Slashdot Mirror
Florida Congressman Wants Blogging Critic Fined, Jailed
vvaduva writes "Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail, all over her use of the word 'my' on her blog. In a four-page letter sent to [US Attorney General Eric] Holder, Grayson accuses blogger Angie Langley of lying to federal elections officials and requests that she be fined and imprisoned for five years. Her lie, according to Grayson, is that she claims to be one of his constituents. Langley, Grayson says, is misrepresenting herself by using the term 'my' in the Web site's name."
Where political speech can land you in jail.
Is lying, in a political context, a crime? If the Vice President lies about wmd in Iraq, is that a crime? If Monsanto lies about their political contributions, is that a crime? If a blogger lies about her relationship with a Congressman, is that crime?
Best Slashdot Co
Childish approach? He's just mimicking the Republican Standard Operating Procedure. Yeah I can see how that's childish.
I'm not sure if you're trying to say that the Democrats are no less or more childish than the Republicans (if you are, I agree with you) but you do know that he's a Democrat with, of course, a history of controversies, right?
You seem to be confused in thinking it's "Republican Standard Operating Procedure" when in reality it's "Politician Standard Operating Procedure."
My work here is dung.
Interestingly, TFA is from Fox News, which pretty much NEVER fails to note the party of a political official in a scandal, regardless of the party they are in, including this one.
Right, Fox News just lies about what party the scandal-ridden politicians belong to.
Seriously, after they repeatedly represented scandal-ridden Republicans as Democrats, and misrepresented footage from previous events as being from more recent ones (tea parties, Palin book signings) to make crowds look larger than they actually were, I don't know how anyone can hold up Fox News as a paragon of journalistic integrity anymore. And please don't trot out the old tired argument that "everyone else is just as bad or worse". The fact is Fox News routinely does this sort of thing, and acting like they're in any way "fair and balanced" is just absurd.
I am pretty sure the FCC is headed that way. Congress would just as likely modify their Congressional Incumbents Protection Act (McCain/Feingold) to keep any criticism of a sitting Congressman. Why not, its not like they care what you think until its time to vote.
It all comes down to arrogance not seen since the late 1700s in France. The "ruling" class while "elected" has no problem in engineering a system by which they cannot be criticized (see McCain/Feingold) but will change laws to prevent people from voting against them (redistricting - Voter Rights Act - not prosecuting thugs at election sites - philly).
Grayson is an embarrassment to his district, but like voters in Louisiana proved, money in the freezer does not mean your guilty, just stupid. Remember all Congressmen and bad except yours.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Childish approach? He's just mimicking the Republican Standard Operating Procedure. Yeah I can see how that's childish.
Right. Just so we're clear about this...
Democrat is to Republican as:
C) Pot is to Kettle
It strikes me that she's both. I mean, that certaily looks like a blog to me...
Please enlighten us on what news source is not biased? Every professional news source is in the news management business as opposed to the news reporting business.
health care == Holocaust??
No, but denying health care to people resulting in the deaths of thousands sounds pretty close to me.
You know what's gonna happen? This profit-over-human-life doctrine is eventually going to be abolished, and it will be remembered in the future the way slavery is remembered now. A small number of special interests and their hillbilly followers thought it was a great idea at the time, but eventually peoples' values changed and the full extent of the suffering and loss of life became clear.
BTW, his use of the word 'holocaust' was entirely appropriate. 'Holocaust' is not a word that has been reserved exclusively for the Jews who died at the hands of the Nazis. If people are dying in their hundreds every day at the hands of profit making health insurance extortionists, then to call it a holocaust is putting it fucking mildly.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
I typically vote for Democrats rather than Republicans because they don't do the same hyperbolic bullshit, or at least don't do it nearly as often. If they're going to start pulling this crap, then I'll henceforth start filing "voting for a Democrat" in the same category as "voting for Sarah Palin".
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Republicans have become masters of the art of pressing the emotional buttons over and over again even if their message is laced with lies and half truths
What, and Democrats haven't done the same thing? Were you around for the debate on social security privatization? If you listened to them back then you'd have thought that the GOP was aiming to put America's seniors into concentration camps.
As you can see from the 2000 and 2004 elections, the voters respond much better to emotional messages (particularly the emotion known as 'fear' as Karl Rove and Dick Cheney know too well) than they do to something as mundane as logic.
And the 2008 election was immune? Barack Obama's entire campaign was one of sweeping emotion. Emotion that "change" was on the way, emotion that we'd be able to "rise above" our "petty differences", emotion that he would "transcend" race, etc, etc.
You really can't claim that the Democrats are any better. Democrats and Republicans use the same playbook. If you think any differently then you must be a partisan for one side or the other.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
That's the kind of thing a drunk guys says at a party to try to appear insightful. Actually, it's not. It's just plain stupid. A lack of diverse choice in political parties is not the same thing as having two equivalent choices.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
In your opinion. In my opinion the Democratic party is worse. Now, neither of us has any unbiased and reliable data to support our beliefs so who is correct? We cannot both be correct. Both parties could be similarly "repulsive", the Democrats could be worse, or the Republicans could be worse. But as it stands it is simply a matter of opinion.
BTW, his use of the word 'holocaust' was entirely appropriate. 'Holocaust' is not a word that has been reserved exclusively for the Jews who died at the hands of the Nazis. If people are dying in their hundreds every day at the hands of profit making health insurance extortionists, then to call it a holocaust is putting it fucking mildly.
Yeah...paying for services and free emergency room service for everyone who can't is a true holocaust. Way to put it "fucking mildly."
Getting sick and dying is natural.
Gassing 6 million scapegoats is not.
Get some perspective.
Yep. I mean, something like comparing opposition to a bill to being in favor of slavery. A Democrat would NEVER do something like that.
