Root picks up endorsement from Greg “Fossilman” Raymer

From the Root for President campaign:

Wayne Root has been endorsed by one of the world’s most famous poker champions Greg “Fossilman” Raymer (winner of the $5 million dollar grand prize in the World Series of Poker, and countless millions more in many big victories since then).

Raymer is also a publicly announced Libertarian, who has spoken openly in numerous media articles in the past year about running for Vice President on the LP ticket:

“As a professional poker player who has worked hard my entire life to get where I am today, I am whole-heartedly endorsing Wayne Allyn Root for President of the United States. There are 3 reasons- First, because Wayne will fight for the rights of 10 to 12 million poker enthusiasts in this country. Second, because Wayne will fight for all forms of Internet freedom- what we as Americans do in our own homes, on our own computers, with our own hard-earned money is none of the government’s business. Third, because Wayne will fight for smaller government, lower spending and lower taxes for the taxpayers. A Wayne Root administration would be heaven to the ears of every taxpayer, poker enthusiast and freedom advocate in this country.

Give ‘em hell Wayne!”

Greg “Fossilman” Raymer
Professional Poker Player & Patent Attorney
2004 World Series of Poker Main Event Champion

23 Responses to “Root picks up endorsement from Greg “Fossilman” Raymer”

  1. Dave Williams Says:

    Fuckin’ aye! Join the WAR! www.rootforamerica.com

  2. Dave Williams Says:

    Raymer is one of my favorite poker pros…a real class act.

  3. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    Too bad “Fossilman” expects daddy government to take care of him when he can’t get the kind of contracts he wants.

  4. Scott Lieberman Says:

    “Thomas L. Knapp says:

    Too bad “Fossilman” expects daddy government to take care of him when he can’t get the kind of contracts he wants.”

    Typical Thomas Knapp comment. Instead of just ignoring this article,
    Mr. Knapp can’t control himself. He gets this uncontrollable urge to post something negative any time Mr. Gordon posts one of Wayne Root’s press releases. Except, of course, Mr. Knapp doesn’t back up his comments with any actual facts. Or he posts some facts, but he leaves most of the relevant information out of his comment. And even if what Mr. Knapp says above is 100% true – so what? Is Knapp saying that an endorsement is totally worthless unless the endorser meets Mr. Knapp’s lofty standard of libertarian purity?

    If Thomas L. Knapp really wanted to help the Libertarian Party, instead of him continually trying to desperately counteract every single bit of even mildly positive news about Wayne Root, Mr. Knapp would instead try to post positive items about his chosen Presidential candidate, who I think is still Steve Kubby.

    Or maybe it’s just that Mr. Knapp thinks that negative campaigning should be the norm in Libertarian Presidential campaigns.

  5. Bill Wood Says:

    What I have heard the next FEC report will be very, very interesting to see. Roots appearances on Glenn Beck, Mancow and Medved might have a lot of Libertarian leaning Republicans giving the LP and Root serious consideration over McCain.

  6. Eric Dondero Says:

    Tom, that was way out of line. C’mon man. Do you have to be negative on every single thing Wayne Root does?

    This is a huge victory for Root. EVERYONE knows “The Fossilman.” There’s not a single thing you could say to rain on Root’s parade on this.

    Huge endorsement for Wayne Root. Good job Wayne.

    Perhaps we’re seeing the making of an All Pro-Gambling ticket???

    One would hope.

  7. Michael H. Wilson Says:

    Eric writes: “EVERYONE knows ‘The Fossilman.’ ”

    Never heard of him.

    MHW

  8. Wes Benedict Says:

    I have to say I find Thomas Knapp’s knee-jerk Root attacks nearly as irritating as Scott Liebmerman’s knee-jerk “libertarian purity” remarks.

    I’m sure Knapp and/or Lieberman are about to call me irritating, too, or maybe even worse. But, it’s too late. Because starting now:

    I’m rubber and you’re glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks on you!

  9. Brent Burk Says:

    Barr/Root ticket?

    Root comes off too goofy though, I don’t think America would like him. I don’t think he understands the libertarian ideals yet either. I want a great ticket though.

  10. Alexander S. Peak Says:

    As far as I’m concerned, the more people we have endorsing Libertarian candidates (as long said people are not nuts and/or fascists in disguise), the better—even when I’m not personally all too fond with the candidate. With that said, I know nothing about Mr. Raymer’s views.

    Cheers,
    Alex Peak

  11. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    Scott and Eric,

    Read my comment again. I said nothing whatsoever about Wayne Root. I said something about Greg “Fossilman” Raymer.

    I didn’t feel the need to belabor the fact that Raymer is a big-government welfare-seeker when it comes to poker, because it’s been covered here before. But, if you insist, here goes:

    Raymer is one of seven professional poker players who sought government intevention under the anti-trust laws versus the World Poker Tour. WPT has specific requirements for participation in their events. Raymer and some others a) have signed contracts with other poker organizations which don’t allow them to meet the qualifications for WPT events, and/or b) don’t want to meet the WPT’s qualifications. They want the government to step in and force WPT to let them compete despite the fact that they’ve either disqualified themselves or decline to qualify themselves.

    Here’s an article on the matter.

    As a side note, the “countless millions more” that Raymer has won in addition to the $5 million WSOP prize come to a little less than one million as of 2007.

    I wouldn’t have noticed any of this, of course, if Raymer hadn’t previously publicly considered running for the party’s VP slot. I certainly don’t begrudge Root the endorsement—nor would I begrudge anyone else the opportunity to comment on the quality of other candidates’ endorsers.

    Regards,
    Tom Knapp

  12. Brent Burk Says:

    Tom Knapp > Forums.

  13. Dave Williams Says:

    “The Complaint alleges that WPTE and the casinos have unlawfully conspired to eliminate competition for the services and intellectual property rights of top, high stakes professional poker players. In particular, the Complaint alleges that the casinos have agreed with WPTE that they will not host any non-WPT televised poker tournaments. The Complaint also alleges that WPTE and the casinos have conspired to fix the price and other terms and conditions under which Plaintiffs and other professional poker players are forced to give up their valuable services and intellectual property rights in order to participate in WPT tournaments.”

    Sounds legit to me…Knapp.

  14. Dave Williams Says:

    Yeah what Wes said…stix and stones…

  15. Dave Williams Says:

    “Too bad “Fossilman” expects daddy government to take care of him when he can’t get the kind of contracts he wants.”

    Just like when daddy gov took care of you as a Marine? (hahahaa “Toe jam! Pop that blister! Trim ‘em!”) Or after your service? Used ANY of your VA benefits or privileges granted to you by the gov for personal advancement Knapp? Say, the G.I. Bill, or a home loan? Do you still have that coveted FCU account with all the low interest rates? Of course not!! That wouldn’t be very libertarian now would it?!

    This looks nothing more than simple hypocritical financial envy on Knapp’s part. You are weaker than I thought. Now go write a 10 paragraph explanation…’writer’...hahahha

  16. Dave Williams Says:

    From the ‘Root fireside chat’ thread.

    1. Dave Williams Says:
      March 30th, 2008 at 4:55 pm

    Tom Knapp, Ron in Deluth, Jim Dorsey, Al from Cinci, Jeff Wartman…who’s the looser here, Root? Like my new friend and BLA mentor Rev. Wright says…”No no no”...

    I see why you guys are belly aching…you guys are all looser gamblers who lost your money to Root and are pissed off about it. Come on, you know it, I know it, ‘cause you can’t bullshit another gambler. hahahah it all makes sense now.

  17. Dave Williams Says:

    WOOD WROTE: “What I have heard the next FEC report will be very, very interesting to see. Roots appearances on Glenn Beck, Mancow and Medved might have a lot of Libertarian leaning Republicans giving the LP and Root serious consideration over McCain.”

    Awesome!

  18. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    Dave,

    No GI Bill, no home loan, no FCU account. I’ve used one “veterans benefit,” one time—I visited a VA hospital when I thought I’d had a stroke—and I won’t make that mistake again.

    No, I never fell for, and therefore never lost money on, Root’s scamdicapping scheme. I generally don’t bet on sports other than politics.

    If using the government to force others to give you contract terms you like instead of contract terms you don’t like “sounds legit” to you, well, I’m not surprised … but I wonder if you think it’s all right when unions, rather than poker celebrities, do it.

  19. Dave Williams Says:

    “If using the government to force others to give you contract terms you like instead of contract terms you don’t like “sounds legit” to you, well, I’m not surprised … but I wonder if you think it’s all right when unions, rather than poker celebrities, do it.”

