Facebook, Twitter, eBay & Other Big Internet Companies Come Out Against SOPA

Ron Paul Comes Out Against SOPA; Joins Other Elected Officials Saying No To The Great Firewall Of America

from the speak-up dept

Tue, Nov 15th 2011 10:18am — Mike Masnick

It appears that more and more members of the House are realizing just how bad SOPA is. Joining Reps. Issa and Bachmann, who had previously spoken out about SOPA, a group of ten House members have signed a letter opposing SOPA. The letter was organized by Rep. Anna Eshoo, the leading Democrat on telco & tech -- but whose committee was not involved in the crafting of this bill for reasons that only make sense if the purpose of the bill was to regulate the internet without input from the industry being regulated.

The letter makes the same points many of us have been raising about SOPA. It's way too broad, does not accurately attack the problem it's trying to address, and will create massive liability for the internet & technology -- one of the few sectors growing today, and which has contributed a tremendous amount to economic growth over the past decade. Basically it makes the simple point: stifling the growing tech industry, to appease a Hollywood that refuses to adapt, is no way to go about managing an economy.

Among those who signed onto the letter are Ron Paul, showing that he continues to be internet savvy and recognizes that regulating the internet is a bad, bad idea. Others who signed on include Reps. Jared Polis, Mike Doyle (the man who introduced Girl Talk to Congress), Doris Matsui, Mike Thompson, Lloyd Doggett, Mike Honda, George Miller and Zoe Lofgren (who's been a vocal opponent to these attempts to stifle innovation from day one). We too often speak about politicians who aren't representing the best interests of the public, but it's great to see more and more elected officials recognize that SOPA is a gross overreach by a few big companies who don't want to adapt to a changing marketplace. Kudos to the Congressional Reps here for taking a stand and protecting jobs and innovation.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: anna eshoo, copyright, doris matsui, george miller, jared polis, lloyd doggett, mike doyle, mike honda, mike thompson, ron paul, sopa, zoe lofgren

99 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:22am

So this means SOPA will now pass by only a 425-10 margin?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:23am

OK, It's official
If Ron Paul isn't on your presidential ballot this coming election, wright him in. I don't care if it's physically impossible for him to win, show these assholes what we truly want. Don't just vote against someone, vote for Ron Paul.

That was pretty good, I should start an official campaign.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Designerfx (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:32am
  
  Re: OK, It's official
  why would I wright him? He didn't have anything to do with flying.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:42am
  
  Re: OK, It's official
  Waste of time. Two words, man: Electoral College.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 11:12am
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    "Waste of time."
    
    Three words that caused this crap. It's just a waste of time for me to fight it, what can one man do. When there are millions saying that, it's not just one man.
    
    And yeah, I know, "Electoral College". But the point isn't to get him elected, the point is to show the people that the government doesn't stand for the people any more. If they don't vote the way we tell them to, they aren't our government any more. It's another form of protest, like American Censorship Day.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jay (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 11:12am
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    First to Post System
    
    And Electoral College Part 1
    
    The trouble with the Electoral College (Part 2) - or "How you can be elected President with 22% of the vote."
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- zegota (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 12:37pm
  
  Re: OK, It's official
  No thanks. As much as I love the current Internet, reproductive rights are far more important to me. And given that Rep. Paul has said that outlawing abortion is literally the most important issue our country faces, I don't think he'll be getting my vote.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - kirillian (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 2:06pm
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    Sorry but I'm gonna have to call out Bullshit on this. Ron Paul has been quite consistent in stating that he doesn't believe that abortion is right but he is not willing to criminalize women who have them. Whether you like the guy or not, he's REALLY consistent.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - zegota (profile), 16 Nov 2011 @ 6:53am
      
      Re: Re: Re: OK, It's official
      Call bullshit all you want. He introduced a bill that would define life as beginning at conception at a federal level -- effectively outlawing abortion. The dude is just as rabid and crazy as the rest of them.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Captain obvious, 15 Nov 2011 @ 3:11pm
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    Ohhhh please provide one link where he says that! Your so full of shit I can smell you from over here.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - zegota (profile), 16 Nov 2011 @ 6:56am
      
      Re: Re: Re: OK, It's official
      Ron Paul saying abortion is "the most important issue of our age." Not wars, not the economy. Abortion.
      
      http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/08/26/305485/ron-paul-abortion-is-the-most-impor tant-issue-of-our-age/
      
      Ron Paul advocating for a federal ban on abortion by enshrining fetal personhood in law (an idea so crazy that Mississippi rejected it)
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctity_of_Life_Act
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jay, 15 Nov 2011 @ 3:15pm
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    Well, he's never advocated outlawing abortion. He favors getting the federal government out of it, as it's not an enumerated power in the constitution, and allow the states to find workable solutions on their own.
    
    That being said, I personally believe reproductive rights start in the bedroom.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - zegota (profile), 16 Nov 2011 @ 6:55am
      
      Re: Re: Re: OK, It's official
      Wrong. He has, and continues to, advocate a federal ban on abortion by defining a fetus as a human life at a federal level.
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctity_of_Life_Act
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 11:57pm
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    Ron Paul does not personally support abortion but it doesn't matter what he personally supports. He said he'd leave to the individual state to decide that matter. Do your research, you twat.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - zegota (profile), 16 Nov 2011 @ 6:54am
      
      Re: Re: Re: OK, It's official
      Incorrect. He wants fetal personhood, the concept that even ALABAMA rejected, on a federal level
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctity_of_Life_Act
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - zegota (profile), 16 Nov 2011 @ 6:57am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: OK, It's official
        And, of course, I meant MISSISSIPPI.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mike W, 16 Nov 2011 @ 7:24am
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    Holy shit, another retard. When has he EVER said it was the most important thing the country faces? When has he even said it is somewhat important?
    
    Your fucking stupidity is mind blowing. At most, he said he would like to return the right to decide back to the states.
    
    OH GOD, YOU MAY HAVE TO GET INVOLVED IN STATE POLITICS NOOOOOOOOOOOOO.
    
    Lets keep taking away rights and bombing brown people so that you don't have to worry about state politics.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - zegota (profile), 16 Nov 2011 @ 7:28am
      
      Re: Re: Re: OK, It's official
      "When has he EVER said it was the most important thing the country faces? When has he even said it is somewhat important? "
      
      http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/08/26/305485/ron-paul-abortion-is-the-most-impor tant-issue-of-our-age/
      
      "Your fucking stupidity is mind blowing. At most, he said he would like to return the right to decide back to the states."
      
      Nope. He wants fetal personhood to be defined at a federal level.
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctity_of_Life_Act
      
      But your vulgar defensiveness of your religious wacko savior is quite delicious to me. Keep going.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Mike W, 16 Nov 2011 @ 9:30am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: OK, It's official
        I know this is hard to comprehend, given your complete ineptness and everything.
        
        "The first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don�t need a federal abortion police."
        
        Quote from the man himself, not taken out of context. While he is personally strongly pro-life, he is running for FEDERAL OFFICE. The only reason he voted on the other bill was because it overturns Roe Vs Wade, which invalidates states ability to determine this issue.
        
        I don't agree with him on a personal level, but at the most Paul would leave it to the states to decide.
        
        PS, calling Paul a religious wacko savior is fucking hilarious and stupid. I am as agnostic as they come and I don't think he's any savior. There is simply not a single other legitimate option for president, and if you think otherwise you are flat out dumb.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        zegota (profile), 16 Nov 2011 @ 10:29am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: OK, It's official
        "The only reason he voted on the other bill was because it overturns Roe Vs Wade, which invalidates states ability to determine this issue."
        
        He didn't vote on it. He introduced it. He introduced the bill whose main purpose was to define life as beginning at conception. This has nothing to do with state's rights. This would make abortion equivalent to a federal murder charge.
        
