Posted on 02/16/2012 7:51:49 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
....Asked about the legalization of online gambling, Santorum responds:
"I’m someone who takes the opinion that gaming is not something that is beneficial, particularly having that access on the Internet. Just as we’ve seen from a lot of other things that are vices on the Internet, they end to grow exponentially as a result of that. It’s one thing to come to Las Vegas and do gaming and participate in the shows and that kind of thing as entertainment, it’s another thing to sit in your home and have access to that it. I think it would be dangerous to our country to have that type of access to gaming on the Internet.
Freedom’s not absolute. What rights in the Constitution are absolute? There is no right to absolute freedom. There are limitations. You might want to say the same thing about a whole variety of other things that are on the Internet — “let everybody have it, let everybody do it.” No. There are certain things that actually do cost people a lot of money, cost them their lives, cost them their fortunes that we shouldn’t have and make available, to make it that easy to do. That’s why we regulate gambling. You have a big commission here that regulates gambling, for a reason.
I opposed gaming in Pennsylvania . . . A lot of people obviously don’t responsibly gamble and lose a lot and end up in not so great economic straits as a result of that. I believe there should be limitations."
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
"Freedom’s not absolute. What rights in the Constitution are absolute? There is no right to absolute freedom."
Hello?
Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of people to assemble ARE absolute, unalienable rights.
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated"
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
I don’t know Adelson’s views on online, either.
But in my mind it’s Rick’s views that count...let’s say Adelson does oppose it online, for business reasons.
But Rick is opposed to gambling, period, for moral and societal reasons.
I, too, am opposed to gambling but I have been outvoted. That’s something I can’t overcome, can I?
Rick would overcome it, if he had the ability.
Online or anywhere.
On another post I asked if he might make an exception for Catholic bingo...
:o)
Yes enough with the lecture on morals all the time. I don’t need my president imposing his morals on me. You’re against abortion, yay we get it. You have 8 kids, yay we get it. You’re old-fashioned, yay we get it. Focus on the big picture. Jeesh.
“People shouldn’t gamble so much. There are two standard deviation points between the casino and the person gambling — but that is enough!
You blow $40.00 at a casino — not $50,000 or more!”
People can do whatever they PLEASE with their money.
That’s what a free country is for.
I’m sick and tired of Santorum&consorts telling people what they should or shouldn’t do. It will be much better if Santorum postulated for a preacher’s office, rather than for POTUS.
To me one is as bad as the other and they both can just shut up!
It’s all about WHO Rick is, and if society were like Rick, all would be well.
That’s what you are noticing.
It raises red flags and leaves him open to attack.
Concern for those who gamble could place gambling into a health care issue of addiction, neglect, abuse, housing (not enough food for the children, beating up your wife/husband, losing your home). It’s the Left’s playground — control.
Santorum can say gambling causes problems (it does) but he should not state it should be limited.
Another PLUS in Santorum’s column, IMHO.
“There are limitations.” - Yes Ricky, there are Constitutional limits on government’s power, not Constitutional limits on freedom. Of course the Santorum fans will be here to accuse everyone of being doped up anarchists, but it’s really about a mindset more than anything. How is Rick’s belief that government should decide what hobbies are good for you better than Michelle Obama’s belief that government should decide what food is good for you?
What “plus” would that be?
No. This guy reminds me of the annoying busybody neighbor down the block who always had a stupid comment- like telling us kids not to ride our bikes without hands b/c we might fall and get hurt. And then he would tell our parents on us. I don’t need, or want that in a president.
Alcohol causes problems. Tobacco causes problems. Fatty foods cause problems. Out of wedlock sex causes problems. Actually, with a 70% divorce rate, marriage causes more problems than all those others combined. Government regulations on everything, surely someone in Washington can figure out what's good for us and tell us what to do.
Sadly trading Barry for Rick is just changing one govt knows best for another. People are confusing social conservatism with small government. Rick Santorum is not a small government guy.
...or running for the presidency. These men are gambling millions of dollars on the chance they can strike it rich and become president of the United States. I'd call that gambling.
Going flat broke in the space of a day -- some fun!
If a majority vote for it, either with their wallets or their ballots, it is what it is.
I have an opinion on it, but that’s all I have.
If I were to call for the people’s will on the question to be “limited” by some greater force, given the American system we are blessed to have, that would be worrisome.
That’s why I don’t.
Rick won’t let go, but worse, these types of issues and questions are really a huge portion of what he likes to focus on.
It let’s people know who he, Rick Santorum, is.
It let’s people know how he thinks our society should function.
Strange...I thought we were seeking a leader to rally the nation in a time of political and economic crisis and palpable fear for the future. A Reagan like figure such as in the Carter days of hostages and malaise.
If not Rick Perry, then who but Newt...of those who are running?
This seems to be a primary problem with Santorum.
Has anyone attributed that reported sentiment to a real name yet?
Funny, I didn’t know Adelson was running for office but I as a social conservative will be sure not to vote for him on my ballot.
But as a social conservative, I am also still an American, and America is built on freedom.
Not a government nanny state on social issues or economic issues or health issues or...you name it.
Abortion is different.
Because the Constitution says right to LIFE, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
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.