Can Obama shut down the Internet?

posted at 12:17 pm on April 4, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

When Mother Jones and Jules Crittenden agree, isn’t that a sign of the apocalypse?  Both take a hard look at the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, S.773 sponsored by Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Olympia Snowe (R-ME).  The bill addresses the need to protect vital networks from cyber attack, but it gives a lot of power to the executive branch — perhaps too much power.  Mother Jones reports:

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.

Jules adds:

You know, if it was the Bush administration, I’d be more inclined to trust them. They sought extraordinary wartime powers, and used them to prosecute the war on terror. Never abused them, though, despite all the squawking.

Jules wonders when the Leftosphere will erupt in outrage.   Mother Jones isn’t a bad start, though.

Here are the sections raising eyebrows:

SEC. 14. PUBLIC–PRIVATE CLEARINGHOUSE.

(a) DESIGNATION.—The Department of Commerce shall serve as the clearinghouse of cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information to Federal government and private sector owned critical infrastructure information systems and networks.

(b) FUNCTIONS.—The Secretary of Commerce—

(1) shall have access to all relevant data concerning such networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access; …

SEC. 18. CYBERSECURITY RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITY.

The President— …

(2) may declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network; …

The second provision is something less than advertised, I believe.  It gives the President the authority to disconnect federal networks from the Internet in the case of cyberattack.  That doesn’t seem like an outrageous provision to me; it sounds like a sensible option to protect vital government systems.  In fact, I’d be surprised if that power doesn’t already exist within the various federal agencies.  This would allow the President to make a blanket order to take networks off line.

That doesn’t make it completely benign, either.  That power could get abused to keep people from accessing public information.  However, the provision on its own does not equate to “shutting down the Internet”, at least not how I read it.

Section 14 may be a bigger problem.  It essentially revokes all privacy safeguards on Internet use for all networks.  The Fourth Amendment would go straight out the window with the explicit inclusion of “private sector owned critical infrastructure information systems and networks.”  While Section 18 limits jurisdiction to federal networks, Section 14 allows the government to go after private networks without search warrants.  The section also doesn’t limit the jurisdiction to acute attacks, either.  That jurisdiction exists at all times.

The big problem isn’t that Obama might shut down the Internet.  It’s that the bill essentially repeals the Fourth Amendment.

Update: Suitably Flip sees the Terminator on the horizon.

Update II: I used the word “repeals” for rhetorical effect, not as a literal meaning.  It takes a Constitutional amendment to repeal any part of the Constitution.  CSA’s Section 14 certainly appears to be an explicit violation of the Fourth Amendment.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

First Obama should contact the inventor of the Internet

lavell12 on April 4, 2009 at 12:19 PM

First Amendment, too. Imagine the censorship potential.

Wethal on April 4, 2009 at 12:20 PM

If Al Gore can create it, why not?

Mr. Joe on April 4, 2009 at 12:21 PM

They told me that after the election of George Bush, the fascist US government would crush the internet under its boots… and they were right!

It just took his successor to actually think of it.

George Orwell on April 4, 2009 at 12:22 PM

The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

I dont like this. He could then shut down the internet over a tea party protest or when we are making fun of him. ;)

becki51758 on April 4, 2009 at 12:22 PM

internetS

lavell12 on April 4, 2009 at 12:22 PM

constitution to Bambi= nuisance

gsherin on April 4, 2009 at 12:23 PM

It’s a tough one Ed. I can see it both ways. I, as Jules stated would trust the Bush admin. more on this than Obamas. But once that Genie is out of the bottle, You will never be able to get it back in there.

portlandon on April 4, 2009 at 12:24 PM

The leftists won’t let Obama have this one. I doubt he even gives it much of a try before he gets taken to the woodshed by his own side.

Guardian on April 4, 2009 at 12:24 PM

I think the Obama administration has heard about people wanting to hack into the teleprompter.

backwoods conservative on April 4, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Yeah, he could shut it down. Of course he would also shut down about 300,000,000 bank transactions in the process, but heh, what has smart got to do with anything.

Limerick on April 4, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Talk about people going nuts! If the whole net got shut down, think about how much damage that would do to commerce, even for a short period.

Heck, I start getting nuts those few rare times that Hot Air, Ace, Drudge, and a few select others show “Webpage cannot be displayed.”

JamesLee on April 4, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Talk about people going nuts! If the whole net got shut down, think about how much damage that would do to commerce, even for a short period.

Well, he’d probably like that.

The recipe seems to be: Make things worse, then take power to “resolve it.” (Taking care to make sure it doesn’t get better without your intervention.)

Looks to me like as far as Obama and crew are concerned, all power should rest naturally with him, regarding all things. There is nothing that can’t be “improved” by putting it under Obama’s power.

This sort of thing will go on until he controls everything there is.

Alana on April 4, 2009 at 12:30 PM

So when Obama tells Gary Locke to take a look at something (or someone) on the internet, Locke can snoop “without regard to any provision of law”?
Scary.

LASue on April 4, 2009 at 12:31 PM

China agrees this is a great idea.

Bishop on April 4, 2009 at 12:32 PM

Bishop on April 4, 2009 at 12:32 PM

Russia thinks this would be great for its new “comrade,” too.

Wethal on April 4, 2009 at 12:34 PM

Can I call him Caesar, yet?

OldEnglish on April 4, 2009 at 12:36 PM

Nope – the left and especially far left – will not have any of this.

It’s just troubling that they even throw it out there for consideration, as they have with so many other things, to empower themselves.

Scary times, indeed.

tru2tx on April 4, 2009 at 12:37 PM

Can I call him Caesar, yet?

OldEnglish on April 4, 2009 at 12:36 PM

More a Tiberius Gracchi (IMO)

Limerick on April 4, 2009 at 12:38 PM

I put this up a few days ago, glad it’s finally getting attention.

lorien1973 on April 4, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Limerick on April 4, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Complete with an African connect. I like it!

OldEnglish on April 4, 2009 at 12:42 PM

Anthem – Ayn Rand

RealDemocrat on April 4, 2009 at 12:44 PM

Can I call him Caesar, yet?

OldEnglish on April 4, 2009 at 12:36 PM

How about Hugo?

conservnut on April 4, 2009 at 12:44 PM

More a Tiberius Gracchi (IMO)

Limerick on April 4, 2009 at 12:38 PM

While the Gracchi–btw, their last name is Gracchus, Gracchi is plural :) Tiberius and Gaius were populist revolutionaries in their day, I don’t think either one really applies to Bambi. I see Bambi more as a wannabe Robespierre–a far more frightening prospect.

Matt Helm on April 4, 2009 at 12:44 PM

The Dali Bama transcends the Internet…

RealDemocrat on April 4, 2009 at 12:45 PM

I, as Jules stated would trust the Bush admin. more on this than Obamas. But once that Genie is out of the bottle, You will never be able to get it back in there.

portlandon on April 4, 2009 at 12:24 PM

If you’d trust an R with this, but not a D (or vice versa) it’s a simply an argument that it shouldn’t happen.

I’d make this point to liberals all the time too. Would you be comfortable with Bush/Cheney having this power?

lorien1973 on April 4, 2009 at 12:47 PM

Snowe rears her ugly head again.

I wish she were up in 10.

artist on April 4, 2009 at 12:49 PM

Guardian on April 4, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Oh, come on. You know and I know they’re just going to applaud Dear Leader’s “take charge” attitude.

Ryan Gandy on April 4, 2009 at 12:50 PM

If he would shut down the internet whenever he gives one of his internet speeches, then I have no problem with it. ;)

becki51758 on April 4, 2009 at 12:50 PM

Didn’t another unqualified messiah like ruler try to control the flow of information? If I remember correctly, it was Europe in the 1930s.

Tommy_G on April 4, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Funny all Federal CIO’s at the various agencies have this capability already. They don’t need legal authorization. Since the agencies work for the executive branch any President could request that say DoJ turn off their internet connection till further notice. But it would never get to that level anyway. The local network admin once his dashboard alerts him to an attack would be taking steps, including disconnecting the primary router(s), long before waiting for a Oval Office wakeup call.

The thing is anybody with the smarts and the connection can work out the network map, ISP and sometime even the equipment type for most internet routes. It is no big secret for the publicly exposed components.

What a waste.

Dr. Dog on April 4, 2009 at 12:53 PM

Had Senator Judd Gregg accepted the Sec of Commerce appointment, would these powers still have flowed through that position in the Cabinet?? Things that make you go “hmmmm…”

Warmongerer on April 4, 2009 at 12:55 PM

Here are the provisions that allow POTUS to shut down and seize EITHER federal govt computers OR private computers that are “compromised” which means YOUR PC OR MINE or any other piece of equipment that COULD be compromised. I’m tellin you, nothing and no one is safe. Plus the bill is a slush fund for Congressman to give scholarships to select friends and neighbors in cybersecruity then jobs with the federal govt. Only scholarships over $1 million need approval of higher ups. Gird your loins people. This is BS.

SEC. 18. CYBERSECURITY RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITY.
The President—
*** (1) paraphrasing here – develops a plan to do the following…
***
(2) may declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network;

(3) shall designate an agency to be responsible for coordinating the response and restoration of any Federal government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network affected by a cybersecurity emergency declaration under paragraph (2);

(4) shall, through the appropriate department
or agency, review equipment that would be needed
after a cybersecurity attack and develop a strategy
for the acquisition, storage, and periodic replacement of such equipment;
***

JustTruth101 on April 4, 2009 at 12:55 PM

I’d make this point to liberals all the time too. Would you be comfortable with Bush/Cheney having this power?

lorien1973 on April 4, 2009 at 12:47 PM

I am not comfortable with anyone having this power and that is the point. We don’t delegate power to individuals, you cannot give powers to the president that you wouldn’t give to the worst possible president.

conservnut on April 4, 2009 at 12:56 PM

The second provision is something less than advertised, I believe. It gives the President the authority to disconnect federal networks from the Internet in the case of cyberattack. That doesn’t seem like an outrageous provision to me;

Fine. I’ll give you that, as long as this story starts to get just enough traction among the lesser informed that it follows the same meme as “Bush wants to tap your phones w/o a warrant” did a few years ago.

Captain Scarlet on April 4, 2009 at 12:56 PM

I’m sure some of the Leftist robots posting here, lile sesquipudding and getaclue, would love to see O’bama pull the plug-they have been taking an awful beating here the past few days.

Let’s not forget, Hillary Clinton favored censoring the Internet as early as the mid 1990s.

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2009 at 12:57 PM

Oh, come on. You know and I know they’re just going to applaud Dear Leader’s “take charge” attitude.

Ryan Gandy on April 4, 2009 at 12:50 PM

Dude. They are called nutroots for a reason.

Guardian on April 4, 2009 at 12:57 PM

But, he’s really not fascist or communist or anything.

Jvette on April 4, 2009 at 12:58 PM

Snowe rears her ugly head again.

I wish she were up in 10.

artist on April 4, 2009 at 12:49 PM

Yep, there’s another turd that won’t flush!

conservnut on April 4, 2009 at 12:59 PM

Jvette on April 4, 2009 at 12:58 PM

And there’s no problem with un-elected “czars” having control over things.

No problem at all.

The command economy rolls on.

lorien1973 on April 4, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Sieg Heil!!

Daggett on April 4, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Interesting article on a child-porn witch hunt over sexting: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/04/sexting-hysteri.html

pedestrian on April 4, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Ed I think you may need to read the second part of the second provision “or United States critical infrastructure information system or network”. Seems like if the President wanted to they could declare ANY network critical and take control of it. I mean wouldn’t an ATT hub in Atlanta that serves the SE United States by both critical and not a federal network?

Zaggs on April 4, 2009 at 1:01 PM

BROAD STROKES OF THE PEN consign us all to doom without Constitutional protection.

You bet Obama’s going through line by line finding ways to unravel our Bill of Rights from under our feet, from our grasp.

Generalizations are ignored until the boogie man decides to victimize YOU for not agreeing with his (new or not) interpretation of broad language. Then you get hit full force by the bloated federals and your existence is snuffed out, and a fine whole cloth story broadcast by authorities and the media leaves you no recourse beyond destruction.

maverick muse on April 4, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Everything about Obama’s adminisration so far has been about consolidating power in Washington, specifically, the executive branch. And into the hands of unelected officials – appointed by Obama himself.

And we have liberals on here saying, “oh this isn’t socialism. This is normal!”

More control. Less choice.

The other day, someone commented “hope and change” is really “rope and chains” – it’s not far from reality.

lorien1973 on April 4, 2009 at 1:03 PM

Well, all of our news is now on the internet, and a big boom in the economy was due to online purchasing. Why would he want to kill that? We’d be back in the stoneages. If he does that he seriously needs to have his intentions examined.

johnnyU on April 4, 2009 at 1:03 PM

To paraphrase Ayn, when what you see doesn’t make sense or seems impossible, check your premise. Your premise is wrong.

Obama and congress wasting time and effort on a doomed piece of legislation? Check your premise. Who’s time are they wasting? Who’s time did they waste with the AIG retention bonus faux-scandal?

