Back in April, one "outlaw cowboy" in Bunkerville decided to wage a "Range War" against the federal government. So he gathered an army of fellow "outlaw cowboys" to point guns at federal agents and back up traffic on The 15. And the rest is history...
Except it's also still happening. Over the weekend, the Southern Poverty Law Center checked in on "The Bundy Files" and uncovered no legal action against Cliven Bundy or any of his accomplices. Neither the feds nor local authorities have stepped up as of yet, though both claim investigations are still underway.
So now, Bundy is enjoying the celebrity life as he accepts speaking engagements, media interviews, and even invitations to appear in campaign ads. Yep, he's actually going there.
Never mind he and his cohort pointed guns at federal agents. Never mind he's still palling around with his buddies in the sovereign citizen gang and the Patriot Movement. And never mind that he still owes the feds over $1,000,000 in back owed taxes and fines while he continues to trespass on federally owned land.
For now, let's return to Bundy's "sovereign" and "patriot themed" buddies. Remember them? They just have an extensive history of resorting to whatever means necessary to overthrow our duly elected government.
Remember when #BundyRanch was not just trending on Twitter, but was also attracting "sovereign" warriors from across the nation? One of them happened to be one Jerad Miller. Remember him? He & his wife just shot two Metro Police Officers and a third victim dead before they shot themselves to "start the revolution".
Even before #BundyRanch exploded onto the national media's radar, "sovereign citizen" inspired criminal activity was on the rise. But since Cliven Bundy has taken to the national stage to legitimize this fringe "movement", we've been witnessing even more "sovereign" activity across the nation.
Last month, a sniper opened fire on a Pennsylvania State Police barracks in Pike County. Trooper Alex Douglass was critically injured in the attack. Corporal Byron Dickson was shot dead.
Investigators soon found an abandoned Jeep Cherokee nearby containing the Social Security card belonging to Eric Frein. The Jeep was then traced to Frein's parents. Eric Frein is now the sole suspect in this attack. Pennsylvania State Police is in an active manhunt for Frein, and the FBI recently added Frein to its "Ten Most Wanted" list.
Surprise, surprise, Eric Frein is a "sovereign citizen". Who could have guessed another one would attack law enforcement?
Yet even though they deny their role in promoting him, a slew of prominent Nevada Republicans refuse to actually condemn Cliven Bundy's free range lawlessness. And because calling this what it is has somehow become "controversial", the federal response has been awfully slow... Perhaps too slow.
And so for the time being, we're stuck with the Bundy Family Circus. And no, we're not laughing.
Showing posts with label Pennsylvania. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pennsylvania. Show all posts
Monday, October 20, 2014
Thursday, September 25, 2014
Real Life "Segregation Law"
We figured now is as good of a time as ever to explain this to him. Sure, we had some choice words for outgoing Assembly Member and current NV-04 candidate Cresent Hardy (R) after he let slip his (lack of) qualification to serve in Congress. But ultimately, we at Nevada Progressive are here to help. And yes, this means we're even willing to help Cresent Hardy.
But before we can help Cresent Hardy, he really needs to help himself. And that means he needs to be willing to reevaluate his idea of "segregation laws".
While Hardy has been engaged in a philosophical debate (with himself?) on the nature of anti-discrimination laws, real Americans have been enduring real life wrongful discrimination. Matthew Hileman was fired from AT&T after he spoke out on the nasty notes being left on his chair. Hobby Lobby still refuses to allow Meggan Somerville the same treatment afforded to other female employees. And Colin Collette was fired from his church for getting engaged.
And that's not all. Sometimes, wrongful discrimination can turn violent. Earlier this week, Philadelphia police arrested Kathryn Knott (ironically, the daughter of a Bucks County police chief), Philip Williams, and Kevin Harrigan in relation to the brutal beating of a Philadelphia gay couple. While Knott, Williams, and Harrigan face several serious charges, including aggravated assault, this case has revealed the lack of protection Pennsylvania state law provides its LGBTQ residents. This has infuriated Pennsylvania State Rep. Brian Sims (D), especially since this attack occurred in his district.
This isn't just Pennsylvania. This is Texas. This is Utah. This is New York. And this is a shocking number of states across the nation. This is real life "segregation law".
Fortunately, Nevada has improved in recent years in moving closer to equal protection under the law. However, that's no thanks to Cresent Hardy, as he's voted against nearly every single piece of pro-LGBTQ civil rights legislation. He even voted against SB 139 last year, the hate crimes law that Brian Sims is now fighting for in Pennsylvania.
Back in February, Cresent Hardy claimed he couldn't support any advances in LGBTQ civil rights "because of my religious beliefs, the way I was raised [...] For me to vote for it would be to deny the same God that I believe in." Has he ever met Former President Jimmy Carter? He still teaches Sunday School at his local Baptist church. And when asked about this matter at a Michigan college earlier this month, Carter had this to say.
And Cresent Hardy should pay attention to this. This is real life "segregation law". When loving couples are prohibited from marrying because of their respective genders, that's "segregation law". When someone is fired from the job because of who one is, that's "segregation law". When someone is beaten to near death because of how someone looks, that's "segregation law". And when someone can't even count on being treated like a human being because of someone else's definition of gender, that's "segregation law".
There. Now, no one can say we never did Cresent Hardy a favor.
But before we can help Cresent Hardy, he really needs to help himself. And that means he needs to be willing to reevaluate his idea of "segregation laws".
While Hardy has been engaged in a philosophical debate (with himself?) on the nature of anti-discrimination laws, real Americans have been enduring real life wrongful discrimination. Matthew Hileman was fired from AT&T after he spoke out on the nasty notes being left on his chair. Hobby Lobby still refuses to allow Meggan Somerville the same treatment afforded to other female employees. And Colin Collette was fired from his church for getting engaged.
And that's not all. Sometimes, wrongful discrimination can turn violent. Earlier this week, Philadelphia police arrested Kathryn Knott (ironically, the daughter of a Bucks County police chief), Philip Williams, and Kevin Harrigan in relation to the brutal beating of a Philadelphia gay couple. While Knott, Williams, and Harrigan face several serious charges, including aggravated assault, this case has revealed the lack of protection Pennsylvania state law provides its LGBTQ residents. This has infuriated Pennsylvania State Rep. Brian Sims (D), especially since this attack occurred in his district.
This isn't just Pennsylvania. This is Texas. This is Utah. This is New York. And this is a shocking number of states across the nation. This is real life "segregation law".
Fortunately, Nevada has improved in recent years in moving closer to equal protection under the law. However, that's no thanks to Cresent Hardy, as he's voted against nearly every single piece of pro-LGBTQ civil rights legislation. He even voted against SB 139 last year, the hate crimes law that Brian Sims is now fighting for in Pennsylvania.
Back in February, Cresent Hardy claimed he couldn't support any advances in LGBTQ civil rights "because of my religious beliefs, the way I was raised [...] For me to vote for it would be to deny the same God that I believe in." Has he ever met Former President Jimmy Carter? He still teaches Sunday School at his local Baptist church. And when asked about this matter at a Michigan college earlier this month, Carter had this to say.
And Cresent Hardy should pay attention to this. This is real life "segregation law". When loving couples are prohibited from marrying because of their respective genders, that's "segregation law". When someone is fired from the job because of who one is, that's "segregation law". When someone is beaten to near death because of how someone looks, that's "segregation law". And when someone can't even count on being treated like a human being because of someone else's definition of gender, that's "segregation law".
There. Now, no one can say we never did Cresent Hardy a favor.
Thursday, June 19, 2014
Political Paradox
We're now used to hearing about "the next big march in DC". How many times have we heard this from the usual G-O-TEA suspects? Anyone remember "Operation American Spring"?
They're already back. But this time, they're doing the #March4Marriage. All those tens of 21st Century Know Nothings descended upon the nation's capital to try to stop marriage equality. No, we're not kidding. This actually happened.
But why? Why did this have to happen? Why are G-O-TEA Culture Warriors still fighting against civil rights? Are they truly that threatened by parents like Jason Hanna & Joe Riggs raising their children?
Are they that afraid of American innovators like Martine Rothblatt making even more positive contributions to science, medicine, and society?
Or are they just too caught up in Adam Laxalt's "political issues" and Cresent Hardy's "segregation laws" to realize we're all living in the 21st century now?
Here's the strange paradox of the G-O-TEA's relationship with LGBTQ civil rights. They're trying so hard to make us believe "Republican rebranding" as some real phenomenon, yet they keep following the marching orders of an ever shrinking yet somehow still quite vocal minority who refuse to accept LGBTQ Americans as real people. They're trying so hard to make us believe politicians like Rick Perry, Daryl Metcalfe, Kevin Cramer, and Joe Heck have "rebranded" their way to being "refreshed and renewed"... When they're simply supporting the same old agenda of bigotry and discrimination.
There were only tens of #March4Marriage agitators on Capitol Hill. So why are they still allowed to dictate nationwide policy? Why do they still have so much juice in Congress? And why must we still take them seriously?
How can so few have so much power to discriminate against so many? Perhaps this is the great political paradox of our time.
They're already back. But this time, they're doing the #March4Marriage. All those tens of 21st Century Know Nothings descended upon the nation's capital to try to stop marriage equality. No, we're not kidding. This actually happened.
But why? Why did this have to happen? Why are G-O-TEA Culture Warriors still fighting against civil rights? Are they truly that threatened by parents like Jason Hanna & Joe Riggs raising their children?
Are they that afraid of American innovators like Martine Rothblatt making even more positive contributions to science, medicine, and society?
Or are they just too caught up in Adam Laxalt's "political issues" and Cresent Hardy's "segregation laws" to realize we're all living in the 21st century now?
Here's the strange paradox of the G-O-TEA's relationship with LGBTQ civil rights. They're trying so hard to make us believe "Republican rebranding" as some real phenomenon, yet they keep following the marching orders of an ever shrinking yet somehow still quite vocal minority who refuse to accept LGBTQ Americans as real people. They're trying so hard to make us believe politicians like Rick Perry, Daryl Metcalfe, Kevin Cramer, and Joe Heck have "rebranded" their way to being "refreshed and renewed"... When they're simply supporting the same old agenda of bigotry and discrimination.
There were only tens of #March4Marriage agitators on Capitol Hill. So why are they still allowed to dictate nationwide policy? Why do they still have so much juice in Congress? And why must we still take them seriously?
How can so few have so much power to discriminate against so many? Perhaps this is the great political paradox of our time.
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
Not If... But When
Just yesterday, we talked about two more to fall. Now, we can add another one to the pile: Pennsylvania. No really, Pennsylvania is the latest state where a federal court struck down its marriage ban.
As we were discussing yesterday, marriage equality is increasingly becoming a legal reality for the entire nation. And it's only a matter of time before it arrives in Nevada.
When the US Supreme Court issued its US v. Windsor ruling, it made clear that anti-LGBTQ discrimination would no longer be welcomed there. And since that ruling, we've had this long string of federal judges issuing rulings in favor of equality. That's certainly not a coincidence. Lower federal courts tend to take their queues from "The Supremes".
And it's not a coincidence that Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) & Governor Brian Sandoval (R) decided to drop their legal defense of marriage discrimination this past February. The original defendants in Sevcik v. Sandoval had tried to make their case in court, but that only blew up in their faces. They ultimately had to realize that they truly had no Constitutional ground to stand on, so they stood down.
It's no longer a question of if... But rather, when. When will Question 2 finally be tossed into the dustbin of history? When will Nevada's marriage ban be declared unconstitutional? When will marriage equality arrive in The Silver State?
Just two years ago, Sevcik v. Sandoval seemed like a long shot. But now, it's feeling more like a slam dunk. But really, this was bound to happen. Eventually, public opinion would catch up with Constitutional law.
And it's no longer a question of if it will arrive here... But when.
As we were discussing yesterday, marriage equality is increasingly becoming a legal reality for the entire nation. And it's only a matter of time before it arrives in Nevada.
When the US Supreme Court issued its US v. Windsor ruling, it made clear that anti-LGBTQ discrimination would no longer be welcomed there. And since that ruling, we've had this long string of federal judges issuing rulings in favor of equality. That's certainly not a coincidence. Lower federal courts tend to take their queues from "The Supremes".
And it's not a coincidence that Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) & Governor Brian Sandoval (R) decided to drop their legal defense of marriage discrimination this past February. The original defendants in Sevcik v. Sandoval had tried to make their case in court, but that only blew up in their faces. They ultimately had to realize that they truly had no Constitutional ground to stand on, so they stood down.
It's no longer a question of if... But rather, when. When will Question 2 finally be tossed into the dustbin of history? When will Nevada's marriage ban be declared unconstitutional? When will marriage equality arrive in The Silver State?
Just two years ago, Sevcik v. Sandoval seemed like a long shot. But now, it's feeling more like a slam dunk. But really, this was bound to happen. Eventually, public opinion would catch up with Constitutional law.
And it's no longer a question of if it will arrive here... But when.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
NV-Sen, NV-03: What a Difference 4 Months Make!
Remember those cold, dark, frightening days of January? When Republicans turned Massachusetts red for a night and I went off on my infamous angry tirade? I had regained composure by the morning, and I was starting to see a way out of the hot mess that national Democrats threw us into.
And in the coming days and weeks, something changed. Democrats organized... Even if it meant doing some rabble rousing in the primaries in some states. Health care reform passed. Financial reform will hopefully be on its way to passage soon. Climate and energy may FINALLY get a Senate vote soon. After all that dithering last year, we're seeing more action this year.
And the result? This:
And speaking of those primaries... I know the establishment Dems around these parts were freaking out over it, but look what we got out of it. The Sestak v. Specter race won us both a House seat AND a more viable candidate for November! And look at the turnout in Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Oregon. In all cases, Democratic turnout far exceeded Republican turnout! So much for that "depressed Democratic base"...
OK, so what does this mean for Nevada? Here you go:
- If Democrats can hold onto the only district in the country that went from Kerry in '04 to McCain in '08, we can most certainly hold a state (Nevada 55-43) and district (NV-03 55-42) that went strongly for Obama.
- Harry Reid has been the one leading the charge on health care, Wall Street, climate and energy. It was initially thought of as a liability, but he can now make these into strengths.
