Wired article on internet gambling

[JBB]

Interesting, but not too much new.

wired article (http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,70660-0.html?tw=wn_story_page_prev2)

[Overdrive]

Well last week I saw on Jim Cramer's mad money that he said to buy Cryptologic. He did a segment and talked about the Republican religious nuts in this current adminstration who are behind this push against internet poker. Cramer said he wasn't worried at at all and that internet gambling and casinos are here to stay.

Also, remember a US justice department under a different administration would take a whole different stance on internet gaming. It looks like the way things are going the Republicans aren't going to do too good in the coming elections which can only be good for online gaming. As long as the Republicans don't have control of the White House and congress like they do now, maybe things will get better. But everyone needs to remember when they vote that it is the Republicans who are trying to ban internet gaming and trying to take away your freedom.

[AncientPC]

[ QUOTE ]
But everyone needs to remember when they vote that it is the Republicans who are trying to ban internet gaming and trying to take away your freedom.

[/ QUOTE ]

Talk about oversimplifying a party's platform.

[pshabi]

He's not oversimplifying a platform, he's just stating the issue that is probably the biggest issue for people on this forum.

I'd wager that a majority of the posters here did not even vote in the last election. Hopefully, that will change.

[Gregatron]

I thought it was a good article, and nice primer for newer posters who might not be that familiar with the issue. Thanks for posting.

[YoureToast]

[ QUOTE ]
He's not oversimplifying a platform, he's just stating the issue that is probably the biggest issue for people on this forum.

I'd wager that a majority of the posters here did not even vote in the last election. Hopefully, that will change.

[/ QUOTE ]

To say the Republicans are the ones "trying to take away your freedom" really isn't an oversimplication, its just incorrect. The Republicans are the ones trying to "protect your freedom".

[Gregatron]

Please don't get in a partisan food fight. Or take it to politics. The fact of the matter is that individual congresspersons can have different views on this legislation regardless of party affiliation. To argue that political parties are unitary actors in this country is incorrect. (As I taught my Intro to Comparative Politics class.)

[Jay Cohen]

The Goodlatte bill originally had 115 co-sponsors when it was introduced this year, only 5 were democrats. the Leach bill had 34 co-sponsors last time I checked, all republican.

I am a conservative. Unfortunately the republicans are for limited government and increased personal liberties as long as it is consistent with their moral view of the world.

I never met a republican who tried to protect my freedom. As a matter of fact, just the opposite. I was sent to prison and denied appeals by republican appointed judges.

On the other hand, my prosecution was rubber stamped by Janet Reno.

They all suck.

The article was ok. It would have been nice if they actually contacted someone involved with the WTO matter.

[hashi92]

I live in an anomaly than. My state for the most part is run by democrats but we are one of only two states that have no form of gambling.

[octop]

So sportingnews has to give up their ad revenue from online gaming? And who exactly are they giving it to?