BUSH VS. KERRY... Which Choice Is Better For Internet Gambling?

Search

ODU GURU
Joined
Feb 26, 1999
Messages
20,881
Tokens
As an avid online sports bettor, it is very important for me to consider the answer to this question before casting my vote...

In my opinion, while it is not very clear as to which President is better for offshore/online sports betting, here's something to consider...

Senator John Kyle (R), from Arizona, has continued to try and get his ANTI INTERNET GAMBLING BILL passed for years. And although he hasn't managed to succeed up until today, he has continued to work feverishly to make it ILLEGAL for all of us to bet offshore and online...

One thing that I know for sure is that IF and maybe WHEN the KYL BILL gets passed by the House and Senate, PRESIDENT BUSH will automatically sign off on it and make it the LAW. He has said so and that is a fact....

On the other hand, Senator Kerry is not a lock to back such a BILL because he is much more of a believer in Individual Rights as a whole...

I throw this topic out for some serious feedback and discussion because although I am a registered REPUBLICAN, I am seriously on the FENCE regarding this year's Presidential Election...

Although one debate doesn't mean that much, I did think that KERRY clearly WON last night's debate, but whether it will have any serious impact on voters in swing States, remains to be seen...

As of now, I understand that BUSH may have too big of a lead for Kerry to comeback from, but stranger things have happened in my lifetime...

A penny for your thoughts...

Thanks,

THE SHRINK
 
Last edited:

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
I guess I am not the normal type gambler becuase I would trade internet gambling for a more safer world with a stronger president...I would not be happy giving it up but im 100% sure I could do so if the Kyle bill went thru .. so if it meant that Bush would run the country better then kerry but would vote to ban net gambling I could handle that IMHO.

but im sure im not the normal type gambler here so my view is way different Just my opinion
 

Part Bionic and Organic
Joined
Feb 21, 2003
Messages
5,626
Tokens
Dante said:
I guess I am not the normal type gambler becuase I would trade internet gambling for a more safer world with a stronger president...I would not be happy giving it up but im 100% sure I could do so if the Kyle bill went thru .. so if it meant that Bush would run the country better then kerry but would vote to ban net gambling I could handle that IMHO.

but im sure im not the normal type gambler here so my view is way different Just my opinion
AMEN
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
720
Tokens
Shrink For The Sake Of My Safety And Yours As Well As That Of Our Children, Friends And Neighbors Please Vote For President Bush On November 2 Because Our Lives Are More Important That Being Able To Get Down On Some Football Games And Nothing Will Happen To Internet Betting With Either Man In Office And The Last Time I Checked Feingold And Kohl Were Our Senators From Wisconsin.
 

New member
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
3,271
Tokens
As Shrink said, internet gambling falls under INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND PRIVACY. Personally I would much rather have my rights and freedoms, even if it means life is a little riskier. Both candidates will do what they can to fight terrorism, and probably one is not significantly better than the other. But they way they go about it would differ.

Don't be fooled into thinking you have to sacrifice YOUR rights for safety. Individual rights are what the U.S. was founded on and what makes it so great.

I will take my chances, but live my life FREE, rather than pretend I am safe and live under a watchful governement eye.

U.S. PATRIOT Act was the biggest setback on American freedoms that any of us will ever see.
 

RX Senior
Joined
Apr 20, 2002
Messages
47,431
Tokens
look at how much the "patriot act" has screwed the western union process.
 

Active member
Joined
Oct 20, 1999
Messages
75,444
Tokens
Are there any AMERICANS here thinking about leaving the USA?

Personally, I am contemplating seriously doing so.
 

ODU GURU
Joined
Feb 26, 1999
Messages
20,881
Tokens
Financial Services Committee Moves Legislation to Protect Military Personnel, Extend Terrorism Insurance, and Implement 9/11 Commission Recommendations​

The House Financial Services Committee today successfully moved three pieces of bipartisan legislation to: protect military personnel from unfair financial products and bad sales practices; extend the terrorism reinsurance program for two years; and implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

By a vote of 68-0, the Committee passed H.R. 5011, introduced by Rep. Max Burns (GA). The legislation would ban the sale of contractual mutual funds, an obscure product that disappeared from the civilian market more than two decades ago. Additionally, the bill would clarify that State insurance commissioners do have jurisdiction over military bases located within their borders, as well as military installations overseas. The legislation would require that military personnel be informed about life insurance available from the Federal government prior to the sale of any private insurance. The States are directed to develop standards to further protect members of the armed services. House Financial Services Committee Chairman Michael G. Oxley (OH) offered a manager’s amendment with the support of Rep. Rahm Emanuel (IL).

Rep. Jim Ryun (KS) offered an amendment to create a registry of barred insurance agents and financial advisors that would be made available nationally to all military installations and Federal and State financial regulators. Rep. Steve Israel (NY) offered a second-degree amendment to the Ryun amendment to require notification of military installations and regulators when there is a change in the registry. The Ryun amendment, as amended by Israel, passed by voice vote.

The full Committee also passed by voice vote H.R. 4634, the Terrorism Insurance Backstop Extension Act of 2004, offered by Rep. Pete Sessions (TX). The legislation would extend for two years the terrorism risk insurance program, which was created in 2002 to ensure the continued availability of commercial property and casualty insurance and reinsurance. A manager’s amendment was offered by Chairman Oxley and supported by Ranking Member Barney Frank (MA); Subcommittee Chairman Richard H. Baker (LA); Subcommittee Ranking Minority Member Paul Kanjorski (PA); Subcommittee Chairwoman Sue Kelly (NY); Rep. Michael E. Capuano (MA); and Rep. Steve Israel (NY). To protect taxpayers, the bill steadily increases the industry’s retention of risk and insurer deductibles in order to encourage the private insurance marketplace to develop long-term solutions for handling the risk of terrorism.

The Committee passed by voice vote its portion of the package of 9/11 legislation put forward by the House leadership to respond to the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. While the Commission’s report cited with approval the anti-terror finance and anti-money laundering provisions in Title III of the USA Patriot Act, it went on to say that the terrorists are motivated and highly adaptive, and efforts to block their finances will need to continue to evolve and improve.

The legislation would make technical corrections to Title III and includes provisions that would: require the Treasury Department to develop a national money laundering strategy; grant the Securities and Exchange Commission emergency authority to respond to extraordinary market disturbances; boost the authority of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, the U.S. Governments financial intelligence unit; and equate the possession of counterfeiting tools with the intent to use them with the actual act of counterfeiting.

The so-called “netting” provision included in the bill would revise the banking and bankruptcy laws to provide for the orderly unwinding of certain financial contracts where one party to the transaction becomes insolvent, thereby minimizing the risk of market disruption. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has stated his belief that this measure is vital to the financial system’s ability to endure a future terrorist attack.

Also included in the legislation is a provision that passed the House last year that would bar Internet gambling sites access to the U.S. financial services system by preventing the use of credit cards, wire transfers, or any other bank instruments to fund illegal Internet gaming transactions. The Committee has previously heard testimony from the Federal Bureau of Investigation that Internet gambling is vulnerable for use in terrorist financing schemes.

To ensure that the government’s efforts against terrorist financing are matched throughout the world, the legislation would direct the Secretary of the Treasury to establish an international terrorist finance coordinating council.

The Committee adopted the following amendments by voice vote:

Rep. Kanjorski (PA) to require a study on the business continuity planning of the financial services industry by the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Subcommittee Vice Chair Judy Biggert (IL) and Subcommittee Chairman Peter King (NY) to strengthen the hand of the Treasury Departments role in multilateral negotiations on international financial issues.

Rep. Joe Baca (CA) expressing the sense of Congress, that the insurance industry and credit rating agencies should consider a companies compliance with emergency preparedness standards when considering its insurability or credit worthiness.

Subcommittee Vice Chair Judy Biggert (IL) to commend the Department of Treasury for its work on emergency preparedness and anti-terrorist financing. Expressing the sense of Congress, that the Secretary of Treasury in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security should encourage public-private sector initiatives on counter-terrorist financing plans and submit an annual report to Congress.

