Tuesday, April 04, 2006 

Why We Fight.

A reminder from NCO:
"Why We Fight" film at Cedar Lee through Thurs., April 6th,

WHY WE FIGHT by Eugene Jarecki

"Jarecki's nimble and brilliant docu-dissection of the
military-industrial complex, unearths the deepest roots of
our scariest political realities. I defy anyone not to be
staggered by it." - Owen Gleiberman, ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY

"A stunning film that lines up the evidence to explain not
only how we got into Iraq, but how corporate forces have
propelled us into wars for the last 50 years."
-Sean P. Means, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE

"An even-handed interrogation of war's financial
implications."
-Chris Vognar, THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS

If you haven't seen WHY WE FIGHT yet, there's still time...

This may be the film that convinces those who have not yet
been convinced and make the turning of the tide complete...

WHY WE FIGHT is showing through this Thursday, April 6,
2006, at the Cedar Lee Theater, 2163 Lee Rd., Cleveland
Heights; showings each day: 2:25pm, 4:50pm, 7:20pm, 9:40pm

WHY WE FIGHT, the new film by Eugene Jarecki which won the
Grand Jury Prize at the 2005 Sundance Film Festival, is an
unflinching look at the anatomy of the American war machine,
weaving unforgettable personal stories with commentary by a
"who's who" of military and beltway insiders. Featuring
John McCain, William Kristol, Chalmers Johnson, Gore Vidal,
Richard Perle and others, WHY WE FIGHT launches a bipartisan
inquiry into the workings of the military industrial complex
and the rise of the American Empire.

Inspired by Dwight Eisenhower's legendary farewell speech
(in which he coined the phrase "military industrial
complex"), filmmaker Jarecki (THE TRIALS OF HENRY KISSINGER)
surveys the scorched landscape of a half-century's military
adventures, asking how - and telling why -=EC a nation of, by,
and for the people has become the savings-and-loan of a
system whose survival depends on a state of constant war.

The film moves beyond the headlines of various American
military operations to the deeper questions of why - why
does America fight? What are the forces - political,
economic, ideological - that drive us to fight against an
ever-changing enemy?

"Frank Capra made a series of films during World War II
called WHY WE FIGHT that explored America=92=C4=F4s reasons for
entering the war," Jarecki notes. "Today, with our troops
engaged in Iraq and elsewhere for reasons far less clear, I
think it's crucial to ask the questions: "Why are we doing
what we are doing? What is it doing to others? And what is
it doing to us?"

Visit www.whywefight.com for more details on the film,
trialers, video clips, etc.

This film should be mandatory viewing for everyone.


Tags:, , ,

Monday, April 03, 2006 

Who do the Independents like? Regionalism, CrossOver Appeal, Brown, Dewine and more!

The Suffolk Poll had the questions broken down into numerous formats. Some of these were how a respondant answered according to thier party affliations, income, location, age, sex, ect, ect - You get the picture.

Anyways - here is how the Independents answered the favorability questions (Is your opinion of candidate X generally favorable or generally unfavorable?):

Who do the Independents like?
Crossover appeal in paranthesis

Mike DeWine - 53% Favorable with I’s (34% with D’s)
Jim Petro – 38% Favorable with I’s (21% with D’s)
Ken Blackwell - 33% Favorable with I’s (17% with D’s)
Ted Strickland 33% Favorable with I’s (31% with R’s)
Sherrod Brown – 29% Favorable with I’s (29% with R’s )
Paul Hackett – 12% Favorable with I’s (17% with R’s)

Not very surprising. The Republicans certainly have an edge with Independents. But as far as crossover - DeWine, Strickland and Brown all had more crossover appeal than I expected them to have, especially DeWine. Brown had a higher crossover number than Petro, Blackwell or Hackett. It seems important to point out that respondants did not have to choose one candidate over another. So, in primary races the respondant could have answered "favorable" to all candidates.

Who do the Independents dislike?
Dislike within own party in paranthesis

Ken Blackwell - 31% Unfavorable with I's (21% with R's)
Jim Petro – 26% Unfavorable with I's (20% with R’s)
Mike Dewine - 24% Unfavorable with I's (17% with R)
Sherrod Brown – 14% Unfavorable with I's (16% with D’s)
Paul Hackett – 9% Unfavorable with I's (12% with D’s)
Ted Strickland - 7% Unfavorable with I's (7% with D’s)

Ted Strickland looks really great here. Brown seems to fair a little better than DeWine. Funny how the Republicans were both the most "Highly Favorable" and the most "Highly Unfavorable" with I's. As far as inside party discontent, all of the Republicans had more "unfavorable" marks from within thier own party than the Democratic candidates.

