• As I sit and let my thoughts on these rantings you provided percolate, I just wanted to highlight this particular passage from Hahn, and all its dangerous implications:

    "This condition is extremely dangerous in a self-governing country, for the public cannot make informed decisions if it is not so much informed as manipulated by political partisans."

    Ooooooohhhhhhhhh.....do you see what I see here?  That sentence appalls me.  It frightens me.  That sentence is, at its core, a call for state control of the media.  "...public cannot make informed decisions...political partisans."  
    Who, then (in the mind of Hahn), is capable of providing information to the public that is not manipulated by political partisans?  Why, the only prudent choice is...the Government!

    The right wing scares me.  A lot.  

  • comment on a post Republican Pervert Open Thread over 7 years ago

    Jack Ryan of Illinois, who's candidacy (and golden boy image) was torpedoed when the news came out that he took his ex-wife, Jeri Ryan, to BDSM clubs in New York.  

    As a result, the Illinois GOP brought in a Maryland carpetbagger in the form of Alan Keyes to get whupped by Barack Obama in the 2004 Senate Race.

    Keyes, if memory serves, disowned his daughter after she came out of the closet.  Keyes is a homo-bigot of the first degree.

  • comment on a post What is with the weirdos at the top? over 7 years ago

    paddle tennis isn't table tennis.  

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paddle_tenn is

    like regular tennis, but smaller paddles and a 'spongy' ball.  

    i've certainly heard of people puking from extremely strenuous exercise.

    usually its running though, i think...

  • comment on a post The Lobbying Game on Net Neutrality over 7 years ago

    I'm sure there are lobbying dollars going the other way.  Obviously, Google, Amazon and Microsoft are strongly in favor of net neutrality, and I recently read that a financial services lobbying group is pro-net neutrality.  Which basically equates to Wall St being pro-net neutrality.  It makes sense, the telcos are only a few companies that stand to benefit.  Many more companies stand to lose.  

    The telcos were hoping to slip this through quietly, as a little rider on the end of a bill that opens up the market for cable services.  The blogosphere's real contribution here is getting the word out, and getting the issue noticed.  

    Once the companies that could be adversely affected took notice (or take notice), well, killing net neutrality doesn't stand a chance.  Appease AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast and piss off Google, Microsoft, CitiBank, Chase, Amazon, Yahoo, E-Trade, NASDAQ, and about 400 other Fortune 500 companies?  That just doesn't make sense for any congressman.

  • comment on a post Link Morning over 7 years ago

    http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/st ories/johnlaesch/

    John Laesch (Fightin Dem) vs. Denny!

  • alright, so I'm just a bit paranoid today.  I just read the full text.  This is straight up net neutrality, no shady riders.

    But Sensenbrenner is still scum.  

  • Woo hoo for net neutrality, but is this the same Sensenbrenner bill that requires ISP's to record and maintain all your internet usage for 'law enforcement' purposes?  Democracy Now was discussing a bill introduced by Sensenbrenner a few days ago that will require ISP's to maintain logs of what sites you visit, what emails you send, etc.  The stated objective was to fight child porn, but with the illegal spying going on already, this worries me.  Has anyone read the text of the bill?  

    Sensenbrenner is such scum that I have a hard time believing that this bill is just a blanket net neutrality bill...

  • comment on a post CBC in Revolt Against Pelosi on Ethics over 7 years ago

    The CBC has a point if she didn't ask Mollahan to resign his post, too.  She needs to establish that corruption in the democratic caucus is unacceptable.  Not only is it the right thing to do, its also the only way to ensure this remains a strong campaign issue for the democrats.  

  • comment on a post Internet Freedom: Eleven Candidates, Senate Fights over 7 years ago

    Here's some big news.  A huge lobby just jumped into the fray, along with the internet companies.  The financial services sector is jumping hard on the net neutrality bandwagon.

    Here's the link:

    http://www.informationweek.com/news/show Article.jhtml?articleID=187002854

    Sensenbrenner and Conyers also introduced another net neutrality bill.

    http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetReleas e.asp?id=66072

  • on a comment on Big Break on Net Neutrality over 7 years ago

    the kind of free market I was dissing, the kind that libertarians espouse, is not embodied in EBay.  EBay doesn't have many rules, but it is, in fact, a micro-scale mostly free market.  Macro scale is much, much bigger than EBay.  EBay is large in the sense that its a huge company and a lot of product is sold through it, but its still micro (in economic terms).  Its a limited marketplace.  Macro scale is much larger.  The entire United States is a macro scale marketplace.  

  • comment on a post Big Break on Net Neutrality over 7 years ago

    This isn't really a big business vs. little guys thing though.  A small group of big businesses are really taking on the world.  Big internet companies have a great deal at stake here.  

    Because:
    1.  Increased access fees

    2.  The possibility of the telcos and cables blocking or slowing their sites.  Telcos could block out internet telephony.  Amazon could pay to block Barnes.  Yahoo! could pay to block Google.  And so on

    In other net neutrality news:
    The Christian Coalition is on our side.  http://www.earnedmedia.org/cc0517.htm

    A sketchy looking source says that Yahoo! is helping bankroll the net neutrality fight (on our side).
    http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx ?1c93ee5a-18aa-4faf-ae19-07dd2c0d8f55

    Brownback and DeMint are in the telcos pocket.
    http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article /CA6335577.html?display=Breaking+News

    REM and Moby are on the net neutrality side (various)

    Inouye is pro-net neutrality
    http://news.com.com/Democratic+senator+w ants+Net+neutrality+regulations/2100-102 8_3-6070494.html

    Amazon pro net neutrality:
    http://www.technewsworld.com/story/Lz6OL xO8XfXyZj/Amazon-VP-Paul-Misener-Makes-t he-Case-for-Net-Neutrality.xhtml

    Some idiot right winger rails against net neutrality while making the case for net neutrality.  
    http://www.opinioneditorials.com/guestco ntributors/jwright_20060512.html

    Enjoy.

  • comment on a post Big Break on Net Neutrality over 7 years ago

    How can you really call Sensenbrenner a libertarian though.  A true libertarian would be all about open borders.  Free markets and all that.  

    The net neutrality thing is exactly why the entire concept of free markets is a misnomer in the modern world.  They could make one market free, but that would serve to erase an existing free market.  Preserve the existing free market, and prevent a free market elsewhere.  

    Free market theory is bs anyway.  A truly free market only works in theory or on a micro-scale, but not in practice (on a macro-scale).  Just like communism is an idea that works in theory or on a micro-scale, but not in practice (macro- scale).

  • comment on a post Big Break on Net Neutrality over 7 years ago

    Ugh.  I'm so torn.  Sensenbrenner is scum incarnate.  I guess even scum can do the right thing once in a while.  

    But he's still the slime behind the immigration bill.  

    Ah well, Bobby Rush is usually a good guy, but he's wrong on telecoms.  And I've railed against him heavily for that (not here, but elsewhere).

    Gotta take em when we can get em.  

Diaries

Advertise Blogads