This is hilarious. Orly brings up Obama’s selective service card during the interview. Hey, Orly, if Barry isn’t a citizen, why would he have to register with selective service? BAHAHAHAHAHHA!
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7ba9KRIIik[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03SYqxO8QYI[/youtube]
This is the real deal, rockabilly. Dust off your cah – boy boots. He will be playing at Boonies Bar tonight – 9 PM. He has worked with Hank III and Brian Setzer. Pull your head out of your ass and show up.
Scotty Hudson had a great suggestion this morning about starting a new Facebook group called ‘Build it Nowhere‘.
What I can’t figure out about the whole EC debate is the lack of other options. I think there should have been an option ‘C’ and ‘D’
We both know the Mayor wants the Arena location, and his former campaign manager wants the DT location, but what about another ‘ghost’ site. What would be the economic impact of building it somewhere else – anywhere else in the city? Also a study if we didn’t build it at all? How much would we really be losing?
You can listen as the SD Supreme Court weighed in on this case .
So why has there been no media about the case? Because we know the SF MSM are tools, and the city has turned that tool away from the case.
This is what I know so far;
• The City filed a 7 page brief citing 4 obscure cases.
• Daily’s attorney submitted a 38 page brief citing 35 state court cases, 13 US Supreme Court Cases, 2 other cases, 6 constitutional provisions, 8 SD statutes, and 3 city ordinances.
I’m no lawyer, but I think we know how this will turn out. Then maybe the media will pull their heads out and consider this a REAL story.
That, of course, according to a SPECULATIVE study, by a company that is getting paid by the city that is run by Mike Huether. This of course is not surprise. Mike has made it pretty clear he wanted it at the Arena site because that’s what voters would support – according to him. But, to be honest with you, if we voted on an Events Center tomorrow, I don’t think it would CUT THE MUSTARD.
If you watch the informational meeting, you will see that many ‘hidden costs’ with both locations have been left out, that is why I call this a ‘Speculative Study’.
While it pains me to say this, I do agree with the BID group on many levels, and I will not get into that. But I will say this, no matter where we build it, it will be expensive, that’s a given and we all know the true cost of the facility is not realistically being presented. The ‘$100 million number is laughable at best.
That is not what the debate is about.
What is the debate about? Will taxpayers approve bonding for this structure? I guess that is the last question that every single freaking EC task force wants to ask, yet they have known all along it is the final hammer. Drop it already.
l3wis