 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
So sick of UIGEA (venting)
You cant send money to sportsbook, Only allowed to use "play money" on poker. This stupid act was Republican made and was put along side of a Defense bill (which is fine) but what does "defense" having to do with wagering????? F**k the Republicans, f**k this stupid ass law and f**k whoever thinks this law is good for America
Last edited by gridiron guru; 04-23-11 at 06:56 PM.
everything you said is true,but you left one thing out,under the dems online gambling has become worse
The dems are just enforcing laws that were already established under bush.
The argument is that offshore transactions fund terrorism. It's "money laundering".Originally Posted by gridiron guru
Republicans made poker more difficult to fund
A Democratic controlled Dept of Justice took away the largest 2 poker sites from Americans.
they both suck but I am sick of everyone acting like the democrats shit roses. they are no better then the republicans.
The blame lies with the Christian nutjobs and American society that embraces them. There are plenty in both parties...mainly from middle America. The reason gambling is legal in Canada and most of Europe is because they have to the good sense to keep religion out of government.
It was added to a homeland security bill because the sponsors couldn't get it passed as a stand alone measure. Quit blaming all the members of one party.
You have to ask how many representatives care a great deal about this issue. The Democrats wouldn't mind allowing betting online, but they want the government to get a cut. Don't forget they had a chance to change it and didn't.
The Christian Science Monitor a few days ago applauded the move against the poker sites because people's lives were going down the drain due to online betting. Paternalism, anyone?
"They" kept religion out of government in the Soviet Union, China and a good number of other places. How did that work out?
And there was this Baptist preacher who was shot in Memphis in 1968. He was animated by religion.
The argument against state lotteries has been made by liberals who eschewed the religion angle. But maybe you think anyone who is religious is a nut job.
Everyone who wants to ban some freely chosen activity is a nutjob.
i blame me. for living in this country. i am an adult. free(for now) to move where i actually will find more freedom. while i do blame the christian right for everything i can't do. i can always just get up and leave. ever since i was a teenager and the goverment killed 4 people at ohio state. i have always felt the people running this country was the enemy. so after 40 years i am still here in the land of the free. and it just keeps getting worse.what a sad fool i am.
Both parties are the enemy. Stop trying to blame one party over the other. The Dems could have easily done away with the UIGEA. But they chose not to.
Obama with his political hack AG Eric Holder, could have easily chose not to pursue legally run poker sites. They chose not to.
it wasn't part of the defense bill it was part the harbour safety act, you wouldn't want our harbours to be safe from terrorism? we give up a little bit of freedom in the form of internet gaming leisure but gain a lot more in making america safe, seems fair to me
Allowing me to transfer funds from a bank to an offshore gambling account is not something that is high on the radar of any political group. Once this situation came into being, we were all screwed.
It's another example of the difference between libertarians and many conservatives.
no i do not want to give up any freedom at all. the goverment has always used fear to take away thier citizens rights. all goverments. they have convinced you to be fearful of everything and evryone who is different. the only thing you should be fearful of is your goverment. can't believe people are this ingnorant. but then again g w bush won an election. acually got enough votes after what he did the first 4 years when he stole the presidency with his old man's buddys on the supreme court.
what did supreme court have to do w/ any of this? did supreme court rule in any way relative to g.w bush being elected? did they rule in any way in regards to UIGEA?
sounds like a piss-poor argument to me.. don't get your panties in a bunch just b/c god never intended for us to gamble..
This is my whole point. If I want to blow my money on a 4 team parlay or Buy in on a poker tournament that is my business. i am not no terrorists so why bother me. I think its because America cant tax, america cant get nothing out the deal so ban it just like marijuana
you are kidding me. the decisions by the supreme court,overruling the florida supreme court, to do with which votes were counted made gw the winner in florida(his brothers state,the florida supreme court wanted all votes counted). but he did not win florida by the votes. votes were counted in every district after the election which showed bush would have definately lost florida. the christian right (holier than thou attidute for everything) with gw in the white house has a lot to do with UIGEA. let me guess---you are republican------and consevative----you loved reagan--bush 1 and 2---hated carter-----even worse clinton. i will not respond on this subject with you again. it makes me vomit to think of these idiots running our country. even the ones i liked, was a worse of 2 evils thing. never mind the actual evils-war mongers--- like the bushs and reagan, come to think of it. when was the last time we landed on any other ground to kill. always started with a republican in the white house.
do you not understand the difference between COUNT and RE-COUNT?
another lie, site the source for your wild (and inaccurate) claims.
here's the one that showed RE-count would not have mattered:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-b...onducted-media
uhh.. FDR declared u.s entry to world war II
america can't tax current online poker companies b/c they're not located within u.s, those companies do pay taxes to their (rightful) country of governance. there exists many other companies domiciled outside of u.s that america cannot tax, but they have not been declared illegal
another strawman, if marijuana is legalized within u.s w/ production companies located within u.s, then those companies would be expected to be taxed within the u.s same as every other localized business
The Internet gambling provisions were added to another bill because the proponents didn't have the votes to get it passed on its own. What part of that don't you understand?
And please give us documentation that GW was pushing the gambling bill. We await your swift response.
most people wanted to be involved in that one. and i belive he had the ok from congress and the people. unlike all the republican conflicts that followed.
tired of your right wing crap. let's both just go our own way. each thinking the other is a fool.
I read the CSM article. They summed it up with a quote from some moron professor at Illinois (now my least favorite Big 10 school) who compared internet gambling to crack cocaine. Even if one accepts his idiotic implication - that an equivalent percentage of online gamblers and crack users will become hopelessly addicted and have their lives ruined - doesn't he understand that drug prohibition has been a resounding failure?
Both parties are jealous that they aren't smart enough to control gambling or agree on a way to regulate and tax.
Reply With Quote
