
I’m an empty suit sellout.
Remember Mike McCurry? Bill Clinton’s former press secretary? He fought the good fight as the impeachment years took off, before handing over the reins to Joe Lockhart. The press liked him, even though he used to run circles around them. Now he’s selling his charm and verbal gymnastics to the telecom industry, and he wants to destroy Internet Freedom. Because hey, it’s a paycheck.
The Internet began with regulations that blocked providers from favoring access to one site over another. That’s Internet Freedom, a.k.a., "Net Neutrality." That means you can access what you want when you want, and anyone can create a web based destination. Phone companies were set up along similar lines: they are not allowed to block you from calling any number you choose. Cable companies are different. They steer you where they want and charge you what they like for the privilege. Mercenary Mouthpiece Mike McCurry and his telecom pals want to make your Internet like cable, changing it from its free state.
Why does this matter?
Have your cable rates gone down lately? Can you always get the channels you want? Is there content you would like to get on cable but cannot? Do you think monopolistic control of cable has left you with a 500 channel wasteland? Do you like to shop for out of the way bargains online? Do you like to get unbiased medical information online when your kid is sick? Do you think online political organizing has been good for free speech and the country? Do you think that innovative small businesses, who create most of the country’s jobs, should have access to customers the big players want to own outright?
Are you getting the picture? Mike McCurry is spinning, deceiving and cashing checks to get your representatives to sell you out.
Enough, already! These craven Clinton era consultants have to be stopped. They are cashing in at your expense and running the party into the ground.
Today is a big day on the Hill. The following comes from an email sent by a contact on the Hill:
As I think everyone knows, net neutrality/COPE Act is being marked up in committee today. Net neutrality is in Title II of the bill, so we likely won’t get to that part of the markup until mid-afternoon. Barton, of course, scheduled the opening statements last night (the part of the markup that CSPAN usually covers).
Pelosi has come out strongly in support of Net Neutrality and there’s a citizen co-sponsorship effort on the Markey amendment. Markey’s going to announce how many citizens have co-sponsored this afternoon. The co-sponsorship can be found here.
Go here for Markey’s opening statement last night. Representative Markey’s office will be updating his site throughout the day with clips and such.
There are Democrats already on the wrong side of this issue, because we have not been watching closely enough. Bobby Rush of Illinois, a key vote on Internet Freedom, sits on the board of a charity that has gotten over one million in cash from the telecom industry. Guess whose side he’s on:
An Englewood community center founded by Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), a key player on telecommunications legislation, received a $1 million grant from the charitable arm of SBC/AT&T, one of the nation’s largest phone companies.
The chief of a congressional watchdog group says Rush’s ongoing association with the Rebirth of Englewood Community Development Corporation and his role in shaping telecommunications law as a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee is a conflict of interest. Using charitable giving as a backdoor way to curry favor with lawmakers is coming under increasing scrutiny, figuring in controversies associated with former Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.), who was forced to temporarily step aside as the ranking Democrat on the Ethics panel.
On Wednesday, the energy and commerce panel on which Rush sits is set to vote on a controversial rewrite of telecommunications law co-sponsored by Rush and backed by major phone companies eager to compete with cable television companies.
This is not an overnight fight. The Markey Amendment will not win today in committee, but the vote count matters. The time to put pressure on our representatives is now, so we can build momentum to save Internet Freedom.
And get the word out: Mike McCurry is lying, and he needs to be stopped. He deserves piñata status.
See also Taylor Marsh’s excellent post and compendium of links on Internet Freedom here.



121 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
I know I’m an undeserving lurker, but..
FITZ!
Could you go over to the Washington Monthly and beat Kevin Drum about the head and shoulders with this please? A little less naivete would be welcome across the blog stratosphere.
PACH!!
Pinata status……beautiful.
If net neutrality is not reinforced, it cripples the internet. Plain and simple. It would create a class structure on the internet where companies that paid their dues to the ISP get first billing before those that did or cannot ante up the dough. Also, speeds would be slower on those sites that cannot/did not pay for access.
Thanks Pach, this issue is so important if we are to keep our internets free. I’ve signed Pelosi’s ‘SaveTheInternet’. For anyone who may have missed it above you can sign it here, please:
http://www.democraticleader.ho…..heInternet
Just sent this to my Congressperson. Feel free to borrow ideas (as I clearly have), though I suggest you use your own words.
I’ve enjoyed the Internet for years precisely because it’s a place where anyone with a point of view is allowed to express it. It’s not only a place where you can buy books and airline tickets – it’s a place where people build communities and champion causes. Any restriction on this medium, no matter what the motivation, threatens that community and that path of expression.
This is a concern, not only for small businesses and individuals who make a living from the Net, but also for all of us who value freedom of expression. Television, radio, and the news are largely controlled by a few corporations. There is little real coverage of the events that are affecting us in these media. There is almost no give and take between the customers of these media and the purveyors. It’s only on the Net these days that one can find real, useful information about what the government and those large corporations are trying to do to the rest of us. Maybe that sounds paranoid, but sometimes the only real path to understanding is paranoia.
I’ve enjoyed the Internet for years precisely because it’s a place where anyone with a point of view is allowed to express it. It’s not only a place where you can buy books and airline tickets – it’s a place where people build communities and champion causes. Any restriction on this medium, no matter what the motivation, threatens that community and that path of expression.
Please support Congresswoman Pelosi’s efforts to defend Network Neutrality. To do otherwise serves no one but the telecom industry and a few big ISPs at the expense of the rest of the country.
Thanks, Jane, for reminding me to do this.
If you don’t know how to e-mail your congressperson, go to:
http://www.house.gov
and find your representative from the list that’s in the drop down menu.
thanks Pach!
Shez– signed it and thank you for posting the link.
Cujo359 @ 10:45 am (#7) – You might also want to avoid pasting the same paragraph twice. It’s those little stylistic things that sometimes make the difference.
Signed on; thanks, Shez! (And I just bought some software via Internet; downloaded last night, pay today for the registration. Not the first time for that, either. ‘Not available in stores’ software.
IF something like McCurry’s pushing wins out – and I guess this is a general question about all legislation passed in the last 5 years – how does the next Democratic President overturn it? Is there a waiting period? Does there have to be a constitutional challenge?
Signed.
This issue may well be the most important issue currently being worked over. If we lose this one, we lose ‘em all. Or so it would seem without pitch forks and fire sticks.
McCurry is blacklisted forever for having even thought about his ideas being the way to go on this. He’s cooked. Forever. Or until he seriously repents…and then puts his money where his mouth is when and if he does repent.
Let’s let just a few big businesses decide where we can drive our cars, too. Let them own the roads and exit ramps and charge different rates for different brands of car. Buy Goodyear tires or your entrance ramp fees go up. 50% more to pull off and shop anywhere but Wal-Mart or Target. Big gate at the bottom of your driveway with a credit-card swipe required to open the lock.
Won’t that feel GREAT!!
Shez @ 10:43 am (#6) – Have signed on, thanks. I did decline the junk e-mail, however.
OT – Think Progress has the banner headline from AOL.com regarding Tony Snow’s hiring. The picture of Snow is freaky. His eyes look crazy, as if he is saying, “You will believe every last word I have to say, or else!”
The waterfall of info continues. Boy Genius sure made a mistake by finally attacking the dead as a doornail press and the Generals.
Apparently there was a whole orchard of bad apples:
Hundreds invloved in detainee abuse.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0…..98,00.html
-GSD
By the time this is over, Fitz is going to be the least of their porblems.
Hey, I’m a co-sponsor. Gonna dash a quickie msg. off to mine own Rep., although, from what I’ve seen of his other stands, he’s likely already in the our chior on this.
I’m kinda ‘olde skool’ on this. The folks who researched and designed this ‘environment’ (couldn’t think of another word) took a very open view of how it was meant to work (kinda like the Constitution). It was literally a ‘netroots’ kind of project; cooking up a solution/hack for this or that, then sending out their ideas in a memo to others for review. One of the first ’shorthands’ on the net was ‘RFC’ — ‘request for comments’ Very democratic. The responese would be analysed and incorporated in concensus.
There is already a ‘digital divide’ and this proposal will foster a ‘digital chasm’.
Ahh don’t thank me, Pach has the link up there in a blockquote. I was reading the state Roots Project email Pach had sent and had just signed it through that when this thread popped up. I hope they change the color of the “links” so that they stand out more, not just on hover.
ferd #14, great analogy!
GSD @ 11:01 am (#17) – Wonder which colonel that article is referring to? The only one I’m aware of being responsible was the MI one, can’t remember the name. He was granted immunity in, IIRC, the Lindie England trial.
Anyone know at what time Karl
HubrisRove began his GJ testimony today?Thanks Pach & Shez. Wrote my Congresscritter yesterday and signed the petition today.
Don’t forget to write the media about this:
letters@nytimes.com
letters@washpost.com
letters@latimes.com
editor@usatoday.com
And of course your Congresscritters:
http://www.house.gov
http://www.senate.gov
We need to jump all over this, NOW!
Blank Kludge @ 11:05 am (#18) – The Internet Protocol (that’s the “IP” in TCP/IP) was designed to allow a nationwide network to survive a nuclear disaster. Its main design principle, along with the packet network the Arpanet was then based on, was that there would be no central control. IOW, the best way to survive is to adapt to change and disruption.
Central control is counterproductive to how the Internet works.
I think history will prove even worse, GSD # 17 How awful this is. Check this out from Dahr Jamail via truthout– the article is difficult to stomach, but it goes to the heart of what we were all discussing in Jane’s post the other nite wrt torture:
>>>>>>
Since the entire catastrophe in Iraq is primarily the handiwork of the Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces, let it be noted that under US Federal Law, the War Crimes Act of 1996 makes committing a war crime, defined as ” … a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party … ” punishable by being ” … fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.”
>>>>>
If you don’t know Dahr, this is tagged to the article:
Dahr Jamail is an independent journalist who spent over 8 months reporting from occupied Iraq. He presented evidence of US war crimes in Iraq at the International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration in New York City in January 2006. He writes regularly for TruthOut, Inter Press Service, Asia Times and TomDispatch, and maintains his own web site, dahrjamailiraq.com.
John Casper, I believe someone said 1:00 Eastern.
Just called my Congresscritter’s office — this is too important for e-mail.
Breaking news on MSNBC
Nattile Hollaway is still missing, mother holds press conference to raise awareness!
OT – Fourth Circuit orders hearings on wiretap evidence in Islamic scholar conviction
http://apnews.myway.com/articl…..9EK8G.html
angie @ 11:14 am (#25) – As we’ve discussed before, it also appears that they have illegally classified the information related to the black prison network to avoid prosecution under that act.
Cujo359 #30
Yes, hopefully, they will all be exposed soon…
Decisions like the one cited by Birdman #29 will certainly help, especially with Turley on the case.
drip, drip, drip followed by a deluge.
Does anyone remember paying net access by the minute? Using 24k modems?
Now, I get DSL service for a month for about what 100 minutes cost back in the day. (This next is ‘obvious, but) This is a money grab by telcos. Competiton for subscibers have pushed rates down. Now they want to collect both ways, us the consumer, and squeeze cash out of the ‘content providers’. This will not be healthy for such things as Apple’s iTunes Music Store. You can bet both them and Microsoft are lobbying against this. They’re downloadable content will lose value if it ain’t pushed to full broadband speed. Or, if they pay-to-push then they lose profit (uh, no, I don’t think so.) I would be a raise in price for the content. Not so good to raise prices.
And what about the nice (Bill & Melinda donated) fiber-optic free access in my public library? Users get an hr at a time. High-speed access means nothing if the site you log onto ain’t the annointed. So, an hr goes by real quick. Same for schools. This is an anti-education measure.
I’m just sayin’ …
“You denigrate rat fuck bastards everywhere when including Rove as one of their own.
Knock it off. heh”
Yeah. :)
As for what kind of “Fitz” I’m waiting for…
FitzMATE!
It’s amazing I write letters about the NSA spying, and by the time I’m finished the subject has moved on to Rumsfeld and his failures, followed W’s pretend compassion for us poor people filling our tanks, and now we’re back to the CIA leak. That’s Rove’s goal isn’t it? Keep ‘em so busy chasing us that nothing sticks. I think Fitz his got him in his sights this time and Rove knows it!
whoops, forgot to link to Dahr’s article
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042506A.shtml
should know this, but who pays rove’s legal fees?
Remember how VHS (It already seems so long ago.) was going to destroy television and the move industry. It didn’t happen and, in fact, the market got bigger and everybody made a lot more money.
Then there was the case of filesharing. It was going to destroy the recording industry. Industry executives blamed the filesharers and not the fact they were selling a poor product (CDs with a few good cuts and much substandard filler) at vastly inflated prices. Where they saw a threat, Apple saw an opportunity and came out with the iPod. The result was that the recording industry could sell their product, listeners could buy just what they wanted, legally and at a price that was reasonable.
In both these cases, industries tried to force both their business models and their product on consumers who wanted something but not what they were being offered. The industries hated and feared the solutions that came along, then embraced them, and being what they are tried to manipulate this new marketplace. Think of the iPod and how the industry is trying to increase its cut of the action and increase prices now that the market has formed.
What the telecoms are trying to do with the internet is much the same. They are not offering innovation, new products and services attractive to consumers. They are trying to force their current business model down the throats of internet users. They are interested in controlling the market and selling us what they want to sell, not what we want to buy.
It never ceases to amaze me how such anti-competitive practices get so much mileage in what is supposed to be a free market economy.
should read: “keep US so busy chasing THEM…”
US Commander in Iraq capitulates to terrorists, says troops could be reduced.
Zarqawi and Bin declare victory. US is cutting and running.
Aytollah Khameini says “I told you they would bail out.”
Bush phones Murtha and apologizes.
Daniel Pipes, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh commit suicide.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/IraqC…..SFeeds0312
-GSD
I came upon this article of what it’s like in Chernobyl 20 years later. If anyone thinks that a nuclear attack is a good thing to start they ought to read this:
http://society.guardian.co.uk/…..30,00.html
Cujo369 24
Yes. It’s beautiful ain’t it? Or, to use a term out of the early days ‘an elegant hack’ (non-kludge)
I sent an email to my rep, Louis Capps (CA-23) the other day. I’ll keep reminding her. She’s a great congresswoman but it doesn’t hurt to keep vital issues like this on the front burner. Besides, congress reps use strong reactions in deciding how hard to push on an issue they agree with, or in deciding about taking lobby money and backing an issue that is otherwise distasteful.
