Online gambling to be attached to defense bill???- article Uh oh!!!

[Jack Bando]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My aim is to be productive in fighting this legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]

By willfully overlooking the likelihood that this thing will pass or condemning others who simply find it much more likely in an election year?

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I just have a procedurally oriented mind. Its good for poker (I am process oriented and not results oriented most of the time), but not so good for discussion. My approach to this legislation is to a) get as much info as I can b) figure out what I can personally do to accomplish the end I would like to see (anything but passage of this bill) c) accomplish everything that I possibly can that will achieve the end that I desire. Worrying about likelyhood of passage does not enter my thought process, and I find those with doomsday attitudes to be particularly counter productive. I guess we're probably just wired differently.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point.

The odds of losing do not matter if you can not afford to lose.

[Lawman007]

[ QUOTE ]
The odds of losing do not matter if you can not afford to lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Actually,the odds of losing matter the most when you cannot afford to lose.

[Jack Bando]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The odds of losing do not matter if you can not afford to lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Actually,the odds of losing matter the most when you cannot afford to lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think my version is right. If it's a fight you must fight and one you must win, the odds no longer matter. Why should you care if it's a million to one shot if you must take the shot? Just do whatever you need to do to win.

[DuderinoAB]

[ QUOTE ]
If it's a fight you must fight and one you must win, the odds no longer matter. Why should you care if it's a million to one shot if you must take the shot? Just do whatever you need to do to win.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly.

[tempogain]

[quote

Actually,the odds of losing matter the most when you cannot afford to lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

NOT spoken like a gambler! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Sciolist]

[ QUOTE ]
you would think if this were to go down that Party poker or Stars would have a pretty detailed/simplistic tutorial on how to use other methods to fun an account.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeh, we already have that: Lots of players don't have cards in any case, or have ones with hostile gaming policies.

[Sciolist]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess you did not read my idea that someone (maybe 2+2) should send 100 copies of Theory Of Poker to the Senate

[/ QUOTE ]
I'll pay for a copy to be sent. I'm just catching up on all of this, I'm a couple of weeks out of date, so I have no idea if luck is even an issue here. If it is, I'm definitely interested in sending someone $20 or whatever to get that done. Hell, I'm in for $200. It's kind of frustrating to live outside the US and find legislation being considered by people who do not represent me that affects my livelyhood (I work for PokerStars), and my hobby.

[malo]

Apologies for a minor hijack, but want to say a big thank you to Mr. K, Berge, and everyone who is working hard to keep us updated. Greatly appreciated.

[Mr.K]

Monday Morning Update:

CongressDaily reports this morning that progress is being made on the Defense Authorization, and that the chief negotiators are meeting today to try to resolve a few outstanding differences. The Internet gambling bill was not mentioned as one of the items for discussion, though that doesn't necessarily mean much. Here's the blurb:

"Defense and security issues will dominate the congressional agenda again, with defense authorization conferees hoping to clear the way for a House vote by the end of the week and both chambers likely to consider legislation regulating the use of military tribunals to try terrorism suspects.
After meeting frequently last week, the so-called Big Four Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services committees will try again to find common ground on personnel and other issues.
Among the most contentious provisions is House language that would allow military chaplains to pray in the name of Jesus Christ. Supported by several House conservatives, House Armed Services Chairman Hunter has said he will not back down on the issue, leaving little room for compromise with Senate Armed Services Chairman Warner, who opposes the language."

[Jack Bando]

So, how long does it take from the time the conference report is finished until it is available to look at? Will some news about what's generally in it be out before that?