- Local issues still matter, and Harry Reid & Dina Titus have proven to be up to the challenge in dealing with the foreclosure crisis, Yucca Mountain, promoting gaming & tourism, and stopping the Sloan Hills gravel pit that would destroy the ecosystem of Sloan Hills conservation area and disastrously pollute most of Henderson (where I live).
- Dina Titus is an expert at constituent outreach, and this election is showing so far that "staying in touch" will matter a whole lot when we start voting.
- And finally, it was the ground game that led to strong Democratic turnout in all these races, especially in the PA-12 special. And as we learned here in 2008, Nevada Democrats have a good ground game while the GOoPers... Well, don't. Those "angry voters" that the media like to talk about aren't actually the ones who just go on their own to "throw the bums out". It takes good campaigning and a good field program to make it happen. Trust me, I've been there. And I'll tell you now that Dems here are running way ahead of the GOoPers when it comes to field operations and getting out the vote.
See now? Things don't look so scary these days. It isn't the end of the world. And what's happened in Pennsylvania may turn out to our benefit here in Nevada. I have a feeling 2010 won't be what Nevada Republicans were hoping for... Especially with fabulous(ly wackadoodle) candidates like these...
So what happened? It was a combination of things. Massachusetts Democrats spent too much time infighting and not enough time organizing. Martha Coakley ran a lousy campaign. President Obama's "triangulating" and capitulating to the corporate right have demoralized the base. And if Nevada Democrats can learn these lessons, organize early & well, and work in Washington & Carson City to give us good reasons to get out and vote, we won't have to be afraid of November.
And in the coming days and weeks, something changed. Democrats organized... Even if it meant doing some rabble rousing in the primaries in some states. Health care reform passed. Financial reform will hopefully be on its way to passage soon. Climate and energy may FINALLY get a Senate vote soon. After all that dithering last year, we're seeing more action this year.
And the result? This:
Mark Critz (D-PA) appeared to narrowly win a special election today to fill the late Rep. John Murtha's seat, a victory the Democrats believe means the fall midterm elections might not be so bad after all. He'll be quickly seated by House leadership once results are finalized.
Critz was leading Republican Tim Burns with 53 percent of the vote to Burns' 45 percent and 70 percent of precincts reporting, and Burns conceded the race around 10:30 p.m. In an unusual twist, both candidates are aiming to be on the November ballot. Critz was on track to prevail in a party primary to be the nominee in the general election, and if Burns' lead for his primary holds steady, these two candidates will be matched up again in November.
The Dem turnout was boosted by a competitive Senate primary between Sen. Arlen Specter and Rep. Joe Sestak, one reason the majority party had been sounding quite confident about the race for several days. Critz was fueled as well by labor activists and Democratic volunteers who made calls and knocked on doors for weeks to help keep the seat. Former President Bill Clinton stumped for Critz over the weekend.
Although, RNC Chairman Michael Steele was once talking a pretty big game on the race as well, telling the Washington Post last week "We're going to win."
Democrats believe this is a bellwether district since it voted narrowly for John Kerry in 2004 (51%-49%) but for Sen. John McCain over Barack Obama in 2008 by by less than one percentage point. Al Gore handily won the district in 2000.
And speaking of those primaries... I know the establishment Dems around these parts were freaking out over it, but look what we got out of it. The Sestak v. Specter race won us both a House seat AND a more viable candidate for November! And look at the turnout in Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Oregon. In all cases, Democratic turnout far exceeded Republican turnout! So much for that "depressed Democratic base"...
OK, so what does this mean for Nevada? Here you go:
- If Democrats can hold onto the only district in the country that went from Kerry in '04 to McCain in '08, we can most certainly hold a state (Nevada 55-43) and district (NV-03 55-42) that went strongly for Obama.
- Harry Reid has been the one leading the charge on health care, Wall Street, climate and energy. It was initially thought of as a liability, but he can now make these into strengths.
- Local issues still matter, and Harry Reid & Dina Titus have proven to be up to the challenge in dealing with the foreclosure crisis, Yucca Mountain, promoting gaming & tourism, and stopping the Sloan Hills gravel pit that would destroy the ecosystem of Sloan Hills conservation area and disastrously pollute most of Henderson (where I live).
- Dina Titus is an expert at constituent outreach, and this election is showing so far that "staying in touch" will matter a whole lot when we start voting.
- And finally, it was the ground game that led to strong Democratic turnout in all these races, especially in the PA-12 special. And as we learned here in 2008, Nevada Democrats have a good ground game while the GOoPers... Well, don't. Those "angry voters" that the media like to talk about aren't actually the ones who just go on their own to "throw the bums out". It takes good campaigning and a good field program to make it happen. Trust me, I've been there. And I'll tell you now that Dems here are running way ahead of the GOoPers when it comes to field operations and getting out the vote.
