Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)

17. I agree with you jd. This is a strong and good statement. Now. Do I go easy on the

Reply to jefferson_dem (Reply #3)

Sat Jan 14, 2012, 09:37 AM

Jan 2012

administration? No, I don't. Is this issue wildly important to me? Why yes it is. There are few people who see this issue with any sort of informed clarity. I agree in some areas with each 'side' in the argument, and also think each side makes utterly insane and dated arguments that are not realistic in anyway.
This statement is one of the few things to come out of DC that suggests some of them know the difficulty of crafting this law to protect all interested parties, users, creators, the whole enchilada.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

33 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

White House on SOPA: "We will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression..." [View all] jefferson_dem Jan 2012 OP

why is it so hard to believe what they say? ChairmanAgnostic Jan 2012 #1

those words are given as fuel boston bean Jan 2012 #2

DU...Never fails... jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #5

DU never fails to amaze me. boston bean Jan 2012 #6

2, even 8 years ago, I would have scoffed in your face, claimed you were too ChairmanAgnostic Jan 2012 #15

While I have guarded skepticism like that that I have reserved for the NDAA think Jan 2012 #23

Perhaps because you simply feel destined to be disappointed, regardless of reality. jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #3

It gets to be a bit too late to hold folks accountable boston bean Jan 2012 #4

Those who are hoping to do damage (with SOPA) just received a major pushback from the POTUS... jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #7

Good if it's really true, but no reason for anyone boston bean Jan 2012 #8

Your ,not disruptive, insensitive or over the top orpupilofnature57 Jan 2012 #11

Adn you are entitled to speak your opinion,, even if someone else boston bean Jan 2012 #16

Priceless. jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #12

I am not in the doldrums, and I do notice one thing with your posting style. boston bean Jan 2012 #14

I like the statement and also strongly agree that 'Vigilance is the word' Bluenorthwest Jan 2012 #19

Maybe POTUS is trying to compensate orpupilofnature57 Jan 2012 #9

I agree with you jd. This is a strong and good statement. Now. Do I go easy on the Bluenorthwest Jan 2012 #17

Indeed, Bluenorthwest. jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #18

How is it Internet Freedom when the US wants the ability to prosecute justiceischeap Jan 2012 #21

That's the point. jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #26

They said much the same about the Defense Authorization Act JCMach1 Jan 2012 #10

Please provide examples! FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #29

"any bill I sign must contain a public option" Zhade Jan 2012 #31

Actions vs words. Edweird Jan 2012 #13

So does this mean more signing statements. n/t Joe Shlabotnik Jan 2012 #20

Let's hope not. Zalatix Jan 2012 #33

Really? Folks on DU are pissed that the WH spoke on the matter? Sheepshank Jan 2012 #22

+1 Itchinjim Jan 2012 #24

I wouldn't say "pissed" unless you mean in the british sense. ChairmanAgnostic Jan 2012 #25

I'll believe it when I see the veto. n/t LadyHawkAZ Jan 2012 #27

MORE: Obama Administration Comes Out Against SOPA, PIPA jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #28

Thanks. Scurrilous Jan 2012 #30

So far when the WH says such things it signals an eventual signing. We should believe this because? Dragonfli Jan 2012 #32