Any example you can give of Republican malfeasance can easily be matched by a similar Democratic one.
You simply choose to have selective blindness as to which malfeasance you remember.
When you just throw up your hands and say they're all like that you basically let the problem continue.
You do the same thing by pretending one side is altruistic while the other is Satan. Actually, you do far worse - you encourage the side you have a blind spot for to escalate behavior.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I think it's high time we started shunning both parties and voting for independent.
Both parties are corporate vetted.
that's easy: Olbermann.
Show me the batshit insane crying clip and I'll believe you.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Yep. I think the action of trying to put someone in jail for 5 years for creating a blog criticizing you, will have great consequences for the congressman. Hopefully people will get fed up at our leaders recommending draconian punishment for the most trivial of things.
Before you comment about this from a political perspective, think about the kind of punishment proposed by the congressman within the context of a "three strikes" IP law that everyone seems to be clamoring for.
If super punitive punishments for things like this gain a foothold, look out, because they'll be coming into every aspect of your lives.
Pretty much attributable to LBJ and the fact that he more or less hoodwinked them into thinking that the Democrats were responsible for the 1964 CRVA(They weren't, the Republicans were) And then giving them a straight up bribe that was entirely a poison pill in his Great Society. Oddly enough, pretty much the moment that passed, the poverty rate stopped declining.
It's older than Nixon. Johnson did it. Those before him did it to. There probably hasn't been a President since George Washington (the only guy who didn't want the job) who hasn't used these types of techniques.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
I typically vote for Democrats rather than Republicans because they don't do the same hyperbolic bullshit, or at least don't do it nearly as often. If they're going to start pulling this crap, then I'll henceforth start filing "voting for a Democrat" in the same category as "voting for Sarah Palin".
Democrats are every bit as emotional and idiotic as Republicans. They constantly run adds "about the children", they constantly talk about "fascism" and "nazis", they constantly try to limit free speech when it is for the common good or involves things they don't agree with (e.g. hate speech). Don't get me wrong the GOP is certainly no better but the days of rational debate on either side is long gone, neither party holds to the principles of individual freedom and equal treatment, and emotion is all any of them go after. And the reason is it works on way too many people who can't be bothered to educate themselves.
Now if you want to compare who does more of it I would suggest we look over time at who is the majority and who is the minority party. I'm guessing you'll find that the minority is nearly always the more hysterical and emotional of the two as they're trying to break the status quo and it requires more energy to get people to go out and change things.
Oh and this guy is an idiot...way to teach me your name Mr. Grayson and way to show me how little you actually value the basic principles of this country. Regardless of the letter of the law regarding PACs (and I have no idea what it is) the fact that you want to put a critic in jail shows me that you're not suited to represent anyone in a country that supposedly values free speech and criticism of its rulers. Given the chance I will gladly vote against this guy in any future elections.
Nice institutional racism.
http://www.nbra.info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African-American_Republicans
Dems are the biggest racists on the planet. Keep people dependent on you forever.
Teach a man to fish and eats for a lifetime, Give a man a fish every day and you have a voter for life.
Too bad you don't want to...
But I wish you'd tell us who you are so I can sell you stuff you don't need at inflated prices and you won't care.
Do you eschew markets when you buy or sell things (used cars, new cars, houses, your labor etc...). Do you willingly sell well below "market" price or refuse to accept "market" price (meaning you never find a buyer)?
Why do people reject markets - are they scared of them and trust politicians and the electorate to treat them more nicely? If you're 60 or 70 years old, maybe you can get away with that as you will probably die before the SS system collapses under its own weight (coupled with a general permanent decline in the US economy now that we have exited the "Century of America" and move into the "Century of Asia"). If you're 30 or below, the older folks will "own" your paycheck by their voting power through much of your career - get used to it.
Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading
It's hard to justify already. I'm 28, so I will reach todays retirement age in 39 years, which assumes it isn't raised before I get to 67.
According to a recent GAO study, SS will be insolvent before I reach that age. In effect, I'm already paying tax into a program I will receive zero benefit from. My tax dollars are support YESTERDAYs retirees. It's a ponzi scheme. Always has been. You need massive inflation growth or people to die much faster to keep it solvent.
Let me invest that tax money the way I see fit in my 401k and I guarantee you I will do better than the SS program will do for me.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
Notice that the story, complete with the completely false, yellow journalism, headline, is only being run by Fox News. I saw the story on Google News earlier, and wanted to read the actual facts. However, so far no reputable news organization has bothered to report it. Something to keep in mind.
What seems to be the actual story is that the Congressman sent a rather routine notice to the FEC about a likely violation of PAC status and election law. All the "trying to send to prison" bit is just a deceptive way of saying that, well yes, laws do have legal force (including ultimately penalties).
Buy Text Processing in Python
Healthcare needs massive government intervention. Way beyond what either party is proposing. In theory a free market would remove these types of inefficiencies, but healthcare is the least free market I can think of. It's heavily regulated.
How does this make sense? You're right that heavy regulation and excessive government intervention has all but eliminated free market pressures from keeping prices in check. But how, then, do you come to the conclusion that the solution is ... more government intervention?
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Actually, when we had those nice surpluses under Clinton, he and Gore were saying we should use the surpluses to start paying down the national debt. It was the Congressional Republicans who torpedoed that idea.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Dems are the biggest racists on the planet. Keep people dependent on you forever.
I find it cute that this opinion is consistently voiced by people who are well beyond middle-class in status, or who chose to disregard the many ways in which they receive support from others.
It's a nice cop-out, and makes it impossible to have a rational discussion about the matter. After all, anyone who supports any type of social services clearly just wants to keep the black man (and woman) in poverty. /sarcasm
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.