See now? Things don't look so scary these days. It isn't the end of the world. And what's happened in Pennsylvania may turn out to our benefit here in Nevada. I have a feeling 2010 won't be what Nevada Republicans were hoping for... Especially with fabulous(ly wackadoodle) candidates like these...
Thursday, March 18, 2010
What's the Big Deal About Casino Gambling?
OK, so I get sh*t all the time about it these days. What am I, "Ms. Radical Homosexual Femi-Enviro-Nazi Leftist Socialism-loving Progressive", doing in a state that depends on the "horribly regressive habit" of casino gambling? Aren't casinos supposed to be evil in my book?
Not necessarily.
I was thinking about it this morning when I read Steve Friess' well reasoned Philadelphia Inquirer op-ed in favor of Wynn Resorts' new Philadelphia casino plan. And while I don't really like what I consider the unfortunate "liberal elite" right-wing framing, I otherwise dig what "The Friesster" is saying about the reality of casino gambling today.
As you all know quite well by now, I'm not a fan of Steve Wynn's far right economic theories and political philosophy. However, I do LOVE his casinos... And I do agree that it's unfair to criticize him for "preying after the poor" when he's clearly after a more well-heeled set of customers.
And stepping back to the larger question of casino gambling, I have to object to all the "holier-than-thou" arguments about casinos being thieves and casino-goers being greedy fools. Most players these days know that casino gaming is entertainment, plain and simple. Occasionally I might hear my dad or another visiting family member or a friend complain about "tight slots", but they know they can't make a living off the casinos.
And ultimately, this comes down to the question of free will, consumer choice, and civil liberties. Do we really want to use the force of local, state, and or (gawd, I hope it never comes to this!) federal government to tell people what they are and are not allowed to do on their free time?
I especially find some of these anti-casino cries hypocritical when the same folks don't object to lotteries. Lotteries are gambling, too... But unlike casinos, they don't provide as many jobs and economic opportunities.
But anyway, back to casinos. I'm always irritated when the religious right tries to shove its "moral values" down our thorats in telling us what we can and can not do (determined by how they interpret The Bible). However, I'm equally irritated when I hear progressives try to make the case that gambling is some viral disease that infects people, and we somehow must enforce bans to prevent people from catching it.
Gambling is ultimately a choice. One can choose to play, and one can choose not to. Kids have video games and arcades, and adults have video poker, slot machines, table games, and sports betting. And seriously, what's the difference between those "video games" at Dave & Buster's and casino slot machines? One accepts tickets and offers prizes... While the other accepts tickets and offers prizes.
I guess this is my "libertarian streak" coming out. Whatever. I just don't understand those on the right and the left who want to criminalize fun. And ultimately, that's what we all need to remember about casinos. They're operating to provide a fun experience to players, NOT to offer "free money" or "prey after unknowing victims". It's a business. Period.
And while I don't think it's ultimately smart for Nevada for solely rely upon casinos for financial survival, it's foolish to deny that they're an essential part of our economy that won't be disappearing any time soon. And for other states that are now legalizing casino gaming, all they need to do is look at how we handle gaming in Nevada to realize that it isn't scary, it isn't some "one way ticket to hell", and everyone will be fine.
Not necessarily.
I was thinking about it this morning when I read Steve Friess' well reasoned Philadelphia Inquirer op-ed in favor of Wynn Resorts' new Philadelphia casino plan. And while I don't really like what I consider the unfortunate "liberal elite" right-wing framing, I otherwise dig what "The Friesster" is saying about the reality of casino gambling today.
But what's really behind the objections is the East Coast liberal elite's instinctive propensity to react badly to gambling. For some reason, the fact that the vast majority of casino-goers have no trouble keeping their spending within reason escapes these critics, who also tend to believe that poor people are stupid, defenseless, and without willpower.
Gambling is regressive, they claim, rarely noting that the lottery already exists in Pennsylvania. Lotteries create no jobs and require no infrastructure or capital investment. Casinos, by contrast, are actual physical spaces focused on customer service.
To play in a casino, one must make an effort to go somewhere and enter a controlled, adults-only environment. Taking a go at the lottery requires nothing more than a trip to the corner store. Even if you buy the notion that poor folks are idiots who are incapable of controlling the urge to bet with their milk money, isn't it better to separate gambling from the places where people actually buy milk?
Casino-goers are suckers, gambling foes always say. And yet, after many years covering the business in Las Vegas, I have yet to meet a patron who is unaware that the odds are against him. Most gamblers expect to lose; if they break even or win, they're pleasantly surprised.
Most players see gambling not as investment, but as entertainment - which is why your Aunt Fern goes to the church for bingo night. Nobody ever suggests people are suckers for spending big bucks at an Eagles game, so why the judgment of folks who define a good time as a few hours at a blackjack table?
