Daniel Negreanu's response - Page 5

THE HOBO · #41 10-02-2006, 04:10 AM

Post deleted by Ryan Beal

Lawman007 · #42 10-02-2006, 04:11 AM

If I'm not mistaken, he's also a high school dropout.

jimmytrick · #43 10-02-2006, 04:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]
If I'm not mistaken, he's also a high school dropout.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I'm not mistaken, you're a jerk.

db9db9db9 · #44 10-02-2006, 04:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
If I'm not mistaken, he's also a high school dropout.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's good at playing poker, but he's not much of a legal analyst. This seems to be a misread on his part.

SkandarAkbar · #45 10-02-2006, 04:26 AM

agreed daniel isn't the guy I'm looking to get advice from, he should stick to video games and golf and try not to sound intelligent.

Jive Dadson · #46 10-02-2006, 04:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
George Jefferson and Andrew Lincoln forgot to staple the Article 11: "US Residents shall have the right to gamble on the internet" to the main part of the Constitution.

[/ QUOTE ]

George Jefferson and Andrew Lincoln?! [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] Please tell me you aren't an American.

[/ QUOTE ]

I googled it. Those are names of actors. It's hard to say, but I think he was trying to be funny.

pig4bill · #47 10-02-2006, 05:20 AM

Daniel is a naive kid. He's never had to live in the real world. The government doesn't have the resources to enforce this law? It won't take much. Plus, they have resources that are enforcing other laws who can probably take on one more law.

Oh, and way to show those pesky Republicans by not voting for them. Oops, Canadians can't vote for them anyway. But he can root for those Dems. They would never vote to stop online poker. Oops, looks like 115 Democrats did vote for the House version in July.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/c...e/2/votes/363/

chicagoY · #48 10-02-2006, 05:37 AM

That's true but if the sites quit on us it makes no difference.

chicagoY · #49 10-02-2006, 05:38 AM

He's just like a rock star: good at one thing but talking about everything else. Other than hair care products, I wouldn't take his advice on anything.

MasterLJ · #50 10-02-2006, 05:40 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I hope you Americans are going to get some new leaders. What idiots you have in charge. I cant believe their arrogance. Is there nothing in the Constitution about protecting personal liberties?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not when it hurts the children man.

Nevermind that a child with access to monetary sources can not only gamble online but they could also:

1. Buy a crate of pink dildos
2. Buy a case of viagra
3. Buy alcohol
4. Buy illicit narcotics
5. View porn
6. Join in online lotteries
7. Bet on horses
8. Purchase weapons
9. Solicit/Be solicited for sex
10. Engage in a webcam sex show involving a donkey, a migit and produce

BUT GOD FORBID THEY GAMBLE! WE MUST LEGISLATE!