Notes from Ground Level

Where has he been?

2005-01-29T09:54:00.000-08:00

The Cincinnati Enquirer opines today regarding Magistrate Judge Merz's recommendation that the City materially breached the collaborative agreement and should be put under court order:

Streicher is now on notice that their cooperation in this effort is not optional. For that reason we believe Dlott should not impose the court order.

What? Streicher didn't know that till now?

Junior welterweight news

2004-12-17T09:53:00.000-08:00

Those of you who are boxing fans might be interested to read this article, which suggests that a fight between undisputed junior welterweight champion Kostya Tszyu and undefeated contender Ricky Hatton is very close to being finalized. I think this is one of the best matches that could be made at 140, and probably one of the best in boxing.

p.s. Ha! Didn't think I was posting anything here anymore, did you? Well, I initially put this up at the Cincinnati Group, but then switched it over here because of my guess that a boxing post would be too far afield for the typical CG content (varied as it is).

The Cincinnati Group

2004-08-07T09:53:00.000-07:00

So I think that I'll be posting primarily at this new group blog and am not sure how much content I'll put up on this site for the time being.

"I'm George W. Bush, and I approved this message. In fact, I think it is awesome."

2004-08-03T09:52:00.000-07:00

I know that this Will-Ferrell-as-W ad has been flying all over the internet, but not everyone has seen it.

What's Ashcroft telling Bush?

2004-08-01T09:52:00.000-07:00

At a campaign stop yesterday in eastern Ohio, President Bush said this to the crowd:

"We stand for the Second Amendment, which gives every American the individual right to bear arms," he said.

"I've got a record on that issue. It stands in stark contrast to my opponent."

The right-wing grass roots are very fond of proclaiming that the Second Amendment "gives every American the individual right to bear arms," but it's flabbergasting to hear it from the president himself because it does not reflect the law. To illustrate with an example from the other end of the political spectrum, imagine if the president said: "We stand for the Fourteenth Amendment, which prohibits an employer from firing anyone on the basis of the employee's sexual preference." Now, maybe you think that the Constitution should be read this way, but that's simply not the dominant way that courts read it.

Is Bush just getting bad advice about what the law is, or is he willfully telling constituents something that wouldn't hold up in court? I find either possibility extremely troubling.

Factual question on a national policy issue

2004-07-29T09:51:00.000-07:00

I'm having a hard time figuring out where I should stand on so-called "outsourcing" and other trade issues. Here's my question: is there any data that's easily accessible and reliable that documents (1) the trade agreements to which the United States is currently a party and (2) the extent to which those agreements are currently being enforced?

I'm no economist, but my general understanding is that the promotion of trade and the reduction of trade barriers is good for everyone involved, so treaties that accomplish these things seem to make sense in theory. But how are they enforced in fact?

So now direct appeals are discretionary? Huh?

2004-07-28T09:45:00.000-07:00

The first two paragraphs of Dan Horn's article in today's Cincinnati Enquirer are as follows:

A convicted drug dealer from Northern Kentucky will try next month to change how federal judges sentence criminals to prison.

Robert Koch, who is serving a 20-year sentence on drug and firearm charges, won the chance to challenge his sentence Tuesday when the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati agreed to hear his case.

This is extremely perplexing. Unlike the Supreme Court, which has discretion to hear or not hear nearly all of the cases that are brought before it, the intermediate federal appellate courts must hear and decide all cases that are properly appealed to them. So I don't know what Horn could be talking about when he says that the Sixth Circuit "agreed to hear" this guy's case, which sounds like a routine criminal appeal. Nor do I have any idea what could have happened Tuesday, since, in the normal course of things, appeals are noticed months in advance of oral argument.

UPDATE: I'm reliably informed that what this story meant to report was that the Sixth Circuit has voted to hear Koch's appeal en banc. That would explain things. It's too bad that wasn't explained at all in the story.