Rep. Rahm Emanuel (IL) requires the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress on the progress of public and private sector counter-terrorism initiatives.

Rep. Jay Inslee (WA) to make a technical clarification to the internet gambling provision in the legislation.

Subcommittee Chairwoman Sue Kelly (NY) calling for the Secretary of the Treasury to draft regulations requiring the reporting in certain circumstances of cross-border wire transfers.

Subcommittee Chairwoman Sue Kelly (NY) and Rep. Luis Gutierrez (IL) to impose a one year cooling off period for senior bank examiners who leave a regulatory agency to accept employment at a bank they examined.
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
so what does that mean Shrink??? when does the ban on using neteller and other things to fund your accounts take effect??
 

ODU GURU
Joined
Feb 26, 1999
Messages
20,881
Tokens
It still needs to pass the whole House and the Senate. But, based on the committee vote, it doesn't seem to have any resistance...

THE SHRINK
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
if it did that would it take effect this year??? or is that up in the air
 

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2004
Messages
4,663
Tokens
Dante,

no offense but you are brainwashed. You are doing exactly what the Bush campaign wants you to do.. vote based on fear.

You think with Kerry in office we are more likely to get hit with another attack? That is ridiculous.

Considering your statement on how much better the country would be ran undr Bush.. let me ask you this..

Who has run the country better.. Clinton or Bush?
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
8,781
Tokens
You would be surprised Shrink. The committee votes quickly right now because Congress thinks the people want action on this bill and won't waste time arguing it in committee when they have elections to win and stump for back home. When it gets to the floor objections will quietly be raised like they were before, by states and special interests that don't want their opportunities to offer some gambling online blocked. If any of these objections make it seem likely there will be some debate on the matter, then leadership can quietly see to it that the provision gets taken off to avoid any in-fighting. This could happen before a vote in either chamber or just during the attempts to rectify differences that might exist between the House and Senate versions of the passed bill. I am not saying for sure it won't pass, but a lot of people have told me they don't think it will because it was too contentious an issue before to just sail through on legislation the voting public considers important.

As for who to side with Shrink, come on think about it. Who is responsible for sending out threats to media companies about advertising for offshore activities despite there being no clear law on this? John Ashcroft. Considering you sold the site to be moved to Canada, that shows the issue clearly worried you. If your vote is really up in the air, that alone would have caused you to change sides. BTW, I am registered Republican too, but no way would I ever vote for Bush again.
 

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2004
Messages
4,663
Tokens
I can tell you this Dante, This is the first time in my lifetime a President has affected my personal life and my personal choices directly. in regards to the kyl bill and the "un" patriot act

how do you feel about that ?
 

FreeRyanFerguson.com
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
13,308
Tokens
Fishhead said:
Are there any AMERICANS here thinking about leaving the USA?

Personally, I am contemplating seriously doing so.
Not sure I've heard this anytime recently. How come? I'm curious.
 

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2004
Messages
4,663
Tokens
Dante, I didnt get to see what you originally posted.. dont hold back.. this is a healthy fun discussion.. I wont be offended..
 

New member
Joined
Jun 20, 2004
Messages
4,663
Tokens
Newbie- 1st.. a provision on the Patriot Act was ruled unconstitutional. The original Patriot Act is very much in place..

2nd.. your avatar says it all.. I think you have smoked yourself damn near retarded.
 

I'm still here Mo-fo's
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Messages
8,359
Tokens
WildBill said:
BTW, I am registered Republican too, but no way would I ever vote for Bush again.
:aktion033:aktion033:aktion033 Nice to see someone using logic and sensibility!

I agree with you on the prediction. As usual, the Congressional Repub's will stop at nothing to legislate morality, as if they have a monopoly on it.
This is pretty much a diversionary and kinda sleezy underhanded way to try and sneak the bill through by attatching it to a larger measure, under the umbrella of "national security" Hogwash
jac-"kyle" is another one of those idealogues that just doesn't seem to get it. :finger:
The provision will be divorced from the bill to avoid overall failure of the bill itself, so I wouldn't worry too much.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,967
Messages
13,575,633
Members
100,889
Latest member
junkerb
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com