Free Press: Too radical even for Obama officials

On June 23, 2010, in General, by Neil Stevens

Some were skeptical when the idea was raised of a split between FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and the Communist organization known as Free Press. We’re so used to the President being the furthest left holder of his office since the Carter years at the earliest, that we forget sometimes there are real unabashed hammer and sickle wavers out there.

Just look at what Robert McChesney wants. He co-founded Free Press and he wants nothing less than the gradual nationalization of the mass media in America. He calls it “media reform” and it’s as statist and wrong for America as “health care reform” turned out to be.

Genachowski sure isn’t going to forget how much the radical neo-Marxists hate his guts, though, not when Free Press buys a large add calling him a “$ellout” in a move reminiscent of MoveOn’s disgusting and libelous attack on General Petraeus.

Continue reading »

Welcome to the fourth and final part of the series (See I, II, and III to get up to speed with what’s going on here).

Brief summary: Andrew McLaughlin is Deputy White House CTO, and has been reprimanded by the White House for inappropriate relations with his former employer, Google. Due to a Google Buzz security hole, wide-eyed observers at Big Government noticed that McLaughlin was still very cozy with Google through his Gmail account. This led to a FOIA request for those emails, and now I’m reading them from an InsideGoogle.com release.

On to Part III of that release.

Continue reading »

We continue now from Part I and Part II of the series. InsideGoogle.com has the emails between Andrew McLaughlin and his contacts in Google, all the while serving as Deputy White House CTO, in a 3 PDF set, and I’m now starting on the second file.

Continue reading »

Continuing from Part I, we are reading the emails of White House Deputy CTO Andrew McLaughlin to see if he’s been acting inappropriately as an agent of Google from his job working for the people.

Despite close cooperation with Google “evangelist” Vint Cerf, McLaughlin laughably claims on September 4 that “I keep a very strict line between myself and Google (and Googlers).” Clearly he only does so in public, where people can see.

Continue reading »

Via InsideGoogle.com I’ve come across the Andrew McLaughlin emails released via FOIA requests (Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3). I’d meant to make a 5 part series of my reading through them for signs that McLaughlin was inappropriately acting as an agent of Google from his job as White House CTO (which is an accusation that Darrell Issa is not letting drop quietly, internal slap on the write to McLaughlin or not, and is in fact expanding beyond McLaughlin). This will be a four part series this week though. We’re starting on Tuesday instead of Monday because life got in the way. Unlike some of my opposition, my advocacy on technical matters is not funded.

Anyway, let’s begin.

Continue reading »

Tagged with:
 

Law and Order: Google’s Intent

On June 11, 2010, in General, by Neil Stevens

It’s been a while since we peeked in at Google’s doings. The proud champion of unprecedented FCC power grabs toward Net Neutrality regulation of the Internet (for which opposition is growing in the Senate) is still under fire for two broad breaches of the public’s trust: The Andrew McLaughlin lobbying from the White House, and the massive privacy breaches in the Street View program.

Continue reading »

House Republicans pile on against FCC Deem and Pass

On May 28, 2010, in General, by Neil Stevens

I’ve hated to have to talk about how 72 House Democrats (and now John Dingell) are on the record against the FCC and its “Title II reclassification” power grab to deem that the Telecommunications Act 1996 no longer exists and so the FCC can do whatever it wants to ISPs, include control prices and regulate content.

Well now I don’t have to so much anymore. 171 House Republicans have joined up to oppose the FCC’s defiance of the courts and the Congress to ram through Net Neutrality. Comcast v. FCC was a clear and correct decision, the Republicans note. The Telecommunications Act was concrete. They must be obeyed.

Good Job, Joe Barton and the House Republicans.

Arithmetic note: 171 + 72 = 243, more than enough votes to defeat any Net Neutrality bill. We are the majority, not the neo-Marxists at Free Press or the self-seekers at Google.

Google-backed FCC Censoring the Internet: Not a joke.

On May 27, 2010, in General, by Neil Stevens

I told you the FCC wanted to censor the Internet. They said it was a joke. Well, Reason kept digging and lookee what they found: Michael Copps, the FCC commissioner who would like to have jurisdiction over the entire Internet, wants to start a “national conversation” about the FCC enforcing either regulations or “voluntary codes” controlling content.

It’s no wonder that even Democrats are scared of the runaway FCC

Continue reading »

When the FCC announced plans to declare that ISPs are no longer information services, but are instead phone companies, the FCC claimed the authority to regulate content and prices on Internet service nationwide. And no matter how many times the neo-Marxists at Free Press (and their front group Save the Internet) claim that Net Neutrality is all about “preserving an open Internet,” the FCC’s actions are all about command and control.

Even Democrats see the problem, as 72 House members of the Democratic persuasion signed a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski urging him to slow down and let the Congress do its job, instead of taking matters into his own hands and defying the law and the courts to do so.

Update: It’d help if I link the right letter.

Continue reading »

I hear that Free Press employees all have to see the New Orleans Saints’s old team doctor after one month on the job, because they all get turf toe by that point.

But seriously, they really are. National Journal recently wrote them up (subscription only, unfortunately) but here’s what I think the key takeaway is about the neo-Marxist organization dedicated to the nationalization of all mass media in America:

Most of Free Press’s financing is also concealed. In 2008, the group and its lobbying arm, the Free Press Action Fund, raised $5 million, including $270,330 in public contributions and $3 million from 12 major donors. The group’s Form 990 tax filings do not include the names of 11 out of 12 donors, but Internet searches revealed donations of $225,000 from the Park Foundation and $300,000 from the Ford Foundation. In the same year, the action fund spent $332,967 on lobbying and $89,855 on grassroots efforts, according to its Form 990.

What do they have to hide? Why are the supposed proponents of openness themselves so opaque? Just how do we know that George Soros and Google aren’t behind the hidden donations, as the organization acts in the interests of huge, wealthy Internet firms in the course of its net neutrality special interest lobbying?

We don’t, and until they open up, we have every reason to believe they’re a bunch of fakers who throw big, corporate money around to gin up artificial support. I mean heck, they can’t even give consistent numbers on how large they are.

Nima Jooyandeh facts.