about above and this column is a shit-storm.  He built the controversy and he attempted to bottle it.  I call that trying to catch your own pass, something you can't do in American football, unless someone else touches the ball first.  Simpson didn't touch this story and that pissed off Williams off, but didn't stop him from catching his own pass.  That is what I call a fumble recovered for a loss.  Journalism and politics need forward progress, not steps back.  This is a step back.  The worst part, he could have written about this topic and not made it such a big deal and made an actual point about the Facebook comment.  That doesn't help his cause, so fair play be damned.

Saturday, October 20, 2012

Obama Yard Signs Burned in Green Township

The Cincinnati Herald is reporting multiple incidents where Obama yard signs were burned while they sat in the front yards of Obama supporters.

The undertones of racism to these incidents can not be denied. Burning anything in someone's front yard is obviously based on the KKK, assuming otherwise is ignorant.  It is sad that this likely will not get the coverage it should. WCPO has as story as well.

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

More COAST Bigotry

Are we just numb from the bigotry and veiled racism that flows from the people behind COAST?  I starting to think we are heading that way, but Kevin Osborne of CityBeat has a strong blog post outlining what the latest incident entailed.  The surprising source of the bigoted graphic came from a black UC student who, according to Osborne, has volunteered on local GOP political campaigns, including Council member Amy Murray.

Monday, August 22, 2011

False Perceptions Are Fueled By the Media, and Build Walls

The events Friday and Saturday are tragic events, but the lingering tragedy is in the fuel that burns the false impressions into the minds of ignorant people from the media coverage of these events.  No, there's nothing false about the news, but it's the intensity given the story. The articles are going out of their way to give the truth about crime rates and the exceptions that these incidents represent, but people like Joe Deters are using it and will use it to build fear.  All they need are the images and the words describing what happened.  The headlines and the pictures are what linger in the minds of the average Joe-Q-Public.  When there are three or four different headlines about the same story, an extra importance is perceived.

This results in the false perception of the city and of Downtown.  It strengthens the bigotry of some and it puts doubt in the fickled ignorant, who consume news as if they are window shopping for shoes.  This is a cultural state that is plaguing the public and I don't know any type of solution, short of driving around every cul-de-sac and neighborhood in the tri-state area, shouting slogans on a megaphone.  That still wouldn't get the truth into minds who don't want to know anything that isn't easy and familiar.

What I am bracing myself for is the political onslaught of fear mongering.  There was some from Deters in the article above.  He's done it so many times I think everyone expects the same and they get the ignorance he puts out, like his ignorance on Times Square crime rates. (Hat Tip to CincyCapell).

What I am really hoping we don't get are Council Candidates using this as political fodder.  I encourage council members and candidates issuing comments that are introspective or positive.  We need to work together to prevent crime and we need to make people understand that our city is safe.  We don't need council candidates claiming this is any type of indication or example of something that should drive future action of government.  Here the system worked. No more or no fewer police officers were going to prevent a person from carrying a gun illegally in a public place. It is tragic that a 16 year old put himself into this situation.  I also really hope that the police actions are allowed to be reviewed, but not used as a tool to build hate.  If there are questions, they can be asked.  We don't need to push fear of the police.  I am looking right squarely at Chris Smitherman on this. I hope he does not play politics with these incidents. Instead I really hope he helps people understand what happened, not assume they know what happened and create more false perceptions.  False impressions build walls.  Many of us have tried to tear down all of the walls that separate  us into conflicting factions.  It is the duty of all public officials, and those trying to become public officials, to help keep those walls down and create open spaces were people and their cultures can freely blend with all others.

Friday, June 18, 2010

Is "Black-on-Black Violence" A Myth?

Earlier this week, the Enquirer reported that several local non-profit agencies are working together to "curb black-on-black violence."

This piece, currently available at The Root, posits an interesting thesis: that the label "black-on-black violence" is an unnecessarily racialized view of problems that are really socioeconomic in nature. From the op-ed:
At this particular moment in our history, it is more important than ever to reject these kinds of racialized explanations. They are being used to slander public school children as incapable of learning; to deem affordable housing a hopeless cause. In gentrifying cities, ''black-on-black crime'' is used as a weapon to encourage public policies that treat black people as blights on the new urban aesthetic. There is a moral imperative to challenge these assumptions.

I've not fully thought this through, but I thought the piece made some good points (after all, have you ever heard a crime described as "white-on-white violence"?) that might be of interest to our readers.

And with respect to the linked Enquirer article: I should note that apart from the headline, the article doesn't use the phrase at issue. And, in fact, the body of the article does a pretty good job of exploring the socioeconomic causes of urban crime.