Andrew Warner

Steve Colbert is generating a lot of buzz with his speech at the correspondents dinner. This is the second time in a week that he has made conservatives feel really uncomfortable. Weren't watching C-SPAN on a Saturday Night? Check out the video here.

The Dean of Cincinnati brought my attention to a little piece of nostalgia for anyone who grew up as part of the Nintendo generation. Probably the funniest, most innovative performance at a talent show ever. Watch Mario Live and remember the simpler times.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 6:21 PM | Permalink | Comments   

The Sudan accepted a peace agreement only to have the rebels reject it.

This is all happening on a day where thousands of Americans are rallying for peace in the Sudan.

Condoleeza Rice has said that a more "robust security force" is needed and that America continues to lead the way for peace in the region.

Congratulations to all of those who got on a bus and shipped themselves to one of the many rallies throughout the country -- thank you for raising your voices. It is you who will make a difference for the people who, because of the most dire circumstances, can't make a difference for themselves.

Save Darfur

Posted by Andrew Warner at 4:34 PM | Permalink | Comments   

The Enquirer has a real ground breaking piece on why Cincinnati won't get a casino.

Their official analysis: "City didn't push as Cleveland did"

The "pro-development" crowd (as if there is an anti-development crowd) is certain to be up in arms about the squandered opportunity to become a tourist destination with burning neon signs, bad comedians, and "free" drinks (free as long as you are losing exorbitant amounts of money).

This is a real win for the community. In a post entitled the House Always Wins, I warned against the obvious in regards to attracting a money burning service like a casino. I will reiterate the point for those of you who pine over the loss of Vegas glitz on the muddy banks of the Ohio River:

Casinos are the anti-Robin Hood, they take from the poor and give to the rich. It's the ultimate tease for people who have two bills and can only afford to pay one; bet on black just once, win, and all your problems will be solved.

Casinos are in business for one reason, they take more money from people than they give.

I'm glad our community is smart enough not to "push as Cleveland did" for a service that produces no goods or benefit for the consumer. Now, unfortunately for the Bortz' and the "creative" class, we can figure out development that is good for the community as a whole.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 11:51 AM | Permalink | Comments   

Condoleeza Rice has accused Iran of playing games.

Some comments coming out of this situation are disturbing me. I will give them to you, decide if you feel we are on the brink of war.

Ms. Rice:

"The international community's credibility is at stake here... We can either mean what we say, when we say that Iran must comply, or we can continue to allow Iran to defy."

Colin Powell:

Iran seems to ""have pretty much decided they can accept whatever sanctions are coming their way."

The Washington Post points out that

Iran insists it has no plans to make nuclear weapons and does not need or want them. The United States, Britain and France suspect the program is aimed at producing nuclear warheads.

Sanctions that are supposedly not working, America supposedly doing what the international community should, a Middle Eastern country claiming they don't want or have nuclear weapons... This is all too familiar.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 9:39 AM | Permalink | Comments   

Ian McKellen, you may know him as Magneto from the hit movie series X-Men, was a guest Friday night on Real Time with Bill Maher. A typical European movie star, he criticized Americans over our unrelenting use of cars, people's lack of face to face social interaction, and generally the things that movie stars can afford to think about that people who live in reality can't find the time or effort to ponder.

Generally these stars, which are easy for the right to write off as pompous or out of touch with reality, are right, but in regards to policy, they go ignored. It's a shame since these "eccentrics" may just have the answers to at least some of our problems.

McKellen caught my attention when he began discussing a new roof he just had installed on his house. The roof uses solar technology in order to power his house -- surprising, seeing as how his hometown of London is so gloomy and gray. The roof is so effective, he actually has energy left over to give back to London. He will probably never have to pay an energy bill again (good thing since his pocket book is stressing with the coming release of the Da Vinci Code).

Is this dream of, what I will now dub, "household energy independence" possible for people not landing roles in blockbuster films, or just another way for Hollywood stars to feel like they are better than the rest of us (I kid the folks in Hollywood)?

I searched the internet for related information and can't give you anything conclusive. You can purchase a solar system for your roof for about $20,000. There is also an alternative system called PV roofing, where the solar technology is built into the roofing technology, a "more attractive" look for those of you in the suburbs who can't shake up the neighborhood by putting those unfortunate looking solar panels on your roof.

While our politicians, and myself, use energy and gas prices to tear down Bush and our pretty worthless legislative body, we seem to be missing the boat on practical solutions like these solar systems.

I'm certain the government could foster a transition from gas and electricity to solar energy in homes through income-based subsidies, low interest loans, etc. This is merely a matter of initial cost, once the transition is made we live on free energy for years.

Now is the time for innovation, if we wait until the last remnants of fossil fuel have dripped way, it will already be too late.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 10:27 PM | Permalink | Comments   

At last the war on drugs is over...In Mexico.

Our own "War on Drugs" has been just about as successful as our "War on Terrorism." A lot of money spent and nothing to show for it. It seems the only abstract war America doesn't want to fight any more is the "War on Poverty." After all, what campaign contributors would benefit from that nonsense?

I wish our legislators would learn a thing our two from the progressive haven that is Mexico. In Cincinnati, and America, we have a problem letting go of failed polices. Heck, Cincinnati just implemented a "tougher" marijuana ordinance so we can pay for more people to sit in jail and lock up more kids on their late night UDF munchie runs.

Clarification: It is still illegal to sell drugs in Mexico. The new law eliminates the arrests of drug users and addicts, clearing police officers time and jail space for the supply side.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 2:17 PM | Permalink | Comments   

Whether it is the Cincinnati Enquirer deciding which campaign to help take flight, or the entire national media ignoring three states proposals for impeachment of the President, it is difficult for even the most desperate of media apologists to deny the way editorial choices can start, stall, or completely squash political movements.

The Chicago Sun-Times and a speckling of "non-major" media sources have picked up the story, but even blogs have even been relatively quiet, as if they feel uncomfortable talking out of turn because the story has been squelched by the mainstream. Even the "progressives" over at Daily Kos feel comforted by taking a "wait and see" attitude, not realizing it is only through our buzzing excitement and relentless pressure that the corporate media, who is in bed with the corporate politicians, will spread the sparks of this story. The do nothing attitude is sadly trickling down from the elected officials, who I expect it from, to the grassroots bloggers and activists who carved out their niche pressing the issue.

People often argue that the impeachment story is not even a story until one of the states actually passes one of these resolutions. Tom Callinan, editor of the Cincinnati Enquirer, on this very blog suggested Illinois Papers and the big news wires may be waiting to see if the story "has legs" before giving it some ink, which may be fair argument. In order for it to be a fair argument though, we have to understand at what point something has legs enough to make it into print.

What makes news news? I can't remember all the answers from my journalism 101 class, but I remember one of the big ones: Something is news if it affects peoples lives.

Just for a comparison, let's create an imaginary headline for the impeachment story: "State legislature finds loophole, proposes impeachment of President Bush"

Using the one criteria I listed for what makes news news, let''s compare our imaginary headline to some of the local headlines from the Chicago Tribune local news section and decide which ones have the greatest effect on the greatest number.

