Gambling Bill NOT officially dead this week

Search

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
12,563
Tokens
Why do you keep posting. You said on covers you were going to stop posting because of the gambling bill and have admitted you lied about your mba.
 

New member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
917
Tokens
gtc08 said:
Why do you keep posting. You said on covers you were going to stop posting because of the gambling bill and have admitted you lied about your mba.

What?

Im asking for clarification on this article. Bedtime for you apparantly.
 

"It's great to be alive and ahead by seven" Mort o
Joined
Feb 2, 2002
Messages
5,649
Tokens
This is NOT good. Frist and his bible thumpers remind me of a gang of Draculas. This bill will be passed in the darkness of night. LT
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
Internet gambling bill revived in DoD measure ...WTF!!!

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 width=490 border=0 valign="top"><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=2>Internet gambling bill revived in DoD measure
By Patrick O’Connor and Roxana Tiron
</TD></TR><TR><TD>Controversial language to curb illegal gambling on the Internet snuck back into the defense authorization bill over the weekend.
While the language in the bill was not finalized as of press time last night, the insertion of the Internet gaming language could be a big win for Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.).
But that potential victory hung in the balance on Monday as House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) continued his threats to postpone a vote on the overarching bill until negotiators from both chambers include unrelated measures on immigration and court security.
“The Speaker will not move this bill until these critical security measures are included in it,” Hastert spokesman Ron Bonjean said yesterday.
Conferees were still ironing out defense-related issues yesterday, but lawmakers are now fighting to include a number of non-defense items in the must-pass bill that has become a regular vehicle for pet projects.
The Internet gaming language would create an additional enforcement mechanism for federal officials to crack down on money transferred from banks, credit card companies and other financial institutions to gambling outfits overseas.
Internet gambling is already illegal in most of the country, with the major exceptions of Nevada, Indian reservations and other smaller locales where residents have voted to change the law.
The fight in Congress to enact further enforcement methods has persisted since former GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff fought to defeat a bill offered by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) in the summer of 2000.
Goodlatte combined his language with a bill introduced by Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa) that passed the House earlier this year.
The language included in the defense reauthorization bill appeared to mirror Leach’s language, numerous outside lobbyists said over the weekend. Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) has been pushing a companion to the Leach bill, which is far narrower than Goodlatte’s legislation that would, among other things, revamp the 1961 Wire Act.
Frist has been working hard to include some version of the Internet gaming language in the defense reauthorization bill in what a number of outside lobbyists see as a push to ingratiate himself with social conservatives and, more specifically, Leach, whose endorsement would be a big boost during the Iowa primary.
Frist co-hosted a field hearing on Internet gaming with Leach earlier this fall in Iow.
The Internet gaming issue is far from settled because conference negotiations do not end until all the negotiators have signed off on an agreement.
This move to include an Internet gambling curb comes after Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner (R-Va.) and Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the committee’s ranking Democrat, rebuffed Frist’s attempts to include it in the bill because it is not related to defense policy.
K Street has been watching the back-and-forth on Internet gambling intently. Wall Street, in particular, has already priced Internet gambling stocks to reflect some of the possibility that Congress will approve the legislation.
A unit of Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co, an Arlington, Va.-based investment firm, has been tracking the legislation closely as it related to various Internet gambling companies. In a report last week, the firm wrote that “failure to attach a gaming provision to the DOD authorization bill likely means that proponents have missed their last best chance to pass anti-gaming provisions…before senators head home for the final campaign stretch run.”
Hastert has told negotiators that he will not move the bill unless there is authorizing language to boost the security of judges in and out of courtrooms, eases the process of deporting convicted gang members, and bars their indefinite detention.
Senate leaders promised to include the courtroom language, which was part of a larger child safety that passed the House earlier this year, on must-pass bill some time this year, a House GOP leadership aide said yesterday.
Hastert has made a bill political issue of this push following the brutal murder of the family of a federal judge in Chicago earlier this year. Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) has also pressed for the legislation.
On the immigration language, House leaders said they have borrowed language included in the Senate’s own comprehensive immigration bill that was approved this past spring.
Senate Democrats are critical of the gang-related measure, and the American Civil Liberties Union said the measure is too broad and could negatively impact legal immigrants. A spokesman for Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) refused to comment on the issue.
House leaders hope to include other border security provisions in a spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security. At least one Republican conferee has criticized that move.
At a National Press Club briefing yesterday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) Senate Judiciary Committee chairman and a member of the Homeland Security Appropriations subcommittee, criticized the House’s decision to enact its some immigration measures by including them in the 2007 homeland security defense appropriations bill.
“The House of Representatives doesn’t think much of the bicameral system,” Specter said. “The Senate and House passed bills, but somehow we can’t go to conference on them. Now the House wants to take their key provisions and enact them, which would take all the leverage away from the Senate bill.”
He said that the Senate has pending provision for a fence running along the southwest border, but that he is not for the “fence piecemeal.”
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>:pucking: :pucking:


