I Agree With This 100%

[barry2006]

FREE SPEECH THOUGHTS...
At this moment I am listening to the president praising the "port security bill" that he is signing. OK, I am all for security, but with all the highlights of the new increased efforts to protect our country safely tucked in this bill I RESENT that online gambling has been grouped in this bill designed to help fight terrorism. It is outrageous that our Law makers and special interest groups use popular bills for their own interests. Sure they make arguments that they are protecting us. They make arguments that terrorists launder money through gambling sites. Well Hello, why not put a ban on shipping, or construction, or internet sales, or a hundred thousand other ways people get ripped off or use their money. As far as I am concerned Ronald Reagan's words shine through this outrageous misuse of Washington Power when he said that the ten scariest words used in the English language is when someone arrives at your door and says "I am from the Government and I am here to help".

[Mister Sanderson]

good thread... spend that money cracking down on the pedifiles and online predators and such..gah;

[FastG45]

YES, I agree 200%. Most of the folks running our Government are as full of wind as a corn-eating horse. If brains were leather, all of them together couldn't saddle a flea. Governments are too big to solve the small problems of life and too small to solve the big ones. We live on the Planet of Wrong. There must be a parallel universe where on the Planet of Right it’s the other way around and common sense stills applies.

[chango55]

at one time this used to be the land of the free now it's the land of the oppressed

[Mister Sanderson]

its also the land of the dumb... if you don't believe me, take a look at our current pop culture and the crap we are so willing to swallow from tv and the radio.

[ken]

The Repubs don't think Neocons watse their money gambling!

[notrapmit]

repub or dem doesn't matter all they care about is the party or linning their pockets or playing a political game where the minority is protected and the majority is negelcted , they should not be allowed to serve more than two terms

[RichieC]

We all have our little agendas and things that involve us personally don't we? This is still the land of the free and the home of the brave. What did we think or do when abortion was legalized?when prayer and God was taken away from our schools,courts,money,etc,,? Chances are on this gambling issue was that a few wanted it to pass so it was attached to a real necessary bill. This has been done for years where special interest groups attach their stuff to popular bills (usually gov't funding) and they slide through. The best we can do is write our senators and congressmen and give them our views on the issues. The other big thing is to vote. That is what keeps us free and is our most important job as citizens of this great country. The gov't/president's job is to keep us safe. Some of you have probably heard the term LINE ITEM VETO which allows the president to veto parts of bills instead of the whole thing. Both parties claim they want ot give this to the president but not while the other party is in power. So if the president wanted to eliminate the gambling portion and not make it law he would have to VETO the entire bill. Not very practical and way down the list of importance to the country as a whole,IMHO. Vote for PEDRO in 08.

RichieC.

Stupid IS AS STUPID Does....

[horsecrazy]

I also agree! Why do they have to take large steps for small problems, and very tiny steps for BIG problems!

[Steve]

RitchieC,

You are correct about the Veto ...Absolutely. You are also correct about this attaching has been done for years..BUT...This time was VERY different.

Gambling was associated with Nuclear Bombs, Suicide Bombers, and so forth. In fact, the idea that any special interest matter would be allowed in such a Bill is criminal itself. This bill --which was supposed to be about making ou country safer---should have stood alone and sailed through without any issues casting doubt again to our legal system.

This bill was sponsored by James Leach of Iowa and John Kyl of Arizona. So, ask yourself why these two were tucking this away in such a powerful sure thing Bill. Were they getting all these calls from their home folks pleading for some relief from Nuclear On-Line Gamblers? NO...

It is, and always be, about the money and who stood to gain. Just look at where they are from. In addition everyone let it go ahead. If you could follow the money I bet you would throw up learning what this was REALLY all about.

A question I ask all the time to those who have all these negative views concerning Gambling is "Why is it illegal"? Sure, maybe it hasn't been approved by the voters in a particular State..but really...WHY? The answer is unless is has a federal tax stamp it is illegal. Bottom line? If the government can get a piece of the action then it's OK and no longer sinful.

Regarding this Bill, if it were meant to protect us, assuming that there are all these people ready to screw us poor souls then why wasn't it voted to regulate rather than criminalize? So, if you are one of those sick Gamblers you now have TWO problems and one is going to jail. By the way, where were all the hearings to discuss this issue?

For me the outrageous way this Bill was handled and attached to Terrorism makes me real mad and upset with those who sponsored and attached this Bill. The larger issue had to handled and I agree that at the signing the President had little choice. Its those others that took the path our sewage takes to gain their own interests without national debate and grouped us to Terrorism that has me hoping that all those involved are not reelected and are watched very closely for criminal behavior using the money they sold us out for.

Steve

[RichieC]

Understand your rage, Mr. STEVE. Without knowing all the details, I'm certain that Terrorism and gambling being coupled together was not the intent of this bill. It is a sleezy trick by our lawmakers to tie unacceptable bills or controversial issues to bills that they know will pass through the president. I've personally been involved on several occasions in simiular attaching to popular bills those that are not. A lot of PORK BARREL spending is done this way. One bill has no relation or connectivity to the other. Just attached so it will not get much if any discussion nor public notice. Fair? Probably not. It just gives you a bad taste when issues near to us gets by this way. A lot of this kind of attaching occurs with defence spending. I was furlowed on occasions because presidents would not sign bills to keep the Gov't running that had really undesirable attachments. There is probably not a big gov't conspiracy to eleminate gambling and in no way is it or could it be tied to terrorism. Just a few of our lawmakers had to honor some political promises. Sorry bout the ramblings.

RichieC.

Stupid IS AS Stupid Does.