When you have 113 candidates and only 100 "TP" fans how is that much of a rally?
I guess the TP fanatics have lost the will to get out of their bunkers and support their candidates.
Also, who was the lone Democratic Candidate? I am guessing it was Dusty Rhodes. Anyone want to bet?
Saturday, February 27, 2010
A Sign of the Future in the Q
Friday, February 26, 2010
Neighborhood Squabbles
The fight over how the City of Cincinnati's Neighborhood Support Program is administered appears to be political and personal. Water is wet, as well, I know, I know.
I don't place much focus on a He-said-She-said type of argument, so what the article reports may just be hot air venting. It appears that the conservative majority on council is acting to structure the funding program with a lot of oversight. This is then causing at least one community council member to lash out at the structure's front man, Jeff Berding as both an angry football fan and angry Democrat pissed that Berding got an endorsement in the first place, even though it was pulled last year.
Boycott? Seriously, that's the plan Joe Gorman of the Camp Washington Community Council has come up with? Bad mouthing Berding (who often deserves it) wasn't enough. I guess Gorman got his limited press coverage of this, but he really stands a better chance of being heard if he attended the event he wants to boycott and lobby the rest of the community councils and City Council members to try and affect change to the Structure of the funding program. I guess a boycott is an easy way to stay home and watch the Winter Olympics.
The spat is highly entertaining, but bad governing all around.
I don't place much focus on a He-said-She-said type of argument, so what the article reports may just be hot air venting. It appears that the conservative majority on council is acting to structure the funding program with a lot of oversight. This is then causing at least one community council member to lash out at the structure's front man, Jeff Berding as both an angry football fan and angry Democrat pissed that Berding got an endorsement in the first place, even though it was pulled last year.
Boycott? Seriously, that's the plan Joe Gorman of the Camp Washington Community Council has come up with? Bad mouthing Berding (who often deserves it) wasn't enough. I guess Gorman got his limited press coverage of this, but he really stands a better chance of being heard if he attended the event he wants to boycott and lobby the rest of the community councils and City Council members to try and affect change to the Structure of the funding program. I guess a boycott is an easy way to stay home and watch the Winter Olympics.
The spat is highly entertaining, but bad governing all around.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Tolliver vs. Burke
I just wanted to highlight Howard Wilkinson's post, noting that Darren Tolliver has announced that he will seek the chairmanship of the Hamilton County Democratic Party later this year.
Tolliver was the president of the student body at UC during my final year of law school. Law students, like most grad students, don't get involved in campus politics. While I'm not sure what, exactly, my exposure to Tolliver was, I remember thinking at the time that Tolliver was a really bright, ambitious kid. (He was a college student; it was OK to think of him as a "kid" back then.) More recently, Tolliver was a board member of CincyPAC. I'm not sure what Tolliver now does professionally (if he hasn't gone to law school yet, isn't a JD nonetheless inevitable?).
Tim Burke, of course, has been the chair of the HamCo Democratic Party forever. He is a partner at Manley Burke.
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. The "central commiittee," comprised of the party's precinct executives (who are themselves elected, precinct by precinct, this May) elect the party chair. I don't know (and please comment if you do) if there has been an recent influx of new members of the central committee, or if the May 4 elections are likely to bring new members. I would think the current executives are loyal to Burke, but Tolliver is the party's treasurer, and no doubt has support of his own.
Tolliver was the president of the student body at UC during my final year of law school. Law students, like most grad students, don't get involved in campus politics. While I'm not sure what, exactly, my exposure to Tolliver was, I remember thinking at the time that Tolliver was a really bright, ambitious kid. (He was a college student; it was OK to think of him as a "kid" back then.) More recently, Tolliver was a board member of CincyPAC. I'm not sure what Tolliver now does professionally (if he hasn't gone to law school yet, isn't a JD nonetheless inevitable?).
Tim Burke, of course, has been the chair of the HamCo Democratic Party forever. He is a partner at Manley Burke.
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. The "central commiittee," comprised of the party's precinct executives (who are themselves elected, precinct by precinct, this May) elect the party chair. I don't know (and please comment if you do) if there has been an recent influx of new members of the central committee, or if the May 4 elections are likely to bring new members. I would think the current executives are loyal to Burke, but Tolliver is the party's treasurer, and no doubt has support of his own.
Springer vs. Springer
I really wanted to write a post making fun of the HamCo Republican Party for inviting Michele Bachmann to be the keynote speaker at its annual Lincoln-Reagan dinner tomorrow night.
I was particularly appalled by the choice because for the last couple years, every now and then I think about whether I should be a Republican instead of a Democrat. But then the GOP puts someone like Bachmann front-and-center and I realize that's not a real option. (Or I am reminded that the party's extreme right wing controls its stance on social issues.)
But there's a problem with writing that post. The HamCo Democratic Party--the party to which, for the time being, I belong--is having its own event tomorrow night. Its "guest of honor" is Jerry Springer.* I'm not thrilled that Democratic-endorsed judges are appearing at an event headlined by the king of trash TV.
So the question is: what's worse? That the HamCo Republicans can't find a better keynote speaker than the Jerry Springer of Congress, or that the HamCo Dems can't find a more suitable guest of honor than the real Jerry Springer?
* In 2003, when Springer was considering running for the Senate, I met him. He was at a Mt. Adams bar (much more sober than I was). He sat for hours talking to people about his ideas and plans and why he was considering getting into the race. He's a very intelligent, thoughtful man. I wish he hadn't spent the last quarter-century using his television show to pollute our culture and, frankly, to exploit people who aren't as smart or as rich as he is. But he has, and we shouldn't pretend that he's a serious individual when his actions are to the contrary.
I was particularly appalled by the choice because for the last couple years, every now and then I think about whether I should be a Republican instead of a Democrat. But then the GOP puts someone like Bachmann front-and-center and I realize that's not a real option. (Or I am reminded that the party's extreme right wing controls its stance on social issues.)
But there's a problem with writing that post. The HamCo Democratic Party--the party to which, for the time being, I belong--is having its own event tomorrow night. Its "guest of honor" is Jerry Springer.* I'm not thrilled that Democratic-endorsed judges are appearing at an event headlined by the king of trash TV.
So the question is: what's worse? That the HamCo Republicans can't find a better keynote speaker than the Jerry Springer of Congress, or that the HamCo Dems can't find a more suitable guest of honor than the real Jerry Springer?
* In 2003, when Springer was considering running for the Senate, I met him. He was at a Mt. Adams bar (much more sober than I was). He sat for hours talking to people about his ideas and plans and why he was considering getting into the race. He's a very intelligent, thoughtful man. I wish he hadn't spent the last quarter-century using his television show to pollute our culture and, frankly, to exploit people who aren't as smart or as rich as he is. But he has, and we shouldn't pretend that he's a serious individual when his actions are to the contrary.
Where's the "No Bunt" Pledge?
When ever I read about politicians signing pledges "not to raise taxes" I find myself thinking about Baseball. Why doesn't COAST or the Tea Baggers, as the good baseball fans they surely are, demand that Dusty Baker sign a "No Bunt" pledge?
They might even require an oath: "I,, do solemnly pledge never to use the bunt during a regular or post season game, including suicide squeezes, where the man on third has the speed of Jackie Robinson and we are down by 10 or more runs. If I should break this pledge, I promise to forfeit the game and never, ever, play baseball or any other sport, again, so long as I live. Amen"
Yes, that is ridiculous. It is meant to be ridiculous.
Sometimes you have to bunt. Everyone in baseball knows this. Sometimes, you have to bunt to get the runner into scoring position. When you get the sign, you, the batter, don't shake it off or point to the fans and say: "But they demand efficiency! They expect me to hit a home run every time I am at bat. Home Runs are the only way you win ball games!"
Sacrificing an at bat is part of the game. You don't bunt every time a man is at bat, but you should never rule it out because some insane sports fans obsessed with statistics hate how it ruins someone's batting average.
If I were a Republican thinking about appeasing the Tea Baggers or COASTers, I would think about Baseball and at least try and maintain some intellectual honesty, and not sign a pledge "to not raise taxes." Not all Republicans are void of intellectual honesty, but they don't seem to show often enough, for my taste.
Sometimes you have to bunt and sometimes you have to at least have the option to raise taxes.
They might even require an oath: "I,
Yes, that is ridiculous. It is meant to be ridiculous.
Sometimes you have to bunt. Everyone in baseball knows this. Sometimes, you have to bunt to get the runner into scoring position. When you get the sign, you, the batter, don't shake it off or point to the fans and say: "But they demand efficiency! They expect me to hit a home run every time I am at bat. Home Runs are the only way you win ball games!"
Sacrificing an at bat is part of the game. You don't bunt every time a man is at bat, but you should never rule it out because some insane sports fans obsessed with statistics hate how it ruins someone's batting average.
If I were a Republican thinking about appeasing the Tea Baggers or COASTers, I would think about Baseball and at least try and maintain some intellectual honesty, and not sign a pledge "to not raise taxes." Not all Republicans are void of intellectual honesty, but they don't seem to show often enough, for my taste.
Sometimes you have to bunt and sometimes you have to at least have the option to raise taxes.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Respect Is Earned, Disdain is Free
I was wondering what happened to all of the crazy people who would disrupt City Council meetings. It appears they have shifted to the school board.
Why would any parent think that exhibiting this type of behavior is acceptable? When you act boorishly, you are going to be ignored. When you continue to act like jerks, you are going to be disdained. Quite a few parents deserve detention.
Why would any parent think that exhibiting this type of behavior is acceptable? When you act boorishly, you are going to be ignored. When you continue to act like jerks, you are going to be disdained. Quite a few parents deserve detention.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)