Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: issues2000.org

Stories and comments across the archive that link to issues2000.org.

Comments · 73

  1. Information on spectrum giveaway and renewal by Sarcasmooo! · · Score: 5, Insightful · on Spectrum Wars: The Hidden Battle
    The digital spectrum, estimated to be worth $70 billion, was given away in 1996, to existing broadcasters. Prior to that, the spectrum was public property due to be auctioned off to broadcasters; after all, who but the public as a whole could be justified in having defacto ownership of something so widespread and intangible? Auctions like these created a balance of public interests, and offered opportunities to American businesses. By 'renting' this public property, business could flourish while operating under guidelines that ensured the public's airwaves would serve the public good. A plutocratic minority would love to tell you about how the evil government is censoring their broadcasts, but the truth is that airwaves that are won through these auctions are regulated by a 'public good' that is defined by public commentary to the FCC. These auctions are the ultimate example of free-market in a democracy, because the buck stops at the people.

    But with the Telecommunications Act of 1996, it was Trent Lott who prohibited the auctions, and forced the FCC to give licenses away. The act also prohibited consideration of anyone but the renewal applicant for the license, assuring that only the owners of the ill-gotten licenses would be keeping them, and I quote:
    `(4) COMPETITOR CONSIDERATION PROHIBITED- In making the
    determinations specified in paragraph (1) or (2), the
    Commission shall not consider whether the public interest,
    convenience, and necessity might be served by the grant of a
    license to a person other than the renewal applicant.'.


    You do the math.

    Deciding whether to side with the FCC or with Corporate America in this matter is easy. I live in a democracy; if I don't like the government I can run for office and change it. I don't like Carnivore, Echelon, the DMCA, and I would like to play a significant role in having the NSA and the CIA dissolved and opened to the scrutiny of the world. Why does it work this way when 90% of the country, left and right, libertarian and conservative, doesn't like it? Why can't I change the way this government works? It's because no one takes office without large corporate donors behind them, and no one campaigns without the millions of dollars needed to get themselves on corporate airwaves. The public would never know your name, and that would gaurantee you a sideline seat for the election debates that, by the way, happen to be corporate-sponsored as well. It's one big joke.
  2. Corporate-Welfare dept. by Sarcasmooo! · · Score: 2 · on The Great .us Giveaway

    This is another example in case anyone is wondering what that term means. There are several ways to contact The Department of Commerce to tell them what you think, (check the bottom of the page).

  3. Re:Cable TV by Sarcasmooo! · · Score: 1 · on Macropayments: ISPs pay Content Providers for Access

    I meant to include this here link that gives the short version of the story.

  4. This is why this site sucks. by b0r1s · · Score: 4 · on Technology Issues by Candidate

    Instead of taking a few seconds to check the actual url, this fine person is trying to post early so that he gets modded up. This might be a decent post, had he: 1) checked which url actually works, and 2) taken a few seconds to make it into a real link.

    For everyone else, here's the link.


  5. Re:Who would you vote for? by Chalst · · Score: 2 · on Presidential Answers, Round One

    According to issues2000 there are eight candidates.

  6. Buchanan and Nader by ChristTrekker · · Score: 1 · on Politics With A Slice Of Lemon

    What is it about the Reform and Green parties that earns them better-than-typical-3rd-party status at sites like issues2000.org and webwhiteblue.org? More and more I am seeing these candidates presented as "real" candidates in web forums while other 3rd parties are left in the "other" column. (Of course, they're all ignored by mainstream media.) What's the deal? Why not equal treatment for all?

    I'm not trying to troll, here. If someone could explain why Buchanan and Nader have such (media) appeal, I'd appreciate it. I'd really like to know. Maybe I've overlooked something.

  7. Browne == anti-choice libertarian by Anne+Marie · · Score: 3 · on Politics With A Slice Of Lemon

    How can the man call himself a libertarian when he's profoundly anti-choice about abortion?

  8. Look at the Options! by Quotha · · Score: 2 · on Politics and The Almighty Buck
    Your vote is only truly wasted if you don't take the time to evaluate the real breadth of options out there.

    Here is the SHORT list:
    sort @lastname;

    • Harry Browne (Libertarian)
    • Pat Buchanan (Reform)
    • George W. Bush (Republican)
    • Al Gore (Democrat)
    • John Hagelin (Natural Law)
    • David McReynolds (Socialist)
    • Ralph Nader (Green)
    • Howard Phillips (Constitution)
    Since CmdrTaco is down on candidate's websites today, I'll just link to issues2000.org where you can find out what each candidate intends to do about your favorite topic. But it won't tell you much about the candidates personality and only indirectly about their charachter.
  9. If you're having trouble deciding who to vote for by embo · · Score: 1 · on Should You Vote?

