Let's lobby Sen. Barack Obama

[TheEngineer]

I was going to put this in Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Weekly action thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=9946416&an=0&page=0#Post 9946416), but it seemed important enough for its own thread. We need a senator to support some pro-Internet poker legislation. We also need a top-tier presidential candidate with us. Perhaps we can get a two-for-one in Barack Obama.

As 61% of House Congressional Black Caucus members are with us ("A" or "B", meaning they've at least consponsored the study bill), and as 49% of House Democrats are "A" or "B" rated in my rating post, it makes sense to look at the top-tier presidential candidates who are Democratic senators and members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Obviously there's only one....Sen. Barack Obama. So, I phoned his office yesterday to ask him to support us. I was very surprised to hear that they were familiar with the legislation and that they "may" release some statement in a couple of days.

Additionally, Barack Obama is reputed to be a good, tight player. On a blog on his own website, at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/group/PokerPlayersforObama , is the following post:

[ QUOTE ]
Obama Supports Poker Players-- and Poker Players SHOULD Support Obama
By Zach - Jun 4th, 2007 at 6:22 pm EDT

Terry Link, the senate majority whip, complained about Obama’s successes in a long-running poker game. “I’m putting his kids through college,” Link said.

Long before he became a political rock star with designs on the White House, Barack Obama was known to friends in the Illinois legislature as a fearsome card player.

During weekly games of Texas Hold 'Em, he played a tight style of poker -- patiently waiting for the right cards, folding when dealt a bad hand and taking few unnecessary risks.....


[/ QUOTE ]

A longer article is at www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=0130165f-82d7-4c5a-85bc-64d52aaf8318&k=36044&p=1 (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=0130165f-82d7-4c5a-85bc-64d52aaf8318&k=36044&p=1) .

So, he sounds like someone who may be on our side. Perhaps we should choose one day next week to all phone his office to ask for his support. By coordinating it for the same day, it should make a bigger impression. What do you all think?

[TheEngineer]

July 22, 2007

The Honorable Barack Obama
United States Senate
713 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Obama:

I would like to congratulate you on your performance to date in your presidential run. I wish you well in the race. As you know, a lot of your support comes from young, Internet-savvy Americans. While we are a diverse group, we do share one common interest; we want individual freedom and liberty. One important area for many of us is Internet poker.

As you are likely aware, HR 2046, The Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007, provides for safe, secure, regulated online poker. The bill provides for stringent licensing to ensure that poker operators are legitimate. Via a regulatory framework, the bill addresses underage gambling as well as compulsive gambling. The bill also provides a provision by which states can choose to opt-out, thus preserving the rights of the states in this important area. Sports leagues can also opt-out, thereby allowing the leagues the ability to prohibit all Internet gambling on that sport anywhere in the U.S. What is your position on HR 2046 and on allowing Americans to choose to play Internet poker?

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

July 25, 2007

The Honorable Barack Obama
United States Senate
713 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Obama:

I am writing regarding my pleasant conversation with your Senate office today. I was informed that you may release a statement regarding your stand on pending Internet poker legislation “within the next couple of days”. This is encouraging to many of us in the poker community, as the attempts to ban this all-American game of skill have been serious affronts to our freedom and liberty.

As you know, a lot of your support comes from young, Internet-savvy Americans. I think if you were to publicly support our right to play poker on the Internet, you would significantly increase your support among this important group. I believe you would also significantly increase your support among the millions of Americans who believe the federal government has no business telling Americans what to do inside their own homes.

Politicians across America are lining up in support of the right to choose to play Internet poker. In fact, as of right now almost 50% of Democratic congressmen, and 61% of Congressional Black Caucus House members, have either voted against HR 4411 (the bill that because the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act when it was rammed through the Senate as part of the SAFE Ports Act), cosponsored HR 2046 (Rep. Frank’s Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007), or cosponsored HR 2140 (Rep. Berkley’s Internet Gambling Study Act), and more join the side of freedom every day. It seems the party and its members want freedom. It also seems Americans regardless of party affiliation want freedom.

I encourage you to take a stand against the Internet poker prohibitionists and for liberty. America will thank you!

