Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Since when is Gambling "Liberal"?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 12:52 PM
Original message
Since when is Gambling "Liberal"?
Edited on Thu Oct-13-05 12:55 PM by devilgrrl
I write this in regard to this thread. When did this all happen?

Judging the sorry state of Atlantic City outside the realm of casinos I would think Gambling would be considered conservative, as it seems to benefit no one except the owners of those casinos. What am I missing here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
triguy46 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. I was wondering about that this AM
Is it liberal or libertarian? I'm thinking the latter which then raises questions of compatibility between liberalism and libertarianism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
2. the GOP now calls it "Gaming" as though it is not targetted to the poor
So much nicer of a tone than that rude "Gambling."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. Glad I missed that thread!
I have never considered gambling "liberal". About the only one who it benefits are the owners of the casino.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. It isn't--the ones who love it are tax hating Republicans and mobsters
And they are often one in the same...

Ask Bill "abort the black baby" Bennett--he'd give you ten to one odds on that assertion!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
melody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Do they love it or do they not want it outlawed?
I don't want it outlawed. I don't want the government telling me I can't gamble - and I'd have to have a gun to my head to get me to go into a casino and throw my money away on that nonsense. I'm all for casinos funding gambling addiction intervention programs as a necessity for a gaming license, however.

If we start passing laws against every vice in the world, we risk becoming the very fascists we have in office now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Two words--PAUL LAXALT
Former GOP gov, former Senator, mobbed up Reagan confidant. Make no mistake, the bulk of gambling related contributions go to the GOP--they are seen as more PRO BUSINESS than the Dems.

http://www.gamblingmagazine.com/articles/27/27-409.htm

The casino will have 800 slot machines, 13 table games and about 600 employees. Rooms will rent in the $40-a-night range. In other gaming decisions Thursday, the commission recommended a permanent license for former Lt. Gov. Bob Cashell to run the Ormsby House casino in Carson City. Cashell has been operating the casino, built by former U.S. Sen. Paul Laxalt, R-Nev., under a two-year license. During the hearing, Cashell said the new owners of the hotel would put $8 million to $10 million into its renovation.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:lEd8Kj8ViDAJ:www.policestudies.eku.edu/POTTER/International/Reagan.htm+paul+laxalt,+gambling+casinos&hl=en

Senator Paul Laxalt: Paul Laxalt, the former Governor and Senator from Nevada, was Ronald Reagan's "closest friend and most trusted advisor" (Wall Street Journal, June 20, 1983: 1). Laxalt, who met with Reagan two or three times a week, was described in the press as the "first friend," and Reagan's "eyes and ears" in the United States Senate (Friedman, 1984; Condon, 1983; Waas, 1984). Senator Laxalt had served as Reagan's campaign manager in 1976, 1980, and 1984 and had delivered the nominating speeches for Reagan at the Republican National Conventions in those years (Friedman, 1984: 34; Hamill, 1984: 13).

While Laxalt's White House connections gave the impression of great respectability and power, his other associations were less than savory. Particularly troubling was Laxalt's long-time friendship and political association with Allen Dorfman, the man who had supervised the use of the Teamsters Union's Central States Pension Fund as a private bank for organized crime figures (Moldea, 1978: 7; Time, August 8, 1977: 28; Brill, 1978: chapter 6; Washington Post, January 21, 1983: 1). Laxalt made no secret of his association with Dorfman and his actions on Dorfman's behalf, as the following letter sent to Richard Nixon asking that the incarcerated former Teamster Union president, Jimmy Hoffa, be pardoned indicates:
"Dear President Dick:
The other day I had an extended discussion with Al Dorfman of the Teamsters, with whom I've worked closely for the past few years ... This discussion, which described in detail the personal vendetta that Bobby Kennedy had against Hoffa, together with other information provided me over the years, leads me to the inevitable conclusion that Jim is a victim of Kennedy's revenge" (Moldea, 1986: 260).

Laxalt went on to describe Hoffa as a "political prisoner" and asked Nixon to pardon him on his jury tampering conviction. At several other points in the letter, Laxalt called attention to his friendship with Dorfman, the man who had been named by the Justice Department's Organized Crime Strike Force as the person "most responsible for turning the Teamster pension fund into a series of mob loans" (Walsh, 1983: A9): "While I don't know Mr. Hoffa personally, I have had the occasion to have a great deal of contact with Mr. Dorfman ..." (Moldea, 1987: 260). Dorfman's role in organized crime was immortalized for all eternity when he was shot down by ski-masked killers in a Chicago parking lot in 1983 (Washington, Post, January 21, 1983: 1). Accompanying Dorfman at the time of his murder was major Chicago organized crime figure Irwin Weiner, who escaped unscathed from the attack (Ibid.).

