PDA

View Full Version : Well CISPA just passed in the House




CaseyJones
04-18-2013, 11:05 AM
House just passed HR 624, CISPA.




Y
N


R
196
29


D
92
98


Total
288
127



///

tsai3904
04-18-2013, 11:10 AM
Roll call vote:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll117.xml

Lucille
04-18-2013, 11:10 AM
What's with the bum's rush? Gun control, internet control, amnesty... I shudder to think what the traitorous goons have in store for us over the next few years.

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-04-18/house-passes-cispa-privacy-shredding-web-spying-bill


The privacy-shredding Internet spying bill - CISPA - has passed the House.

Our only chance is to stop it in the Senate. Background here and here.

It's exhausting defending rights that are supposed to be unalienable.

V3n
04-18-2013, 11:11 AM
but 90% of people are against this!!

jmdrake
04-18-2013, 11:13 AM
Wow! The GOP has a hard on for CISPA. :mad:

paulbot24
04-18-2013, 11:13 AM
It's exhausting defending rights that are supposed to be unalienable.

Amen to that.

HOLLYWOOD
04-18-2013, 11:19 AM
Congressman evokes Boston bombings as reason to pass CISPA (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDYQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Frt.com%2Fusa%2Fcongress-house-bill-cispa-031%2F&ei=1SlwUfbTIoqLiAKuwYGABw&usg=AFQjCNHW3ZKbXU9nLADqGcMsPvRSrLOSvw&bvm=bv.45373924,d.cGE&cad=rja)


The US House of Representatives has passed the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protect Act (CISPA).
Lawmakers in the House voted 288-to-127 Thursday afternoon to accept the bill. Next it will move to the Senate and could then end up on the desk of US President Barack Obama for him to potentially sign the bill into law. Earlier this week, though, senior White House advisers said they would recommend the president veto the bill.
Should CISPA earn the president’s autograph, private businesses will be encouraged to voluntarily share cyberthreat information with the US government. The authors of the bill say this is an effort to better combat the reportedly increasing attempts to harm America’s critical computer networks and pilfer the systems of private companies for intellectual property and other sensitive trade secrets.

One of the bill’s creators, Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Maryland), said during a round of debate on Wednesday that $400 billion worth of American trade secrets are being stolen by US companies every year. Passing CISPA, he said, would be a common sense solution to a threat that’s growing at an alarming rate.

“If your house is being robbed, you call 911 and the police department comes. That’s the same scenario we are looking at here,” he said." :rolleyes:

That same day, CISPA co-author Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Michigan) stressed that his bill doesn’t extend any extra surveillance powers to the federal government, despite condemnation from critics that say exactly that. “It does something very simple: it allows the government to share zeroes and ones with the private sector,” he said.
“We have yet to find a single United States company that opposes this bill,” said Rep. Rogers.

But companies do in fact oppose CISPA, including a number of entities that carry a good deal of clout around both Silicon Valley and inside the beltway. Just last month Facebook rescinded their support of the act, according to Cnet’s Declan McCullagh, because a spokesperson for the social media site says they prefer a legislative "balance" that ensures "the privacy of our users.”
After CISPA was unsuccessfully introduced to Congress last year — only to stall in the Senate — Microsoft endorsed the act only to eventually do an about-face.

“Microsoft believes that any proposed legislation should facilitate the voluntary sharing of cyber threat information in a manner that allows us to honor the privacy and security promises we make to our customers,” the company’s Scott Charney told McCullagh at the time.

But just last week, TechNet President Rey Ramsey sent a letter (http://rt.com/usa/google-lobby-backs-cispa-792/) to Reps. Rogers and Ruppersberger saying his group thinks CISPA "recognizes the need for effective cybersecurity legislation that encourages voluntary, bi-directional, real time sharing of actionable cyberthreat information to protect networks," but that further work may be needed. TechNet’s Executive Council includes Yahoo's Marissa Mayer, Google's Eric Schmidt and Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith.

Web browser makers Mozilla oppose the bill, as does the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil Liberties Union, and last year’s attempt to pass CISPA after it was unveiled for a first time prompted the White House to issue a veto warning then. In the months since the bill stalled in the Senate, though, the president has on his own part urged Congress to adopt a new cybersecurity bill.

