Dear Congressman Doyle...
Dear Mr. Doyle:
I have a small web log, or *blog* at http://htfdidthishappen.blogspot.com/ called the *The fatman chronicles--all hope renounce, ye lost, who enter here* and it has come to my attention that on November 3, 2005, the Online Freedom of Speech Act (H.R.1606) was brought before a roll-call vote of the House and that you voted against it. I was wondering why.
Could it be that you truly believed that leaving blogs unregulated would lead to obscene amounts of "soft" money being spent on them to affect elections? Like the $63,000,000 that George Soros, Herb and Marion Sandler and Peter Lewis spent on various 527's trying to beat George W. Bush last November?
Maybe you figured that if you threw us bloggers a bone like H.R. 4194, which won't offer protection to unincorporated bloggers, or to incorporated bloggers who endorse candidates or urge donations to them, that we would be happy with that and lick your boots in gratitude.
Of course, if bloggers had been effectively muzzled in 2004, the lie behind Dan Rather's and Mary Mapes' TANG memo forgeries would have gone undiscovered. And "news" organizations like ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Reuters, AP, Fox, the New York Times and the Washington Post would be able to keep their stranglehold on what gets into the news and how it's presented. But I'm sure those thoughts never crossed your mind.
Or maybe it's just a matter of another in the long line of back-bench lapdogs who've represented Pittsburgh following the orders of of a House leadership that seems very uncomfortable with anyone who speaks and disseminates anything other than the party line.
But I guess it doesn't really matter, since whatever you and/or the FEC do won't effect what I do. You see, I've taken the Pledge:
"If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules."
Now you may point out that the Supreme Court has already ruled on this, and that's true. But the Court ruled in Plessy v. Ferguson that seperate-but-equal was also constitutionally acceptable. Fifty-eight years later, in Brown v. Board of Education, the Court reversed that abominable decision. Hopefully it won't take that long this time.
I'm posting this as an entry on my blog, along with any comments I may get.