Replies

I was under the impression that Mr. Bennett gambled $8 million, not lost $8 million.

I have close relatives that have gambled well into six figures over the past ten years or so. Since they are "smart" gamblers, their losses are less than 1% of that. Since they go to Vegas a couple of times a year (not to mention the Bahamas) they get their meals, hotel room, and often their plane tickets "comped". If the cost of those "freebees" is counted, their little hobby doesn't cost them much at all. I would even venture to say that I spend more on computers and electronics than they do on gambling.

It is probably a similar situation with Mr. Bennett. As for hypocracy, I would say there is a case if he were an anti-gambling shrill, but since he hasn't taken much of a stand against gambling, I wouldn't hold it against him.

Now if they found him coked to the gills with a hooker on one arm and a drag queen on the other, THEN I would tell him to STFU. ;-)

"...I was under the impression that Mr. Bennett gambled $8 million, not lost $8 million...."

Certainly, the size of Mr. Bennett's losses remains unclear. I am gaining the impression, however, that the dollar amounts were large.

This impression is strengthened by knowledge that we do have, corroborated by Mr. Bennett himself, of the types of games that he regularly played. Apparently, Mr. Bennett favored video poker machines. As I understand it, these games do not involve skill, as do the games your relatives play (actual poker, baccarat, "21," even craps). Rather, a computer generates the poker hands and determines whether the player wins or loses.

Needless to say, over the long term the player loses and the house wins. If the stakes are high enough, the player could lose a great deal.

In my view, this is the definition of "pi$$ing away" money. I would have no qualm if Mr. Bennett liked to while away a few hours putting $100 of quarters into slot machines when he happens to be in Vegas or Atlantic City. This is harmless fun. But if he is losing millions of dollars, gained primarily from speaking fees paid by groups of earnest do-gooders (as he poses to be), that would be far better used by the truly needy, his church, his childrens' schools, then he is no better than a Pharisee, perhaps worse.