Politics
GOP Candidates Sharply Critical of Stop Online Piracy Act
- Posted on January 19, 2012 at 11:33pm by
Tiffany Gabbay
- Print »
- Email »
Watch the GOP candidates reflect on the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and point out why they think the bill goes too far:
Find out what Glenn has to say on the matter in this clip from Wednesday’s GBTV show:
Comments (55)
Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 692 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 492 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 375 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 343 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 330 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 315 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 330 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 237 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 315 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
ConsideringWhatIf
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 1:05pmSuggest the article title be revised… 3 Candidates Sharply Critical of SOPA, 1 Candidate not so sharp, well…Mushy actually…( subtitle: I would not protest SOPA Sharply if it got voted through on a Midnight session and signed by the President late some Friday night.)
Report Post »lembrandt
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 11:43amWhat’s with Glen and the really expensive, tailored, three piece suit and the multimillionaire cane? He loves to tell his radio audience all the time how rich he is now – what’s next? A suit made of hundred dollar bills?
I expect him to show up wearing the “Mister Monopoly” Tuxedo any day now….
We get it, Glen, you’re fabulously rich now…please tell us again.
By the way, he’s right about PIPA and SOPA – dead right, but I also think he’s missed a huge point – I think these two bills are secretly intended to shut down public information sites like The Blaze, Drudge, World Net Daily, News Max, etc.
The line of thought here is too long to post, but if you take it step by step, it is obvious.
Report Post »BeHeardAmerica
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 6:41amAmen.. Stop the government regulation / intervention.
Report Post »Demaslut
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 11:16amAmen
Report Post »Landfill
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 5:57amYou strict constitutionalists love to refer to “first principles.” In Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution, you will find reference to granting Congress the right to secure to authors their exclusive rights to their own creative work. To ignore the massive infringement of copyrights via the Internet is a violation of one of the most fundamental principles of the Founders. The importance of patent and copyright rights is listed in the Constitution even BEFORE the clauses relating to raising and funding of land and naval forces of the United States. Our country was founded upon the rock of liberty of free men to own and control their property – including intellectual property. All of you who decry enforcement of copyright law obviously have no creative work of your own being massively pirated on the Internet. The Internet is a very recent convenience but its existed does not negate the fundamental principles of owning private property. Communists want the community to own everything. Is it OK if I drive YOUR car whenever I want? Is it OK if I move my elderly mother into YOUR house? If everything belongs to all of us, COLLECTIVELY,…… WHY NOT?
Report Post »Obeckian1984
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 8:54amIf you have a complaint then you can Sue in court as we have been doing
Report Post »all along.
smithclar3nc3
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 8:57amTotally disagree, aquaintings a news report,a book,music,a movie or a video game to private property
Report Post »is BS. It stop being private property when they sell it to the public. And me sharing a movie,cd,book or anything else online is no different than letting my neighbor borrow a book,movie or whatever. Freedom of expression is absolute Now if I make copies of the books and sell them then there‘s copy right issues But as far as online sharing it’s a world wide neighborhood. BUT THESE NAZI DEMOCRATIC BACKED LEGISLATIONS OUTLAW ME LETTING MY NEIGHBOR BARROW A MOVIE……BS.
People look around at whose holding the chains and trying to place them on every aspect of your lives it the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVES. 21st century plantation owners
George Patton
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 9:30amYou are incompetent. No one is opposed to protecting copyrights. Those who oppose sopa and pipa are against the means used to protect copyrights. Do you enforce laws prohibiting theft of other property is the same way? If a man steals your car and tries to sell it on his front law, should the police go after the bank who holds the mortgage on his house and force them to evict him so he doesn’t have a lawn to sell the car on? Then perhaps the police should force the landscaper to stop mowing his lawn…they should then force Sharpie Inc. to stop selling him markers so he can’t make for sale signs….and they should hold cardboard companies responsible to screen people who buy cardboard in case they use it to make “for sale” signs to sell stolen goods.
Or they could just uphold current laws against theft and go after the thief. The goal is obvious: prevent theft by preventing the selling of stolen goods. Sorry, you can’t prevent the selling of stolen goods without oppressing people who did not commit any crimes: Sharpie inc, landscapers, verizon, google, craigslist, etc.
