Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

but they can say "no" right?(nm)

Posted on: January 24, 2018 at 15:11:50 CT
cnk MU
Posts:
190594
Member For:
26.45 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
(nm) means no message
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

Legalized sports betting is closer to becoming a thing - Grasslands MU - 1/24 14:54:03
     National legalized gambling, weed, dogs and cats - HandBanana MU - 1/24 17:36:35
     Smart. (nm) - Tiger_Claw MU - 1/24 15:25:47
     They need to do it the proper way, which they won't do. - Evenflow MU - 1/24 15:05:09
          Not if the SCOTUS rules for NJ. Creating a new agency - hefeweizen MU - 1/24 15:09:21
               The argument against it from the sports leagues for decades - MrBlueSky MU - 1/24 15:12:23
                    You can bet on UNLV games - Eggs MU - 1/24 15:24:28
                    yes, the leagues finally abandoned that ridiculous notion - hefeweizen MU - 1/24 15:14:41
     that'd be great although seems like MO would be on the - ajpe53 MU - 1/24 15:03:56
     hell yes(nm) - cnk ATL - 1/24 15:01:46
     as long as these hopheads arent taking the marijuana drug. - colonel angus beef KC - 1/24 15:01:01
          It has implications there too(nm) - hefeweizen MU - 1/24 15:01:42
               because of the implication?(nm) - cnk ATL - 1/24 15:04:02
                    Im sure the argument will be that the Fed does indeed - hefeweizen MU - 1/24 15:05:45
                         but they can say "no" right?(nm) - cnk ATL - 1/24 15:11:50
                              If 5 say the Supremacy Clause doesnt apply, sure. Better - hefeweizen MU - 1/24 15:13:10
                                   ROFL!! Now you’re blabbing on abkut the Law, lmafao!! - STL1DFW STL - 1/24 18:09:05
                                   RE: If 5 say the Supremacy Clause doesnt apply, sure. Better - cnk ATL - 1/24 15:14:27
                                        The implication... (nm) - MrBlueSky MU - 1/24 15:16:20
                                             RE: The implication... (nm) - colonel angus beef KC - 1/24 15:20:56
                                   AND sports betting(nm) - MrBlueSky MU - 1/24 15:14:02
                                        oooh, no. Congress should stay the **** out of it if - hefeweizen MU - 1/24 15:15:48
                                             I'm saying they could pass a bill to legalize it - MrBlueSky MU - 1/24 15:17:07
                                                  Of course, a SCOTUS decision may be needed if it is - STL1DFW STL - 1/24 18:10:08
                                                  lol, and my aunt would be my uncle if she had balls(nm) - hefeweizen MU - 1/24 15:20:54
                    It's the implication of danger... (nm) - MrBlueSky MU - 1/24 15:05:05
     The NBA is trying to get a 1% rake on all wagers. - Zeaux MU - 1/24 14:58:12
     SCOTUS will determine it this year I think(nm) - hefeweizen MU - 1/24 14:54:43
          They're ruling on the federal ban enacted by Congress - Grasslands MU - 1/24 15:12:13
          Yes, New Jersey case. Chris Christie is a party - MrBlueSky MU - 1/24 14:56:29
               The crux of the case is that the Feds prohibit it but have - hefeweizen MU - 1/24 15:01:14
                    Surely it could relate to interstate commerce (nm) - MrBlueSky MU - 1/24 15:05:46
                         Pretty sure that's not the argument that was made though. - hefeweizen MU - 1/24 15:07:58
                              ez solution, The Department of Gambing is your newest - 90Tiger MU - 1/24 16:00:48




©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard