Tweet temporarily derails SOPA debate

If you aren't already depressed enough following these SOPA hearings, check out this interview with Mr. King:<p><a href="http://www.rightsidenews.com/2010120612252/us/politics-and-economics/rsn-exclusive-a-conversation-with-congressman-steve-king-taking-back-congress.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.rightsidenews.com/2010120612252/us/politics-and-e...</a><p>Choice bit:<p><i>RSN: Cliff Kincaid recently had a National Press Club conference where he called for resurrection of the Congressional internal security committees along the lines of the House Un-American Activities Committee. Would you support recreation of such committees?<p>King: I would. Something similar. If we called it the House Un-American Activities Committee, that would be lighting up the history of McCarthy in a way that wouldn't be necessary, although I am often quoted as saying "McCarthy was a hero for America." He was. He was right far more times than he was wrong. It is a historical fact. But I would submit a different committee name so that we don't have to deal with the history, and move forward. I think that is a good process and I would support it.</i><p>My inner cynic isn't surprised by this, but that little hopeful light that typically keeps the cynic in check is flickering out.<p>(Nota bene: Under SOPA, RSN could take down Hacker News for this comment, no?)

The irony is that if SOPA passes, Rep. Steve King's experience "surfing the internet" to "kill time" would likely be significantly less interesting with less content available to view/read.

So, does anyone here honestly believe we owe these clowns anything?<p>How many of you in meetings with a VC tweet about being bored and surfing for cats with cheeseburgers?<p>How many of you would keep an employee who did this during an engineering meeting?<p>How many of you would keep working at a job when your boss ignores you so they can check their fantasy football teams?<p>The only funny (morbidly, blackly funny) part of this is that that wasn't what stopped the debate--it was a finicky rule about choice of language, some pieces of which date back over a century and a half.<p>Folks, these are the people running the US. These are the people who have a monopoly on force, and who claim the moral highground to do with you what they will for the nation.<p>Why the fuck aren't you doing something?

For those Americans on HN born before the 90s, have American politicians always been this petty and ignorant?<p>It seems like for since Obama elected the entire opposition party has tried to do everything in their power to oppose anything that the party in power has come up with. And when Democrats and GOP do agree on something, it's bills like SOPA and NDAA.

"Rep. Lamar Smith, a SOPA-loving Texas Republican who's the chairman of the committee"<p>Didn't Lamar Smith <i>write</i> SOPA? And he's the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee overhearing this debate? How is this ok?

The premise that a tweet set off the parliamentary rule enforcers is fun.<p>Also, is there anything more boring than a tweet declaring boredom?

This brings up an interesting idea, however. Now that twitter is such a big part of election campaigning, etc, couldn't twitter give an example of the perils of blocking free speech by blocking the twitter accounts of any Representatives that vote pro-SOPA?<p>It could send a message: "Politicians, if you are so eager to block and censor internet activity, we are happy to show you first hand what it can do, starting with your re-election bid".

Is this kindergarten play time or are we shaping laws for an entire country?<p>I'm lucky to be an American. But lately, our government is a real embarrassment.

In fairness, the break for the parliamentarian to be consulted was shorter than the forced complete reading of the manager's amendment at the beginning of the session. And I think both sides had already acknowledged that the markup session would likely last days, and quite possibly need to be resumed in January.

The American political machine blows my mind. There are some big problems on the horizon, and these problems will require cooperation (or at least a little capitulation). Let's hope they figure it out.

<i>interrupted the steady flow of amendments that critics were offering to SOPA, which were being merrily defeated one after another by the pro-SOPA majority on the committee.</i><p>Does anyone have a complete list of these "pro-SOPA majority" handy?

What happened to the proposed blanking of Wikipedia in protest? I haven't heard anything since the original voting.

Am I the only one that thinks someone bored by debate and process behind the passage of a bill (and childishly bragging about it) should be allowed (nay, encouraged) to spend their time elsewhere. Preferrably as far from Congress as possible?

We need to build a lobbyist presence for liberty. A large enough number of people have their livelihood depend on it. We ought to be able to build it.<p>Google - put your best brains on hacking the lobbying system. The world needs you.

Anyone else think it's interesting that Rep. Steve King complained about being bored by using the very thing that this debate is trying to restrict? These guys kill me.

This happened yesterday. The hearing seems to be in recess now:<p><a href="http://www.keepthewebopen.com/sopa" rel="nofollow">http://www.keepthewebopen.com/sopa</a>

If SOPA were law, we could use it to shut down Congress for posting content to Twitter that disrupted Congress.

HOW IS THIS NEWS?<p>And who are the retards that vote it up?<p>Please, make sure you also vote, when Fox reports that a Congressman farted with his mic on.