Whoson1st said:mickj said:
seek injunctions against people who facilitate illegal Internet gambling.
I guess you could construe that to mean ISP's would have to block gambling websites, but that's still a stretch for that to ever happen IMO. I wrote a lot about this on a specific ISP blocking thread, but if you could say that just by providing Internet access an ISP is "facilitating" illegal gambling you could also reason that they're "facilitating" any number of other far more heinous "sins" like terrorism, kiddie porn, etc. The vague language is a concern, no doubt, but ISP blocking is pretty much beyond the pale. It's never been done by a non-totalitarian government for *any* reason, and the last thing the Feds want is to get the ISPs on our side inadvertently. Any big ISP that was threatened with an injunction if they didn't block gambling sites would sue that all the way to the Supreme Court. I'm still of the opinion that if the Federal Government didn't demand blocking of pro-terrorist websites they're sure not going to do that for online gambling websites.
On a practical level, ISP blocking would be easy enough to get around. On a political level, consider the damage the Republicans have suffered in the "Foley-gate" scandal--what hurt them more than anything is the hypocrisy of preaching "family values" while one of their own is scamming on young boys. Considering that a number of the biggest foes of online gambling--particularly Jon Kyl--have made Internet freedom in China a pet issue and have spoke very strongly against the concept of blocking websites there, just imagine the political damage they'd suffer if they, or the Bush Administration, started doing it here. The attack ad saying the "Republicans want to the Chinese Communist government to give their people more Internet freedom than they're willing to give you" practically writes itself...
In a roundabout way, of course, it might even be a good thing if the Feds tried to do this--the whole thing could get ruled unconstitutional.
I hope everyone here will very strongly consider voting against ALL incumbants this coming Nov.
The ones there seem to WANT chaos (mispelled)....so tell them we understand now.
At least this guy, Frist from Tenn. has ONE thing right---He's not running again for his Senate job. His plans down the road may change course.
As for 2 years from now---his best bet is not to run. And if ALL incumbants are voted against....he may get the idea!
The ones there seem to WANT chaos (mispelled)....so tell them we understand now.
At least this guy, Frist from Tenn. has ONE thing right---He's not running again for his Senate job. His plans down the road may change course.
As for 2 years from now---his best bet is not to run. And if ALL incumbants are voted against....he may get the idea!
That won't happen at all. I know of at least 6 websites off the top of my head that sell illeagal drugs to americans everyday that are based in foreign countries.
These websites aren't blocked and never have been.
Either way, someone needs to eliminate the president, no matter who it is. They just can't do half as good of a job as I can.
These websites aren't blocked and never have been.
Either way, someone needs to eliminate the president, no matter who it is. They just can't do half as good of a job as I can.
Whoson1st said:
Voting against incumbants is definitely the best idea, particularly vis a vis the online wagering bill. If you've got one of the few elected officials that have come out against it I might make an exception.
Frist is planning to run for President. He's got about as much chance of getting elected as Billy Walters, but he's going to be doing anything he can to pander to his religious fundamentalist base.
Mr. Wonderful said:
Exactly. There are sites based in other countries where I can order up Cuban cigars, among any number of other things. ISP blocking would open a *huge* can of worms and get a number of industries and non-profit groups into the fight on our side who at the moment could care less. Not to mention the fact that it would be an almost impossible sell politically....
