Current Events

TOPICS:

7/24/06

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

100 | 101 | 102

 ... 441

Next

legionnaire

legionnaire

United Kingdom
November 2003

JUL 19, 2006 02:39 PM

In yet another bone thrown to the morality police in an election year, the GOP, with the president's approval, passed a ban on internet gambling last week that would make it illegal for ISPs to provide access to offshore gambling sites, and for consumers to use them. Of course, horse racing and the lottery were exempted, because they lobbied for it. Now, however, the WTO is saying that the ban may not be legitimate because it is enforcing unfair trade sanctions on WTO member states that will be hit the hardest by it.



US laws banning interstate betting over the internet will be examined by the World Trade Organization (WTO).



The Caribbean state of Antigua and Barbuda, host to many online casinos, has been in a long-running battle with the US over the legality of its stance.



The WTO earlier found that some of the US laws were not in line with trade rules, though others were permissible.



The Antiguan authorities asked for the panel to be set up after negotiations with the US broke down.



The panel has 90 days to report on how the US is complying with earlier WTO rulings.



Trade partners who fail to implement WTO rulings often find themselves hit by sanctions - for example, extra tariffs on their exports.



Antigua and Barbuda says the prohibitions are hampering the country's economy.



It has invested heavily in the industry in a bid to lessen its reliance on the tourism sector.



Caribbean nations reliant on tourism are constantly struggling with the sword of Damocles dangling above their heads; a single hurricane can decimate business and cause beach erosion that irreparably harms long term tourist interests. In an attempt to diversify their economies, some Caribbean countries have gotten into internet hosting, particularly for gambling sites, which are bringing in a source of revenue that is not so dependent upon the weather.



If the WTO investigation determines that this law represents an illegal trade restriction on the part of the US, the WTO will be in a position to enforce trade sanctions against the US until it reverses the law. Which will put the GOP in an interesting position. As the home to die-hard "free traders" who supposedly support relaxation of international trade restrictions to create a global market economy, it will be difficult to dismiss the WTO's decision, as it would certainly seem to be trying to promote free trade. But the GOP is also home to the hand-wringers, those religious conservatives who love to blame television, video games, Hollywood, and the internet for all of society's ills, and passing this ban was a way to tell them just how important they are to our politicians. In an election year that has failed to pass constitutional bans on flag burning and gay marriage, these people are going to demand some sort of recompense for their electoral support.



You've made your bed, Republicans. Time to lie in it.

MrCrisp

MrCrisp

Charleston, SC
August 2004

JUL 19, 2006 10:09 PM

are you kidding? republicans were born to lie!

but more seriously, it'd be interesting to see what happens when the united states government goes after, let's say, bit-torrent sites hosted in the caribbean.

back to the silliness board...

Vestril

Vestril

Coronado, CA
February 2003

JUL 19, 2006 10:11 PM

I guess killing Stem Cell research and stifling progress to protect...no one, is part of their strategy to appease their foul masters?

litebrite

litebrite

Washington, DC
July 2005

JUL 19, 2006 10:38 PM

I don't understand why people think the government should stick its nose everyplace, and police all forms of human activity. Truly, we no longer believe in freedom. Which is why it hurts all the more when Bush talks about it all the time. Sure, it could be worse. Dissent is tolerated here; they won't shoot you. Usually. But every day we chip away at our freedom to live our lives as we wish. And God, talk about a victimless crime.

ogrebushi

ogrebushi

Delta, BC
March 2005

JUL 19, 2006 10:41 PM

"As the home to die-hard "free traders" who supposedly support relaxation of international trade restrictions to create a global market economy"

Tell that to the companys up here that have been spending the past few years winning cases against the american government over softwood lumber tariffs (equaling approx 5bil so far)

ElPres

ElPres

Tampa, FL
November 2003

JUL 19, 2006 10:47 PM

I wonder...

If the WTO decides to impose sanctions, would 'G-Dub' declare that an act of terrorism?

Necia

Necia

San Francisco, CA
August 2005

JUL 19, 2006 10:49 PM

ogrebushi said:
"As the home to die-hard "free traders" who supposedly support relaxation of international trade restrictions to create a global market economy"

Tell that to the companys up here that have been spending the past few years winning cases against the american government over softwood lumber tariffs (equaling approx 5bil so far)



Hence the "supposedly," if I'm understanding all this correctly.

ElPres

ElPres

Tampa, FL
November 2003

JUL 19, 2006 10:49 PM

"those religious conservatives who love to blame television, video games, Hollywood, and the internet for all of society's ills"

Stupid internet...If it hadn't been for internet porn, WWII would never have happened!

ASSH0LE

ASSH0LE

Las Vegas, NV
June 2003

JUL 19, 2006 10:56 PM

Hmmm... this could mean opportunities to me.

What I'd probably foresee happening is that if this sticks, internet gaming COULD be legalized so long as it's legal in the locality that the servers are hosted in.

Oh say, Nevada and Atlantic City?

Sports betting would be the hang though. And McCain is still kinda whackjob about that.

StanleyTweedle

StanleyTweedle

Shallotte, NC
OLD SKOOL

JUL 20, 2006 12:04 AM

Even though I think it is asinine to ban online gaming, since when does the WTO have jurisdiction over the US? Last I checked our government was located in Washington, DC.
"They took our jobs!"

Gringo

Gringo

Liberty Lake, WA
May 2006

JUL 20, 2006 12:25 AM

What this news report (or whatever it's supposed to be) doesn't show is that this bill was introduced with three Democratic cosponsors. It also doesn't show another fact: 115 Democrats voted FOR this bill and only 76 voted against. Additionally, 201 Republicans voted for this bill and a mere 17 voted against it. The sole Independent voted for.

Even though the majority of Democrats voted in favor of this bill...the author is still going to have the audacity to say, "You've made your bed, Republicans. Time to lie in it."

I really wish the "contributors" to SG's news would be honest and fair. I guess that's asking way too much. There's an obvious agenda.

Please do not use the SG stories for news and do not consider them "facts." They are opinions...and misleading ones at best.

Source: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2006-363

And before any of you assume I'm some George Bush lover - you're wrong. I think the guy is totally incompetent. I just hate the bullshit of this two-party system where it does nothing more than divide the country into two sets of assholes. Each thinking they're better than the other and both giving half-truths to make their points.

jonasthewhale

jonasthewhale

San Francisco, CA
September 2003

JUL 20, 2006 01:04 AM

If the gambling lobbies, national lotteries and indian casinos had gotten their shit together they could be running the whole damn online gambling thing---now all they do is pay corrupt republicans to keep it safe and legal in their own home states

if there is one thing i have learned in my short time on this planet, it is that if people want to do drugs, they will do them and if they want to smoke drink and gamble and even get their labia pierced---then god knows they will do it

now lets do the smart thing and make it safe and legal and let the rich get richer from the tax revenue we could be making from online gambling if it were legal here like it is in the UK

filmjedi

filmjedi

Brighton, MA
June 2004

JUL 20, 2006 04:34 AM

these people hate our freedom.

Asael

Asael

Hudson Falls, NY
May 2005

JUL 20, 2006 04:39 AM

DrZaius said:
Even though I think it is asinine to ban online gaming, since when does the WTO have jurisdiction over the US? Last I checked our government was located in Washington, DC.
"They took our jobs!"



Article VI of the United States Constitution: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

ZetaMale

ZetaMale

Tallahassee, FL
April 2006

JUL 20, 2006 06:25 AM

TheGringo said:
What this news report (or whatever it's supposed to be) doesn't show is that this bill was introduced with three Democratic cosponsors. It also doesn't show another fact: 115 Democrats voted FOR this bill and only 76 voted against. Additionally, 201 Republicans voted for this bill and a mere 17 voted against it. The sole Independent voted for.

Even though the majority of Democrats voted in favor of this bill...the author is still going to have the audacity to say, "You've made your bed, Republicans. Time to lie in it."

I really wish the "contributors" to SG's news would be honest and fair. I guess that's asking way too much. There's an obvious agenda.

Please do not use the SG stories for news and do not consider them "facts." They are opinions...and misleading ones at best.

Source: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2006-363

And before any of you assume I'm some George Bush lover - you're wrong. I think the guy is totally incompetent. I just hate the bullshit of this two-party system where it does nothing more than divide the country into two sets of assholes. Each thinking they're better than the other and both giving half-truths to make their points.




True, a lot of democrats voted for this bill, but what I think he's referring to the fact that it's a republican-controlled congress and that while 60% of Democrats voted for it, an overwhelming 92% of Republicans voted for it.

Also, I think the readers are aware this is opinion, as evidenced by the box highlighted "Commentary" at the top.

roshambo74

roshambo74

Dublin, CA
May 2005

JUL 20, 2006 07:46 AM

This just goes to show how retarded all forms of goverment are. The revenue that this could generate is astronomical. Instead of taking advantage of that and perhaps paying teachers more, improving the schools, pay down the debt or 1000's of other things the money could be wisely spent on, the brilliant Idea is to just ban it. I wonder how many loan bonds will be on state ballots during the next couple years of elections. This would probably generate enough money to pay for all of them without having to take out loans that screw us all over in the long run. I guess I will have to trade poker chips in for horse racing. Problem is I can play poker and make money at it, I don't have a clue about horse racing. The people with serious gambling problems will still have that itch and will bet in some other form. Just make the sites have gambling help links and adds like the casinos run and in addition to paying taxes, have them set up a fund to help pay for treatment to those that need it.

legionnaire

legionnaire

United Kingdom
November 2003

JUL 20, 2006 08:15 AM

TheGringo said:
What this news report (or whatever it's supposed to be) doesn't show is that this bill was introduced with three Democratic cosponsors. It also doesn't show another fact: 115 Democrats voted FOR this bill and only 76 voted against. Additionally, 201 Republicans voted for this bill and a mere 17 voted against it. The sole Independent voted for.

Even though the majority of Democrats voted in favor of this bill...the author is still going to have the audacity to say, "You've made your bed, Republicans. Time to lie in it."

I really wish the "contributors" to SG's news would be honest and fair. I guess that's asking way too much. There's an obvious agenda.

Please do not use the SG stories for news and do not consider them "facts." They are opinions...and misleading ones at best.

Source: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2006-363

And before any of you assume I'm some George Bush lover - you're wrong. I think the guy is totally incompetent. I just hate the bullshit of this two-party system where it does nothing more than divide the country into two sets of assholes. Each thinking they're better than the other and both giving half-truths to make their points.



I will never understand why so many new members get so bent out of shape over the newswire. Regardless, please refer to the FAQ where we address this topic thoroughly.

From the FAQ:

The news is totally biased! Why don't you publish the truth???

The news is submitted by random fuckbags like you and me. For the most part we're not career journalists, just interested onlookers. Editors do strive for a certain degree of quality in news postings, but if you feel your point of view or area of interest is being overlooked, the best thing to do is submit some news yourself!

We are not a reputable, objective news source. Walter Cronkite, Edward R. Murrow and other fat senior citizens who think of news as objective would/do hate the SG Newswire. We are part gossip rag, part talk radio, part daily show, part djs (spinning you the newspaper stories instead of songs). Other sites report; we mangle, spin, pontificate upon, slant and direct you to the stuff on the web we think worthy of your notice, whether for humor's sake, or because it's important.

We report, you decide!



It's even labeled as "commentary" if you check the top of the story. So please don't pretend like I'm trying to report this as factual information, it's pretty clearly an editorial.

Gringo

Gringo

Liberty Lake, WA
May 2006

JUL 20, 2006 09:59 AM

legionnaire said:

I will never understand why so many new members get so bent out of shape over the newswire. Regardless, please refer to the FAQ where we address this topic thoroughly.

It's even labeled as "commentary" if you check the top of the story. So please don't pretend like I'm trying to report this as factual information, it's pretty clearly an editorial.



It just seems ignorant and reckless to puposely ignore all the facts and data before making such a strong statement against any person or party. Regardless of the F.A.Q., you probably know that most people are sheep and assume what is posted here to be facts. Just read the threads/responses. I probably have more (or at least as much) disgust for the president than you do. I am completely embarrassed with how our country is viewed by other countries (as well as by our own citizens). As for the Republican party? They are douchebags just like the Democrats. Neither party acts in the interest of the people [opinion]. What a country we'd be if we abolished party affiliation and just voted on issues.

It appears that the trend in politics has always been to side with their party - regardless of how stupid the issue is or without finding any/all of the facts.

As for the stupid gambling bill? No Republican, Democrat, or Independent should decide how any U.S. citizen spends their money. Period. They're all wrong.

joker_

joker_

Windsor, CA
October 2005

JUL 20, 2006 12:59 PM

The current administration is the WTO's bitch. As are we all in a way.

Expectation:
The administration will do what the WTO tells them to do, poste haste.

PhLaXuS

PhLaXuS

Fort Lauderdale, FL
November 2005

JUL 20, 2006 11:24 PM

It's especially subversive because it allows yet an even greater overreach of the US government over what should be protected civil liberties. Big Brother is tired of watching and now really wants to get his hands dirty.

Mike

Mike

Titusville, FL
OLD SKOOL

JUL 21, 2006 06:07 AM

TheGringo said:
What this news report (or whatever it's supposed to be) doesn't show is that this bill was introduced with three Democratic cosponsors. It also doesn't show another fact: 115 Democrats voted FOR this bill and only 76 voted against. Additionally, 201 Republicans voted for this bill and a mere 17 voted against it. The sole Independent voted for.

Even though the majority of Democrats voted in favor of this bill...the author is still going to have the audacity to say, "You've made your bed, Republicans. Time to lie in it."

I really wish the "contributors" to SG's news would be honest and fair. I guess that's asking way too much. There's an obvious agenda.

Please do not use the SG stories for news and do not consider them "facts." They are opinions...and misleading ones at best.

Source: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2006-363

And before any of you assume I'm some George Bush lover - you're wrong. I think the guy is totally incompetent. I just hate the bullshit of this two-party system where it does nothing more than divide the country into two sets of assholes. Each thinking they're better than the other and both giving half-truths to make their points.



It is asking too much.
I agree with you 100% and used to argue about it as well but I gave up on it years ago.

ASSH0LE

ASSH0LE

Las Vegas, NV
June 2003

JUL 21, 2006 08:48 AM

legionnaire said:

I will never understand why so many new members get so bent out of shape over the newswire. Regardless, please refer to the FAQ where we address this topic thoroughly.

From the FAQ:

The news is totally biased! Why don't you publish the truth???

The news is submitted by random fuckbags like you and me.



It's even labeled as "commentary" if you check the top of the story. So please don't pretend like I'm trying to report this as factual information, it's pretty clearly an editorial.



Thanks, random fuckbag!

fountainofdreams

fountainofdreams

Mokena, IL
January 2005

JUL 21, 2006 09:30 AM

TheGringo said:

legionnaire said:

I will never understand why so many new members get so bent out of shape over the newswire. Regardless, please refer to the FAQ where we address this topic thoroughly.

It's even labeled as "commentary" if you check the top of the story. So please don't pretend like I'm trying to report this as factual information, it's pretty clearly an editorial.



It just seems ignorant and reckless to puposely ignore all the facts and data before making such a strong statement against any person or party. Regardless of the F.A.Q., you probably know that most people are sheep and assume what is posted here to be facts. Just read the threads/responses. I probably have more (or at least as much) disgust for the president than you do. I am completely embarrassed with how our country is viewed by other countries (as well as by our own citizens). As for the Republican party? They are douchebags just like the Democrats. Neither party acts in the interest of the people [opinion]. What a country we'd be if we abolished party affiliation and just voted on issues.

It appears that the trend in politics has always been to side with their party - regardless of how stupid the issue is or without finding any/all of the facts.

As for the stupid gambling bill? No Republican, Democrat, or Independent should decide how any U.S. citizen spends their money. Period. They're all wrong.



submit your own news story then.

as long as it's well written (and not a duplicate) it'll be posted on the news wire.

PhLaXuS

PhLaXuS

Fort Lauderdale, FL
November 2005

JUL 21, 2006 08:13 PM

ASSH0LE said:
Thanks, random fuckbag!



Ahhhhh. I read that as all chipper and happy sounding. Made it absolutely hilarious.

vampiresoldier

vampiresoldier

Germany
March 2004

JUL 22, 2006 02:26 PM

Well, the assholes at Congress really pissed me off now, i can't put more funds into my poker account because my bank card won't let me. What the fuck i am 7 years old?

If i want to waste my fucking war earned money on poker i think i should be able to... mad mad mad mad