Slashdot Mirror
Congressional Candidate Over P2P & DRM
Dark Nexus writes "Wired is running an article on a woman in North Carolina who has chosen to run against Howard Coble, who has come out against P2P networks. She said that she was sick of "individual rights sacrificed for big corporate politics" and is campaigning for digital rights to be preserved. A quote from her weblog: "I have put myself in the bullseye to stand up for our rights as free thinking citizens." It's about time someone stood up and tried to run against one of Hollywood's Congressmen on Hollywood's key issues." Update: 08/23 21:10 GMT by M : We're getting enough submissions of this story that we're probably going to post it on the front page.
Don't just do that.
If you have the time, volunteer!
This is very much a grass roots candidate. She'll be running against VERY deep pockets since she's up against one of Hollywood's bigboys.
Getting the geeks out to vote isn't enough on it's own, she has to capture some of the popular vote. If she makes even a decent showing without winning, it might just send a message to Washington.
I don't expect she'll win. But if she does better than expected, it'll help get more people involved in future elections. Maybe at the next one, we'll see a larger number of candidates standing up against Hollywood.
Dark Nexus
"Sanity is calming, but madness is more interesting."
The end of the article mentions that part of the issue facing the Tech community is that we don't have financial contributors and lobby groups. What the article fails to realize is that many in the movement (at least here on /., anyway) oppose such activity as cheating and corruption.
Question: Which is more important, the end of such corruption in politics, or the assertion of digital rights?
Those who complain about affect & effect on
The chairs are elected positions, which usually end up being appointed by each party, ususlly on seniority. People with an interest can usually get a committee that they wish to, with the execption if House Ways & Means, House Rules, Senate Finance, and Both Oversight there are others but they are similarly powerful committees. Those are the ones that usually decide funding for a large part of the government, so everyone wants to be on them. The newly elected congresswoman, if she were to win the election would not inherit the commitees of the outgoing congressman, since they usually have quite a bit less seniority. Also since the senate has fewer commitees, senators ususally serve on several, while house memebers only have a few committees they sit.
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
I was a little young then, so could you enlighten me on how Ross Perot's 20% in 1992 influenced the two parties (other than taking the majority of that 20% from the Pubs)? Not being a smartass -- it's a serious question.
"You're never ready, just less unprepared."
Who is Coble's Democratic Opponent?
Anybody know where they stand on user rights?
I'm a little hazy on that myself, but Perot no doubt set up the conditions for the Contract with America and a whole lot of limited-government, more-accountability electioneering. That in turn led to the Republicans capturing the House of Representatives in 1994 (with some help from Clinton's utter cluelessness on the issues of energy policy and health care). Perot dragged the Republican party away from the Religious Right for a little while and toward a more consistent stance on limited and efficient government (rather than "limited only where it doesn't offend our preachers"); unfortunately, it has fallen back.
Scientists restrict study to entire physical universe; creationist
our personal vote for any "3rd party" candidate makes MORE difference than your vote for Disneycrats or Ruperticans. Consider that a "3rd party" only needs to make a substantial showing to "influence" political policy - if the Libertarians, for example, got 20% of the vote, they certainly wouldn't "win", but "the two parties" would almost certainly moderate their policies, at least in the open, in a "libertarian direction" in an attempt to "win back" some of that chunk
;-)
yes! This cannot be stressed enough! Most new political ideas come from the "third parties" and are later adopted reluctantly by the Democrats and Republicans. Those parties want the STATUS QUO, not new ideas that threaten their cushy jobs and sweet campaign financing from big business.
Third party candidates (such as Ralph Nader) are not spoilers. The two main candidates' political platforms are spoiling their elections for them. In 2004, do you think Al Gore will become more right/moderate in an attempt to steal votes from Bush? or will Gore try to sound more liberal in an attempt to steal Ralph Nader votes?
anyways, I'll be voting for Jesse Ventura in 2004..
cpeterso
Which congressmen/women are *not* in the MPAA's back pocket.
Rick Boucher. Maybe Leahy...
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
anyways, I'll be voting for Jesse Ventura in 2004.
Hell, if he runs, I'd probably vote for the man... He's not afraid to speak his mind even if it pisses people off ("Religion is a crutch...").
Of course, if he was elected, he should probably not take part in extracurricular activities (XFL anyone?).
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
Apparently so!
sulli
RTFJ.
I was a little young then, so could you enlighten me on how Ross Perot's 20% in 1992 influenced the two parties (other than taking the majority of that 20% from the Pubs)? Not being a smartass -- it's a serious question.
... a technology that had been around for a decade or two by then and was familiar to anyone who ever bothered to go out and shop for themselves.
1. Ross Perot did not take the majority away from the Republicans. One of the very interesting things about his campaign was that roughly as many democrats voted for him as republicans. He didn't cost George Bush Senior the election, George Bush Senior cost himself the election, by being completely and utterly out of touch with America, to the point that when he visited a grocery store and saw the laser scanning bar code reader he commented on that remarkable technology that was 'making America more effecient'
2. Ross Perot influenced both parties thusly:
Democrats would discuss balancing the budget, but state that certain programs (mostly social and educational) were a higher priority.
Republicans would discuss balancing the budget, but state that certain programs (mostly defense and drug war) were a higher priority.
Ross Perot came along and discussed balancing the budget in his famous "it's time to pay the piper" manner, and stated in terms everyone could understand that nothing was more important than getting our fiscal house in order.
Although he likely wouldn't have made a very good president, he was right. And many agreed, so many that he won 20% of the vote in a two party system where voting for a third party is widely (and erroneously) equated with "wasting your vote."
It shocked both the democrats and the republicans, both of which fell over each other trying (and succeeding) in balancing the budget. The budget remained balanced until George W. Bush took office, cut taxes in a manner which was widely considered to be fiscally irresponsible, followed the events of 9/11 which led to increased spending and, and further exacerbated by the numerous corporate scandals and subsequent short-circuiting of the economic recovery which reduced revinue even more.
For several years it was Ross Perot's single campaign plank, balance the budget, that drove the agendas of both major parties, almost entirely as a result of his winning 20% of the votes and shocking both parties deeply, to the core.
Of course, after the Republican's attack dog Bucchanon sabataged and destroyed the third party Ross Perot founded we are now largely back to business as usual, with another segment of the electorate that, for a brief time, thought they could actually effect change, having joined the growing ranks of the disillusioned.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
And don't forget the recent campaign finance laws, made to make it harder for other parties to raise money.