Report Post »Pearsontech
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 9:54am@smith First off let me be perfectly clear on this. I do not agree with SOPA at all. It is a gross inflation of the governments already over inflated power. The act at it heart has absolutely nothing to do with stopping piracy. You can’ make laws that will stop criminals from committing crimes!!! When are people going to wake up to this. Criminals will continue to do what they want to do it doesn’t matter you are only putting chains on law abiding citizens. Now with all that said I have to call what you said (smith) complete bull. Don’t you dare sit there and say that you are “borrowing” or “lending” the movie or whatever. You know perfectly well that you aren’t getting it back. If you were lending something to someone you would expect to be getting it back and you wouldn’t have the privilege of continuing to have said movie or music yourself while you “lent” it out to someone. The person you are “sharing” the movie or whatever with gets to keep it for as long as they want as do you. This is NOT a borrowing or lending or sharing situation. And before you think I don’t understand this is coming from a former pirate so I very much do know the ins and outs of that world. Do sit there and try to claim it is all innocent because its not. I do think that the movie industry and the music industry are quite a bit melodramatic about the whole thing and hurt themselves more in the process, but it doesn‘t mean it isn’t wrong.
Report Post »Demaslut
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 11:15amyou are boring
Report Post »JRook
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 11:16amYour point is well taken. However, what is occurring is an economic resetting based on a refusal to accept corporate manipulation of the free market in terms of supply and demand, and through anti-competitive influence on the distribution of content. The real supplier is the song writer, musician, script writer, actors, directors, etc. The producing companies are nothing more than investors that enable the artists. For that investment they should receive a reasonable ROI. When that ROI becomes unreasonable relative to what the artists receive and the value of the content the demand side of the market will respond. Clearly, mass privacy of material that is sold should be stopped and there are laws that provide remedies. The threatening thing for the established industries is that artists the suppliers of content and consumers the demand side of content will begin to connect in ways that weaken the market dominance and influence of established producers. My kids and most of their friends use ITunes and similar paid sites. This isn’t about file sharing on the Internet, it is about who will control the content. The artist and the consumer or the established publishing and distribution companies. Everyone loves the free market, until it threatens their economic position.
Report Post »Pearsontech
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 12:18pm@jrook You are talking about a completely different yet semi related issue. pay for services like iTunes don’t count in what I was saying my comment was in rebut to the lame attempt to equate piracy to borrowing and sharing or just lending out your movies to a “friend” because there is a huge difference. Now that being said I don’t fully believe the industries hipe that all of this “sharing” is really VASTLY effecting their bottom line but again beside the point. My point was don’t try to say that piracy on the internet is just a bunch of friends “borrowing” each others movies and such. This was outside of the SOPA issue which like I said SOPA is not about piracy on the internet. At its heart its about government getting more power to abuse.
Report Post »JRook
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 1:21pm@Pearsontech I agree. I was responding to Landfill. My point is this is an issue of control by the wealthy and large corporations through the instrument of government. My company has to deal with both the EPA and FDA depending on our product lines. People would be amazed on how many laws and regulations are lobbied for and even authored by large corporations to limit competition by creating barriers to entry. The last thing most established companies want is a truly free market.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 5:05amGe-stopa!
Report Post »dutchy
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 4:13amKudos to all the GOP candidates that are against any internet censorship! Let’s get BHO out of office!!
Report Post »A Conservatarian
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 3:05amThere’s a pretty thought provoking article on DailyPaul.com on this topic: http://www.dailypaul.com/205980/the-real-reason-for-sopa-pipa-and-the-ndaa-provisions
The Real Reason for SOPA, PIPA, and the NDAA Provisions
By Revolution News Network – on Facebook Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 11:45pm
There is a very simple, and we think overlooked, reason why the abominations of SOPA and PIPA have appeared like cancerous growths in the House and Senate, and it has more to do than just censoring the internet. It goes deeper than that. It hits a nerve. The very idea of a bottom-up, people driven internet clashes violently with the ideological and political worldview that surveillance should only exist in one direction: From the top down.
You see, we’ve overlooked what it really means in terms of discomfort and career risk to those who normally bask and benefit from the art of statecraft.
You see, the ordinary, unwashed masses – that would be you and me – are in possession of one of the most powerful forces the earth has ever seen.
And you have learned to use it in a way that is indeed alarming.
Ordinary people, with little or no political knowledge or even education, are using it to keep their elected employees under surveillance 24 hours a day, seven days a week – like real hiring managers should. (cont)
Report Post »A Conservatarian
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 3:09am2) You see, you’re all figuring out that your computer desk at home is now headquarters – it’s now the head office – and you’re acting like the boss, and these employees don’t like it one bit.
You’re calling them out for having a business on the side. For taking long lunches with your competitors. For using the company car and copy machine for their personal use without telling you. For improper conduct that would violate any employee ethics manual. For noticing that they exempt themselves from it, but not you, the boss.
In other words, you are finally (as the founders intended, and would be ecstatic to see) holding your elected Federal and State employees accountable beyond their wildest imaginations.
You’re watching “the help” like any good supervisor, manager or owner would and THEY DON’T LIKE IT.
Why? You’re tirelessly performing hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, and annual performance reviews. You are writing them letters of praise or reprimand. You are sending them the equivalent of performance improvement plans (“improve or remove” coaching letters). You are expressing your anger or disappointment for lying to you during presentations (i.e., debates on the floor of the House or Senate, during interviews with the press, or during campaign speeches) since you’re able to compare a report they delivered a year ago, or a month ago to one they gave today.
Report Post »A Conservatarian
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 3:15am3) And you can even post a clip of them lying that they cannot deny or hide from. You‘re catching them lying on or padding their expense reports or catching them investing or accepting rewards or favors where it’s a conflict of interest to you personally as the real CEO of this country.
You have harnessed a resource at your fingertips – Google alone processes 24 petabytes of data alone per day – that you can use to micromanage them, in a way that they prefer to use instead to micro-manage you.
In other words, you are doing things that they prefer TO DO TO YOU INSTEAD, AND TO YOU ONLY, AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
SOPA and PIPA have been introduced (along with other abominable legislation of late) to keep you and the Constitution of the United States from activating at a level that they will never be able to suppress unless they act now. A tipping point in what they believe is the wrong direction is at hand. A tipping point that could restore the Republic to its original Constitutional form and end a 100 year reign of the kleptocracy.
You and your use of the internet have inadvertently leveraged an 18th-century Constitution, a Bill of Rights, the Privileges and Immunities clause, and powers reserved to the States or the people themselves, and raised them all to an unprecedented, almost astronomical power.
Report Post »Twobyfour
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 3:20amA Conservatarian, quite well put. Kudos.
Report Post »A Conservatarian
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 3:30am4) You have accidentally taken all the rights and powers in these old parchments to a level several orders of magnitude above the most basic objections against the divine rights of kings and despots that were so eloquently expressed, even in the Decl aration of Independence, to a dizzying height never thought possible by the Fou nders.
You have arranged yourselves in direct competition to them, into virtual Senates, virtual Houses of Representatives, virtual Judic iaries, and virtual Insp ectors General, all in a manner that redefines what consent of the governed will mean from now on. You can all now deliberate every decision, every move, every dollar, every law, beyond the mere vehicle of freedom of assembly and freedom of speech.
You have arranged yourselves into a neural net, or brain of the actual Republic, as originally intended, but never foreseen.
And it is from that height, that the internet has allowed the US Constitution and you as the owner to, almost without being fully aware of it, decimate the worldview – the philosophy of empire – that to this day would prefer that the nuisance of the cult of liberty vanish from the face of the earth along with its insufferable US Constitution once and for all.
You have it on the run.
And there you have the real reason for SOPA, PIPA, and the NDAA provisions [There's another 2-3 sentences in the article but you get the gist!]
Report Post »A Conservatarian
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 3:31amI keep getting tripped up trying to post part 4 – there‘s some trigger censor word I’m not catching besides d o c u m e n t… so just click the link in the main comment and check it out!
Report Post »A Conservatarian
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 3:34amOook one doctored version of pt.4 finally worked!
Report Post »jespasinthru
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 6:29amAnd the best part about it is that most of the people sitting at their home computers are far more computer literate, and have much more knowledge about the inner workings of the internet than most of the tired old fossils on Capital Hill who tried to pass these toxic laws. They don’t even realize that SOPA and its companion bill would cause numerous “Anti-nets” to spring up all over the place. The hackers, techno-wizards and cyber-warriors would have a field day.
Report Post »Obeckian1984
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 8:58amConservatarian Excellent post
I just wish Ron Paul would have loudly Proclaimed
Report Post »and by the way I am also opposed to the Patriot act…..
Like to see how the other NeoCons would have reacted to that.
smithclar3nc3
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 9:07amInteresting that the internet is the new target after the NDAA was passed. So let see suspend all Constitutional rights then censor the only real means of getting the message out to the masses.
Report Post »Where I’m sure when this done CREATING CAMP FEMA will be next to house all the citizens of a free society that the progressives black bag. WAKE UP AMERICA
ANYONE WILLING TO TRADE FREDDOM AND PERSONAL LIBERTY FOR SAFETY WILL ALWAYS END UP WITH NEITHER FREEDOM OR SAFETY.
JRook
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 9:57am@A Conservatarian Well said although you left out the key link. That is who benefits most from the inability of the larger citizenry from being able to evaluate full information about the actors in Congress and within the government. When you see the revolving door between large corporations and the FDA, Energy Department, Agriculture Dept., Treasury, etc. you understand that it is not the group we can now watch that is at risk. It is the wealthy and large corporations who control and direct that group now which has the most to loose. But of course many of the simpletons here will swallow the left vs. right parlor game that is provide to the masses to keep them occupied while the federal government is used to transfer wealth. You can spot those as the individuals who think that food stamps, a program by the way that is heavily lobbied for by the food industry and farming associations, is the problem. Yea, no reason consider the $100s billion going out the door to military contractors, infrastructure contractors, big pharma, etc. etc. Have the proponents of free trade agreements, those who like to expound about how positive they are for the US, explain to you why if that is true would trade deficit continue to get worse.
Report Post »run4thehills
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 1:33amIf we could only stop online stupidity. Let’s enact the Stop Overall Public Ant stupidity Act. Severe penalties including death will be required.
Report Post »jespasinthru
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 6:36amBut online stupidity is what amuses the rest of us.
Report Post »Fella
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 1:13amI did not get the impression that Santorum was sharply critical as much as he begrudgingly agreed with the other three. I do not trust Santorum at all on this.
Report Post »the_ancient
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 1:15amand you should not, he does not care at all about “piracy” his end goal it to censor anything he deems “immoral” from the web
Report Post »texrubarts
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 2:12amSantorum is for SOPA / PIPPA. And I am not surprise S.E. Cupp is “mum” on this topic…..
Report Post »NancyBee
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 2:40amNo…..I did not like Santorum’s answer at all….the laws are allready there
Report Post »jespasinthru
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 6:40amI agree. Listening to him just now made me lose a lot of respect for him. It’s not the “Wild West” out here. The Internet has done a very good job of policing itself all this time without the heavy hand of government intervention.
Report Post »JP16
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 8:22amYeah, maybe the Blaze needs to review what Santorum said. He did not come out against it, if anything he was all for it. But maybe they think they can distort the truth and say that “all the candidates” came out sharply against it just to cover the fact that such support for a bill like this would make Santorum look like the big government politician he is.
Report Post »The-Monk
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 1:06amObama is the Food Stamp King…
http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/09/29/obama-gives-oregon-5m-bonus-boosting-food-stamp-rolls
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/09/29/oregon-food-stamp/
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/or-got-5m-bonus-for-food-stamp-sign-ups
Report Post »the_ancient
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 1:04amSantorum Used to Support SOPA, he only Changed his mind because he did not want to alienate Glenn Beck, because with out Glenn Beck he would still be at 3% of the vote
It is SCARY that he is doing as well as he is…..
Report Post »piper60
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 1:52amActually–he sounded in favor of the bill tonight to me. Lost my vote altogether. I took my email address off of his mailing list. What a tool.
Report Post »JP16
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 8:23amDefinitely still supports it, until he gets on the radio with Beck and says that he doesn‘t support it and that he just wasn’t clear enough.
