Bill Gives President Emergency Control of Internet

[Q-BZ]

Jesus Christ, for the second time itsd a fucking joke. Haven't you guys ever heard of Bill Cosby before? He's a comedian. You know what they do? They tell jokes! Laugh a little, Holy shit.

I'd vote for him. I wish he'd run. He has far more credibility and common sense than most of these jokers in D.C. any day of the week.

 

[tubular]

wtffffffff

I thought he was going in the right direction by helping out net neutrality

 

[w1retap]

Deception is a bitch.

 

[dr.stevil]

No, the government is the one that manipulated the prices which CAUSED the energy crises. You screw with capitalism and you screw stuff up. Funny how California learned this the hard way but the federal government somehow thinks they're going to do better...

The California government capped the prices of energy. The costs of production went up. What's that mean? The companies don't have money to maintain existing infrastructure or bring more energy onto the grid (Expansion).
So here you have these companies that cannot charge what the demand is requiring. Yet the wonderful California government forces them to continue buying electricity at UNCAPPED prices. The energy companies are then buying electricity at a higher price than what they can actually sell it for. Now, anyone with half a brain can see that would end up badly.

So Enron capitalized on the situation. Yes, they made it worse, but the government was the source of the problem. Enron simply came along later, sold energy at lower-than-cap pricing, which since the energy companies had a cap on their energy, they sold to out-of-state sources since they could make more money. It was simply an after effect of the government's screwup.

The entire lesson was not to screw with supply and demand of capitalism.


Let's see... They were contractually and legally allowed to receive their bonuses. So the House passed a bill with a 90% tax. Makes sense.
Or kindof like how the Attorney General threatened to reveal the names of those who received their legal bonuses if they took them. Make sense.
Or how the CEO of GM was required to be fired before receiving any government support, even though he didn't engage in any criminal activity. Makes sense.
Or how the banks around the country were threatened with increased audits if they didn't receive bailout funds. Makes sense.


Now, I'm not defending AIG or GM whatsoever. They still failed as businesses and should have been held accountable. But the government is vastly overstepping their bounds.


All this is: the government wanting more power. It's amazing how the "big government" folks don't see what's happening here. You think by giving the government MORE power it'll solve issues?

Our Founding Fathers saw the constitution as something to put restraints on the government with.
"Big government", or "Progressive" folks are turning the constitution into something the government restrains citizens with.





You do? Sorry, but not even our congressmen read the legislation they pass. I'm trying to remember the times, but the congress session ended at 11PM after working on the bailout bill. The peeons then typed the bill up overnight. 7AM the next morning congress was back in session to VOTE on that bill. It was a 10,000 page bill.

You're going to sit there and criticize ME for not reading a bill? How on earth could you read 10,000 pages in 8 hours, putting aside the fact that the congressmen slept that night?

spot on post

 

[gdonovan]

Deception is a bitch.

Nothing good that I can recall has every come out of Chicago politics.

I'd be vastly amused if it was not so tragic for our nation.

People have almost endless possibilties in research via the internet and would rather trust the smooth packaging of a political machine.

The same folks will be stunned I'm sure when they lose their jobs and face massive tax hikes.

"But he said that would never happen"

Google "Argentina 2001 crisis" after having a few stiff drinks, it is coming here fools unless something is done ASAP..

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it!

 

[nilepez]

EasyAce = astroturfing troll with fresh account

You clearly did not live through the Carter years as a teen or an adult.

Everyone here is about to get a taste, but Zero is more than Jimmy Carter II.

Tighten your belts, its going to be years before this is all sorted out if ever.

I lived through it. It sucked, but to blame it all on Carter shows a distinct lack of context.
Inflation was an issue prior to carter.

To be clear, if you could buy a car in 1973 for $1.00, then it would have cost you $1.10 to buy it in 1974.

In 1974, your had to make 11% more than 73 to break even.
In 1975, you need another 9% raise to break even
In '76 it was 6%
'77 it was again 6%
'78 it was 8%
'79 it was 11%
'80 it was 14%
'81 it was 10%
'82 it was 6%
'83 it was 3%

So what do 1974 and 1975 have in common with 79-80? Hmm...let's look at oil prices, shall we?
Inflation Adjusted Percent
Year Price Price Change (without inflation)
1973 $4.75 $22.89
1974 $9.35 $40.84 97%
1975 $12.21 $48.91 31%
1976 $13.10 $49.66 7.3%
1977 $14.40 $51.22 9.9%
1978 $14.95 $49.47 3.8%
1979 $25.10 $73.89 68%
1980 $37.42 $98.07 49%
1981 $35.75 $84.93 -4.5%
1982 $31.83 $71.20 -11%
1983 $29.08 $63.00 -8.6%

Oil was clearly a huge factor in lowering the buying power of a dollar.

When carter nominated Paul Volker as fed Chairman, Volker vowed to strangle inflation. And he did, but it took raising interest rates to north of 20% to do that.

THAT is what caused stagflation. Skyrocketing oil prices lowered the buying power of a dollar, while high interest rates made it hard to borrow money and sent the economy in to a recession. That is why we had stagflation.

It's worth noting, however, that the recession was over before Reagan took office and interest rates peaked before the 1980 election. We probably didn't think it was over, but then again, most of us thought we were in a recession when Clinton won the 1992 election, and history shows it was already over.

Again, Carter wasn't a great president, but inflation had been at 6% or more for almost a decade and hyper-inflation was largely a by product of OPEC. Volker came in to end inflation (not just hyper-inflation) but it sent us into a recession.

Some things are beyond the control of the president and clearly a 500% increase in oil prices from 1973 - 1980 (north of 400%, if you adjust for inflation), is one of them.

 

[nilepez]

No, the government is the one that manipulated the prices which CAUSED the energy crises. You screw with capitalism and you screw stuff up. Funny how California learned this the hard way but the federal government somehow thinks they're going to do better...

Give me a fucking break. Enron broke the law. Your argument is, apparently, that the best way to prevent corruption is to not regulate businesses.....which a quick look at our history prior to Sherman Antitrust shows that's not the case.

I can't believe anyone would defend the practices of Enron. They broke the law. If they don't break the law, the problems in CA wouldn't have happened. They broke the law. There is no defense for what they did, regardless of whether the CA law was a good one or not.

 

[Dantrax]

It's fun to watch guys say that the government "trying to shut down the internet is bullshit". All while saying that "the government's only reason to shutdown the internet would be to protect the electric grid from terrorists" isn't. It still all comes down to their control of the information you receive. They want you to remain sitting on your couch after dinner with a brew in your hand, thinking I've got mine & life is wonderful, while listening to their news media tell you what to think. All while they pick your back pocket to buy votes with your $ because we have to be fair to everyone. Wake the F-bomb UP people. It's people protesting their status-quo, that's got them to propose shutting down the opposition. Vote them out.

 

[beowulf7]

Wow, this thread really blew up. When I responded yesterday, it was 3 pages long. Now it's 13. Good thing the bill hasn't passed yet, otherwise Obama would probably force this thread to be locked or even deleted in the name of the gov.'t knows what's best for us.

 

[w1retap]

Wow, this thread really blew up. When I responded yesterday, it was 3 pages long. Now it's 13. Good thing the bill hasn't passed yet, otherwise Obama would probably force this thread to be locked or even deleted in the name of the gov.'t knows what's best for us.

He'll send out the anti-smear laywers/agents to come get you, then he'll put out some propaganda to set the record straight so that will be the end of that. Then he'll shut down the site for a cybersecurity emergency and quarantine you and give you a few forced immunizations for good measure. Then the census and voter redistricting begins to ensure victory for next round so part two can begin even though we're only 1/4 of the way through part one. Free speech will continue to be denied, the money crisis will deepen, weapons bans will broaden so we cannot defend ourselves, and the internment camps will await you. Welcome to the new Amerika.

Ridiculous and almost laughable? Sure. Too bad it's happening.

 

[beowulf7]

He'll send out the anti-smear laywers/agents to come get you, then he'll put out some propaganda to set the record straight so that will be the end of that. Then he'll shut down the site for a cybersecurity emergency and quarantine you and give you a few forced immunizations for good measure. Then the census and voter redistricting begins to ensure victory for next round so part two can begin even though we're only 1/4 of the way through part one. Free speech will continue to be denied, the money crisis will deepen, weapons bans will broaden so we cannot defend ourselves, and the internment camps will await you. Welcome to the new Amerika.

Ridiculous and almost laughable? Sure. Too bad it's happening.

Wow, that's an incredible post. I assume you got that from elsewhere, otherwise, kudos to you on all that link research.

I hope voters wake up and send a message to Washington in the mid-term elections next year, just like they did back in 1994 when Clinton was showing his liberal side.

 

[TechieSooner]

Give me a fucking break. Enron broke the law. Your argument is, apparently, that the best way to prevent corruption is to not regulate businesses.....which a quick look at our history prior to Sherman Antitrust shows that's not the case.

I can't believe anyone would defend the practices of Enron. They broke the law. If they don't break the law, the problems in CA wouldn't have happened. They broke the law. There is no defense for what they did, regardless of whether the CA law was a good one or not.

Way to take the context of my entire point out of the picture. I originally used this as an example that Government control is NOT the answer. They screwed the pooch on the California deal big time.

You also must've missed the part where I said Enron made it worse. I am not defending them at all, Mr. Troll. What they did was wrong and I won't argue with it. My point was that the GOVERNMENT OF CALIFONIA caused their own energy crisis. Period. But somehow since the FEDERAL government is involved, they think THEIR variations will work better. I think not.

 

[gwarren007]

Man i hope this doesn't mean I'll have to watch the SOTUA on the Internet as well as all of the news channels.

 

[Retronym]

God i can't wait until 2010.

 

[Tokamak]

Wow, I'm surprised this thread hasn't gotten locked yet. I wonder why that is?

 

[Retronym]

Wow, I'm surprised this thread hasn't gotten locked yet. I wonder why that is?

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

I think this bill makes a lot of sense. And I work in network security.

Let me give you a brief and very real example of a problem we face today. And will face in larger scale in the future.

Botnets.. zombie computers call them whatever you want. As the price of computers moves down and more and more (internet) uneducated people make the leap into computers we will have a sliding scale of more systems taken over without the users knowledge. If they think they have a problem they take there computer to the local electro shack (best buy.. computer store down the street. Whatever) And they ask how much to get there computer working like how they bought it. Most of these places are going to start the pricing at around 50 bucks. Couple this with harder economic times and these people will call someone who they think knows better to get a good action to take.

So they stay infected. Couple this with the exposure of giving broadband access to cover in excess of 90% of US households and you have an issue that will only grow more pervasive.

If your Comcast, or Verizon Fios (less likely) or beam wireless provider is providing always on internet access with no protections for the end user (because that would be the machine/man and just wrong.) And they start attacking public sites.. be they private companies or government/religious organizations. Do you think in order to get the issue under control we shouldn't be able to shut down Comcasts pipes carrying this traffic?

I think we should. Because this will educate the users of these services and get there networks more secure to help prevent this in the future.

Maybe even require IDS protection by broadband providers. Then they can proactively nip this kind of crap in the bud.

That's just my opinion on it though. I could be wrong.

since you work in securit you OBVIOUSLY know that you do not put valued assets on a public domain.........and no one can proactively do shit, as there is always someone with more skill waiting out there to get into a so called secure system.

 

[Methadras]

Sounds like you and your neighbors need to vote better

We did, but the douche bags in L.A. and San Fransisco put these two fails into office since they have the largest density population centers in the state. San Diego, where I live is still, by the numbers a conservative enclave, but you can see the demographic change as the urbanites are slowly taking over. Besides, California is a traditionally blue state, but hopefully, someday people will wake the fuck up and change that.

 

[T00L]

I am seriously trying to imagine one single possible event that would call for the 'internet to be shut down' other than for political gain.

 

[Monkey34]

I am seriously trying to imagine one single possible event that would call for the 'internet to be shut down' other than for political gain.

Information control. Look at Iran's recent elections. The only reason we were hearing about the situation was because Iranian citizens turned to the internet to broadcast information about the protests.

 

[Monkey34]

You can search it, but here's one link on the media blackout.
http://www.digitalnewsreport.com/2009/06/iran-media-blackout-youtube-twitter-facebook/1416

 

[TechieSooner]

Information control. Look at Iran's recent elections. The only reason we were hearing about the situation was because Iranian citizens turned to the internet to broadcast information about the protests.

IE, political gain.

Iran was trying to stop honest truth from getting out about their fraud election. That's not a "legitimate" use of shutting it down.

 

[xX_Jack_Carver_Xx]

Rahter than argue with a number of dining room tables, Ill just make a prediction:

Democrats will win 6 more Senate seats and 25 House seats in the 2010 election.

So if you are shitting your pants now over how terrible this is, then you better go by a

BIG BOX OF DIAPERS

...cause its gonna be alot worse for you down the road.

 

[Xaero_toast]

Rahter than argue with a number of dining room tables, Ill just make a prediction:
Democrats will win 6 more Senate seats and 25 House seats in the 2010 election.
So if you are shitting your pants now over how terrible this is, then you better go by a
BIG BOX OF DIAPERS
...cause its gonna be alot worse for you down the road.

pantsshitting will be socialized by then. the government is going to buy my diapers for me, with a loan from china

 

[Master Blaster]

the "internet" isn't the only part of networks...anyone up for the digital underground railroad?

 

[Monkey34]

Iran was trying to stop honest truth from getting out about their fraud election. That's not a "legitimate" use of shutting it down.

OBVIOUSLY.
You think the real reason they would shut it down would be legitimate? Wake up.

 

[TechieSooner]

OBVIOUSLY.
You think the real reason they would shut it down would be legitimate? Wake up.

