Blasphemous Hypocrisy

Is this column from Bronson Blasphemy? Granted it only is if you believe in Christianity as Bronson does. I don't, so it is no skin off my ass, but what puts sand in my sandals is Bronson's hypocrisy. "The Last Temptation of Christ" was one person's interpretation of the biblical story with some extrapolations. What was Mel Gibson doing? The same thing; one person's interpretation of the biblical story with some extrapolations. Why did people like Bronson protest Martin Scorsese for not portraying what they believed was the "right" story, and now Gibson's movie is getting similar (all be it less pious) criticism, but is being praised as the "greatest movie ever made."

I have not seen the movie. I have no plans to see it. I don't care if anyone does or does not, but what I would like would be for bible thumping columnists to try and be consistent on treatment of art. Peter, when you hit Corpus Christi for not being "truth," I hope you don't mind that I point out "The Passion of the Christ" is not "truth" either.

UPDATE: Greg Mann comments on Bronson's column as well.

Theoretically Sound

Ok, so the Ohio Board of Education is expected to allow into school curriculum "a critical look at the theory of evolution." I have to wonder, will they include "a critical look at" the Germ Theory of Disease? There very well might be criticism of the germ theory out there, and it might even be taught in high schools, but if you are going to open up science to criticism, then you better do it to everything, not just those topic which conflict with certain religious fundamentalists.

The Enquirer has guest columns from the Anti-Evolution crowd, and the Pro-Science crowd. As well as letters. Thursday's Editorial was just peachy too with its "lets appease the fundamentalists" attitude. I really have to laugh at those who want "debate" in education. Where is the debate on the theory of gravity?

Just a reminder, ID (Intelligent Design) is nothing but a philosophical argument, not a scientific argument.

Calpundit: Blair and Bush

Kevin Drum at Calpundit referenced a recent speech from Tony Blair on the Iraq War and terrorism in general. Drum makes the observation that Bush would never say what Blair said. Blair basically made a " I understand that reasonable people can differ on this, but...." argument, which is not new, but something Bush couldn't or wouldn't pull off. His with us or against us type of rhetoric is why the world dislikes him so, and emblematic as to why don't like him.

Ohio, Ohio, Ohio Continued

BushCo has opened their Ohio campaign headquarters up in Columbus with a plan for 12,000 volunteers with plans for the number to grow to 50,000. Now, those are campaign numbers, so when they say volunteers they are including the guy who puts a sign in his yard.

The numbers indicate to me that it is going to be an in your face race here in Ohio. I have seen Bush's commercials already aired on Cincinnati TV stations, which simply may be the case for all media markets this size.

Michael over at Rantophilia disagreed with my concerns about potential violence in the Presidential Race this year. He seems to be dismissing it outright, calling it "silly." Well, blood in the streets is silly; I am not talking about a full civil war or anything here. What I am talking about is a 19th Century style of strong-arm politics with a touch of European Fascism. I predict that in Columbus, for example, it is likely that counter protestors at a rally for one of candidates will go over the edge and start a pushing and shoving match, which if tempers are not in check could end up cracking a few skulls.

I normally would say that those who follow politics are generally pussies, when it comes to actual fisticuffs. We use big words because we generally don?t have the footwork to back up our verbal jabs. This year I see something different. I see more people actually paying attention. I see growth in frothing at the mouth on rally goers. I am very fearful that some idiot will cause a media circus akin to the über-hyped Janet Jackson boob fiasco, thus making people angry that one side started a fight, and then the beatings would really begin. I see American politics as a powder keg, damp, but drying out quickly.

Downs on Politics

Good! Maggie has a column about politics. I hope to read more columns on political and current events issues from Maggie. The Enquirer has no other non-paleoconservative columnists in the Metro section, or at least those that do far more reporting than commenting (like Korte).

Chabot Plays the Shill

Rep. Steve Chabot is leading the charge against Gay Marriage in the House. I wish he would look beyond the end of his nose:

'The people and their elected representatives - and not a handful of rogue judges and officials - should have the right to make decisions regarding marriage policy,' he said.

Now, hmm, Rep. Chabot is concerned about the right of some of the people to tell other people what they can and can't do, but when individuals want to do something that is no threat to him or anyone else, he holds hearings. Almost ironic, if it were not so typical of a politician.

Doug White, State Senator, supports it, but I am perplexed by this:

In Ohio, Senate President Doug White, R-Manchester, said he would help ratify an amendment if Congress acts. He said he would support it for the same reasons he supported the Defense of Marriage Act that passed in January. Gov. Bob Taft signed that bill, making Ohio the 38th state to pass such a law in recent years.

We'll see if Washington acts," White said. "And then we'll see what the will of our citizens are when it gets out here."

Ok, what were the reasons White supported the Ohio law? Why, Why, Why does he and the rest of the law's supporters think homosexual marriage will harm anyone? I have been asking this constantly and it is a bit of baiting question, so I don't really expect an answer. The only answer given is hollow: "Marriage is defined as the union of a man and a woman." That is about all you will hear a politician say.