This Favorability question in the Suffolk Poll could have been answered 4 ways - Favorable, Unfavorable, Undecided and Do Not Know" the candidate. Between 15 and 20% of respondants answered "Undecided" for all of the candidates. Who they answered "Do Not Know" the candidate for - surprised me a little, at least, the region where it was coming from.

Who Didn’t Anybody Know?
55% Didn’t even know who Paul Hackett was. (It broke down 47%D, 57% both R &I)

I expected Mr. Hackett to be less known than other candidates since he hasn't really run or held statewide office before but - this number was much more than I expected. Of the 55% who did not know who Paul Hackett was - by far the highest concentration was the Cincinnati/Dayton region! How could respondants in the Cincinnati/Dayton region not know who Paul Hackett was? Isn't that where he ran? This seems weird to me. I had really expected Paul Hackett to be doing better here. In contrast, only 9% did not know who DeWine was. This poll was taken in March, right after Hackett dropped out of the race. ( Hackett was getting a lot of press and had been in the blogosphere nonstop since the special election.) I just assumed, he would be better known than that. I guess, I am a little isolated in my own blog world.

Some other things that I didn't expect from the Hackett question were that NE Ohio gave him the highest favorablity marks. Toledo and the NW portion of the state knew him the most but were also the most undecided about him. Also, respondants whom stated they were voting for Sherrod Brown gave Paul Hackett the most favorability marks.

57% of the Suffolk Poll was comprised of people who proclaimed themselves as Unenrolled in a party, Independant or Undeclared. The rest of the respondants were pretty equally D's and R's.

Another shocking revelation:
Jim Petro was the candidate most popular with the ladies :-) Yikes!

Sometimes, I get a little caught up in internet and blog politics and I forget the rest of the world is set at a different pace. This poll offered me a little insight on the true make up of our state. It also makes me ponder whether political bloggers are trendsetters, running a little ahead of the pack or just isolated in an internet clique. My conclusion so far - a little bit of both.

Tags:, ,

 

Education most important issue to Ohio Republicans according to Poll

I recently went through the Suffolk University Poll on Ohio Politics that was released in early March. The poll was quite extensive with over 210 pages of data and analysis. I was surprised by some of the findings in the Poll including :

Q11(A-F). How important is this issue:
  1. Health care? 90% very important
  2. Education? 89% very important
  3. Terrorism? 73% very important
  4. Ethics in government? 69% very important
  5. Unemployment? 68% very important
  6. Taxes? 64% very important
I would have suspected it to be a little different. Now, if you seperated it by Party affliation it plays out like this:

Q11(A-F). How important is this issue:
  1. Health care? 90% Total 87%R - 95%D -89%I
  2. Education? 89% Total 90%R - 92%D -87%I
  3. Terrorism? 73% Total 87%R - 66%D -71%I
  4. Ethics in government? 69% Total 74%R - 74%D -65%I
  5. Unemployment? 68% Total 50%R - 76%D -70%I
  6. Taxes? 64% Total 69%R - 59%D -64%I
So, the most important issues for all Ohioans regardless of party is Education and Health Care. That sounds pretty progressive to me.

Ted Stricklands Turnaround Ohio plan really focuses alot on Education. It's number one component is "Provide every child a fair start through access to high-quality early care and education". This seems like a solid plan.
Recent findings have found that investing in early-childhood education programs is key to ensuring solid economic growth in a community. With every tax dollar spent on early-childhood development, $17 will be returned to the community through the increased earnings of the child in the future or by eliminating potential spending on special-education and correctional institutions.

The plan also addresses technology in education and increasing enrollment in our higher education programs.

Ken Blackwell offers the 65 cent solution which would put restrictions on how schools could spend money. Schools would be unable to repair buildings, provide busing, provide food service, have support staff or in house nurses and counselors if 65% of the schools funding didn't go to in the classroom activities (which oddly but thankfully included field trips and athletic programs). This initative is popular in conservative circles and has been defeated in many states including Texas.

"There's no guarantee (this proposal) would put more money in classrooms, especially if you leave it to administrators, who're more likely to cut valuable and necessary support services rather than their own salaries," said Ohio Federation of Teachers President Tom Mooney (no relation to Tim Mooney).
The Republican establishment has decided to move this agenda forward, not to help education in Ohio but to obtain "political benefits" according to this memo circulated amoung Republican lawmakers.
The memo, first published by the Austin American-Statesman last month, says the proposal will "create tremendous tension" within state education unions by pitting administrators against teachers and will divert spending on other political goals of the "education establishment."
This seems typical of Ohio Republicans who seem to be more interested in their own futures than the future of our state or our children.

