What A Country -- I Guess The Constitution Just Doesn't Apply In Some Places.

HAMMOND, La. (AP) — A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have. Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

Neither Bardwell nor the couple immediately returned phone calls from The Associated Press.

But Bardwell told the Daily Star of Hammond that he was not a racist.
"I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house," Bardwell said. "My main concern is for the children."

Bardwell said he has discussed the topic with blacks and whites, along with witnessing some interracial marriages. He came to the conclusion that most of black society does not readily accept offspring of such relationships, and neither does white society, he said.

"I don't do interracial marriages because I don't want to put children in a situation they didn't bring on themselves," Bardwell said. "In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer." If he does an interracial marriage for one couple, he must do the same for all, he said. "I try to treat everyone equally," he said.

Thirty-year-old Beth Humphrey and 32-year-old Terence McKay, both of Hammond, say they will consult the U.S. Justice Department about filing a discrimination complaint.

Humphrey told the newspaper she called Bardwell on Oct. 6 to inquire about getting a marriage license signed. She says Bardwell's wife told her that Bardwell will not sign marriage licenses for interracial couples.

"It is really astonishing and disappointing to see this come up in 2009," said American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana attorney Katie Schwartzman. "The Supreme Court ruled as far back as 1963 that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry."

The ACLU was preparing a letter for the Louisiana Supreme Court, which oversees the state justices of the peace, asking them to investigate Bardwell and see if they can remove him from office, Schwartzman said.

"He knew he was breaking the law, but continued to do it," Schwartzman said.

According to the clerk of court's office, application for a marriage license must be made three days before the ceremony because there is a 72-hour waiting period. The applicants are asked if they have previously been married. If so, they must show how the marriage ended, such as divorce. Other than that, all they need is a birth certificate and Social Security card. The license fee is $35, and the license must be signed by a Louisiana minister, justice of the peace or judge. The original is returned to the clerk's office.

The Hut is Dead, Long Live Mayday

CityBeat has another good story this week about the the Gypsy Hut reopening as Mayday under new ownership. The Gypsy Hut crowd was not my crowd, but I'm looking forward to giving this new venue a try. Opening Night is October 24th with big show from the Lions Rampant, Oxford Cotton and Earthquakes (DJs Kendall Bruns and John Hogan).

Brinkman Picks on the Public Library

I guess Tom Brinkman doesn't know a puppy he wouldn't like to shoot in the head. His dislike of publicly funded libraries is out in the open in this column at the Beacon. Tom really knows how to hit hard, attacking Harry Potter! What is worse in the world than having a bunch of copies of a book for the public to read? I mean 'seriously,' what citizen doesn't want to close down library branches where anyone can go and learn, for free. That is just...just such an American thing to do. Who in their right mind wants to act like an American and give away opportunities to gain knowledge to any Joe off the Street?

Osborne Takes Down Westwood Concern

CityBeat's Kevin Osborne does a great job Westwood Concern and its key supporters, namely Melva Gweyn and Mary Kuhl, but several other leaders and loud mouths who give the neighborhood a bad name. I really can't add much to Kevin's article, so just go read it.

Ghassomian Leaving Cincinnati

For those who follow the YP and civic circles of Cincinnati this may be surprising news about Kevin Ghassomian.

Jean-Robert's Table To Open By Year's End

Foodies all around Cincinnati have been seen literally dancing for joy at news that Jean-Robert de Cavel is opening a new restaurant in downtown Cincinnati. The location is at the former Buddakhan on the 700 block of Vine St. I hope for something a little more downscale than Pigall's, more everyday or at least a couple times a month. I'm not a foodie, so I'll leave the discussion to others with more knowledge.

Groups Join Forces to Protect the Charter

A wide coalition has formed to Protect the City Charter by opposing the November, 2009 Cincinnati Charter Amendment Issue #9. The Coalition includes the Charter Committee, the Cincinnati Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Cincinnatus Association, and the League of Women Voters. These groups are what you would call the grown-ups of Cincinnati. They have the experience to know what form of government works best. Local Business and Civic leaders have formed a coalition that agrees that constant nuisance referendums are not the way to run a representative democracy. These groups all agree: No on Nine.

