New Arizona Law Makes Pretty Much Everything People Do On The Internet Illegal

posted at 3:25 pm on April 3, 2012 by John Hawkins

Get your comments in while you can because half of them will probably be illegal in Arizona if Jan Brewer signs this bill.

Arizona House Bill 2549, which is now on Gov. Jan Brewer’s desk for signature, was created to counter bullying and stalking. The law would make it a crime to use any electronic or digital device to communicate using “obscene, lewd or profane language” or to suggest a lewd or lascivious act, if done with the intent to “terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend.”

…H.B. 2549 “would apply to the Internet as a whole, thus criminalizing all manner of writing, cartoons, and other protected material the state finds offensive or annoying,” Media Coalition says on its website — at least for now, until what it says is found to be offensive or annoying by those in Arizona.

This is what happens when a group of politicians who know virtually nothing about the Internet, yet feel entitled to insert themselves into every facet of American life, swing into action. Not only is the bill a crystal clear violation of your First Amendment right to free speech, every net-savvy 14 year old in America can easily identify problems with this bill. How do you criminalize profane language or legally define what would be “offensive or annoying?” If a liberal criticizes this post in the comments section, can it be called “bullying” in Arizona and can he be thrown in jail? What if he rips me and I curse him out? Do we both go to the pokey? How about posting Muhammad cartoons? Free speech or bullying? Anti-Christian art? Calling Obama an idiot? Rush Limbaugh’s comments about Sandra Fluke? Media Matters’ attempt to bully advertisers into dropping Limbaugh’s show? Even if this weren’t a First Amendment issue, only someone whose agenda is outright censorship would want the court system getting involved in those cases.

Libel and threats are already illegal on the Internet; so with that in mind, why don’t we let the people who own each website set their own standard and ban anyone who won’t abide by the rules without the government blundering in and creating a whole new set of problems?


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

Ahhh…yes… The INTERNET a shine’n example of how well Anarchy can work … can’t B have ‘n none of that now can we.

roflmao

donabernathy on April 3, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Have to assume:
1. It was a Dem legislature that passed the bill, and
2. Jan Brewer will not sign it.

petefrt on April 3, 2012 at 4:30 PM

RINO in Name Only on April 3, 2012 at 4:24 PM

There are a lot of stupid laws in most, if not all states that would be struck down as unconstitutional if they were ever challenged. But they aren’t challenged because they are just about never applied. Courts won’t hear a case unless a law has actually been applied. As farsighted pointed out this law looks like it was almost word for word copied from a law that applied to telephonic communications. But I am guessing that law is just about never applied in an unconstitutional manner.

NotCoach on April 3, 2012 at 4:32 PM

If she signs this, it will likely kill her re-election bid and justifiably so.

Hard Right on April 3, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Have to assume:
1. It was a Dem legislature that passed the bill, and
2. Jan Brewer will not sign it.

petefrt

Strike 1. GOP controlled

Praying number 2 is what happens.

Hard Right on April 3, 2012 at 4:33 PM

How about this for a Law:

Any politican that introduces, votes for, or signs any unconstitutional law is subject to 10 years in a federal prison, a $500,000.00 fine and deportation to Mogadishu upon release.

Wallythedog on April 3, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Ah the power of the Governor’s pen! Just veto it Jan!

Conservative_Hippie on April 3, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Have to assume:
1. It was a Dem legislature that passed the bill, and
2. Jan Brewer will not sign it.

petefrt on April 3, 2012 at 4:30 PM

Sadly, the AZ House has 40 Rs, 20 Ds and the AZ Senate has 21 Rs, 9 Ds.

steebo77 on April 3, 2012 at 4:34 PM

What’s new from Arizona!???! When you have nut bags and hypocritical closeted gays for sheriff. It’s the new coalescing ground for nazi’s and mendacious dirtbag.

0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 3, 2012 at 4:36 PM

People that have no idea how the internet works should not be trying to legislate it.

mythicknight on April 3, 2012 at 4:37 PM

The “First and three quarters-eth Amendment” protects everyone from ever being offended, right?

krome on April 3, 2012 at 4:39 PM

This is basically the Ace of Spades Must Be Imprisoned Bill isn’t it?

