It looks like Internet perverts and porn pushers alike have lost a big one. Is this the first step to making the entire Internet family friendly? We can only hope.
The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a bill saying that anyone offering an open Wi-Fi connection to the public must report illegal images including “obscene” cartoons and drawings–or face fines of up to $300,000.
And this could change the Internet almost overnight. Cheers could be heard across the nation, across the world.
That broad definition would cover individuals, coffee shops, libraries, hotels, and even some government agencies that provide Wi-Fi. It also sweeps in social-networking sites, domain name registrars, Internet service providers, and e-mail service providers such as Hotmail and Gmail, and it may require that the complete contents of the user’s account be retained for subsequent police inspection.
Even the traditional consumers of porn, the Democrat party, supported this important and necessary bill. And I applaud them for that. Anyone who stands up for family values, against their own prurient interests, deserves credit where credit is due.
Before the House vote, which was a lopsided 409 to 2, Rep. Nick Lampson (D-Texas) held a press conference on Capitol Hill with John Walsh, the host of America’s Most Wanted and Ernie Allen, head of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
Allen said the legislation–called the Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online Act, or SAFE Act–will “ensure better reporting, investigation, and prosecution of those who use the Internet to distribute images of illegal child pornography.”
And how could anyone disagree with that, keeping the Internet SAFE? I’m sure that there won’t be much discussion about this non-controversial legislation that benefits us all. But feel free to comment about how wonderful this is.
We are bravely moving forward together into a new age of information, a renaisance, where the Internet is safe for all. Hallelujah!
Update: Well, that was quick. Liberal KGO talk show host indicted for child porn.
Bernie Ward, a popular liberal San Francisco radio talk show host and former Catholic priest, has been indicted on federal child pornography charges, authorities said today.
Ward, 56, surrendered to federal authorities earlier today but the specifics of the allegations against him are under seal, officials said.
Ward hosts a nightly news talk program on KGO 810 AM as well as GodTalk on Sundays. He had been a priest with the Society of the Precious Blood order.
Yikes. Another left winger bites the dust. Child Pornographers are naturally concerned about their image in light of this arrest.
— Psycheout
Blogs 4 Brownback 
Even the Democrats have seen the light. Maybe they can be saved yet.
Comment by Bob_Corker — December 6, 2007 @ 3:27 pm |
Well, I would like to see a little evidence other than your own opinion that the porn watchers are Democrats. But then, if you have to blame a bad thing on someone, you always blame the Democrats. There’s been plenty of Republicans caught with porn on their computers too (and no, it wasn’t planted there by Democrats, they put it there themselves) Pornography is a non-partisan activity, it includes people of all races, religions, parties, and ages. Perversion does a lot of things but it does not discriminate.
Other than that I basically agree with psycheout, it’s a good thing to get some tough laws on internet availability of porn, however I don’t think the implementation of the law will be as easy as passing it. The more porn sites (especially child porn) that get shut down the better, and I would like to see all of the suppliers and producers of child porn get what’s coming to them (to the extent of the law anyway, but the law needs to be extended itself in that area to include some sort of extreme pain, what do they call that? make the punishment fit the crime). However, enforcement will be tricky, there are thousands of sites that would be hard to track down, and finding and getting them all would be almost impossible just because of the extreme saturation level, there are many times more porn sites than there are any other type, in fact well over half of all internet sites world wide are porn related.
But just think how much bandwidth would be saved if we could get rid of all of them. We don’t need any at all, if you absolutely have to have porn (it seems that some people do) then we still have adult theatres and bookstores, at least we know we can keep the kids out of there.
Comment by Arn — December 6, 2007 @ 4:34 pm |
Personally, Arn, I agree with you on everything you say. Republicans can turn out to be traitors as well, as Satan’s temptation can happen on anyone. But we must pass severe laws to stop child pornography (at least life in prison), and relentlessly work to overturn those laws allowing this ‘speech’ (nothing more than exploitation of poor children). Also, my internet repairman says that porn likely increases internet lag by up to .75 seconds. I’d have a pretty good .52 if porn didn’t exist on the web.
Comment by Bob_Corker — December 6, 2007 @ 4:46 pm |
Also, my internet repairman says that porn likely increases internet lag by up to .75 seconds. I’d have a pretty good .52 if porn didn’t exist on the web.
Comment by Bob_Corker — December 6, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
Bull(poop). The only way for the lag time on your computer to be affected by the browsing of internet porn would be for you to actually be on the porn site yourself. Stop making up things to fit your agenda.
