A defense from one reader:

“In fairness to W, the Rangers and the politicians, the stadium wasn’t (contrary to the article) “handed over to the Bush group.” The stadium was and remains the property of the city, and the team holds a lease to it and pays rent. Yes, some adjacent land was also seized by the city and that was turned over to the Rangers for development and/or later sale. Some cities give tax abatements under similar circumstances, some pay for only part of the stadium and make the team – which then owns the building – pay the rest…The primary purpose of the “taking” under ED was the public purpose of building a new stadium that the taxpayers would own and keeping the baseball team and the (presumed) revenues it generated in the area. This is nothing like Kelo where the entire purpose is to seize private property to allow a business interest build and own something the city prefers to that which is already there. I agree the whole deal was unwise, and these public stadium things don’t thrill me under any circumstances. GW should be embarrassed about this in a “Caesar’s Wife” kinda way, because as a matter of appearances it is bad, but not because he is guilty of hypocrisy if he voices opposition to Kelo…”