http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/092606/gambling.html


NROG can you comment on this
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
looks like our only hope is in this article


House-Senate Disagreement Could Halt Defense Bill




By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 25, 2006; Page A06

House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R.-Ill.) -- in a showdown with Senate Republicans -- has vowed he will not bring a major defense policy bill to the chamber floor this week unless Senate negotiators add a federal court security bill and a controversial House anti-illegal-immigration measure, senior House leadership aides say.
The last-minute confrontation is pitting the House's most powerful member against Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John W. Warner (R-Va.), who has said he will not add extraneous measures to the annual defense authorization bill unless they can garner unanimous support from Democrats and Republicans alike. House leadership aides are emphasizing the court measure, which would bolster the protection of judges in the aftermath of the shooting of a judge in Atlanta and the killing of a judge's family in Chicago.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=238 align=right><TBODY><TR><TD width=10></TD><TD width=228><LINK media=all href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/css/sidebars.css" rel=stylesheet>
U.S. Congress

Browse every vote in the U.S. Congress since 1991.
Congress 109, House vote: Vote 473: H R 6102
Congress 109, House vote: Vote 472: H R 5062
Congress 109, House vote: Vote 471: H R 5059 » EXPLORE THE DATABASE






<SCRIPT src="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/technorati/Technorati.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT>var technorati = new Technorati() ;technorati.setProperty('url','http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/24/AR2006092400861_Technorati.html') ;technorati.article = new item('House-Senate Disagreement Could Halt Defense Bill','http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/24/AR2006092400861.html','House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R.-Ill.) -- in a showdown with Senate Republicans -- has vowed he will not bring a major defense policy bill to the chamber floor this week unless Senate negotiators add a federal court security bill and a controversial House anti-illegal-immigration measure, senior...','Jonathan Weisman') ;</SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/24/AR2006092400861_Technorati.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT>document.write( technorati.getDisplaySidebar() );</SCRIPT>
Who's Blogging?

Read what bloggers are saying about this article.
<STYLE>#technorati_link a {color:#339900;}</STYLE>
icn-talkbubble.gif
Full List of Blogs (12 links) »
spacer.gif

Most Blogged About Articles
<STYLE>#technorati_link a {color:#339900;}</STYLE>
icn-talkbubble.gif
On washingtonpost.com | On the web
spacer.gif




<SCRIPT src="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/javascript/resetCookies.js"></SCRIPT><!-- delicious --><SCRIPT><!--var delicious_url = 'http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/24/AR2006092400861.html?referrer=delicious' ;var delicious_headline = 'washingtonpost.com | House-Senate Disagreement Could Halt Defense Bill' ;var delicious_subheadline = '' ;var delicious_byline = 'Jonathan Weisman' ;delicious_byline = ( delicious_byline && delicious_byline.indexOf('By ') != 0 ) ? "By "+delicious_byline : delicious_byline ;var delicious_blurb = 'House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R.-Ill.) -- in a showdown with Senate Republicans -- has vowed he will not bring a major defense policy bill to the chamber floor this week unless Senate negotiators add a federal court security bill and a controversial House anti-illegal-immigration measure, senior...' ;// --></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/javascript/delicious2.js"></SCRIPT><STYLE>#delicious_display {display:none ;color:#333333 ;background-color:#EEEEEE ;padding:4px ;padding-top:0px ;border:1px dotted #0D3159 ;}</STYLE>
Save & Share

  • Tag This Article
triangle2.gif
Saving options

<FORM id=delicious style="DISPLAY: inline">1. Save to description:
<INPUT onclick=keep_it_checked(this) type=checkbox CHECKED name=headline_name> Headline (required)
<INPUT onclick=set_delicious_options_changed(this,DELICIOUS_DESCRIPTION_BYLINE) type=checkbox name=byline_name> Byline

2. Save to notes (255 character max):
<INPUT onclick=set_delicious_options_changed(this,DELICIOUS_NOTES_BLURB) type=checkbox name=blurb_notes> Blurb

</FORM>3. Tag This Article





<SCRIPT>setTimeout('update_delicious_form(delicious_cookie)',1)</SCRIPT></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>The court measure has bipartisan support and is being pushed by Hastert and Sen. Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), the Senate Democratic leadership's second in command. It authorizes additional funding for U.S. marshals to protect the judiciary, increases penalties for crimes against federal judges, bolsters protections for jurors, and funds security enhancements at state courthouses. Those provisions were included in the Senate's version of the defense policy bill at Democrats' insistence. But support for the measure has begun to fray after House members added a provision that would allow judges to carry concealed weapons.
The real controversy, however, lies with the immigration measure and Hastert's insistence that Warner accept both provisions as a package. The Community Protection Act passed in the House overwhelmingly last week, 328 to 95, but it has garnered opposition from Latino organizations and civil liberties groups.
It would allow the indefinite detention of some illegal immigrants who are protected from deportation by political asylum laws. That provision has garnered interest in the Washington area, with its large community from El Salvador and violence among Salvadoran gangs. The bill also would expedite the removal of immigrant criminals, denying them some court access, and would broaden the definitions of gang violence to facilitate detention and deportation.
Senate Democrats and the American Civil Liberties Union have said the measure would expand such definitions so broadly that it could hurt legal immigrants, who would be whisked out of the country with little recourse. Warner has deferred to Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Carl M. Levin (Mich.), the Armed Services Committee's ranking Democrat, in refusing to accept the package on the defense policy bill. With only a week left before Congress recesses for the fall campaigns, a showdown could jeopardize the measure's passage.
"The speaker is not going to let the bill move until these critical security items get in," said Ron Bonjean, Hastert's spokesman.
House GOP aides are urging Durbin to bring Senate Democrats into line on the issue. But Durbin spokesman Joe Shoemaker said the Senate minority whip is feeling no real pressure. The addition of the concealed-weapons provision has soured Durbin on the court security bill, and the immigration bill is garnering strong Democratic opposition, he said.
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
well I notice the first article is NOT dated and uses words like over the weekend....maybe it is OLD news that the IDIOT press did not notice it was already dead and NROG posted after the article was publish...


can you confirm NROG please?
 

New member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
2,401
Tokens
My question is this, if it is passed are all offshore books forced not to take U.S. customers? Is that how it will work. Or will it be that offshore places will take U.S. customers and U.S. citizens will be playing at their own risk with possible penalties?
 

New member
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
393
Tokens
Guys - I know the NROG is working hard for us, but their info has proven to be wrong in the past. Sorry, but I will not believe this is dead this week until I hear from reliable sources.

There are others saying it is NOT dead this week.

I love how the NROG keeps taking both sides of whether or not it is dead and saying "as we correctly stated before..."

All I'm saying is this: NROG is not the best source for what is really going on. There are more reliable sources. And if people stop calling their Senators now and the NROG was wrong AGAIN about this, then we could all get sandbagged.

I appreciate what the NROG is doing, but you cannot trust their info. And I'm not the only one who is saying that.

Please do not stop calling Warner's office.

Thanks.
 

New member
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
4,821
Tokens
I have an idea - if the bill passes, read the bill. Then you will know what it includes.And offshores are not required to follow U.S. law. If they do not follow US law, their executives can not travel to the U.S. It has been this way for 10 years.Sean
 

New member
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
393
Tokens
Thanks to some irresponsible posts all over the Internet yesterday from the NROG, people stopped calling.

JC got ripped on some boards for not agreeing with the NROG's statement that the bill is dead for this week, and I agree with JC. This is not officially over yet this week.

Please do not stop the calls. And NROG, please don't post information that you keep changing. You see, when you post it's not going to get passed this week, then people stop calling! It's FUCKN IRRESPONSIBLE TO DO THAT!!!! Everybody celebrated yesterday, and this is NOT over yet this week!


Bill to ban online gambling could pass


By Emily Pierce and Kate Ackley
Roll Call Staff


September 26, 2006

A controversial Internet gambling measure may hitch a ride on a Defense Department authorization bill, but as of press time, a standoff over adding legislation to improve courthouse security and crack down on illegal immigrants in gangs continued to hold up action on the overall Defense package.

While it was not clear that Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner (R-Va.) has actually agreed to attach the anti-gambling legislation, Republican leadership sources on both sides of the Capitol said the measure would be added to the Defense bill.

“It’s Kyl-style, with a Frist twist,” said a senior aide to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) of attaching the Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) bill designed to bar Internet gambling by preventing credit card companies from honoring charges on gaming Web sites.

The aide said the Internet gambling bill has been tweaked slightly to ensure optimum support in the Senate, though details of the changes to Kyl’s original bill were not available.

Warner spokesman John Ullyot declined to comment, saying, “This is in line with the long-standing committee policy to keep such negotiations confidential.”

Still, one GOP lobbyist working against the gambling bill said Warner and Frist had a “showdown” last week over the Internet gambling legislation, with Warner telling Frist that he wasn’t going to put the Internet gambling bill in the Defense authorization bill. “Then Frist told him the [DOD] bill won’t come to the floor,” said the lobbyist.

Meanwhile, Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) has threatened to prevent the measure from coming to the House floor if Warner does not agree to include a House-passed courthouse security bill and the gangs legislation.

Warner is concerned that any of the three bills could complicate passage of the larger authorization measure, sources said.

The wrangling over the three law enforcement measures provides a glimpse into the end-of-session gamesmanship that goes on behind the scenes as Members seek to add controversial measures to one “must-pass” bill or another.

And because GOP leaders in both chambers have vowed to recess at the end of this week so that Members can go home to campaign for this year’s pivotal midterm elections, Members and lobbyists have stepped up their push to get their measures sent to the president’s desk before Congress adjourns.

One Democratic lobbyist working against the gambling bill called the past few days a “roller-coaster ride.”

“Frist has been on a jihad about Internet gambling,” this Democratic lobbyist said.

Democratic Senate aides also complained that they have been left completely out of the bargaining process, and that the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over all three bills, has not approved the versions currently being considered for inclusion in the DOD authorization measure.

“It’s just such a sneaky and sleazy way to go about it,” said one of the aides.

Three bills are moving this week that could play host to the Internet gambling, courthouse security and gangs bill: the spending bills for the Defense and Homeland Security departments and the Defense authorization bill.

But GOP and Democratic Senate sources said that backers of the bills were rebuffed in their attempts to get them attached to the annual Defense spending bill, which has more of an imperative to move since it will actually disburse funds to U.S. troops.

Because House and Senate conferees signed off on a conference report for the Defense spending bill last week, any attempts to add extraneous language now would send the appropriations bill back to conference committee — an unlikely scenario.

Meanwhile, conferees for the Homeland Security spending bill were hoping to wrap up their conference report last night.

