ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: After all of mine...

It's disheartening sometimes, since it seems that the world (well, QuimBob :-) -- I'm just messing with you, bud, thank you for your engagement) doesn't agree with your endorsements..

...at least the BlackFistBlog is on my side.

Well, mostly...

HA!

---

Tomorrow is election day, and I hope Obama wins.

Mostly, though, I hope this doesn't become the latest punchline in America's comedy known as racial identity politics. 

That all of this becomes reduced to a line from Christine Baransky in Cruel Intentions that "I gave to Colin Powell [therefore I'm not racist]."

Anyways, I'm tired. Have a good night :-).

---

And dammit everything is making me cry today. . . That's how tired I am...

Including this fabulous starbucks ad. 

Much love and sympathy to the Obama family. Obama's grandmother just passed away... a day before she saw it happen. Much love to them all.

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: *YES* on Issues 7 & 8

Local Issue 7 -- Vote YES

Shall the Charter of the City of Cincinnati be amended to limit the use of photo-monitoring devices to detect certain traffic law violations by adopting new Article XIV?

Essentially, a yes vote means that a simple traffic camera will not be enough to give a ticket to a motorist that runs a red light.

I don't think these things are good policy. There are a lot of good arguments for them -- including safety issues that are 100% relevant and salient to the discussion, and I don't mean to discount them. However, they are simply illegal. There are no witnesses save a camera, and a picture of a car driving through doesn't tell us who was driving the car. I'm not a big fan of big brother, and I'm tired of the ongoing debate of placing video cameras every where we go.

At some point, we need to just say "enough with the ongoing monitoring."

Like sex, when you drive, you are taking certain risks. Understanding those risks are part and parcel of the process. Yes, traffic fatalities are awful things, but how does a camera help? If someone runs a red light, they run a red light. A camera is not going to change that simple behavior. People argue that it keeps honest people honest, but it's not the honest people I'm worried about.

They don't protect people, these cameras; they are merely punitive. And I just don't think that's right.

Local Issue 8 -- Vote YES

Shall the proposed amendment to the Charter of the City of Cincinnati to provide for a method of proportional representation for electing the members of Council whereby each voter ranks candidate choice in descending order from 1 through 9 on each ballot; to provide for the counting of ballots and the determination of results whereby the ballots that are not needed or cannot be used to elect a candidate are distributed to the next highest candidate choice on each ballot who remains eligible to be elected; to provide for the ballot language and direction to voters; to provide for the election of two candidates for mayor in a primary election who shall be eligible for the regular municipal election for mayor; to provide for the election of mayor in the general election; to provide for the choice of write-in candidates; to provide for the election of council and the mayor by ballot without designation of political party; to provide for the marking, sorting and counting of ballots and tabulating the results in a manner consistent with the charter and general election law for non-partisan ballots; to provide for the ongoing validity of Article IX should any provision of Article IX be amended or held unconstitutional or in violation of state law; to provide for the use of mechanical, electronic or other devices for vote counting; and provide other procedures to implement proportional representation by repealing existing Sections 5, 5a, 7, 8, 11 and 12 and enacting new Sections 5, 5a, 7, 8, 11, 12 and 13, be approved?

I'm actually divided on this one for two reasons:

1) I am 100% in favor of instant run-off election processes, which is what proportional representation is (essentially). I think it's fair and creates more balance in the system, while opening the system and allowing for more people to run for office.

2) This process is really, really, really complicated. I'm really concerned how upcoming elections will be run for city council because we can even trust people to properly press a button for one candidate for president (ignoring arguments about voting machine difficulties, here). Asking people to rank their preference... well... I've read some on the issue and I'm still not 100% on how the Cincinnati specific program works.

However, I think in the broad picture, this will be good for Cincinnati. I think the first time around we'll all be confused and there will be some bumps on the road, but I definitely definitely believe that we can step up to the challenge (I'm tired of dumbing stuff down for people instead of asking people to smarten up).

Besides, there are some dire issues of political access that need to be addressed in the city, and I think this is a step in the right direction.

