steve-o
Introduction To The House of Carr
Introduction To The House of Carr

Current Events

,

Speaking Of Cars . . .

,

I really don't want to talk about the mistake the governor of New York made, but one thing must be noted. On tonight's Daily Show they showed the prices said escort service charged to "rent a friend" for a day. It ranged anywhere from $10,000 to $30,000.

Seriously.

You could buy a car for that. Or a lot of other stuff. Or give the money to charity.

And you think gas prices are high.

Don't make me close the comments on this one . . .

,

To the Needy, Not the Greedy

,

News hit this last weekend that the Kroger in Walnut Hills could be closing by the end of the year. This could be devastating to much of the community as it is the only major grocery store between Clifton and Hyde Park. There are many in our community who do not have cars and would have to hop on a bus in order to get groceries. After chewing on this for a few days, I have some observations to share. Observation 1: I've only been shopping at that Kroger a few times, and never for more that a couple items [we do our regular grocery shopping at the Biggs in Hyde Park]. We have chosen not to shop at our local Kroger. In my opinion, the Walnut Hills location is their worst store in the tri-state area. The food is never as fresh and the prices are higher than other stores. While all around the city [including Price Hill and Over-the-Rhine] they've attempted to fix up their stores, this location remains virtually untouched for twenty years. It is my understanding is that the Kroger Co. had no desire for a Walnut Hills location but was "guilted" into it in the early 1980's.

Observation 2: Kroger complains that the Walnut Hills location struggles to turn a profit. One of the reasons they cite is current sales. I find this interesting in light of the influx of people moving into the area. I'm convinced that there are more people living in the community than there were even five years ago, and people with higher incomes. You have to wonder, with more people moving in, why Kroger would now decide to close that store. It seems they could be poised to make even more profits. Which brings me to . . .

Observation 3: Another reason for shutting down the store is that Kroger does not own the Walnut Hills building. The Enquirer article linked above quotes one Kroger executive saying, "Because we lease the building and also pay rent on the land, our monthly rent in Walnut Hills is significantly higher than in similar-size stores in comparable locations." This is the aspect that is stressed the most in the article, with Kroger saying a lease renegotiation is critical to them staying in the neighborhood.

All this leads me to my conclusions:

Conclusion 1: Kroger understands how important this store is to the community. In a few weeks the community council will meet again and I'm sure this issue will be at the top of the agenda. I've already heard that some local churches might get involved to advocate Kroger staying. Voices will be raised, public officials will be contacted, and the company will answer back: talk to our landlord about lowering rent and we'll consider it.

Conclusion 2: That landlord, the suburban Cincinnati-based Shawnee Investments [about whom I could find nothing online] has no huge stake in the neighborhood and doesn't need Kroger as a tenant. If they left, there would probably be someone else who would want that space/land. I would think someone would be interested in buying a good chunk of Peebles' Corner to develop it. Basically, the land is probably worth more than the rent they get from Kroger anyway. So even if it closed, Shawnee Investments would be fine. So I finally arrive at . . .

Ultimate Conclusion: Kroger is actually making a power play for the city to step up and give them funds for them to maintain the Walnut Hills location. Whether it means a remodeling or just a dirt cheap lease, they're going to work the system for all it's worth. They'll watch local community leaders work their butts off to try to get Kroger a better deal and they'll reap the rewards. And they'll do their best to avoid negative PR by saying they couldn't afford it.*

Now I'm not saying this is anti-American. Kroger is a business and they have an obligation to shareholders to be profitable. But I am saying that it's rather sleazy trying to use a community in this way. The Greater Cincinnati area helped make Kroger what it is. Barney Kroger recognized this and invested his earned wealth back into this city. But now the corporation is no longer a family/local company and will do whatever it takes to get whatever they want [five years ago they threatened to leave the city if they didn't finance their downtown parking garage]. And if they get what they want here, it will be tax-payers who pay for it.

