. . . but it's still my city. We had a record number of homicides here last year. The infrastructure for economic growth is severely lacking. The most prominent acreage of Cincinnati real estate [the Banks] is still a barren wasteland. So what is City Council's response: pass a resolution disapproving of President Bush's troop escalation in Iraq.
Brilliant.
In case you are confused, the Constitution has not been rewritten giving Cincinnati's city council the power to determine national policy.
There are some who say that there is an "interconnectedness of American society" that requires local politics to influence the national. If this is the case, then why limit resolutions to the Iraq war? Where are the local municipalities voicing official positions about issues like AIDS in Africa, North Korean nukes, and the invasion of aliens [space, not illegal]? Nowhere to be found. Why? Because it's now sexy to come out and criticize the war. And some in Cincinnati don't want to be left behind.
Sidebar: Let's be honest about Iraq for a second. Ever since the poorly conceived "Mission Accomplished" banner was unfurled on the USS Abraham Lincoln, people have slowly joined the bandwagon against the conflict. It's now uber-chic to bash the war and dropping the Vietnam card is the new red ribbon. But there's a definitive difference between Vietnam and Iraq: a volunteer army. The Vietnam protests were rooted in opposition to the draft. But we forgot that because . . . well . . . we were stoned, young, or unborn then. War is hell. Our generation is finally seeing this firsthand.
But as far as City Council is concerned, this is nothing more than a waste time. It's not like there's anything else out there that our city needs. If you're that interested in Iraq, find a job that affects our international policy. This city's citizens are unimpressed.
***I refer you to an interview with a dissenter on the resolution. Councilman Chris Bortz gives an excellent explanation on why he voted against the resolution.