In February, Pres. Obama signed an executive order that urges his administration to begin working towards improving cybersecurity protections until Congress can craft a bill. Hours later, he said during his annual State of the Union address how imperative legislation action is.

“Earlier today, I signed a new executive order that will strengthen our cyber defenses by increasing information sharing, and developing standards to protect our national security, our jobs and our privacy. Now, Congress must act as well, by passing legislation to give our government a greater capacity to secure our networks and deter attacks,” the president said.
But in the veto threat extended by his office earlier this week, the White House writes, “the Administration still seeks additional improvements and if the bill, as currently crafted, were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.”

During Thursday morning’s debate, one elected lawmaker cited this week’s deadly terrorist attack in Boston as a reason to pass a cybersecurity bill, despite lacing evidence that the pair of bombs detonated Monday at the Boston Marathon were acts of cyberterror.

“Recent events in Boston demonstrate that we have to come together as Republicans and Democrats” in order to pass a bill that will strengthen national security, Rep. Mike McCaul (R-Texas) said Thursday morning.
“In the case of Boston,” said McCaul, “there were real bombs.”

“In this case, they are digital bombs — and these digital bombs are on their way.”

The House is slated to vote on remaining amendments being considered for CISPA on Thursday and will vote on the act as a whole shortly thereafter.

Lucille
04-18-2013, 11:20 AM
^ How convenient for them.

ds21089
04-18-2013, 11:34 AM
Well there goes the internet as we know it...

jmdrake
04-18-2013, 11:41 AM
Jason Chavetz voted for CISPA. :mad:

ds21089
04-18-2013, 11:55 AM
I know there's ways to help prevent being traced, but I question the effectiveness. You can use a VPN to get custom IPs; such as BTGuard on top of changing your computers ISP recognition to basically reroute your internet connection through your VPN only. But I guess that doesn't prevent them from just shutting down all the good websites :confused:

jtap
04-18-2013, 12:15 PM
Sickening. Every rep. from the state I am in voted yea.

cajuncocoa
04-18-2013, 12:21 PM
Congressman evokes Boston bombings as reason to pass CISPA (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDYQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Frt.com%2Fusa%2Fcongress-house-bill-cispa-031%2F&ei=1SlwUfbTIoqLiAKuwYGABw&usg=AFQjCNHW3ZKbXU9nLADqGcMsPvRSrLOSvw&bvm=bv.45373924,d.cGE&cad=rja)If anyone was looking for a reason for the possibility of a "false flag" event, there it is.

Warrior_of_Freedom
04-18-2013, 12:25 PM
more republicans voted for it than democrats? O_O

Uh CISPA yeah, because the fucking bombs were created by the Internet.

HOLLYWOOD
04-18-2013, 12:25 PM
^ How convenient for them.How convenient of their military/security related sector campaign donations/lobbyists:

REPRESENTATIVE (R - TX) Michael McCaul
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?type=C&cid=N00026460&newMem=N&cycle=2012
(http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?type=C&cid=N00026460&newMem=N&cycle=2012)Homeland Security
(http://www.opensecrets.org/cmteprofiles/overview.php?cmte=HHSC&cmteid=H23&cycle=2012)Foreign Affairs
(http://www.opensecrets.org/cmteprofiles/overview.php?cmte=HINT&cmteid=H11&cycle=2012)Science,Space and Technology (http://www.opensecrets.org/cmteprofiles/overview.php?cmte=HSCI&cmteid=H17&cycle=2012)

REPRESENTATIVE (R - MI) Mike Rogers
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cid=N00009668&cycle=2012&type=C&newMem=N&recs=0
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Permanent_Select_Committee_on_ Intelligence) (Chairman)

REPRESENTATIVE (D - MD) Dutch Ruppersberger
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2012&cid=N00025482&type=C&newmem=NCommittee
Armed Services (http://www.opensecrets.org/cmteprofiles/overview.php?cmte=HARM&cmteid=H04&cycle=2012)

kcchiefs6465
04-18-2013, 12:28 PM
I don't even know why I check.

