Slashdot Mirror


MPAA-Dodd Investigation Petition Reaches Goal

An anonymous reader writes "The petition on 'We the People' website petitioning the administration to investigate Chris Dodd for corruption has reached the required 25,000 votes in two days: now the government has to officially respond to the petition. The petition ... stemmed from Chris Dodd's statement that tried to portray campaign donations as quid-pro-quos for SOPA/PIPA votes."

32 of 270 comments (clear)

  1. respond? by spidercoz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    my money is on ignore

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
    1. Re:respond? by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Me too -- we are asking the mafia to crack down on organized crime here.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:respond? by sneakyimp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      See, this is where Anonymous could actually make itself useful. Maybe dig up some incriminating emails and leak them.

    3. Re:respond? by ALeavitt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What could possibly be more incriminating than the chief lobbyist for the MPAA openly threatening politicians who don't vote the way he would prefer? Let's face it, no amount of damning evidence is going to get the general populace to care.

      --
      This sig has been stolen. Return it to its original user for a reward.
    4. Re:respond? by jythie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is why I dislike the WH petition system.. it makes people feel like they are being heard and doing something, but it is little more then a placebo. It does not actually do anything other then make people feel like they are doing something.

    5. Re:respond? by sohmc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The WH petition system isn't even based on any law. For all intents and purposes, WH could say, "Yeah...get 5 signatures and we'll 'respond'."

      BHO said it best when "petitioners" wanted a response to legalizing marijuana and he pretty much said STFU and GTFO.

      I would actually vote for him if he had set up the website such that once there was enough votes, he would call a lackey in congress to actually draft a bill. That would have shown he had balls. But doing so would give power back to the people and that's just bad politics.

      --
      We don't live in Shouldland.
  2. Alright! by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cue up the bullshit, meaningless response! Boy it's great having a voice in government, even if it's constantly ignored!

    1. Re:Alright! by blind+biker · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah. It would be fun if a popular techie-friendly website such as Slashdot or Reddit would sponsor a wager contest: write the expected BS response, and the one closest to the actual BS response from govt gets a prize.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    2. Re:Alright! by quintus_horatius · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think Dodd knows the score - he'll understand that he has to be reprimanded, but under the covers it will be business-as-usual.

    3. Re:Alright! by Bucky24 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Revolution, you say? Maybe tomorrow, American Idol is on tonight...

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    4. Re:Alright! by Brain-Fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Thank you for submitting your petition. Bribery is a serious offence which threatens the stability of governance, and as such we will not tolerate this behavior and will of course prosecute anyone who is caught engaging in it. However, based on our preliminary investigation, there is not enough evidence to merit a case.

      Campaign contribution is a means by which one can legally support the spreading of information about one's political ideals. In and of itself, this is not bribery. Furthermore, it is reasonable to expect a politician who represents himself as an advocate for a specific political party to openly support, and take action that directly supports, the stated political positions of that party.

      Chris Dodd observed that some candidates deviated from their party's stated position. Further, he observed this after having made significant campaign contributions to the party in question. While his words may have been ill-chosen, the mere expression of frustration over such position-switching is not sufficient grounds for a bribery charge.

      Thank you for your interest in governance, and please continue to share your concerns with us, whatever they may be.

  3. HAS TO officially respond? by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't be silly.
    There is no "HAS TO" when the government is involved.
    And a one word response of "DENIED" is all you are likely to get, or the Washington equivalent, of a vague promise of having it looked into, followed by a chuckle-fest in the back room over brandy on the rocks.

    The whole thing sort of reminds me of one of the typical flame fests here on Slashdot or Usenet. Lots of smelly wet wool. But nobody notices that you "won the internet".

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    1. Re:HAS TO officially respond? by NotSanguine · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't be silly. There is no "HAS TO" when the government is involved. And a one word response of "DENIED" is all you are likely to get, or the Washington equivalent, of a vague promise of having it looked into, followed by a chuckle-fest in the back room over brandy on the rocks.

      The whole thing sort of reminds me of one of the typical flame fests here on Slashdot or Usenet. Lots of smelly wet wool. But nobody notices that you "won the internet".

      WTF is wrong with you!?! I can't believe that you could say such a thing!!!

      Everyone knows that you *never* serve brandy on the rocks. Geez!

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    2. Re:HAS TO officially respond? by srjh · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why not? The Pepsi I mix it with tastes flat otherwise.

      [ducks]

  4. In a perfect world... by Handbasket+Passenger · · Score: 5, Funny

    We the People: This is bribery! We demand you investigate yourselves!

    Gov'ment: We've investigated ourselves thoroughly, and we're guilty (sad-face)

    1. Re:In a perfect world... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only hope of this gaining any legs is if the Republicans pick up this ball and run with it, but they won't do that either because they have just as many fingers in the till as the Democrats.

      Right, so:

      Had Dodd been a Republican, there would already be a call for a Special Prosecutor.

      Is false.

      There's one party with minor differences paraded out for the masses to choose from. Understanding this is key to understanding Washington.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  5. 25,000 sig petitions have alredy been ignored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The petition titled "Actually take these petitions seriously instead of just using them as an excuse to pretend you are listening" reached 25,000 by the required date and currently has 33,000 signatures. It has received no response despite being almost 3 months old.

    (Link: https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/actually-take-these-petitions-seriously-instead-just-using-them-excuse-pretend-you-are-listening/grQ9mNkN)

    "We the people" is a propaganda tool to be exploited when convenient, and nothing more.

    1. Re:25,000 sig petitions have alredy been ignored by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Funny

      You didn't really think they'd take the take these petitions seriously petition seriously, did you? Of course not. They're waiting for the inevitable take this take this petition seriously petition seriously petition. Then they'll reply. Maybe. And when they do, they'll take this take this take this petition seriously petition seriously petition seriously.