"Gunfire kills 1, injures 1 in apartment"
"1 killed, 1 hurt when car slams into fence"
"Woman found dead in alley was strangled"

Now those stories sure sound gruesome and may produce a rubber necking response from some readers, but do they affect the lives of the Chicago Tribune's readership? Other than the involved families or friends of the victims or involved parties, these stories have little to do with the average persons daily routine.

Or does my proposed alternative story about an exciting, controversial bill in the state legislature effect more people of greater Chicago and Illinois? How can people write to their representatives, lobby for or against proposed bills, or generally become involved with the democratic process if even the most eye grabbing of proposals are ignored the media upon which we depend to keep us in the loop? If one were to read this story, they could take the information, process it, and act. What is one to do with stories about a shooting or a dead woman in an alley?

Posted by Andrew Warner at 10:06 AM | Permalink | Comments   

As Americans we often shrug our shoulders in confusion when people tell us that the "international community" looks at us with nothing but hate and resentment.

Sociologists call it ethnocentrism, the idea that people view their own culture as the correct culture. While we're all guilty of it from time to time, for example when you giggle at the Saudis formal wear or your jaw drops upon seeing ear lobes stretched to the point of scraping the ground in tribal Africa, we can at least make an effort to realize our way of living isn't the only way of living.

When President Bush shunned the Spanish version of "The Star Spangled Banner," he gave us a good indication why our country remains divided by race, heritage, language, religion within our own nationl borders, let alone why we remain resented by most of the world. He put on display, for many already bitter neighboring nations, how self absorbed and arrogant we as a country have become.

In any language, the singing of our National Anthem means you are proud of your country. The music may sound slightly different to a foreign ear, but the meaning isn't lost in translation. As cliche as it has become, we are a country that was built with the sweat and blood of immigrants, and immigrants remain our vital backbone. Pride in the United States is not exclusive to the tough talking cowboys of Texas, or the stuffed shirt blue bloods of Massachusetts, or anyone in between.

Attend a football game or a sporting event and listen to the hesitant mumbles scatter across the crowd where the National Anthem is supposed to be sung. Then tell me we don't need to add a few proud voices to the choir.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 9:10 PM | Permalink | Comments   

It's not what you're thinking. It's actually the first time in a long time that I have been proud of our elected officials.

Yes, five members of congress really were arrested. This "law-breaking" was much different than what we have come to expect from our representatives; it was not for a coin scandal, or for taking illegal and unethical campaign contributions, but for a timely and bold act of civil disobedience.

They had been blocking the entrance in order to embarass "the military dictatorship's ongoing genocide of its non-Arab citizens," said the San Francisco Chronicle.

Five Democratic members of congress, along with 6 civilian activists, were pulled away by members of the Secret Service from the front entrance of the Sudanese Embassy as a crowd of about 60 demonstrators applauded their efforts as they were packed into a D.C. police van.

In a time when public officials are generally making my skin crawl with disgusting lies and abuses of powers, I can't describe how refreshing it is to read something about our representatives that makes me openly smile and quite literally tingle with pride.

After the arrest Representative Lantos had this to say (from the San Francisco Chronicle):

"What we did was symbolic and simple and basically pain-free," Lantos said via cell phone after his release.

"I'm back in my car with my wife, Annette, and our dog, living our life, but the people in Darfur are living a 24-hour nightmare."

Posted by Andrew Warner at 12:23 PM | Permalink | Comments   

Today's front page of the Cincinnati Post (at least the on-line version) has another gut-wrenching story about George Clooney and Darfur.

Clooney sums up the issue well when he explains this issue:

There is no right or left, there is only right and wrong.

When a "slow-rolling genocide" like this continues to destroy and end countless lives, I start to wonder where the United Nations is, where everyone is, on this issue. It's bewildering to me, and I don't know if because of the distance in miles or the distance between our very different cultures, that the western world continues to allow this to happen.

I obviously wasn't alive during the Holocaust, but the way it is explained in history classes indicates the world is willing to rally behind this type of oppression, this targeted and systematic destruction of certain races, colors, or religions.

How can we choose to ignore this?

I remember as children we used to ask one another, and deeply ponder, whether a falling tree in the woods makes a sound if no one hears it. Now that I am a more capable thinker, I can assure you it does. And whether or not we are in ear shot of the screams that occur during a systematic slaughter, I can assure you, they too make a sound.


Not sure what's going on in Darfur? Jacquie at the Cincinnati Beacon has a brief explanation.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 9:25 AM | Permalink | Comments   

In a growingly unpopular war, a candidate who calls for its end gets support.

I can't believe Democratic politicians have become so tentative to say anything that may lose a precious "swing voter," that it is actually a front page story when they take a firm position that is already supported by their base.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 9:07 AM | Permalink | Comments   

An amazing series of journalism is coming out of Cincinnati. Not from the Enquirer, but from the paper destined for non-existence, the Cincinnati Post.

Post columnist Nick Clooney and his son George took a bit of a renegade journey to the Sudan and Darfur, the Post is releasing a new column from each day. The series is definitely worth your attention.

George Clooney is proving to be the classiest of celebrities. While his father was writing, he was documenting the situation on film. He took the story to Oprah yesterday (04/26). Perhaps he can change the world by making us see with our own eyes the horrors that we allow to sit in the farthest reaches of our minds.

This story, a story of unimaginable atrocity, still isn't resonating with the people that could put an end to this genocide. I'm elated the Post is putting the story out there and glad George is using his celebrity in such a positive way while so many other celebrities can only focus on themselves.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 6:32 PM | Permalink | Comments   

I drove down Vine Street yesterday and I finally learned what it's like to be in a police state. In a two block radius I saw about 8 cops, 1 detective, and one undercover with a young black man in a full nelson.

Today the Cincinnati Enquirer reports that Mayor Mallory took an "official" walk through one of Cincinnati's most notorious neighborhoods, Over-the-Rhine.

A string of shootings in the neighborhood has brought an extreme police presence and caught the eye of politicians including our mayor.

I understand that a lot of people don't feel safe in OTR and the entertainment district struggles from time to time, but what is the vision for the neighborhood? After all the criminals are rounded up and locked away, what is the city pushing for OTR to become?

Peace activist Berta Lambert, who is quoted in the Enquirer article and pictured with the "NO YUPPIE-VILLE IN OTR" sign, is justified to question plans for condominiums and lofts that are going to sell for $200,000 -- well out of the price range for most of OTR's current residents.

Facing this criticism in front of the flashes of the media cameras, Mayor Mallory assured him that people will not be displaced, but how does he figure? Is the plan to renovate all the buildings, which are structurally magnificent, and give them back to the lower income individuals and families that currently live in them at no extra charge? If not, I don't see how Mallory can live up to his promise of not displacing members of the community.

