Come to think of it, I do remember the Kansas City-Omaha Kings.

So named because they split home games between the two cities. Actually, we got them from another city and they were originally called the Royals, but changed their name for obvious reasons.

I'm up to 18.5 million chips on the WSOP android game and I am bored out of my mind! I'm a tournament player and the tournaments are single tables so they are over too quickly.

I haven't been to active on my blog because I really haven't had much to say and I have been busy on other areas of 2plus2, most notably NVG.

Well, I am going to use my blog to track how long it takes my elected officials to respond to emails regarding RAWA which I sent yesterday.

My elected officials are Representative Cleaver, who is a co-sponsor of the house version; Senator Roy Blunt; and, Senator Claire McCaskill. Based on past experience, expect a lot of updates saying "nothing yet."

I sent several emails to Cleaver before and the only reason he finally responded was because of my sending a letter to the editor of the local paper complaining and saying Cleaver shouldn't be elected again because he didn't bother responding.

I sent an email to McCaskill several months ago when it was revealed the intelligence community had engaged in wider spread spying on Americans than was previously known. She finally responded this week.

My hope is that my blog goes up on Google so when people search for Cleaver or McCaskill, they will see how bad they are in responding.

In terms of speed, Blunt has been the quickest, but that's not saying much.

Still no response.

Still nothing as of yesterday. James May is faster than this trio.

Still no responses from Representative Emanuel Cleaver, Senator Roy Blunt, or Senator Claire McCaskill.

Representative Emanuel Cleaver, Senator Roy Blunt, and Senator McCaskill, do you treat all your constituents this way with your slow/no responses.

You may think the issue is unimportant, but that doesn't matter as it is important to me and you work for me. I don't work for you.

Senator Blunt responded today and I'll be posting his response when I am on my desktop.

Here is what Blunt wrote.

Dear [My Name],

Thank you for your letter on internet gambling.

While I understand and appreciate all Americans' rights to individual freedom, I believe that legalized internet gambling could be harmful. Internet gambling is rapidly increasing, appealing to a wider range of individuals, specifically young players who are susceptible to the addictive nature of gambling. It can place undue stress on family relationships and finances. One person's gambling can have a profound, adverse effect on a wider community.

Again, thank you for contacting me. I look forward to continuing our conversation on Facebook (www.facebook.com/SenatorBlunt) and Twitter (www.twitter.com/RoyBlunt) about the important issues facing Missouri and the country. I also encourage you to visit my website (blunt.senate.gov) to learn more about where I stand on the issues and sign-up for my e-newsletter.

Sincere regards,

Roy Blunt

Still nothing from Cleaver and McCaskill.

Received this from McCaskill finally.

December 18, 2014

Dear Mr. [My Last Name],

Thank you for contacting me regarding online gambling. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.

Gambling includes activities such as bingo, card games, slot machines, lotteries, casinos, and horse racing. Once outlawed, these activities are now primarily regulated at the state level. In our state, the Missouri Gaming Commission is the chief regulator, and you can visit the agency's website at http://www.mgc.dps.mo.gov/.

In recent years, more and more gambling has taken place over the Internet. Internet gambling companies are often located offshore, making it difficult for state and federal prosecutors to enforce gambling laws. As a result, many in Congress have advocated for stronger regulation of online gambling. In 2006, before I was elected to the Senate, Congress passed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), which prohibits gambling-related businesses from accepting payments in connection with unlawful Internet gambling activities. The Department of Justice has begun enforcing this law, but critics hold that the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act is too vague to be effective and does not have a mechanism to stop gaming operators from using offshore financial institutions to process payments.

You may be interested to know that, on July 17, 2013, I chaired a hearing of the Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Insurance about the impact of online gambling on consumer protection and whether a patchwork of state regulations adequately protects consumers. During the hearing, we also discussed possible technological solutions to some issues surrounding an increase in online gambling, such as fraud, underage gambling, and money laundering.

Online gambling is inherently an interstate matter and Congress has an important role to play in overseeing its expansion. I understand that some have concerns that making online gambling more accessible could have negative consequences. Others are law-abiding citizens who just want to be able to participate in this form of entertainment over the Internet. Please know, I will keep your views in mind should relevant legislation be considered in the Senate.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance to you on this or any other issue.

Sincerely,



Claire McCaskill
United States Senator

Still nothing from Representative Emanuel "Captain Slow" Cleaver.

Quote says it all.

Different day, same song.

Guess it shouldn't surprise me given it is Christmas Eve.

Santa didn't bring me a Christmas letter from Cleaver. Nor has the succeeding days seen me get a response.

Sent the email back on the 8th and still no response. Bang up job, Emanuel!

The close of the old year didn't bring a response.

Here is an email I sent to a columnist at my local paper about Cleaver.

Dear Ms. Shelly:

It was with interest that I read what you wrote about Emanuel Cleaver in today's paper. He definitely needs to be more of a presence. Specifically in the speed with which he responds to his constituents.

On December 9th, I wrote to him, Senator Blunt, and Senator McCaskill. Blunt responded in about a week, McCaskill in about a week and a half, while Cleaver has yet to respond.

I cannot imagine that I am the only person he is doing this to. Such a man doesn't deserve to be in office.

Sincerely,
[my name]

While I still haven't heard from Cleaver, I got a quick response from Ms. Shelly. She was a little stunned at Cleaver's lack of response.

We interrupt this program to bring you this special announcement.

For Christmas, the wife got me a seat in a deep stack tournament at a local casino. The tournament took place yesterday, had ninety entrants, top nine got paid, and I finished sixteenth.

We talked and the wife and I agreed that we can afford for me to play one deep stack tournament a month. Any money I make will go into a poker bankroll for me.

So this blog is going to be more than updates consisting of me saying I haven't heard from Cleaver yet. It will actually be more about poker.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled program.

As part of my effort to improve at poker, I am going back and study some of my poker books. Not just read, but really study.

On my reading list (in probable order) are Theory of Poker, Psychology of Poker, another more recent book on poker psychology, both Tells books by Elwood, all volumes of Little's books on tournament poker, Poker Tournament Formula, Kill Everyone, and Raiser's Edge.

I'll probably pick up Harrington on Modern Tournaments at some point.

Four days since my last update on this subject and nothing has changed.

Through a private message, someone asked me about how to study a poker book. Here is my response to them.

"Think back to how you studied especially in college. If you were like me, you read, you really thought about what you read, and you highlighted what you felt were the most important parts. And then you read some more."

By read some more, I meant go back and read what you already read more than reading from where you left off.