Slashdot Mirror
Political Bloggers May Be Forced to Register
Thebes writes "Under Senate Bill S.1, political bloggers with a readership of over 500 who comment on policy matters or hope to incite 'grassroots' action amongst their readers would be forced to register with the Federal Government as lobbyists."
Huh. I thought it was only the Republicans who were after our 1st Amendment rights. But here are the Democrats assaulting our freedoms again by trying to control who says what.
<sarcasm>Oh, never mind, they just want to make sure we have "our papers in order" before we can criticize them.</sarcasm> And we thought that they would be for our rights. But it looks like they are just interested in using the power to stay in power.
It's time to lose the naivte and realize that politicians (whether Republicans or Democrats) are only interested in one thing--getting re-elected.
Even if this passes, I can't imagine a judge would uphold it in court.
Our civil servants are committed to being our uncivil masters.
/. members who can to vote "NO" to *anything* regarding McCain, and hope that this poor little non-accomplisher can exit to the well-deserved status of non-entity.
The one upside to the US is that the process is documented and public *as* *it* *happens*.
I would encourage all
668: Neighbour of the Beast
Each of my blogs has only 499 users.
But if one of my blogs did indeed gain an extra reader, how would they ever know?
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
The bill just redefines what it means to be a lobbyist, and seeing as this comes from a grassroots lobbyist, I would argue that this exact article is exactly the type of lybbying the Senate wishes to be kept informed of.
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
Go fuck yourselves. Hard.
...or news commentators have to do this? This is, pardon the crassness, total and unmitigated bullshit.
Loading...
500 hits per day? 500 unique readers in a ten year span? 500 "friends" linked on your myspace page? 500 links from incestuous follow-backs or google bombs?
Free speech is one of the most important rights we have; why is the government so keen on regulating it? You can't regulate a right, it is a right. I can understand regulating the lobbyists for organizations, corporations, and interest groups--groups are not citizens. But individuals who ARE citizens have inalienable rights. A hearty "Fuck Off!" to those who seek to "regulate" individual rights.
More music, fewer hits
You bet. I also realize that many of them like doughnuts, have siblings, and read books. Further, I concede that they often have heartfelt opinions about matters of punctuation and some (but not all) of them did well in algebra.
But most importantly, I can recognize a straw man from a kilometer away. Bloggers taking advertising doesn't mean that their advertisers are paying them to influence public opinion, anymore than the lawyer whose face is plastered all over the city buses around here is paying people to use public transportation.
Nice try though.
--MarkusQ
You do realize that there's a Democratic majority in the House and Senate, right?
And that the Democrats proposed the bill?
And that GWB didn't propose the bill?
But what the hey, it seems like a good enough reason to impeach him. What I'm more confused about is your mention of the "return of fascism." I must have missed the good ol' fascist days here in the US.
Sponsered by Senator Harry Reid(D) on 1/4
Cosponsored by: Bennett(R), Brown(D), Cantwell(D), Collins(R), Durbin(D), Feinstein(D), Lautenburg(D), Leahy(D), Liberman(I), Lott(R), McConnell(R), Menendez(D), McKulski(D), Salazar(D), Schumer(D), Stabenow(D), Webb(D). 17 cosponsors so far.
For those who didn't become politically aware until after the republicans gained power in 1994 and thought the democrats actually practiced what they preach about the First Amendment, I welcome you to reality. The Democrats will tell you anything you want to hear to achieve power just like the Republicans do. The only way to fix it is to scale the federal government back to its Constitutional powers and you can be damn sure that they will do anything they can to stop that from happening.
Don't leave your mind so open that your brain falls out. Don't close it so much that you cut off the blood.
They will be harrassed only if they are paid not just for lobbying through their blog. This protects everyone's rights by showing who is paying whom. Transparency in government is the best way to protect those governed.
Clones are people two.
> Huh. I thought it was only the Republicans who were after our 1st Amendment rights.
/. earlier in the week about Russ Feingold wanting the "Fairness Doctrine", otherwise known as the abolish talk radio law, back on the agenda and it is clear they simply desire to keep power this time by outlawing opposition.
I know you are being sarcastic, but a lot of "Republicans" do want your 1st Amendment Rights. Almost no Conservatives do though. But RINOs like John McCain are happy to join forces with almost every single Democrat to shut down the 1st. Other RINOs like Rudy want to join forces with Democrats to eliminate the 2nd. But make no mistake, while you can almost always find a RINO to agree with any limitation of essential liberties, the bulk of the votes will come from Democrats. Hell, the Civil Rights act was passed over the opposition (including, I do seem to recall, a filibuster assisted in by none other than the current #3 in the chain of succession) of Democrats.
You think I'm being overly partisan, just slagging Democrats? Consider this then: They get back from the wilderness after a twelve year period out of power and look at the first thing out of the chute? This is Senate Bill #1. I.e. the very first thing they proposed after getting control over the agenda. Combine with the story on
Listen up folks, this is the big fight. None of the rest matters if we can't get the 1st Amendment back. McCain/Feingold already damned near voided it, this will finish the job. If we can't peacefully assemble (in places like blogs for example) and petition our government (i.e. lobby) for redress of our legitimate greivences then the only option left will be messy.
Reasonable people can argue whether the 1st Amendment protects some things, but if it doesn't protect political speech during an election season what the hell is it good for anyway? What sort of diseased mind can claim that the 1st protects porn but supports outlawing buying a billboard to support/oppose a candidate for political office?
Democrat delenda est
And the way this could be used is if someone here on slashdot raised the eyebrows of a powerful lobby (err.. politician) and they decided to go after you. They could put you in jail for saying something they don't like, on the grounds that you are lobbying without a permit.
It is your personal duty to fight for what is right on a daily basis. Ignoring injustice is identical to approving
So what about the editor of your national/local newspaper or magazine?
They all, from time to time, write political articles. Some have a deliberately partisan approach.
They all have a readership of greater than 500 (Hell, even my local church newsletter that comes through my door 3 times a year does).
Therefore they should all register as lobbyists.
What a piece of garbage piece of legislation.
Stephen
By saying:
-----
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
-----
Where in this statement does it say that political or corporate statements should be regulated by any law? Speech is done by people, even if paid by someone else. Why is there a standard of "who can say what" when it concerns corporate speech and political speech?
Now, repercussions can result from said speech, and that is a separate issue (libel, slander, threatening...).
Democracy 21 has the correct facts. Bloggers are fine, unless they are paid astroturf shills:
I have a blog.
According to your logic, the entire Bush administration and every congressperson and senator who supported them are RINOs. That would be roughly the entire Republican party. Don't even try to use the "Democrats made me do it" argument either. Republicans had control for a solid four years, and those were the worst four years the first and fourth amendments have ever seen. Yeah, the state of free speech is pretty grim in this country right now, but your "conservatives" are way too preoccupied with attacking abortion and homosexuality to care about free speech. That's just liberal intellectual elite stuff, remember? True patriots are supposed to go along with whatever the President says, remember? If you question the government the terrorists win, remember? We need to use government resources to spy on anti-war groups, remember? If all of that is okay then why is the sky falling as soon as some questionable language gets into a bipartisan bill?