Obama COMMANDEERING Your Computers

8/9/2019 Obama COMMANDEERING Your Computers

1/103

President Barack Obamawants to control the internet.


2/103

Should President Obama Control The

Internet?by Austin Hil, l Sunday, July 19, 2009

President Barack Obamawants to control the internet.

And if our President has his way, this website maysoon be under legal attack from the White House.

Since the internets emergence in the private sector(it actually began in the public sector, throughdevelopments at the U.S. Department of Defense

back in the 1960s), officials in our U.S. Government

have generally viewed the internet as a good andnecessary thing.

In 1996, when former Sun Microsystems OfficerJohn Gage began a movement to get high-techcompanies involved in providing internet

infrastructure for the worlds schools, libraries, andclinics, President Bill Clinton and Vice President AlGore marked the first ever NetDay celebration bytraveling to Concord, California, and spending the


3/103

day re-wiring a high school campus with computercables.

Similarly, both President Clinton and PresidentGeorge W. Bush pushed for every school inAmerica to be connected to the world wide web, andinternet connectivity generally flourished around theglobe under the leadership of both Presidents, and by

both public and private funding means.

But today, things are different. After approximatelyseven months in office, President Obama controls, invarying degrees, General Motors, Chrysler, and avariety of financial services companies. He is seekingto control, among other things, the health careindustry, the energy industry, and the amount ofmoney that business executives are paid by their

employers.

And now it appears that the President who ran themost successful, web-savvy political campaign inworld history, wants to curtail what other people cando online.

Cass Sunstein, an American legal scholar andHarvard Law Professor, has been appointed byPresident Obama to head up the White House OfficeOf Information And Regulatory Affairs. His title issufficiently broad and ambiguous, but he wields


4/103

plenty of power. And with advance copies circulatingof his new book On Rumors: How FalsehoodsSpread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be

Done, Americans who still care about their rights tofreedom of speech should be paying closeattention.

You owe it to yourself to review what has beenreported in both the New York Post and the WallStreet Journal about Mr. Sunstein, and the ideas that

he advances in his book. And while we dont knowprecisely what Obama and Sunstein will be doing,many of the thoughts that Mr. Sunstein expressesabout the internet seem consistent with PresidentObamas proclivity to control things, generally.

Perhaps most disturbing is Mr. Sunsteins vision for

the future of web content, as he argues for a so-callednotice and take down law. Under this provision,those who operate websites - - The Washington Post,radio stations, private bloggers, and perhaps evenyou, yourself -we would all be required take downfalsehoods upon notice from the U.S. government.

And not only would the original content of websitesbe scrutinized by the government for falsehoods,website operators would also be held responsible forthe content of posts created by the websitesvisitors and readers. At first blush it may seem that,


5/103

for a web operator to be held accountable for contentgenerated by posters, is completely untenable. Butthat may very well be Mr. Sunsteins goal - - to

create an untenable situation for website operators -given his assertion that a chilling effect on thosewho would spread destructive falsehoods can be anexcellent idea..

But who shall determine what, exactly, is true andfalse? Mr. Sunstein laments the supposed lie that

emerged during last years presidential race, thatBarack Obama pals around with terrorists. Despitethat fact that a friendship between Obama and knowndomestic terrorist William Ayers was something that

both men acknowledged, Sunstein alludes to thenotion that this was one of those destructivefalsehoods of the sort that needs to be policed.

As I was recently talking about this matter on-air atArizonas NewsTalk 92-3 KTAR radio, a caller to theshow observed that theres no way this could belegal, or constitutional.. Thoughtful Americans of allsorts will immediately view this situation through thelenses of constitutionally guaranteed rights.

But issues of legality dont seem to matter, attimes, with the Obama Administration. In March ofthis year, there was nothing illegal about executivesof the AIG Corporation being paid bonuses that they


6/103

earned from their employer, but they were harassedand publicly belittled, nonetheless. President Obamahimself demonized them, while dozens of Obama

supporters demonstrated in front of the privateresidences of the executives, alleging that it wasunfair for those executives to be making so muchmoney.

In a similar way, it appears that the ObamaAdministration may be ushering-in an era of

harassment for website operators. Regardless of whatU.S. courts may or may not say about this in thefuture, a notice and take down letter from theWhite House could have quite a chilling effect fortoday.

http://townhall.com/columnists/AustinHill/2009/07/19/should_president_obama_control_the_internet?page=full&comments=true

============================================================
http://townhall.com/columnists/AustinHill/2009/07/19/should_president_obama_control_the_internet?page=full&comments=truehttp://townhall.com/columnists/AustinHill/2009/07/19/should_president_obama_control_the_internet?page=full&comments=truehttp://townhall.com/columnists/AustinHill/2009/07/19/should_president_obama_control_the_internet?page=full&comments=truehttp://townhall.com/columnists/AustinHill/2009/07/19/should_president_obama_control_the_internet?page=full&comments=true


7/103

Now Obama and his

Socialists (Sen. JayRockefeller) Look toControl the Internet What Happened to the

First Amendment Freedom of Speech?

GOVERNMENT CONTROL YOU

CAN BELIEVE IN!!!

America, wake up and take a good look at whatObama is doing. Do you care about your civilliberties and Constitutional Rights?
http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/08/29/now-obama-and-his-socialists-sen-jay-rockefeller-look-to-control-the-internet-what-happened-to-the-first-amendment-freedom-of-speech/http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/08/29/now-obama-and-his-socialists-sen-jay-rockefeller-look-to-control-the-internet-what-happened-to-the-first-amendment-freedom-of-speech/http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/08/29/now-obama-and-his-socialists-sen-jay-rockefeller-look-to-control-the-internet-what-happened-to-the-first-amendment-freedom-of-speech/http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/08/29/now-obama-and-his-socialists-sen-jay-rockefeller-look-to-control-the-internet-what-happened-to-the-first-amendment-freedom-of-speech/http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/08/29/now-obama-and-his-socialists-sen-jay-rockefeller-look-to-control-the-internet-what-happened-to-the-first-amendment-freedom-of-speech/http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/08/29/now-obama-and-his-socialists-sen-jay-rockefeller-look-to-control-the-internet-what-happened-to-the-first-amendment-freedom-of-speech/http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/08/29/now-obama-and-his-socialists-sen-jay-rockefeller-look-to-control-the-internet-what-happened-to-the-first-amendment-freedom-of-speech/http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/08/29/now-obama-and-his-socialists-sen-jay-rockefeller-look-to-control-the-internet-what-happened-to-the-first-amendment-freedom-of-speech/http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/08/29/now-obama-and-his-socialists-sen-jay-rockefeller-look-to-control-the-internet-what-happened-to-the-first-amendment-freedom-of-speech/http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/08/29/now-obama-and-his-socialists-sen-jay-rockefeller-look-to-control-the-internet-what-happened-to-the-first-amendment-freedom-of-speech/


8/103

This is not CHANGE its a government takeover.

