Developer missing with $184,000 in tax money
Council Man Pat Dewine wants answers from Luken? Luken may have some blame, but where was Dewine? He did vote against the loan, but why, as Finance Committee chairman, did he not oversee the project it he found it objectionable?
The story also incorrectly reported "Mayor Charlie Luken voted for the city loan to the theater project to help revitalize Over-the-Rhine." The Mayor, under the new strong Mayor form of city government, does not vote on measures before the council, as the minutes showing the approval of the loan indicates, but he can execute a veto.
Thursday, January 23, 2003
Dueling abortion marches see urgency
This section seemed to a be a problem:
This section seemed to a be a problem:
As is traditional, Mr. Bush broadcast a message to the anti-abortion rally, saying Americans "must protect the lives of innocent children waiting to be born."As is traditional? It is not traditional for the President of the United States to Address an anti-abortion rally. It might be considered traditional for the President of the United States to address the side of the debate he supports.
Anti-abortion rally causes stir
With a GOP run House, Senate, White House, and Supreme Court, why is it a surprise that the Smithsonian Institution would be abused by a gang of Kentucky Republicans? The Smithsonian is not a place to play politics, but the anti-abortion protestors generally adhere to an "ends justifies the means" attitude about their cause. If any left-leaning group abused the Smithsonian like this, the White House and Congress would be calling for an investigation. Instead, the Smithsonian is left to fend for itself. This breakfast was sponsored by a Catholic Group. Did that group lie to the Smithsonian officials, or did they participants just take advantage without any warning? I am glad the Enquirer reported this story, but I wonder who else did? The problem with the Enquirer's story is that in an accompanying puff piece on anti-abortion protestors who went to D.C for the protests, the story reports that they were at the breakfast at the Smithsonian. Why didn't the reporters ask the participants about the political activities at the breakfast? Did the reporters go to the breakfast? I see a bias, but is it in the reporting or in the editing? Yesterday's Enquirer editorial on abortion sounded like a slightly less than an extreme position on abortion, but one still riddled with propaganda. I have to keep on reminding myself, you live in a right-wing town. They know not what they do.
With a GOP run House, Senate, White House, and Supreme Court, why is it a surprise that the Smithsonian Institution would be abused by a gang of Kentucky Republicans? The Smithsonian is not a place to play politics, but the anti-abortion protestors generally adhere to an "ends justifies the means" attitude about their cause. If any left-leaning group abused the Smithsonian like this, the White House and Congress would be calling for an investigation. Instead, the Smithsonian is left to fend for itself. This breakfast was sponsored by a Catholic Group. Did that group lie to the Smithsonian officials, or did they participants just take advantage without any warning? I am glad the Enquirer reported this story, but I wonder who else did? The problem with the Enquirer's story is that in an accompanying puff piece on anti-abortion protestors who went to D.C for the protests, the story reports that they were at the breakfast at the Smithsonian. Why didn't the reporters ask the participants about the political activities at the breakfast? Did the reporters go to the breakfast? I see a bias, but is it in the reporting or in the editing? Yesterday's Enquirer editorial on abortion sounded like a slightly less than an extreme position on abortion, but one still riddled with propaganda. I have to keep on reminding myself, you live in a right-wing town. They know not what they do.
Taft Smack!
Chris Anderson gives us a super insider look at Bob Taft's State of the State speech. His initial draft takes Taft down a peg or two. Chris better watch out, SNL might want to steal this bit. I know I busted a gut laughing while reading it. I wish more voters could have heard about Taft's plans before last November's election, but who ever heard about a politician telling his constituents his real plans before an election? If you really care, here is the final version of the speech.
Chris Anderson gives us a super insider look at Bob Taft's State of the State speech. His initial draft takes Taft down a peg or two. Chris better watch out, SNL might want to steal this bit. I know I busted a gut laughing while reading it. I wish more voters could have heard about Taft's plans before last November's election, but who ever heard about a politician telling his constituents his real plans before an election? If you really care, here is the final version of the speech.
John Schlagetter has cornered Nate Livingston's html programming fingerprints. I wonder if anyone still thinks the http://www.friendsofkarendewine.com website is really run by a disgruntled conservative. If they do, I think they might be waiting in line to buy season tickets for the Red's Riverfront Stadium season opener all alone.
Wednesday, January 22, 2003
Tri-State Blog Round Up
Chris Anderson on Denise Smith-Amos's column and Article XII.
John Schlagetter on the State of the City Address. On Problematic for the People Jon is asked "What Am I Contributing?"
Rob Bernard tries to make hay with Jack Nicholson's alleged anti-abortion stance. This statement is from National Review's the Corner and has no support listed, so I don't trust it, and it does not preclude the possibility that Jack is both anti-abortion and pro-choice.
Chris Anderson on Denise Smith-Amos's column and Article XII.
John Schlagetter on the State of the City Address. On Problematic for the People Jon is asked "What Am I Contributing?"
Rob Bernard tries to make hay with Jack Nicholson's alleged anti-abortion stance. This statement is from National Review's the Corner and has no support listed, so I don't trust it, and it does not preclude the possibility that Jack is both anti-abortion and pro-choice.
Abortion: 30 Years after Roe v. Wade.
Abortion should be legal. The debate can rage for hours about the issue, but it should be legal. The details as how it should be legal are not set in stone. There is room for compromise in how it is legal. In my opinion very few limits, if any, should be made, but those are elements that States can regulate. Beyond that, it is the choice of the women and those she wishes to confer with and confide in.
The Local Media has shown a dichotomy in coverage. The Cincinnati Enquirer has an amazing bias against abortion. They run stories praising kids for skipping school to go protest in D.C., but don't ask the kids why they don't protest against the War, a reasonable question for those who claim to "defend life in all stages." The most amazing element to this is that the reporter, Maggie Downs, filed the story in D.C. Either she went along with the protestors, or she is based in the D.C. area.
The Post on the other hand ran a serious of stories that analyzed the local availability of abortion, the current legal standing of the issue with the US Supreme Court, and the status of the law nationally.
John Schlagetter also provides his thoughts on today's 30th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision.
Abortion should be legal. The debate can rage for hours about the issue, but it should be legal. The details as how it should be legal are not set in stone. There is room for compromise in how it is legal. In my opinion very few limits, if any, should be made, but those are elements that States can regulate. Beyond that, it is the choice of the women and those she wishes to confer with and confide in.
The Local Media has shown a dichotomy in coverage. The Cincinnati Enquirer has an amazing bias against abortion. They run stories praising kids for skipping school to go protest in D.C., but don't ask the kids why they don't protest against the War, a reasonable question for those who claim to "defend life in all stages." The most amazing element to this is that the reporter, Maggie Downs, filed the story in D.C. Either she went along with the protestors, or she is based in the D.C. area.
The Post on the other hand ran a serious of stories that analyzed the local availability of abortion, the current legal standing of the issue with the US Supreme Court, and the status of the law nationally.
John Schlagetter also provides his thoughts on today's 30th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)