[YoureToast]

[ QUOTE ]
Berg, you suggested we being drafting a list of questions, my initial ones as follow:

Draft 1
Thoughts – Notes – Questions

USDOJ states in Master Card case the Government was not a party to the case and believes case ruling not valid, ALL Internet gambling illegal.

So.....

1. Why NO prosecution of Master Card when they admitted in open court to funding Internet Gambling?
2. Paypal left the ‘gambling’ market as stated around 2001-2002. Paypal continues to fund Internet wagering to ‘skill’ gaming sites. Why is this allowed if ALL Internet gaming is illegal?
3. MSN, YAHOO! and AOL promote and benefit from Internet wagering (see games sections on welcome page, click cash / skill competitions). Why no prosecution? Is it that Bill Gates cannot be located?
4. States engage in interstate Internet wagering, pooling lottery proceeds in multi-state games. Why no prosecutions?
5. Fantasy sports is wagering, costing from free to several hundreds of dollars to play. Why no prosecution?

Well, that is a start, I have several pages to sort.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

obg,

I think pointing out the hypocracy of our opponents' position is useful, but the only thing I started wondering about while listening to the hearing is that the focus seems to have turned from one of promoting freedom, regulation and taxes to one of letting our opponents know how much more room they have to attack other seemingly permitted activities (ie horses/fantasy/skill games). In a way, while I agree the approach is useful in debate setting, can this be pushed too far?

Just a thought