The irony of criticisms to the effect that Wynn will create something "cheesy" is that his record of accomplishment in design is the strongest argument in his favor. This is a man batting a thousand in creating places with class and beauty. It's unlikely that he would put his reputation behind something lousy for a quick buck.
As you all know quite well by now, I'm not a fan of Steve Wynn's far right economic theories and political philosophy. However, I do LOVE his casinos... And I do agree that it's unfair to criticize him for "preying after the poor" when he's clearly after a more well-heeled set of customers.
And stepping back to the larger question of casino gambling, I have to object to all the "holier-than-thou" arguments about casinos being thieves and casino-goers being greedy fools. Most players these days know that casino gaming is entertainment, plain and simple. Occasionally I might hear my dad or another visiting family member or a friend complain about "tight slots", but they know they can't make a living off the casinos.
And ultimately, this comes down to the question of free will, consumer choice, and civil liberties. Do we really want to use the force of local, state, and or (gawd, I hope it never comes to this!) federal government to tell people what they are and are not allowed to do on their free time?
I especially find some of these anti-casino cries hypocritical when the same folks don't object to lotteries. Lotteries are gambling, too... But unlike casinos, they don't provide as many jobs and economic opportunities.
But anyway, back to casinos. I'm always irritated when the religious right tries to shove its "moral values" down our thorats in telling us what we can and can not do (determined by how they interpret The Bible). However, I'm equally irritated when I hear progressives try to make the case that gambling is some viral disease that infects people, and we somehow must enforce bans to prevent people from catching it.
Gambling is ultimately a choice. One can choose to play, and one can choose not to. Kids have video games and arcades, and adults have video poker, slot machines, table games, and sports betting. And seriously, what's the difference between those "video games" at Dave & Buster's and casino slot machines? One accepts tickets and offers prizes... While the other accepts tickets and offers prizes.
I guess this is my "libertarian streak" coming out. Whatever. I just don't understand those on the right and the left who want to criminalize fun. And ultimately, that's what we all need to remember about casinos. They're operating to provide a fun experience to players, NOT to offer "free money" or "prey after unknowing victims". It's a business. Period.
And while I don't think it's ultimately smart for Nevada for solely rely upon casinos for financial survival, it's foolish to deny that they're an essential part of our economy that won't be disappearing any time soon. And for other states that are now legalizing casino gaming, all they need to do is look at how we handle gaming in Nevada to realize that it isn't scary, it isn't some "one way ticket to hell", and everyone will be fine.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Casinos: Las Vegas Sands to Move Out of Pennsylvania? Into Florida?
Confusion, confusion, confusion! What on earth is going on at Sheldon Adelson's empire these days?
First off was some explosive news over the weekend that Las Vegas Sands is looking to sell the Sands Bethlehem casino that they had just started building last year. The casino has been open only for a few months, and works hasn't even begun yet on the planned hotel part of the project.
So today, the official word out of LVS is that they are NOT planning to sell Sands Bethlehem.
OK, so what are we to take from this? Obviously, Sands Bethlehem hasn't yet turned a profit and hasn't been as successful as LVS was originally hoping for. Oh yes, and Sheldon Adelson has said repeatedly that his company is now "an Asian company doing business in America", so it seems to make sense for LVS to focus more on its budding casino projects in Macau and Singapore.
However, one can argue that Sands Bethlehem hasn't had a chance yet to reach its full potential. After all, the hotel hasn't been built yet. The shopping mall hasn't been built yet. The conference center, with its promised arts & cultural center and local PBS TV studio, hasn't been built yet. Sands Bethlehem is supposed to be a "destination resort", but LVS hasn't yet finished the "destination" or the "resort".
Oh, and did I mention that Pennsylvania has just legalized casino table games and Sands Bethlehem can now install them in the casino?
So we don't know yet what really really know about LVS' plans for Pennsylvania... But we now know they're showing interest on the other end of The Eastern Seaboard.
The issue in Florida is over the Seminole Tribe and how much of the gaming market the state will allow them to control. Previously, the state legislature has been dominated by anti-gambling "Christianist right" Republicans who have toed the religious right line on limiting casino growth in Florida. But now with the Seminole Tribe operating table games without a necessary agreement and the feds likely to direct them to work out a new agreement with the state, there no longer looks to be a "Moral Majority" in Tallahassee as state legislators see massive "Ka-ching! Ka-ching!" dollar signs in using this situation to expand legal gambling across Florida and allow more operators, like Las Vegas Sands, to jump into the market.
Seriously, it will be a game changer... A game changer for Atlantic City, Las Vegas, Biloxi, Tunica, California, and the entire American gaming industry if Florida loosens its anti-gambling laws and allows casinos in or near the state's major tourist attractions like Miami and Orlando.
I guess we'll see how LVS is trying to take advantage of this... And for that matter, if the other big casinos follow suit...
