The Right Livelihood Award is set up to honor grassroots and community-oriented environmental and social/solidarity/pro-poor activists, and was inspired and founded to address a gaping hole left by the Nobel Prizes. It is a hub for activist information in my view.
Right Livelihood Award Recipients call on German Government to stop backing nuclear power in Brazil
In
March 2011, a global alliance of some 50 Right Livelihood Award
Recipients and members of the World Future Council demanded a global nuclear phase out. The initiative inspired Right Livelihood Award Laureate Chico Whitaker to help build up a movement in Brazil aiming at the shutdown of Brazilian nuclear power plant Angra.
While
having been hailed widely for its nuclear phase-out and for admitting
the uncontrollable risks of nuclear energy, the German Government
considers a 1.3 billion export credit guarantee for companies involved
in the construction of Angra 3.
This German ambiguity has spurred
bewilderment among many of our Laureates who, together with members of
the World Future Council, signed an appeal to the German Government.
For German citizens, a campaign led by Urgewald offers the chance to demand the Government to stop its double standard policy.
from rightlivelihood.org
Friday, February 24, 2012
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Apple in the NY Times
The Fair Labor Association has been one of the organizations providing the major work of creating a system to make corporations accountable for the labor conditions in the factories they use in developing nations. DemocracyNow provides their probing follow up to recent NY Times reporting.
Further on in the discussion, there are comments about the US as a model for working conditions which are very naive, I think. See Barbara Ehrenreich's Nickel and Dimed and her sequel, a book called White Collar Sweatshops, and the New York Times' piece some years ago about McWade Industries where at least one death highlights atrocious conditions contrasted with ACIPCO.
Apple, Accustomed to Profits and Praise, Faces Outcry for Labor Practices at Chinese Factories
Protesters visited a half-dozen Apple stores around the world to deliver petitions calling for reforms in the working conditions at factories run by Apple’s suppliers in China. The protests come on the heels of recent revelations of harsh conditions and onerous work environments at Apple’s controversial Chinese supplier Foxconn, where more than a dozen employees have committed suicide. We’re joined by New York Times reporter Charles Duhigg, who helped break the story about the human costs of Apple products for workers in China. We’re also joined by Mike Daisey, whose acclaimed one-man show, "The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs," is based partly on his visits to Apple’s Chinese factories and his interviews with the workers there. "I want Apple to take real responsibility," Daisey says. "They have the resources to change this overnight." ,,,,
see site below for full article...
.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Wall St. Fraud Updates and Action
I just got these emails, the first from Credo Telcom, the new name of Working Assets Telcom. I´ve had billing problems with them on one occasion, but overall, their activism is very probing. Nevertheless, Earthtones Telcom is another activist business worth looking at.
In this letter, Credo informs activists about the recent Fraud Settlement. Another sad story requiring more action.
The second is from Public Citizen about new legislation that could help regulate speculative activity by banks.
1) Dear Mark,
In this letter, Credo informs activists about the recent Fraud Settlement. Another sad story requiring more action.
The second is from Public Citizen about new legislation that could help regulate speculative activity by banks.
1) Dear Mark,
Wall Street banks fraudulently and illegally foreclose on your house.
You get $2,000. The bank gets let off the hook. We'd
call that a bad deal.
And yet yesterday, at the urging of the White House, federal regulators
along with 49 state attorneys general announced a
settlement deal for mortgage servicer abuse that does essentially that.
It lets banks off the hook for widespread foreclosure
fraud.
Press releases have trumpeted a $26 billion deal which may sound like a
lot, but it's a paltry sum when you break down the
numbers.
With an average mortgage of $180,000, and loan instruments executed
illegally, a family that lost their home will get a check
for just over 1% of the value of the mortgage.1 That is not a
victory. The amount of money this deal makes available
to help homeowners is an order of magnitude too small and incommensurate
with the harm done by the banks.
The estimated $10-$20 billion in the deal for principal reduction would
reduce only about 2% of the $700 billion in equity
destroyed during the financial crisis. And the banks themselves will
only pay $5 billion out of their own pocket. By far
the lion's share of the cost will be borne by investors and taxpayers,
who had no part in the robo-signing scandal. 2
No doubt the deal is far better than the deal that was offered months
ago. And this most certainly is a result of activism
from members of CREDO and many of our allies in the progressive movement
who worked with progressive attorneys general like
New York's Eric Schneiderman, California's Kamala Harris, Delaware's
Beau Biden, Massachusetts' Martha Coakley and Nevada's
Catherine Cortez Masto to fight a bad deal.
But the final deal, while better, still can't be characterized as a good
deal or even as a good first step towards real accountability
for Wall Street banks.
The reported $26 billion settlement will not come close to inflicting
any real pain on the banks all of which have already
reserved the full amounts required from them under the deal. As Robert
Reich said, the "$26 billion settlement with banks
over mortgage fraud is far short of what they should pay and distressed
home owners deserve."3
One in five Americans with mortgages owe the banks more than their homes
are worth, and these home owners are underwater
by an average of $50,000 each. This is a collective negative equity of
nearly $700 billion.4
Consider the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street paid for by U.S.
taxpayers5 and the more than $1.2 trillion in
loans6 provided by the Federal Reserve to Wall Street banks.
Or another way to put the deal in perspective is
to compare it to the tobacco industry settlement in 1998 — the largest
previous multi-state agreement. That deal was
worth $350 billion in today's dollars — more than ten times the size of
the mortgage deal.7
And that's not even all that's wrong with this deal. The federal
government's track record for enforcing settlement terms
with Wall Street banks is abysmal. Furthermore, even if the banks follow
the terms of the deal, it's quite possible than
when all is said and done, not only will the banks have suffered no
pain, they may actually come out having profited from
their illegal schemes to rip off homeowners. According to the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau, the largest mortgage
banks saved $20 billion by taking illegal shortcuts — an amount far
greater than the $5 billion out of pocket they
will be required to pay in this deal.8
All of which adds up to a scenario in which this settlement does
literally nothing to deter the banks from engaging in the
same fraudulent behavior in the future.
Senator Dick Durbin famously said the Wall Street banks own the
politicians in Washington, DC. Today, this could not be more
clearly true as we closely examine the deal that the Obama
administration cut with Wall Street and pressured state attorneys
general to sign.
There has yet to be a full investigation of the robo-signing scandal
despite what Reuters called "copious evidence" of "widespread
forgery, perjury, obstruction of justice, and illegal foreclosures...." 9
By establishing settlement terms before there has been any meaningful
investigation, the deal whitewashes the widespread
lawlessness of the banks and virtually ensures that no bankers will be
held criminally responsible for their part in the
robo-signing scandal and foreclosure fraud.
Though the exact terms of the settlement have not been disclosed, we
understand that it will not cut off other important
avenues to hold the banks accountable. New York Attorney General Eric
Schneiderman is co-chairing a federal task force that
if fully resourced and left to operate unhindered by the White House
could achieve hundreds of billions in reduced principal
for underwater homeowners and criminal indictments for bankers who broke
the law and helped drive our economy off a cliff.
And other state attorneys general can continue investigating Wall
Street's role in causing the housing crisis to ensure that
the banks that caused the crisis are held accountable for their
wrongdoing.
This is the biggest case of fraud in our history. Homeowners deserve
justice for crimes committed against them by Wall Street
banks that in many cases literally stole their homes from underneath
them. Unfortunately, yesterday's settlement doesn't
even provide anything close to a down payment on justice.
As the election season heats up, we must be insistent about real
accountability for Wall Street crooks. Pressure from activists
like us will be even more important in the days to come if we are to
achieve any real measure of accountability for Wall
Street bankers who profited from their crimes and left the 99% to pay to
the price for their reckless disregard.
