« The Moral Equivalent Of Online Poker | Home | Getting From Here To There »
10.02.06
Tut-tut, Looks Like Rain
posted by Absinthe | 1:15 PM
I had about the most embarrassing 0-fer weekend possible at the tables. Some bad plays, very few suckouts in my favor, and I managed to lose as just about every kind of favorite you can be. Turns out if I’d just taken the weekend off I could have saved some money, since obviously the future of the whole collective online poker endeavor is, let’s say, in flux. As it is last night I’d decided to take a week off anyway. Seems like a pretty good week to be doing it.
I’m ultimately Not That Worried for myself – anyone who really wants to make their living as a poker player, not that I necessarily do, had better be goshdarned adaptable – but there are a number of people out there who’ve attached their names and livelihoods to one site or another who may have just had their careers revoked, and for them I worry a great deal. Hang in there. I’d offer floor space but for the time being I don’t really have any. But I’ll keep you posted.
I could go on and on about the idiocy of Congress and the evils of the ruling party because of the way they handled this bill. It’s inane. But for a little perspective, here’s a segment from the recent Torture-Is-Grand bill:
PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER SOLE BASIS FOR REVIEW OF MILITARY COMMISSION PROCEDURES AND ACTIONS–Except as otherwise noted in this chapter and notwithstanding any other provision of law (including Section 2241 of title 28 or any other habeas corpus provision) no court, justice or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any cause of action whatsoever, including any action pending on or filed after the date of enactment of this chapter, relating to the prosecution, trial or judgement of a military commission under this chapter, including challenges to the lawfulness of procedures of military commissions under this chapter.
“Military commissions under this chapter” = “kangaroo courts of dubious provenance”, and that’s describing them charitably. What’s worse, given our current administration’s because-we-say-so approach to the definition of an “enemy combatant”, this potentially means you, me, and anyone else who the powers-that-be decide is an enemy of the state. (Which apparently may be “online poker players”, what what?)
Kinda puts things in a diffferent light, doesn’t it? Suspending our ability to play online poker is merely stupid. Suspending the means by which we can petition for release from unlawful detention is utterly insane. I know a lot of us place great value on poker, whether for recreation or income; let’s not let our anger over an attack on our right to checkraise a fish distract us from the broader, more sinister game going on. The stakes are much higher than digital card games, higher than any amount of money you can possibly win. The time to decide what’s important to you is the same time it’s always been: now.
Popularity: 9% [?]
Topics: Poker | 6 Comments »
October 4, 2006 at 9:18 PM
October 2, 2006 at 3:13 PM
Habeas corpus more important than our right as Americans to play poker?!
Next thing you’ll be telling me is that the’s US media spineless coverage of the Administration’s Iraq policies is worse than ESPN barely mentioning the disappearing 2,000,000 from the Main Event.
Keep things in perspective Ryan!
October 3, 2006 at 6:21 AM
I doubt I’ll be able to change your mind, but the military tribunals are legal, and the vast majority of the detainees are not guaranteed the rights that a US citizen would be allowed, for very good reasons. They’re not US citizens, and they’re unlawful combatants. We’re even being generous giving them Geneva Convention rights, since they’re not parties to the Genva Conventions. There are other obvious reasons why you don’t want to try unlawful combatants in civilian US courts, but why ruin your perfectly good rant by using logic?
October 3, 2006 at 6:49 AM
“let’s not let our anger over an attack on our right to checkraise a fish distract us from the broader, more sinister game going on”
Well, said, Ryan.
(As to Scott’s comment – this from the US Supreme Court:
“writ of habeas corpus is the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action”
Perhaps Scott ought to step back and take a second look at the power Congress just gave the Pres. To me, it’s chilling.
October 3, 2006 at 11:17 AM
Scott:
1. “Legal” != “right”. The tribunals are (in many but admittedly not all instances) the very definition of a kangaroo court: the defense is often not permitted to see or rebut evidence and the prosecution is not required to present witnesses for cross-examination. The Geneva Convention rights for unlawful combatants aren’t something we give out of generosity; required treatment of unlawful combatants is in the Geneva Conventions, and though those rights are not enumerated as specifically as they are for prisoners of war, they explicitly include humane treatment and a fair and just trial. Torture is inhumane; kangaroo courts are unfair and only rise to the level of just by chance; QED.
2. You are correct that enemy combatants aren’t accorded the same rights as US citizens. But under the current regime not all US citizens are accorded the same rights as US citizens, since the Bush administration has decided that it has unilateral authority to declare it so, even in the face of strenuous opposition from the courts. I am not particularly interested in being the baby that is thrown out with this bathwater and neither should you be.
But, by all means, bring on the logic.
October 4, 2006 at 8:33 PM
Poker, torture, domestic spying-it’s all part of the same fight. The far right is testing the waters, seeing what it can get away with. It’s possible we haven’t seen nothin’ yet.
I agree the torture thing is scary. Who’d of thought six years ago we’d be more like the old USSR than unlike it?