Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range
    • From:

      To:


Comment Archives: stories: News: Woods

Re: “In the guns-in-bars ruling, a tricky maneuver uses handgun-permit holders’ provision against them

Actually it is extremely easy to determine which business derives 51% of its revenue from alcohol sales. Make it a requirement that they post a sign saying so. Works great in Texas.

Posted by Gordon on 11/26/2009 at 10:20 AM

Re: “In the guns-in-bars ruling, a tricky maneuver uses handgun-permit holders’ provision against them

A slight expansion of my earlier comment (more facts): 37 other states allow CCW (carry a concealed weapon) licensees to drink in establishments where liquor is served. There have been no problems. That, of course, does not mean that there have been no stupid comments about the subject from TV elitists and uninformed columnists. Actually, such establishments would be far safer if NON-licensees were forbidden: Fact: The general public is: * 5.7 times more likely to be arrested for violent offenses than CCW permit holders. * 13.5 times more likely to be arrested for non-violent offenses than CCW permit holders. http://www.concealedcampus.org/pdf/ccw_gun_facts.pdf RE: Your anecdotes of four accused (which is not the same as convicted) CCW holders: that is a rate of .002 percent of CCW licensees. What is the rate in TN for the general public again? Oh yes, homicide is at .0066 percent. (http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/tncrime.htm) Thus TN licensees are at least three times safer to be around even if you assume all of your four instances were considered to be murder and all four men were found guilty. Where are your anecdotes about incidents in TN drinking establishments during the several months the law was in effect. Could it be that there weren't any?

Posted by -dan z- on 11/26/2009 at 7:08 AM

Re: “In the guns-in-bars ruling, a tricky maneuver uses handgun-permit holders’ provision against them

37 other states, allow CCW (carry a concealed weapon) licensees to drink in establishments where liquor is served. There have been no problems. That, of course, does not mean that there have been no stupid comments about the subject from TV elitists and uninformed columnists. Actually, such establishments would be far safer if NON CCW licensees were forbidden: Fact: The general public is: * 5.7 times more likely to be arrested for violent offenses than CCW permit holders. * 13.5 times more likely to be arrested for non-violent offenses than CCW permit holders. http://www.concealedcampus.org/pdf/ccw_gun_facts.pdf RE: Your anecdotes of four accused CCW holders: that is a rate of .002 percent of CCW licensees. What is the rate in TN for the general public again? -dan z-

Posted by -dan z- on 11/26/2009 at 6:55 AM

Re: “In the guns-in-bars ruling, a tricky maneuver uses handgun-permit holders’ provision against them

Ah, we see the Joyce Foundations lap dog is yapping it's ceasless and meaningless cry of the sky is falling again, all based on an organization whose numbers and reports have been proven repeatedly to be fabricated lies. Doesnt say much for such journalists. We would wish you a happy Thanksgiving, but communists like you dont celebrate such AMERICAN holidays!

Posted by Outzide on 11/25/2009 at 11:34 PM

Re: “In the guns-in-bars ruling, a tricky maneuver uses handgun-permit holders’ provision against them

This is something the legislature will fix next session. Clearly, an inalienable right to protect one's self extends to restaurants ... and yes, even bars.

Posted by Carl from Chicago on 11/25/2009 at 6:53 PM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

Prediction: Some time before the January vote, Gaylord will fall in line behind this wonderful boondoggle, and the organized opposition will fall mysteriously silent. Months later, someone will discover a secret memorandum to the effect that the management of the Convention Center and its hotel will be contracted out to an experienced hospitality corporation whose name starts with G. The management contract will be paid for by taxpayers. You read it here first.

Posted by loveforsale on 11/11/2009 at 12:17 PM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

4... count them 4 Council members showed up for the "information" session with Sanders. That is over $1000 per member. Quite an expensive recap of nothingness....

Posted by producer2 on 11/10/2009 at 7:11 AM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

All Moostie Sharp has been taught to do is parrot Woody "There Ain't Never Been a City That Listened to Me" Sanders. How much are you paying Woody to come in Monday night, Moostie?

Posted by Kevin (NotSo) Sharp on 11/07/2009 at 9:32 AM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

I am always amazed at the obligatory MOOST reply of "not lived up to consultants expectations" What does that mean? Does it mean what it seems to, that they promised a 200% increase but only got a measly 75%. I hate it when the profit is not quite as huge as you had hoped for.....