Cincy Twitter Pros

Soapbox Cincinnati has assembled a list of the most interesting Tweeters in Cincinnati.

Don't forget you can follow the Cincinnati Blog on Twitter here, and our sister publication TheConveyor.com is on Twitter as well.

Donald's Take on the Mayoral Debate

Griff is live-blogging the mayor's debate. I don't want to provide as much running commentary as Griff, but I thought I'd weigh in with some thoughts.

After the first third: I'm not sure who prepared Brad Wenstrup for this debate, but they shouldn't ever prepare any other candidate. Both Wenstrup and Mark Mallory are pivoting to pre-prepped answers to questions, but it's much more obvious for Wenstrup. He keeps looking down at his notes, reading responses. It's obvious his goal isn't to answer a particular question, but instead to get part of his stump speech.

Wenstrup's opening statement was ineffective at best. He raised some good points about the mayor. For instance, if all the travel is good for Cincinnati's economy, why do we have a deficit? His delivery really stepped on the line, and it would have been a much more effective attack in a two-minute response. It would have been an awesome answer in response to the question later about fixing the deficit.

Mallory isn't quite on his "A-game," but he's doing quite well in comparison. He's touting what he views to be his accomplishments without really talking about his opponent. It's the typical game plan for a relatively popular incumbent.

Neither candidate offered useful responses to a question about how to bridge next year's deficit. Wenstrup's response was essentially "I'll cut anything but police and fire." Mallory simply told us that the city manager is working on it.

Near the end of the first twenty minutes, Wenstrup raised the issue of criminal justice reform and making sure that people in jail aren't simply warehoused there. An excellent idea, but it's not clear how that fits into his agenda for the city. After all, the administration of the jail is a county issue.

After 40 minutes: I'm reading through Griff's thoughts, and I disagree a bit. For instance, when Wenstrup answered the question about how to increase the awarding of contracts to minority-owned businesses, he did have a specific: break large projects down into smaller parcels so that small contractors can successfully bid. What Wenstrup didn't say--and perhaps he doesn't know--is that this was the model for the Freedom Center construction; it successfully increased MBE participation in the project.

Mallory said something interesting about the streetcar. I thought we've been told that the streetcar isn't about transportation, it's about development. But tonight, he says it's about transportation. Specifically, he said it's about giving people in a neighborhood where somewhere over forty percent of people (I forget the precise number) don't have a car access to transportation. This is a smart pivot for streetcar proponents. It's not about "economic development" (often perceived as more money for rich people) anymore; now it's about transportation options for poor people. Will people buy this?

Wenstrup shows again a lack of knowledge on criminal justice issues. He repeats a campaign promise to consolidate the City and County prosecutor. That's been discussed for decades, without results. And besides, the City's office couldn't be entirely eliminated (since the County wouldn't prosecute offenses arising entirely under Cincinnati's municipal code). I may have a full post on this proposed consolidation later this week.

A pretty useless question near the end of this period: "What's the worst thing that could happen if your opponent is elected?" Both opponents missed the opportunity to display some grace and class and to note that the city certainly won't shut down if the other guy wins. Mallory had the best answer, I thought: the city loses a lot of experience. The answer (which probably wasn't prepared ahead of time) gave Mallory the opportunity to extol his own virtues without really putting his opponent down.

After 40 minutes: again, I disagree with some of Griff's takes. He didn't like the question as to whether Cincinnati should adopt an executive mayor system. It's a good question; I've long advocated for a decrease in the role of the city manager with a corresponding increase in the mayor's power. While I disagree with Mallory's conclusion, he answered the question quite well.

Asked about under-served neighborhoods, Wenstrup pivots back to his proposal for a liaison between the mayor and the community councils. He's not made it clear why a special staff position needs to be created for this. And wouldn't a better answer be a commitment to try to attend community council meetings? Mallory had a better answer to this, citing a specific neighborhood (Walnut Hills) that will change significantly (for the better) next year.

