Conservatives like Jeff Ruby's French Boycott
Robbernard and SpicedSass both are praising Jeff Ruby for refusing to sell any French products in his restaurants. Boycotts are good when you are on the side that is boycotting "them." If you put a picture of Jeff Ruby and Nate Livingston side by side and closed your eyes, could you really tell which was the bigger opportunist? No, no you could not.
Thursday, March 06, 2003
Chris Anderson on Green Beer Day at Miami University. Mmmmmmmmm, Green Beer. [Insert Drooling sound here]
14th Amendment possibly snagged in Ohio House
Guess what Cincinnati, Rep. Bill Seitz R-Green Township is a fascist. Now before the conservatives get pissed with my "f" word, let's look at what the word means: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control. How does this apply to Mr. Seitz? Well, in this case Mr. Seitz is upset that the 14th Amendment has been used over the years to protect individual rights of people, namely our rights to life, liberty, property, and equal protection under the law. Bill prefers to control women's bodies by banning abortions, and he wants to dictate who can get married. I wonder if Bill remembers what the main argument was in Bush v. Gore back in 2000? Just to remind you, that was the SCOTUS ruling that gave Bush the presidency. The main basis for that rule, or at least one of the main basis, was the right of equal protection under the law guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Bill likes the 14th amendment when it helps his side, but it is horrible when it helps others.
This issue has been a hot topic in the Blogosphere. Atrios, Cal Pundit, and Kevin Holtsberry all posted on it. No one brought up a big point. The amendment can't be changed by the State legislature. They can just ratify it, or not. Any other language in the bill calling for ratification would be pointless. Seitz’s language is meaningless and political posturing.
Guess what Cincinnati, Rep. Bill Seitz R-Green Township is a fascist. Now before the conservatives get pissed with my "f" word, let's look at what the word means: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control. How does this apply to Mr. Seitz? Well, in this case Mr. Seitz is upset that the 14th Amendment has been used over the years to protect individual rights of people, namely our rights to life, liberty, property, and equal protection under the law. Bill prefers to control women's bodies by banning abortions, and he wants to dictate who can get married. I wonder if Bill remembers what the main argument was in Bush v. Gore back in 2000? Just to remind you, that was the SCOTUS ruling that gave Bush the presidency. The main basis for that rule, or at least one of the main basis, was the right of equal protection under the law guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Bill likes the 14th amendment when it helps his side, but it is horrible when it helps others.
This issue has been a hot topic in the Blogosphere. Atrios, Cal Pundit, and Kevin Holtsberry all posted on it. No one brought up a big point. The amendment can't be changed by the State legislature. They can just ratify it, or not. Any other language in the bill calling for ratification would be pointless. Seitz’s language is meaningless and political posturing.
State Rep. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, is proposing more strident language: "Resolved that the General Assembly rejects those judicial interpretations of the 14th Amendment that unreasonably restrict state governments from promoting the free exercise of religion, defending the sanctity of unborn life and ensuring the equitable distribution of education dollars to aid students enrolled in schools sponsored by religious institutions."Seitz wants States to dictate to the people what religion to follow, how to use their bodies, and how to fund various religious sects. Fascist is to Bill Seitz as Bad actor is to Tom Arnold.
Wednesday, March 05, 2003
CityBeat: Jerry: The Once and Future Springer
Jerry Springer, the TV show, is trash; and it's because of that fact -- not in spite of it -- that Jerry Springer, the candidate, could be the political phenomenon of 2004.Greg, Please no! NO NO NO!!!!!! Not the ringmaster! Greg unfortunately provides an example of the final thought in my Springer post in Polstate.com.
CityBeat: Your Negro Tour Guide 50/50: Being an Influential
Kathy was named one of the 50 Most Influential Blacks in Cincinnati in the Past 50 Years. Her column gives a report and her impressions from the event honoring her and 49 others. I think Kathy did a good job of reporting her impressions, but I feel that she should not have written the column. Kathy was very humble in what she wrote, but still writing about an event were you are one of the honored guests is still a bit of self aggrandizing no matter how humble one tries to be.
I still don't like this event at all. It's intent is generally ok, but it reeks of self-segregation and a blatant double standard. Why are they honoring 50 people based on race? Why would it be considered racist if there was an event with the 50 Most Influential Whites in Cincinnati in the Past 50 Years? I would not want such an event, but why is a black event ok, while a white event is not ok?
Kathy was named one of the 50 Most Influential Blacks in Cincinnati in the Past 50 Years. Her column gives a report and her impressions from the event honoring her and 49 others. I think Kathy did a good job of reporting her impressions, but I feel that she should not have written the column. Kathy was very humble in what she wrote, but still writing about an event were you are one of the honored guests is still a bit of self aggrandizing no matter how humble one tries to be.
I still don't like this event at all. It's intent is generally ok, but it reeks of self-segregation and a blatant double standard. Why are they honoring 50 people based on race? Why would it be considered racist if there was an event with the 50 Most Influential Whites in Cincinnati in the Past 50 Years? I would not want such an event, but why is a black event ok, while a white event is not ok?
Chris Anderson brings up a letter in City Beat that covers the break up of the CJC. The letter writer brings up their websites, which Chris links to. The problem I have is that letter writer refers to the "old" website, but if you go it has not been updated much, if at all. It refers you to the "new" website for the CJC, but is has no new or revised information, which is what the letter led me to believe would be the case. I hope they update the "Black Fist's" name in their list of endorsers; they are no longer called the "Cincinnati Black Special Forces." The Special Forces are over in Iraq I guess.
Group: Uncle Milt's needs another chance
Nearly everyone I have heard talk about this bar and the area around the bar agree that has a real problem with crime. Drugs, theft, assault, and even murder go on with no check. The bar has been judged as a magnet or congregation point for these crimes. Now the Avondale Community Council now wants to give the bar another chance. So, this bar has contributed in attracting crime to their neighborhood, yet they want it to reopen under the same owners, who would likely attract the same crowd? Is this a case of the Stockholm Syndrome?
Nearly everyone I have heard talk about this bar and the area around the bar agree that has a real problem with crime. Drugs, theft, assault, and even murder go on with no check. The bar has been judged as a magnet or congregation point for these crimes. Now the Avondale Community Council now wants to give the bar another chance. So, this bar has contributed in attracting crime to their neighborhood, yet they want it to reopen under the same owners, who would likely attract the same crowd? Is this a case of the Stockholm Syndrome?
Local College Students Protest Possible War
They just don't carry any weight when they face no draft. I was in their boat in 1990 and 1991. Back then there was a slightly more realistic concern about creating a draft that would lead to an unknown long-term war. Now there might be a short-term war, lasting months, but there will not be a draft. If we end up needing troops, Bush will make a formal call for more volunteers and would get all needed. UC's News Record's account of the protests. CNN's Take.
They just don't carry any weight when they face no draft. I was in their boat in 1990 and 1991. Back then there was a slightly more realistic concern about creating a draft that would lead to an unknown long-term war. Now there might be a short-term war, lasting months, but there will not be a draft. If we end up needing troops, Bush will make a formal call for more volunteers and would get all needed. UC's News Record's account of the protests. CNN's Take.
WHAT THE HELL is this all about? I have nothing to do with this page or whoever posted a link to my blog.
Local Restauranteur Bans French Products
Ruby is an idiot, and this part of the article proves it:
Ruby is an idiot, and this part of the article proves it:
In the past, Ruby has been critical of the boycott of downtown Cincinnati.It is not an embargo, it is a boycott. If Ruby refused to sell France something, that would be an embargo. The hyper-patriotic fool knows nothing of what the issues are in this situation. He instead hopes he can capitalize on the knee-jerk conservatives happy to conform to the “cause celeb” of the talk radio jet set.
When asked if his efforts against French products are hypocritical, he said, "I don't think so, but I suppose you can stretch anything good into anything bad." He added, "This is not a boycott -- it's an embargo."
Pledge of Allegiance: Under God
Well, it is obvious to me that the editorial staff is monotheists at a minimum, but most likely Christian. This part is their legal basis for believing the 1954 Pledge is constitutional:Today, the words are part of America's colloquial usage, in the same way that "In God We Trust" is included on our currency. So if words are colloquial they lose their original meaning? I guess then the FCC will not fine people for saying "God Fucking Damn It?" If "God Damn It" is not offensive, then why is it beeped on TV so often? Why couldn’t I say that back when I was in school? Why can't a student ask their teacher for a fucking pencil? The word "fucking" is a colloquial term regularly used by a large portion of Americans. What is the problem with the word “fucking?”
There is a problem using the term. The word has a vulgar or obscene meaning to some people. The term "One Nation, Under God" means to me that that our nation is a theocratic state subject to the rule of "God". It also means that the government agreed with this statement in their 1954 law and the crass law passed last year reaffirms the 1954 law. The government or an agent of the government telling me in an official capacity that the country is subject to a “God” is extremely offensive and to me and anyone who does not share that belief.
If the term is meaningless, then why were so many Christians upset at the ruling? Why would they care what version of the Pledge was used? These are basic and honest questions that I cannot believe people would not ask and not understand. The more Christians fight to keep their "God" in the Pledge, the more valid the 9th Circuit Court's ruling becomes.
Well, it is obvious to me that the editorial staff is monotheists at a minimum, but most likely Christian. This part is their legal basis for believing the 1954 Pledge is constitutional:
There is a problem using the term. The word has a vulgar or obscene meaning to some people. The term "One Nation, Under God" means to me that that our nation is a theocratic state subject to the rule of "God". It also means that the government agreed with this statement in their 1954 law and the crass law passed last year reaffirms the 1954 law. The government or an agent of the government telling me in an official capacity that the country is subject to a “God” is extremely offensive and to me and anyone who does not share that belief.
If the term is meaningless, then why were so many Christians upset at the ruling? Why would they care what version of the Pledge was used? These are basic and honest questions that I cannot believe people would not ask and not understand. The more Christians fight to keep their "God" in the Pledge, the more valid the 9th Circuit Court's ruling becomes.
Nate Livingston back in Jail
Nate Livingston, CJC co-chair and local racist, is back in jail serving out the sentence he received as the result of a Fountain Square incident at the opening ceremonies of the year 2000 Oktoberfest. Nate has been fighting his case with multiple appeals, but the Judge in the case ruled against him and Nate was forced back into the lock-up. Nate will fight this more I am sure, but he will most likely not get out before he finishes most of the remaining sentence. Nate deserves his jail sentence, but I am sure it will do nothing but build up his hatred of people that don't look like him and think like him.
I am surprised that since Nate has been the constant media quote machine for the AP that they have not picked up the story. I have not even read it or heard in any local media outlet. The link above is from the CJC's website, where a member posted it wrapped around a huge log of propaganda that is the usual drivel their group puts out. Please take it with a large block of salt.
Nate Livingston, CJC co-chair and local racist, is back in jail serving out the sentence he received as the result of a Fountain Square incident at the opening ceremonies of the year 2000 Oktoberfest. Nate has been fighting his case with multiple appeals, but the Judge in the case ruled against him and Nate was forced back into the lock-up. Nate will fight this more I am sure, but he will most likely not get out before he finishes most of the remaining sentence. Nate deserves his jail sentence, but I am sure it will do nothing but build up his hatred of people that don't look like him and think like him.
I am surprised that since Nate has been the constant media quote machine for the AP that they have not picked up the story. I have not even read it or heard in any local media outlet. The link above is from the CJC's website, where a member posted it wrapped around a huge log of propaganda that is the usual drivel their group puts out. Please take it with a large block of salt.
Tuesday, March 04, 2003
Enquirer Readers' Views: God should be optional in pledge
Thomas Amann writes in a letter:
No one is telling you Mr. Amann that you can't say the Pledge any way you wish. What the lawsuit says is that 1) the law changing the Pledge in 1954 is unconstitutional, which it clearly is, and 2) that public school teachers/administrators (the State) can't lead children or anyone in this form of the Pledge. The original version is fully legal and actually pretty good.
The Pledge currently is optional. No student has to say it or any part of it. That is not the issue. They issue is that the law changing the pledge was a law that established a religion. That religion does not have to be an organized or an institutionalized religion, but belief in a "god" is by itself a religion. That is what most Christians, and other followers of major monotheistic religions, just don't grasp. I can worship a tree or a mountain. That is protected under the first amendment. If the government says that there is a "God," note the upper case "G" used, that would be a direct contradiction to my tree worshiping religion. I know many Christians like to think that other religions they don't know about are meaningless, but under the law they are no more meaningless than their own religion. That does not even begin to cover those of us, me included, without a religion. I honestly hope that this issue does not create the bigoted and theocratic fervor it did last year. I also hope that when it reaches the Supreme Court, that the Justices don't play politics or rely on their religious beliefs and rule in favor of establishing a state religion. I fear that monotheism will be the adopted de facto.
Thomas Amann writes in a letter:
Seems the easiest and most American way to resolve this issue over the Pledge of Allegiance would be to rule that reciting either way, with or without "under God," is acceptable. If someone doesn't want to say, "under God," that's fine with me. Just don't try to tell me that I can't say it.
