Loading
Lady Liberty Green
Suffield, Connecticut US
148 news,
1 videos,
1 blog posts,
17 comments,
0 forum posts
Recently Submitted News
1 commentObama Encounters a REAL Interview- and Doesn't Like It
Reaganite - For the first time in memory, Barack Obama was but back on his heels by a persistent...
Covering the Backsides of Obamacare-pushers?:CBO
Michelle Malkin - The poor number-crunchers have been working overtime as Speaker Pelosi and the Dems have re-jiggered and re-jiggered...
What Hath Queen Nancy Wrought??
Spectator - In a surprising moment of candor, Nancy of the House of Pelosi said she wishes to avoid...
Huffington Post's Ventura Censorship Backfires
www.prisonplanet.com - Did you know that Adam Lambert has a bulge in his crotch?
Obama Says ‘Louisiana Purchase’ Will Help With the Earthquak
www.breitbart.tv - Without a teleprompter Obama shows his stupidity, no wonder he rarely speaks without one.
Nuns want healthcare
CNN - ""We write to urge you to cast a life-affirming 'yes' vote when the Senate health care bill...
Democrat Felon Conyers To Get Tax Payed Attorney
Weekly Standard - Defying all odds, former Detroit City Councilwoman and wife of Rep. John Conyers became even more loathsome...
Pelosi, Slaughter went to court against GOP in 2005 case
Washington Examiner - You've been hearing a lot this week about the Slaughter Solution, the rule devised by House Rules...
- 33 Comments
- Add a comment
Show Newest to Oldest
Show Oldest to Newest
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 12 months ago
Reply to nimrod
Is it a conspiracy if Rosette says you're her mother?
Is it a conspiracy if Rosette says you're her mother?
Nimrod, I said, "Yes, mother," because in my time on politics.com - I have had discussions with him. He has something to offer me at times. Other times we debate. Other times we agree.
Other times, I find he takes on this personality. That personality is, "I am right. I am the teacher -so there"
So that is why I responded accordingly. I was shaking my head like "Oh brother" there he goes....
He seems adamant about something or in denial of something. Either way, "Yes, mother" was suiting to the [tude] that I got from him.
MrsPresident 12 months ago
Reply to Rosetteismyname
ha ha, i don't thinkk anyone thinks that you pretend to be liberal on here.... but many liberal p … Show full comment
ha ha, i don't thinkk anyone thinks that you pretend to be liberal on here.... but many liberal p … Show full comment
Lol stop outing me even further Rosette. Goodness!!!!! Just cause I don't like to respect anyones authoratize doesn't mean I'm up to no good.
nimrod 12 months ago
Reply to scot
Saying that it is possible for the government to hide or lie about something does not equate conspir … Show full comment
Saying that it is possible for the government to hide or lie about something does not equate conspir … Show full comment
Is it a conspiracy if Rosette says you're her mother?
nimrod 12 months ago
Reply to MrsPresident
Crap and I searched how to poison someone last night on google. I'm now going to jail......gosh darn … Show full comment
Crap and I searched how to poison someone last night on google. I'm now going to jail......gosh darn … Show full comment
I'll vist if you're close enough. I'll bring some glue so the guards won't know when you cut through the bars to pull the Internet wire from it.
CrashTack 12 months ago
Reply to ahoymehearties
I think your original question just needs to be seen in a different framework. I think you're viewin … Show full comment
I think your original question just needs to be seen in a different framework. I think you're viewin … Show full comment
That makes me think:
By presuming away my presumed trigger, you avoided my question. No big deal - even I'm a bit bored with that loaded (ptp) hypothetical.
I thought the govt already had a pretty firm hold on cell phones, with gps chips and all. Or maybe I've been reading too much of the scary World Net Daily stuff posted around here, or watch too much tv, or both. Or maybe that's what you said was a "given" - unclear to me.
I would encourage no one to take anything as a "given." Only by questioning everything, always, can optimization be approached. All we know is that things change, and if we don't pay attention and adapt when appropriate then we will, by definition, be living in the past. You may recall Professor Colbert saying that "the facts may change, but my opinions never do."
!
Matt H (Independent) - 12 months ago
Reply to ahoymehearties
Scuttlebutt is that this may not be a "real" bill. It s obvious that it's not only rather … Show full comment
Scuttlebutt is that this may not be a "real" bill. It s obvious that it's not only rather … Show full comment
This is actually not very difficult technically. There are only a few parties that would have to be ordered for a shutdown. Cutting only parts of it down is much harder. Blocking the few core registries and duplicates as well as the well documented and controlled entry points would suffice. There are many plans for keeping the net up, and they are hard to implement, against the right type of attack. As an attack, it is hard to pull off. As a positive action it could be arranged within weeks. The trigger would take less than a second afterward.