CONTROL ITS ALL ABOUT

CONTROL!!!Now Obama and his minions are coming after thecontrol of the Internet. So much for free speech.This bill would allow a President who has alreadyshown a propensity to use the Internet to haveAmericans nark on fellow Americans with the

[email protected] snitch site. And who will saythat there is a so-called cyber emergency, BarackObama? How convenient. Just what we need, morefederal bureaucracies in charge of the Internet.

Internet companies and civil liberties groups werealarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed

handing the White House the power to disconnectprivate-sector computers from the Internet.

Theyre not much happier about a revised versionthat aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West VirginiaDemocrat, have spent months drafting behind closeddoors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-

page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appearsto permit the president to seize temporary

control of private-sector networks during

a so-called cybersecurity emergency.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10320096-38.htmlhttp://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10320096-38.htmlmailto:[email protected]://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10320096-38.htmlhttp://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10320096-38.htmlmailto:[email protected]


9/103

The new version would allow the president todeclare a cybersecurity emergency relating to non-governmental computer networks and do whats

necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections ofthe proposal include a federal certification

program for cybersecurity professionals, and a

requirement that certain computer systems and

networks in the private sector be managed by

people who have been awarded that license.

Excerpt from Bill

So President Obama have already taken over thefinancial banking industry and the automotiveindustry. They now look to take over 1/6th of thenations economy with a twisted form of socialist,government run health care. As stated by Wizbang,

the Obama gang has already professed a desire toimpose the fairness doctrine to stifle dissentingmedia. This coming from the same White House thatwanted fellow Americans to nark on each other andsend emails of their neighbors [email protected]. These people just dontstop. This bill has all the signs of controlling political

dissent.

Stated beautifully by Right Wing News, are notthese the same people who are looking to control theInternet the same people who were carping at the
http://www.politechbot.com/docs/rockefeller.revised.cybersecurity.draft.082709.pdfhttp://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/08/28/be-afraid-be-very-afraid.phpmailto:[email protected]://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2009/08/obamas_attempt_to_take_control.phphttp://www.politechbot.com/docs/rockefeller.revised.cybersecurity.draft.082709.pdfhttp://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/08/28/be-afraid-be-very-afraid.phpmailto:[email protected]://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2009/08/obamas_attempt_to_take_control.php


10/103

Patriot Act and other actions by the previous GWBAdministration that civil liberties were beingattacked? But I guess it is different now because it is

Barack Obama and Democrats doing it. TheseLiberals complained about library books, but nowlook to completely control the Internet!

How does one grant a President Executive authoritywhen he is already in the midst of an abusivegovernment power grab?

Now Republic says HELL NO Call Rockefeller and voice your

opposition.

We must call and jam the switchboard of Senators John

Rockefeller (D-W. Virginia) (202) 224-6472 - and Olympia

Snowe (R-Maine) (202) 224-5344 - and our own congress

representatives and senators reminding them that if they want

to keep their jobs they must say HELL NO to bills like this, or

be kicked out next election, voted out of office and replacedwith loyal, ethical and caring people with conscience and

compassion.

===========================================================

Regulating the Internet, One Way or theOther

by Lori Drummer
http://www.qando.net/?p=4343http://www.qando.net/?p=4343http://www.nowpublic.com/world/should-obama-control-internet-absolutely-nothttp://biggovernment.com/ldrummer/2010/04/09/regulating-the-internet-one-way-or-the-other/http://biggovernment.com/ldrummer/2010/04/09/regulating-the-internet-one-way-or-the-other/http://biggovernment.com/author/ldrummerhttp://www.qando.net/?p=4343http://www.qando.net/?p=4343http://www.nowpublic.com/world/should-obama-control-internet-absolutely-nothttp://biggovernment.com/ldrummer/2010/04/09/regulating-the-internet-one-way-or-the-other/http://biggovernment.com/ldrummer/2010/04/09/regulating-the-internet-one-way-or-the-other/http://biggovernment.com/author/ldrummer


11/103

According to Tuesdays unanimous court ruling, theFederal Communications Commission (FCC) is notabove the law no matter what Commission

Chairman Julius Genachowski or his Leftist friends atFree Press might wish.

For the past several years, the Left has breathlesslyclaimed that without the imposition of governmentoversight and control, the Internet as we know it willcease to exist.

Just try and follow the Lefts logic for a moment.The Internet whose ingenious development andexplosive growth has occurred almost entirely freefrom the heavy hand of the government will ceaseto exist as we know it withoutthe heavy hand ofgovernment?

This weeks ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals forthe D.C. Circuit clearly states that the FCC does nothave the authority to impose network neutrality ruleson Internet service providers. Indeed, the FCC
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/201004/08-1291-1238302.pdfhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303411604575167782845712768.htmlhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303411604575167782845712768.htmlhttp://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/201004/08-1291-1238302.pdfhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303411604575167782845712768.htmlhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303411604575167782845712768.html


12/103

failed to tie its assertion that any law gives theCommission regulatory authority to oversee Internet

providers network management practices.

Thats right: no law exists that gives the FCC theauthority to regulate Internet service providers. Itsnot that the FCC just misinterpreted their authority they unilaterally asserted authority where noneexisted.

So, whats this Obama FCC likely to do now? Well,forge ahead anyway, of course!

Instead of suspending their network neutralityrulemaking proceeding, the FCC has extended thecomment period for the proceeding (from April 8 toApril 26), seeking creative ideas on how they can

legally assert their authority to regulate the Internet.The FCC started out its Open Internet proceedingwith high-minded rhetoric about it being a fact-

based investigation. But in the wake of the courtdecision, the investigative process increasinglyresembles a fact-based inquiry among cats as to the

proper treatment of mice.

In the end, the Commissions attempt to enforce aregulatory regime over the Internet withoutCongressional approval is unlikely to pass judicialmuster. But testing those limits seems to be what the
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-607A1.pdfhttp://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-607A1.pdfhttp://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-607A1.pdfhttp://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-607A1.pdf


13/103

current FCC Chairman and his boss over at 1600Pennsylvania Avenue seem to have in mind: Expandthe role of government over wide swaths of the

economy by whatever means necessary.

So, instead of appropriately seeking Congressionalapproval, which would be difficult, and probablyunsuccessful, expect Chairman Genachowski and theDemocratic majority at the FCC to pursue a path offorcing Internet providers into a regulatory box

known as Title II of the 1934 Communications Act.No, thats not a typo. They really are talking aboutapplying a 1934 statute to the Internet. (Hope allthose gamers learn to love pushing hoops aroundwith a stick!)

What would that mean? In her own admission,

network neutrality proponent Gigi Sohn of PublicKnowledge plainly stated on PBSsNewsHour:

the best option is for the FCC to reverse its 2002decision that deregulated broadband Internet access.If they reverse that decision, they say, look, we werewrong in 2002 the predictive assumptions we

made were wrong. The market has changed. Weregoing to now regulate broadband access again.

Cramming the Internet into Title II would go againstthe policy pronouncements of the Congress, the
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/jan-june10/fcc_04-07.htmlhttp://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/jan-june10/fcc_04-07.html


14/103

Supreme Court, and even the FCC itself. It wouldplace the Internet under an outdated regulatoryscheme designed for antiquated phone monopolies

and treat broadband like a public utility. But, itwould give these power hungry regulators a bettershot of enacting net neutrality regulations, taxinginternet services under the Universal Service Fund,and even regulating Internet pricing. These policiesare implicitly and explicitly written into theNationalBroadband Plan Chairman Genachowski just sentCongress.

The Obama FCC, Free Press, and Public Knowledgewill not stop until the federal government regulatesthe Internet. Through network neutrality regulations,the National Broadband Plan, or shoving the Internetinto Title II, their motives are clear: to control theInternet.

If the Left wants yet another hot-button issue tocontend with in the upcoming elections, I think they

just found it.

http://biggovernment.com/ldrummer/2010/04/09/regulating-the-internet-one-way-or-the-

other/#more-103798

============================================================
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-277.ZO.htmlhttp://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-77A1.pdfhttp://surprisinglyfree.com/2010/02/23/broadband-as-a-public-utility/http://www.broadband.gov/plan/17-implementation-and-benchmarks/?search=title%2BII#s17-3http://www.broadband.gov/plan/17-implementation-and-benchmarks/?search=title%2BII#s17-3http://biggovernment.com/ldrummer/2010/04/09/regulating-the-internet-one-way-or-the-other/#more-103798http://biggovernment.com/ldrummer/2010/04/09/regulating-the-internet-one-way-or-the-other/#more-103798http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-277.ZO.htmlhttp://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-77A1.pdfhttp://surprisinglyfree.com/2010/02/23/broadband-as-a-public-utility/http://www.broadband.gov/plan/17-implementation-and-benchmarks/?search=title%2BII#s17-3http://www.broadband.gov/plan/17-implementation-and-benchmarks/?search=title%2BII#s17-3http://biggovernment.com/ldrummer/2010/04/09/regulating-the-internet-one-way-or-the-other/#more-103798http://biggovernment.com/ldrummer/2010/04/09/regulating-the-internet-one-way-or-the-other/#more-103798


15/103

Democrats Back FCC in AnticipatedEfforts to Regulate Broadband

by Capitol Confidential

In the wake of the Court of Appeals judgment lastweek that the Federal Communications Commission(FCC) lacks sufficient authority to regulate

broadband services, senior congressional Democratsare reaffirming their support for alternative methodsof executing what some critics charge would be a de

facto government takeover of the internet.

Rep. Ed Markey, a Democrat from Massachusettsand co-author of the Houses Internet FreedomPreservation Act, said the FCC should take anyactions necessary to ensure that consumers andcompetition are protected on the internet, and
http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/11/democrats-back-fcc-in-anticipated-efforts-to-regulate-broadband/http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/11/democrats-back-fcc-in-anticipated-efforts-to-regulate-broadband/http://biggovernment.com/author/capitolconfidentialhttp://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/06/court-delivers-blow-to-fcc-in-ruling/http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/11/democrats-back-fcc-in-anticipated-efforts-to-regulate-broadband/http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/11/democrats-back-fcc-in-anticipated-efforts-to-regulate-broadband/http://biggovernment.com/author/capitolconfidentialhttp://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/06/court-delivers-blow-to-fcc-in-ruling/


16/103

offered to continue to work with my colleagues inCongress to provide the Commission any additionalauthority it may need to ensure the openness of the

Internet for consumers, innovators and investors.

Markey, like FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, is abacker of net neutrality, a policy that wouldinadvertently be instituted were the FCC to reclassify

broadband services under existing rules relating totelephone services, and directly instituted were his

bill passed and signed into law.

Fellow Massachusetts Democrat Sen. John Kerry,meanwhile, insisted that while it is within theauthority of the FCC to reclassify broadband he is notadvocating such aggressive action.

I am not advocating that the FCC reclassifybroadband services as a result of this decision,Kerry, the chairman of the Senate CommerceCommittee, said. But I absolutely believe theymaintain that legal authority and it would be entirelyconsistent with the history of communications laws inour country if they did.

Kerry went on to say that Congress did not intendfor cable and telephone broadband internet service

providers to fall outside of the authority of the FCC,and therefore that he would be willing to work with


17/103

all interested parties on the construction of a newlegal and regulatory framework for broadband,especially if reclassifying broadband as a

telecommunications service proves too difficult toadminister.

Democratic FCC commissioners, for their part, seemdetermined to attempt to reclassify broadband as aTitle II service, which (if done successfully) wouldenable the agency to effectively regulate the internet

and institute net neutrality by the back door.

The only way the Commission can make lemonadeout of this lemon of a decision is to do now whatshould have been done years ago: treat broadband asthe telecommunications service it is, Michael J.Copps said. We should straighten this broadband

classification mess out before the first day ofsummer.

Observers say that if the FCC does what is beingdiscussed, it is likely to kick off World War III,with broadband providers effectively going to battlewith the agency in what could be a politically messy

showdown, in which other groups who firmly opposenet neutralityincluding, prominently, minority andcivil rights organizations could also weigh in.


18/103

Congressional Republicans have vehemently opposedboth plans to institute net neutrality and to pursuereclassification, with Rep. Joe Barton saying last

month that The worst idea Ive heard in years isreclassification. He added that I dont want toregulate broadband like we regulated telephoneservices in the 1930s. In addition, Republican Rep.Mike Rogers of Michigan and Genachowski had alengthy exchange when Genachowski appeared

before House members to discuss regulation of theinternet. Rep. Rogers office says he does not believesuch regulation via direct institution of net neutralityor reclassification is the best way to encourageinnovation and increase investment in broadbandinfrastructure, two ostensible goals of net neutralityadvocates.

Observers say it bears noting in all of this, however,that, skepticism of and opposition to net neutralityhas not been confined just to Republican ranks: Lastyear, 72 House Democrats signaled doubts about netneutrality in a letter to Genachowski.

http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/11/democrats-back-fcc-in-anticipated-efforts-to-regulate-broadband/#more-104274

=======================
http://www.publicknowledge.org/pdf/dem-letter-20091016.pdfhttp://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/11/democrats-back-fcc-in-anticipated-efforts-to-regulate-broadband/#more-104274http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/11/democrats-back-fcc-in-anticipated-efforts-to-regulate-broadband/#more-104274http://www.publicknowledge.org/pdf/dem-letter-20091016.pdfhttp://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/11/democrats-back-fcc-in-anticipated-efforts-to-regulate-broadband/#more-104274http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/11/democrats-back-fcc-in-anticipated-efforts-to-regulate-broadband/#more-104274


19/103

American Citizens, BELOW PLEASE FIND THE LETTERSEND TO THE COMMIE FCC czar Genachowski by the 72

HOUSE DEMOCRATS ( WHO WANT TO CONTROL

YOUR COMPUTER, YOUR INTERNET USAGE, YOURE

FREEDOM OF SPEECH AS GIVEN TO YOUU BY THE 1STAMENDMND OF THE US CONSTITUTION : ( Feel Free to

call these 72 Congressman who claims they represent your

interest.)


