Posted on 01/09/2012 10:12:29 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan
In the midst of all this talk of jobs and wars and families, one of the issues the Republican presidential candidates have not addressed that much is the internet. Specifically, their positions on regulating the internet. Over the weekend, Rick Santorum was asked by a New Hampshire resident during a campaign stop if he supported or opposed the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which would give the government more authority to regulate the internet and crack down harder on piracy.
Considering how much the Republican party of late has been concerned with government overreach, Santorum has been a surprisingly strong defender of big government conservatism in this race. And his opinion on online piracy remains consistent with these principles. Santorum explained that from his perspective, not every right or freedom is unlimited, and there need to be regulations in place to limit the extent of a certain right.
“There is, and can be, a limitation on that. You know, freedom of speech. The things you can’t say. You can’t cry ‘fire’ in a crowded theater. And there are limitations to all freedoms. They’re not absolute rights. They are rights that have responsibilities that come with them, and if you abuse those rights… then you have a consequence of you using that right.”
Santorum identified piracy as an abuse of one’s rights. While acknowledging that the internet can be “a powerful force for good,” he argued that making it a “regulation-free zone” would be the wrong approach. He did not specifically say that he endorsed SOPA, given that he admitted he is not very aware of the bill’s provisions. But he did give an incredibly forceful argument for cracking down on piracy and the unrestrained right to do whatever you want on the internet.
Ping.
(Not intended as an attack on Santorum but as a request to his supporters to take action.)
Can you explain the “direct threat to Free Republic?” Is Free Republic a site engaged in piracy located on foreign shores?
More like the Stop Online Privacy Act.
Santorum supporter who agrees.
Thank you for the polite admonition.
I guess I don’t understand what is wrong with what he said. Of course there have to be limits: committing crimes over the Internet, sending threats, etc.
I don’t think Santorum wants to limit free speech, rather he’s probably taking the above into account.
Having said the above, there might be language buried in the proposals that might be troubling...don’t know.
This same guy supported Arlen Specter. Oh and he voted for the TARP, No Child Left Behind, The Prescription Drug Benefit, bailing out G.M., etc.... just in case anyone thinks he is conservative. Observe him by what he does and not what he says.
Speaking of piracy:
Americans would like to know when the US government and our bought and paid for politicians are going to start cracking down on the real piracy of average Americans by the illegal immigrants. They and those who hire them are guilty of or assisting in the theft of intellectual property of Americans by stealing their identity.
These politicians need to understand that Piracy is about more than stealing Hollywood (that IMO is mostly trash).
Santorum’s just mad because his name has been google-bombed for years.
In any event, I don’t think anyone should be surprised that he’d support measures like SOPA, given that he is on record stating that “America is all about imposing our values on each other.” He’s also very gung-ho against “radical individualism” and his misconstrued ideas of what Libertarianism means.
Please review the comments on the following thread for a detailed explanation of the danger of SOPA/PIPA:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2824948/posts
“One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a Libertarianish right. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. That is not how traditional conservatives view the world. There is no such society that I’m aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.”Of course the guy who said this favors SOPA.
Yeah, that's exactly what this country needs, more big government!
SOPA ping.
You can find out what is wrong with the bill with a simple search. Santorum is a big government “conservative”, like the Bushes. I’ll vote for him if I have to because of he position on life, but if it weren’t for that he would just be another Romney.
You are most welcome. Please be sure Santorum understands the implications of SOPA/PIPA.
The youtube video at about 2:00 - you will hear that he says he does not know enough about this particular bill to have an opinion one way or another.
The bill text makes a number of references to existing regulations. As I read it, it just got too stinkin’ involved to see exactly what this bill does or doesn’t do.
In such cases, if I was a Congressman, I wouldn’t vote on it; if it ain’t crystal clear, forget it, IMHO. Legislation that reads like obfuscation invariably has things in it that people would never vote for if they understood everything about the bill.
In this video Rick was simply reminding the guy who asked the question that free speech is a guaranteed right, but that right does not trump personal civil or criminal liability for things one says.
The video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HT0SX2jpgFQ&feature=youtu.be
Wow. Thanks for playing, president of Iowa, we have some lovely parting gifts...
Stepping up to that line. Not cool and an absolute deal breaker for me if he is going to support SOPA or any other dreck legislation like it.
I don’t care for his story about absolutes either. On that point he is absolutely wrong and there are laws currently on the books to deal with IP issues.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.