Its interesting. You can think about it as an attack on Google and Yahoo and their advertising dollars and high stock valuations. And they say socialism is dead (not for some corporations). Think of how complicated the sale of advertising will become if you cut a deal with Google but don’t with the access providers. I haven’t checked Time Warners stock price, but as an access provider and a popular portal, they should be smiling. Call it the Time Warner/Richard Parsons Relief Act.
The big telco access providers have always felt left out of the real money in the internet, even though much of the traffic rides over their networks. Maybe this is revenge for VoIP. It is no different from access providers attempts to keep local gov’t’s from building their own wifi/broadband networks.
Is it the right answer? No. Its corporate welfare at its worst. The internet was intended to be equal for all, sort of like the phone system. Would any rep agree to a prioritization of phone traffic/access (not that I want to give them ideas)?
OT – I missed all the Rover stuff yesterday.
I agree with anyone who said that this is an indication that Rover has really finally flipped, and will now testify truthfully and completely. There is no other reason that either Fitz would call him to testify or any defense attorney would want him to testify. But that’s me.
listen folks – there are wankers and good folks in both red states and blue states, republicans and democrats. everyone needs to stop listening and acting along party lines and think about what’s good for the country and the future.
my point: why is this a fucking surprise? i mean – he IS after all, part of the washington establishment? dems have their hands out to lobbyists, some have nearly sold their soul for votes, and all are part of the entrenched mass of shit once known as Washington D.C.
This guy doesn’t give a damn about internet freedom – otherwise, he wouldn’t have sold himself out for money for the corporate interests looking to restrict internet freedom.
This movement / bill / act was not a principle on which to stand – it was an opportunity to use his network to get his client what they want so he can enjoy a fat payday.
face it – there are sell-outs in both parties. lobbyists and politicians and politics aren’t part of the problem… the institution is the problem. like the Roman Senate, the american government is bloated, corrupt, entrenched, and removed / alienated from the PEOPLE they’re supposed to represent.
so – stop acting so shocked when shit like this happens. after all, I only need to mention two words to bring this into focus:
DICK MORRIS
from the last thread: “Rove is a borderline genius. Fitz is no slouch.”
He is a genius at selling snake oil to the American public, however, he has never had to face the likes of Fitz. I think Fitz rolls him: either he flips and takes Cheney down, or he goes down.
I’m not sure which is more appealing :)
This issue exemplifies how the Republicans and corporations have no interest whatsoever in the free markets.
They’re entirely capable right now of putting any content they like on a web site and charge admission without congress getting involved at all; if what they have to sell is worth it they’ll make out fine.
No, Republicans/corporatists are only interested in exploiting a sure thing with no interference from competition or government after they’ve bought off the system.
One more thing, when Republicans decided after Watergate to establish their own mouthpiece through talk radio and faux foundations (which is now aka MSM), to drum their message incessently into the American People’s consciousness, they didn’t know about the internet and it has them scared to death.
They know they must stamp this out soon before their entire thirty year assault on the truth is exposed for what it really is, and Americans wake up to the fact FDR/JFK/LBJ/WJC might have had a few good ideas afterall.
What better way than to have a friendly internet “Haliburton” ownership in the fold that calls the shots; and keeps out rabblerousers/Democrats?
#41 marksb – what a coinkidink – Lois Capps is my rep too! (I’m in Carp) And, of course, I also sent her an e-mail about this HUGELY important issue.
cathy #39– transcript not up yet but Democracy Now is doing a program today wrt Chernobyl and discussing the new Greenpeace report:
Also interviewed today Nat Hentoff and Daniel Ellsberg — all about whistleblowers.
>>>>>
The extent of human suffering linked to the Chernobyl disaster is almost beyond definition. Estimates of the death toll and health effects linked to nuclear accident vary widely. The International Atomic Energy Agency has maintained that radioactive fallout from Chernobyl caused 4,000 extra cancer deaths. But a new report released by Greenpeace claims that is a gross simplification. The report concludes the full consequences of the disaster could top one million cancer cases, nearly 100,000 of them fatal.
* Ivan Blokov campaign director of Greenpeace Russia. He has been leading research on Chernobyl for Greenpeace International.
http://www.democracynow.org/ar…..26/1439209
Hit the comment site on my congresscritter’s site (I have to go through a poll first, which hasn’t changed since, oh, January. Why is that?). Let him know which bill to vote for and which against. Made the point that ‘Internet tolls’ would cripple the economy. Ferd, I borrowed your paragraph through ‘…Target.’ It says it so well!
rabblerousers/Democrats
I resemble that remark!
hmm…mention of Google reminds me. This would hurt them. Wonder if it has anything to do with contesting Gonzo’s search subpoenas?
cathy -
20 years ago I was managing a REMP database (Radiological Enviromental Monitoring Program) in Oak Ridge for a radiation lab where I worked. The data were for a nuke plant startup in Ohio. We always got below LLD (Lower Limit of Detection) for the air sample filters (”
Rover isn’t a genuis. Although we should define our terms. Genius used to mean one event, or one idea, or one theory. Example, Einstein may have been a genuis 7 or 8 times, but not everything he came up with or did was genuis. These days, genius is used too broadly, applied too easily to everything and anything that a “genius” does. A modern day example would be Steve Jobs, who has come up with some pretty genius ideas in his lifetime, but doesn’t mean he is always a genius. He is also the person who wouldn’t license his operating system, which at least I don’t think was a genius move (See, Bill Gates/Microsoft).
I don’t think Rover was ever a genius, border line or otherwise, but if he was, it was only for ONE marketing idea. It ended there. He may be a smart person (I wouldn’t agree with that either, but I have high standards), but he is not as smart as he thinks he is, that too clever by half thing, which is why he will always against someone like Fitz. That, and the facts help too.
“….lose against someone like…..”
EPU’d:
TiredFed says:
April 26th, 2006 at 11:38 am
RH – saw your email to Cafferty got read on air last night! good on ya. back to work. cant even lurk for a while. home puter shot sparks out its a** last night so I can only do drive bys at lunch.
should have added: “sycophantic” — what a marvelous word.
OK, my post just got crapped up, didn’t all post. w’sup with that?
Try again:
cathy -
20 years ago I was managing a REMP database (Radiological Enviromental Monitoring Program) in Oak Ridge for a radiation lab where I worked. The data were for a nuke plant startup in Ohio. We always got below LLD (Lower Limit of Detection) for the air sample filters (”
Sorry, looks like it choked on the “less than” sign, thinks it’s an html thing.
cathy -
20 years ago I was managing a REMP database (Radiological Enviromental Monitoring Program) in Oak Ridge for a radiation lab where I worked. The data were for a nuke plant startup in Ohio. We always got below LLD (Lower Limit of Detection) for the air sample filters (”less than 0.04 pCi/cu m.”). One week after Chernobyl and for a month thereafter, we got positive readings on all of them — airborne I-131 — until the shit decayed away (8.05 day half-life) back below LLD. It was from Chernobyl.
Small world.
In that Chernobyl article it states how their government has been fudging the numbers of people exposed, amount of exposure and the number of deaths. I could just see that happening here if Bush were still in office and we started a nuclear war.
He’s already done that, Cathy– remember we don’t do body counts. It would only be worse with a nuclear attack…
Cathy 58
I’m only half kidding when I say that these evil scum could be seeing one drop here and then retaliating back somewhere every freekin day and they’d say something like ‘There’s been no formal declaration of war or hostilities; therefore the situation that we have is peace.’
see ‘War is Peace’
OT – but my local npr station just announced that there will be full details on Snows negative talk on Bush comming up on All Things Considered. Should be fun!
Fitz update via DKos:
UPDATE 2: Bob Franken and John King on CNN say it involves the Viveca Novak matter, questions that have come up since Rove’s last appearance before the grand jury and that no indictment expected this afternoon.
Busted thanks, for 26. From the realm of wild ass guesses, the shorter the period of time that Rove is in there, the worse it is for
DeadEyeCheney.OT -
CNN’s write-up on Rove and G/J today (allegedly ‘from King’ w/two contributors; one named Bohn (?)) leaves much to be disired. Luskin or a henchman is definitely ‘contributing’. Slanted isn’t even in the ballpark. Not only that, it has factual innacurracies. Maybe first draft blues on a breaking story, but…arghh..
hmmm– raw story headline:
Rove was offered deal, Truthout to report… Soon.
headline now reads:
REPORT: ROVE RECEIVED TARGET LETTER… SOON
that’s CNN.com as opposed the the cable TV entity. Strictly a ‘netizen’ and no cable here, so I ‘assume’ the dotcom. Need to remember specificity (man, Fitz would get me on ‘what time is it?’)
Oh boy.
A target letter.
But Karl was a subject not a target.
I bet his announcement this afternoon is that he is spending some time with his family.
-GSD
Oh jeebus, please oh please let him have received a target letter. I have been such a good girl this year…
Gotta love it. Rove, you are goin’ DOWN!
Looks like we might all be pitching in for a bicycle.
-GSD
…that said, I haven’t hearde anything to confirm the target letter info — so I’m gonna wait and see. (Please oh please…)
Target Letter sounds serious if I recall. Does this mean an indictment is on the way? Help!
a most informative explantion of the net neutrality issue appeared in
“the carpetbagger”
on monday april 24 under the title “net neutrality”.
(below in brackets):
[ The Center for American Progress published a helpful guide to the issue a couple of weeks ago.
Telecommunications companies like Verizon and AT&T want to build high-speed networks to provide video and Internet services in competition with cable companies. Will these networks be broadly available and foster technological innovation? Or will they simply benefit certain moneyed interests? The answer — and, ultimately, the future of the Internet — depends on the telecommunications bill currently winding its way through Congress. Consumer advocates and progressives like Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) are pushing for the telecom networks, which will be built using public rights-of-way, to provide universal, non-discriminatory access. The telecommunications companies (along with the cable giants) want to reserve the right to give preferential access to whomever has the most cash. Thus far, unfortunately, the industry is winning.
WHAT IS NET NEUTRALITY?:
Markey and others are pushing for the telecommunications bill to require “net neutrality.” The telephone network already operates on this principle. Anyone willing to pay a reasonable fee can get his or her own phone line. Once you get a phone line, it works just as well as Paris Hilton’s phone line or any other phone line. Also, it doesn’t matter whether you’re calling Brad Pitt or your grandmother, the connection works the same. (This is the way networks run naturally. Data is data. It doesn’t matter who sends it.) Open, non-discriminatory access to the phone networks means businesses compete on the basis of what they do with the telephone network, not whether they can afford preferential access to it. The telecoms want to reserve the right to sell privileged access to their high-speed networks. (Edward Whiteacre, the CEO of SBC Communications put it this way: “Now what they would like to do is use my pipes free, but I ain’t going to let them do that.”) So, for example, Amazon.com could pay the telecoms a premium and ensure that its site loads much faster than an independent bookstore’s site. The end result could be a two-tiered Internet, where your success doesn’t depend on innovative ideas but rather the ability to pay, thus stifling small businesses that could become the next Microsoft or Google.
It sounds bad. It is bad. As Digby put it, “This isn’t some arcane technological issue. It affects all of us who surf the internet. It means that the network providers will be able to make deals with certain companies to degrade or cut off your access to its competitors to give you an incentive to use their service.” ]
I didn’t believe a word of John King’s “Rove watch” report on CNN – all Rove spin. I’ll bet very little of Rove’s testimony had anything to do with Viveca Novak, like King said.
Why is it that a so-called professional like John King (who’s the “National somethingerother reporter” for CNN) does not have the initiative or the brains to do anything other than regurgitate what Luskin tells him? Never mind, I know – but don’t they have any pride left? I mean they know they’re not really reporting the story – just playing stenographer and taking their salaries under false pretenses…
please, please, please let it be true.
Lawrence O’Donnell from Huff Po wrote:
Karl Rove’s return to the grand jury today could mean the end of the Rove investigation or the beginning of the Rove prosecution. It depends on who asked Rove to return. If Fitzgerald asked Rove to return to the grand jury, that means Fitzgerald thinks he doesn’t have enough for an indictment.
If Rove asked to return to the grand jury, that means Rove’s lawyer, Bob Luskin, believes an indictment is imminent and is sending his client back to make a final desperate attempt to avoid indictment. Luskin did this once before when he told Fitzgerald about the Viveca Novak connection, which is certainly going to be covered in Rove’s testimony today. Luskin has experienced extreme mood swings in his willingness to talk to the press about this case. If a reporter can ask him one question today, it should be who asked Rove to return to the grand jury?
P.S. For what it’s worth, the buzz among the Washington press corps right now is that Rove asked to return to the grand jury.
MSNBC just confirmed that it was Rove that asked to testify, and David Shuster says:
According to NBC News’ David Shuster, legal sources say Rove volunteered to testify and was no[t] subpoenaed. Rove’s decision followed a recent conversation with Fitzgerald.
Here’s a link to a talkleft piece on the definition of a “target letter”. I found it helpful:
http://www.talkleft.com/new_archives/012634.html
As I see this is also a Rove thread I will repost my comment which was self-EPU’ed below:
If in fact, Rove is before the Grand Jury voluntarily, he is doing so to avoid MORE and MORE SERIOUS charges, not to wrap things up. Witnesses are allowed to “correct the record†before a sitting grand jury to avoid purjury charges. Now technically, Rove is not before the same GJ, but there is a clever argument that because his previous testimony was presented to this GJ, and because the last GJ took no action (that we know of) then his testimony before this GJ clearing up the record should be treated the same as his clearing up testimony before the original.
My educated guess is that Fitz would meet with Rove and his attorney to set out the future indictment guidelines — along the ones I just proposed above. This would not, however, in any way prevent the obstruction charges from being filed. In fact, if I was Fitz, when I met with Rove, I would allow Rove to:
1) testify before the GJ to clear up the record,
2) avoid perjury indictments (for the moment),
3) require complete candor,
4) offer in return to indict for lesser or fewer charges,
5) with the understanding that Rove would plead guilty to those charges when filed and testify against others.
That is what I see here today.
Just saw the “target letter” headline too. Remember, Raw Story tends to jump the gun on this sort of thing. Remember how positive they were with their news that Fitz was going to announce multiple indictments against multiple WH officials including Rove last fall?
I’m not buying it until there’s some hard confirmation.
Lawrence O’Donnell asks, “Who Asked Rove to Return?”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..19858.html
cathy – that is HUGE. Thanks. If Rove asked to come back because he knows he is facing indictment, well, that is HUGE.
It means Fitz isn’t necessarily trying to fill in any more gaps, but he is willing to entertain Rove as he goes through his last throes before the GJ.
