Bennett’s Real Problem

As NRO readers are fully aware, William Bennett has received the Big Flak over revelations that he's a high roller, so much so that he's sworn off the dice. "It is true that I have gambled large sums of money," Bennett announced Monday. "I have also complied with all laws on reporting wins and losses. Nevertheless, I have done too much gambling, and this is not an example I wish to set."

There is much pain here. Being chased away from your pleasures, after all, is no one's idea of fun. One thinks of poor tipplers through the ages who have been forced to take the pledge by nagging wives, or contemporary smokers under siege by vice officer Bloomberg. Suddenly, one is deprived of a source of comfort, solace, and even strength. The universe is a much colder place.

Yet such is the hand fate has dealt, and Bennett must make the most of it. As it happens, staying out of the casinos should be a blessing to Bennett, both in a personal and professional sense. At the same time, deep damage has been done — more damage, in fact, than is widely acknowledged.

First off, these revelations can't be good for business. While many a Bennett defender has pointed out that gambling is no absolute moral horror, it's safe to say that lots of Bennett's supporters don't agree. Quite the contrary. They consider gambling the devil's snare — a "something for nothing" scheme that, among other things, undermines respect for honest labor. That is especially true at the level Bennett played. Church bingo is one thing, and is mostly a way for churches to raise funds. Tossing around hundreds of thousands during a night at the casinos is quite another. That Bennett allegedly wagered far more money in the past several years than most Americans will ever make in their nine-to-five puts him in a new light.

Virtue, of course, is a tough business, and all who enter should give up any hope of mercy should anything even approaching vice be detected. This is especially true when you make 50 grand per speaking engagement, worked for a Republican president, and went after Bill Clinton with supreme gusto. Clinton has no doubt welcomed these revelations with even more glee than Michael Kinsley. To Bennett that may be the worst cut off all.

Others of us, however, have other problems with these revelations. For one thing, the casino industry pumps a lot of money into politics. Timothy O'Brien, author of Bad Bet, said the industry put at least $4.5 million into national campaigns between 1992 and 1996, making gambling "a political force at the federal level on a par with the National Rifle Association and the United Automobile Workers." Those contributions are rising, and lots of that money goes to people at war with everything Bennett stands for.

But the aspect of these revelations most damaging to Bennett, at least to some of us, is that they totally undermine the notion that Bennett is a thinking man. Even those who found him something of a scold could at least admit that he had an active brain. This guy studied philosophy, after all.

Yet the games he preferred — video poker and slots — represent gambling for dummies. You can teach a blind, pin-headed monkey to play the slots, and video poker isn't much better. It's not for nothing that video poker is called the crack cocaine of gambling. People can become so enthralled they leave their kids in locked cars, where they are duly broiled to death.

These solitary games require none of the skills required of the true gambler. The true gambler — the thinking gambler — is found at the card table. Indeed, the man who triumphs at five-card stud is a formidable human being, one who has taught himself how to read body language, how to bluff, and how not to sweat when the mortgage is on the line — and when a loss might mean sending his wife and daughters into prostitution.

The other beauty of true poker is that it can be played far from the public eye, and off the taxman's ledger. These games are also occasion for good conversation, moderate alcohol consumption, and all around good fellowship. In short, true poker has many virtues that videos and slots totally lack.

Luckily for Brother Bennett, America is a land of second, third, and fourth acts. In time, and with the proper application of the p.r. arts, the sheep can be returned to the fold — or, more to the point, to the lecture hall and bookstores. Winning back intellectual respect, however, will be a tougher assignment. I'm putting the odds at 3-5.

The question that no one has asked: where did this info come from, over a 10-year period.

I've heard speculation that this $8M came from the private records casinos keep on their high rollers. These records are supposed to be kept absolutely confidential out of consideration from the high rollers who don't want to advertise.

This smells an awful lot like the "unsealing" of W's DUI, which came about due to some "convenient" nosing around by RATs, and a special change in the law.

I smell a smear operation by the klintons, perhaps just to demonstrate that they have the power to get at secret information and have it splattered all over the media. Maybe it's a "shot across the bow" at Bush. It sure brought out the leftist media in full tar-and-feather mode.

Maybe it was done just because the leftists are so "down" after Bush winning the war, and they needed a pick-me-up.

I've found gambling in AC to be rather addictive.....but what I've won or lost on any given weekend has been in the hundreds...not the thousands.

I've been able to control my gambling...staying away from AC for months on end when I want to get a handle on my budget, even though it is only a hour away.

I read in todays USA Today that he was playing $2500 per hand at Caesar's Palace in Vegas.

Also, from LewRockwell.com:

"Each casino must give a W-2G tax form on all wins over $1,199. In playing more than $8 million through the high-limit machines he played, Bennett would have received a very large number of W-2G tax forms to offset some, all, or more than he lost. And he would have been paid all wins under $1,199 without the tax record being given to him.

Newsweek stated that Bennett enjoys Video Poker. Playing Video Poker perfectly on fair-returning machines nets 99.5% to 102% over time. That means that, over the decade Bennett played, his $8 million wagered would have returned him anywhere from $7.95 million to $8.16 million dollars for the effort. In ten years time, therefore, he falls in the expected range of losing a maximum of $50,000 to winning $160,000. For a man who makes millions each year, these expected dollar returns certainly does seem to support his claim that it was a relaxing hobby he enjoyed 2 or 3 times per year.

Bennett’s own words, quoted by Newsweek, were, "Over 10 years, I’d say I’ve come out pretty close to even." The expected return from Video Poker would suggest that he was telling the truth."

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.



	http://www.nationalreview.com/shiflett/shiflett050703.asp