Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. regulatory czar nominee wants Net 'Fairness Doctrine' [censoring the Internet]
http://www.worldnetdaily.com ^ | April 27, 2009 | © 2009 WorldNetDaily

Posted on 04/27/2009 6:34:44 PM PDT by luv2ndamend

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-142 next last
To: luv2ndamend; SunkenCiv; Clintonfatigued; fieldmarshaldj; BP2; Polarik; patriot08; GreatOne; ...
Do we really need a White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at all? A "regulatory czar"? Or any "czar", for that matter? (For the historically challenged, a "czar" is nothing but a Russian king, which should be the furthest thing from any job description in a government founded in revolt against royalty and nobility.)

Is Sunstein taking that job to make a "name" for himself until O finds a vacancy on the SCOTUS to which to appoint him?

61 posted on 04/27/2009 7:57:17 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #62 Removed by Moderator

To: HiTech RedNeck
This is going to rile the civil libertarians.

Only the right libertarians, I'm afraid. Don't think the ACLU types - at least most of them - will object to Sunstein.

63 posted on 04/27/2009 7:59:48 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GlennBeck08
Better keep it to yourself. Soon they'll have a law for folks like you abusing young minds with that “Constitution” nonsense and other bourgeoisie thinking. And they'll indoctinate the kids in school to turn in their parents and grandparents.
64 posted on 04/27/2009 8:02:44 PM PDT by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

Yeah, that statement disturbed me too.


65 posted on 04/27/2009 8:03:17 PM PDT by softengine (Betrayal and Hypocrisy play on both sides of the fence.......but no one will admit it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Putz is passe. The new word is f***tard.

He’s a f***tard.


66 posted on 04/27/2009 8:04:22 PM PDT by softengine (Betrayal and Hypocrisy play on both sides of the fence.......but no one will admit it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!

I read this book, 1984 or 2009, I can’t remember the exact title, and I thought, no never could this happen in the United States of America, we have a Constitution and a limited government. We can overthrow tyrants should a tyrant or 2 hold office. What the hell was I thinking?


67 posted on 04/27/2009 8:06:36 PM PDT by GlennBeck08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: luv2ndamend

Sunstein also has argued in his prolific literary works that the Internet is anti-democratic because of the way users can filter out information of their own choosing.

“A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government,” he wrote. “Democratic efforts to reduce the resulting problems ought not be rejected in freedom’s name.”

Really, Americans don’t need to be confused by multiple
sources of information, it just warps their proletarian
brains, it’s much better if the democratIK party filters
out all the mind numbing trivia and gives the people just
the information they need to agree with the choices made
by the DNC leadership. /S


68 posted on 04/27/2009 8:14:45 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

only *peer-reviewed, approved, consensus* views will be permitted to be disseminated.

Be sure to tune in to the DELPHI radio network,
your source for the correct news and views.
Consensus broadcasting bringing you in line
with the nations leader. /S


69 posted on 04/27/2009 8:17:26 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: luv2ndamend
Found this on NRA News site - "In fact, in his book Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, Sunstein wrote, "Animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives, to prevent violations of current law ... Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardianlike obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients' behalf ..." ...Cass Sunstein.

Interesting statement. "Guardianlke obligations" and "represented by (human)counsel" conjure visions of the potential scope.

News heights in deceptively asinine.

70 posted on 04/27/2009 8:23:41 PM PDT by softengine (Betrayal and Hypocrisy play on both sides of the fence.......but no one will admit it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luv2ndamend
You can't tell me what to do. If I have something to say I may only express rhetorically. Meaning your engagement in debate is not required and neither is your opposing view.

Further, If I am angry, such as I am today about “Buzzing the Towers” of Manhattan, then Damn it I have a right to express myself, immediately.

The only goal of this is squelch emotion and put people on notice that the Internet Spazi are watching.

The Internet does not belong to you Mr. Government official. It was opened up to private enterprise years ago and we bulked it up so it can support almost any medium of communications, be that entertainment, business or self expression.

What next? You gonna tell what to do with paper and pencil. You must wear red, because you sound like the soldiers of the United Kingdom in the era of the late 1700’s.

Go to hell this a nation of free people witha 1st amendment right and you do not define said right.

71 posted on 04/27/2009 8:27:20 PM PDT by Vendome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luv2ndamend

Sunstein also has argued in his prolific literary works that the Internet is anti-democratic because of the way users can filter out information of their own choosing.

Kind of like turning the page of a newspaper to read something you might actually be interested in reading or turning the channel of the radio or TV to find something more entertaining or informative.  That is the choice a sentient and free person makes.

"A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government," he wrote. "Democratic efforts to reduce the resulting problems ought not be rejected in freedom's name."

What are you Jackie Chan?  What are we children and you know what is best for us?  Not in the interest of citizenship and self government?  Aren't you proposing something in direct conflict with that statement?  Self government is the hallmark of this Constitutional Republic.  You can forget democratic efforts.

Later, Sunstein rethought his proposal, explaining that it would be "too difficult to regulate [the Internet] in a way that would respond to those concerns." He also acknowledged that it was "almost certainly unconstitutional."

Oh!  Then we have found something reasonable in your logic?

"The modern world suffers from insufficient civility," they wrote. "Every hour of every day, people send angry e-mails they soon regret, cursing people they barely know (or even worse, their friends and loved ones). A few of us have learned a simple rule: don't send an angry e-mail in the heat of the moment. File it, and wait a day before you send it. (In fact, the next day you may have calmed down so much that you forget even to look at it. So much the better.) But many people either haven't learned the rule or don’t always follow it. Technology could easily help. In fact, we have no doubt that technologically savvy types could design a helpful program by next month."

That is the beauty of being human.  Learning from mistakes and express indignation.  I am don't want to be protected from making mistakes.  What next you gonna put an Inspector Gadget safety unit on my when I snowboard?  I don't want it.  Although I do wear a helmet, that is my choice.

That's where the "Civility Check" comes in.

I don't want a civility check or any other check from the government.  Why don't you check your self into a hospital for the psychological care you need to assuage your emotional problems and help to suppress your covert hostility.

Pussy.


72 posted on 04/27/2009 8:44:35 PM PDT by Vendome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

Now, now now that wasn’t very civil LOL. You don’t want to hurt the Internet’s feelings do you?


73 posted on 04/27/2009 8:47:59 PM PDT by Shaun_MD (Velius In Evidens Visum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

This is going to rile the civil libertarians.

You’ve got that right my friend...I’m riled up...


74 posted on 04/27/2009 8:51:31 PM PDT by phatus maximus ( John 6:29. Learn it, love it, live it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Shaun_MD

I love the Internet and would never hurt her feelings. I would always protect her, care for her and stand up for her.

This “Nancy girl” with a mans name on the other hand fancies himself to be an intellectual superior and bully. It is how he finds validation and relevance.

I don’t like being told what to do, Sissy boy.


75 posted on 04/27/2009 8:57:54 PM PDT by Vendome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: NoobRep

Jeez, I guess this will put sites like DU and Daily Kos right out of business. I wonder how the loons will react to this one?

_____________________________________________-

Good question.


76 posted on 04/27/2009 8:59:05 PM PDT by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Former Proud Canadian

sounds like it to me, but then he fits right in with all the other nominees so far.


77 posted on 04/27/2009 9:02:04 PM PDT by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

You know its only a matter of time before this waste of skin or others like him succeed.


78 posted on 04/27/2009 9:06:58 PM PDT by Shaun_MD (Velius In Evidens Visum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93

Thanks for the ping!


79 posted on 04/27/2009 9:07:52 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: luv2ndamend; Jim Robinson; y'all

Lookie here!

http://www.law.uchicago.edu/faculty/sunstein/

Looks like the same stupid grin...can’t quite tell with the glow shining off his bald head and all.

Please note email addy etal.


80 posted on 04/27/2009 9:19:50 PM PDT by Brad’s Gramma (Life is but a big granola bar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-142 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson