Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online (SAFE) Act

Posted by jerry as Ron Paul, politics, technology

The US House of Representatives passed the SAFE act by a 409 to 2 margin.  It also appears likely to pass the senate.  It is interesting to note that one of the 2 “nay” votes on the bill was none other than Ron Paul.  While I agree with his decision to vote against the bill, it will certainly come back to bite him.  “How can you be in favor of exploiting children, Mr. Paul?” 

On the surface, the bill appears to be a draconian measure placed on ISPs, web hosts, public wifi provders, etc, requiring them to report all instances where child pornography is transmitted over their network to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.  The penalty for non-compliance is $150,000US for a first offense, and $300,000 for subsequent offenses.  Complying with the law provides civil and criminal immunity from any resulting legal issues of the disclosure.  That’s about the extent of what is being reported in most of the alarmist media.

If you ACTUALLY READ THE BILL, you will notice this interesting section:

`(f) Protection of Privacy- Nothing in this section shall be construed to require an electronic communication service provider or a remote computing service provider to–

•   `(1) monitor any user, subscriber, or customer of that provider;

•   `(2) monitor the content of any communication of any person described in paragraph (1); or

•   `(3) affirmatively seek facts or circumstances described in subsection (a)(2).

Very interesting.  So, the law doesn’t require the providers to proactively monitor traffic.  So, what does it do then? 

Providers that use technology to determine if someone is viewing an inappropriate site - from a known list of sites or from some form of intelligent analysis of the image content - they are compelled to report such traffic to the NCMEC.  If a web hosting company discovers that a customer is hosting child porn, the hoster must report it.

The other important aspect of the law is what must be reported.  Essentially all identifiable info that is know must be submitted, presumably in an attempt to track back to the owner.

In some respects, this bill just makes something that’s illegal even more illegal.  The bill does add some additional mechanisms to find the child pornographers, distributers and those that view it, and does not appear to place a major burden on providers. 

The downside, as usual, is in the interpretation of child porn.  It’s interesting that a definition of “child pornography” is not included in the bill, yet many other things like “web site”, are.  It is conceivable, as some reports of the bill contend, that clothed children in lascivious poses could constitute child porn.  I wonder how the average Abercrombie & Fitches catalog would fare?

Kucinich and Paul make a good team?

Posted by jerry as Ron Paul, politics

This interview with Dennis Kucinich’s lovely & intelligent wife:

Has moderates on both sides quite excited. Unfortunately, it can’t be. There are a few major obstacles:

1. Neither appears to be on a trajectory to win their respective party primary race.
2. Someone has to be VP. It’s unlikely that, though they are close on many issues, certain ideologies like abortion, will prevent each from playing second seat to the other.
3. Either Paul or Kucinich would likely lose the support of their party should they win the primary and choose a running mate from the opposing party, rather than from the “talent pool” from their own party.

I agree, that it would be a great presidency. There would be balance and sanity in the White House, but we are teeing up for another 4 years of craziness.

Can Ron Paul be elected?

Posted by jerry as Ron Paul, politics

The answer is: I don’t think so.  I’ve grown to equate the presidential selection process with the top 3 videos on each week’s edition of “America’s Funniest Home Videos”.  You sit and watch the show, and at the end, the producers pick three videos which will be voted on to determine the winner of $10,000, but the videos that are picked are typically lame and definitely not the funniest of the show, but the audience is forced to vote among that set.

The presidential race is not entirely different.  We sit and watch a lot of really interesting candidates, but in the end, we’ll end up having to choose from a select few that the “producers” have hand picked for us - Guiliani &  Romney on one side, Clinton and Obama on the other side.  The media is really the group that determines who gets to play and who doesn’t.  I don’t believe that they have a hidden agenda, are working as part of some covert society, or the like, just that they all want to focus on who they think are going to be the top contenders. In the process, they impact the outcome of the races.

 I was looking at the Ron Paul Money Bomb, and they have a great list of Ron Paul “commandments”:

01. End the Patriot Act Immediately.
02. End the IRS.
03. End the Homeland Security Department.
04. End the Iraq Police Action.
05. End the private ownership of the Federal Reserve.
06. End the national ID Card program.
07. End the sending of jobs overseas.
08. End the flood of illegal immigrants.
09. End preemptive military strikes.
10. End the “future” police state.(a)(b)
11. End nation building & defend OUR nation, not others.
12. End executive war powers. Congress alone can declare War.
13. End the North American Union. Preserve US sovereignty.
14. End the War on terror. Terror is not tangible. Therefore it cannot be won [EVER].
15. End the onslaught of our freedoms and liberties by the Federal Government.

 I definitely want to see most of these put into place.  They are all noble and sensible, but there is so much inertia behind almost all of them, that even if Paul were to be elected, I have no confidence that any of them could be accomplished.  However, there is value in slowing down the course that we’re on, so it might not be all bad. 

In the end, I believe the contortion of Paul’s views by opponents and media, such as abortion and affirmative action, will be his undoing.  I share them, but they will inevitably come across as “minority hating”, “women hating”, etc, even if that’s not the case.

Growing dissent of Ron Paul

Posted by jerry as Ron Paul, politics

It’s been interesting watching the groundswell of support for Paul over the past year.  His republican affiliation and anti-war, pro-liberty beliefs are very appealing to many who feel the current administration has been assaulting all that is American.  But now, people are starting to realize that he is a conservative libertarian.  As a libertarian, he has views that the federal government should not be in the education business, it should not be mandating racial quotas or bailing out municipalities after disasters.

I find it really funny that the author of the article in question is clearly anti-Iraq war, yet wants the US to go in and kick some butt in Darfur. Ron Paul’s position is that we don’t go to war unless the threat is against us.  See, it’s a consistent view.

It should also not be suprising that he attempts to pass legislation to stop abortions.  He is, after all, a conservative.  Protecting the lives of a countries citizens is one of the core tenants of a libertarian, so that would appear to be in the perview of the federal government.  You can debate the issue of whether or not a fetus is a life, but in his eyes, at least, it’s clear and he is fighting for what he believes is right.  I’m personally pro-women’s choice, but he isn’t.  His philosophy aligns with mine in many other key areas, though. 

Paul’s desire to do away with the Department of Education is being taken as a anti-education stance.  I can’t believe that for a minute.  I do believe that his stance is that education is a State and local affair, and that the Federal government only screws things up.  History, since the creation of the DoEd, seems to back up his view.

Likewise, hiw view that affirmative action should be abolished is taken as an anti-minority stance.  Again, I can’t believe that is his intent.  Like me, I believe his intent is that discrimination should not be tolerated, and when found, should be prosecuted, but federally mandated minority quotas are not appropriate.

Paul’s view that the Federal government should not have provided aid for Katrina victims is also a hot button. Again, his view is likely not that the people should be assisted at all, just that the federal government is not the right group to do so.  The states  themselves should be doing this sort of thing.

So, in short, it seems that many people are awakening to Paul’s conservative views, and “jumping off the Ron Paul bandwagon”, which will ensure that we continue to have many more years of the same kind of crap that we’ve been experiencing up to now - continued erosion of liberty, increasing our military activities abroad, bigger deficits, more taxes, lower currency value, and on and on.  Good luck with that.  Glad you’re love of the federal programs is worth the complete destruction of the US.