I can't be bothered to read the article; what has the guy in drag got to do with it?

To all f tards calling them hypocrites re 'feds don't want into gambling':

They are saying they don't want to invest/profit from it.... Not that they don't want DOJ to f with it... Completely different.

Though they are obv liars... Gambling = mega tax ldo

why are you guys taking this article as the last word on the subject? Billion dollar corporations seem to be betting that legalization is gonna happen and many are setting themselves up for that. It would seem that they know more people on the inside of the political scene... my money is with them...it's gonna happen.

I can think of a few reasons. Vegas and Miami Canada is not. Its bloody cold there in the winter time. (I have family in Alberta as well as Ontario and due to the law changing Im actually a dual citizen now of Canada and the US). That being said my biggest beef with Canada is taxes are actually worse in Canada then the US overall (I can buy a bigmac cheaper then a pack of cigs theres something wrong with that). But on the flipside the Conservatives have a solid grip on Parliment and the Looney is worth more then the USD right now. Im still keeping my options open at this point but if the US keeps goign down the craphole I may have to move North (laugh My wife was married to a Canadian before ironically so it would be her 2nd landing snicker)

The Sun most certainly represents the Busch League of Las Vegas newspapers.

I'm more sick of the caption than the photo. Why the hell can't they just say "a woman plays poker online"?

You must not have played on Stars much, or you would know that two outs gives us ~ 75% equity.

Because that wouldn't emphasize how spooky, shady, and totally illegal and wrong internet poker is. As was pointed out, she doesn't even appear to be playing.

See, this quote from Kyl annoyed the hell outta me. He makes it sound like the US government is going to open up its own online casinos (which I don't necessarily have a problem with, but of course some would see it as eeek, socialism!) when all that's being discussed is regulation and the revenue that would generate. He puts a really sneaky slant on "government getting into the business of gambling." I-poker legislation wouldn't be a case of this anymore than legalized gambling anywhere is. Stupid thing for him to say.

I despair of our government (and many of my contemporaries accepting it because this is the way its always been) ever ceasing to try and legislate preference and morality... and doing it poorly and ever more inconsistently.

Keep in mind this is just one article. While it does give us some information that doesn't sound all that positive, it doesn't mean this is going away. I wish they would hurry, but I still don't think online poker is going to be gone forever. It just doesn't make sense. Its a cash cow that someone is going to want to exploit, you would think.

Kyl is most likely referencing the Barton Bill in which the government would regulate IPoker and force states to opt out instead of having to opt in. The Reid Bill that will be introduced probably by Thanksgiving will address this by having an opt in bill and no federal government oversight or taxation(other than standard business taxes).

^ god I hope you're right

please, be true

I would love for this to be true but we need more details from Kyl to suggest this.

These are the only comments we have from him right:

Of course I read the full article, I also know who Kyle is, and I stand by my opinion of him.

Not sure what your point has to do with my opinion of Kyle. I'm sorry if we seemingly have differing opinions, as I have the view that my liberties are under attack constantly by corrupt politicians who take stances that only benefit them and will change their positions when/if it further benefits them. ESPECIALLY when doing so behind some false pretense by saying he doesn't want Gov involved. It's absolute ****.

I'll make my "constructive" debate and I'll continue to do it with anger, because anger is a motivator and motivates me to get off my ass and stop idly sitting by while these guys destroy my life and liberties and sit there and hope they give it back to me one day, or worse, beg them for it. I'm of the opinion they should be exposed and challenged, rather than being blindly lead by their self serving views and actions on things that impact me.

Has anyone seen any comment on this from the PPA?

I'm not implying that the Reid bill will instantly pass. I was addressing this:
I don't believe Kyl would support Campbell or Barton bill for this reason, so until the Reid bill is introduced, I don't think any comments from Reid or Kyl matter.