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 12 months ago
Reply to MrsPresident
Crap and I searched how to poison someone last night on google. I'm now going to jail......gosh darn … Show full comment
Crap and I searched how to poison someone last night on google. I'm now going to jail......gosh darn … Show full comment
ha ha, i don't thinkk anyone thinks that you pretend to be liberal on here....
but many liberal people are anarchist
MrsPresident 12 months ago
Crap and I searched how to poison someone last night on google. I'm now going to jail......gosh darnit! I'll be outed for the anarchist that I really am pretending to fly under the leftist democrat wing.... Crapx2.
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 12 months ago
Reply to scot
Saying that it is possible for the government to hide or lie about something does not equate conspir … Show full comment
Saying that it is possible for the government to hide or lie about something does not equate conspir … Show full comment
yes, mother
scot 12 months ago
Reply to Rosetteismyname
hiding implies lying....lying implies conspiracy theory Yes, I had read all the comments up to … Show full comment
hiding implies lying....lying implies conspiracy theory Yes, I had read all the comments up to … Show full comment
Saying that it is possible for the government to hide or lie about something does not equate conspiracy.
ahoymehearties (Green) - 12 months ago
Reply to Rosetteismyname
hiding implies lying....lying implies conspiracy theory Yes, I had read all the comments up to … Show full comment
hiding implies lying....lying implies conspiracy theory Yes, I had read all the comments up to … Show full comment
That is a HUGE leap of logic. All conspiracies involve lies, but all lies aren't conspiracies! The sky is bronze!
scot 12 months ago
Reply to Rosetteismyname
hiding implies lying....lying implies conspiracy theory Yes, I had read all the comments up to … Show full comment
hiding implies lying....lying implies conspiracy theory Yes, I had read all the comments up to … Show full comment
You may have read the words... but you misunderstood what I was saying with them.
ahoymehearties (Green) - 12 months ago
Reply to CrashTack
Thanks for that. Just what I was looking for. And I conclude my question earlier was even more … Show full comment
Thanks for that. Just what I was looking for. And I conclude my question earlier was even more … Show full comment
I think your original question just needs to be seen in a different framework. I think you're viewing the issue in the same way that congress is - where the Internet is a kind of new, novel technology. The "trigger" you mention could just as easily be done over a cellular network, yes? Yet no one talks of government control of cellular networks, because we take it as a given. I think we should take our free internet as a given as well - so that no one has the right to pull that off switch.
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 12 months ago
Reply to scot
I never mentioned a conspiracy. If you actually read all the comments in a thread, specifically the … Show full comment
I never mentioned a conspiracy. If you actually read all the comments in a thread, specifically the … Show full comment
hiding implies lying....lying implies conspiracy theory
Yes, I had read all the comments up to that point Mr. Scott middle-name conpiracist Smith
CrashTack 12 months ago
Reply to ahoymehearties
China's controls are based on ISP proxies. You can do a search for "china proxy" to see wh … Show full comment
China's controls are based on ISP proxies. You can do a search for "china proxy" to see wh … Show full comment
Thanks for that. Just what I was looking for.
And I conclude my question earlier was even more speculative than I thought!
ahoymehearties (Green) - 12 months ago
Reply to CrashTack
Help an old guy: is our Internet architecture so different that we couldn't have a switch like China … Show full comment
Help an old guy: is our Internet architecture so different that we couldn't have a switch like China … Show full comment
China's controls are based on ISP proxies. You can do a search for "china proxy" to see what their Internet is like and how small it is. Conceivably, if the government controlled ISPs, they could do the same thing. What this bill is endorsing is not ISP takeover, but an actual recreation of Internet protocols that allow full tracebacks and that sort of thing.
Al Gore is still stuck on email, you might try that instead.
CrashTack 12 months ago
Help an old guy: is our Internet architecture so different that we couldn't have a switch like China's? Maybe with the abundance of cross-border communication portals that's so.
I'm curious, and Al Gore isn't answering my IMs.
ahoymehearties (Green) - 12 months ago
Reply to amnestymyazz
If I understand you you're stating the unfeasibility would be actually utilizing the law? The inabi … Show full comment
If I understand you you're stating the unfeasibility would be actually utilizing the law? The inabi … Show full comment
No one's expressing any desire to see the bill pass, that's for sure. It's just worth noting that any actual action after passing would be more than any administration could take on.
amnestymyazz 12 months ago
Reply to scot
Agreed, very unfeasible - both in creation, implementation, and maintenance. The technology involved … Show full comment
Agreed, very unfeasible - both in creation, implementation, and maintenance. The technology involved … Show full comment
If I understand you you're stating the unfeasibility would be actually utilizing the law? The inability of the President to actually avail himself of the remedies provided by the bill? I agree with you. However it seems to me that allowing the bill to pass based on the perceived inability for anyone to utilize it is no reason to allow it to pass. I mean why even have the law? Years ago the Illinois States Attorney Lisa Madigan appeared before the IL Sup Ct in a case involving unlawful search by police drug sniffing dogs. I'm cloudy on the exact specifics of the case but you will get my meaning I'm sure .Her stance was that the dogs had allerted on a stash of narcotics while the police were searching a home for weapons. The weapons were never found yet the homeowner was arrested for narcotics possession. The defendent stated that was not why the police were there and was therefore not subject to arrest. Madigan said the dog discovered the stash during a lawful search. The Judge asked her that if the search were found to be lawful, wouldn't that mean that police dogs could simply walk up and down the street and sniff out drugs anyplace that their handlers found fit? Madigan replied "Yes, but we don't have the manpower to do so. So that would never be an issue". I always found it scary that she just missed the hole point of the question. It's not about whether or not it happens. It's what to do when it does. No law should provide for abuse.
ahoymehearties (Green) - 12 months ago
Reply to scot
Agreed, very unfeasible - both in creation, implementation, and maintenance. The technology involved … Show full comment
Agreed, very unfeasible - both in creation, implementation, and maintenance. The technology involved … Show full comment
That's the current hope - that self-regulation will rule the day. Part of that though is creating a bit of a groundswell about it. There are people who use the internet every day that don't care about it at all, and treat it as a phone or a television. At this point, most of us are confident in accepting the phone and television as a given, but we shouldn't be thinking of the internet that way yet. It's new technology, so the conservatives (I mean conservative like "those who wish to conserve the status quo) are going to legislate it to hell until the public doesn't find it interesting any more.
So by influencing casual users to recognize that they should DEMAND the internet as a given, since they do use it and are thus part of it, policy can also be influenced - or eliminated entirely, as is my hope too.
scot 12 months ago
Reply to Rosetteismyname
wow~ now who sounds like a conspiracy theorist... Don't trash talk to me about "sounding" … Show full comment
wow~ now who sounds like a conspiracy theorist... Don't trash talk to me about "sounding" … Show full comment
I never mentioned a conspiracy. If you actually read all the comments in a thread, specifically the one I was responding too, you might actually know what is going on. I was responding to the other comment, where they mentioned it could be hiding something, I simply remarked it was possible - not that it was happening.
Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 12 months ago
Reply to scot
Agreed, very unfeasible - both in creation, implementation, and maintenance. The technology involved … Show full comment
Agreed, very unfeasible - both in creation, implementation, and maintenance. The technology involved … Show full comment
wow~ now who sounds like a conspiracy theorist... Don't trash talk to me about "sounding" conspiracy theorist like...
"And the bill could be a cloud to hide another issue or topic, which makes it scarier."
"cloud" implies hiding...Hiding is a notion of conspiracy
scot 12 months ago
Reply to ahoymehearties
Scuttlebutt is that this may not be a "real" bill. It s obvious that it's not only rather … Show full comment
Scuttlebutt is that this may not be a "real" bill. It s obvious that it's not only rather … Show full comment
Agreed, very unfeasible - both in creation, implementation, and maintenance. The technology involved is beyond the speed of government anyway.
In my opinion, the net should be left relatively free, self regulating and self maintaining.
And the bill could be a cloud to hide another issue or topic, which makes it scarier.
ahoymehearties (Green) - 12 months ago
Reply to scot
Bad is an understatement! So much power.... this is absurd. Odd thing is, had the Bush administr … Show full comment
Bad is an understatement! So much power.... this is absurd. Odd thing is, had the Bush administr … Show full comment
Scuttlebutt is that this may not be a "real" bill. It s obvious that it's not only rather fascist, but also technically unfeasible - this wouldn't be an "obama term" project, this is something that would take decades to implement.
So rather than being an actual effort to regulate the web, it could be a bill simply to draw attention to the actual matter and work toward actual resolution. The debate is whether or not the Internet has the capability to self-regulate through the many means available to it, or whether some government intervention is needed.
Usually the only time "internet" comes up in Congress is when it's in the same sentence as "child porn," but the intent may be to change that with a larger focus on malware and that sort of thing. A bad bill may prove to be a good fake in the end - to keep us on our toes. Psychotics on all sides of issues on this very site have one thing in common - they're all making themselves heard, and that's something for them to care about.
SPREAD THE WORD