Pericles
04-18-2013, 12:30 PM
but 90% of people are against this!!

That only matters when the 90% agree with me.

Origanalist
04-18-2013, 12:43 PM
The more the government protects me the less safe I feel. I am out of words to describe how sick I am of this shit.

Antischism
04-18-2013, 12:53 PM
Republican'ts and Demoncrats; destroying our liberties across different issues.

Nothing to see here folks, just another day in Americaca.

jmdrake
04-18-2013, 01:00 PM
The good news is that in 2012 while it passed the house it failed the senate. The bad news is that democratic opposition to the bill has weaked somewhat since last year while GOP support has remained solid.

House vote on April 26, 2012 passing CISPA
Affiliation Yes votes No votes Did not vote
Democratic 42 140 8
Republican 206 28 7

I have no idea what that means for the senate.

V3n
04-18-2013, 01:14 PM
Oh Look, Rep. Mike Rogers Wife Stands To Benefit Greatly From CISPA Passing... (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130417/16253022748/oh-look-rep-mike-rogers-wife-stands-to-benefit-greatly-cispa-passing.shtml)


So it seems rather interesting to note that Rogers' wife, Kristi Clemens Rogers, was, until recently, the president and CEO of Aegis LLC a "security" defense contractor company, whom she helped to secure a $10 billion (with a b) contract with the State Department. The company describes itself as "a leading private security company, provides government and corporate clients with a full spectrum of intelligence-led, culturally-sensitive security solutions to operational and development challenges around the world."

more at link

jbauer
04-18-2013, 01:21 PM
Dianne Black: Yea, Just contacted her office.

When are "conservatives" ever going to figure out that bigger government is never the answer?

Brian4Liberty
04-18-2013, 01:49 PM
Wow! The GOP has a hard on for CISPA. :mad:

What's there for the establishment GOP not to like?

Pro-business (really MIC and corporatism), anti-terrist (really Constitution destroying), and it expands government power.

Spikender
04-18-2013, 01:55 PM
Glad to see that while some Republicans were helping to protect our right to bear arms in the Senate, others were moving to destroy our first amendment in the House.

Truly lovely.

WhistlinDave
04-18-2013, 01:59 PM
I say this while holding back a little bit of vomit at the back of my throat, but thank you, President Obama. Obama has stated he will veto CISPA again unless it is significantly re-written to contain appropriate privacy protections for individuals. (When I say "again," I mean he made the same threat last time CISPA was being considered by Congress. Not that it went to his desk for signature.)

http://blogs.wsj.com/riskandcompliance/2013/04/16/obama-issues-cispa-veto-threat/

RockEnds
04-18-2013, 02:00 PM
Wow! The GOP has a hard on for CISPA. :mad:

Including Steve King. I've still no clue why anyone thinks he would make a good Senator.

jbauer
04-18-2013, 02:03 PM
I say this while holding back a little bit of vomit at the back of my throat, but thank you, President Obama. Obama has stated he will veto CISPA again unless it is significantly re-written to contain appropriate privacy protections for individuals. (When I say "again," I mean he made the same threat last time CISPA was being considered by Congress. Not that it went to his desk for signature.)

http://blogs.wsj.com/riskandcompliance/2013/04/16/obama-issues-cispa-veto-threat/

Below was my email to Black's office. It basically says what you're saying. It'll be funny to see what she emails back.

Dear Congresswoman Black,
I’m quite discouraged with your recent yea vote on HR 624 more commonly referred to as CISPA. What I can’t understand is why someone who calls herself a conservative is so willing to unleash additional power and cost to an already bloated federal government.

Lately both parties have been willing to shred our fundamental and God given rights. The Left seems to think its ok to take our 2nd amendment rights and the Right seems all too happy to infringe on our 4th amendment rights. The executive branch already has wide and in use ability to breach our 4th amendment rights given to them by the Patriot act. This bill just makes it even easier and one more hurdle that the true conservatives will have to close at some point.

The encroachments on our freedoms must stop now from both sides of the aisle. Hopefully there will be more sense in the Senate. It’s unfortunate that we have to rely on Democrats in the Senate to protect our civil liberties when it should have been stopped in the house.

President Obama has been out trumpeting his horn about the will of the people with regards to gun control. You voted against the will of the people today. When will people who claim to be conservatives ever realize that more government is never the answer?

Sincerely,

Czolgosz
04-18-2013, 02:05 PM
Excellent. Hope it passes.

kcchiefs6465
04-18-2013, 02:25 PM
I say this while holding back a little bit of vomit at the back of my throat, but thank you, President Obama. Obama has stated he will veto CISPA again unless it is significantly re-written to contain appropriate privacy protections for individuals. (When I say "again," I mean he made the same threat last time CISPA was being considered by Congress. Not that it went to his desk for signature.)

http://blogs.wsj.com/riskandcompliance/2013/04/16/obama-issues-cispa-veto-threat/
Obama said he would veto NDAA 2012 if section 1021 wasn't removed. We saw how well that worked out.

kcchiefs6465
04-18-2013, 02:25 PM
Excellent. Hope it passes.
Please elaborate.

HOLLYWOOD
04-18-2013, 02:27 PM
Oh Look, Rep. Mike Rogers Wife Stands To Benefit Greatly From CISPA Passing... (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130417/16253022748/oh-look-rep-mike-rogers-wife-stands-to-benefit-greatly-cispa-passing.shtml)

more at linkMore Graft/RICO from Mike Rogers and the Military Industrial Complex. I'd say, it's a direct conflict of interest.
INCREDIBLE... you have to read some of these racketeering partnership between Aegis and the DOD/DOS

Arlington, VA: Aegis Defense Services, LLC
http://www.aegisworld.us/

Aegis Defence Services
A British private military company (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_military_company) with overseas offices in Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iraq, Kenya, Nepal and the United States. see Sandline International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandline_International)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Defence_Services

In May 2011, it was announced that U.S. Military is to pull out of Baghdad, in the air and ground, and to be replaced by eight companies including Aegis and DynCorp International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DynCorp_International) to take over in the air. Aegis has been granted a two-year $475 million contract, the largest-single security contract in Iraq. The deal is raising concern among some members of Congress.

U.S Hires Gun-Runner to Guard Diplos
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/u-s-hires-gun-runner-to-guard-diplos/

The State Department is also giving a slice of its $10 billion security contract (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/exclusive-blackwater-wins-piece-of-10-billion-merc-deal/) to Aegis LLC, the U.S. branch of a company founded by a man Vanity Fair dubbed a “mercenary king (http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/04/spicer200704)” who’s violated international arms embargoes and tried to overthrow at least two African governments.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14586525

US consulate in Benghazi 'did not have enough security'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19605322

US embassies and consulates in areas of the world where they are deemed liable to attack are usually offered a formal security contract called a Worldwide Protective Services Agreement, known in the industry as a 'Wips'. The contract, or so-called tasking order, is between the US state department and any one of several major private military contractors such as DynCorp International and Aegis Defence Services.

AEGIS PSD TEAMS
http://www.globalresearch.ca/british-military-involved-in-acts-of-terrorism-in-iraq/1090

January 14, 2009
OVERSIGHT OF AEGIS’S PERFORMANCE ON SECURITY SERVICES CONTRACTS IN IRAQ WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
http://www.sigir.mil/files/audits/09-010.pdf

AEGIS Advisory: Strategic risk alert Libyan localism and contract security Feb 2012
http://www.strategicriskindex.com/pdf/Libyan%20localism%20and%20contract%20security%2024 %20Feb%202012.pdf

Security contractor deals: AEGIS
http://civiliancontractors.wordpress.com/category/aegis/

This a Libyan Gem: http://newsjunkiepost.com/2013/01/29/libya-lubricating-the-oil-magnates-with-blood/
http://newsjunkiepost.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/5566850093_338f1a6bd5_o-448x298.jpg (http://newsjunkiepost.com/2013/01/29/libya-lubricating-the-oil-magnates-with-blood/5566850093_338f1a6bd5_o/)

Krzysztof Lesiak
04-18-2013, 02:40 PM
Sucks.

dillo
04-18-2013, 03:19 PM
And its shit like this, Gay Marriage, Weed and Israel that prevent the GOP from winning every election

Spikender
04-18-2013, 03:20 PM
And its shit like this, Gay Marriage, Weed and Israel that prevent the GOP from winning every election

And, of course, a noticeable lack of swag.

Czolgosz
04-18-2013, 03:34 PM
Please elaborate.

I'd like this turd flushed and broken up into pieces sooner, rather than later.

Spoa
04-18-2013, 03:38 PM
Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) voted against it. He tweeted this on twitter:


Rep. Walter Jones ‏@RepWalterJones 48m
Today I voted against CISPA--legislation that erodes your constitutional rights and the rule of law. http://is.gd/UqZTre

Good for him. :)

Spoa
04-18-2013, 03:42 PM
While I don't like Rep. Polis (D-CO), I have to say that he is one of the better Democrats in congress:


Justin Amash ‏@repjustinamash 1h
Honored to fight alongside you to protect civil liberties. “@jaredpolis: @repjustinamash thanx 4 your work to make #cispa less bad”

Spoa
04-18-2013, 03:43 PM
Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) also voted against CISPA. He tweeted this:


Paul Broun ‏@RepPaulBrounMD 1h
I voted against #Cispa to protect your privacy and civil liberties.

He's running for senate in 2014. Here's his website: http://paulbroun.com/

bolil
04-18-2013, 03:49 PM
And, of course, a noticeable lack of swag.

And a remarkable vapidity concerning principles. Funny how they push these things through while making a lot of noise in another area. Isn't it fun reaching around someones back and tapping there other shoulder, then laughing at them as they turn towards a whole load of nothing?

Spoa
04-18-2013, 04:14 PM
Rep. Bridenstine (R-OK) Explains Why He Voted AGAINST CISPA! :)


Bridenstine Votes Against CISPA
Apr 18, 2013 Jim's Blog
Today, after careful consideration, I decided to vote against the final passage of the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA). To be clear, there are provisions of the bill that are very good and I support, but there are also provisions that prevented me from supporting it.

I support the language in CISPA that enables the government security agencies to rapidly share classified cyber threat information with private companies. The existing Department of Defense cyber security defense industrial base programs have been successful partnerships between the government and eligible companies. Expanding these programs beyond the defense industrial base is a step forward in the government sharing classified cyber threat information and would go a long way to protecting our nation’s networks.

However, CISPA should have stopped there. In my opinion, it went too far in the provisions that encouraged private companies to share information. The bill grants immunity to private companies when they share information with the government and with other private entities. Entities choosing to participate in CISPA could simply not offer customers credible commitments that they will not break privacy contracts. While attempting to increase information sharing, CISPA undermines the sanctity of a contract.

On a slightly positive side, the immunity provision only offers liability protection if the entity shares the information “in good faith.” It is my assessment, however, that “good faith” is too low and too vague a standard by which to render all other federal or state privacy laws and private privacy contracts unenforceable, as CISPA does. In the coming years, we will likely see how the courts interpret “good faith.”

If enacted into law, CISPA will sunset and return for reauthorization in 5 years.

http://bridenstine.house.gov/media-center/blog-posts/bridenstine-votes-against-cispa

tsai3904
04-18-2013, 04:25 PM
Ted Yoho's statement against CISPA:


Rep. Yoho Votes Against CISPA

WASHINGTON—Congressman Ted Yoho (FL-03) voted against H.R. 624, the Cyber Information Sharing and Protection Act, known as CISPA. After the vote, Congressman Yoho said,

“We have a right to privacy that should be protected whether or not a cyber attack is happening. This legislation is written in such a way that it could invade individual privacy to a point that was unacceptable to me and many constituents who took the time to share their views on this bill.

“As a small business owner, I know first hand the challenge of protecting sensitive customer and business information. There are better ways to help businesses protect themselves without further government overreach.”

http://yoho.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rep-yoho-votes-against-cispa

Spoa
04-18-2013, 05:36 PM
Ted Yoho's statement against CISPA:

http://yoho.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rep-yoho-votes-against-cispa

Awesome. I was waiting for his statement. :)

sailingaway
04-18-2013, 05:46 PM
Good for Yoho. The vote is really depressing, though.

