Jay Love is Stupid
That sounds petty, but I don't know how else to characterize him for his latest screw up. On his radio program today, Jay wondered why no US news outlet was reporting a story from the CBC claiming that 350 civilians were killed in Iraq by the US. I guess Jay missed the headline of the CBC story: "Baghdad claims 350 Iraqi civilians killed in war." Jay, the claims are from Saddam's "Health Minster!" Do you really trust anyone from his regime to be honest about this issue? If you do, then you are either lying or are stupider than I thought. The article then states:

A Web site that is using media reports to tally the number of Iraqi civilian deaths in the war puts the number at between 227 and 304.

Jay is placing his trust in an unnamed website, whose sources are unconfirmed? Jay appears to be exceedingly gullible. I wonder if he is interested in buying a portion of the Brent Spense Bridge.

It is just amazing how Jay attacks callers who voice opinions supporting the war, demanding they provide a level of proof greater than any court of law would require, where all other possibility must be removed, no matter how remote or farcical. I have not be able to take listening to Jay much this past few weeks leading up to and during the war. His persistent use of the most baseless propaganda reads like an International A.N.S.W.E.R. leaflet. Next I expect Jay to start denouncing the capitalist dogs for their abuse of the underclass and the economic apartheid, oh wait that is what a former 1230 the Buzz host is saying now a days.

UPDATE: Just so Jay does not pop a blood vessel, CNN is now reporting the same story.

Trucker claims he didn't aim to hurt war protesters
The newest talk radio "hero" has been born. This trucker was slated to appear on Scott Sloan's radio program this evening. I refuse to tune into the show. With topics like this "Should Muslims and Arabs be allowed to fight for the U.S. Armed Forces?", I can't see that anyone but bigots and/or racists would want to tune it in. I hope people understand it is all an act, but that is not understood by the ignorant masses of morons who listen and call into WLW. They don't know that WLW is all about sensationalism and ratings. They will say anything to get you to listen, except for an ever-shrinking list of taboos. Their station would not be so horrid if they were openly honest about what they did. They are trying to fool people. They are lying on purpose. They think it is just fictionalized entertainment, that is their rationale, but instead they have created a means of manipulation that is often pure Pravda. I would bet that this trucker is able to hire a good attorney with the money WLW helps raise for his “defense.” When you say things like this though: "I'm pleading not guilty," Watters said. "What I did was wrong. I did break a few laws, but I'm not guilty. you really make it difficult to defend, unless you cut a deal or shoot for jury nullification. He is out on bail on very low bail, and I am sure Mike Allen is looking to make this go away, especially with the coming outcry fabricated on WLW.

Religious groups seek to settle boycott issues
Any negotiation is capitulation. Seeking "change" is like seeking a widget in pixie dust factory. If you will excuse me, I have to commence the hitting of my head against a brick wall.

Best of Cincinnati 2003 - Public Eye Staff Picks

"Best Use of New Communications Technology: Blogs"

I am debating if I am going to add the graphic to my blog. I don't want to be arrogant, but I like to puff my feathers as much as the next Joe Blogger on the street. The biggest negative is that my picture is included again. I am not arrogant about my looks, for obvious reasons.

The Gulf War Drinking Game
If I was back in college, I would be playing 24/7. Well, I might make it an hour before passing out.

[Link via SledgeBlog]

Queen City Soapbox
Chris Anderson has a new graphic and takes on the issue of the War and local media coverage.

Bird: Press provides front-line spin
The headline is spin as well, so it starts out with a slight bit of hypocrisy. I am in favor of embedding reporters. My view is not really about the value of getting the instant coverage, which is good, but rather instead what I hope will be a semi-objective accounting of the war and the actions of the U. S. military. Bird seems to be looking for some kind of cure all to know about the war. That is a fool's dream. Wars are not easy to understand. There is no way that anyone can provide big answers to the war, during the war. What they can provide are the basic elements of the war itself. It would be nice if outlets like FOX were not so horrifically cheering for the war, and it would be nice if the BBC and Al Jazeera would not be so hostile to the USA. Most of the rest of the TV outlets are doing fairly well. The real media star of this war is the Internet and print in general. Pictures, contrary to popular myth, are not worth 1,000 words, at least when those words are trying to convey fact, not emotion.

The Cincinnati Post also had an editorial on this subject: Watching the war.