Gore-Lieberman on Filters 24
The NYT tells us about
Gore's latest campaign commercial,
which tells us that Gore will "fight violence and pornography on the
Internet, helping parents block out what children shouldn't see."
zhensel comments:
"I was aware of Lieberman's previous efforts at censoring, but this
seems a little bit ridiculous. Should we expect a government provided
net filter for families? A government requirement that sites rate
their content? I don't see how a president could accomplish
this." There are many ways; the problem is that most parents don't
need censorware, and they especially don't need the government pushing
it on them. The NYT today has an above-the-fold, front-page story in
which parents say censorship of films, music, and the internet is
Their Job,
Not Politicians'.
Re:You don't need to register to read this comment (Score:1)
Sparky sez a vote for Gore is a wasted vote (Score:1)
Re:If you really want to vote against censorship.. (Score:1)
Places to check for more info:
Re:If you really want to vote against censorship.. (Score:1)
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
It seems that we have gotten so used to the government breaking the rules that we now expect it.
The role of government (Score:1)
If you really want to vote against censorship... (Score:1)
Toward a one party system? (Score:1)
I'm a Libertarian and I'll be voting for Harry Browne [browne2000.org]. I think the reason why I finally decided to become a Libertarian is because it seems like their is a growing anti-literacy lobby in this country. There seem to be people around who simply oppose to much book learning and independant thought, and there numbers seem to be growing. Has anyone ever looked at the American Family Associations Website [afa.net]? I think that one of the things that disturbs me most about their condemnation of Harry Potter (for example) is that he shows "disrespect to authority figures." I have heard this argument for censorship in at least on other context, in the case of the early 20th Century German film, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. The film originally had a twist ending, in which the evil doctor controlling the murderer turned out to be the head of the local insane asylum. However, German censors decided that this sent the wrong message, and forced the film makers to add a second twist ending, in which the whole story turned out to be a delusion of a mental patient and the asylum administrator was actually kindly. The strong belief in German society at that time, that authority figures should never be questioned, was one of the defenses later used at the Nuremberg Trials.
Obviously, Al Gore and Joe Lieberman are not Nazi's, but then neither were the German censors who altered Cabinet. These censors were merely part of a system that made someone like Hitler possible.
I'm sure that someone will point out that Reverand Wildmon, of the AFA, and his ilk are part of the right and therefore supporters of George W. Bush. I do not dispute this, I know Bush was trying to curry favor with these people during his appearances at places like Bob Jones University, where inter-racial dating was forbidden because it was "against scripture" (a low point in American politics).
I'm glad I'm a Libertarian, I don't have to make a choice between two tickets that support censorship.
Re:If you really want to vote against censorship.. (Score:1)
------
this is your Liberal? (Score:1)
I'd never realized it was that true though. Man, that's so scary, I'm even starting to get some respect for the Canadian federal Liberal Party. (so called)
THE EVIL ONE... (Score:1)
Re:Vote for this schmuck anyway, lest Bush destroy (Score:1)
For decades, the Republicrats have been trying to scare the voters into not voting for third parties with this "wasted vote" argument. Look where it's gotten us. Allegedly liberal Democrats have no interest in preserving the First Amendment. Allegedly conservative Republicans no longer bother even pretending to want to reduce the size of government.
The American people aren't buying this "wasted vote" argument, and the Demopublicans know it, and it scares them. They're trying to revive this tired old argument with the variant "OK, we have no differences on 99% of the issues, but a vote for a third party is still a wasted voted because the winner will get to appoint Supreme Court Justices!"
Poppycock. None of the justices are so infirm that they'll have to retire in the next four years. And no justice wants to be replaced by someone ideologically opposed to them. So if Gore wins, a few liberal justices may resign, but none of the conservatives will. Vice versa if Bush wins. The overall ideological makeup of the court will not change as a result of this election.
Remember, voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.
HOW THE FUCK IS THIS OFFTOPIC? (Score:1)
Re:If you really want to vote against censorship.. (Score:1)
Something like that cannot happen again by reducing government. There needs to be some sort of rule...
Re:If you really want to vote against censorship.. (Score:1)
it's his anyway (Score:1)
Al Gore Created the damn INTERNET, he can do what he wants with it!
stop your bitch'n!
maybe we can bring the internet up to all other government standards! then we'll have nothing to worry about.
when you add up all that Clinton/Gore have done in the past 8 years, wouldn't it be great to have them around for 8 more?
now on a serious note.
all you "liberal" Al Gore people on this post make me ill. i didn't think is was possible for people with some amount of thinking ability to be "liberal"! You must have a little thinking ability to be on this site? NO? AL GORE is an EVIL SOCIALIST! plain and simple. he is far far LEFT wing!
think people!
