Posted on 01/25/2011 11:19:12 AM PST by Mier
Renewed Push to Give Obama an Internet "Kill Switch"
A controversial bill handing President Obama power over privately owned computer systems during a "national cyberemergency," and prohibiting any review by the court system, will return this year.
Internet companies should not be alarmed by the legislation, first introduced last summer by Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), a Senate aide said last week. Lieberman, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, is chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
"We're not trying to mandate any requirements for the entire Internet, the entire Internet backbone," said Brandon Milhorn, Republican staff director and counsel for the committee.
Instead, Milhorn said at a conference in Washington, D.C., the point of the proposal is to assert governmental control only over those "crucial components that form our nation's critical infrastructure."
Portions of the Lieberman-Collins bill, which was not uniformly well-received when it became public in June 2010, became even more restrictive when a Senate committee approved a modified version on December 15. The full Senate did not act on the measure.
Read More: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20029302-501465.html
No power given to Obarry. None!
Another example of this administration taking a power that it does not legally have.
It's the Fairness Doctrine at work.
OH MY F***ING GOD.
That's it. I'm bailing. Gotta be a better country than this fascist piece of s**t country.
He wants the kill switch on granny.
Anything by Elmer Fudd and the rino is a warning and alarm enough..
Yep, that is the proper reaction.
You know what? I guarantee the Repubs will hand the switch over to Obama, too. AND they will make it a felony to question it.
This is exactly the type of thing that Tea Party folks will be watching out for and will NOT tolerate.
Message to the new crop of Republicans: under no circumstances do we want this enacted. Not in any way, shape or form.
Got it? We want a return to us being the land of the free and home of the brave, so grow a pair.
Don't care if it's a Donkey or an Elephant.
Exactly what sort of “Cyber-emergency” could possibly warrant such heavy-handed power here in the US? This proposal sounds more like an act of Red China or the old Soviet Politburo...
And with the death of print media, and even a lot of the old broadcast media - the internet becomes the defacto “press”... Which fully explains the power-grab.
Never give this kind of authority unchecked by a court review.
If they can’t convince a judge of the merits of their cause, they don’t have a cause.
The GOP loves to cave and compromise.
If the Pubs don't start rolling back some stuff, I will be convinced that there is ONE PARTY, with two flavors.
“prohibiting any review by the court system”
I’ve commented on this before, but the idea that any other branch of the government could arbitrarily decide that the courts are prohibited from reviewing them is absurd. That’s for the court to decide. Just like it’s for Congress to decide to impeach a justice, for instance. Or for Congress, the states, or the people to overturn the courts by amending the Constitution.
Killing the internet is not unreviewable just because Congress or the president says so. If nothing else, their claim that judicial review doesn’t apply could itself be subject to review.
UH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
No POWER to ZERO period.
The roundups will be pretexted on things like Tucson, they’ll just be rounding up law abiding conservatives instead of insane leftists.
“Exactly what sort of ‘Cyber-emergency’ could possibly warrant such heavy-handed power here in the US? This proposal sounds more like an act of Red China or the old Soviet Politburo...”
Um...uh...the one in the last Die Hard movie?
“Instead, Milhorn said at a conference in Washington, D.C., the point of the proposal is to assert governmental control only over those ‘crucial components that form our nation’s critical infrastructure.’”
Just who decides what that is? I’m thinking not the legislature but some regulatory agency. That is what scares me because then you end up with a definition to suit political ends. This gives way too much leeway in determining the definition.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.