Yet another downtown restaurant has closed. It's a clear sign that downtown is in trouble, and isn't drawing enough people to support the dining and entertainment venues there. So don't buy or rent living space there, and certainly don't think about going there to spend your money. In all likelihood, the restaurant closed because people are so afraid they'll become crime victims when they come to the area.
Oh, wait!!! I misread the linked article! It's not a downtown restaurant at all--it's Moe's Southwest Grill in Newport on the Levee. So everytime you see the word "downtown" in the previous paragraph, replace it with "Newport."
Sorry. Of course the closing of Moe's doesn't mean that Newport--or even the Levee--is in trouble. But that's how certain people would be spinning the story if it were a downtown restaurant. So next time a downtown establishment closes up, can we refrain from taking the "the sky is falling approach" to reporting news? (For "certain people," you can fill in the name of your favorite Enquirer reporter or City Beat blogger.)
I'm sorry, by the way, to see Moe's go, as I am anytime a business closes and employees inevitably lose jobs and have their lives disrupted. I don't mean to make light of a bad situation for those adversely affected.
Monday, February 18, 2008
But Where's The Big Hair?
Did anyone else feel like they were trapped in some strange time warp last night? NBC's primetime lineup consisted entirely of American Gladiators and Knight Rider. (Who agrees with me that if you put the women's winner, Monica, up on a joust platform with the men's winner, Evan, that Monica would win in about 6 seconds?)
Don't get me wrong--I watched every minute of both. (As a male of a certain age, watching a new installment of Knight Rider was some sort of preordained, primordial duty.) I'm just sayin'....
Don't get me wrong--I watched every minute of both. (As a male of a certain age, watching a new installment of Knight Rider was some sort of preordained, primordial duty.) I'm just sayin'....
Detour Ahead
I'm sure that it's absolutely necessary, but the closing of the Eighth Street viaduct isn't going to make getting to the West Side (or back Downtown from the West Side) much fun at all.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Portman for McCain's VP?
On Meet the Press this morning, Rob Portman (former 2nd District Congressman from Ohio and Cincinnati Resident) was mentioned as a possible VP running mate for John McCain.
From a local angle, how much attention would that put on Cincinnati if a local person were on the national ticket? Would that be good for us, no matter what? We are looking to be a big stop on the campaign trail again, with the nation NAACP convention being a stop for the Presidential nominees. I don't look forward to those who seek to bash the city at all cost (say Chris Smitherman or Joe Deters for example) getting the opportunity to frame the discussion when ever Cincinnati is referenced.
Portman is not considered on the A list for the VP slot, but logically he has the economic background McCain lacks. From a GOP perspective, one
Would Portman, a fairly well liked former Ohio Congressman, give McCain Ohio?
From a local angle, how much attention would that put on Cincinnati if a local person were on the national ticket? Would that be good for us, no matter what? We are looking to be a big stop on the campaign trail again, with the nation NAACP convention being a stop for the Presidential nominees. I don't look forward to those who seek to bash the city at all cost (say Chris Smitherman or Joe Deters for example) getting the opportunity to frame the discussion when ever Cincinnati is referenced.
Portman is not considered on the A list for the VP slot, but logically he has the economic background McCain lacks. From a GOP perspective, one
Would Portman, a fairly well liked former Ohio Congressman, give McCain Ohio?
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Advantage Democrat?
I've been a little post-happy the last two days. I promise, this is the last one for the weekend (unless something really interesting comes up tomorrow).
The conventional wisdom is that the Democrats' prolonged primary season will benefit John McCain. Supposedly, McCain can now begin "uniting" the Republican Party behind him and begin a national general election campaign, while Barack and Hillary are left to squabble over who the nominee will be. I've begun to wonder if the opposite is true.
As you may recall, the Florida legislature moved the date of its primary to be ahead of Super Tuesday. The Democratic National Committee had told it not to do so, and threatened to refuse to seat Florida's delegates at the convention. Well, Florida stuck to its guns (and according to the current DNC rules, Florida will have no voice in choosing the Democratic nominee). The major Democratic candidates all agreed not to campaign in Florida before its primary.