That a majority votes so easily to violate the Constitution still bothers me, every time.

Brett85
04-18-2013, 06:04 PM
And the "small government" Republican Party overwhelmingly supports this bill. How do you vote for something like this if you oppose gun control?

Brett85
04-18-2013, 06:05 PM
My former Rep Huelskamp also voted against it, and he voted for it last year. It seems like his voting record has improved a little bit recently. I heard he's friends with Amash, so maybe Amash is influencing him.

Dr.3D
04-18-2013, 06:09 PM
If anyone was looking for a reason for the possibility of a "false flag" event, there it is.
And there you have the motive for the crime.

WhistlinDave
04-18-2013, 06:15 PM
Below was my email to Black's office. It basically says what you're saying. It'll be funny to see what she emails back.

Dear Congresswoman Black,
Iím quite discouraged with your recent yea vote on HR 624 more commonly referred to as CISPA. What I canít understand is why someone who calls herself a conservative is so willing to unleash additional power and cost to an already bloated federal government.

Lately both parties have been willing to shred our fundamental and God given rights. The Left seems to think its ok to take our 2nd amendment rights and the Right seems all too happy to infringe on our 4th amendment rights. The executive branch already has wide and in use ability to breach our 4th amendment rights given to them by the Patriot act. This bill just makes it even easier and one more hurdle that the true conservatives will have to close at some point.

The encroachments on our freedoms must stop now from both sides of the aisle. Hopefully there will be more sense in the Senate. Itís unfortunate that we have to rely on Democrats in the Senate to protect our civil liberties when it should have been stopped in the house.

President Obama has been out trumpeting his horn about the will of the people with regards to gun control. You voted against the will of the people today. When will people who claim to be conservatives ever realize that more government is never the answer?

Sincerely,

Awesome letter!

Feeding the Abscess
04-18-2013, 06:16 PM
I love those small-government Republicans.

sailingaway
04-18-2013, 06:20 PM
Below was my email to Black's office. It basically says what you're saying. It'll be funny to see what she emails back.

Dear Congresswoman Black,
Iím quite discouraged with your recent yea vote on HR 624 more commonly referred to as CISPA. What I canít understand is why someone who calls herself a conservative is so willing to unleash additional power and cost to an already bloated federal government.

Lately both parties have been willing to shred our fundamental and God given rights. The Left seems to think its ok to take our 2nd amendment rights and the Right seems all too happy to infringe on our 4th amendment rights. The executive branch already has wide and in use ability to breach our 4th amendment rights given to them by the Patriot act. This bill just makes it even easier and one more hurdle that the true conservatives will have to close at some point.

The encroachments on our freedoms must stop now from both sides of the aisle. Hopefully there will be more sense in the Senate. Itís unfortunate that we have to rely on Democrats in the Senate to protect our civil liberties when it should have been stopped in the house.

President Obama has been out trumpeting his horn about the will of the people with regards to gun control. You voted against the will of the people today. When will people who claim to be conservatives ever realize that more government is never the answer?

Sincerely,

Fantastic letter.

Spoa
04-18-2013, 06:49 PM
Good for Yoho. The vote is really depressing, though.

That a majority votes so easily to violate the Constitution still bothers me, every time.

I agree. But we are making progress. Stearns and Sullivan (the predecessors of Yoho and Bridenstine) voted for CISPA last year and look what happened to them. Now we have two fantastic replacements. Also, I was happy to see Bentivolio side with us. It seems like he is going down the road of being somewhat-fiscal responsible and mostly pro-liberty.

And we have great representatives like Amash, Labrador, Massie, McClintock, Jones, DeSantis, and others. So there is hope. :)

TheTexan
04-18-2013, 06:52 PM
We raised all kinds of hell, and we had our victory: SOPA was shot down. It's back, however, and worse with CISPA. Unless we raise all kinds of hell all over again, it's going to pass. Even if we win again, they will just be back, again, and again, until SOPA passes. We can't keep doing this.