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[TheEngineer]

July 26, 2007

The Honorable Barack Obama
United States Senate
713 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Obama:

Some congressional Republicans resisted providing full aid to Hurricane Katrina victims on the grounds of “limited government”. However, when it came to trying to ban Internet poker, apparently no government was too big for these same politicians. Why is that? They wish to monitor banking transactions, censor the Internet, and have ISPs spy on American citizens! The DoJ flies around the world arresting people for.... gasp!... offering Americans the opportunity to decide to play a little poker in the privacy of their own homes with their own hard-earned money! In fact, rather than rebuilding New Orleans, they're preparing to send our hard-earned tax dollars to Antigua, the EU, Japan, and other nations in the form of trade concessions to get out of our WTO trade commitments allowing Internet gaming in America. Negotiations have already started. This all sounds very hypocritical to me.

I, and many of my fellow recreational Internet poker players, believe you could gain significant support by taking a stand against the Internet poker prohibitionists and for liberty. Rep. Robert Wexler and Rep. Barney Frank have certainly enjoyed great gains as a result of supporting freedom. Your gain would be many times that, as you are a national candidate. You’ll be able to highlight the hypocrisy of the prohibitionists while offering freedom and liberty to the rest of us. Now, there’s a winning combination!

I encourage you to take a stand against the Internet poker prohibitionists and for liberty. America will thank you!

Sincerely,

TheEngineer

[Karak567]

Engineer,

When it comes to "big government", Obama is fully in support of it. A lot of his policies are downright socialist. He is not the man to back for online poker's future.

[coachkf]

[ QUOTE ]
Engineer,

When it comes to "big government", Obama is fully in support of it. A lot of his policies are downright socialist. He is not the man to back for online poker's future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I live in the Bible belt, go to a church that would probably make FoTF look a bit liberal, and have always voted Republican. Yet if I were president today I would do my best to see that online poker was legal.

I'm not saying you're wrong about the big govt./socialist tag, but we can't surmise that "he's not the man to back for online poker's future" until his feelings one way or the other are made public.

If the articles are right about him being a tight card shark, he at least understands that poker is a skill game, and not to be lumped with slots and keno.

[Dire]

[ QUOTE ]
Engineer,

When it comes to "big government", Obama is fully in support of it. A lot of his policies are downright socialist. He is not the man to back for online poker's future.

[/ QUOTE ]

Big government / socialism / blah blah blah (or not) has nothing to do with online poker. It is being restricted because of religious/pseudomorality bs. Obama will not be relying on religous zealots for a large portion of his vote, thus there's absolutely no reason to believe he would not support this.

[Karak567]

Well, I'm sorry. If I had my pick between Obama pushing his socialist policies on the country and no online poker... then I'd take no online poker.

I just don't see how a "huge government" democrat is going to create any type of good situation for online poker. Could he bring it back? Sure.

It would be heavily taxed and heavily regulated (I understand that would happen now - but it could be worse than even our wildest dreams under his administration). We might be better off with what we have now than that.

[coachkf]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I'm sorry. If I had my pick between Obama pushing his socialist policies on the country and no online poker... then I'd take no online poker.

I just don't see how a "huge government" democrat is going to create any type of good situation for online poker. Could he bring it back? Sure.

It would be heavily taxed and heavily regulated (I understand that would happen now - but it could be worse than even our wildest dreams under his administration). We might be better off with what we have now than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

While Dem's are many times "big government" concerning the economy and business, they tend to not be big government in what they would consider personal freedom issues. (See: gay marriage, abortion, etc.) -- Playing online poker in our underwear would fall under that same "personal freedoms" tent I think.

Both parties would tax it like crazy if it's legalized, just like everything else is taxed to death in this country. I'd imagine online casinos would be fine though, judging by the fact that B&M casinos are obviously very profitable while paying taxes.

I understand where you're coming from. I can't choose to vote for a candidate soley based on their support for online poker. It will get some hefty weight though, since the industry is currently my full time job.

You might want to take a look at the Libertarian Party. They feel the govt. should stay out of their lives in both business and personal freedoms.

[Dire]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I'm sorry. If I had my pick between Obama pushing his socialist policies on the country and no online poker... then I'd take no online poker.