Becky Bond, Political Director
CREDO Action from Working Assets
CREDO Action from Working Assets
1. "The Top Twelve Reasons Why
You Should Hate the Mortgage Settlement," Yves Smith, Naked
Capitalism, 02-09-12
2. "The Servicing Settlement: Banks 1, Public 0," Adam Levitin, Credit Slips, 02-09-12
3. Twitter, 02-09-12
4. "Mortgage Plan Gives Homeowners Bulk of the Benefits," Nelson D. Schwatz and Shaila Dewan, New York Times, 02-09-12
5. "Wall Street Aristocracy Got $1.2 Trillion in Secret Loans," Bradley Keoun and Phil Kuntz, Bloomberg, 08-22-11
6. "The Wall Street Bailout Plan Explained ," David Stout, New York Times, 09-20-08
7. "FAQ: The foreclosure settlement ," Sarah Halzack and Sarah Kliff, WashingtonPost.com, 02-09-12
8. "Big Banks Save Billions As Homeowners Suffer, Internal Federal Report By CFPB Finds," Huffington Post, 03-28-11.
9. "U.S. AG Eric Holder, DoJ Head Lanny Breuer Linked To Banks Accused Of Foreclosure Fraud ," Reuters, 01-19-12.
2. "The Servicing Settlement: Banks 1, Public 0," Adam Levitin, Credit Slips, 02-09-12
3. Twitter, 02-09-12
4. "Mortgage Plan Gives Homeowners Bulk of the Benefits," Nelson D. Schwatz and Shaila Dewan, New York Times, 02-09-12
5. "Wall Street Aristocracy Got $1.2 Trillion in Secret Loans," Bradley Keoun and Phil Kuntz, Bloomberg, 08-22-11
6. "The Wall Street Bailout Plan Explained ," David Stout, New York Times, 09-20-08
7. "FAQ: The foreclosure settlement ," Sarah Halzack and Sarah Kliff, WashingtonPost.com, 02-09-12
8. "Big Banks Save Billions As Homeowners Suffer, Internal Federal Report By CFPB Finds," Huffington Post, 03-28-11.
9. "U.S. AG Eric Holder, DoJ Head Lanny Breuer Linked To Banks Accused Of Foreclosure Fraud ," Reuters, 01-19-12.
2) Mark ,
One of the most important reforms intended to ensure Wall Street can never cause another financial crash deserves your input.
It’s a section of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law called the Volcker Rule. The rule’s goal is to stop banks that receive federal backing from making risky, speculative bets — a practice called “proprietary trading.” Federal banking agencies are accepting public comments through February 13.
This might sound complicated, but our aim is simple: to ban the Big Banks from risking taxpayer money on high stakes gambles and keep them from crashing the economy again.
Tell the financial regulators: Banks should not be casinos.
The Big Banks have raked in billions on these risky bets. In fact, the speculation is so lucrative that some banks have made it their primary focus. This means that, instead of fueling the real economy like they’re supposed to, these banks are siphoning money away from it. But when they lose big, taxpayers cover the losses.
Basically, the Volcker Rule would stop federal subsidies for banker gambling and help reorient the banks toward building a sound economy.
Wall Street lobbyists have met with the regulators more than 350 times in an attempt to fill this new rule with loopholes. Their priority is protecting this risky source of bloated, bonus-producing profits.
The regulators need to hear from people like you who care about the stability of our financial system, not rigging the system for Wall Street.
Urge the financial regulators to adopt a strong, simple Volcker Rule.
One of the most important reforms intended to ensure Wall Street can never cause another financial crash deserves your input.
It’s a section of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law called the Volcker Rule. The rule’s goal is to stop banks that receive federal backing from making risky, speculative bets — a practice called “proprietary trading.” Federal banking agencies are accepting public comments through February 13.
This might sound complicated, but our aim is simple: to ban the Big Banks from risking taxpayer money on high stakes gambles and keep them from crashing the economy again.
Tell the financial regulators: Banks should not be casinos.
The Big Banks have raked in billions on these risky bets. In fact, the speculation is so lucrative that some banks have made it their primary focus. This means that, instead of fueling the real economy like they’re supposed to, these banks are siphoning money away from it. But when they lose big, taxpayers cover the losses.