    I found these sites to be extremely helpful:

    http://www.issues2000.org
    http://www.speakout.com/votematch/index2.asp

    I don't know about any bias or anything like that on these sites, but there is a wealth of information about issues and candidates. The quiz was particularly helpful for me.

  10. Re:War on Drugs by interiot · · Score: 2 · on Ask the Presidential Candidates
    http://www.issues2000.org/Drugs.htm


    Also:

    Al Gore: Gore worked to reduce the influence of drugs. The Administration Proposed the Largest Anti-Drug Budgets Ever. The Administration requested $19.2 billion in the FY01 budget to fight the war on drugs.

    George Dubya: On the supply side, Governor Bush will improve interdiction and stop drugs before they reach our children. He will use better intelligence and surveillance to track and catch drug smugglers before they reach our borders. He will ensure that the INS hires the full allotment of Border Patrol agents required under law. Right now, the GAO reports that the INS had "a net shortfall of 594 agents for the 3-year period ending September 30, 1999." Governor Bush will hire more agents, and will reform the INS to better focus on its job of defending our border.
    --

  11. Interesting, but... by Deosyne · · Score: 3 · on Slashdot, The Elections, and Space Exploration

    While I did enjoy reading up on Bush's and Gore's viewpoint as they specifically relate to space and other sciences, I find it rather sad that they are yet again the only candidates to get a mention. It appears that the folks at NASA Watch took some time to find out about the candidates' viewpoints on the space program, but they couldn't spend just a few minutes learning who the other candidates running on the majority of the ballots were and what they thought? I understand the thinking behind the whole "wasted vote" philosophy which so many people abide by and therefore disregard third party candidates, but it is that kind of thinking which has resulted in this two party oligarchy that currently holds power in the USA today and will continue to do so until people learn that you shouldn't vote against a candidate but for a candidate. The Republican Party was a third party once as well, until a guy by the name of Abraham Lincoln ran on their ticket back in 1860, and that was 140 years ago, when to find out what candidates were about, you had to run your dumb ass all over hell and gone just to catch a rally and hear what they were about. These days, we have so much info without ever getting off of our asses, that there really is no excuse for not knowing who's running, what their stances are, etc.

    If you are still in the dark, cruise over to www.vote-smart.org to get a brief view of the candidates and links to their official sites, or for a cool website concerning the candidates' stances on many issues, check out Issues2000.org. Oh, and don't neglect to learn about your local Congresscritters, either, especially since their decisions have a hell of a lot more impact on your daily life than the president's does. Whatever you do, don't just whine about not being able to make a difference, because that's a load of horseshit; even if your candidate of choice doesn't win, at least your vote is officially tallied so that whoever is elected will realize that, although they may have won, there is a large number of people, voting people, who support a different way of doing things and that they do well to find out why so many people voted a certain way. So go out, learn about the candidates and their views, decide who you would like to support and, most importantly:

    Vote!

    Deo

  12. Re:Technology Platforms by necerra · · Score: 1 · on Dark Hearts And The Net
    For political information that matters including technology views . This site looks at *all* the candidates including Ralph Nader and Harry Brown.

    Make a difference in the world before someone else decides your fate for you. Get out and vote.

  13. The Opinion Oligopoly by Shut+Up · · Score: 1 · on The New Mediascape

    I always hated politics because television's presentation of it was so stupid. Web sites like issues2000.org changed my attitude. Consider this little rant by Ralph Nader that criticizes the boring political views of pundits who are pigeonholed into "liberal" and "conservative" categories by their superiors.

  14. Nader? Facts please... by gruntvald · · Score: 1 · on BSD And Politics

    Try popping a few facts to back up your statement, or maybe check out The Issues if you don't have any.

  15. political tools by nomadic · · Score: 5 · on Online Politics - Will it Work?

    Regarding political tools, http://www.issues2000.org might be helpful; it lists each major candidate's stand on just about every conceivable issue. I haven't really examined it in-depth, but it appears pretty objective and even-handed.

    As for who is the "geek" candidate, I'd say Gore probably fits the geek image better than anyone else (George W.'s frat boy "might not know much but I can hire advisors" mentality seems diametrically opposed to what most geeks hold dear). And yes, Gore didn't invent the Internet, but he was instrumental in getting government funding for DARPAnet, and as far as politicians go, he's one of the most informed on technological issues. Personally, I'd like to finally see someone in the White House who's on the right side of environmental issues (while I believe George W. would pretty much try to gut the EPA, which is what Reagan tried to do in the 80's).
    --

  16. Ralph Nader on Technology by ekmo · · Score: 3 · on Online Politics - Will it Work?

    http://www.issues2000.org/Ralp h_Nader_Technology.htm

  17. Taco's full of shit by Syberghost · · Score: 2 · on 2600 Staffer Arrested During Republican Convention

    (This has no relevance, but I'm abusing Slashdot to say that I think Bush is a rotten candidate, and while I don't like Gore, I would vote for a malignant carbon rod for president before I would vote for GWB).

    So instead of doing something rational, like voting for a candidate who shares your views, you're going to vote for a schlub who thinks it ought to be legal for the government to tell you to shut up.

    I've met George Jr., and while I haven't met Al I've met Str^H^H^HTipper Gore, and told her she was a dangerous idiot to her face. (Well, she heard me, anyway.)

    Between the two of them, I'd have to vote for Harry Browne

    At least he doesn't think the government should be able to force all schools to censor Internet access if they want Federal funding, or support the v-chip. (Which they both do.)

    --

  18. Taco's full of shit by Syberghost · · Score: 2 · on 2600 Staffer Arrested During Republican Convention

    (This has no relevance, but I'm abusing Slashdot to say that I think Bush is a rotten candidate, and while I don't like Gore, I would vote for a malignant carbon rod for president before I would vote for GWB).

    So instead of doing something rational, like voting for a candidate who shares your views, you're going to vote for a schlub who thinks it ought to be legal for the government to tell you to shut up.

    I've met George Jr., and while I haven't met Al I've met Str^H^H^HTipper Gore, and told her she was a dangerous idiot to her face. (Well, she heard me, anyway.)

    Between the two of them, I'd have to vote for Harry Browne

    At least he doesn't think the government should be able to force all schools to censor Internet access if they want Federal funding, or support the v-chip. (Which they both do.)

    --

  19. Re:Payback by J4 · · Score: 3 · on Sen. Hatch Warns Labels: Don't Make Me Come Spank You

    Orrin Hatch _is_ a republican.
    IIRC he was also a shit stirrer in the MS anti trust suit.

    Here are his positions on a few items.

  20. more fluff than a pillow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Al Gore's Webmaster Answers Your Questions
    Our site has the most content, the most detailed content, more interactive features of ANY of the presidential campaign sites - AND it runs on Linux and PHP!

    Don't they all say that? :) I don't know I see 98% fluff too. Most of my presidential information has come from issues2000.org. They're more objective.

    The only site I've found that is more content than fluff is Libertarian Harry Browne's website (shamless plug? ehh not really). Bush, McCain,Bradley,Gore...fluff,promise,fluff.

    And I wonder why less than 40% of people vote?
  21. Find out where the candidates stand on the issues by Silmaril · · Score: 1 · on Geeks, Geek Issues and Voting

    These sites show where the candidates stand on the issues: www.issues2000.org and www.selectsmart.com.

  22. Re:Ralph Nader Pro gun? by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 2 · on Geeks, Geek Issues and Voting
    Of course I am speaking relative to other candidates. Nader supports the Brady Bill, which has a lot of good ideas in it (now that instant background checking exists, and not counting the 10-round limit on detatchable magazines), and wants to implement "carefully thought out gun control." (emphasis mine) Compare this to:

    It should be noted that Buchannan, Hatch, Keyes, Forbes and Bauer are similar to Browne in supporting gun rights. But all of these candidates (except Browne) are too fascist for me. Browne is Libertarian, which I have some issues with, although nowhere nearly as many as with the GOP in general.

  23. Re:Ralph Nader Pro gun? by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 2 · on Geeks, Geek Issues and Voting
    Of course I am speaking relative to other candidates. Nader supports the Brady Bill, which has a lot of good ideas in it (now that instant background checking exists, and not counting the 10-round limit on detatchable magazines), and wants to implement "carefully thought out gun control." (emphasis mine) Compare this to:

    It should be noted that Buchannan, Hatch, Keyes, Forbes and Bauer are similar to Browne in supporting gun rights. But all of these candidates (except Browne) are too fascist for me. Browne is Libertarian, which I have some issues with, although nowhere nearly as many as with the GOP in general.