Another strategic blunder by the Obama campaign

Sen. John McCain announced today that he was suspending his campaign and returning to Washington D.C. to help the Senate work on the bailout proposal. He invited Sen. Barack Obama to join him.

But Obama said no.

Obama said that unlike McCain, he will not suspend ads, or campaign events scheduled between now and Friday's debate.

"I think it's very important that the American people see the people who potentially could be in charge of this problem within the next couple of months and so my attitude is that we need to be focused on solving the problems, as I have been," Obama said. "It's also important that we communicate where we need to go in getting us out of the situation."

Obama said he will stay in Florida for the time being and will not return to Washington unless asked by Congressional leadership.

"I've told the leadership in Congress is that if I can be helpful then I am prepared to be anywhere at anytime," he said.

I think Obama's answer is a huge blunder when it comes to the campaign. For weeks we've been hearing how the financial issues are a crisis. We've been told that this is the worst economy we've ever had and this bailout will help stabilize the situation. We've also been led to believe that unless Congress acts, doom, gloom and destruction will erupt.

"...my attitude is that we need to be focused on solving the problems, as I have been."

Maybe it's just me, but how can you be focused on solving these problems if you're not in the Senate participating in the discussion and crafting of the legislation???

"It's also important that we communicate where we need to go in getting us out of the situation."

What good is communicating where we need to go if you're not communicating to the people who are making the decision? The members of the Senate are deciding where we're going on this issue - not the candidates out in the field.

Obama said he will stay in Florida for the time being and will not return to Washington unless asked by Congressional leadership.

"I've told the leadership in Congress is that if I can be helpful then I am prepared to be anywhere at anytime," he said

So let me get this straight...unless the leadership in Congress asks him, he's not going to go to D.C. to do the job he was elected - and for which he is getting paid - to do????

What happens if no one asks him to come back? Does that mean they don't think he would be helpful? And if they do ask him to come back, and he goes, would he be contradicting himself?

"What is important is that we don't suddenly infuse Capitol Hill with presidential politics."

I think Capital Hill is pretty infused with presidential politics as it is.

Obama's statements make me think he is somehow afraid of the vote on the bailout and that it would be more politically expedient to not actually cast a yes or no vote on this issue.

Another thought is that he's mad about McCain getting the jump on the issue by coming out first with the idea that they should both be in the Senate doing the job they were elected to do and his only possible political response is to disagree or be on the opposite side. If he agrees, he's following McCain's lead, and he can't be seen to do that.

To oppose the idea provides the contrast - and campaigns are all about contrast. But it also puts Obama on the wrong side of the issue. If this is such a critical issue that it has so dominated the campaign discussion, how can Obama actually say that participating in deciding how the issue will be resolved is not as important - if not more so - than campaigning and debating foreign policy?

For Obama to stay on the road while McCain is 'coordinating the solution,' may eliminate the small lead Obama had gained in the polls over the last several days. And now, after saying he's not going along with McCain, he will look even worse if he decides, tomorrow or Friday, to change his mind.

I think the Obama campaign blundered in how they overreacted - in a negative way - to the selection of Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate. The handling of this issue is, I think, their second strategic blunder.

Will they make a third - perhaps fatal - one between now and election day?

The Next Right has a good look at the issue from the McCain campaign side: On Multi-tasking, Governing and Solutions.

Where's a police car when you need one?

Well, if you're in Toledo, they're on southbound I-75 between the Michigan State Line and Interstate 280. At least, that's where they've been for the last week or so.

Going to the station at 2 p.m. last week as I filled in for Brian Wilson and the afternoon drive, there were usually 6 cars doing targeted speed enforcement in this area. They were gone by the time I came home at 6.

Tonight, on my way home from the station there 8 - yes, 8 - police cars catching speeders. Now, the fact that they were catching speeders is a good thing - and the city probably has a traffic enforcement grant to cover the expense of doing this. And the city certainly needs the money from the traffic fines.

But 8 cars sitting on the expressway could make many residents wonder if the city might have their priorities a bit off when you've got so many who complain about a lack of neighborhood patrols.

Of course, it's not the officers' fault that they're out there, but if you're one of those people who can't get a patrol car to come out and take a report about something stolen, it could make you a bit angry. And rightfully so.

So if you're planning on heading South on I-75 - watch out!

Breaking news: McCain suspends campaign

FOX News is reporting that John McCain is going to suspend his campaign to help on the bailout issue.

Sen McCain has requested a delay of this Friday's presidential debate, plans to suspend his campaign tomorrow night and return to Washington for bail-out talks, and has challenged Barack Obama to do the same.

Not 'business friendly' post #14 - noise restrictions

Even before Ohio had a smoking ban, the City of Toledo passed one. The result was that many businesses spent loads of money to separate their patron areas into smoking and non-smoking, in addition to installing upgraded air filtering systems.

That money, it turns out, was wasted after Ohio passed a much more restrictive smoking ban. Now, in response to the total ban of smoking in bars and restaurants, many businesses are building outdoor patios where patrons can have service and a smoke. Of course, that presents its own problems as patrons also want to enjoy the sounds emanating from said establishments.

As District Councilwoman Wilma Brown opined, the reason taxpayers are leaving Toledo is because of the "durn noise." (Actually, they're leaving because of high taxes, high government spending, lack of job opportunities and poor schools - but that's another rant for another post.) So Toledo City Council is considering enhanced restrictions in their noise laws.

During last night's meeting, they decided to continue the measure until their next meeting, but not before adding a very anti-business amendment.

According to the amendment, the first two violations would result in a warning. Upon a third violation, the city would suspend the business’ occupancy permit for two business days. On the fourth violation, it is suspended five days; a fifth violation results in a 15-day suspension.

Yes, you read that correctly. Toledo, with the highest unemployment rate of all the urban areas in the state, wants to shut down a business and put all its employees out of work if they make too much noise!

Fortunately, not all members of council think that's a good idea. The amendment passed 7-4 with Michael Ashford, Joe McNamara, George Sarantou, and Mark Sobczak voting against the stricter penalties. Betty Shultz was absent.

What amazes me are the number of people who didn't anticipate such an issue in response to the smoking ban. The new law says you can smoke outside, but not inside. So what did people think bars and eateries were going to do? And if an establishment has an outdoor area, wouldn't it make equal sense that any entertainment would be extended to the outside venue?

The public may demand reasonable restrictions on noise, but do we really want to sanction violators by shutting down their business?

This certainly doesn't say 'welcome' to companies considering doing business here. Instead, it screams 'not business friendly' and enhances the anti-business reputation Toledo is proving it deserves.

I'll have more to say about this tonight on Eye On Toledo, so tune in!

Three ideas about the government's bailout

First, Leslie Carbone reports on the House Republican Study Committee's "Ten Conservative Concerns" with the bailout plan.

I think one of the biggest questions raised is what if?

4) What if it fails? The plan does not give any consideration to what would occur if this authority failed to solve the current crisis. Those reasons could potentially include risk from other private sector failures outside of mortgage-backed assets, international financial services failures, lack of willing sellers, lack of willing buyers, an understatement of the depth of the problem or the financial commitment needed to abate it, or even the fact that the program might work according to planned but produce no beneficial impact.

Leslie has the complete list.

Second, The Heritage Foundation says that any bailout must (1) restore the markets and (2) protect the taxpayers. They also call for any legislation to be free of other programs, projects and pork. They give a good analysis of the good and the bad in the current proposal, along with proposals that should NOT be included as Congress goes forward.

Third, we have this post, The Bargain for the Bailout, on The Next Right. Author Ironman speculates that, despite issues with the bailout, both Republicans and Democrats may find it impossible to vote against it. So he recommends some 'conditions' upon which to base a vote.

Some prominent Democrats must demonstrate a level of responsibility for this disaster before Republicans allow themselves to be roped into looking like die hard Dubya loyalists.

The quid: The chairman of the Senate and House Banking Committees---Chris Dodd and Barney Frank--must relinquish their chairmanships as a condition for Republican yes votes on the bailouts.

Discord in the Obama camp?

Yesterday, Sen. Joe Biden, the vice presidential running mate of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, told CBS's Katie Couric that the Obama attack ad on Sen. John McCain’s ignorance of computers and technology was “terrible.”

Asked whether he’s disappointed with the tone of the campaign, including the ad that Couric characterized as “making fun of John McCain’s inability to use a computer,” Biden said “I thought that was terrible by the way.

“I didn’t know we did it and if I had anything to do with it, we would have never done it.”

When Biden was in Ohio, he had another of those 'Joe being Joe' moments when he said he 'supports clean coal for China but not for the United States.'

"We’re not supporting clean coal," he said of himself and Obama.

According to the Obama website:

Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology.

Obama’s Department of Energy will enter into public private partnerships to develop five “first-of-a-kind” commercial scale coal-fired plants with clean carbon capture and sequestration technology.

