Hitlery, you're just going to have to get used to the fact that you and your minions no longer have control over what news is and isn't made public.
1 posted on
09/25/2005 2:29:18 PM PDT by
wagglebee
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
To: wagglebee
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." --Hillary Clinton
To: wagglebee
Somewhere between freedom of the press and freedom of speech (by the way Ms. Clinton, these are covered in the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution--look it up), the right of the people to openly debate current events is undeniable. No matter how Ms. Stalin, I mean, Clinton tries, she'll never be able to get around that one......without appointing 6 or 7 likeminded individuals to the Supreme Court.
3 posted on
09/25/2005 2:35:06 PM PDT by
cincinnati65
(Just up the road a piece.......)
To: wagglebee
Hitlery wants mind-control of the masses, the aphrodisiac of lefties everywhere. This would make a great campaign ad when she runs....
To: wagglebee
I don't have a clue Well, there is one statement I agree with her on.
To: wagglebee
Here is a pic for you, Sen. B***H!!
My sentiments exactly!
7 posted on
09/25/2005 2:38:39 PM PDT by
Inge_CAV
To: wagglebee
The Beast's internet "Rethink" : Get rid of those damn FReepers!
8 posted on
09/25/2005 2:38:46 PM PDT by
varyouga
(Reformed Kerry voter (I know, I'm a frickin' idiot))
To: wagglebee
I'm a big pro-balance person Here, let me fix that.
I'm a big pro-unbalanced person
To: wagglebee
Imagine UN control of the Internet.
To: wagglebee
Can't flood the Internet with Clintonistas like the talk shows Hillary? The beast must be stopped.
11 posted on
09/25/2005 2:40:45 PM PDT by
ncountylee
(Dead terrorists smell like victory)
To: wagglebee
"It can lead to all kinds of bad outcomes which we have seen historically." The only bad outcomes that comes from the 1st amendment is usually bad for the person or persons in the wrong anyway.
To: wagglebee
"We are all going to have to rethink how we deal with this, because there are all these competing values ... Without any kind of editing function or gatekeeping function, what does it mean to have the right to defend your reputation?" The Truth will set you free Hillary. Or, in your case maybe not.
The internet has given us the freedom of the press promised in the Constitution, and even Joe Sixpack seems to be able to "Get It" even if he occasionally reaches for his tinfoil hat.
13 posted on
09/25/2005 2:43:28 PM PDT by
konaice
To: wagglebee
I'm a big pro-balance person. What he hell does that mean? This woman(?) has to many quotes on record to ever run for President!
To: wagglebee
... I don't have a clue.Where's Craig Livingston, Hiltery?
Who murdered Vince Foster for you and your hillbilly-marxist soulmate?
15 posted on
09/25/2005 2:47:17 PM PDT by
ElCapusto
(For ENGLISH, press one.)
To: wagglebee
"I don't have any clue about what we're going to do legally,
regulatorily, technologically -- I don't have a clue."
To: wagglebee
MRS. CLINTON: Bill, I don't know what -- that's why I said I don't know what I'm in favor of
because I haven' seen a poll to see what direction the wind is blowing with the voters. And I don't know enough to know what to be in favor of, because I think it's one of those new issues we've got to address. We've got to see whether our existing laws protect people's right of privacy
when they want to have an abortion, protect them against defamation.
And if they can, how do you do that when you can press a button and you can't take it back. So I think we have to tread carefully, until I see what is posted on DU, KOS, MoveOn.org and what cindy $heetHann is saying.
18 posted on
09/25/2005 2:50:59 PM PDT by
Arrowhead1952
(Note to the MSM - Don't stay stuck on STUPID!)
To: wagglebee
That's why I love the founders -- checks and balances; accountable power. Anytime an individual or an institution or an invention leaps so far out ahead of that balance and throws a system, whatever it might be -- political, economic, technological --out of balance, you've got a problem,"PIAPS is either ignorant of what is meant by "checks and balances" or she is so cynical as to blatantly misrepresent it.
Either way, this is NOT someone who should hold public office.
20 posted on
09/25/2005 2:52:37 PM PDT by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
To: wagglebee
It's Gore's fault this time...after all he invented the inner-nut
21 posted on
09/25/2005 2:56:26 PM PDT by
The Unknown Nobody
(Have you had the opportunity to fight for your freedom or has someone fought for it for you?)
To: wagglebee
She should be the poster child for the "down with the first amendment movement". I wonder what ole hildabeast is afraid of . dfu and blurblogger and some others are putting together a little internet production she may be thinking about .
22 posted on
09/25/2005 2:57:23 PM PDT by
lionheart 247365
(( I.S.L.A.M. stands for - Islams Spiritual Leaders Advocate Murder .. .. .. ))
To: wagglebee
I wonder if she read about herself in the FreeRepublic?
"Without any kind of editing function or gatekeeping function, what does it mean to have the right to defend your reputation?" she said. "
You Commies are control freaks. I pray you NEVER get into power here!
And the best way to defend your reputation is with your behavior. No one can fake it for you like they do for Bill.
23 posted on
09/25/2005 2:57:37 PM PDT by
RoadTest
(And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Matt. 23:9)
To: wagglebee
She is probably closely watching these developments. [Heck, ole Bill may even be in the background advising them of the need for closed societies.]
China's model for a censored Internet(Chinese Internet surveillance system for export)
|
|
Posted by TigerLikesRooster On News/Activism 09/24/2005 11:46:29 PM CDT · 24 replies · 353+ views
Christian Science Monitor ^ | 09/22/05 | Kathleen E. McLaughlin from the September 22, 2005 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com China's model for a censored Internet Some worry China's controls could be copied elsewhere. By Kathleen E. McLaughlin | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor SHANGHAI, CHINA - As China began to go online, observers made brash predictions that the Internet would pry the country open. Cyberspace, the thinking went, would prove too vast and wild for Beijing to keep under its thumb. Now these early assumptions are being sharply revised. Under an authoritarian government determined to control information, China has grown a new version of the Internet. As former US President...
|
24 posted on
09/25/2005 3:03:56 PM PDT by
TomGuy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson