[FoxV]

Just thought I'd post this considering that I think this website would come under the laws mentioned.

CONGRESSIONAL LOBBYING REFORM LEGISLATION

Interesting that this law is coming from the Democrats of both the house and senate and not from Bush. The article also mentions that its the Republicans that are fighting it.

What!? you guys actually thought you were voting for a change? What foolishness.

[gego]

All you guys yelling and screaming for the Democrats to take charge of this country, get your tube of KY jelly, drop your pants, bend over and grab your ankles.

You are just as much jerks as the supporters of the Republicans. All of you are defectives.

[eric_b]

That was an interesting article.

Sheesh. God forbid anyone from trying to hold any of these bureaucrats accountable! They'll just stifle free speech before they'll allow that to happen. I like how these cowards bury provisions like this in bills with titles that contradict what they're trying to do. Sad, but apparently business as usual.

[neocone]

Those morons ignore the power of PGP

Tomorrow the police could raid my place and all they would find would be blurbs of PGP encrypted data.

2 fish is also good...

[NEOPO]

This really is great news and only confirms that everything is proceeding as planned.
I hope it grows and festers and stinks so bad that every american smells it from dawn to dawn each and every fucking day

I cannot wait to hear all of the "we should have done something about it while we had a chance" whining that will be going on in forums limited to 499 members

[Loki]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FoxV', 'W')hat!? you guys actually thought you were voting for a change? What foolishness.

[seldom_seen]

The important thing to remember is that the new fascist state is here 'for the children.' We all know there is nothing more important than the children, certainly not your money or your freedom. All of this will be sacrificed for the children. They're the future you know.

"Let's hear it for the children. We're here for the children." ~Nancy Pelosi

[EnergyUnlimited]

Hi Americans,

Bye, bye free speech...
And be ready to surrender your guns to Osama...
As you wanted Democrats...you will have them.

Free speech, guns and democracy does not mix.
Well, you will have democracy and your government will have guns and free speech.
Fair enough, I suppose...

[Micki]

Same topic already in this thread
http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic26406.html

[gg3]

Sorry folks, but I smell paranoid bullshit by the bushel here.

The way you're reading this, it would also prevent newspapers from running editorials attempting to get their readers to write letters to Congress.

That is patently absurd. And if on the off chance anyone tried to demand paperwork or raise a prosecution on those grounds, it would be thrown out as a 1st A violation so fast your head would spin.

A quick perusal of Loeffler's articles shows that he frequently writes for religious extremist publications and denounces the teaching of evolution in the schools.

An anti-evolutionist.

That makes him a wacko.

And for those of you who swallowed his proverbial load without engaging your critical thinking, it makes you suckers.

[Aaron]

Defeated... George Orwell wants a recount...

[waegari]

Here's a comment that may take away some of your worries:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')y colleague Mitch Wagner and some other journalists have picked up on a report by an organization called Grass Roots Freedom that a Senate bill designed to bring transparency to the lobbying process could result in the jailing of political bloggers. Did you know that the bill does not even mention the words "blog" or "blogger"? There's also a couple of things you should know about "Grass Roots Freedom."

As Mitch reports on his own blog entry, Grass Roots Freedom says Senate bill S. 1 "would require grassroots causes, even bloggers, who communicate to 500 or more members of the public on policy matters, to register and report quarterly to Congress the same as the big K Street lobbyists" or face time in the slammer.

As Bill O'Reilly might say: Folks, that's just spin. First off, as I mentioned, the bill itself contains no reference to blogs or bloggers. What it does cover are paid lobbying activities, which include "paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, but do not include grass roots lobbying," according the text of the bill itself. It also indicates that the lobbyist must be receiving at least $25,000 per quarter from a client to fall under the "paid" definition.

[eric_b]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gg3', '
')And for those of you who swallowed his proverbial load without engaging your critical thinking, it makes you suckers.

[vision-master]

Makes ya wonder?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')n explanation of our search results.
If you recently used Google to search for the word "Jew," you may have seen results that were very disturbing. We assure you that the views expressed by the sites in your results are not in any way endorsed by Google. We'd like to explain why you're seeing these results when you conduct this search.
A site's ranking in Google's search results is automatically determined by computer algorithms using thousands of factors to calculate a page's relevance to a given query. Sometimes subtleties of language cause anomalies to appear that cannot be predicted. A search for "Jew" brings up one such unexpected result.
If you use Google to search for "Judaism," "Jewish" or "Jewish people," the results are informative and relevant. So why is a search for "Jew" different? One reason is that the word "Jew" is often used in an anti-Semitic context. Jewish organizations are more likely to use the word "Jewish" when talking about members of their faith. The word has become somewhat charged linguistically, as noted on websites devoted to Jewish topics such as these:


http://shakti.trincoll.edu/~mendele/vol01/vol01.174
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/jonah081500.asp
Someone searching for information on Jewish people would be more likely to enter terms like "Judaism," "Jewish people," or "Jews" than the single word "Jew." In fact, prior to this incident, the word "Jew" only appeared about once in every 10 million search queries. Now it's likely that the great majority of searches on Google for "Jew" are by people who have heard about this issue and want to see the results for themselves.
Our search results are generated completely objectively and are independent of the beliefs and preferences of those who work at Google. Some people concerned about this issue have created online petitions to encourage us to remove particular links or otherwise adjust search results. Because of our objective and automated ranking system, Google cannot be influenced by these petitions. The only sites we omit are those we are legally compelled to remove or those maliciously attempting to manipulate our results.
We apologize for the upsetting nature of the experience you had using Google and appreciate your taking the time to inform us about it.
Sincerely,
The Google Team
p.s. You may be interested in some additional information the Anti-Defamation League has posted about this issue at http://www.adl.org/rumors/google_search_rumors.asp. In addition, we call your attention to Google's search results on this topic.

[Dreamtwister]

If I were a one of these belly-crawlers in Washington, and I wanted to pass this kind of legislation, here's what I'd do:

I'd go out and find the biggest nutter I could. Maybe some anti-evolution wacko. Then I'd "leak" every detail of the bill to him.

That way, if anyone else broke the story, it would already be "out there" and completely discredited.

Reverse psychology folks, that's how they rammed the Federal Reserve Act down your throats. Those bankers wrote the legislation, then went on a big tour saying "Oh, this bill will ruin us!"

Sure enough, the stupid masses said "Oh, well if the bankers hate it, it must be bad for them!"

Dance puppets, dance.

[Ludi]

Read the bill:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.1:

[Fishman]

Pick up your history books, Democrats have far more frequently restricted people than Republicans. Watch the dance of the Democrats over the next two year. Wheras the Republicans have not acted aggressive on peak oil issues (but allowed you to do your own prep) the Democrats will put restrictions on you that will make it harder to prepare (in the name of the children or the "common good")

[loveandrage]

Amazing the sweeping conclusions and paranoia people are so earer to accept. I contend it is because they have not participated in a campaign or the political process more than a day or two at a protest. Get involved and try to understand both sides of any issue before flying off the handle. For those who still haven't read the bill:

"except that such term does not include any communications by an entity directed to its members, employees, officers, or shareholders."

And the list of improvements to the system in the bills are significant. Long time involved non-profits like Public Citizen and Common Cause cite the Ethics Reform bills as the most significant steps to improving ethics since Watergate.

Senate Bill 1 passed yesterday (Jan. 18)