George W. Bush buys anti-Bush names 231
Quite a number of people have written over the last few days, alerting us to the fact that it appears that presidential candidate George W. Bush, has bought up over 200 Internet Domain Names. The article on Zdnet says that people wanted to put a website up at www.bushsucks.com, but Bush bought that, and more such as bushsucks.net, bushsucks.org, and even bushblows.com Huh-I guess it's a way of having a clue. Sort of.
How about... (Score:1)
Oopsies (Score:1)
HeilBuchanan.com! Yes! Yes! Oh, yes. (Score:1)
I wonder if you could register HeilBuchanan.com?
Better would be to do a bunch of blatantly and sincerely neo-nazi domain names, with lots of neo-nazism on 'em, and pack the meta tags with perfectly normal Bush and Buchanan crapola. (I mean, as "normal" as Buchanan gets. When he's speaking to a national audience he usually does pull up short of neo-nazism.) So anyway, suck a lot of mainstream, timid voters into a fake neo-nazi web site and have ringing endorsements of Bush and Buchanan. But make them ringingly neo-nazi endorsements. I've heard that in Louisiana, David Duke occasionally lurches up out of his slumber and endorses somebody -- who invariably falls over himself denying any association! It's wonderful. Poor Duke. (By the way, Duke is well thought of in the well-dressed middle class western suburbs of Philadelphia -- they think he got a raw deal. So much for facile assumptions (mine, for example
The right wing has gotten tremendous mileage out of painting moderate centrists as "extremist left-wing radicals". Okay, fair enough. Let's play.
Oh shut up. (Score:2)
Re:Register, Read, Vote. (Score:2)
I dont like how we arm militias of 3rd world countrys so we can help take over their gov
I dont like how we police the world.
I dont like how the politicians arent in it to better the country, but to better there own careers.
I dont like our over-agressive capitolism-But capitolism is a great thing, if done correctly and fairly.
They say if you dont like it, you can leave
Well, I don't like it-I can't change it, so im moving to canada.
Just my $0.02
PS: If you are going to whine and cry about spelling/grammar errors, save the bandwidth and forget reminding me how terrible I am.
Re:Oh that makes more sense now... (Score:2)
Settle down, no need to get frustrated.
It's a free market economy. If Bush is smart enough to buy up those names before some anti-bush person does, then more power to him.
Smart? For doing what, letting the bushsucks websites find another name, that is smart? That is a lame attempt.
Yeah, free market, I buy out your company have them fire you, buy out the every company you could work for and have them deny you a job even as janator, and then when you're wife has to leave you because you can't afford to be with her, then I will take her, or give her to a friend.
Hey!!!! Its a free market. I can buy anything with enough money, even if it is not for sale. If your wife is beautiful enough I can imagine many other rich men trying to do the same thing, we may even poll our money together just to get our turn with her.
Let someone use their geocities account to post bad things against Bush, it just won't be as easy for people to find it.
Exactly, its not how bush did it (buying up a lot of obvious bushsucks site names), its what it says in his actions.... "You can dislike me, but you wont be able to scream loud enough about it".
Sure money is power, but it isn't ethics, morals, or responsibility. Sure guns give you sense of power, but they also don't give you those things, and Colorado is a good example of abuse of that kind of power. Abuse of money is another thing, personly I think it was a dumb thing he did, not only a waste of money, but also a bad message to send out to everyone.
Either you don't live in the US (and thus don't really understand our country), or you do but really have no clue of how "free speech" and "market economy" go together.
All right lets not be lame, I'm not saying he is not free to buy them, just like I am free to shoot you there is nothing "real" holding me back, but there are and should be moral and ethical problems with this. You should know the diffrence.
If I was a Democrat, I wouldn't list that as a reference to some negative thing used against Bush.
Of course not, but there are people who would be interested, just like their are people who are interested in clintonsucks sites, and the rest of the anti sites, its just human nature to look at the bad side of something, as well as the good sides. And GB obviously know this, but he his solution is not to discuss anything its to buy everything out.
Actually your comments leave me speachless. I've never heard such a warped point of view.
OK, then try to explain why he bought them with out getting close to my "warped point of view".
Re:boycottbush.com (Score:3)
brand name" by buying up the
Register, Read, Vote. (Score:5)
Re: Who should be able to own a domain (Score:1)
I also thing companies should be able to buy as many domains as they wish - tho I'm waiting for IPv6/IPng to grow - wonder if we'll have this domain buying spree all over again...
Re:It's not over yet... (Score:1)
Oh well. Please don't encourage cracking, by the way. Cracking is bad. And it's not constructive, either. And anyone who cracks for political reasons can get in really deep doo-doo. So don't do it.
Re:quick society question... (Score:1)
I think this is the real issue anyhow, not whether he dropped 14 grand with NSI just for publicity.
boycottbush.com (Score:2)
Re:I don't get it (Score:1)
Apparently this time it was more interesting what he said than who he was.
Baahhh (Score:4)
1. You must be some kind of an official organization
2. There should be a certain number of individual computers uniquely connected to it (no virtual hosting crap)
3. ONLY ONE domain per organization
4. That name must say who you are
Domain names were never intended to be used by everly little clown that wants a web site. They were intended to identify networks and to give organizations their own namespace.
I like Bush, but this is kinda stupid. Maybe I'll vote for Alan Keyes like I did last time.
(www.)bush1999.com is not taken... (Score:1)
ttyl
Farrell
Re:quick society question... (Score:1)
Re:boycottbush.com (Score:1)
Re:Um, banner ads? (Score:1)
Re:boycottbush.com (Score:2)
Umm, no it's not. Slashdot is run by BSI, a company, not a non-profit organization. Rob has said himself that he makes money from Slashdot's banner ads. In fact, since Rob has no other job, Slashdot is his sole source of income.
dumbass.
You remind me of a middle school student. Are you 12 or 13?
Re:boycottbush.com (Score:1)
i was thinking bushbites.com
pennacook
There outta be a law... (Score:2)
If Bush buys bushsucks.com, he should be required to actually use it.
[veering OT] Stay in Sweden (Score:2)
It doesn't matter. A president's job has little to do with technical matters. If you think Gore hasn't a clue (he actually has the ability to borrow a clue; one wishes he would remind himself of that sometimes), then Bush would be an even bigger joke. Like his father (a man I really like, BTW -- except as a politician), George W just wants to be president; the only relevant details he has worked on so far is fund-raising and focus groups. Policies are not so worked-out at this time, i.e., they're for sale to the highest bidder, be it a special interest group or a corporation. He's ahead in the polls right now, but if the press scrutinizes his past business deals (e.g. Harken Energy, and the Texas Rangers baseball team), the voters will see that he made a lot of money from his surname and the fact that his dad was (at various times) the DCI (head of the CIA), vice president, and president. Of course, the voters may ignore all that and vote for the guy anyway; I'm sure he and his handlers will have worked out explanations and alibis for everything, or Double U wouldn't have run for prez. Are top politicians in Sweden this bad? Many top American politicians are; Bush is in the 90th percentile, with plenty of company.
Oh. Did I forget my RANT tags again? Moderators: I have no problem with this being reduced to a -1 score :)
--
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
domain name != URL (Score:1)
Perhaps someone is using their domain name for workstation hostnames, email, a gopher server...
Is that so bad?
--
Get your fresh, hot kernels right here [kernel.org]!
Re:just a couple things... (Score:1)
How could this possibly be a restriction of free speech? The domain names were open for anybody to take, the Bush guys just got to them first. You are still free to put up a site that makes fun of Bush, details why he's a bad choice, or even documents why you think he's the leader of a vampire cult. You just have to think of a name that hasn't been registered yet.
Re:Domain name registration. (Score:1)
just joking . . .
Beer recipe: free! #Source
Cold pints: $2 #Product
Re:Baahhh (Score:1)
So what if you can't register the domain name you want because someone's holding it? They're not limiting you, they're just limiting your execution. If what you say is really important, people will find your information.
Does it hurt him at all? (Score:1)
This is not an attack on free speech in any way. People can still say whatever they want about him.
You're blowing this out of proportion... (Score:1)
When someone compares the buying of domain names to various illegal and/or reprehensible acts, are they being brilliant?
Its just like saying "you can say anything you want, but you can't say it out loud".
Oh, please. You make it sound like he's banned anti-Bush Websites. He hasn't. Yeah, now the sites are going to be something like bushsucks.somewhere.com, or maybe something a bit more obscure like www.nowhere.org/~fvj2354/bush/ih8bush.html. Big deal.
By the way, I suggest you read the Gnome vs. KDE flamewars sometime. Why? Take a look at all the posts. Every time the word "sucks" or "blows" or anything is used in a post, you'll notice that the person doesn't have anything worthwhile or serious to say. Those who are really trying to make a point never use language like that (I dare you to find me a serious post on the issue that has the word "sucks" anywhere in it except to quote someone else). My point: yeah, the little oh-boy-lets-badmouth-a-candidate kiddies are going to be deterred by this. But not the professionals, and not the people who actually have something to say. Bush hasn't stopped the pros. He didn't mean to do that either.
Re:You're blowing this out of proportion... (Score:1)
You honestly think that's his message? Look, here's the thing:
The written word is a remarkable thing. It can convey messages, calm the hysterical, heal the depressed, and so forth. It can also be a terrible weapon. Look back over the history of presidential races: especially in recent years, every candidate who runs is dragged through the dirt. Every little aspect of their lives, sometimes going as far back as childhood mistakes, is dredged up in ways which would land the dredger in jail in any other circumstance.
No you think Bush wants that? No; he'd have to be out of his mind to want that. I doubt you'd want it either; no one does.
Also, note the names he eliminated. "bushsucks.org" or "bushblows.org," but not things like "boycottbush.net." My point: he took the names which were explicitly defamatory, as opposed to ones which suggested actions or at least sounded professional (honestly, do you think his opponents' campaigns will use "bushsucks.com"? No; it'll be the upstarts, the people with little vendettas and axes to grind). He's trying to save some shred of his dignity; he'll lose the rest during the race, as will all the other candidates. Can you blame him for that?
That important? (Score:1)
It won't accomplish anything (Score:1)
He can't have tagged all of them... (Score:1)
Re:Baahhh (Score:1)
Wow, did I read that right? I hope you don't take too much offense, but I must strongly disagree with your implied point. Of all the rights in the Bill of Rights, free speech is, IMO, by far the most important (especially for those of us who spend a lot of time communicating over the internet). It certainly isn't 'mere rhetoric'.
Read through some of the other posts on this topic and notice how some other democratic countries (Canada and Sweden are mentioned) limit the way you can register domains. Not only does this serve to limit one's speech, in some cases, someone comes up with a workaround of some sort (the Polynesian
I'm no big, flag-waving, patriot-zealot, but I'm glad I'm in the US where I can register as many domains as I want for any reason (or no reason!). Do you really want the government or a corporation deciding how you can express yourself on the internet?
Cheers,
Matthew
Re:quick society question... (Score:1)
Dibs on networksolutions.sucks
Re:Here are 3 they missed... (Score:3)
His brother Jeb, OTOH, kept trying to jam the ethernet cable into the phone jack.... Don't ask Jeb Bush to help with anything technical.
just a couple things... (Score:1)
First, I doubt that I will vote for someone who is squatting on over 200 domain names.
Second, Isnt this in some way a restriction of free speech?
Re:boycottbush.com (Score:1)
Re:boycottbush.com (Score:1)
at the time of this writing I'm 14(I was 13 like 2 months ago), I'll be a highschool junior for 99-00...
Though I don't see how age comes into the matter, age really is so fickle...
I've been using linux since I was 12, and it was NOT redhat, I did my time reading HOWTOs and man pages, I got X working my first time from a CONF file I wrote completely from scratch, which is alot more then I can say about some "adults" that I know.
There's been kids much younger then I that have gotten doctorates, and written books. Hell, wasn't Alexander the Great like 9 when he started?
Re:How about... (Score:1)
Cheers,
Perrin.
Re:I don't get it (Score:1)
Cheers,
Perrin.
Re:He didn't get the cannibals choice... (Score:1)
Cheers,
Perrin.
Re:How about... (Score:1)
Cheers,
Perrin.
Re:quick society question... (Score:1)
Cheers,
Perrin.
Re:Oh that makes more sense now... (Score:1)
Cheers,
Perrin.
Re:quick society question... (Score:2)
Cheers,
Perrin.
Re:Well... (Score:3)
Cheers,
Perrin.
Re:Baahhh (Score:3)
Cheers,
Perrin.
Re:Um, banner ads? (Score:1)
-mike kania
Exactly: Utterly pointless (Score:1)
As for wanting the publicity, boff... I'm not sure I agree that "any press is good press". Are people really going to be more likely to vote for him, having read this?
Incidentally, I have nothing against the man myself. I don't live in the US and have no idea of his policies, anyways. Just pointing out that this was a dumb idea.
Steve 'Nephtes' Freeland | Okay, so maybe I'm a tiny itty
I don't get it (Score:4)
I Think This is Cool (Score:2)
Re:just a couple things... (Score:1)
Second, no.
Hmm.,. dunno what that would do.. (Score:1)
Given that I usually get my url's from references from people I know, from a search engine, or from postings on newsgroups/slashdot, I don't see how this would stop any anti-Bush sentiment from showing up on the Internet.
Looks like it's time to start looking for an original domain name that attacks Bush.
Ben
Re:boycottbush.com (Score:1)
200*70 = 14000
when i grow up i want to own a monopoly
Re:Here are 3 they missed... (Score:2)
If your state doesn't have a motor voter law, look up your town's electorial commission in the phone book, phone them for instructions on registering and just do it.
I live in Cambridge, MA, and there are voter registration tables at street fairs and a lot of other public events. It's not exactly a normal town, since there's more registered Libertarians than Republicans in it, but even less activist towns have to let you register if you can prove:
1. citizenship
2. residence in the town
3. that you have no felony convictions
Re:quick society question... (Score:1)
Re:Baahhh (Score:1)
off-topic: is keyes running again? i didn't get to vote in the last election, but he would definately be my choice for president. he's a good, honest man with whom i tend to agree on almost every issue.
Re:www.microsfot.com (Score:1)
whois microsfot.com
[rs.internic.net]
Registrant:
JS technologies SA (MICROSFOT2-DOM)
Rue du Centre 72
St-Sulpice, 1025
CH
Domain Name: MICROSFOT.COM
hrm (Score:1)
I am sure the 200 names Bush registered only represent a very small fraction of the possibilities.
Forcing your opponents to be more creative is not always the best way to go.
Re:HeilBuchanan.com! Yes! Yes! Oh, yes. (Score:1)
Did any of you ever hear of irony? (Score:1)
Re:I don't get it (Score:1)
And as for good publicity vs. bad publicity, there's not much difference. Publicity is the point. Forget who said it, but "say whatever you like about me, just so long as you spell my name right."
Re:HeilBuchanan.com! Yes! Yes! Oh, yes. (Score:1)
And wasn't what's his name, "This space for Rent" Byrd in the Clan back when?
Re:.sucks.com and .rules.com domains (Score:1)
--
.sucks.com and .rules.com domains (Score:3)
The domains sucks.com [sucks.com] and rules.com [rules.com] are not being used for this sort of purpose. sucks.com exhibits a "coming soon" sign, and rules.com seems to have been snaffled by a speculator/hosting company.
If I owned these domains I would be selling subdomains, and making lotsa dosh! I shudder to think of the money geeks would pay to get domains like microsoft.sucks.com, or linux.rules.com. People would probably play ~internic rates for subdomains there, IMHO....
Besides, it be much more fun to tease those who only sorta get the tech, but exploiting holes in their knowledge....
Re:boycottbush.com (Score:1)
Lay off. :) It's not like it really affects anyone.
Scientologists own the Cult Awareness Network (Score:3)
That was about three years ago.
Poor flame artists (Score:2)
Erm, my heart bleeds for all the poor flame artists who will find it marginally harder to throw personal insults at someone because they disagree with his politics. Um, not.
I'd have to say that buying domains instead of sending threatening letters is a definite improvement.
Project Vote Smart! (Score:3)
This non-partisan site has lots of detailed info on all the candidates and so forth, including issues responses and recent voting history. That is, if they've been a Congressman, it lists how they voted on various bills.. very good solid data. (Could use more info on those bills, though.)
Anyway, this is the quickest way to check out tons of solid facts about various candidates.
www.microsfot.com (Score:4)
Apple owns 100's of domain names to point to thier website, Nike owns around 500 I belive, and I'm sure there are alot of others who own that amount of domain names.
And I'll be damned, look where www.microsfot.org takes me too.....
suckclinton.org fund? (Score:1)
:-)
He didn't get the cannibals choice... (Score:1)
little companies become big companies (Score:1)
Re:Is it _really_ clever... (Score:1)
Re:Is it _really_ clever... (Score:1)
First of all, the main reason for buying the domain name is to keep it out of the hands of the opposition.
But second, it's fairly clever to have someone looking for one thing find exactly the opposite message -- like sometimes happens with various brand names, as we've seen on
To be really fiendishly clever, they could direct people coming to those negative URLs to specific targeted pitches designed for people who already dislike the candidate (or other product). Focus groups could tell them what stuff works best for these people, and it's probably not the same rah-rah stuff that would be at the main home page.
Re:www.microsfot.com (Score:1)
way to go!
*ROTFL*
Is it _really_ clever... (Score:2)
Bush just demonstrated his low ethical standards (Score:1)
Not that I'm defending Gore-the-Internet-Inventor, but...
I think it's revealing that Bush was willing to do something so petty just to attempt to keep people from speaking against him. It's analogous to a rogue moderator marking down messages that disagree with his opinion. Regardless of Bush's stand on "important" issues, there's no way I could vote for him after reading this, simply because it shows that he's basically a dishonorable person. He just proved himself to be just another Clinton.
no one missed anything... (Score:1)
And he can't get bush.com, some other guy named Bush registered it in 1995 (smart guy, that one. Got his own name first!)
Apache/Php (Score:1)
Here are 3 they missed... (Score:1)
blowmegeorge.net
blowmegeorge.org
Of course, I'm stuck in Sweden at the moment, so I don't have a clue about the potential candidates. I know that Gore doesn't have a clue, but what about George, how does he stand up when it comes to technical matters?
---
Re:www.microsfot.com (Score:2)
Nowhere...
whois microsfot.org
[rs.internic.net]
No match for "MICROSFOT.ORG".
You agree that you will not reproduce, sell, transfer, or
modify any of the data presented in response to your search request, or
use of any such data for commercial purpose, without the prior
express written permission of Network Solutions.
Now microsfot.com on the other hand points to linux.org...
---
www.george-bush-sucks-cock.com is free, go buy it (Score:2)
-----BEGIN ANNOYING SIG BLOCK-----
Evan
Re:Hmm.,. dunno what that would do.. (Score:2)
Jaq
This is a problem with name registration, not Bush (Score:2)
I would suggest a good rule for domain name registration authorities is that a company can have its domain name renewal denied if it hasn't made use of the name. If all a name does is point to a "Coming soon" or "Buy this domain" page for a year, then we should return it to the pile and let someone else have a go at it. Ditto when someone has a bunch of domain names point to the same page.
Bush isn't doing anything wrong, but he's still being a jerk by buying something just to keep someone else from having it. We should work for rules that stop this sort of land-grab behavior.
If he can't put up content on every domain name, and not just link them all to one page, then let him, but if he's just pissing all over stuff to keep other people away... Well, we don't need that bullshit on the net as well as in the physical world.
It's a brave new world (Score:2)
I can imagine George and his advisors sitting around some large expensive table discussing if they want to buy www.bushblows.com. I'll bet they were laughing as hard as I was.
It says something about the power; or maybe the perceived power of the internet. It's really amazing how far it has come in the span of a few years. I was thinking back to 94 when I got my first account on Prodigy. You had to pay extra to go on the "Web" at that time and the speed coming through prodigy was horrible, but I'll bet I didn't sleep for a week.
Now the internet seems so commonplace, having an email adr. is the norm not the execption, and major political powers are giving some serious thought on how to harness the power.
This should be interesting.
Re:Baahhh (Score:2)
So, I should have to agree to someone else's definition of organized?
2. There should be a certain number of individual computers uniquely connected to it (no virtual hosting crap)
Hmm, how many addresses can you map to ONE name? And wouldn't that be fun if you had to have NSI manage your subdomains.
3. ONLY ONE domain per organization
Lessee, there's my right foot, my left one... Is my head the same organization as my book collection? How many names do you go by personally? There's usually your first name, your last name, a nick name, insults, email aliases, handles...
4. That name must say who you are
And who you are must say what you do, what you sell, your interests, your history, your address, your income, your SSN, your license plate.
Domain names were never intended to be used by everly little clown that wants a web site.
They were meant to be used by suits to communicate to other suits, or by scientists to communicate with their peers. Clowns need web sites to look at, too.
They were intended to identify networks and to give organizations their own namespace.
I believe they were intended to identify addresses belonging to interfaces belonging to computers belonging to networks belonging to organizations. Well then, there are mail handlers too.
I like bush
hee hee
I like Bush more and more (Score:2)
While Gore claims to be the high-tech candidate, I think Bush is the man for the geek community. Why? His actions show that instead of jumping on buzzwords and trying to jump in front of the crowd so that he can call himself a leader, Bush is actually willing to do his homework and study the nature of our world before he opens his mouth.
Note please do not construe this post as flaim bait. This forum isn't about who supports welfare, abortion, bombing soveriegn countries, etc. It's about technology and which candidate can best drive it forward. Please, please, please, limit responses to this.
www.linuxsucks.com exists (Score:2)
quick society question... (Score:3)
Why do people in general have to create sucks.com sites? Yeah, you may not like the person, but you can still let the person campaign/sell/express their opinion. Going out and just saying they suck is just childish. If you want to vent your frustrations with someone, you can find a far more adult way to do it somewhere else.
(And I'm not associated with *any* political party...I don't agree with any of them)
Anyone capable of getting themselves made presiden (Score:2)
Douglas Adams, The Hitchikers Guide To The Galaxy
read some history dorkwad and go back to coding (Score:2)
capitalism is still a theory
Feudalism never ended. People just feel rich because of suits.
communism is extreme socialism for control of power. Some cultures' medium of value(currency) is power.
protectionism is extreme capitalism for control of
money. Some cultures' medium of value is money.
so far no culture has held value as a medium of value.
stop trying to legislate or institutionalize good will. nothing lasts past a few generations after its inception. every generation is as far from the last generation as the next will be from it because nothing changes just the percentage of different qualities of character. stop being so ridiculously enthusiastic, it's sickening.
Read Forever Flowing, A Captive Mind, watch "Brazil" a few times.
"but we can still do much better..." go back to coding.
Re:Register, Read, Vote. (Score:2)
Re:Baahhh (Score:2)
And all those old programs were never intended to be used after 2000, or they would have been Y2K compliant.
So what?
We need more Slashdot categories (Score:5)
These stories weren't very interesting to begin with and now they're just plain annoying. I don't care.
I care about Linux news, but not what people have to say about piddly bi-weekly kernel improvements.
Thank you, and good night.
Re:Baahhh (Score:4)
Worst part is that it's some American lawyer who manages it, not the polynesians, who gets all the money...
Re:Hmm.,. dunno what that would do.. (Score:2)
anyhow, if your refering to the guy who the story says wants 300,000 (?? didn't go back and reread figure could be wrong..) then I appologize and ignore me..
Domain name registration. (Score:2)
rules on who gets what type of domain name,
and how many you can have. An organization
can only have ONE domain name, and it either
has to relate to their company name, or
a registered trademark. So now, for example,
you can have either coke.ca or coca-cola.ca,
but not both. You wouldn't believe the hoops
I had to jump through to get pollock.ca!
Jason