David Blue on April 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

NotCoach on April 3, 2012 at 4:32 PM

I see. Thanks.

I suppose it makes a bit more sense if it was just an edited version of a law for phone communication – that’s a situation where some offensive things really do constitute harassment, since everything you say is targeted towards one individual.

Maybe some intern wrote a computer script to replace “tellyphone” with “itertubes”, and no one else bothered to check. I know it’s really hard to imagine legislators not reading the bills they sign, as they are usually such diligent, hard-working folks, but maybe they were busy with some other pressing state matter, like funding American flags for orphaned minority children. You don’t hate America and orphaned minorities, do you?

This is still criminal negligence and/or complete stupidity at best and creepy totalitarian fascism at worst, but I can at least understand how a mistake like that can be made.

Now that it’s been exposed, if Brewer signs this it will be with her eyes wide open, and she will be finished. But I doubt she will, given the attention.

RINO in Name Only on April 3, 2012 at 4:50 PM

What’s new from Arizona!???! When you have nut bags and hypocritical closeted gays for sheriff. It’s the new coalescing ground for nazi’s and mendacious dirtbag.

0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 3, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Dude, you misspelled your own name again. That’s like the 500th time.

Now run along. By your own admission, you have some coalescing to do.

RINO in Name Only on April 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM

New Arizona Law Makes Pretty Much Everything People Do On The Internet Illegal

Good grief, Arizona, get a grip..

The next thing you know, McCain will be running for president…

Bruno Strozek on April 3, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Signing this Bill seems a nice way to indicate that politics no longer interest Gov. Brewer. Sticks and stones, sticks and stones.

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

There are enough appointed and self-appointed PC types on the ‘net already. I guess the only thing left is to make it official as far as our political masters are concerned.

Just think of all the sites that could be blocked, shut down, etc.

The time will come, I’m afraid. Some day it will be hardly worth the money and effort to even bother with an internet connection and a web browser.

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 3, 2012 at 4:57 PM

F**k you AZ legislature. How’s that for offensive?

angryed on April 3, 2012 at 3:34 PM

I think you meant to write FUCK you AZ legislature. Now it’s offensive.

Liberty 5-3001 on April 3, 2012 at 4:58 PM

what in the world!!! i don’t understand how this bill actually passed the AZ congress. it really surprises me. there are obvious huge problems with the bill. how the heck did the AZ congress actually approve the bill? what drugs are they on? lol

but seriously. i don’t get it. how do you read that bill and not realize the obvious problems with it?

i hope brewer doesn’t sign it. if she does though, the law is not enforceable and it’s unconstitutional so it’ll be gone soon.

Sachiko on April 3, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Signing this Bill seems a nice way to indicate that politics no longer interest Gov. Brewer. Sticks and stones, sticks and stones.

Cindy Munford on April 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

If you want to be thrown out of office in disgrace, there are many other much more fun ways to do it.

RINO in Name Only on April 3, 2012 at 5:09 PM

Why is the internet any different than books in the library? Or posters on a bulletin board? Or speech on the sidewalk? Or in your own home?

This is insane! Absolutely insane!
It won’t be long before just criticizing your politician or saying something offensive to a politician will be illegal too.

Who gets to define the offense?

People have fought and sacrificed so freaking much for free speech! It is an insult and an offense to countless Americans who have died in battles preserving our freedoms to allow such a law to stand! That law is a freaking offense to God and to nature!
I am sick of people who get offended! Offended over this! Offended over that! We are being ruled by a bunch of whining crybabies!

JellyToast on April 3, 2012 at 5:10 PM

but seriously. i don’t get it. how do you read that bill and not realize the obvious problems with it?

i hope brewer doesn’t sign it. if she does though, the law is not enforceable and it’s unconstitutional so it’ll be gone soon.

Sachiko on April 3, 2012 at 5:08 PM

I believe you may have answered your own question.

RINO in Name Only on April 3, 2012 at 5:11 PM

I wish Rick Santorum were the nominee so we could see a lot more of this over the next four years.

Swerve22 on April 3, 2012 at 5:11 PM

Your Being Offended Offends Me.