Your premise is that they’re wasting their time. The truth is that they’re distracting you from the less-dramatic (but far more damaging because it will happen) things that they are doing.

Obama and congress maxing out the United States’ credit cards and leveraging our lines of credit to the absolute maximum are actions that the next president will not be able to hand-wave away. He will be responsible, with our money, for repaying this debt. And what are we getting for this drunken orgy of spending? Can you think of something… anything we’re getting for it? Please don’t talk about $13 a paycheck either. Even crack whores won’t lay down for that.

Immolate on April 4, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Will there ever be Supreme Court challenges to all this madness?

ddrintn on April 4, 2009 at 1:05 PM

Please don’t talk about $13 a paycheck either. Even crack whores won’t lay down for that.

Immolate on April 4, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Don’t bet on it. I’ve overheard two co-workers grumbling about it not being on the check already.

Limerick on April 4, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Just think, you wouldn’t be able to see Obama supporters like these…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeM6K3tjuL0

RealDemocrat on April 4, 2009 at 1:10 PM

Is it too much to think that someday Americans in search of Freedom will be trying to defect to Russia? (Well, probably, but…)

Tzetzes on April 4, 2009 at 1:10 PM

The First Amendment has been dead as far as political speech is concerned for a long time–thanks in no small measure to McShamnesty.

I don’t think this is too horrible. It basically legalizes the spying program — called Project Echelon — that’s been around for a long time. And it allows the Government, through the Commerce Department (which is the agency that has regulatory authority over much of the Internet), to shut things down in the event of a cyber attack. I’m not opposed to tightening up the definitions to curb abuse, but the overall concept doesn’t scare me.

What is hilarious, though, is that the liberals don’t seem upset about this. When Bush did the Patriot Act, they all completely freaked. But the Messiah can do no wrong. Hallowed be the Messiah!

Outlander on April 4, 2009 at 1:13 PM

While the Gracchi–btw, their last name is Gracchus, Gracchi is plural :) Tiberius and Gaius were populist revolutionaries in their day, I don’t think either one really applies to Bambi. I see Bambi more as a wannabe Robespierre–a far more frightening prospect.

Matt Helm on April 4, 2009 at 12:44 PM

Comparing Obama to the Gracchi is an insult to the Gracchi.

I could definitely see him as more of a Robbespierre though.

Chaz706 on April 4, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Can Obama shut down the Internet?

Probably.

zmdavid on April 4, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Does it say anything about protecting your library card?

tarpon on April 4, 2009 at 1:15 PM

johnnyU on April 4, 2009 at 1:03 PM

This is not about shutting down the entire internet. It is about shutting down specific networks.

conservnut on April 4, 2009 at 1:15 PM

Is it to early to talk about impeachment or are those rules being changed as we talk.

Ernest on April 4, 2009 at 1:16 PM

I just heard a speech from Richard Clarke on this subject. What he suggested to protect our utilities and government infrastructure is to get these networks off the internet, set up a new system, and possibly create all new software so that it would be harder for people to access the information.

He said there is no reason, for example, for the power grid to be accessible through the internet. By taking it off, it will make us less vulnerable and if we do have a cybersecurity threat, then we shouldn’t have to go into civilian networks.

glasschariot on April 4, 2009 at 1:16 PM


It gives the President the authority to disconnect federal networks from the Internet in the case of cyberattack. That doesn’t seem like an outrageous provision to me; it sounds like a sensible option to protect vital government systems. In fact, I’d be surprised if that power doesn’t already exist within the various federal agencies.

It does exist; in fact, I can think of a couple times when this has happened, for security or legal reasons.

The Department of the Interior was once ordered by a federal judge to shut down all their servers during a lawsuit. And I mean ALL, even those that were completely unrelated to the suit.

And the Department of Defense runs their own network, what’s called “NIPRNET“. I believe that there has been at least one occasion when the NIPRNET was shut down for security reasons. Certainly it’s closely monitored.

The President, in effect, owns Federal servers and networks. He doesn’t need a law for this. So this law is, in large part, superfluous, and either reflects the degree of ignorance by the bill sponsors, or their indifference to existing policies and laws. That’s scary.

The parts directed at non-Federal cyber systems is scary as well. The entire bill is a blatant grab for power.

The_Real_JeffS on April 4, 2009 at 1:16 PM

Does it say anything about protecting your library card?

tarpon on April 4, 2009 at 1:15 PM

Video rentals? Netflix?

Wethal on April 4, 2009 at 1:17 PM

What Would Alito Do?

Dr Evil on April 4, 2009 at 1:17 PM

Good idea.

As far as w abusing power, it has not been challenged in the courts and this will not be challenged too.

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:17 PM

Much of the national infrastructure rides commercial mediums. Section 14 is not as spooky as some might feel. Many of the SCADA systems rely on commercial networks or are commercial entities.
Cyber warfare is something that is measured in seconds and minutes – not hours and days to deliberate the right course of action. To react means the net defenders need to be able to read the packet headers and traffic crossing the boundaries – not necessarily the information the packet is carrying.
I remind people that the creation of a “cyberczar” and roll up of the cybersecurity functions are resulting from classified reports/studies generated under the Bush administration. Both Mcain and Obama campaigns were hacked by foreign actors. Both candidates mentioned cyberczars.

Bradky on April 4, 2009 at 1:18 PM

As far as w abusing power, it has not been challenged in the courts and this will not be challenged too.

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:17 PM

And yes, we have no bananas.

ddrintn on April 4, 2009 at 1:19 PM

All it takes is a look at the sponsors.

sponsored by Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Olympia Snowe (R-ME).

Bad moon rising.

Speakup on April 4, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Ho hum blah blah blah Captain Ed’s feverish mind conjures up another scary Obama conspiracy. What next week…Obama is an alien? How long before the internment camps? Sharia Law anyone? One World Order Ed and Glen Beck start a “resistance” movement? Obama…. the anti-christ?

athensboy on April 4, 2009 at 1:21 PM

As far as abusing power, it has not been challenged in the courts and this will not be challenged too.

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:17 PM

And how would you ensure that? How do you stop someone from filing a lawsuit? I have a lot of legal clients who would like to know.

Wethal on April 4, 2009 at 1:22 PM

athensboy on April 4, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Funny, after the moonbats spent a long feverish time screaming about Bushitler and the Patriot Act.

ddrintn on April 4, 2009 at 1:24 PM

Can I call him Caesar, yet?

OldEnglish on April 4, 2009 at 12:36 PM

How about Hugo?

conservnut on April 4, 2009 at 12:44 PM

How about just comrade?

Entelechy on April 4, 2009 at 1:24 PM

As far as w abusing power, it has not been challenged in the courts and this will not be challenged too.

smokeabowl on April 4, 2009 at 1:17 PM

Can you translate that into English please?

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2009 at 1:24 PM

athensboy on April 4, 2009 at 1:21 PM

If this week in Europe didn’t bring home with you the one world order, nothing will.

Entelechy on April 4, 2009 at 1:25 PM

Can you translate that into English please?

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2009 at 1:24 PM

He only speaks Libtard.

conservnut on April 4, 2009 at 1:25 PM

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:17 PM

You are a dumb ass. Courts have struck down most of the legislation over the years.

lorien1973 on April 4, 2009 at 1:27 PM

Can you translate that into English please?

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2009 at 1:24 PM

Yeah, adults are in charge.

Deal with it.

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:27 PM

As far as w abusing power, it has not been challenged in the courts and this will not be challenged too.

Bush was challenged on similar matters, abuse or not.

The_Real_JeffS on April 4, 2009 at 1:27 PM

Yeah, adults are in charge.

Deal with it.

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:27 PM

We are.

Obama Franks Waters LLC

unclesmrgol on April 4, 2009 at 1:29 PM

Can you translate that into English please?

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2009 at 1:24 PM

Yeah, adults are in charge.

Deal with it.

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:27 PM

We are. You’re the one who apparently can’t deal, logging onto a conservative site to snark. What’s up with that?

ddrintn on April 4, 2009 at 1:29 PM

You are a dumb ass.

lorien1973 on April 4, 2009 at 1:27 PM

One word too many, dear lorien,

Entelechy on April 4, 2009 at 1:30 PM

Yeah, adults are in charge.

Deal with it.

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:27 PM

The adults will file lawsuits if this ever becomes law. How will you stop them?

Wethal on April 4, 2009 at 1:30 PM

Adults are indignant.

Entelechy on April 4, 2009 at 1:30 PM

Don’t worry, conspiratorial conservatives and libertarians. I’m sure the ACriminalLU, Huffpoop, KOS, etc will be filing briefs on Monday to kill this in the gestattion state (apologies to PP, actually NOT!).

Olympia Snowflake needs to be stuffed back in the Pandora’s Box she crawled out of.

Poll Question: How long before IP Addresses feeding into HotAir are seized by TOTUS and Gary Locke?
A) 6 months
B) 1 Year
C) Never, stop exaggerating
D) How naive can you be? They’ve already got them.

Western_Civ on April 4, 2009 at 1:32 PM

The adults will file lawsuits if this ever becomes law. How will you stop them?

Wethal on April 4, 2009 at 1:30 PM

Claim Executive privilege and refuse to testify of course.

Just like w.

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:32 PM

Hey, shut her down Comrade, shut her down. Saves me a bunch of headaches. No more e-filing of my income taxes, no more e-filing those pesky payroll taxes I file for my employees, ditto on those SS payments I make for them, no more paying my credit card bills and mortgage payments and no more shopping at Amazon and those other convenient sites I spend money at.

But best of all, drumroll please………..

No more Getalife!

Knucklehead on April 4, 2009 at 1:33 PM

The Donkeys can protect themselves from getting tossed from the connection by going to RUN on your start menu and typing format c:/

Limerick on April 4, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Claim Executive privilege and refuse to testify of course.

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:32 PM

The testimony comes after the lawsuit is filed. And constitutional challenges rarely have in-court testimony. They are decided as questions of law, not issues of fact.

So again, how will you stop someone from filing the lawsuit? You said, “This will not be challenged.”

Wethal on April 4, 2009 at 1:36 PM

Had Senator Judd Gregg accepted the Sec of Commerce appointment, would these powers still have flowed through that position in the Cabinet?? Things that make you go “hmmmm…”

Warmongerer on April 4, 2009 at 12:55 PM

No. These powers would have been delegated to Emmanuel and, in turn, to ACORN.

BuckeyeSam on April 4, 2009 at 1:36 PM

getalife on April 4, 2009 at 1:32 PM

Totally. It’s awesome that not only do they get control over the intertubes; they can choose not to testify about it.

And getalife says, “man, that’s awesome”

lorien1973 on April 4, 2009 at 1:36 PM

You bet your bippy that he can, because The NWO dictates it!

Last night I watched a documentary about the Federal Reserve Bank, which is an arm of the global banking cartel and the puppeteer to our puppet ‘gov’t (and others, world-wide).
I knew that the globalists were in charge, now I know who our real enemies are, aside from our open enemies who actually say they want to kill us…
It’s called The Obama Deception; go to:
http://www.spinpolitico.com/profiles/blogs/a-lengthy-documentarybut-a
or go to PRISONPLANET.TV and download it
It helps explain why WE SHOULD NOT BE TARGETING PUPPET Obama OR HIS ‘PARTY’, but the criminals of the Fed Reserve Bank. It’s about the struggle between the Free World and The New World Order.

This morning I found out about this book: To Tame a Tyrant, by Walter Meyers.
It outlines how to abolish the Fed Reserve Bank…
The author is charging only $10/per book, but will send 3 books for $25.
Here’s the link: http://www.tryranttamer.com
(Sorry if you have to cut and paste!)
Please, at least read the page, pass it on, but if you have the time, copy it as a flyer to distribute at Tea Parties/ Rallies and buy extra books to give to others! (They are only $10 per book and $25 for 3!)
Thanks!

Christine on April 4, 2009 at 1:37 PM

why would the liberals ever protest anything obambi does, even when it affects their constitutional rights?

someone explain to me why any liberal/getalife-type organization will care how many rights obama & clan take from us?

kelley in virginia on April 4, 2009 at 1:38 PM

As far as w abusing power, it has not been challenged in the courts and this will not be challenged too.

smokeabowl on April 4, 2009 at 1:17 PM

Can you translate that into English please?

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2009 at 1:24 PM

We’re F***ed.

(note the capital F).

Chaz706 on April 4, 2009 at 1:39 PM

kelley in virginia on April 4, 2009 at 1:38 PM

As a few liberals here have said, they want to be controlled by the feds.

lorien1973 on April 4, 2009 at 1:40 PM

and christine: yeah, i knew the Fed Reserve was the boogeyman all along. but it makes me feel better to want to blow NK off the map.

kelley in virginia on April 4, 2009 at 1:40 PM

What’s this mean?

United States critical infrastructure information system or network;

SlimyBill on April 4, 2009 at 1:42 PM

isn’t that a sign of the apocalypse?

Screeching to a halt. I heard my name pop up (brief pause) apacalyps leaves in a trail of dust as he says “Beep! Beep!” and speeds ….::::away.

apacalyps on April 4, 2009 at 1:42 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3