Poker, Politics And Power
Poker Anorak
/
Editor /
03 June 2008 /
IN "Poker group has important allies on Hill", politico looks at the US poker lobby.
The piece lists some of the political poker players - Sen. Ted Stevens plays in his native Alaska's fishing camps; Rep. Charlie Rangel deals with his buddies from the block back in New York.; Rep. Joe Barton heads north from Dallas on I-35 to Oklahoma's Indian reservations; Rep. Duncan Hunter runs nickel/dime/quarter games on Capitol Hill.
And, of course, Sen. Barack Obama is player.
But not of the great and good play poker for money online, at least they don't while in the US.
The Poker Players Alliance aims to convince the US Congress to reverse the ban on Internet poker.
"There's a difference between a bunch of guys getting together for a friendly game and having ready access to big money gambling at your fingertips," says Rep. Jim McCrery McCrery.
Yes, the main difference being that you don't have to drink and smoke and talk about your wives and girlfriends while you play the game of real kings for loose change. Play online and do so at your own pace. If you want to play with friends, you can do that too.
Former Sen. Alfonse D'Amato (R-N.Y.), chairman of the Poker Players Alliance says that has hosted poker games in his office, low-stakes games "included aides, lobbyists and lawmakers ordering takeout, smoking cigars, telling jokes and swapping political intelligenzzzzzz".
Internet gambling would save all those seated and sleeping around the table form such dullness. You can play on your own.
The aforesaid Stevens said his first father-in-law kept a twice-monthly appointment with the Economic and Social Research Organization -- a front for poker nights.
Politico tells us that though an "avid card player", Stevens said he voted for the Internet gambling ban. Says he: "No person has ever talked to me about online poker for money," he said, "and I hope you don't invite them to do so."
Why? Because he and fellow clear thinkers would then have to answer a charge of protectionism?