Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

On-line poker players have turned en masse against Bush

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:25 PM
Original message
On-line poker players have turned en masse against Bush
My husband likes to play on-line poker to unwind from time to time. This afternoon he received notice that his on-line poker days were coming to an end as soon as Bush signs the bill banning it which he is expected to do tomorrow. Fortunately he transferred most of the money out of his on-line account last week and it is already stateside in the bank. He kept in about $10 so he could continue playing until the end.

He's been on-line for the last few hours chatting with members of an on-line poker site. Every few minutes he starts laughing as more and more players are expressing their out and out hatred toward congress and Bush for the new law. More than a few of them admitted that the voted for Bush and now wish they had not. Some of the comments mention things that Bush can do with the bill after he signs it, which are. to my knowledge, physically impossible for any human being to do.

What perfect timing for this happen. A number of the players have expressed their discontentment with their congressional reps because they are getting cut-off from their favorite poker site and are saying they will not vote for their current GOP incumbent.

I think the GOP just lost another segment of voters. :rofl:

How many more times can they shoot themselves in the foot between now and the election?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:28 PM
Original message
Frist pushed for it---NPR did a good one hour segment on this a few
days ago. Monday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. Nat. security was an argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. saying the $$ might to terrorist groups.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. AKA "people other than casino-owning millionaires with whom
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 09:32 PM by BullGooseLoony
we are already good friends and who donated well to our campaign."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
7. Senator Bill Frist was probably trying to impress....
religious conservatives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frank Cannon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-15-06 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #7
61. Except that it won't
Hell, I lived in New Mexico. The first thing people did after church was make a beeline to the casinos for the slots and the Sunday brunch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bushfire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
42. Frist pushed for it as a favor to someone in Congress from Iowa
probably to get his support for his election bid in 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. You realize why they're doing this, right?
It definitely ain't for any "moral reason."

Who benefits?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Fantasy football is one...
NFL scored good on this bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lfairban Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #4
28. True!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. American Casino's.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. It's just like the do-not-call registry.
They didn't do that out of the goodness of their hearts. They wanted to effectively ban a form of advertisement. Taking away one advertising medium would, in turn, increase demand for other types of advertisements (i.e., newspapers, TV and radio) thereby increasing advertising rates for the owners of those media- who just happened to be looking the other way for a matter of years before and after we invaded Iraq.

They're all just good buddies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
obreaslan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #9
39. I think they also wanted to gather our info into one large database...
Sure, they could pull all of that info together, but it might take time. Why not just have you add your info yourself. Now we know who you are and your phone number and such, and they didn't have to go looking for anything. Now we'll just pass that info on to the NSA and we're all set. Thanks for your help.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #39
45. For sure.
These guys NEVER do anything that isn't going to benefit them, somehow. It is their only motivation.

They look for some way that they can make money, then slap some kind of policy reason on it to get it done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maseman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #9
50. I don't play
but my father was livid yesterday. He was swearing about the Bush Admin. and how they don't give a shit about anyone but big business. He wouldn't vote for teh repukes anyway, but he did make a point taht a number of young people in factory where he works was also pissed. He made it a point to let them all know it was Bush who did this.

Hey, whatever it takes to get someone to vote against these guys...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. What matters is that the poker players are pissed
and they are blaming Congress and Bush. They don't care how it is happened. All they care about is that they won't have their favorite poker site to gamble on anymore. (One guy just said that his wife is wants to find a way to overturn the law. She likes having him at home where she can keep an eye on him.)

My husband is doing his best to keep the pot stirred. He was playing on three tables a while ago and was keeping the pot stirred on all three of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #10
48. Exactly. We can pick apart the whys and wherefores all we want.
What's important is that average people (as in not political wonks) are realizing that the neoCons only have their own self-interest in everything they do.

And really pissed off people make certain to go to the polls, it's been my experience.

I've never internet gambled myself, but this legislation pisses me off like mad.