Then this morning, Obama had to reprimand Biden about another comment.

"What has been clear during this entire past ten days is John McCain has not had clarity and a grasp on the situation," Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., told NBC's Matt Lauer in an interview that ran this morning.

Lauer was talking about how Obama hit Sen. McCain for flip-flopping on the AIG bailout -- saying he opposed it one day then announce he supported it the next day.

But, as Lauer pointed out, scarcely three minutes after McCain said he opposed the AIG bailout last week, "in an interview with Meredith Vieira, Joe Biden, your running mate was asked the exact same question, 'should the federal government bailout AIG?' And he said, 'No, the federal government should not bailout AIG.'" (As we noted at the time.) "And I think that in that situation," Obama said, "I think Joe should have waited as well."

"But it's the kind of thing that drives people crazy about politics," Lauer said. "It sounds like you were trying to score some political points against John McCain using his words, when your own running mate had used very similar words."

"No, hold on a second Matt," Obama said. "I think what drives people crazy about politics is the fact that somebody like John McCain who for 26 years has been an advocate for deregulation, for 26 years has said the market is king and then starts going out there suggesting somehow that he's a populist who's been railing against Wall Street and regulation -- that's what drives people crazy about politics."

Obama doesn't answer the question about the contradiction, he just changed the subject to his own point - a good political strategy for the interview, but it leaves everyone wondering about the 'flip-flopping.'

Of course, just as everyone was excusing Biden for his gaffes, he makes another one.

"When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, 'Look, here's what happened,'" Barack Obama's running mate recently told the "CBS Evening News."

Except, Republican Herbert Hoover was in office when the stock market crashed in October 1929.

And even though I wasn't alive during that time, I'm pretty sure television wasn't around then.

With these incidences, many are wondering if the rumors that Biden will resign from the ticket for 'health reasons' might have some validity. I think such a step would do more harm to Obama than keeping Biden on the ticket, especially because this penchant of Biden to insert his foot into his mouth was well known. But it does make you wonder...

Lawsuit filed to stop AIG bailout

I received an email about this, but haven't seen any news coverage of the action.

We The People Foundation, has filed a lawsuit in United States District Court in Albany seeking to halt the execution of the emergency bailout of American International Group, Inc. (AIG) by the United States Government and the Federal Reserve.

The lawsuit asserts that the commitment of public funds and credit for the direct benefit of privately owned AIG is an ultra vires action by the United States Government and Federal Reserve, i.e., beyond the limited legal authority granted by the Constitution. The lawsuit asks for a "show cause" hearing demanding that the Government produce evidence of its legal authority to commit public funds for such a purpose, as well as emergency and permanent injunctions halting the bailout transaction.

Beyond the Constitutional deficiencies, the bailout establishes a dangerous precedent enabling the Fed and/or Government to nationalize virtually any business or property within the United States without legal authority or congressional approval.

(ultra vires means 'beyond powers')

The complaint is very simple, while the memorandum in support of the injunction is more detailed.

In asking for the injunction, WTP states that taxpayers are subject to irreparable harm if the government takes action while AIG has other alternatives (bankruptcy protection) if it cannot pay its bills. The suit is asking the government to prove it has the Constitutional authority to take the action contemplated.

Regardless of your position on the bailout, I think there are a lot of people who will be interested in how the federal government responds to the challenge of proving their authority for such action.

Regardless of name, government does not create jobs

Lisa Renee at Glass City Jungle is on the email list of Commission Ben Konop. I am not. She reports the following 'Fellowship Program.'

Commissioner Konop Urges Colleagues to Support High Tech Jobs Program

Proceeds of Stamping Plant Loan to Fund Jobs at Local Start Ups in Alternative Energy and High Tech

(Toledo, OH)– At a time of rising unemployment and serious economic uncertainty, Commissioner Konop will propose a jobs program to help jump start local start up businesses in high tech and alternative energy. Commissioner Konop will introduce his resolution at tomorrow’s 9:30 A.M. Commissioners Meeting.

Several local small business owners in the high tech and alternative energy fields will be speaking at tomorrow’s meeting in support of Konop’s resolution.

“Last week I was excited to support an investment in the stamping plant to help create manufacturing jobs in Lucas County,” stated Konop. “This week I hope my colleagues have the courage to also invest in jobs in high tech and alternative energy and put people to work in 21st century jobs,” added Konop.

Konop’s proposal calls for investing the proceeds of the loan to the Maumee Stamping Plant into a fellowship program which would place 15 Lucas County residents in 6 month fellowships at local companies in emerging technologies. Under the plan, local businesses in the high tech and alternative energy fields will submit proposals to the County for six month fellowships in research, design, engineering, manufacturing, business strategy, and marketing. These jobs will then be filled by Lucas County residents, including recently displaced workers, via the Source, the county’s one stop job center.

“This program is a win/win for local small businesses trying to grow but lacking capital and people looking for jobs in an increasingly tough economy,” stated Konop. “I hope my colleagues put progress over politics and invest in our communities future by voting for the resolution,” concluded Konop.

This is not the role of government!

First of all, the county doesn't yet have any of the interest on the loan and probably won't until after the end of the year.

Second, since when is it the role of government to hire people to work at private companies? This is his 'Job Corps' program repackaged with for-profit companies rather than non-profits, but it's still wrong. Government should not spend tax dollars to pay people to work at outside entities - and the only government workers they should pay would be the ones absolutely necessary to fulfil the mandates placed upon the county government.

Third, this is not creating jobs nor wealth within our community. Remember the 'broken window fallacy' of economic development? It's the story of a shopkeeper whose window is broken by a little boy.

Everyone sympathizes with the man whose window was broken, but pretty soon they start to suggest that the broken window makes work for the glazier, who will then buy bread, benefiting the baker, who will then buy shoes, benefiting the cobbler, etc. Finally, the onlookers conclude that the little boy was not guilty of vandalism; instead he was a public benefactor, creating economic benefits for everyone in town.

The fallacy of the onlookers' argument is that they considered only the benefits of purchasing a new window, but they ignored the cost to the shopkeeper. As the shopkeeper was forced to spend his money on a new window, he obviously could not have spent it on something else. For example, the shopkeeper may have spent the money on bread and shoes for himself, but now cannot so enrich the baker and cobbler because he must fix his window.

Thus, the child did not bring any net benefit to the town. Instead, he made the town poorer by at least the value of one window, if not more.

If one broken window is good - is not a dozen, or a hundred or a thousand? Shouldn't we break all the windows, thus stimulating the economy? So it is with Konop's 'fellowship' program. If 15 fellowships are good, what about 50, or 100?

One great lesson of political economy, emphasized for centuries, is that the government creates no wealth of its own. Everything it has it has to get from you and me, one way or another. If the Commissioners spend this interest income on part-time, temporary jobs, it won't be spending the money on the mandated functions of county government - and that means that you and I will still have pay taxes to afford those things.

Of course, if you're one of the few businesses that would qualify, you might welcome having someone else pay for the work you're getting through such a program, so expect Konop to produce several business owners who will rave about what a great idea this is. Should we be surprised that the recipients of government's largesse support it? No.

As the Board of Commissioners rejected Konop's 'jobs corp' program, they should reject this 'fellowship' program as well, because other than the name, they are exactly the same. However, if Commissioners Pete Gerken and Tina Skeldon Wozniak again reject this type of 'program,' expect Konop to accuse them of 'politics over progress' and 'maintaining the status quo' while he whines about not getting his way - once again.

If you really want to 'jump start' local businesses, lower the taxes, reject all property tax levy increases, stop spending so much money, reduce regulations and end duplicative requirements on businesses. Doing those things would be a much more effective way of helping ALL Lucas County companies, not just the ones you like.

McCain over Obama by 6 points says Ohio Newspaper Poll

The race for president is still tight in Ohio, but is trending toward Sen. John McCain.

An Ohio Newspaper Poll shows McCain has a 48% to 42% lead over Democratic opponent Barack Obama. The margin of error is +/- 3.3% for the survey which was conducted Sept. 12-16.

Some interesting tidbits from the poll:

* A majority- 53% - said they are either the same or better off than they were four years ago. (If a majority of voters are not experiencing difficulty or find themselves better off now, this does not bode well for candidates who are selling themselves as a solution to a bad economy.)

In the breakdown, the higher your education level, the better off you say you are, with 85% of respondents without a high school diploma saying they are worse off now than they were four years ago. A large majority of Democrats - 68% - say they are worse off. Independents are evenly split at 50% but only 26% of Republicans say they're worse off now. Interpreting the results from an educational perspective is easy - people without education are not doing as well as those with an education. This is pretty much a given. Interpreting the discrepancy between the opinions of Democrats and Republicans is another matter entirely.

* A significant majority - 70% - believe in global warming, but most do not think man-made emissions are to blame. (Yes, Ohioans know how to think critically.)

* A majority - 57% - support building more nuclear power facilities. (This is a plus for McCain who has indicated his support for this source of energy as well.)

* A majority - 55% - think the most important priority for an energy policy is alternative energy. The other choices in the survey were more drilling, nuclear plants, conserve energy and don't know. There was no 'all of the above' choice.

The political party breakdown on this question was 71% of Democrats, 52% of Independents and 41% of Republicans selecting 'alternative energy' as an answer. Conversely, for 'more drilling,' the results were 16% of Democrats, 20% of Independents and 43% of Republicans. Independents had the highest percentage for 'conserve energy' at 22%.

* A majority - 65% - support providing health care for all Americans, even if it means raising taxes. (This is a plus for Obama who supports a universal health care concept.) The choices were universal coverage, even with higher taxes, no taxes for universal coverage and don't know. 87% of Democrats, 67% of Independents and 44% of Republicans selected 'universal coverage, even with higher taxes.

* A majority - 57% - think Obama's race won't have any impact on the presidential race. (This shows that some elected Democrats in Ohio are out of touch.) Interestingly, it was Republicans who gave the 'no impact' answer most, 66% versus Democrats (33% of whom thought his race would hurt him) and Independents (who were evenly split between 'no impact' and the other choices of 'help,' 'hurt' or 'don't know.')

* 51% think McCain's age won't make a difference. 51% of Democrats, but only 39% of Republicans think it will hurt him.

All in all, I'm not surprised by the results of this snapshot of likely Ohio voters.

One-third of white Dems are racist, poll says

While some Ohio elected Democrats think their fellow Ohioans are racist, it turns out that perhaps the problem is in their own party.

An AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks — many calling them "lazy," "violent" or responsible for their own troubles.

"More than a third of all white Democrats and independents—voters Obama can't win the White House without—agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, according to the survey, and they are significantly less likely to vote for Obama than those who don't have such views."

This certainly does not bode well for the Obama campaign, as such voters could easily swing the presidential election one way or the other.

The poll was conducted to determine why Obama is locked in such a close race with McCain. Elites just don't understand why Obama is not running away with the lead, citing the unpopularity of the president as an advantage for Obama. Of course, they forget that the only approval rating less than Pres. Bush's is that of Congress and both candidates come from that body.

Apparently, 'experts' just don't get it ... for Republicans, it has more to do with Obama's positions and policies than it does his race. Even the survey found that, while Republicans harbor prejudices, too, they weren't voting against Obama because of his race. "Most Republicans wouldn't vote for any Democrat for president—white, black or brown."

The survey had some surprising news for Democrats - especially those who've been saying, in the last several days, that their fellow Americans are bigots and afraid to vote for a black man. According to the results, doubts about Obama's competency outweigh the racial issue.

"More than a quarter of all Democrats expressed doubt that Obama can bring about the change they want, and they are likely to vote against him because of that.

Three in 10 of those Democrats who don't trust Obama's change-making credentials say they plan to vote for McCain."

Some other interesting survey findings from the article:

* More than a quarter of white Democrats agree that "if blacks would only try harder, they could be just as well off as whites."

* About 20% of independent voters called blacks "intelligent" or "smart," more than one third latched on the adjective "complaining" and 24 percent said blacks were "violent."

* Nearly four in 10 white independents agreed that blacks would be better off if they "try harder."

* Just 59% of Hillary Clinton's white Democratic supporters said they wanted Obama to be president. Nearly 17% of Clinton's white backers plan to vote for McCain.

* Among white Democrats, Clinton supporters were nearly twice as likely as Obama backers to say at least one negative adjective described blacks well.

Ohio unemployment: numbers vs. percentage

The media was awash yesterday with the news that Ohio's August unemployment rate of 7.4% was the highest it's been since 1992.

EGAD!!! It's all Bush's fault!
NO - it's that Democrat Strickland!

But the reality of the situation is a bit different when you take a look at the details and not just just the headlines and the spin.

The unemployment rate is a reflection of the number of people unemployed divided by the total estimated number of people in the labor force and then multiplied by 100 to get the percentage.

And percentages can be deceiving.

If you have 100 people available to work and 20 of them are out of work, your unemployment rate is 20%. If you have 1000 people available to work and 50 of them are not working, your unemployment rate is 5%. Obviously, if you're comparing only percentages, it would seem that the 20% rate was much worse, even though fewer people are unemployed.

So it is with Ohio's rate. The number of people unemployed in August in Ohio was, according to the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, 445,000. If you look at their historical records, that's actually 38% less than the record number of 715,200 unemployed in December 1982.

We had fewer people unemployed in August 2008 than we did in December 1982.

But, because we have fewer people in the workforce these days, the percentage is high.

We are, of course, comparing apples to apples in that the unemployment rate is always the number of people not working divided by the total estimated number of people who can work. But what does it really mean?

Is Ohio worse off now, because of a higher rate, than it was in 1982 when more people were actually unemployed? That's the question.

Sadly, the facts behind the statistics are often overlooked when it comes to how politicians and others spin the numbers. With a Democrat governor, Republicans will blame the high percentage on him and his administration of the state. This being a presidential election year, Democrats will blame the Republican in the White House.

And in trying to put the blame on each other, they will miss the real problem: that Ohio has not been a place where businesses want to be, which is why we have residents who cannot find jobs, and that our out-of-work residents either can't or won't do the jobs that are available.

Ohioans (both employed and unemployed) would be better off if those politicians would focus on making our state more business friendly, rather than focusing on how to 'spin' the numbers.

Rangle calls Palin 'disabled'

Yep - it's true. Rep. Charlie Rangel, when asked why Democrats are so afraid of Sarah Palin and her popularity, said, "You got to be kind to the disabled."

The reporter then questioned Rangel on this, to see if he did, indeed, mean Sarah Palin. He did.

If I had been the reporter, I probably would have turned the comment back on Rangel by interpreting the 'disabled' to apply to the Democrats who are so afraid of her...but that's just me.

I realize that there is a lot at stake with a national election - but this is just too much! However, the more they talk like this, the better the chances McCain-Palin have of ending up in the White House.

Talk Like A Pirate Day

Ahoy there, scallywags and sea wenches! It be Talk Like A Pirate Day.

According to the originators, "Talking like a pirate is fun. It's really that simple. It gives your conversation a swagger, an elán, denied to landlocked lubbers." And anyone can do it - though some do it better than others. LOL!

In honor of this ignoble day, here be some bad pirate jokes:

A seaman meets a pirate in a bar, and the talk turns to their adventures. The seaman notes that the pirate has a peg leg, a hook, and an eye patch. 'How did you end up with the peg leg?' he asks.
The pirate replies, 'I was swept overboard into a school of sharks. As my men were pulling me out, a shark bit my leg off.'
'Wow!' says the seaman. 'What about your hook?'
'Well,' answers the pirate, 'we were boarding a ship when one of the enemy hacked off my hand.'
'Incredible!' says the seaman. 'How'd you get the eye patch?'
'A seagull pooped in my eye,' the pirate replies.
'You lost your eye to a seagull dropping?' the seaman asks.
'Well,' says the pirate, 'it twas my first day with the hook.'


Q. What are a pirate's favourite socks?
A. Aaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrgyle.


Q: Why does it take pirates so long to learn the alphabet?
A: Because they can spend so many years at C!
alternative answer: Because they can't get past R (arrgh)


A pirate walks into a bar with a parrot on his shoulder. The bartender points at the parrot and says, 'Wow! That's really cool! Where did you get that?!'
The parrot says 'Hispaniola! They're freakin' everywhere!'

And a classic:

A pirate walks into a tavern with a ship’s wheel down the front of his pants.

The bartender asks the pirate if he knows its there and the pirate responds: Yarr, it’s drivin’ me nuts.

Quote of the Day

From The Patriot Post:

"The ordaining of laws in favor of one part of the nation, to the prejudice and oppression of another, is certainly the most erroneous and mistaken policy. An equal dispensation of protection, rights, privileges, and advantages, is what every part is entitled to, and ought to enjoy."

~ Benjamin Franklin (Emblematical Representations, Circa 1774)

FOIA Friday - September 19, 2008

One of the biggest frustrations in trying to get public records is when a government entity doesn't want to give you the information. Despite the fact that the information is there, it might not already be in a form that makes it easy to hand out.

Each state has its own laws and in Ohio, governments are not required to create a record in order to provide it to you. While this makes sense on the one hand, it can become a way for entities to hide information they don't want you to know.

When I was the Clerk of Toledo Municipal Court, the city of Toledo, through which our budget was processed, periodically issued a report that listed how many employees were in each department (by classification) and how many of those budgeted positions were vacant. Figuring that if the report existed in the past, it should be able to be produced in the present, I asked for the information.

Apparently, they no longer do the report on a regular basis, hence, the answer I got from the city was that no such report exists. Could it easily be produced? Probably, considering that they haven't changed the computer systems since I was in office.

But, if the city doesn't want people to know this information, they can just say that they have no such report, and the logic of 'you used to have it so please produce it' just doesn't resonate with them.

As a citizen, I should be able to know, at any given point in time, how many employees the city has on the payroll, and how that number differs from what was budgeted. The mayor, facing budget deficits, has said that he believes there are positions in each department that are not necessary and could be eliminated in order to reduce those deficits.

Um...if the positions are not necessary, why are they there in the first place????

But if you're getting ready to lay off people, wouldn't it be logical to think that you already know how many of the budgeted positions are not filled? Either you do, and you just don't want to share that information with the public, or you don't, which makes you a less-than-competent mayor.

He who controls the information controls the world...

I'm not racist because I don't want to vote for Obama!

Some elected Democrats in Ohio say the only reason Ohioans won't vote for Barack Obama is because they're racist. Some idiot from Cincinnati said the same thing on CNN last week and even the governor is playing this tune.

"There are good people who won't vote for Obama because he's a black man," (Ted) Strickland said.

I get so sick of this - it's not his skin color I'm voting against, it's his philosophy and policies.

Of course, maybe they're just setting up a reason for losing the state. I can hear it now: "it's not our fault we lost the election, Ohioans are racist..."

I guess they'd rather believe the worst of others than admit their policies don't resonate with their fellow Ohioans.

The irony of Constitution Day

Today is Constitution Day. It was on this day in 1787 that the first 39 signatures were placed on the Constitution that had been created.

On December 8, 2004, the Congress of the United States, one branch of the government established by the Constitution, passed a "Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005" (118 Stat. 2809, 3344-45), establishing Constitution Day in the United States.

In Section 111 of Division J of Pub. L. 108-447, there is a subsection (b) that states:

"[e]ach educational institution that receives Federal funds for a fiscal year shall hold an educational program on the United States Constitution on September 17 of such year for the students served by the educational institution."

So today, just about every school in the nation is, or should be, doing a program of some kind about the Constitution.

I suppose the irony of the law was unrecognized by those members of Congress who voted for this. Where does the federal government get the authority to “mandate that all federal agencies and schools receiving federal funds hold educational programs pertaining to the Constitution on Constitution Day”???

Certainly NOT in the Constitution they’re promoting.

I also find it sad that Congress could find the votes for such a mandate, but cannot muster the courage to pass the Enumerated Powers Act, which would require all legislation passed to include the section of the Constitution which grants them the authority to pass such a law. Of course, if Congress had such an Enumerated Powers Act, we wouldn't have a Constitution Day.

Those points aside, I do think it's a great idea that we focus attention on this historic document that has given us one of the most stable - and free - governments of all time. I just think we should pay attention to its precepts on a daily basis - not just one day out of the year.

If you'd like more information, you can visit The Constitution Center, Constitution Facts or Constitution Day.

Should Ohio unionize court workers?

That's the question that will be before the Ohio legislature, thanks to State Representative Matt Szollosi (D-49th District), who issued the following press release yesterday:

Rep. Szollosi Introduces Bill to Protect Court Workers’ Rights

Legislation Would Allow Collective Bargaining for Court Employees

COLUMBUS – State Representative Matt Szollosi (D-Toledo) introduced legislation today to give specified court employees the ability to enter into collective bargaining.

The legislation would eliminate an exemption from the Public Employees’ Collective Bargaining Law for “employees and officers of the courts” and “employees of the clerks of courts performing judicial functions.” It was born from a situation at the Lucas County Juvenile Court in which court employees voted to form a bargaining unit, but the Court reversed an initial decision and stopped the employees’ effort to organize.

“We want to enable these court workers to negotiate for better wages, competitive benefits and improved working conditions,” Rep. Szollosi said. “It seems only fair to allow this flexibility for public employees who work so hard to keep the public safe and uphold our laws.”

Rep. Szollosi’s legislation now awaits assignment to a House committee for formal hearings.

SIDE NOTE: As I've said before, if the state law specifically excludes you from collective bargaining, you have no 'right' to it, no matter what Szollosi's press release states. And someone should ask Szollosi about those 'better wages' and 'competitive benefits.' These workers already have wages higher than the private sector in the county, and they are consistent with other courts in the area. Their benefits are the same as all county employees and are extremely generous (including minimal co-pays, coverage of just about all health conditions, prescription drug coverage, vision and dental coverage, and health coaches) and, again, better than what is available in the private sector.
***

Why is this even an issue? Because, for about a year, the United Auto Workers has been trying to organize our Juvenile Court workers. They'd been given a voluntary recognition by the judges, because they are, under Ohio law, specifically excluded from collective bargaining. Several things went awry during the negotiations, from the interference of a county commissioner to damage to a judge's tires, resulting in the withdrawal of the voluntary recognition and the rejection of any further discussions.

The UAW, furious with the withdrawal of the recognition, began a public campaign. They took out a full-page ad in the paper and began radio commercials to urge citizens to tell Presiding Judge Denise Cubbon to change her mind. This resulted in my effort to encourage the public - and my WSPD listeners - to also call and share their opinion.

Obviously, the public campaign wasn't successful because the UAW, with Szollosi's help, had a bunch of state elected officials sign a petition urging Judge Cubbon to reconsider. As I detailed in my linked post, the UAW is certainly getting a return on its campaign donations.

But despite the urging by all those state reps who've never been to Toledo, the UAW saw no success, as Judge Cubbon has stood her ground.

So what's a union to do? Well, it does what it always does: failing to gain support within the community, or with voters, or - in this case - with the court, they want to change the law. And they have a willing participant in Rep. Matt Szollosi and, I expect, the other signers of the petition.

Did I mention that this is an election year for state representatives?

Having been a Clerk of Court, I'm pretty confident that this proposal will generate objections from across the state, although some of it may be behind the scenes so as not to anger the unions in Ohio. But support of unionization for workers aside, this is bad policy in general and, specifically, a bad reaction to a local problem. And Ohio legislators and citizens should reject this change in law.

Development principles for Ohio cities

The following is an article by Samuel R. Staley, Ph.D. is a co-founder and senior fellow at the Buckeye Institute. He directed the Urban Futures Program at Reason Public Policy Institute, the research division of the Reason Foundation in Los Angeles from 1997 to 2002 where he also served as Deputy Director of RPPI. An Ohio native and resident, he is the author of several books.

While this was written in 2003, the principles are valid today, especially #2 when it comes to Toledo's economic development approach.

Five Development Principles for Ohio Cities

Local regions in Ohio are faced with 21st-century challenges that fundamentally question both the logic of existing economies and the ways we approach economic development policy. Citizens and local policymakers must take a fresh look at how the economy repositions itself in an information-driven, globally competitive world market and what, if anything, public policy can do to influence these shifts.

There are five key observations and principles that would be helpful to include in any discussion of local economic development policy:

1. Focus on the achievable. Any elected official's first inclination is to create and implement a positive program for change. Unfortunately, reality, political and economic, often gets in the way of grand plans, and elected officials need to factor this into their policy recommendations. Cities must focus on what they can achieve, not on visions, hopes, or aspirations that are no longer within reach or impossible to achieve under the best of circumstances. While vision can provide a general context, it cannot provide a workable action plan. Thus, a practical key to successful economic development policy is the ability of local leaders to be realistic in their expectations and in the programs they create to achieve them.

2. Private-sector participation will be key. In the late 20th century, many elected officials believed that government could create jobs by investing directly in projects, or seeding projects that would create a catalyst for long-term investment and growth. Most of these plans have achieved results far below expectations.

Over the past two decades, economic development specialists have recognized that good projects almost always have a significant private-sector component because entrepreneurs have a better grasp of market conditions and the long-term viability of certain kinds of projects. In short, the private sector does a better job of leading and managing projects and leveraging public dollars than does the public sector investing on its own.

Nowhere is this more evident than in downtown revitalization efforts. Downtowns across the nation continue to struggle despite significant public subsidies. Downtowns that in fact have revitalized are those that recognize long-term growth depends on creating a viable market and a business climate in which private investors and entrepreneurs could thrive. More often than not, this requires local officials to recognize that downtowns are boutique markets and serve a specific niche; they no longer serve the historical role of economic engines for regional economies.

3. Providing core services efficiently is paramount to long-term success. Local governments must not lose sight of their core competencies - the services and products local governments provide that no one else can (or will) provide. These core competencies include local infrastructure, certain kinds of regional planning, law enforcement, criminal justice, the quality of public education and other services. To ignore these core services risks compromising economic development in the short and long run.

4. Private investors create sustainable economies. Government investment does not create long-term job growth. Certain types of investments, such as road and sewer infrastructure, help lay a broad-based foundation for private investment. Their job creation and impact on local wages, however, are relatively small. Public works projects may provide a short-term infusion of cash that increases the number of jobs in the short run but they don't provide a foundation for sustained investment.

The vast majority of jobs come from local small businesses starting up, expanding and diversifying over time. Local officials rarely can pick and choose among those private businesses to determine which will be successful. Indeed, the history of economic development is rife with examples of companies that became successful as a by-product of their efforts in their core competencies. Wealth creation, from a public official's perspective, is largely a spontaneous process where the logic and rationale of the success of a particular business can be determined only in retrospect.

5. Leadership requires focus, drive and simplicity. Sometimes, policymakers tend to take a shotgun approach to economic development policy that captures the following philosophy: try as many ideas as you can and hope two or three have an impact. This approach tends to diffuse accountability in the process, and often sets in motion initiatives that work at cross-purposes. A more effective strategy has been for local leaders to identify two or three key areas and goals, and then develop a timed, phased action plan to achieve them. The results are easier to measure, and implementation is clearly and more likely to succeed.

Ohio cities should strive for programs that are focused, market-driven and provide a basic foundation for private investment and wealth-creation. That is what generates tangible results in the long run.

Light postings this week

I'll be filling in for Brian Wilson on the Afternoon Drive (3-6 p.m. on NewsTalk 1370 WSPD), so my postings may be a bit light as I focus on preparing for the show.

You can always listen live if you need your daily dose of Thurber's Thoughts.

Can a conservative be a feminist?

When I was growing up, I was surrounded by women who didn't follow the 'traditional' roles. Both my grandmothers worked - one out of necessity and the other out of interest. One helped run a family business; the other, a divorced woman at a time when that was taboo, supported her two young daughters.

My mother and my aunts worked as well, partly for the additional income and partly because of their desire to have a career. As a sailor - more specifically a racer - there weren't very many women role models, but that didn't make much difference. While I and my female friends were outnumbered by men on the race course, we were there - along with our mothers - and were quite competitive.

My perspective of the feminist movement comes from these women. For me, it was never about the issues: equal pay for equal work, glass ceilings, abortion on demand, burning bras, pregnancy leave, etc. It was always about the philosophy: as a woman, I should be treated equally. With this philosophy, I didn't require special consideration - just equal consideration - being judged by the same criteria. Furthermore, that philosophy included my ability to decide my own life, not have it dictated to me by other's expectations.

I was once asked, during a County Commissioner candidate debate, to say something nice about my opponent. She was older than me and had been in politics much longer. I pointed out that she - and several other women in Lucas County - paved a path for younger women like me. They broke the political glass ceiling in our area before I even knew the term. As a result, the fact that I was the first woman elected as the Clerk of Toledo Municipal Court wasn't an issue. The fact that two women were running for County Commissioner wasn't an issue. Today, Lucas County continues to have a very high proportion of female elected officials. And I consider myself fortunate to live in an area with such a perspective.

Am I an example of what the early 'feminists' fought so hard for? Definitely! I chose a career path and have been successful. My sister, who chose to be a stay-at-home mom when her kids were growing up is also an example of what those early female leaders fought for. She made her choice and that was her decision.

Today, women are found everywhere - in every profession, field, and role. While there are still some 'firsts' to be achieved, we know that those 'firsts' are just a matter of time - no longer a wishful dream.

But then along comes Sarah Palin. She, too, is a perfect example of what those early feminists fought so hard for. She has a successful marriage, a fine family, and a successful career. When it came to choices, she made them and no one told her she couldn't.

So why are feminists so outraged and vehement in their opposition to her? Is it because she chose a political philosophy different from their own? Apparently. According some, it appears that you can't be a 'true' feminist unless you're also liberal.

But if feminism is all about making choices for yourself and not having them dictated to you based upon others' expectations, why is it that today's feminists expect you to adopt their collective left-leaning political philosophy? Doesn't this expectation from today's feminists contradict their core philosophy? Do they really believe that women should have 'choice' only so long as they can dictate what that choice should be?

Have today's feminists become the same as those they used to fight against? It seems so.

Today, instead of a patriarchal system dictating the role of women, we have feminists dictating the political role of women. It used to be men telling us that 'a woman's place was in the home.' Today, it's feminists telling us that 'a woman's place is as a Liberal' and woe unto those who dare challenge such a concept.

As a woman, I oppose the hijacking of the feminist movement by partisan interests. The core principles of feminism are not the purview of any one political party - nor should they be. If women are free to choose, that choice must apply to politics as well as jobs, motherhood and abortion.

I reject today's so-called feminist leaders who tell me that my choices aren't the right ones because they are different than the ones they made or support. We've seen this fight before. Stay-at-home moms used to be denigrated because they chose motherhood over a career. But saner minds prevailed.

I'm a conservative. I'm also a feminist, in that I believe in the ability of women to lead a life free from coercion. Being both is not contradictory, rather it is the epitome. And the sooner today's so-called feminist leaders recognize and acknowledge this fact, the better off all women will be.

Obama can't win against Palin

My husband and I have been having some interesting discussions about the way Sen. Barack Obama has been going after Gov. Sarah Palin. The positions range from 'democrats don't know how to run against women - even their own' to 'has he forgotten he's running against Sen. John McCain and not Palin' to 'I hope he keeps it up because it spells doom for his campaign.'

Karl Rove, former senior advisor to President George W. Bush, is loved by the right and hated by the left for his savvy abilities when it comes to campaigning, earning the nickname 'The Architect' and with just cause.

Rove's column in the Wall Street Journal sums up the points we've been making at home. Some of the key points:

If Mr. Obama wants to win, he needs to remember he's running against John McCain for president, not Mrs. Palin for vice president.

If Mr. Obama keeps attacking Mrs. Palin, he could suffer the fate of his Democratic predecessors. These assaults highlight his own tissue-thin résumé, waste precious time better spent reassuring voters he is up for the job, and diminish him -- not her.

A debate between Mr. Obama and Mrs. Palin over executive experience also isn't smart politics for Democrats. As Mr. Obama talks down Mrs. Palin's record, voters may start comparing backgrounds. He won't come off well.

Mrs. Palin did seek earmarks as Wasilla's mayor. But as governor, she ratcheted down the state's requests for federal dollars, telling the legislature last year Alaska "cannot and must not rely so heavily on federal government earmarks." Her budget chief directed state agencies to reduce earmark requests to only "the most compelling needs" with "a strong national purpose," explaining to reporters "we really want to skinny it down."

Mr. Obama has again started a debate he can't win. As senator, he has requested nearly $936 million in earmarks, ratcheting up his requests each year he's been in the Senate. If voters dislike earmarks -- and they do -- they may conclude Mrs. Palin cut them, while Mr. Obama grabs for more each year.

Mr. Obama is already finding it difficult to win over independent women and Hillary Clinton voters. If it looks like he's going out of his way to attack Mrs. Palin, these voters may conclude it's because he has a problem with strong women.

If Mr. Obama keeps attacking her, the odds of Gov. Palin becoming Vice President Palin increase significantly.

Rove gets it right, even if the Obama supporters don't want to hear what he has to say. Of course, the McCain-Palin supporters obviously hope it continues.

When you're on the defensive in a campaign, you're losing.

Quote of the Day

“Tolerance is the last virtue of a dying society” – Aristotle

Another editorial telling the United Way what to do

I'm tired of the Blade editorial pages - and I hate continually pointing out their deficiencies in logic and consistency. But I think it's important for there to be a balancing perspective when it comes to their agendas.

So I find myself today taking exception to their portrayal of the United Way and the decision their board has made to tear down their old, dilapidated building and construct a newer, smaller one.

In today's editorial, "No haste for waste," they try to twist the facts to have readers think that the United Way has made a 'hasty' decision.

"UNITED Way of Greater Toledo should set aside a rash decision it may regret and heed Mayor Carty Finkbeiner's request for a moratorium on demolition of the charitable group's downtown headquarters."

Rash??? The United Way board spent three years evaluating the building and developing the plans for how to deal with it. They had one of the preeminent engineering/architectural firms spend several months examining the structure and workings of the building. They involved the Stranahan Foundation, the organization which represents the original donor who made the existing building possible, and the Foundation fully supports the decision.

Three years is hardly 'rash' ... but they don't mention the amount of time the United Way spent on making a good decision.

What is 'rash' is the immediate rejection of all the months of work in favor of the opinion of the publisher, John Robinson Block, that buildings - no matter what - should always be preserved. Of course, such opinion was conspicuously absent by many, including the publisher and The Blade, when it came to tearing down buildings for the new downtown arena.

What is 'rash' is the outcry by the lemmings in elective office who, without even viewing the building, joined the cry to stop the demolition. Mayor Carty Finkbeiner hasn't even toured the building yet, but he's making demands on the United Way and telling everyone he'll do everything within his power to keep the building standing.