Basically, the Volcker Rule would stop federal subsidies for banker gambling and help reorient the banks toward building a sound economy.
Wall Street lobbyists have met with the regulators more than 350 times in an attempt to fill this new rule with loopholes. Their priority is protecting this risky source of bloated, bonus-producing profits.
The regulators need to hear from people like you who care about the stability of our financial system, not rigging the system for Wall Street.
Urge the financial regulators to adopt a strong, simple Volcker Rule.
 |
Thanks for
all you do, Rick Claypool Public Citizen’s Online Action Team action@citizen.org http://action.citizen.org |
Monday, January 23, 2012
Ralph Nader on Obama's S of U 2012
Monday, January 23.
2012
Posted by nimda
in Special
Features
Letter
to President Obama Re: The State of the Union Address
January 20, 2012
Dear
President Obama:
As you prepare your State of the Union
address, please be advised that those who support you are very
cognizant of what you do not mention in such annual presentations
to the Nation. For example, last year, environmentalists were
shocked that global warming-climate change received no attention.
Nor did raising the minimum wage, as you promised in 2008 to
$9.50 by 2011.
Enclosed is my recent column titled
"Congress Needs to Get to Work" that reminds and
recommends what you and the Congressional Democrats should be
advancing this year. They are not only needed legislative
actions, but they are both significant and popular.
Try to
avoid being drawn into corrosive conflicts with the Congressional
Republicans on matters you could have avoided by learning how to
bargain for more when you give up much. An example is your
concessions on the Bush tax cuts in late 2010 for which you
should have demanded concurrence for raising the debt limit.
Think of the time that struggle absorbed in 2011,
To call
a reduction of the employee side of the payroll tax a "tax
cut" for 160 million Americans is beyond disingenuous. You
know who pays for this maneuver once this can is kicked down the
road.
The many organizations in this country striving to
stem the rising poverty in this country have wondered why you
never mention "the poor" in your speeches. They are
aware of the Clintonesque code that only referred to "the
middle class," and never to "the poor" or "to
low income people" who now number nearly 100 million
Americans. They did not expect that Barack Obama also would have
employed this language of avoidance.
You do not want them
to feel they are being taken for granted.
Sincerely
yours,
Ralph Nader
http://nader.org/index.php?/archives/2346-Letter-to-President-Obama-Re-The-State-of-the-Union-Address.html
Monday, January 23. 2012
Posted by nimda
in Special
Features
Letter to President Obama Re: The State of the Union Address
January 20, 2012
Dear President Obama: As you prepare your State of the Union address, please be advised that those who support you are very cognizant of what you do not mention in such annual presentations to the Nation. For example, last year, environmentalists were shocked that global warming-climate change received no attention. Nor did raising the minimum wage, as you promised in 2008 to $9.50 by 2011. Enclosed is my recent column titled "Congress Needs to Get to Work" that reminds and recommends what you and the Congressional Democrats should be advancing this year. They are not only needed legislative actions, but they are both significant and popular. Try to avoid being drawn into corrosive conflicts with the Congressional Republicans on matters you could have avoided by learning how to bargain for more when you give up much. An example is your concessions on the Bush tax cuts in late 2010 for which you should have demanded concurrence for raising the debt limit. Think of the time that struggle absorbed in 2011, To call a reduction of the employee side of the payroll tax a "tax cut" for 160 million Americans is beyond disingenuous. You know who pays for this maneuver once this can is kicked down the road. The many organizations in this country striving to stem the rising poverty in this country have wondered why you never mention "the poor" in your speeches. They are aware of the Clintonesque code that only referred to "the middle class," and never to "the poor" or "to low income people" who now number nearly 100 million Americans. They did not expect that Barack Obama also would have employed this language of avoidance. You do not want them to feel they are being taken for granted. Sincerely yours, Ralph Nader |
"He Says One Thing and Does Another": Ralph Nader Responds to Obama’s State of the Union Address
Responding to President Obama’s State of the Union address, longtime consumer
advocate and former presidential candidate Ralph Nader says Obama’s criticism of
income inequality and Wall Street excess fail to live up to his record in
office. "[Obama] says one thing and does another," Nader says. "Where has he
been for over three years? He’s had the Justice Department. There are existing
laws that could prosecute and convict Wall Street crooks. He hasn’t sent more
than one or two to jail." On foreign policy, Nader says, "I think his lawless
militarism, that started the speech and ended the speech, was truly astonishing.
