=20

Sign = In | Register=20 | Newsletter

=20

Scenes=20 From the White House Egg Roll

The annual event is no longer just for insiders. Now kids of all=20 backgrounds can barf on the South Lawn.

=E2=80=94Stephanie = Mencimer
Is=20 Organic Outdated? Discuss.

A MoJo writer, an ag trade wonk, an organic consumer = lobbyist,=20 and a professional foodie debate the future of food.
In=20 Praise of Boring Banking

Will the financial industry ever be dull again?

=E2=80=94Kevin=20 Drum

=20 Advertisement

=20

- Co= leman's=20 Appeal
- The= =20 Power of Lobbying
- Millionaire=20 Journalists
- Big=20 Banks
- = Obama=20 and the Pirates
- Friday=20 Cat Blogging - 10 April=E2=80=A6
- In=20 Praise of Boring Banking
- Taxing= the=20 Dead
- SEE=20 ALL
- More=20 "News" About the Oldest Profession
- Pen= sions=20 for the World's Poor
- Clarence= =20 Thomas Is One Seriously=E2=80=A6
- Illegal=20 Immigrants in Japan Forced=E2=80=A6
- Scenes=20 From the White House Egg=E2=80=A6
- Ob= ama's=20 Bipartisanship
- = Lessons=20 in the Media Landscape
- The=20 Racial Wealth Gap, and Congress=E2=80=A6
- SEE = ALL
- Ethanol=20 or Water: Which One?
- Forum=20 Sneak Peek: Is Organic and=E2=80=A6
- Friday=20 Cocktail: The Conflagration=E2=80=A6
- Who's=20 Hating on Mrs. Obama's Garden?
- Will=20 H.R. 875 Kill Organic Farming=E2=80=A6
- Tar=20 Sands Bad for Caribou
- How=20 to Make Farm Subsidy Reform=E2=80=A6
- Furthermore=20 When Deciding to Have=E2=80=A6
- SEE=20 ALL
- Adorable=20 Singing Puppets Announce=E2=80=A6
- NY=20 Times: Fairey Not a Crook, Just=E2=80=A6
- C= oachella=20 Preview: Rock
- Feminism=20 and Domestic Violence
- O= kay,=20 Here's the Freakin' Dog
- Susan=20 Boyle, Curing Cynicism Since=E2=80=A6
- T= weeting=20 with Christ
- California's=20 Charitable E-Bingo=E2=80=A6
- SEE = ALL
- Ethanol=20 or Water: Which One?
- Co= leman's=20 Appeal
- More=20 "News" About the Oldest Profession
- Adorable=20 Singing Puppets Announce=E2=80=A6
- NY=20 Times: Fairey Not a Crook, Just=E2=80=A6
- Pen= sions=20 for the World's Poor
- C= oachella=20 Preview: Rock
- Clarence= =20 Thomas Is One Seriously=E2=80=A6
- SEE ALL

=20

Most=20 Read
Most=20 Active
Editors'=20 Picks

Is=20 Organic Outdated? Discuss.

A=20 MoJo writer, an ag trade wonk, an organic consumer lobbyist, and a=20 professional foodie debate the future of food.
= Obama=20 and the Pirates
O= kay,=20 Here's the Freakin' Dog
Will=20 Israel Attack Iran?

A=20 message to Obama from an observer in Israel: Don't flash the yellow = light=E2=80=94not=20 even once.

Are=20 Starbucks and Whole Foods Union Busters?

Inside=20 the secret anti-union meetings.
The = Decline=20 of the West
Vermont's=20 "Happily Ever After"

Yes,=20 anti-gay marriage robocalls urged us against it. Then love = won.
What=20 Does "Pass" Mean to You?

Is=20 Organic Outdated? Discuss.

A=20 MoJo writer, an ag trade wonk, an organic consumer lobbyist, and a=20 professional foodie debate the future of food.
Who's=20 Hating on Mrs. Obama's Garden?
Video:=20 Anti-Gay Marriage Ad Audition Tapes
In= side=20 the CIA's (Sort of) Secret Document Stash

Wh= at the=20 Agency thinks of MoJo, and other tidbits I found in a digital vault in = Maryland.

