Feeling a bit under the weather yesterday – presumably my body’s reaction to the fact that San Francisco has suddenly become sunny – I decided to take a jaunt around the Internet for column ideas. My deadline was a whole 24 hours away, but it doesn’t hurt to be prepared, right?
My first find was this story about a bear who had got trapped in a Colorado skate park, presumably after breaking in to practice his Ollies, or whatever it is bears do on skateboards. The bear was finally rescued when townsfolk dropped a ladder into the park, allowing him to climb to freedom.
To any normal person, a bear trapped in a skate park would be little more than a heartwarming newsbite; a quirky story to distract from another week of war and terrorism and kidnapped children living in back yards in Antioch. But not for the lazy tech columnist looking for inspiration.
For the lazy tech columnist looking for inspiration, a bear trapped in a skate park easily becomes a metaphor for the attitudes of certain Silicon Valley types who are trapped in their little Northern California bubble and don’t realise – or care – that there’s a world outside. And the ladder, I suppose, represents the columnist whose job it is to provide escape from the ignorance. Perfect. Another Saturday box ticked. Move on, nothing to see here.
But just as I was about to shut down Firefox and start scribbling skateboard jokes in my special columnist’s notepad, another headline caught my eye, this time from CNET. It read: ‘Bill would give president emergency control of Internet‘. Wow, I thought, this Bill guy sounds like a dick.
But no, as it turned out, the Bill in question is the Rockefeller-Snowe bill (S.773), notable both for being the first piece of US legislation to be named after a Fatboy Slim track and for the fact that it gives the President the power to shut down the Internet whenever he feels like it. Unsurprisingly, the 1000+ comments on the article are somewhat hostile, helped by a link from Matt Drudge who thoughtfully added his own scare quotes around the word ‘emergency’.
‘This has nothing to do with “prorecting” [sic] the internet,’ wrote one commenter, ‘and everything to do with the power drunk, dicatorial [sic] Obama engaging in an unprecedendted [sic], unconstitutional power grab, orchestrated by his psychotic lunatic fringe “czars”.’
A bold statement, from that rare person who can spell ‘psychotic’ and ‘czars’ only to stumble over ‘protecting’.
‘Can you say, “Caesar Chavez?”‘, asked another, presumably rhetorically – while a third managed to wrangle two talking points into one meaningless one with: ‘Of course this goes along with the Obamacare nonsense that the government will have direct access to your bank accounts if this Obamacare BS becomes law. Hitler all over again’.
Well said, Sir. It’s a scandal that Adolf Hitler’s cybersecurity bill and healthcare proposals don’t get the criticism they deserve. But behind the megaditto rhetoric, some of the commenters do actually have a point. Unlike the previous administration’s PATRIOT act, which promoted freedom of information by wiretapping every man, woman and child in America, the Democrats’ Rockefeller-Snowe bill does sound pretty creepy and invasive.
All the President needs to do is declare a state of emergency and he’ll have the right to disconnect US citizens from the web, access their computers and even hack into the servers of private companies. That’s a horrendous power-grab for use in an unspecified emergency.
Or at least it would be. If that’s what the bill actually proposed.
In fact, in its current form, the worst the bill does is to clarify the President’s existing power to take limited control of communications networks in the case of national emergency or war. Like President Bush was able to order all planes to be grounded on September 11th, the bill would allow President Obama to ground parts of the Internet in similar circumstances.
But at this stage even those powers aren’t set in stone – the bill is still in draft form, having already been redrafted after early objections that the wording was too vague. And it’s still too vague, to the point where Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, says: “we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill.”
Indeed. What we really have here is a classic situation of an ambiguously-drafted bill, not even close to passing but which has the capacity to generate some pretty scary headlines. Last week it was death panels, this week it’s Obama stealing our Internets. Like a bear trapped in a skate park, critics – mainly of the President rather than the bill – are running round and round, without any kind of information ladder to help them out of their pit of paranoia.
And so, as ever, it falls to me to provide that missing ladder. Don’t ask me how (*cough* French hacker *cough*), but I’ve managed to get hold of a copy of a secret memo sent to Senators Rockefeller and Snowe by the Whitehouse, outlining exactly what powers Obama wants over the Internet, and why.
I think you’ll agree, it makes pretty interesting reading…
Hey Senators,
Please find below President Obama’s wishlist for taking control of the Internet. As promised, these powers will only be used in the event of a national ‘emergency’
….
1) In the event of an ‘emergency’ drop in poll numbers, the President needs to ensure that copies of Bill O’Reilly’s ‘Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity’ and Rush Limbaugh’s ‘The Way Things Ought To Be’ are automatically deleted from the nation’s Kindles and replaced with ‘The Audacity of Hope’. (Note: contrary to previous draft, there is now no need to extend this to Ann Coulter’s ‘Treason’ as it is already basically unreadable)
2) Should the US deficit pass 20 trillion, the President will need to take over private email servers to send an ‘emergency’ 419 scam message to every American citizen. In these emails, the President will invite Americans to send him their bank account information, so that he might use it to process the fortune of his late uncle. Obviously, he will request their confidential co-operation in this matter, in exchange for a share of the proceeds.
3) Following the recent successful trial in France, the President requires the ability to turn the iPhones of any of America’s enemies into improvised exploding devices. Or ‘Freedom Phones’.
4) Should US unemployment levels continue to rise, the President needs the ability to order the shut down of World of Warcraft, forcing millions of Americans to go out and get fucking jobs.
5) In case of ‘emergency’ bad press over a badly-drafted cybersecurity bill, the President will require unfettered access to Drudge Report servers to delete all ’scare quotes’. This would prevent Drudge from using the headline ‘Bill would give president “emergency” control of Internet’ to suggest that Obama might just decide to nuke the entire web because he’s having a bad day.
6) If the bad press ‘emergency’ continues, Obama will need to shore up support by ordering that the hashtag ‘#Ilovethepresident’ be appended to all tweets. In response to specific threats, he may also request that trending topics be replaced with a new, approved list including: #everythingisfine, #nothingtoseehere, #lookoverthere, #areyoukiddingme and #theotherguywasfarworse
Ok, that’s all for now! Let’s pass this thing, comrades!