GAY STUFF: BLOGGING: Write to Marry Day, 10/29

Today is Write to Marry Day for bloggers across the country!!!! (Thanks to JereKeys for reminding me, and thanks to Pam's House Blend for organizing this, and don't forget to check out my previous posting on the issues.)

Now, I'm not one for marriage. It doesn't fit within my personal ideals of life. In fact, I'm kinda centrally anti-marriage as a heteronormative institution that is based on undermining women and should be destroyed from the get-go, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't allow people to shackle themselves if they want.

I kid, but only a little.

Seriously, marriage isn't my thing. Hell, monogamy isn't my think. Hell, dating isn't even my thing. That doesn't mean it isn't other people's. . . and the ongoing laws making the practice of same-sex illegal are nothing more than bigoted religious crap with no basis in reality except for the twisted nightmares of the far right.

And, in the end, I'm far more anti-right wing than anti-marriage.

I don't think this is going to make the "best of the web 2008" awards anytime soon :-).

There's some crazy stuff on YouTube about Prop 8 in California. First, one from the crazies, one of the sickest videos I have ever seen:



And then one from the good guys:



I love Dave. :-)

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: From Equality Cincinnati

Equality Cincinnati has released its endorsements a few days ago (thanks to Rainbow Cincinnati).

President/Vice President - Barack Obama/Joe Biden
U.S. Representative, 3rd District of Ohio - Jane Mitakides
U.S. Representative, 2nd District of Ohio - Victoria Wulsin
Ohio State Representative, 28th District - Connie Pillich
Ohio State Representative, 31st District - Denise Driehaus
Ohio State Representative, 33rd District - Tyrone Yates
Hamilton County Commissioner - Todd Portune & Chris Dole
Ohio Supreme Court - Peter Sikora
Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas - Jody Luebbers & Norma J.H. Davis

Interesting, neither the Bill Seitz/Dan McCarthy nor the Chabot Driehaus race is on there. Strange. 

I wish I could, you know, confirm the information with their website... but it hasn't been updated since 2007.

Such is the state of GLBT Politics in Cincinnati..

PS And despite the woman empowing article Campbell Brown wrote on CNN.com about embracing your inner diva to Sarah Palin, don't let her recent desire to be a diva -- which I fully support -- distract you from the fact that she's still a rancid bitch.

PPS Make sure you follow the latest early voting statistics. My interest and curiosity, of course, will be the 33% of votes already cast in places like Georgia and Florida...

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: Barack Obama

I've added him to my endorsement list. If you are desperate and love to know why, check out this column over here that was posted way back in August.

Another big "duh."

If you hadn't figured it out by now that that's whom I support... well...

...you might just be a McPalin supporter.

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: Amendments not in Ohio

Arizona... *NO* on Proposition 102



In 2006, Arizona became the first state in the union to defeat a Defense of Marriage Act by popular vote. Not happy with their loss, anti-marriage Arizonans put it back on the ballot this year. I mean, really, are they going to do this in 2010, as well, if they lose. Anyways, polls are close again, so go out and vote no again. It doesn't even legalize gay marriage. It only blocks putting the definition of marriage as "one man and one woman" into the state constitution.

Vote no, and let's end this silly cycle. Contribute here.

California... *NO* on Proposition 8


California's Supreme Court has said gay marriage must happen in the state. The State Assembly voted for gay marriage, to be veto'd by the Governator, Arnold. Now that marriage is happening, opponents are taking it back to the ballot. A yes vote would eliminate new gay marriages in the state of California. A no vote would allow them to continue, though there is a legal argument that those that have all ready occured would still go through..

Vote no. Contribute here.

Florida... *NO* on Amendment 2

Also a gay marriage amendment, doing much the same as in every other state. Blah, blah, blah. Defining marriage as one man, one woman, not allowing other unions to be recognized. Aren't they aware of full faith and credit clause, and that the minute it gets to the Supreme Court all these little things are goners? Apparently not.

Vote no. Contribute here. Or here.

At least there are only 3 this year, as opposed to 11 in 2004.

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT *YES* ON ISSUES 1 & 3

These are almost no-brainers...

Issue 1 -- Moves the required petition filing date up from 90-days before the election to 125-days. Why does this matter? Because the current 90 day requirement doesn't give enough time for signatures to be validated and the issue to be "vetted" before the ballots are printed. So, like last year, we're going to have another Issue -- issue 4, I believe? -- that was withdrawn after the ballots were printed. There's a little rumbling that it will make things more difficult for people to get issues on the ballot. However, you should be planning more than 4-months out if you are really impassioned about an issue.

Issue 3 -- Simply allows citizens the right to "reasonable use" of water on their property. That's it, in a nutshell. It's about protecting people's property rights. I get the impression there was a specific incident that spurred this, but I don't think it's silly or egregious. What's on your property is on your property, though I imagine it won't be long before we get the legal question: what is reasonable use.

That's all for this evening, and pretty much all the issues.

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: *YES* on Issue 5

This is probably one of the more pressing issues on our ballot this time around, excepting the actual representative elections.

Issue 5 is a vote to maintain reforms put into place by the Ohio Legislature to reduce the lending abilities by so-called payday lenders. Currently, payday lenders can charge up to 391% interest on these loands which, yes, over two weeks would only be $15 on a $100 loan. However, the cycle that is created for predominantly low-income persons just trying to make ends meet is destructive and does not help the current credit crisis. For my original post on the issue, go here.

I have friends stuck in this mess (as shown by the fun little cartoon below), and it's rough and it's difficult to get out of. Yea, there's an argument to be made that people should be responsible for their own money and their own financial decisions.

Not to be snarky, but we've seen where that has gotten us, haven't we?


Language of issue 5.
Arguments for it.
Yes on Issue 5 Campaign.

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: *YES* on Issue 2

This is really not me putting myself out there, as it seems to be in the support of the majority of people.

Issue 2 allows the state of Ohio to borrow $400 million for the preservation and revitalization of green spaces in Ohio's dying and industrializing blighted cities. Although there is an argument to be made that that's a lot of money to spend on "greening" our towns -- especially coming from Cincinnati which has a really extensive park system and a lot of wonderful natural aspects to it -- it would help give a certain je ne sais quoi to our downtowns and our urban spaces. And, god knows, there's a lot of redevelopment needed and we need to support that in a healthy manner... and, really, how many times have you found yourself complaining about the quality of Ohio's drinking water?

It's good for Ohio, it's better for all of us.

So, this is a YES to Issue 2. (Check out CleanOhio.org, the ballot measure website)

It has the backing of The News Leader (from big city source Macedonia, OH), The Cleveland Plain Dealer, The Lantern (of OSU) and Ohio.com (a site from the Akron Beacon Journal).

Arguments for.
Arguments against.
(Both from the Secretary of State)

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: *YES* ON 6

This is the most hotly debated constitutional amendment in the state, and there are some interesting arguments either way and I'm not fully convinced on my own position here, but I'm goign to say this:

Why? Not because this particular casino is the best thing in the world. In fact, I would argue it's probably not. The amendment is written strangely and, even though I'm no legal scholar, I can definitely see the argument that it's possible, in the future, the taxes could be lowered to zero. But make sure you read exactly what is being said: it could be lowered, and it's possible.

Not that it is. 

Here's my point: how many times has Ohio been given the opportunity to move forward? We've said no to slot machines before -- for the love of god -- and we've said no to public transportation -- which is silly, now -- and we've said no to gay marriage (and probably would have said no to equal rights had it come to the ballot in 2006). We keep saying no on simply going forward with our lives.

Rather, we want to wait to be the final state in the country to do anything. I think this is a chance we should take as a state. I think the huge successes of the out of state casinos should be used as a model of how beneficial this could be. After all, what does it say that Argosy is running the No on 6 campaign? Says to me that they are scared that people from Ohio will stay in Ohio. 

Both sides are funded by rich businessmen. Both sides are trying to get your money one way or another.

To my mind, I would rather the money stay in Ohio. Even if the taxes go down later (which would mean more casino's have opened, which means more money, btw), there are still jobs to consider, and lets talk about peripheral businesses. Gas stations, what? Restaurants? Hotels? Other entertainment venues??? 

If you are so hot on economic development, this is what we call a tax break to spur development, and it's crazy that we should be opposing it just because maybe sometime in the future there may be fewer taxes generated. That's not an argument, that's a scare tactic. Even for the first year, we could see upwards of $800million or more raised from people doing nothing more than simply throwing cash at a machine. We've raised money in more complicated manners in the past.

Let's stop fighitng it, and let's grow up, Ohio. 

Yes on 6. 

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: Daniel McCarthy for State Senate, 8th District

I'm endorsing Daniel McCarthy for the State Senate, 8th District...

I know nothing about him, except that he's really good looking. (Please, can I interview you??? LOL)

HOWEVER, he's running against my arch-nemesis: Bill Seitz, who wrote the Defense of Marriage Act for Ohio. And anything is better than that nincompoop Seitz.

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: Vic Wulsin for OH-2

Second endorsement...



QueerCincinnati.com is throwing its hat behind Dr. Victoria Wulsin for OH-2, even though I can't vote for her :-).

Why? Because she knows what the hell is up with our issues. Jean Schmidt has repeatedly proven that she has no idea what the world is about, and she's bad on a lot of the issues that we care about.

It would be easy for people to say "oh, you like her because she's a Dem and they told you to like her." Granted, that's true. And, granted, she's been marked as part of the DCCC's red-to-blue program, but let me get a little bit of information out there: before she became political, Wulsin was active in Cincinnati's HIV/AIDS prevention community. She used to sit on the Cincinnati Regional Advisory Group, a small meeting of local prevention providers (ranging from the insane 4CHARIS/SARA-IRP faithbased organization to STOP AIDS to the UC Early Intervention Program to Planned Parenthood). Also, granted, a lot of people who sat on that crew thought she was a little outspoken.

But, really, I'd rather have a loud, proud, in-charge woman who is outspoken on the right things than Jean Schmidt, who is a loud, proud idiot with nothing but her own selfish interests at heart.

I'm all for Vic. I've met her personally and I know she's good with us.

How many people can honestly say they know Jean Schmidt?

PS On the whole malariotherapy thing -- first off, she didn't do any experiments; her involvement seems to be limited to reviewing the information. Also, in a world where we have no way to cure HIV/AIDS, isn't it important that we at least look at the evidence? Malariotherapy was proven bunk, but so have a lot of things in the HIV/AIDS crisis -- are you going to hold everybody accountable just because something they looked into, either professionally or on the side, was proven wrong? Really.

ELECTION 2008: ENDORSEMENT: Steve Driehaus for OH-1

This is the first of many upcoming endorsements...

In OH-1 -- true, my voting district, I am endorsing Steve Driehaus over Rep. Chabot. We need more compassionate leadership in Cincinnati, and we need someone who has represented us so well in the statehouse to take that same leadership to DC.

And it's nice that he's ahead in the polls.

Granted, he's not made a lot of statements about gay issues; there aren't many in our area. However, I have been in contact with them, and Steve (via Joe Wessels) was "excited" to not just answer questions from QueerCincinnati.com ... but actually stated they'd rather me sit down with them. IE: he is willing to talk about it, and he's not afraid of what I'm going to ask. The interview is on hold as it was scheduled around the same time as the wind storm and then Steve's father dying. So... yea, more important things came up, but I'm not the only local blogger who was slated to chat that was not able to around the same time.

Besides, Driehaus' camp contacted me; has anyone heard from Chabot???

Kids, October is big month. Aside from the LGBT History, you will be seeing more and more election updates. After all, it is less than a month away. For a look at all the issues that are going on the ballot next month for all of Hamilton County, check this PDF from the BoE.