“I understand that America is a mess right now. Unemployment and the economy are in a dismal state. It is my number one priority to solve these problems and fix the economy. But people, don’t spend money! Save it! Stuff it under your mattress! Keep it away from the greedy banks and don’t spend it on frivolous things! Hoard your money because you’re going to need it!”

Obviously, saying something like that would be terrible for the economy and is the exact opposite of what the country needs. It’s also a loose paraphrase of the words of President Barack Obama. Throughout his year in the White House and even before, Obama has made it clear that he’s not a fan of capitalism, taking every opportunity to portray businesses as greedy, people as being in need of handouts, and the government being responsible for taking care of the people. That would be fine, except that he is the president of a country that has a Representative Republic system of government and a capitalist form of economy. His attitudes are not only counterproductive, but also downright dangerous for both.

The most recent of many examples of this is Obama’s criticism of Las Vegas and people who visit the city. Obama recently said that people saving money for college shouldn’t waste their money on gambling in Vegas. Last February, he made a similar remark about companies that received TARP funds, saying that it was irresponsible for them to take trips to the Sin City.

It’s no surprise that an anti-capitalist wouldn’t realize that trips to conferences and junkets in places like Las Vegas are an important part of the process of obtaining and retaining clients. But at least in that case he was criticizing the spending of money by companies that had received money from taxpayers. In his recent comments, he criticized private citizens for spending their own money.

Lawmakers and businessmen in Vegas are understandably furious and many have vowed to support whoever runs against Obama in 2012. They recognize that his comments and policies are bad for Las Vegas, the state of Nevada, and the country as a whole.

While the entire country has a dismal unemployment rate of 10% — you know, the catastrophic number that Obama said we would reach if he didn’t get to pass his “stimulus” bill – Nevada is even worse, at 13%. You should also note that both are conservative estimates that don’t count people with part-time jobs, those who have given up looking for work, and those who work on a temporary project. And with unemployment that bad and Nevada’s tourism industry struggling, the President of the United States, the most powerful man in the country (with the exception of George Soros and Al Gore), is telling people not to visit Las Vegas and not to spend money in their casinos, which just so happens to be the biggest industry they have in the state. Real responsible, Mr. President.

People of the United States and the rest of the world, spend your money as you see fit. You should of course be responsible, but if you have the disposable income to take a vacation, I can think of no place better than Vegas. Of course, as I’ve said countless times, you should never wager money that you can’t afford to lose, but if you can afford to lose it, Las Vegas would be happy to have it.

Not long ago I warned our readers to not be too confident in the overturning of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act in the United States. There are simply too many reasons the legislation in Congress could fail, as it did last time Barney Frank tried to get it done. I’m not the only one who thinks so.

Tony Cabot, founding member and former president of the International Masters of Gaming Law Association, agrees with me. Considered an expert on gambling legislation, Cabot believes that no law will be passed on a federal level that legalizes and regulates online gambling. Barney Frank has already pushed his House bill back and it likely will not be heard on the floor this year. Expect the same from Menendez’s similar Senate bill. In both cases, online gambling is simply not a priority, with the no end in sight to the recession and no prospect for the creation of new jobs in the near future. In addition, with the administration focusing on healthcare reform, there simply isn’t the time or energy to devote to a bill that would have a minor impact on the economy.

If the bill isn’t passed this year, though, it could be dead, according to Cabot. Next year is an election year and no politician is going to want to give their opponents ammunition by backing a controversial subject like gambling. I agree. Not only that, but the reason Barney Frank is so confident that he will succeed this time where he failed in the past is because he has strong support from Congress that has a strong Democratic majority. However, if the politicians hold off on the legislation until after the 2010 elections, the Democrats could lose that majority and therefore, online gambling would lose its support. Midterm elections are always unfavorable to the party in the White House, and with the approval rating of Obama and Congress plummeting, many experts predict a huge shakeup on Capitol Hill.

Another reason Cabot provided for a lack of optimism is that some online casinos are against the legislation. Yes, you read that correctly. According to Cabot, some of the online casinos that are already dealing with American customers are against repealing UIGEA because it would give them more competition in the market. Some fear that they will even be denied licenses to operate in the United States. Likewise, land-based casinos in the country, especially in Las Vegas, are divided on the issue. Some want online gambling legalized because they want to expand into the online realm. Other casinos are against online gambling because they see it as competition. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, who is basically a puppet of the Vegas casino lobby, has refused to pick a side on the issue.

Cabot gave 20 to 1 odds for the success of Barney Frank’s bill, but thinks legislation at the state level is much more likely. Sorry to be a buzz kill, fellow gamblers. I’ll try to have better news tomorrow.