Thomas Amann, Mount Washington
No one is telling you Mr. Amann that you can't say the Pledge any way you wish. What the lawsuit says is that 1) the law changing the Pledge in 1954 is unconstitutional, which it clearly is, and 2) that public school teachers/administrators (the State) can't lead children or anyone in this form of the Pledge. The original version is fully legal and actually pretty good.
The Pledge currently is optional. No student has to say it or any part of it. That is not the issue. They issue is that the law changing the pledge was a law that established a religion. That religion does not have to be an organized or an institutionalized religion, but belief in a "god" is by itself a religion. That is what most Christians, and other followers of major monotheistic religions, just don't grasp. I can worship a tree or a mountain. That is protected under the first amendment. If the government says that there is a "God," note the upper case "G" used, that would be a direct contradiction to my tree worshiping religion. I know many Christians like to think that other religions they don't know about are meaningless, but under the law they are no more meaningless than their own religion. That does not even begin to cover those of us, me included, without a religion. I honestly hope that this issue does not create the bigoted and theocratic fervor it did last year. I also hope that when it reaches the Supreme Court, that the Justices don't play politics or rely on their religious beliefs and rule in favor of establishing a state religion. I fear that monotheism will be the adopted de facto.
Black coalition: Repeal gay-rights section
Why does this sound familar? Who does this remind you of? Something "Fist," and I am not talking about Robert Mappelthorpe.
Why does this sound familar? Who does this remind you of? Something "Fist," and I am not talking about Robert Mappelthorpe.
Jonah Goldberg on Ohio
Jonah says this in reference to Cleveland: "..I've always had a special respect for Ohio. I've always thought of it as America's Rhineland." This is actually close, but I would say that he would have to lump all of the Great Lakes States together to get a real comparison to the Rhineland. Cincinnati has the automatic fit with any Rhineland connotations. Our Over-the-Rhine is not what is once was though.
Jonah says this in reference to Cleveland: "..I've always had a special respect for Ohio. I've always thought of it as America's Rhineland." This is actually close, but I would say that he would have to lump all of the Great Lakes States together to get a real comparison to the Rhineland. Cincinnati has the automatic fit with any Rhineland connotations. Our Over-the-Rhine is not what is once was though.
More young ideas for Main Street
This idea sounds great, but what about the "Banks?" What about the proposal to develop the area around Fountain Square? This may work, but I do not see it working for many years to come. Nothing happens quickly in this city, and no help will come from anti-development folks in Over-the-Rhine. People in the suburbs will not really care; they are too scared to go anyone but Reds/Bengals games. I would love to have a place like this in our city, but it needs to be more than just a carbon copy of Memphis or New Orleans.
UPDATE: Chris Anderson has some expert analysis worth reading.
This idea sounds great, but what about the "Banks?" What about the proposal to develop the area around Fountain Square? This may work, but I do not see it working for many years to come. Nothing happens quickly in this city, and no help will come from anti-development folks in Over-the-Rhine. People in the suburbs will not really care; they are too scared to go anyone but Reds/Bengals games. I would love to have a place like this in our city, but it needs to be more than just a carbon copy of Memphis or New Orleans.
UPDATE: Chris Anderson has some expert analysis worth reading.
Monday, March 03, 2003
Fingerhut entry may make for an interesting primary
Jerry Springer may have some company. Eric Fingerhut, current State Senator has thrown his hat into the ring, but Springer is still testing out the temperature of Democratic voters. Comments on this announcement can also be found on Polstate.com.
Jerry Springer may have some company. Eric Fingerhut, current State Senator has thrown his hat into the ring, but Springer is still testing out the temperature of Democratic voters. Comments on this announcement can also be found on Polstate.com.
Prosecutor: Shooting Of Man Who Attacked Officer Justified
This came a little quick. It is valid, but it will not go over well with the activist crowd.
This came a little quick. It is valid, but it will not go over well with the activist crowd.
Conservative national figure to speak at OU
If Jerry Springer only got 300 people to come to his speech at Miami, I would bet Bay Buchanan will only attract 100 to hers, not counting the 200 protestors who will picket or other wise oppose her speech.
If Jerry Springer only got 300 people to come to his speech at Miami, I would bet Bay Buchanan will only attract 100 to hers, not counting the 200 protestors who will picket or other wise oppose her speech.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)