John McCain ..Gambling..

Old School

OVR
Forum Member
Mar 19, 2006
38,565
516
113
74
is this the same man who has tried for the last 15 years to eliminate internet wagering entirely..

sure rings a bell..:shrug:


someone please refresh this old man's memory


:0corn
 

Old School

OVR
Forum Member
Mar 19, 2006
38,565
516
113
74
December 22, 2004

[a little refresher now that I remember.]

Can John McCain save sports?
By Peter Keating
Special to ESPN.com

Updated: December 22, 2004, 5:49 PM ET
Email
Print
PHOENIX -- No politician enjoys battling bad guys like John McCain, and these days, the senior senator from Arizona wants to save sports from its own worst elements.

McCain, who was reelected to a fourth term in November, chairs the Senate Commerce Committee, which basically means he can stick his thumb into any activity in America where dollars change hands. He is a genuine sports nut who says the best perk he gets is the chance to buy tickets to otherwise sold-out boxing matches. And he is a maverick, by temperament if not party label, who enjoys attacking various corporate interests and standing up for underdogs.

In short, McCain styles himself a cross between Jefferson Smith and Ted Williams. He has an ambitious sports agenda, and he's got the power and tenacity to push it.
U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) recently sat for ESPN Motion cameras and commented on a wide array of sports-related topics.
? Boxing reform
? Steroids in MLB
? Merits of Sports


And with the sordid tale of BALCO and its founder, Victor Conte Jr., erupting across headlines on daily basis, McCain has something more, too: a scandal that's throwing light on the sports underworld, and that just might swing public opinion behind the efforts of McCain and his fellow reformers.

McCain is fighting on at least four fronts to clean up sports. Closest to his heart are his efforts to fight corruption and improve the plight of beaten-down fighters in boxing. For years, he tried an incremental approach: he was a key sponsor of a 1996 law requiring medical care for boxers and a 2000 law banning conflicts of interest among managers and promoters. But these efforts have been almost completely unenforced by state agencies, and now McCain is proposing a national commission to straighten out the sweet science.

"I'll push for boxing reform until it passes," McCain told ESPN.com in an interview at his Phoenix office. "The thing that gets me so involved is the exploitation of the boxers who, with rare exception, come from the lowest rung on our economic ladder, are least educated and are left many times after some years in the sport mentally impaired and financially broke."

But it's BALCO, specifically what McCain calls baseball's "meaningless enforcement" of its rules about performance-enhancing drugs, where McCain has been making the biggest news recently.

"I don't care about Mr. Bonds or Mr. Sheffield or anybody else," McCain barked to reporters after Conte went public with his story in ESPN the Magazine and the San Francisco Chronicle reported grand jury testimony given by Barry Bonds, Jason Giambi and Gary Sheffield. "What I care about are high school athletes who are tempted to use steroids because they think that's the only way they can make it in the major leagues."

Before the players' testimony leaked, McCain, whose committee has the records of MLB's drug tests, had predicted to ESPN.com that there would be "more to come & more in the BALCO situation." Now he blames owners as well as players for the mess: "[Baseball commissioner Bud] Selig and the owners are getting a free ride here," he says. "They've said, 'Well, it was the final item in our negotiations [for the last labor deal], so we just sort of let it go.' Well, wasn't it their obligation to press for a better kind of enforcement on steroids than they got?"

McCain has given both sides until January to revamp their collective-bargaining agreement. Otherwise, he says, he will introduce federal legislation to toughen drug testing in baseball.

It hasn't gained much notoriety yet, but along with his claims to being a steroid mastermind for Olympic athletes, Conte has also charged that a huge majority of baseball players are ingesting stimulants. And McCain is a key member of a group of members of Congress who are trying to regulate nutritional supplements, some of which are chemically similar to and have effects like the now-banned ephedra. (Each pill of Metabolife's flagship "Ultra" product, for example, contains 54 milligrams of caffeine and 6.6 milligrams of synephrine, a close relative of ephedra.)

McCain voted for DSHEA, the 1994 law that gutted the federal government's authority to oversee supplements -- and that triggered the explosive growth in the sale of everything from horny goat weed to bee feces. But he says: "I'm not satisfied at all. The bill I voted for, frankly, I was not as aware of it as I should have been."

Now McCain would like to force makers of supplements or any substance that affects the human body to test their products before bringing them to market. Given that the supplement manufacturers have huge political influence in Congress -- they can mobilize millions of loyal customers, and they have a powerful patron in Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah -- that's not likely to happen. But since the high-profile deaths of Steve Bechler, Korey Stringer and Rashidi Wheeler, all of whom used supplements, the industry hasn't been able to fend off all further regulation of performance-enhancing stimulants. In the coming year, reformers, led by Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and McCain, will probably be able to require manufacturers to report negative side effects to the government.

"It's incomprehensible to me that we would not have a provision that would require them to report adverse reactions," says McCain.

Finally, McCain wants to eliminate what he sees as the most troubling aspects of legalized gambling in the United States. He has led the fight to ban gambling on college sports, a battle the Nevada casinos have won (so far), in part by suggesting that he would make Super Bowl and NCAA pools illegal. (He wouldn't, since they are zero-sum games, not for-profit enterprises.) And McCain would ban Internet gambling -- not because it's addictive, but because players typically have no way of knowing whether they are in fair games.


All this crusading has made McCain a passel of enemies, and several of the men who would like to derail his plans have also gained power since the November elections. For example, Sen. Harry Reid, a Democrat from the gambling state of Nevada, has become the Senate Minority Leader. Reid's opposition stalled boxing reform for a full year in the Senate, though he's now on board with McCain's bill. But Reid also has worked assiduously to keep gambling on college athletics alive.

Then there's Don King, who hustled all fall for George W. Bush's reelection campaign, even taping an anti-John Kerry ad, and who surely wants to use whatever newfound influence he has to sway the Bush administration against boxing reform. McCain laughs off King's alliance with the GOP and predicts that if his national-commission bill passes the House of Representatives, President Bush will sign it.

And Rep. James Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican and Bud Selig ally, now chairs the House Judiciary Committee. Sensenbrenner came to Selig's aid during the commissioner's embarrassing testimony on contraction two years ago, and he's not likely to give a green light to any legislation that interferes with baseball's labor deal unless Selig approves it.

But powerful animosity is nothing new for McCain, who outside of sports has taken on tobacco companies, HMOs and big-money campaign contributors. The more villainous the opponent he draws, the more he seems to enjoy the fight. And just as important, McCain has come to see his role as skirmishing as long as it takes for public opinion to come around his way. About banning gambling on college sports, he says: "When the most respected coaches in college athletics come to me and say, 'We want this banned because we think it can have a terrible effect on young people, then I'm going to react. But is it going to pass? No."

For McCain, though, that's not the bottom line. "I'll give you a little straight talk," he says. "There's going to have to be another scandal, and there probably will be."

That's McCain: waiting for the next, inevitable burst of bad news to come along, to present an opportunity not only to excoriate wrongdoers but to corral the powerful into doing the right thing.

To take another step toward saving sports.

Tune in January 5, when Congress comes back into session, and watch him start with baseball.
 

Old School

OVR
Forum Member
Mar 19, 2006
38,565
516
113
74
smarter folks than me can bring us all up to snuff as to where these issues stand..


:0corn
 

ELVIS

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 25, 2002
3,620
1
0
memphis
dirt bag, i guess the true crime is has diminished to the point we have extra time to attack the tax payers who enjoy a little recreation.


i have never voted democrat before, but i will not vote for dirt bag.
 

Old School

OVR
Forum Member
Mar 19, 2006
38,565
516
113
74
The ESPN.com Interview: John McCain

The ESPN.com Interview: John McCain

The ESPN.com Interview: John McCain

Updated: January 18, 2005, 11:24 AM ET



ESPN.COM: You have sponsored legislation that would outlaw gambling on college sports, which is something millions of fans indulge in. Why?

McCain: I'll give you a little straight talk. It wasn?t my idea to ban gambling on college sports. It was because Dean Smith, Joe Paterno, Gary Williams, Lute Olson, you name 'em, all of them, all of these college coaches are saying that this is a temptation out there, and it's going to sooner or later corrupt some young athlete as it has in the past. That?s why I sponsored the bill. I don't claim to be -- I'm a sports fan, an avid sports fan, I don't claim to be an expert. But [if] the most respected men in college athletics, respected coaches, come to me and say we want this banned because we think it can have a terrible effect on these young people, then I'm going to react.

But is it going to pass? No.

ESPN.COM: The NCAA had been cooperating with you on that bill a couple of years ago, and then it turned out that they were holding events at a casino. Did they blow your chance to get a college-gambling ban passed?

McCain: I don't know if the NCAA blew it as much as the billions of dollars that are wagered on college sports. The casinos did a very smart job, the Las Vegas people particularly. They said, 'See, it's going to be against the law for you to engage in betting the company pool, the office pool during the NCAA tournament.' Well, give me a break, of course that wasn't the case.

The proposal says if there's nobody that gains from [a betting pool overall], then it's perfectly legal. But they scared the pants off everybody.

ESPN.COM: You are also against online gambling?


