Virtues, Values and Vegas [NYT Op-Ed defends William Bennett]

The NY Times ^ | May 6, 2003 | JAMES McMANUS

[summer]

Virtues, Values and Vegas

By JAMES McMANUS

CHICAGO

"Virtue Is as Virtue Does?" reads a headline in the current issue of Newsweek. The Washington Monthly Online puts a similar story under the heading "The Bookie of Virtue." The reporters Jonathan Alter and Joshua Green, in a joint effort by the publications, explain that the conservative author William Bennett likes to gamble and "speaks out, often indignantly, about almost every moral issue except one — gambling."

The implication here is that playing high-stakes video poker makes Mr. Bennett a hypocrite. And on top of it, he's a "loser" too, according to one unnamed "casino source"; the reports cite "casino estimates" putting his total losses over the past decade at more than $8 million. The authors also note that he accepts the "high-roller treatment" at casinos, including free limousines and hotel rooms.

The fact is, the perks that so-called whales like Mr. Bennett enjoy are hardly free or unearned — they're paid for, and then some, because the house's statistical edge guarantees that such gamblers (as a group) will give back a least that much in the long run. More important, the authors admit that it's impossible for them to determine whether Mr. Bennett's in the black or the red as a player. If he has legally put $8 million in play over the course of a decade, it's not the same as risking that amount, let alone losing it, in a weekend.

Playing slot machines, blackjack or video poker may involve cycling a few hundred thousand into action, but for practical purposes a gambler is risking only a small fraction of that amount, since no one loses every spin or hand. A player is "taking the worst of it" by a only few percentage points. And I think a guy who earns $1,000 a minute giving speeches (and plenty more writing books) has just as much right to play high 21 as a guy on a pension who makes a couple of weekly Lotto quick picks.

Mr. Bennet now says his "gambling days are over." I wish he had toughed it out like another celebrity who faced similar "gotcha" journalism. When Michael Jordan went to Atlantic City to play late-night blackjack for stakes he could easily afford during the 1993 playoffs, he was taken to task by several reporters. He needed more sleep, they complained; he should have been concentrating on splitting Knick double-teams, not on whether to double down with nine against eight, or to split sixes when the dealer is showing one too. Mr. Jordan made clear he could manage both tasks with aplomb, and that he didn't appreciate sportswriters peeping resentfully into his personal life.

For some people, however, betting pennies on tiddlywinks or 10 bucks on Pick 4 constitutes a "gambling problem." They sniff that gamblers are venal because "they want something for nothing." Yeah, well, of course we do. Players and nonplayers alike get aced out of cherished, indispensable things all the time and get zip in return, so it seems only reasonable to want to balance the equation a little.

All of us gamble. Air travel, dating, investments, education, even driving or walking to work are not for the risk-averse. Vastly more is at stake when conceiving a child than when Mr. Bennett plays video poker, yet married couples are treated to no finger-jabbing sermons when they roll the dice on reproduction. As a finger-jabber himself on some subjects, Mr. Bennett should perhaps be more alert to such ironies. Still, if he pays his taxes and abides by the law, we should keep our noses out of his personal life.

After a recent speech in Rochester, Mr. Bennett was asked what the chances were of his running for president in 2008. He responded by saying that he might enter the World Series of Poker instead. He was only half serious, I gather; his purpose was probably to stir more presidential conjecture while manfully ducking the question. But perhaps Mr. Bennett should try the real deal. The $10,000 entry fee for the championship event would appear to fall comfortably within the parameters of his bankroll. But is the God-fearing author of "Why We Fight" and editor of "Our Sacred Honor" up to this challenge?

God may play dice with the universe, despite Einstein's hope, but serious gamblers prefer no-limit Texas hold 'em, and they scoff at video poker and blackjack. Live poker strategy is the American way. Nothing bears this out more succinctly than illustrating our attack on Saddam Hussein's regime with a Most Wanted poker deck — unless it's Martin Sheen dealing draw on "The West Wing."

Harry Truman, playing marathon sessions between momentous decisions as commander in chief, was accused by a reporter of "running a straight stud filibuster against his own secretary of state." Richard Nixon won enough playing cards in the Navy to help finance his first run for Congress. As one of his professors at Whittier College pointed out, "A man who couldn't hold a hand in a first-class poker game is not fit to be president of the United States." This may be a terrifying notion for some of us, but it's one that we all should face up to, Mr. Bennett included.

James McManus is author of "Positively Fifth Street: Murderers, Cheetahs and Binion's World Series of Poker."

[summer]

This editorial, in defense of Mr. Bennett, did not change my opinion at all. I believe William Bennett has seriously discredited himself. As one conservative commentator recently pointed out, $8 million spent on gambling would disqualify him from any position in the top levels of government.

The way I see it is this: Someone such as Mr. Bennett can also legally buy pornography in this country -- and, that's another huge industry in terms of profits.

But, does that mean someone like Mr. Bennett should then be making a living by discussing virtue (when he's also spending $8 million on pornography)?

Pornography, gambling, yeah, I know it's legal; but, I think someone in his public position raking it in on the subject of "virtue" should be reaching just a little higher than that.

[nvcdl]

Considering that Mr. Bennett is a supporter of gun bans I salute his exit from public life.

[summer]

I salute his exit as well. We all make mistakes, but surely it takes more than one or two (or three or four) trips to a casino to blow $8 million. He obviously has a habit. And just because he says he wants to break his habit, doesn't mean he will. It's tough to change a habit; any habit.

[Cathryn Crawford]

I kinda, in my heart, wished that instead of going on TV to apologize and express his sentiment that he would never gamble again, Bennett had simply given the finger to his critics and carried on.

[summer]

That's what this editorial says. But, honestly, I can't see how his message would be as respected anymore. The messenger counts as well as the message.

[Cathryn Crawford]

I know. Just my personal wish, deep in my heart. Ya know?

[Scenic Sounds]

I kinda, in my heart, wished that instead of going on TV to apologize and express his sentiment that he would never gamble again, Bennett had simply given the finger to his critics and carried on.

ROFL. That's why you're headed for the big arena!!

[summer]

We all want people who set an example for others to follow to also maintain high standards for themselves. It hurts when they don't. So, I think I understand how you feel. :)

[Cathryn Crawford]

LMAO...just my personal burning desire.

[Cathryn Crawford]

I guess. But I don't think Bennett did anything wrong...that's why I think he should have given 'em the finger.

[summer]

Well, if he was a milkman or a garbage collector, I would agree with you (and, no offense to people in those jobs). But, it is rather annoying that he makes a handsome living espousing a moral philosphy about how others should live, when a gambling habit is not really the way most people seeking to live a life of "virtue" would ever hope to live.

[Cathryn Crawford]

I guess it depends on your idea of virtue; I guess he didn't think it was too bad!

[Dr. Scarpetta]

I agree.

[Scenic Sounds]

LMAO...just my personal burning desire.

[Getting serious again] - Keep that desire burning for as long as you can. ;-)

[Cathryn Crawford]

I plan on it! With all you people agging me on, how can I not?

[RAT Patrol]

There is no virtue greater than a repentant heart. I think his response speaks of virtue. There is gambling and then there is GAMBLING. He over did it and this whole thing will benefit him in the long run. I still love the guy.

[Texas Eagle]

And just because he says he wants to break his habit, doesn't mean he will.

Bet ya.

[moneyrunner]

As this vapid morality play goes into its third act, it’s not about Bill Bennett. It’s about the long nosed biddies sticking their noses into someone’s private business and clucking their tongues. “Why Martha, what a wicked man that Bill Bennett is. He gambles, and I’ll bet he drinks too, and who knows who he hangs out with. Tsk, tsk, tsk.”. And lets not forget the newly minted Cotton Mathers of the Left and Libertarian persuasion who never could stand having anyone remind them that their “if it feels good do it” version of morality is a crock. I can see the moral equivalence now: “You got a speeding ticket, so don’t you dare talk about Ted Kennedy and his driving.”

[TLBSHOW]

BUMP

[summer]

There is no virtue greater than a repentant heart.

I agree with you there, and forgiving someone is something worth doing.

But, we'll have to see where he goes from here.

BTW, I thought Grover Norquist made a very good point when he said he thought a sin of gambling is that 1/3 of the money goes straight to the government.

In that same line of thinking, I thought: "This guy had $8 million just burning a hole in his pocket? And the best he could figure out what to do with it was to piss it away inm a casino?"

I realize people can do whatever they want with their money. However Bennett is quite talented at identifying the ills and problems of society. He did not have the brains to take $8 million and maybe -- provide needed start-upo capital and invest in some small businesses, so more people could get jobs? Start a private school? Fund a scholarship for some deserving person who wants to go to college? I mean, there was just NOTHING BETTER he could think of to do with $8 million bucks than hand it over to a casino (and, to the government, as Grover mentioned)?

Like I said, we'll see what happens...