Rendell explains his "60 Minute" outburst: the producer egged me on
What happened to Governor Ed Rendell during his "60 Minutes" interview broadcast on January 9, 2011? KYW gave an exclusive interview on January 10, 2011.
Rendell first pointed out that it was a "60 Minutes" producer, not Lesley Stahl, who kept asking him about the gambling addiction issue. He told KYW-3: I patiently answered it five times. Rendell pointed out that during his outburst: I was looking at the producer, not Leslie. If Rendell's point is correct, then "60 Minutes" did present the television viewer a somewhat altered reality of the context experienced by Rendell. Rendell still says: People, some people, are going to gamble.
The KYW interviewer asked Rendell if the outburst were an "Effort by you to audition for a second career as a talking head"? Rendell indicated emotional outbursts would not be a good ploy for obtaining such a job. Rendell defended his outburst: Show me someone who doesn't lose their temper (some times) and I will show you someone who doesn't care.
Neither Rendell interview answered the point made by "60 Minutes" that placing gambling facilities closer to potential gamblers facilitated gambling that would NOT otherwise occur. The central tenet of Rendell's theory, that the gambling would occur anyway and Pennsylvania should get its share, is being attacked, and Rendell has no answer.
One can look through the text and comments on a post like Rendell angrily defends casinos to ‘60 Minutes’ but the idea that state-promoted gambling disproportionately hits poorer people AND "proximity matters" is NOT negated. Who is the simpleton here?
Re-directing money from poor people to the Pennsylvania treasury does not create new sources of wealth. All Rendell is saying is "Pennsylvania, not somebody else, needs that money." Similarly, expending time in patent reform on litigation damages does not create new sources of wealth, it merely shifts money around. All the IT guys are saying is "we need to pay less in infringement damages."
Rendell first pointed out that it was a "60 Minutes" producer, not Lesley Stahl, who kept asking him about the gambling addiction issue. He told KYW-3: I patiently answered it five times. Rendell pointed out that during his outburst: I was looking at the producer, not Leslie. If Rendell's point is correct, then "60 Minutes" did present the television viewer a somewhat altered reality of the context experienced by Rendell. Rendell still says: People, some people, are going to gamble.
The KYW interviewer asked Rendell if the outburst were an "Effort by you to audition for a second career as a talking head"? Rendell indicated emotional outbursts would not be a good ploy for obtaining such a job. Rendell defended his outburst: Show me someone who doesn't lose their temper (some times) and I will show you someone who doesn't care.
Neither Rendell interview answered the point made by "60 Minutes" that placing gambling facilities closer to potential gamblers facilitated gambling that would NOT otherwise occur. The central tenet of Rendell's theory, that the gambling would occur anyway and Pennsylvania should get its share, is being attacked, and Rendell has no answer.
One can look through the text and comments on a post like Rendell angrily defends casinos to ‘60 Minutes’ but the idea that state-promoted gambling disproportionately hits poorer people AND "proximity matters" is NOT negated. Who is the simpleton here?
Re-directing money from poor people to the Pennsylvania treasury does not create new sources of wealth. All Rendell is saying is "Pennsylvania, not somebody else, needs that money." Similarly, expending time in patent reform on litigation damages does not create new sources of wealth, it merely shifts money around. All the IT guys are saying is "we need to pay less in infringement damages."
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 3:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home