[Lazamataz]

Another self-generated editorial. I hope this one can stay in the editorial sidebar!

[Lazamataz]

The Official Lazamataz Funny-But-Somewhat-Disturbing Ping List (24 Satisfied Customers!)

This one ain’t funny, but it’s my editorial and it’s important.

[dforest]

Indeed. Good post. The left has been doing this for ages because they know the media will not report the truth and will blame it on the evil republicans.

Sometimes people on our own side fail to realize that some bills get voted down because of added destructive content within a bill.

[unixfox]

Once the camel gets his nose under the tent it isn’t long before the sh!t is hip deep.

[Lazamataz]

This editorial needs more exposure.

[Lazamataz]

This editorial needs more exposure.

[Lazamataz]

This editorial needs more exposure.

[Carry_Okie]

It is nonsensical, and a bright Republican leadership will propose the exact same legislation, with a much more neutral enforcing agency.

There is no such thing. People simply have to refuse to work for companies that do that, or else stay off Facebook (my preference).

[Lazamataz]

mhking, who I am in contact with, says.... “Just damn.” LOL

[Islander7]

[Fast Moving Angel]

Not exactly on topic, but somewhat related — California finally did something right by introducing a bill banning prospective employers from requiring Facebook info:

http://economy.ocregister.com/2012/03/28/calif-bill-would-ban-employers-from-asking-facebook-passwords/106522/

[CatherineofAragon]

"And since the legislation did fail, the second option is the one that has materialized. The left and their accomplices in the leftist press, is in fact obscuring the true objection (the FCC) and claiming Republicans hate privacy.

It is nonsensical, and a bright Republican leadership will propose the exact same legislation, with a much more neutral enforcing agency."

At this point in time, a bright Republican leadership is almost an oxymoron to me. They MUST stand up and fight these duplicitous, snakelike Communists.

Someone who pays for Rush's premium service should send your editorial to him.

[SaraJohnson]

Thanks for the report, Laz. They called the last censorship system the “fairness doctrine” and Republicans were said to be against fairness. Dems are sneaky petes.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Ping

[TheOldLady]

Abusing my ping lists for this excellent editorial by Lazamataz.

Please read and pass it on.

[Mad Dawgg]

Actually in November of Last year new FCC rules went into effect for the internet. But hardly a word was mentioned in the MSM.

U.S. Internet rules to take effect November 20

[null and void]

[shibumi]

Thanks for the post Laz. The libs are flooding FB with a skewed version of this story.

This is the ammo needed to respond.

[bgill]

seemingly had a benevolent intent -- to prevent employers from demanding Facebook passwords -- but inside the legislation was a poison

Every bill has pork, small print, and extra little perk$ for someone. Yet, nobody ever reads so much as the title.

[Zionist Conspirator]

These are the hypocritical bastards who scream to high heaven every time a school principal censors the "f-word" in a student newspaper.

They obviously think the Internet contains too much criticism of the government and not enough porn (the only thing they think the First Amendment protects).

[Dudoight]

I am taking the free Hillsdale course on the constitution. Just started...hope to get some real knowledge and understanding.

These efforts would be an attack on free speech and means that all these dems who voted for this, are willing to deprive us of more freedoms. In particular this would be to their advantage message-wise. I would call them a group adverse to the constitution and liberty.

Czar Sustein feels that the government should allocate the right to speak in order for it to come out equal.

The people better take note.