Report Post »JP16
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 10:09amOh, here he is on the Glenn Beck Radio Program…. Wow, is this a surprise?
Report Post »the_ancient
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 12:22pm@JP16 Until the Nomination (or Nov if god forbid Bibleman gets the nod) they should just rename the program to “The Rick Santorum Support Show, with your Host Pat Gray”
Report Post »TeaPartyForRomney
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 12:31amInteresting how Santorum said that he liked freedom like everyone else and then attacked them for not saying there were things the government could do… they all agreed on this.
There is way more than this in the debate. Watch the whole thing here: http://url2it.com/liee
Report Post »ConservativeCharlie
Posted on January 19, 2012 at 11:50pmActually as I remeber it, cause I watched the debate… Santorum actually was a little wishy washy on SOPA. Here is the biggest story of the Night… The People are standing up to the Media finally http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llT5MA5pcIA
Report Post »Pearsontech
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 10:01amYeah was really pretty disappointed with Santorums response to this question. At this point still plan to vote for him regardless of if he wins the nomination or not, but this did raise an eyebrow with me.
Report Post »PJL
Posted on January 19, 2012 at 11:48pmLets hope Washington is listening. SOPA has to be stopped.
Report Post »Joey8
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 12:19amDoes anyone realize that Marco Rubio was the cosponsor if this bill with Harry Reid???
Report Post »slr4528
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 12:38amJoey8
Yes, I read that too. That is what Ron Paul was talking about that there are many republicans supporting this bill. I did hear that Rubio withdrew his support for PIPA but I am not sure about SOPA. It concerns me that a Republican would even think of writing a bill to regulate or essentially censor the internet. The internet is fine the way it is. Let the private sector and our current patent and copywrite laws solve this problem.
Report Post »ChooseSides
Posted on January 19, 2012 at 11:45pmSOPA NOPA…
Can you say…rhymes with schrmuniversal schrmealth schrmare
All need to link arms to defeat.
Report Post »JENGA
Posted on January 19, 2012 at 11:43pmThis is not about stopping online piracy, its all about the government wanting to control the internet, space is not the final frontier, the final frontier is the internet, at least for the government it is……
Report Post »Shasta
Posted on January 19, 2012 at 11:47pmAnd the government controlled all space activity and look at our space program now, DEAD. They need to leave the net alone.
Report Post »A Conservatarian
Posted on January 19, 2012 at 11:39pmThey didn’t all roundly condemn SOPA… again Tiffany, you’re too agenda driven. Three of those men said they want a piracy act, just not as intrusive as SOPA.
One of them said they don’t want a new law and fought for legislation against anti-piracy laws, guess who?
Report Post »Shasta
Posted on January 19, 2012 at 11:45pmClose but no cigar. Ginrich said we already have patent and privacy laws and we don’t need more. Amazing how you Paulies hear what you want to hear. I will agree though that Romney‘s and Sansorum’s answer on this was very sad. I think I need to admit that Sansorum is really a progressive. Still could never vote for Paul, unless it was against Obummer.
Report Post »slr4528
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 12:45amRomney does not want SOPA..I have seen him answer this same question multiple times. He is extremely opposed to regulations that are intrusive to the free enterprise system especially the internet. The internet business has been booming due to zero regulations.
Santorum on the otherhand did waffle at the end of his question which made me nervous.
Report Post »A Conservatarian
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 12:49amShasta… Gingrich saying he wants democratic community organizer boards to elect new citizens must’ve skewed that memory.
Pretty sure Romney said a law was needed just not one as intrusive…. not really wanting to watch it again but ok.
Report Post »slr4528
Posted on January 20, 2012 at 1:09amRomney is opposed to SOPA and PIPA..He agreed with Gingrich about enforcing the current patent and copywrite laws. He said that many businesses have thrived on the internet and we do not need more regulations to hamper the growth of internet businesses. Again, I have seen him speak on this subject multiple times and if there is anyone against regulations that affect the growth of the free market that is Romney.
Report Post »vampiric aristocracy
Posted on January 19, 2012 at 11:38pmSOPA-socialism,needs to be stopped,its a violation of a free trade capitalist market.
Report Post »