The Republicans took a more laid-back approach, though, and just stripped Florida of half of its delegates to the Republican convention. The Florida Republican party was thrilled. It believes that as a result, the Republican candidate will have a head start in Florida for the general election, since he's already campaigned and built an organization there, whereas the Democrats didn't bother. (The DNC is still weighing whether to hold caucuses in Florida and Michigan, which also jumped the gun, and seat delegates based on those results.)
Does the same hold true for the Democrats? Three states that are sure to be pivotal in November--Wisconsin, Texas, and Ohio--are going to see a whole lot of love from Clinton and Obama. We already know about the intense organization-building taking place in Cincinnati, and I can only assume the same is happeneing in Madison, Milwaukee, Houston, Dallas, and so on. So this supposed disadvantage (that the Dems will actually elect a nominee rather than simply coronate one) might work out in the Democrats' favor. Well in advance of the conventions, the Democratic nominee will have GOTV organizations in place. The still-to-be-contested primary states will have a lot of opportunity to see the eventual nominee. And John McCain will have to start from scratch.
Any thoughts?
The conventional wisdom is that the Democrats' prolonged primary season will benefit John McCain. Supposedly, McCain can now begin "uniting" the Republican Party behind him and begin a national general election campaign, while Barack and Hillary are left to squabble over who the nominee will be. I've begun to wonder if the opposite is true.
As you may recall, the Florida legislature moved the date of its primary to be ahead of Super Tuesday. The Democratic National Committee had told it not to do so, and threatened to refuse to seat Florida's delegates at the convention. Well, Florida stuck to its guns (and according to the current DNC rules, Florida will have no voice in choosing the Democratic nominee). The major Democratic candidates all agreed not to campaign in Florida before its primary.
The Republicans took a more laid-back approach, though, and just stripped Florida of half of its delegates to the Republican convention. The Florida Republican party was thrilled. It believes that as a result, the Republican candidate will have a head start in Florida for the general election, since he's already campaigned and built an organization there, whereas the Democrats didn't bother. (The DNC is still weighing whether to hold caucuses in Florida and Michigan, which also jumped the gun, and seat delegates based on those results.)
Does the same hold true for the Democrats? Three states that are sure to be pivotal in November--Wisconsin, Texas, and Ohio--are going to see a whole lot of love from Clinton and Obama. We already know about the intense organization-building taking place in Cincinnati, and I can only assume the same is happeneing in Madison, Milwaukee, Houston, Dallas, and so on. So this supposed disadvantage (that the Dems will actually elect a nominee rather than simply coronate one) might work out in the Democrats' favor. Well in advance of the conventions, the Democratic nominee will have GOTV organizations in place. The still-to-be-contested primary states will have a lot of opportunity to see the eventual nominee. And John McCain will have to start from scratch.
Any thoughts?
Cincinnati: More Progressive Than You Think?
I'm a little reluctant to post this for fear of starting a religious flame war in the comment thread. But as a born-and-raised Presbyterian (the son, in fact, of a Presbyterian pastor), I can't pass up this story.
Tuesday night, the Presbytery of Cincinnati (roughly the equivalent of a diocese, but governed democratically rather than by a bishop) voted to send an overture to the General Assembly (the Presbyterian Church's national governing body, which meets once every two years) to permit the ordination of openly gay and lesbian pastors, elders, and deacons. The Enquirer's coverage is here.
It's certainly not surprising that a presbytery is sending such an overture to the General Assembly. This is a battle that the Presbyterian Church (USA) has been fighting for years. Many believe the issue will ultimately force some sort of formal schism in the church. Some, in fact, are openly working towards such a schism. (It's not easy for a congregation to separate itself from the Presbyterian Church, though; each individual church's property is held in trust by the presbytery in which it sits, so any congregation that "left" would also leave behind its building. If there's a schism, expect lots of nasty battles in secular courts on this issue--the Methodists are already fighting them.)
