Slashdot Mirror

Her bill that she introduced near the end of this legislative session (the companion bill to Boucher's) would formally extend the doctrine of first sale to cover this sort of situation (i.e. once you've purchased a license, you can transfer your rights to another person or entity without the permission of the copyright owner). Then we wouldn't even be talking about all this.

According the site Jay Inslee has got most from MSFT, total of $237,400 - nice money already. He is one of the persons behind the "Internet Radio Fairness Act" - "designed to make the copyright royalty arbitration process more fair for smaller entities." What else has he been involved with?

According the site Jay Inslee has got most from MSFT, total of $237,400 - nice money already. He is one of the persons behind the "Internet Radio Fairness Act" - "designed to make the copyright royalty arbitration process more fair for smaller entities." What else has he been involved with?

My girlfriend is a political type (who's worked in DC for a Congressman, among other things, so she's pretty farmiliar with these sorts of things) and she assumes me that everything on a US House website must be approved by the bipartisan Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards or the "Franking Commission". (Commission on Congressional Mailing) I know this doesn't cover all viewpoints, but at least the two major parties have a say in the approval process.

With elections coming up (US) I wanted to poll the my candidates on where they stand regarding issues I care a lot
about (e.g. the DMCA,
CBDTPA, etc). This is not only time consuming when done
individually, but also tends to result in vague replies: For example Adam
Smith, (yes, that congressman, featured on Slashdot recently here and here) would not explicitly state whether he
supports or opposes Rep. Boucher's legislation on Digital Media Consumers' Rights (Although with the recent events coming to light about him
it seems to matter less). What I would like to know if there is a web site, where I can find out who the
slashdot-type community (i.e. EFF, DigitalSpeech, etc.) endorses (or opposes) in each race. It would be even
nicer if this would go down to the sate level.

With elections coming up (US) I wanted to poll the my candidates on where they stand regarding issues I care a lot
about (e.g. the DMCA,
CBDTPA, etc). This is not only time consuming when done
individually, but also tends to result in vague replies: For example Adam
Smith, (yes, that congressman, featured on Slashdot recently here and here) would not explicitly state whether he
supports or opposes Rep. Boucher's legislation on Digital Media Consumers' Rights (Although with the recent events coming to light about him
it seems to matter less). What I would like to know if there is a web site, where I can find out who the
slashdot-type community (i.e. EFF, DigitalSpeech, etc.) endorses (or opposes) in each race. It would be even
nicer if this would go down to the sate level.

With elections coming up (US) I wanted to poll the my candidates on where they stand regarding issues I care a lot
about (e.g. the DMCA,
CBDTPA, etc). This is not only time consuming when done
individually, but also tends to result in vague replies: For example Adam
Smith, (yes, that congressman, featured on Slashdot recently here and here) would not explicitly state whether he
supports or opposes Rep. Boucher's legislation on Digital Media Consumers' Rights (Although with the recent events coming to light about him
it seems to matter less). What I would like to know if there is a web site, where I can find out who the
slashdot-type community (i.e. EFF, DigitalSpeech, etc.) endorses (or opposes) in each race. It would be even
nicer if this would go down to the sate level.

With elections coming up (US) I wanted to poll the my candidates on where they $
about (e.g. the DMCA,
CBDTPA, etc). This is n$
individually, but also tends to result in vague replies: For example , (yes, that congressman, featured on Slashdot recently $
href="http://slashdot.org/articles/02/10/24/233 120 7.shtml?tid=167">here and$
href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/ 10/23/ 1320238&tid=117">here) wo$
supports or opposes Rep. Boucher's $
href="http://www.house.gov/boucher/docs/dmcraha ndo ut.htm">Digital Media Consume$
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-d yn/article s/A10655-2002Oct24.html">rece$
it seems to matter less). What I would like to know if there is a web site, whe$
slashdot-type community (i.e. EFF, DigitalSpeech, etc.) endorses (or oppos$
nicer if this would go down to the sate level.

EMPs are basically just sudden extremely intense electromagnetic fields that appear and disappear, producing something like one nanosecond worth of electric field in whatever is within range. They're extremely 'dirty' - there's a large range of frequencies, which complicates things. The actual magnitude of the field isn't that great, less than your average lightning strike, but the problem is the rate at which the pulse occurs - which is much faster.

Any conductor will pick up on this effect, like metal pipes, land lines, what have you, which naturally tends to destroy anything connected to said devices. Processors and such are particularly vulnerable to, as you say, heating to destruction, since the devices cannot dissipate the extra heat.

You're pretty much right both ways, I think, in that overheating and 'messed up electrons' probably go hand in hand.

Incidentally, this hearing suggests another effect of high-altitude nuclear bursts, which is to fill the Van Allen belt with radiation and thus destroy all the low-earth orbit satellites not specifically designed for a high - radiation environment.

they are often designed more to promote current office-holders than to conduct governmental affairs.

From: <Me>
From: webmaster@sec.senate.gov
Date: 10/11/2002

I was writing a script that helps people identify their senators and representatives when I noticed an error on: http://www.senate.gov/ senators/senator_by_state.cfm

If you look at the source code of the page, there is a link to former Senator Moynihan's site (http://moynihan.senate.gov) listed immediately before the link to Hillary Clinton's site. It doesn't show up on the page because there is no text inside the erroneous anchor tag, but it should still be corrected because I don't think Moynihan's coming back. Plus, it's confusing my script. :o)

-<Me>

--

From: webmaster@sec.senate.gov
From: <Me>
Date: 10/22/2002

Thanks. Moynihan is now gone :-)

<name expunged>
Senate Webmaster

"they are often designed more to promote current office-holders than to conduct governmental affairs."

And the other avenues of communications aren't? How is Congressman Tauzin's self-promotional website different from, say, the form letter I got from Congressman Tauzin explaining how good the Tauzin-Dingel through franked mail (who needs to buy stamps when you're a member of Congress?) in response to the complaint I sent to him about said bill? Tell me how that letter and all the other form letters various members of Congress send to concerned voters isn't just so much political advertising?

No, I'm not saying all members of Congress are guilty of this (at the very least somebody read letters I've sent to my Senators, for example), but there are some who are quite guilty of this, and all we've seen come of it is legislation against using franked mail within X number of days of election day.

Come back when you've noticed the problem in general and not just the websites in particular.

Here's a small Wisdom McNugget from my congressman, Rep. Adam Smith. Yes, it's Redmond's good old "Burger and Fries Metaphor(tm) again.
Some time back, Slashdot noted that MS had a congressional spam-o-matic page about the DoJ lawsuit, placed in a section where they knew only MS religionists would be bothering to read. Slashdot responded by posting up an article saying "Use this MS page to write your Congressman. Give our side of the story, politely." So I did, politely.
By way of reply, Rep. Smith placed me on his spam list, with monthly doses of more or less the same marketing horseshit as in the above McNugget, with no means of removal. Emails to the congressional sysadmin went unanswered, naturally, so I had to phone up Smith's office, and explain to some hapless young secretary at length how to remove my name from the mailing list.

It's worth noting that Rep. Smith and Agent Smith have never been seen together in the same photo. They are almost certainly the same person.

Here's a small Wisdom McNugget from my congressman, Rep. Adam Smith. Yes, it's Redmond's good old "Burger and Fries Metaphor(tm) again.
Some time back, Slashdot noted that MS had a congressional spam-o-matic page about the DoJ lawsuit, placed in a section where they knew only MS religionists would be bothering to read. Slashdot responded by posting up an article saying "Use this MS page to write your Congressman. Give our side of the story, politely." So I did, politely.
By way of reply, Rep. Smith placed me on his spam list, with monthly doses of more or less the same marketing horseshit as in the above McNugget, with no means of removal. Emails to the congressional sysadmin went unanswered, naturally, so I had to phone up Smith's office, and explain to some hapless young secretary at length how to remove my name from the mailing list.

It's worth noting that Rep. Smith and Agent Smith have never been seen together in the same photo. They are almost certainly the same person.

held hearings on the use of Personal Electronic Devices on aircraft to find out if the FAA's regulations banning their use had any merit. HERE is a memo about their findings.

As a WI taxpayer . . .

Clever -- but only by half. This is where his staff stops reading. If you're not from his Congressional district, there really is no reason to pay attention to you.

[Wisconsin has 9 congressional districts. It is apparent that the writer is from a district other than that which Rep. Kind represents, otherwise he would have written "As a constituent" rather than "As a Wisonsin taxpayer."]

Hmmm... I didn't find anything specific about prohibiting the GPL, but the New Democrats' "E-Genda 2002" sounds in line with the info posted at NewsForge. Of course, that could just be a smear campaign by their opponents.

