So I spent my Tech time tonight writing about Net Neutrality. I suggest reading that. It’s still a bad idea, because it’s founded on premises that aren’t true, and doesn’t address the real issues.
Meanwhile industry’s fighting it out over Net Neutrality 3.0: the return of the revenge. Who are Obama’s picked winners and losers, and are they winning or losing enough? Do they think they can bet more?
Speaking of picking winners and losers, we’ll have to see what comes out of Senate patent negotiations. Last time the Senate worked on this there was a good Republican bill and a bad Democrat bill.
Continue reading »
Yesterday, when the US Supreme Court denied the right of California citizens to stand up and appeal for Proposition 8, the state constitutional amendment they voted in place directly, it looked like the lower court’s decision against the amendment would stand.
After all, The Supreme Court has thrown out all of those appeals in Perry v Brown, leaving only the initial trial court injunction against Proposition 8 by George H. W. Bush appointee Vaughn Walker, and a stay against that by the Appeals Court, which will likely be lifted now.
But Big Government has noticed that the California constitution may not take the word of one judge alone as binding on the state. So as of now, Proposition 8 may be the law of the land in the Golden State.
Continue reading »
Censorship’s the big word right now. The FCC’s under pressure to ban pro sports blackouts, and the Supreme Court may end national profanity rules. However I consider those things small. Few people have access to television broadcasts. Most of us aren’t actually censored by these regulations.
We all have access to the Internet though; that’s how a nobody like me is able to shape the debate against well-funded leftist groups. So I’ll freely admit it: It’s a self-serving thing for me to oppose Internet censorship. I don’t want the Obama administration to have the power to collaborate with private leftist groups to steal people’s domains, and force all ISPs to cooperate with that effective creation of a national censorship blacklist.
They want to call the little guys “E-PARASITES,” using copyright as cover to censor whatever the heck they want. Because once you let the government start blanking out parts of the Internet, then what’s to stop them from blanking out oversight of that censorship? Nothing. Just ask Australia, which censored the internet “for the children,” but then started banning oversight of the censorship, as well as unrelated content like American anti-abortion websites.
The committee vote on SOPA / E-PARASITES is coming, and I’m hearing that the witness list for the bill is stacked 5-1 in favor of the bill. In the Republican House, we’re rigging the hearings in favor of giving the President more regulatory power over the Internet. It boggles the mind. Please consider contacting the Judiciary Committee and asking them to oppose this censorship power grab.
If the US Government starts monkeying around with DNS, the world will ignore it, the same way we ignore Chinese attempts to censor the Internet. We will lose our position as world leader of the Internet overnight.
Continue reading »
I made a video.
They’re coming. Planned Parenthood is probably the most successful private vendor of death since Tesch und Stabenow m.b.H. made a killing selling Zyklon B to the Nazis. Planned Parenthood makes millions off of its abortion factories, and now the firm is on the political march for one of its dearest, but most vulnerable, allies in the Senate: Barbara Boxer.
Will we do nothing, or will we fight back?
Continue reading »
The Orange County Register ran a doom and gloom article on abortion, saying that a Field Poll release suggests abortion will drive statewide elections this year. This is important because Carly Fiorina is a three-exception pro-life Republican.
But there’s one big, honking problem with that theory, and the Register‘s Dena Bunis even mentions it:
Among Boxer supporters, 82 percent support abortion rights. Of those who back Fiorina, 55 percent favor them.
If 55% of Carly Fiorina’s backers are pro-Roe v. Wade, then that undercuts any theory that abortion is driving the election in California this year.
Continue reading »