WhackyNation

In this most wonderful of all nations, we also have our quota of wacky oddballs, and they aren’t all in the realm of politics. This time they seem to be appearing in mounting numbers in national television, where, it appears, the people who make the big decisions have lost their way big time.

How else can one account for the maddening proliferation of poker games, of all things, on many network channels? Are the networks so unimaginative that they cannot come up with better programming than poker games, as if the national TV studios have suddenly been taken over by the gambling lords in Las Vegas?

My objection to the televised poker games is twofold. First, watching people play poker for high stakes on TV is a gigantic bore. And, second, how in the world do the TV networks get away with running a gambling racket on so many channels without being challenged by law enforcement?

Furthermore, many channels specializing in sports programming have adopted poker-game formats to fill in their otherwise busy schedule. Now, pray tell, who in the world, outside of Las Vegas, that is, has designated poker gambling for high stakes as a competitive “sport”?

If this keeps up, it’s reasonable to assume that, in time, national TV networks may introduce pornographic programming and perhaps such other monstrosities as bullfighting Spanish style, burlesque shows, soap operas taking place in nudist camps, and other similarly wacky entertainments on the assumption that “the public demands them.”

As if that weren’t enough news from the whacky front, Parade magazine reports that a Democratic congressman from Florida, Rep. Robert Wexler, has filed a bill in the House that “seeks to exempt online poker and other games of skill from the law. If the legislation passes it could lead to more than $3 billion a year in taxes.”

There it is again! Once more, a Democratic lawmaker has uttered the “secret” word, “taxes,” to legitimize an utterly crackpot move he hopes to convert into national law. One of Wexler’s henchmen, Josh Rogin, speaking for Wexler, told Parade: “Regulating online poker could be a new revenue stream, and there aren’t many these days.”

Legalize online poker games? Where in the world is the beleaguered Federal Communications Commission when we need it most? The FCC should have banned poker games and any other form of gambling from television at the onset. has the authority to do so and should act pronto.

Also, as Parade indicates, “according to a 2006 U.S. law, it’s illegal to pay for most online wagers with a credit card — which basically prohibits Americans from betting money on online poker or other such games,” even though some people “get around this by using foreign credit cards and bank accounts.”

What a terrible example TV is setting for youngsters in America. The TV poker games will give them the impression that gambling is a “sport” and, since it is programmed as “entertainment,” it must be OK.

If you live in a growing, modern city like Seattle — from which point I am writing this — I’m sure that at some time or other you may have experienced the dilemma the Greater Seattle and Western Washington areas encountered several years ago. At the time, the dilemma was caused by a Canadian company that wanted to ante up $75 million to build a new race track for thoroughbred and harness racing.

The dilemma was caused by the fact that the Canadian company wanted to replace the existing race track, which already had been something of a headache to the region. The entire incident might have been a long, drawn out comedy if it hadn’t been a serious economic issue.

The problem was — and this may sound familiar to you — that environmental groups got into the act and insisted that the sites proposed for the new track were environmentally sensitive wetlands that were so sacred they should not be harmed in the slightest way.

Although I consider myself to be an environmentalist, but an environmentalist who preaches common sense, I blew my stack in print and in commentaries on television. “Holy Toledo!” I exclaimed. What in the world could be more environmentally correct than building a home for the noble beast, the horse!

On the other side of the issue were members of the horse industry and, of course, race enthusiasts. They proclaimed vociferously and frequently that the region had better provide the new home for the beautiful four-legged animals — and soon! — or it would face the loss of a half-billion-dollar-a-year industry and hundreds of jobs.

I was in a dilemma of my own, mainly because I had problems with both sides on the issue. Now, everybody loves horses. I certainly do. But nobody has yet dissuaded me from the opinion that horses are raised these days primarily to feed the never-satisfied gambling industry.

Are race tracks and horse breeders really interested in the noble animal, the horse, and in the art of horsemanship? To answer that question for yourself and anybody who might wish to take the side of the gambling fraternity, consider the true nature of present-day horse-racing and race tracks, in general.

For example, let’s say that it were possible to take the mutuel windows and betting out of horse-racing. And let’s say, further, that, instead of racing the horses, we were simply to trot them around a track in a sort of beauty contest — similar to that one sees at dog-show competitions. That’s all. No racing. Just a beauty contest.

Under those conditions, how many race tracks would survive for a day? I think the answer is obvious. Zero! So much for the horse-race enthusiasts and track gamblers who go on rhapsodically about the beauty of the four-legged animal and how important it is in the animal world — and the human world, as well.

So, who is right in this continuing battle to build race tracks in every urban area in America? Probably nobody, but I just wish everybody on both sides of the dilemma would face the race-track issue honestly for a change — and disregard the money-mad preachments of the gamblers.