And you’re right, where WAS he back in 2007. Where were any of them? As I recall, it took the entire population of Carver showing up at his door to get his apathetic behind to Middleboro for that meeting.

When I watch some of these reps from other towns around the State, and how much more responsive they are to their constituents instead of gambling or other special interests, it makes me cringe in embarrassment. And then it makes me angry. Pacheco, Menard, Flynn among others. Most of our South Shore reps get an F-. Vote em out Bumpkin. Vote ‘em out.

Another form of participation, is just attenda meeting and sit in one of those “Cheap Seats”
As Mr. Spataro has called them.

Ask questions, on public record. Blogs and letters to the editor are not part of the public record.

Monday Selectman’s meetings can be very intertaining. But you canot participate from your couch, well not yet anyway.

Why can we not use technology and text in a few comments? The answer is we cam, so long as we have someone attending the meeting.

Our selectmen need to here from you, but if you do not show up, they just praise everything the do, and think things are great. Or Status Quo.

Senator Pacheco’s answer to my question, regarding foreclosure rates was pretty much wrong.

NV’s population is much smaller 2.6M than MA at 6.6M. So his comment about NV being larger is the reason for the hight foreclosure rate is wrong.

Secondly I asked about the percentage comparision, but he seemed to miss that.

RI is yet another state that has legalized gambling…..so we do not have to looko to far to see how gambling has hurt RI. Yet Mr. Pacheco still touts counting license plates in Foxwoods.

Anything is possible when you make up your own numbers. The idea of bringing casinos and slots is flawed only be the lobbiest numbers. From $800k to over $2M in dollars spent trying to bring gambling into MA.

Folks where do you think these lobbiest monies get spent?

I guess you might think it limiting if you look at something like Web Kit or Rails in that they give you blocks to roll your own. But for an off-the-shelf tool, WordPress is pretty dang good.

Texas v. Kickapoo held up because Texas does not have slots. They proved the Vegas Night exception wasn’t enough to force a state to sign a compact. Florida successfully held back tribal casinos for years until it impetuously legalized slots at the tracks – which DeLeo wants to do here.

Like I said, there are hurdles but the biggest one has always been that our State has wisely opposed legalizing slots. The biggest problem is that if it legalizes them now, the tribe, and those of us who oppose a Middleboro casino will be facing a long fight.

Who needs it?

The fight isn’t over, folks. Go to USS-Mass.org to find out how you can help.

The state sponsors gaming in lotteries and race tracks. This is just another extension. The reason it exists is people want it. If they didn’t all its various forms would be dead in the water world wide. Tax it. Regulate it. Educate about it. Enjoy it. Live with it.

All the safeguards put in for degenerate gamblers are a joke. This is conscious clearing feel good legislation. They want their fix they’ll find it. You get gaming you will get that fall out. Guaranteed.

I have been to dozens of casinos in probably ten or more states. I have written on my experiences especially on a site I was shunned at. Hal’s posted them. LL has posted them. I’ve posted them. What I can say is that it is my opinion that the anti’s have over stated their “facts” and the pro’s have understated their “facts.”

I’m a NIMBY but like BB I am a NIMBY with a price. That price was not even close to being negotiated nor will it ever be. IMHO the Middleboro gin mill is dead.

The Raven was symptomatic of what you get with gaming. This is the domain of the pinky ring set. They can fly jets and have an Ivy League pedigree but so did Madoff.

I absolutely agree that we need to consider the impacts of ANY business and I agree that there can be serious social problems associated with gambling.

Where we differ is that I think all those things can (and SHOULD) be dealt with and that legislating morality is always the LAST recourse that should ever be considered – both because it seldom works and because it interferes with those who legitimately enjoy the activity (whether it is gambling, drinking, sex, whatever) without causing social problems.

Again: I’d rather see you put your energies to work making the impacts less damaging. Or at least part of your energies: y’all on the anti-casino side would make me very happy if I heard you say “If we can’t stop it, at least let’s support things that would make it less damaging”.

I can support support higher taxes on gambling. I can support making a casino or any gambling establishment liable for anyone getting drunk there (because it may lead to them gambling more than they should). I can support requiring Indian casinos to abide by no smoking laws. I’d also love to see my idea of gambling licenses because I think it could dead stop many of the social problems you are so angry about.

So we DO have things we could agree on. But I’ll never support your flat “No casino ever” stance.

Um, for a start, how about to off set the costs increased crime, addiction, bankruptcies, child neglect and abuse, youth gambling, spousal abuse, environmental impacts, cannibalization of local business and lower property values.

If a nuke plant or chemical plant wanted to build in your neighborhood, they’d damn well have to make economic sense.

If you’d really like to live in a place where economic sense has been tossed to the wind, I suggest you buy a ticket to Detroit.

More accurate correlations to casinos, rather than popcorn and movies are smoking, alchemical and drugs.

The State is trying it’s best to legislate more and more limits on smoking, which is a currently legal activity.

Drugs, now currently illegal, remain so.

And we all know what happens when you make alcohol illegal.

And yet, unlike what would be the case with casinos, our State does not officially sanction or promote cigarettes, drugs or alcohol.

Netflix wasn’t an existing business and the movie industry may still not be sure they like it very much: http://current.com/items/91468087_reddit-user-20th-century-fox-discusses-buying-a-senator-and-making-netflix-illegal.htm

The same should be true for gambling. You and I agree that there are some extremely bad social consequences. Where we differ is that I believe those problems can be dealt with without prohibiting gambling outright.

I’ve said this before: gambling is inevitable. You are NOT going to stop this from happening. I would much rather see you put your energy to work lobbying for ideas like gambling licenses, higher taxes on gambling and so on.

As to the lottery: I *like* the lottery. Every week I spend $2.00, which I look at as a voluntary contribution of taxes that *might* have a payback. Sucker tax? No more so than not bothering to hunt for every possible deduction, which is another voluntary contribution for me, but one that has no potential for winning anything

Suppose that you needed a gambling license to buy lottery tickets? It’s not a “sucker tax” then because you couldn’t spend more in a month than your economic situation indicated is reasonable. Would you still want to close it down?

Yes, that would cost money. I’d happily pay $3.00 instead of $2 if I knew that was helping keep addicted gamblers from ruining their lives.

OK, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe it would cost far more than that. Maybe there would be enforcement issues, they’d surely be cheating, abuse, scams – just like there is wirh alcohol and tobacco and porn and everything else that causes problems for some. I still can’t help thinking it’s the better way to go.

If someone wants to open a giant movie theater in Middleboro or anywhere else, does it have to make economic sense? If they plan to hire 100 people, does it matter that those 100 jobs will probably be filled from existing smaller places forced out of business?

If people want to waste their money watching movies there when they can get Netflix at home for far less, is that our concern? If the patrons eat too much candy and popcorn and cause a rise in health costs, should we stand up and rail against movie theaters?

There are things I don’t like about casinos. I think that patrons should have to get a state issued license that limits the amount of money they can risk gambling – that amount would be based on a persons financial condition and the costs associated with all that would be borne by the casinos and the tracks and the church bingo halls.

But other than that, to me it’s just another business. Businesses sometimes have undesirable social consequences – pollution, for example. We pass laws to deal with those problems and that’s exactly what we should be doing with gambling.

It’s not just the courage to risk losing because you only got 1% of the vote, it’s the courage and thick skin required should you actually get elected.

No matter what your positions are, somebody is going to dislike you intensely because of that. Heck, you don’t even have to be in a position of power: just write a letter to the editor and somebody will give you a dirty look in the coffee shop.

I’ve thought about this stuff and it took me almost no time at all to decide I want none of it. I’m disliked already for being an ACLU atheist liberal; I’m not going to make it worse by getting into public service

I notice that your attacks are personal against me(party blind, dangerous) whereas mine are general about Republican party leadership. You stated “No where did I say that Republicans can do no wrong. Neither did I say that Democrats are always wrong”. At no time did I make any claim or representation of what you said or didn’t say except for the “party blind comment” and followed up with specifically why I take issue with the GOP since the Rush/Gingrich days.

I have plenty of issues with the Democratic party but view them as a much better choice overall for me. I hated bailout 1(bush). I also hated the subsequent Obama bailouts.

Since Gingrich IMO, the Republicans are more interested in torpedoing Democrats than leading. That’s my issue with them, that’s why I stopped voting for them, and won’t again until I see some change.

As far as Bush and his adventurous tactics in Iraq and Afghanistan it seems the current administration is clearly intent on following exactly the same path with an expanded role of 30,000 more troops and who knows what else I the works. I do not rule out adventurism in the Middle East with Iran as a potential target unless the administration will let Israel do that for them.

The increase in government goes unabated and the current administration is intent on expanding government and piling on debt that has never been seen before. The legacy of the current generation will to leave a nation economically worse off than when they found it. A sad commentary for two failed presidencies and a Congress that has proved to be totally inept no matter who runs the show.

No where did I say that Republicans can do no wrong. Neither did I say that Democrats are always wrong.

But you were ready with a list of wrongdoings by Republicans. Not once in your little tirade did you criticize a Democrat.

And that’s what we call party-blind.

Give you a break? Until you are equally aware of what our elected leaders are doing wrong, regardless of thier political affiliations, you are the most dangerous kind of voter – a man armed with an opinion and little else.

No my eyes are wide open. And I’ll support a Republican when the GOP shows that they’re worthy of my support – because for the last 25 year(at least) they haven’t been.

Party of small government and personal freedom?… Gimme a break.