In his State of the Union, President Bush claimed..
There were
statements made by politicos recently that had serious direct ramifications to
the gambling rights community. One avowal was made by the current President
of the United States, George W. Bush. The other assertion was by one of the
final three contenders for the White House, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
In his
State of the Union,
President Bush claimed, “The people’s trust in their government
is undermined by congressional earmarks—special interest projects that are
often snuck in at the last minute, without discussion or debate. Last year, I
asked you to voluntarily cut the number and cost of earmarks in half. I also
asked you to stop slipping earmarks into committee reports that never even come
to a vote. Unfortunately, neither goal was met. So this time, if you send me an
appropriations bill that does not cut the number and cost of earmarks in half,
I’ll send it back to you with my veto,” said Bush to applause from both sides
of the aisle.
The “To Bet a Man Square Massacre” was a result of the
so-called Unlawful
Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, a pork barrel favor to conservative
traitor Bill “Jesus” Frist attached to the completely unrelated Security
and Accountability For Every Port Act of 2006.
Knowing
that respecting the democratic process would mean defeat, Frist was able to
circumvent debate and discussion by waiting until midnight
on the final night before Congress adjourned for the 2006 elections.
Could
there possibly be a better (if not bettor) example of as Bush said “special
interest projects that are often snuck in at the last minute, without
discussion or debate”? What the President failed to mention is he signed
the bill.
More
recently, Democratic President hopeful Hillary Clinton sat down with Bill
O’Reilly of Fox News in what appeared to be more of a courtship between
forbidden lovers than a no-spin interview.
In
response to how she would control spiraling oil prices, Clinton
answered, “Nine of the 13 biggest oil-producing countries that are in OPEC are
also members of the WTO. I would file complaints.”
The
direct implication that statement has on online gambling is that the
United States
deemed the World Trade Organization irrelevant when the international body
rightfully ruled that the US
unfairly targeted offshore websites by passing the anti-gambling rights act
while making an exemption for US firms that offer off-track betting on horse
racing.
In his
two-part love fest with Clinton,
O’Reilly opted to follow up with scripted softballs instead of challenging Clinton’s
courting of the WTO.
Would it
not make imperative that Clinton
insist we honor the WTO rulings against America
before appealing to them for assistance against OPEC? Why should OPEC respect a
ruling against them anymore than the US
has?
O’Quixote opted not to derail his dalliance with Clinton.
He sidestepped asking her what say she about the obvious conundrum. Get a room
you two.
Frankly
the chances of a potential President Clinton making good to the WTO is about the same as Bush refusing to sign Frist’s earmarks.
If
politicians on either side of the aisle actually practiced what come out of
their big mouths, the right to gamble would never have been infringed on to
begin with.
The
author Joe Duffy is CEO of OffshoreInsiders.com and widely accepted as one of
the all-time great sports handicappers of
all-time.