Just for this idiotic post I'll play all my live poker at Sands casinos.

No you wont

I thought he was on the deathbed or something?

just because u like live doesn't mean u have to support someone who is actively fighting against online poker

Sources?

See there is one thing if you called him a scumbag (which to so many online poker players he is and that is totally justifiable). But once you call anyone a racist that you don't like, or they voted in a way you don't like there becomes a problem. Is 50% of the country racist?

He frequently claimed that Palestinians are a made up nation consisting of Syrians and Egyptians whose sole purpose is to destroy Israel.

It’s up to you to decide if those claims are racist or not. There are some relatively narrow definitions of “racism” that don’t cover statements like that because Palestinian isn’t a race. Not too different from claiming that a statement like “All Hispanics are rapists” isn’t racist because Hispanic isn’t a race.

So what you meant to say is that it WAS a terrible room.

Its worse now than it was.

I mean that's a cute explanation, you know that is not what that guy was going for though.

Can you elaborate? Somebody said Adelson is a racist, you asked for an example and I provided one with the asterisk that not everyone considers that racist.

His posting consisted of exactly that one sentence, so I am not sure what you think he was going for. If you think the racism has to be directed against African-Americans or people living in the US, you’re obviously entitled to your own opinion. But that’s not how most people would define racism.

if your views do not align with the founding of the country then, get the **** out. it's that simple.

In the words of the late Great George Carlin, boycotting Venetian (and his other properties) are simply "fine and dandy". But, I think a more powerful, pragmatic and efficacious tactic would be if someone could just FCOL dig up an old female associate/employee/ex-spouse/girlfriend/girl/boy/boyfriend etc. that was maybe physically abused/harassed or whatever else badly harmed by this repugnant SOB and come out and have that female/male tell their story publicly joining the "MeToo" movement. There must be at least ONE out there, no? Remember, Wynn got his arse banished from the industry in this fashion. Perhaps repugnant half hobbit - half orc Adelson can too, no?

P.S. - It wouldn't surprise me in the least to find out that Adelson perhaps was/is a pedofile who abused children years/decades ago and public maybe only finds out now.

The same could be said of a large percentage of poker players.

Hire Jacob Wohl. He will not even worry about finding someone who exists with a true story.

Of course the dirt has to be clean (no pun intended). I don't believe in vetting after the fact. It is just difficult to believe this sob does not have something on him... anything. And I still think Sheldy was born from a hobbit mating with an orc but I will never be able to verify that one.

Yeah that could be true, but that is 1. nonetheless not relevant and 2. even if it were, all men and women in US are under one rule of law (purportedly at least) so if Sheldy is a sexual abuser, he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law like any of the rest of us would be and NOT be shielded by his crony, corrupt, crooked capitalistic power he otherwise wields.

Some people think their opinion is the only one that matters,so dont tell me where to play or not to play, i dont care

Sorry, but your summary blame of live poker players. playing at the V. as THE reason "California and New York are out of the online poker market" Then doubling down that those same few players are "stopping interstate agreements" smacks of your utter ignorance and a lack of context.

There is no online poker in California because the vested gaming interests there, i.e tribes, race tracks and card clubs, are too greedy and protectionist to agree on a workable framework to accommodate their respective interests. You blame poker players who play live at the V as a necessary or sufficient force to stop online poker is those states, which is simply stupid political analysis , beyond words X 100.

If you were serious about playing online poker, in markets other than Nevada and New Jersey, you have several choices available to you ..... quit whining about no online poker being available, you nanny-state nattering nabob of negativism.

If you don't care about the poker community, then don't play online at sites offering you the opportunity. Instead, pretend it is a small group of live poker players who are bankrolling every defeat or opposition to legalization in additional States.

Just curious, where do you live and whae have YOU done to bring/continue online poker being available where you live ?

Do I play live at the V on occasion, yes. Do I play online, ever, No. Did I formerly operate a US-facing online poker network, yes ... Did the UIGEA cost me a lot of money, yes, in my view.... Was Sheldon its driving force, hell no.

Were Full Tilt and PokerStars and Caesars in large part responsible for the failure of authorizing leglslation to pass ? Yes, that sh*t show that was the Federal Solution wasted years that could have been spent organizing State-level actions.

Is there hope, yes. I think the rise of 18 or so States legalizing sports-betting, mobile or onsite only, may provide poker players an opportunity to log roll. Unless of course they follow your lead and piss and moan about supposed live poker traitors to The Cause in their midst.

Educate yourself rather than continue posting poseur nonsense. Then, get to work ...

Stop with your stupid lecturing brah. Maybe you need to educate YOURSELF on how bad of a lawyer you convey on here. And my wife says she wouldn't say hi to you if you were the only person in the room.

Its plain and simple that you are ******ed yes.

I love Trump, hate Adelson, think online poker has become a joke, and never play at the Venetian simply because one of their dealers once moved my chips from one seat to another while I went to the bathroom because someone asked for my seat while I was gone. So I disagree with everyone in this thread, fight me @ PCA if you don't like it.

I play at the Rio when I'm in Vegas near exclusively because it's too gutter for Doug Stanhope and that's my kind of place.