I just don't see how a "huge government" democrat is going to create any type of good situation for online poker. Could he bring it back? Sure.

It would be heavily taxed and heavily regulated (I understand that would happen now - but it could be worse than even our wildest dreams under his administration). We might be better off with what we have now than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The choices are vote for a government that will spend many billions on pointless wars and work to slowly strangle all personal liberties, or vote for a government that will spend many billions on largely impotent social programs but work to maintain all social liberties.

The way I see it there's a 0% chance of poker regulation in the former case, a small-moderate chance of poker regulation in the latter. The big government thing has no influence whatsoever. There's no such thing as a small government party anymore except maybe libertarian, as mentioned, but nobody'll vote for them because nobody wants to 'waste' their vote.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I'm sorry. If I had my pick between Obama pushing his socialist policies on the country and no online poker... then I'd take no online poker.

I just don't see how a "huge government" democrat is going to create any type of good situation for online poker. Could he bring it back? Sure.

It would be heavily taxed and heavily regulated (I understand that would happen now - but it could be worse than even our wildest dreams under his administration). We might be better off with what we have now than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say we should lobby FOR Senator Obama. I said we should lobby Obama to support us. In other words, I not talking about us backing him. I'm talking about him backing us, and why he should wish to do it. We want him to publicly back us and to sponsor Senate legislation, don't we?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I just don't see how a "huge government" democrat is going to create any type of good situation for online poker. Could he bring it back?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who else will bring it back? We have no Republican support. In the House, there are only 16 Republicans who I rated "A" or "B", out of 202 Republicans in office (I found 109 Democrats). Now, I'm no Democrat, but our party won't do it for us. So, for my poker advocacy efforts, I'm personally staying nonpartisan and focused solely on poker (like the NRA does).

[ QUOTE ]
Sure...It would be heavily taxed and heavily regulated (I understand that would happen now - but it could be worse than even our wildest dreams under his administration). We might be better off with what we have now than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shouldn't we let him propose something before dismissing it out of hand? After all, it's not like Kyl will propose anything better. And, I don't see a way to maintain the status quo....it's either going to improve or get worse, IMHO.

[oldbookguy]

Count me in Engineer, though I have sent letters to him already and have a blog there as well.

No, I do not support him for president, that is politics of my own choosing.

There are many posts here confusing that same issue.

Asking him to stand up for poker players does not mean you have to vote for him.

The idea is to get a prominate political figure in the Senate and running for president to support our rights.
Many have suggested simply concentrating on the house, however, if we are somehow successful in the House we need to be getting the Senate primed.

IF this can be done it will spark media attention (something we are lacking)to our cause.

From there we would have to actively try and control the debate.

My only wish is the PPA would take a more pro-active stance.

Lets pick a day, actually two, I like Mondays and Fridays, start the week off with us on their mind and end it the same way.

We can call that day and e-mail at the same time.

Actually, lets start today, then follow-up with two intense days next week.


OBG

[dorethawsp]

The genie is out of the bottle. The theocrats and neo-cons have taken over the Republican party. Ron Paul has practically been cast out of his own party because he doesn't please these people. The only thing that can save online poker is a Democrat. Four more years of a GOP administration means four more years of a conservative justice department who at some point may put the bulls eye on poker stars, ft, etc. and leave us in a really bad spot.

[Moneyline]

[ QUOTE ]
Engineer,

When it comes to "big government", Obama is fully in support of it. A lot of his policies are downright socialist. He is not the man to back for online poker's future.

[/ QUOTE ]

One can be in favor of legalized poker and not be a libertarian. In fact, it is preferable that the politicians who are in favor of legalized poker are not libertarians because the libertarian philosophy is not viewed favorably by the overwhelming majority of Americans.

[Skallagrim]

While I respect the long term opinions expressed here regarding big government and the danger that democrats present, it would be silly to not recognize the political realities of the moment: 1) the current republican party is also a party of big government, they just divide the pork a little different; 2) the republicans (barring the miracle of a Ron Paul nomination), thanks primarily to their complete inability to deal intelligently with the war in Iraq, are going to lose the next presidential election (if they dont I give up on democracy in this country).

Given the above, finding a democratic presidential candidate who supports our cause and helping him or her out is an absolutely smart move.

Once the republicans see their a-- kicked horrible in '08, maybe they will support candidates less theocratic and more small government. I might even consider voting for them again if they do.

Skallagrim

[oldbookguy]

Skallagrim this is all so sad but true.

That is why, perhaps, with enough efforts not just on this issue but others as well we can 'flip' enough GOP reps to change at least a little and move to the center again.

obg

[Grasshopp3r]

The Republicans have left the libertarian wing behind. I was an active Republican, going to conventions and organizing, etc. All I see at the conventions are pro-life t-shirts and religious zealots. The GOP in its current form is doomed.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
No, I do not support him for president, that is politics of my own choosing.

There are many posts here confusing that same issue.

Asking him to stand up for poker players does not mean you have to vote for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. I'm not asking us to stand for him....I'm asking us to ask him to stand for us. Different things entirely.

[ QUOTE ]
Lets pick a day, actually two, I like Mondays and Fridays, start the week off with us on their mind and end it the same way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like a plan. Also, let's call all of his offices...not just one.

Let's make it Monnday and Thursday, though (too many people out of the office on Friday, plus the fact that if we call right before quitting time Friday, they'll forget all about it when they get back to work on Monday).

[TheEngineer]

[oldbookguy]

GREAT engineer, lets really start promoting this. I will post shortly on several sites I also post on (and add to a few blogs I am at as well) and hopefully others will and keep the posts updated with reminders throught the week.

I only wish the PPA would have some initiave like this.

obg

[Wongboy]

[ QUOTE ]
Engineer,

When it comes to "big government", Obama is fully in support of it. A lot of his policies are downright socialist. He is not the man to back for online poker's future.

[/ QUOTE ]

Regulating online poker will create more government bureaucracy. Big government is not inconsistent with the idea of legalizing and regulating online poker.

[TheEngineer]

3 against and 3 for, so far.

You guys don't want Obama's support because you don't support him for president? I don't get it. Can someone explain this?

[Perseus]

I vote for Obama...the arguments against this so far are close to ignorant IMO

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I vote for Obama...the arguments against this so far are close to ignorant IMO

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm trying to imagine the NRA not accepting the support of any senator. I'm also trying to imagine NRA members not calling a potentially supportive senator and top-tier presidential candidate to ask for support on gun rights, especially after a gun ban was passed.

[Perseus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I vote for Obama...the arguments against this so far are close to ignorant IMO

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm trying to imagine the NRA not accepting the support of any senator. I'm also trying to imagine NRA members not calling a potentially supportive senator and top-tier presidential candidate to ask for support on gun rights, especially after a gun ban was passed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. In fact, this is a great example. Especially if that senator had a gun himself, knew how to operate a gun, and was a republican (or on the side who historically backed their organization).

The only difference is that a Senator knows how their state can profit from allowing the NRA to exist and taxing gun sales, whereas most senators may not realize the profits from the legalization and taxation of poker.

To those saying the taxation of poker could make the online game worse... Think about the amount of fishy players found in a local casino or home game, and think how the games would be if these players knew it was legal to play online.

[CountingMyOuts]

[ QUOTE ]
I vote for Obama...the arguments against this so far are close to ignorant IMO

[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
GREAT engineer, lets really start promoting this. I will post shortly on several sites I also post on (and add to a few blogs I am at as well) and hopefully others will and keep the posts updated with reminders throught the week.

I only wish the PPA would have some initiave like this.

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

I saw your blog entry on Obama's site. Well done! Hopefully people will start to see that freedom matters in America.

[Bilgefisher]

I have no opinion on this candidate. From what little I do know about politics, someone who a top tier candidate from president will not stick his neck out on this issue.

It has very little hope of helping him, but could hurt him drastically in the feeding frenzy that has started in this race.

Eng, it may be helpful to at least let him know that many Americans still enjoy the game, but I wouldn't count on getting his stance on the issue anytime soon.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no opinion on this candidate.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's okay. Again, we're asking him to support us, not the reverse. We don't have to support him at all to ask him to vote for us.