I try to sympathize with the creative class movement. I understand the desire to walk through a "vibrant" community filled with art galleries, bright lights, theatre, and exciting night life. This type of atmosphere can attract young talent, gays (which creative class proponents seem to think are a hot commodity), or empty nesters, and many think this is the solution for our city.

As Cincinnatians we need to ask ourselves how many lives we want to ruin to accomplish these goals. How many people do you want to throw in jail for possession of marijuana because some rich guy with a form fitting t-shirt on wants a nice "urban" condo?

I'm a proponent of responsible development, but throwing 700 people in jail in the small window of a few weeks is anything but. It's neither economically feasible nor compassionate (whichever side of the brain you think with). It is unethical to make potential new residents feel safe by taking away the safety and consistency of the current residents.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 3:57 PM | Permalink | Comments   

Congressman and Senate hopeful Sherrod Brown heeded the call of bloggers, Google, and the rest of the savetheinternet.com coalition when he voted for the Markey amendment to the COPE act. An amendment which would have prohibited internet service providers from selling faster connections to the highest bidders.

That was right before he decided the preservation of an open and democratic internet just isn't really all that important.

The amendment was voted down by a vote of 34-22 and the full bill passed easily with a 42-12 vote by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Congressman Brown of course was not one of the 12 to fight the bill that aims to steal the internet away from the people and send it gift wrapped to Verizon.

What exactly does this mean?

It means I have to take the Sherrod Brown bumper sticker off my car.

Allow me to quote myself from a previous entry:

To me, someone who feels the internet is one of the most important tools we have, there is NO FLEXIBILITY or excuses on this topic.

While I'm sure the Brown campaign will have a myriad of excuses, I made myself very clear. I even put "NO FLEXIBILITY" in all caps. My interpretation of this situation: Brown is trying to have his cake and eat it too. He gives the common folk, the bloggers, the students, the small businesses, the non-profits (basically anyone without a shit ton of money) the "show vote" by voting for the net neutrality amendment, and he gives the multi-million dollar corporations the yes vote by approving the COPE ACT, in spite of the bill not including net neutrality.

Perhaps it is the failure of Grow Ohio. Maybe it is the fact that the blogosphere still supports Hackett in spite of him being long gone from the Senate primary. Whatever the reason, equality on the internet just isn't as important to Brown as Verizon's or AT&T's profits.

Maybe DeWine can once again assume the role of the renegade Republican and save us in the Senate. Remember, he stepped out of the Republican marching line and saved ANWR, maybe he can do it for the internet. Probably not.

It looks like another year of begrudgingly casting a ballot for a Democrat who pretends to represent the values of the people, but when it comes right down to it, it's just another Democrat who doesn't really get it.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 2:50 PM | Permalink | Comments   

President bush tapped Fox News for his new press secretary today. Not the most subtle move in the history of politics.

"Snow will become the first Washington pundit -- and an outspoken ideological voice at that -- to take over the pressroom lectern at a time when tensions between journalists and the administration have been running high, over such issues as the Iraq war investigations involving leaks of classified information."

Everyone knows the back room happenings with this administration and the media. Everyone REALLY knows how Fox News shills for Bush and his corrupt administration at every turn.

But to hire one of their ideological pundits straight from the news desk? That boldness is impressive.

Congratulations Tony Snow, spinning the commentary their way landed you in the White House. Hopefully lying constantly doesn't wear on you the way it did on poor McClellan... Oh wait, it's old hat for you. You worked for Fox News.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 1:01 PM | Permalink | Comments   

The Colbert Report's guest last night is the writer of an intriguing book, one I am certain to speed through when I can get my hands on it.

The End of Faith by Sam Harris discusses how our acceptance of people's religious beliefs, especially when those beliefs fly in the face of reason, breaks down society and destroys our country.

I was impressed watching Harris discuss this taboo topic with the always satirical Stephen Colbert. It's hard to imagine someone that would dare step on the toes of the faithful, since religious intolerance is so out of style in our country right now. Religion gets lumped into categories of discrimination like race, age, or gender, though it is hardly deserving of the same sensitivity.

Logically speaking, the existence of God (in the Christian sense) is an idea that is incredibly easy to defeat:

God is all powerful
God is all loving
There is extreme suffering in the world

In other words, a god who loves everyone equally and has the power to do anything his will desires, would not allow a person to starve, suffer through the extreme pain of chemotherapy, live in a ditch by the side of the road, get raped, or any other type of real suffering.

Apparently this God people put so much faith in prefers to sit on the sidelines and watch his "loved ones" go through exquisite amounts of pain, I guess as part of "the plan." I like to think my mom loves me unconditionally, I certainly hope she wouldn't let me suffer if she was an all powerful being with the ability to stop my pain at the flick of a wand, or however God carries out his bidding.

The casual religious person, when backed into a corner, may concede the absolute truth of God and say something like "well, it helps me be a better person," or "it helps society function."

There is a definite truth, though by no means absolute truth, to those statements. A lot of great people do amazing things in the name of religion, donate time or clothing to help a cause like fighting homelessness. Mother Theresa did great things for the world and countless individuals and she felt she was carrying out the will of her god. Would she have been a prostitute or a thief if she was an atheist? I don't think so.

The laws of religion do help members of society "stay in line," so to speak. People may be less inclined to murder someone if they believe their is an eternal price to be paid in the fiery pits of hell, others may feel inclined to just generally treat other people well when reading their badge of honor, their "What would Jesus do" bracelets.

But this device of religion, capable of accomplishing great things, is also capable of killing countless innocent people, destroying our environment, and the oppression or abuse of millions.

I recognized the controlling power of religion when I first read about Hinduism. The ideas of Dharma and Karma are some of the greatest controlling devices ever created by organized religion, perhaphs Bush will find a way to insert them into Christianity. Essentially these religious laws say this: Do your job and know your role, whether that be peasant, slave, or king, and you will be reborn into a life that is better than this one. This way the migrant worker who works a twelve hour day under the beating heat of the sun, can't afford to feed his or her daughter, and lives in a shack, will not dare speak out against the oil tycoon's son who's born with a silver spoon in his mouth and potty trained on a golden toilet seat. With such a powerful religious law, if they can get people to believe it, the powers that be have stifled dissent and kept the lower classes in order-- who would revolt if they honestly believed in their heart they would be reborn as a rat or cockroach?

Religion is no longer serving the masses of society, but only the higher ups who speak of faith whenever they want to make people dance like puppets confined by tight strings. We now see it every election cycle with "values issues" and anti-gay religious babble. We have an administration that doesn't mind ignoring the environment because their faith, based on no facts of course, says that Jesus will come back before the planet is destroyed.

When religion contradicts the facts generated by science and logic, puts our future in jeopardy, encourages discrimination, and risks the lives of future generations (yes, your children and grandchildren), should we continue to show tolerance for these dangerous and intolerant beliefs? Do you show religious tolerance for the Muslims who flew their planes into the trade towers (that's right, I can use 9/11 too)?

Richard Dawkins from the Guardian says this about Harris' book, which I think sums up these thoughts nicely:

"[some] blame extremists who “distort the “true message of religion. Harris goes to the root of the problem: religion itself. Even moderate religion is a menace, because it leads us to respect and Âcherish the idea that certain fantastic propositions can be believed without evidence”. Why do men like Bin Laden commit their hideous cruelties? The answer is that they actually believe what they say they believe”. Read Sam Harris and wake up."

Independent U.K. points out there is a wall around religious faith that insulates it from criticism. As religion continues to divide and hurt our country, we need to pull these walls down and call a spade a spade.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 9:10 AM | Permalink | Comments   

The Vermont Guardian is reporting that Vermont will add it's name to the growing list calling for the impeachment of wanna-be King Bush.

By my count, that's three brave states. Who's next?

Posted by Andrew Warner at 5:00 PM | Permalink | Comments   

SusanG over at Daily Kos has a brief, yet surprisingly powerful post about some of the President's greatest scams.

The most recent: President Bush is relieving oil companies of environmental restrictions.

At the same time, President Bush has decided to investigate oil companies who just may be gouging us at the pump. Who would have thunk it?

I thought that same plan sounded good when the Democrats brought it up months ago, but with Bush's approval rating dwindling and stuck on life support, I guess he finally decided to pull his head out of his ass and at least pretend like he is doing something for the common good.

Just the other day I was talking about this president not understanding diplomacy, but it looks like I have finally been wrong about something. When it comes to dealing with oil companies, he has a complete grasp of give and take, the natural flow of negotiations: Take from the oil companies by giving them a little bad PR, a little fake investigation to make America think he cares. Then give back to big oil by releasing their environmental restrictions that make it so hard to make a buck, "temporarily" of course. SusanG points out some of his other temporary suspensions in time of crisis:

Any bets on how long a "temporary suspension" will last?
And is anyone else detecting a pattern here?
In the wake of Katrina, Bush suspends prevailing wage laws.
In the aftermath of 9/11, Bush basically suspends the Fourth Amendment and, at Gitmo, the right to a fair trial.

Bush is an opportunist in the most despicable kind of way, cashing in on every misfortune of the American people in order to slide through unpopular policies under the cover of shadows and desperation. Using our pain to take away our rights, our reasonable wages, and now our environmental protection.

Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and assume, if only for a second, he is actually looking out for us and our increasingly difficult financial situations (which if you're not rich, would be a first). We can't continue to be this shortsighted when it comes to our environment.

I know this is the president who still clings to every word in the bible as fact, refuses to believe we share a common ancestor with apes, and thinks Jesus will return to Earth before the environment gets into a real crisis, but we shouldn't gamble our o-zone layer away on blind faith.

Stop catering to oil companies. Stop dealing with oil companies. Stop trying to figure out a way to conserve oil. Just pretend like it's gone and actually come up with a long-term solution. He's the damn president, build some high speed trains that run off electricity or some super people movers like at airports. Whatever, just anything but more pandering to oil execs in 10 gallon hats that seem to have no problem destroying Earth-- as long as they get their $144,573 a day.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 3:58 PM | Permalink | Comments   

State legislatures should have shocked the world yesterday, but today all is quiet.

The next time someone tells you the media has a liberal bias, you can confidently look them in the eye and tell them they are completely full of shit.

I've only been able to find one non-indy media source that has reported on Illinois' and California's move to impeach emperor Bush. The Chicago Sun-Times was gracious enough to give this little story a spot in the pages of their paper. I guess it is a little harder to ignore the story when it happens in your backyard.

You'd think if the liberal media bias existed in large doses as conservative pundits would have us believe, newspapers would be dying to spread this story and push their crazy liberal agenda. Doesn't seem to be the case.

Mr. Tom Callinan, editor of the Cincinnati Enquirer, promised he bookmarked this site in his last blog post, perhaps he can clear this up for us in the comments. How am I wrong to think this is news? It's obviously not just our Cincinnati paper that feels this isn't deserving of ink. There must be some type of justification that common people like myself can't wrap our heads around.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 7:41 AM | Permalink | Comments   

I've been clamoring for the for the impeachment of Bush for what seems like forever. Lucky for us, I'm not the only one.

Thanks to Eric at Plunderbund I caught wind of the greatest relief in years: Illinois and now California have done what the Democrats at the federal level couldn't find the back bone to do, throw the yellow flag at a criminal president.

Who knew state legislatures could do such a thing? Not me.

In a story by Scoop, they cleverly titled the little-know loophole "Jefferson's revenge." Students of the game know "Jefferson was clear on his opposition to centralized federal power and frequently sought balances giving states greater liberties and rights," says Scoop. I imagine Thomas Jefferson is smiling with satisfaction being the one who gets to eliminate this sorry excuse for an elected leader-- he can do from the grave what Ms. Clinton and Mr. Kerry can't, or aren't brave enough, to do in office.

Jefferson's rule 603 reads:

Inception of impeachment proceedings in the House: "… there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion: by charges made on the floor on the responsibility of a Member or Delegate; by charges preferred by a memorial, which is usually referred to a committee for examination; by a resolution dropped in the hopper by a Member and referred to a committee; by a message from the President; by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State or territory or from a grand jury…”

Our elected leaders may generally be incompetent, overly safe, or cowardly, but at least TJ had the oversight to recognize politicians hadn't completely sold their souls while only serving at the state level.

Federal Democrats should be ashamed with themselves for making the state legislatures do their jobs for them, but those state legislators that set this in motion can call me for a favor anytime.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 5:25 PM | Permalink | Comments   

What I remember most about the post-Katrina investigation is the 200 school buses that could have been used for evacuation and weren't.

The country got to see through first hand accounts (by that I mean reporters standing in ankle deep water with wind blowing through their hair) of how the local, state, and federal government bungled the Katrina disaster. The buses, lined up in parking lots and filled with water, is what we all should remember--how incapable our government is when we need them the most. When I heard it, I figured every politician involved would never work in politics again, I think many shared the same sentiment.

Now it's election time. These incapable politicians are out of here... Or not?

American voters just seem to love failure and in politics crap just seems to float to the top.

Mayor Ray Nagin led the field of candidates with 38% of the vote and must face a white challenger in the run-off election, Lieutenant Governor Mitch Landrieu.

Democracy Now is reporting a complete reversal in voting trends, in the previous election Nagin's support was predominantly from the white community. This election he has received 65% of his votes from predominantly black communities, what gives?

The other story that needs to be told about this election is about the tens of thousands displaced citizens who were denied the right to vote, predominantly African-Americans. Democracy Now notes that this may open the door to the first white mayor in nearly 30 years.

As Americans we must ask questions, like why is this mayor, who let the possible evacuation buses sit in a puddle of water, winning the hearts of these African-American neighborhoods? Why did the white community stop backing him? Do American voters just insist on voting for people who consistently fail them?

Do any readers know the answers to these questions? Please feel free to say so in the comments.

In a positive note about these elections, 36% of the 297,000 elgibile voters, in spite of the many road blocks, managed to find their way to the polls. That's about as good as Cincinnati, and we didn't have tens of thousands of people displaced by a natural disaster.

After getting the only positive note out of the way, it's been too many years in a row now that black voters are being denied equal treatment at the polls, we should be past Jim Crow laws by now, though every election seems to tell me that we're not.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 3:20 PM | Permalink | Comments   

Conservatives and their itchy trigger fingers always ask "liberals" this question when they are talking about defense: "Yeah, but what happens when diplomacy fails?" It's as if they view the process of diplomacy as a formality that happens before they get to blow shit up.

A commenter on Steve Fritsch's blog said it best when he or she said "diplomacy is only dead when Bush refuses to engage in it."

The threat of a nuclear attack is not diplomacy. Can anyone blame Iran for hurrying to put together a nuclear arsenal when a proven criminal and aggresive leader has them in his crosshairs? We live in a patriarchal/paternal society, so let me break it down in a way that simpler minds can understand:

Imagine a man in a house with his loving wife and young children. The little white house next door has been on sale, and finally a buyer. The man in the house is very excited to have a new neighbor in the community until he sees the new neighbor pull up in old General Lee, pumping Toby Keith, and throwing beer cans out the window of his car on to the well kept lawn. The man in the house begins to get nervous.

One day, the new neighbor goes over to another house, accuses another neighbor of stealing his grill, makes threats and leaves. The man from house number three stands up to him in a defiant act, saying that he doesn't have the alleged grill. He will not be pushed around by the driver of General Lee. The driver of General Lee goes over the next day and kills everyone in the house and begins looking for the grill. The grill is never found.

The next day, the newest member of the community goes over to the house of the original man.

"You have my grill, don't you?" he says.

"No, it's not here," the proud father says. He receives a squinty, evil look from the driver of General Lee as he begins to leave the yard.

"I'm coming back tomorrow for the grill, and you better have it."

Does anyone blame this homeowner and family man for going to the store that night and buying a gun to defend himself?

It's a simple scenario for sure, but I think we can all understand. Countries, similar to individual households in our own country, have the right to defend themselves to the best of their ability.

Obviously, it is my hope that every country will eliminate it's nuclear programs and ambitions, but can we blame a small country for trying to protect itself when George Bush shows a strong affection for eliminating countries in the general region?

We need to make an honest, good faith effort at diplomacy with Iran. It is discriminatory for certain countries to own and threaten use of nuclear weapons, while denying other countries the same right. We are not superior because we are a nation of Christians or because the majority of our population has lighter skin.

If we want other nations to get rid of their nuclear programs, why don't we lead the way by dismantling our own? I know conservatives, the thought of being a nation without nukes in a world where so many other countries have them is scary, isn't it?

If we want Iran to feel less defensive, why not end the occupation of the middle east? Why not stop destroying their neighboring countries?

Give and take, not take take take. That is diplomacy.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 9:30 AM | Permalink | Comments   

Sherrod Brown's sloppy appearance is more likely to remind you of infamous shoe salesman Al Bundy then a United States Senator. A three day, non-stop tour must wear on a politician. It was obvious by looking at his misplaced, slightly sweaty hair and listening to his tired, throaty voice.

Cincinnati was the final stop on his three day sprint known as the "Road to Change" tour. About a dozen interested citizens came to the African American Chamber of Commerce shake hands with the Congressman from Avon, ask questions about impeachment and health care, and to be forced in front of TV cameras. Most importantly, they wanted to hear the message of the man Democrats are hoping can unseat incumbent Senator Mike DeWine.

His message, though obviously over rehearsed, is important:

Trade. How our big business friendly free trade agreements have put the American worker in a vice.

College education. The fact that we've gone from an average of 70% grants and 30% loans to the exact opposite. Such facts contribute to "brain drain," the loss of young people, and most importantly, the loss of young people who contribute their talents to the communities of Ohio. Representative Brown points out the creating jobs is only part of the process of completing the ultimate goal, creating the strong communities he thinks are dwindling.

Health care. His ultimate goal being that every American has it. He wouldn't go as far to say the dreaded words, "single payer," but he spoke highly of programs like Medicare.

Environmentally, he stressed the importance of alternative energy and mass transit. When a reporter asked if he and Voinovich were on the right track and part of the same team, he was quick to hand out criticism in Senator Voinovich's direction, saying that Voinovich has been in the Senate for years(and Governor before that) and should have been on the alternative energy bandwagon a long time ago. (Way to go Channel 5 reporter on comparing him to Voinovich -- you must be studying hard).

Courteous Hamilton County Democrats

State Representative Catherine Barrett (who was recently in a bit of a tussle with the Hamilton County Democratic Party) was the only local elected official to be on time for the event. She also introduced Congressman Brown to the audience.

State Senator Eric Kearney (the former opponent of Ms. Barrett) showed up after the event was completed. He didn't want to miss the opportunity to get his picture taken with someone who was actually elected to an office.

Tim Burke, chairman of the Hamilton County Democratic Party, also managed to find the time in his day to arrive well after the speech was done and the TV cameras were gone.

No other Democratic office holders came to show support for the Senate hopeful.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 3:38 PM | Permalink | Comments   

I am about to go listen to Senate hopeful Sherrod Brown on his "Road to Change Tour."

I posted the information before, but I will put it here again in case you read this in the next few minutes and want to come out and hear the Congressman:

African American Chamber of Commerce, 2:30PM today.
2945 Gilbert Avenue

If you can't make it, there will of course be a report here later today. You know you can expect the best from me.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 11:50 AM | Permalink | Comments   

It comes with little fanfare or joyous celebration, but it is indeed Earth Day.

I briefly looked for some environmental information or issues in the news, but surprisingly had little success. Environmental issues apparently just don't make papers fly off the news stands.

One intriguing article is from yesterday's Cincinnati Post. The article is about some type of solar powered super trash can.

The trash can is equipped with solar panels that power it's compacting ability. Aside from the solar power, they are placed in wi-fi capable areas of Cincinnati so that they can signal the pick-up truck using wireless technology when they are full and ready to be emptied.

This could cut down the use of trash trucks greatly if implemented on a large scale. At best it can eliminate three out of four pick up trips. Anyone who has ever driven behind a dirty, black smog emitting, trash truck knows what a benefit this would be for our already disgustingly thick and dense air.

Aside from that it is another reason to promote community wireless throughout the entire city. Once we have a city full of these things, it will be another city service that would be improved by providing free wireless. Until then they are going to attach a type of cell phone unit to the "Big Belly" units to send out the 'ready for pick-up' signal (if they are not in range of project Lily Pad).

If you want to celebrate Earth Day, and you are in the greater Cincinnati area (those who aren't will have to figure it out themselves), festivities start at 1:00PM at Sawyer Point. There will be exhibitors, live music, rock climbing, and more. I won't be able to make it since I am about to run out of town for the day, but I will be there in spirit.

Make an Earth Day resolution. I try to make a change in my life every Earth Day that is beneficial to our fragile environment. They are much more useful then the petty things people usually try to change on New Years. I've yet to decide on my own, so if anyone has any good ideas, feel free to leave them in the comments or drop me an e-mail.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 10:29 AM | Permalink | Comments   

I'm not surprised that the Enquirer endorsed a crook for governor alongside someone who makes up an education and can't figure out John Murtha is a marine for congress.

Ken Blackwell's endorsement is subtitled: "He's the forceful, ethical presence the Republicans need," which is probably the most ironic thing I have ever read in a newspaper, seeing as Blackwell made his name rigging elections for Republicans. Blackwell is the voice of the religious right: anti-gay, anti-choice, the same cheap shot ammunition used by the Republicans to rile up the right for years now. Hopefully Ohio has expanded it's mind slightly after seeing what happens when you voted based on hate and resentment. Six years of Bush had to teach this "swing state" something, right?

With two sub-par candidates on the Republican side this year they could have stepped out of the box and endorsed the Democrat for governor, after all, he is a southeast Ohio Democrat who is loved by the NRA.

The Jean Schmidt endorsement looks like a mail in, their main criteria was the she actually lives in the district, unlike her Republican counterpart Bob McEwen. On the Democratic side of the primary they endorsed Dr. Vic Wulsin-- she's been implicated in some of the Heimlich scandals, supporting the injecting of AIDS patients with malaria. She doesn't deserve anyone's vote.

I know the guys at Buckeye State Blog are going to be happy about this one: Subodh Chandra can add the Enquirer's endorsement to his growing list, and it is well deserved. Subodh is an exciting and energetic candidate who has won crowds over across the state. While receiving the Enquirer's endorsement throws up a red flag (is he really a Republican or something?), it may just be that our daily rag has finally gotten something right. Hopefully if Chandra makes it through, they won't support their endorsement on the Republican side, Betty Montgomery. But knowing this Gannett owned paper, they probably will.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 8:43 AM | Permalink | Comments   

I've heard whispers of a bill in Congress with the goal of wrenching the internet from the hands of the people and handing it over to the big telecommunications companies.

So typical, the bill is sponsored by a Republican from Texas, Representative Joe Barton. This is the same congressman who has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from telecom companies-- don't try to tell me money isn't driving these legislators.

What the bill aims to do is kill net neutrality, essentially moving certain web sites to "the slow lane." Just as a hypothetical, let's discuss what this will mean: A typical blogger surfs from one site to the next looking for news. What this bill will do is make the Cincinnati.com blogs run at blazing speeds, because they can afford to pay an exorbitant amount of money to AT&T or Verizon, while everyone's favorite Cincinnati website, the Cincinnati Beacon, will mysteriously run extra slow. Citizen journalists or media activists who work for free to discuss important issues within the community will be punished for not cluttering their web page with advertisements.

I'm not surprised a move like this is happening. Blogs and independent web sites frustrate the big corporations to no end, whether it be Daily Kos or a more modest Cincinnati Blog. The sleazy corporations don't like honest, hard-working people playing an active role in the media.

The internet has been the people's strongest tool in reclaiming our government and our media, of course the "haves" aren't happy that the "have-nots" are participating again, waking from a long slumber. They of course want to lull us back into complacency by taking away the voices that are waking more and more people up, your Paul Hacketts, your Daily Kos', anyone who isn't playing nice with the status quo.

Politicians are still forming their opinions on this issue, some have already come out for or against, but others are still deliberating. Someone who has not made their position clear yet is Senate hopeful Sherrod Brown. To me, someone who feels the internet is one of the most important tools we have, there is NO FLEXIBILITY or excuses on this topic.

The Free Press and savetheinternet.com are taking the lead in fighting this bill.

They again have a very simple form you can fill out to notify the proper people that you are not going to stand for this BS. 45 seconds of your time is all it costs to help this vital cause.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 11:51 AM | Permalink | Comments   

The Daily Show had Senator Ted Kennedy and the Colbert Report had Ralph Nader. It was like leftist heaven wasn't it?

Ralph Nader was fired up about global warming. He also debated with Stephen Colbert on how great corporations were, Colbert of course said he worked for a corporation and thought they were great (he is a clever satirist).

Ted Kennedy mostly talked about his book.

The Daily Show footage should be available here and the Nader/Colbert interview should be available here. The sites have not been updated at the time of posting this, but I imagine they will be soon. Of course, you can always catch the re-runs on Comedy Central.

If you saw it, let me know what you thought about their performances.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 7:39 AM | Permalink | Comments   

Chinese President Hu Jintao was welcomed to the White House with a 21 gun salute, a salute usually reserved for honorary occasions like the death of a soldier or police officer. Now President Bush has extended that honor to cruel dictators.

The main event from the historical meeting of presidents, men separated by thousands of miles and a sea of ideals, was one woman protesting:

"President Bush, stop him from persecuting the Falun Gong!"

She went on to tell the Chinese president that his "days are numbered."

Most people don't really know anything about the Falun Gong, my own knowledge is about an inch deep. I've met them in Cincinnati, they have a tendency to set up displays, artwork, protesting tables, etc., in order to raise awareness within America for the persecution they suffer at the hands of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Such persecution is not widely reported since the corrupt government of China also controls the media of the country, no negative reports or "liberal bias" to worry about.

Had the protestor voiced this opinion in China, who knows what would have happened to her? A dictator like Jintao wouldn't tolerate such an outburst on his own soil, the protestor would likely never be heard from again. In America, President Bush merely had to apologize for the right of free speech afforded to our citizens and have the secret service rush her away from the scene so his master wouldn't feel uncomfortable.

Now wait a second, I was operating under the impression that Bush fought and removed such dictators, not rolled out a red carpet and performed a 21 gun salute for them.

I guess China is to George Bush as Visa is to me. You can't really bite the hand that feeds you. You just kind of have to do what they say, make your payments on time, and hope they don't call in your debt when your pockets are empty. And Jintao is taking advantage, getting all sorts of promises in exchange for saying "sure thing President Bush, I'll work on that human rights stuff" as he winks (not a real quote).

Bush, the man who wants to spread democracy throughout the world, swore off Taiwan, a free and open Democracy. So I don't get it, are we for spreading Democracy or for supporting dictators like the communist party of China? When America refuses to recognize Taiwan as a country, we disable trade with them, all the while we are trying to trade with China as much as possible. Not a very exciting topic, but the fact is that Bush continues to dismantle the democratic Taiwan by not trading with it, preferring to support a cruel communist party in China with American dollars-- a country that openly stifles protestors, free speech, or dissent of any kind... I am starting to see why Bush respects this guy so much.

I'm not a free trade guy in the first place, but do we have to trade so extensively with one of the cruelest governments in the world? We don't want to spread democracy there as well? I guess President Bush is only tough and an advocate of independence when the country he is dealing with has oil and is the size of one American state.


A little consistency please.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 8:00 PM | Permalink | Comments   

Paul Hackett's million dollar dimples weren't enough to take down the mighty congressman from northern Ohio. And I know there are plenty in the greater Cincinnati area who are still slightly bitter about the fact that he ruined the political career of the internet's darling. BUT, it's time to move on and get behind the future progressive senator of Ohio.

Cincinnati is one of the many campaign stops for Representative Sherrod Brown, I'm looking forward to hearing what he has to say-- to see if his message is as boring as the Hackett heads at Buckeye State Blog say. Of course I'm also looking forward to seeing why he has been cowering in a corner instead of helping Russ Feingold censure our crook of a president.

The event takes place at 2:30, Sunday the 23rd at the African American Chamber of Commerce: 2945 Gilbert Avenue.

RSVP here.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 5:42 PM | Permalink | Comments   

Does this mean we're going to get a little peace?

The Bush administration lost a few figureheads, but not the one (or two) figurehead(s) we were all hoping would be ousted. Yes, white house press secretary Scott McClellan, who bares a striking resemblance to Cincinnati's own David Pepper, left his post. On top of his departure, Karl Rove is also leaving one of his jobs, his position as head of policy development.

I've been trying to wrap my mind around this overhaul, but I can't figure out why this is happening, or what will result of these changes. Will we avert the war with Iran? Will Iraq suddenly rebuild itself? Will the religious right start loving everyone... Even the gays? Will the world suddenly respect us again?

Eh, probably not. McClellan, who always had the aura of being a good human being (I don't know why I think that) was either fired because he couldn't lie well enough, or he quit because he was tired of lying to the American people. He will ultimately be replaced by someone who hasn't grown weary from a career and livelihood built on the foundation of lies. It must be hard to sit in a mansion that was built with the lost lives of Iraqis and young American soldiers.

Karl Rove giving up his influence over American policy? Please. We know he's still going to be the devil on each of Bush's shoulders coming up with ways to eliminate the social net created by FDR's New Deal and LBJ's Great Society-- and of course start some new wars. He just has to go further behind the scenes because he ceased to be the 'man behind the curtain,' instead he became another lightning rod for criticism.

President Bush can't get anything right. We're attacked by terrorists from Afghanistan and he attacks Iraq. We ask for the removal of an inept Secretary of Defense and we get the removal of a somewhat insignificant mouth piece.

Worst of all, the person who deserves to be fired the most sits comfortably in his luxurious white house paid for by the tax payers of an abused and mistreated country.

So much for Truman's placard on the Oval Office desk. It has been replaced with a new one:

"The buck stops anywhere but here."

Posted by Andrew Warner at 4:24 PM | Permalink | Comments   

On Sunday I floated the idea of a gas boycott on this blog. Obviously, I am not the first person to ever make such a suggestion and I won't be the last.

While I would chalk this one up to coincidence, I popped over to Cincinnati.com and found a top story with an awesome headline. That story's headline was "Boycott Gas?"

The article discussed an e-mail and a popular idea that gets passed around the internet (I read it off DailyKos). That idea being a one day or one gas station boycott, usually ExxonMobil since it is regarded as the most evil by most anti-gas types. It went on to refute the boycott of ExxonMobil, discussing how it would be good for nobody, mostly the consumer since ExxonMobil could just sell their gas to other companies:

A one gas station or one day boycott?

They say don't waste your time and don't waste your money. I'm John Matarese.

They're probably right. An all-out boycott, or a massive reduction is what's needed. ExxonMobil isn't the only sinner out of the oil company bunch.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 7:50 PM | Permalink | Comments   

I don't know if he was brave or stupid when he started his blog, but he finally decided to turn on the good ol' comment moderation.

After a constant barrage of questions, most of them honest and straightforward, Callinan decided enough was enough. Like I mentioned in this post, Callinan's blog was a great idea with incredibly poor execution.

When concerned minds have direct access to the editor of the major paper in town, it is a media dream come true. However, it was only a dream, he side-stepped every question and instead gave snide remarks.

True, people rambled off topic sometimes. People had certain questions on their minds and Callinan (stupid or brave) opened himself up to the public, put himself on record and allowed people to ask these important questions.

What it all comes down to is this: If he is an honest and hard-working editor as he claims he is, then the questions would be easy to answer. Watching him back away from these important inquiries is sad and confirms everything about the paper that was just speculation until his complete and utter failure to answer any criticism.

While people like myself and the Dean are considered "less important" than Tom Callinan, we always answer our criticism to the best of our ability. And we get plenty of it, and far worse than Callinan has ever gotten on his newly formed blog.

According to our critics I've been convicted many times over of drug crimes (not true--they even found someone with the same name as myself at the clerk of courts website) and the Dean is called an unemployed teacher who lives in Norwood, and of course insane (none of those are true either).

The blog world is not friendly. It is quite surprising that a seasoned professional has a thinner skin then a bunch of amateurs doing this stuff for free (that includes most of the blog world).

Posted by Andrew Warner at 5:37 PM | Permalink | Comments   

If you read the New York Times article about the talks between the United States and Iran, I don't know why you're not scared, or at least worried or concerned.

"President Bush declined to rule out a nuclear attack to stop Iran from building atomic weapons if diplomacy fails, saying that "all options are on the table."

Let me pretend President Bush is reading this (ha, President Bush read) so I can tell him: No sir, all options are not on the table.

The people (most people) of the United States trusted you once, we waded behind you into unknown water, holding your hand, all the while you were convincing us you knew where we were going, how deep the water was. Of course we all know now that you didn't. Sadly, most of us Americans have cared very minimally that we were lied to, deceived, and drown-- at least not enough to have you still sitting in your high chair in the oval office.

Keep it up though, and everyone will start caring soon.

It's funny because so often we are told how crazy the President of Iran is, how unreasonable he is. In the aforementioned article, he is the only one who is making sense. He told his army that they will not be aggressive and that they will only be strong so that they can defend their country, not go on the offensive.

I know there are many conservatives in the our own country who wish the president they elected would take the same position, not spend billions on 'nation building' projects or unnecessary wars based on lies. Sadly, the president doesn't even care about the opinions of his own base any more.

The President is on his own, on some unintelligible rebellious mission. Perhaps he will carry it out in the name of God, perhaps in the name of Halliburton, or maybe he has just seen one too many John Wayne movies where the idea of diplomacy, give and take, well, those never come into play. That's why he carries the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world, and simply tells everyone else in the world: the world isn't big enough for the both of us.

And while he's mastered the art of talking tough, the reality of the situation is we can't afford a war right now. Our troops are spread entirely too thin as it is and enlistment hasn't improved in spite of the incredibly high bribes (signing bonuses) offered by the U.S. Army. This goes to show that people would rather suffer a life of poverty, a life of misery (one that a Bush government fosters), then sign up to fight some ridiculous war led by a band of idiots (the Bush administration).

I can't even fault Iran here. With a shoot first, ask questions later President Bush running rampant through the middle east, I would want the optimal defense possible too. I too would want to protect our people. I only wish our president had as much interest in protecting America as he does in destroying other countries.

This country will not be duped again. We will not follow this moron president into another war, a war which will certainly lead to more corporate profits and more pain for the individual... At least, I think.

