How does the example of bill cheek disprove the point of the article? Cheek is the previous generations mod chip mfg'er.
The difference is that while the feds went after people like cheek (and mod chippers under the DMCA, i.e. the distributors), the FCC wants to go after you, the end user. You are not permitted to receive unencrypted hdtv signal (according to them) into your computer, regardless of how you did it. If this is the rule, then to regulate this they have to monitor you.
And the article doesn't disagree that the FCC will try to enforce its rules, but communicates that the enforcement will involve an unacceptable intrusion into our privacy.
These people are living in a weird Schrodinger's Cat universe, where you can think two opposite things simultaneously, and only commit to one when you are observed. This allows you to believe that Bush "took his eye off the ball" and "let Osama Bin Laden escape in the mountains of Tora Bora" but also believe that he has was caught a year ago and held for a media op, thereby doubling your anger. But you don't even feel the contradiction.
Diesel has jumped on expectations of demand for heating oil (which is somehow related to diesel, don't ask me how). As for gasoline, we are coming out of the peak gas usage season (the summer), so we'd expect gas prices to fall.
The problem isn't on the demand side, it's that traders are worried about the supply side, so they buy up heating oil contracts now so they'll have the heating oil when people need it in december. ANWR would have directly address supply on two fronts: by providing placing a large reserve on the market, and by creating a stable flow of oil not subject to the political insanity of most oil producing countries.