Closing statements: Mallory had a good closing statement. Frankly, though, Wenstrup's closing may have been his strongest moment tonight. He didn't talk specifics, but he didn't intend to. A very nice call for service.

Parting thoughts from me: Overall, the mayor had the upper hand in the debate. When the two candidates talked about crime numbers, they were talking past each other. Mallory talked about decreasing crime, and he did so by going back to 2000. Wenstrup talking about a trend towards increase, and he did that by comparing this year to last year. Generally, though, Mallory seemed in better command of the facts and had a better handle on the nuts and bolts of city administration.

And a word on the candidates' ties: they were likely symbolic of the evening. I think Wenstrup's tie hadn't been "camera tested," as it's one of those patterns that doesn't look good on TV. Mallory, though, wore a great shade of powder blue that really stood out on his white shirt.

It's pretty clear that Mallory will be re-elected. Wenstrup showed that he needs some seasoning before he's ready for a one-on-one race with the city's most powerful and most respected political family. But we should thank him for coming forward to run and giving an alternative viewpoint.

Mayoral Debate

So, here's my stream of thoughts on the debate, as it happens:

Opening Remarks:

Wenstrup had nothing to good to say about our city, all he had were negatives, and he brought up the debunked national study saying "one" of our neighborhoods is the most dangerous in the country.

Mallory cited his stats and not much else.

Question #1: Wenstrup stated his campaign speech, Mallory Answered it with positive ideas.

Question #2: Mallory avoided answering the question if public safety workers. Wenstrup said he would not cut safety workers, but then used gimmicks to say he would do something else but didn't have any details.

Question #3: Wenstrup is asked how to bring more jobs and he gave more gimmicks about minor ways to gain jobs. Mallory had more generalities, but clarified he

Question #4:Mallory running through long list of improvements and accomplishments on bringing crime down. Wenstrup instead points to perception of Cincinnati as being crime ridden, yet he is building up that FALSE perception.

Question #5: When asked what he would do with the estimated 20 million dollar a casino would bring to the city, he blathered on about generalities with no specifics. Mallory wants to create jobs with the 20 million dollars.

Question #6: Mallory answered the minority business question by stressing process. He didn't give specifics on how to do this. Wenstrup responded by saying this issue comes up a lot, but doesn't give any specifics.

Question #7: Wenstrup avoids the question on tourism and jumps on the Streetcar preamble from the long winded question. If you are going to avoid the question, why not stick to the topic. Mallory clarified the streetcar is not meant as a tourist attraction. He then put forth the strong points about how the streetcar will spawn development.

Question #8: Mallory put forth a long list again on how crime has been addressed and improved. Wenstrup sees increasing police community relations as a way to make the streets safer with groups like Citizens on Patrol.

Question #9: Wenstrup wants to cut waste. What waste? He goes on to claim that merging city and county departments will affect the 2010 budget. It won't! Mallory shows we made cuts in 2009, he turned it to creation of jobs and attarcting new business like Grater's.

Question #10: Well the anti-streetcar bias in the Cincinnati Herald Reporter was clear there! Mallory turned the question back on her well. Wenstrup wants regional transportation, but where does he stand on issue 9? Is anyone going to ask that question? He fucking brought up the subway? Blame the GOP for that one!

Question #11: Terrible question, really terrible question. I am very disappoint with all three questioners so far. Wenstrup was taken aback by the question. Mallory went in for a minor zinger, bringing about the leadership and experience question.

Question #12: Another bad question! Geesh! Why not ask the Mayor if we should just abolish the democratic system! Grr! But does Wenstrup know what an Executive Mayor system is? Why have that now!

Question #13: Hunger bad, nutrition good.

Question #14: On the Arts: Mallory city should support the arts, cited the buildings CAM, Music Hall, Union Terminal, as ways we should support arts. Wentrup wants to promote the arts, but brings up crime because he has no opinions on anything.

Question #15: Wenstrup won't answer the question, it does trap the candidate into specifics. Mr. Wenstrup: MY NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS THE STREETCAR! Mallory started to avoid naming one neighborhood, but comes through with Walnut Hills with a plan he being put in specifically.

Closing Remarks:

Mallory gave a good summary and was very gracious to Wenstrup thanking him for being a gentleman in the race.

Wenstrup: Returned the complement to Mallory. He did stick in a minor dig to the mayor talking about political plots, something he might want to look for in the FOP as well.

Overall Comments: Wow, that was bland. I learned nothing. There were no fireworks to write about, no zingers, no jabs, not much of anything. I really was disappointed with the questioners. Jane Prendergast was too insider and asked questions for a press conference. The woman from the Herald asked questions that matter to society, but not to the mayor's office. Her biased anti-streetcar question was the most biased of the night. Maryanne Zeleznik asked the most thoughtful questions, but they were too long and had confusing preludes that work for interviews, not debates.

Local Greens Hate the Environment

There is no other way to say it, but the Southwest Ohio Green Party is against passenger rail. They can say, oh, they don't like the wording of issue 9, but they still Support IT!

If Issue 9 passes, then high speed rail will skip the City of Cincinnati. That will mean more automobile traffic, more pollution, and more damage to the environment.

I think someone needs to tell the local Greens where the "Green" in their name comes from. Creating an urban core where people don't need to own an automobile is a goal any sane environmentalist would agree is a great goal to work towards for every city in the country.

Instead, local Greens want "capital projects that will satisfy existing needs, particularly in lower-income communities." What the Hell do they want, the city to build a Damn in Over-the-Rhine? How will adding jobs through both the building of the streetcar and the development it will attract to the entire urban core of the city NOT provide opportunity to the low income neighborhoods like OTR, West End, Corryville, South Fairmont, and the rest of the city?

The SWOGP are out on the deep end on this issue and have nothing to offer in its place. They share the "burn it to the ground" attitude of many extremists who prefer to sit on the sidelines of government and throw ill-conceived roadblocks in the way of progress instead of constructively working within the political system. Communism is dead and SWOGP is doing more to help COAST/Smitherman bring about Feudalism, than accomplishing anything they claim to believe.

Brand X on Midpoint

Brand X, Xavier's Student run television show covering music, has a very good episode on the Midpoint Music Festival. Here's part 1:

Who is Tom Chandler?

I pulled up the HamCo BOE's issues and candidates list, and noticed there's a write-in candidate for mayor named Tom Chandler.

Is this the same Tom Chandler who ran as a Democrat for other offices several times in the '90's? I cannot find a campaign website. Anyone have any idea why he's chosen to run a write-in campaign for mayor?

Bengals Thread

Just out of curiosity: if this past August, someone had told you that five weeks into the season, the Bengals would be 4-1--and undefeated in the division after playing each of their division opponents once--what would have been your reaction?

I'll be honest: I'd have laughed at you.

There's a good number of people who just can't wait to point out that the Bengals are "four plays away" from being 0-5. Fine. But they're also just one play away from being 5-0. So let's deal with what is, not what could have been. The Bengals defense, for the first time, is looking as formidable as we thought Marvin Lewis might be able to make a defense look. The offense is starting to look nearly as good as it did in 2005.

And could someone please get our tight end some Stickum?

Good Review for Know's Boom!

The Enquirer gives a very good review for Know Theatre's Boom! which opens tonight and runs through November 7th. I'm hitting the Season opening night, this evening, and am really looking forward to this production. Get to some local Theatre! Advance tickets are only $12, which is a great deal for professional theatre.

Wenstrup Might Want to Head Back to Iraq

So, you say you are running for public office in a city and while speaking to the local daily newspaper you make the claim:

"I felt safer in Iraq."

when talking about being back in Cincinnati, then you are a lousy candidate. By making such a clearly outlandish claim, Wenstrup has no respect for the City, otherwise he was lying, delusional, or never actually was in Iraq during any part of the war or occupation. Brad Wenstrup should be ashamed. He obviously knows nothing about this city and has NEVER experienced what it has to offer. I think he may want to consider moving out of the city, since he spouts the rhetoric of someone who hates the city and lives in the burbs.

