Tell your conservative cronies about this pls. The news you guys pay attention to (stereotypically) isn't going to be reporting on this shit. Probably.
Whatever.
Printable View
Tell your conservative cronies about this pls. The news you guys pay attention to (stereotypically) isn't going to be reporting on this shit. Probably.
Whatever.
Good. That would actually be a good thing, so it shouldn't come attached to a bill we're trying to stop. Though this bit is particularly telling:Yes that's what he should do, but the idea that this amendment would make the bill LESS passable just shows you how fucked the GOP's positions on these matters are.Quote:
While Perlmutter warned of breached privacy and the potential to impersonate employees, as U.S. News & World Report notes, CISPA sponsor Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) called the Democratic congressman's proposal an attempt to kill the bill.
Perlmutter denied the claim, but Rogers still suggested that he instead address the employee privacy issue with separate legislation.
Does this surprise anyone?
Mike Rogers, the man pushing CISPA, has set his family up to profit enormously from the bill: http://t.co/xWz8FYkgFB
Not surprised, just disappointed.
Interesting that Rogers is introduced as "the man sponsoring CISPA" by that not so eloquent speaker. I guess she wants to protect its other sponsor, Dutch Ruppersberger. Not coincidentally, Wikipedia makes the same intentional omission in its overview section before finally mentioning that Rogers isn't alone down in the "Recent Developments." I can't imagine why...
Things to do for fun: Change Wikipedia to reflect accurate info and see how long it takes to put back.
Probably seconds.
Sorry Mech, I don't have time, I'm busy updating the TNL Wiki.
Because someone should.
CISPA is dead. http://www.zdnet.com/cispa-dead-in-s...ed-7000014536/
We win for now.
Fuck that guy.