A Children’s Garden of Overheated Maryland Slots Rhetoric
As one of City Paper's Maryland staffers, much of the political noise broadcast on my TV set and left hanging on the front doorknob of my house involves Question 2—the referendum about whether slots should be permitted in Maryland. It's as divisive an issue as any in this election: The Washington Post has come down against slots, while the Baltimore Sun has come down for slots.
That is, after being against them. Confusion! How to decide? An assortment of ads and footage on the referendum, compiled after the jump, should help. Or not.
No on slots because it's another example of the Man keeping you down:
Yes on slots because Maryland comptroller Peter Franchot is a hypocrite who once supported slots, but supported slots in a bad way, so you should support slots because this time the slots proposal is good. Or something:
No on slots because Maryland will then suffer crime and invasion of skeezy-looking used-car-salesman types:
Yes on slots because Maryland is full of damn fools who are spending the money in West Virginia or Delaware or elsewhere anyhow:
No on slots because the damn fools who'll remain in Maryland to dump money in slots will destroy our moral infrastructure:
Yes on slots because otherwise honest, hardworking people will be forced to carry the state's financial burden. Let non-hardworking, slots-addicted Marylanders carry it!
No on slots because it's an evil plot on the part of Governor Martin O'Malley to bail out a failing casino company:
Yes on slots because, please, please, won't somebody please think of the horses?: