Here are a couple of sites that have reported on Adelson's recent gaming expo speech.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...bling-25906211

http://www.vegasinc.com/business/gam...ternet-gambli/

Nolan Dalla skewered Adelson pretty good.

http://www.nolandalla.com/lies-lies-...poker-players/

from the ABC article...

"Critics have said it's because Internet gambling could be steep competition for Adelson's physical casinos. Adelson reasoned Wednesday that it was because there's no knowing who was gambling and no way to keep people who shouldn't, from doing so. He said he didn't want other families to suffer the "scourges" of gambling like his family did. He said his father was a gambler."

I guess all of his guests are free from the "scourge".
Unbelievable.
So instead of playing the FTP Daily Dollar, I should spend thousands to fly out and stay at the V and play games I have no reasonable chance to ever win at.

Can the PPA rally the troops to go on the offensive? We should actively support those running against the most vocal anti-poker politicians.

I wonder how Adelson explains the fines his company has had to pay for allowing underage gambling or the instances of money laundering?

what a crook

What do you think the PPA is trying to do through the DAP?

The old saying about leading a horse to water comes to mind.

One thing we could keep hammering both Wynn and Adelson on is they are people who don't understand technology, but they want technology restricted. This would be like a person who doesn't believe in modern medical care wanting to have what a doctor could do to be restricted.

So this guy does not want people so suffer gambling problems but owns a casino. Yeah sounds about right to me.

Understood, yes they do a great job with what resources they have.

What I had in mind would be a more targeted approach. For instance, the PPA could identify a target congressional race to have all PPA followers focus there efforts on. Senate/Rep, prop poker vs. anti poker, whatever. The PPA would know best which race to target on. The point is, I think if we did this type of focused approach, we could hit the radar so to speak.
Does this make any sense?
I just think pro poker supporters are spread to thin.

the PPA does a lot of that legwork already, but in order to make it work, there has to be follow thru from the players. Grassroots is just that, it has to come from us. This isn't something that 'they' or 'the PPA can do for us. They are a resource, its up to us to use it.

The DAP is targeted every day. We can't really drill in on a single race, as its effectiveness would thin with each day, while no other lawmaker would hear from us. IMO, what would be better would be to participate and to encourage others to do the same. The more participation we have, the more we can do.

I have a close friend who works as an assistant for a business magnate here in vegas, who has told us stories of sheldon and how much of a piece of **** he is. Apparently this guy gets contracts for tens of millions of dollars, such as buildings/concrete/etc, and will find a small flaw in it (not the right shade of grey,etc) and never fulfill/pay the contract. Apparently his billion dollar legal team is able to fight these suits in court for decades that the victims of his deeds cannot profitably pursue him in court due to legal fees. This guy truly is a piece of crap.

My friend told me several other specific incidents much like this.

Luckily for the planet, he probably doesn't have many decades left.

I wonder how many people on here play at an Adelson casino. I decided in 2012 after Adelson's involvement in the presidential election process, to never play at the Sands in Bethlehem, PA. There are other closer rooms, so it wasn't that big a sacrifice, but still...
During a home game, when the host, who has similar political views as I, mentioned a recent trip to the Sands I explained to him why I refuse to play there. He said he hadn't really thought about it before I told him. I wonder how many players play in his casinos not realizing who they're supporting. That's who we should be getting the word out to. Yes, I realize that Adelson isn't going to lose any sleep over me not playing in his casino but it's the principle. Why would I put money in the pocket of a man and a corporation that is actively advocating and working against my interests? I've tried to educate people around me, but I'm not as active on the issue as most of you people on here so I don't know, is there an attempt to educate poker players specifically or casino goers in general about boycotting Adelson's properties? His U.S. casinos are the Sands and the Venetian in Vegas and the Sands in Bethlehem, PA.

When I've suggested boycotting in LVL, I got blasted for being off topic. Also, a lot of people talk about how juicy the games are at the Venetian and thus they continue to play.

BTW, have you written to anyone at your area Sands to let them know you aren't playing there and why?

A silent boycott makes sense IMO. I know I won't gamble or stay in any Sands property. However, I don't think we want to stage a public protest and boycott because our numbers are likely way too small. It would end up putting a magnifying glass on who insignificant our opposition really is.

Good point. No I have not. That would be a good idea.

Perhaps not an organized official boycott. I guess I shouldn't have used that word. Although I would support one if one was called for, I'm not advocating for one. But educating players on this topic would be a good idea. How many players at those "juicy" Venetian games don't know or just haven't thought about where their money is going? And not just poker players. I'm sure if all those people dumping quarters into the Sand's and Venetian's slot machines (yes I'm fully aware they don't use actual quarters anymore) knew that their money was going to someone who's doing everything he can to make sure they'll never have the opportunity to play online, at least a few of them would chose to not play there.

As for not speaking publicly about this because our numbers are too small, how do we increase our numbers if we don't publicly talk about it?

I don't claim to be an expert or have great ideas on the subject. I may just be ramblng at this point, but any more opinions would be welcome.

LVL is a section here on 2plus2. When I have said someone shouldn't play at Venetian, I have gotten scolded by others.

Attitudes may be changing.

id never in a million years play there. as a matter of fact I have told a few people who were planning on staying there to stay elsewhere.

I'm no expert either. However, I think you've already got it figured out. We spread the word grass roots style. The way you did with your friend. Tell people at home games who play poker. Tell people who share your political views. If everyone tells their friends and their friends tell other friends then word will spread. Slowly but surely.

When I talk about a boycott, I am talking about encouraging people to not play, stay, or eat there AND letting Sands Corporation know why. I am not saying picket.

Lindsey Graham was caught on tape joking, "If I get to be president, white men in male-only clubs are going to do great in my presidency."

Hopefully, this Sheldon puppet gets what's coming to him.

While Graham deserves to get what's coming to him for a number of reasons, that joke isn't one of them.

What was the setup? If that is it, then it barely even makes sense, let alone be funny.

He was speaking at a male only private club.

Lindsey Graham unfiltered: jokes about white men, Baptists [cnn.com]

In the recordings, Graham, who is favored in his race for re-election next Tuesday against Democrat Brad Hutto, appears to joke about the possible 2016 presidential bid he recently floated in an interview with the Weekly Standard.

"I'm trying to help you with your tax status," Graham says in the recording. "I'm sorry the government's so f---ed up. If I get to be president, white men in male-only clubs are going to do great in my presidency." The crowd is then heard laughing.