Logan Clements visiting NH

[Fluff and Stuff]

CNHT is against gambling??? Where do you see that?   

http://www.cnht.org/images/gambling.pdf

From the CNHT website.  The people is 100% BS, BTW.  Gambling is a plus for everyone.

[CNHT]

CNHT is against gambling??? Where do you see that?   

http://www.cnht.org/images/gambling.pdf

From the CNHT website.  The people is 100% BS, BTW.  Gambling is a plus for everyone.

Well that is just one person's opinion, not the opinion of CNHT. It doesn't oppose it but merely shows how gambling would serve to control the politicians...you want that?
Maybe you are OK with that...

Here is the argument about how it would control things, even over and above whether there was gambling at all:

Las Vegas-based Millennium Gaming and Mississippi-based Torguson Gaming Group have acquired interests in Rockingham Park and Lakes Region Greyhound Park.  To get a return on these money-losing race tracks, gambling interests have openly stated that they will spend what it takes to manipulate public opinion and purchase legislative support to legalize slot machine casinos at these tracks.

The effort will include screening and recruiting candidates for our party primary and handing out campaign cash to those who test positive.  In many other states, this process has lead to casinos dominating party affairs.  Is this what we want?

Jim Rubens will address this question and the economic and crime problems associated with legalized casinos at upcoming Nashua City and Hillsborough County GOP meetings.  Q&A and discussion will follow.
Wednesday, February 1, 7:15pm, Nashua City Committee, Nashua Country Club, 25 Fairway Street.
Thursday, February 9, 6:30pm, Hillsborough County Committee, Harley-Sanford VFW, Milford, corner Perkins and Rte 113.
Jim Rubens served as 2000 Platform Committee Chair, NH GOP, 1994-1998 state senator and is Executive Committee Chair of the Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling.

Contact:                                                                           

Jim Rubens
(603) 643-6059 v
(603) 359-3300 c
JimRubens@aol.com

Regardless of ownership, legalized video slot machines and casinos would damage New Hampshire's enviable quality-of-life and reputation as a healthy place for families, business and visitors.

Legalized slots and casinos would:

1. Divert consumer spending from existing New Hampshire businesses such as restaurants, hotels, entertainment and retailers.
2. Damage New Hampshire's quality-of-life by increasing crime, family breakdown, childhood gambling, social services costs, and reducing workplace productivity.
3. Pressure neighboring states to legalize, evaporating promised state gambling. revenue, then pressuring our legislature to allow yet more gambling.
4. Open the tribal gambling loophole, making "limited" gambling impossible.
5. Corrupt New Hampshire politics.

For detail and documentation, please visit our website, NoSlots.com.

[KBCraig]

Mr. Rubens' argument sounds a lot like arguments in favor of zoning and planning: "If you let them paint their shutters pink, next thing you know there will be cars on blocks in the front yards, then people will start demanding the government do something, then there will be more government power. We know you don't want that, so we better outlaw painting shutters pink."

Sometimes Freedom isn't pretty. But it's always beautiful.

Kevin

[Fluff and Stuff]

CNHT is against gambling??? Where do you see that?   

http://www.cnht.org/images/gambling.pdf

From the CNHT website.  The people is 100% BS, BTW.  Gambling is a plus for everyone.

Well that is just one person's opinion, not the opinion of CNHT.

Uh?  It is a position piece of the CNHT right?

[Dreepa]

From the first line of the pdf:

This the CNHT original/updated position.

[Fluff and Stuff]

Legalized slots and casinos would:

1. Divert consumer spending from existing New Hampshire businesses such as restaurants, hotels, entertainment and retailers.

Nope.  It would increase spending to those businesses.

2. Damage New Hampshire's quality-of-life by increasing crime, family breakdown, childhood gambling, social services costs, and reducing workplace productivity.

It may increase some crime but overall crime will go down because it will end the gambling related crimes that are currently commited millions of times a year in NH..  It should improve the family.  It will help teach children that gambling is not bad.  I don't even know what they mean by social service costs,  Like schools, roads, and fire?  Or is that welfare?  With lots of casinos there will be higher employment and more sales taxes collected so less people should need welfare and the government will have more money to give to that smaller amount of people.  I don't understand how this relates to workplace productivity.

3. Pressure neighboring states to legalize, evaporating promised state gambling. revenue, then pressuring our legislature to allow yet more gambling.

