In my role as “monitor” and Chief-Pain-in-the-Ass of Sheldon Adselson’s Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling’s (CSIG) website and Facebook pages, I get to see the flotsam and jetsam that get discharged from that group. From the four co-chairs (all former something or others, including some who were actively FOR some type of gambling at one time or another) comes a steady stream of blather that has Shakespearean qualities in that it’s full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
In Part One I highlighted how believable the claims of CSIG were (not very). While they are long on rhetoric, they’re short on actual facts (those pesky things). What makes their arguments even more ridiculous is the hypocrisy of the whole thing. I mean, you basically have a man who makes billions in the gaming industry trying to stop others from making money doing the exact same thing, only with a different delivery system
Adelson has spoken about how he saw gambling ruin his father and his family…so that’s EXACTLY the business he goes into? And now he wants to “save” others from his fate (irk irk) by prohibiting online gambling? Yes, ridiculous when you look at the large picture. And even sillier when you look at the specific arguments CSIG makes in its claims against online gambling. And unlike CSIG, I have examples, links, and pictures galore!
We left off in Part One talking about “the children.” We’ve documented the many cases where Sheldon’s Bethlehem Sands in Pennsylvania has been fined for underage gamblers, but what about his flagship USA casino, the Venetian? Seems to me, if you really wanted to keep kids out of your casinos, you’d do your best to not make your casino “family friendly.” Do a search for “family friendly” and “Venetian Las Vegas” and guess who comes up on several “Top 10” lists? C’mon, guess! I presume having those canals, living statues, and all those other attractions cater to kids, too. Who could have known? And guess where the “The Playstation Experience” is next month. Think of the children!
Another age group Adelson supposedly worries about is young college students. He was concerned that they’d blow tuition on online gaming. He never said anything about them blowing it at his casinos. So making it very, very attractive to them would probably be a bad (hypocritical) thing, too. Having a hot pool like Tao (with dope DJs and celebs like Paris, Kim, and even Justin Bieber), the Tao nightclub, and the Rockhouse bar: “Rockhouse offers drinking games in the daytime and DJs at night, with a sexy bar staff that keeps the party going all the time.” Yeah, lots of studying going on. Goodbye, tuition, here comes a hot babe in a bikini and there’s a 21 table over there…
Finally, there’s the money laundering and “other nefarious activity” claim against online gaming. One word: Macau. You know who has the biggest casino over there, don’t you (responsible for the lion’s share of his Sands Corporation profits)? You can read all about the money laundering, corruption, junkets and more here, here, here, here, and here. Oh, and Justin Beiber was here, too.
So to sum it up…just about every negative claim Adelson and his minions at CSIG have made about online gaming ALREADY EXISTS in land-based casinos, notably those owned by Adelson. If he really, really, really cared as much as he claims, wouldn’t he take care of the issues in his own back yard first?
Yes. Unless, of course, he’s a hypocrite.