User profile

macdaddyg

Steve_Cain - the idea here is not for the city to make a bundle off of a large company. The idea is that by "making us NO money" (as you put it), the city is bringing 2000 NEW, NON-TOURIST bodies into the downtown area...every day. That means that the restaurants, the dry cleaners, the drug stores, all will see more foot traffic. More foot traffic means more sales. More sales means more revenues. More revenues mean more hires for the downtown businesses and more taxes generated for the city.

Consider the rate the city is getting on the lease as a loss-leader...it's like a grocery store selling brand name sodas for 50 cents...they lose money on the soda, but know you'll also buy some chips, maybe some dip and a few other things, where they'll make up for the loss on the soda. Bring in more people, and businesses in the area will survive and thrive.

chief_wigum:

The first casino to go smoke-free was the Silver City Casino next to the Peppermill on the Strip. It closed its doors less than a year later. You can't miss the place...there's a Walgreens there now.

Casinos offer both a smoking and a non-smoking section. I can't tell you how many times I had someone sitting in the smoking section complaining about smokers. The fact is, non-smokers want to enforce their beliefs on smokers, period. They will walk the smoking areas and act like they're hacking up a lung; they'll sit at a blackjack table in a smoking area, then complain when someone lights up.

Aprilgirl12:
Apparently you have never flown seated next to an overweight person on an airplane...my wife and I have. They either smell from the fact that they cannot properly clean themselves, or bathe in cologne to mask the scent. In either case, my wife gets a major migraine from the smells. So you are wrong to say that consuming sugary items does not affect others.

anchorbine and KillerB:

The problem with studies is they will ALWAYS find in favor of whoever foots the bill for that study, either for or against smoking. As for me, I smoke. I smoke cigars. I smoke in places that allow them. But please do not tell me smoking bans have no economic affect; I personally know of 5 people who lost their jobs because their place of employment lost customers due to the ban. I know of places in California, Ohio, and Florida that are now closed because of the ban. Quote whatever study you want, I prefer to deal in people...people I know who are still looking for jobs.

This story indicates Righthaven picked up a new client.

STORY QUOTE: "Righthaven has picked up a new client: WEHCO Media, a privately-owned company in Little Rock, Ark., that has 15 daily newspapers, 13 weekly newspapers and 13 cable television companies in Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Mississippi and Tennessee."

Am I the only one who noticed that WEHCO Media has ties to Stephens Media?

STORY QUOTE: "WEHCO says on its website that it has a partnership with Stephens Media in which the operations of their Northwest Arkansas publications were combined last November."

Maybe someone should research how much money Stephens Media is making on these shakedowns.

Just my own humble opinion...If you don't like it...too bad

You have an armed man opening fire without notice and moving around trying to get past security. You have security that is NOT running around because they have to stand their ground to PREVENT the armed suspect from getting past them. Suspect carries a shotgun, security armed with sidearms. Anyone who actually SHOT a weapon knows the longer the barrel, the more accurate the shot. Throw in that the suspect was moving and security was standing their ground, and you can see why his shots might have been more accurate.

As for those claiming it's the "liberal Democrats" fault there are so many shootings, keep in mind it was REPUBLICAN governor Huckabee of Arkansas who granted clemency to the Clemmons character who ended up shooting 4 cops dead in Seattle.

The only "politics" involved here is whatever you dream up in your petty little heads.

My prayers go out to all men and women in uniform, and to those who gave the ultimate price.

First, while I do not necessarily agree with the advertising, they have the legal right to do it...just as they'll have the legal right to defend themselves against the invariable lawsuits because someone was "injured" watching them. I hope they have deep pockets.

Second, @atdleft said "George W. Bush trampled upon our Constitution in passing the USA (un)PATRIOT Act, illegally wiretapping our phones and emails, indefinitely detaining people not even charged with a crime, and torturing in our country's name..."

And of course, @Det__Munch followed with "Don't be naieve. ALL that HAS HELPED keep our country and it's citizens safe. Wire tap and torture away as long as we get some of the bad guys since the terrorists LIVE AMONG US and have for years waiting patiently for an opportunity to kill as evidenced at Fort Hood."

Apparently, @Det__Munch PREFERS living in a police state like Libya or Afghanistan(when the Taliban ruled). They had no terroristic acts. The general public was safe. THEY believe in detaining people without charges...throw 'em in jail if they don't believe like we do, or we don't like the way they look, or they're protesting or voicing their opinions. Well, sir, I say, if you like police states, please feel free to move there...and we'll see how well THEY tolerate your opinions.

Benjamin Franklin (I believe) once said, "Those who are willing to give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither, and will lose both." Those word still hold true over 250 years later.

And to all of those in the military who stand the wall so we can sleep in peace, and the families they leave behind while protecting us, thank you.