    I don’t endorse unions & would never be part of a union, but I understand unions. I have worked for ‘the man’ my entire life. I know what it feels like to put in 100hour weeks because of corporate greed. So if a union stands up and says “look here you cocksuckers we’re done working mandatory overtime” I’m down with that. As for me, I just went out and found another job.

    But here’s the real issue; This country will not turn libertarian any time soon, it will not happen overnight. And because of that, the system is what it is, and if these are the rules with which folks are allowed to play by, then that’s that until the proper changes can be applied.

  20. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    Dave,

    Yes, the system is what it is, and the rules are what they are—but nobody forced Greg Raymer to try to exploit those rules versus World Poker Tour.

    Raymer wanted a shot at the prize money that their tournaments offer, but he either didn’t meet, or refused to meet, the qualifications.

    My understanding is that in his particular case, it had to do with the fact that he had already sold exclusive rights to use his name, likeness, etc. to other poker entities. Nothing wrong with that, and I hope he made big bucks doing it … but WPT requires that participants in its tournaments sign releases to use their names, likenesses, etc. as well.

    If he can’t do it, he can’t do it. If he won’t do it, he won’t do it. But WPT has no ethical obligation to let anyone participate in its events. Like all other businesses, WPT exists to make a profit, and they judge that they can’t do so if they can’t use the names and likenesses of the players in their advertising, game spinoffs, etc.

    Saying that Raymer found a loophole that would let him bring the government in on his side and quash the free market to his benefit is not the same as saying that it’s RIGHT for Raymer to exploit that loophole. It isn’t right, it’s wrong.

    Does it reflect badly on Root that one of his endorsers is a nanny-stater when it comes to lining his own wallet? I don’t think that’s necessarily true. But I know of no taboo against mentioning it, any more than I know of any taboo about bringing up what Obama’s pastor said in church, what criminality Hillary’s fundraisers are caught up in, which organizations McCain’s handlers are affiliated with, etc.

    Just the other day, I noticed something in some of Kubby’s background material that sent a red flag up. I discussed it with him, and it turned out to be nothing and easily explainable … but I have to wonder why nobody ELSE has brought it up. Not my job, since I’m one of his supporters/staffers. But I have to wonder why LPers shy away from doing due diligence on their candidates. Apparently we’d rather tell ourselves rainbow and teddy bear fantasy stories about those candidates and then hope the “mainstream media” doesn’t notice the flaws that we ignored.

  21. Susan Hogarth Says:

    Raymer. Ah, Raymer. So plugged in to the Libertarian Party he couldn’t even be bothered to respond to a personal note mailed (snail-mailed, even) to him inviting him to attend a local county party meeting in his home county. And the LNC member who recruited him wouldn’t ‘bother’ him by passing on an email invite to attend a meeting in his own county. This level of insulation for a guy who’s not a particularly strong libertarian as far as I can tell and who is only well-known among people with a particular game-playing hobby.

    Seeking and catering to this sort of ‘celebrity’ is a bad move for the LP if the person is not invited to participate fully in the party and provided help in learning about libertarian principles. But it’s only a waste of effort until we actually GET some of them, at which point it can turn out to be either an embarrassment or a disaster, depending on the actual press attraction of the ‘celebrity’.

  22. Dave Williams Says:

    “Apparently we’d rather tell ourselves rainbow and teddy bear fantasy stories about those candidates and then hope the “mainstream media” doesn’t notice the flaws that we ignored.”

    “Let he who is w/o sin cast the first stone.” Well said Jesus. Are there any flawless candidates? If so, I’m not sure I could vote for one.

  23. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    Dave,

    I agree—there are no flawless candidates.

    However, part of the pre-nomination vetting process is detecting the candidates’ flaws. Some of those flaws, they may correct. Others, they may at least be able to deal with in a way that makes them less problematic. The more of this we get out of the way pre-nomination, the less of a problem it is when the New York Times or Fox News decides to pay our candidate a little attention and decides to throw one of his or her flaws out there for public consumption.

    If you think I’m being hard on Root, well, fine. The fact, however, is that I doubt many of his supporters have spent as much time reading and re-reading his book Millionaire Republican as I have. Just because his supporters support him without bothering to understand who he is and what he’s about, that doesn’t mean his opponents are required to ignore who he is and what he’s about.

    Now that I’m a candidate—and even when I wasn’t—I invite anyone who wants to go after me to do so. Either I can take it or I can’t. If I can’t, that’s my problem.

Leave a Reply