        Also, I love (love!) that you're bending over backwards to call me ignorant, and then in the very next sentence, you pretend that Ron Paul is a "legitimate option" for president! Ha! Right on, dude! I'm sure the election will be Ron Paul vs. Ralph Nader!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2011 @ 12:47pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: OK, It's official
        try to ignore the man all you want, but people are tired of their liberty being stomped on. this is why he has spoken out against SOPA, and why he continues to gain support from the left. keep listening to the MSM though, its clearly doing you so much good..
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Jim, 17 Nov 2011 @ 4:50pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: OK, It's official
        So, I don't use drugs, I don't smoke pot! But if you want to smoke it then I see no reason for me to shoot you in the head!
        Does that mean that I'm flip-flopping? Personal belief and what is allowed are two different things. Ron Paul believes that life begins at conception, but that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT has NO business telling you what to do or not do. That he would leave up to the states and the people of each state. If you don't like the decision your state comes to then you are free to move to one that has a law you can agree with.
        But it looks to me like you are making a ONE issue decision! So, you would vote for someone that agreed with you on abortion, even if he will be shooting and arresting innocent people? How about if he (your choice) says he is going to raise personal taxes to 99% and allow no private ownership of a home?
        Look at the full story, please.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2011 @ 12:44pm
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    that is entirely untrue.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Danny, 17 Nov 2011 @ 5:21pm
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    On how many issues do the other candidates agree with your views? Are reproductive rights more important than our country becoming a police state?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - George, 18 Nov 2011 @ 2:51am
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    Use a condom. Or blow on her face. Ron Paul is awesome.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jeremy, 13 Dec 2011 @ 10:01pm
    
    Re: Re: OK, It's official
    Ron Paul is not going to take away your "reproductive rights" - you have the right to reproduce all you want! The issue with abortion is at what stage a baby is a human. 3 months? 6 months? 9 months? Conception? He is not pushing his view on you - his view is that murder is a state issue, not federal issue, and states will decide. Sounds completely constitutional to me ...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lash Canino, 15 Nov 2011 @ 7:32pm
  
  Re: OK, It's official
  Little tip: when you start your official campaign, start by learning how to spell "write".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2011 @ 7:35am
  
  Re: OK, It's official
  WRITE, god, you are not doing him any favors. And yeah, Ron is great. Unless you are black. or a woman. or gay. or believe in evolution.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:24am

"Among those who signed onto the letter are Ron Paul, showing that he continues to be internet savvy "

Ron Paul, once again proving that his stands tend to flap in the breeze of public opinion. If he sees a poll that says dog shit is tasty, he would be pushing for congress to give it to food banks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:26am
  
  Re:
  Isn't that what politicians are suppose to do? If public opinion is against SOPA, shouldn't that mean that politicians are as well?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:31am
    
    Re: Re:
    If you are a politician, you have an opinion and you stick with it. Allowing yourself to be swayed by the opinion of the hour (especially consider that when you don't use the word "censorship", most people support action against piracy), makes you look like a wishy-washy flip flopper, someone who doesn't have any real backbone.
    
    Ron Paul will never be President because he doesn't seem to be solid enough on his views. Do you really want to vote someone in that supports your views, and then have them change tomorrow because an opinion poll says otherwise?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:37am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      'If you are a politician, you have an opinion and you stick with it. Allowing yourself to be swayed by the opinion of the hour (especially consider that when you don't use the word "censorship", most people support action against piracy), makes you look like a wishy-washy flip flopper, someone who doesn't have any real backbone.'
      
      Yup, ban lobbyists, i agree
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Chris Rhodes (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:38am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Ron Paul will never be President because he doesn't seem to be solid enough on his views.
      HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
      
      Yes, Ron Paul is such a flip-flopper. You know, that guy that has been preaching the exact same thing his entire political career without fail? He's obviously not as solid in his views as someone like Romney,Perry, or Bachmann right?
      
      I think that is literally the stupidest thing I've heard since that reporter went on television to explain that gold was riskier than the US dollar because gold "isn't backed by anything". Congratulations, you might just be the most clueless person to ever post a comment here, and with the likes of OOTB and daryl floating around, that's really saying something.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:38am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      most people support action against piracy
      
      Your statement is meaningless without saying how they support that action.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - MrWilson, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:39am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "If you are a politician, you have an opinion and you stick with it."
      
      That's a great standard. Nobody can change their minds. Nobody can see the light. If they're wrong from the beginning, they stay that way.
      
      What about politicians who are complete greedy assholes? They favor corporations at every turn and undermine the rights of the people they supposedly represent. It's okay for them to stick with their opinions?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Planespotter (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:41am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Obama? How many people who voted for him found that soon after he became President he flip flopped on them and went from talking about open/transparent government started to be the complete opposite?
      
      So you don't like Ron Paul, whoppie doo... at least he seems to be consistant on highlighting the damage being done to the Constituition in the name of big businesses and how America should go back to worrying about itself and not quick to jump into wars thousands of miles away that never seem to end.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - BUCK, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:44am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      ron paul has remained consistent on his views for the past 40 years. bone head.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Mary, 15 Nov 2011 @ 11:09am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      @anonymous coward, you obviously have your candidates all mixed. The ONLY consistent, honest, constitution abiding candidate is RON PAUL. Please check name and facts before making baseless statement. Don't mislead misinformed media sheep.
      
      Ron Paul 2012!
      Restore America!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 11:32am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      You mean like what Obama did?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 11:42am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "(especially consider that when you don't use the word "censorship", most people support action against piracy)"
      
      Hmmm, let's check that! Nope, wrong again!
      
      "Comparable majorities (56%) oppose government involvement in �blocking� access to infringing material. This number increases to 64% when the term �censor� is used."
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 1:41pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        censorship or "government" gets about the same reaction. Sorry, but when you remove that from the situation, more than 50% want pirate stuff blocked.
        
        Nice try to play the numbers your way. Sort of like the Paulites who get pissed off when they overflow online surveys, and wonder why their votes get ignored.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        kirillian (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 2:10pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Nice one. You picked the weakest comment of the bunch to respond to, completely ignoring all the other comments that point out the problems with yours. We're still waiting for you to show us your numbers.
        
        We've had studies linked on this site for YEARS, and you come in here in 3 posts expecting us to take anything you say on hearsay? I'm sorry, but it's YOUR responsibility, not ours to provide the proof. We've already done so. Not our problem that you're too lazy to use the search feature.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 3:18pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      If you are a politician, you have an opinion and you stick with it.
      
      That's a pretty bad idea.
      
      I want politicians to change their minds, not necessarily because of an opinion poll, but because of evidence and facts. I don't want them swayed by lobbyists and campaign contributions. I don't want them swayed by what their party leader wants them to vote for. I want each and every one to take a hard look at the facts and evidence about every bill they vote for.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The Guy I'm Responding to Does Not Know What He is, 15 Nov 2011 @ 7:23pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Ron Paul has stood up for his principles and never voted against them in his many decades in the Congress. Even Jon Stewart understands thishttp://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2007/06/jon_stewart_res/
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 9:00pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Well, shouldn't politicians be representing their constituents? That's why they're elected.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - YouFail, 15 Nov 2011 @ 9:50pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      @ Anonymous Coward
      
      Ron Paul is VERY solid on his views. In fact, that's one of his selling points: consistency in his voting. If you're really curious, mull over his voting record.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - YouFail, 15 Nov 2011 @ 9:55pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      @ Anonymous Coward
      
      Ron Paul is VERY solid on his views. In fact, that's one of his selling points: consistency in his voting. If you're really curious, mull over his voting record.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 11:51pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Are you retarded?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Brave Man, 16 Nov 2011 @ 1:29am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      What? Are you kidding? Ron Paul is the most consistent guy ever, look at his positions 20 years ago and they are the same today - he NEVER compromised. You're really just talking out of ignorance, aren't you? I hate when people do this without looking at a single fact ...
      
      Oh my *facepalm*
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Gmartine, 16 Nov 2011 @ 6:22am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I hope you were being sarcastic. Ron Paul is known for having consistent views and voting record.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2011 @ 7:10am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      If the change in viewpoint was based on well-justified, and realistic representations of community expectation, why the hell not?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Mike W, 16 Nov 2011 @ 7:18am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      LOL what? Ron Paul is not solid on your views? I'm just going to assume you are not a political observer, which is fair.
      
      However, one thing you should know is that Ron Paul does not flip flop. He is not doing this for popular opinion, he has been strongly against regulating the internet for YEARS.
      
      The man is the the most consistent around. Please look him up if you dont know anything about him.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - What, 16 Nov 2011 @ 7:30am
      
      Ron Paul flip-flop? You must be on crack.
      
      He's probably the single most principle-based person in Congress.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Charles D Fed, 16 Nov 2011 @ 8:38am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      What Ron Paul are YOU talking about?
      
      Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who is SOLID in his views. He has been consistent in his principles, his values, his positions for over 40 years. If you don't know this, perhaps you should learn before spouting off.
      
      Whether RP becomes president really depends on whether people like you begin to learn the truth. And if you don't, you're in no position to predict.
      
      Win or lose, Ron Paul is the only candidate who is causing any motion toward Liberty. And you, by spouting, are in opposition. Are you willing to slide into tyranny? If not, pull your head out and starting learning FROM RON PAUL.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - JBDragon, 16 Nov 2011 @ 10:00am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      What are you smoking. Ron Paul is the ONLY one that's Solid on his views. It's the same views he's had for YEARS. He might never be President because he doesn't flip-flop like everyone else does! He's also one of the few left that actually believe we should be following the Constitution of this country.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2011 @ 12:55pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      bahahahaha! he has been the most consistent, speak from the heart politician in washington for decades. he is the only one not up there reciting lines at the debates, the only one who does not appear to be lying through his teeth. if you honestly truly think he is not consistent and solid in his views, you have not been paying attention.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2011 @ 3:44pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      That is the most idiotic thing I`ve read about Paul to date. You`re right about politicians needing to follow their own moral compass, but that is exactly what Ron Paul had done for decades, and, moreover, why he WILL be our next president. Find me a more solid record than his, and then we`ll talk, genius.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - billg64, 4 Dec 2011 @ 6:51am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Popular opinion and personal opinion are not the basis for legislation. The 18 enumerated powers given congress should be the basis for all law. Find the place in the Constitution for regulating the internet and its all good.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Man, 20 Dec 2011 @ 9:40pm
      
      WTF?
      Can't tell if trolling or just stupid. Look up Ron Paul's voting record and try again sir.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Eric, 16 Jan 2012 @ 11:27am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I think you are confusing Ron Paul with every other presidential candidate in the race... Ron Paul is the one who has had the same views for several decades.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 18 Jan 2012 @ 9:31am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      What? He ain't no Mitt "Flip-FLop" Romney or Chickenhawk Newt Gingrich. He's been consistant with his views for 30 years. Stop with the MSM bs and open your mind. He has the majority of military, active and reserve, overseas in regards to the military issues.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anon, 20 Jan 2012 @ 10:31pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Ron Paul is the last honest politician on this planet. This is a politician who refuses a government pension even if he's entitled for it(for being a Congressman) and he's been drumming the same message for more than 30 years. He's against SOPA not just because most of his support comes from the Internet but because he sees SOPA as unconstitutional.
    
    Ron Paul worships the Constitution like the bloody bible.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- blaktron (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:34am
  
  Re:
  Also, this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Like him or hate him, Ron Paul is the only member of your House of Representatives that has consistently held the same views for his entire 30 year career as a politician. Coming out against this bill is EXACTLY what he believes, and has always believed, since he is fundamentally against government regulation always. If you think that Ron Paul flip flops on anything, you sir, are a moron.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Joe Mama, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:46am
  
  Re:
  Wait what? Yeah all those SOPA polls. LOL. But anyhow, yeah Ron Paul is such a flip-flopper! He should totally pick a position and stick to it! What the heck RP! He should be more like the other candidates! Now let's hurry up and pass SOPA! I'm sick of not having my Internet monitored even more. All of this excess freedom is scaring me. I might make a mistake! Save me from myself!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jesse, 15 Nov 2011 @ 11:25am
  
  Re:
  Making that claim against the only politician that has shown three decades of consistency and integrity only reveals your ignorance.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 11:39am
  
  Re:
  If everyone thinks dog shit is tasty and it's still as cheap as it is now why not give it out at food banks?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 1:41pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Nah, the poll says 64% of people think dog shit is tasty, because they were told that blocking access to dog shit as food would be censorship.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 8:57pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      You truly get more idiotic with each post.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 2:12pm
  
  Re:
  Why is this 'flagged'?
  
  While I don't agree with this AC's statement, the Report button should be reserved for abusive or spammy content. Please don't use it to stifle free speech, Techdirt.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Chris Rhodes (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 2:31pm
    
    Re: Re:
    1. Free speech applies to government action, not private action.
    2. His speech is still there, hence no censorship.
    3. Until there's a "Douchebag" flag, I just hit report when someone vomits up another tired troll post.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - BearGriz72 (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 8:20pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Can I vote for a "Douchebag" flag?!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 3:58pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I don't know about that AC, the same posts copy/pasted on every single article on techdirt? Sounds like Spam to me.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - JMT (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 4:39pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I agree with you, except the "stifle free speech" bit. I think there should be a better way to flag comments that are strongly disagreed with, as opposed to genuine spam or abuse, but lets not overstate the issue. His speech is not actually free on a privately run blog but neither is it stifled by being hidden behind a single mouse click.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2011 @ 12:12am
  
  Re:
  He has been consistent and against the status quo for decades you fool. Go read something.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Kaega (profile), 18 Nov 2011 @ 10:52am
  
  Your gums are the only thing flapping
  You have once again demonstrated that someone can formulate an opinion without a single iota of knowledge related to the subject your are directing your opinion at.
  
  If you can find one example of Ron Paul simply changing his policy to meet public opinion, show me. He's the only politician I have seen that HASN'T changed his opinion based on public opinion (including his stance on the war, economics, Taxes, and laws against the constitution).
  
  He's always stuck to his guns, and many of his stances/opinions are not popular due to most people being brainwashed by the media to think his suggested solutions would be bad for the public. Until years later when he's proved to have been right all along. And STILL people won't listen to him.
  
  I don't know why I'm even posting this, since you're probably one of those people who formulates an opinion, and never changes their mind even when the evidence is right in front of your face.
  
  But seriously, watch some documentaries he's been in (I don't remember the name, but the one about the Federal Reserve). Ron Paul points out things that have been wrong for years, which no one else will take the time to point out.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- James Buckey, 23 Nov 2011 @ 4:28pm
  
  Response to: Anonymous Coward on Nov 15th, 2011 @ 10:24am
  Actually, Ron Paul is a libertarian. He would move whatever "food banks" Congress has anything to do with to state control. That is where every it belongs. Actually it belongs nowhere, but if the state wants to do it, they have the right. Congress has no authority to do so, constitutionaly.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:25am

Anyon want to place bets on whether Google censors their logo tomorrow with a link to http://www.americancensorship.org/? Think they have the balls to do it? Considering they are the only ones allowed access to the SOPA hearing and that they have the most-hit page on the planet, I think they could go along way towards raising awareness of the clueless. But I for one don't think they'll have the stones.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- BearGriz72 (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 8:26pm
  
  Re:
  FYI it needs to be http://americancensorship.org/ (For some odd reason the www subdomain does not work apparently).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:32am

Reading the letter, I would guess that most of it was crafted by EFF types. I guess we know where they spend their lobbying dollars!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:41am

Somebody should go to the whitehouse.gov petions website and create a petion telling them to sign sopa. But give it the description it deserves. Calling it what it is so to speak the great firewall of america and legalized censorship and government monopoly. I think that would be swell.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- kirillian (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 2:12pm
  
  Re:
  Make a petition to rename the bill...again...to the Great Firewall of America Bill? GFAB?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2011 @ 12:01am
    
    Re: Re:
    I think E-Parasite was an appropriate name and we should stick to it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:56am

But...
Conyers and Smith's letter in favor of the bill is entitled:

"Promote Jobs and Economic Growth: Protect Consumers and Our Troops - Support H.R. 3261"

That's all we need to know. We want to protect our troops, right? This bill also protects children, puppies and ponies too. Let's put a stop to those darn pony counterfeiters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:57am

Google should at least splash a thing on every search page and all over Youtube telling people that "we're in danger of being censored, please contact your congresscritters to stop it."

