There are several possible suspects, but no clear evidence of the party(s) responsible.
UPDATE: XRay has more on this story.
UPDATE#2: Rob Bernard commented on this last night.
"Music, literature, politics, commentary, criticism, news by Amy & Dave Purcell, and Michael Kearns. All powered by Guinness, dogs, and Buddhist thought."A group blog that looks fun. After I have a read for a few days I likely will add it to the blogroll.
She said she went into the woods to sell sex for $20, then changed her mind and was raped.Peter, why not just come out and say "she was asking for it?" If this man did not do it, then I am glad he was found innocent. If this woman was raped, then where does the investigation stand or does her mistakes, allegedly made out of fear, mean that another criminal will walk the streets without facing trial?
"It's mighty funny how some folks communicate their religious conviction, and yet compromise on the issue. I have a problem with that," Malone said. "I think we're talking about morality. We're talking about family values. The community has a right to say what the morality of the community shall or shall not be."Sam, so when does the individual get to be who they are? Why do I have to live by your oppressive religion's standards? What is immoral about not discriminating against someone because they are naturally different? I do mean naturally, from birth. Religious dogma has no place in public law. Sam, do you favor making discrimination against women and ethnic/racial/nationality minorities illegal? If yes, then why do they get "special rights?" Sam, I am part of the community you seek to lead. Why is my view less important than your pious dogmatically challenged opinion?
Stephanie Dunlap, a writer for CityBeat, contributed $20 to Spencer's campaign on Oct. 13.That of course did not happen. Was Korte making that implication? I don't know.
Dunlap wrote "No Chinese Allowed," the Oct. 1 story that caused quite a flap over Main Street developer John Elkington's alleged bias against Chinese restaurants. The story quoted Spencer and advanced his case that Democratic Councilman John Cranley's plan for Main Street should be jettisoned.
"I can see how people might see a conflict of interest," Dunlap said. "I don't pretend to always be objective. Nobody is."
Dunlap said Spencer tipped her off about Elkington.
I was wondering why you singled out Nick's Campaign to name campaign donors?Greg responds to those questions and my original post as follows:
Is it a coincidence that you named two CityBeat staffers the same week that the Enquirer's Cin Weekly, a direct competitor for CityBeat, debuts?
Were you tipped off to these contributors, or did you go looking over all candidate's financial reports for local media contributors?
Mr. Griffin:I agree with Mr. Korte that it is a stretch to think the timing of his reporting of the facts involving CityBeat could have been deliberate to coinside with the release of CinWeekly. I also think that is even more preposterous to imply (however subliminally) that CityBeat had some kind of quid pro quo with the Spencer campaign, especially over such a small contribution. I don't want an ink war either, so I hope this can be the end of it, but if Flannery gets wind of this, which I know he will, I am sure something will be said, assuming their deadline has not yet passed. It could be fun for blogging geeks like me however.
In answer to the questions in your e-mail dated 7:46 p.m. today:
I have not singled out donors to Mr. Spencer’s campaign. I could refer you to several stories and columns in which I discussed contributions to political campaign. To wit: “Finance Reports Foreshadow Upcoming City Council Race,” July 8, 2003; “Candidate Contributions Grow,” September 5, 2003; “Lynch Donors Expand,” October 5, 2003; “Lindner Family Leading Contributions,” October 23, 2003; “Candidates Opening Wallets,” October 24, 2003.
Of course the timing with regard to Cin Weekly is coincidence. To suggest otherwise would be to think I have some influence over either campaign finance reporting deadlines (set by the Ohio General Assembly) or the date of the tabloid launch (set by the publisher, who has been planning it for months.) I have not been involved at all in the young reader initiative, and I think it’s a stretch to think that my reporting of campaign contributions by City Beat staffers will have any effect on the competitive situation. Had I been solely interested in attacking City Beat, as your message seems to imply, I would not have reported on a much larger campaign contribution by an officer of the company I work for.
I came across the contribution on Nick Spencer’s campaign finance statement, filed with the Hamilton County Board of Elections last Thursday. The connection was clear as soon as I saw it. I put it in my next column, which was Sunday.
Finally, let me say this: I haven’t always agreed with what City Beat writes, but I do respect the role of an alternative press in a vibrant city. As I told Ms. Dunlap on Friday, my interest was not in starting an ink war (although, regrettably, it may be inevitable). However, given City Beat’s reporting on L’affair Elkington -- a story that soon crossed over into the “mainstream” media — I believed it was important for readers to know all the facts surrounding that story. Beyond that, I encourage you to take the story at face value: Like John McCain in 2000, Nick Spencer is the uncontested “media darling” of the 2003 Cincinnati City Council race.
Korte.
That happened during the past year when the administration failed to act to eliminate abortion payments from city health benefits, and when in negotiations with the police union it gave up on the issue of allowing the city manager to appoint assistant police chiefs.Monzel pushed that issue to appeal to "Westside" voters. Why does the Enquirer bring it up now? Hmmmm....
In June of 2002, seven council members approved $220,000 in loans and grants to LeShawn Pettus-Brown to rehab the 88 year old Over the Rhine landmark.Did it mean anything to the story to state how many council members voted for the loan? There are two problems with this bit of information. One is that it implies a party split: Only 2 of the 9 council members are Republicans. Now, the average person would likely not know the breakdown of council by party on that day or any day. So I will let that go. The real problem is that 7 people did not vote to loan money to Pettus-Brown in June of 2002, according to the council minutes from June 5, 2002. Jim Tarbell was excused from that meeting, so it was 6-2 in favor. I am nit picking a bit, but I would hope journalists might get that kind of thing correct. I would bet their error was in not checking the press release they got from the GOP or Pat DeWine, which ever source pushed the story.