(Will it ever stop?)

Metalhead on April 3, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Another shining example of idiotic legislators who know nothing about the Internet passing laws in a pathetic attempt to regulate it.

This “anti-bullying” nonsense has gone too far.

Kingfisher on April 3, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Who gets to define the offense?

JellyToast on April 3, 2012 at 5:10 PM

I will and I’ll be extremely offended if you don’t like it.

I wonder what will happen if we declare this law offensive? Will they remove it?

Kingfisher on April 3, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Well, if they are going to make it punishable by a fine, can we pay it in advance? How about $50 per year for a license to annoy at will.

Will they start a registry of annoying offenders?

Will annoyers have to register their hands as annoying weapons with the FBI?

Do they seriously not understand this law is totally unconstitutional?

talkingpoints on April 3, 2012 at 5:19 PM

I think Mr. Hawkins (and, by extension, Arizona) doesn’t understand the nature of web servers.

Suppose that there is a web browser located in Tucson, AZ, and a web server (serving the domain hotair.com) located in downtown Richmond, VA.

In order for traffic to be obtained from the web server in Richmond, it must be pulled by the web browser in Tucson. It is the person in Tucson who has initiated the conversation, and therefore must bear the ill effects of the AZ law.

But the person in AZ was only listening to the offensive traffic emitted by the hotair.com server in VA, not actually creating the offensive traffic. He or she did not create the content — they merely listened to it, as interpreted by their browser software.

So is Arizona going to penalize anyone who passes near a person who is emitting offensive speech, even if they did so deliberately?

Now, I’m not even going to get into encryption or anonymization or any of a number of technologies which could get around the Arizona law.

Now, e-mail might be different, as e-mail is a method of point-to-point communication — a push technology, as it were. If I don’t want to correspond with you and I even tell you so, there’s no way to prevent you from inserting materials into my e-mail box. Blacklisting won’t help, because it’s easy to get a new sender identity and use it should the original be blocked. The only way to prevent this is by a law giving the recipient the teeth they need to punish continuing offense.

The difference between push and pull technologies needs to be better spelled out in the law. You cannot push your speech onto my property, but I should be allowed to pull all the speech you offer up for public consumption.

unclesmrgol on April 3, 2012 at 5:22 PM

I wish Rick Santorum were the nominee so we could see a lot more of this over the next four years.

Swerve22 on April 3, 2012 at 5:11 PM

Now, now, let’s not perpetuate the DNC talking points…

firegnome on April 3, 2012 at 5:24 PM

I would be surprised if any judge doesn’t declare this law unconstitutional. However, you never know with some of these judges.

Even if this law were to pass constitutional muster, geeks are going to have a field day with this law and intentionally offend everybody possible as a means to insult the Arizona legislature. The geek community does not react favorably to censorship, and rightly so.

I bet this law was voted without one single feedback from any Internet or technology expert.

Kingfisher on April 3, 2012 at 5:27 PM

The “legislators” responsible for this bill were obviously not beaten up often enough in school…

bofh on April 3, 2012 at 5:30 PM

You know, this just could be a case of someone trying to be too cute by half.

There is no way, that this will pass muster with the courts; someone…hell a lot of someones (EFF, ACLU) are gonna challenge this as serious overreach.

No way from SCOTUS on down that it doesn’t get slapped down.

BlaxPac on April 3, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Jan Brewer=Community College graduate.

Typical tea party hero.

KeninCT on April 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM

I would be surprised if any judge doesn’t declare this law unconstitutional. However, you never know with some of these judges.

Kingfisher on April 3, 2012 at 5:27 PM

In many Arabic speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society.

RINO in Name Only on April 3, 2012 at 5:37 PM

Jan Brewer=Community College graduate.

Typical tea party hero.

KeninCT on April 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM

I marvel at your posts.

What process do you use to write them?

Does the first step involve drilling a hole in your head?

HeatSeeker2011 on April 3, 2012 at 5:43 PM

KeninCT on April 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Oh excuse me. So like graduating from a CC is some sort of black mark?

You truly are a smug SOB, aren’t ya? I’m sure your B.A. in B.S. serves you in great stead…

BlaxPac on April 3, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Jan Brewer=Community College graduate.

Typical tea party hero.

KeninCT on April 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Dumbass troll = illiterate high school dropout.

Arizona House Bill 2549, which is now on Gov. Jan Brewer’s desk for signature, was created to counter bullying and stalking.

If she is actually dumb enough to sign this, she can kiss her tea party support goodbye. But I doubt she will.

RINO in Name Only on April 3, 2012 at 5:45 PM

RINO in Name Only on April 3, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Ok, for one thing its a MSNBC story so i question most of it outright.

Second thing did i miss something? It doesn’t say who actually authored the thing or if she was a proponent of it at any point…

BlaxPac on April 3, 2012 at 5:52 PM

I like Jan – but if she signs this piece of trash I will have no respect for her any more.

dentarthurdent on April 3, 2012 at 5:52 PM

However, on the bright side, if this gets into law, libtard trolls like libtard4life, keninct, bayam, and a few others would be sure convictions on felony annoying…..

dentarthurdent on April 3, 2012 at 5:56 PM

closeted gays for sheriff. It’s the new coalescing ground for nazi’s and mendacious dirtbag.

0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 3, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Oand‘this’dirtbagisclosetedwiththesheriffforfun

KOOLAID2 on April 3, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Have to assume:
1. It was a Dem legislature that passed the bill, and
2. Jan Brewer will not sign it.

petefrt on April 3, 2012 at 4:30 PM

you’ld think so, but nope. GOP controlled state house and senate.

i’m double face palming right now…i live in AZ and i’d tell you how much i’m offended by this bill but i’m afraid they’d toss me in sherrif joe’s tent city.

DrW on April 3, 2012 at 5:57 PM

Oh excuse me. So like graduating from a CC is some sort of black mark?

You truly are a smug SOB, aren’t ya? I’m sure your B.A. in B.S. serves you in great stead…

BlaxPac on April 3, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Yes.

KeninCT on April 3, 2012 at 5:59 PM

KeninCT on April 3, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Im sure you were a shining example of elucidation also, as your answer reveals.

Tell us, or great sower of pearls of wisdom, what college degree was anointed on your holy ass?

BlaxPac on April 3, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Have to assume:
1. It was a Dem legislature that passed the bill, and
2. Jan Brewer will not sign it.

petefrt on April 3, 2012 at 4:30 PM

I didn’t see it there either…was this bill introduced and passed by a democrat(s) or GOP or bipartisan…? Brewer is obviously a tough woman, and should send this to the circular file.

JetBoy on April 3, 2012 at 6:09 PM

JetBoy on April 3, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Nothing here about it…weird.

BlaxPac on April 3, 2012 at 6:12 PM

So, if I’m offended by something Obama says in a speech, and that speech appears on the internet… does that mean we can impeach Obama?

malclave on April 3, 2012 at 6:14 PM

Arizona has turned to crap (disclosure it was once my favorite and I lived there too) and has become a communitarian armpit. How the hell that happened nobody knows but its a nanny state run by a bunch of bible-thumping ignorants. State of Arizona always knows whats best for you now. Same as Bloonberg’s New York, except with a moral crusading flavor.

Nobody ever accused Arizona of not militarizing their police state enough.

Daikokuco on April 3, 2012 at 6:16 PM

Are they talking about the series of tubes?

WeekendAtBernankes on April 3, 2012 at 6:16 PM

The Day the GOP becomes the Party that restricts the internet a la SOPA/PIPA and now this AZ foolishness…is the day the party writes its own death certificate….they’ll lose every voter under 35 forever….and rightfully so…

Bad Policy. Bad Idea…absolute friggin idiocy.

Afterseven on April 3, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Nothing here about it…weird.

BlaxPac on April 3, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Good link tho…bookmarked. Yeah, I’m not familiar with the party makeup of the Arizona legislature, but can’t find anything about who introduced this bill and/or voted for it.

JetBoy on April 3, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Have to assume:
1. It was a Dem legislature that passed the bill, and
2. Jan Brewer will not sign it.

petefrt on April 3, 2012 at 4:30 PM

I didn’t see it there either…was this bill introduced and passed by a democrat(s) or GOP or bipartisan…? Brewer is obviously a tough woman, and should send this to the circular file.

