Springer Postpones Announcement
RunJerryRun reports the following:

Jerry Springer will hold a news conference to announce his political plans on Wednesday, August 6 at 2:00pm in the "Senate" Meeting room on the 1st floor of the Hyatt on Capital Square hotel, 75 East State Street in Columbus.

Springer's postponement is also covered in the Enquirer, the Post, and WLWT-NBC.

Cincinnati IMC?
Well, more media the better, but the track record for the IMC has been one of crack pots with unedited conspiracy theories better kept on the usenet than on a supposed news website. IMC has been at the forefront of communist and faux anarchist movements all over the world. The opinions are on the surface individual, where the line between activist and journalist are gone, but in reality they are just as homogenized as the Christian Right. The only difference with the IMC friends is that they all want to be the boss. Organization by appeasement brings chaos. If this group starts up I will read their site, and over at XRay we might even overlap on content, but I for one will not hold back in pointing out their problems and unfair biases.

Renting ZipCodes?
Kathy Y. Wilson still is playing both sides in her latest CityBeat Column. She blames "blacks" and blames "whites." Blacks in America are not African enough and whites, well, are just white. The "African Diaspora™" is actually a good description of the attitude of some in the black community. I found that very perceptive. Kathy's balancing act must be difficult. Dancing on pinheads could be an Olympic sport someday.

Nate Livingston on Hannity's Radio Show?
According to Nate himself he and Amanda Mayes will be on Hannity's radio show today at 4:00 PM EST. Nate is trying to get Hannity to not break the boycott with a scheduled appearance here on August 8th. Now, Hannity will most certainly break the boycott. What is funniest is that Nate and company are using him as their future anecdotal claim that they don't just target "black" entertainers/celebrities for boycott. This is just a stunt and I am helping along his Press push, but the boycotters have been quiet lately, so I will be a sucker and listen.

UPDATE: Nate did make it on the air. It was what I expected, more of the same. What I find odd is Hannity's ignorance about Cincinnati, and his claim or attempted fishing expedition that Nate had been arrested on drug charges, which is false. That was amazing that he claimed such, when Nate's lengthy criminal and civil court file indicates he was clearly never arrested on those charges. Hannity could be sued for slander if Nate really wanted to have some fun. Insinuation of drug use is a fine line, and I think Hannity would win hands down, but I would love seeing the two square off in court. I think Hannity and his "Hannitization of America Tour" and Nate Livingston are just the opposite side of the same coin. That coin's demonication is one of bigotry. "Hannitization" sounds like pure fascism, but it is a stunt. It sounds like purification to me, which is disturbing, but that is the effect Hannity and his producers want.

Nate was actually very passive, for Nate. Hannity came across as the aggressor, while Nate did not seem his usual deplorable self. Hannity proves he is an ignorant cuss, so all in all I give Nate the nod over Hannity in the "debate."

Hannity, for the record, Nate will not get 22 protestors. If there are 22 protestors there, 6 to 10 might be from Nate's group.

Hello Enquirer Editorial Board?
Folks, what are you guys smoking? You start out with this paragraph:

Every time you fill up your car with gas in Ohio, you donate 11 percent of the federal tax on that gas to other states. That may not sound like much, but it adds up to tens of millions of dollars lost each year - money the Buckeye State sorely needs to fix the deteriorating roads we rattle over - and build new ones.

That basically means: federal gas taxes are bad and Ohio pays a boatload of them. Then you say this:

Meanwhile, Ohio struggles to maintain its roads, which handle the nation's fifth-largest volume of traffic. It isn't fair. Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, has been complaining about it for years. He was in Columbus on Monday to push his current bill, which would increase Ohio's take from 89 cents to at least 95 cents, bringing in about $56 million extra a year. He also would raise the federal gas tax, now 18.4 cents a gallon.

So Voinovich wants to increase taxes and you applaud it, or at least don't challenge it. I am a bit perplexed. You advocate tax cuts and like Vionovich's steering of Bush to a light plan, but you don't seem to care about a tax increase that would be regressive and cause transportation costs to rise along with consumer prices. I don't see how this can square. Your tax cut endorsement relies on economic growth, but a gas tax increase would deter economic growth. How can anyone balance those positions?

Listening Skills
Does the Bush administration listen to anyone who does not support their predetermined positions? Yes, that ends up being a rhetorical question. If there was ever a more closed administration I would like a historian to correct me. What I don't understand is why does Bush not listen to people? Now, when I say listen I don't mean allowing people to talk to you. I mean listening to their opinions, and allowing their wisdom to sink in. Bush should start with Adeed Dawisha a professor at Miami University. He is an expert on Middle-East politics, often quoted and interview by various television outlets. The Enquirer had a nice story today where Mr. Dawisha warns, "Whatever goodwill we had when we went in has almost dissipated." Does Bush have the skills to listen when people give him bad news? I don't think so. The Bush ego is the Mt. Everest of politicos. Listening to him is just letting the words in to play with the hamster for a while, and then using them to line the cage.

No Word From Springer on Race
My latest Polstate post is up: Jerry Springer's candidacy is in some doubt. His deadline looms, but he is out of the country. He might push back the deadline a bit. The issue he is likely concerned about is the level of support he is getting from the Ohio Democratic Party insiders. If they don't at least give him credibility in the primary race, he will hurt the Democrats more than help.

The macro benefits of a Springer candidacy is to bring new voters to the polls in 2004 and help the Dems win Ohio for the Presidency. Springer could loose, even loose big, but still could help give the Dems Ohio's electoral votes. Springer's way to win lies with turning out new, mostly young, voters and pulling some of the libertarian vote from the GOP. Springer's support of a conceal and carry law, in a modified form, is a sign of that type of strategy.