Always Pay the Band

Yeah, if you want to get elected to office, always, repeat, always pay the band.

Streetcar Facts!

Here's a video providing facts on the Streetcar


As always check out www.cincystreetcar.com for more.

Don't forget: No on 9!

Big Sports Event (That Isn't Football) This Weekend

It's hard to believe that there are sporting events other than football games in Cincinnati in October. But it's true. This weekend, the region is host to the Cincinnati International Cyclocross Festival, a festival featuring bicycle races in three venues--Covington, Middletown, and Fairfield--over the next three days.

The only thing I really know about competitive cycling is that women really seem to dig men in cycling jerseys. But judging from the Enquirer's article on the event, the Cyclocross Festival has become something akin to the tennis Master's tournament that's held in Mason each summer. The event has grown beyond all expectations over the last few years; big names in the sport come out for it; and everyone is surprised that Cincinnati is able to hold such a successful event. Think of it as a sort of two-wheeled Midpoint Music Fest (rumor has it that Cadillac Ranch plans to deny admission to anyone wearing bicycle shorts this weekend).

If you're not up to speed on the ins and outs of cyclocross, check out this Wikipedia article for some more information. This is one of those events that's good to see in the area, as it brings a diversity that major cities need to succeed. Individual races last only from half an hour to an hour, so you can easily stop by one of the venues and check things out without committing to an entire day. Or, you can spend all day at a venue, enjoying the races and perhaps even giving the sport a go during one of the open course sessions.

FTC Says Bloggers Must Disclose Freebies

Cincinnati-area bloggers, beware: The Federal Trade Commission has codified new guidelines that require bloggers to disclose any freebies, payment, swag, or other gratuities they get when they review a product.

In promulgating the guidelines, which apply for the first time to "new media," the FTC offers the following explanation:

The Commission does not believe that all uses of new consumer-generated media to discuss product attributes or consumer experiences should be deemed "endorsements” within the meaning of the Guides. Rather, in analyzing statements made via these new media, the fundamental question is whether, viewed objectively, the relationship between the advertiser and the speaker is such that the speaker’s statement can be considered “sponsored” by the advertiser and therefore an “advertising message.” In other words, in disseminating positive statements about a product or service, is the speaker: (1) acting solely independently, in which case there is no endorsement, or (2) acting on behalf of the advertiser or its agent, such that the speaker’s statement is an “endorsement” that is part of an overall marketing campaign? The facts and circumstances that will determine the answer to this question are extremely varied and cannot be fully enumerated here, but would include: whether the speaker is compensated by the advertiser or its agent; whether the product or service in question was provided for free by the advertiser; the terms of any agreement; the length of the relationship; the previous receipt of products or
services from the same or similar advertisers, or the likelihood of future receipt of such products or services; and the value of the items or services received. An advertiser’s lack of control over the specific statement made via these new forms of consumer-generated media would not automatically disqualify that statement from being deemed an “endorsement” within the meaning of the Guides. Again, the issue is whether the consumer-generated statement can be considered “sponsored.”

Thus, a consumer who purchases a product with his or her own money and praises it on a personal blog or on an electronic message board will not be deemed to be providing an endorsement. In contrast, postings by a blogger who is paid to speak about an advertiser’s product will be covered by the Guides, regardless of whether the blogger is paid directly by the marketer itself or by a third party on behalf of the marketer.

There's a lot of hysteria in the national blogosphere (particularly in the legal blogosphere), most of which is probably unjustified. Check out PCWorld's extremely layperson-friendly guide to the new guidelines. As the article notes, most bloggers who review the free stuff they receive already disclose the potential conflict. Still, though, local bloggers who get swag (hey Griff: where's my swag?) and talk about what they've received should take a few minutes to familiarize themselves with the FTC's new interpretation of federal law.

Disclosure: I have not received money or other consideration from the FTC, PCWorld, or (sadly) Griff to comment on any of those entities' or individual's merits or shortcomings.