Living the Liminal » Politics

US Lawmakers Want to Censor You and Me

LtL — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 16:47:04 +0000

Senator Robert Casey Co-Sponser’s the PROTECT IP Act and Gives his Reason Why

LtL — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 01:22:46 +0000

Senator Robert Casey Jr. writes:

Dear Mr. Wood:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding S. 968, the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property (PROTECT IP) Act of 2011 and H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act. I appreciate hearing from you about this issue.

S. 968 was introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy on May 12, 2011. The PROTECT IP Act would allow the Attorney General and property rights holders to take legal action against websites dedicated to copyright infringement and intellectual property theft. It would also allow the Attorney General and intellectual property holders to seek a court order to have websites engaging in piracy shut down.

The PROTECT IP Act would make the Internet more secure by empowering intellectual property rights holders to help identify and eliminate rogue websites that operate maliciously and are dedicated to violating intellectual property rights of innovative and original entities.

S. 968 was voted out of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on May 26, 2011, and has been placed on the Senate calendar. I have become a co-sponsor for this act because I believe in protecting American consumers from counterfeit goods and services as well as copyright infringement. This bill will also help combat the shortage of American jobs; it would cut off international rogue websites that take American jobs as well as harm American consumers.

A similar version of this bill, H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act, was introduced to the House of Representatives by Representative Lamar Smith of Texas on October 26, 2011. It was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, where hearings were held.

Many individuals are concerned about these bills violating their right to freedom of speech; this is not the intent of S. 968 or H.R. 3261. While these bills will give the Attorney General some control, they do not infringe on internet users first amendment rights for freedom of speech. Counterfeiting is illegal, but outside of America the government can do nothing to stop it. This bill will also protect American public safety. Rogue sites often sell counterfeit prescription drugs and cosmetics that harm American citizens who were misled to believe that the goods were reliable. These bills will help reduce the amount of counterfeit and illegal foreign websites that try to sell goods and services to the American public. When this legislation is voted on please be assured that I will have your views in mind.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.

If you have access to the Internet, I encourage you to visit my website, http://casey.senate.gov. I invite you to use this online office as a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office, or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.

Sincerely, Bob Casey United States Senator

After I am done with my last paper of the semester, expect me to respond to this letter in more detail and suggest, respectfully, that the Senator is full of shit when it comes to the effects that this bill could have on the American people. But let me make one point here and now:

This legislation would enable law enforcement to take down the entire tumblr.com domain due to something posted on a single blog. Yes, an entire, largely innocent online community could be punished for the actions of a tiny minority. Slate

So you know what, Senator Casey, you’re assurance that this act would have no impact on first amendment rights is utter bullshit. What’s more, as co-sponsor I am sure you’ve read the entire thing and understand this. You just hope that we don’t because then you and the 1% you work for could pull down Tumblr or Twitter whenever you wanted to do so in order to disrupt, oh I don’t know, maybe the people’s right to free speech and right to peaceful assembly?

Hello? Is There Anyone In Charge Listening to Sense?

LtL — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 21:52:18 +0000

Boggles the mind how our leaders allow reactionary bullshit to take the place of thoughtful planning and tactics. And at the population of the US for allowing our leaders substitute smoke and mirrors (inconveniently situated ones at that) for sane and sensible and useful policy.

“Israelis, unlike Canadians and Americans, don’t take s— from anybody. When the security agency in Israel (the ISA) started to tighten security and we had to wait in line for — not for hours — but 30 or 40 minutes, all hell broke loose here. We said, ‘We’re not going to do this. You’re going to find a way that will take care of security without touching the efficiency of the airport.”
[From The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother - thestar.com]

Via Daring Fireball

Speak Up

LtL — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 03:18:50 +0000

A Tea Party Lesson

LtL — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:48:07 +0000

Of course, I doubt teabaggers will have the patience to read the entire piece, or the comprehension skills to understand it, but for the rest of us, it’s a great history lessson:

Tax History: Four Things You Should Know About the Boston Tea Party by Joseph J. Thorndike

via Capital Gains and Games

An Open Letter to President Obama

LtL — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 16:38:58 +0000

Dear Mr. President,

I regret to say that while I support you in a lot of ways, I will not vote for you in the next election, no matter who the Republican’s run or how bad I think they may be for the country. By sanctioning assassination on Anwar al-Awlaki you have crossed a moral line that I cannot accept and that is fundamentally opposed to the rule of law.

I realize you have an incredibly complex job and that there is no easy answer for most of the situations and problems that we face as a country. However, sanctioning murder is not the answer. Ever.

I understand that you have a personal relationship to Jesus and I have to ask, in what way does ordering the cold-blooded killing of someone who is suspected of crimes square with your faith? How does it square with American rule of law? How does that square with your call for hope and for change?

I wish you the best, but I will never vote for you again.

References:
Salon

NYT

Washington Post

A Note to Those Considering Domestic Terrorism

LtL — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:05:39 +0000

Do you really want to fight? Then let’s fight.

But know this: we won’t come at you with guns and hatred in our eyes. We won’t threaten your children and shrug our shoulders and mutter “collateral damage.” We won’t attempt to bully you and wrap ourselves in the flag while demonstrating that democracy and freedom are mere words to be thrown around and not concepts to respect and embrace. We won’t throw temper tantrums and mock people with Parkinson’s disease or make fun of 11 year old boys whose mother died because of a shitty health care system.

