Feds get set for Net rules

[Melodybe]

Don't know if this has been posted or not but a friend just sent it to me.

By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com


WASHINGTON--The Federal Election Commission has begun the perilous process of including political blogs and Web sites in campaign finance rules that were created long before the Internet became such a powerful political tool.

FEC commissioners voted 5-1 on Thursday to approve a procedure that is expected to end with a final set of Internet rules--governing everything from whether bloggers are journalists to bulk political e-mail--in place by the end of the year. SNIP

Here is the link:

http://news.com.com/Feds+get+set+for+Net+rules/2100-1028_3-5634670.html?tag=nefd.lede

[Liberty Belle]

1. Uh-oh. Bad news. Keep this kicked so the a.m. folks can see.

:kick: :kick: :Kick:

[bluestateguy]

2. This may be a cause upon which bloggers on all sides may want to unite

If, for example, Daily Kos and Instapundit were to issue a joint statement of opposition signed by bloggers from the wacko left through the center to the wacko right that might have a positive effect.

[truthisfreedom]

3. well, hell, there's always a way around these kinds of anti-communication

rules. make your blog into a private club, and have people join that club by paying a tiny fee (1 cent via paypal sounds fine.) they can't restrict communication within a club. it's just a bunch of friends hanging out. 8^)

[DearAbby]

4. Kick for A.M. Readers

[trogdor]

32. Here's another.

Publish a 'dead trees' periodical edition. Example from the right: The Limbaugh Letter. Does the FEC specify how large the circulation should be in order to qualify as a legit newsmagazine? How about the layout? Does it have to be done professionally, or can it be done by volunteers using scissors and Scotch tape? My guess is, merely registering your magazine with the LOC copyright office should suffice. After all, the Washington Times has been in circulation for a quarter century, and has yet to make its first dime in profit.

[GetTheRightVote]

5. I agree, we must keep this up for continued sightings

:kick:

[FlemingsGhost]

6. Won't matter, bloggers will find a way.

Finally, they're reacting to us. Not the other way around.

They'll always be a step behind ...

[AndyTiedye]

7. The Net is The Only Mass Communications Medium We Democrats Have

The Repubs rule the airwaves and most of the print media.
They are poised to buy up the rest, and they are already starting
on the movie theaters.

They don't own the net, because the net cannot be owned by anyone.
We made it that way on purpose, for reasons of national security.
This is anathema to those who believe it is their right to own everything there is.

[Tesla]

8. not the net!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[CoffeeCat]

16. The movie theaters???

Ok, you're scaring me a bit.

The Republicans are buying up movie theaters?

I believe you. I'm just a bit thrown back. I guess I shouldn't be surprised by another extreme attempt to push propaganda in this country.

So...did Michael Moore's movie scare them a bit?

When Farenheit 911 came out, a local movie theater owner who is a rightwingnutjob, refused to show the movie. He stated that he wouldn't show an unpatriotic movie during a time of war.

Is there any medium that these Nazi propagandists aren't after?

[Don1]

17. Good Idea for Fascists.

It is certainly a good way to control the "Hollywood liberals," isn't it? Control their wallets.

[jean]

19. when I heard that I bought twenty copies of F-9/11 and gave them

to local libraries. The librarians I dealt with were ecstatic to receive multiple copies - each library had long waiting lists for F-9/11.

I'm restless waiting for Moore's newest film - isn't it about Big Pharma? As soon as he offers the dvd's I'm getting them to the libraries.

[rockedthevoteinMA]

20. I swear the week F 9/11 came out, it was in the news that the

Carlyle Group bought Loews (the movie theater chain). Someone correct me if I'm wrong. :shrug:

I remember waiting until it went to an independent theater to go see it.

Carlyle also was part of yesterday's $2 billion purchase of the U.S. and Mexican assets of movie theater chain Loews Cineplex. Bain Capital LLC and Spectrum Equity Investors were partners in that buyout.

The group also has a piece of the $4.3 billion buyout of satellite network owner PanAmSat Corp., which is expected to close this summer. Also pending is Carlyle's $1.7 billion purchase of Verizon Communications Corp.'s local phone business in Hawaii. And 10 months ago, Carlyle was part of a group that bought phone directory company Dex Media Inc. from Qwest Communications International Inc. for $7.05 billion. Carlyle plans to take Dex public in a $1.5 billion stock offering later this year.

"Clearly we feel this is a good time to be buying telecom," said Carlyle spokesman Chris Ullman.

A number of private equity firms -- investment advisers that use large pools of money raised from well-heeled investors to take large stakes in companies or buy them outright -- have taken similar plunges into the telecommunications and media sectors in 2004. Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. led the PanAmSat deal. Providence Equity Partners, Blackstone Group, Bain Capital and Madison Dearborn Partners are among the major private equity groups investing in the sector. Intelsat Ltd., a Bermuda satellite company with most of its operations in Washington, is widely expected to sell to a group of private equity investors this summer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58968-2004Jun21.html

Wtf would a defense group want with movie theaters and telecommunications?

[AndyTiedye]

28. They Need to Own All Sources of Information

The Republicans are buying up movie theaters?

The Carlisle group snatched up Lowes right after 9/11.
Of all the big chains, Lowes was the one that had 9/11 on multiple
screens in every theater, frome early in the moring until after
midnight for a while.

So...did Michael Moore's movie scare them a bit?

You betcha!

When Farenheit 911 came out, a local movie theater owner who is a rightwingnutjob, refused to show the movie. He stated that he wouldn't show an unpatriotic movie during a time of war.

A lot of theater owners refuesed to show it at first.
Many relented when they saw how popular the movie was.

Is there any medium that these Nazi propagandists aren't after?

No. They need to control every source of information. Except for
the net, they pretty much do already.

[UncleSepp]

30. It's The Outer Limits!

We control the horizontal, we control the vertical... :-D

[Don1]

34. I looked it up

for you. Yes, the fascism is real. Here it is. The website is reputable. You know why? Because it's the Loew's Theatres corporate website:
http://www.enjoytheshow.com/corpinfo/aboutus.html

Here is the quote:
"Loews Cineplex Entertainment Corporation (www.enjoytheshow.com) is the third largest movie theater chain in the world, with 200 theaters and 2,176 screens worldwide and is privately held by Bain Capital, The Carlyle Group and Spectrum Equity Investors..."

[superconnected]

9. Blow to free speech

The internet is where people from all over the world/let alone country, can congregate and form political groups and opinions.

this is a HUGE blow to free speech.

[radfringe]

10. back in 2001

when campaign finance was being debated -- GOPers argued that the new legislation infringed on free speech

be it in the form of discussion groups, blogs, forums, bullitin boards -- the internet is a form of town hall meetings where people freely discuss their concerns, interests, and opinions

the only thing I can say about these new regs is "THEY HATES OUR FREEDOMS"

[Massacure]

11. They don't have a rats chance in hell.

The FEC doesn't have jurisdiction in Canada or Britain or Africa.

[LiberalFighter]

18. My website is registered and physically in Canada

[demnan]

12. Why didn't the Democrats on the Commission stand up?

When will the Democrats start fighting?

We should have a massive demonstration about this.

[redqueen]

25. "When will the Democrats start fighting?"

I am SO sick and tired of asking that question.

:grr:

[Xithras]

31. Even wierder, the article says the Democrats are responsible for this

The FEC is in the unusual position of being required to extend the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) because of a federal judge's order last fall. The three Republican commissioners had tried to persuade their three Democratic colleagues to appeal U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly's decision (click for PDF) to include the Internet, but the Democrats refused.

But they're probably not very progressive. I looked up the bio's on the Dems and discovered that one is a Bush appointee and the other was originally a Reagan appointee. IMO, it smells like a setup.

[unkachuck]

40. it's 'smells' more....

....like corporate control over the two parties vs. 'potential' grass-roots control....

....we sure wouldn't want anything like democracy interferring with corporate interests....

[Deja Q]

13. If they want to keep direct links off, so what. But to prohibit what

regular folx say? That's pissing on the First Amendment. 'nuff said.

Franklin, Washington, Jefferson would have LOVED the internet.

Hitler, Mussolini, Hirohito would not have.

[The Backlash Cometh]

14. Congress swore they wouldn't touch the net, so they gave the task

to the Fed?

[ConcernedCanuk]

15. They will knock out satellites b4 the next war - count on it . .

.
.
.

one of the ONLY deterrents IMO to using MORE deadly force than they have already is the fact that the news is getting out across the web

I'm quite sure that the BFEE et al have plans, if not already implemented to target comm satellites to interrupt web coverage of their next carnage

Lets face it - without the web - how much would we even have a CLUE as to what is going on in the ME?

MSM would have us at their mercy with their flashy portrayal of the desired propaganda . .

didn't anyone notice the not so subtle flash pics in the background, especially on CNN,

of Saddam when they were talking about 911,

or the flash pics of the towers in flames when talking about Saddam?

talk about not so subliminal messaging

wunder where the masses got the idea that Saddam and 911 were connected (doh)

No, the BFEE and gang will definitely have control over much of the web b4 their next invasion - count on it . .

They, in all their murderous insanity, are not stupid - they KNOW that they can get away with more if they curtail world-wide communication

and places like Abu Ghraib will be the "nice" detention centers of the future . .

Right

I have absolutely NO respect for the American Government, and completely distrust the motives of their foreign policies

I figure the present maladministration would ignore ALL humanitarian laws if they could get away with it . .

and that's the government south of my border -

(sigh)

[mmonk]

21. always looking for total control

[reprobate]

22. Just another of the corporate laws the revolution will delete.

[Catchawave]

23. I think they should concentrate on the MSM first......

...especially where Murdoch stashes his money "legally".

See:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1446130,00.html
<snip>
Rupert Murdoch last week floated his family's £3.8 billion personal investment company in Bermuda - saving himself £522 million in taxes.

[Melodybe]

24. There is a contact link in the article, so that you can tell the Fed how

you feel.

Kickin' my own thread cause it's important.

[earth mom]

26. Okay, I'm PISSED!

They want to control us in every way shape and form they can! What's next ?! Keeping people from even TALKING in person to each other?!!!!!!!!!!!!! :grr: :grr: :grr:

[TexasLawyer]

27. kick n/t

[KevinHayden]

29. Online opposition petition

You can sign The Online Coalition letter opposing this regulation <a href="http://www.onlinecoalition.com/">here</a>. Both lefties and righties are together in this effort.

[NYC]

42. Welcome to DU.

Thanks for the link.

[rockedthevoteinMA]

33. Kick. n/t

[tsuki]

35. The Neocons will persecute anyone they cannot control.

[Megahurtz]

36. This is complete insanity!

And how do they think they're going to control this? Send the Gestapo to every residence that says the "wrong words"?

Fuck them!:mad: This is the most horrible government ever!

[AuntiBush]

37. The Federal Election Committee??

I read this a few places here and there in the last few days.

They want "us" to not be able to "communicate" so "they" can control the damn world! America is at the hands of death squads.

When did the Republicans begin such hatred for their own country? Sick. This can't keep going on... they want to put a plug on our bloggers who get the real news to us. Maybe its' time we ALL INVEST in our GOOD NEWS bloggers out here, and create our OWN NEWSPAPERS.

How much? 500 each. We'd start our own corporation. Be the new hero's of the day! F'um! Honestly!

[osiristz]

38. Are and Democrats doing anything to stop it?

[GHOSTDANCER]

39. Im confused? To me this sounds like a good thing?

Seems to be a bunch of momb jomba about campaign finance laws. which wuld allow parties to contribute to websites like o i don't know DU? And even the commisioner says "We are not the speech police," said FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub, a Democrat. "The FEC does not tell private citizens what they can or can't say on the Internet or elsewhere."

Does anyone have a list of what they are going to try and inforce?

[ngGale]

41. Total control, I suppose they don't appreciate...

the truth being told.