Re: Fred Thompson for Poker?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do I have to lead you by the nose?

UIGEA has two driving factors. Harrah's bribed Frist, while the horseracers bribed Goodlatte et al. The other was Frist wanted to PANDER to FoF for primary support to be president. They repute themselves to be THE authoritative CHRISTIAN voice in America. These Republicans signed some kind of "values contract" with Dobson's consent, blessing and participation. This activity is despicable, unchristian, and will lead to a loss in the general election worse than Bob Dole's(thats the Viagra reference because his loss led to his endorsement deal with them). It ALSO keeps Fred Thompson from having the cahones to back poker players. These evil people with the mailing lists to the blue-haired old ladies and the bible thumpers are screwing us over to keep power, simply because they dislike gambling, and it appears to be another evil bogeyman to scare people with. They call gambling a sin, totally ignoring the Bible. Would you prefer calling them blasphemers or apostates in lieu of Nazis? They want to install some de facto social order to consolidate their position as determiners of what is right and wrong, and keep the halndle-end of tithing. To hate them, to name-call them, and to actively post agaisnt them is well within the scope of this forum, this thread, and any poker player's perogative. If you want to extrapolate from trashing them to trashing all Christians, maybe you should fax your resume' to their marketing dept. That's exactly the doublespeak and misrepresentation they present to their sheep audience. None of us are anti-Christian, anti-family, or anti-Republican. Hell, most of us go to church, have families, and used to be Republicans. We just can't keep silent that our names and beliefs are being used to rob our livelihoods and liberties.
If your ego and vanity can't handle that, open internet forums aren't for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

A gentle request, from those of us who want to see legal poker online: Please do us all a favor, and refrain from sending any written communication to any candidates, journalists, or other organizations with public policy interests.

We really do need to put our best foot forward to win this. It will not help our cause if we make it easy for folks to dismiss our views because we act like raving lunatics.

Please give this request serious consideration.

Re: Fred Thompson for Poker?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your only choice in this discussion is to leave or to somehow shore up the very weak position you've adopted. I expect more from you, and this is disappointing.

[/ QUOTE ]

My interest in this topic started and stopped with sticking up for a poster's right to express his opinion. Trying to goad me into an argument won't do the trick, as I have no dog in this fight. See, while you've been worrying about Legislurker's post, I was busy writing next month's Congessional Ratings Guide and sending copies of my three published letters to the editors to my congressman, governor, and both senators (and all with one arm in a sling). See, I'd rather work on my rights than fight with my allies. So, keep starting arguments from behind your keyboard (this is the third one I've seen you start in the past three weeks)...we'll be busy fighting our opponents.

Have a good day.

[/ QUOTE ]

This work on the new Congessional Ratings Guide and on the next round of letters sounds like a great use of your time, just the kind of effort that we've all grown accustomed to seeing from you. We all appreciate the hard work you do for our cause; nobody has done more.

This thread was an unfortunate deviation from the normal high quality of your contribution here. For whatever reason, your defense of this poster involved a lot more than "sticking up for a poster's right to express his opinion;" you claimed that it had valuable content, but you would not supply it. When asked to elaborate, you turned to personal insult, erected and demolished a strawman, and then withdrew. All in all, it was a very disappointing performance, and definitely out of character for you.

Now let's get busy fighting our opponents, and let's all put our best foot forward and advance high-quality arguments. And I wish you a good day as well, and thank you for your many positive contributions.

Re: Fred Thompson for Poker?
 

I have watched this discussion of Thompson with great interest.
Sen. Al supports him; the question we need to know is why.
OK, lets see.
The true conservatives to not really like Fred, he is on the record speaking for and lobbying for abortion rights, now…..
The liberals do not like him; he is for a strong defense and supported pardoning Libby though he only got a commute in his sentence.

OK, so examine the realistic options, Paul aside.

Hillary or Obama from the democratic side.

On the GOP we have:

1. Rudy – he went after gambling and stuff as a federal prosecutor, no he would not support us.
2. McCain – he helped sponsor anti gaming legislation after the 2000 primary, he will not support us.
3. Huckabee – if I remember correctly he is an ordained minister, he will NOT support us; rather he will be in bed in a three way with Dobson and Chad Hill.
4. Mitt Boy, please, he is so religious NOW, he has made his deal with the devil; he will not support us. See number three above.

After this, the choices for us are pretty limited, unless of course you are OK with Clinton or Obama.

So, why is Sen. al supporting Thompson?

We need a campaign to let Thompson know we are here and we are watching.

obg

Re: Fred Thompson for Poker?
 

We can post letters and comments to Thompson and reply to his federalism position at:
http://fredfile.imwithfred.com/2007/.../#comment-5811

obg

Re: Fred Thompson for Poker?
 

We could phone bone his campaign, excuse me, exploratory committee, this week.

Re: Fred Thompson for Poker?
 

[ QUOTE ]
4_2_it, where are you man?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I actually decided to have a life this weekend. It actually seems like you guys just about managed to work things out, so I will not stir the pot at this point. I will add this: Mentioning Dobson, FoF is fine if you have a point, just insulting them or Moveon.org for that matter without an argument makes you look stupid. A ban decision will be made based on how stupid you manage to look.

Re: Fred Thompson for Poker?
 

ACPW.org's Perspectives Weekly

About 7:30 in, they mention someone by the name of Bill Wichterman, a top advisor for Bill Frist who helped get the UIGEA passed. Thompson recently hired him as an advisor for his potential campaign.

Re: Fred Thompson for Poker?
 

Worring about which Presidential candidate might or might not suport on-line poker is, IMO, a waste of time.

1. The no one beleives poker is such a swing issue with enough suport to cause people to cross party lines. I wouldn't vote for Hillary if she made this her signature issue.

2. The fight will be on the Hill for any favorible legislation for on-line poker.

3. Poker groups are doing NOTHING to show that they are any kind of cohesive voting block.

4. The current "leadership" of the poker lobbing efforts have, IMO, placed too much emphasis on lobbing with out proving that they can motovate us players.


I'm an old campaign hand. Yes I come from the "evil" Republican side of politics. But my heart and soul is grassroots politics. I've hepled moderate Republicans win in States normally run by the fundementalists.

It can be done.

But until we have some sort of structure to organize around, to prove to elected officals and those seeking office we are a group they HAVE to deal with all of these posts are wrothless. Letter writing campaigns have a limited value as well.

What politicans respect more than money are volunteers in their campaign offices. Volunteers do the work no campaign can afford to pay for, this is why the various organized groups have clout.

We can continue to fragrament out efforts and loose all chance to be a chohesieve group or pick one and move forward.

Just my opinion,

D$D

Re: Fred Thompson for Poker?
 

Im not sure what to read in to the hiring. I just don't know the inner workings of the Frist staff. The Tennessee roots and Frist's aborted national ambitions both seem more plausible than an anti-gambling conspiracy. Frist did have a more professional and fully formed exploratory committee ready to go than Thomspon has. Perhaps he is just cannibalizing it. Until we see some advertizing going out saying he will back UIGEA lets not jump the gun. Maybe we should speed up lobbying him via phone/letter. Let him know we will vote Hillary before him if he condemns poker. 500 calls and letters for that should slow an already reticent decision maker down from taking a drastic line.

Re: Fred Thompson for Poker?
 

Ron Paul talks about an unregulated Internet

While Fred Thompson is talking about The federal government regulating the internet. Ron Paul is discussing keeping it unregulated.