GAG THE INTERNET!

GAG THE INTERNET! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

rfd1 -> GAG THE INTERNET! (7/16/2009 1:06:25 PM)
Democrats once again demonstrate their commitment to the Bill of Rights, hey if they can screw the 2nd why not the 1st? quote: AN OBAMA OFFICIAL'S FRIGHTENING BOOK ABOUT CURBING FREE SPEECH ONLINE When it comes to the First Amendment, Team Obama believes in Global Chilling. Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law professor who has been appointed to a shadowy post that will grant him powers that are merely mind-boggling, explicitly supports using the courts to impose a "chilling effect" on speech that might hurt someone's feelings. He thinks that the bloggers have been rampaging out of control and that new laws need to be written to corral them. Advance copies of Sunstein's new book, "On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done," have gone out to reviewers ahead of its September publication date, but considering the prominence with which Sunstein is about to be endowed, his worrying views are fair game now. Sunstein is President Obama's choice to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. It's the bland titles that should scare you the most... If this happened, the blogosphere would turn into Pluto overnight. Comments sections would slam shut. Every writer would work on a leash shorter than a shoelace. Sunstein is an enemy to every news organization and blogger. We should return the favor and declare war on him.

tazzygirl -> RE: GAG THE INTERNET! (7/16/2009 1:28:10 PM)
In part, i agree with Sustein. only the part about something needing to be done about the malicious behavior of some on line bloggers who wouldnt have the guts to say half of what they say to someone's face. you can have an opinion, you dont have to resort to some of the extremes.. aka... calling Obama's daughter a whore because you dont like what tshirt she is wearing today.

DomKen -> RE: GAG THE INTERNET! (7/16/2009 1:55:39 PM)
Got to love the NYPost lying for Murdoch as usual. Sunstein proposes strengthening tools for defamation cases. Truth is always a defence in defamation. All this would do is make it easier for people lied about by bloggers or in forums to recover damages. Now why would the owner of FoxNews be worried about defamation suits?

downkitty -> RE: GAG THE INTERNET! (7/16/2009 2:31:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rfd1 Democrats once again demonstrate their commitment to the Bill of Rights, hey if they can screw the 2nd why not the 1st? quote: AN OBAMA OFFICIAL'S FRIGHTENING BOOK ABOUT CURBING FREE SPEECH ONLINE When it comes to the First Amendment, Team Obama believes in Global Chilling. Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law professor who has been appointed to a shadowy post that will grant him powers that are merely mind-boggling, explicitly supports using the courts to impose a "chilling effect" on speech that might hurt someone's feelings. He thinks that the bloggers have been rampaging out of control and that new laws need to be written to corral them. Advance copies of Sunstein's new book, "On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done," have gone out to reviewers ahead of its September publication date, but considering the prominence with which Sunstein is about to be endowed, his worrying views are fair game now. Sunstein is President Obama's choice to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. It's the bland titles that should scare you the most... If this happened, the blogosphere would turn into Pluto overnight. Comments sections would slam shut. Every writer would work on a leash shorter than a shoelace. Sunstein is an enemy to every news organization and blogger. We should return the favor and declare war on him. ... not exactly. He wants to treat the internet much like print media. If someone blogs about John Doe having 6 testicles, Sunstein wants it to be as easy to sue for defamation/slander/liabel as it would be if someone printed a book about John Doe having 6 testicles. All John Doe should have to do in either case is drop his pants and show that he does not have 6 testicles. How is this a bad thing? Should people free to harrass, attack, and lie about someone just because its the internet?

sappatoti -> RE: GAG THE INTERNET! (7/16/2009 5:05:34 PM)
Anybody can sue anyone for libel right now for things written and posted on the internet. Why would another law be necessary?

OrionTheWolf -> RE: GAG THE INTERNET! (7/16/2009 5:10:44 PM)
There are already existing laws about slander and such. We do not need anymore. If someone wants to hide, and do nothing more than speak words that illicit anger in every single citizen of the world, then they have that right. There are of course a few limitations, such as inciting riot, endangering public safety, slander, etc. Do not need any laws that take away rights. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl In part, i agree with Sustein. only the part about something needing to be done about the malicious behavior of some on line bloggers who wouldnt have the guts to say half of what they say to someone's face. you can have an opinion, you dont have to resort to some of the extremes.. aka... calling Obama's daughter a whore because you dont like what tshirt she is wearing today.

tazzygirl -> RE: GAG THE INTERNET! (7/16/2009 5:29:29 PM)
greetings Master Orion I do see your point. However, i guess a part of me would hope that incidents like the teenager who killed herself over a "boyfriend" who was actually an adult delighting in tormenting the girl would be less of a problem. im still researching as this isnt a topic i am truly up to date on yet well wishes tazzy FR An interesting article about Sustein and his book "Nudge" http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/from-push-to-nudge-a-qa-with-the-authors-of-the-latter/?scp=5&sq=%22cass%20sunstein%22&st=cse

UglyTruth -> RE: GAG THE INTERNET! (7/16/2009 7:40:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Got to love the NYPost lying for Murdoch as usual. Sunstein proposes strengthening tools for defamation cases. Truth is always a defence in defamation. All this would do is make it easier for people lied about by bloggers or in forums to recover damages. Now why would the owner of FoxNews be worried about defamation suits? Truth and lawyer fees. This would also make it easier to harass people who can't afford to hire a lawyer every time someone doesn't like what they've written.

DomKen -> RE: GAG THE INTERNET! (7/16/2009 8:54:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UglyTruth quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Got to love the NYPost lying for Murdoch as usual. Sunstein proposes strengthening tools for defamation cases. Truth is always a defence in defamation. All this would do is make it easier for people lied about by bloggers or in forums to recover damages. Now why would the owner of FoxNews be worried about defamation suits? Truth and lawyer fees. This would also make it easier to harass people who can't afford to hire a lawyer every time someone doesn't like what they've written. There are numerous organizations devoted to protecting free speech rights. In my years opposing creationists I've seen several prominent critics of the religious nuts sued for defamation and they never had any problem getting one or another group to defend them pro bono.

Jack45 -> RE: GAG THE INTERNET! (7/17/2009 11:07:01 AM)
They put that "Thought Crimes" law as an amendment to the Defense appropriations bill. Every single Democrat voted for it, couple of Republicans also. "Conservative" Democrats = Democrats "Liberal" Republicans = Democrats The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act now opens up big time "DOUBLE JEOPARDY" that's what Pat Leahy said yesterday or day before. He LIKES that idea, 5th Amendment be damned. from his press release, it will be used when: “a state prosecution has failed to vindicate the federal interest against hate-motivated violence” So if a State court has a trial and the defendant is found NOT GUILTY and the feds have a particular hard-on for that person's politics, such as DHS Secy Napolitano outlined earlier this year, then the Feds will drag the poor soul into Federal Court and do the deed on him/her. We can be quite sure that the Sotomayor type of "Justice" will have no problem with tossing out the 5th Amendment on that. After all the person charged is one of "those" This bill is about privileging some favored groups. political policing The long term goal is to eventually prosecute dissident voices on the internet, plain and simple. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said it was “patently offensive” that violence against one class of victims would be considered worse than violence against others. “We cannot have a colorblind society if we continue to write color-conscious laws,” he said. “It violates all the principles of equal justice under the law.” No law for little Jesse Dirkhising, he didn't qualify. So the Commisars are getting ready and they have supporters right here on collarchat.

DomKen -> RE: GAG THE INTERNET! (7/17/2009 11:58:56 AM)
Obviously federal civil rights laws, what whoever Jack45 copy/pasted above is complaining about, are completely unnecessary. Emmett Till's murderers were convicted quite easily in state court. Of course the state courts tried and convicted all those who had openly bragged about murdering Chaney, Goodman and Schwerner. Of course in reality Till's murderers never spent a second in jail and the murderers of the civil rights workers weren't even prosecuted in state court.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125