20/103


21/103


22/103


23/103


24/103

=====================================================


25/103

T he right speaks out

against Net Neutrality

Posted byNeil Stevens (Profile)

Thursday, April 15th at 12:30PM EDT

A letter opposing Net Neutrality went out today tomembers of Congress from a number of groups onthe right. The spectrum of our movement isrepresented: libertarian groups, religious and values-oriented groups, economic and fiscal policyadvocates, large organizations, and grass roots are all

there. The entire list of signers, available below thefold, is as diverse as it is long.

They all recognize that weve all benefited from howthe Internet has grown and innovated under years ofregulation with a light touch, because contrary tomyth the Internet has never been a Title II Common

Carrier under the Communications Act*, and that wemust continue to allow the free flow of informationwithout heavy-handed government interference.Competition protects us better than empowering anactivist FCC ever could.


26/103

Im glad to see that more of us are coming around onthis critical issue. Were a long way from the dayswhen Free Press front group Save the Internet could

rattle off technobabble and convince conservativesthat their neo-Marxist regulatory plans wereharmless.

* I linked to AT&T, and now the neo-Marxists aregoing to call me a capitalist lap dog! Oh no!Everybody Panic!

Anyway, heres the letter itself for review:

April 15, 2010

Dear Member of Congress,

We are writing to alert you of a dangerous effort

currently underway at the Federal CommunicationsCommission (FCC). Unelected bureaucrats areseeking to fundamentally alter the federalgovernments role in regulating the Internet byimposing so-called net neutrality mandates.Democratic and Republican administrations alikehave agreed that a light touch approach to the

Internet creates competition, lowers prices,incentivizes innovation, and ultimately benefitsconsumers. The current proposal under considerationis a harmful departure from long held successful
http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/15/the-right-speaks-out-against-net-neutrality/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/15/the-right-speaks-out-against-net-neutrality/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/15/the-right-speaks-out-against-net-neutrality/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://www.redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://attpublicpolicy.com/broadband-policy/the-myth-of-broadband-reclassification/http://attpublicpolicy.com/broadband-policy/the-myth-of-broadband-reclassification/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/15/the-right-speaks-out-against-net-neutrality/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/15/the-right-speaks-out-against-net-neutrality/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://www.redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://attpublicpolicy.com/broadband-policy/the-myth-of-broadband-reclassification/http://attpublicpolicy.com/broadband-policy/the-myth-of-broadband-reclassification/


27/103


28/103

families to continue to have access to the toolsnecessary to keep unwanted content out of the home.

We ask that you support innovation, competition, andconsumers and oppose this effort to regulate theInternet.

Sincerely,

Phyllis Schlafly

President and Founder

Eagle Forum

Penny Nance

CEO

Concerned Women of America

Grover Norquist

President

Americans for Tax Reform

Tom McClusky

Sr. Vice President

Family Research Council Action

Tim PhillipsPresident

Americans for Prosperity

Steve Pociask


29/103

President

American Consumer Institute

C. Preston Noell IIIPresident

Tradition, Family, Property, Inc.

Andresen Blom

Executive Director

American Principles in Action

Bill Wilson

President

Americans for Limited Government

Lisa Correnti

President and Founder

OneNationUnderGod.org

Kelly William Cobb

Executive Director

Digital Liberty Project

Timothy LeeVice-President of Legal and Public

Affairs

Center for Individual Freedom


30/103

Steve Elliott

Founder

Grassfire Nation

Mathew Staver

Founder and Chairman

Liberty Counsel

Chuck Muth

President

Citizen Outreach

Mario Lopez

President

Hispanic Leadership Fund

Joseph K. Grieboski

Founder and President

Institute on Religion and Public

Policy

Deal Hudson

President

Catholic Advocate

Phil Kerpen

Director

NoInternetTakeover.com


31/103

Andrea Lafferty

Executive Director

Traditional Values Coalition

Timothy B. Wildmon

President

American Family Association

Curt Levey

Executive DirectorCommittee for Justice

Rev. Rob Schenck

President

National Clergy Council

Phillip L. Jauregui

President

Judicial Action Group

Jamie Story

President

Grassroot Institute of Hawaii

Dave Trabert

President

Kansas Policy Institute


32/103

Larry Cirignano

President

Faith & Freedom New Jersey

John Taylor

President

Tertium Quids

Hance Haney

Director and Senior FellowTechnology & Democracy Project

Discovery Institute

Dr. Carl Herbster

President

AdvanceUSA

====================================

Its Official: Google is

censoring emails from me



33/103

Tuesday, April 13th at 6:46PM EDT

60 Comments

I guess I made one too many posts about Google,because Google is now blockading all mails from meto Gmail users. Then again, it could just beincompetence thats causing this, but I have no wayof knowing.

But what I do know is that this sudden block of a

conservative is yet another example in a long line ofconservatives being victimized by Googles falseaccusations of spam on the Google search service, onYouTube, and on Blogger.

I warned people it would happen on Gmaileventually. I just never thought it would happen to

me.
http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/13/its-official-google-is-censoring-emails-from-me/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/13/its-official-google-is-censoring-emails-from-me/http://redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/


34/103

====================================

We are putting theNational Broadband Plan

into action.

Posted by Kenny Solomon (Profile)

Friday, April 9th at 12:54PM EDT
http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/13/its-official-google-is-censoring-emails-from-me/#comments


35/103

6 Comments

Obama Administration claims ownership and

total control of the internet.FCC chairman Julius Genachowski:

The court decision earlier this week does notchange our broadband policy goals, or the ultimate

authority of the FCC to act to achieve those goals,the FCC chairman said.

The court did not question the FCCs goals; itmerely invalidated one technical, legal mechanism

for broadband policy.

http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-technology/fcc-presses-on-with-broadband-plan-

despite-court-ruling-20100410-rz1o.html

the ultimate authority of The FCC

Nudge.

Their ends justify the means any means.If this isnt proof that theyre going to do whateverthey want, whenever they want, where they want andto whoever they want to affect, then you havent been

paying attention.
http://www.redstate.com/etcartman/2010/04/09/obama-claims-ownership-and-total-control-of-the-internet/http://www.redstate.com/etcartman/2010/04/09/obama-claims-ownership-and-total-control-of-the-internet/http://www.redstate.com/etcartman/2010/04/09/obama-claims-ownership-and-total-control-of-the-internet/http://www.redstate.com/etcartman/2010/04/09/obama-claims-ownership-and-total-control-of-the-internet/http://redstate.com/etcartman/http://redstate.com/users/etcartman/http://redstate.com/etcartman/http://redstate.com/users/etcartman/http://www.redstate.com/etcartman/2010/04/09/obama-claims-ownership-and-total-control-of-the-internet/http://www.redstate.com/etcartman/2010/04/09/obama-claims-ownership-and-total-control-of-the-internet/http://www.redstate.com/etcartman/2010/04/09/obama-claims-ownership-and-total-control-of-the-internet/http://redstate.com/etcartman/http://redstate.com/users/etcartman/


36/103

The will of the people, the courts, the law, theconstitution and YOUR RIGHTS mean nothing toeven one single person within the administration.

They are fundamentally transforming America..Scratch that. They did it already.

The powder keg is well past full and starting toexponentially expand at the seams. One errant sparkis all its gonna take.

I wonder how long it will be until some well-knownpeople start getting tuned up, or evendisappeared ? The administration has their civiliandefense force just as big and as well funded as themilitary. SEIU, AFL-CIO, Teamsters, Teachersunions, etc.

Whos gonna be first ?.. Beck, Rush, Hannity,Conservative Congresspeople, SCOTUS justices ?

Kenny SolomonDC Works For Uswww.dcworksforus.comA South Florida-based patriots organization.

====================================
http://www.redstate.com/etcartman/2010/04/09/obama-claims-ownership-and-total-control-of-the-internet/#commentshttp://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-technology/fcc-presses-on-with-broadband-plan-despite-court-ruling-20100410-rz1o.htmlhttp://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-technology/fcc-presses-on-with-broadband-plan-despite-court-ruling-20100410-rz1o.htmlhttp://www.redstate.com/etcartman/2010/04/09/obama-claims-ownership-and-total-control-of-the-internet/#commentshttp://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-technology/fcc-presses-on-with-broadband-plan-despite-court-ruling-20100410-rz1o.htmlhttp://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-technology/fcc-presses-on-with-broadband-plan-despite-court-ruling-20100410-rz1o.htmlhttp://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-technology/fcc-presses-on-with-broadband-plan-despite-court-ruling-20100410-rz1o.html


37/103

Democrats plot two-

pronged attack onInternet freedom


Thursday, April 8th at 2:42AM EDT

15 Comments


38/103

The Hill yesterday ran two stories that show theDemocrats are planning a two-pronged attack onInternet Freedom, to empower the FCC to control the

Internet and everything on it, just as they dotelevision and radio. Yes, Im talking about our goodfriend, neo-Marxist Net Neutrality.

The first story discusses the honest approach, whichis to go to Congress and pass a law expanding theFCCs powers. After all, the DC Circuit Court of

Appeals refused to find Internet regulation in thepenumbra of the Communications Act, and changingthe law would be an easy way to fix that.

But of course that takes pesky things like votes, sothey have a backup plan, Deem and Pass. They call itreclassifying, because they want to take the

unprecedented step of placing ISPs under Title II ofthe Communications act, which would give the FCCthe same power over ISPs that the Bush-era FCC hadwhen it fined television stations for showing JanetJacksons breast, and that FCCs in eras past hadwhen they imposed the Fairness Doctrine ontelevision and radio stations.

The justification for strict regulation on televisionand radio used to be that there are only so manyfrequencies useful for broadcast over the air, and that

public resource had to be managed to avoid the
http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/http://redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/#commentshttp://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/http://redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/08/democrats-plot-two-pronged-attack-on-internet-freedom/#comments


39/103

tragedy of the commons. However the Internet isprivately held and expandable, so the argument justdoesnt hold. There is no valid reason to reclassify

ISPs under Title II.

But it sounds like the Democrats of the FCC areplotting it anyway, because they just cant stand thefreedom enjoyed on the Internet today. There must becommissars watching every ISP, every router, every

packet, to ensure political correctness transparency

and neutrality.

====================================

FCC loses Internet

regulation lawsuit
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/90773-markey-congress-will-give-fcc-additional-authorityhttp://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/90773-markey-congress-will-give-fcc-additional-authorityhttp://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/90853-fcc-democrats-determined-to-reclassify-broadband


40/103

Posted byNeil Stevens (Profile)Tuesday, April 6th at 11:50AM EDT

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals slapped the FCCtoday by ruling in Comcast v. FCCthat the

regulatory body overstepped its legal bounds when ittried to regulate Internet management practices. This

precludes Net Neutrality regulation, which is at heartregulation of how ISPs manage their networks.

Judge David Tatel, Clinton appointed successor ofnow-Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, wrote for the court

that since even the FCC acknowledged it had noexpress statutory authority to go after Comcast forregulating use of Bittorrent on its network, theCommission had to show that the regulation wasreasonably ancillary to the authority it does have.The FCC did not, and so the FCCs order to Comcasthas been thrown out.

Im no lawyer, but having lost decisively at the DCCircuit Court of Appeals seems to set a dangerous

precedent for the FCCs future ability to regulateISPs. That is why the FCC has a plan: reclassify (or
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/06/fcc-loses-internet-regulation-lawsuit/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/06/fcc-loses-internet-regulation-lawsuit/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/06/fcc-loses-internet-regulation-lawsuit/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/06/fcc-loses-internet-regulation-lawsuit/http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/06/fcc-loses-internet-regulation-lawsuit/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/06/fcc-loses-internet-regulation-lawsuit/


41/103

deem) ISPs to be something different under the law(make them a Title II service under theCommunications Act, which former Chairman

Michael Powell says they never, ever have been), andthen reassert (or pass) this authority regardless ofwhat the court said.

Weve got to raise the alarm and pressure the FCCagainst this deem and pass tactic.

====================================

Tech Roundup


Tuesday, April 6th at 2:28AM EDT

1 Comment

Two quick hits following up with ongoing stories.

First off, Google and/or Andrew McLaughlin(Deputy White House CTO formerly of Google)seem to have responded to the FOIA request for
http://redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/201004/08-1291-1238302.pdfhttp://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/201004/08-1291-1238302.pdfhttp://redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/201004/08-1291-1238302.pdfhttp://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/201004/08-1291-1238302.pdf


42/103

McLaughlins email by deleting his Buzz account.Its not the crime, its the cover up, as they say. BigGovernment is doing such great work on this story.

Next we turn from the behind-the-scenes discussionsof Net Neutrality to the front lines. Reuters has astory on the FCCs Deem and Pass plan to reclassifyInternet services into a different category, if andwhen they lose the Comcast case and the judge tellsthem they have no authority to regulate the Internet.

The ISPs arent ready to lay down and die andaccording to Susan Crawford, formerly of the ObamaWhite House, theyre ready to fight World War IIIover it. I hope they remember that elections haveconsequences, and spend accordingly for November.

====================================

Former Chairman Michael

Powell on Deem and Pass

http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/06/tech-roundup/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/06/tech-roundup/http://redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/05/breaking-white-house-deputy-cto-mclaughlins-google-buzz-account-deleted-after-foia-request/http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/05/breaking-white-house-deputy-cto-mclaughlins-google-buzz-account-deleted-after-foia-request/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/06/tech-roundup/http://redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/06/tech-roundup/#commentshttp://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/05/breaking-white-house-deputy-cto-mclaughlins-google-buzz-account-deleted-after-foia-request/


43/103

Thursday, April 1st at 9:20PM EDT

Michael Powell is a former Chairman of the FederalCommunications Commission who is not in favor ofthe whole Net Neutrality takeover of the Internet. Sohes warning us about what Im calling deem and

pass, in which the FCC will respond to a lost lawsuitby deeming ISPs to be something different, and using

that to justify passing rules to regulate the Internetlike television.

You may remember Michael Powell because rightout of the gate during the Bush administration he wasan active regulator of content. Imagine a Democrathaving that kind of power over the Internet.

Anyway, Powells reaction to deem and pass is thatI think that idea is an unadulterated disaster. Strongwords for what is a pretty dry, technical interview.Read the whole thing, please.

====================================
http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/05/breaking-white-house-deputy-cto-mclaughlins-google-buzz-account-deleted-after-foia-request/http://in.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idINIndia-47416420100402?sp=truehttp://in.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idINIndia-47416420100402?sp=truehttp://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/01/former-chairma-michael-powell-on-deem-and-pass/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/01/former-chairma-michael-powell-on-deem-and-pass/http://biggovernment.com/capitolconfidential/2010/04/05/breaking-white-house-deputy-cto-mclaughlins-google-buzz-account-deleted-after-foia-request/http://in.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idINIndia-47416420100402?sp=truehttp://in.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idINIndia-47416420100402?sp=truehttp://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/01/former-chairma-michael-powell-on-deem-and-pass/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/04/01/former-chairma-michael-powell-on-deem-and-pass/http://redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/


44/103

Danger at the FCC: An

Omnibus Warning


Saturday, March 27th at 2:37AM EDT

Ive been talking about the dangers of NetNeutrality and the neo-Marxist FCC for sometime at RedState. However events are picking upspeed, especially with Obamacare now out of
http://www.multichannel.com/article/450846-Q_A_Michael_Powell_Title_II_Move_Could_Spark_War_.phphttp://www.multichannel.com/article/450846-Q_A_Michael_Powell_Title_II_Move_Could_Spark_War_.phphttp://www.multichannel.com/article/450846-Q_A_Michael_Powell_Title_II_Move_Could_Spark_War_.php


45/103

the way. Its time I laid everything back outfrom the beginning.

There are two major plans that the Obama FCC,headed by Chairman Julius Genachowski, has instore for us. Net Neutrality and a NationalBroadband Plan. Net Neutrality is the moremisleading issue, though, and has the greaterexternal push behind it, so the majority of the

talk on the Internet is about that.

Theyre both dangerous, though. Heres why.

Net Neutrality is a term that has floated aroundin the technical community for years. Its aharmless concept, but I wont go into it because

it has nothing to do with Net Neutrality as aregulatory practice. Seriously. The Neo-Marxists at Free Press and the self-seeking

bosses at Google have perverted that tech-pleasing label into something vastly different.

Heres what it is in practice: ChairmanGenachowski made a landmark speech in whichhe declared that the FCC would enforce twonew, never before used principles on theInternet: neutrality and transparency.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/27/danger-at-the-fcc-an-omnibus-warning/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/27/danger-at-the-fcc-an-omnibus-warning/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/27/danger-at-the-fcc-an-omnibus-warning/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://www.redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/27/danger-at-the-fcc-an-omnibus-warning/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/27/danger-at-the-fcc-an-omnibus-warning/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://www.redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/


46/103

Neutrality: Here the FCC is claiming theauthority to regulate how the Internet routes

packets. Packets are the small pieces of datathat everything is broken up into when it is sentover the Internet: email, web pages, images,videos, Skype phone calls, everything. Packetsare like postcards: They contain data glued tothe to and from addresses, in a manner ofspeaking. Routing is how the Internet passes

those packets from computer to computer untilthey make it to their destination.

For years now, with tools like Quality of Serviceflagging, the Internet has been moving toward asmarter ability to route packets on the basis of

what they contain, how time-sensitive they areand, yes, how much their senders and recipientswere willing to pay for higher priority use of theresources. Smarter routing is more and moreimportant as we use the Internet in more varied,more important, and more bandwidth-intensive

ways.Also, by making special arrangements and deals,ISPs and Internet companies can get togetherand offer services that otherwise might not be


47/103

available to users. Even Net Neutralityproponent Googleparticipates in non-neutralarrangements both abroad such as in the Indiansoccer deal on Youtube, as well as at homewhen Google promises to abide by any T-Mobile restrictions on Android-based phones,even those restrictions which are non-neutral onthe part of T-Mobile as an ISP. Freedom ofenterprise helps Americans because the

innovation enables us to have more services andoptions available to us. We need those options toremain, and that freedom to continue.

However Genachowski and the Obama FCC areplacing these kinds of sensible cost-cutting and

efficiency-gaining innovations in jeopardy withtheir talk of heavy-handed governmentregulation of the industry. The Internet hasflourished since it came out from the thumb ofgovernment control when it was the ARPAnet,and became the free-wheeling marketplace it is

today. Clearly, that scares people who wantgovernment to be in control of things.

And its total control they want, too. Because thesecond principle Genachowski asked for,


48/103

transparency, doesnt mean transparency ofgovernment. No, it means that the government isto claim the right to have access to every routerin America, every switch, and every other pieceof hardware that makes the Internet go. Public orPrivate, the FCC wants to be able to snoop onhow it runs, to be able to control how it runs.

Does that scare you? It should. When you

connect to the Internet, your home computernetwork (even if its just one computer) is nowon the Internet. The Internet is not like a publicroad. Its a vast series of private networks, allconnected together. Government wants controlover the whole ball of yarn, how everyone

configures and runs their own private computersrouting the packets of the Internet.

That control will have one immediate impact:The FCC will be picking winners and losers onthe Internet, which is why Google is 100%

behind this effort. Google will be a winner,

thanks in no small part to its close ties with theObama administration through Google CEO andObama advisor Eric Schmidt, while those whoinvest in the capital of the Internet, the wires that
http://newteevee.com/2010/03/25/youtube-caught-in-net-neutrality-flap-in-india/http://newteevee.com/2010/03/25/youtube-caught-in-net-neutrality-flap-in-india/http://newteevee.com/2010/03/25/youtube-caught-in-net-neutrality-flap-in-india/http://newteevee.com/2010/03/25/youtube-caught-in-net-neutrality-flap-in-india/


49/103

criss-cross the country and the planet, will lose.If you look at any of the literature put out by the

pro-Net Neutrality forces, youll see plenty ofvillification of ISPs, AT&T in particular.

