Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu
I brought up other philanthropic endeavors to show that the guy isn't as full of himself as you really think, and he has given away millions, again, to two organizations in Chicago already and has vowed to give more in Chicago in the coming years.
No, I don't have that attitude, and never have. Funny, because on numerous occasions on this forum I have very clearly stated that if any person or organization would have tried to put something there other than a cultural institution, I'd be severely against it. Anybody who actually knows me as a person, other than on a message board, would know that what you said is a complete crock of shit and I have never favored rich people getting whatever they want simply because they're rich. To me, it doesn't matter who you are - and it shouldn't matter to anybody else either. I could care less if they're wealthy - I have wealthy people in my family and I deal with wealthy people at work everyday. I could hardly give a shit how much money someone has or doesn't have. That's not what makes a person. What should matter in this circumstance is what they're proposing to bring/develop. Please, stop trying to act like you know what I stand for - it's very clear you don't, and I've stated numerous times on here that I'm against developing the lakefront unless it's a cultural institution here and there.
|
i apologize if i misread your stance. that said, it was the stance of the administration brokering this deal
from Kass' column:
Quote:
|
"If you're spending a billion dollars to build a museum in Chicago, you should be able to put it wherever you want," a friend at City Hall said.
|
you think this narrative materialized out of the blue? it came from the top down. you dont understand why everyday citizens, even those who support the concept of a Lucas museum in Chicago, might be troubled and offended by that attitude when it comes to public land?