[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Remember, liberals want to legislate for the social good, and they often view gambling as something that damages this aspect of our society.

[/ QUOTE ]


Indeed...and a good point.

A friend of my Dad's who knows nothing about internet-gambling or the psuedo-illegality of it was asking me some questions about it.
This person is a Republican (as is my Dad) and when I mentioned that there is a senator from Arizona who has had several failed attempts to legislate/prohibit internet-gambling the immediate assumption by this person was that the senator must be a democrat for exactly the reasons Mason outlines.

I explained that this senator (and many others who are in the anti-internet-gambling-agenda camp) are Republicans and that it is partly due to a moral objection to gambling in general.


I'm really not sure if our chances would be much better with a democrat controlled congress or a democrat in the White House.
I find it unlikely that politicians would take the risk of officially making some form of gambling perfectly legal all across the country.


They tried pushing for it in North Dakota...but that's an entirely different animal than politicians from all 50 states trying to move forward on a practice that so many Americans still find to be morally objectionable.

[/ QUOTE ]

We dont need politicians to make online gambling legal becasue it is already legal for all intents and purposes. The DOJ's official position is that they will prosecute gambling operators but not individual gamblers, which means there is no danger of anything happening because all online sites are overseas. And there are still serious doubts over whether the Wire Act of 1961 could even be applied to online gambling.

But anyway, I'd be willing to bet a lot that if legislation against online gambling is ever passed, Republicans will be the ones leading the charge.