Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Storm storm

1

Who cares? They're moving to OKC! Their new fans won't care.

Posted by chris | February 26, 2007 8:02 PM
2

THEIR GAME IS OVER - STORM GAMES WERE THE FAVORITE PASTIME OF EVERY DYKE I KNOW

BYE BYE BYE

Posted by eric | February 26, 2007 8:43 PM
3

From the P-I article:

"Senate Ways and Means Chairwoman Margarita Prentice, D-Renton, has been one of Bennett's biggest advocates in the Legislature. She said the co-owners political activities are irrelevant.

"I think this is probably the first time that I've known that we are demanding ideological purity when someone comes to invest in our state," she said. "The whole notion that we have to start examining things like that is really odious, and it shows the desperation because it's obvious that we are gaining some momentum."


NOTE TO SENATOR PRENTICE: WHAT HOLE IN THE SAND DO YOU HAVE YOUR HEAD BURIED IN? I'LL TELL YOU WHAT'S ODIOUS... IT'S POLITICAL LEADERS LIKE YOU WHO CAN'T SEE THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE THAT'S PRESENT IN THIS WHOLE SONICS STADIUM MESS NOW: I DON'T WANT MY TAX DOLLARS HELPING FUND (YES, EVEN INDIRECTLY) GROUPS WHO ARE WORKING THEIR ASSES OFF TRYING TO DENY MY RIGHTS AS A CITIZEN AND HUMAN!!!

GET A CLUE MARGARITA! THIS DEAL IS OVER. SEND THEM PACKING TO OKLAHOMA!

Posted by HL | February 26, 2007 9:04 PM
4

some history here -

Jim Kneeland, who is now the lobby chief for the Sonics - was a key powerful political operative as chief of staff for Gov. Booth Gardner, years ago.

Kneeland announced to an astonished press and legislative members, the then Gov. Booth Gardner's bold and total support for the gay rights bill in the process of a hearing. Yes, the Anderson Murray bill, before either was in the legislature, if I recall.

House legislator Gary Locke was the prime sponsor. (Locke was shunned by his Baptist Church for his legislative boldness)

The Gardner support, pledged on the election trail to a group of gay and lesbian supporters by Gardner, I was there, was not public until that very moment, although some of us knew it was going to be announced.

The added irony was that most political observers of the era thought Gardner to be quite conservative for a Dem. - and they thought his office was there to testify against the bill.

Media scurried, right winger shills gasped, and assorted queers clapped and hooted. Quite a moment, indeed.

Kneeland is cool, this must be a pain in the ass for him.

Posted by George Bakan | February 26, 2007 9:16 PM
5

This just goes to show that the owners of professional sports teams don't care about the people who buy the tickets - period. Call it adding insult to injury. And Margarita Prentice wants to give these guys a stadium? Screw them.

Posted by Terry Parkhurst | February 26, 2007 9:41 PM
6

It will be nice to have a stadium more or less dedicated to me deep in the heart of heathendome. As for gay marriage, hay - we all like a little cock now and then - i never tired of blowing John, and in return he wrote all that nice poetic stuff about me. But come on marriage. Even I managed to settle down and marry a woman. You folks in Seattle should realize this more than anyone, that you can't spend your whole life blowing fishermen.

Posted by the lord | February 26, 2007 10:13 PM
7

"invest in our state"? Wait--who's investing in our state? It seems to me that the state is investing in the Sonics, not the other way around.

Posted by Seth | February 26, 2007 11:02 PM
8

The PI slapped that story up there so fast, they used the phrase "in good conscious".

Posted by Nat | February 26, 2007 11:10 PM
9

Mm-hmm, yes, P-I posted up its article without waking an editor. With four errors leaping out so boldly it may as well be the Seattle Gay News.

(Note to Mr. Bakan @4: each day, write up a story of what your memory says and post it as a comment to some Slog item. You are Joel Connolly speaking through Dina Martina. I want more of you.)

Posted by Tomasyalba | February 26, 2007 11:22 PM
10

If you knew a lick about Oklahoma politics, you'd notice something about McClendon's donor list on opensecrets -- for as much money as he pushed the GOP's way, he also supported some noted Democrats through Chesapeake Energy (e.g. Dan Boren, Brad Carson). It even looks like he wrote checks to both Carson AND Tom Coburn in the 2004 Senate race.

At least McClendon knows to play both sides.

Posted by dw | February 26, 2007 11:27 PM
11

Tom... blahblah..

Seems like you are having a difficult evening.

At least I was on topic. And, you don't know me well, I have a great memory, and 25 plus years of center stage activism/observation in Seattle to draw from.

Just my luck in life I suppose. Joel who? Dina who? You have a whimsical mind.

GB

Posted by George Bakan | February 26, 2007 11:52 PM
12

@ #10...McClendon may have given money to some Democrats, but Oklahoma Democrats are more like Republicans in California, Washington, etc...yes, a scary prospect. And yes, getting any Democrats elected is better than no Democrats at all. However, McClendon support of Boren or Carson doesn't really balance the scales.

~Joey (who lived in Oklahoma for 25 years, and is only 26 now)

Posted by Joey The Girl | February 27, 2007 3:23 AM
13

the above should have said McClendon's support.

Posted by Joey The Girl | February 27, 2007 3:24 AM
14

This will just add to the sting of paying for their stadium, which I have a feeling is going to happen no matter what we say. But it doesn't change my mind. I didn't want them before, I don't want them now.

Fuckers

Posted by monkey | February 27, 2007 7:13 AM
15

MSNBC.com picked up the PI story:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17363448/

Posted by Cori | February 27, 2007 9:52 AM
16

Good to hear on the radio this morning that the owners are agreeing to a vote on the stadium. No worry of sleazebag politico Prentice pushing this through.

Posted by him | February 27, 2007 10:17 AM
17

I grew up in Oklahoma too, Joey the Girl.

I also know Dan Boren's dad is gay.

Posted by dw | February 27, 2007 10:21 AM
18

I just have to make a couple of points. First of all, what do professional sports add to the overall value of civilization? Really, I would like to know. The overpaid jocks, the thoughtful insights into homosexuality, fans who should be playing sports instead of sitting on their asses watching it (for the sake of their own health). I am struggling to understand the value professional sports add to our lives. And I forgot the steriods and wife beatings.

Second, (I have mentioned this before) there has never been an example of a professional sports stadium built in the United States in the past 30 years that actually provided a net economic gain for the communities where they have been built. (The Economist did a great study on this 18 months ago). That is why the owners have the taxpayers pay for them. The owners used to build the stadiums themselves when it was profitable to do so. Think about it.

It is time to tell the Sonics and the Storm to pack their junk and head to Sea Tac. Flights are leaving all the time!

Posted by Andrew | February 27, 2007 10:33 AM
19

dw... no one mentioned Democrat or Republican causes and the one YOU did is about some energy thingy, not a civil rights organization... An anti-gay marriage group could be staffed by orthodox satanists, republicans, or democrats... the point is THEY ARE ANTI-CIVIL RIGHTS

Posted by phenics | February 27, 2007 10:49 AM
20

Sports are entertainment. As a fan of other forms of entertainment, I can't begrudge people who like watching sports without being a huge hypocrite. I can, however, begrudge $300 million of our taxes being spent to subsidize it.

Posted by keshmeshi | February 27, 2007 10:55 AM
21

Bakan: I'm not sure Tomasyalba was being sarcastic, as much as we all come to expect vitriol in Internet discussions.

Posted by Noink | February 27, 2007 11:20 AM
22

Andrew @ 18: Don't confuse the trees with the forest... a few maples in a conifer forest does not make it a maple forest.

Professional sports does not add value to your life (it seems from your post), or mine, for that matter. But, professional sports are recreational entertainment. Maybe not for the masses of people you know, but for a larger mass of people, professional sports are the "IT" way to kick back and relax. Socialize with friends. A way to yell and scream in a social acceptable manner. A way to blow off steam from the stress of life and everything. I expect you don't have a problem with recreational entertainment as a whole, but you did ask the question.

Posted by phenics | February 27, 2007 11:24 AM
23

The difference between pro sports and (most) other forms of entertainment is that with, say, movies or concerts, the people who go to the movie or concert pay. With pro sports, people who DON'T go pay too.

Though it's not entirely as clearcut as that; large concerts are often held in taxpayer buildings, and movies are made (though not shown) with substantial subsidies from governmental film boards. And of course there's "one percent for art". But nothing approaches the subsidies for pro sports arenas.

It's also not QUITE true that they provide NO economic benefit. It's just that the benefit is very small, equivalent to dozens or hundreds of other businesses. Sometimes these businesses receive large state subsidies as well, as when Tennessee or Alabama pay billions to get Toyota or Saturn to build a plant there. In this area, Boeing and Microsoft have received and continue to receive subsidies and tax abatements (you can see this simply by looking at a map and noticing the elaborate dance the city limits of Seattle does around certain Boeing facilities, or at Microsoft's special freeway ramps).

But it is true that the bang for the taxpayer's buck is nowhere as low as for professional sports. And other places have proven that sports franchises, when forced to by regions that have enough backbone to say no, will eventually back down and pay for their pleasure palaces themselves.

Posted by Fnarf | February 27, 2007 11:45 AM
24

The Times has now picked up the story and credits Josh and Slog.

Posted by elswinger | February 27, 2007 11:50 AM
25

@22 & 23 = What is the source you are citing that there is even a minor fiscal benefit? I cited mine and I am going to push my BA in Economics as well. What is the source of your information?

Posted by Andrew | February 27, 2007 12:26 PM
26

@22 & 23 = What is the source you are citing that there is even a minor fiscal benefit? I cited mine and I am going to push my BA in Economics as well. What is the source of your information?

Posted by Andrew | February 27, 2007 12:27 PM
27

The views of ownership will be better reflected in their new OKC fans.

Posted by Portland Web Design | February 27, 2007 2:08 PM
28

Itís not just the Sonics. NASCAR is also run by major rightwing anti-marriage equality donors.

NASCAR is owned by Florida Republicans. The ISC's James C France is a major Republican Donor
http://opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?key=B8ZWH&txtEmploy=International%20Speedway&txtAll=Y&Order=N&Cycles=A&page=2

The ISC has steadily flowed money into far rightwing causes. They have attempted to hedge their bet a bit with a stray donation to a democrat but if you crunch the number the massive bulk of their money goes to far Rightwing politicians.

NASCARís Richard Petty ran as a Republican.

Posted by Jake of 8bitjoystick.com | February 28, 2007 11:35 AM
29

oseyxdqi copmufkt jbfpt xgcedh dnqxjc xfjeru wtio

Posted by usdeayr pfyhikweg | March 10, 2007 3:28 PM
30

oseyxdqi copmufkt jbfpt xgcedh dnqxjc xfjeru wtio

Posted by usdeayr pfyhikweg | March 10, 2007 3:29 PM
31

oseyxdqi copmufkt jbfpt xgcedh dnqxjc xfjeru wtio

Posted by usdeayr pfyhikweg | March 10, 2007 3:30 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).