Lately (and entirely due to this blog), I’ve been getting a few requests from reporters to talk to them (I’ve had them in the past but they seem more frequent now). For example, one lady from the Wall Street Journal wanted to talk to me about the poker bill. I told her I blogged about it but was probably not the best and referred her to some poker players I know. Now, I have one from a New York paper that wants to talk about the Mayors Alliance Against Guns. My inclination generally is to decline for the following reasons:

So, it is with reservation that I even consider talking to the press. Am I paranoid? A bit. The downside, of course, is that I am missing the opportunity to speak truth to power. So, what are your thoughts?

Some stuff since the Republicans decided that we can’t spend our own money on entertainment by banning banks from engaging in transactions with illegal gambling sites. Illegal gambling being undefined.

Up For Poker has an FAQ on the new bill.

Neteller, the last hope for online transactions, pusses out.

David Post says outlines the stupidity of the bill.

The NYT says it could cost the Republicans some seats. I hope so.

At the Gunbloggers Rendezvous. Blogging will resume later. Off to a poker tourney.

CJ has the dope:

The banking industry response to the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act is something in which we can take some heart. The banks were initially afraid the bill would hold them liable for not enforcing the law. Now, bankslawyers are telling them that it appears the banks’ exposure is limited.

Full Tilt Poker issued a statement:

In the short term, we assure you that your online experience at Full Tilt Poker will not change. You will still be able to deposit and withdraw money from the site using the same methods and payment processors you have always used, and your money will remain completely safe and secure. We cannot predict how the online poker experience may change in the future, but we do not expect any immediate impact from the legislation, as the banking industry has 270 days to implement new rules after the bill is signed.

I have a confession. I like to play poker. Not that I’m all that good at it, but I like it. I’ve been tempted to try my chops at online poker but, thanks to the US congress, that urge will no longer be an option:

To summarize what was passed, this bill is designed to prevent the use of payment instruments (credit cards, fund transfers, etc.) for certain forms of online gambling that are defined as “unlawful Internet gambling.” The bill requires financial institutions to identify and block payments related to so-called unlawful Internet gambling transactions. If there is a violation, the government may file a lawsuit (known as an injunction) to prevent or restrain the violation. The bill provides a special exemption for three types of Internet gambling: (1) horse racing under the Interstate Horseracing Act (IHA), so OTBs and account wagering systems can remain in business, (2) Indian gambling that takes place on a reservation or between two reservations; and (3) Internet gambling that occurs solely within a state’s own borders, referred to as Intra-state gambling.

The bill doesn’t define “unlawful Internet gambling”. So, I guess he horseracing folks have some pull, since it is a sport for rich dudes. Anyway, it’s a stupid bill.

The bill passed by an overwhelming margin because it was attached to a port security bill. CJ says:

What this Congress is saying, then, is that it is more important to attack the scourge of online gaming than it is to make sure our buses and trains do not blow up. This is the Congress we elected. This is the Congress we have to get rid of.

Terry Frank tells us that all Tennessee congress monkeys voted for it, except for Jenkins. Good for Jenkins. (Update: Terry comments that Jenkins was a no vote and not a nay – that is, the dude didn’t vote not that he voted no. Stupid reading comprehension).

Party Gaming, the largest online gambling site, issued a statement:

After taking extensive legal advice, the Board of PartyGaming Plc has concluded that the new legislation, if signed into law, will make it practically impossible to provide US residents with access to its real money poker and other real money gaming sites. As a result of this development, the Board of PartyGaming has determined that if the President signs the Act into law, the Company will suspend all real money gaming business with US residents, and such suspension will continue indefinitely, subject to clarification of the interpretation and enforcement of US law and the impact on financial institutions of this and other related legislation. Access to PartyGaming’s online gaming sites for the Group’s US free play customers will be unaffected. Access for all of PartyGaming’s non-US customers will also be unaffected.

The back-alley sports-book and poker games will be on the uptick. Poker is now more popular than it ever has been and there will be an expansion of criminal activity as a result of this legislation. Yes, illegal gambling has been around but, with poker’s popularity, it’s bound to increase.

CJ (who I think is that CJ) notes that the ban on online gambling is rearing its ugly head again:

Over the past 24 hours, there have been a series of reports telling us that the dreaded internet gambling bill is both alive and dead. In recent weeks, we’ve reported that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) had hoped to sneak the gambling bill into the massive Defense Department 2007 Appropriations Bill.

That bill has now passed through the conference committee, but it doesn’t seem to be headed for guaranteed passage, nor is it clear that the gambling bill will ever be attached. Currently, House Republican leaders are holding up the bill hoping to add unrelated bills on immigration and court security.

So, today I signed up for one of those online poker sites. I’ve been playing the free tables since the last thing an unemployed person needs to do is take up a new hobby that costs money. Well, I’ve turned my fake $1,000 into fake $45,474. This tells me one of two things: Either I am a good poker player or the types that play on free tables are bad poker players. I’m betting the latter.

True story and rare poker blogging

I play Texas Hold ‘em poker with friends on occasion and this really happened. I’m dealt a pocket pair of fours. With a pair (even a low one), I’ll stay in at least for the flop. So, I do and flop is most kind when it reveals another four, a five and a face card. Three of a kind on the flop, I think. Sweet. Now, not to overplay and scare folks whose money I want off, I slow play a bit. Everyone folds but me and one guy. The turn turns out to be another four. Sweet, four of a kind. I am invincible! I bet more aggressively. The opponent stays in. The river, another five. You play four of a kind to win because the odds dictate you do that. I’m all in. My opponent is too. I assume he’s riding a face card full house or he’s overplaying a three of a kind.

He flips over a pocket pair of fives. Son of a bitch. Four fours beat by four fives. He looks at me and says: Look on the bright side. That will probably never happen to you again as long as you live.

Every other Saturday, me and my homies get together to play some Texas Hold ‘Em. And by play some Texas Hold ‘Em, I mean we sit around, talk shit, and drink adult beverages. There’s usually between five and eight guys and we put in $10, winner take all. It never works that way because the house rules have some low blinds, which makes the game last longer than it should. Usually the top two guys wind up splitting. I was always one of the top two guys. But the last two times, I came in third. I’ve lost my mojo. I think it happened when my brother-in-law really bluffed the shit out of me and then showed me his cards to rub it in. Anyway, here’s hoping I get my mojo back.

Last game, one of my buds said that he thought my posts about Laurie Berkner’s kind-of-hotness were funny. I told him I was serious (girls got moves). He almost fell out of his seat laughing. Then, day before yesterday, my wife asks me who this Laurie Berkner person is that I was yammering on about on my blog. I told her it was some lady who sings kids’ songs on Noggin. She didn’t know who she was. Yesterday, one of Laurie’s videos came on during Jack’s Big Music Show (which Junior happens to love) and I said That’s Laurie Berkner! She looked at me like I was nuts and said she’s not hot. I said She’s kinda hot.

The wife then tells me that it’s not any jealousy sort of thing. And tells me that she knows I find Lucy Liu hot and she concurs that Lucy Liu is in fact hot. However, she says Laurie Berkner definitely is not hot. So, maybe it is just me.