Jim Petro offers only one platform on Education on his "Vision for Ohio" section of his website. This article focuses on his P-16 approach. From what I can tell, this plan would like to create a more centralized governing approach by shifting power to the State Board of Regents away from the independent board of trustees for 2 and 4 year colleges. He is also interested in creating Charter Universities which he feels would shift funding away from state sources. In the end, Mr Petro seems wishy washy even on these vague proposals. His website states that these are "nothing more than ideas" and in the end he fails to commit to our children.

So for being the number one issue to Ohio Republicans - the Republican candidates really come up short on innovative ideas and planning. Mr. Blackwell opts for the plan that will offer him the most "political benefits" and Mr. Petro concedes that he has some ideas but no real plans. That is depressing.

On the other hand, the Strickland/Fisher Turnaround Ohio plan seems to be solid and offers creative approaches backed by research and experience. He has a background in education and was awarded entry into the UofK Education Hall of Fame in 2000. Among the many education laws he helped author are the National Service Act and the Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (NCLB 2001).

If Ohio Republicans truly believe that Education is a very important issue in Ohio - they'll have to look seriously at the Strickland Plan. It offers a proven return on investment minus the risk, politics and big government of the other candidates plans.

Tags:, ,

 

Morning Round Up of Ohio Progressive Blogs (Monday)

The best Progressive Blog diaries this morning with a focus on Ohio State Liberal Blogs.

ClevelandAFLCIO - French Fighting for what Americans Lack
DemocraticVeteran - On or off his meds? Orrin Hatch.
TheChiefSource - Torture, Apocalypse Now and The National Uniformity of Food Act. (The new food act is especially scary, well - they are all scary!)
LICOPAC - Dann v Chandra (One night only at Ohio State!)
StubbornLiberal - The Good, The Bad and the Ugly and When Right Wingers Attack.
LawDork - Finishes a half marathon with his family. Great photo
Openers - Ney one step closer to jail? and Blackwell forgets to pay bill
AStraightShotOfPolitics - The Faces Of Worry And Pain and an Evening's Smorgasboard at Der Dutchman!
PrissyPatriot - Get Outta My Life, George!
PeopleHaveThePower - CoinGate goes Washington.
DispassionateLiberal - Snow And Noe (Speculation on where CoinGate could go) and Immigration Battle - When The Right Fights.
BobNeyWatch - Abramoff free, despite sentence
UAPA - Brown offers criticism of health insurance bill
Pho - Weekly Reader Educational News
AtheistMama - Freethinking Women Jamboree 2


If I am missing your Ohio blog please feel free to email me at cindyREMOVE@urbancode.com. (Delete the word "remove" from the email address)

Thank you.


Tags:, ,

Sunday, April 02, 2006 

Great start to spring (Visiting a red county)

Yesterday, I went out to my folks house. They live in a somewhat "red" county and I usually get slightly disheartened by the number of Pro-Bush bumperstickers. But, this time - something was different. First, on the way out, not a single Bush/Cheney sticker to be seen. Then on the second page of the local paper was DeWines ugly mug grinning at me. What was he grinning about? Why - it was an anti-DeWine ad proclaiming his recent votes on privatizing Social Security. Wow! That was exciting. It was paid for by the local democratic club. So far so good.

Could it stay that way? I went to the post office. Only one person working and they were listening to talk radio, but what was the radio saying? That global warming was something to worry about! Now, I am not sure if that was Progressive Talk or not but - the message seemed right. I'll take it.

We finally drove into the main town and ultimately ended up seeing a few Bush/Cheney stickers (and even a Bob Ney sticker). But there was definately less than usual and we did see a "Proud Democrat" sticker too! My day was topped off by the sighting of a Subodh Chandra sticker. WOW! I feel like the tide may be turning. Now, if someone would get rid of that nasty large Bush/Cheney and Voinovich posters on rt 71, I'll be happy. Although, it might be more poetic to watch them rot.

Tags:, ,

 

Why the Left is Right - Liberal Quotes

Life is a long lesson in humility.
-- James M. Barrie

Whatever a movement to abolish torture will achieve for society, it
is clear what participating in it means for each of us as
individuals. It means above all that our children and grandchildren
will not remember us with shame.
-- Fred Branfman

Unless we look out for everyone, no one is secure.
-- Ronald Aronson

From the book The Best Liberal Quotes Ever - Why the Left is Right.


Tags:, , ,