Well look at the freaking context you responded in and see if my response wasn't warranted:

I am seriously trying to imagine one single possible event that would call for the 'internet to be shut down' other than for political gain.

Information control. Look at Iran's recent elections. The only reason we were hearing about the situation was because Iranian citizens turned to the internet to broadcast information about the protests.

 

[The-UselessNoob]

I understand ... I do see the same thing happening here, in terms of blindly supporting a party. Perhaps it is not as bad because we are not limited to two political parties. (however there are only two competitive parties currently, the NDP and Green are epic fail)

I think you are perhaps forgetting about the bloc?
pour le quebecois!

 

[Shlomo]

hello... *taps mic*... is this thing on.

At what point during the last election did people not put DEMOCRAT and SOCIALIST together? Part of me is actually laughing as I watch more and more people realize that voting for Democrats was one of the worst political moves ever made in the history of the US. The other part of me wonders if enough of the people who realize they screwed up... are going to remember that in the upcoming congressional elections, and kick enough of the Democrats out to have a 2/3+ majority to over-ride and repeal the legislation passed by the Democrats.

You have no clue what socialism is...

 

[w1retap]

It's actually pretty clear what's going on.

- Marxist principled legislation on the congressional side (massive redistribution of wealth initiatives, government take-over of the private sector, etc,)

- Tyrannical power grabbing on the executive side (report-to-president-only 'czars', propaganda war, lawyers/teams to bring down opposing points of view, expansion of powers into new sectors, etc)

- Legislate from the bench on the judicial side (re-defining the Constitution, throwing up people for the bench who believe race is a deciding factor, viewing the Constitution as a roadblock toward social justice, etc.)

 

[Emission]

Unfortunately for you the ones that want less government are outnumbered by the ones that want more. If that wasn't true you'd have Ron Paul in there right now who ran on a platform of downsizing the government as much as possible. (and in return people called him crazy for wanting to do so)

God damn isn't that unfortunate. I actually pray that they drop this guy and get Ron Paul in there, ASAP.

 

[Emission]

And if that or something similar doesn't happen, well, looks like it's time to pack up and leave the country.

 

[Dethred]

Yes, it has begun! Democracy is now dead since a black man is doing things similar to the Bush administration. Such a bill is abhorrent, yet the reaction is hugely ironic after 8 years of Bush.

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

soon people are going to be so restricted that they will be forced into correcting the problems and it is going to cost a lot of blood to get this mess sorted out.

 

[gdonovan]

Yes, it has begun! Democracy is now dead since a black man is doing things similar to the Bush administration. Such a bill is abhorrent, yet the reaction is hugely ironic after 8 years of Bush.

Ohhh the RACE CARD.

President Zero has spent more money than every president COMBINED since the founding of this nation!

Get back under your rock troll.

 

[Draax]

I think you are perhaps forgetting about the bloc?
pour le quebecois!

I don't consider a group which only appeals to a few people in one province, and who want to separate from Canada a valid political party.

 

[Kazzanova]

Patriot Act.. which made half of this stuff even remotely possible. signed by Bush

9/11, signed by Clinton

Patriot Act - beginning of the slope.

Began in the early 1800s imo... Second bank ftl.

Patriot Act, FISA violations, signing statements, ignoring habeas corpus . . .

Some people are only concerned with Constitutionality when it's not their party in question.

+1

You're off by a few years. It started October 26, 2001, courtesy of President Bush and our Republican Congress.

again, see 9/11

You are off by more than that by a few decades. Stop playing gotcha one-upsmanship politics with things you don't understand.

+1, but I say a century or two.

It is what it is.

Do you think McCain was the best the Republican party had to offer? Hell no!

The GOP needs to have closed primarys JUST LIKE THE DEMOCRATS DO.

Ron Paul had his hat in... As did many others, but I voted RP.

 

[Xaero_toast]

Originally Posted by demingo View Post
Patriot Act.. which made half of this stuff even remotely possible. signed by Bush

9/11, signed by Clinton

You are joking, right? If that's not a joke, do explain.

 

[gdonovan]

You are joking, right? If that's not a joke, do explain.

Started when Clinton treated the first World Trade Center bombing and the Cole bomb as.... wait for it....

A police matter.

The SOB's blew up one of our warships and Clinton sent in the d*mn FBI.

Should have sent in B-52's

 

[Retronym]

Yes, it has begun! Democracy is now dead since a black man is doing things similar to the Bush administration. Such a bill is abhorrent, yet the reaction is hugely ironic after 8 years of Bush.

It was bad under Bush and it is bad now. As much as it just kills you, the skin color of whoever currently happens to reside in the oval office has jack shit to do with their actions.