[Obama] was very committed to projecting the American empire, in Obama terms."
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/1/25/he_says_one_thing_and_does
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/1/25/he_says_one_thing_and_does
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Herve Kempf- Hold the Rich Accountable
Herve Kempf´s book, HOw the Rich Are Destroying the Planet, returned to my thoughts the other day. While looking for it, I found this piece on Chavez at the 2009 Copenhagen COP. One of my favorite statistics and discoveries about Chavez´s impact on Venezuela has been the tens of thousands of co-operatives incentivized since his first election and before and after the 2002 temporary coup. Venezuelanalysis.com has some detailed discussions of these events.
Chavez Slams Rich Nations at Copenhagen, Calls for Systemic Change to Save Planet
Tags
Caracas, December 16th 2009 (Venezuelanalysis.com) – During his
speech to the 15th United Nations Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen, Denmark,
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez slammed the “lack of political will” of the
most powerful nations to take serious action to avert climate change, and called
for systemic change to save the planet.
Chavez, who received a standing ovation for his speech, said the process in Copenhagen is “not democratic; it is not inclusive.” In particular, he criticised an attempt by rich countries to overturn the Kyoto Protocol. Doing so would eliminate differentiation between the obligations of rich and poor countries, treating countries from the Global North and South as equally responsible for climate change.
“There is a group of countries that believe they are superior to those of us from the South, to those of us from the Third Word… this does not surprise us… we are again faced with powerful evidence of global imperial dictatorship,” Chavez said.
The Venezuelan president also applauded the initiative of the protesters outside the summit who were calling for serious measures to stop catastrophic climate change.
“There are many people outside... I've read in the news that there were some arrests, some intense protests there in the streets of Copenhagen, and I salute all those people out there, the majority of them youth… They are young people concerned for the world’s future,” he said.
“I have been reading some of the slogans painted in the streets… One said, ‘Don’t Change the Climate, Change the System!’ – And I bring that on board for us. Let’s not change the climate. Let’s change the system! And as a consequence, we will begin to save the planet. Capitalism is a destructive development model that is putting an end to life, that threatens to put a definitive end to the human species.”
Another notable slogan is, “If the climate were a bank, they would have bailed it out already,” Chavez said during his speech. “It’s true; the rich governments have saved the capitalist banks,” he said, but they lack “the political will” to make the necessary reductions to greenhouse emissions.
“One could say there is a spectre at Copenhagen, to paraphrase Karl Marx… almost no-one wants to mention it: the spectre of capitalism,” he declared.
History requires all people to struggle against capitalism, and if we don’t, life on the planet “will disappear,” the Venezuelan president argued.
“Do the rich think they can go to another planet when they’ve destroyed this one?” he asked as he recommended a copy of a book by Hervé Kampf, “How the Rich are Destroying the Planet.”
“Climate change is undoubtedly the most devastating environmental problem of this century. Floods, droughts, severe storms, hurricanes, melting ice caps, rise in average sea levels, ocean acidification, and heat waves, all of that sharpens the impact of global crisis besetting us,” he continued.
Human activity is exceeding the limits of sustainability and endangering life on the planet, but the impacts of climate change are also being felt disproportionately by the world’s poor, Chavez explained.
He also pointed to the relationship between economic inequality and levels of greenhouse gas emissions. He said the richest 500 million people, or 7% of the world’s population, are responsible for 50% of global greenhouse emissions, while the poorest 50% of the worlds population are responsible for only 7% of total emissions.
http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/5012
Chavez, who received a standing ovation for his speech, said the process in Copenhagen is “not democratic; it is not inclusive.” In particular, he criticised an attempt by rich countries to overturn the Kyoto Protocol. Doing so would eliminate differentiation between the obligations of rich and poor countries, treating countries from the Global North and South as equally responsible for climate change.
“There is a group of countries that believe they are superior to those of us from the South, to those of us from the Third Word… this does not surprise us… we are again faced with powerful evidence of global imperial dictatorship,” Chavez said.
The Venezuelan president also applauded the initiative of the protesters outside the summit who were calling for serious measures to stop catastrophic climate change.
“There are many people outside... I've read in the news that there were some arrests, some intense protests there in the streets of Copenhagen, and I salute all those people out there, the majority of them youth… They are young people concerned for the world’s future,” he said.
“I have been reading some of the slogans painted in the streets… One said, ‘Don’t Change the Climate, Change the System!’ – And I bring that on board for us. Let’s not change the climate. Let’s change the system! And as a consequence, we will begin to save the planet. Capitalism is a destructive development model that is putting an end to life, that threatens to put a definitive end to the human species.”
Another notable slogan is, “If the climate were a bank, they would have bailed it out already,” Chavez said during his speech. “It’s true; the rich governments have saved the capitalist banks,” he said, but they lack “the political will” to make the necessary reductions to greenhouse emissions.
“One could say there is a spectre at Copenhagen, to paraphrase Karl Marx… almost no-one wants to mention it: the spectre of capitalism,” he declared.
History requires all people to struggle against capitalism, and if we don’t, life on the planet “will disappear,” the Venezuelan president argued.
“Do the rich think they can go to another planet when they’ve destroyed this one?” he asked as he recommended a copy of a book by Hervé Kampf, “How the Rich are Destroying the Planet.”
“Climate change is undoubtedly the most devastating environmental problem of this century. Floods, droughts, severe storms, hurricanes, melting ice caps, rise in average sea levels, ocean acidification, and heat waves, all of that sharpens the impact of global crisis besetting us,” he continued.
Human activity is exceeding the limits of sustainability and endangering life on the planet, but the impacts of climate change are also being felt disproportionately by the world’s poor, Chavez explained.
He also pointed to the relationship between economic inequality and levels of greenhouse gas emissions. He said the richest 500 million people, or 7% of the world’s population, are responsible for 50% of global greenhouse emissions, while the poorest 50% of the worlds population are responsible for only 7% of total emissions.
http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/5012
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Bill Moyers at OWS
Bill Moyers: Occupy a Cause
by: Bill Moyers, Moyers & Co. | Video
(Image: Moyers & Co.)
What’s the common cause behind Occupy protesters?
The Moyers & Company team visited the Occupy Wall Street site several times between October and December in 2011 — visits that reveal real faces, real people, and a true common cause. In this premiere Bill Moyers Essay, Bill talks about their anger — not at the concept of wealth itself, but at the crony capitalists who resort to tricks, loopholes, and hard, cold cash for politicians to make sure insiders prosper… and then pull up the ladder behind them.
BILL MOYERS: By coincidence I first met with Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson on the very day Occupy Wall Street had sprung up in lower Manhattan. And I wondered, as so many others did, were we seeing the advance guard of a movement by organized people to challenge the power of organized money? Well, it’s still too soon to know. But in the weeks that followed, every time we went down to the encampment, there was no mistaking the message.
LINNEA PALMER PATON: I don’t have thousands of dollars to go buy myself a lobbyist to lobby for my views, but corporations do.
BILL MOYERS: Linnea Palmer Paton is 23 and an Occupy Wall Street Volunteer.
LINNEA PALMER PATON: This is supposed to be a government for the people, run by the people and if our voices don’t matter because we’re not wealthy, that’s really unacceptable and it’s dangerous.
Read more articles and view more videos from Moyers & Co. by clicking here.