Well, Steve Chabot, Rob Portman, Mike DeWine, et al: Why do you support this (if you do)? Please be specific. Don't make the reporters answer follow-up questions. If you are going to keep homosexuals as second-class citizens, please have the "courtesy" of being fully honest as to why.

Ad Bitz

Get used to the phrase I am {Insert Candidate's Name Here} and I endorse this message. Ohio will be the dumping ground for every political advertisement possible in the Presidential race. We are in for wall to wall TV commercials that will really start to wear on you. I would get used to it for while. Your only hope is that the polls swing to one candidate's favor over 15%, so the other candidate might give up on us.

City Worker's Racial Slurs

Well, I hope they fire this idiot. This guy sounds like a Klansman. What I hope people understand happened is this:

The suspect even made some of the comments after he was verbally confronted by fire and police personnel who were monitoring the radios.

"Why don't you be a man and identify yourself?" one of them asked.

Now, I hope this is not played up into some wide conspiracy of KKK infiltration of city government. I hope the boycotters don't go McCarthy on us.

Springer Back in Town

Jerry is moving back to Cincinnati, or so says his aides. Maybe Jerry is going to run for Mayor in 2005.

Cranley and Ghiz?

Korte is reporting, well mentions in passing that Leslie Ghiz used to date John Cranley. This is not the first I heard of this, but I thought someone was just kidding around. Damn, the political class in this city sure moves around in small circles.

In the same article Korte writes in what I can assume was Steven Reece corning him and forcing him to listen to him go on and on about the plans he has for his daughter. Statewide office or Mayor? Does she need to learn to walk before she can fly?

Bronson and Amos Clarification

Yesterday I wrote about Bronson's column and need to clarify my comments about Denise Smith-Amos. She sent me an email and mentioned the her Jan 12 Q&A did include a section on the topic Bronson covered. She also mentioned that her Q&A is not an opinion piece, therefore she does not express her views, as I suggested she should have.

My intent in mentioning her was to more point out that Bronson was the wrong person to be making the points he made in his column, and my asking why she did not cover it in her Q&A failed to mention the linked article above. I did not mean to suggest that she failed in reporting this issue. What I intended to ask is why the Enquirer Editors did not have her tackle that subject, and then I brought up that she might not share Bronson opinions, which is of course understandable.

If I offended her, I apologize.

Primaries

Kerry won BIG. He will be the Democratic Nominee. Ohio I think is officially in play.

DeWine is winning big.

Monzel is losing. That means it will be Grossman vs. Portune.

Museum Levy is passing big.

Voter turnout in the county was about 28%. Not horrible for just a primary.

The biggest joke of the primary is that Kabaka Oba got 14,110 votes. We have over 14 thousand people who voted for a racist. I would love to see the breakdown as to where these voters came from. Did Kabaka win any precincts? Or even any wards in the City? I can't imagine that Oba got the Burb vote. I am ashamed that an open racist was able to get that kind of support. The "so called" black militant wants to break away from the United States and form a separate "black dominated" country. So lets all give big cheer to the fools who voted for someone who made his name making religious and racial slurs at City Council meetings. Oh, happy days.

So Long Sweety

Marge Scott has died. I was not a fan, but not a huge detractor. She had many problems that were common to those of her generation, but she was an owner with World Series Win under her belt.

Queen City Forum

The folks over at QCF takle both Gay Marriage and Article XII.

Maybe Peter will read Steve Fritsch's piece where Steve, a conservative, supports Civil Unions. I may not agree this is the ideal, but I am happy to see there are many conservatives who see this as an issue of freedom and equality and are willing to find some reasonable middle ground. I might want to pull Steve to closer to the Gay Marriage position, but compromise show that people are coming at this from a non-emotional and non-religiously obsessed mindset and are willing to be fair.

Question to Bronson

Bronson: Why do you fear homosexuals?

I know you are against gay marriage and against equal rights for homosexuals, but I want to know why. Why do you think homosexuals impose on your rights? How do two men getting married affect you? If it is about money, then why are you not opposed to making remarriage after divorce illegal, thus reducing "costs" across the board.

What I also have to ask also is why is it a problem for a HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, to support a movement for the equal rights of humans?

Also, Peter, do you really believe a poll by the CCV? I mean, that is like believing a poll by the Tobacco lobby saying most people like eating in the smoking section of a restaurant.

Peter, the bigoted Article XII was passed mostly because your side misled the public into thinking it gave special rights, which you guys still are doing. It gives no more special rights than those who are protected from discrimination based on religion. Are you opposed to that Peter?

I didn't think so.

Ohio, Ohio, Ohio

On Meet the Press yesterday Tim Russert had out his marker board with the words Ohio Ohio Ohio on written much like he did in election day in 2000 but with Florida written three times. Speculation is now growing that Ohio will be the battle ground for President and that we could be the next Florida.

