More nonsense from PPA paid spokesperson
Pokerblog.com seems to think Annie Duke is making a compelling argument when he quotes her as saying
"Having the right to continue to pursue my profession, wherever I might choose to pursue it, is very important to me from both a financial standpoint but also from the broader perspective of freedom, personal responsibility and civil liberties."
Huh? That's compelling?
She choose a profession, playing poker in public raked games, that was illegal in most states when she made the choice. Now she argues that her freedom is being restricted? That's not compelling, that's nonsense. Why not chose burglary, or prostitution, or canning pickles without allowing government oversight?
I'm all for legalizing poker. But please don't give that kind of nonsense and call it logical argument.