[ QUOTE ]
From what little I do know about politics, someone who a top tier candidate from president will not stick his neck out on this issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

They won't if we don't ask, that's for sure. It seems many politicians have just assumed Americans either wanted prohibition or didn't care. We were too quiet. Now these guys are starting to hear from us. Our best strategy is to make a lot of noise.

[ QUOTE ]
It has very little hope of helping him, but could hurt him drastically in the feeding frenzy that has started in this race.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think many of us believe this from hearing this in the media, but I don't think that makes it true. First of all, not so many people are in favor of big government prohibition on behavior, really. Of those who do, Obama likely isn't their candidate. Secondly, the House hearings on 6/8 showed that we do have a valid position that can win debates and hearings.

I tried to share with the senator various ways supporting us can help him. Will it work? I don't know, but it beats not asking out of fear that our position cannot stand public scrutiny. I honestly believe supporting our position will help Obama in the race more than it will hurt him. This is just my personal opinion -- I have no data -- so feel free to disagree.

[ QUOTE ]
Eng, it may be helpful to at least let him know that many Americans still enjoy the game, but I wouldn't count on getting his stance on the issue anytime soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't disagree at all. I'm far from counting on anything here. Rather, as we need some Senate support, he's the logical one to ask. Is it a longshot? Of everything we've done this year, what wasn't a longshot when we started? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Our odds are better if we do this than if we don't, so I hope we'll all give it a shot. What do you say? Are you in?

[oldbookguy]

Just a tongue in cheek note here:

If you WISH to receive an entry into the next Dinner With Obama lottery (no state left out!), the deadline for making a 'DONATION" to receive your entry runs out at midnight July 31st!.

Donation required for entry though.........

obg

[threeonefour]

Barack, a friend to poker players everywhere...




LOL

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I vote for Obama...the arguments against this so far are close to ignorant IMO

[/ QUOTE ]

6 against now, only one posted a valid reason. WTF? This is easy; I can't think of a reason anyone here wouldn't do this. Anyone wish to share reasons to not call?

[DMoogle]

I will call. What exactly should I say? I never know what to say with this type of stuff.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I will call. What exactly should I say? I never know what to say with this type of stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

I’d say something like this:

Staffer: Hello, Senator Obama’s office.

You: Hi, my name is _______. I’m calling to urge Senator Obama to sponsor Senate legislation permitting Internet [poker/gaming]. I’m upset about last year’s Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, as I don’t feel the government has a right to tell me how to spend my own money in my own home. Please urge Senator Obama to support the rights of the millions of Americans who enjoy a relaxing game of poker after a hard day’s work. Thanks.

If the staffer seems interested in talking, then bring up specific legislation (H.R. 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act of 2007 or H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act). I'd have the bill numbers handy when you call, just in case.

Also, he'd normally be less intereted in the opinion of someone not residing in Ill., but he'll have more interest now because of the presidential race.

[DMoogle]

Thanks, TheEngineer. I hope they get flooded with calls on Monday and Thursday. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks, TheEngineer. I hope they get flooded with calls on Monday and Thursday. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's hope so. Hopefully we'll call multiple office and have our spouses, parents, brothers, friends, and anyone else we can think of call.

[Ron Burgundy]

When I called Obama's office about 2 months ago, the guy said he didn't have an official sance on the issue. I'll call again monday.

[kioshk]

I'm going to lobby Obama to grow a thicker neck. He looks like a bobblehead doll.

[tangled]

If we are calling, is this the best number or are there others?:

To reach the Campaign Headquarters by phone, please call: (866) 675-2008

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
If we are calling, is this the best number or are there others?:

To reach the Campaign Headquarters by phone, please call: (866) 675-2008

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's call his Senate offices, as they're the ones who have the capability to relay our messages. I posted the contact info to my Action thread. His offices are at:

Washington D.C. Office
713 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
(202) 224-2854
(202) 228-4260 fax
(202) 228-1404 TDD
Email our office: http://obama.senate.gov/contact/

Chicago Office
John C. Kluczynski Federal Office Building
230 South Dearborn St.
Suite 3900 (39th floor)
Chicago, Illinois 60604
(312) 886-3506
(312) 886-3514 fax
Toll free: (866) 445-2520
(for IL residents only)

Springfield Office
607 East Adams Street
Springfield, Illinois 62701
(217) 492-5089
(217) 492-5099 fax

Marion Office
701 North Court Street
Marion, Illinois 62959
(618) 997-2402
(618) 997-2850 fax

Moline Office
1911 52nd Avenue
Moline, Illinois 61265
(309)736-1217
(309)736-1233 fax

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Engineer,

When it comes to "big government", Obama is fully in support of it. A lot of his policies are downright socialist. He is not the man to back for online poker's future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know Obama's is for big government. I didn't say otherwise. I do feel your pain, so to speak, as I'm a conservative Republican who's probably to your right.

That being said, I think we have to handle this effort based on who's on our side. Think of it this way. Imagine this were a gun enthusiast forum. Some guns had just been banned and others were threatened. We'd be lobbying a lot of conservatives, right? Well, imagine if a liberal posted that we shouldn't call someone because he's an "extreme right winger" who's for smaller government. Well, that's where we are. Republicans won't help us here, for the most part. Hell, this ban was in their party platform. We'll work to get as many as we can (especially the non-Southern ones) but, right now, 15 of the 202 House Republicans figure to be on our side....7.4%. And, one of those (Poe, Ted [R-TX]) is very suspect, as he voted against HR 4411 but cosponsored HR 4777 (along with over 100 other cosponsors).

We Republicans who support limited government should be working hard for this, IMHO. If our party isn't reoriented to include all conservatives soon, there won't really be a national Republican Party.

Democrats should support this to, for obvious reasons. Anyone who supports freedom and liberty should be with this effort. Please everyone....call both days. It's easy and it's worth it.

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x223/TheEngineer2007/US.House2.jpg

[JavaNut]

I may be wrong but isn't Sen. Obama a muslim?

To my knowledge gambling is considered very sinfull by the Quran at the same level as interest on loans. But again I could very well be wrong.

[Perseus]

[ QUOTE ]
I may be wrong but isn't Sen. Obama a muslim?

To my knowledge gambling is considered very sinfull by the Quran at the same level as interest on loans. But again I could very well be wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are wrong.

He attended a school or camp when he was a kid that had Muslim influence...just as I attended a catholic elementary/high school and I'm not Catholic nor do I believe in that faith. This was something falsely reported by FOX news.

He is a Christian.

[tangled]

Called.
Screwed it up bad,
but called

[oldbookguy]

I would also suggest copying the Engineer's letter and e-mailing to the presidential Campaign Office @

http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/contact2

When I called it seemed the staffer was like, another caller?.... What is going on.....

obg

[Merkle]

I was looking at the list of offices to call. As I reside in TN all will be long distance. Is there a best number to call? Do we want to flood one office primarily or some calls to each office? Since you seem to be "engineering" this Engineer, just let me know which office you want me to call.

[Ron Burgundy]

You should probably call the DC office then.

I'll call the Chicago office since I have a phone with a 312 area code.

let us gogogogogo

[Merkle]

Just called the washington number. Pointed out that I had been a life long Republican but that in the last election I voted 100% democrat and possiablly would in the upcoming elections for a couple of years. That even though I was a TN resident I was following his bid for the Democratic nomination as a presidential candidate and hoped he would come out in support for Wexlers bill and Franks bill. (Yes I did use the appropriate bill #'s although I don't have them in front of me now). I heard the person I was talking to typing in the background, almost like he was taking notes on the call.

Hope it helps.

[Legislurker]

The absolute best thing, IMHO, that could happen for our political fortunes is for the Dems to realize we could hand them a garunteed House retention in 08. I think they fail to realize how fragile their victory was, and how unpopular they are. A Republican could still become Prez, and they can still lose the House, but I don't think they know that. If they look at the races we have and do the math..........seeing as how we can deliver 2-3k WHITE MALE 18-50 yos per district to the Democratic candidate while losing virtually no votes.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Have I called? YES
Do I want Obama to support us? YES
Will I vote for him? NO

I will vote for Ron Paul in the GOP primary, and if he's not nominated /images/graemlins/tongue.gif I'll vote for whoever the Libertarians run.

Both those choices are more palatable for me because they will both support our right to play *and* make sure we never have to pay a penny of income tax on our winnings.