Thanks to OP for politicizing poker rooms. I think I'll restrict my play to Venetian, Wynn since both Adelson and Wynn were both big Republican donors and support Trump. Really didn't think about where I played before reading this thread, thanks OP.

fingers crossed

he is racist towards Iran


Adelson and FDD Want to Nuke Iran, Diplomacy
10/24/2013 06:37 pm ET Updated Jan 23, 2014
Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire best-known in political circles for losing a great deal of money trying to unseat President Obama in the 2012 election, is also a major donor to organizations that are pushing for new sanctions and war with Iran. Just yesterday, Adelson made some shocking comments on Iran that help clarify what the real goal is behind the latest diplomacy-killing sanctions push in the Senate. In a video recorded by Mondoweiss, Adelson suggests that instead of diplomacy, we should nuke Iran:

“What are we going to negotiate about? I would say ‘Listen, you see that desert out there, I want to show you something.’ ...You pick up your cell phone and you call somewhere in Nebraska and you say, ‘OK let it go.’ And so there’s an atomic weapon, goes over ballistic missiles, the middle of the desert, that doesn’t hurt a soul. Maybe a couple of rattlesnakes, and scorpions, or whatever. Then you say, ‘See! The next one is in the middle of Tehran. So, we mean business. You want to be wiped out? Go ahead and take a tough position and continue with your nuclear development. You want to be peaceful? Just reverse it all, and we will guarantee you that you can have a nuclear power plant for electricity purposes, energy purposes.’”

Become a founding member
So, instead of pursuing negotiations that experts agree could prevent an Iranian nuclear weapon, Adelson thinks it would be a good idea to break a nearly 70 year taboo on the use of nuclear weapons in warfare — the deadliest weapons ever invented that could end life on planet earth — in order to send a message that we don’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons because they could, you know, use them or something. And if launching a nuclear weapon against Iran convinces Iran’s government that having a nuclear deterrent might be a good idea, Adelson casually suggests that the U.S. should just go ahead and kill millions of innocent people.

Unfortunately, Adelson is not just some drunk uncle you have to put up with once a year at Thanksgiving, far from Washington’s power circles. He is a major player in bankrolling some of the most active Middle East policy lobbies and think tanks in Washington. Among them, he has given at least $1.5 million to a hawkish think tank, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), that has been the architect and among the chief advocates of increasingly stiff sanctions on Iran.

FDD and their neoconservative cronies know that they can’t openly call for attacking Iran with nukes or other weapons — at least not yet. But their ultimate goal in imposing sanctions is clearly not to use the sanctions as any part of a diplomatic solution, but rather to undermine one. In their latest op-ed in the Washington Post, FDD President Mark Dubowitz and Senior Fellow Reuel Marc Gerecht reiterated their call for the immediate passage of new sanctions that would limit President Obama’s ability to trade in existing sanctions for a nuclear deal:

“The administration and Congress would be wise to hit Tehran with more sanctions immediately... Abandoning the long quest for atomic weapons would be an extraordinary humiliation for Iran’s ruling class. That isn’t going to happen unless Iran’s supreme leader and his guards know with certainty that the Islamic order is finished if they don’t abandon the bomb.”

In other words, we should sanction Iran until we can’t sanction any more. Doing so would cripple the president’s ability to offer sanctions relief — a key component of any nuclear deal with Iran - while also signaling to Iran that the conciliatory approach of their new President Hassan Rouhani only invites more pressure. By spoiling the current diplomatic opening through new sanctions, FDD would make sure that their ultimate goal — attacking Iran and promoting regime change — is the only option remaining.

In the lead-up to the war in Iraq, a cabal of neoconservative groups helped to sell the Iraq war as a necessity and a cakewalk. It turned out to be neither. With Americans now more skeptical about rushing into an unnecessary war, FDD and other neoconservatives have learned how to adjust their tactics to sell the next war of choice. And supporting new sanctions, just as serious diplomacy is underway, is a simple way to ensure that we get there.

HuffPost
BEFORE YOU GO

Content loading...
MORE:
Hassan Rouhani War Sheldon Adelson Sanctions Iran
The Pope Met Trump And The Look On His Face Says It All
Following a tense war of words during the 2016 campaign trail, President Donald Trump finally met Pope Francis. Let's just say things got a little awkward.
HuffPost
TRENDING
Patrick Stewart Unveils ‘Star Trek: Picard’ Trailer, Reveals 2 Surprise Co-Stars
Ana Navarro Blasts Marco Rubio For Calling Outrage Over ‘Go Back’ Tweet ‘Self-Righteous’
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Embraces Her Maverick Role In First Town Hall Since High-Profile Spat
Lenny Kravitz Discusses His Blended Family, Calls Jason Momoa His ‘Brother’
Megan Rapinoe Blasts Trump’s ‘Disgusting’ Racist Attack On Progressive Congresswomen
Subscribe to The Morning Email.
Wake up to the




https://www.huffpost.com/entry/adels...WnCerv41FmxqVx







ADELSON: US SHOULD DROP ATOMIC BOMB ON IRAN
American-Jewish billionaire blasts Obama over negotiations with Tehran; says US should show Iran nuclear capabilities.



https://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-...on-Iran-329641

If you're bringing up politics continually in settings where it doesn't belong then there is something mentally wrong with you. It's a personality defect not a political view.