No.

We are going to fight you through the laws of this country. We are going to fight you by organizing and getting angry and organizing more and making sure that we show everybody just how toxic and racist and un-democratic you are. We are going to call you by your rightful names: American Taliban, Terrorists, Criminals. You can believe what you want, you can scream and shout your imbecilic beliefs about birth certificates and death squads, you can fantasize about shooting liberals and taking back the government through force for all I care. Go to it.

But you turn that fantasy into action. You martyr another innocent person in the name of your petty, selfish, black-hearted fear that the world doesn’t revolve around you and only you, and we will fight tooth and nail . . . to make sure that you are given your Miranda rights and a fair trial.

Does that seem weak to you? A pansy way to go? A soft, liberal answer? That’s because you are the weak ones. You are the scared ones. You are the ones that don’t understand just how valuable and important the rule of law is to a free nation. You are the ones who don’t have the strength and the guts to stand up for democracy and America. Instead, you hide in your bunkers and beneath your banners of vitriol and scream over and over again that you are the “Real Americans” that you are the Patriots. You are neither. You are a sad, scared group of people who have all the emotional maturity of a two-year-old. You like to pretend you are tough and macho, but inside you know that you are desperate and afraid. That’s why you need your guns and your hatred, because deep down you know that you’ve already lost, that you are pitiful, and that you are terrified of your own obsolescence.

We’ve already won. And you know it. With one hand tied behind our back with due process, we will still win. Because, as Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice.”

So do you really want to fight? Really? When you can grow the fuck up and take responsibility for your actions and this country and agree that we can always disagree about policy and fiscal choices; about who we tax and how; about issues of governance and the intricacies of government involvement in our lives. Let me state this as clearly as I can: we do not have to agree on anything but the fundamental necessity for a democracy to operate through the rule of law and through the operation of its established political system. You don’t like something, then win the fucking election and change it. But don’t you dare, don’t you dare tread down the path of violence and have the effrontery to be shocked when we call you out for being criminals and terrorists.

So what will it be? Do you want to fight or do you want to get back on board with trying to make our country a strong and secure nation for all of its citizens, as well as being a moral leader for the world?

Go ahead, take some time to cool down, catch your breath, and make a choice. But know this, and know it deep in your heart:

We will fight for this country, for freedom, and for justice.

And we will win.

McCain Introduces Bill To Make Obama More Powerful Than A King

LtL — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:55:14 +0000

S.3081 is obscene. S.3081 is profoundly anti-law. S.3081 allows for indeterminate detention for pretty much anyone the President “considers appropriate.” S.3081 is backed by Republicans who talk a big game when it comes to freedom and liberty and the rule of law, but who, as this bill demonstrates, are really bullies and thugs who have no regard for the Constitution, the rule of law, or basic ethical principles. McCain and Lieberman (and the others who have signed onto this bill) are doing the terrorists work for them by allowing the United States to become a land ruled by fear and imperial dictate rather than a system of justice that presumes innocence until guilt is proven.

Go ahead, someone prove to me why giving the President the power to label someone a “high-value detainee” based on whatever reasons that President decides to make up and then holding that person indefinitely is a good idea for a democracy. I thought the whole fucking point of the United States was that we didn’t live in a dictatorship/monarchy.

And I hope all you fucking teabaggers and libertarians take down the GOP for their desire to concentrate even more power in the hands of the President. But somehow I don’t think you will because you were perfectly happy to give up your rights to Bush and his cronies, and you’re now too busy whining about the fact that liberals want to actually get you better health care.

CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION OF INDIVIDUALS AS HIGH-VALUE DETAINEES- The regulations required by this subsection shall include criteria for designating an individual as a high-value detainee based on the following: (A) The potential threat the individual poses for an attack on civilians or civilian facilities within the United States or upon United States citizens or United States civilian facilities abroad at the time of capture or when coming under the custody or control of the United States. (B) The potential threat the individual poses to United States military personnel or United States military facilities at the time of capture or when coming under the custody or control of the United States. (C) The potential intelligence value of the individual. (D) Membership in al Qaeda or in a terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda. (E) Such other matters as the President considers appropriate. Text of S.3081 as Introduced in Senate: Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010… OpenCongress

via Glenn Greenwald

Food Policies Designed to Make Us Unhealthy

LtL — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:22:46 +0000

This is not rocket science, people:

The government also purchases surplus foods like cheese, milk, pork, and beef for distribution to food assistance programs—including school lunches. The government is not required to purchase nutritious foods. (Link)

If anyone thinks that the Government isn’t already deeply entrenched in what you eat and what foods are available at low costs, they are either deeply misinformed or deliberately blind to the facts. We need smart policies that are designed for a healthy population instead of policies that line the pockets of the few at the expense of the rest of us. The surest way to keep the status quo is to fool people into thinking that diet and nutrition are entirely personal choices and not part of an economic and political system that effects each and every one of us.

Update: Stubborn Mule has an excellent article about the problems inherent with pyramid charts and how they distort numbers.

One Simple Question

LtL — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:40:52 +0000

If you don’t trust the government, how in the world do you trust the corporations who dominate the “free market,” and whose primary purpose is to take your money away from you to do anything for the betterment of you, your family, your community, or your nation?

I ask this in all sincerity because I’d really like someone to provide a well-reasoned argument that, say, Anthem Blue Cross, is more trustworthy and effective at promoting civic well-being than the government.