That leaves the Defense authorization bill as the only measure in a position to carry the controversial provisions and still have a chance of passing this week.

Bill backers are betting that opponents of all three Judiciary bills will fear the political ramifications of voting against any national defense measure in this potentially volatile election year. And by threatening to hold up action on the bill, both Frist and Hastert hope to force Warner’s hand, reasoning that Warner would be loath to see his authorization bill become unnecessary, like so many other federal agency authorization bills that languish in committee each year.

While it is unusual for Congress not to pass a Defense authorization bill, it only authorizes funds; it does not distribute them.

Even though leadership sources said the Internet bill would be included on the Defense authorization bill, the conference committee on the bill has not yet completed and the deal could hinge on whether the court security and gang bills are also included.

Additionally, Democratic sources said they were not convinced that Warner would go along with the gambit to include the law enforcement bills in the Defense measure.

The Democratic lobbyist said that Warner was not likely to cave in to the pressure.

“You very likely might not have a Defense authorization bill,” the lobbyist said.

Other opponents of the Internet gaming bill said that any legislative vehicle could be fair game.

“We remain on guard that the Internet gambling prohibition could be included” in any remaining bills, said John Pappas, a spokesman for the Poker Players Alliance, which opposes the ban.

Indeed, if the impasse does not get resolved this week, backers of the three bills could attempt to add the measures to legislation such as an omnibus appropriations bill that would be set to move through the lame-duck session after the Nov. 7 elections. And of course, if the Defense authorization bill does not get passed this week, the battle could then begin anew as well.
 

New member
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
393
Tokens
This (below) is from another source. This poster know is stuff about what is going on in DC. Another indication NROG jumped the gun on yesterday's post. Please keep the calls going.

-----

Now, nothing in the article spells imminent doom, but I think what we can take out of that story is that Frist remains actively engaged in an effort to move the Internet gambling language, and that he may now be considering a much wider array of options to do so. You see, he will probably control the content of the final wiretapping/tribunal bill, meaning he wouldn't have to deal with someone like Warner when working to insert the gambling language. Hmmmmmm. Also, Frist's threat not to bring the DoD bill to the floor w/o the gambling language is probably legit, but see he has to compete with Hastert who has his own threat, which is even more credible. As I said Sunday night, the wars will be just as intense internally between Republicans this week as they will be between the two parties.

I guess on further reflection this story really just serves as an indication that the battle has not been decided one way or another, and that the fur will continue to fly as the week goes on. And yeah, NROG has like a million eggs all over its face. Good gracious.

------
 

New member
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
4,221
Tokens
NROG was wrong and misinformed and maybe lessoned learned but enough of that. They are ON OUR SIDE AND HAVE HELPED. WHo knows what has happened and what has been said. Lets focus on here and now. Frist is the real culprit here not NROG. He is being a sleaze and scum just like the article says. NROG has only helped but if they errored so what, lessoned learned. Lets all focus on what we can do. Not NROG. Please.
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
Tom Brady#1 said:
NROG was wrong and misinformed and maybe lessoned learned but enough of that. They are ON OUR SIDE AND HAVE HELPED. WHo knows what has happened and what has been said. Lets focus on here and now. Frist is the real culprit here not NROG. He is being a sleaze and scum just like the article says. NROG has only helped but if they errored so what, lessoned learned. Lets all focus on what we can do. Not NROG. Please.
Tom good post but if you notice there are only like 10 different posters posting in these type of threads over the past few weeks

the RX has 28000 which leads me to belive many DO NOT CARE about this net gaming bill

as either they won't be stopping net gambling OR just to lazy to care no matter what the new law says
 

Rx Post Doc
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
12,805
Tokens
Dante, there is not much to say...

GO!!! Beat that proposed bill adendum down!!

For the average public (me included) here at the site we don't know enough to speak up on this. We can call and I have. We all need to call at least a couple of times each.

tulsa
 

New member
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
4,221
Tokens
Dante said:
Tom good post but if you notice there are only like 10 different posters posting in these type of threads over the past few weeks

the RX has 28000 which leads me to belive many DO NOT CARE about this net gaming bill

as either they won't be stopping net gambling OR just to lazy to care no matter what the new law says


Dante, also and maybe most of all, people are tired on this issue. I think that is how most feel. back and forth and back and forth.

I do not as this is very important and hope many can see that. The year is almost over and with recess and all that it is not that hard to make some calls. We must hang in there!
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,361
Tokens
How did our legislative process ever evolve into such a f**ked up mess? No wonder nothing ever gets done in Washington. It's not the Republican conservatives or the Democrat liberals, it's just a system out of control and being exploited by all parties involved.

That any Senator can attempt to attach controversial anti-gambling legislation to a completely unrelated defense authorization bill with impunity speaks volumes about the depths to which we have sunk in Washington.

Congress won't approve a line item veto provision because it would inhibit their ability to utilize such a sleazy tactic. And the beat goes on. :neenee:
 

New member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Messages
38
Tokens
Good afternoon guys. I have to admit it becomes harder and harder to come on here and post updates when we get hammered at the first internet article that is posted contradicting our statements. How easy it is to lose faith huh? I want to be clear...NROG is not a news organization...we do not have reporters trying to write stories. NROG is an active group lobbying on Capital Hill in DC. Our information comes from sources far deeper than any reporter could find (other than those at the AP probably...they know everything! Funny how they haven't written another story since their report of Frist failing...hmmm).

The Hill article is nice...it creates panic which I'm for 100%...we should NEVER stop calling and being active. NROG has stood firm with that message. Also...its important that I point out...NROG has never been wrong with the stories we've released.. I know some of you may believe otherwise but our first release last Monday stated that Frist failed at his first attachment attempt. The fact is...He Did...Yet NROG URGED YOU TO KEEP CALLING/EMAILING. We came back last Friday with a new release that said he may have been trying again. He did not. AND NROG URGED YOU TO KEEP CALLING/EMAILING.

Its unfortunate. Part of the reason we started NROG was to let you guys all know what was going on in real-time. We didn't like that other lobbying groups were hanging you out to dry with no updates. Sadly you misread or misinterpret information we provide and are the first to judge us based on incorrect stories on the internet. Fact is we have never claimed victory and our sources have all been 100% accurate. Just because a newspaper has an outdated story doesn't instantly make US wrong and them right. Guys...we're here to inform you. We don't think you should have to google this topic and hope the information you're reading is accurate. We are reporting direct from our efforts on Capital Hill. There is no better source right now...

Now...as of today at 12:30pm there was no gambling language in the DoD bill and a key aide to Senator Frist confirmed he is not seeking to attach it again before elections. That being said...here's where you guys run away with information...this DOES NOT mean he will not attempt it after elections. It DOES NOT mean he won't eye a bill other than the DoD. What it means is...right now...as of this moment...his office has confirmed that it IS NOT attached and he has no intentions of trying again before recess. Sen Warner has also held true to his original statement that he will not allow non-germane language in this bill and he and Frist are still feuding over the refusal.

This information has been corroborated through multiple sources, other Senators involved in the fight and other lobbying efforts. Sadly they all believe you do not need to know about this. They haven't told you because they feel if this gets too public it may upset Frist and Company and they may try harder. We simply disagree with holding information from you. We think the more you know the more active you become. Call...Email...BE VOCAL and DONT STOP REGARDLESS OF THE NEWS!

So all I can say is ...this is information, direct from Washington DC...not the internet. Use it as you wish but rememebr one thing that we have never chanegd position on...this fight is FAR from over!

Thanks to all of you who are supporting us in our efforts. For those of you who doubt us we hope we can earn your trust and respect as we continue to fight for your rights.

JayB
NROG
www.saveonlinegaming.com
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,108,637
Messages
13,453,180
Members
99,427
Latest member
68gbtools
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com