Liebe Grüße,
Caesar Chavez
Policy Director, The White House
So there you have it. The bear of ignorance, rescued by the ladder of facts. My work here is done: let the mature, informed debate begin.
Another great article. Unfortunately, the masses don’t care what the bill actually says, and they will continue to bitch about something they’re all too lazy to research, and form an intelligent opinion over.
It sounds like you’ve really put your finger on the pulse of “the masses.”
Stupid, bitchy, lazy masses. Bad, bad masses.
And you’re in good company, with none other than J.J. Rousseau. “A people cannot bear to see its evils touched, even if only to be eradicated; it is like a stupid, pusillanimous invalid who trembles at the sight of a physician.”
Thank goodness we have smart, beneficent people like you and J.J. to tell the masses (aka haters) what to do.
Dear Paul,
the moment I saw the headline of your article I was very interested in what you would write as there are many mainstream sources telling as “the truth”. As a general rule of thumb “don’t believe anything that has the word ‘truth’ in it’s headline” I was wary of your article but being posted in somewhat independent blog I also haven’t given up the hope for actually objective and well reasoned article. Unfortunately this hope faded just a few lines after your elaborate analogy featuring bears trapped in parks or whatever.
You start your ‘argument’ by ad hominem aimed at a simple misspelling in a comment marginalizing commenting folk in advance. I would think that if you would do that to your readers they wouldn’t be very pleased about it, would they? Are you implying that every person here making a misspelling is somehow mentally challenged? No? So why even mention it? But that was only first sign that put me on guard to potentially expect a propaganda hit piece.
But it gets much worse as then you proceed to argue that it is a good thing that president would have power over parts of privately owned networks connected to the Internet saying that it’s it’s the same thing Bush was able to do after 9/11 with planes. You obviously believe that it was a good thing that president was able to do that, but is it?
Do you believe that the way to deal with ‘emergencies’ is to give some entities dictatorial power? Obviously you do. Do you know how that type of system and ideology is called? Yeah, right … it’s fascism. This is not to insult you or anything, maybe you do not realize it but what you’re advocating here is historically by scholars called fascism and policies you advocate are fascist. That’s an objective fact.
Now that we established that the mindset shining trough from between the lines of this article is fascist we can analyze what else is in your bag of tricks.
You then transform into an apologist for the bill in question saying that it grants president only “limited” power over private networks. How much is limited? 1% of the Internet? 20%? 99%? How is it “limited”? This “ambiguity” you speak of can make a difference between reasonable bill and total dictatorial takeover and you shrug it off like it was a non-issue implying that those who are concerned about it are being silly. Really? The fact that a bill can be drafted in such a vague terms as to give president dictatorial powers all over the Internet and private sector is scary enough but the implications are even scarier. Do you think people drafting the bill are stupid morons? Is it an accident that it’s drafted in such a way, do those people drafting it just not realize what the language used means? Or could there be an intent and they’re probing how much they can get away with?
The Internet threat is almost nonexistent, there is no justification to even introduce such a bill and what you’re essentially saying is “go back to sleep America, everything is taken care of, nothing to see here, move along”. If there wouldn’t be such an opposition the bill could easily pass with such a vague language and if people would listen to your “advice” nobody would even notice until it’s too late and those powers would be used. Just as with Patriot Act, people are just now realizing it’s more and more used to suppress dissent than to fight “terrorists”.
People need to realize that every government given the opportunity will eventually transform into fascism. Unless people are ACTIVELY involved just as those who oppose this dictatorial bill. Nobody is going to do it for you, YOU have to make the research and YOU have to be ACTIVE. And to suggest that opposition is somehow silly and you should ignore it is not only stupid but extremely dangerous, anti-democratic and opens the doors to fascism.
So dear author, please stop advocating dictators arguing that they’ll be “good dictators”. Dictatorship is never good, no matter the excuse and this bill is no exception. People should fight it with all their power and repeal it completely. Those who are active in this field are heroes not wackos as you try to paint them.
Dear Carr,
You are !#@$ing funny. LOLz
But you missed the point. This bill is being created to justify future regulation and taxing of the internet.
I was thinken the same. Thanks!!! for putting it so good.
You know what, I’m just about getting over my slight infatuation with this Obama guy. From whatever I’ve been reading, he’s not the messiah you (and everyone else) wanted. He’s just another power obsessed, ultra intelligent-thus-ultra-arrogant dumbass who will drag the world into a deeper shit hole than that Bush guy did.
From what I know, he hasn’t taken the time to actually reverse several Bush laws that infringed on your privacy. Neither has he made good on his promise of ending all bloody wars (Iraq/Afghanistan – what’s the difference? You’re getting your ass kicked anyway)?
Taken for a ride, can I say?
Sometimes things are best viewed sitting outside of the box.
You nailed it on the head Puranjay.
Good article and thanks for putting it on my radar.
Anyone looking for a “messiah” from their government is going to have a problem or at least be very disappointed. When (if) there’s an actual bill to be read if it starts out “in order to protect the people” we’ll know we’re all in trouble!
Uh what? This article is demonstrating that the bill is not a power-grab like everyone is saying it is. And what evidence do you have that Obama is power obsessed? I mean I’m no Obamaniac and I disagree with a number of things he has done, but that doesn’t mean he is worse than Bush, and it doesn’t mean he is power hungry, at all.
Speaking about privacy. WHO CARES? I have nothing to hide. Do you? My privacy has not been infringed upon. I don’t care if you track my purchases, I don’t care if you know where I browse, I don’t care because none of what I am doing is all that bad. A little bit may be illegal (some pot now and then), but the amount of manpower needed to track down every minor infringement would be ridiculous and they know it.
You talk as if you expected Obama to walk in and stick to all his election promises (there isn’t a single person in existence who can get elected AND follow up on all the promises that got them elected) and reverse all that Bush did. That is a fantasy world, not one with the kind of government we have (incredibly inefficient, impossible to do anything without it getting diluted, and little of the power rests with the President).
Honestly you come across as an ignorant ass with a post like that. Try to have a little perspective.
-1
-10
Do you realize how idoitic you sound when you say “I’m not doing anything wrong so I don’t mind being spied upon”?
Think it through man, think it through.
Read this: http://www.wire.../chemistry.html
This is an example of a company doing nothing wrong, completely out in the open. Yet… the owner’s house got swarmed by BATF agents. The owner even worked for the government’s Los Alamos Lab for his entire life. Someone behind a desk somewhere saw he was selling aluminum powder (which you can buy on Ebay) and decided that was a just reason to swarm his home and seize records.
My point bringing up the article is: all it takes is someone in a federal power position to misinterpret something (like United Nuclear selling aluminum powder, or someone saying “Gah, I wish I could blow up that blasted house that’s blocking my view!” in jest on a blog post or chat window) until BATF agents show up outside a window.
I’m not conservative by any means, but… People are imperfect. People run the government. We don’t need to give imperfect people an all-seeing view into everyone’s lives. It’d likely do more danger than good.
For that reason, I and others should mind being spied upon…
(my two cents)
“there isn’t a single person in existence who can get elected AND follow up on all the promises that got them elected”
In my opinion that means that not a single person in existence deserves to be president.
As Douglas Adams wrote, “Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”
Or, perhaps we ought to just elect folks who aren’t slaves to donors or specific block of voters. Would you even allow any elected officials to watch your dog overnight? Water your plants? Babysit? Our selection process sucks, as do the options we’re ultimately given to choose from. Is Obama-McCain really much of a choice? Bush-Gore? That’s like saying; do you want the stinking rotten bag of crap, or this used colostomy bag? Well, that one sure LOOKS better so I chose…
You would make an excellent subject in a totalitarian regime. You are the DREAM voter for most politicians…”I don’t care. Whatever you want is fine.”
All they need to do to track you down as a pot user is get the ip address and time connected to your post, do a 5 second ip trace to find out what locality you’re in.
Then they make a 3 minute phone call to the DEA in your area. The DEA makes a 20 minute phone call to your internet provider and asks them for the information of the user that had your ip at the time you made the post. The provider doesn’t have to give them your information without a warrant, but they can. You accepted a legal disclaimer that waives all liability for release of information to law enforcement agencies when you signed up with the provider.
The research takes about a day. Then the DEA drives out to your place to look for easily seen evidence of marijuana on your property. If they find it, they arrest you. If not, and they want to spend the effort, they go get a warrant based on your comment here on the blog, and they go in and search your home.
They find your pot, you’re arrested, and if you can’t post bail soon enough, your in jail for at least the evening. Within a two days of posting. And your whole life is a mess.
And you spurn your own right to privacy. What a fool.
That is pretty rediculous. You can smoke a dooby with the cops in california. Yup, we are just that cool
-1,200,000,000,000 (size of national debt… and climbing)
And I Quote:
Speaking about privacy. WHO CARES? I have nothing to hide. Do you? My privacy has not been infringed upon. I don’t care if you track my purchases, I don’t care if you know where I browse, I don’t care because none of what I am doing is all that bad. A little bit may be illegal (some pot now and then), but the amount of manpower needed to track down every minor infringement would be ridiculous and they know it.
Basically by your own admission, you do have something to hide. A little bit illegal is somehow going to be ok if the government is spying on you?
Really….
An ultra-intelligent dumb ass? Really? Either he’s stupid or malicious. Pick one, but please don’t resort to oxymoron.
OK, I’ll pick malicious.
Technically an oxymoron… but actually in really life when it comes to human beings, it is very true. Many a smart person with intentions of goodness and peace have only helped to create destruction.
In other words, yes, you can most certainly be too smart for yourself.
Its not black or white, its lots of shades of gray. In fact that is the problem right now in the USA; why do I HAVE to be on either the Dems side or the Republicans? THEY BOTH SUCK.
Vote them all out
Pay attention dude. Preparing to put a bow on Iraq and leave. Afghanistan will take longer…but will be done eventually. Get info somewhere besides HuffPo
Well, at least we are not shitting in holes, wiping our asses with hands and living in Filth. This whole America thing is going pretty well.
And did you read the bill and form an intelligent opinion, or just assume the author was right?
Might want to re-adjust your sweat pants Hombre. Your boner is showing.
This Bill sucks ass.
Stop trying to take away my freedoms you greedy sons of !@#$%^.
The covetous, power hungry ass wipes in congress are passing this bill as a step toward justifying new taxes and regulations.
Do you hear me, you idiots? This isn’t about Obama taking control of “Al Gore’s internets.” It is about creating an excuse to make more legislation taxing and regulating the internet.
Meta-Columns with a point and passion. Nice work, Mr. Carr.
I used to play World of Warcraft at work. We’re not all unemployed.
Why is this column marked “WITN” when it’s clearly safe for work?
Comment of the week.
CILYIMBF?
NTBUSWAB, this is getting weird.
WTF? O_o
Clearly.
Not only is it safe for work, but it clearly IS NEWS. WTF!
Great article. The attack against the commenters had me spitting up the milk that i was not drinking.
Your pieces don’t seem to fit in with the rest of techcrunch, but i look forward to them. not complainin…
Nice post.
I can’t think of any situation that could excuse messing with access to internet in any way.
At first, i wouldn’t think so either… but, then again, we never thought we would need to shut down all air traffic nationwide either.
I can assume it would be needed to either isolate access from specific countries or within the united states in the case of a major attack on our infrastructure.
Considering we’re moving toward a “smart grid” electrical system, something like this would be needed. A terrorist DOS attack could shut down half the country, if not more in a matter of minutes.
So, while I don’t believe in limiting access to the internet, I can see a national security concern and a need for it. We’re in a different world.
Actually, we DID think we might have to shut down all air traffic some day. It’s part of an FAA contingency plan that has been in existence for many years. We just hoped we would never have to actually use it.
Ooh can we please have the “smart grid” oh please oh please oh please?!?!?! Nothing gives me a boner more than someone deciding I am using too much electricity. Thanks Al Gore! Maybe I can come bask in the lights of your giant mansion some night when my electric has been “eased back to balance load”. You people will accept ANYTHING. Move to Cuba already. You’ve been brainwashed by leftist teachers who make you feel guilty for living at all.
Say that hgackers are breaking into tons of banks and crashing the economy, destroying everyone’s credit ratings and digging up 4chan memes. I can see needing to take down the internet to stop the damage from something like that. As of now, there would be little way to stop it.
Not sure it would be worth the potential downfalls of such a bill, but you asked for an example.
Shutting down the internet would crash the economy anyway. Everything major uses the internet to function.
The shutdown of the flight systems took a day. I can’t see any benefit for shutting down the internet for a day. A week, maybe.
Sure, we stop people from hurting our system by completely destroying it.
Smart idea.
Nice Shakespeare reference. Should we call you Antigonus?
“…a metaphor for the attitudes of certain Silicon Valley types who are trapped in their little Northern California bubble and don’t realise – or care – that there’s a world outside.”
Hey, Paul! You started sounding as a grown-up sometimes. It turns out that you are not hopelessly sick after all. I take most part of my personal attacks on you back. I need to apologize too then. I’m sorry, man. You were pretending to be such an idiot but it turns out you are not.
If the bill is just clarifying existing powers, what purpose does it serve?
I remember when you were funny and wrote about things you had experience with. Those were good times.
Good point. There is most likely a “catch” in there somewhere. Otherwise, why do it at all?
Yeah, the Gammas and Deltas* who make up the “GOP base” are depressingly easy to distract and sway by pushing simple suggestions of projection at them.
Their elected leaders are criminals bent on draining the treasury and burning the Constitution? Nope, never happening, and you hate America if you say so.
And then the next Democrat who comes in to clean up the mess, he’s Stalin and Hitler and (I assume they mean HUGO Chavez, which is silly, anyway) combined.
It’s an old and boring song that only appeals to the higher-functioning retarded end of the American brain pool.
–
*”I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.” -JSM
sorry dude, but i have to say that your profile pic is totally a d**khead LOL
On the other side, Joe, YOUR profile is very conservative. hehe.
Republican idiot.
I see you’re a fan of that highly skilled, articulate social scientist and philosopher Jeanine Garafolo. What’s your philosophy? Ah yes, now I remember…puff, puff, give…correct?
People are just looking for any reason to hate the president. They’re just mad they lost control.
Evidently you haven’t read parts of Cap and Trade (that wasn’t written by Congress but by Apollo), listen to the President tell us how high our energy costs are going to be, or Health Care bill telling us if one thing changes on our Health Care we like we are obligated (or ordered) to take National Health Care. 70% of Canadians have to have private health care because their national h c won’t cover things like heart attacks.
First, good article. I’ll pay attention to this bill when it is rewritten and is possibly coming up for a vote.
Diane , I am sorry but you have absolutely no clue how the Canadian healthcare system works. Canadians are 100% covered for things like heart attacks or any other emergency procedure. They are seen immediately for things of this magnitude without having to worry about the bill.
Canadians aren’t even allowed to purchase private insurance. Please don’t spread you misinformation.
Actually, yes, Canadians are allowed to purchase private insurance. Their Medicare system ensures you’re covered for the basics, but just like with our Medicare system, you can buy supplemental private insurance to cover more. It’s simply that their Medicare covers everybody, instead of just seniors. That’s pretty much it.
Yes, we are “allowed” to purchase additional health care (that would cover all those things the government wouldn’t cover because they are elective — boob jobs..anyone?). But Diane s way off. The majority of Canadians do not purchase it, nor do we need it. As for us needing it to be covered for heart attacks, that is down-right stupid to say. All emergency procedures are covered.
BTW.. Canadian LOVE their health care and wouldn’t give t up for anything, including tax breaks.
Just a clarification! Canadians are allowed to purchase supplemental health care for those things not covered by the universal plan (what government in their right mind would offer everything for everybody) but can not buy insurance for what is covered already by the universal system (as in.. jumping the line).
To get a good understanding how real Canadians feel about their care, this is a good post
http://biznik.c...urs-perspective
Note to self…
Thriving economy > public health care
That may be the case for many, but for many it is also not the case.
I voted for the guy, hoping he would right some of the wrongs of the worst president in all of history (Bush for you slow folks).
Apparently this isn’t’ his plan. I’ve finally come to realize that he’s much more Bush2 than any sort of salvation for this country.
Can I take my vote back? Didn’t think so.
If you believe Bush is the “worst President in history”, I can only assume you’re roughly 12 years old, or were in a very deep sleep from 1976-80.
Carter? Really? Worse than Franklin Pierce, whose main claim to fame was signing the Kansas-Nebraska Act? Worse than James Buchanan, who supported the Dred Scott decision and mistakenly went to war against Utah? Worse than Warren Harding, whose administration’s “Teapot Dome” scandal is scarcely rivaled by anything we’ve seen since save Watergate? For that matter, there was, y’know, Watergate– Nixon going to China doesn’t quite erase that.
Perhaps the OP was in a deep sleep from 1976-80, but you, sir, appear to have been in a deep sleep through your history classes.
None of that was taught in my history classes.
Can’t right all the wrongs of the past eight years in six months, especially when you have half the democratic party working against you.
Also, sometimes I think people just projected whatever they wanted onto Obama and didn’t actually listen to what he promised. For the most part he’s either delivered or put in motion plans to deliver on most of his promises.
The problem with the Bush presidency is he wasn’t conservative–his spending was out of control. so what was our solution as a country? Oh yes, somebody who will really show us how to spend.
Alas, “control” is rapidly returning in 2012.
Don’t need A reason. He’s such a rich source of reasons, all by him’s widdle self. 2012, baby!
Good point about far more sinister laws actually passed by previous administration(s).