Once again, Commander Bunnypants says the adults can't play.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #48
51. That's what I'm talking about
Sadly, some people don't pay attention to what's going on until they feel directly affected. They need a triggering event to wake them up. I know there of more than one Republican congressional representative who started questioning the safety of vaccines after their child or grandchild had adverse affects (Dan Burton and Joe Scarborough). I've met a lot of local people who got involved in politics after they were affected by a change in zoning law, redistricting of school boundaries or the banning of fireworks.

While I don't like it, I do understand it to a degree. A lot of people just go to work and come home and don't want to have to think about what goes on in the world. For the on-line poker players their escape was to play poker. Now that that's been taking away from them it might force some of them to start asking questions about what else the GOP has screwed up. It works to our advantage and I'm not about to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sequoia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #1
23. No, I really don't. Tell me.
I don't do this, but what's with the bill anyway? Do they only want gamblers in the casinos of the USA and not bet out of the country? And why did Chimp and Kitty Killer feel this bill was necessary and of course, who's to profit. You can just provide a link if you like. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. LOL, great observation. Online gaming communities are very popular.
MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
11. Wow - that must be - what - like a HUNDRED total persons?!?!
not exactly a large demographic...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. There are tens of thousands of them
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 10:03 PM by Mabus
My husband just checked the number currently on-line, it is close to 50K. There are people from all over the world who play and at this time of day there are a lot of Americans logged-in.

fwiw, he's playing on his Party Poker account right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcscajun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. There are literally Millions of Online Poker Players in the US alone.
Seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Hence the number of poker shows on ESPN, the Travel Channel
and others. All of which have commercials for on-line poker sites. If the sites weren't making money there wouldn't be any poker on television.

You are correct. It is no small constituency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. travel channel - WPT -
if you watch this, you'll see ME!

BTW, i just finished xfer'ing all of my PP money to a set of credit cards... no more
online poker. :-(

There are millions of poker players in the US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #18
21. Are you kidding me?
My husband records shows like the WPT and WSOP. I'm sure we've seen you.

He transferred most of the money out last week. He left around $10 in both accounts to play a couple of $5 ring games. He's back up to almost $150 and is thinking about doing one more tournament before doing his last transfer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 01:20 AM
Response to Reply #11
19. Ummmm, no........
You may not be aware of it but the real figure is actually closer to a half million people. That's a rather significant group to piss off all at once, just for giggles. Don't you think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #11
25. Online Poker is a MAJOR MAJOR industry
I don't play online poker but I've heard that there is a massive following especially with the popularity of Texas Hold 'Em here in the states.

Just because you or I doesn't play does not mean these people aren't getting web traffic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smoogatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #11
34. D'oh! Think again.
And large numbers of them are young adult males who in other respects might lean conservative, which is an important demographic for the Repigs not to piss off. But as other posters have mentioned, it's all about protecting the stateside casino industry. The timing is, I have to say, exquisite. Yet another nail in the Repig congress's coffin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #11
56. Wow - from thousands to now MILLIONS!
The number grows with every post!

I don't believe any of it...

PROVE the figures..

My point is that it the numbers are insignificant in the big picture.

Now let's talk about online porn users, THAT'S a multi-million demographic.

Online poker players I wouldn't worry about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soothsayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
15. Actually makes me miss Abramhoff! This wouldn't have happened
if he were still in play.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. Actually it likely would have
You see this bill isn't really about gambling per se, it's about doing it ONLINE, particularly with companies based outside the US. It's to PROTECT our homegrown casinos, see?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lfairban Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. Actually, I kind of doubt that.
Edited on Fri Oct-13-06 11:01 AM by lfairban
The obvious assumption is that B&M casinos are in favor of the online Prohibition because they think it will cut into their business, but I am not so sure. It is true that Ralph Reed, an associate of Jack Abramoff was lobbying to prevent online gambling to protect the interests of Indian Casinos:

Reed's work on behalf of eLottery came while he was also doing other work for Abramoff. That work had Reed conducting antigambling campaigns across the South for two Indian tribes that feared the expansion of gambling would cause competition.


E-mails Show Ralph Reed knew of Jack Abramoff's Ties to Gambling

. . . but as far as online poker is concerned, I fail to find the argument compelling, for the following reasons:


  • About the only reason B&M casinos spread poker games is because they believe it will bring patrons into the casino who might also use other more profitable games.

  • Most of the online poker is at stakes that are too low to justify a casino presentation so they don't actually constitute competition.

  • Some casinos would like to start their own online poker sites.

  • Online poker and poker tournament satellites stimulate interest in table games and tournaments at casinos. The "MoneyMaker effect" would have not happened without online poker sites.



    I know some of the reasons may seem contradictory, but it does make sense once you look at all the details.

  • Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    No Exit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 12:06 AM
    Response to Original message
    16. AT LAST (eyes welling up with tears of joy) AT LAST,
    an issue that will DRIVE THE MASSES INTO THE STREETS!!! :eyes:

    (Okay, all kidding aside, I have no doubt that this encompasses a LOT of pissed-off people. Good!)
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 12:28 AM
    Response to Original message
    17. Frist led the charge on this bill, are they against him??
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    lfairban Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 11:16 AM
    Response to Reply #17
    24. Sure are.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 11:41 AM
    Response to Reply #17
    26. it had the support of a majority of Democrats in the House
    So, I'm not so sure I'd make this a big issue.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    lfairban Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 12:07 PM
    Response to Reply #26
    29. The GOP is taking the brunt of the negative impact.
    This is mostly because Frist lead the inclusion into the SAFE Ports Act, and the GOP is more often associated with the Religious Right that supports the ban.

    The Democratic representatives who supported the ban in congress would do well to re-think their position as it applies to poker.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 12:29 PM
    Response to Reply #29
    30. Besides that the Republicans are in control of the government
    They're getting blamed for everything that's going wrong.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Zodiak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 01:25 PM
    Response to Reply #26
    36. Not many take cues from the Dem party as to what to believe
    Edited on Fri Oct-13-06 01:27 PM by Zodiak Ironfist
    or how important an issue is.

    They do not tell me what to think nor does their position on a matter preclude my own independent decision. It was wrong for the Dems to join with the pukes on this. What I think is that most libertarian-minded Americans are going to be pissed about this, and rightly so. If the Democrats voted for it, it doesn't surprise me in today's climate. Heck, even habeas corpus and the constitutional right to a trial took a backseat to politics with a third of the Democrats.

    Our government isn't about upholding rights. It is only taking them away....both parties.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 12:42 PM
    Response to Reply #17
    31. When they're playing
    There is a small chat window at the bottom of the screen. Most of the time the players don't chat much during games. The majority of players are usually concentrating on their current hand or watching how the other players are betting and trying to figure out "tells". There are a number of on-line players who play on multiple tables simultaneously. This means they are switching between screens and don't get involved with chatting. When there is chatting it is usually when players congratulating/chiding each other on a hand or other innocuous conversation. They tend to stay away from politics. Last night was different, the American players were particularly chatty. and they directed their hatred Bush and the GOP. People didn't mention a lot of local candidates by name but they sure as hell were mad at the GOP and, as far as I'm concerned, that's a good thing.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Hawkeye-X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 11:48 AM
    Response to Original message
    27. Want to hear something very interesting?
    I just returned from Las Vegas.

    I was talking to a dealer during a tournament, and he was telling me that the general consenus of the gamblers in Las Vegas is that they are NOT happy that the Congresscritters and Senators have passed that damned law, and will not be voting for their incumbents. Now, understanding that most of them are from out of town, and they're probably rich, so it doesn't bode good news for the GOP incomubents.

    (And one of the players were advertising BetonUSA.com )

    Hawkeye-X
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 12:55 PM
    Response to Reply #27
    32. That's what I'm talking about
    A lot of the blame will be on the GOP. Whether or not other posters want to believe it, there is a sizable segment of the voting population that has been affected by this legislation. More importantly, they feel they have been adversely affected and they don't like it. Hopefully it will work in the Dems' favor.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 11:24 AM
    Response to Reply #27
    53. stay out of my bedroom did not work for some but maybe this will.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Awsi Dooger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 05:34 PM
    Response to Reply #27
    57. Everyone here in Las Vegas is furious about it
    Sports bettors also, not merely online poker players. The bill impacts and taking payments from the offshore sports betting companies.