Not to forget the inevitable draft that would follow another war of aggression. If you want to see the sleeping giant that is the American population wake up, do it. I'd be the first one to go to jail before I go to fight for Bush & Co. , you'll never get me to lift up a gun for this bullshit system that works for no one but the companies who win the no-bid contracts that come with building nations that we just destroyed.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 3:52 PM | Permalink | Comments   

Corporate commercials airing as news pieces? Have you been following this story?

It happened right in our back yard at WCPO and is going on throughout the country. What exactly am I talking about? Corporations prepare what are called "Video News Releases." Basically, they are clips about how great their medicine or product is, the type of material that is supposed to be aired as advertisements. Lately they have been sneaking them through as 'news' though...

The Free Press has a simple on-line action campaign you can get involved with really easily. I would recommend it, as corporate media is really starting to push the envelope and set some bad precedents.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 9:18 AM | Permalink | Comments   

Every time I pull up to the gas pump I'm more and more overwhelmed with disbelief. Why do I keep paying for this crap?

Prices surged above three dollars a gallon at one time, slightly subsided, and when I filled up today it was nipping at the heels of three dollars again. When is enough, enough?

The data has come out in the last year, oil companies are raking in record profits while we drain our piggy banks to get around to our jobs, school, or wherever.

I've tried to adjust, but Cincinnati and America don't make it all that easy. The Metro system is complicated, slow, and overall quite inefficient. I've known honors students who couldn't figure out the bus schedule. In Cincinnati public transportation doesn't even really exist outside of the Metro system. It's painful when there is a half-built subway system and a population that votes down light-rail (which would have been a big step into this century).

I've tried to adjust my life to minimalize my personal gas use; I live in neighborhoods where I can walk to pretty much anything, also good for supporting local business and your local community, and try to only drive when it's absolutely necessary.

But honestly, that's not good enough. I, like many, am hooked on fossil fuels and the convenience of cars.

Recognizing our own guilt, like any addiction, is the first step. The next step is to realize that our culture, our government, and everything around us wants us to keep spilling that blood-oil into our gas tank.

But like I said earlier, we need to get to the point where we say enough is enough, and soon. Lives are lost in the name of the oil that gets us from point A to point B, and in a more selfish regard, our wallets can't sustain the beating these gas pumps are giving it.

What can we do though? I guess we could take a simple step like buying a bus pass, which is a start. But more drastic steps are needed. We need to remind our city, state, and national government that we need a way to move around town that isn't $3 a gallon. We need to stop padding the pockets of these greedy oil companies that get some sick satisfaction from taking our hard-earned wages.

We can't keep sliding our Visas or Mastercards into these friendly pay-at-the-pump gas dispensers. We need to make this is an issue.

Is it time for a boycott? It's an idea. We need to ween ourself from oil and gas, America's strongest and most harmful addiction.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 7:09 PM | Permalink | Comments   

Underreported candidate for Secretary of State, Tim Kettler of the Green Party, is campaigning in Cincinnati tonight on a multi-stop tour.

Word has it he was at Findlay Market collecting signatures until closing time, and tonight he is cruising the progressive pockets of Cincinnati looking for support. His schedule consists of a 7:15-8:30 stop at the Comet and a 9:00-10:30 meet and greet at Sitwell's Coffee House.

I've met Tim once before and my original impression was that he was a very passionate and driven candidate. I know he's been a personal work horse for his own campaign, and as expected with progressive candidates in Ohio, he has been completely ignored.

I will have some reactions, or maybe an entire write-up following the event. It's good to see the Ohio Greens putting together a ticket of REAL opposition to the corporate parties of Ohio.

Posted by Andrew Warner at 5:03 PM | Permalink | Comments   

Co-written by myself and the Dean of Cincinnati for the Cincinnati Beacon.

Jacqueline Henretta and The Cincinnati Beacon drew an intense amount of criticism in the wake of a report filed on the shooting of Kabaka.

Folks at Brian Griffin's Cincinnati Blog called the Beacon's article "foolish." The always ambitious Michael Altman of The Queen City Forum hopped on what he saw as an opportunity to bombard the Beacon with comments about how his publication was an uncontroversial, reliable source of news in Cincinnati. Our own readers cursed the Dean of Cincinnati for his editorial decision (while it lasted) to leave such "trash" on his site.

All over this one paragraph:

"When asked who could be behind this horrific act, Tyrone Smith of the “Stop Squad” gives a very specific, high profile list of suspects, one of them being David Pepper, because “Pepper had Kabaka illegally arrested for unjust causes.” He went on to say that “Pepper had called him a terrorist.” Another option was the Police Department, since Oba was such an “advocate against the police department.” When asked if Pepper could really be capable of something like this, he retracted his certainty, and said “Well, no, but wealthy people...”

As anyone capable of reading can see, a man made a claim -- albeit an outlandish claim -- about a local politician, that came in the wake of a planned shooting of one of his friends and fellow activists.

So who is this man that sparked the controversy? His name is Tyrone Smith, an active member of the community and founder of the S.T.O.P Squad-- a group focused on stopping violence in Cincinnati. Tyrone is a working class kind of guy. He is also an African-American.

He doesn't have the glitz or fundraising ability of Leslie Ghiz, who was another source quoted in the controversial article. His comments were also clearly much less "media savvy" than that of an elected council person or smooth talking politician.

His comments were his opinions. The opinions of the victim's friend, the opinions of an African-American community activist, the opinions of someone who was at or near the crime scene.

Nearly every media outlet in Cincinnati talked with Smith, asking him who Kabaka's enemies were, who he thought might be behind this; everyone was probing him for the type of information that would come from someone close to the victim, someone who earlier had signed Kabaka's petition for a cause in which they both believed.

Come time to tell the story of the violent crime, every media outlet left out his comments. Apparently the mainstream media shares a similar thought process with many of our own readers-- Tyrone Smith's opinion isn't worth publishing.

After the article in question was published and people began their complaining, our friends in the biz told us the problem came with Smith's lack of what they call "inherent credibility."

It's an interesting concept, "inherent credibility." Some people apparently have authority that they have earned somewhere in life. For example, the President has an "inherent credibility." This is why so many people believed him when he told us there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Mark Mallory would have an inherent credibility. Had he come out and pointed his finger at David Pepper, every newspaper or TV station in the city would have run with the story. The Cincinnati Enquirer, with their towering office building and paid staff, have a similar type of "inherent credibility." This theory posits that "inherent credibility" -- being indirectly related to rank, power, and resources (institutional classism) -- would cause the speaker to refrain from saying anything not credible, since he or she would have much to lose through spreading misinformation.

Someone like Tyrone Smith -- who works to improve his community, makes a living by a "real job," and says things that make people uncomfortable -- does not have this necessary credibility.

For those that can't recall why the Cincinnati Beacon, Cincinnati Blog, DailyKos, CityBeat, or any other independent media sources exist -- it is because so many figures with "inherent credibility" have failed to live up to their instant authority.

It is not just the people who can spend $200,000 on a city council campaign, $1,000,000 on a mayoral campaign, or own a Gannett