Tweet
Presidential candidate Ron Paul has stated in no uncertain terms that he is thoroughly against internet regulation and has spoken out against federal rubric of the web in the week after a bill was passed by the Senate Commerce Committee as a pretext towards implementation of universal filtering on the Internet.
Speaking after another victorious Republican nominee debate, Dr Paul told Gambling911.com's Kira Wissman:
“I believe strongly that the internet should not be regulated by the federal government and believes even more strongly that people should be free to engage in the activities they wish, as long as they are willing to take responsibility for their actions.”
The Texas Congressman is co-sponsoring a bill to legalize online gambling along with Democrat Barney Frank.
“The majority of people in Washington were afraid to support the internet for fear it would label them ‘pro-porn’ or ‘pro-gambling’.” Paul continued.
Paul's comments come in the wake of the passing of another bill that represents a greater step towards federal regulation of the internet.
The United States Senate Commerce Committee passed a bill last Friday that would require a review, within one year of enactment, technology that can help parents manage the vast volume of video and other content on television or the Internet, just a week after Senators made a bipartisan call to implement universal filtering on the net.
Free speech groups including the Center for Democracy and Technology have expressed concern that the Child Safe Viewing Act of 2007 (S. 602) may represent a step toward expanding the FCC's censorship authority to include Internet content.
Other recent bipartisan proposals in the Congress have taken huge swipes at internet freedom by aiming to impose multiple different forms of crippling taxation and restriction on its users. Both Republican and Democrat representatives have joined a chorus of others in demonizing the Internet in attempts to further lead it down a path of strict control.
In previous debates Ron Paul has come out in strong support of internet freedom while all other candidates are in favour of regulation.
During the first Republican presidential debate, MSNBC's debate back in May, the Congressman stated that he trusted the internet "a lot more" than the mainstream media. Paul went on to state:
And I trust the freedom of expression, and that’s why we should never interfere with the Internet, that’s why I’ve never voted to regulate the Internet, even when there’s the temptation to put bad things on the Internet. Regulation of bad and good on the Internet should be done differently.
When compared with other leading candidates on the issue of internet freedom, Ron Paul stands alone. For example, John McCain, on the Republican side, has previously tabled legislation that would fine blogs up to $300,000 for offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards. It is well known that McCain has a severe distaste for his blogosphere critics, causing a definite conflict of interest where any proposal to restrict blogs on his part is concerned.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton, for the Democrats, has voiced her support for the so called "Fairness Doctrine" which would effectively suffocate the independent media.
The Congressman has once again proven that where the upholding of liberty and the defence of free speech in the 21st century are concerned, he is the only candidate who can seriously be considered.
Ron Paul emphatically won the post debate polls once again for the fourth time running, yet this still was not enough to prevent Fox News attempting to smear him once again by using Infowars as fodder in a carefully scripted attempt to ensnare the Congressman and insinuate his appearances on the Alex Jones show somehow make him un-American.
Speaking after another victorious Republican nominee debate, Dr Paul told Gambling911.com's Kira Wissman:
“I believe strongly that the internet should not be regulated by the federal government and believes even more strongly that people should be free to engage in the activities they wish, as long as they are willing to take responsibility for their actions.”
The Texas Congressman is co-sponsoring a bill to legalize online gambling along with Democrat Barney Frank.
“The majority of people in Washington were afraid to support the internet for fear it would label them ‘pro-porn’ or ‘pro-gambling’.” Paul continued.
Paul's comments come in the wake of the passing of another bill that represents a greater step towards federal regulation of the internet.
The United States Senate Commerce Committee passed a bill last Friday that would require a review, within one year of enactment, technology that can help parents manage the vast volume of video and other content on television or the Internet, just a week after Senators made a bipartisan call to implement universal filtering on the net.
Free speech groups including the Center for Democracy and Technology have expressed concern that the Child Safe Viewing Act of 2007 (S. 602) may represent a step toward expanding the FCC's censorship authority to include Internet content.
Other recent bipartisan proposals in the Congress have taken huge swipes at internet freedom by aiming to impose multiple different forms of crippling taxation and restriction on its users. Both Republican and Democrat representatives have joined a chorus of others in demonizing the Internet in attempts to further lead it down a path of strict control.
In previous debates Ron Paul has come out in strong support of internet freedom while all other candidates are in favour of regulation.
During the first Republican presidential debate, MSNBC's debate back in May, the Congressman stated that he trusted the internet "a lot more" than the mainstream media. Paul went on to state:
And I trust the freedom of expression, and that’s why we should never interfere with the Internet, that’s why I’ve never voted to regulate the Internet, even when there’s the temptation to put bad things on the Internet. Regulation of bad and good on the Internet should be done differently.
When compared with other leading candidates on the issue of internet freedom, Ron Paul stands alone. For example, John McCain, on the Republican side, has previously tabled legislation that would fine blogs up to $300,000 for offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards. It is well known that McCain has a severe distaste for his blogosphere critics, causing a definite conflict of interest where any proposal to restrict blogs on his part is concerned.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton, for the Democrats, has voiced her support for the so called "Fairness Doctrine" which would effectively suffocate the independent media.
The Congressman has once again proven that where the upholding of liberty and the defence of free speech in the 21st century are concerned, he is the only candidate who can seriously be considered.
Ron Paul emphatically won the post debate polls once again for the fourth time running, yet this still was not enough to prevent Fox News attempting to smear him once again by using Infowars as fodder in a carefully scripted attempt to ensnare the Congressman and insinuate his appearances on the Alex Jones show somehow make him un-American.
Comment