The hope of the Net Neutrality left is that youllforget that todays AT&T isnt the hugemonopolist of old, big and hated by manyAmericans. No, that AT&T is gone, and what is

now called AT&T is actually the scrappy littleCingular, a company comparable in marketcapitalization to Internet firms like Google andMicrosoft (and in fact Cingular/AT&Ts a bitsmaller).

Of course, such class warfare is old hat to a littleleft-wing organization called Free Press. Co-founded by a man named Robert McChesney,the organization I believe is best expressed asneo-Marxist. While the original Marxists wantedcontrol of the means of production of goods,today the groups like Free Press want the state to

control the means of production of information,as ours is increasing an information-driveneconomy. Free Press traditionally has soughttight state controls over television and radio, but


50/103

now they have turned their attention to theInternet. They even have a front group for that

purpose, called Save the Internet.

Save the Internet is innocuous looking at first.They take full advantage both major deceptionsof the Net Neutrality movement. First, theymake you think this is all a harmless little bit oftechnocracy, and not a power grab. In fact

theyve used that to trick some rightys intothinking that withoutNet Neutrality, ISPs mightcensor content. In fact its just the opposite: Itsonly if Net Neutrality comes into effect that thecensors of the left will even have the power tocontrol the Internet.

Phase one, Net Neutrality, includes no plans toregulate content, just routing. But just as theFCC regulates content on television and radio,most famously in the case of the Janet JacksonSuper Bowl show,so too will it be able toregulate content on the Internetshould Net

Neutrality be the law of the land.

The fight has already begun to prevent it,though. Comcast has taken the FCC to court,


51/103

arguing that the FCCs current reaches intoInternet regulation go beyond the statutory

powers the FCC has been granted. In fact, thosewho watch this industry closely tell me that thefederal courts at this point are almost sure to rulein Comcasts favor.

Genachowski has a plan though. Its one youmay have heard of before: Deem and pass. The

backup plan the FCC has, in the event that thecourts rule that the FCC no longer has theauthority to regulate information services on theInternet, is to deem that ISPs are no longerinformation providers, and then re-pass the sameregulations that the courts just threw out, then

pass Net Neutrality on top of that. Once thathappens, the government will be taking overanother sixth of the economy.

Verizon is taking a leading role against the newdeem and pass (demonpass?), and AT&T agrees,calling upon the Congress to take up these issues

rather than leaving the FCC to expand beyondits legal bounds to do these things on its own. Ofcourse, Democrats lack the votes for Net


52/103

Neutrality, so its easy to see why nothingshappened on that front.

We have to stop it, though. If ISPs are hindered,then the very foundation of the Internet will behindered. The Internets backbone must continueto grow and to innovate as needed to withstandthe ever-growing traffic burden we put on it, andno regulatory framework can keep up with how

fast the Internet is changing. The market andcompetition will stamp out any hostile behaviorfaster than the government ever could, andwithout even any distortions or government-chosen winners and losers.

In particular, the coming wave of wireless, high-speed Internet access is going to rock thefoundations of the broadband market. Sprint isalready deploying its 4G WiMax network. WhenAT&T and Verizon counter with their 4G LTEnetworks, cable and DSL Internet will feelunprecedented pressure to deliver the best

service to their customers for the lowest price.Unfettered technological advancement will savethe day, not government. As Reagan put it,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/24/AR2010032403106.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/24/AR2010032403106.htmlhttp://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/89071-atat-joins-verizon-in-calling-for-overhaul-of-telecom-lawshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/24/AR2010032403106.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/24/AR2010032403106.htmlhttp://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/89071-atat-joins-verizon-in-calling-for-overhaul-of-telecom-laws


53/103

government is not the solution to our problem.Government is the problem.

Ultimately, the goal of neo-Marxists likeMcChesney and Free Press is to have SinglePayer Internet, with all the central governmentcontrol and lack of freedom that the comparisonwith Single Payer Socialized Medicine wouldimply. Just as the Public Option for medicine

was described as a right by the Democrats, sotoo do the Free Press people want Internetaccess to be a right, owned, operated, andcontrolled by the government. The UK has itsdoctors and hospitals controlled by the NationalHealth Service, and McChesney would have our

Internet under the control of a National InternetService.

Phase 1 of Single Payer Internet is NetNeutrality, which establishes the baseline ofFCC authority over the Internet. Phase 2 is the

National Broadband Plan. To continue the

Obamacare comparison, the goal of the Plan isto get universal coverage. Even if you live inthe middle of nowhere, in a place thats far tooexpensive to wire up, even though the


54/103

technology is right around the corner forwireless Internet to come at high speed, the FCCneo-Marxists want to say everyone has a right towired Internet access. And guess what will payfor it?

Thats right, you and I will pay for it with newtaxes. For phones we already pay a universalservice tax. The FCC wants to expand that to

high speed Internet connections, thus, anInternet Tax. This is a tax that would never see asingle Congressional vote, because the FCCwould apply it all on its own with the authorityvested in it by deem-and-pass Net Neutrality.

On top of that,prices will go up if the NationalBroadband Plan becomes reality. Your Internet

bill at home could go up 25%.

And again, innovation will suffer further. Oncethe FCC starts dictating control over even the settop boxes your cable providers hand out to you,

and after theyve already taken control overrouting on the Internet, truly there will be few orno ways for Internet service to get better inAmerica without a game of Mother May I. Just


55/103

think: In 10 years maybe even Iraq would havebetter Internet access than wed have, should allthis come about.

Of course, just as with Net Neutralitys two biglies, the National Broadband Plan has a big lie

behind it. Namely, the claim is that Americalags behind the rest of the world in high-speedInternet access, and the problem is that there

isnt enough government involved yet. Once youstop laughing when given this argument, ask theneo-Marxist questioning you to adjust the

broadband statistics for demographics andgeography. Countries like Japan and the

Netherlands have better Internet access per

person not because their governments areworking better, but because they are smaller,more densely populated countries. America willalways have a different profile of Internet accessas long as Americans are free to live anywherewe want on the fruited plain, whether in an

apartment in a big city, on a farm on the plain, orin a cabin in the mountains.

Its the same reason that American Internetaccess varies from Europe and Asia, that our
http://www.fastnetnews.com/dslprime/42-d/2665-broadband-plan-4-am-tuesdayhttp://scrawford.net/blog/set-top-boxes/1324/http://www.fastnetnews.com/dslprime/42-d/2665-broadband-plan-4-am-tuesdayhttp://scrawford.net/blog/set-top-boxes/1324/


56/103

need for the automobile varies from the rest ofthe world. Were spread out, and we value ourfreedom to be spread out. And just as you cantrun public transit to every little suburb and ruralarea, so too cant you immediately and cheaplyget the best Internet access out to everyone at thesame time. Higher costs, delayedimplementations. These are facts of geography,and no amount of FCC regulation can fix that.

I hope this has been a useful summary of whatthe FCC has planned for us and our Internet inthe coming months. Its harder to fight anunelected, unaccountable regulatory agency thanit is a Congressional action, but we can try.

Were the people and we will be heard.http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/27/danger-at-the-fcc-an-omnibus-warning/

===================================

Rush Limbaugh on Net Neutrality


57/103


Wednesday, March 17th at 9:05PM EDT

5 Comments

Rush Limbaugh weighed in on Net Neutrality. As tobe expected, hes against it. A kindly listener hasuploaded it to Blip for us:

Writing quickly here, Ive only read a transcriptgiven to me. Sadly I think he gets some points wrong.First, Net Neutrality isntyeta content-level fairnessdoctrine, but its true that if the FCC does as expectedand deems ISPs no longer to be information services,then nothing will stop them from regulating content

on the Internet the same way they regulate content ontelevision. But theyre not trying that yet, becausetheyre still just getting the camels nose under thetent right now.

Basically, Rush is reading what is applied to ISPs asapplying to websites. Websites dont yet have to treat

everyone equally under the plan of FCC ChairmanJulius Genachowski, but your ISP does. And Googledoesnt want anyone to be able to charge you moredepending on what strain you put on the network, as
http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/27/danger-at-the-fcc-an-omnibus-warning/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/27/danger-at-the-fcc-an-omnibus-warning/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/17/rush-limbaugh-on-net-neutrality/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/17/rush-limbaugh-on-net-neutrality/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/27/danger-at-the-fcc-an-omnibus-warning/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/27/danger-at-the-fcc-an-omnibus-warning/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/17/rush-limbaugh-on-net-neutrality/


58/103

some perverted left wing notion of fairness, to echowhat Rush said yesterday.

But still, Im heartened that Rush is getting peoplethinking about Net Neutrality. Too many on the righthave bought into the bland-sounding technobabblethat Free Press and Google have been putting out,without seeing the neo-Marxism behind it.Traditional Marxists wanted control of the means of

production of goods. Neo-Marxists want control over

the production of information, because ours is aninformation-based economy today.

====================================

This is how privacy dies: to thunderous applause
http://redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/17/rush-limbaugh-on-net-neutrality/#commentshttp://redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/17/rush-limbaugh-on-net-neutrality/#comments


59/103

Posted byNeil Stevens (Profile)Thursday, March 11th at 1:15PM EST

132 Comments

Back when Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith came out,it was popular to compare the villains with the Bush

administration. But now I see Google fitting better asSenator Amidalas opponents, when now the firmssupporters cheeras Eric Schmidt refuses even toconsider the option of not storing your personal data.Says Fortune at CNN:

In one of the sharper exchanges of the afternoon, a

questioner challenged Schmidt with the fact thatGoogle is collecting a staggering amount ofinformation about who we are, what were thinking,and even where we are. All this information that youhave about us: where does it go? Who has access tothat? (Google servers and Google employees, undercareful rules, Schmidt said.) Does that scare

everyone in this room? The questioner asked, toapplause. Would you prefer someone else?Schmidt shot back to laughter and even greaterapplause. Is there a government that you would

prefer to be in charge of this? It was quite the
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/11/this-is-how-privacy-dies-to-thunderous-applause/http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.over-blog.com/500x672/2/36/25/88/IMAGES7/obama-watching-you.jpg&imgrefurl=http://europumas.over-blog.com/article-35436236.html&usg=__mjPdbRNkH0tSSsuTswI8XSy_pY8=&h=471&w=350&sz=32&hl=en&start=73&sig2=H-O5fKrjd-Lbfp2AAQRfUQ&itbs=1&tbnid=gPDQdnx28WPckM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3DObama%2Bcontrol%2B%2BINTERNET%26start%3D72%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=KwTIS_7BEpS4sgOt26j1BAhttp://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2010/03/11/this-is-how-privacy-dies-to-thunderous-applause/


60/103

effective moment that showed we still trustgovernment less than we trust Google. But should wetrust either?

It doesnt even cross their minds that we might askGoogle not to build the database to begin with,

because its a basic law of databases that they canalways be put to another purpose.

Its a long forgotten incident, but this concept of re-

purposing databases was illustrated during theClinton administration. As part of the smallintrusions into your private life that President Clintonran on, attacking deadbeat dads was something thathe and Attorney General Janet Reno spoke of often.The result was a national database of deadbeatdads, but before the end of the Clinton

administration, the database was already to be reusedto track those who owe money for other reasons. SaidWired in 1999:

The measure would require the Department of Healthand Human Services to use a national list of current

public and private-sector employees to track people

suspected of cheating the government out of money.

You got it: That was the deadbeat dad database,which once built had no idea it was meant to be usedonly for deadbeat dads, and so became a tool for
http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2010/03/11/top-five-moments-from-eric-schmidt%E2%80%99s-talk-in-abu-dhabi/http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2010/03/11/top-five-moments-from-eric-schmidt%E2%80%99s-talk-in-abu-dhabi/http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/http://www.redstate.com/users/neil_stevens/http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2010/03/11/top-five-moments-from-eric-schmidt%E2%80%99s-talk-in-abu-dhabi/http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2010/03/11/top-five-moments-from-eric-schmidt%E2%80%99s-talk-in-abu-dhabi/


61/103

more and more expansive intrusion. And guess what?The same is true of any Google database. What is tostop Google, a business partner, or the government

from using it later? Good will? Internal corporatesafeguards? The request to Dont be evil? What isto stop the government from passing a law whichgrants access to the database?

The only true way to respect us and our privacy is forGoogle not to build that database to begin with. But

we know why they do it anyway: the love of money.Also from Fortune:

Advertising that is more targeted is worth more

money. Eventually, the revenue in the digital

world should be higher.

Not just higherthan it is now, but higher than it wasin the analog world, Schmidt said. For newspapers,magazines and broadcasters who are watchingrevenues drop in their legacy businesses, this soundslike wishful thinking. But the Google chiefmaintained that because digital advertising shouldallow marketers to tailor their message to the

audience, it will be more effective and brands willspend more money. He didnt say how much of thatmoney Google would pocket, and how much would

be left for content creators.
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/1999/11/32435http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/1999/11/32435


62/103

Google expects to make too much money off ofbreaching your privacy for the firm to stop doing it.All the high minded talk goes away as soon as it

comes time to keep growing as a business. Its timeall Americans stopped pretending that Dont beevil actually means anything, and started lookingclosely at every single element of policy the firm

promotes, starting with Net Neutrality, examining forways that the corporation will gain at our expense.

http://redstate.com/tags/index.php?tag=net-neutrality

============================================================


63/103

Following Kerpens Lead Again, Beck Claims That Net

Neutrality Is An AttackOn Freedom OfSpeech

In September, ThinkProgress dissected how Glenn Becks

successful character assassinationcampaign against formerWhite House environmental adviser Van Jones was fueledby Americans for Prosperitys Phil Kerpen, who had takencredit for notifying Beck of some of Jones past c

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	levitator
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Obama COMMANDEERING Your Computers

Documents