Posted by producer2 on 11/06/2009 at 3:14 PM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

Ol' Moost Sharp pulls the Woody Sanders tricks of simply going back to the same old conventions centers and talking about them, whether anyone else is talking about them or not. What is this garbage you keep throwing out, Moostie, about the project being shelved. That's total crap and you know it. Furthermore, there is no veil of secrecy. The financing package for this project is being worked out, and you, Emily Evans, Mike Jameson and the other Gaylord puppets continue to prattle on about a financing package that doesn't yet exist.

Posted by Cheetos Bastardo on 11/06/2009 at 1:36 PM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

You will find there that each of the centers you mentioned filed to meet the expectations placed upon them by the consultants hired to produce those numbers. The Milwaukee center is nice (odd but nice) but the expansion was done because the previous build was completed without meeting those promises. The expansion was touted as the cure for the already expensive underperformance. So the second investment was made to meet the expectations of the first project. Coincidentally it was at the Milwaukee convention center that I heard economists talk truthfully about the real tragic effects of tourism on the economy as a whole. Dr. Fox simply reinforced that with his state of the economy presentation a few months later. You will now discover that Milwaukee for the last 4 years has returned to the usage that it was previously experiencing. Just like in Atlanta where a billion dollars has brought them a net 1% gain in meeting attendance and facility usage in 10 years. One billion dollars in Georgia taxpayer money for 1%. That gain of course was from two years ago. The GWCC now is losing record amounts of money and projects even larger losses in FY 2010 and FY 2011 with promises to return to 2001 performance in FY2012. Baltimore officials expect to spend their buffer on the new hotel in three years instead of the 5 year operating loss budget. Dallas officials admitted that their new hotel will actually cost the convention center money since it will keep its own hotel motel tax money instead of forwarding it to the convention center like every other Patel in town does. Portland officials pulled the plug on their cc hotel because it did not make sense to build play things while the other parts of the actual government was dealing with cutbacks and layoffs. Las Vegas, same thing with their center expansion. No large public center has met expectations let alone escaped the red ink in 4 years. As I said before MDHA is rushing to close on property in order to get it torn down. Then we will be told the project is frozen. That is the reason for the cloak of secrecy. Obviously proponents are not capable of giving complete pictures. But they can make incomplete ones look really good. We will be able to handle 90% of all meetings. OF course that doesn't mean any more actual meetings, but what do you expect for a billion dollars, 30,000 new jobs and a million new visitors. Who will call them on it when this obviously does not happen?

Posted by Moost on 11/05/2009 at 10:09 PM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

No evidence of successful convention centers, "Moostie" Sharp? You are truly sipping on the Woody Kool-Aid. How about these: Milwaukee increased its exhibit space by 42 percent, quadrupled the size of its ballroom, and doubled the number of its meeting rooms. It doubled its room nights. After Tampa opened its new convention center, downtown room inventory increased by about 40% and convention center business increased by 40%. Seventy percent of pre-bookings for Austin's new convention center came from groups that had never been to the city. Since the Loews Miami Beach Hotel opened, 50 additional hotels have opened. I could go on, but my point is that Woody and you never talk about those, Moostie. Why is that? Because you make your money by running down the convention business. That's Woody's niche, and your no more than Colin Reed's puppet.

Posted by Kevin (NotSo) Sharp on 11/05/2009 at 4:24 PM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

I imagine Dr. Heyward will talk about St Louis, Atlanta, Miami, Boston, Dallas, Denver, Indianapolis, Louiville, Las Vegas, Orlando, Honolulu, Detroit, Raleigh, Kansas City, Seattle, Memphis, Knoxville, Myrtle Beach and any of the countless other examples of publicly financed convention facilities which failed to meet long term consultant expectations and pie-in-the-sky economic promises. St Louis will be brought up simply as the most glaring and tragically laughable example of a city that thought it had a brand that must be protected and invested in. I am not amazed that there is only one Dr. Heyward, what I am amazed about is that there is not anyone who travels the nation talking about all the successes. Dr. Heyward ALWAYS debates a local yokel tourism overlord whose only arguments are their city is not like the 100 other cities that have failed before because they have a brand and the current facility only accommodates 20% of the market.

Posted by Moost on 11/05/2009 at 4:01 PM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

Was this the same Bill Fox who has decried tourism as the poorest excuse for an industry in the state? You should listen to his annual addresses to the Government Finance Officers Association, they have been pretty informative about the "industry" and the economic drag it provides on the state's resources. Tourism and hospitality has the highest numbers of employees on state assistance, highest rates of unemployment, lowest salaries (gross and per capita), and highest level of tax breaks. It is the one industry that never pays off the "investments" governments make on its behalf. The only one. The road is riddled with the broken promises of tourism. Yet it is the only industry that can get away with using those broken promises as proof that more investment is necessary. Tourism is the broken slot machine of the economy. I find it amusing that this one convention center can produce 30,000 jobs while the Great Smoky Mountain National Park was only given credit for creating 15,000 jobs in a recently published and heralded study. Yes, the Music City Center will apparently create twice as many jobs as the most visited national park in the country! My advise, don't believe any tourism person, there is documents proof of 30 years of failure in public financing and zero documented proof of actual success meeting promises. In this fight one set of tourism liars are deflecting attention on yet another set of tourism liars. Those of us with knowledge are left just shaking our heads wondering why no one looks at the real numbers instead of the promises.

Posted by Moost on 11/05/2009 at 3:37 PM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

Hmmm . . . the Gaylord shill, "Moost" Sharp, touts ol' Woody Sanders as an expert. A prof from San Antonio, TX knows Nashville better than Bill Fox, an economist with the University of Tennessee, huh? Tell us, Moostie, who is paying to bring Sanders in again? He's a hired gun, you know. He's been giving this anti-convention center spiel for almost 30 years. How many cities have taken his advice? None, you say. If no one else listens to the crackpot, why should Nashville? Here's another riddle, Moostie, who wrote that Sanders "relies upon notoriously inaccurate data and then reaches conclusions that are based upon simplistic and incomplete analysis"? Yeah, Woody sounds like a real expert. How much do you suppose he'll talk about St. Louis?

Posted by Kevin (NotSo) Sharp on 11/05/2009 at 2:13 PM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

Ah one of the caffeinated ones laying the ground work to dismiss the preeminent expert on the topic of public financing of convention facilities. Not falling into line on a topic of great financial personal interest to you is no reason to disrespect the scholarly research he has published. It is hard to believe that a Harvard educated, municipal administration Phd knows less than the meeting planners and PR hacks. By all means bring Dr. Sanders back so everyone can hear the dark and truthful numbers from all the other cities that have gone down this disastrous path before us. Maybe someone can challenge his facts and figures with that "Nashville is a brand" mantra.

Posted by Moost on 11/05/2009 at 12:06 PM

Re: “Council members feel the burn as the Music City Center fight heats up

Why is Mike Jameson such a cry baby? He claims he wants a balanced and fair discussion, but he invites Heywood Sanders to come do a hatchet job on the Music City Center next week.

Posted by FloydR on 11/05/2009 at 11:01 AM

Re: “The Great Gadfly

Yes-no questions are formed in various ways in various languages. , gen. marcy, [url="http://rustdoctors.iespana.es/gen.-marcy.html/"]gen. marcy[/url], http://rustdoctors.iespana.es/gen.-marcy.html/ gen. marcy, tafwbi, www.educational resources.org, [url="http://almlek.iespana.es/www.educational-resources.org.html/"]www.educational resources.org[/url], http://almlek.iespana.es/www.educational-resources.org.html/ www.educational resources.org, mmuni, r.e.m official web site, [url="http://planetecsat.iespana.es/r.e.m-official-web-site.html/"]r.e.m official web site[/url], http://planetecsat.iespana.es/r.e.m-official-web-site.html/ r.e.m official web site, iqz, www. flog the lotie, [url="http://izakura.iespana.es/www.-flog-the-lotie.html/"]www. flog the lotie[/url], http://izakura.iespana.es/www.-flog-the-lotie.html/ www. flog the lotie, unx, orginaldrafthouse.com, [url="http://aaomr.iespana.es/orginaldrafthou

Posted by Mr.Carrot21 on 10/23/2009 at 8:21 PM

Re: “Pedro Garcia won’t testify in NAACP suit that hinges upon his memos

Huh? I thought this was supposed to be about Burnett.

Posted by Taterman on 09/24/2009 at 1:10 PM

Re: “With the GOP stoking anti-Obama resentment, old times here are not forgotten

I find your "mass-man" Tennessean analysis to be spot on. And a Republican tsunami will be especially good news for the corporate-welfare sector.

Posted by Homer Ferguson on 09/24/2009 at 8:54 AM

Sign Up! For the Scene's email newsletters





* required

All contents © 1995-2014 City Press LLC, 210 12th Ave. S., Ste. 100, Nashville, TN 37203. (615) 244-7989.
All rights reserved. No part of this service may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of City Press LLC,
except that an individual may download and/or forward articles via email to a reasonable number of recipients for personal, non-commercial purposes.
Powered by Foundation