Cathy — I love Lawrence O’Donnell — but he has never been a prosecutor and has not presented information to a grand jury. There are any number of very useful reasons to place someone under oath and get their testimony under threat of perjury, most of which do not mean that you have no case. I’m just saying.
From Raw Story: “Snow: Racism no longer ‘a big deal’”
“….Ironically, the remarks were made in defense of Rush Limbaugh’s assertion that quarterback Donovan McNabb was overrated by a media showing preferential bias to “black quarterbacks.”
“Here’s the unmentionable secret,” Snow said on an October 2003 edition of Fox News Sunday, “racism isn’t that big a deal anymore.” Snow argued that “no sensible person supports” racism, arguing that the problem is “quickly becoming an ugly memory…..”
79 immanentize – Wow, your analysis sounds dead on, although it could be wishful thinking on my part.
John Casper-
It’s easy for him to say that when he’s a white male, isn’t it?
John at 84. Of course, what Snow meant to say is that “racism isn’t a big deal anymore for me now that I am rich and have all these happy brown-skinned servants, no problems….”
Am posting this link as very general info on target letters for those of us who needed refreshing on the subject (me)
linked text
Christy, I agree that there are many useful reasons to get Rove under oath, but, as you mentioned earlier, this if the 5th time he has gone before the jury. So it is a somewhat unusual circumstance and therefore a bit more difficult to analyze.
I guess my only point is that while Patrick asking Rove back before the GJ is not necessarily a good or bad sign, the fact that Rove may have himself requested this GJ appearance is almost certainly a good sign. So, for now, I will hope it was the latter. Thanks!
Oh god, I hope some brilliant, genius, awesome crackers/hackers don’t pull a malicious “V”-like stunt and fuck with the lives and businesses of those responsible for the Barton Bill and its supporters.
ReddHedd-
I thought that too. If Fitz got some new information since he last talked to Rove, wouldn’t he want to clear up some things?
Christy is right. As to why a reporter could not figure out that the MOST LIKELY reason he is testifying is b/c he cut a deal and it requires him to testify truthfully and completely under oath, to the grand jury investigating his (Rover’s) and his cabal’s (whether other’s individual crimes or conspiracies), is tough to figure out.
It really is that obvious. It may not be the reason, but if we are going to speculate it is the logical, reasonable explanation.
Tony Snow said that his experience on the show “Black/White” proved his theory that racism no longer exists.
He plans on doing his first presser in blackface.
-GSD
Cannot confirm target letter story. Nothing on reuters,cnn,msnbc,abc,etc.
To all – It IS a bad thing for Rover. There are no “good” reasons to appear before a grand jury.
He plans on doing his first presser in blackface.
Oh, so Snow’s going with the “one with the people” gambit?
Doncha think its going to be really confusing when Spokesman Snow has to announce that the administration has dumped Secretary Snow? I wonder what Senator Snowe will think?
EPU,
Mix in the the massive flurry of “look over there” stories emanating from the Whitehouse and it looks like serious trouble for the pasty porkchop.
-GSD
To all of us who were here the first time around with Scooter:
Deja vu?
Just used ‘contact your congresscritter’ MA 2nd:
Sir;
Please be aware that the current effort to overthrow ‘Net Neutrality’ is a pernicious proposition. You may be aware that such a proposal is being marked up in the ‘Energy and Commerce Committee’ today. Your fellow MA delegate Mr. Markey is a member of that Committee. He has proposed an alternative, which I support. Your House Leader, Ms. Pelosi has posted an online petition also in support on Mr. Markey’s measure. I have added my name to her petition.
As you may know the origins of the Internet were designed to remain flexible, open and dynamic. I offer you a quote from of the giants who contributed to the birth of this elegant online environment from testimony he gave in writing before Commerce last November.
The words of Vint Cerf:
“My fear is that, as written, this bill would do great damage to the Internet as we know it. Enshrining a rule that broadly permits network operators to discriminate in favor of certain kinds of services and to potentially interfere with others would place broadband operators in control of online activity. Allowing broadband providers to segment their IP offerings and reserve huge amounts of bandwidth for their own services will not give consumers the broadband Internet our country and economy need.”
Not only does this measure hurt citizens in their homes, but, considering the recently installed fiber-optic high-speed access (donated thru Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation) at the Springfield Central library, users of that facility will be hamstrung. As a former teacher, you can appreciate that this will also impact school access and will negatively impact students. The ‘digital divide’ will grow to a ‘digital chasm’.
I hope this missive will help you rally suppport for Mr. Markey’s proposal.
Thank You,
xxxx.xxxxxx
Netizen
i very well may be as tightly wound as Rover right now… my refresh button could break from the strain…
what a bunch of snowballs, immanentize.
You can’t be human and be a press secretary. I hope McCurry has a fucking heart attack. He is trying to destoy what is basically, an Age. If this happens I’ll dump everything having to do with any company that signs on in 2 seconds and I won’t be paying the fucking early termination fee because that’s not what I signed up for.
cathy #77 – CNN said that Fitz asked Rove to testify – you posted that MSNBC says the opposite (that Rove asked to testify) and I would be very much more inclined to believe your source, David Shuster, than mine at CNN – CNN seems to be getting it’s information only from the Rove camp.
It’s just so interesting to me that there are such differing (opposing) stories on the different networks – you’d think that the simple fact of who asked who to testify would be just that – simple – hrrrrmph.
everhopeful-
That’s the state of the media today. How sad that they can’t get things right.
Just mentioning, the House is debating the Intelligence issue and my Rep, John Tierney is yelling and demanding, slamming the pres for not being forthcoming to the committee.
Return to Rove
here’s the article re target letter by Leopold:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042606I.shtml
If you call your Rep (which I just did) have the BILL NUMBER. Nobdy knows Congressman’s position. Intern took my info; I requested response.
What’s the buzz on Rove?
Target Letter link on Raw Story just went live. It’s to a Leopold story on TruthOut.
Not sure if this was reported earlier, but just in case it wasn’t….
Jason Leopold at Truthout.org is reporting that the reason, or at least part of the reason, that Turdie is testifying for a fith time is because he received a “target” letter from Fitz.
Thus, conventional wisdom would be that Turdie is running scared and asked Fitz for a chance to speak to the grand jury in the hopes that having the new grand jury hear him out will sway the new group away from returning an indictment. This is a bold and ballsy move by Rove (and a last ditch effort).
Now it all makes sense. In addition, Rove being allowed by Fitz to testify in front of the new grand jury must be a political move by Fitz. “Political” in the sense that if Rove is indicted Rove and Luskin will conduct a very hard “press campaign” to attempt to tarnish the indictment and Fitz wants to take some ammo from Turdie.
If Turdie was not allowed to testify before the new grand jury, you can bet that he and Luskin would attack the indictment by claiming that Fitz did not allow Turdie to clear his name and that he is being “railroaded.”
Good move by Fitz….And this also coincides with my belief that it will be a cold day in hell before Turdblossom rolls over on Cheney, Libby and his main man….Mr. Nucular.
I SMELL BACON!!
Sorry, got a little giddy there for a second. Go Fitz!
new thread…
Leopold’s article:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042606I.shtml
FWIW, I am reading O’Donnell’s post (linked above) as 100% spin from Rover’s attorney, Bob
Gold BarsLuskin.It sounds to me as though Luskin is planting one question that he wants the press to ask him when he and Rover exit.
“Luskin has experienced extreme mood swings in his willingness to talk to the press about this case. If a reporter can ask him one question today, it should be who asked Rove to return to the grand jury?”
who i pity the most: roves children; the prospect of more time with kkkarl is probably making boarding school back in TX look good . . .
Zennurse – Kazuza (spelling is probably variable). News Radio was one of the greatest tv shows of all time, and my personal favorite (why it is not on DVD is beyond me, although A&E once said they were gonna have it).
Anyway, there was an episode in which Bill (Phil Hartman) was hired to read ads for malt liqour. The copy for the ad was in an “urban” (i.e. Black) syntax, and Bill read it with an “urban” (i.e. Black) accent. Katherine (Khandi Alexander) was offended by the ad, so, to screw with him, she told him that no Black person talks like in the ad, but that Black’s greet each other by saying Kazuza.
It is a greeting I often use.
Perhaps too much information.
zennurse– I have been away from my computer since my comment about the NSA domestic spying bills being voted on in the Senate tomorrow. Has there been more discussion of that since then, or do I need to repost the information for current readers?
EPU — I LUV me some News Radio. And the loss of Phil Hartman is still a blow — he was a one of a kind comic, and he and Dave Foley rocked that show. (Well, the guy who played the boss whose name escapes me at the moment was pretty damn good, too…Stephen Root, maybe?)
Any son of a bitch that votes for this should be recalled. Is this feasible. Let them have to spend their graft money fighting it.
To follow up on the post, we lost the vote on the Markey Amendment today. But we got 22 votes, more than could have possibly been expected at this time last week (Repub Heather Wilson even crossed party lines to vote with us). Bobby Rush was among the 5 Dem turncoats.
It’s clear that the telcos wanted to enact this under cover of darkness, the way everything else typically gets done in DC. But they messed with the ultimate sunshine generator. Let’s keep the pressure on and preserve Internet freedom.
So now what, Friends. We need to get out there and defeat some rethuglicans. Especially the people who voted for this abomination. Also, any lawyers out there, seems to me that anyone who has internet has standing to sue. Lemmie see….shall we start with AT and T
Someone should tell those genius Democrats that Republican-controlled telecom companies could easily make it harder for voters to access Democrat websites if this becomes law.
I swear to god, politicians suck.
I am so tired of being sold out by bastards trying to make money that I can hardly read the news. It is a sad commentary on our system and on humanity in general that people in positions of trust betray us for money routinely. I should say that they betray us for “more” money.