House Passes CISPA. Senate to come.

Discussion in 'Serious Chat' started by Jesse, Apr 27, 2012.

  1. Jesse

    Jesse Out of the abyss. LPA Über VIP

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    11,054
    Likes Received:
    9
    Read more via Tech Dirt and The Verge
     
  2. SuperDude526

    SuperDude526 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh...well that'll be fun. Probably a fool's hope, but I hope Obama will veto or at least pocket veto it. It is an election year, after all.
     
  3. travz21

    travz21 Muscle Museum LPA Super Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    4,002
    Likes Received:
    0
    Go government!
     
  4. hawk

    hawk because the internet LPA Super VIP

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    7,680
    Likes Received:
    1
    Fuck off CISPA. Not only did they make it worse, but they rushed the vote.

    Redditors unite!
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2012
  5. Jesse

    Jesse Out of the abyss. LPA Über VIP

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    11,054
    Likes Received:
    9
    Indeed they did make it worse, and added an amendment that claims to protect children just so they can say you are against child safety if you vote against this bill.

    Also over 200 Republicans voted for this bill. The party that says they are for small government. What a laugh!
     
  6. @LP2K12

    @LP2K12 Est. 2K12

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Veto or lose my vote. That is all.
     
  7. Derek

    Derek LPAssociation.com Administrator LPA Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2002
    Messages:
    40,015
    Likes Received:
    12
    It doesn't matter if Obama vetoes this. You guys know as well as I know that the Senate will sell out to labels/technology companies and vote enough that Obama's veto can be overturned. It's what happened with NDAA. Obama vetoing would've meant nothing. It had a veto-proof majority.
     
  8. Jesse

    Jesse Out of the abyss. LPA Über VIP

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    11,054
    Likes Received:
    9
    It would have been political suicide to veto the NDAA due to it being the military's budget. Or at least that's what I got from all I've read. But you're probably right.
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2012
  9. @LP2K12

    @LP2K12 Est. 2K12

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe, but it matters to me on principal alone. That's my President. ;)
     
  10. travz21

    travz21 Muscle Museum LPA Super Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    4,002
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is no such thing as veto-proof majority. Once it's vetoed, it goes back to the House and Senate and they each vote to override the veto. Obama is bought and sold just like the majority of congress. The reason he doesn't veto things is because he wants them to be put into law. If he didn't, he would veto them. Here's a little basic info on it.

     
  11. The sad thing about this is that when the majority of the REPUBLICANS in the house voted for this, it will be OBAMA that will get almost all the blame from close-minded people who do no research before they speak. On Youtube, so many people will say "obama's a monkey! ron paul 2012!". This will surely happen if the Senate passes it too. Now, no offence to Ron Paul supporters, but he's basically wanting to have a government comparable to Somalia's. He's an honest politician and all, but his views are far too extreme.

    And that's really ignorant.
     
  12. travz21

    travz21 Muscle Museum LPA Super Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    4,002
    Likes Received:
    0
    Republicans and Democrats are the same. People need to stop taking sides and fighting each other over it. It simply comes down to the money. Most Republicans or Democrats will vote for whoever pays them the most (or any) money, regardless if it goes against what they traditionally stand for. This is called "lobbying". You can blame that for nearly everything that is corrupt in government.

    And how exactly is that ignorant? Is it not a president's duty to veto things he thinks is not in the country's best interest? That's the whole reason the president has that power. If he doesn't use it, he absolutely thinks the bill is in our best interests. There is no other intellectually honest reason for not vetoing something if you believe you should be vetoing it. Every other reason is a corrupt reason. So either Obama really wants to veto it but isn't out of corrupt reasons, or he just doesn't want to veto it because he believes it should be law.


    Also, people need to stop using the Somalia fallacy. Just because some country sucks doesn't mean that it's because of something you randomly assign the blame to. "Correlation proves causation" is the logical fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc. Just like I can't say, "I haven't been attacked by a tiger in my life because I carry around my tiger-repelling rock!" It's just pure illogical nonsense. Correlation does not prove causation. You can't just look at the surface of something and draw random conclusions.

    If you guys want to have your minds rocked you can do some simple research on Somalia and see that the quality of life actually improved once their government disbanded.
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2012
  13. Todd

    Todd FLǕGGȦ∂NKđ€ČHIŒβǾLʃÊN LPA Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,060,675
    Likes Received:
    5
    Yes, except for their differences of opinion on economic policy, healthcare, a woman's right to choose, gay rights, gun control, the role of religion in public schools and government, education, immigration, foreign policy, military spending and social programs, they're exactly alike :rolleyes:

    If the quality of life is so great in Somalia, why don't you pack up your shit and move over there? I'm sure whichever guerrilla terrorist group is running that hellhole at the current moment would welcome you with open arms.
     
  14. travz21

    travz21 Muscle Museum LPA Super Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    4,002
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do some research, bro. Their rhetoric is definitely different, but the majority of Democrats and Republicans vote exactly alike. It's because they're all paid by the same interest groups. It's why Obama is so alike Bush. It's why Romney would be so alike Obama.

    I never said the quality of life in Somalia was great. Do most things fly over your head like that are you deliberately trolling by just throwing in more fallacies?
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2012
  15. SuperDude526

    SuperDude526 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, I think we're all pointing out that libertarianism is completely absurd. And it's libertarians and Republicans that are two sides of the same coin, not Republicans and Democrats. Only difference is libertarians used to comprise white privilege, and Republicans still do.

    Anyway, my hope is people will get informed and get behind this like they were with the SOPA/PIPA bills. And I don't know where Google stands on this one but it would be great to get their support once again. Perhaps we should start a petition to get them to sign on with the bill's opponents...
     
  16. travz21

    travz21 Muscle Museum LPA Super Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    4,002
    Likes Received:
    0
    You think it's absurd because you can't understand it. It's a lot to comprehend when you're not used to thinking logically.
     
  17. Benjamin

    Benjamin LPA team LPA Super VIP

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm actually going to agree with Travz about the veto issue. Sorry, but the fear that congress will override your veto is not a reason to not veto something.

    Democrats and Republicans are the same? You've got to be fucking kidding me.
     
  18. shinformant

    shinformant Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2012
    Messages:
    142
    Likes Received:
    0
    There have to be better examples than Somalia, right? There's practically no infrastructure left, it's overpopulated with people who are barely above the starvation line, there are no fucking roads there even. To say nothing of the warlords and pirates. I guess people must hear about the latter and have their minds jump to Johnny Depp and Dustin Hoffman.
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2012
  19. Todd

    Todd FLǕGGȦ∂NKđ€ČHIŒβǾLʃÊN LPA Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,060,675
    Likes Received:
    5
    Examples of functioning anarchies? Nope, Somalia is the only anarchy, and it's not setting the best example. I think the fact that there aren't any functioning anarchies says a lot about how much we need government. If lacking a functioning government was so great, we'd see more countries without one.

    So Somalia's quality of life has improved since their government disbanded. Big deal. The quality of life there is still terrible, it wasn't exactly a high bar to reach. Look at some of the European countries that are consistently at the top the quality of life index. Sweden, France, Norway, etc. These countries have big governments. Some of the high school dropout morons in the Tea Party might even say they're socialist. Health care is provided to all citizens regardless of social standing. Higher education costs hardly anything. There's a great infrastructure in place for things like transportation and telecommunications. Roads and bridges are maintained. And they have a strong social safety net for people who lose their jobs and fall on hard times, speaking of which, they have lower unemployment rates than the United States.
     
  20. Exactly. I agree with you 100%. There's a reason why the scandinavian countries (Sweden, Finland, Norway) are so stable.
     

Share This Page