[DMoogle]

Called all the offices. Nobody who answered really seemed interested, but they said they would relay the message.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I was looking at the list of offices to call. As I reside in TN all will be long distance. Is there a best number to call? Do we want to flood one office primarily or some calls to each office? Since you seem to be "engineering" this Engineer, just let me know which office you want me to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I called Washington and Chicago. It probably doesn't matter....it's good to get the "buzz" going among all of his staff.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Have I called? YES
Do I want Obama to support us? YES
Will I vote for him? NO

I will vote for Ron Paul in the GOP primary, and if he's not nominated /images/graemlins/tongue.gif I'll vote for whoever the Libertarians run.

Both those choices are more palatable for me because they will both support our right to play *and* make sure we never have to pay a penny of income tax on our winnings.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for calling. Again, we don't have to support him to ask him to support us.

Everyone: I called twice, as I noted in the previous post. They didn't have a position, but they've heard from us. Great job everyone.

Please call back on Thursday (per OBG).

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Called all the offices. Nobody who answered really seemed interested, but they said they would relay the message.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's standard. Once in a while they'll have a conversation, but they typically relay messages, especially for issues on which the politician hasn't yet taken a stand. The important thing is that they heard our opinion. I'm sure Focus isn't contacting Obama for ANYTHING, so we have a monopoly here.

[TheEngineer]

The NY Times had an interesting article about Sen. Obama today. They mentioned his poker playing <u>skills</u>. That can't hurt us. In fact, I mentioned it in my phone call today.

NY Times article on Sen. Obama (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/us/politics/30obama.html?em&amp;ex=1185940800&amp;en=5732286f35dc9da3&amp; ei=5087%0A)

[ QUOTE ]
Mr. Obama worked hard at building connections. Aside from taking up golf he joined a weekly poker game. One lobbyist said Mr. Obama played poker well, but “with more skill than luck,” adding, “It’s certainly not instinctive with him; it’s cerebral.”

[/ QUOTE ]

[Legislurker]

Im not sure FoF hasn't been talking with Obama. He may be the closest thing to an actual Christian running. Before I get flamed, Im not saying Romney isnt a Christian because he is Mormon, I just doubt anyone who hoards high 9 figures and spends low 9 figures on worldy ambitions is really following Christ. He may be as false as W or Bill about God, but he is IMHO, the most likely. He may not be able to give FoF what they want, assurances on action on their agenda, but they may hedge their bets in an election they see as lost.
SO, if we get some kind of comment out of him(unlikely) first, it would be a major coup. Maybe later in the election if he wins the nomination, we could confront him with incinsistency if he won't come out for us. One interesting tidbit from a recent G911 article was that NBA players were backing him heavily, and a LOT of NBA guys are into poker now. Arenas was playing at halftime at one point. Barkley plays, but I don't think we want his gambling problems front and center, only John Daly would be worse face for us. Lebron had a mini casino put in his house, and would be a good person. If people have a pipeline to ask NBA players to put in a word to Obama in conjunction with this.......maybe someone who plays some live games in the nosebleeds and is chummy with an agent or possee member. If we want to buzz his staff even more, imagine guys giving him the max with celebrity status asking him to give us a look see.

[TheEngineer]

Please remember to call Sen. Obama again on Thurday. The Monday call was a success. For the Thursday call, our friends at EOG will join us. See http://forums.eog.com/online-sportsbooks...tion-95276.html (http://forums.eog.com/online-sportsbooks-and-gambling-discussion/fight-online-gaming-america-weekly-action-95276.html) .

[TheEngineer]

www.eog.com (http://www.eog.com) put this item at the top of their home page. /images/graemlins/grin.gif This should lead to good participation. Please check it out.

[Legislurker]

I trolled the hell out of Yahoo Poker and ESPN Poker the last couple days as well. ESPN yielded quite a few hits of people willing to say they would give him a call. If you have some time when you play tonight or tomorrow, hit up your poker table via Chat, and maybe a Play Money table as well. Link this thread if the room lets you paste. Every stranger we can get hooked into this makes it bigger. And please, don't trot out that lame excuse about not letting the fish discover 2p2.

[oldbookguy]

also sent in to CNN &amp; Fox News though doubt they care and posted on my personal web

www.wvgeneralstore.com (http://www.wvgeneralstore.com)

obg

[Fonzi]

just called... staff told me Obama supports Frank's and Wexler's legislative efforts, is concerned that the UIGEA will push on-line gambling 'underground', and that he's following the issue. If nothing else, this week's calls have caused his staff to practice their responses to our plight!

The Fonz /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[DMoogle]

[ QUOTE ]
just called... staff told me Obama supports Frank's and Wexler's legislative efforts, is concerned that the UIGEA will push on-line gambling 'underground', and that he's following the issue. If nothing else, this week's calls have caused his staff to practice their responses to our plight!

The Fonz /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
This is fantastic news, correct?

[oldbookguy]

any word on a press release or public statement?

BTW, we ALL need to follow up with e-mails and calls again on Thursday!

obg

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
just called... staff told me Obama supports Frank's and Wexler's legislative efforts, is concerned that the UIGEA will push on-line gambling 'underground', and that he's following the issue. If nothing else, this week's calls have caused his staff to practice their responses to our plight!

The Fonz /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Outstanding news! I sure hope he makes this official.

Again, EOG will join us tomorrow, so we should have quite a few folks with us.

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
just called... staff told me Obama supports Frank's and Wexler's legislative efforts, is concerned that the UIGEA will push on-line gambling 'underground', and that he's following the issue. If nothing else, this week's calls have caused his staff to practice their responses to our plight!

The Fonz /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty much what I got Tuesday afternoon.

What about setting up an Act Blue page again for Obama?

[DMoogle]

Called all the offices again today. Unfortunately the Moline and Marion offices didn't answer. I will try again in a half an hour.

I hope others are calling!

[TheEngineer]

I got through the Washington office just fine. It seemed as though they'd been hearing from us.

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
Just a tongue in cheek note here:

If you WISH to receive an entry into the next Dinner With Obama lottery (no state left out!), the deadline for making a 'DONATION" to receive your entry runs out at midnight July 31st!.

Donation required for entry though.........

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you checked with the Obama campaign to see whether or not the people who win a dinner with Obama are chosen by lottery? If you have not, why do you keep writing here and elsewhere that this is the case? I think it is more likely the winners are chosen by how interesting their "story" is which they may contribute at the time of their donation. I appreciate the sentiment you are expressing, but let's not get like FoF and make stuff up that sounds good and supports our cause.

[Soulman]

As a non-American who's affected by the legislation in the US as well, I'd just like to thank all you guys who are really fighting for this - I'm impressed by your resourcefulness /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[oldbookguy]

Yes, the criteria for selection is a 'donation' deposit only.
Rather than ask quests that may try to make something untrue, try going to the Obama site.

More interesting is that you need be ONLY 16, not even 18 so children can enter as well.

The 'Donation' page can be viewed at:

https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/dinnerjuly?source=20070730_dinnerhomepage
obg

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, the criteria for selection is a 'donation' deposit only.
Rather than ask quests that may try to make something untrue, try going to the Obama site.

More interesting is that you need be ONLY 16, not even 18 so children can enter as well.

The 'Donation' page can be viewed at:

https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/dinnerjuly?source=20070730_dinnerhomepage
obg

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not making sense. I realize you must be a first time donor to be eligible. You are asserting, however, that the people chosen for the dinner from amongst the pool of first time donors are selected on the basis of a lottery. Do you know for a fact that a lottery is used to select the dinner participants? It is more likely IMO that participants are chosen based on their "story" which they may provide, in keeping with the overall theme of these dinners.

[oldbookguy]

You must NOT have read the linked page very well, Any 'story' is optional, not a requirement.

And even IF a story were required, there is still the matter of a required 'donation', a payment if you will to enter.

The story, as stated on the page is optional.

Common sense tells you a lottery / random selection must be used then to select since there are no criteria except a donation and and only those making donations qualify.

obg

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
You must NOT have read the linked page very well,

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop saying that. I read it ... I read it well.

[ QUOTE ]
Common sense tells you a lottery / random selection must be used then to select ...

[/ QUOTE ]

http://heroicsalmonleap.members.winisp.net/OhReally.jpg