Well, there are several problems with this concept. Ohio will not be super close. We might be within a percentage point, but nothing like Florida. We will be targeted as the swing state of all swing states, but with a catch. The Democrats don't need Ohio to win. It would make it easy to win the White House if they did, but they don't need Ohio. The GOP must win Ohio or they will loose. Ohio is the bell weather for middle America, and the GOP can only win if they carry the Midwest big.

At this point Bush can likely forget about winning Michigan and Pennsylvania. It think the issues will hurt him there and many of those same issues spill into much of Ohio. That is where he is in danger. Ohio is much more GOP than either Michigan or PA, but the social issues don't carry the state. Jobs and Security will carry Ohio. Bible thumping might get you Adams County, but that is about it, and Bush had them at hello.

I am worried about campaign in Ohio. We are seen as a target and will likely be the place that sees the candidates a dozen times come the fall. That means we will be ripe for conflict. Local party people could start getting nasty. I could see things in Columbus get out of hand. I mean, they rioted when they won a football game, so I would think some hot bloodied college Republicans might get a few too many beers one day while watching the Buckeyes on TV and decide to go disrupt the Democratic VP's rally on OSU campus. Yes, it could happen the other way around, but I think this would were the GOP could be more desperate. Hold onto your hats kids, the Buckeye will be bucking.

Primary Predictions?

Anyone have any? I will bet Kerry takes Ohio, DeWine wins, and Brinkman. Other than that, I have no clue.

Bonson and Smith-Amos

Ok, Peter Bronson had a column yesterday about education in the inner city and the problem of anti-intellectualism or about being bullied for being "too white." I did not have a problem with the overall point of his column. I think that is a problem in some segments of the black community. My concern is the messenger. Peter's opinions will go on deaf ears in the black community. He is either hated or just not read by anyone who might actually gain something from the issues he raised. Why then didn't Denise Smith-Amos do a story on that issue? She does the education Q&A every week. Would it be because she disagrees with the premise? I hope she does not, because in this case Bronson is not making up a problem out of thin air. It exists. It is a problem, and it is ignored all to often.

Now, the only ironic thing about Bronson is his sudden defense of intellectualism. That is ironic from a conservative like Peter. He often attacks higher education, and education in general because it is not his brand of education. What do they lack? Well they lack the 4th "R". Yep, good old "religion." I am glad Peter kept that out of this, but I hope he will remember that historically "religion" has done more than any other element of society to hold back intellectualism and new thought. It did wonders to teach reading and basic education, but thinking for oneself, thinking that man is not mere chattel of a deity, that is just ‘heathenspeak.’ But I digress...

Priceless Mary

From CiN Weekly's review of Hamburger Mary's

"Mary's makes you feel like a queen, not a picky eater."

If the suburbanites only knew, they might run to the hills in terror!

'God' Hates Shrimp

Hilarity! I wonder what Phil Burress is doing about this bible verse, Leviticus 11:12?

Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

Red Lobster is sending us all to 'Hell'.

Speaking of Religion

Gina Daugherty of CinWeekly reports about Brendon Cull, press secretary for Mayor Charlie Luken becoming a "minister" in the Universal Life Church.

Brendon Cull, press secretary for Mayor Charlie Luken, became a minister through the Universal Life Church online earlier this year so he can officiate at his sister's wedding this fall.

But Rev. Cull didn't just opt for the freebie ordination - he spent a few bucks to get the certificate, laminated card, sticker for his window and - drum roll - a parking pass with "Minister" on it.

"That's my favorite," Rev. Cull says. "And it's fun in social occasions to whip out my minister card - it's come out on more than a few occasions. But it's not worked as a pick-up line yet."

Does Brendon's religion allow Gay Marriages?

If it is this "easy" to become someone who can officiate a wedding, then I have to ask, what really is the big deal about Gay Marriage? Why are we letting the right wing theocrats push their religion on every one else?

Gun Nut on Stephen Hill

Ok, the Conceal and Carry law has passed here in Ohio, something I disagree with. At this point, the law is the law. For some reason someone, ID of "cbaus", at www.ohioccw.org, is beating on reporters and citing Stephen Hill. I have to ask, what the hell does Stephen Hill have to do with gun laws? Why is this guy attacking reporters? I know conservatives bitch about the "liberal media," but this guy is going nuts, all in the cause of privacy. He does not want gun owners to have to face a background check for guns. He is pissed the media can investigate who is applying for a C&C permit. What I have to ask, "Can we trust Truck Drivers with Guns?" I mean when an out of work truck driver breaks into a Truck company and kills people, that "shows" that we can't trust truck drivers. What an ass. Give your freaking gun obsession a rest. You "won." Take your victory lap and shut the hell up. If you want to attack the media, then do it with a little class. Cite some examples of reporters doing something that conflicts with your gun rights positions, and then link to it. That is all it takes. Exploiting a child abuse case to further your need to quell your fears is disgusting.

The Rambler

Drop over and say hello to The Rambler, a new local Cincinnati blogger.