McCain: Absolutely. Internet gambling is skyrocketing, and a lot of these outfits that do it are located outside the United States of America. There is no confidence that you're in a fair game, there are absolutely no rules, no regulation.

Look, [when] I go to Las Vegas and see a fight, as I did [for] Hopkins-Oscar de la Hoya, I contribute a couple hundred dollars to the ailing Las Vegas economy at the gambling table --


"There's no doubt that baseball right now has meaningless enforcement [on dealing with steroids]."

ESPN.COM: Who'd you bet on?

McCain: I bet on Hopkins.

So I'm not a -- I don't judge other people, I don't tell people what to do. I enjoy gambling. I enjoy a weekend in Las Vegas and going to a show, etc., like millions of other Americans do. But in this particular case, it is not regulated, it is not supervised. It is wide open for all kinds of exploitation.

My colleague from Arizona, John Kyl, has been more of a leader on this than I have. I am told that it's very addictive, but that's not my problem with it. My problem with it is that there's no safeguards whatsoever.

ESPN.COM: So what would you do?


McCain: I would ban Internet gambling. I just would, but I don't know if that's going to happen.
 

Old School

OVR
Forum Member
Mar 19, 2006
38,565
516
113
74
I can't find a recent statement by this man as to his stand on this topic..

If anyone on the forum can find his campaign stand and comments on this issue I sure would appreciate it..
 

saint

Go Heels
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
9,501
140
63
Balls Deep
Our country is going to be in fine shape. After all, we have voters who will choose their candidates based on their stance on sports gambling. I can't think of a more important or pressing issue for our country right now than that.
 

IE

Administrator
Forum Admin
Forum Member
Mar 15, 1999
95,440
223
63
Our country is going to be in fine shape. After all, we have voters who will choose their candidates based on their stance on sports gambling. I can't think of a more important or pressing issue for our country right now than that.

as far as madjacksports.com goes, kinda bring's up some issues.......which i think old school was getting at.

btw ..

this is a sports/handicapping/gambling site.

543 users/visitors a day lose that in their postings..........
 

Old School

OVR
Forum Member
Mar 19, 2006
38,565
516
113
74
Our country is going to be in fine shape. After all, we have voters who will choose their candidates based on their stance on sports gambling. I can't think of a more important or pressing issue for our country right now than that.


There are certainly more pressing issues my friend.

But I would certainly think that the members of the forum would like to know his stand on the topic of banning Internet wagering.

Furthermore we will have voters who will narrow down their choices based solely on the color of the candidates skin or the gender of the candidate.

I hardly think our country will be in fine shape given the cold hard facts of the statement above.

I try to make an as informed decision as I can about everything I do.

All issues will be considered and everyone can BET their last dollar, all things being equal, when that decision times comes if it is between he and another candidate yours truly will not vote for the candidate who wants to prevent me from enjoying my hobby on a daily basis.
 

ImFeklhr

Raconteur
Forum Member
Oct 3, 2005
4,585
129
0
San Francisco
Got this from the Poker Players Alliance before Super Tuesday:

Purely as an informational service, we are providing PPA members with information on the records of the leading presidential primary candidates. Bear in mind that we can not make an educated judgment solely from candidates' votes on the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA), 1) because there were many other issues involved in its last-minute passage through the Congress, and 2) some of the candidates were not in Congress when it passed.

Frankly, there is very little specific information from most of the candidates on this issue, so we are also encouraging you to contact the campaigns of the candidates who interest you, and ask their position. Please let them know you are an undecided voter and a proud poker player when you contact the campaign, so we can illustrate the grassroots strength behind the great game of poker. It's time to let the presidential primary candidates know that Poker Is Not a Crime!

Note: Under the Internal Revenue Code, as a non-profit 501c4 organization, we are prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. We can provide candidate information.

Democrats
Hillary Clinton
Barack Obama
Republicans
Mike Huckabee
John McCain
Ron Paul
Mitt Romney

For the latest information on these candidates, please go to the web version of this guide, click here.

Share your thoughts about the candidates and their positions with your fellow PPA members at our PPA forums.

Poker Players Alliance




The Democratic Frontrunners:

Hillary Clinton:

The two-term senator from New York won the New Hampshire Democratic primary. She has recently expressed that she supports the industry?s position: to study Internet gambling to see whether it can be fairly regulated so that individuals can safely participate in it and American businesses can compete in the international market (Las Vegas Sun, 01/18/08). When contacting the campaign, be sure to let them know you are an undecided voter and a proud poker player.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/help/contact/


Barack Obama:

The senator is from Illinois and winner of the Iowa Democratic caucus. Obama has recently expressed that he worries that the Internet is "a Wild West of illegal activity", and supports a study of Internet gambling and supports regulation to address the worst abuses (Las Vegas Sun, 01/18/08). He is reputed to be a good player, and doesn't mind letting it be known that he enjoys playing poker for money. These stories are even on his own website. When contacting the campaign, be sure to let them know you are an undecided voter and a proud poker player.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/contact/


The Republican Frontrunners:

Mike Huckabee:

Republican Iowa caucus winner and former Arkansas governor, Mike Huckabee does have a clear position OPPOSING Internet Poker. Mike Huckabee responded to the National Coalition Against Legalized Gambling's questionnaire (the only candidate to respond, by the way). In it, he promised to veto any legislation repealing UIGEA or otherwise clearly legalizing online gaming.

Here is the question he was asked, complete with its bias and inaccuracies:

1) Last year, Congress voted overwhelming to criminalize most forms of Internet gambling. This year some members of Congress are promoting legislation to legalize Internet gambling. If such legislation passed, would you veto it? Huckabee answered "yes". That's about as clear as it gets.


John McCain:

The New Hampshire Republican primary winner does not have a specific position on Internet poker, but does appear to have been influenced by his fellow Arizona Senator Jon Kyl, who is a vigorous opponent of our rights. McCain, however, has always been willing to consider both sides of an issue and may simply need to know how strongly PPA members feel about this issue. We encourage you to contact his campaign and ask whether he has a specific position, and of course, to let them know you are an undecided voter and a proud poker player.

http://www.johnmccain.com/Contact/


Ron Paul:

In keeping with his Libertarian philosophy, Congressman Paul is a proud supporter of our cause. Rep. Paul has supported and sponsored pro-poker legislation, and has also made time to visit with PPA grassroots members, poker celebrities, and citizens lobbyists every time we have asked. His credentials on allowing adults the freedom to play poker are unblemished.


Mitt Romney:

The former governor of Massachusetts has no formal position on internet poker. However, he - like Giuliani - has contorted his issue positions wildly in a bid to gain support from social conservatives. As part of that effort, Romney tapped Tom Coates, Vice President, Truth About Gambling, Iowa, to his "Faith and Values Steering Committee." Coates, in turn, is vigorously opposed to gaming of any sort. We urge you to contact the Romney campaign, and ask whether the candidate has a specific position. As always, be sure to tell them you're an undecided voter and a proud poker player.

http://www.mittromney.com/ContactUs
 

ELVIS

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 25, 2002
3,620
1
0
memphis
Our country is going to be in fine shape. After all, we have voters who will choose their candidates based on their stance on sports gambling. I can't think of a more important or pressing issue for our country right now than that.



forgive me, maybe i won't vote at all. after all, ron paul is the only candidate i feel is worth a vote, but he has no chance getting the nomination.

furthermore, how much more do you want the F'n gov in your life ? i think they make enough shitty decisions that i don't need them calling me a terrorist, income tax evader, etc. -- all because i wager on sports.

maybe i will vote for the democrat (in republican clothing) after all, and make my party happy because i am a loyal voter - regardless of the shat bag candidate they give the nomination too.
 

hedgehog

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 30, 2003
32,881
691
113
50
TX
simple solution, allow Las Vegas casinos have online capabilities, sportsbooks, poker rooms and problem solved. I am sure Las Vegas is against online gambling because they have a monopoly on legal gambling.

I just wish it was all legal and regulated.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Forum Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,914
140
63
17
L.A.
simple solution, allow Las Vegas casinos have online capabilities, sportsbooks, poker rooms and problem solved. I am sure Las Vegas is against online gambling because they have a monopoly on legal gambling.

I just wish it was all legal and regulated.

The solution already existed. We had many sportsbooks and poker sites to choose from that we could easily deposit and withdraw with. Life was good. Then the Republican congress destroyed what was great. Now the Republican candidates (minus Paul) have spelled out that they pretty much want to get rid of internet gambling alltogether. Not sure how much more simple this can get. One more big blow to gaming and I wouldn't be suprised if Madjacks is forced to shut down completely.

McCain's history shows his position. He made major attempts to make betting on college sports illegal several years ago. In fact, the reason you can now bet on UNLV and UNR when in Vegas is a result of McCain. Vegas was worried that they were within a year of not being allowed to have college wagering so they lifted their own rule of not posting Nevada teams to try and get all they could while they could (around year 2000?). McCain's efforts did not result in a ban of college wagering, but Vegas continued offering Nevada teams anyway.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Well who knows John changes his mind all the time. Ask his conservative base who say they rather vote for the Dem's.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top