      Seriously.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  6. Awesome by Osgeld · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I await the generic response pulled from the filing cabinet soon

  7. And the reponse is... by Eldragon · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...the White House quietly removes the We the People petition system.

  8. A little bit of hope.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    My expectations are very, very low as to the outcome of this petition. Anyone who expects anything more than a cursory "We understand your concerns but feel statements made on a news channel do not merit an investigation" has their head in the sand.. ..but still, I can't help but tap at the sand regardless.

    Now I think a petition should be made about the RIAA/MPAA suing dead grandmas and 10 year old children.

  9. Re:What's funny is by NotSanguine · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That most /.'s actually believed Obama would run an open and honest administration. Democrats are great on the talk, worse on the walk but liberals will never see it.

    But the radical reactionaries who call themselves "conservatives" are so good with walking the walk, are they? Please.

    The whole bunch of them are so beholden to the monied interests that it's amazing we still bother to have farcical "elections" instead of auctions.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
  10. Wow ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is the first I'm reading the link fro the last Slashdot story
    Seriously ...

    "Those who count on quote 'Hollywood' for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who's going to stand up for them when their job is at stake. Don't ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don't pay any attention to me when my job is at stake,"

    I didn't think any of these guys went so far as to acknowledge that they've been bought and paid for. Usually they try to couch it in nicer terms, but this pretty much says if you're gonna take the bribe, you gotta do what they tell you.

    Holy crap, does that sound illegal. Not that they'd over pass laws that actually limit the money from the lobbyists ... that's too big of a chunk of their income.

    And people wonder why everyone thinks politicians are corrupt.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  11. Dodd responds by ZOmegaZ · · Score: 4, Funny

    I wouldn't be surprised if the White House has Dodd himself write a response. When the "End the TSA" petition got a response, it was written by the head of the TSA. Why not?

  12. will respond but completely dodge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Their response will be similar to all the other responses to petitions they don't like-- completely dodge any of the points and cut/paste a wikipedia like entry. See their response to eliminating the TSA for violating people's civil rights and being useless-- nothing more than Pistole cut/pasting the TSA's official mission statement.
    This one will probably be more of a campaign like statement that they care about the people and protect their rights completely dodging the statements in the petition.

  13. Why would anyone expect Chris Dodd to be charged? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why would anyone expect fromer Senator Dodd to be investigated for this? This is the man who, along with a few others, stood in the way of anyone doing anything about the problems with the financial systems in this country until it all blew up. Then he was asked to write the law that would "fix" the problem that led to the meltdown.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  14. I'd have no problem with lobbyists if... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 4, Interesting

    1) They were never allowed to physically meet lawmakers, ever.

    2) All requests were limited to about 1000 words per week, in email.

    3) All such requests were publically viewable via the internet as unformatted text files.

    4) All lawmakers submitted their finances to lifelong review after serving with an eye to spotting cash sources from foreign bank accounts. Better still, make having foreign accounts or receiving money from foreign accounts a felony for ex-lawmakers.

    5) No ex-lawmaker was ever allowed to act as a lobbyist, ever.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:I'd have no problem with lobbyists if... by dex22 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Or use the British system. Have a "Register of Members' Interests" in which they must publicly list any payment, donation or gift received, and which bars them for the remainder of their term from voting on any related issue, to avoid claims of bias.

  15. Re:Concerns sound exaggerated by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have a lot of problems with Dodd's cozy relationship with the financial industry (probably what's driving him out of the Senate)

    Driving him out of the Senate? He's already out of the Senate. He is now the Chairman and CEO of the MPAA. Hence, his statement is from the MPAA to his former colleagues in the Senate saying that the MPAA gave them money so they better pass the legislation the MPAA demands. Somehow, the fact that Dodd is now the head of the MPAA is often left out of the reporting (even left out of the petition). Does that make the sleaziness a little clearer?

  16. STFU Defeatist Whiners by eepok · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Oh... the government will do nothing!"
    "The crooks won't investigate their handlers!"
    "The petition will be ignored!"

    Are you the **AA 'turfing or just fashionably rebellious with your doubt of the value of the US Judicial system? If you've given up already, why are you bothering to comment?

    Remember when Nixon was investigated? What about when Clinton got some booty on the side? Big investigations DO happen and they have to start somewhere. If you don't like the idea of an investigation, then say so. I'd genuinely like to hear those comments. But if all you got are "Whaaa! They've done nothing in the past, they'll do nothing again!", then you're the worst kind. You remove value from the entire discussion and give nothing in return..

    If you give in to your butt-hurt and so easily declare "They so rarely do what I want... why bother?", then WE can never get anything done. You are WORSE than those who do nothing because you KNOW something is bad and take the time to discourage others from acting on the injustice.

  17. Put up or shut up by Rix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You are as Anonymous as anyone else. If you think Anonymous should do something, then do it.

  18. Re:ALL IS GOOD !! by Thoguth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why are we signing petitions? It's primary election season. Let's make an example of one of the congressmen-for-hire.

    the Tea Party came to power when Scott Brown defeated an incumbent in a primary contest. Let's get an incumbent SOPA supporter out of office because he supported SOPA.

    Primary congressional elections are where the real electoral power is... and we have a tendency to ignore them. I believe that nothing less than a primary loss from a SOPA or PIPA supporter would get their attention.

    The problem is they get $50,000 for their campaign fund for supporting it. The solution, obviously, is to make it cost them more than $50,000 worth of publicity for supporting it.

    Lamar Smith, who introduced SOPA, is currently running uncontested for the Republican Primary in his district.

    --
    The requested URL /iframe/sig.html was not found on this server.