UPDATE: I also added a couple of conservative bloggers to the blogroll, Rob Bernard and the Naughty Pundit. I don't agree with there opinions, which I am sure they know, but I like having local people to link to on the other side of spectrum who are not oblivious to Cincinnati Area culture.

I also added a link to the Queen City Forum. I recently met both the Publisher Steve Fritsch
and Editor-in-Chief Michael D. Altman. Both nice guys with a strong commitment to opening the eyes of the city to ideas they are not getting while watching local TV news.

WCPO TV News Reporter Arrested on 'Sex Charges'

Stephen Hill a reporter with WCPO has been arrested on charges of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor. Hill faces 8 counts of unlawful sexual conduct with boys whose ages have not been disclosed. As police tried to arrest him, Hill reportedly attempted to commit suicide by slashing his wrists.

This is what can best be described as a local bombshell news story. When news like this hits home to the media, they take it hard. What will be interesting is the amount of coverage it gets nationally. It was headline news on WLW radio this morning, but was not really a topic of conversation for callers. I chalk that up to it being Saturday morning.

The man deserves his day in court, but his behavior does not bode well for innocence. I would hope his past is being investigated to determine if he has had contact with other children locally and in cities where he worked previously.

If one of children abused was any of the kids he has cared for as a foster parent, then I hope local government officials will investigate how he was screened and let into the program.

The age of the children should be a factor that I hope is made public. All to often this is called Pedophilia no mater how old the victim is. Pedophilia specifically refers to the sexual attraction of children aged 13 and younger. Those who want the 14-17 year olds fall into what is called Hebephilia. For more information on this definitions check out www.religioustolerance.org which lists some definitions and terms used. Neither of these types of behaviors are tolerable, but one is worse than the other. If Hill was abusing a 15 year old, that is one crime, while a 5 year old is a whole different crime, or rather it should be. Lumping both crimes into one umbrella is ultimately unfair. I am sure this sounds like I am trying to defend Hill, something I don't wish to do, but passing comments on WLW referred to this a pedophilia, which is not a valid term. Hills added "crime" is that these people trust Hill to help mentor their children. That makes his actions just seem more heinous, much akin to the Priest sex scandals.

WCPO issued an on air comment on the issue, which is online here.

Additional coverage: WCPO, WLWT, The Post.

UPDATE: WLW is reporting that the children's ages were between 13 and 17. The also saying he is being charged with "child molestation" which goes to the point that no, this would not necessarily be the case.

UPDATE#2: I hate to link to this, but Nate (Rhymes with Hate) is claiming Hill was set up by Keith Fangman. Here is one of his many pseudonym's full post:

Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 3:28 am Post subject: Channel 9's Steven Hill Arrested.

I can't believe this shit! The cops are trying to ruin another black man in this city. Steven Hill has been one of the few decent reporters in this town who wasn't afraid to tell the truth about the police department. You might remember Keith Fangman went on a crusade against Mr. Hill a few years ago and now they tell us that Mr. Hill was having sex with children. Give me a fucking break. I don't believe a word of this bullshit. This is the same type of shit they tried to pull with Ovie Mitchell.

These white boys are a bunch of devils. Fangman is a dirty dog just like Pat Dewine. They both hang around with the family values crowd and they both left their wives. Everybody knows that Pepper is a fag. The cops couldn't get Mr. Hill on anything REAL so they made some shit up. When is the Black community gonna wake up and realize that these white motherfuckers ain't worth a damn and stop letting them pick off Black people one by one.
_________________
Posted by The REAL Blog
This is protected by the 1st Amendment aaaannd the RED, the BLACK, and the GREEN !!!

Now I can't wait to see how Nate responds to my post by showing his racism and frankly his paranoia. This was post late last night, so he may not have been thinking clearly, or did not know about the attempted suicide by Hill, but the guy must really be living in a dream world, or just likes baiting people. If he's trying to bait people, I guess he hooked me, but exposing this type of comment I hope instills all of the liberals/progressives and journalists in town, and I especially hope the LOCAL AP REPORTERS, that Nate is a racist and bigot. Please see him for that and do not consider him or his organization as legitimate or worthwhile to include in any community discussion or effort. Also, for those reading this on his message board be sure to read the original at cincinnati.blogspot.com.

Thought Police: Just the Facts Ma’am

Ok, where are all of the conservatives who get pissed off every time a leftist wants them to stop using "Redskins" or "Indians" to describe a sports team going to take a full bore stand against the out right theocratic fascism (yet I said it again) of Phil Burress and the CCV?

Now, everyone knows that Clear Channel has nothing to fear from the current FCC commissioner or the current President, after all Rush Limbaugh is a Clear Channel man. It is interesting that we have not heard much about this on WLW, but I guess they want it to just go away.

On the other hand, this situation sounds like it was taken right from the plot of the 1987 version of Dragnet, where an anti-porn preacher conspired with a pornographer to push each other's causes by orchestrating a theft and a controversy. Now, I don?t see any theft, other than of my freedom, but controversy, yes that is what we have.

What strikes me as funny though, is that Burress is not mounting a campaign against Howard Stern. I have heard WEBN and its morning show and I have heard Stern's morning show, both show compete locally. Stern is 100 times "worse" than the Dawn Patrol. So, Clear Channel dumps on Stern, and then the next day CCV attack WEBN. The target market for WEBN would find Phil Burress to be a nutty prude (some might even call him a fascist as well). It is laying out like a passion play.

Side note: I have to raise one problem with Rick Bird's article. Rick failed to mention in the article that he used to work for WEBN and specifically was part of the Dawn Patrol. Rick should have made that admission in the story. I don't think the story is totally tainted, it says the facts as I think they are, but it does give fuel to the CCV to claim that this story is "biased" because of Bird's relationship to the story. CCV, in a rare case, may have a point. The Post should have given this story to someone else, or at least added a co-writer who could have gotten more of the CCV viewpoint. After all, nothing makes the CCV sound worse then when they keep talking about their bigotry and theocratic movement to bring about Christian Fascism.

Sex and the Cincy

Maggie Downs brings up the finale of Sex and the City. Having not had HBO since I left for college in 1990, I have only watched the show once will visiting a relative. I have to admit that it was entertaining, but I never though it was really that great. It was a story about women, and believe it or not, I am a guy, so I can see why I just did not "get it." I much prefer a West Wing or an ER.

1 Year From Now

If you look forward to the 2005 Oscar season, what do you see? I see a bunch of fanatics bitching and moaning as to why Mel Gibson film did not either get nominated or win an Oscar for every category. I think they will be really pissed if they don't get the Oscar for best adapted screenplay.

Also, as soon as the Passion comes out on DVD I will be looking for news reports of some fool pissed off because public schools will not let him show the movie in the school. I expect that locally too.

Marriage Amendment Dead

Calpundit is pointing to a tally that indicates that 40 senators are against the anti-gay marriage amendment. Bush got his day in the theocratic sun, but nothing to show for it. Will this piss off the right wing? Will he still lose the centrist votes that one would guess such a swing right would eliminate?

Preaching to the Choir

Based on this article, the Gibson Movie seemed to just bring out the religious people, this really did nothing but reshuffle the deck. A few Catholics or Protestants might swap sects, but no one new is really taking up the mantle of Christianity. Now, I am sure evangelicals will tout some stats about who is joining their flock, but what I think they miss is that most people they gain, someone else's church is losing.

Gift Horse?

When it is Peter Bronson who writes a column about you and your book, do you take the media attention and smile, or do you distance yourself from his conservative stench? Well, if you are Kathy Y. Wilson, what do you do? Since Kathy writes for a paper with much smaller circulation I would just take it, and hopefully smile at the increase in book sales.

Pot - Kettle

Howard Stern Show Taken Off Clear Channel Stations

'Liberal Media'

Wow! This person is a copy editor. Amazing how the religious hate speech can just roll of the keyboard like that. I wonder if Peter Bronson is taking notes.

[Via Atrios]

Gibson's Film: Crucifixation

"Crucifixation" was from the Daily Show, which tonight hit the film's marketing machine hard. I do not think I will go see Mel Gibson's Passion. I don't like going to movies that get this kind of Hype. I have never seen Titanic, nor the Matrix movies.

What I have read about the film though, I really am taken aback by. I, as most readers should know, am an atheistic agnostic, so I don't share the religious beliefs of Mel Gibson or other various types of Christians. I was raised as a middle of the road Christian, Methodist to be specific, so I very familiar with the religious doctrine. I am repulsed by the violence and the worship of the violence the Jesus character is put through in the movie. To me the value of Christianity was to act like Jesus, the old golden rule element of the religion. Believing Jesus was the "son of God" seems so trivial. The point of the religion always seemed to be about how you treated other people, not about stroking the ego of a deity. This film to me glorifies that image, not of the caring person. It seems more about worshiping "Jesus" because he did this for you, instead of worshiping Jesus through your actions by helping people. This is an underlying difference in Christian sects, so I am sure many Christians would disagree, but hopefully they can see the differences.

Enquirer's review of the Film, and the Post's local PR piece on it.

Gay Marriage, Again

One thing that has been bothering me are the claims that Bush's statement yesterday should be construed to mean that he does not want to ban state's rights to create civil unions. There are two problems with that contention. One is that he did not put forth any language to suggest that he would not support the most popular amendment up for consideration, the Musgrave Amendment. That amendment clearly has language, as I previously posted, indicates that civil unions would illegal if the amendment was adopted. If Bush was against such a thing, why did he not make it clear that he does not support the Musgrave Amendment as written?

Secondly, it is clear that Bush is against Civil Unions.

MR. McCLELLAN: [...] The President has made it very clear that he would not have supported it for the state of Texas.

Q Civil union?

MR. McCLELLAN: Right.

So, Bush is all about state's rights, I guess, except when it comes to marriage. States can relegate homosexuals to second class citizens, but they can't allow them to be full citizens with equal rights. Hmmm, sounds like a bigot to me.

I will give a shout out to Rob Bernard for getting a traffic surge from the 800-pound gorilla, but a commenter on Rob’s site referred to me as an "unknown blogger." Now, I am a nobody in the Blogosphere, but what kind of ego trip does it take to slam me for having an opinion, voicing it, but not having a reputation big enough to fit that commenter’s sense of self importance?

Just so we are clear, Bush is a bigot. Bush opposes allowing homosexuals the rights given to married couples. If he even wanted to help homosexual with some rights, like hospital visitation, I have not heard him once voice support for it either at the federal or state level. Now, to say that he is merely doing this for political reasons begs the question, if he is willing to work against gays, why would he not also wage a war for political reasons?

Cheney

Are the vultures starting to circle?

Broken Record: Bush is a Bigot Without a Doubt

I couldn't disappoint anyone by not once again pointing out that Bush is a bigot, so there ya go. I guess his fence sitting State of the Union quasi-support for the Gay Marriage Ban Amendment was not playing well in the bible belt, so he had to go full tilt.

Well, I have said why I think Bush is a bigot enough, so I will instead deal with why Bush is flat out wrong on what the proposed FMA will do. He seems to think that states will be able to create "Civil Unions." Claims otherwise are being refuted by many legal scholars. Eugene Volokh gives a conservo-libertarian view on why the FMA does ban civil unions as currently written.

Kevin Drum has excellent Analysis and Atrios has comments as well.

The most surprising posts and comments are coming from Andrew Sullivan. Sullivan is a conservo-libertarian Bush supporter who is also a firm Gay Marriage supporter. A large portion of his readers seem to be pissed at Bush?s stance on Gay Marriage, which appears to be the last straw holding up their support of Bush. I can't see how there can be any homosexual Bush supporters after today. I mean, the man came out and gave no rationale why any can't marry a person of the same sex. I mean, Bush did not even have the guts to say why Gay Marriage is bad. How will it affect Heterosexual Marriage? It is freaky how Bush sounds like he is defending an anti-miscegenation laws:

Marriage cannot be severed from its cultural, religious and natural roots without weakening the good influence of society. Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all. Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife.

That makes me want to vomit. WHY can't marriage be severed from the past as it was when anti-miscegenation laws were repealed? HOW do two men or two women getting married weakening society? HOW does making homosexuals serve "us all?" Bigoty does not serve me. I guess oppressing homosexuals serves Bush's political aims buy getting the bible thumpers all good and frothy.

Locally Covington Jim comments, as does Wes Flinn.

Lynch Steps Down as CBUF President

Damon Lynch has stepped down as the President of the Cincinnati Black United Front. His reason appears to be to focus on a 2005 Council Run. Politically this is a great move for Lynch. Stepping away from the boycott was the one thing he needed to make council. He has done that and should walk easily onto council.

What is troublesome, yet inevitable, is that Dwight Patton would take over as President. Dwight's reputation has a racial reconciler is laughable. Dwight is a confrontationalist who pushed CBUF into racist positions and stances. It is with those type actions that make it odd that Dwight's biggest enemy is Nate Livingston.

Why I Give a Damn

Have some of you folks out there, my few yet brilliant readers, wondered why I tend to throw around terms like "theocratic fascist around? Well look no further than the scary congressmen behind the movement to strip power from the Supreme Court, and in the name of religion. It appears that Sen. Zell Miller (D) of Georgia seems to have joined Congressmen ADERHOLT and PENCE in pushing for a theocratic state, where freedom of religion is only for the 'majority', not the individual.

Read the Christian Coalition's list of issues and you wonder why I oppose them and those who work with them.

[Via Atrios and Wes Flinn]

Portman for Vice President?

Well, WCPO reported the rumor, which they call "speculation" and had this teaser in their article "Rob Portman will speak with 9News this morning and we'll have an update as soon as it is available." WLWT seemed to have the same story.

WCPO's website has nothing new reported on Portman, in fact the story was buried. This kind of speculation is very interesting, but highly dubious. Someone from Portman's camp is floating the idea out there to see if any remnants of a ground swell can be built for ousting Dick Cheney from the GOP Ticket. Cheney is nothing but a drag on Bush. Now, I of course have no problem if President Bush sees fit to stick to loyalty. I see no problem with that at all.

In all seriousness, Bush will keep Cheney on unless he needs new blood to pull in more votes in a race he could be losing. Think of dumping Cheney as a reserve. When Bush's polls are running low, he will tap into a new VP to inject a new heart to GOP ticket. That would at least be the pragmatist’s play. Is Bush really a pragmatist?

Ohio the Heart of it All

Will Ohio be the battle ground state for 2004? Edwards was here. Bush's Approval rating here in Ohio (pdf) is below 50%. That should be scaring the crap out of Republicans. Bush must win Ohio. If Bush loses Ohio, the Democrat will win.

Edwards has to at least win Ohio, New York, or California if he really plans on winning the Democratic nomination.

Dumb Headline

"Most at festival avoid arrest." What did the Enquirer expect, a majority of festival goers to be arrested? Stupid headline writer.

Holy Shit!

I just watched Dowlin's anti-DeWine commercial on WKRC where he says DeWine left his wife and kids for a "Convergys lobbyist." Wow, I had not seen it live, and that is one of the most low brow political commercials I have ever seen. This year is going to be the bloodiest political season in 36 years.

Bush Still a Bigot

Rob Bernard is on me for calling Bush and using "bigot" a lot. Sorry, that I have to use the word so often, but there are no synonyms that capture the meaning I am after.

Now Rob's attempting to play the game that not everyone against Gay Marriage is a bigot, and then points to Kerry and Edwards. Well, I don't like their positions, but they come out for equal rights for Gays. Bush and his horde are against gay rights. Rob even tried to float the idea from radio talk show host, a real "authority," that heterosexual men have no more rights to marry men they gay men do. I hope he is just trying to be funny, because that is laughable as a reason. I guess he would say that if a black man could not marry a white woman, that is not discrimination as long as a white man could not marry a black woman.

The really issue in his post is that Bush is not a bigot. I say why? Bush wants to both ban homosexual marriage and civil unions. Greg Mann comments on why the Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment does both.

If civil unions was something Bush supported he would be doing the logically thing, including an establishment of civil unions in the Marriage ‘Defense’ Amendment. Why will that not happen? Those pushing the Amendment do not want to provide equal rights or any level of rights to gays or lesbians on issues they can't claim otherwise. That is bigotry, and Bush is supporting it.

I have still not heard any conservative against gay marriage state why it would be a bad thing for homosexuals to get marriage licenses. Now, I mean details reason why, not rhetorical generalities like “it will harm the institution.” I want to know how they think that will happen and more specifically how heterosexual marriages would be affected by homosexual marriages.

How To Come Across as a Right Wing Crusader

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger gave a speech with in the last couple of days were he called for the Mayor of San Francisco to comply with the law and stop issuing marriage licenses to homosexual couples. I have no problem with Arnold doing this. It is after all the law and it is his duty to enforce the laws of the State of California. The problem is with how he is doing it. He could have given a solemn speech where he either pushed for civil unions, something he supports, or just made it a dry enforcement of the law. Instead, Arnold made it a political speech where a crowd cheered him for saying he was going to come down hard on San Francisco for what it is doing:

Schwarzenegger told a cheering crowd at the state GOP convention that "in San Francisco, the courts are dropping the ball."

"It's time for the city to stop traveling down this dangerous path of ignoring the rule of law. That's my message to San Francisco," he said Friday night.

Arnold chose the GOP State Convention to rally the troops against Gay Marriage like it was his new crusade against those horrible gays that he would prefer to do his hair, but not try and get married or anything. He can't have "them" be like everyone else, now can he?

Arnold should have given a speech from the State Capital and made it as the Governor enforcing the law. Instead he gave to a bunch of Republicans who CHEERED him for doing this. Now, I am sure some will now say, "but they should cheer him for doing his duty!" Sorry, no, they should not, unless of course they like keeping homosexuals as second class citizens, which those who cheered I think like. When a police officer arrests a man for murdering the person who caused the death of the man's child, no one cheers the officer. The officer is doing his duty. The only ones who might cheer are the family of the person who caused the child's death. Why would they feel the need to cheer? Why would they cheer a cop doing something most would wish he did not have to do, but the law is the law.

Arnold could have used a little less glee in his enforcement of shutting out gays from marriage. The cheers make those Republicans sound like bigots, which I would bet they are. Yep, I called someone else a bigot! Better start complaining that I called a duck a duck.

Flowers from the Midwest

There are simple things that people can do to make people feel human. One such thing is happening in San Francisco, where gay and lesbian couples getting married are being given anonymous bouquets of flowers from total strangers in the Midwest and other places not normally thought of as gay friendly.

There are notes with each bouquet saying things like ?To The Happy Couple,? which is a small gesture, but make the couples feel like people care. People want to wish them happiness just like any other newlyweds. That is all they want, to be like everyone else. Homosexual couples want to share their lives and form a loving home and stable life. Random gifts and messages wishing these couples good luck is a totally simple thing to do, but something I think that can give warmth to two people that will last the rest of their lives.

If you are feeling good and want to do something great for people, send some flowers tomorrow to the newlyweds.

UPDATE: Flowers for Al and Don has a way to donate money for flowers fairly easily.

Nader's Windmills

Nader's announcement to run for President as an Independent is getting plenty of coverage. What I want to know is why he is not running on the Green Party Ticket? Did he drop them, or did they drop him? The press is not answering that question. One report I found indicates that the Greens said no to him. The reasons for why are not specific.

Trackback

Via Atrios: Haloscan as added a Trackback feature. I have installed it and invite other trackback users to please use this function if possible. Thanks!

Springer or Nick Lachey?

Who would make a worse Mayor of Cincinnati? Jerry has already been mayor of course and beyond paying for a hooker by check, his term in office was not considered bad. Springer also, well, was a reasonably qualified politician. According to his bio Nick was going to Miami (damn it, why did have to be Miami?) when he joined in on 98 Degrees. I assume he did not finish college. Based on Nick's age I would guess he was there while I was going to Miami. Odd.

A Bully Brooklynite's Head in the Sand

Ken Wohlrob, Publisher and Editor of Bully Magazine, has put out Bully's "Ten Worst American Cities To Live In" List. This magazine is new to me, I had never heard of it before reading about this list on the Cincymusic.com boards. I therefore am not placing much credence in its finds, but I still have few bones to pick with it. Here’s the list:

10. Seattle
9. Toledo
8. Los Angeles
7. Salt Lake City
6. Cincinnati
5. St. Louis
4. Atlanta
3. Miami
2. Phoenix
1. Cleveland

Now, I don’t mind that Cincinnati made the list, but I really have to wonder how this list was complied and if actual residents of the cities were interviewed. What was written about Cincinnati is just plain wrong:

If you took Chicago, sucked out every last ounce of culture including its thriving music scenes and quality restaurants and bars, leaving a graying hulk of skyscrapers and a complete lack of night life, then you would have Cincinnati. To some Cincinnati is the greatest city in the U.S. - usually these folks are old, white, Christian fundamentalists, confined to wheelchairs, and are very scared of "coloreds." If you are not this type of person and you live in Cincinnati and like it, you have mental problems and should seek professional help.

Now, Cincinnati has a shit load of conservatives who don’t know a Dali from Dogs Playing Poker or Gershwin from Jessica Simpson, but Cincinnati has as good a culture as any City its size if not better. The CSO, Cincinnati Pops, Ballet, Opera, CAM, CAC, Taft, just to name a few of the MAJOR cultural institutions that this city has to offer that are as good as any in the country, except for New York and other mega cities. We don't have places that would get the girls on "Sex and the City" wet, but for a Midwestern city of nearly 2 million people we have plenty to do and plenty of good places and cultural events to go. In fact with the conformist and stale society in this city I would argue the artistic and cultural groups here have more courage, are more cutting edge than New York. Throwing horseshit on a painting or laying in the street nude is rather innocuous in the Big Apple. Here in Cincinnati, dying your hair pink still gets you looked at funny. We have far more people per capita here willing to be "truly" unique, than say NY or LA. Uniqueness is of course relative to the situation, but the variation is still part of the equation. We here in Cincinnati don't have to go to the extremes to gain attention from the blue hairs. Other places they have to damn near blow their brains out to cause a ruckus.

Has Mr. Wohlrob ever even been to Cincinnati? I am guessing he has, mainly because three Ohio cities were on the list, Cleveland being #1. I would guess that is where Mr. Wohlrob was beaten up for dressing up like member of the Cure back in the 1980’s. Now, while I don’t like Bullies either, it just strikes me as funny that he would call his magazine Bully and then proceed to condemn 10 cities basically because they are not New York. Well, they are not Brooklyn. That is the high land of culture where Mr. Wohlrob’s is based. We all know the fabulous cultural wonders that make Brooklyn the vibrant hub of American culture.

I really have to wonder why cities like Buffalo, Jacksonville, Tampa, Houston, Dallas, Memphis, Nashville, Knoxville, St. Paul, Detroit, Portland, San Diego, Lexington, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Eire, Richmond Va., or anywhere in the State of New Jersey.

Cincinnati does not deserve to be on this list. The city is made a laughing stock by the mainstream media who live on the coasts and think the midwest is where they escaped from after college. Life is not dull here. It is vibrant. We are not New York or Chicago or San Francisco. We are, however, not a bad place to live.

Pontus Pilate

5th/3rd Bank has announced that it is putting the decision to its shareholders whether or not to include sexual orientation in its nondiscrimination policy.

Gee, how nice of them. I guess it is a real "ballsy" thing to do. (Cough, Cough)

This is not only horrid; it reeks of fear of offending someone with a big bank balance. What company the size of 5th/3rd does not have such a nondiscrimination policy? This should be a no brainer. 5th/3rd lists its policy:

"Fifth Third offers equal employment opportunities, regardless of race, religion, national origin, sex, age, disability or veteran status."

Now, if they were to say put religion up to a vote and allow discrimination against lets say Roman Catholics or Mormons, who would be screaming about it? Yes, that is right, the Conservative Christians would be. Those same Conservative Christians, like Phil Burress, who are against equal rights for Homosexuals, demand “special rights” for the religious.

What don’t understand is the need for the vote. Why doesn’t the CEO just add in sexual orientation to the list above, and forget about pretending that shareholders votes are somehow democratic. Why would they not want to adopt this policy and try and shield themselves from lawsuits? It is poor company management to not have such a policy.