And using a bunch of people who really can't afford to shop anywhere else as bargaining chips is B.S.

So we'll monitor the situation and see what we can do to get involved. We'll even contemplate if it would be appropriate for Echo to get involved. I say "contemplate" because it's not a given; it's an ethical minefield, really. Do you promote/encourage corporate greed to help your community? Even though this is a serious situation, Walnut Hills will survive. But it would severely alter the community's make-up, perhaps driving even more lower-class folk away.

And that, by the way, is yet another reason I shop at Biggs.

*Kroger stock today is going for about $26 a share. That's almost double of what it was five years ago, the results of steady improvement. So the company is still definitely making money.

Border War

In my rankings of which states are the most ridiculous, I always placed Tennessee higher than Georgia. I might have to readjust those rankings and apologize to the Volunteer State.

The city of Atlanta [located in Georgia, in case you were wondering], an industry leader at how to allow uncontrolled sprawl, is running out of water. They've been looking at options for how to prevent this from happening in the future and came to a decision:

Invade Tennessee.

Apparently an erroneous survey completed in 1818 placed the Georgia/Tennessee border one mile south of where it should have been. And since recovering that land would give them access to the water of the Tennessee River, the state legislature of Georgia voted for an official survey study so they can eventually take the land back. And just so you understand their seriousness, both houses passed the resolution unanimously.

Never mind the fact that the original surveyor of the land, one James Camak, a professor at the University of Georgia, was conducting the survey with poor equipment. He'd asked the state's governor for some more sophisticated equipment so he could be as accurate as possible but he was refused. So because Georgia was cheap 200 years ago, Camak's border was off and it has remained until today. Not quite sure I feel too sympathetic for Georgia here.

And it should be noted that moving the border north would bring parts of the city of Chattanooga into Georgia, and parts of the city of Memphis into Mississippi. So it's not like reclaiming this land would only affect a few people. It would, likely, cost hundreds of millions of dollars to sort everything out. 

So instead of admitting years of mismanagement in permitting massive sprawl, or coming up with practical solutions of how to deal with water crisis, Georgia's solution is to reclaim land they never wanted in the first place?

Nice job, Georgia politicians. Way to increase our faith in politics.

And I'm not quite sure I'd want to invade Tennessee anytime soon, either. They take the second amendment pretty seriously down there.

,

See Dead People

,

When a local news issue has ethical and religious undertones, I feel obligated to chime in. There's a new exhibit at the Cincinnati Museum Center called Bodies. It's a display of human cadavers and organs from unclaimed bodies in China. It opens today and will make a seven month run here.

It's created a little stir here locally, as the Archbishop forbade Catholic schools to use it for field trips and a few people even protested the exhibit's arrival. For Archbishop Pilarczyk, it's an issue of human dignity, although he didn't demand that Catholics avoid it altogether. For others, it's about human rights, as exhibitors aren't sure whether or not the bodies were Chinese political prisoners, as the nation is notorious for violating human rights issues.

So how do people of faith deal with this exhibit?

First, we need to recognize that this isn't a Biblical issue; there is nothing explicitly "un-Christian" going on here. So now we have to approach it as a purely ethical decision that needs to be explored.

I will respectfully disagree with the Archbishop that this is an issue of human dignity. We live in the most sophisticated societies in world history. I know people my age and older who have never actually seen a dead body. I'm not sure that would have been possible in societies until the last century. And if we are truly concerned about issues of human dignity, I'd suggest that atrocities taking place in third world countries around the world are much more disturbing than this science exhibit. So I'm not buying this as a reason.

I would be more bothered with the possible Chinese human rights violations. I wonder if the Chinese government was able to significantly profit as a result of this exhibit. I'm not sure I want to take their word that these people just "happened to die." But that being said, why couldn't a similar bodies exhibit be created out of American cadavers? I would suspect that a lot of people would volunteer to let their innards tour the country after they die. I do think there's something to knowing the legitimacy of the bodies in the exhibit.

That said, I can't argue that there's an ethical issue present here. So if you want to, go see it. I here that it's fascinating. Not quite sure I'll go, however, because I'm a cheap skate and can see similar stuff on the Discovery Channel.

Messed Up

Regular blogging will return soon, but this story is so ridiculous that I felt obligated to link to it now. In an effort to win some Hannah Montana tickets in a contest, a mother helped her six-year old daughter write an essay that began, "My daddy died this year in Iraq." Problem: her dad did not die in Iraq this year. 

The mother responded with the classic, "We did the essay and that's what we did to win . . . we did whatever we could do to win."

Well, then, I guess it's OK.

With mommy displaying such fine morals, I'm sure the daughter will turn out just fine.

Merry Christmas

I'm not sure Cops has filmed in Lewiston, Idaho, but there's probably not much to see there, especially when crimes are solved by reading the paper. Recently a wallet-snatcher might have avoided getting arrested, if he wasn't featured on the front page of the local newspaper. Michael Millhouse was painting a "Merry Christmas" sign and was lucky enough to get his picture taken for the paper. But Millhouse had also stolen a wallet and was caught on a surveillance camera. The pictures appeared right next to each other on the front page of the paper. Click here for a PDF version of the paper. 

If convicted, the guy could get five years in prison. Brilliant.

,

Announcements

,

Yes, a terrible way to die. I've had a couple busy days but I wanted to note:

1) I've had some email issues, so if I haven't gotten back to you, it might be because of that.

2) I have some new photos up at Flickr, including a Kaelyn Christmas shoot, shots from Balluminaria [you'll have to see for yourself], as well as a couple of pics of my newest nephew Jack. Wild, wacky stuff.

3) I should have another announcement later tonight [no, Kelly isn't pregnant] that could be cool. You'll have to check back to find out if the suspense was worth it.

,

The Times, They Are A-Changing

,

Oral Roberts University is reeling from the mess made by President Richard Roberts [son of Oral] who resigned this past weekend. It's interesting that the President was done in by his own faculty and staff who could no longer ignore his misuse of school resources. It was a big step for these people to stand up to Roberts, especially considering his name, as well as his role as a spiritual leader. Throughout the past years of American evangelical scandal [especially those within the Pentecostal realm] you would usually see these leaders protected by his underlings. Perhaps the Ted Haggard situation taught people that institutions could survive these scandals if they were handled quickly and truthfully.

The real reason I note this situation is an interesting quote in this article concerning the way the ORU situation was handled by those within. To me it says a lot about the current state of American Christianity:

"'There was a time when the wagons would circle and we'd protect our own,' said the Rev. Carlton Pearson, a former member of the ORU board of regents who is now a United Church of Christ minister. 'But we don't know what our own is anymore. People are asking questions and questioning answers, and we're not used to it.'"

I guess it's true: we don't know what 'our own' is anymore. So maybe this reinforces the idea that we have entered an age where it no longer matters what your family lineage is, or what kind of title you wear, or what denominational name is attached to your church as those are no longer acceptable litmus tests for one's beliefs. We can no longer place our trust in the words themselves. 'Christian' is now an incredibly broad term that a few billion people claim, let alone all the other ones that have now become indecipherable [and I'm not convinced that substituting "Christ follower" for "Christian" really makes any difference]. This is one of the many reasons I abhor vision statements: just because I name it doesn't make it true.

In the end, it comes down to what you embody as an individual or an organization; i.e, you are what you are. Words will only get you so far.

Even Badder Dog

Haven't really kept up on all the latest Dog the Bounty Hunter screw-up news but Kelly and I decided to listen to his racist rant on YouTube [listening to YouTube?]. Stick a fork in his career; he's done. There's no recovery from that tirade. This got me thinking of a church in our brotherhood that brought in Dog on a Sunday morning to get people to visit. I'm sure it seemed like a good idea at the time, but does allowing a celeb in the pulpit prove as helpful when they go off the deep end?

Hey, there are no safe bets. Any minister can have a moral failure and that can definitely taint a church. But bringing in a high profile celebrity/politician just to get butts in the seats can do more harm than good.

,

One Flew Over The Atheist's Nest

,

From the New York Times: Antony Flew, a retired Oxford educated atheist, is now coming out in his old age as a believer in a higher power. Evangelicals shouldn't get too excited as he doesn't claim to believe in Christianity, but I do find it fascinating that a person can totally deviate from one's life beliefs like this. He has a book due out soon. Should be an interesting read.

,

Do As I Say

,

The crazy Pat Robertson news of the day should be concerning the news that China will ban Bibles from the Olympic Village for next year's games. Doesn't this seem perfectly tailored PR story where he can decry the adverse influences of the godless Chinese government? Instead, crazy Uncle Pat comes out and endorses Rudy Giuliani, a man with whom he has major philosophical/theological differences, for President. Basically, Robertson defends this decision because he sees Rudy as someone who "can win the general election.”

He picked the wrong horse. He should have endorsed Hillary. Here's how I arrive at this conclusion:

1) Basically, the way I read it, Pat picked Rudy because he thinks he can win the Presidency. So instead of holding to his (shaky) beliefs, he kicks them to the curb and goes for the "W." Well if that's how he chooses his endorsement, why not go all the way and pick the HRC?

2) I'm pretty confident in saying that the Robertson endorsement isn't what it once was, if it ever really was anything in the first place. I'll go even further and say that Rudy is actually worse off having Pat back him [no one really seeks out that Ted Kaczynski endorsement, do they?]. If Uncle Pat really wants the Republicans to win, he would've been better served to back Hillary.

In short, Robertson Endorsement = Black Death.

This ensures Rudy will not win in 2008.

,

Issue 27

,

If you're not interested in Cincinnati news, this probably isn't the post for you. I'm fascinated with politics but am leery to comment about specific voting issues because of my role in a local congregation. We have Democrats and Republicans in our church, in addition to independents and non-voters and I think you could make a Biblical case for any of these perspectives [of course, you could probably make defend communism Biblically too, so what does it prove?]. So while I love to watch the American political process play out, I don't want to come out with official endorsements.

That said, I think things change a little bit when it comes to local politics. Usually there are no overlying Christian ethical issues at stake [ex: abortion] so it mostly boils down to opinion/preference. So the following is by no means an endorsement, but food for thought as election day nears.

The biggest issue facing the Cincinnati Metro area this November is Issue 27, a proposed "jail tax." Passage of this issue would raise the Hamilton County sales tax from 6.5% to 7% for eight years, reducing to 6.75% for the next seven years after that. The tax increase is supposed to raise $736million. A similar tax was voted down last year by county voters because the language was suspect [nowhere was the construction of a new jail even mentioned]. The county commissioners decided to overstep the voters and enacted the tax anyway, but a group of citizens petitioned to get the issue on the ballot for approval again this fall.

Support of this issue is pretty popular around here, because everyone wants to fight crime. The Hamilton County Sheriff, a long-time local politician with a solid base of supporters, has warned the public that voting down this referendum would put jailed criminals back on the streets. Somehow, in addition to their release, the Sheriff claims a slew of assault rifles would be back on the streets as well [which still confuses me: do they give guns to them when they leave the jail?]. The message coming across is simple: unless you want to see Snake Plissken roaming the streets of Cincy, pass this levy.

Now if it was totally necessary, I would vote for a jail without hesitation. But there are issues surrounding this issue that are indeed cloudy and need to be explored. Among them are . . .

  • The city rents out jailspace to the US Government for their criminals, something that the county is not required to do. There is absolutely no benefit for the county for this except a stipend that is cheaper than what the county currently rents beds for from neighboring counties [so taxpayers lose money on the deal] and favors which the general public would never see anyway. So instead of looking out for the good of the local crime situation, the county loses jail space to the federal government who is responsible for that issue.
  • We are told that the condition of the Queensgate jail is deteriorating to the point that it's unsafe. I've been all over this city and have seen some shoddy construction and this jail is in much better shape than people realize; the Queensgate jail has passed all building inspections and is in no danger of collapse. Interestingly enough, the sheriff has refused local media the opportunity to tour the structure with photographers to confirm this claim. So follow this reasoning: the jail is collapsing because we say it is. Trust us. Give us money.
  • PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF THE COUNTY COURT SYSTEM. Only a very small percentage of criminals are there for long term periods of time. The purpose of the jail is to hold criminals until trial and sentencing until they are sentenced to a state facility. The biggest drain on housing is people forced to wait overnights/weekends to see a judge. The logical solution for this would be to institute a night court [remember Bull?] to process these claims immediately. This would be an investment but would still be more cost effective than this levy.
  • Even worst case scenario, the people being "released early" are not dangerous criminals. They are people who are charged with low-grade misdemeanors such as public intoxication. These people still have their day in court.

You just have to ask yourself: is it worth three-quarters of A BILLION DOLLARS without making every effort to try other alternatives? But that was never investigated. Ironic that Republicans are usually known for lamenting the tax-and-spend Democrats but in this case a Republican has led the charge, with some Democrats supporting and others criticizing. This issue supersedes party affiliations. But, most importantly, proponents have the big money backing to make it work. And for that reason it will probably pass. Could you imagine if someone wanted to take that money and invest it into community education/jobs programs, into fighting the our horrendous infant mortality rate, or into affordable housing for the poor? It would be called "a handout" and quickly defeated.

But these are some of the root issues surrounding the crime problem in this county.

Instead: build bigger jails.

It might make sense to you, but it doesn't to me.

Still Holding Strong

It was almost a year ago that I first predicted a Barack Obama presidency. I'm still going with that pick, even though the polls seem to contradict this prediction. Honestly, these early polls don't mean as much as people think. Iowa and New Hampshire can totally alter the face of the election [see Howard Dean]. And you never know what will surface in the middle of the campaign [see Gary Hart].

Although a Clinton/Giuliani match-up seems more inevitable than ever, I sincerely doubt we will see one or both of them come out of the conventions with their party's nominations.

Understand that I'm not supporting Barack, but merely suggesting he'll win this thing.

Inked

"Almost half of all Americans under 30 have one, and 40 percent of adults 26 to 40 have a tattoo." That and more in this article [and no, I'm not a regular CBN reader].

I swear I got mine just as it started getting cool [spring of 1995]. I thought I would be different. Now I'm normal. I still want another one, just not sure what I'd get.

True story: I hid it from my mother the entire summer. When she saw it for the first time, she got a washcloth and tried to rub it off.

About Global Warming

Is global warming real? Yes. Is it the most important problem our world faces? Not by a long-shot. If you're looking for an informative article about finding some middle ground on this issue, here it is.

Interesting tidbits from the article:

  • Environmentalists lament the rising temperatures in Greenland when, in reality, the temps in 1941 were warmer there than it is today.
  • As a result of global warming oceanic water levels could rise between 6 inches and two feet in the next century. It actually rose a foot in the past 150 years. Ironically, relatively no land was lost to the ocean as people figured out how to construct barriers to prevent land loss.
  • While rising temperatures will cause 400,000 more heat-related deaths each year, the lack of extreme cold spells will save 1.8 million lives.
  • One of the battle cries of the environmental lobby is "save the polar bears." Enacting suggested environment changes would save one additional polar bear every year at a cost of billions, while hunters kill 300-500 bears every year. Wouldn't it be easier to outlaw polar bear hunting?

Earth worship has been around since the beginning of time. I am just continually amazed that we now twist use scientific data to perpetuate it.