Mainstream values? (Score:2)
But what could possibly be a better example of mainstream values than having an affair with a White House intern? Isn't this the great American dream? God save us from folks who want to forbid us from having all the crazy circus sex we like with White House interns (and let's not forget the interns of other governmental departments -- I hear the interns over at the Pentagon are top-notch.)
Re:Vote for this schmuck anyway, lest Bush destroy (Score:2)
If you care about freedom, you want a justice that believes that "no law" means "no law".
Re:The true reason... (Score:2)
The true reason... (Score:2)
Re:this is your Liberal? (Score:2)
This derives from the fact that the US was founded with the belief that man had *all* rights, and gave some selected ones up to the government in return for certain protections.
So while in America, we call Democrats liberals and Republicans conservatives, in general the Democrats are for bigger government and the Republicans are for smaller.
The parties are pretty similar, but our conservitives are actually (sorta) classic liberals.
since i'm postin anyway, bush is a guy who's total life accomplishments come to forgetting his whole life before 40, losing loads of his parents' friends' money in an oil company in texas, and as governer, making texas schools 49th in the US.
it doesn't matter how bad gore is, bush is worse
too much sex and violence on tv? remove the bush and gore ads.
Be afraid... (ok, not THAT afraid) (Score:2)
While I personally don't think it will ever go quite that far... still.. makes you think...
-GreenHell
*sigh* I'm voting for Nader... (Score:2)
True, I do feel bad for those kids whose parents take no interest in their lives and don't set any limits, but that is their right also.
But I do agree that if George "Dubya" gets elected things will only get worse. I'm voting for Nader, how about you?
From the Green Party Platform (http://www.gp.org/platform/gpp2000.html#speech)
"Although we see regular assaults on the freedoms of speech enshrined in our nation's founding documents, we oppose censorship in the arts, media (including the World Wide Web and Internet), and press. We encourage individual and social responsibility by artists, creative media, writers - and all citizens"
This is a form of censorship because the parents aren't being given the full right to control what their kids can and cannot see.
Re:Toward a one party system? (Score:3)
Moving towards? Done deal at this date, I'd say. This joke, from the UK, is over thirty years old:
"In the US they have two main political parties. The Republicans, who are the equivalent of our Tory party, and the Democrats, who are the equivalent of our Tory party."
If memory serves it was a Peter Cook line originally.
You don't need to register to read this comment. (Score:3)
The Gore-Lieberman campaign began broadcasting a new commercial, titled "Veteran," this week that highlights stands on several issues, including tax cuts, welfare, child support and Internet pornography, that are the kinds Republicans have used in the past against Democrats. It is being broadcast in 17 swing states, although the Gore campaign would not identify them.
PRODUCER The Campaign Company
ON THE SCREEN The 30-second commercial begins with a black and white picture of a young Al Gore in Vietnam and then switches to color footage of Mr. Gore with his family and with his wife, Tipper, and campaigning. It then moves to color footage of workers and families.
THE SCRIPT "Vietnam veteran. Father of four. Married 30 years. Al Gore will fight for families. Tax cuts for middle-class families including a $10,000-a-year tax deduction for college tuition. Continue welfare reform with time limits, work requirements. Force deadbeat parents to take responsibility for their children. A crime victims' bill of rights to protect victims, not just criminals. Fight violence and pornography on the Internet, helping parents block out what children shouldn't see. Al Gore. He'll put his values to work for us."
ACCURACY Mr. Gore does have proposals in the areas he mentions, and President Clinton did sign an overhaul of the welfare system into law in 1996, establishing time limits. Republicans argue that in several cases their proposals are tougher or more rigorous than Mr. Gore's. What Mr. Gore does not say is that his $500 billion tax relief plan would not help all middle-class families. It is intended to give tax relief for certain social goals; to benefit, a family must meet certain criteria, like having a parent in long-term care or a child in college or a child in day care.
SCORE CARD Although this Gore advertisement is ostensibly about individual issues, its real purpose is signaled in its tag line, "He'll put his values to work for us." Republicans are traditionally viewed as more mainstream on cultural and social values than Democrats, and that perception was only strengthened by the president's affair with a White House intern.
Without ever mentioning Mr. Clinton, Mr. Gore distances himself from him somewhat in this commercial. He mentions his service in Vietnam. (Neither Mr. Clinton nor Gov. George W. Bush, the Republican nominee, served in Vietnam.) And by boasting of his 30-year marriage, Mr. Gore emphasizes that he is a family man.
The issues the advertisement covers -- tax cutting, welfare, child support, crime and fighting pornography -- are ones the Republicans had been capitalizing on for years until Mr. Clinton began to move his party to the center and stole some of their thunder. This shows Mr. Gore also setting down markers to fight off accusations that he is a big spender or that he is soft on crime or welfare.
ALISON MITCHELL