Comment by TrogdortheEnlightened — December 6, 2007 @ 4:59 pm |
This sounds like some kind of attempt by the Democrats to attack Republicans. Clearly the Democrats are subscribing to the Liberal MSM myth of the gay Republicans from a solitary, isolated incident that was widely misinterpreted. Obviously the Democrats are hoping this law will trap and embarrass many Republicans. How foolish of them. Since it is well know most, if not all, Democrats are gay they should be the largest group rightfully imprisoned under this law.
Comment by BJ Tabor — December 6, 2007 @ 5:43 pm |
Well, BJ just screwed up our otherwise normal conversation. Homosexual pictures aren’t illegal.
“Since it is well know most, if not all, Democrats are gay they should be the largest group rightfully imprisoned under this law.”
Provide evidence or GTFO.
“solitary, isolated incident that was widely misinterpreted”
Assuming you’re talking about Mark Foley, how was it misinterpreted? Again, evidence or GTFO.
Comment by Elephant Bones — December 6, 2007 @ 5:55 pm |
“Democrats are gay they should be the largest group rightfully imprisoned under this law.”
Really now BJ, if this were true wouldn’t they have gone extinct instead of increasing in number?
Comment by Arn — December 6, 2007 @ 6:13 pm |
“This sounds like some kind of attempt by the Democrats to attack Republicans. Clearly the Democrats are subscribing to the Liberal MSM myth of the gay Republicans from a solitary, isolated incident that was widely misinterpreted. Obviously the Democrats are hoping this law will trap and embarrass many Republicans. How foolish of them. Since it is well know most, if not all, Democrats are gay they should be the largest group rightfully imprisoned under this law.”
Comment by BJ Hellboy — December 6, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
BJ is an honorary member of the Log Cabin Republicans.
http://online.logcabin.org/
Looks like most gays are Republican after all.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 7, 2007 @ 11:18 am |
Why do you know so much about the Log Cabin Republicans, leftist? Are you a gay homosexual?
Comment by Psycheout — December 7, 2007 @ 4:13 pm |
The assumption that the internet is not ‘safe’ is simply your opinion from your platform perspective.
The idea the internet can be made safe is a childish fallacy at best, used to strike fear into the heads, and hearts of those who can not think for themselves.
Comment by azigni — December 8, 2007 @ 2:27 am |
First off, isn’t the phrase “gay homosexual” kind of redundant?
Theres just one thing that bothers me about this. Sweet, there cracking down on porn. Good for them. Its just the sections that states “…it may require that the complete contents of the user’s account be retained for subsequent police inspection.” Okay, so now my privacy has been reduced even further?!?!?! As said by Mr. Benjamin Franklin “Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.”
Comment by Hissho — December 8, 2007 @ 2:28 am |
I would also like to point out that the two votes agains the bill, WERE REPUBLICANS!.
Comment by Hissho — December 8, 2007 @ 2:35 am |
Why do you know so much about the Log Cabin Republicans, leftist? Are you a gay homosexual?
Comment by Psykkkeout — December 7, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
Why do you ask? Are you flirting with me?
Face it Psykkkeout, homosexuality and pedophilia are most in line with outer fringe far right Conservativism than Centerist or Liberal leanings. I guess it is’nt your time to come out of the closet yet meat gazer.
Comment by Spacebrother — December 8, 2007 @ 9:29 am |
My father has been a Republican for his entire life–the only Democratic candidate he ever voted for was Carter, and he regretted it soon after. And even he used to read pornography as a young man, because that’s how young men learn about sexuality in the absence of actual sexual activity. To destroy all pornography would either cause an increase in teen sex, or the creation of new pornography. It’s the lesser of two evils, neither of which can be wholly eradicated, although they can be reduced.
I agree that child pornography is vile, disgusting, and needs to be wiped from the face of the earth. And this law, while definitely a step in the right direction, is sadly unenforceable. The Internet is capable of expanding infinitely. Trying to find and shut down all the kiddy porn on the Internet is like trying to destroy every star in the universe–it is theoretically possible, but we mere humans are unlikely to ever accomplish it.
And a computer program to find and destroy it won’t work until image-recognition software advances sufficiently, which may take decades.
Comment by L — December 8, 2007 @ 10:34 am |
“Also, my internet repairman says that porn likely increases internet lag by up to .75 seconds. I’d have a pretty good .52 if porn didn’t exist on the web.”
Bob, he’s saying that to keep you on dial-up. Switch to broadband, and the lag won’t even be noticeable. You can also try an ad-blocking program (I use Firefox’s AdBlock myself) to keep unwanted advertisement images (including randomly-generated smut ads) from even loading, speeding up your connection considerably. I do, however, agree wholeheartedly with your condemnation of the sexploitation of children.
“Perversion does a lot of things but it does not discriminate.”
Couldn’t have said it better myself, Arn.
“Since it is well know most, if not all, Democrats are gay they should be the largest group rightfully imprisoned under this law.”
BJ, that’s impossible, since at least 35-40% of the US is Republican, and only around 10% of the country is gay or bisexual. That means that 90% of the country is hetero or in the closet.
“The idea the internet can be made safe is a childish fallacy at best, used to strike fear into the heads, and hearts of those who can not think for themselves.”
Seconded, Az. (Do you mind if I call you Az?) The only way to keep your kids of dirty sites is to install a porn filter and monitor their online activities. If you direct your children to safe sites and explain that some websites aren’t good for children to look at, the presence of smut on the Internet won’t corrupt them in the slightest. I didn’t even know online porn existed until I was 17 and an online acquaintance on IRC started linking to fetish porn, claiming it was “some new art I’ve drawn.”
Comment by L — December 8, 2007 @ 10:52 am |
Is this blog still around? Amazing. The half-life for satirical blogs, FSJ notwithstanding, is generally very short.
Well played, B4B. And you keep hooking everyone in with *just* the right amount of faux legitimacy. Awesome.
Comment by Jeff Ventura — December 9, 2007 @ 2:14 pm |
LOL. They have to report any instances of porn on the entire web??
Hmmm…well of course…you know…the internet is just like, you know, a huge series of “Pipes” you know….and so,like, all you have to do is like get some Drano to like clean out those “pipes”…
You know?
Comment by outsider222 — December 9, 2007 @ 4:03 pm |
If you know me, then you know that technology is about as welcome in my house as my mother-in-law. And while Ethel sometimes brings over delicious lemon bars that are best eaten with hot coffee and a dash of suppressed anger, the only thing that this nameless, faceless digital beast called technology brings is pain, strife and vile e-curses. I know what you’re about to say: “But Debbie, you write a successful online column featuring commonsensical advice straight from a mom’s intuition and your latest book was just released in paperback!”
Rest assured, dear reader, that each of my “Mom’s Eye View” columns are written by hand and then mailed to their respective publishers after I drive to the post office and give my mail to an actual human being–as strange as that may sound to most of you out there! You can take your modern ways and stuff ’em, mister; this gal doesn’t mind taking a few extra hours and a trip to the gas station just to do things the old-fashioned way. After all, that’s the only way that makes sense.
Strangely enough, there are quite a few bad apples out there who don’t see things my way–and a few of them can even be found in the Kunzel clan! When my little boy Dylan was ten, I bought into the techno-propoganda spewed by that child-brainwasher Bill Gates (shame on him!) and purchased a computer for our household, just so our family wouldn’t be without the tool that tempted us with the unnatural sight of flying toasters and promised to make us all smarter, stronger, and richer beyond our wildest dreams. When we brought the computer home and opened its massive box, I immediately threw up my hands in anguish at seeing the many pieces that demanded us to assemble them. “That’s it for me,” I exclaimed, and I sat in a comfy chair to watch TV–not in front of a keyboard, mind you–with a glass of iced tea as my husband, Don, and Dylan put together the electro-terror-machine. A few months passed, and I decided to venture into our den to use this technological invader–I had just tried Chinese food the week before (and I did not like it!), so I was feeling a bit adventurous.
A brief thirty seconds later, I was flushed with rage and lamenting the day I decided to “enrich” my family’s life with the 1s and 0s of Satan’s propaganda. I had sat down at the personal computer, fully intending to write a letter to my friend Carol in Florida. Hello, science? It’s Debbie. I thought computers were supposed to be smart. If this is true, then why is it that when I type “I would like to write a letter to my friend Carol, please,” all I get are a chorus of beeps and boops, adding up to the soundtrack of my frustration? Still, even after suffering such torment, I was determined to see if anyone in camp Kunzel was able to use this waste of chips and CD-Roms.
I waited for Saturday morning, and peeked in on my son, clacking away at the keys like some sort of robo-Liberace. Dylan was quite accomplished; in the course of an hour, I watched him write a report for school, edit photos, read about Benjamin Franklin, send an electro-message to his grandma, and create a secret code that only he and his father could understand. And here I was, unable to get the gosh-darn thing to write a letter to my ungrateful friend Carol! Needless to say, Mr. PC was picked up by the garbageman the following week. I wasn’t about to live in world where my ten year-old son could possibly know more than me–yet millions of adults allow the parent-child power pyramid to be subverted every day by these e-monsters. For them, I have three words: “Shame on you.”
Maybe I am crazy, as so many of the reviews of my book on Amazon.com indicate. Or maybe it’s more plausible to think that I’m the only sane one around here! Let me take you back to that wonderful time known as the 1960s, dear reader, better known as “my childhood.” We didn’t have computers tearing apart the family unit, and look how much better we had it back then; there was no war, far fewer murders, less violence, no depression, and the average dinner certainly had better cuts of meat. The technocrati would have you believe that life is much easier now, but I beg to differ. You can’t even let your kids out of the house these days, and when you do, most of the time they come back with their minds full of crazy ideas about i-mails, e-pods; i.e., the many heads on the Hydra known as “progress” and “convenience.”
The last time Dylan’s friend Robert came over, he was wearing a pair of earphones and a digital music playing unit, and when I asked him why, he said that he “Wanted to listen to music during the walk over.” Is this what our world is turning into? A place where people can entertain themselves at the drop of a hat during mundane tasks? Life used to be about building character, which is why Robert is no longer allowed in our house. I’d rather not have Dylan tempted by the crack-cocaine of the compu-zombies who can’t go more than five seconds without staring at a digi-screen. Hey, addicts, it’s called television–and it’s served us well for the past 60 years. Sheesh.
I wish I could say that this “Mom’s Eye View” was held by most people, but many I’ve talked to disagree out of what can only be sheer ignorance. They spew their facts about literacy, dropping crime rates, and life improvement, yet I can’t seem to shake the notion that these poor souls are just jealous for not experiencing the technology-free golden age that I grew up in; and frankly, I feel sorry for them. But this conflict is not limited to strangers–the Kunzel clan still has problems with my “backwards” ways. Just yesterday, I caught my son–who is now 17–talking about a video game machine with his father. The only thing I could say was, “I will not have a device in my house that simulates conflict and warfare! Now, hurry up or you’ll be late for football practice.” Thankfully, my husband has started to see things my way, which is why I have allowed him to buy a laptop for a project he proposed himself. Every night he researches the prevalence of Internet e-porno, and when he stumbles to bed after his research, I can barely say “goodnight” before Mr. Kunzel falls asleep. Poor guy; all of that e-vil really takes it out of him.
Yes, reader, there’s pornography on the Internet; and in my next column, I’m going to blow the lid off of the computer’s best-kept secret.
Comment by Debbie Kunzel — February 3, 2008 @ 3:25 pm |
“Let me take you back to that wonderful time known as the 1960s, dear reader, better known as “my childhood.” We didn’t have computers tearing apart the family unit, and look how much better we had it back then; there was no war, ”
comment by Debbie Kunzel
Were you even alive in the sixties? No War? What was VietNam?
For someone who claims to not believe in technology, you used a bunch of it to post that long winded senseless comment onto the internet. Not to mention all the gas (and carbon monoxide) you expelled out the tailpipe of some more technology to do things the “old fashioned” way.
Perhaps you should also doublecheck some of those other comments, the murder and crime rate was very high in the sixties, not to mention our own president was murdered in ’63. Didn’t we also have those wonderful people like Charles Manson.
The truth is, the crime rate rose sharply in the 1960s and reached an all time high early in the seventies, and has been declining since 1991. So obviously your “childhood” was very protected and you just weren’t allowed to see what was going on in the world, like that war that was on the news every day for years.
Comment by Arn — February 3, 2008 @ 4:36 pm |
“Were you even alive in the sixties? No War? What was VietNam?”
Yeah but see, America lost Viet Nam. So therefore there never was a Viet Nam. Catch my drift?
In ten years there will be no Iraq, either.
Comment by Adam Nelson — February 3, 2008 @ 5:03 pm |
Oh goody, Adam. Now it’s going to be your turn to try and convince Sisy and Psyche that we lost in Nam. They are convinced that we won because we ran away before it was over.
Comment by Arn — February 3, 2008 @ 5:07 pm |
Meh, I don’t think it’s possible to convince Sisyphus of anything. He has this combination of being so unmovably stubborn and conceited with a totally paralyzing stupidity that makes all efforts of learning futile. If he’s not some hilarious parodist, he’s a deeply depressed and sad man who is so afraid of the world around him that he cannot let his mind be changed about anything, lest he be viewed as a weakling.
Comment by Adam Nelson — February 3, 2008 @ 5:46 pm |
What is hilarious bout 666siphus anyway…..he is just an attention whore to be forgotten in 3 years….even Britney Spears’s 15 minutes of fame lasted longer.
Most of all…..he ain’t funny.
Comment by Jim — February 3, 2008 @ 7:39 pm |