Thoughts on Jim Les, lawsuits, and Einstein...

I have just a couple further comments about the Jim Les contract mess that's emerged...
http://www.pjstar.com/news/x910594697/Report-Les-intends-to-sue-Bradley

This morning's expanded column has a few comments of interest..

--first it is clear that BU does owe Jim Les the pay as spelled out in his contract, but if he earns money coaching elsewhere (UC-Davis) then that pay would offset what BU owes Coach Les...but only coaching salary earned elsewhere. Salary earned for teaching or anything else is outside the terms.
The issue at the center of this dispute is how the UC-D contract is drawn up, and BU claims that Les and UC-D somehow conspired to draw up an oddball contract to make BU pay more.
Well - no matter what side you take on this -- you have to admit this is the first time you've ever heard of such an excuse being used to NOT pay a fired coach...this is unprecedented. BU is clearly pulling all the strings to dodge paying on Jim Les' contract.
60-80 D-I head coaches are fired every season while their contracts are in effect - so this scenario happens all the time and is resolve just fine. Likewise it happened with jim Molinari where Jim was still under contract and was paid by Bradley for 3 years even while working as an NBA scout.

--Jim Les' statement...
"In retrospect, I guess I should have sat at home for the next three years and just collected the balance of my contract instead of saving BU money"

This is true -- by going to work for UC-Davis, Jim Les is saving hundreds of thousands of dollars for Bradley. Every penny Les earns coaching at UC-D is a penny BU does NOT have to pay on the contract -- so Coach Les is 100% correct here....Bradley benefits big time from Jim working at UC-D so they should be HAPPY not upset about his working there.

--Then Dave Reynolds concludes his column with this comment...
"The man who replaced Les, former Kent State head coach Geno Ford, is also facing a contractual battle with his former employer.
Kent State has filed a $1.2 million breach of contract lawsuit against Ford, who has asked an Ohio judge for a dismissal of the lawsuit."

BUT -- does anyone note what I note?? Dave seems to totally ignore that Kent State is also suing Bradley University as well....so the university is also facing this Kent State suit - not just Geno...
why does DR leave that major, significant fact out??
http://www.cleveland.com/sports/college/index.ssf/2011/05/kent_state_files_suit_against.html
http://bradleyfans.com/vb/showthread.php?t=18598
http://www.pjstar.com/sports/x447606969/Kent-State-suing-Bradley-coach



The new Renaissance Coliseum is in the news...

It is being reported that Peoria District 150 high schools are looking into having their graduation ceremonies (all three groups of seniors would graduate in consecutive ceremonies - Manual, Central, Richwoods) AT the new Bradley on-campus arena, Renaissance Coliseum.
They are tentatively planning for the 2012 graduations to be at the Renaissance Coliseum...details to be worked out.

"The District 150 School Board wants to make graduation cool.
On the agenda for Monday's board meeting is a vote that could move the three public high schools' graduation ceremonies out of their respective gymnasiums and into Bradley University's air-conditioned Renaissance Coliseum.

If the vote passes, next year's graduations will take place June 2. The three schools' ceremonies will be staggered throughout the Saturday as they were this year."

http://www.pjstar.com/news/x1850042935/District-150-to-vote-on-moving-graduations



Everyone knows this Albert Einstein quote...

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Well, the guy who wrote one of the main editorials in the Journal Star this morning is NO EINSTEIN!!

A man named Mr. Kevin Williams writes his political views -- but note how he uses an altered version of this Einstein quote, and then makes some incredibly glaring errors!

He starts with ..

"An open letter to Congressmen Schock and Shilling:

Then he blasts certain past economic policies - which he has every right to if he chooses - and then says this...
"Those who repeat the same ideology and expect different results are insane.

Congressmen who represent their constituencies should vote their interests..

First, the rich are not paying their share in taxes.

Second, they are not creating jobs.."

http://www.pjstar.com/opinion/spotlight/x1850042925/In-the-Spotlight-A-congressmans-loyalty-belongs-to-constituency

Well...I will challenge this guy's "facts"...because the numbers are UNDENIABLE...

First - congressman are under no obligation to vote some way just because someone in their district demands it. NOPE - those congressmen have a mind of their own and can vote as they want. After all they were elected and can vote as they wish.
In fact there's clearly NO WAY any representative could possibly vote the way all their constituents want since their constituents come in all shapes, sizes, opinions, and wants -- you'd never make everyone happy -- so you have to vote the way you want.

Then he says the "rich" (which he does not define) are not paying their share in taxes?
This is hogwash as the rich by any definition are paying far, far more than their share!

Here are proven facts...
"the Bush tax cuts "actually shifted the total tax burden farther toward the rich so that in 2000-2004, total income tax paid by the top 40% of income-earners grew by 4.6% to 99.1% of the total."
"the top 1% of earners pay 38-40% of income taxes"
"the top 10% of earners pay 70% of income taxes"
"the bottom 50% of taxpayers pay only 2.7% of income taxes"

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/lying_about_bushs_tax_cuts.html

http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

Then - who are the job creaters? First - the government does create some jobs but those jobs do NOT help our economy since for every job the government creates, then the private sector must create 6-10 jobs in order to collect the taxes to support that government job! More government jobs will HURT our economy because it increases government spending!

So the only job creation that matters in a bad economy are the privately created jobs - and guess who is creating those jobs??

"They" (the rich people Mr. Williams is referring to) create almost ALL the jobs...
The top 10% of earners create 96-98% of ALL the new jobs.......but it sure wouldn't take a genius to figure this one out -- since the lower half of the earners sure aren't the ones starting new businesses and hiring people....all the new jobs in the US that matter are being created by the higher wage earners.

Lastly -- I do agree with Mr. Williams' point that government should get rid of subsidies. But most subsidies are pork and pet projects mostly of or from the left as political gifts back to local supporters....
The biggest example of a government subsidy was the TRILLION dollar handout (bailout) to the auto industry -- coming from our current very liberal President and given mainly as a big time gift to his union supporters.
Other subsidies - especially farm subsidies have some reasonable value but I would agree most government handouts hurt our nation and hurt our economy instead of helping.