Is is surprising, however, that the overture is coming from the Presbytery of Cincinnati. This is a city that hasn't always been gay-friendly (think about the now-repealed Article XII). Just a few years ago, the Presbytery of Cincinnati defrocked Steven Van Kuiken for performing same-sex wedding ceremonies. (You can read City Beat's article on the resulting aftermath at Mt. Auburn Presbyterian Church, where Rev. Van Kuiken had been pastor, here.)
I really like it when Cincinnati surprises me like this.
Tuesday night, the Presbytery of Cincinnati (roughly the equivalent of a diocese, but governed democratically rather than by a bishop) voted to send an overture to the General Assembly (the Presbyterian Church's national governing body, which meets once every two years) to permit the ordination of openly gay and lesbian pastors, elders, and deacons. The Enquirer's coverage is here.
It's certainly not surprising that a presbytery is sending such an overture to the General Assembly. This is a battle that the Presbyterian Church (USA) has been fighting for years. Many believe the issue will ultimately force some sort of formal schism in the church. Some, in fact, are openly working towards such a schism. (It's not easy for a congregation to separate itself from the Presbyterian Church, though; each individual church's property is held in trust by the presbytery in which it sits, so any congregation that "left" would also leave behind its building. If there's a schism, expect lots of nasty battles in secular courts on this issue--the Methodists are already fighting them.)
Is is surprising, however, that the overture is coming from the Presbytery of Cincinnati. This is a city that hasn't always been gay-friendly (think about the now-repealed Article XII). Just a few years ago, the Presbytery of Cincinnati defrocked Steven Van Kuiken for performing same-sex wedding ceremonies. (You can read City Beat's article on the resulting aftermath at Mt. Auburn Presbyterian Church, where Rev. Van Kuiken had been pastor, here.)
I really like it when Cincinnati surprises me like this.
Big Question Left Unanswered
Howard Wilkinson summarizes the Clinton and Obama events in Cincinnati yesterday. But he leaves unanswered the single most important question on the minds of Cincinnati voters:
Does Hillary Clinton like Cincinnati chili?
(In Howard's defense, he does note that the campaign staff and Clinton's press flotilla took with them a rather large to-go order. But there's no word on Senator Clinton's own preference. How can we choose our nominee if we don't know where the candidates stand on Cincinnati chili? Hopefully, Howard will do better next time one of the candidates is in town.)
Does Hillary Clinton like Cincinnati chili?
(In Howard's defense, he does note that the campaign staff and Clinton's press flotilla took with them a rather large to-go order. But there's no word on Senator Clinton's own preference. How can we choose our nominee if we don't know where the candidates stand on Cincinnati chili? Hopefully, Howard will do better next time one of the candidates is in town.)
Friday, February 15, 2008
Why I Was At Music Hall Tonight
I turned 18 in 1992. In August, in fact--after the primaries. So the first time I ever cast a ballot, it was in the George H.W. Bush-Bill Clinton presidential race. I had been excited for months by Bill Clinton. I had been enraptured by the Democratic National Convention that year. Watching (on TV) Bill Clinton walk towards and enter Madison Square Garden once enough delegates had cast votes to secure the nomination, I felt chills. When he accepted the nomination, I was spell-bound and thrilled with his speech. Here's how it ended:
I remember being a first-year college student at the University of Chicago, and gathering in a dormitory lounge with fellow students to watch the general election results come in on the TV. We all jumped up and down, slapped high-fives, and hugged each other when the networks declared Clinton the winner.
I haven't been that excited about a candidate since then. Until Barack Obama.
I was at the Obama breakfast at the Westin about a year ago. It marked the first time I'd ever given money to a political candidate. Hearing him speak (even at that event, where he didn't give a fire-and-brimstone stump speech) leaves me with goosebumps. It's clear to me that he's the new torchbearer of Bill Clinton's 1992 message of hope.
The point of this post has not been to convince you to vote for Barack Obama. (If it were, I'm a miserable failure, as this isn't the kind of argument that persuades anyone to favor a candidate.) Instead, my message is this: no matter who you're supporting--Obama, Clinton, McCain, or Huckabee--I hope you're as excited by your candidate as I am by mine.
Somewhere at this very moment, another child is born in America. Let it be our cause to give that child a happy home, a healthy family, a hopeful future. Let it be our cause to see that child reach the fullest of her God-given abilities. Let it be our cause that she grow up strong and secure, braced by her challenges, but never, never struggling alone; with family and friends and a faith that in America, no one is left out; no one is left behind. Let it be our cause that when she is able, she gives something back to her children, her community, and her country. And let it be our cause to give her a country that's coming together, and moving ahead -- a country of boundless hopes and endless dreams; a country that once again lifts up its people, and inspires the world.
Let that be our cause and our commitment and our New Covenant.
I end tonight where it all began for me: I still believe in a place called Hope.
I remember being a first-year college student at the University of Chicago, and gathering in a dormitory lounge with fellow students to watch the general election results come in on the TV. We all jumped up and down, slapped high-fives, and hugged each other when the networks declared Clinton the winner.
I haven't been that excited about a candidate since then. Until Barack Obama.
I was at the Obama breakfast at the Westin about a year ago. It marked the first time I'd ever given money to a political candidate. Hearing him speak (even at that event, where he didn't give a fire-and-brimstone stump speech) leaves me with goosebumps. It's clear to me that he's the new torchbearer of Bill Clinton's 1992 message of hope.
The point of this post has not been to convince you to vote for Barack Obama. (If it were, I'm a miserable failure, as this isn't the kind of argument that persuades anyone to favor a candidate.) Instead, my message is this: no matter who you're supporting--Obama, Clinton, McCain, or Huckabee--I hope you're as excited by your candidate as I am by mine.
On the Docket
As one of the two resident attorney-bloggers, I thought I'd highlight two stories that made news today that might be of interest. (They're completely unrelated, but I'm keeping them in one post for those of you who wish lawyers would just crawl back under the rocks from whence we came.)
First, the Warren County grand jury indicted Michel Veillette, the French Canadian accused of killing his family in Mason, on murder charges that include death specifications. If the prosecution's theory is proven correct, and Mr. Veillette killed his wife and then set fire to his house--thus killing his children--in order to cover up the crime, then his conduct could warrant the death penalty under Ohio law. (Remember, though: an indictment is not proof of a crime. Mr. Veillette remains innocent until 12 Warren County residents unanimously agree otherwise.)
Cincinnati attorney Tim McKenna was appointed to represent Michel Veillette. I'm not sure, but I believe Mr. McKenna is qualified to handle death penalty cases (the Ohio Supreme Court has fairly strict standards governing the requisite qualifications to defend a death penalty case). But I believe the death specifications mean that there will be another attorney joining him at counsel table. Based on the stakes (life and death) and the complex analysis of the physical evidence that will be required for both sides, the trial will likely be one of the most expensive Warren County has seen in some time.
Second (and on a much lighter note), say what you will about Eric Deters (and people have said just about everything about him), he's a fearless, ingenious litigator. With Hugh Campbell (of Villa Hills, KY) and a New Orleans attorney, Mr. Deters has filed suit against the New England Patriots, asserting that they cheated during the 2002 Super Bowl. The lawyers want to represent two groups of people: the defeated St. Louis Rams, who each would have earned an additional $25,000 (plus a really nifty ring) had they won; and the nearly 73,000 fans who attended the game and who each paid $400 for a ticket.
The suit raises a number of interesting questions. First, for the players: don't they need to prove that they would have won if the Patriots hadn't cheated? If they can't prove that, then they can't prove they were "damaged" by the Pats' alleged misconduct. One of the player-plaintiffs now plays in the Arena Football League; can't he argue that if he were a Super Bowl winner, his NFL career would have been longer and his earnings higher?
Second, for the fans: assuming they're entitled to refunds because they thought they were paying to see a fair contest and instead saw a less-than-fair one (which also assumes Deters and friends can prove the cheating), are they entitled only to the face value of the ticket, or can people who bought in the secondary market (or "scalpers") recover what they actually paid? How about a class of fans who watched on TV, who wish to be compensated for the four hours they devoted to watching an unfair game? What about a class of St. Louis fans who suffered emotional distress when their beloved Rams lost?
If the Deters team survives a motion to dismiss, we should put them in the Lawyers Hall of Fame.
First, the Warren County grand jury indicted Michel Veillette, the French Canadian accused of killing his family in Mason, on murder charges that include death specifications. If the prosecution's theory is proven correct, and Mr. Veillette killed his wife and then set fire to his house--thus killing his children--in order to cover up the crime, then his conduct could warrant the death penalty under Ohio law. (Remember, though: an indictment is not proof of a crime. Mr. Veillette remains innocent until 12 Warren County residents unanimously agree otherwise.)
Cincinnati attorney Tim McKenna was appointed to represent Michel Veillette. I'm not sure, but I believe Mr. McKenna is qualified to handle death penalty cases (the Ohio Supreme Court has fairly strict standards governing the requisite qualifications to defend a death penalty case). But I believe the death specifications mean that there will be another attorney joining him at counsel table. Based on the stakes (life and death) and the complex analysis of the physical evidence that will be required for both sides, the trial will likely be one of the most expensive Warren County has seen in some time.
Second (and on a much lighter note), say what you will about Eric Deters (and people have said just about everything about him), he's a fearless, ingenious litigator. With Hugh Campbell (of Villa Hills, KY) and a New Orleans attorney, Mr. Deters has filed suit against the New England Patriots, asserting that they cheated during the 2002 Super Bowl. The lawyers want to represent two groups of people: the defeated St. Louis Rams, who each would have earned an additional $25,000 (plus a really nifty ring) had they won; and the nearly 73,000 fans who attended the game and who each paid $400 for a ticket.
The suit raises a number of interesting questions. First, for the players: don't they need to prove that they would have won if the Patriots hadn't cheated? If they can't prove that, then they can't prove they were "damaged" by the Pats' alleged misconduct. One of the player-plaintiffs now plays in the Arena Football League; can't he argue that if he were a Super Bowl winner, his NFL career would have been longer and his earnings higher?
Second, for the fans: assuming they're entitled to refunds because they thought they were paying to see a fair contest and instead saw a less-than-fair one (which also assumes Deters and friends can prove the cheating), are they entitled only to the face value of the ticket, or can people who bought in the secondary market (or "scalpers") recover what they actually paid? How about a class of fans who watched on TV, who wish to be compensated for the four hours they devoted to watching an unfair game? What about a class of St. Louis fans who suffered emotional distress when their beloved Rams lost?
If the Deters team survives a motion to dismiss, we should put them in the Lawyers Hall of Fame.
Michelle Obama in Over-the-Rhine
I'm just back from Music Hall. There are two lines from Ms. Obama's speech that stayed with me all the way home.
On the success (once unexpected) of the Obama campaign:
On public education:
For any of you there, what were your thoughts on the speech and the assembled crowd?
Could anyone tell: was there a teleprompter at the back of the room? I couldn't see one from my vantage point. If not, then Ms. Obama spoke for an hour from what looked like about a half-page of notes.
Also: if anyone was at Senator Clinton's invitation-only event today, please share your experience here.
On the success (once unexpected) of the Obama campaign:
I'm proud of America, because we have exceeded our own limited expectations
of ourselves. . . Hope is making an important comeback.
On public education:
When people look at me, I don't want them to see "the next First Lady of the
United States." I want them to see what an investment in public education
looks like.
For any of you there, what were your thoughts on the speech and the assembled crowd?
Could anyone tell: was there a teleprompter at the back of the room? I couldn't see one from my vantage point. If not, then Ms. Obama spoke for an hour from what looked like about a half-page of notes.
Also: if anyone was at Senator Clinton's invitation-only event today, please share your experience here.
Cincy Clear Channel Radio to be Sold?
Regulators have ruled that Clear Channel must sell all of its Cincinnati area radio stations in order for CC's sale to Bain Capital and Thomas H. Lee Partners.
What does this mean for local radio? Will a different media giant come in and start to rule the local airwaves? Will the set of stations that include heavy weights WLW, WEBN, the FOX, and 55KRC, be split up?
Is it possible that we might actually get more local radio programming, instead of the national tripe that rules most of our radio air waves?
For some insider radio debate, check here.
What does this mean for local radio? Will a different media giant come in and start to rule the local airwaves? Will the set of stations that include heavy weights WLW, WEBN, the FOX, and 55KRC, be split up?
Is it possible that we might actually get more local radio programming, instead of the national tripe that rules most of our radio air waves?
For some insider radio debate, check here.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
It's Just Us. Be Honest.
Now that the Ohio primary contest is in full gear (at least for the Democrats), are you:
a. thrilled that you will finally get to cast a meaningful vote in a presidential primary;
b. secretly annoyed that the longest presidential campaign ever just won't end, but pretending otherwise; or
c. openly indifferent to the election, since all politicians are liars anyhow?
a. thrilled that you will finally get to cast a meaningful vote in a presidential primary;
b. secretly annoyed that the longest presidential campaign ever just won't end, but pretending otherwise; or
c. openly indifferent to the election, since all politicians are liars anyhow?
Invaders at the Gate
Yesterday, Howard Wilkinson posted on the alleged support Hillary Clinton has among Republicans, on the theory that she'll be easier to beat in the general election than Barack Obama.
Assuming that's true and Republicans want Senator Clinton to be the Democratic nominee, has anyone thought about the impact that Republican voters might have in Ohio's "open" primary on the Democratic contest? In some parts of Ohio, of course, Republicans will have strong incentive to vote a Republican ballot (the Second Congressional District comes to mind, where there's a primary fight between Jean Schmidt and Tom Brinkman). In some places, though, there really won't be much going on in the way of local primaries (is the DeWine-King judicial primary really enough to keep Republican Hamilton County residents from crossing over to vote a Democratic ballot?). So what's to stop Republicans from voting a Democratic ballot in an effort to nominate Senator Clinton?
Any thoughts?
Full disclosure: I've previously noted my support--both figurative and financial--for the Obama campaign. I do not, believe, however, that "The Republicans hate Hillary" or "The Republicans think they'll beat Hillary" are reasons to vote for Obama.
Assuming that's true and Republicans want Senator Clinton to be the Democratic nominee, has anyone thought about the impact that Republican voters might have in Ohio's "open" primary on the Democratic contest? In some parts of Ohio, of course, Republicans will have strong incentive to vote a Republican ballot (the Second Congressional District comes to mind, where there's a primary fight between Jean Schmidt and Tom Brinkman). In some places, though, there really won't be much going on in the way of local primaries (is the DeWine-King judicial primary really enough to keep Republican Hamilton County residents from crossing over to vote a Democratic ballot?). So what's to stop Republicans from voting a Democratic ballot in an effort to nominate Senator Clinton?
Any thoughts?
Full disclosure: I've previously noted my support--both figurative and financial--for the Obama campaign. I do not, believe, however, that "The Republicans hate Hillary" or "The Republicans think they'll beat Hillary" are reasons to vote for Obama.
Goodbye Chelsea, Hello Michelle
Michelle Obama will attending a campaign rally on Friday, February 15, at 6:00 PM at Music Hall. Doors will open at 5:15.
The event is free.
Update: Howard Wilkinson has now posted this information on the Enquirer's Politics Extra Blog.
The event is free.
Update: Howard Wilkinson has now posted this information on the Enquirer's Politics Extra Blog.
Forgetfulness About History
Ricky Santorum today on the history of the Republican party and why John McCain is apparently a problem:
"The Republican Party was founded as the antislavery party. It was, thus, a regional party. After the Civil War, the North and Upper Midwest were Republican, the South and Southwest Democratic. With the exception of the solidly Democratic Catholic vote in the Northeast, the North was virtually a one-party region right up to the Great Depression.