    Go to many of the betting sites and there are threads saying "Fuck Frist and the Republicans." It's been that way for two weeks.

    I can't believe there were posts in this thread from someone in Las Vegas doubting the number of online poker players. That's wacko to the extreme. Obviously someone who never frequents the poker rooms or talks to people who do. The vast majority of those games are filled by tourists. Talk to them for the last couple of years and all they mention is how they got started playing online poker and now it has snowballed, their friends doing it also. The number is comfortably in the millions and was growing rapidly. Just look at the dollar figures.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 06:20 PM
    Response to Reply #27
    59. That's correct
    Online boosts casino visits, for absolute certain.

    This bill helps nobody but the Christians.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    terip64 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 01:07 PM
    Response to Original message
    33. We couldn't have brainstormed all the ways that the GOP could screw up!
    It is so great! Proof that karma does exist!
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 01:24 PM
    Response to Reply #33
    35. Another piece of straw on the camel's back
    Or, I guess that would be another bale of hay on the elephant's back.

    If I had to make a list of how they could shoot themselves in the foot, banning on-line poker wouldn't have been on it.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    SnowGoose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 01:53 PM
    Response to Original message
    37. Physically impossible?
    I think you may have failed to consider the amount of stretching that has been necessary to allow for the insertion of his entire head for these many years.

    Their suggestions might, in fact, be possible for him.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    hippiechick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 02:07 PM
    Response to Original message
    38. Good but sad also, that it took something like this ...
    ... to catch their ire. So many people in this country just don't pay attention until something gets them between the eyes.

    Otherwise they could care less about what - or who - little Shrubista is banning or torturing or eavesdropping on.

    That's simply got to change before there's nothing left of this country. :(
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 03:25 PM
    Response to Reply #38
    41. I'm just glad it is something that caught their attention
    There are people who don't stay informed about candidates or issues. They much vote either for the incumbent or their party over and over again without thinking. They don't pay attention until they are personally affected or think they will be affected. It happens time and time again. There are single issue voters that we don't recognize until their issue comes to the forefront. Think of this group as a cyber equivalent of soccer moms. They finally have an issue that has the potential to change their minds or get them motivated.

    Moreover, there are probably a significant number of these people who have never voted before but will register and vote this time around.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 08:57 AM
    Response to Reply #38
    49. We can't all be political wonks. I happen to have the time
    and the inclination, but people have families, jobs--sometimes two, and enjoy their hard-earned leisure time engaged in pursuits other than political wonking (of which I am a proud practitioner).

    But as the old saying goes--grab them by the balls and their hearts and minds are sure to follow.

    Yes, it's sad, but instead of lamenting it, do what I do with the info I glean from DU--spread it at the water-cooler. Or the ladies' room. Or on the fake cell-phone call.

    There's a million ways--I can't tell you how many people had no idea about the torture bill until I told them and were summarily shocked. And these peiople do VOTE--and I imagine some have been swayed our direction just because of my water cooler talk.

    We are all involved in little communities at work, church, PTA meetings, etc.

    We MUST be the media--the "real" media is as lazy as all get-out and whoreporate driven.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Kixel Donating Member (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 02:55 PM
    Response to Original message
    40. This is interesting...
    The coolest thing about this-these people are probably going to be folks that dont normally vote. I have tons of friends that play Party Poker (including an old roommate whod stay up all night). The old roommate is the only one I know voted (Hed call me and ask who to vote for and where to go, it was funny-he knew he agreed with my views). This could actually be one way to get people who normally dont turn out go vote for Dems. This is a whole different segment. A lot of the Party Poker people I know are the childless 20-30 somethings.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Bushfire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 04:19 PM
    Response to Original message
    43. Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 Analyzed
    The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 Analyzed
    by I. Nelson Rose filed under Top Story

    The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 was rammed through Congress by the Republican leadership in the final minutes before the election period recess. According to Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), no one on the Senate-House Conference Committee had even seen the final language of the bill. The Act is title VIII of a completely unrelated bill, the Safe Port Act, HR 4954, dealing with port security. It can be found on pages 213-244 of the Conference Report. It is based on the Leach and Goodlatte bills, HR 4411 and HR 4777, but there are some important differences.


    The following is a detailed analysis of the Act. The section numbers that follow refer to new sections that have been added to title 31 of the U.S. Code:


    5361 The Act begins with Congresss findings and purpose. These include a recommendation from the discredited National Gambling Impact Study Commission, whose chair was the right-wing, Republican incompetent, Kay Coles James. Findings include the doubtful assertion that Internet gambling is a growing problem for banks and credit card companies. It correctly states that new mechanisms for enforcing gambling laws on the Internet are necessary, especially cross-border betting.


    The Act contains a standard clause that it does not change any other law or Indian compact. It repeats this many times, to make sure that no one can use the Act as a defense to another crime, or to expand existing gambling.

    more...

    http://www.pokerplayernewspaper.com/viewarticle.php?id=...

    The republicans have never been known to do favors for Native Americans IMHO.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 07:11 PM
    Response to Reply #43
    46. Great article. Thanks for posting it.
    Nothing in the act should be perceived as protecting American Indian casinos. They are doing it for all the non-Indian corporations that contract with the tribes whether it is to help set-up the casino or sell them institutionally made food they serve. Plus, per captia payments - if you're lucky enough to get them - are taxable, so the government gets its cut in a number of ways.

    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Bushfire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 04:53 AM
    Response to Reply #46
    47. If anything it will increase casino profits by 1 to 3% in revenue
    Their bread and butter is slots by far.

    On a side note our state's top taxable revenue source is not from any Fortune 500 company, but a native american casino. This is a crime where corporations are paying less than 25% in state taxes than they did back during WWII.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 11:34 AM
    Response to Reply #43
    55. ...rammed through Congress by the Republican leadership

    .......rammed through Congress by the Republican leadership
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 04:22 PM
    Response to Original message
    44. They'll start using these cards in their decks...

    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 11:22 AM
    Response to Original message
    52. Frist et all legislating morality--maybe this is what it will take for som
    e to open their eyes.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    cyberpj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 11:34 AM
    Response to Original message
    54. I guess they took too much money away from Casinos and Bush pals. nt
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-14-06 06:18 PM
    Response to Original message
    58. This is the underground issue that will be talked about for years
    The guys I play poker with - and many former players in our game - have been emailing to large lists about this since two weeks ago, when the news first came out. People are FUCKING PISSED, and - quite frankly - have every right to be. The reason that 25-35 year old straight men lean GOP is because they buy the whole Nanny State argument: they don't like a government telling them what to do. Mostly, this position has no relation to the reality of the political situation, and is just really masculinist pathology, but once in a while, it actually does seem politically relevanyt. This is one of those times. I would guess that the majority of online poker players are in this demographic. People LOVE this shit. They really love it. The idea that it should be illegal (after having been de facto legal) is very very annoying and non-sensical to the very demographic the GOP depends on for an easy vote.

    I'm telling you, political scientists will study the Great Poker Uprising of 2006 for twenty years.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    Bushfire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-15-06 06:29 AM
    Response to Original message
    60. Frist pushed as a favor for Jim Leach, R-IOWA
    Rep. Jim Leach, R-Iowa, the sponsor of the original bill, said Internet gambling sites "yield only liabilities to America and to Americans.

    http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Story.aspx?guid=%...

    Care to guess that Frist will want payback when he runs for president in 2008.

    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    meganmonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-16-06 09:23 AM
    Response to Original message
    62. Any idea how the vote went?
    I can't seem to find it on the LOC site, the only thing I see is that it was a voice vote.

    I am curious as to how the Dems voted...
    Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
     
    DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 16th 2014, 06:38 AM
    Response to Original message
    Advertisements [?]
     Top

    Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

    Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
    Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


    Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

    Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

    About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

    Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

    © 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC