 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Veto SOPA - Now 'I.P. Attache'
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA - Now "I.P. Attache" From: Stilly River Sage Date: 14 Jul 12 - 10:45 AM [sigh] it's another Texan making a stupid move, in this case, Lamar Smith (San Antonio). The Internet regulation bill known as SOPA was decisively defeated in Congress earlier this year after an enormous outcry by activists, but fragments of it are turning up in other bills. One such bill — by Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas — appeared this week that would place "intellectual property attachés" all over the world. These attachés would represent U.S. interests abroad, specializing in copyright and intellectual property issues. The bill describes the attachés' purpose this way: (1) to achieve potential benefit by reducing intellectual property infringement in the United States market and globally; (2) to advance the intellectual property rights of United States persons and their licensees; (3) to work with and advance the interests of United States persons who may otherwise be harmed by violations of intellectual property rights in those countries; and (4) to promote the economic interests of the United States and market access by United States persons abroad. more at the link John provided. I guess he's going to flood the world with American suits to clobber Internet users. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: JohnInKansas Date: 13 Jul 12 - 02:46 PM The Monster Lives: US Bill to Create "IP Attaches" Worldwide Devin Coldewey 13 July 2012 'IP Attaché' bill would post copyright officers across the globe. The Internet regulation bill known as SOPA was decisively defeated in Congress earlier this year after an enormous outcry by activists, but fragments of it are turning up in other bills. One such bill — by Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas — appeared this week that would place "intellectual property attachés" all over the world. There's more at the link, but it's hard to tell how important this sort of "creeping crepitude" may be. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: kendall Date: 24 Jan 12 - 08:52 AM My rep. to congress contacted me to say she was fighting it. Apparently, she won. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: JohnInKansas Date: 24 Jan 12 - 06:35 AM I put a link in "the other SOPA thread" that didn't get any reponse. It was "up there" where people aren't much interested in anything other than "what is Folk" debates, so maybe it would be more interesting down here. Repeating myself, with minor edits: Now that SOPA/PIPA is officially dead, there remains the threat that something similar could follow, especially after the #$@%# election crap gets over with. It might be a good idea to begin to consider what restrictions are appropriate and what ones are unnecessary and/or harmful. A main problem with the bills most recently considered is that they would have allowed shutting down (without a hearing or legal action) any entire domain, if a copyright holder complained that any site in the domain showed his/her work. Other sites, and especially search engines, could have been barred from linking to any domain (not just the individual site) thus blackballed. The prohibition on linking to sites, even when the site/domain couldn't be shut down, could have been applied to anyone within US jurisdiction (under laws or treaties). Mudcat is one site that might well have been subject to such actions, unjustified as it might have been. A "complaint" that points up a problem seen by many copyright holders is "gently(?) voiced" by a web pundit who's generally opposed the draconian legislation proposed by the idiots; but it is a point that should be considered. Stop pirating my stories about SOPA, or I'll have to support it By Bob Sullivan SOPA – Maybe I'm for it after all. I'm as adamant a supporter of Web free speech as you'll find. And there's a lot to dislike about the Stop Online Piracy Act. But when my stories about Web free speech are stolen and posted in their entirety by "rogue" websites, my head hurts. Stealing content is a funny way to prove your anti-SOPA credentials. Opponents of controversial anti-piracy legislation called SOPA have been gaining momentum in the past week, and on Wednesday, their show of muscle reached orgasmic proportions. Perhaps swept up in the excitement of a protest that seems to be working, a long list of websites copied in its entirety a story I wrote about it over the weekend and placed it on their own sites. Here's one example, viewed early Wednesday afternoon. ... The article continues. (Read it there?) Sullivan writes the "Red Tape Chronicles" where I've found quite a few articles well worth some thought, and I've posted links and comments to several of them here. When the articles are short, as most of his are, I've likely pasted a little more than necessary; but I'm pretty sure I've always included a link to the original. Keeping the copy/paste posts within "fair use" permitted, and even more important, showing some respect for (some) sources should mandate providing a link, if one is available; and even if you have to look a bit to find the originator of an article, and link to there, it does seem fair. Especially when starting a thread, it would seem that anything worth talking about (for the rest of us) is worth some explanation of why the initiator thinks it's important enough for the rest of us to be interested, and it would be polite to indicate "which side" the one starting the conversation thinks is the stronger, especially if it's something even slightly controversial. Reading the original articles linked in discussions surely would contribute to avoiding the appearance of ignorance (although that doesn't really bother some of us all that much), but as Sullivan points out, he also gets his nickel from the number of hits on the article, so as a favor to him I'll request that everyone who reads this post should click the link - even if it's just to help make him happy. (And while you're there, you might look at a few other articles to see if his reporting merits trying to keep him happy if he is quoted again here.(?)) Similarly considerate treatment of other "reasonably respectable" sources may be consered as well. (Rumor is that "Anonymous" recently created a DDOA attack just by spreading links all over the 'net and letting the "socials" flood the sites ... ... ...) Is this worth discussing? (the © stuff, not the DDOA thing) John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: JohnInKansas Date: 24 Jan 12 - 06:15 AM gnu "But... it says... "I, the undersigned, join with thousands of Americans to oppose the Senate's current version of the Protect IP Act. We demand a free and open internet for all!"" doesn't say "I am an American," or even "fellow Americans" or "other Americans." Difficult as it may be to believe, we do have allies who sometimes cooperate with us (although Canada and Canadians might not be well represented in that department). Sometimes (I won't comment on how often) we even consider what they have to say - without even a smirk or a giggle (although Canada and Canadians might be low on the list of "acceptables" we'd do that for, or might be a little higher on the giggle list). Once in a while, even a few Brits (but not too often French?) "join with us" for particular occasions. Canada, and Canadians do have more interests at stake in the effects SOPA might have, although we'll have to watch it again when it reappears with the objectionable stuff disguised by more John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: katlaughing Date: 23 Jan 12 - 11:46 PM Well, technically "Americans" could mean all "North" Americans which continent includes Canuckland last I checked.:-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: gnu Date: 23 Jan 12 - 08:18 PM But... it says... "I, the undersigned, join with thousands of Americans to oppose the Senate's current version of the Protect IP Act. We demand a free and open internet for all!" I am a Canuck. Maybe an "iternational " petition could launched? Max? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: katlaughing Date: 23 Jan 12 - 06:09 PM Don't know 'til ya try, gnu!:-) Great, Don, thank you! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Don Firth Date: 23 Jan 12 - 06:08 PM Just signed it, Kat. Thanks! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: gnu Date: 23 Jan 12 - 04:36 PM Can ferriners sign that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: katlaughing Date: 23 Jan 12 - 02:04 PM Back to the subject. Our Senator Udall points out the fight is not over and urges all to sign his petition which one may find HERE. Time is of the essence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Jan 12 - 01:24 AM Jack, because that may be your highest point of reference! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Jack the Sailor Date: 22 Jan 12 - 07:53 PM When I see the word "scooter" why do I picture a dog wiping its butt on the carpet? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 22 Jan 12 - 07:50 PM Send him my condolences. I've lost a FEW friends, due to bike accidents. I wish him well, and hopes he recovers, as much as possible. Shit!..that sucks when that happens. On the lighter note, as Catspaw noted, mine was only a 'scooter'..though, come to think of it, lot's of bikers call their bikes 'scooters'..... Anyway, as I was telling Catspaw, as I was thinking of not wanting the courtesy, of a police escort, though I appreciated it, I thought, there's no need for them to go through all this trouble, so I hurried as fast as I could...besides, there were too many of them, for me to shake ALL their hands, and to sign autographs....they must have called ahead.....as I approached Arizona, I saw another bunch of police cars racing in to greet me. .....Being as I try to stay in great health, I thought it a great time to get out of my car....and go for a casual jog...across the desert!....it was so invigorating, I just left my car there....maybe a needy policeman could use it. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Little Hawk Date: 22 Jan 12 - 02:23 PM Hey, GfS - My friend Raptor embedded his Harley in the wall of a local ice cream store last summer. The bike did not survive. He did....just barely. It probably happened because he hit a bump, got off balance, and unintentionally accelerated the bike and lost control of it. (this has happened to more than a few people) His recovery has been gradual, but steady, and his Harley-riding days are over. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 22 Jan 12 - 01:58 PM Catspaw: "Must have been a really bad scooter crash............" No, it was a tequila...one tequila...two tequila...three tequila...floor! Actually, I'm not much of a drinker....and my scooter is embedded in the wall of the Police station...how it got there, I don't know...but the judge...he didn't believe me.......but, they were kind enough to give me a police escort...all the way to the state line!..They helped me get there, real fast...even had their lights flashing for me... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: DrugCrazed Date: 22 Jan 12 - 07:41 AM If SOPA had been passed, the first thing I would have said would have been "I don't want to live on this planet anymore". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: catspaw49 Date: 22 Jan 12 - 06:20 AM Must have been a really bad scooter crash............ Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 21 Jan 12 - 09:14 PM ..and the motion is floored.........(hic)....crash! gfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Little Hawk Date: 21 Jan 12 - 06:17 PM I'll second that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: gnu Date: 21 Jan 12 - 03:49 PM Ahhh... please don't do this. It just ain't right. It does not belong on this thread. It doesn't belong on any thread here in The Café. Please... just don't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 21 Jan 12 - 03:13 PM Racism runs both ways....You can not vote for a person because of his race......or you can vote FOR him, because of his race..either way, it's still racism! Don, If you are in ANY way inferring that I'm 'one of your secret haters, of blacks.....my first REAL group was playing behind 4 blacks, and a lead singer....we kicked ass! Also, have done some tech work for both Michael Jackson and Tina Turner...among others...I didn't even give a shit WHAT they LOOKED like.....just what the music sounded like, or that the show worked well. ....Oh, and BTW, behind the scenes, the most the word 'nigger' is used, is among the blacks!..Black to black!! Nobody else gave a shit! Nor do I! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Don Firth Date: 21 Jan 12 - 02:35 PM "I don't think there is a single person here on this forum who would object to the color of Obama's skin and let it prejudice them against him...." Unfortunately, Little Hawk, I know that there are two people who have given every indication that that is the case with them. Over time, it has become abundantly clear from what they have said, the frequently with which they have said it, and the manner in which they have said it. Just about everything but the "N-word," and they avoid that because they know perfectly well what the reaction would be. Nevertheless, it's all there! I will nor reveal who they are. I will leave that as a matter for you to exercise your perceptions on. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: gnu Date: 21 Jan 12 - 01:57 PM PORN? NO porn??? Where do I sign up? >;-) LH... what 9 said X 10. Except... "As for Canada....it's kind of like that here too...only not so blatantly bad as it is in the USA." Air Bus, Afghanistan, Auberge Grand-Mère, Bell, Bombardier... Elephant Talk anyone? There's a lot of letters in the alphabet. Just as many here as in The States. And it's gettin worse by the minute. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: number 6 Date: 21 Jan 12 - 11:31 AM I applaud the the mass protest concerning SOPA. With that in saying I am somewhat perplexed about the apathy demonstrated by the mainstream news organizations and people themselves towards the NDAA.. This law has stripped away one of the basic principles of our civilized and democratic processes we have in our society. The right to habeas corpus. Oh well .... I guess people are more concerned paranoid about losing their access to Facebook, Youtube, there fav porn and downloading sites and yes even our own dear Madcat. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST Date: 21 Jan 12 - 11:29 AM Does Online Protection and Enforcement of the Digital Trade Act (OPEN) qualify as a less draconian alternative to SOPA? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Little Hawk Date: 21 Jan 12 - 12:27 AM I don't know for certain what you think about various things, Don...but I have the same objection to what you often say about GfS...or some other people here...you seem to think you know what THEY think, and according to what I know of GfS, you're way off the mark. So I say to you, Don, to quote your own words above "if you will just stop insisting on telling me—and others here—what you're so certain that GfS thinks (despite what he keeps saying to the contrary) and cavalierly misrepresenting his views. . . ." See? Same problem going the other way. None of us can know for sure what the other is thinking...but wouldn't it be a step in the right direction to at least not leap to the most negative possible conclusions about what you imagine the other person is thinking? Regarding Obama: I don't have as generous a view of his intentions as you do. I don't think that his personal values tend to be progressive, I think he's right-of-center, but brilliant at sounding like whatever his listeners hope for. I don't think he has made the error of trying to be a conciliator...I think he's doing exactly what the powers that be put him in office to do, and that his squabbles with the Right are nothing more than a form of political theatre to delude the public into imagining he's not doing what he's doing, which is advancing a Rightist agenda. You say, "I also think there is an undertone in many of those who hate Obama so much of considering him not quite the right hue, although they know better than to say as much (and I suspect that holds for a few people right here on Mudcat, unfortunately)." I think that is arrant nonsense in regards to the people on Mudcat. I don't think there is a single person here on this forum who would object to the color of Obama's skin and let it prejudice them against him, quite the contrary, the majority would rush to support him precisely because of the color of his skin (among other things)! I was absolutely delighted to see a half-Black man get elected president when it happened. I was delighted that Obama got elected. I hoped he would really change things. I deeply regret that he has not done so. I don't think that's because he's a "conciliator". I think it's because he's a puppet, frankly....a puppet of the same power brokers who helped him become president...and he's a damn good actor. Their business is war, power, corrupt banking procedures (pyramid schemes), and feeding a rich elite at the expense of absolutely everyone else...meaning the 99% (which is us). I think Obama works for those guys. I think he's a very smart man. I think he knows what he's doing. Whether it causes him some sleepless nights, I cannot say. What I can say though is that you, I, and GfS all share many of the same progressive ideals. We all want honest government and real democracy and financial and election reform. So does everyone else who posts here. By the way, I would also prefer a preferential voting system, same as you. And I'd prefer a no-party system. Or, failing that, a multi-party system with instant runoff voting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jan 12 - 11:31 PM Bravo, Little Hawk...a standing ovary from me!!..oh, wait a minute...yikes...OVATION! Been my position ALL along! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Don Firth Date: 20 Jan 12 - 11:19 PM Little Hawk, I have it on good authority that Obama's personal values tend to be progressive. But—he has made the egregious error of trying to be a conciliator in a climate in which the Right-Wing wants to tear him and anything he proposes to shreds. I also think there is an undertone in many of those who hate Obama so much of considering him not quite the right hue, although they know better than to say as much (and I suspect that holds for a few people right here on Mudcat, unfortunately). Unless he takes a few vitamins and gets a swift kick in the ass by Michele, frankly, I don't have much hope for him. Ron Paul? Honest he may be (in terms of not taking money out of blind men's cups), but think Ayn Rand! He isn't saying it any more, except behind his had to certain people, but he is a great admirer of her and her philosophical and political system. I am VERY familiar with her beliefs. And I compare what she said with what HE says! And Little Hawk, apparently you, too, missed the many times that I have said that I DO NOT FAVOR A TWO PARTY SYSTEM! I have long been arguing for multiple parties (if parties at all!) and preferential or instant run-off voting. A number of countries use it and it works one helluva lot better than ours does. No, I am not an apologist for the current system. In fact, I don't think the United States can pull out of this without going through something very much like the Great Depression all over again. Now, if you guys will just stop insisting on telling me—and others here—what you're so certain that I think (despite what I keep saying to the contrary) and cavalierly misrepresenting my views. . . . Why do you and GfS insist on doing that, anyway? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Neil D Date: 20 Jan 12 - 11:02 PM Barack Obama is not a liberal. He never was. The only people who claim that he is are so far to the right that any moderate looks like a commy. The political pendulum doesn't swing from left to right in this country. There is a wall in the middle so it falls to the center and bounces to the right, falls to the center and bounces to the right. A true liberal would never get elected president, but if we're not careful an arch-conservative just might. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Jan 12 - 09:43 PM Thanks, Bruce. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,999 Date: 20 Jan 12 - 09:38 PM LH, as often as we disagree, when you 'nail it in one' I have been one of the first to applaud you. I hereby do so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Little Hawk Date: 20 Jan 12 - 09:25 PM If Obama genuinely represented progressive causes, Don, I'd be very much in favour of him. I've seen little or no evidence that he does. I do not believe the Democratic Party (at its higher levels) has any intention of allowing a genuine progressive to be its candidate for president. The only genuine progressive they had running for president in the last election primary process was Dennis Kucinich, and he was shut out of the later televised debates on ridiculous technicalities, because he was making it quite clear in those debates that the other Democratic candidates were "emperors with no clothes", and that to vote for them was to preserve much the same status quo that existed under George Bush...only with a different phony Party in the White House. The only progressive (meaning honest) Republican candidate in the last election was Ron Paul. He didn't become his Party's official candidate for president either. I think it's virtually impossible for a genuine progressive...meaning an honest man who defends the Constitution...to be picked as the presidential candidate for either one of those Big 2 Parties, because they both serve the same entrenched interests (while parroting different divisive hoo-ha to divide the public into 2 opposing blocs and maintain the illusion of choice). Where GfS and I disagree with you, Don, is not in the area of your progressive ideals......but in your continuing faith in the existing 2-party system, your faith being based on the notion that voting in the Democrats will save you from the Republicans! Don......Americans need to be saved from both the Democrats AND the Republicans. They are the two wings of the same vicious bird of prey that rules over you. I'll put it more bluntly: The Democrats and the Republicans are more or less what you'd have if the Nazis had decided to divide the Nazi Party into 2 supposedly separate parties and send those 2 parties out to the German polls for people to vote for. They're what you'd have if Stalin had decided to divide the Communist Party into 2 Parties and send those 2 parties out to the Russian polls for people to vote for. It's a sham, Don. You really have just ONE Party in the USA. It masquerades as 2 separate parties. The 2 in the masquerade yell about different highly emotional trigger issues (such as Gay rights, creation vs evolution, global warming vs "deniers", etc.) because that works great to divide the public into frightened oppositional camps and it distinguishes the 2 parties as supposely different....but when it comes down to brass tacks...meaning war, law, and basic financial policy...those 2 parties both serve the same entrenched financial and imperial interests. The other divisive stuff is smoke and mirrors to keep you dreaming that you have a real choice in front of you. There is the odd individual in each of those 2 parties who is a free man or woman and who speaks honestly about what's going on. The main 2 I can think of in that regard are Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul. They have both chosen to remain in the Big 2 parties, because there IS no way of getting a 3rd party off the ground in the USA. Your ruling class has made quite sure of that through financial means and media control. You live under a form of somewhat subtle dictatorship, Don, and it masquerades as a 2-party democracy. As long as it can keep enough of your citizens believing it's not a dictatorship, the illusion of that 2-party democracy can be maintained in the minds of most Americans, and the big phony game goes on. ***** As for Canada....it's kind of like that here too...only not so blatantly bad as it is in the USA. I'd say that's partly because we're not a superpower, and partly because we have a more progressive foundation to work from here. But our various political parties? They sell out to the biggest financial interests, just like yours do. And that's why fewer and fewer people here are bothering to vote in each succeeding election. They instinctively sense that their vote has become meaningless. (Note: I still vote regardless.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST Date: 20 Jan 12 - 09:14 PM Don Firth: "My apologies, GfS. I may have done you an injustice."..... ....."No, GfS, I do not favor the things you claim I favor. Now that you understand my position, I accept your apology." Are you talking to yourself again?? wink! Hey, how'd you like the tunes? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Don Firth Date: 20 Jan 12 - 08:29 PM By the way, that should read "vicious," not "viscious." Slip of the fingerbone. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Don Firth Date: 20 Jan 12 - 08:21 PM My apologies, GfS. I may have done you an injustice. Perhaps you are merely ignorant. I have already said several times that, although I had high hopes for Barack Obama, I have found him to be disappointing, not—SO FAR—living up to what many people expected of him. He has, however, met extreme, perhaps one could justifiably say, viscious resistance from a Congress that is determined to see him fail. Unfortunately, he is the only candidate on the horizon right now (I said "candidate," not someone you would LIKE to see run who either has not appeared yet or who would not stand a chance even if nominated) who is not either a total idiot or one of the tribe of the Right Wing's selection of Beelzebubs, like, say, Ron Paul or Newt Gingrich. You may disagree, but if so, tough shit. ANYBODY but one of those clowns recently playing patty-cake in South Carolina. Unless Obama grows a spine or Hillary decides to run, the Democrats don't currently have a breathing, and beyond Bozo's Third Political Party and Lemonade Stand, there isn't anyone much else in the race. As it is, I may emigrate! As to your insisting on calling me a "liberal," DO try to learn—and remember—the differences (from a book entitled, A Brief Explanation of Modern Political Systems): The term "progressive" is today often used in place of "liberal." Although the two are related in some ways, they are separate and distinct political ideologies and should not be used interchangeably. In the US in particular, the term progressive tends to have the same value as the European term social democrat; which is scarcely used in American political language.As to the subject of this thread, I have always been strenuously opposed to any SOPA-style restrictions or censorship, and have been since the early 1960s when some of the organizations such as ASCAP and BMI wanted to collect royalties from—not for--guys like me singing in clubs and coffeehouses. They backed off only when we informed them that considering that the vast majority of songs in our repertoires were traditional folk songs and ballads, some of which were hundreds of years old, and they were Public Domain as far as royalties are concerned, I, for example, could simply stop singing the half-dozen recently written songs (Ed Beddoe's Copper Kettle, for example). No sweat! I'm all in favor of writers, composers, performers, et al receiving due royalties and such for their work. But there is more to it that just that. Something much more sinister. And I, personally, am doing a couple of things to fight it. This current caper, as I see it, is a Trojan horse, to allow the government into the business of regulating and censoring the internet. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure out that, since movements such as the Coffee Party and the Occupy Movement got their ideas out and around so quickly because of the internet, the possibilities have scared the Holy Crap out of Those Who Would Like To Rule Us, and they want to get their fingers around the throats of such avenues of reform. No, GfS, I do not favor the things you claim I favor. Now that you understand my position, I accept your apology. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,999 Date: 20 Jan 12 - 06:26 PM Today's news is that SOPA and PIPA have been stopped FOR NOW. It was in large part thanks to Wikipedia closing for the day. However, it seems it will be re-introduced after some tweaking goes on, so it ain't over, not by a long shot. Lots of damned congressmen/women trying to pass legislation when none of them understand it or its repercussions. There's the real PTUI in that piece of legislation. "Mark Twain: I was very particular about the kind of job I wanted. I didn't want to work. So I went over to the Congress, that Grand Old Benevolent National Asylum for the Helpless, and I reported on the inmates there." I got nothin' to add. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Don Firth Date: 20 Jan 12 - 04:45 PM I never said I was a "liberal," YOU did. Progressive, yes, but I don't fit any of your childish stereotypes. Nor do I support any of the things you claim above. You, sir, are FULL of it. And you know it. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jan 12 - 04:28 PM So, Is Obama a liberal or not?..Mr Ptui? Is NDAA a liberal idea? The Patriot Act? Solyndra? Sopa? Pipa? Immelt, 'jobs CZAR' creating all these jobs in China...and dodging the taxes? Timmy Geithner, tax cheat and part of IMF, A BANKSTER, and YOU think this is 'liberal'????????????? Seems like Donny our resident phony, 'so-called liberal' favors this stuff. Seems to me, he is up for this shit...and those who won't rescind it...or veto it. Maybe YOU are the one who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground! Maybe you should try separating wishful imaginations for reality, Bub! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Don Firth Date: 19 Jan 12 - 06:07 PM GfS wouldn't recognize a liberal if one bit him on the ass--which isn't going to happen, because liberals have taste. Ho-o-o-och PTUI!!!. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 19 Jan 12 - 03:40 PM As the Greeks danced the drunken bystander yelled SOPA! SOPA! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: catspaw49 Date: 19 Jan 12 - 07:01 AM And GfS crashed the damn thing too! Without a helmet! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 19 Jan 12 - 12:32 AM ..and I figure you support the administration who supports SOPA, NDAA, and PIPA......and ships jobs to China, and grafts to Solyndra...and lies through their teeth!...But as long as you are convinced they are 'liberals' by title only, they are on YOUR side! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: catspaw49 Date: 19 Jan 12 - 12:14 AM I figure GfS bought one of the scooters and can't ride it.......... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 19 Jan 12 - 12:00 AM Why???....Don't you think your 'so-called liberal' president would veto it.....unless he's not so...well, on the people's side, as you allowed yourselves to naively believe???? "CHANGE YOU HAVE to BELIEVE IN" ................suckers! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: catspaw49 Date: 18 Jan 12 - 08:34 PM Veto Sopa.........sounds like an Italian scooter................ Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,999 Date: 18 Jan 12 - 02:00 PM Just came across this: 18 January 2012 — a day of protest The internet and the public domain belong to the people! Dear friends, Without a healthy public domain, and without the internet, Project Gutenberg Canada would not exist today. But both the public domain and the internet are under attack. The U.S. is proposing two very dangerous pieces of legislation: the "Stop Online Piracy Act" (SOPA) and the "Protect IP Act" (PIPA). These acts would definitely affect Canadians. The "free trade" talks underway with Europe and with Pacific Rim countries could well result in a twenty-year extension to copyright terms in Canada. Why should foreigners make our laws? Our own government is proposing "digital lock" rules more appropriate to a totalitarian state than to a free and open society like Canada. So there is lots to protest. And we are joining the worldwide day of protest by shutting down Project Gutenberg Canada for one day, January 18th. We look forward to seeing you on the 19th! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: Bobert Date: 18 Jan 12 - 01:16 PM SOPA is dead... Even the sponsors of the original bill have stepped back from it... Dead, dead, dead so there won't be any bill for Obama to veto... You heard it here first!!! B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: pdq Date: 18 Jan 12 - 01:16 PM "The SOPA law will mean whatever they want it to mean when and as it's convenient..." And it would be administered by Eric Holder and his "Justice" Department. Reason to be scared. BTW, if Obama does not support this travesty, the billionaires of Hollywood and the Music industry will be very stingy with their money this election cycle. Follow the money. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Veto SOPA. From: GUEST,999 Date: 18 Jan 12 - 01:02 PM DMcG: you're asking that question of a country that no longer has habeas corpus. The SOPA law will mean whatever they want it to mean when and as it's convenient.. |
