Slashdot Mirror
San Francisco Attempts to Regulate Blogging
Lawrence Person writes "Forget about theocratic Iran or Communist China; today's report of a political entity trying to regulate blogging comes not from The People's Republic of China, but rather The People's Republic of San Francisco. 'The San Francisco Board of Supervisors [announced] yesterday that it will soon vote on a city ordinance that would require local bloggers to register with the city Ethics Commission and report all blog-related costs that exceed $1,000 in the aggregate." Worse, this is not an April Fools joke. It seems that 'campaign finance reform' is turning out to be the biggest Trojan Horse in the campaign to regulate free speech. "Are you now or have you ever been a blogger?"" Chris Nolan -- the "not a joke" link above -- is more reserved about the true scope of the proposed law (which would deal with election-related journaling specifically, not most diary-style Web journals), but has little good to say about it.
The liberals can spin this as Bush's fault. I mean, it must be his, right?
>> if it's whiney and useless enough, it qualifies as a blog.
Off I go to edit wikipedia's entry for 'blog'
muhahaha
http://request-header.info
I prefer to get my news from some organization without an axe to grind.
You must be new here...
>Extremists on both sides will always try to muzzle those with whom they disagree.
;-)
i can see that by the moderators this evening.
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
So, did you agree or disagree with him when he said of Jesse Jackson "the Kerry campaign has finally gotten a chocolate chip"?
He said he agreed with Rush ~50% of the time. Taking every other word, "Kerry has gotten chocolate" would seem to be a reasonable statement.
Pop quiz: which of these people is a Republican:
If you answered "McCain", congratulations! You have enough political knowledge to come out on the winning side of a 50/50 chance! Your "crowd of Democrats" appears to include equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats.
Quiz number 2: Which of the following Soviet dictators signed the McCain-Feingold act into law:
If you selected "George W. Bush", you're right again! Beloved Father of America Bush signed the McCain-Feingold Free Speech Destruction Act into law, thereby acheiving for the Republican Party what Soviet Russia could never do: limiting political speech in America.
Final question, regarding tolerance of other viewpoints: which of the following prominent politicians issued a threat on Thursday against any federal judge who dared oppose his wishes?
See if you can pick the right answer.
...because no one here ever presents political opinions and I'm sure many would blow over $1000 worth of man hours here a year?
It is not enough to obey big brother, you must love him too.
- Eric Blair
Not all speech is protected by the First Amendment. Speech ranges from "I have a dream" to spam.
...to mention the diarrhea and vomiting, or when weight loss ads...
I have a dream to spam?
but in the United States you have to remain inside designated fenced-in areas or they'll arrest you for leaving your "First Amendment Zone".
I have a dream spam in the zone?
Restrictions on commercial speech are perfectly constitutional as long as they are reasonable.
I have a resonable dream of prefectly constitutional long spam?
Nevermind.
Congress shall make no law
:)
They should have stopped there
http://www.xpurple.com