If you guys really want to write letters to legislators... send letters to your local representatives... to secede (and/or nullify)

TaftFan
04-18-2013, 06:58 PM
Republicans who voted AGAINST CISPA:

Amash
Bentivolio
Bishop
Bridenstine
Broun
Davis, Rodney
DeSantis
Duncan (SC)
Fleming
Garrett
Gibson
Gohmert
Gosar
Hall
Herrera Butler
Huelskamp
Kingston
Labrador
Marchant
Massie
McClintock
Meadows
Posey
Rigell
Rohrabacher
Sensabrenner
Stockman
Yoho

Mani
04-18-2013, 07:24 PM
So CISPA is all about protecting us from terrorists and keeping us safe......

How many times can they use that one trick pony??


Patriot act, ndaa, gun control, CISPA, TSA, always the same fucking excuse over and over and over again....mother fucker. Basically you can pass any shit bill on the fucking planet if you can slip in the words national security and fighting back against terrorists....

I can't believe that guy started blabbering about the boston marathon bombings and related it to CISPA. Is he high?? Or are politicians so fucking lazy and the people so stupid that he can blabber about a completely unrelated tragedy and somehow that justifies and gains support for it.

I'm sooooo fucking tired of hearing this. Just fuck us up the ass even further. At the airport, in your wallet, Or pulling u over in ur car, or coming into your home, and now even online......the government can finally ass rape you digitally online as well...but to keep u safe.

When CISPA was about shutting down pirate sites and saving copyrights it got flushed down the drain......but make it about national security.....OMG we need to keep us safe from terrorists!!

Argh!! Is it really that fucking easy??

Let's start a bill where the government comes into ur home once a month and does a drug test...those who fail go to jail...we all know only terrorists do drugs! It's for national security! It's to keep us safe!!

Let's create a bill where every male Needs an bimonthly cavity search...We all know only terrorists hide weapons of mass destruction in their ass. It's to keep us safe from terrorists! It's for national security!

FUCK!

WhistlinDave
04-18-2013, 07:48 PM
I can't believe that guy started blabbering about the boston marathon bombings and related it to CISPA. Is he high?? Or are politicians so fucking lazy and the people so stupid that he can blabber about a completely unrelated tragedy and somehow that justifies and gains support for it.

Yes well initially they were going to try to pass some legislation to control pressure cookers and backpacks, but then they decided there were other uses for the incident that would be much more useful to their agenda.

J_White
04-19-2013, 12:09 AM
"digital bombs" ? now i m scared. plz pass this bill and protect me ! mommy !

Christopholes11
04-19-2013, 12:14 AM
Such a travesty. I really hope Obama vetoes this. Of course my representative voted for it. Reminds me of why I didn't vote for him. He ran on limited government for his first term and I voted for him. It also helped that I was acquaintance with the man and thought he was sincere. But I watched his voting record and saw his idea of limited government was far different than my own. So I made sure not to vote for him again when he ran the second time. Fool me once...

ProvincialPeasant
04-19-2013, 01:51 AM
The reason mainline GOP (i.e. not libertarian or true conservative) held back their votes last time was because the grassroots rallied against it. With immigration and gun-control dominating attention lately, no one even knew about a CISPA vote until it was too late.

Barrex
04-19-2013, 06:59 AM
Standard operating procedure:

1. Politicians propose tyrannical law.... mob goes crazy....politicians back away
2.Politicians propose same tyrannical law.... mob gets upset...politicians back away
3.Politicians propose same tyrannical law...mob just notices it and does nothing....politicians pass the law.


Our short term "victories" are part of their plan. As long as our side is just going crazy and not actually punishing those who are pushing those laws we will be on the loosing side of it. I know it is not possible to impeach, primary or replace all of those who voted for it but it is possible to do it to one person. Who? It is simple decision: Who brought that law on the floor? Who is first sponsor? Going crazy and cheering after our false victories does us no good. RETRIBUTION, PUNISHMENT ...or....well this what we have now.

Next, in a same manner: PIPA, SOPA, FUCKUPA....