All that changed after the 1960s. The Democratic Party embraced the '60s Cultural Revolution, with its hostility to the military and traditional values. The GOP pursued Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy to court Southern conservatives away from the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party became the party of George McGovern and Ted Kennedy. After some stiff resistance, the Republican Party became the party of Ronald Reagan. The upshot today: If you are a conservative, you are a Republican; if you're a liberal, you're a Democrat."
Now, what exactly was that Southern Strategy and isn't there something missing in Ricky's history lesson? I think I have found it. The Democratic Party's embrace of the "60s Cultural Revolution" included an embrace of the civil rights movement and led the GOP to pursue a racist strategy to to court white Southern conservatives away from the Democratic Party. A query for 2008 --- Will the current incarnation of the GOP employ a Southern Strategy against Barak Obama, if the Democratic Party (and this seems likely at the moment) nominates a multiracial (not that all of us are not multiracial) person of color -- a person of African descent -- to be its Presidential candidate? Will such a Southern Strategy be successful in 2008?
"The Republican Party was founded as the antislavery party. It was, thus, a regional party. After the Civil War, the North and Upper Midwest were Republican, the South and Southwest Democratic. With the exception of the solidly Democratic Catholic vote in the Northeast, the North was virtually a one-party region right up to the Great Depression.
All that changed after the 1960s. The Democratic Party embraced the '60s Cultural Revolution, with its hostility to the military and traditional values. The GOP pursued Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy to court Southern conservatives away from the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party became the party of George McGovern and Ted Kennedy. After some stiff resistance, the Republican Party became the party of Ronald Reagan. The upshot today: If you are a conservative, you are a Republican; if you're a liberal, you're a Democrat."
Now, what exactly was that Southern Strategy and isn't there something missing in Ricky's history lesson? I think I have found it. The Democratic Party's embrace of the "60s Cultural Revolution" included an embrace of the civil rights movement and led the GOP to pursue a racist strategy to to court white Southern conservatives away from the Democratic Party. A query for 2008 --- Will the current incarnation of the GOP employ a Southern Strategy against Barak Obama, if the Democratic Party (and this seems likely at the moment) nominates a multiracial (not that all of us are not multiracial) person of color -- a person of African descent -- to be its Presidential candidate? Will such a Southern Strategy be successful in 2008?
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Get On Your Soapbox
Starting today there is another website, beyond this one, that will be telling the story of Cincinnati. Hop up on your own Soapbox and find out the latest about why Cincinnati is a vibrant place to live, work, play, and create.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Contrast and Compare
The Hamilton County Democrats provide information to local party members about events going on for both Presidential Candidates. Here is today's email:
Dear Supporter,Both campaigns are represented in the mailing, which isn't the issue. What I believe is illustrated is the failure of the Clinton ground game. The Obama camp is ready to open their Cincinnati headquarters. The writer of the email apologetically tells the reader that they'll let you know as soon as the Hillary camp has a local office. Hillary may win Ohio, but they are not doing by being a little slow on the pick-up. Will a good ground game in in Ohio be enough for Obama win in Ohio?
To All Southwest Obama Supporters,
Obama for America is proud to announce the opening of its Cincinnati, Ohio office and an organizational meeting to kick off the final three weeks of the Ohio campaign. Volunteers have been working hard here to spread Barack Obama's message of change to FAMILY, FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS in Cincinnati. Now, following a series of victories across the country, the Obama campaign is happy to welcome everyone to an organizational meeting here in Hamilton County. The details are:
What: Obama for America Organizational Meeting
When: Wednesday, Februrary 13th, 6p.m.-8p.m.
Where: New Friendship Baptist Church, 3212 Reading Road, near the intersection of Martin Luther King and Reading Rd.
This is an important opportunity. It's a chance to meet the staff you'll be working with, hear about what we plan to do here in Hamilton County, and learn about how YOU can help deliver Ohio for Barack Obama. If you haven't been involved, the time is now.
NEW CINCINNATI OFFICE
We are also excited to announce the opening of our new Cincinnati office. It's located at:
1524 Madison Rd., in DeSales Plaza, (just across the street from the former Kerry HQ).
The office will be open from 9a.m.-9p.m., everyday, beginning this Thursday, February 14th. We would love to have everyone stop by and check us out. Watch for more events, meetings, and opportunities to get involved over the next week. Phone numbers will be available soon.
There are 20 days until the Ohio Primary.
_____________________________________________________________________
Hillary in Columbus
Hillary Clinton will be appearing at a Rally in Columbus on Thursday Febrauray 14, at the French Field House, 410 Woody Hayes Dr. Doors will open at 4:30 and the event is open to the public at large.
Rally for Hillary
Sunday, March 2, 2008 at 3:00 PM - 10:00 PM
Where: Adonis, 4601 Kellogg Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45226
General Area: east side of town near near Old Coney, Riverbend, Lunkin airport
This Rally will be held on Sunday, March 2nd, to accommodate some special guests. This is just two days before the Ohio primary!
Doors open at 3:00 PM. $7.00 each person requested. EVERYONE is welcomed to join us in our big HILLARY rally just before the Ohio primary! This event is at an upscale night club, casual dress is OK! Everyone knows that Ohio will be a crucial battleground state, and Hillary needs your support for Ohio! If you're not in Ohio we still want you here, the more the merrier!
This will not be a boring political event, there will be FUN for everyone! We will have keynote democratic speakers, food, fun, dancing and lots of Hillary stuff for everyone! We are having this event in the mid to later afternoon so people from all over the state of Ohio can attend. If you would like to stay the night in Cincinnati please let us know if you need hotel information and we will forward it to you. More info at www.myspace.com/hillaryohio $7.00 each person requested donation. Camera's are welcomed!
Host
Jeff Harney
PS.
We'll pass along information a bout the local Clinton Campaign office as soon as we have it, at this wrting that information is not available.
Do We Have Presidential Nominees Yet?
This is all just too much fun --- even more fun because it captures the very essence of the man and his campaign.
OK, how does McCain make the Huckster go away? And what gives with only counting two-thirds of the caucus sites in Washington State and then declaring McCain the winner?
Can Clinton survive to the March 4 primaries, if Obama has won Kansas, Washington, Louisiana, Maine, DC, Maryland, Virginia, Hawaii and Wisconsin between Super Tuesday and March 4 and she has won none? What does Obama have to do to begin to capture lower educated and lower income non-African American voters? Who gets Latino voters in Texas? Union workers in Ohio? Why are those white Democratic voters who are most secure and comfortable in their financial position in society ("Starbucks Democrats") overwhelmingly supporting Obama thus far, while those white Democratic voters who are least financially secure and comfortable ("Dunkin Donut Democrats") overwhelmingly sticking with Clinton thus far? Does Clinton withdraw if she does not win Ohio AND Texas on March 4? Should she withdraw at that point or should she fight on through Pennsylvania? What if Clinton and Obama remain virtually tied in delegates through the end of all primaries and the super delegates have to make the decision? How should they decide? What do Obama supporters do if the super delegates swing to Clinton? What do Clinton supporters do if the super delegates swing to Obama? Either way they swing, hasn't the process been run according to the rules and neither side has grounds for bitching? Aren't super delegates fundamentally anti-democratic? How will all this end?
Maybe everyone will just get together and decide that the country deserves another Bush term to keep us all safe from terror through torture ----- Mission Accomplished!
Monday, February 11, 2008
Best Of Cincinnati 2008
CityBeat has opened up voting for its Best Of Cincinnati issue. Please be sure to make your choice for Best Blog. With the addition of our new writers, I think Cincinnati Blog has improved. 2007 did see the advent of many great new local blogs, so the competition I think will be tough this year.
The hardest thing about the survey is trying to remember the names of all of the places. I'm having a hard time remembering the actual name of some of the restaurants I like, especially in the more obscure categories.
The hardest thing about the survey is trying to remember the names of all of the places. I'm having a hard time remembering the actual name of some of the restaurants I like, especially in the more obscure categories.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)