Hopefully.  NH needs sport gambling, table games, slots, poker tours, and more.

4. Open the tribal gambling loophole, making "limited" gambling impossible.

Great.  Almost an entire race of people was killed and all of their stuff was taken.  Of course, the Indians are now the bad people because they don't agree with the government on freedom issues?  WTF?

5. Corrupt New Hampshire politics.

NH politics are very corrupt.  By allowing peaceful adults to do peaceful activity, overall corruption will decrease.

[CNHT]

Mr. Rubens' argument sounds a lot like arguments in favor of zoning and planning: "If you let them paint their shutters pink, next thing you know there will be cars on blocks in the front yards, then people will start demanding the government do something, then there will be more government power. We know you don't want that, so we better outlaw painting shutters pink."

Sometimes Freedom isn't pretty. But it's always beautiful.

Kevin

Well, if that is CNHT's position, then the explanation is, we are trying to keep government out of things that they might get undue influence from. As long as government is gong to be there, we would rather everyone have equal access and apparently whoever wrote that feels that this would jeopardize that access since not all of you would have the kind of money that would be plentiful enough to influence government in an undue fashion.

For example, we are opposed to the HB 626 on the grounds that it will give the NHMA the right to withhold their sneaky doings from the public  (it's being voted on today) but most at first had no idea what 91-A was or that it is the sharpest tool in the citizens tool box. But we knew the NHMA was behind it. When the NHLA did a review on it, they said it was liberty neutral. But when we pointed out the inside story, they came to realize it was NOT and MUST be defeated.

[CNHT]

Great.  Almost an entire race of people was killed and all of there stuff was taken. 

If you believe rewritten history.

Of course, the Indians are now the bad people because they don't agree with the government of freedom issues?  WTF?

Sounds like liberal, politically correct mumbo-jumbo to me. I'm surprised at you! No one said anything about Indians. But we do know that this would lead to undue influence on gov't that is already corrupt enough.

[Fluff and Stuff]

4. Open the tribal gambling loophole, making "limited" gambling impossible.

It looks like someone said something of Indians.

[CNHT]

4. Open the tribal gambling loophole, making "limited" gambling impossible.

It looks like someone said something of Indians.

Yes they did because it would give special privileges to one group of people over another with regard to government benefits ? the epitomy of political correctness and simply wrong.
Do you I suppose also believe in quotas and affirmative action? I shudder to think....

Again it's beginning to sound like the 60s around here!

[Fluff and Stuff]

Yes they did because it would give special privileges to one group of people over another with regard to government benefits ? the epitomy of political correctness and simply wrong.
Do you I suppose also believe in quotas and affirmative action? I shudder to think....

Again it's beginning to sound like the 60s around here!

No, I don't.  However, I do think that all Americas, including Indians, have the right to open a casino on any property they own.

[CNHT]

Yes they did because it would give special privileges to one group of people over another with regard to government benefits ? the epitomy of political correctness and simply wrong.
Do you I suppose also believe in quotas and affirmative action? I shudder to think....

Again it's beginning to sound like the 60s around here!

No, I don't.  However, I do think that all Americas, including Indians, have the right to open a casino on any property they own.

So do I...

[Fluff and Stuff]

Yes they did because it would give special privileges to one group of people over another with regard to government benefits ? the epitomy of political correctness and simply wrong.
Do you I suppose also believe in quotas and affirmative action? I shudder to think....

Again it's beginning to sound like the 60s around here!

No, I don't.  However, I do think that all Americas, including Indians, have the right to open a casino on any property they own.

So do I...

Great.  Lets walk together and talk to the head of the CNHT about this during porcfest.  Freedom 

[CNHT]

Yes they did because it would give special privileges to one group of people over another with regard to government benefits ? the epitomy of political correctness and simply wrong.
Do you I suppose also believe in quotas and affirmative action? I shudder to think....

Again it's beginning to sound like the 60s around here!

No, I don't.  However, I do think that all Americas, including Indians, have the right to open a casino on any property they own.

So do I...

Great.  Lets walk together and talk to the head of the CNHT about this during porcfest.  Freedom 

Well as I suggested to you before, there is more to this than meets the eye. What you do in prinicple may not always be practical if the gov't is in the way ? like KB said, it's not always pretty!

[Dreepa]

Front page of the CM:

http://concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060203/REPOSITORY/602030308/1031