[PBJaxx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is like pointing out that one kid robbed a bank because he acquired an online gambling debt, and we know how effective that is against us.


[/ QUOTE ]

That was pretty effective, right? It made national news. If a story was to break that several prominent anti-gambling Senators had a weekly 1K buy-in game in an office on the Hill it would hurt our cause? Explain how, I don't get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

That may have been a bad example. They aren't the same thing. In a simplistic idiot world someone could say:

Online gambling leads kid to rob bank --> Online gambling = bad

You cannot, however, conclude this:

Congressman says online gambling is bad, but he does it himself --> Online gambling is okay

Calling out a congressman only identifies hipocracy of one man, it does not say anything to the appropriateness of the law. In fact, if the gambling of a congressman caused family/financial issues, it may actually strengthen their stance.