![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
"Congress shall make no law..."
Posted by Stephen Green · 14 April 2005
Most Americans believe bloggers should not be allowed to publish sensitive personal information about individuals, according to a new survey. Thanks to McCain-Feingold, the American public may very well get its wish.
Comments
We get the goverment that we deserve, unfortunately. Things like this tend to push me away from my beloved GOP and right into the arms of the Libertarian party. Posted by: zombyboy at April 14, 2005 12:28 AMMm. However, more than one-third of respondents had never heard of blogs before participating in the survey, and only around 30 percent of participants had actually visited a blog themselves. ...sounds like another meaningless online poll to me.
Don't let the Center for American Progress hear about this poll. Next thing you know, there'll be a "grass roots" effort of Soros-funded nonprofits lobbying for the establishment of the Federal BlogControl Agency, and people in places like DesMoines, Ottumwa, Plattsburgh, Westchester, Sonoma, and Nogales all coming up with the exact same ideas to put into the exact same letter to the editors of their local papers... The "slippery slope" argument used to be considered facile. Thanks to the statists, tranzis and left wingers, its now pretty much one of the strongest arguments going. I'd be okay with progressive politics, if anybody could tell me where they are supposed to progress *to*. Sadly, progressives only know that they are progressing *away from* certain positions, which makes their politics quite dangerous. Posted by: Al Maviva at April 14, 2005 04:47 AMThe term "progressive" doesn't mean anything in a political context- the idea is to imply anyone who opposes them is regressive, not to tell you anything about what 'progressives' are in favor of. Orwell would be impressed. Well of course they shouldnt be publishing addresses and personal info. It is socially irresponsible Posted by: Monjo at April 14, 2005 06:10 AMzombyboy - what does this poll have to do with the Republican party? Posted by: erp at April 14, 2005 07:11 AMKeep in mind the way that the question was phrased. I'm pretty sure that if you replace "blog" with "newspaper" or "TV show," the poll results would be the same. Americans are (rightfully) pretty big about privacy. This is why we have a Bill of Rights to begin with.......the majority can't (shouldn't) be trusted to protect freedom. > This is why we have a Bill of Rights Apart from the 3rd amendment, which part of the bill of rights is still in force? I always think of freedom of speech as theoretical as long as no line is crossed. Shouting FIRE in a movie theatre is the classic analogy. If there were true freedom of speech, no one would care what damage results. I don't think blogs or newspapers should publish phone numbers or home addresses of people they want to punish just because they can. Excuse me, addresses are not "personal information". If I want to reprint where you live, that's my choice. Phone numbers, if published in a book, are fair game too. Social Security numbers, bank accounts, and the like, however are not. Posted by: Easycure at April 14, 2005 08:54 AMOn the other hand, if this cuts down on stories that What's-her-name Spears is pregnant, there is an upside. Posted by: RobertJ at April 14, 2005 10:49 AMerp, it has nothing, directly, to do with the Republican party and everything to do with my desire to see politicians who won't buy into things like the McCain-Feingold idiocy. I can't imagine any Libertarian having voted for that. In a larger sense, beyond the scope of this post, what I want is for the GOP to be the party of small government and less government intrusion. I've voted for Bush both times I had the opportunity, and I don't regret that; but while I value his leadership as a war president and his commitment to reforming Social Security, a veto now and then would be nice and a little less faith in the power of the government to solve all of our problems would be appreciated. If I can't get that from a Republican, sooner or later I'll have to look somewhere else. The Democrats--the party so harshly opposed to reforming Medicare and Social Security, many of whom still grow angry of Clinton's reform of welfare, and who supported creating an even bigger problem by trying to bring us a European-style nationalized health care system--certainly isn't the party for me. What's left? Not voting out of spite or looking at the Libertarian candidates seem to be my only two options when my own party doesn't want to field the people who would represent my interests. Posted by: zombyboy at April 14, 2005 11:25 AMI'd be disinclined to trust the meaning of online poll results. The only thing I take away from this is a quick jab of "hey, my day job employer's getting a little media attention!". :) But seriously, guys. 70% of the respondents had never visited a blog, and you're taking seriously their opinions about blogging? Posted by: Matt at April 16, 2005 02:41 AM |
MDS - Give Until It Hurts Terror War Scorecard Watching America 50 Things American Cancer Ablation Center Buy VodkaPundit Stuff
"Vodka--it's not just for breakfast anymore."
Ann Althouse
Across the Atlantic
American Realpolitik
Albion's Seedlings
Justene Adamec
The Argument Clinic
Todd A
Moe Freedman
Allah Is In the House
Body in Mind
Ben Domenech
Duck Season
Banana Counting Monkey
Ted Barlow
Eric Alterman
American Times
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |