Sen. Ted Stevens Introduces "Son of DOPA" 221
DJCacophony writes "Ted 'series of tubes' Stevens has introduced a bill, going by the interim name S.49, that aims to block access to interactive websites from schools and libraries. The wording of the bill is vague enough to apply to Wikipedia, MySpace (and other social networking sites), and potentially even to blogs. The bill is apparently so similar to the failed Deleting Online Predators Act of last year that it has been termed 'Son of DOPA' by some." Stevens introduced S.49, the text of which is not yet available, on the opening day of the legislative session.
Jeez... (Score:5, Insightful)
Guys not too bright (Score:1, Insightful)
Think of the (poorly educated) children (Score:5, Insightful)
They Want to Take Away the Power to Publish... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Once again... (Score:2, Insightful)
No need for a law. (Score:1, Insightful)
States Rights Trashed Again (Score:2, Insightful)
People Dont read (Score:2, Insightful)
Predators? Well, in that case.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You know it's an election year... (Score:5, Insightful)
It got rewritten and nobody told you.
Republicans are the party of Big Daddy Government: their platform is to put cameras in your bedroom to make sure you're not having sex the wrong way, because pornography is a national epidemic.
Democrats are the party of Big Mommy Government: their platform is to put cameras in your kitchen to make sure you're not eating the wrong kinds of food, because obesity is a national epidemic.
Once upon a time, Americans valued "freedom to" over "freedom from". The past 40 years of "every life is precious" and "you are a unique and valuable snowflake" rhetoric has changed that; as a nation, we've pretty much decided we'd rather be safe than free. Kinda sucks for us oldthinkers who unbellyfeel amsoc, but that's our problem, not New America's.
Re:Jeez... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:People Dont read (Score:5, Insightful)
The federal government collects this money from all the working members of society, then they withold it from anyone who won't accept rules that they are not actually supposed to be able to make. That's generally considered extortion.
Re:They Want to Take Away the Power to Publish... (Score:4, Insightful)
We get web censorship by explaining that we are protecting our children from the evils of pornography, and in their defense, no measure can be too extreme, so we'll ban sites at the schools and the libraries, and leave the potential open for banning them in homes.
You balk at this idea? What are you, some kind of pervert who wants kids to have open and free access to porn?
We get personal tracking by explaining that we are protecting our children from the dangers of child molesters, and to prevent that, no measure can be too extreme, so we'll put GPS collars on convicted child molesters and other sex offenders, and leave the option available for putting them on everyone.
What? You don't like this? Why are you standing up for perverts, anyway?
We are good. Un-we, then, are un-good. Mini-love will see they become un-persons. This is plus good.
<irony=0%> (Oh, for crying out loud, did I forget the <irony=100%> tag again?)
Re:Think of the (poorly educated) children (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Think of the (poorly educated) children (Score:5, Insightful)
What have you learned from MySpace that has any value in an educational environment?
I learned:
Besides, this is only for schools and libraries.
Federal funding means responsibility to act constitutionally, including upholding free speech/expression for adults. The government judging that posting to MySpace is less valuable than posting to Slashdot, or some purely educational forum, is an unconstitutional act. The government should never be making these decisions, individuals should. It is called freedom, even if it is the freedom to waste an hour writing about how cute your poodle is and publishing it.
The case could be made that there is no valid reason for someone to be accessing MySpace from a library other than wasting time.
The case could be made that doing anything other than praying to Allah is a waste of time. The case could be made that reading literature instead of car repair manuals is a waste of time. The point is that it is not the government's responsibility or right to make that call, it is the right and responsibility of the individual.
However, I am assuming that by "schools", he is not including universities and colleges.
Public schools are one thing. The people there are children who are assigned by our society a subset of rights and responsibilities belonging to other people. In that case it is up to the parent's to decide, possibly through the democratic process of the government, subject to some limitations. In public libraries, however, there is no justification. If people actually went to said libraries and read the constitution as well as the essays of the founding fathers, maybe they'd understand why.
Re:States Rights Trashed Again (Score:3, Insightful)
There. Fixed that for you.
block Ted (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Sex Trafficking Site Covered By Proposed Law (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You know it's an election year... (Score:4, Insightful)
You know it's an election year... when politicians come up with laws restricting... well, anything.
When do politicians ever come up with laws that don't restrict things? When was the last time a politician ran on the platform of repealing all our stupid, useless, counterproductive laws? Americans do not value freedom very much anymore. It is no longer an important cultural value. Most people see the government and laws as a battleground where they try to force other people to conform to doing things their way rather than the way the other party wants. Very few people want to take a stand in favor of personal choice.
Ever talk to a die hard "pro choice" advocate? They say it is every woman's right to make choices for herself, not have them forced upon her by others. I agree. My opinion might be that abortion is unethical, but it is not up to me to make that choice and force others to agree with me; it is up to each individual to choose. The problem is most of the people I talk to are a lot less in favor of the right to own a firearm or the right to hunt some non-endangered animal, or in some cases the right to eat meat. It is sick and sad that someone can have a "pro choice" bumper sticker, but not even think about the fact that they don't advocate personal freedom to choose in general, just personal freedom to make one particular choice, while they advocate taking other choices away from people. Is it any wonder so many children these days don't even think freedom of speech is an important right?
Freedom in the US died as a cultural value and is dying in our legislature as well. People don't even see it as an issue or concern. They just want to tell other people how to live at gunpoint, whether that is "worship Jeebus" or "don't shoot bunny rabbits."
Re:Priority (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:You know it's an election year... (Score:3, Insightful)
No, I believe he's talking about the opposite. The "you are a unique and wonderful snowflake" analogy works great... for snowflakes. However, the problem is that the crowd we speak of also subscribes to such ideas as placing more emphasis on self-esteem in education than actually making sure kids learn and can perform what they learn correctly. It's the "all opinions are equally valid" crowd, where we have to make sure not to offend anyone because we all need to get along in HappyFunLand.
This crowd encourages individualism... so long as the individuals conform to what they have decided individuals should be. It's pretty much the opposite of what people typically mean when someone says "rugged individualism."
Re:Alaska's pork should be reduced in 2007 (Score:5, Insightful)
That's probably true on "big" issues, but not appropriations. Also, keep in mind that the Democrats don't really have a majority right now, one of their members is out recovering, so it's 49 + Lieberman (50), vs. 49... and any ties go to the GOP... and it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster (but budgets can't be filibustered).
The Democratic party isn't REALLY in a position to bully Republican states... and you don't want them too. The last thing we want is to become like parliamentary countries, where parties in the opposition see their "perks" like education for schooling becoming part of coalition politics... look what happened in Israel in this year's budget re: national religious education... NRP is in the opposition, so their budget get walloped... that is NOT good government.
Not to dismiss the out of control corruption that the GOP brought in over the past 5 years (as a conservative, I was aghast), but I don't really believe that the Democrats freeze is real. Basically, the GOP didn't pass a budget, didn't during a lame duck session, and the Democrats choose to fund the year via continuing resolutions. This has messed up some agencies (NASA in particular), has given Bush an opportunity to crow about the budget (spending increases won't happen because no budget is being passed), and whatever earmarks were in there will stay.
The K-Street project got a lot of play, but it's important to realize that the Democrats controlled the House for 40 years before the 1994 change, and the Senate for the majority of those years. The Democrats (and most of the GOP) never considered the Republicans anything but an opposition party, and the first few years of the GOP, they still acted like the opposition (that's how silly things like the government shutdown happened). Basically, the Washington establishment had been a Democratic-only land because the growth in government (FDR-onward) had coincided with a nearly permanent Democratic government (in terms of Congress and therefore spending). While we hoped that the GOP would start dismantling the Democrat-built government, the alternative of feeding corruption to their people was the more likely scenario. And as corruption rarely shrinks, all the crap the Democrats built stayed while the GOP built their own.
I find it unlikely that the Democrats will try to take down GOP pork/corruption, because if they do and the GOP regains power, they will retaliate, and hard.
The unwritten rule of politics is to never attack your enemy's backers, especially when all they want is to feed at the public trough. Better to pay everyone with OPM than risk getting hurt when you are out of power.
Otherwise, you could never explain how the entertainment industry wasn't decimated by the 5 years of total GOP control, considering HOW left-wing and democratic the Hollywood/New York crowd is... it's not a bunch of liberal Democrats, this crew borders on the left wing extremist crowd... yet the GOP NEVER attacked them... just like the Democrats will never REALLY attack the Wall Street crowd... too risky... If the Democrats REALLY take shots (excess profits tax on oil, etc.... things that they harped about in opposition but would never do), they risk a GOP response of declaring war on the trial lawyers and entertainment industry... which would cut off their funds.
Re:States Rights Trashed Again (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Alaska's pork should be reduced in 2007 (Score:1, Insightful)
reality check pal.. 60% of the us population shares the same views as the so called "hollywood new york crowd".
they're not extremists, you are.