Internet Gambling Rights Not a Priority for Political Parties
When asked which Presidential candidate might be better for poker players and gamblers, a poker industry mainstay answered neither. In an interview with the "Las Vegas Sun", Jay Lakin said while both John McCain and Barack Obama are themselves poker players, neither has the rights of gamblers high on their agenda.
Just today, the Republican Party reversed its decision of yesterday removing a paragraph citing the supposed social ills of gambling and calling for a ban on online wagering. Masses of voters had written the party at its online platform website to inform officials of the views held by many stout Republicans, that the party was about small government and personal liberty.
The party responded by removing the anti-gambling passage, but after an outcry by far right religious radicals, the clause was placed back on the platform, potentially costing the party hundreds of thousands of votes at a single stroke.
Lakin said in his interview that poker is not a priority for either candidate, and it might be well into the next year before any action to rectify the existing situation is taken.
While neither party claims to support online casino gambling, the Democrats have been more likely to vote in favor of lifting restrictions. Republicans sympathetic to the desire for personal choice have been beaten down and bullied by such shills as Spencer Bachus, noted liar and Republican Representative from Alabama.
Members of the fringe elements which seem to wield influence far beyond their numbers in the party have used obfuscations and outright lies to push their anti-gambling agenda.
Scientific studies refute their assertations of the social problems that they insist accompany gambling, but they do not accept any evidence contrary to their opinion. This is not surprising for a group that insist fossils do not prove anything about the past.
Voters are encouraged to write and demand their will be heard here.