But Allen Dorfman was not the only organized crime figure who was close to Senator Laxalt. Another major political supporter of Laxalt was the late Moe Dalitz, famous as the head of the notorious Cleveland Four during Prohibition and one of the leading organized crime figures in Las Vegas. When Laxalt was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1974, Dalitz boasted that, "Laxalt is my boy, I put him there" (Friedman, 1984: 36). In his two campaigns for the Senate, Laxalt received $50,000 in direct campaign contributions from Dalitz and several of Dalitz's associates who were named by Department of Justice organized crime investigators as organized criminals (Wall Street Journal, June 20, 1983: 1). When the Wall Street Journal investigated Laxalt's ties to Moe Dalitz, Laxalt said, "He's been so decent to me over the years, there's no way - I don't care what the political considerations would be - I would turn my back on him" (Ibid.: 18). Further probing of Laxalt's organized crime connections turns up close relations with still other major organized crime figures:

--Rudy Kolod, a felon who had been convicted of fraud and extortion in 1965 and a man with illicit business dealings involving the Teamsters Union, Meyer Lansky, the Chicago Outfit, and other organized crime groups, was a key fundraiser for Laxalt's 1966 gubernatorial campaign in Nevada (Hamill, 1984: 10). When pressed on his relationship with Kolod, Laxalt said that he "did help us tremendously" (Ibid.; Friedman, 1984: 36).

--The late Sydney Wyman, who contributed heavily to Laxalt's Senatorial campaigns, was a large-scale illegal gambling operator and former business partner of Bugsy Siegel (Walsh, 1983: A8).


--Allen Glick, a Pittsburgh attorney who served as a Las Vegas frontman for both the Chicago Outfit and Meyer Lansky, was also a major Laxalt fundraiser (Ibid.).

--Organized crime operative Al Sachs, who has been identified by Justice Department sources as a major participant in organized crime's illegal casino profiteering and skimming operations, also was a most generous contributor to Laxalt's campaigns (Friedman, 1984: 32-39).

--Campaign funds also came to Laxalt from Frank "Lefty" Rosenthal, one the most important organized crime figures in Chicago and a man generally acknowledged as one of the largest "layoff bankers" in the Midwest (Ibid.).

--Morris Shenker, who provided legal representation for the Central States Pension Fund, was a business partner of Meyer Lansky, and according to informants cited by the FBI worked closely with Kansas City organized crime figures, also raised campaign funds for Laxalt (Ibid.).

--Former Texas organized crime figure and entrenched Las Vegas gambling magnate, Benny Binion, also was one of Laxalt's strongest and most charitable supporters (Ibid.). ....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
melody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. What has that to do with the issue of gambling?
Should we outlaw porn because the wiser heads in that business donate to more liberal people? Do we outlaw whatever field backs the opponents?

There's a way to have responsible gambling and fairness without being everybody's meddling Auntie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. Who is talking about outlawing it???
My point, in brief--the gambling industry PREFERS the GOP. They feel they are more pro business than the Dems, and believe, falsely, that the Dems disapprove of gambling.

The gambling industry in NV was in bed with both the mob and the GOP for years...vestiges remain, and many former politicians are up to their necks in gambling endeavors--quid pro quos, as it were.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
melody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. That was the topic earlier discussed - outlawing
I don't like it either, but I sure as hell don't want it outlawed.

Of course rich men serve their own interest... hath ever been thus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. The branch of this thread starts with the question of who loves it
Post 4. And the GOP loves gambling, and gambling loves the GOP, way more than they love the Dems, or vice versa. Tom Delay, George Pataki, Paul Laxalt, and those are just the most visible...the monkeyking actually wants to give gambling industries in NOLA the same tax breaks that a bakery or other business would get--like they need the leg up! Please! Crony politics at its finest...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
melody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. Well, it followed on the other day's "should it be legal" free-for-all...
Confusion is rampant at my age. lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #18
31. It's the schizoid personality of the modern republican party.
The pro-business, pro-crook, libertarian wing loves the gaming industry. The anti-fun fundie, legislate your morals wing hates gambling.

That leads to fundie, moralistic Ralph Reed supporting gaming, and mainstream repubs declaring that the dems are going to let gambling into the schools.

I know it is said that it is a sign of higher intelligence to be able to process a paradox, but DAMN!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
groton Donating Member (75 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. no not at all
I live in CT not far from the two largest Casino's in America both are Ran by Native American Tribes.
The People who Benefit from them are not Republicans or Mobsters but there poorer Minority's .

I Like to Gamble I know the risk and the odds for the games i play Poker,BlackJack and the Pony's.
i also set a limit on what i bring to the casino.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
23. Who ripped off native americans WRT casinos?
Why, TOM DELAY and his lobbyist criminal pal did! http://slate.msn.com/id/2116389/

And whose pal is involved in northeastern AI gaming ventures? Why, Governor Pataki's old buddy!! http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/pequots.html

And if you do not think the mob is all over American Indian gaming, I will have some of what you are smoking.

See my post above, re: Paul Laxalt.

I have a friend who works at FOXWOODS. She is not AI, nor are any of her friends that I have met who work there. I am sure the tribes are making some money, but I suspect they have plenty of hired management talent. She tells me there are more than a few Soprano like types who breeze in there, comped to the max, on a regular basis. So I would not be surprised if the mob was in there, too, adorable commercials notwithstanding....

And who is gambling's new best friend?? Why, MONKEYBOY!

National gambling companies -- already rushing to rebuild casinos on the Gulf Coast -- would be granted access to millions of dollars in tax breaks under President Bush's plan to entice businesses into the Katrina disaster zone.

In a break from previous Gulf Coast economic development practices, White House officials said they do not plan to exclude the gambling industry from huge tax write-offs for investment in equipment and structures in the president's proposed Gulf Opportunity Zone.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/21/AR2005092102394.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
6. Well misogyny is liberal - as long as someone is naked.
Edited on Thu Oct-13-05 01:12 PM by mzmolly
So, what's your beef!?

;)

In all honesty, I haven't an issue with gambling per se. I see it as rather a-political personally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mongo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. Whereas replacing one set of oppresive beliefs
with your own repressive beliefs is called What?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. You tell me.
Edited on Thu Oct-13-05 01:50 PM by mzmolly
Is misogyny no longer oppressive these days?

How bout gun control, is that liberal or conservative in your view?

~ Nevermind, I'd rather not hijack this thread. ~

Cheers.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
8. I believe people should be free to do with their money as they wish
Its a freedom issue, the govt hasn't the right to decide for me whether I pump my money into some machine anymore than it does to decide for me whether to smoke a joint or have sex for pay - I'm not promoting any of these actions, their virtue is beside the point - its my body, my mind, my money - and my choices. I'm not state property, and it should be no business of the government what choices I make (as long as I'm not infringing on the rights of others).

maybe that makes me more of a libertarian than a liberal in this case, tho I've never really been big on labels anyway...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
triguy46 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #8
38. and that gets back to my question of semantics...
is that viewpoint a liberal one or a traditional libertarian one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. it could be both, I'm not sure. according to the def. of liberalism,
A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority.

allowing gambling ( I really don't like that word, allow) would be liberal, letting individuals make their own choices.

and its clearly libertarian - maybe both labels apply

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mongo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
9. Maybe it is because being progressive
includes not foisting your "values" onto other people.

De-criminizing minor social "ills" that people will do regardless of their legality is better for society overall, as it takes the criminal element out of the picture.

We could put Marijuanna, gambling, prostitution, porn into the above catagory (sorry if I missed anyones favorite vice).

At least that's how I see it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. I'm not that convinced that mob run gambling would be that widespread
Edited on Thu Oct-13-05 01:44 PM by wuushew
For the most part don't black markets typically result in less product at higher prices?

Prohibition was a fundamentally flawed goal by virtue on the impossibility of enforcement. Alcohol most certainly can said to be a negative influence in society. The enjoyment of intoxication must be weighed against the drunk driving deaths, violence and ill effects and health. Can not we view are lives in a more systematic view were basic needs take president over the utility gained from more higher order utilities like personal freedom?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mongo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #19
27. I think that prohibition proved
that you can't outlaw activities that people are going to do anyway.

And at some point, prices, especially for high taxation creates black markets. Cigarettes are getting to the point that the cost is creating a black market.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SiouxJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
11. Go to a casino and see how many "W" stickers you see
in the parking lot. Gambling is definitely a conservative's hobby.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
groton Donating Member (75 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Depends
When i go to the two casino's that i go to I'm more likely to see a Karry or Dean sticker then a W Sticker but of course I am talking about Casino's in a Solid Blue State of CT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SiouxJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #12
36. Interesting. I'm in a so-called red state so
Although it's not as red as it used to be (AZ). I see a lot more W's on the occasion when I pop into a casino. I love pulling in next to them with my Kerry sticker (still on my car).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hughee99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #12
37. As someone else from the area, I have to agree with you on that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
melody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. Gambling is a Native American business where I am
And trust me, very few Native Americans are Republicans (outside, of course, of Ben Turncoat Campbell).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. Well if the Native Americans found a way to get
back some of what we stole from them then more power to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #24
30. Billions Missing From U.S. Indian Trust Fund
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
14. I consider it a business like any other

Can't see any real ideological reason to be for or against it.

The politics of it come from several different places.

1) How much money will it take from businesses that sell non essential items.

2) What other industries will a new casino compete with ie restaurants, bars, bingo etc.

3) What sectors will it help, local airport, hotels, taxi etc.

4) A moral opposition (I don't agree with it, but there is moral objections on both the left and right.

along with other local issues that come into play.

In Louisiana and Texas the biggest opposition has always come from right wing Christian groups, who argue morality.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jose Diablo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
21. Good question
Is the meme that gambling is a liberal thing a new RW christian talking point? Makes no sense to me. I have never considered gambling to be either a conservative or liberal thing. Liberals and conservatives both gamble and not gamble.

Sounds like a Falwell, Robertson or Dobbs idea to me. Since when is it a liberal thing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neil Lisst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
22. I am personally appalled at gambling excesses, but ...
... But I believe in freedom, and that means if someone wants to pierce their skin, change their sex, take mass quantities of things bad for them (be they drugs or calories), believe in religion, or let someone tie them up and flog them ... I'm ok with that. Just don't scare the animals while you're doing it.

I hate to see poor people lined up wasting their precious resources on a stupid get rich quick scheme, but the alternative is stopping them, which I find repugnant to my beliefs.

http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
25. a sea of blue hair looks up from their
church-sponsored bingo game and says:

"Gambling is evil!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LondonReign2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
28. Because Liberals don't force others to follow their beliefs
Republicans try to cram their beliefs and so-called morals down everyone's throats. Liberals don't.

Don't like gambling? Then don't gamble.

Same with alcohol, tobacco, porn, or any other form of entertainment. Liberals son't try to unnesccasily intrude on others' freedoms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #28
33. Funny you mention that
The AFA and the Southern Baptist Convention are waging war against the casinos in Mississippi that went under because of Katrina. You see, the law was written so that casinos are confined just to barges on water to try appease the religious groups. Of course, we know what happened to that scheme. Now they are opposed to changing the law to allow casinos to be build on land to afford more safety against hurricanes. They bring out the usual argument of it being a sin and being immoral, and then they try and legislate it on you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
32. I don't think gambling is either progressive or conservative
It's a vice in large quantities, though. In any other case, it's a recreational business, but unlike hotel and resort businesses, it often attracts graft and corruption with it.

My views on casino gambling are mixed, to say the least. I will say this though:

What people do with their spare time is no business of mine. The only time it does become a business of mine is when it affects me personally, like a higher crime rate in my neighborhood. Where a conservative wouldn't want to spend time and effort cleaning up the mess, progressives would by setting up social programs to address the social ills.

I come from the Mississippi coast where we had these casinos, and it caused an economic boom not seen before on the coast before the 1990s. I believe it had a net positive on the three coastal counties. The casinos were wiped out now as well as many other businesses in the aftermath of Katrina. The boom allowed many other businesses not related to gambling to spring up like hotels, shops, and restaurants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pitohui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
34. since when is kicking ppl while they're down "liberal"?
gambling is a key source of jobs on the gulf coast & i'm appalled that ppl find anything progressive abt taking this "opportunity" to attack & stop us from re-building

there is a chorus of little frogs peeping "oh don't rebuild it's a swamp," "on don't rebuild it's a sin," "oh don't rebuild because a condo might accidentally get built," "oh don't rebuild it's an environmental hazard" & i am not best pleased that ppl are not being called on it more strongly

it is the CONSERVATIVE way to shit on ppl while they are down

LIBERALS & PROGRESSIVES are supposed to be better than this

if you want to help, help, if you don't, get the hell out of the way

but don't put on a holy-roller anti-gambling mask & use that as an excuse to kick ppl while they're on their back

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-05 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
35. Gambling is considered a SIN.. Sin = liberal eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC