The debate to to bring casinos to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts continues on. Will we or won't we? The bill, along with it's 182 amendments is still with the Senate. Gambling proponents claim a casino moratorium only sends tax dollars across state lines and wax poetic about the jobs to be created. Others say casinos are a breeding ground for illegal activities and foster gambling addiction.
Personally I am not necessarily dying for a casino or three to be in place in Massachusetts although I don't see alot of wrong with it. We already have scratch tickets and keno for the degenerate gamblers who don't want to travel, don't we? How much deeper into the depths of depravity will casinos plunge us? It's not like we're talking about legalizing the dog fights that go down every Friday night at midnight at Faneuil Hall. Those are illegal and will remain so! See. We'll still be one up on Michael Vick.
As far sending our tax dollars across state lines, you all know I'm a prime example of that. For me, the casino debate isn't as momentous as you might think. If we build a few casinos it'll be a little more convenient for me to play poker. If we don't, I will still play in NH, Connecticut and God help me, Atlantic City. Maybe a compromise would be to have the casinos just straddling our state line so the actual gambling happens in Rhode Island, or as I call it, Massachusetts' Mexico.
Play smart hombre.