=20

Discuss the latest from Mother=20 Jones with other readers in Comments=20 Central.

=20

=20

Politics + Current Affairs

=E2=86=92 Civil=20 Liberties, Politi= cs

Should Obama Control the Internet?

=20

A new bill would give the President emergency = authority to=20 halt web traffic and access private data.

=E2=80=94By Steve = Aquino

179=20 Comments | Post=20 Comment

=20

=20 =20 Share=20

=E2=80=94Photo from flickr user marcos=20 papapopolus used under a Creative Commons license.

Thu April 2, 2009 12:33 PM PST

Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet = traffic=20 during a state of emergency?

Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) = think so. On=20 Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National = Cybersecurity Advisor=E2=80=94an arm of the executive branch that would = have vast power=20 to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to = critical=20 cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil=20 libertarians.

=20 Advertisement

=20

The=20 Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to = "declare=20 a cybersecurity emergency" and shut down or limit Internet traffic in = any=20 "critical" information network "in the interest of national security." = The bill=20 does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity = emergency.=20 That definition would be left to the president.

The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also = grants the=20 Secretary of Commerce "access to all relevant data concerning [critical] = networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or = policy=20 restricting such access." This means he or she can monitor or access any = data on=20 private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.

Rockefeller made cybersecurity one of his key issues as a member of = the=20 Senate intelligence committee, which he chaired until last year. He now = heads=20 the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, which will take = up this=20 bill.

"We must protect our critical infrastructure at all = costs=E2=80=94from our water to=20 our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health = records=E2=80=94the=20 list goes on," Rockefeller said in a statement. Snowe echoed her = colleague,=20 saying, "if we fail to take swift action, we, regrettably, risk a=20 cyber-Katrina."

But the wide powers outlined in the Rockefeller-Snowe legislation has = at=20 least one Internet advocacy group worried. "The cybersecurity threat is = real,"=20 says Leslie Harris, head of the Center for Democracy and Technology = (CDT), "but=20 such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology = and=20 networks could harm both security and privacy."

The bill could undermine the Electronic Communications Privacy Act = (ECPA),=20 says CDT senior counsel Greg Nojeim. That law, enacted in the mid '80s, = requires=20 law enforcement seek a warrant before tapping in to data transmissions = between=20 computers.

"It's an incredibly broad authority," Nojeim says, pointing out that = existing=20 privacy laws "could fall to this authority."

Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier = Foundation, says that granting such power to the Commerce secretary = could=20 actually cause networks to be less safe. When one person can access all=20 information on a network, "it makes it more vulnerable to intruders," = Granick=20 says. "You've basically established a path for the bad guys to skip = down."

The bill's scope, she says, is "contrary to what the Constitution = promises=20 us." That's because of the impact it could have on Internet users' = privacy=20 rights: If the Commerce Department uncovers evidence of illegal activity = when=20 accessing "critical" networks, that information could be used against a=20 potential defendant, even if the department never had the intent to find = incriminating evidence. And this might violate the Constitutional = protection=20 against searches without cause.

"Once information is accessed, it can be used for whatever purpose, = no matter=20 the original reason for accessing something," Granick says. "Who's = interested in=20 this [bill]? Law enforcement and people in the security industry who = want to=20 ensure more government dollars go to them."

Nojeim, though, thinks it's possible the bill's powers could be = trimmed as it=20 moves through Congress. "We will be working with them to clarify just = what is=20 needed and how to accomplish that," he says. "We're hopeful that some of = the=20 very broad powers that the bill would confer won't be = included."

Page 1 of 1 3Dimage=20

Print=20
Send To = A Friend=20

" = target=3D_blank>Post

Share=20

= =

=20

Shocking that a Rockefeller

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 2, = 2009 -=20 6:21pm.

Shocking that a Rockefeller would promote authoritarianism. =

recommend=20 this (3)

reply =

=20

best comment ever.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 3:31pm.

best comment ever.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Should Obama control the Internet

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 4, = 2009 -=20 1:05pm.

Absolutely NOT, he can come here and I'll give him my bills to = control and=20 pay.
What a damn Socialist bunch of rats.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Socialist...

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 4, = 2009 -=20 5:25pm.

Look it up. Please.

I have a suspicion it doesn't mean what you think it = means.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Socialism definition (most of us DO know what it = means)

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 4, = 2009 -=20 10:06pm.

tagged as:

= result=20

=3D the current whitehouse agenda.

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating = collective or=20 governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and = distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in = which there=20 is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the = means of=20 production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of = society in=20 Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and = distinguished=20 by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work = done.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

The question is. . .

Submitted by Ann R. Key (not = verified) on=20 April 6, 2009 - 5:53am.

how is this admin any different from previous admins?

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

No difference. Both sides

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 6, = 2009 -=20 5:38pm.

No difference. Both sides of the aisle are and have been doing their = best to=20 destroy the Republic. Scum bags who have risen to power by lying, = cheating and=20 stealing. No matter how you dress them up, they are the scum of the=20 earth.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Oh, please, it has nothing

Submitted by Momma (not verified) on April 7, = 2009 -=20 3:14pm.

Oh, please, it has nothing to do with socialism. It's called fascism, = or=20 corporatism, or perhaps even better a plutocracy. True socialism's goal = is the=20 equality of all people. What's going on now has nothing to do with the = common=20 good of the people. It's the international bankers and the kings and = princes of=20 our age vying for ultimate power -- Just the way it has been for = centuries. You=20 might want to study some history. Watching this documentary about the = controlled=20 collapse of Argentina might also give u some insight:=20 http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22169.htm

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

your comment

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 8, = 2009 -=20 5:36am.

Bullhockey!! Not socialist problem at all. It is a low information, = low=20 education, paranoia based lifestyle like your own.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

The goal for the very

Submitted by out the truth (not verified) on = April 5, 2009=20 - 11:45am.

The goal for the very wealthy is absolute control - not just of the = United=20 States, but of the entire world. The people of the United States will be = the=20 biggest obstacle to world domination by the very wealthy and "we" must = be=20 "controlled" at all costs. The world's central banks, the IMF and the = World Bank=20 are all being used to manipulate current events. The object is to create = worldwide panic - in personal security, finances, global warming (a = gigantic=20 lie) and to force us to surrender our personal liberty to a greater and = greater=20 degree. Ultimately, we will lose our ability to control our own destiny = as free=20 men and the new system will make us nothing better than = slaves.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

The goal of the tyrannical

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 6, = 2009 -=20 1:58pm.

tagged as:

= solution=20

The goal of the tyrannical is absolute control, for the most part the = very=20 wealthy just want to keep their money and be left alone.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

The internet is our last link to freedom

Submitted by txscout56 on = April 6, 2009=20 - 5:04pm.

When the Rockefellers-Obama-Kissinger's shred the internet we will = lose our=20 last lifeline. Their model is World Government where we are governed = like=20 China.
In controlling The Federal Reserve, The Corporate Media, CIA, = UN.=20 Trilateral Commision, World Bank, The Biderbergers they almost have = their World=20 government controled by Corporate and Banking Facists. It will not be = communism,=20 socialism but rather facism.

Ike Shurtleff

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

A New World Order.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 8, = 2009 -=20 1:12pm.

A New World Order. www.infowars.com

recommend=20 this (2)

reply =

=20

The people of the US are not the biggest...

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April = 13, 2009 -=20 1:48am.

threat to the oligarchy. We are a nation of fat, stupid, and scared = people=20 who can no longer think on their own, let alone act out in their best=20 interest.

We have the power to stop the trillions being given to the banks, but = we=20 won't do it because we are scared, stupid, fat people.

A simple bank run would have settled the issue a long time = ago.

recommend=20 this

reply =

=20

Shocking that a Rockefeller

Submitted by LizzieTish (not verified) on April = 6, 2009 -=20 11:20am.

Gee - maybe we'll be just like Orwell's vision in 1984... we'll get = rid of=20 any remaining truth and depend only on the mainstream media talking = heads=20 spewing government press releases as if they were journalists. Then = we'll be=20 docile and controllable - and what the heck, who needs the=20 constitution???

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

If you want to hear whats

Submitted by Alex Jones has been warning us for = years (not=20 verified) on April 8, 2009 - 1:14pm.

If you want to hear whats really going on, turn off = corporate/mainstream=20 media and tune into the Alex Jones show 24 hours a day at=20 www.infowars.com

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Rockefeller wants Authoritariansim? No!

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April = 12, 2009 -=20 7:58am.

Why is it shocking that a Rockefeller would want authoritarianism? = Have you=20 ever seen the video of Aaron Russo interviewed regarding his friendship = with=20 Nick Rockefeller? See it while it is still on the Internet. Before you = know it,=20 it too will be banned.

recommend=20 this

reply =

=20

Scary

Submitted by John Woods (not verified) on April = 3, 2009 -=20 6:31am.

If ever there was a time to utilize privacy services, now is it!

RT
www.anon-tools.cz.tc

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Benjamin Franklin

Submitted by The Environmental = Citizen (not=20 verified) on April 3, 2009 - 12:10pm.

He who would sacrifice liberty for security deserves = neither

recommend=20 this (2)

reply =

=20

security and liberty and security

Submitted by elixelx (not verified) on April 4, = 2009 -=20 8:44am.

Who sacrificed security for liberty is lying, both free and secure, = under a=20 HEADSTONE which says "Oops! Made the wrong sacrifice!"

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Who sacrificed liberty for

Submitted by Cortillaen (not verified) on April = 4, 2009 -=20 3:09pm.

Who sacrificed liberty for security is lying in an unmarked grave = near the=20 gulags.

See? The pointless little quips can go both ways.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Who sacrificed security for

Submitted by TheBambino (not verified) on April = 4, 2009 -=20 6:15pm.

Who sacrificed security for liberty is feeding the worms and knows = neither.=20

recommend=20 this

reply =

=20

Wrong. I'll take my liberty

Submitted by Amos (not verified) on April 10, = 2009 -=20 5:40am.

Wrong. I'll take my liberty and provide for my own security, or = freely band=20 with others like me.

I may go, but I'll take some collectivists with me. Better on my feet = than on=20 my knees like you, begging for a little more time to live out an empty = life of=20 servitude, secretly consoled by the notion that you, like the flag of = Ahab, like=20 the devil, would not sink to hell without dragging a living part of = heaven with=20 you and helmeting yourself with it.

We know that men have lived in better times than they did in the = past. How?=20 Did they get it by being serfs - cowering in the mud, waiting for their = masters=20 to protect them, or did they get it by fighting for it?

In a heterogeneous, chaotic, random world where rain does not fall = equally,=20 where minerals do not sit under the ground in equal measure, where = history=20 itself can never be written from a single vantage point, the notion of = enforced=20 equality is the ideal of an idiot, blind to the very universe he longs = to=20 command.

Freedom gives men happiness and security and the kind of equality = that only=20 free men can know - not the equals of the herd, but that of the = pack.

Bend your knee to your Master Obama, if you want, slave. But keep = your eyes=20 on the ground; avert them from us; we who would rather die = standing.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

This would be a violation of

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 12:24pm.

tagged as:

= result=20

This would be a violation of civil liberty rights - it is not in the = provence=20 of the Government to control.

recommend=20 this (2)

reply =

=20

Violate this

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 1:34pm.

tagged as:

= result=20

No, but your mom is in the provence of mine to control. Waka = waka!

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Absolutely not. I don't

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 1:42pm.

Absolutely not. I don't trust Obama anywhere near enough to give him = that=20 authority.

recommend=20 this (2)

reply =

=20

I more than agree with you.....in fact.....

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 5, = 2009 -=20 12:36pm.

.....when those that voted for Obama wake up from their hypnotic = spell and=20 see him and his Chicago mob administration and socialist cronies for = what they=20 really are, they will exclaim, "Gosh, golly, gee, I guess he is still an = intimidating community organizer after all". The signs of radical = socialism are=20 everywhere to see.....in plain sight. Can you just imagine what is going = on=20 behind those 'progressive' closed doors?

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

why not control the web-he

Submitted by Craig Lowell (not verified) on April = 3, 2009 -=20 1:50pm.

why not control the web-he now controls Government Motors and = appointed union=20 thugs to key positions, and the Constitution prohibits that as = well

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Internet control

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 6, = 2009 -=20 10:37pm.

How can any reader with 9 th grade education blame current = administration for=20 state of affairs we face, domestically, economically or politically? = Only=20 caution that is relevant is that powers/restrictions being legislated = are not=20 Obama powers ... but powers that will be in the control of future = holders of=20 office.

recommend=20 this

reply =

=20

why not control the web-he

Submitted by Craig Lowell (not verified) on April = 3, 2009 -=20 1:51pm.

why not control the web-he now controls Government Motors and = appointed union=20 thugs to key positions, and the Constitution prohibits that as = well

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Nope. No more power. This

Submitted by Newton (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 1:51pm.

Nope. No more power. This is Socialistic.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

This is not socialism or

Submitted by Hernando (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 6:41pm.

This is not socialism or communism. By definition, government = controlled=20 capitalism is called Fascism. Benito Mussolini coined this term in WWII. = Wake up=20 everybody...It's comming.

recommend=20 this (2)

reply =

=20

There's no small amount of

Submitted by oldleprechaun (not verified) on = April 4, 2009=20 - 8:51am.

There's no small amount of confusion regarding the terms socialism, = fascism,=20 and communism. I would commend to you two titles that you might find=20 informative:
"The Faces of Janus: Marxism and Fascism in the = Twentieth=20 Century" by A. James Gregor and "The Deadly Embrace: Hitler, Stalin, and = the=20 Nazi-Soviet Pact 1939-1941", by Read & Fisher.

Whatever term you apply, the result is an unaccountable dictator and = tyranny.=20 I had tremendous respect for Ronald Reagan, but I would been against = giving=20 power such as this RWR. Of course the difference is, Mr. Reagan believed = people=20 should run their own lives, not have every decision made for them by = some=20 dictator.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Actually it's both. BHO

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 4, = 2009 -=20 10:09pm.

Actually it's both. BHO want control as you state, but he also = believes=20 strongly in redistributing wealth.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

It's fascism, not socialism.

Submitted by Ankhorite on = April 3, 2009=20 - 7:27pm.

Look 'em up.

Socialism is an economic system.

Fascism is a legal system under which all rights go to the government = and=20 none to the people.

So what you're trying to say is: this is fascist.

recommend=20 this (2)

reply =

=20

This is an example of facism

Submitted by Kulak (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 7:50pm.

This is an example of facism in a socialist society. = Us.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Well, Hayek would say that

Submitted by Matt S (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 9:36pm.

Well, Hayek would say that there is little practical difference = between=20 socialism and fascism and I am inclined to agree. I would also point out = the=20 "net neutrality" would provide the gov't with similar powers under a = different=20 patina.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Socialism, by definition,

Submitted by Cortillaen (not verified) on April = 4, 2009 -=20 3:15pm.

Socialism, by definition, requires power to be concentrated in the=20 government, which is the effective definition of fascism. In essence, = socialism=20 requires some degree of fascism to exist. Communism, supposedly the = extreme form=20 of socialism, is likewise extremely fascistic. The difference between = the Nazis=20 and the Soviets was one of rhetoric and little else.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Look, rather than argue

Submitted by North of South and East of West (not = verified)=20 on April 4, 2009 - 8:43pm.

tagged as:

= solution=20

Look, rather than argue about the semantics of different, ultimately=20 collectivist philosophies, perhaps we should just agree that this is = freaking=20 scary.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Well said, well said! I.....

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 5, = 2009 -=20 12:48pm.

.....could not have said it any better! Both socialism and fascism = have the=20 same end result.....TYRANNY!!!!!!!

Wake up all of you who do not see what is happening right in front of = you.=20 Those who have voted in the present representatives and president are = seeing=20 TYRANNY in the beginning stages! Geeeez.....what does it take to wake = you=20 up?

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Definition of fascism

Submitted by JW Kessler (not verified) on April = 5, 2009 -=20 9:28am.

The current dictionary definition was revised some time back. It = originally=20 referred - in it's simplest form - to a merger of business and state. At = it's=20 heart fascism was a corporatist system where instead of the government=20 representing the people it represented the corporations. Of course it = got more=20 complex than that.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Nope. No more power. This

Submitted by debrarae (not verified) on April = 3, 2009 -=20 2:34pm.

Nope. this is 'not' Socialistic. This is COMMUNISM pure and simple.=20

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Fascism v. Communism

Submitted by Ankhorite on = April 3, 2009=20 - 7:26pm.

Look 'em up.

Communism is an economic system.

Fascism is a legal system under which all rights go to the government = and=20 none to the people.

So what you're trying to say is: this is fascist.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Facism=3DCommunism. Both are

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 5, = 2009 -=20 10:53am.

Facism=3DCommunism. Both are systems where means of production are = controlled=20 by the state and that rights we normally enjoy are abrogated by the = state.

I'm starting to see the wisdom in one of Reagan's classic statements: = "There=20 is no such thing as a right or a left.... only an up or a = down."

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Upon further reflection

Submitted by Kulak (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 8:26pm.

Upon further reflection Communist fits. Point taken.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

No Socialism or Communism

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 3:33pm.

Check with Gerald Celente he says this is Fascism plain and simple by = its=20 definition. Socialism is just the platform that Communism and Fascism = are built=20 on.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

No Socialism or Communism

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 3, = 2009 -=20 3:34pm.

Check with Gerald Celente he says this is Fascism plain and simple by = its=20 definition. Socialism is just the platform that Communism and Fascism = are built=20 on.

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

No Socialism or Communism

Submitted by Ian = Parker-Joseph (not=20 verified) on April 6, 2009 - 5:18am.

It is neither Socialism or Communism, nor is it Fascism.

this new brand of politics takes a little from them all and is = called

COMMUNITARIANISM - Google can give you the details.

recommend=20 this

reply =

=20

To government, "protection" =3D "control"

Submitted by James Anderson Merritt (not = verified) on April=20 3, 2009 - 4:01pm.

How typical. In order to "protect" our infrastructure, the government = must=20 assume control over it. Well, of course they will let others exercise = the=20 actual, physical control for the most part, but under the supervision, = and=20 subject to the "emergency" override of, our leaders and protectors.

It's for our own good. Why CAN'T we understand that, sit down, shut = up, and=20 enjoy this wonderful life that we wouldn't have without the government = making=20 everything safe and nice for us?

Can I make a deal with everyone reading this? If this bill gets to a = floor=20 vote and your elected official votes for it, can I count on you to vote = against=20 that official and even actively campaign against him or her? Of course, = try to=20 influence the official before the vote, but if that doesn't work (as I = fear it=20 may not), we will need to clean house on Capitol Hill, and the sooner = the=20 better. The government should not have carte blanche to any information = that=20 passes along the internet. They should not be able to define and declare = "emergencies" by which they are then authorized to take total control. = This is=20 the kind of thing we would have roundly criticized the old Soviet Union = for=20 doing, and today criticize China and other tyrannical countries for = doing. Why=20 is a country that stamps "Liberty" on its coins rushing to act like = those other=20 regimes? I fear a government authorized to take such measures a lot more = than I=20 fear stateless terrorists.

recommend=20 this (2)

reply =

=20

Control of the Internet

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on April 4, = 2009 -=20 3:36pm.

Hey,

It's too late to have people agree they will vote them out. The = damage will=20 have already been done. This needs to be stopped in it's tracks.

Voting no longer works, emails hammering the bailout bill didn't = work. All we=20 get is a collective middle finger from the CONgress critters.

Next step, since the others don't work???

recommend=20 this (1)

reply =

=20

Your name: * = =20

Alternately, you may login to or register=20 an account

E-mail: * = =20

The content of this field is kept private and = will not be=20 shown publicly.

Homepage:=20

Subject:=20

Comment:=20 * =20

Input format

Rich = text=20 editor=20

Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

HTML = Filtered=20

Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links = automatically.
Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> = <cite>=20 <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt>=20 <dd>

More information = about=20 formatting options

=20

Optional: Tag your comment (= what does=20 this mean?):

Proposed Solution

Documented Result =

CAPTCHA

Hate this? We have to do it so the comments = won't be=20 flooded by spambots.
But if you register or login, you'll never have to = see it=20 again!

=20 =20

Scenes=20 From the White House Egg Roll

The annual event is no longer just for insiders. Now kids of all=20 backgrounds can barf on the South Lawn.

Is=20 Organic Outdated? Discuss.

A MoJo writer, an ag trade wonk, an organic consumer = lobbyist,=20 and a professional foodie debate the future of food.

In=20 Praise of Boring Banking

Will the financial industry ever be dull again?

Is=20 Organic Outdated? Discuss.

A=20 MoJo writer, an ag trade wonk, an organic consumer lobbyist, and a=20 professional foodie debate the future of food.

= Obama=20 and the Pirates

O= kay,=20 Here's the Freakin' Dog

Will=20 Israel Attack Iran?

A=20 message to Obama from an observer in Israel: Don't flash the yellow = light=E2=80=94not=20 even once.

Are=20 Starbucks and Whole Foods Union Busters?

Inside=20 the secret anti-union meetings.

The = Decline=20 of the West

Vermont's=20 "Happily Ever After"

Yes,=20 anti-gay marriage robocalls urged us against it. Then love = won.

What=20 Does "Pass" Mean to You?

Is=20 Organic Outdated? Discuss.

A=20 MoJo writer, an ag trade wonk, an organic consumer lobbyist, and a=20 professional foodie debate the future of food.

Who's=20 Hating on Mrs. Obama's Garden?

Video:=20 Anti-Gay Marriage Ad Audition Tapes

In= side=20 the CIA's (Sort of) Secret Document Stash

Wh= at the=20 Agency thinks of MoJo, and other tidbits I found in a digital vault in = Maryland.

Should Obama Control the Internet?

A new bill would give the President emergency = authority to=20 halt web traffic and access private data.

Shocking that a Rockefeller

best comment ever.

Should Obama control the Internet

Socialist...

Socialism definition (most of us DO know what it = means)

The question is. . .

No difference. Both sides

Oh, please, it has nothing

your comment

The goal for the very

The goal of the tyrannical

The internet is our last link to freedom

A New World Order.

The people of the US are not the biggest...

Shocking that a Rockefeller

If you want to hear whats

Rockefeller wants Authoritariansim? No!

Scary

Benjamin Franklin

security and liberty and security

Who sacrificed liberty for

Who sacrificed security for

Wrong. I'll take my liberty

This would be a violation of

Violate this

Absolutely not. I don't

I more than agree with you.....in fact.....

why not control the web-he

Internet control

why not control the web-he

Nope. No more power. This

This is not socialism or

There's no small amount of

Actually it's both. BHO

It's fascism, not socialism.

This is an example of facism

Well, Hayek would say that

Socialism, by definition,

Look, rather than argue

Well said, well said! I.....

Definition of fascism

Nope. No more power. This

Fascism v. Communism

Facism=3DCommunism. Both are

Upon further reflection

No Socialism or Communism

No Socialism or Communism

No Socialism or Communism

To government, "protection" =3D "control"

Control of the Internet