Sunday, July 12, 2015

Winners and losers in Massachusetts casino plans

The opening of the $250 million Plainridge Park Casino last month wasn’t exactly the grand unveiling Massachusetts gaming backers envisioned more than four years ago.
We’re not being critical of Penn National Gaming’s newest casino. The all-slot machine facility is attached to the Plainridge Park Racecourse, a harness racing track, in Plainville, a town about 35 miles southwest of heavily populated Boston.
The trouble is Plainridge Park — Massachusetts’ first legal gambling hall — will be the commonwealth’s last casino for a few years. Two of the three Las Vegas-style casinos planned for the state won’t open until 2018. The third will take longer.
That leaves Plainridge Park as Massachusetts’ only game.
Janney Montgomery Scott gaming analyst Brian McGill told investors the delays “keep Plainridge as the closest casino to Boston for three more years. In general, the Boston area is an underserved gaming market.”
Massachusetts casino proponents said the state’s 2011 Expanded Gaming Act was a job creator for construction, hospitality and tourism. It was also a tax vehicle, providing $300 million to $500 million annually in new revenue.
Those projections may still come true — well into the next decade.
MGM Resorts International, which last year earned the right to build the $800 million MGM Springfield in western Massachusetts, wants to delay the opening by a year, into 2018, when an Interstate 91 rebuild is completed.
Wynn Resorts Ltd.’s proposed $1.7 billion casino complex on the banks of the Mystic River in Everett — just outside of Boston — has been slowed by political, legal and regulatory challenges. It may not open until 2018.
The casino license for the state’s southeast region, which was originally set aside for an Indian tribe, is the subject of a tug-of-war between Brockton and New Bedford. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission won’t pick a winner until fall.
The three resort licenses required an upfront fee of $85 million and a promise to drop more than $500 million on the facility. The gaming tax rate was 25 percent.
Penn National paid a $25 million license fee for the slot machine parlor and is facing a 40 percent gaming revenue tax, and 9 percent to the state’s race horse development fund.
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission said Plainridge Park collected $6.154 million in gaming revenue in its first week.
McGill visited Plainridge Park shortly after it opened and came away convinced the casino will provide Penn National $84 million in annual cash flow by next year. Besides drawing from Boston, the casino can draw from Providence, R.I., which is 18 miles south.
“From our perspective, we are confident the initial results will be strong out of Plainridge,” McGill said. “We also think the company’s estimated annual revenue of $250 million could prove to be conservative.”
Penn National pulled out all the stops in launching the 44,000-square-foot casino with its 1,250 slot machines, including video poker and electronic table games. Penn National executives were joined by local dignitaries and two Las Vegas-style showgirls for the June 25 ribbon cutting.
Former Boston College and New England quarterback Doug Flutie participated in opening ceremonies. Doug Flutie’s Sports Pub is one of Plainridge Park’s signature restaurants, and his 1984 Heisman Trophy is displayed there.
More than 10,000 visitors packed the casino in its first 19 hours of operation, a success by most standards.
Plainridge Park’s closest gaming competition is the Twin River Casino in Lincoln, R.I., about a 30-minute commute from Plainville. Twin River has 4,500 slot machinelike video lottery terminals and 80 live-dealer table games. It also allows smoking. Plainridge is smoke-free.
The Indian tribes that own the Connecticut resorts dread Massachusetts’ entry into the Northeast casino fold.
That’s not the case for the Massachusetts, which could use the gaming tax revenue. MGM’s delay could cost the state $125 million per year.
MGM Springfield President Michael Mathis told gaming regulators the company could be on the hook for “tens of millions” in additional interest money by pushing back the opening date.
But MGM was willing to bite the bullet because I-91 is a “critical piece of infrastructure.” The highway brings 100,000 cars a day past the property’s site and MGM would rather wait than see its opening disrupted by construction and congestion.
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission has to sign off on the casino’s construction schedule. MGM has already said it would give Springfield an additional $1 million payment in 2017, and its revenue commitments, if the city backs the delay.
So the big winner is Plainridge Park.
at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Woman Outraged After Showdown With Census Worker

DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) – An East Dallas woman is outraged after she claims one U.S. Census workershowed up at her door for a housing survey and would not take “no” for an answer.
Sonia Platz said the worker went as far as to camp out in her yard as she waited for Platz to change her mind.
“She’s ringing the bell, knocking on the door. And I’m like, ‘I don’t want to participate.’” Said Platz
The East Dallas resident said it started with a series of three letters from the U.S. Census Bureau. A few days later after receiving the third later, a census worker showed up. Her husband verbally declined.

