Round Three

On the third Anniversary of the 2001 riots it appears that the media is going to startbeating on Cincinnati Again. I guess the 1 anniversary and the 2 were not enough. Here is another column on the Dateline programming airing tonight. Tune in and see what the show reports for yourself.

A Lie or a Delay?

Ken Blackwell has chosen a new voting machine for Hamilton County. He chose eSlate, a machine manufactured by Hart InterCivic of Austin, Texas. What I find troubling is what Blackwell's spokesman said:

A joint committee of Ohio's General Assembly recommended Wednesday that by 2006 all county elections boards be required to allow voters to confirm their choices with a paper receipt. Blackwell supports studying the issue of voter-verifiable paper trails but the technology is unavailable and unproven, spokesman Carlo LoParo said Thursday.

The technology exists, whether or not any of the companies are willing to respond to demand is another problem. How could it be "unproven?" You have a machine that currently "writes" the vote to a data disc. It is not difficult to at the same time it writes to the disc it also print out that data in a report that can be verified by the voter and then stored like current paper ballots are stored at the polling place and then Board of Elections. It is not that difficult a process. The paper trail would serve as a back-up, both for a technical error and for a legal challenge to an election.

I will paint LoParo's comments as spin and not a lie, but that is being generous. It is after all the job of a political spokesperson to lie for their boss, but convince as many people as possible that they are not lying.

A Walter Cronkite Moment?

I am not trying to compare Iraq to Vietnam, even though the political parallels in tactics and policies are obvious, but does these comments from Bill O'Reilly compare at all to Walter Cronkite's famous comments on the Vietnam war. I don't mean to compare Cronkite to O'Reilly. The former is the gold standard in broadcast journalism; the latter is a delusionally ridden ego pretending to be a human television personality.

What O'Reilly is however is a good barometer for the rightwing. If you loose O'Reilly, you lose many hardcore Bush supporters. That is where the comparison to Cronkite comes to bear. He was seen as the man of mainstream America.

I make these comment tentatively and want opinion on them. Is this such a comment from O'Reilly, or just another rant from a man with such an out of context sense of self righteousness that he actually makes sense to insane child molesters or to Michael Jackson? ( I kid, I kid)

[Via Atrios]

Good News for Voters

Panel urges paper proof for voters

"COLUMBUS - A House-Senate committee studying the security of electronic voting machines recommended Wednesday that boards of election be required to allow Ohio voters to confirm their choices with a paper receipt, beginning in 2006 elections. "

Great news for Ohio voters. The only problem is getting Taft and Blackwell behind this. The problem is the lobby for Diebold Election Systems. If Taft or Blackwell give in the GOP friendly Diebold company, elections in this state will lose a level of security.

Boycott B Apologist

When a group of known racists and bigots yell and scream at City Council members and the Mayor nearly every week you might think the new council members might want to taken them on. You might think that outspoken council members who are trying to shake up the status quo, like Councilman Chris Smitherman, would want to confront the obvious racism and bigotry that the Boycott B members, Nate, Kabaka, Kirkland, et al. Instead Smitherman shows his cowardice in this report on yesterday's council meeting:

Councilman Christopher Smitherman said he opposes the new rule. He said the problem is that City Council doesn't show enough respect to the people who come to speak.

Should we drop the "man" from his name and just call him "Smither?" Where is the Councilperson who was willing to dress down the police chief? Why is "Smither" defending their attempts to spew their hate on the city? Why is "Smither" defending racists?

I wish Korte had a direct quote from "Smither," instead of referring to his comments. Maybe "Smither" will give a direct interview on the problems of racism and why racist blacks should be denounced as much as racists of any race.

All is Well

Why do I keep picturing Kevin Bacon in Animal House trying to "calm down" a frantic crowd when I think of the Bush Administration and Pentagon spokesmen talking about the Shiite rebels controlling parts of three Iraq cities? How can parts of three cites come under the control of a rag-tag militia in a matter of a few days? How can that happen and anyone say the "coalition" has Iraq under control. I know, know, all is well, nothing to see here, move along.......

Semantics and BushSpeak

I have a big problem with the language being used by the Administration regarding the latest uprising in Iraq:

'U.S. forces are on the offense. The United States and our partners and free Iraqi forces are taking the battle to the terrorists,' Rumsfeld told a Pentagon news conference in Washington.

The problem I have is throwing around the term "terrorist." When a car bomb blows up the UN building in Iraq, that is terrorism. When grenades are launched at civilian hotels, that is terrorism. When a "militia" rebels against an occupation army, that is not terrorism. Call it a rebellion, call it an insurgency, call it an illegal gang, but don't try and lump it in with al Qaeda, because their actions are not the same.

I am not defending the extremists, but I am defending the use of language in proper communication of factual situations. All to often the government spin things to fit their point of view. "Homicide bombers" was just such a term created for political reasons. That term is propaganda, but it was at least an attempt that announced as a change in terminology. The way the Bush Administration throws around "terrorist" is about as bad as Islamic extremists throw around the term "infidel."