HERO VINCENT: My name is Hero Vincent, I'm 21 years old. I’ve been here since day one. My parents were foreclosed on, my father’s been unemployed a couple of years. My mother was the only one taking care of the family for a while. I’ve been working since I’ve been 14 years old, you know, trying to put food on our table, trying to help out with the bills. So all these circumstances-- my sister is in college and she-- we can barely afford it, you know. And so it brought us here. The struggle brought us to this occupation, this day, this moment.
[NATSOT]: It ain’t hard to occupy if you’re set on freedom.
BILL MOYERS: Amin Husain is a former corporate lawyer. He’s now an artist who has become one of the many organizers of Occupy Wall Street.
AMIN HUSAIN: This connection between government and state regulating money and the flow of money at the expense of 99 percent of the population is untenable and it’s no longer being accepted. There’s been a shift in the way that people think of themselves in this political process. That there has been a level of empowerment. But this movement is about transforming society.....
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
SOPA and PIPA- Corporate Control of the Internet
Ah, the thrill of the threat of corporate control hardly takes a break. Here we go again, and the internet is the subject. Take a look at this email from a Democratic party source. A MoveOn message about voter suppression follows:
Dear ,
Since the dawn of broadcasting, our free speech has been dominated - and largely controlled - by the powerful corporations that control public airwaves and the shows they carry.
Real free speech on the Internet is a profound, existential threat to these media giants and the politicians they own. So they are desperately trying to seize control of the Internet with obscure bills called "SOPA" in the House and "PIPA" in the Senate.
Tell Congress: Stop the Corporate Takeover of the Internet
SOPA and PIPA would wreak havoc on the technical infrastructure of the Internet, and threaten thousands of Internet businesses which are truly creating jobs.
More importantly, these bills would give big corporations and the Attorney General the power to shut down websites large and small that somehow link to copyright violators, whether through their own posts or even visitor comments.
How on earth can a website - ours included - monitor thousands or millions of links that accumulate over the years? And why should a single link be sufficient to shut down a website or force a bankrupting legal battle with a giant corporation?
Bob Fertik, Democrats.com
and a MoveOn campaign issue of Republican voter suppression actions:
Dear ,
Since the dawn of broadcasting, our free speech has been dominated - and largely controlled - by the powerful corporations that control public airwaves and the shows they carry.
Real free speech on the Internet is a profound, existential threat to these media giants and the politicians they own. So they are desperately trying to seize control of the Internet with obscure bills called "SOPA" in the House and "PIPA" in the Senate.
Tell Congress: Stop the Corporate Takeover of the Internet
SOPA and PIPA would wreak havoc on the technical infrastructure of the Internet, and threaten thousands of Internet businesses which are truly creating jobs.
More importantly, these bills would give big corporations and the Attorney General the power to shut down websites large and small that somehow link to copyright violators, whether through their own posts or even visitor comments.
How on earth can a website - ours included - monitor thousands or millions of links that accumulate over the years? And why should a single link be sufficient to shut down a website or force a bankrupting legal battle with a giant corporation?
Bob Fertik, Democrats.com
and a MoveOn campaign issue of Republican voter suppression actions:
Dear MoveOn member,
Imagine Mitt Romney in the White House. Tea party Republicans still in control of Congress. No Obama to veto their worst bills.
The election is months away, but this scenario could definitely happen, and here's a big reason why: voter suppression laws passed by Republicans in battleground states to make it as hard as possible for students, poor people, African-Americans, and Latinos to vote.
Already, Wisconsin, Florida, and Ohio have passed laws to restrict voter registration drives, end early voting, or require voters to present photo IDs at the polls.1 And now Republicans are scrambling to pass laws in virtually every other key battleground state to make it harder to vote in 2012.
These laws shamelessly target key segments of the Obama coalition from 2008, including first-time voters, poor people, and people of color, and could easily tip a close election to Mitt Romney or whoever the Republican nominee is. We're looking at Florida in 2000 all over again.....
Thanks for all you do.
–Steven, Anna, Adam Q., Stefanie, and the rest of the team
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)