Or perhaps Google could go on strike against SOPA for several days, shut down all their services, replace them with a page telling people why they're shutting down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2011 @ 12:02am
  
  Re:
  That might work and is probably a good idea.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2011 @ 12:10am
    
    Re: Re:
    (but it's not good for Google's business).
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2011 @ 12:11am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      (that is, shutting down isn't good for their business. Stopping SOPA might be).
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
anonymous, 15 Nov 2011 @ 10:58am

too few, too little, too late!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
gorehound (profile), 15 Nov 2011 @ 1:00pm

And for all those Politicians who support this toilet paper bill we will need to look closer at how much money they received in Donations.
I am sure the public will want to know how much money it costs to get a Politician to vote out your rights and freedom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Louis Nardozi, 15 Nov 2011 @ 5:27pm

A Promise to Ron Paul
Hi Everyone,

The RNC has been complicit in the marginalization of Dr. Paul, as well as the media blackout. We all know this. I have set up a little website to bring attention to this fact and to help Dr. Paul. It is not the kind of thing he would do (in fact he couldn't even acknowledge it without being summarily expelled from the GOP), but it IS the kind of thing I would do, ESPECIALLY after the last debate where Dr. Paul got a whole 90 seconds to speak. This must stop and by God it WILL stop, and YOU'RE going to help me stop it!

Go to http://RonPaulPromise.com and sign up please, and spread the word. I set up the site myself it has no ads and no profit, just a labor of love in defense of Dr. Paul.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
rhett, 15 Nov 2011 @ 7:31pm

What the eff? Do you people who say Dr. Paul "sways in the breeze of public opinion" even know who this guy is? He has the most consistent voting record of probably anyone else in Congress. Do a little research. I mean seriously. Way to spread misinformation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paul supporter, 16 Nov 2011 @ 4:20am

Ron Paul
Ron Paul 2012
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OUTSIDE OBSEVER, 16 Nov 2011 @ 7:21am

RON PAUL IS THE KING OF THE WORLD. HE WILL FIX ALL THAT IS WRONG.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2011 @ 11:24am
  
  Re:
  Where did Ron Paul claim that he would fix all that is wrong with the world. In fact, if you listen to him, he claims the opposite, that it's not the government's job to fix everything in the world because government can't possibly fix everything in the world and in attempting to do so they only make things worse.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
AMusingFool (profile), 16 Nov 2011 @ 10:09am

I think I know how to shut this down
Point out that if a campaign used a copyrighted song without permission (I know. That's never happened), their entire campaign could be shut down.

And that's assuming no one issued a bogus shutdown without waiting for actual infringement.

Oh, I like this idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
julian-tai chi, 16 Nov 2011 @ 12:42pm

He's probably the single most principle-based person in Congress.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Marvs, 28 Nov 2011 @ 9:10pm

No to SOPA! It's synonymous to carpet bombing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
apex, 17 Jan 2012 @ 10:15pm

RON PAUL CAN WIN!
Ron Paul can win because he won both straw polls in California and Texas. The electoral college is 51 mini state popular election vote that is winner take all. Ron paul popular in both Texas and California which has over 55 + 38 electoral which accounts to 93 electoral, which is about 34% or over 1/4 .You only need 270 electoral out of 538 to be president. It's a numbers game that's why you saw the last election people campaign the states with the most population because it has the most electoral or proportional representation as stated on the constitution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
apex, 17 Jan 2012 @ 10:16pm

RON PAUL CAN WIN!
Ron Paul can win because he won both straw polls in California and Texas. The electoral college is 51 mini state popular election vote that is winner take all. Ron paul popular in both Texas and California which has over 55 + 38 electoral which accounts to 93 electoral, which is about 34% or over 1/4 .You only need 270 electoral out of 538 to be president. It's a numbers game that's why you saw the last election people campaign the states with the most population because it has the most electoral or proportional representation as stated on the constitution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]