Chiefs and Royals Decide to Fight Dirty?

[Simplex3]

Here's a little background article on what's being spent by the pro-stadium tax guys and the anti-tax guys. It seems the pro-tax guys are now filing a complaint of some sort with some Missouri election ethics board to find out, once and for all, the ever burning question, "where did the $501 used against us come from and was it gathered and spent legally". In other words, they're getting their asses kicked and they'd like those people to spend the rest of their time and money fighting the govt. instead of fighting the tax.

If this is how they want to act then they can both leave IMO. Sicking the govt. on a few citizens who hold an opinion that might keep you from making more money from things they'll be forced to buy for you? I expect that kind of crap from Mr. Wal-Mart, but not cool Lamar.

http://www.kmbz.com/listingsEntry.as...ocal+Headlines

Who's Spending What on Stadium Issue ?
Tuesday March 28 2006 7:31

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) - Backers of a Jackson County election to fund millions of dollars in stadium improvements at the Truman Sports Complex might have a tough fight ahead at the polls.

But they have come out ahead in one area: campaign spending.

Supporters of the April 4 ballot measures - one for stadium improvements and one for a rolling roof that would land Kansas City the 2015 Super Bowl - have raised $1.55 million and spent $1.3 million in advance of the April 4 election.

Opponents have spent all of $501, according to the latest campaign finance reports filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission.

That's a 2,613-to-1 spending advantage for the Save Our Stadiums campaign, which dominates the television airwaves with pleas to "save our teams.'' But opponents say the Internet, where they have concentrated their efforts, has leveled the field.

"I don't know if we'll win or lose, but we have all these alternative sources of information on our side, and that makes this election different,'' said Terrence Nash, whose Neighborhood Action Group of Kansas City opposes the measures.

Craig Davis, who founded the No I Can't Afford It Committee, agreed.

"They have given us an opportunity to spread the word,'' he said. "People's e-mail boxes are virgin territory, and to me it's the best direct-marketing tool ever.''

The campaign reports do not take into account anti-proposal Web sites or the time and money put into opponents' e-mail campaigns.

The NFL's Kansas City Chiefs and baseball's Kansas City Royals have been the biggest donors to the pro-stadium campaigns, with the Royals giving $600,000 and the Chiefs $800,000.

Heavy Constructors Association and the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce each gave $50,000 to the campaign.

Pat Gray, a strategist for the pro-stadium campaign, said the latest polls show that the media blitz is beginning to sway voters - although many remain undecided.

"There's no question that television advertising is a driving force,'' Gray said. "It moves (polling) numbers.''

Backers of the stadium proposals also are hitting the speaking tour and sending out campaign teams to sports bars to hand out flyers and take questions from potential voters.

"Obviously, the sports-fan base is an important base to get and to get out'' to vote, Gray said.

(Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

[Saulbadguy]

I sure hope it passes!

[Eleazar]

I believe the law says that if you are pushing an agenda on the issue, such as through a website, you have to disclose who is behind it.

[jspchief]

I'll just be glad when it's done so I can stop reading Simplex's bitching rants about it.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by jspchief

I'll just be glad when it's done so I can stop reading Simplex's bitching rants about it.

Yeah, I'm tired of holding a gun to your head and making you click on the link and read it too.

[Saulbadguy]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

Yeah, I'm tired of holding a gun to your head and making you click on the link and read it too.

I laughed out loud at this statement, just because of your avatar.

[Kylo Ren]

Chiefs and Royals decide to fight dirty? It sounds like they have decided to fight cleanly. They want the debate to be legal and above board. They are wanting to clarify what the law is and be sure that both sides are obeying those laws. There should be a fair playing field for both sides. How is this fighting dirty? It sounds like the OTHER side is possibly fighting dirty and cheating. Simplex3, don't you believe in election laws being obeyed?

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by Gunther_Fan

Chiefs and Royals decide to fight dirty? It sounds like they have decided to fight cleanly. They want the debate to be legal and above board. They are wanting to clarify what the law is and be sure that both sides are obeying those laws. There should be a fair playing field for both sides. How is this fighting dirty? It sounds like the OTHER side is possibly fighting dirty and cheating. Simplex3, don't you believe in election laws being obeyed?

You're afraid $501 dollars, all of which was declared throught the Board of Elections, might be a problem. However, you're convinced that $1.55M, $1.3M of which has been spent, was all cool?

Here's a comparison for you. Let's say you and I both open lemonade stands. I'm selling it for $2,000 a glass, you're selling it for $1 a glass. You're kicking my ass. Do I lower prices or find ways to convince customers mine is worth 2000x more? Nope. I call the INS to investigate your workforce. I call the IRS anonymously and tell them I have knowledge that you've cheated on your taxes. I call the health dept. and tell them you aren't up to code. Is any of this true? How the hell should I know? What I do know is that you're going to be spending a lot of time and money fighting the govt. and it only cost me 4 phone calls.

You're right though. Really I'm just a concerned citizen, making sure my competition is complying with all the laws. It's no big deal.

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

Yeah, I'm tired of holding a gun to your head and making you click on the link and read it too.

True. No one is forcing me to read it. Something about a slow morning on the planet and your whiny bitch stadium rants that just starts the day right for me.

[DJJasonp]

Man....800,000 spent by the chiefs....

Could have been spent on a TO bonus....or maybe a decent DT or DE.

Dammit Carl.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by jspchief

True. No one is forcing me to read it. Something about a slow morning on the planet and your whiny bitch stadium rants that just starts the day right for me.

Happy to oblige.

[Kylo Ren]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

You're afraid $501 dollars, all of which was declared throught the Board of Elections, might be a problem. However, you're convinced that $1.55M, $1.3M of which has been spent, was all cool?

Here's a comparison for you. Let's say you and I both open lemonade stands. I'm selling it for $2,000 a glass, you're selling it for $1 a glass. You're kicking my ass. Do I lower prices or find ways to convince customers mine is worth 2000x more? Nope. I call the INS to investigate your workforce. I call the IRS anonymously and tell them I have knowledge that you've cheated on your taxes. I call the health dept. and tell them you aren't up to code. Is any of this true? How the hell should I know? What I do know is that you're going to be spending a lot of time and money fighting the govt. and it only cost me 4 phone calls.

You're right though. Really I'm just a concerned citizen, making sure my competition is complying with all the laws. It's no big deal.

Your example makes no sense. But I'm glad that you agree that both sides should obey the law and play by the rules no matter how much they've spent.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by Gunther_Fan

Your example makes no sense. But I'm glad that you agree that both sides should obey the law and play by the rules no matter how much they've spent.

I find it very hard to believe that $501 was gathered OR spent illegally. I'd bet you money you could find some infractions in $1.5M, though. As archane and reeruned as some of our campaign finance laws are you just about can't comply with all of them.

And I still think sicking the state on a few individuals, loosely organized but kicking your ass on a major issue, is dirty pool.

BTW, my example makes perfect sense. It also parallels the actual dollars being spent by the two sides. I'm having a hard time competing so I'll just use the govt. to keep you so busy you can't focus on your business (their campaign). In fighting the govt. to prove your innocence you're going to blow cash on lawyers, accountants, etc. Money a campaign with $501 doesn't have, but one with $1.5M does.

[dirk digler]

I don't know about getting their asses kicked from what I understand the polling info is showing that this is going to pass.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

I find it very hard to believe that $501 was gathered OR spent illegally. I'd bet you money you could find some infractions in $1.5M, though.

Don't you find it suspect that the opposition has ONLY spent $501 dollars?

I would definitely throw the BS flag on that one.