But a few days later, a different worker showed up at their home and would not leave according to Platz.
“That is a whole, other level. That’s not following up. I felt like she a part of the mob,” said Platz.
The census worker sat on the bumper of her van for the next 30 minutes. Sonia said the worker would only get up from the back of her van every few minutes to see if she had changed her mind about taking the housing survey.
“Some people were stunned. Some people couldn’t believe it. They were kind of shocked like, ‘that can’t be a true government census bureau worker,’” said Platz.
It was a real federal census worker according to the regional office that covers Dallas. A supervisor confirmed more than 100 other workers are out in the area conducting the same work. The regional office said employees are encouraged to be “pleasantly persistent” and never take “no” for an answer at first.
Platz said it is not a good look for a government agency that survives on voluntary participation.
The U.S. Census Bureau said anyone who feels they are being visited too frequently can request to have their address removed from the list.

Dallas is one of 25 cities targeted in the housing survey which runs through August.
at No comments:
Labels: , ,

With Walker's Entry, GOP 2016 Field Now Numbers 17



Sunday, 12 Jul 2015 08:32 AM


Who yelled "everybody into the pool?"
After all the candidate announcements, after all the speculation about who'd go first and who's yet to jump in, one question remains in this summer BEFORE the election year: Why are so many Republicans running for president?

Surely, the soon-to-be-17 announced GOP candidates don't all think they will become president.
But it's easy for a politician to get caught up in the hype and yell "cowabunga!" in a year when there's no incumbent seeking re-election and no Republican who seems to have an inside track to the nomination.
Plus, it's easier than ever to make a credible run for president, thanks to the equalizing effects of social media and digital fundraising, and with looser federal rules in place on raising money.

The apt question for an ambitious Republican this year seems to be: Well, why not?

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker adds his name to the list on Monday, with Ohio Gov. John Kasich and former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore to follow in coming weeks, bringing the total by summer's end to at least 17.

"Every now and then you have an election cycle that is defined by what can be best described as me-too-ism," says Mo Elleithee, executive director of Georgetown's Institute of Politics and Public Service and a onetime spokesman for Hillary Rodham Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign.

With any number of theoretical pathways to the GOP nomination, second-tier candidates may well have surveyed the field and said to themselves, "Why can't I burst into that top tier?" says Elleithee. "Everybody is sitting there with their advisers, slicing and dicing the electorate, and either finding a potential path or deluding themselves into finding a potential path."

Tony Fratto, a Washington consultant who worked for President George W. Bush, says there's far more than delusions motivating candidates. Beyond the generally easier mechanics of running for office, he says, there are all sorts of incentives to run that have nothing to do with actually being president.

"You have the opportunity to become a personality in a relatively short period of time," says Fratto. "You get on the national stage, your name ID is elevated and that can translate into writing books, giving speeches and getting an opportunity to go on TV." Not to mention a potential job as vice president or in the Cabinet.

It worked for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who's running again after parlaying his losing candidacy in the 2008 primaries into political celebrity, including TV and radio shows and book deals.
The should-I-run equation is different on the Democratic side, where Clinton is dominant, but even there, four other notable candidates have joined the against-the-odds race.

A look at some of the reasons so many candidates are running this year:

WAITING FOR A STUMBLE

Some candidates run just in case. If top-tier candidates suddenly falter, these challengers want to make sure they're positioned to step right up.
These types "genuinely think things can fall apart" for the top candidates, says Princeton historian Julian Zelizer.
He puts New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Kasich in that category.
In Christie's case, says Zelizer, "I think part of him hopes that people will see how great he is — according to him" if an opening emerges.

THE OBAMA EFFECT

The election of a junior Illinois senator with a funny name as president in 2008 has heartened candidates who might not otherwise have thought of themselves as ready to run.

"What Barack Obama proved in 2008 is that you don't need all that much experience," says Fratto. "You can take on a presumed front-runner, and you can raise money and improve your name ID very quickly. That possibility wasn't imaginable in the past."

Obama's precedent has to hearten Marco Rubio from Florida and Ted Cruz from Texas, both 44-year-old freshman senators, and 52-year-old rookie Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky.

TAKING TURNS

Senior politicians may look at relative newcomers who've gotten into the race, and think, "Wait, it's my turn."

Elleithee envisions veterans such as Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kasich asking themselves, "Why should these young up-and-comers be seen as more credible than me?"

IDEA GUYS

Some candidates run to get their ideas in the mix even if their candidacies face long odds.
Graham is pushing the Republicans to focus on national security. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is pressing Democrats to do more to address income inequality.

BIG MONEY

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling that loosened fundraising rules, says Zelizer, "all you need is a few wealthy people and you can be a presidential candidate." Candidates may not have enough money to go the distance, but a supportive billionaire or super PAC can bankroll a candidacy that otherwise might not go far.

Casino titan Sheldon Adelson's millions kept Newt Gingrich's 2008 candidacy afloat long after it otherwise would have gone under. Super PACs will file paperwork later this month that will help show who's benefiting from big donors this time around.

SMALL DOLLARS

No sugar daddy? No problem.

Online fundraising and social media have made it cheaper and easier for candidates to haul in lots of small contributions.

Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson is relying on small contributions to propel his GOP campaign. And on the Democratic side, Sanders' upstart challenge to Clinton is pulling in millions mostly through small donors on the Internet
.
BUILDING THE "ME" BRAND

Businessman-showman Donald Trump has to know he's not going to be president.
His self-promotional candidacy helps keep him in the news, something he's clearly relishing even if it's triggered a backlash that's going to cost him.

Companies and organizations are lining up to cut ties to Trump after his much-criticized comments about Mexican immigrants.




at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

CONNECTICUT SANCTUARY CITY MAYOR: WE WILL KEEP PROTECTING ILLEGAL ALIENS

Illegal alien and Kathryn Steinle’s alleged murderer, Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, would have been treated in Connecticut exactly as San Francisco treated him. Apparently, this is fine with sanctuary city New Haven Mayor Toni Harp.

According to the Journal Inquirer (JI), on Friday, Harp said that her city will continue to protect illegal aliens despite the horrific murder of Steinle in San Francisco.
Without a history of a violent felony or a court order for his detention, Lopez-Sanchez would not have been detained by state or municipal authorities in Connecticut, state Correction Commissioner Scott Semple said, reported the JI .
Lopez-Sanchez, a five-time deportee and seven-time convicted felon, said in a local ABC affiliate interview that he chose to go to San Francisco because he knew the sanctuary city would not hand him over to immigration officials. San Francisco police did not inform immigration officials when Sanchez’s most recent release occurred in April. The illegal alien allegedly stole a .40-caliber handgun from a federal Bureau of Land Management ranger’s car in June and shot and killed Steinle earlier this month.
Last year, Connecticut enacted a law that bars police from detaining an illegal alien unless that individual is determined to pose specific public safety risks. If the risks are deemed present, police are required to inform federal immigration officials that the illegal alien will be detained. The individual is released, however, if federal officials do not take custody of him within 48 hours.
Semple’s memo to federal immigration officials indicates that Connecticut would follow guidelines similar to what transpired in San Francisco:
Under the revised policy, the Connecticut Department of Correction will no longer enforce ICE detainer requests and administrative warrants solely on the basis of a final order of deportation or removal, unless accompanied by a judicial warrant or past criminal conviction for a violent felony.
As Breitbart News reported Friday, since President Obama took office, “the number of non-citizens Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sought to deport but did not due to the ruling of a judge, requests from the government, or the use of prosecutorial discretion have increased 42 percent.”
As a state, Connecticut has opened its arms to illegal aliens. The cities of Hartford and New Haven have signed on as sanctuary cities with ordinances providing that police do not transfer to immigration officials illegal aliens who have been arrested – or even notify ICE at all about them. The state also enacted a law at the end of last year that allows illegal aliens to obtain driver’s licenses.
“New Haven will continue to welcome new residents from other countries and embrace their positive contributions in our community, all in the spirit of ‘e pluribus unum,’” Harp said. “The city’s ongoing ‘sanctuary’ status reflects a widespread acceptance of diversity in New Haven and respects the distinct jurisdictions administered by the federal and local governments.”
at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

For the Liberty of France

In late 1944, Charles Kaiser’s uncle, a U.S. Army lieutenant, stayed for a while at the Paris residence of two sisters, Christiane and Jacqueline Boulloche. So began a relationship that would eventually lead Kaiser to write his new book, The Cost of Courage. An American journalist, Mr. Kaiser has designed this book about the French resistance for an American audience. This account of the resistance provides unique insight into the history of one French family and a courageous struggle against Nazism.
The story begins with a Gestapo raid that targets the book’s protagonist, André Boulloche. André is found by the Germans after a resistance officer under his command breaks under interrogation. Failing in an attempt at suicide as the Nazis raid his apartment, André suffers a gunshot wound to the stomach and is captured.
Though his personal resistance was heroic, there was nothing glamorous about André’s plight. Kaiser explains:
If he hadn’t been wounded, André thinks, this part would have been easy: he would have swallowed the fatal pill right away. But now he is writhing on the floor, with blood spurting out of his stomach – and the cyanide never leaves his pocket.
Fortunately, André’s sister and fellow resistance officer, Christiane, had just left the apartment on ”the best timed shopping trip of her life.” She returns to see the Gestapo at work, and evades capture.
The Boulloches were an haut-bourgeoise, well-connected Catholic family, and unlikely revolutionaries. Yet, as Kaiser explains, they all shared “an innate sense of duty.”  Describing Christiane, Kaiser says, ”more than anything else, it is instinctive patriotism that pushes her into battle.” Still, the Boulloche notion of patriotism is inherently bound to honor and justice. Before she entered the resistance, Christiane organized a collection for a Jewish schoolteacher who was fired after the Nazis seized power.
The Cost of Courage’s most interesting sequences describe the tradecraft of the Resistance. We see how André learned his methods—”letters written with lemon juice, which only becomes legible when the pages are heated over a candle.” Kaiser describes how André records Nazi ”arms depot locations” and ”memorizes a book that interprets every [Wehrmacht] insignia”. We learn of Christiane’s crucial role as a network facilitator in repairing radios, and smuggling weapons to fighters. Kaiser also explains how Christiane used tradecraft to avoid detection, such as stepping off trains just as the doors closed and broadcasting radio transmissions from different locations. Survival, we’re reminded, is about meticulous attention to detail. It was also about spiritual strength. We learn that after André’s capture, he boosted the morale of a fellow prisoner by teaching him “the Schumann piano concerto, certain Beethoven sonatas, and the Brandenburg Concertos.”
at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

On Health Care, Obama worked the Refs and Got His Way

Former Lakers coach Phil Jackson says he finds referees “a very interesting group of people.”
If you’re a basketball fan, you’ll remember that Jackson has used plainer words about referees, and this has cost him a lot of money over the years. During the 2009 NBA Finals he was fined $25,000 for complaining about “bogus” calls. The following year he was fined $35,000 twice in two weeks.
Why did he complain so publicly?
Jackson may have hinted at the answer in a recent video for a youth sports organization. “It’s an impossible game to referee,” he said. “It’s totally impossible. There’s a foul on every play. You have to decide what you’re going to call and what you’re not going to call, who you’re going to attack and who you’re not going to attack.”
So those costly criticisms may have been an investment in helping the officials make better decisions in the future.
The president of the United States happens to be a basketball fan. Maybe he’s seen this trick work a few times.
Speaking in Germany after the G7 summit on June 8, President Obama lectured the U.S. Supreme Court on how to interpret the Affordable Care Act. “It should be an easy case,” he said, “Frankly, it probably shouldn’t even have been taken up.”
The next day the president spoke again about the law, describing a pre-Obamacare America where parents who didn’t have money could only “beg for God’s mercy” to save their child’s life. But thanks to the health care law, he said, a woman has thrown away her wheelchair, an autistic boy now can speak, a barber was cured of cancer. The president said miracles are happening in hospitals every day. “This is now part of the fabric of how we care for one another,” he concluded. “This is health care in America.”
On June 25, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the administration’s interpretation of the health care law, which Chief Justice John Roberts said was necessary to avoid “a calamitous result.” Who would want to be blamed for preventing “miracles”?
Although the justices are insulated from politics by lifetime appointments, they strive to maintain the public’s respect for the institution of the Supreme Court. They can’t put their orders into effect without the aid of elected officials. The judiciary has “neither force nor will, but merely judgment,” Alexander Hamilton explained in the Federalist Papers.
It’s this vulnerability—the Supreme Court’s reliance on the esteem of the public—that Obama attacked in 2010 during his nationally televised State of the Union address. The president slammed the justices, some of whom were seated right in front of him, for their ruling in a campaign finance case.
Longtime political experts were startled by the breach of protocol, but basketball fans would not have been.
With his remarks in Germany, Obama signaled that he was ready to denounce the Supreme Court, perhaps for decades, if the justices blew the whistle on the IRS rule that went around the literal wording of the Affordable Care Act. Sure enough, the call went his way.
Presidents have done this kind of thing before. Franklin Roosevelt famously threatened to pack the court with more justices in order to get the majority he needed to uphold the New Deal. But it was the other Roosevelt, Teddy, who best explained this Progressive technique.
“I may not know much about law,” TR thundered in 1912, “but I do know one can put the fear of God into judges.”
Phil Jackson would have been fined a million dollars for that remark.
at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

A Coming Era of Civil Disobedience?


Certainly, Americans are no strangers to lawbreaking. What else was our revolution but a rebellion to overthrow the centuries-old rule and law of king and Parliament, and establish our own?

The Oklahoma Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, has ordered a monument of the Ten Commandments removed from the Capitol. Calling the Commandments "religious in nature and an integral part of the Jewish and Christian faiths," the court said the monument must go.

Gov. Mary Fallin has refused. And Oklahoma lawmakers instead have filed legislation to let voters cut out of their constitution the specific article the justices invoked. Some legislators want the justices impeached.

Fallin's action seems a harbinger of what is to come in America — an era of civil disobedience like the 1960s, where court orders are defied and laws ignored in the name of conscience and a higher law.

Only this time, the rebellion is likely to arise from the right.

Certainly, Americans are no strangers to lawbreaking. What else was our revolution but a rebellion to overthrow the centuries-old rule and law of king and Parliament, and establish our own?

U.S. Supreme Court decisions have been defied, and those who defied them lionized by modernity. Thomas Jefferson freed all imprisoned under the sedition act, including those convicted in court trials presided over by Supreme Court justices. Jefferson then declared the law dead.

Some Americans want to replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill with Harriet Tubman, who, defying the Dred Scott decision and fugitive slave acts, led slaves to freedom on the Underground Railroad.

New England abolitionists backed the anti-slavery fanatic John Brown, who conducted the raid on Harpers Ferry that got him hanged but helped to precipitate a Civil War. That war was fought over whether 11 Southern states had the same right to break free of Mr. Lincoln's Union as the 13 colonies did to break free of George III's England.

Millions of Americans, with untroubled consciences, defied the Volstead Act, imbibed alcohol and brought an end to Prohibition.

In the civil rights era, defying laws mandating segregation and ignoring court orders banning demonstrations became badges of honor.

Rosa Parks is a heroine because she refused to give up her seat on a Birmingham bus, despite the laws segregating public transit that relegated blacks to the "back of the bus."

In "Letter from Birmingham Jail," Dr. King, defending civil disobedience, cited Augustine — "an unjust law is no law at all" — and Aquinas who defined an unjust law as "a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law."

Said King, "one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."

But who decides what is an "unjust law"?

If, for example, one believes that abortion is the killing of an unborn child and same-sex marriage is an abomination that violates "eternal law and natural law," do those who believe this not have a moral right if not a "moral responsibility to disobey such laws"?



at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Walker Wins: New Budget Will Repeal University Tenure Photo of Blake Neff

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is poised to win a huge victory on education as the state legislature passed a budget that repeals state tenure guarantees while also slashing the budget of the University of Wisconsin.
The victory was enunciated by the acquiescence of the university, which recognized its defeat by passing a spending plan that implements Walker’s cuts. All that remains is for Walker to consummate his victory by affixing his signature to the budget.
The two-year, $73 billion budget approved Thursday makes a host of changes Walker has sought in the realm of education. Wisconsin’s school voucher program is expanded, and $250 million in funding is taken from the University of Wisconsin. That’s down from the $300 million cut Walker originally sought, but still a substantial haircut.
Bowing to the fait accompli, later on Thursday the University of Wisconsin approved its own budget, implementing the big cuts expected of it. About 400 positions will be laid off or will go unfilled, and the university’s budgets no money for pay hikes. The school’s situation is made tougher because the legislature has also frozen in-state tuition.
While academics have accused Walker of sabotaging the school’s competitiveness, Walker has refused to yield, arguing that professors should be teaching more classes. (RELATED: Walker: University Profs Need To Work Harder)
Walker’s push to slash spending at U-Wisconsin has received the most press, but his push to alter tenure may have the biggest long-term implications. Until now, tenure for professors at the University of Wisconsin has been protected by statute (Wisconsin is the only state with such a law). Now, that protection has been eliminated, leaving it up to the school’s board of regents to decide whether professors have tenure.
Not only that, but tenure itself has been weakened so that it doesn’t offer the protections it once did. Previously, only “financial exigency” (an urgent budget shortfall) could justify the firing of a tenured professor. Now, tenured professors may also be laid off whenever it is “deemed necessary due to a budget or program decision regarding program discontinuance, curtailment, modification, or redirection.”  (RELATED: Wisconsin Might Destroy Tenure For Professors)

at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

D.C Metro Murder Undermines Liberal Talking Points

The brutal killing of Kevin Sutherland in the Washington, D.C., subway on July 4, does much to undermine popular leftist tropes, in this case, race, crime, guns and drugs, just as the murder of Kathryn Steinle in San Francisco challenges liberal immigration policies.  Sutherland was beaten and stabbed to death on a Metro train by a drug addled African-American teenager in the middle of the day in front of about a dozen other stunned passengers. 

Sutherland’s killer, 18 year old Jasper Spires, shares many characteristics with more famous and lionized Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, except that while the latter two were shot to death by armed men in the midst of physical assaults, Spires took full advantage of his unarmed victim (and other passengers) to complete his crime and survive, and is now in custody.  The mainstream media and leftist politicians have mostly downplayed the incident, since Spires cannot be caricatured as a victim of white racism.  Indeed, the problem for the media is that in almost every respect, this encounter shows the utter inanity and hypocrisy of many of their favored talking points and positions. 

Of course, D.C.’s only major newspaper, the Washington Post, could hardly overlook the killing, but has done its level best to downplay things.  The Post first reported the murder in its local Metro section, though such a brutal public killing on Independence Day would probably been front-page news had circumstances been more to the news editors’ liking.  That article noted that Sutherland was a vibrant, well-liked recent transplant to the city, but did not include a picture or indicate that he was white and probably gay (it did suggest he was an LGBT activist), but it did show a photo of Spires.  A follow-up article made the front page, but the tone of reportage has been of the “that’s too bad” variety, not outrage.   The online version of that article shows photos of both the perp and victim.

The killing undercuts a half-dozen leftist talking points, and shows the hypocrisy redolent in the outrage expressed by politicians (like President Obama), race baiters like Al Sharpton, and countless media elites. 

Two days before murdering Sutherland, Spires was arrested by D.C. cops for violently attempting to rob another man, and assaulted police as they tried to take him in.  Had he been killed by police in that incident, the recent high school grad, who also briefly attended a private college in North Carolina, would no doubt been treated by the press and the President like Martin, Brown or Freddy Gray up the road in Baltimore, as a promising young man who became a tragic victim of the police war against young black men.  But Spires appears to have been uninjured by police despite his combativeness and small (5’5”) stature.  Local prosecutors then reduced charges and the police released him.  Spires stopped by a D.C. police station and picked up his personal belongings from that arrest shortly before killing Sutherland.  Not only does this demolish the idea that police are out to get guys like Spires, it demonstrates just how lax the justice system is about dealing with violent criminals, whatever their race. 


at No comments:
Labels: , ,

CLINTON FOUNDATION DONOR-OWNED POLITICO PUBLISHES HIT PIECE ON DR. BEN CARSON

On Tuesday, Politico ran an article with this blaring headline: “Ben Carson’s Godly Riches: He reaped $2 million in fees from Christian groups in 2014 alone. Now he wants their votes.”

The headline, which implies some sort of hypocrisy on Dr. Carson’s part, is belied by the actual content of the article.
“Clearly if you were to read in great detail Politico’s article, they are clearly only admonishing Dr. Carson in their headline and not the true substance of their story,” Armstrong Williams, Dr. Carson’s business manager, tells Breitbart News in an exclusive interview.
“The reason being they truly had nothing to report,” Williams notes.
Politico, which is owned by Clinton Foundation donor Robert Allbritton, failed to point out in the article that during that same time period Hillary Clinton charged speaking fees ranging from $200,000 to $325,000, and Bill Clinton charged $250,000 for his average speaking fee. In 2010, Bill Clinton was paid a $500,000 speaking fee by a Russian company. Even former first daughter Chelsea Clinton charged speaking fees of $65,000, well in excess of Dr. Carson’s fees.
In 2014, Dr. Carson’s speaking fees ranged from $12,320 to $48,500.
During roughly the same period of time that Dr. Ben Carson earned $2 million in speaking fees, Bill and Hillary Clinton together earned $25 million in speaking fees.
The actual facts of Dr. Carson’s 2014 speaking engagements reported by Politico do not match the article’s somewhat sensationalist headline.
One fundraiser at which Carson spoke “brought in a net profit of $150,000,” after Carson’s fee was paid, the article reports.
At another fundraiser, the host organization was very pleased with the outcome of Carson’s speaking engagement. “He did a really good job for us in bringing in people who may not have known about HopeWorks,” the group’s executive director Ron Wade toldPolitico.
“They couldn’t find anything negative or controversial about Dr. Carson’s speaking engagements,” Carson’s business manager Williams says.
When asked about Politico’s failure to report the vastly higher speaking fees charged by Hillary, Bill, and even Chelsea Clinton, Williams is quick to point out Politico’s bias.
“Without a doubt the good Dr. Carson is held to a different standard,” Williams says. “It’s nitpicking by Politico. There’s really nothing negative they can report.”
The Politico bias, Williams argues, is as apparent from the people the authors chose not to interview as it is of those they chose to interview.
“Politico could not find anyone who was not satisfied with Dr. Carson’s speaking engagement. Imagine the many individuals interviewed for the article that were not included, because they had high praise for the good doctor.”
Williams’ comments support the perception that Politico is often a “mouthpiece” for establishment Republicans as well as the Democrat elites. “A lot of these sources Politico used are coming from within the establishment,” he says.
Carson’s strong showing in the polls has had an impact on his rivals for the Republican Presidential nomination, Williams argues. “Republican establishment candidates are very threatened by Dr. Carson,” he tells Breitbart News. “The establishment media consistently are searching for phony reasons to negate his immense popularity,” he adds.
From a strategic perspective, Carson offers something establishment Republicans can’t provide—appeal to disaffected conservative voters.
“Dr. Carson is popular among many conservative Christians and Millennials who did not vote in the last presidential election,” Armstrong says.
Currently, “outsiders” like Dr. Carson, Donald Trump , 
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
96%
, and Carly Fiorina appear to be gaining traction, while more establishment- oriented candidates appear to be languishing.

“That article is trying to negate the progress and phenomenal gains Dr. Carson is making as an outsider,” Williams says.
The popularity of “outsider” candidates in the Republican Presidential primary field is likely to continue its upward movement in spite of Politico’s transparent and unsuccessful attempts to discredit them.
at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Popular Posts