What's also 'rash' is that the mayor, in his perpetual tendency to offend, made such an announcement at a meeting of historic committees - prior to communicating his idea to the United Way. Bill Kitson, the U.W. president, probably heard about the mayor's promise through the media when they called him for a response. Even two days later, he hadn't received the letter the mayor said he was sending.

According to the editorial, Finkbeiner said that tearing down this structure destroys the fabric of the central business district. Well, far be it from me to bring reason and logic into the discussion, but what really destroys the fabric of the central business district is the lack of jobs - not a brand new building!

The editorial says the plan to tear down and build new was hatched in secret. Not true. The U.W. board members told many individuals - including the mayor, though he claims to not remember - that they were examining their options, including tear down and rebuild. It was covered in the local media over a period of months. I can't help but think that 'hatched in secret' is Blade code for 'they didn't consult with us, first.'

"In this case, the greater good lies not in the wrecking ball but in preserving a downtown building that, despite its problems, has not outlived its usefulness."

Actually, the greater good for the community IS what the United Way is doing. They are spending around $400,000 out of their operating fund to maintain the building. That's money that could, without the challenges of this dilapidated building, be spent helping people in need. Isn't that the greater good?

"The decision to demolish, we believe, was not arrived at by the United Way board with the deliberation it deserved. While the board includes plenty of good people, it lacks the sort of municipal movers and shakers with the vision to look beyond the immediate desires of its executive leadership for a new building and see the risks inherent in a tear-down philosophy."

Here we go - because you disagree with our opinion, you obviously are the wrong people to make such a decision.

In case it isn't clear, The Blade is saying that all the board members are being swayed by Bill Kitson, the relatively new president of the organization. Here is a list of board members. The current chairman of the U.W. board is Robert LeClair, senior vice president of Fifth Third Bank. Yes, the same Fifth Third Bank that is the primary sponsor of Fifth Third Field, home of the Toledo Mud Hens. This certainly doesn't sound like someone swayed by a single individual. Many would say that LeClair is, indeed, one of the "municipal movers and shakers" with vision.

What about Robert Helmer, President of Lourdes College? Or Elaine Canning, President and COO of The Bostwick Braun Company? Or Sara Jane DeHoff, founder of Caphelon? The members of the United Way board are the who's who of Toledo and the surrounding area - individuals who've made their own way, been successful in their careers and, most assuredly, are the 'movers and shakers' in the community. But they've made a decision The Blade doesn't like so they are suddenly pliant individuals capable of being swayed by short-term desires. Yeah - right!

"Moreover, the costs cited by United Way for demolition and construction of a new building one-fourth the size don't, to our way of thinking, add up."

Well, there are a lot of things that obviously don't add up when it comes to Blade opinions. They complain about the loss of population and businesses, but continue to support increasing the taxes of the people and companies who are here. They complain that the area is going in the wrong direction, but continually support the exact same philosophies that put us into our current economic mess. They blame the bad economy on the current federal administration and say that they must go, but defend the local administration who is more directly responsible for our local economy and say we need more of the same.

The editorial concludes with this:

"United Way should listen to the mayor and act accordingly."

What they're really saying is that the United Way should listen to them, even though they haven't spent anywhere near the time studying the situation and are, themselves, guilty of haste.

I get no pleasure from reading and critiquing the warped perspective of such writings. But, for too many years, we've not had such a competing view when it comes to many important issues. It's a dirty job but someone's got to do it.

Palin as 'Rosie the Riverter'

First, there came the rumors, tidbits and bloggers talking about how vice presidential candidate, Gov. Sarah Palin, was beginning to appeal to women - especially women who were registered as Independents and Democrats.

Then there was this column, "A Feminist's Argument for McCain's VP," by Tammy Bruce:

"For Democrats, she offers something even more compelling - a chance to vote for a someone who is her own woman, and who represents a party that, while we don't agree on all the issues, at least respects women enough to take them seriously.

Whether we have a D, R or an "i for independent" after our names, women share a different life experience from men, and we bring that difference to the choices we make and the decisions we come to. Having a woman in the White House, and not as The Spouse, is a change whose time has come, despite the fact that some Democratic Party leaders have decided otherwise. But with the Palin nomination, maybe they'll realize it's not up to them any longer.

Clinton voters, in particular, have received a political wake-up call they never expected. Having watched their candidate and their principles betrayed by the very people who are supposed to be the flame-holders for equal rights and fairness, they now look across the aisle and see a woman who represents everything the feminist movement claimed it stood for. Women can have a family and a career. We can be whatever we choose, on our own terms. For some, that might mean shooting a moose. For others, perhaps it's about shooting a movie or shooting for a career as a teacher. However diverse our passions, we will vote for a system that allows us to make the choices that best suit us. It's that simple."

Add in the latest poll, as reported by the Wall Street Journal:

"Mr. Newhouse, the Republican pollster, said that Gov. Palin's image with blue-collar voters in the poll was significantly better than Sen. Biden's. Sen. Biden was chosen, in part, with hopes that he would be able to reach voters from blue-collar towns like Scranton, Pa., where he was born."

Now comes this brilliant poster, from a story in the LA Times:

(Arlette Figdore of York, Pa., right, holds a campaign sign with an image of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin as "Rosie the Riveter" at a campaign rally in Lancaster, Pa. ~ Carolyn Kaster/Associated Press, September 9, 2008)

No wonder people are so energized over her selection for the ticket.

It's going to be an interesting campaign!

Words of wisdom from a Blade editor

Dan Simpson is a retired diplomat. He's also a member of the editorial boards of The Blade and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. And in his column today, he has some wise advice to Toledo and Lucas County voters.

Granted, he's talking about national issues and the presidential race and, while I take issue with application of the point to the current presidential administration, I must agree that his position/opinion is certainly applicable to our city and county.

"People resist significant change. In Pittsburgh, we have voted slate after slate of Democrats into office since the 1930s as the city sank from the pre-eminent, wealthy position it had in the nation to the current, sad spot of the fifth poorest of America's larger cities. It is remarkable that the clear evidence that this city's leadership for 70 years has not been able to reverse our slide has not led to a change in political leadership.

That is not to say that the Republicans have put forward an inspired plan.

But continuing to take the same action in the hope that the next time it will have a different outcome is comparable to the theory that chickens peck the ground because they think this is what causes the yard to be scattered with feed."

The sad part is that such an opinion hasn't been targeted to our local elected officials, even when the situations are the same. I don't follow Pittsburgh politics, so I don't know if their paper has endorsed a complete change of political leadership. I know The Blade hasn't done so - although on occasion they seem to think that changing the faces, bringing in 'fresh, new, young' people equates to a change in political philosophy.

My hope is that voters will eventually realize what so many of us already know: that doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results, is perpetuating the problem - not solving it.

Broadcasting live from the Rally for the Troops

Join me and WSPD morning show host, Fred LeFebvre, for a live broadcast from the Rally for the Troops!

Wednesday, Sept. 10, 6 p.m.
Friendship Park 131st Street in Point Place

Join us as we pay tribute to those who willingly protect us each and every day.

Plan to arrive around 5:45 and follow the directions for parking. Broadcast of this special Eye on Toledo show will begin at the regular time of 6 p.m. The rally begins at 6:30.

This is my first remote and I'm so glad to do it from such a terrific event in my own neighborhood.

See you then!

Mayor leaves his dog in hot car - again!

He did it again - and the very sad part is that the citizens are no longer outraged.

Mayor Carty Finkbeiner again left his dog, Scout, in his car, with the windows rolled up, for between two and three hours. He'd been caught doing this once before - in a handicapped parking spot - and, after the Humane Society investigated, he got a slap on the wrist and did a public service announcement. He left Scout in a running car with the air conditioning on during a "Green Event" at the Erie Street Market. But he got no ticket for a violation of the law which says you can't leave a car running like that.

And over the weekend, he left the dog in the hot car while at the Extreme Makeover house. You can listen to the interview with Becky and see the photographs of Scout that she took to document the event. Becky explained that the car was not running, the windows were all the way up, and Scout stayed in the car the entire time Carty was at the event, which was between two and three hours.

Where is the outrage? The previous times, people just shook their heads and said, 'it's just Carty being Carty.' But we all know that if one of us did those things, we'd suffer the consequences.

The reason he continues these types of activities is because he gets away with it.

And shame on all of us for letting him!

Quote of the day

From The Patriot Post:

"In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature." ~ James Madison (Federalist No. 52, 8 February 1788)

The 'piling on' toward Sarah Palin

I've said it before, and I say it again, the place for opinions in the print media is on their editorial pages. But are four editorials in 10 days a bit of piling on?

That's what our local paper, The Blade, has done with the vice presidential pick of Gov. Sarah Palin.

They start on Aug. 30 with "McCain's Machinations," where they dismiss her experience as a governor and mayor, saying McCain picked "a candidate who makes Mr. Obama's resume seem substantial by comparison."

On Sept. 4, they claim that McCain's selection is a 'cynical ploy' designed to distract Americans from the issues. They also tell you that McCain, with his many years in the Senate, is perpetuating the problem - even though his opponents have more combined years in that body than he does. They also make a point of implying that her family obligations are enough to prevent her from doing her job well - an issue that has gotten way too much coverage in this day and age when women are told they can have it all.

Three days later, on Sept. 7, they call Palin a dog in their editorial, "Palin as pit bull." They say she gave a good speech at the Republican Convention, but that it was light on facts and details. Perhaps they missed Sen. Barack Obama's speech? It was equally light on facts and details, especially on how he was going to fund all those give-aways he was promising, but received no such editorial.

While even Democrats acknowledged she hit some sore points with some of her comments - and the way they began defending against them certainly proves that - The Blade editorial board wrote, "Her zingers about the Democratic ticket tended to slide around reality, to be charitable,..." I think that means they think she lied, but they provide no evidence that anything she said about her opponents was inaccurate.

Today's editorial, "Northern Exposure," (wonder if that's a violation of copyright on the TV series?) critiques her record. While such a critique is appropriate for the editorial page, it wasn't something that's been done with her opponents.

I have no problem with such attention to detail when it comes to a candidate's record, but the bias comes into play when you do it for one candidate, but not the other. If people need to know the Republican Vice Presidential candidate's record, shouldn't we also know the Democrat's? And certainly, if such a critique is warranted, it is warranted for the Presidential candidates from both parties.

I've already pointed out the lack of intellectual honesty in news of the campaigns, but four editorials in 10 days is part of the reason why so many people, especially women, think the piling on is too much. It's also showing signs of backfiring on liberals, with some voters looking more favorably at the McCain-Palin ticket because of the excessive negativity being heaped on Palin. And it's cost at least two MSNBC anchors their election coverage positions.

As a former Republican elected official who survived four very tough campaigns in Democrat-dominated jurisdictions, I don't have a problem with intense media coverage and tough questions. I do have a problem, however, when the tough questions are directly only to me and not to my opponents. Knowing I was going to be scrutinized more because I was Republican made me better prepared to handle all sorts of inquiries - and that made me not only a better (and successful) candidate, but it made me a better elected official as well, contributing to my reputation for 'always doing my homework.' I'm certain Sarah Palin feels the same way.

But if the media wants to help voters really know the candidates, they won't reserve such treatment only for the candidate(s) they hope will lose. Perhaps that's the point. Perhaps, in their hearts, they know that the American public wouldn't support their favored candidates if they really knew the objective and unbiased truth about them, so they don't tell you.

Of course, such activity leads to a loss of readers, declining sales and a loss of credibility - which is where many in the media find themselves today, with so many people turning to alternative sources for their news. So maybe this isn't such a bad thing after all.

The bald eagle and the squirrel

No, it's not a children's book, although that might make an interesting title for one...

We've been wondering if our neighbor was going to cut down this dead tree, but today we were very grateful it was still there, as it allowed us to see a bald eagle sitting on a branch. The interesting thing was watching the squirrel as it scampered around the branches to the side and above the eagle, who seemed to tolerate the chattering directed toward it.

I've never seen an eagle this close, so this was a special treat for me.

FOIA Friday: City ordered to comply with records request

We've been following GraphicsGuy's long suffering attempts to get public records from the City of Toledo relating to red light cameras. Despite numerous attempts, the information was not forthcoming and he filed a mandamus action in the Sixth District Court of Appeals.

This week, the Court issued an order:

...EITHER DO THE ACT REQUESTED BY RELATOR IN HIS PETITION OR SHOW CAUSE WHY IT DOES NOT DO SO BY FILING AN ANSWER TO RELATORS COMPLAINT OR A MOTION TO DISMISS RELATORS PETITION. THEREAFTER, THIS CASE SHALL PROCEED PURSUANT TO THE OHIO RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. IF RESPONDENT FAILS TO RESPOND, A PEREMPTORY WRIT SHALL BE ISSUED BY THIS COURT SUA SPONTE, PURSUANT TO R.C. 2731.10.

E-JOURNALIZED 9-2-08 HANDWORK SINGER OSOWIK

The City has 14 days in which to respond. Interestingly, this is getting no attention from local media - except from NewsTalk 1370 WSPD, which is where I work.

It appears that GraphicsGuy will also be eligible for the $100 per day 'compensation' for the city's failure to comply with his request. (They don't call it a fine, but that's what it is.) While this is good for him, it's a cost that will be paid by the taxpayers of Toledo, which is bad for us. However, if it causes the city to actually pay attention to future requests, it may be worth it, even though it should never have gotten to this point in the first place.

Mandatory sick leave pulled from Ohio's ballot

From Gongwer's News Service:

A coalition pushing a ballot initiative that would have provided seven days of paid sick leave for certain Ohio workers said Thursday it will remove the issue from the fall ballot.

Service Employees International Union District 1199 President Becky Williams said the Coalition for Healthy Families will ask to have the proposal taken off the ballot.

Ms. Williams said the decision "was not easy nor made lightly," but was reached after "it became clear that a shrill and vitriolic ballot campaign marred by misinformation and disinformation would be impossible to avoid."

SEIU has been a primary force in pushing the issue that would provide the annual benefit for Ohioans who work for companies with more than 25 employees.

Ms. Williams was to appear at a morning event with Gov. Ted Strickland and U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown to discuss the matter.

Earlier in the summer, Mr. Strickland looked to broker a deal between backers and key opponents in the business community, but couldn't forge a compromise that would have required legislative action. He and Lt. Governor Lee Fisher subsequently said they would oppose the proposal that has been designated as Issue 4.
*********

This is good news, indeed!!!!

More double standard from The Blade

It just irritates me so that the bias in the news stories from our local paper are so evident.

On the Wednesday nights of both political conventions, the vice presidential candidate makes a speech and the delegates actually vote for the presidential candidate.

Here are the headlines from the coverage of those events:

Obama gets nomination, thrills Dems with surprise as running mates celebrate on stage

Palin attacks Obama, defends her experience; governor touts political success in Alaska

I will certainly admit that Gov. Sarah Palin's speech was more of a news item than Sen. Joe Biden's and that the split delegates at the Democratic Party convention was more of a news story than the nomination of Sen. John McCain. So the focus of the two stories was, appropriately, different.

But note the terms: thrills, surprise, celebrate versus attacks, defends, touts.

They describe Sen. Barack Obama's satisfaction with Biden's speech with him "smiling broadly in obvious approval of Mr. Biden’s speech..." They further describe Biden's speech:

"...a from-the-gut uplifting of the struggling middle class to an in-your-face condemnation of the policies of John McCain and President Bush."

They also qualify the role of the vice presidential candidate, saying Biden showed "some of the political teeth that a running mate is supposed to show."

Well, if a running mate is supposed to show some political teeth, wouldn't they say the same of Palin? Unfortunately, no. According to the reporter, Palin joined in "in assailing Democratic Sen. Barack Obama."

"But she, along with most speakers last night, went on the attack, criticizing and mocking Mr. Obama for what they said were his lack of experience."
...
The vice presidential hopeful painted herself as a small-town hockey mom and used the biggest speech of her career to take swipes at Mr. Obama."

Again, note the words: assailing, criticizing, mocking, take swipes. There are also qualifiers - 'what they said were his lack of experience'- implying, subtly, that Obama has experience, but they're saying he doesn't. The statement could have easily - and accurately - been 'mocking Mr. Obama for his lack of experience' as that's what was happening. No such qualifying terms exist in their description of Biden's claims against McCain.

Both stories document the expectations of the campaigns with their selections.

"Republicans hope Mrs. Palin’s speech will convince voters on her candidacy despite questions about her experience, qualifications, distractions involving her family, and the vetting processes used by the McCain camp."

"Mr. Biden, 65, has been a senator since 1973, and Democrats hope his working-class roots and his Irish Catholic heritage will help win over some blue-collar voters who have sided with Republicans over social issues — such as abortion — in previous presidential elections."

Republicans hope Palin will convince...despite four problems. Democrats hope two advantages will win over. Unless you're looking at both stories side by side, you'd probably miss the hidden bias in what should be a simple statement of the hopes and expectations of the two campaigns.

I've had some people say to me that this bias is what we always get from The Blade. I disagree, as I've seen good news stories printed that do not contain such evident distortions. However, The Blade has garnered a reputation for having a slant to their stories that support the editorial viewpoint - and the viewpoint of the publisher. Apparently, publisher John Robinson Block was enamoured with Obama and, intentional or not, readers expect the news stories to be complimentary of Obama/Biden and critical of McCain/Palin.

The bigger problem is that the profession of journalism, which is supposed to be just the facts, suffers. Journalists have a code of ethics that includes not imposing their own cultural values on others and distinguishing between advocacy and news reporting. That includes being careful that their choice of words are neutral and not suggestive.

I have no illusions that blogging about these things will change the way the news is reported here. (In fact, some would say I put myself at risk by doing so.) But I do hope that you, by reading these comparisons, will note the techniques and become a more informed consumer of the news, better able to distinguish between the opinion and the facts.

Palin proves her strength in VP acceptance speech

Since being announced as the running mate to Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, Gov. Sarah Palin has suffered the onslaught of the liberal left - and survived.

I know it's not easy knowing that just about every rumor that's ever been told about you is now repeated across the internet - instantly. But it's even harder when it's your children they're talking about.

Tonight's speech shows she's got what it takes to not only survive such attacks, but also how to hit back. And she did so with a velvet glove, using soft words in a strong way.

As the mother of a member of the military, she has a unique perspective, but one shared with hundreds of thousands of other mothers. And when she speaks about a commander in chief, her words carry extra weight.

"He's a man who wore the uniform of this country for 22 years, and refused to break faith with those troops in Iraq who have now brought victory within sight.

And as the mother of one of those troops, that is exactly the kind of man I want as commander in chief."

With opponents making fun of the 'fly-over' area of the United States, Palin reminds us just what is so special about all those small towns.

"A writer observed: "We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty, sincerity, and dignity." I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman.

I grew up with those people.

They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America ... who grow our food, run our factories, and fight our wars.

They love their country, in good times and bad, and they're always proud of America."

And she works in a small dig relating to Michelle Obama's comment about being proud of her country - but in a way that draws a contrast between what the majority of American's think, and what the wife of her opponent thinks.

And then she takes the gloves off:

"When I ran for city council, I didn't need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too.

Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown.

And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves.

I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities. I might add that in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening.

We tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco."

Wow - I love it! A comparison between a mayor/governor and a 'community organizer' combined with pointing out the elitism exhibited by their opponent when it comes to those middle America values.

She also takes on the media, showing she's not afraid of them and can certainly hold her own.

"I'm not a member of the permanent political establishment.

And I've learned quickly, these past few days, that if you're not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.

But here's a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion - I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country. Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reasons, and not just to mingle with the right people."

One of Pres. Ronald Reagan's great accomplishments was to go directly to the American people with his ideas, ideals and proposals. He did this successfully, knowing that the real power in Washington is not in the elected officials, but in those they are supposed to be serving. Palin does the same thing and I expect the American public, especially in light of the 'news' stories the last couple of days, will respond similarly - embracing those ideas as their own while rejecting the know-it-alls in the media and the capital.

While she details many of her accomplishments she's achieved in Alaska, perhaps the most recognizable success story was her rejection of a particular pork project.

"I told the Congress "thanks, but no thanks," for that Bridge to Nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, we'd build it ourselves."

Being from a state overflowing with natural resources, she certainly speaks with authority when it comes to gas and oil.

As I've said before, campaigns are all about contrasts. After telling the American public what she's done, she then points out what Obama hasn't:

"We've all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers.

And there is much to like and admire about our opponent.

But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform - not even in the state senate.This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting, and never use the word "victory" except when he's talking about his own campaign. But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed ... when the roar of the crowd fades away ... when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot - what exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make government bigger ... take more of your money ... give you more orders from Washington ... and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world."

And when it comes to change, and why McCain is a better choice than Obama, she hits a home run.

"In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.
...
Among politicians, there is the idealism of high-flown speechmaking, in which crowds are stirringly summoned to support great things.

And then there is the idealism of those leaders, like John McCain, who actually do great things. They're the ones who are good for more than talk ... the ones we have always been able to count on to serve and defend America.
...
My fellow citizens, the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of "personal discovery." This world of threats and dangers is not just a community, and it doesn't just need an organizer.

And though both Senator Obama and Senator Biden have been going on lately about how they are always, quote, "fighting for you," let us face the matter squarely.

There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you ... in places where winning means survival and defeat means death ... and that man is John McCain.
...
For a season, a gifted speaker can inspire with his words.

For a lifetime, John McCain has inspired with his deeds.""

Strong words from a strong vice presidential candidate, delivered with humor. Palin has handled tough opponents and tough races before, and tonight we saw that she can handle the 2008 election as well.

Pundits are saying that 'a star is born' in the GOP. I'd say that the GOP actually has many such stars - but they've been overlooked by those pundits because they're usually in the small towns and cities, just serving in the best way they know how.

Palin speech prediction

I predict that Gov. Sarah Palin will answer her critics on her experience level.

The role of a mayor of a small town requires many of the same things needed in the White House: hiring and establishing a cabinet, preparing budgets, making policy decisions based upon what's best for the community/nation, working with legislators, being the public spokesman for the community. The role of governor also requires the ability - and responsibility - to do these things as well...things neither Obama nor Biden have done. And no - being a 'community organizer' or running a campaign don't count as equivalents, especially when running a campaign is what Palin had to do to earn the ability to perform those duties.

I hope she'll have a few words to the elitists who seem to think that a she's unqualified because she's not part of the establishment. Perhaps not being part of the 'logic-free zone' of Washington D.C. is exactly what makes her 'qualified.'

I also hope she'll use humor to counter the attacks on her and her family, on her ability to be a mother and an elected official (something Dems never seem to have an issue of - and where are all those liberal feminists who should be defending Palin in that regard?), on her appearance and all the other non-relevant points her opponents and media pundits have been throwing around. Poking fun at them for their double standard and banality would certainly resonate with the American public.

Those are my predictions and hopes for her speech tonight. We'll watch and see.

Random questions and thoughts

* Why did the media think it appropriate to ask Gov. Sarah Palin who her favorite designer is?

* Do you think Palin's answer to the above question (Patagonia and North Face - two businesses I know through their catalogs and certainly NOT considered 'designers') resonated with more Americans than any 'fashion' designer would have?

* How is it that, according to most on the left and even many news pundits (but then I repeat myself), Palin is too inexperienced to be a heartbeat away from the presidency but that Sen. Barack Obama, with less experience, is qualified to be that heartbeat? And why don't they realize their contradiction?

* Campaigns are about showing contrasts. Last night's GOP convention speakers provided such contrasts between Sen. John McCain and Obama. Fred Thompson's point was 'substance over flash' while Joe Lieberman said, “eloquence is no substitute for a record.” Slam!

* While the Democrat convention focused on party unity, Lieberman made a good point that "country matters more than party." That's a message designed to appeal to and resonate with the voting middle and Independents. I think McCain's best hope for winning the election is to appeal to those middle of the road voters and Independents - which includes the Reagan Democrats. He cannot forsake his conservative base, but he's made huge inroads on that front with his selection of Palin as his running mate.

* How do three senators running for the top two spots in elective office overcome the lowest senate approval rating in history? Are we to think the American public is so dumb that it won't realize their roles in gaining such a poor approval ranking?

* Obama says he's going to raise taxes on businesses but protect the middle class from tax hikes. Does he not realize that a tax on business just gets passed along to all consumers, including that precious middle class, in the form of higher prices and/or less earnings on the stock? Does he think most Americans don't realize this point and will react accordingly?

* With polls showing more and more Americans opposed to abortion (even if they want it to remain legal), will Obama's latest ad telling voters that McCain wants to overturn Roe v. Wade actually give an advantage to the Obama campaign?

* With the selection of a running mate with no international experience, has the McCain campaign sacrificed one is its key points - that Obama is not ready to lead?

* Do political party conventions change voters minds about whom to elect? They're certainly a process that is necessary for the actual business of nominating the party's candidate, but could they be done with less pomp and circumstance (and expense) and still have the desired impact of kicking off a campaign? Is there a better way to kick off a campaign?

President or savior?

I often write about understanding the role of our various governments (federal, state, local) and about the job descriptions of the people we elect to oversee those governments.

So often these days, people look first to government to 'solve' any and all problems or perceived problems. We also blame government whenever anything bad happens in our lives. After all, if government can solve all our problems and yet we still have problems, it must - obviously - be the government's fault.

Even today, as we look at the presidential campaign, we have candidates who are promising to solve all our problems and all it takes to do so is to elect them. Nothing could be further from the truth, but campaigns are not about truth so much as they are about persuasion.

I came across this article, "A President, Not a Savior:"

"What moved Barack Obama to seek the presidency was "the basic idea of empathy" and the notion that if "we see somebody down and out ... we care for them." Republican John McCain explained that he was running "to inspire a generation of Americans to serve a cause greater than their self-interest."

Noble sentiments, to be sure, but in the original constitutional scheme, the president was neither Empath-in-Chief nor a national life coach. His role was to faithfully execute the laws, defend the country from attack, and check Congress with the veto power whenever it exceeded its constitutional bounds."

It explains our unconstitutional expectations of the office holder - which also explains why the candidates are making unconstitutional promises.

My question, though, is this: if we know the nation's expectations of this office holder are unconstitutional, what do we do about it?