Since those laws are all still in force, perhaps our focus should be on fully exposing (in clear English note legalese) and repealing said invasive laws, not passing new invasive laws on top of them – albeit new laws that are “kind of bad, but not nearly as bad”.
Have an awesome day!
Dan
+1
I invite readers to imagine what the reaction would have been if George W. Bush had pushed for a similar piece of legislation. (And assume that his intentions were as benign as it is claimed Obama’s are.) My God, the howls from liberals would be so deafening, I wouldn’t be able to step outside without earplugs!
Now here we have a President with the following track record: Running up the national deficit to levels previous Presidents never dreamed of; taking control of financial institutions and automobile manufacturers, with little authority and in some cases in violation of existing black-letter law; raising the specter of a new “Fairness Doctrine by any other name” to stifle dissenting voices in talk radio and the media; proposing to take control of the health-care industry in similar fashion, with massive consequences for every American; and instructing SEIU thugs to beat up innocent, peaceful protesters at town hall meetings for opposing his health care power-grab. (I’m not even going to speak about his probable beliefs or anything like that; I’m merely looking at what he’s done thusfar.)
Now news of this comes out. Can you understand why it might make conservative folks a little jumpy?
All I have got to say is people please go online and see what the bills say:
Cap and Trade: Come to your house for an energy audit, and will not let you sell until you fix everything, windows and such.
Obama forming a Civilian National Security force, better trained, more powerful, more funded than the American Armed Forces. To fight the enemy????? ( These are words I heard Obama say) But who is the enemy? I’m afraid it is fellow American citizens who disagree. All of us unruly people who go to town meetings and tea parties. Us who have never been political in our lives except to vote. On our walkers and canes we are letting our voices be known. Our doctors are already hearing from Medicare all the cuts in services for next year before the bill comes out so they can say we didn’t cut Medicare with this bill.
You’re right, of course, Diane. I didn’t even mention those, and I should have.
Cap-and-trade (or, as I refer to it, crap-and-tax), if it comes to pass, will drain money–a lot of money–away from everyone and everything in the country, and will have basically zero effect on any “climate change” that occurs, even assuming that the science behind it is correct (which, in and of itself, is an ungrounded assumption). The reason being, of course, that the U.S. amounts to about one twentieth of the world’s population, and there are much larger groups than ours–in China, India, and Africa–that want to bring themselves prosperity, too. And, if you think they’re going to choke off their own economies and leave themselves in Third World agrarian squalor in the name of “preventing global climate change,” I’ve got a bridge I’d like to sell you.
And what possible mission could a “Civilian National Security Corps” have that isn’t already covered by the military, the police, the FBI, and so forth? Certain words come to mind…to avoid Godwinning myself (not that I haven’t done so in the past), I’ll just say “Praetorian Guard.”
It’s funny to me to think about what someone’s brain must be like if they actually believed the things you two are spewing. It must be like walking around in a diving bell, listing to the echoes of your own lies, and believing every word.
I’ll do my best to try to return a pair of automaton right-wing megaphones to sanity: Please consider that everything you think is absolutely wrong. Thank you.
You first, Chris. And I think you’ll have a lot more to “unlearn” than Diane or I do.
My views have the benefit of being based on facts and not pundit talking points and scaremongering. When I consider that my views may be wrong, there are my good friends the facts to straighten me out.
Your points are, frankly, meaningless. Oh, China isn’t going to enact climate change legislation, so we shouldn’t bother either. I guess if China is willing to work children on ten cents a day, we should do the same, in order to be economically competitive. Being a moral leader on the environment means setting a path for other countries to do the same and developing a greener infrastructure for the future. Giving polluters an economic incentive to stop polluting makes sense.
As for your SEIU thugs beating up innocent, peaceful protesters, on a few of those videos it was the SEIU people being attacked. And you call them innocent peaceful protesters when people rip up posters of Rosa Parks, carry assault rifles and dominate rational conversation with talks of Hitler? Those protests are as astroturf as the protests in Florida in 2000 were. To call it anything but an organized, corporate effort to try to stymie reform is naive and frankly self-deluding.
And for God’s sake, no one is cutting Medicare. Wasteful spending will be cut, yes. For all conservatives’ moaning about how bloated and bureaucratically convoluted Medicare is, you’d think they’d acknowledge that there was quite a lot of fat to cut in there, especially in the way of meaningless payouts to medical corporations that do nothing to improve care.
Are you morons or just disingenuous? You don’t really believe that AmeriCorps and Habitat For Humanity are a secret army , do you?
Yes, I understand it quite clearly.
I was really hoping that #declareacybersecurityemergency would take off a bit more.
Whoops, sorry: meant Deltas and Epsilons, obviously.
I’m pretty sure you still have not met your deadline.
I am reading this in the bathroom, and I wasn’t paying attention while wiping, and now I have poop on my finger.
Thanks Paul Carr!
LMFAO hahaha
Thank you Deuce!
Must make you miss the UK a little Paul? Over here no one gives a crap what kind of privacy laws get enacted, as we rightly believe our authorities are too fuck-witted to use their powers.
You earnest Americans with your belief in public figures – it’s so delightful!
Americans have no idea how little power their elected president actually has. They are like a bunch of brainwashed lemmings, restlessly and breathlessly awaiting the president to make something happen. What a bunch of ignorant turds these American compatriots of mine are.
Mr. President. I need a house.
Mr. President. My son needs an operation.
Mr. President. I want to go to college.
Hey people. Your first clue on how useless these politicians really are, is the fact that they even live in Washington D.C. They can’t even run this little district right. How are they supposed to run a country. Lawyers. Losers. Socialists. Communists. All of them.
FYI-Olympia Snowe is a Republican, so calling it “the Democrats’ Rockefeller-Snowe bill” isn’t totally correct. Isn’t this the bipartisanship at its finest?
Bipartisan abuse of power at its finest. Different leaves, but all from the same tree.
If a written submission in your work/employment were too “vague” as is this bipartisan bill, would not you be expected to clarify it? Those who a skeptical of this bill in its draft form have a right to wonder when bipartisanship brought the greatest deficit in post WWII era, so I’m not sure bipartisanship makes a compliment these days, much less an explanation that gives any bill a “pass.”
Olympia Snowe is one of the biggest RINOs in the Senate, and there are a lot of us that wish she’d just switch over to the Democrats and quit pretending to be something she’s not. So, bad example.
Snowe=RINO
Didn’t this happen in Star Wars 3?
Yes, Trevor. It did.
Ironically, Hitler did have significant health-care proposals, and while “cyber” didn’t exist, he did have major “security” proposals. The latter, I think you’ll agree, have come in for a fair share of criticism–and we should be quite wary of leaving “ambiguity” lying around anywhere near that path.
Oh, and Hitler’s healthcare proposals have, indeed, been rather soundly criticized, and recently at that, in this book.
Darn it. Now what am I supposed to throw my arms in the air and run in circles over? Thanks. Thanks a frickin lot. You’ve ruined my day. I scheduled today just for being scared and in a panic over things I know nothing about. ( Although I do admit the concept behind the bill and its being so vague is scary)
You want to run aroung some more???? Read Lou Prichett’s Open Letter to Obama. Find it on the internet under Lou Prichett. It will tell you what to be scared about, then we will enter you into real races and let you run big circles.
I stopped reading at “You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.”
Please join us in the reality-based community.
“classic situation of a ambiguously-drafted bill” –> I’m pretty sure it should be “an” instead of “a” … but I’m simply an ignorant novice.
No worries, I continue to come back each week to read your posts and find them interesting.
Think this is a good idea as long as you can stomach Obama, Cheney, Bush, Nixon, whateverCrazyPresidentYouCan’tStand has the same right to pull the plug. Because it’s not like powers don’t get expanded by the next congress…
Paul stop humping your pillow at night
This is a terrible idea whether it’s being proposed by the democrats, the republicans or ross perot it can only bring about bad things. Whether you trust the current administration or not the thing to keep in mind is that they will not always be in power so the crazy fucked up laws that they enact now will pass that extra power along to the next jackass that has enough money to buy the white house.
great post.
You really need to pay him more so he writes more than just one article every saturday! Easily one of the best writers on the TC staff imo.
I agree…. I would visit more if you had more posts like this. Very informative.
Yes, indeed.
But please, call me a n00b, but can anyone explain me what “WITN” means? Seriously?
Wow. That’s insightful.
I for one wonder exactly what sort of emergency could occur where the best course of action includes keeping me in the dark about what’s going on. But what do I know. After all, what could I possibly need information for during a national emergency?
After reading an endorsement by TechCrunch for a “libertarian-leaning Democrat” I’ve pretty much given up hope this blog has any real discernment when it comes to politics.
Regardless, the bill, simply put, is not a good one.
And you might want to be careful quoting from comments with poor grammar and spelling, as many TechCrunch writers chronically suffer the same misfortune…
So instead of trying to turn this into a Political us vs. them, or it’s all about hating Obama why didn’t you look at what the Bill actually says and draw some attention to what should concern all IT Professionals.
Section 7.
All IT Professionals working with the Feds or any network the President deems “critical” must have a Federal License or Certification to keep his job.
Section 8 and 9.
A panel of non-elected persons who answer only to the President will have total say over all Internet addressing and domain controls.
Section 18.
The President can declare a “cybersecurity emergency” and order the shutdown of any Federal computer system or network or ANY network somebody has declared as a critical infrastructure. There will be no review of what defines a “cybersecurity emergency” nor what is classified as a critical infrastructure, the power will reside in the Office of the President to decide either.
No matter your political views this Bill has millions, likely Billions in additional spending directly inserted in the Bill and Billions more in undefined spending with the enactment of new boards, reviews and more.
With much of our IT Management being done via remote including even outsourcing to foreign countries who is going to verify that tech in India is the tech that actually got certified by the Feds whereas a similar tech in the US would not be on a level playing field as he couldn’t “fake” the fact he took the test or qualifications.
nobody cares about facts, unfortunately. Those that love Obama don’t care what power he holds
Did you actually read the bill? Because your above points are not true.
Section 7 says only those providing cybersecurity services to the government need to be certified.
Section 8 says the Assistant Secretary of
Commerce for Communications needs to get approval from this Advisory Panel on security matters before changing or renewing the ICANN’s oversight of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority.
Section 9 says federal government networks need to have a secure domain name addressing system.
Section 18 has the parts of the bill that will need to be worked on before passage:
[The President]
(2) may declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network;
(6) may order the disconnection of any Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information systems or networks in the interest of national security;
I hope everyone reads the text of the bill and sees how ridiculous the hysteria is over this issue.
http://www.open...l/111-s773/text
The freedom of America was never fully understood and fully defended, even though the founding fathers did an excellent job of constructing the structure of American government.
What undercut it? The altruistic, collectivist, statist, anti-individual, power-hungry European philosophies imported into America via the universities and self-styled intellectuals.
Isn’t Paul Carr, penning this apologetic for yet another attempt at a massive power grab by Marxist Obama, from England, which voted away its liberty decades ago? I guess using watered-down socialists from New York is too weak and TC needs to go back to the old country for the stronger stuff. That’s unfortunate.
It is not speculation or surmise that every one of Obama’s personal/intellectual influences are avowed Marxists/communists. It’s a testimonial to the grossly incompetent American government run public school system that the majority of Americans did not understand the implications of that fact. The central implication is that an ongoing attempt to undercut and destroy the value of the individual to decide his own life, in favor of central government control gained by as large a chunk of power-grabbing as can be attained without much public notice, is perfectly in keeping with Obama’s philosophy. (Do you think that the economy is bad everywhere? Check out indeed.com and look at the top city for jobs right now: Washington D.C.)
There was a time when geeks and hackers ran the Internet…. its grand promise was unrestricted market built joy (and demented porn). There is no difference between libertarian and inventor. Herein you only dilute your own cred. Your opinions become suspect. Dance with the one who brung ya. I hate to see you jump the shark. Insert another trite metaphor here.
You are far more bendy than we are. Now bend.
Paul,
The way you prevent presidents, including even one that is “progressive” and “Mr. Tech Prez” like Obama, from overreaching and taking over the Internet in undemocratic and oppressive ways is by *debating it* when it comes up as a possiblity, even remote, under a bill. That’s what we like to call “democracy”. It’s *ok to do that* in *Congress* which is a democratic, elected body.
You — and many progressive tekkie types these days on the left of you — seem to think that the democratic political process is on longer about debate. That it’s rather about the cerebral perfect tekkies “setting straight” those who are “in error” or perhaps even “telling malicious truths” like — the horrah! — claiming there will be “death panels”.
No one is allow to float a concern, or God forbid, a false hypothesis, or a stretched hypothetical, because *you are there to play gotcha and declare them as inaccurate, false and a threat to the republic.*
It’s not a good thing, because it’s baking totalitarianism into the tools of social media, making it be merely a sounding board for whipsawing the mobs by dropping memes from a view thought-influencers who are politically correct.
But meanwhile, you still aren’t in charge, and people can and will debate as they see fit, and that will include using the same hyperbole as you use on the left and always have.
I’m more than a little concerned about Obama and the Internet after the really over-the-top inappropriate informonyourneighbor.gov stuff that we saw with “flag@whitehouse.gov” — where we were urged to report anybody with “incorrect” or “scary” or “deliberately false” thoughts.
nailed it.
Let me inform you. The lefties have already gotten your number and are taking notes. If you’ve had any leftist acquaintance in the past, you probably have already had a seemingly harmless little phone call because they “haven’t talked to you in a long time.” Just remember, they are taking notes about your dissatisfaction with the Democrats. This is the most fascist group we’ve ever had in power in America. And if you don’t think Obama is ambitious or power hungry, think again numbnuts.
Is this satire?
Heh, welcome to the other side. For years during the Bush administration, I looked on bemused as the far left railed against Bush’s policy, no matter what. Now it’s happening with Obama and the far right.
There really is no point in discussing this bill right now. As a newly introduced piece of legislation, it is just a draft like you said. It’ll have to go through the entire legislative process, which requires extensive hearings. During this process, the bill will likely be rewritten several times. I also doubt it will be passed anytime soon; typically it takes about five years for any bill to pass (with the notable exceptions of national emergencies and the annual budget).
I do recoil from the thought of giving the White House powers over the Internet. As a civil libertarian, I just don’t like the idea of big government having such powerful control over the digital analogue of highways and cities.
So hopefully the legislative process will outline when the President can exercise such powers, to what extent, and for how long.
You, stop making sense. This is the INTERNET you’re dealing with.
it doesn’t take 5 years to pass a bill, pal
i laughed my ass off. yeah, it is still off. bravo Paul. keep ‘em coming.
“They’ll take away my IP when they pry it from my dead burnt fingers!”
The problem, it seems to me, is not that with conservative politicians (e.g. dubya) or liberal politicians (e.g. borackarama), but rather that politicians are just plain impolitic.
“Unlike the previous administration’s PATRIOT act, which promoted freedom of information by wiretapping every man, woman and child in America, the Democrats’ Rockefeller-Snowe bill does sound pretty creepy and invasive.”
What an insanely stupid sentence.
How very interesting your article was. I too read the page on CNET, including every single comment – there were about 980 of them when I did. I also read S773.
What an interesting job of selecting (cherry picking) comments which suit your world view. There were many comments on CNET which raised excellent questions and concerns. You decided these were too troublesome to deal with apparently.
Meanwhile the sheeple bleat at your tripe while you engage in a leftist philosophical circle jerk.
I have no problems with people with whom I disagree. Spirited and fair debate is what this country was founded upon. I do however struggle to find anything redeeming with those for whom any questioning of “The One” is verboten.
This bill is the greatest power grab in American history. I have found myself saying that a lot this year.
I enjoyed your humor. I don’t know what the bill says, but I immediately had my doubts about it for a couple reasons. First, logistically, I have no idea how the government could shut down the entire internet. It just doesn’t seem likely or possible. Second, any serious restraint on free speech will be challenged to the Supreme Court and overturned. Nonetheless, I also don’t see why any legislation is necessary. Why do we need a nuclear option on the internet? Don’t we have enough incomprehensible laws scaring and confusing the citizenry? I think Congress needs a new rule: for every word of new law enacted, they have to repeal a word.
The government wouldn’t need to shut down the entire Internet to be a problem…how about, just one or two key network providers that connect the Web sites of prominent opposition figures (you can guess the names involved) to the rest of the Internet? Despite the design goals, the Internet is not nearly as “fault tolerant” as we might think.
Yes, any serious restraint on free speech would likely be overturned by the Supreme Court…but that takes time, and an awful lot of damage could be done before it gets to that point.
Indeed, I don’t see the point of such legislation either, and I stress the point: What would you think about this power being in the hands of, say, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, or John McCain? I’m guessing that, had such a thing been proposed under the Bush Administration, the howls from the liberals would drown out every heavy-metal concert in the land.
I like the thought of repealing one word of law for every word enacted, and would also direct you to one of Professor Bernardo de la Paz’s suggestions for a Congress (in Robert Heinlein’s The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress): have one house able to pass laws by a two-thirds majority, while the other house could repeal any law by a one-third minority vote. Think about that one.
WTF is WITN? ?
What is the name?
I suggested the following on Twitter:
What In The Name…? Women In Tight Nighties…? Why Isn’t Taunton Near…? Weather Is The News…? Where Is The Newt…?
Paul Carr said I was ‘close’. How close, though, I’ve no idea. New York is close to Tokyo when you’re looking from Space.
Where is the news?
A little off subject but here’s a couple of documentaries that show how f***ed up the American Government actually is.
Worth a watch The Obama Deception
http://www.yout...h?v=eAaQNACwaLw
and
If your yet to be convinced that 9 11 was not the doing of the US Goverment watch this.
http://video.go...ffect&hl=en
Wonk wonk wonk. And wonk. Will you be touring Vegas anytime soon? Wonk! Wowzers! Bing! Wonk.
Show me which way the sheep are flocking and you’ll find me going in the opposite direction, along with all the other common sensed folk.
While everyone else is leaping before they look, we (the common sense folk) will be sitting under a tree, happily eating apples while the blissfully ignorant fall off a cliff.
Mr. Carr,
Rational citizens would agree that the Federal Government should take necessary steps to protect the American people from danger. To be successful in that effort, (especially in this technological age) it likely will require a limited strategy of cooperation between the private sector and appropriate Federal agencies. Where the solution(s) become contentious is the definition of an “emergency,” and the scope of powers the Executive Branch could theoretically assume.
It is important to put this bill in context with the actions of the administration along with your opinion. I submit the following points for consideration:
1. Not even thirty days has passed since the Administration asked average Americans to report suspicious activity of fellow citizens directly to the Whitehouse via, flag@whitehouse.gov. Since it has been such a short amount of time between when the Whitehouse asked citizens to essentially spy on one another, and when the Drudgereport headline reminded us all of the Rockefeller-Snowe bill, it is understandable how some may be incredulous of the bill or the Administration.
2. Not even 30 days has passed since the US Government, via cars.gov, buried in their security statement which stated that the computer used to access the site was property (including all data contained on it) of the government. You will recall that was the beginning of the “Cash for Clunkers” program.
3. Should citizens not be concerned that Cass Sunstein, the “Regulatory Czar” has a new book where he shares his views about curbing free-speech online. Mark Lloyd the “FCC Diversity Czar” who has proposed enacting operating taxes of privately owned radio stations that directly benefits publicly owned radio stations. Am I being paranoid that the Administration surrounds itself with individuals who have radical views like this? I am a conservative and I vehemently disagree with fellow citizens and media members such as Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, and Keith Olbermann. But I don’t want their voices silenced. If we silence voices of opposition then it is only a matter of time until we are all silenced. People should have the liberty to say what they think, and surround themselves with the individuals and institutions they agree with. We must discuss our differences on the civilized battlefield of ideas that exists in this republic of ours.
Mr. Carr, it is understandable that you would take a position on this topic, but “ladders of facts” are not built on statements of your personal health, vaguely written legislation, or fantasy letters to US Senators. At best your recent post was nothing more than a cathartic mental exercise of self-aggrandizement designed to re-assure your ego that your government would never consider shutting down the internet.
As an individual with a useful platform for distributing information, I humbly request that you reevaluate your position on this matter. For the benefit of the TechCrunch audience, I ask you to consider the impossible, the unlikely events that could give this or any other administration the authority to silence information, the press, and free speech for “an emergency.” I ask you to stay on top of this story like a pitbull. I ask you to perform due diligence on those individuals who surround this President. Please research Cass Sunstein, Mark Lloyd, and Van Jones; their own words are sufficient evidence to prove they are not friends of free speech.
I am a critic of this Administration, but I am not “running round and round without any kind of information ladder to help me out of a pit of paranoia.” I am an average citizen, a father of two, who is concerned about my country. I am a citizen that would much rather work to discover the causes that unite us, and this cause is one where you and I could work together to build a real ladder of facts.
Sincerely,
Adam Russell
@Adam
“Not even thirty days has passed since the Administration asked average Americans to report suspicious activity of fellow citizens directly to the Whitehouse via, flag@whitehouse.gov.”
See, you’re being purposefully disingenuous, Adam. You know, if you are as intelligent as you’d like us to believe, that the email link you included wasn’t to report “suspicious activity” of American citizens. It was to report disinformation sent around via email about the president’s health care policy. Was trying to create a mechanism to respond to lies like “death panels” handled awkwardly? Yes. Was it some insidious attempt at building a national enemy list? Hardly, and you and people who bring it up know that.
I am amazed at the fervent concern for “our rights” now… when the new guy is in office, but not a peep from these so-called patriots during the passing of the Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, detention of Americans without due process, etc. Not to mention renditions and torture in our names. In fact, people who spoke out against these REAL affronts to our values and liberties were deemed unpatriotic at that time.
Why, Adam, do you hate America so much?
You also seem to neglect to mention that the cars.gov statement was found only on the dealer side of the process, not on the public site, and only applied when dealers were processing their claims by… gasp… securely connecting to a government run private network in order to write to a secure government database.
Diane Langston -
This statement you make about Canadian health care is a down-right lie. I don’t know where you are getting your facts from, but as a Canadian who has lived my whole life with Canadian health care, the majority DO NOT have additional care and all Canadians are treated for heart attacks (and other emergency services) It truly makes me sick that so many in America pass this garbage around. Time and time again Canadians have voiced loudly they wouldn’t give up their health care program for anything (including a few meaningless tax breaks). Why? Because we believe when everyone is healthy we all benefit.
The Canadians who go to the States for health care because they don’t want to wait are the ones who are rich, feel entitled, and would have to wait for their nose jobs (elective surgery).
Don’t you just hate it when you get to deadline and still have nothing to write?
Why is this news?
Wow. We are debating everything EXCEPT what this loosely crafted and nowhere near passing bill ACTUALLY states. But, hey, don’t let facts get in the way of your pretty little hate machine.
The radical right has simply lost it.
George Bush is the best president ever, shut up you stupid sissies.
… It is as amazing as it is absurd – All these foreigners’ opinions pretending to know what is best for the US, including this posting’s author, Also a foreiner.
Yes, the “American Dream” is a wonderful concept, however, *NO FOREIGNER HAS THE RIGHT TO BE HERE IN THE US*
There.
I think it’s ludicrous to suggest Obama as power mad. He only controls a couple American auto companies (fired the GM CEO, remember?), controls several very large global banking institutions, has designs on controlling the healthcare system and thinks he now holds sway over religious institutions (witness the conference call to arms amongst the nation’s clergy to support his healthcare bill; one he hasn’t even taken the time to read). Power mad? Preposterous, I say. He’s just a really slippery maneuverer and has successfully pulled the wool over the eyes of quite a large number of confused voters. Who’s fault is that?