The government could seize personal property, wiretaps would become legal for the first time, violators could face life in prison and, in an ambiguous and far-reaching provision, the mere attempt to violate a copyright would become a crime.

That’s mighty extreme for copyright infringement. And how far would the government want to go in enforcing such a law? And then there’s…

Exporting pirated material would also become a crime and the bill would grant the feds wiretapping authority, which it currently lacks. The “attempt” provision, stipulating that mere intent constitutes a crime, means that the law could conceivably be expanded to interpret a computer full of music next to a spindle of blank CDs as an act of piracy.

Yes, I would like to see stiffer penalties for copyright infringement. This isn’t the solution, however. This is a power grab that would lend itself too easily to abuse.

Technorati Tags: copyright infringement, law

Wow.

So I thought that I would share my own thoughts on the topic. Just barely, I’m not in favor. This is a really close one for me.

I have to admit, though, that they worry me. I don’t like how this country is being run right now. I worry about where things are going. I don’t feel they have done their jobs well and I am concerned that they are going to continue on their current track, strongly favoring corporations over the overall good of the country.

I worry that they will decide to invade Iran, which I feel would be a huge mistake at this time. And yes, I do know how much saber rattling Iran has been doing.

The problem I have is that I think an impeachment has the potential to be even worse for our country. I feel it was a mistake to impeach President Clinton. I feel that an impeachment will serve only to deepen the political hatreds that have been making things so ugly in this country.

I miss the ability of people to talk sanely about politics and disagree without considering the other person a naive idiot. The ability to disagree politely seems to be largely a lost art.

I can admit that I have seen some of President Bush’s supporters who do make me shudder. The people who think dropping nuclear bombs would solve the Iran problem without making things worse for our country. That is just about enough to give me nightmares. Do they really think that there would be no repercussions from other countries, from Islamic jihadists who would be even less inhibited about attacking the United States if we did something so terrible?

But I do not think they’re idiots. I just don’t think they believe in the same consequences I do.

At this point, I suspect that our politicians will end up taking a close look at impeachment. I just don’t see things going any other way. 39% is a very significant percentage of voters, even higher than the percentage that feels President Bush is doing a good job. I don’t think you can call one significant without considering the other significant.

But I still hope Congress does not vote for impeachment. We don’t need a wider political divide.

The kind of feminism I subscribe to is that women and men should have choices. I know stay at home moms and stay at home dads. Neither group tends to be lazy, but society tends to be hard on both. Probably harder on the SAHDs than the SAHMs, but it’s still not easy to be either.

Whether you choose to be a stay at home mom or a work outside the home mom, you’re going to hear from somebody that you’ve got it all wrong. Working moms are neglectful of their kids. Stay at home moms are wasting their educations. They’re lazy. Unfulfilled.

I happen to disagree with both of those camps. I see mothers of all stripes trying to do what they feel is best for their families and themselves.

Of course, stay at home moms are starting to get more opportunities to continue to bring in money for their families, and I don’t mean by selling Avon or any other stereotypical home business. The internet has opened up all kinds of possibilities for stay at home mothers, from telecommuting from their old jobs to starting businesses of their own.

This aspect of being a stay at home mom tends to be ignored in these debates all too often. Yet, as a work at home mom myself, I can’t help but see it as a major consideration.

But I still do not look down upon the strict stay at home moms. I’m a firm believer in being able to make decisions for oneself, and that means not being pushed into something that I don’t want to do by anyone. Not feminists. Not people who feel that moms ought to stay at home.

A stay at home mom can be a feminist by making sure that all her children know that they have options. Women have options. Men have options too.

Technorati Tags: stay at home moms, sahm, working moms, feminist, feminism

What a load of crap!

I have to agree with the folks over at The Moderate Voice. Never mind that liberals have not been constantly in power over the past 35 years that he refers to. Apparently the mere existance of liberals is sufficient.

Of course, I don’t hold with blaming conservatives for Virginia Tech either. The massacre had to do with one deluded person who decided to shoot a lot of people. Sadly, such shootings have happened in the past, and will likely happen in the future, even if this country were to go entirely conservative (or liberal, for those who prefer the opposite perspective).

So can we blame violent video games?

I certainly have issues with the worst of the violent games. Some of them simply strike me as far too graphic. And you can argue all you like as to whether or not they actually encourage violence, desensitise children who play them, etc. But once again, these happened before.

But the worst of this is all the name calling, trying to find a way to blame a group you don’t belong to. Obviously it’s the other guy’s fault!

I would have to disagree. Yes, you can say there’s some degree of guilt you can place on society. But really I don’t think it’s all that much. The most sensible thing to blame is the easy access to guns, but balancing that with the right to bear arms is pretty tough, and no, I don’t want to do away with that. But a better balance of control could have limited the killings. Or not. A really determined killer could have found a way anyhow.

Or you can say someone should have noticed that he was getting ready to have a psychotic episode. He’d shown some signs of issues already, but do you really want there to be such a careful watch on everyone? I’d worry about how much that could limit freedoms.

What happened at Virginia Tech was a horrendous tragedy. But using it as an excuse to cast blame and namecall is not the solution.

Technorati Tags: virginia tech, liberals, conservatives, gingrich

There are plenty of news stories to read, and thoughts from other world leaders.

Technorati Tags: Boris Yeltsin, Russia

First of all, partial birth abortions, despite what opponents may say, happen very, very rarely, and are typically done as the safest way to abort a fetus that won’t survive anyhow. They are not used as a sort of birth control!

Justice Kennedy conceded that “we find no reliable data” on whether abortion in general, or the procedure prohibited by the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, causes women emotional harm. But he said it was nonetheless “self-evident” and “unexceptional to conclude” that “some women” who choose to terminate their pregnancies suffer “regret,” “severe depression,” “loss of esteem” and other ills.

Yes, having an abortion is, for many women, a painful, painful decision, especially when the pregnancy had been wanted, as is the usual case when a late term abortion is done.

I had a great time reading the post and comments over at Feministe on this idiotic decision. The trouble with this, as noted there, is that this doesn’t stop abortions. It merely takes away one of the safest options for the mother, putting her at added risk for complications. It is not a simple decision or one made on a whim.

Of course, abortion opponents are delighted. Not only did the Supreme Court back them up, it did so with a decision supporting a ban that doesn’t allow exemptions for the health of the mother. Brilliant utterly brilliant, no?

The worst is that the justification used should make it easier for other abortion bans to be upheld.

It’s disappointing to see that enough Supreme Court Justices now take the paternalistic view that we poor women need to be protected from ourselves. We don’t. What we need is access to good health care, including when we want to prevent pregnancy and when we make the devastating decision to terminate a wanted pregnancy. We do not need that decision made any harder or the risk increased.

Technorati Tags: supreme court decision, partial birth abortion ban, reproductive rights, paternalistic

But I’m glad to see that the FCC is looking into whether or not broadband is being deployed fairly and quickly enough. The United States is behind 14 other countries in broadband penetration, which just amazes me. Seems like something has to be wrong with how it’s going.

I worked at Pacific Bell back when DSL was relatively new, but getting ready for the big expansion. Back then, exactly how DSL was deployed was a huge deal, as many areas didn’t have access to it. My bosses explained that it had to be deployed without regard to the income of the area, so even though we might get more request for DSL from areas that had more money, a poorer area could very well get it first.

Deployment wasn’t my area, of course. Taking customer orders over the phone and following up on them was my department. We had to check to see who qualified, as distance was a huge factor, even if DSL was available in the general area.

What has been hugely disappointing, however, is not the deployment of DSL, so far as I know. But there was all the talk about fiber optic services and so forth that just really haven’t come to anything. It seems quite clear that somewhere there’s a problem, especially considering that fees were charged to allow companies to cover the cost of improving the infrastructure.

What happened?

Technorati Tags: broadband deployment, fcc, high speed internet, dsl

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) is the main voice speaking out for impeachment, although many other Representatives are hearing requests from constituents for impeachment.

I understand the logic of going for Cheney rather than Bush. Plenty of people loathe him, and would rather impeach Cheney than impeach Bush and leave Cheney as President.

I don’t like the job overall that Cheney has done. Too much questionable going on. Too many questions of whether or not power has been abused. Then there are the questions of authorizing torture, manipulating intelligence and so forth.

Do note that I’m honest enough to not be certain how much of that Cheney is responsible for. But also note that I don’t care what the situation is, we can’t afford to go around breaking our own laws in an attempt to defend them. Giving up the fundamental respect for human rights that our country to have is a kind of ultimate betrayal of our country.

I also understand that politically, impeaching Cheney is not necessarily the smartest move for the Democratic Party, which I suspect is why it hasn’t happened. An impeachment is quite likely to draw Republicans together, rather than push them away from their party.

Would I impeach, given the choice? I’d have to do a hell of a lot of research first. That just isn’t a question I would want to answer offhand. From what I know, I don’t trust the man, but I couldn’t say for certain that impeachment is the answer.

But if it were, I’d want to consider it, whether the timing was good or bad politically.

Technorati Tags: Vice President Cheney, President Bush, impeach, impeachment, Rep. Dennis Kucinich

I read about this over at Gun Toting Liberal, and I have to agree… this whole thing is a bad, bad idea. We may not like the language they use or the opinions stated, but they have the right to say it. Even when much of it is hateful.

I’m really not a fan of slippery slope arguements, but it’s easy to see one applying in this case. You decide that offensive material should not be published. So what’s offensive now? Next year? Year after that? A problem could develop all too easily.

I’m not a fan of any of the shock jocks. I don’t need to hear it. But that’s my own choice. They do well because people love hearing them state opinions their listeners either love to yell at or would love to say themselves.

And when I think about exactly what got Imus in trouble, it seems to me that there are other entertainers saying the same thing. Is it really better for a black rapper to say it than a white shock jock? Not to me. The one difference is in applying it to specific people.

Of course, the corporations that fired Imus were well within their rights. Their advertisers were no doubt screaming. I just don’t like the idea that all offensive speech should be taken off the air.

Technorati Tags: imus, free speech, shock jocks, media matters

This sounds like it is consistent with real world requirements of businesses that so far have not been applied to online business:

section 6405(c) of the Internal Revenue Code requires 1099 forms to be submitted by any person who, for a fee, “regularly acts as a middleman with respect to property or services.” (from the article linked above)

OK, so it makes lots of sense to the IRS. More income reported so they can see who isn’t reporting their earnings.

Of course, you are supposed to report what you earn from such things. If you’re earning just a tiny bit, you probably wouldn’t be noticed, but if you earn a living there, it’s best to report the income anyhow. Better safe than having to pay huge penalties.

This would be a huge inconvenience to the sites themselves. They’d have to collect that personal information just as though they were employers. Is that a reasonable requirement?

The next question has to do with identity theft. I can see a new rash of phishing emails asking for personal information quoting rulings relevant to this.

And of course, there’s the question of how many people are underreporting. Do most people report their online auction income or no, especially among the big sellers? How much of a difference will this requirement really make?

Of course, this should be considered a head’s up for those who sell on auction websites. If you aren’t reporting your income clearly now, it’s a good time to get moving on that. You do not want to get caught doing otherwise.

Technorati Tags: irs, taxes, online auctions, ebay, personal information, tax, 1099, reporting income