First off was some explosive news over the weekend that Las Vegas Sands is looking to sell the Sands Bethlehem casino that they had just started building last year. The casino has been open only for a few months, and works hasn't even begun yet on the planned hotel part of the project.
So today, the official word out of LVS is that they are NOT planning to sell Sands Bethlehem.
Las Vegas Sands Corp. today denied "rumors" that it plans to sell its Pennsylvania casino because of disappointing results there.
The Express-Times newspaper in Pennsylvania on Saturday reported that, according to a source, the Las Vegas company hopes to sell its Bethlehem casino.
But Las Vegas Sands said today in a press release it's applied to add table games to the 3,250-machine slot parlor and is preparing to resume construction on a 300-room hotel there.
"Las Vegas Sands Corp. said today that recent rumors of the company's supposed interest in selling its Sands Casino Resort Bethlehem property, or indefinitely delaying the completion of the hotel and other components of the development, are unfounded," the company said in a statement.
With $4.5 billion in net revenue in 2009, Las Vegas Sands collected most of that in Macau and Las Vegas and is preparing to open a $5.5 billion resort in Singapore. The Bethlehem casino, which opened in May, produced $141.8 million in revenue last year.
"With the addition of table games, Sands Bethlehem will become the most complete and convenient gaming destination for millions of New York City and northern New Jersey residents and, at the same time, enhance the profitability of the property starting in the foreseeable future," Las Vegas Sands Chairman and Chief Executive Sheldon Adelson said in today's press release.
OK, so what are we to take from this? Obviously, Sands Bethlehem hasn't yet turned a profit and hasn't been as successful as LVS was originally hoping for. Oh yes, and Sheldon Adelson has said repeatedly that his company is now "an Asian company doing business in America", so it seems to make sense for LVS to focus more on its budding casino projects in Macau and Singapore.
However, one can argue that Sands Bethlehem hasn't had a chance yet to reach its full potential. After all, the hotel hasn't been built yet. The shopping mall hasn't been built yet. The conference center, with its promised arts & cultural center and local PBS TV studio, hasn't been built yet. Sands Bethlehem is supposed to be a "destination resort", but LVS hasn't yet finished the "destination" or the "resort".
Oh, and did I mention that Pennsylvania has just legalized casino table games and Sands Bethlehem can now install them in the casino?
So we don't know yet what really really know about LVS' plans for Pennsylvania... But we now know they're showing interest on the other end of The Eastern Seaboard.
The Seminole Tribe of Florida will be at the center of the debate when lawmakers return to the issue of gambling this year.
Though little has changed for the tribe in the past year -- it still runs blackjack and other casino games without a valid state gambling agreement -- its influence is being felt in all corners of the state.
Other players in the gambling scene, spurred by the prospect of the state giving the tribe a monopoly outside of South Florida, are pushing to add more games and more gambling options in Florida.
• The state Division of Parimutuel Wagering gave permission for the state's seven parimutuel casinos to start using a slot machine-style blackjack game.
• Hialeah Park resumed live racing at the historic track with quarter horses.
• One of the largest casino operators in Las Vegas, Sheldon Adelson of Las Vegas Sands, has hired a lobbyist to explore the prospect of resort-style casinos in Florida.
• The Florida House, with a history of opposing the expansion of gambling, is pushing legislation to lower the tax rate on slot machines at parimutuels.
• The operators of international online poker sites are asking legislators to pass a law to allow online poker games within the state.
• And perhaps the biggest change of all: The federal government, after nearly three years of taking a hands-off approach to Florida's gambling scene, has indicated it will decide whether to shut down or sanction the Seminole Tribe's table games, which were ruled illegal in Florida by a 2008 Florida Supreme Court decision.
``There is a heightened level of involvement and diligence occurring on the part of federal government,'' said Rep. Bill Galvano, the Bradenton Republican who has headed legislative attempts to craft a gambling compact with the tribe.
The issue in Florida is over the Seminole Tribe and how much of the gaming market the state will allow them to control. Previously, the state legislature has been dominated by anti-gambling "Christianist right" Republicans who have toed the religious right line on limiting casino growth in Florida. But now with the Seminole Tribe operating table games without a necessary agreement and the feds likely to direct them to work out a new agreement with the state, there no longer looks to be a "Moral Majority" in Tallahassee as state legislators see massive "Ka-ching! Ka-ching!" dollar signs in using this situation to expand legal gambling across Florida and allow more operators, like Las Vegas Sands, to jump into the market.
Seriously, it will be a game changer... A game changer for Atlantic City, Las Vegas, Biloxi, Tunica, California, and the entire American gaming industry if Florida loosens its anti-gambling laws and allows casinos in or near the state's major tourist attractions like Miami and Orlando.
I guess we'll see how LVS is trying to take advantage of this... And for that matter, if the other big casinos follow suit...
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Casinos: Wynn Resorts Loses $0.04 Per Share in Q4, Misses Wall Street Expectations, Prepares for Expansion in Macau & Philly
So Wynn's earnings are now in, and it's looking more like a mixed bag that Wall Street isn't too enthusiastic about.
Apparently the revenue numbers beat Wall Street estimates, but earnings did not. Oh, and Steve Wynn is still not in a patriotic mood. He's still trashing President Obama here while praising the Communist regime in China.
HUH??!! Again, Steve Wynn just doesn't get politics... Or for that matter, macroeconomics. Deficits don't matter if people are still without jobs!
Whatever... Back to Wynn Resorts' earnings report.
So Wynn is planing on Encore Macau opening in April. And so far, Wynn Resorts remains very bullish on its prospects in China.
Oh, and we now have more details on the planned Wynn project in Philadelphia. It will be a Wynn branded casino. However, it will NOT include a hotel. It will be targeting mostly customers/gamblers in the greater Philly area, so it's looking like Wynn's planning on more of a "locals' casino" for Philly than a real destination resort a la Wynn/Encore Las Vegas or Wynn/Encore Macau. And supposedly, we'll hear even more details of the Philly project later.
So what can we conclude from this? Wynn's Las Vegas operations are slowly improving and moving back toward a regular profit, but it's not quite there yet. And if it weren't for Wynn's Chinese operations, its situation would be much worse.
And Harrah's turned a profit last quarter that no one else, not even Wynn, could match.
Wynn Resorts, a Las Vegas-based casino operator run by billionaire Steve Wynn, has had a tougher time getting luxury customers to pay top dollar for trips and entertainment at its high-end resorts in Las Vegas.
But strong results in Macau, the Chinese gambling enclave, helped offset losses in Sin City, and the company's profit and revenue beat analyst expectations.
Here's a summary of Wynn Resorts' fourth-quarter results for 2009 compared with the same quarter a year earlier:
- NET REVENUE: $809.3 million, up from $614.3 million in fourth quarter 2008
- NET LOSS: $5.2 million, smaller than the $159.6 million loss a year earlier.
- CASINO REVENUE: $591.8 million, up from $455.9 million
- HOTEL REVENUE: $92.7 million, up from $75 million
- FOOD AND BEVERAGE REVENUE: $106.1 million, up from $83.1 million
- OPERATING COSTS: $763.8 million, up from $614.6 million
- LONG-TERM DEBT: $3.6 billion
- FULL-YEAR NET INCOME: $20.7 million, down from $210.5 million in 2008.
Apparently the revenue numbers beat Wall Street estimates, but earnings did not. Oh, and Steve Wynn is still not in a patriotic mood. He's still trashing President Obama here while praising the Communist regime in China.
Steve Wynn said he's not optimistic about Las Vegas until the economy improves for working Americans -- and for companies that book meetings in Sin City.
''I'm afraid to say that I think the outlook for 2010 is very conservative,'' he said. ''I don't see any major change in the future. I don't see it getting worse per se, but I do think that unless there is some signal from Washington that they can control the deficits, that not only Las Vegas but the country faces dire problems.''
Excluding one-time items, Wynn Resorts earned $10.3 million, or 8 cents per share, for the fourth quarter, which ended Dec. 31. Analysts forecast profit of 7 cents per share.
Its net revenue was $809.3 million, compared with $614.3 million a year earlier. Analysts expected revenue of $785 million.
Wynn's revenue per available room, a key metric for lodging companies, was $233 in Macau, 2.9 percent less than a year earlier. In Las Vegas, it was $178, which was 20.6 percent less than in the fourth quarter of 2008.
The company's quarterly operating income of $89 million in China's gambling enclave, Macau, made up for operating losses of $56.7 million in Las Vegas.
''We're more of a Chinese company than American company today as we're having this call,'' Wynn said. ''I love it. Thank God for being outside the United States today. There isn't an executive in the world that isn't thrilled about being outside the United States today.''
HUH??!! Again, Steve Wynn just doesn't get politics... Or for that matter, macroeconomics. Deficits don't matter if people are still without jobs!
Whatever... Back to Wynn Resorts' earnings report.
So Wynn is planing on Encore Macau opening in April. And so far, Wynn Resorts remains very bullish on its prospects in China.
Oh, and we now have more details on the planned Wynn project in Philadelphia. It will be a Wynn branded casino. However, it will NOT include a hotel. It will be targeting mostly customers/gamblers in the greater Philly area, so it's looking like Wynn's planning on more of a "locals' casino" for Philly than a real destination resort a la Wynn/Encore Las Vegas or Wynn/Encore Macau. And supposedly, we'll hear even more details of the Philly project later.
So what can we conclude from this? Wynn's Las Vegas operations are slowly improving and moving back toward a regular profit, but it's not quite there yet. And if it weren't for Wynn's Chinese operations, its situation would be much worse.
And Harrah's turned a profit last quarter that no one else, not even Wynn, could match.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)