JetBoy on April 3, 2012 at 6:09 PM

What laughable partisanship. The Republican GOP hold supermajorities in both houses of Arizona Legislature! Also this is the same party that selected Jan Brewer for its top position. You think they pick somebody who disagrees to be their top candidate? Why would she kill it? She is the nanny-and-chief and these are the kinds of bills she loves.

AZ needs a government enima!

Daikokuco on April 3, 2012 at 6:23 PM

BlaxPac on April 3, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Probably Lunatic Studies. Since I am an Arizona resident have I sufficiently insulted him?

chemman on April 3, 2012 at 6:23 PM

To “annoy or offend” is illegal?

What if this very law annoys and offends me?

profitsbeard on April 3, 2012 at 6:38 PM

End of the Democrat party in AZ?

IrishEyes on April 3, 2012 at 6:45 PM

This is the state that keeps sending McCain to the Senate. So their big govt nanny statism is no surprise to anyone paying attention.

If she signs this, it will likely kill her re-election bid and justifiably so.

Hard Right on April 3, 2012 at 4:32 PM

It will be the end of her political career unless she switches to Democrat.

Spliff Menendez on April 3, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Trying to legislate “genteel” behavior? Thought they’d learned by now from the libs that it just does not work. Besides likely being outside the bounds of that 1st ammendment thingy.

IrishEyes on April 3, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Im sure you were a shining example of elucidation also, as your answer reveals.

Tell us, or great sower of pearls of wisdom, what college degree was anointed on your holy ass?

BlaxPac on April 3, 2012 at 6:06 PM

A small school in Hanover, NH.

KeninCT on April 3, 2012 at 6:51 PM

KeninCT on April 3, 2012 at 6:51 PM

“Only an intellectual would believe such stuff – an ordinary man could not possibly be such a fool” – George Orwell

kirkill on April 3, 2012 at 7:10 PM

If she signs this, it will likely kill her re-election bid and justifiably so.

Hard Right on April 3, 2012 at 4:32 PM

What reelection bid? She’s term limited. She can’t run again.

If she signs ths bill, she’s nuts. Hopefully, she won’t.

JannyMae on April 3, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Gee, I wonder if the SCOTUS has the power to declare it unconstitutional!

mediamime on April 3, 2012 at 7:49 PM

A small school in Hanover, NH.

KeninCT on April 3, 2012 at 6:51 PM

So, you’ve got $100,000 in student loans and you’re still a moron. Way to go….

notropis on April 3, 2012 at 7:55 PM

I’m from Arizona. Lived most of my life here. Moved her with my parents from….CHICAGO to get away from the politics and graft. Now I’m in my mid-40s and all the nuts from California who ran out of gas just after crossing the state line are in my state! The first wave was in the early 90s after the Rodney King incident. I remember it well. I was in a BOOKSTORE and there were these 2 people talking in another aisle about how the city of Phoenix had no culture and the one gal had to be there, she’d moved from Cali. The next wave came in the mid/late 90s from California and they changed the whole state to something I don’t recognize anymore.

Guess its time to move to another state.

athenadelphi on April 3, 2012 at 8:24 PM

A small school in Hanover, NH.

KeninCT on April 3, 2012 at 6:51 PM

So the community college attendee is insulting community college grads….
Intersting – and typical lib.

dentarthurdent on April 3, 2012 at 8:47 PM

I was close. Dartmouth is the bottom of the barrel for Ivy League and ranks low across the country – “The list also suggests that some schools–the University of Pennsylvania (61st), Georgetown (76th), Cornell (121st) and Dartmouth (127th)–may be living a bit off of their reputations.”
http://www.ivygateblog.com/2008/08/surprise-surprise/

dentarthurdent on April 3, 2012 at 9:17 PM

I will reiterate – new political party – NOW. The republican establishment are now officially Whigs. To hell with them all. Party like it’s 1852.

SilverDeth on April 3, 2012 at 9:47 PM

Posted above comment in the Wrong thread.

But this law is beyond stupid, to stay on topic.

SilverDeth on April 3, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Jan Brewer will NEVER sign this bill……..

williamg on April 3, 2012 at 9:55 PM

I don’t live in arizona, but I sent her an email for what it’s worth.

Government needs to keep their hands off the internet. It’s a civil rights issue. I don’t have a right to an internet connection but I do have a right to free speech. If that means children sometimes are exposed to emotionally damaging material then their parents should keep them off the machine. Beyond that, man up.

Karmashock on April 3, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Anybody here read the actual bill?

This is not a new law. It’s an old law that prevents people from using telephone communications to threaten, stalk, or harass people. Like if somebody’s ringing your phone over and over at 3 a.m. in order to intimidate you. The “bill” is just an amendment that changes the word “telephone” to “electronic or digital device.”

Of course, it’s a southern state with a heavy Republican majority in the legislature and a Republican governor… so the liberals are out in force to malign them. The same thing happened a few years ago in Utah. The legislature passed a law that criminalized beating a pregnant woman to the point of miscarriage — which was already assault, but the new law elevated the act to the status of murder if it could be proven the miscarriage was intentionally caused. It was a bill that cracked down on violence against expecting mothers, but liberals everywhere were screaming about how Utah was “criminalizing miscarriage.”

Caiwyn on April 3, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Arizona has turned to crap (disclosure it was once my favorite and I lived there too) and has become a communitarian armpit. How the hell that happened nobody knows but its a nanny state run by a bunch of bible-thumping ignorants. State of Arizona always knows whats best for you now. Same as Bloonberg’s New York, except with a moral crusading flavor.

Nobody ever accused Arizona of not militarizing their police state enough.

Daikokuco

Well I still live in AZ, and you know jack shit about the state. What is it with morons like you bashing AZ? Does it make you feel good to think you are somehow smarter? Little hint, you aren’t.
This has gotten almost zero coverage here, but it might now and the people will speak out against it. Hopefully it’s in time to keep it from being signed.
I’m glad you moved douchebag, we have enogh POS’s in AZ and don’t need your kind here.

Hard Right on April 4, 2012 at 12:04 AM

BTW folks Douche-cookoo must not have lived here long (if at all) if he thinks “bible thumpers” run the state.

Hard Right on April 4, 2012 at 12:08 AM

Oops I forgot, douche-cookoo is another religion hating bigot. A little refresher on this mentally ill pr*ck.

http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2012/01/26/video-chris-matthews-not-a-fan-of-creationists/

Hard Right on April 4, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Somehow … someway … this must be Santorum’s fault. It just *feels* like it.

/

JDF123 on April 4, 2012 at 8:38 AM

Hard Right on April 3, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Conservatives R Us on April 3, 2012 at 4:03 PM

Dudes, I think he was being ironic. See, he was using “obscene, lewd or profane language” to “terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend”. Of course, if I’m wrong, and he wasn’t being ironic, then he’s pretty much a jerk.

GWB on April 4, 2012 at 10:28 AM

Caiwyn on April 3, 2012 at 10:53 PM

The difference is that the internet can be ignored. It is sooo easy to tell my email to just ignore anything that you send me. That’s not as easy to do with phones (though it is actually pretty easy to do with Sprint wireless – I can block texts or calls from specific numbers). I believe facebook will let you block particular people. Most decent blog sites will boot someone who is harrassing an individual (and you can even block their IP address in some instances).

This is updating something that isn’t the same, when it isn’t necessary in the first place. Which is the classic government solution.

GWB on April 4, 2012 at 10:34 AM

A blogger recently referred to Obama as the “Bamboozler-in-Chief.” This would definitely not pass muster in Arizona for the following reasons:

“Bamboozler” includes “Bam” (the Bamster); add “boo” and you get “bamboo”—a reference to jungle vegetation. That in combination with “Chief”, the common title of the head of an African tribe, clearly indicates that the expression “bamboozle-in chief” is not far from referring to Obama as a “spearchucker”—a common racist expression. “boo” (marijuana) and “booz” are not very subtle references to Obama’s drug indulgences, not to mention that “boo” is not that far from “booger”, yet another racist word.

stillings on April 4, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2