Relevent links (Apologies in advance for the karma whoring :-)

Adam Smith's Statement on Technology and the New Economy

Press Release for "E-Genda 2002"

New Democrats E-Genda 2002 (full text)

Lister: "Knowledge is Power" -- who said that?
Rimmer: I don't know

Hmmm... I didn't find anything specific about prohibiting the GPL, but the New Democrats' "E-Genda 2002" sounds in line with the info posted at NewsForge. Of course, that could just be a smear campaign by their opponents.

Relevent links (Apologies in advance for the karma whoring :-)

Adam Smith's Statement on Technology and the New Economy

Press Release for "E-Genda 2002"

New Democrats E-Genda 2002 (full text)

Lister: "Knowledge is Power" -- who said that?
Rimmer: I don't know

Hmmm... I didn't find anything specific about prohibiting the GPL, but the New Democrats' "E-Genda 2002" sounds in line with the info posted at NewsForge. Of course, that could just be a smear campaign by their opponents.

Relevent links (Apologies in advance for the karma whoring :-)

Adam Smith's Statement on Technology and the New Economy

Press Release for "E-Genda 2002"

New Democrats E-Genda 2002 (full text)

Lister: "Knowledge is Power" -- who said that?
Rimmer: I don't know

Just glancing at stuff, a very disturbing aspect of the bill is that for an individual webcaster, it defines as "gross revenues" to include any revenue from media, entertainment, Internet or wireless business where the individual owns more than %5. I don't really know, if this is how it works, but if Joe Blow owns a computer consulting company doing wireless installs, (or hell has 5% of it), and he streams mp3s somewhere, does he have to pay licensing and royalty fees on the revenues of his business?!?!?!?

Looks like Gephardt and some other Democrats opposed it.

According to a study by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), a single heavy truck, weighing 80,000 pounds, can do as much damage to roads and bridges as 9,600 passenger cars. Furthermore, the Federal Highway Administration estimates that a 90,000-pound truck would create two-thirds more wear and tear on the infrastructure than one weighing 80,000 pounds.

I haven't looked thru AASHTO's web site yet.

TIVO shares customer data
TIVO shares customer data
TIVO shares customer data
Or how about the US Govt. writing TIVO a letter admonishing them for their privacy policy tactics?
TIVO's response to getting slammed by some privacy group (which is cached on Google).
but mysteriously, I can't find it on their site.

Phiilips announces wquity investment in TIVO cached on Google.

To be perfectly clear, I like what TIVO can do, but not what they do.

Hell, I have a few complaints about ReplayTV:

• Latency with remote control can be infuriating. I wish there were 3rd party remote controls as my older model can't work without it and my wife has no concept of being gentle with it.
• Recently will not get as much advanced programming - only about a week now, when it used to do 2.5 weeks.
• New units charge programming fee, just like TIVO (the original reason I chose Replay over TIVO.
• Can't mod as easy as TIVO
• Tech support by 3rd party comany

At the end of the day though, I feel a lot more comfortable with Replay having my personal info than TIVO.

A year or so ago, I read an article on a guy who was monitoring the data that went from his TIVO out (used a computer as the go between) and found that they were transmitting more user specific data than they admited to. I'll try to find a link...

If patents only lasted for 10-20 years and then became public domain. Widgets and sprockets could be produced by anyone, crushing monopolies and allowing new technologies to be created from the combining of previously uncombinable ideas.

but they try to blind military personnel.

It's not the individuals who are making the stink about it, its the big corporations. The corps and the laws they can get their congresscritters to pass. So write your congresscritter. Also, you would be interested in this bill where Rep. Lofgren basically codifies what you are trying to get across.

frob.

I think it's more likely a rookie reporter with an overworked editor excercising his twenty-first amendment rights.

I submitted this to /., but it was rejected...

This is from her website...

Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) today introduced legislation designed to protect consumer's ability to enjoy digital copyrighted material. Lofgren's bill, the "Digital Choice and Freedom Act of 2002," gives lawful consumers the ability to make personal uses of digital entertainment such as music, movies, and books. In addition, the bill recognizes that digital piracy will never be truly solved until consumers are given an affordable, reliable, legitimate and secure alternative.

"Consumers need a voice in this debate. Right now, it is the entertainment industry versus the technology industry, and the consumers are watching from the sidelines," said Lofgren. "Consumers have rights and expectations that cannot be ignored by industry goliaths."

I believe you are not aware of the whole picture about the big drug companies. Drugs companies at least spend twice as much money on marketing than they do on actually R&D. Also, to cut costs, they tend to take an existing patented drug that is about to expire, modify a bit so a new patent can be obtained, and then market it as a new improved version of the older drug.

The U.S. is the only major country that allows a private company to obtain exclusive rights on a patent where research received funding from public dollars. Hence, people pay up to twice as much for prescription drugs than in countries like Britain, Japan, and Australia.

Big pharma is now just a big marketing engine, where only the real innovative research is mainly being done by public funds.

Some articles worth reading:
http://www.namiscc.org/newsletters/July01/DrugPric es.htm
http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/apr01/scrip0204 0101.asp
http://bernie.house.gov/documents/articles/2001-07 -21-nat_journal-Rx_Drugs.asp
http://abcnews.go.com/onair/ABCNEWSSpecials/pharma ceuticals_020529_pjr_feature.html
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/3240359.ht ml
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=5 34&u=/ap/20021001/ap_on_go_co/drug_wars&printe r=1
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=5 34&u=/ap/20021002/ap_on_he_me/pharmaceutical_marke ting&printer=1
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/showthread.php?thread id=420
http://www.prospect.org/print/V12/17/elliott-c.htm l
http://www.prwatch.org/forum/showthread.php?thread id=638
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename= article&node=&contentId=A1208-2001Jul15&notFound=t rue

She doesn't really expect to push it, or for it to pass.

[Personal Identifying info deleted]

Thank you for your kind words of support regarding my new bill, the Digital Choice and Freedom Act (H.R. 5522). I appreciate the time you took to contact me.

I have been thrilled that consumers from across the country and across the globe have emailed me their positive comments about the Digital Choice and Freedom Act. As you know, this bill seeks to maintain in the digital age the same balance that existing U.S. copyright law establishes between the interest of copyright holders in controlling the use of their works and the interests of the public in the free flow of ideas, information and commerce. The full text of my bill, along with a section-by-section analysis, is available on my website at http://zoelofgren.house.gov/.

Since you do not reside in the 16th California Congressional District, you may also wish to let your own Representative know your views on this subject.

Again, thank you for your support.

Sincerely,

Zoe Lofgren
Member of Congress

1. Find out who your Representative is at www.house.gov/writerep . The form wants your zip+4, and they give you the link to the USPS to find your 4 digit extension.

2. The next form will tell you who your Representative is, and let you send a text message to your Representative, -or-

3. Go to clerk.house.gov/members/index.php and find the office of your Representative and give them a call. They have nice people there to take down exactly these types of calls. Tell the person that you want to express your support for "Zoe Lofgren's Digital Choice and Freedom Act of 2002", and they will ask for your name and there you go.

So don't just sit there, call/write/email your Representative and let them know how you feel.

I'd really like to see a "forward this email" campaign with information about why this bill/proposal is so good, and including the information on how to contact your Representative. I'd start one but I don't know the best way to phrase the rest of the information.

1. Find out who your Representative is at www.house.gov/writerep . The form wants your zip+4, and they give you the link to the USPS to find your 4 digit extension.

2. The next form will tell you who your Representative is, and let you send a text message to your Representative, -or-

3. Go to clerk.house.gov/members/index.php and find the office of your Representative and give them a call. They have nice people there to take down exactly these types of calls. Tell the person that you want to express your support for "Zoe Lofgren's Digital Choice and Freedom Act of 2002", and they will ask for your name and there you go.

So don't just sit there, call/write/email your Representative and let them know how you feel.

I'd really like to see a "forward this email" campaign with information about why this bill/proposal is so good, and including the information on how to contact your Representative. I'd start one but I don't know the best way to phrase the rest of the information.

Here's what I wrote to Jim Davis:

Sir:

I have just heard of new legislation that U.S. Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (16th Congressional District, California) is proposing. As both a software developer and someone who appreciates art in any form, be it written, musical, video or otherwise, I would strongly encourage you to read this new proposal, if you have not already, in hopes that you may lend your support. Relevant website links are below.

Thank you for your time.

http://www.house.gov/lofgren/press/107press/021002 _summary.htm

http://www.house.gov/zoelofgren

• Find out what congressional district you live inLook up
• Call your congressperson's office. Get them on the phone and tell them you want them to vote for this bill
• If you get your congressman on the phone, schedule an appointment. If you cant' schedule an appointment, write 2 letters, yes 2.
• 
  
  The legislative process only works if you involve yourself. Oh, and don't forget to vote!.
  

JOhn.

From the press release summary:(I've added the bold...)

SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS OF "THE DIGITAL CHOICE AND FREEDOM ACT OF 2002"

SECTION 1: Designates the title as "The Digital Choice and Freedom Act of 2002."

SECTION 2: Lists factual findings.

SECTION 3: (a) Section (a) clarifies that America's historic principles of fair use - codified in section 107 of Title 17 - apply to analog and digital transmissions...

...Section (b) seeks to restore the balance by adding section 123 to Title 17. Section 123 allows lawful consumers to make backup copies of digital works, and to use digital works on preferred digital media devices. It further protects consumers by prohibiting non-negotiable "click-wrap" licenses that limit their rights and expectations...

SECTION 4: Today, when a consumer purchases a book, they are free to lend their copy to a friend or family member, or to sell their copy to a used books store. Section 4 allows consumers to do the same thing with digital content by extending the first sale doctrine...

SECTION 5: ..."As the House Judiciary Report accompanying the DMCA stated: "[A]n individual [should] not be able to circumvent in order to gain unauthorized access to a work, but should be able to do so in order to make fair use of a work which he or she has acquired lawfully."

Section 5 reaffirms this intent, while also providing needed flexibility for the copyright owner. Under section 5, a copyright owner is free to employ technical measures to protect his or her work. However, the copyright owner must ensure that those measures allow lawful consumers to make non-infringing uses of the work... Since most consumers do not have the expertise needed to circumvent such protections, Section 5 permits tools if they are designed, produced and marketed to help consumers make non-infringing uses. Again, these tools are only permissible if the copyright owner fails to give consumers a choice by restricting legitimate uses without providing any solution for the legitimate user.

Just called Representative Lofgren's office to say thanks. Even if you don't vote for her directly you can say thanks too :)

JOhn

Snail mail to the federal government now costs us a lot in taxes, and doesn't get to the people very quickly. This is because all mail to the Capitol is diverted to a remote facility, where, in a long FIFO, it is decontaminated (Cl2O, maybe), then opened and faxed to the appropriate office. Email is actually more likely to be read, and better yet is their "write your rep" link, which weeds out the automailers that dilute the effectiveness of email.

But there are others who don't share your convictions about property rights and are currently attempting to march me into the woods for political re-education.

But we don't confiscate people's property and pass it out because people want it for free.

But there are others who don't share your convictions about property rights and are currently attempting to march me into the woods for political re-education.

But we don't confiscate people's property and pass it out because people want it for free.

Here's a link to the full text (PDF) of the bill to legalize hack attacks by the copyright industry.

As far as I can tell Definition (2) `peer-to-peer file trading network' applies to virtually any internet aware program, even ordinary web browsers. Browsing the web is nothing more than "request[ing] the transmission of [HTML]files". Ordinary links "enable the designation of files or data on the connected computers as available for transmission".

-

As much as we think you can't be more famous than when you're mentioned in Slashdot, not everybody reads this site. I think anybody who lives in or near her District and care about her goals should go out and help, print out posters and informational leaflets about her/her campaign and DDoS the real world with it. But ask her first if it'd be okay.

Coble's website got nothing compared to hers, and looking at her photo doesn't scare me away either.

The "Write Your Representative" service can be accessed at http://www.house.gov/writerep/.

Can the general public use these tags? I understand that this system was set up in co-operation between the government and two companies that sound like lobbiests for hire.

How does my cousin in SF use this system to make sure his email will get to his senator? Does he have to go to one of these two companies and pay them to lable his email correctly?

Am I jumping to conclusions? Reading this quote.

In the House, groups could funnel their communications through the "Write Your Representative" Web form,

It sounds like you have to be a special interest group who has paid for the system to use it. This system might be used to filter all email, but if the general public aren't informed of how to use it, then their email will be sent to /dev/null.

Maybe there should be a web page at http://www.house.gov/ that would let you use this system, then you mom-and-pop AOL users can get "equal time".

This is also despite the lack of scientific evidence linking G forces to brain injury, and 320 million riders who turn out just fine every year.

This is also despite the lack of scientific evidence linking G forces to brain injury, and 320 million riders who turn out just fine every year.

What does make him different is that he's recruiting from a population who see their "brothers" being shot by Israeli troops in US made tanks with US made guns calling in US made aircraft for support.

This attempt to blame Israel for bin Laden is no different from those who attempt to blame the US -- the two basic flaws in this argument are as follows:

First off, the only thing Israel is doing which is infuriating to the Islamist radicals is existing at all. Time after time, Israel has met every demand made by the Palestinian leadership, only to be met with a fresh wave of murder-suicide bombings, and a fresh wave of demands. Time after time, the Palestinian leaders have told their own people that they will not be satisfied until all of Israel is theirs -- indeed the only difference between Arafat and the leadership of Hamas and Hizbollah is that Arafat occasionally says something different in English, while saying the same old things in Arabic.

Second, central to your argument here is the idea that we should be setting our foreign policy not based on what is right or just, but on what will appease the radical Islamists, what will (allegedly) placate madmen like Mr. bin Laden and his followers. Do you really believe this? If so, perhaps the mistakes at Munich have not been completely realized by your generation of Englishmen...

Well, New York has close ties with a specific group (the IRA) which killed 2000+ of our (UK) citizens. Should the Prime Minister send the troops into the Bronx?

If you had credible evidence of state sponsorship of terrorism here which posed an immediate threat to Great Britain, and there were no other means to solve the problem, that would indeed be an acceptable solution under international law. That isn't the case, though, and even the description you give, is at best extremely stretched.

What proof is there that Iraq is a threat to the US?

You can start with the testimony of David A. Kay and Richard Spertzel, both former heads of the UN weapons inspections program in Iraq, on the state of Mr. Hussein's weapons programs.

But you seem to think that it's okay if Mr. Hussein has a nuke, since you think he won't use it. What you miss is that he doesn't need to use it himself to be a danger to us -- he has demonstrated links to al Qaeda, and could arm them with such a weapon while maintaining enough deniability to make deterrence useless, and more importantly, you miss that this is not a man with a history of rational behavior. You may be content when all that stands between us and the nuking of one of our cities is Mr. Hussein's tenuous grip on sanity, but I will not, and thus am not willing to see it get to that point.

What does make him different is that he's recruiting from a population who see their "brothers" being shot by Israeli troops in US made tanks with US made guns calling in US made aircraft for support.

This attempt to blame Israel for bin Laden is no different from those who attempt to blame the US -- the two basic flaws in this argument are as follows:

First off, the only thing Israel is doing which is infuriating to the Islamist radicals is existing at all. Time after time, Israel has met every demand made by the Palestinian leadership, only to be met with a fresh wave of murder-suicide bombings, and a fresh wave of demands. Time after time, the Palestinian leaders have told their own people that they will not be satisfied until all of Israel is theirs -- indeed the only difference between Arafat and the leadership of Hamas and Hizbollah is that Arafat occasionally says something different in English, while saying the same old things in Arabic.

Second, central to your argument here is the idea that we should be setting our foreign policy not based on what is right or just, but on what will appease the radical Islamists, what will (allegedly) placate madmen like Mr. bin Laden and his followers. Do you really believe this? If so, perhaps the mistakes at Munich have not been completely realized by your generation of Englishmen...

Well, New York has close ties with a specific group (the IRA) which killed 2000+ of our (UK) citizens. Should the Prime Minister send the troops into the Bronx?

If you had credible evidence of state sponsorship of terrorism here which posed an immediate threat to Great Britain, and there were no other means to solve the problem, that would indeed be an acceptable solution under international law. That isn't the case, though, and even the description you give, is at best extremely stretched.

What proof is there that Iraq is a threat to the US?

You can start with the testimony of David A. Kay and Richard Spertzel, both former heads of the UN weapons inspections program in Iraq, on the state of Mr. Hussein's weapons programs.

But you seem to think that it's okay if Mr. Hussein has a nuke, since you think he won't use it. What you miss is that he doesn't need to use it himself to be a danger to us -- he has demonstrated links to al Qaeda, and could arm them with such a weapon while maintaining enough deniability to make deterrence useless, and more importantly, you miss that this is not a man with a history of rational behavior. You may be content when all that stands between us and the nuking of one of our cities is Mr. Hussein's tenuous grip on sanity, but I will not, and thus am not willing to see it get to that point.

See (free registration required) or here.

The UNFCCC addresses all greenhouse gases, which it defines as "those gaseous constituents of the atmosphere, both natural and manmade, that absorb and re-emit infrared radiation" Such gases include: (1) water vapor and clouds, which account for about 96 percent of the greenhouse effect; (2) CO2, 3.3 percent; (3) methane (CH4), 0.5 percent; and (4) all other gases, 0.2 percent.

Okay, let's find the flaws

Perens is an idealist and a radical. Radicals have their history twisted to make them look like *evil* bastards by their opponents, and idealism is an impediment in politics. You want to *look* like you're an idealist, not be one.

There actually is at least one representative that has a pretty strong alignment with the pro-free-use, anti-government-regulated-Internet types that frequent Slashdot -- Rep. Boucher, from VA. He's figured prominently as the "good guy" in a number of Slashdot stories, and makes me feel good about the legislative branch, despite a few despicable legislators like the Senator from Disneyland.

Also, geeks will get a lot more support at the minute, as the telecom and tech companies are buying off legislators left and right.

"I would scream it from the rooftops if I felt it would do any good: CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM! It may not solve every problem, but strong, enforced CFR would at least help."

The laws are a joke and I should know. All campaign finance reform laws have done is increased the amount of paperwork required to run for office. I have to file paperwork with the Louisiana Ethics Comission, the Clerk of the House the Federal Election Commissions, and I have to send a copy of FEC paperwork to the Louisiana Department of State. All that paperwork does is provide another bureaucratic layer for the candidates to hide behind. Does it increase public access to information on my funding? Not really. Most people don't even know of the existance of these organizations, let alone how to obtain copies of the papers I've filed. It sure as hell isn't as informative to the general public as this, but most politicians want you to know as little about them as possible. It seems that most major candidates spend more time running interference on each other than actually sharing information with the voting public.

"The rich and powerful are vastly overrepresented in the legislatures, some effort at restoring balance is incredibly important."

You're not going to get it with the current batch of party sheep. If anything, they know what they needed to get into office themselves and aren't about to give it up easily.

"I'm a Democrat, but if McCain had been on the ballot I would have voted for him in a heartbeat."

Maybe too many Americans are too busy toeing the party line to see that most of the problems lie in the current two-paty system in the US. Guess how all those legislators probably got all their money? It was likely all funnelled through the state and national Democratic and Republican committees. All that most of the required election paperwork seems to have accomplished is to make sure more money is funnelled ("laundered?") through the party rather than going to the politician directly.

"Now we have a President that has spent over half of his time in office either on vacation or fund raising, or a combination thereof."

Which is completely different from what Clinton, Bush, Regan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, Eisenhower, Truman, Roosevelt, Hoover, Coolidge, Taft, Wilson, Harding, Roosevelt, or McKinley have done in office? Should I go through the nineteenth century as well?

Most of the "this president is the most lazy/money-grubbing yet" stuff is just talk from the other party. If anything it's just more politicians running political interference. We have an executive that is very much alone and very easy for the press to focus on, and we have 535 legislators that can easily hide behind each other and can generally get away with more individually and as a group than the president. In my opinion, all this party nonsense about bad-mouthing the president's policies is little more than Congress keeping the attention shifted away from the real seat of corruption in government.

And the same goes for the states as well. Most governors would know better than to shoot themselves in the political foot by vetoing a bill with a title like that. But if it never gets to the governor's office to begin with, who's the wiser?

The only real solution to this problem is both very simple and the one nobody ever brings up:

1.) Go find the California Legislature on the internet

2.) Find the bill on-line

3.) See which state Senators voted against it (whoever is represented by Senator Haynes is in luck, otherwise...). The measure passed the State Assembly, but it might be worth seeing who voted against it there as well.

4.) Vote against them next election. In fact, tell them you're going to do so. Better yet, run against the bastard yourself. It's a cushy job and looks good on a resume at the very least.

It's that easy! And you're still not going to do it, are you? Most people don't even know their national legislators, let alone their legislators at the state level. Nobody even bothers to vote for anybody in the state governments, except maybe the governor. Maybe. This is probably little more than the state legislators showing the same contempt for the voters as the voters seem to have for the legislators. They listen to campaign contributors because they're usually the only people talking to them.