Wednesday, 24 June 2009

Hypocrisy? You Betcha!

Just a quick thought that popped into my mind as I was reviewing the fallout of Kentucky’s “No!“ to slots:

A common theme you’ll find is criticism of the committee’s Republicans’ hypocrisy, especially Senate President David “Blackjack” Williams, who happily plays the casinos in neighboring states, but doesn’t want to allow them in Kentucky.

I agree it invites ridicule, but since we’re already on the topic of hypocrisy, why not take a quick look in the mirror:

Those racing fans and professionals who support slots want them for no reason other than to fund our sport, yet it would be perfectly within the states rights to legalize slots, VLTs, even full-blown casinos, independently of racing.

Wonder if those Kentucky horsemen and the racing media would be as unanimous in their support for slots then. Or would they suddenly find themselves on the side of the Family Foundation, trumping up the values of the racing-and-lottery-only era and condemning the evils of the highly-addictive slots game?

Hypocrisy indeed.

1 comment:

  1. I certainly wouldn't be AGAINST other forms of gaming. You probably wouldn't find me out there marching FOR them, either.

    I believes slots are no threat to racing. Slots-players and horseplayers are two very different gambling animals. There's no thought needed for playing a slot machine, but the allure of gambling on horses is the handicapping -- and everybody has his or her own system.

    Some in the racing business don't like slots for THAT reason. They think bringing the slots to the track just crowds the place up with people who don't know or care about the horses and the racing. Probably have a point.

    I certainly would take no moral stand against slots and gambling that are NOT tied to the racetrack. Probably wouldn't want them next to a school or church, but otherwise, live and let live.