- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Professor,
I don’t think “Being a Republican” has everything to do with it. This is a “Religious Right” project. There are still registered Repubs like myself who don’t buy into this Religious Moral BS. With that said I will be voting Democrate in Nov. Until I can be assured every last Bible Thumper is out of office. What truely concerns me about this legislation; at first I agreed with Dom on Feist political posturing. But its gone beyond that now. Sen. Feist has an unhealthy obsession about stopping online gambling. Although, I’m sure he has seen all the polls etc. He does not care what his constituents think. If this happens to slip though it will be in the week and 1/2 in Nov. I hope the Senate concentrats on what needs to be done; War in Iraq,Immigration, Min Wage, Transportation Bill etc. Rather then waste a portion of that 1 1/2 weeks on Online Gambling.
Odds are we will not have to shut our sites down as the actual gambling bill that passed the house is dead.
The language Frist is attempting to attach to other legislation is a watered down version of the bill which most likely does not update the wire act and is only concerened with financial institutions.
If the wire act is _not_ updated we’re ok, although we’d receive far less US players until sites find a work around.
There is some speculation that the language Frist is attempting to attach only involves paying off an online gambling debt with a credit card which would actually be a good thing if passed. The matter would not likely come up again in the future anytime soon and most credit cards don’t work at gambling sites anyway.
Hope you guys have all written your senators and called as well. Although not life or death, this is pretty serious, especially if Neteller is blocked within the US…
no matter whos there your screwed pretty much, either they will attemopt to outlaw it for right wingedness, or your going to pay 92% of your income in taxes to the left, pick the side you want, come on back Ross Perot
john1124 wrote:. Sen. Feist has an unhealthy obsession about stopping online gambling.Yes, definitely. Maybe something personal.
But if he runs for president, I doubt his advisors will be too enthused with alienating all these poker players….
Isn´t the real problem that we need this to remain in the grey zone? If they completely legalised internet gambling then we would be wiped out by the big Vegas conglomerates and nobody would need affiliates anymore.
I’m european, and as such I will continue my business even if this bill passes. Some laws are also being created here, but fortunately the government in my country shouldn’t even know what an affiliate program is
I have hundreds of players on my private casinos, and not one is from US.
5 after I started this business, I was finally going to direct my efforts to US players, and this happens. Well, that’s life…so how long do we have? before we hear any news?
Bill is dying. Not dead yet. Still have tomorrow and the week and 1/2 in November. Then hopefully this is off the table.
The gray area question has been covered several times. It can be argued that it would be a good thing or a bad thing, IMO it would be good, but I can certainly live with gray.
M.D wrote:Is all this happening because G.W Bush is a republican?Professor wrote:Absolutely it would help!I don’t agree.
Presidents matter very little. Many governments accross the world are full of people who think they know what’s best for everyone. They’d like to control what you ingest into your body and what you do with your body. They’d like to control the fruits of your labor. If you look at tax rates around the world, they do a pretty good job of it. They’ll take the fruits of your labor under threat of violence.
Changing a president doesn’t change those things. Much governemt is very stable and long lasting. A president is just a figurehead.
It’s not a party or person that’s the problem… it’s the whole nanny state mentality.
When Bush leaves office in 2009, the U.S. will get a whole new set of leaders at the top level. New Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, Homeland Security Director, etc. A lot of people will be walking out the door when his presidency ends. The new president will then appoint new people to all of those vacant cabinet positions. These people have enormous power (and responsibility).
So, there actually is a lot that can change when a new president comes to power. Look at how great things were under Clinton — and look at things now. Complete disaster.
Engineer wrote:When Bush leaves office in 2009, the U.S. will get a whole new set of leaders at the top level. New Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, Homeland Security Director, etc. A lot of people will be walking out the door when his presidency ends. The new president will then appoint new people to all of those vacant cabinet positions. These people have enormous power (and responsibility).So, there actually is a lot that can change when a new president comes to power. Look at how great things were under Clinton — and look at things now. Complete disaster.
Yup even google knows …
thats why Bush comes up consistently in the number 1 position
for the keyword ” failure “.
:eh:
Engineer wrote:So, there actually is a lot that can change when a new president comes to power.I will agree with that, but I’m saying there is a lot of structure behind the scenes that remains. The two other branches of government remain the same as well.
America has maintained a war on drugs since Nixon and it’s hard to find anyone who cites actual positive effects. Politicians have tried to control gambling issues for ages.
They are trying to regulate a consensual transaction among adults – that is none of their business. They’ve been doing that regardless of who is president.
