Welcome to Bizarro Amerika!

Before lilMike says it's all Obama's fault (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/01/13/obama-administration-responds-we-people-petitions-sopa-and-online-piracy) like the NDAA:

Just another loss of my freedoms on Obamas watch.

Obama's against it. :D

Then veto it.

2nd thought, funny how all the stuff that usurps my freedom, Obama is against but it still gets passed.

It won't even get to him.

So why blame Obama?

My point being he is against it, but those bills keep getting passed. So either he is a liar or inept, I hope it is just the later. He can based on powers granted to him by the Constitution stop these bills; he just has not shown the balls to do it.

Just like SOPA, there are ways to stop piracy, without nuking the internet. I guess piracy is now the new terrorist. Funny all the news media outlets are spinning the piracy angle, because their bullshit reporting can't compete with the internet.

If I tell everyone I am a God fearing man, but like to cheat on my cancer riddled wife, it gets harder to believe my self proclaimed Godliness. 

This bill hasn't passed. If it turns out that it is passed, with the support of some blue-dog dems who've fallen for the paranoia of the far right, it still won't be Obama's fault. It'll be the fault of the doomsday conspiracy theorists (read teabaggers).

(http://img848.imageshack.us/img848/2742/40217710150495963916275.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/848/40217710150495963916275.jpg/)

Obama signed the NDAA law. So yes he has had a hand in taking away my Constitutional freedoms. Obama has a history of signing something he does not support or does he just say he doesn't support it and then signs it anyway.

If he didn't sign some shit nothing would get done! He expressed his misgivings with the NDAA and made sure what he was concerned about wouldn't happen during his administration. That's all he could do.

How did my name get dragged into this?  I've not posted anything about SOPA.  Previous experience on the Muche shows that when I've posted about bills that threaten internet freedom, I get a lot of pushback.

At least in this case, there is a left/right coalition opposed to it.  We really couldn't put one together for the NDAA but maybe we've learned something from that debacle.

he was never for SOPA.. he's taking big hits in Hollywood for being against it..


It's Rupert Murdoch who wants this.. not Obama.

Maybe you should read this piece by Andrew Sullivan.. (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/15/andrew-sullivan-how-obama-s-long-game-will-outsmart-his-critics.html)  because you seem to have a major disillusionment going on.. he really can't walk on water and neither can he do it all. It's up to congress and us to make congress do the things we want done.. Just like the SOPA protest today forced even Rubio to take away his support of the bill.. Obama can't do it all.. he isn't od no matter how much the gOP calls him 'messiah'..

wait..

you're against the SOPA bill?

you?

really...

Not like you don't blame everything on Obama,  huh?

That was a topic for tomorrow. >:(

Sullivan nailed it!

I was going to give it it's own thread, but it seemed like a good place for it.. ;)

Yet, after Sullivan's words we still see stuff like this (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/19/us/politics/19poll-documents.html?ref=politics) from the so-called liberal media:

“How would you mainly describe the policies Barack Obama has pursued as president — as socialist, liberal, moderate, conservative or libertarian?”

Socialist: 26%
 Liberal: 22%
 Moderate: 28%
 Conservative: 6%
 Libertarian: 4%
 DK/NA: 15%

Obama is a socialist is the biggest myth perputrated by the right wing media, ever. The dude is moderate and a friend to big business, plus big on defense. Everytime I hear someone use the Socialist word to describe the Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers, I know I am listening to a partisan hack. If Obama is a socialist than so is Mittens. 

Ha!  I did read that article!  It was pretty funny! 

now Andrew Sullivan is the Trig Truther.  He's been investigating Palin's uterus for about 3 years.

Still can't get to the bottom of it...*

(http://i.imgur.com/Uah6o.jpg)


* sorry, couldn't help it!

Why are you surprised?  I'm more surprised that you oppose it.  You've poo-pooed virtually every attempt by the government to wrangle and tame the internet.

So I can't tell who is for or against based on party.  More likely who is close to Hollywood or not.

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/01/19/sopa-activism-moves-republicans-more-than-democrats/ (http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/01/19/sopa-activism-moves-republicans-more-than-democrats/)

SOPA Activism Moves Republicans More Than Democrats

Yesterday’s SOPA strike was enormously successful, not only raising attention to the issue but moving a tremendous amount of politicians for a one-day event. Over 4.5 million people signed Google’s petition against SOPA. The Wikipedia action gave high-profile attention to the issue as well, and even if Facebook and Twitter’s responses were muted, overall the online community made themselves heard.

But those of us charting the protest yesterday were struck by how most of the lawmakers turning against the bill were Republicans. If you look at the latest whip count on PIPA, for example, you see that more Republicans oppose it at this point than Democrats.

Instead, Democrats by and large finessed their responses, claiming that they would work to fix the finished product. Markos Moulitsas lets Democrats have it:

"You have an entire wired generation focused on this issue like a laser, fighting like hell to protect their online freedoms, and it’s FUCKING REPUBLICANS who are playing the heroes by dropping support?

Those goddam Democrats would rather keep collecting their Hollywood checks, than heed the will of millions of Americans who have lent their online voice in an unprecedented manner.

Are they really this stupid? Can they really be this idiotic?

Are they really going to cede this issue to Republicans, hand them this massive public victory, then get left with nothing but public scorn when SOPA and PIPA go down in flames?"

?? since I don't like the idea of Gov't messing with the internet and have "poo-pooed virtually every attempt by the government to wrangle and tame the internet" that leads you to be surprised that I would be against SOPA?

ohkay...



well, they'll either see the light or regret it...

Dang it!  One aspect of the demise of the Muche is the store of previous comments of yours that I could pull up when you say something (like the above) that is contradicted by previous statements.  You've been very much in favor of the Gov't messing with the internet in the past, however I can't really show you now.  The post Muche era will be a boon to you!

you're talking about the FCC and net-neutrality.. I am against anyone interfering with the internet and if it takes the FCC to ensure that no one fucks with it? Then I can go along with that... as long as the FCC doesn't fuck with it either.

the issue was some ISP's wanted to limit their users bandwidths and start changing like cell phone plans used to be or block sites they didn't like and generally fuck with the net.. the FCC said no, but in order to ensure that wouldn't happen they needed to take some control.. that I was for because that was  the only way to keep the larger ISP from taking control and really screwing things up..

that is not the same as being ' in favor of the Gov't messing with the internet in the past' in fact, it's completely in line with my view of keeping the net the way it is.. and if business won't do that, if they infact want to disrupt that for their own bottom lines while hurting millions, then I'm good with the Gov't stepping up and ensuring no one will fuck with it.. someone had to or big business would have bastardized another industry..

you were against it because you'd rather see it in the hands business, all the while tooting your invisible "I'm for free-speech more than you are" horn... but you still think business' are people and can't become corrupted, so... I didn't pay that bullshit quip of yours anymore mind than I do when you try to pretend you're for CU because of free speech.. those are just your trolling buzz words, nothing more.. because we both know you're about as libertarian as Barry Sanders is..

Well, there is a lot to dislike on net neutrality.  First of all, it was  a power grab by the FCC that didn't have the statutory ability to regulate the internet in the first place.  The Courts rejected their attempt as you may recall.  But, as I've learned recently from you, if the Republicans are being dicks (or in this case if the courts are) then it's OK to violate the constitution and applicable laws.  So at the time we originally argued about net neutrality, I would have thought the illegality of it should have been enough to get you to oppose it.  Little did I know...  ;D

it's a shame your mind is a 'lil' as your name..

Well that certainly was an intellectual checkmate!

But heh, you did say that Republicans forced Obama to violate the Constitution:

I asked


and you responded



So what am I supposed to gather from what's been posted here over the past two months?  Obama has carte blanche to do anything.  No mere Constitution dare stand in his way!

you may 'gather' what you're capable of 'gathering'.. which  isn't much in that extremely strict world of yours...

what  I 'gather'  is that it doesn't benefit me to argue with someone so one-dimensional

That makes me think you asked Howey to have the King of Bain thread locked. 

That's one way to get in the last word!

Another lie?

Sheesh!

wrong again... I close it because I was tired of your fantastical bullshit...

You spelled "lie" wrongo. ;)

no no, I don't believed he lied.. I think he believes completely that Obama and Mitt are the same.. while believing me and escobar aren't.. it's the GOP filter that filters out the logic..

it's like saying gov't can't create jobs and when I'm president, I'll create jobs for everyone who wants to work.... Or, I believe gays would ruin the sanctity of marriage, while having 3 mistresses... or saying you're 'pro-life' and pro-death penalty.., or you want a small govt that's stays out of your life, while begging the gov't to ban medical procedures and police someone's bedroom.. or that you're a libertarian but you want the gov't to spy on you or use no-knock warrant-less search and seizures etc etc etc

it's no wonder they're all fucked up, with those hypocritical positions..  ;)

The effect is the same. 

I don't think I would lock threads to shut people up just because I disagreed with them, but it only highlights our many differences.