Airport To Lose 128 Screener
What happened to homeland security? We can afford a tax cut, but we can't afford more airport screeners? This is a 26% cut in the number of screeners, so expect longer lines.
Wednesday, April 30, 2003
Tuesday, April 29, 2003
Covington Passes Anti-Discrimination Ordinance
It appears the CCV hate mail did not stick with City of Covington, KY Officials. Mike McConnell was not pleased this morning on news that it likely to pass. He still wrongly calls this as a special right that he can't use. He is wrong. Under this law people cannot be discriminated against for simply being heterosexual. Mike may claim that such a thing would never happen anyway. Mike should then consider himself lucky and not get pissed off about being in the majority on sexual orientation. It is unlikely that I will be discriminated against because I am not Iraqi, but does that mean that Iraqi's should not be protected from discrimination on account of national origin? This law is simple and should be adopted. If it is wrong to have anti-discrimination laws, then we have to get rid of them all: race, religion, sex, gun owners, etc. I wonder what Mike and other Libertarians will say about those.
It appears the CCV hate mail did not stick with City of Covington, KY Officials. Mike McConnell was not pleased this morning on news that it likely to pass. He still wrongly calls this as a special right that he can't use. He is wrong. Under this law people cannot be discriminated against for simply being heterosexual. Mike may claim that such a thing would never happen anyway. Mike should then consider himself lucky and not get pissed off about being in the majority on sexual orientation. It is unlikely that I will be discriminated against because I am not Iraqi, but does that mean that Iraqi's should not be protected from discrimination on account of national origin? This law is simple and should be adopted. If it is wrong to have anti-discrimination laws, then we have to get rid of them all: race, religion, sex, gun owners, etc. I wonder what Mike and other Libertarians will say about those.
Police union wants out of reform agreement
Here are two big problems with this event. The first is that only 200 of the 1,050 members of the FOP voted on the issue. Fangman thinks that is a fair representation of the overall cop view? Is that how they vote on their union contract?
The second is the fact that this really means nothing, if the police carry out the agreed to reforms. The only issue is how to judge those reforms have taken place. That takes me back to a legal question. There were two legal documents that came out at the time of the collaborative agreement's adoption. There was the settlement agreement with the CBUF and the ACLU, and there was the agreement with the Justice Department. I am guessing the FOP are only pulling out of the agreement with the CBUF and ACLU, not with the DOJ. It would potentially be very bad to break the deal with the DOJ. I don't think Fangman wants John Ashcroft running the CPD. Neither theEnquirer article or the Post'sarticle addresses this issue. I am assuming it is legally possible to stay in one and not the other. Adhering to the DOJ settlement was part of the CBUF-ACLU agreement, but I don't think it was the other way around. If I am correct, police reform will still be carried out and supported by the FOP, they will just not agree to the oversight rules set up by the CBUF-ACLU document.
That was a mouthful, so I hope it makes sense. Copies of the Collaborative Agreement and DOJ Agreement.
Other Coverage: AP Wire, Business Courier, WCPO, WLWT, WKRC.
Here are two big problems with this event. The first is that only 200 of the 1,050 members of the FOP voted on the issue. Fangman thinks that is a fair representation of the overall cop view? Is that how they vote on their union contract?
The second is the fact that this really means nothing, if the police carry out the agreed to reforms. The only issue is how to judge those reforms have taken place. That takes me back to a legal question. There were two legal documents that came out at the time of the collaborative agreement's adoption. There was the settlement agreement with the CBUF and the ACLU, and there was the agreement with the Justice Department. I am guessing the FOP are only pulling out of the agreement with the CBUF and ACLU, not with the DOJ. It would potentially be very bad to break the deal with the DOJ. I don't think Fangman wants John Ashcroft running the CPD. Neither theEnquirer article or the Post'sarticle addresses this issue. I am assuming it is legally possible to stay in one and not the other. Adhering to the DOJ settlement was part of the CBUF-ACLU agreement, but I don't think it was the other way around. If I am correct, police reform will still be carried out and supported by the FOP, they will just not agree to the oversight rules set up by the CBUF-ACLU document.
That was a mouthful, so I hope it makes sense. Copies of the Collaborative Agreement and DOJ Agreement.
Other Coverage: AP Wire, Business Courier, WCPO, WLWT, WKRC.
GOP targets Council races
The Republicans are running a full state of 9 candidates, while the Democrats could only muster up 7. I previously speculated the Democrats were playing the numbers that they felt they could not beat the all 3 of non-Democrats, only betting on defeating 2 of them. In the case of the GOP I think they are still smarting from 2001 when they only put up 5 candidates, and did not field a candidate for mayor. I would bet that at best 1 non-incumbent will make it out of the 7 challengers. Sam Malone is the best known candidate, but his association with the CCV and their anti-gay campaign will be a factor that will not win the moderate voters, who might be turned off by the Democrats. The Charter Party is still a factor, but their ability to be a third party has been limited in recent years. I will be interest to see if any of the many expected independent candidates will get party endorsements from either the Greens or Libertarians.
The Republicans are running a full state of 9 candidates, while the Democrats could only muster up 7. I previously speculated the Democrats were playing the numbers that they felt they could not beat the all 3 of non-Democrats, only betting on defeating 2 of them. In the case of the GOP I think they are still smarting from 2001 when they only put up 5 candidates, and did not field a candidate for mayor. I would bet that at best 1 non-incumbent will make it out of the 7 challengers. Sam Malone is the best known candidate, but his association with the CCV and their anti-gay campaign will be a factor that will not win the moderate voters, who might be turned off by the Democrats. The Charter Party is still a factor, but their ability to be a third party has been limited in recent years. I will be interest to see if any of the many expected independent candidates will get party endorsements from either the Greens or Libertarians.
Monday, April 28, 2003
BRONSON: Senator Skinflint
Nonconformity is the biggest sin in the GOP. Break from the party line and you are called names. "Skinflint" is such a name. It is rather incorrect. It means "a person who would save, gain, or extort money by any means." Voinovich is not extorting anyone, not trying to gain money, and he is hardly saving money by advocating a 350 million-dolllar tax cut. Bronson can't stand anyone dissing his boy. Dubya is the second coming to evangelical Republicans. Those who dare stand against are made talk radio fodder.
The real problem with Bronson hatchet job is this blind ignorance of what he says. He claims that 4 million Ohio Tax payers will benefit from Bush's proposed tax cut. I doubt his number, he cites no source for it. The total lack of rational thought comes in the obvious, there are about 8.5 million adults in Ohio, so less than half of them will get a tax cut under Bush's plan. I am one of those who will get nothing, the 53% of Ohio taxpayers, according to Bronson, that will get nothing from this tax cut. What the Fuck!!!!! How arrogant does a man have to be to think that we don't notice this? That we somehow have to "trust" the 47% to "spend" and "invest" their reduced taxes. Voodoo economics was pronounced a failure 20 years ago, and Bronson and Bush will stop at nothing to buy votes. I wonder how many more of the 4 million are Republicans than are Democrats.
Congressman Jim Boehner, an accounting "genius" (cough, cough), sounds crazy in this column. He thinks the war will pay for itself? Does he plan to have the US steal the Iraqi Oil? What was he smoking the day Bronson talked to him? If the war will pay for itself, why did Bush ask for 75 billion to wage it? Do people not grasp the lies? Is Bronson dumb enough to agree with Boehner? Are average people stupid enough to believe Bronson and Boehner? I am sorry to say, yes, yes they are.
It is sickening to me that Bronson can write what he did with a straight face.
Nonconformity is the biggest sin in the GOP. Break from the party line and you are called names. "Skinflint" is such a name. It is rather incorrect. It means "a person who would save, gain, or extort money by any means." Voinovich is not extorting anyone, not trying to gain money, and he is hardly saving money by advocating a 350 million-dolllar tax cut. Bronson can't stand anyone dissing his boy. Dubya is the second coming to evangelical Republicans. Those who dare stand against are made talk radio fodder.
The real problem with Bronson hatchet job is this blind ignorance of what he says. He claims that 4 million Ohio Tax payers will benefit from Bush's proposed tax cut. I doubt his number, he cites no source for it. The total lack of rational thought comes in the obvious, there are about 8.5 million adults in Ohio, so less than half of them will get a tax cut under Bush's plan. I am one of those who will get nothing, the 53% of Ohio taxpayers, according to Bronson, that will get nothing from this tax cut. What the Fuck!!!!! How arrogant does a man have to be to think that we don't notice this? That we somehow have to "trust" the 47% to "spend" and "invest" their reduced taxes. Voodoo economics was pronounced a failure 20 years ago, and Bronson and Bush will stop at nothing to buy votes. I wonder how many more of the 4 million are Republicans than are Democrats.
Congressman Jim Boehner, an accounting "genius" (cough, cough), sounds crazy in this column. He thinks the war will pay for itself? Does he plan to have the US steal the Iraqi Oil? What was he smoking the day Bronson talked to him? If the war will pay for itself, why did Bush ask for 75 billion to wage it? Do people not grasp the lies? Is Bronson dumb enough to agree with Boehner? Are average people stupid enough to believe Bronson and Boehner? I am sorry to say, yes, yes they are.
It is sickening to me that Bronson can write what he did with a straight face.
Voinovich won't listen to his party or his president. But there are 12 million Ohio taxpayers who might have something to say.Well, there are not 12 million tax payers Peter, but the 4.5 million of us who will gain nothing from Bush's tax plan say "Bite Me Bush, Go Voinovich!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)