Rusted Sky

Only 2?
At least there are less RINO's than there were, although a few more may join the bandwagon of retreat.

Liberals would rather get their way than be right.

Once the dems get what they want and the country goes to hell in a handbasket, they blame everyone but themselves like true sociopaths.

Jerry:

Exactly how many unique hits have you had on your blog?

If it's more than 500 you may want to check this out:

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=ind_focus.story&STORY=/www/story/01-16-2007/0004507242&EDATE=TUE+Jan+16+2007,+06:34+PM

Money Quote:

"Section 220 of S. 1, the lobbying reform bill currently before the Senate, would require grassroots causes, even bloggers, who communicate to 500 or more members of the public on policy matters, to register and report quarterly to Congress the same as the big K Street lobbyists.

Section 220 would amend existing lobbying reporting law by creating the most expansive intrusion on First Amendment rights ever. For the first time in history, critics of Congress will need to register and report with Congress itself.

"The bill would require reporting of 'paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying,' but defines 'paid' merely as communications to 500 or more members of the public, with no other qualifiers.

"On January 9, the Senate passed Amendment 7 to S. 1, to create criminal penalties, including up to one year in jail, if someone 'knowingly and willingly fails to file or report.'

The pertinent text of Admendment 7 to S.1:

(17) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING- The term `grassroots lobbying' means the voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same. `(18) PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING- `(A) IN GENERAL- The term `paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying' means any paid attempt in support of lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to influence the general public or segments thereof to contact one or more covered legislative or executive branch officials (or Congress as a whole) to urge such officials (or Congress) to take specific action with respect to a matter described in section 3(8)(A), except that such term does not include any communications by an entity directed to its members, employees, officers, or shareholders. `(B) PAID ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE GENERAL PUBLIC OR SEGMENTS THEREOF- The term `paid attempt to influence the general public or segments thereof' does not include an attempt to influence directed at less than 500 members of the general public. `(C) REGISTRANT- For purposes of this paragraph, a person or entity is a member of a registrant if the person or entity-- `(i) pays dues or makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount to the entity; `(ii) makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount of time to the entity;

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2007/01/register_blogge_1.php

"voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same." Sounds like writing a letter to your Congressman or to a newspaper is now considered lobbying.

"paid attempt to influence the general public or segments thereof' does not include an attempt to influence directed at less than 500 members of the general public." Would simply putting a post on the internet, knowing it would be freely available over 1,000,000,000 readers constitute an "attempt to influence' not less than '500 members of the general public'.

The "more than a nominal amount of time" criteria could mean just about anything an ambitious prosecutor wants it to mean and could be used to snare anybody who comes to the negative attention of some petty bureaucrat.

The most poisonious viper is less to be feared than the petty bureaucrat with just a little power. The viper is content to merely be who he is and will only use his venom when needed, the bureaucrat must search every day for reasons to use his power or he will lose it.

otpu

Ben -

We can still pull off a win, but when someone who's nominally on your team desires a loss, it gets pretty difficult.

The game isn't over, but they're sure trying to throw it...

J.

Hammer -

Won't argue much with that - they haven't grown up to the point where they realize that sometimes... things ARE their fault!

J.

John, I think I've got less than a dozen regular readers. You, James, Hammer, Ben, AJacksonian are the main commenters - haven't seen Jason around in a while and Rawb seems to have dropped out of blogging completely.

Somehow, I don't think I'm much of a threat to the Dems!

J.

Luckily I take no payments on the things I do... no real need of it in my life at this point. So any lovely lawyer wishing to come and complain that I am lobbying 'for or against' someone needs show cause on just what that is... I am sure I can get excellent legal services from various free-speech lawyers and such who would love to throw a spanner into the Congressional 'silencer' concept. Just a mere Citizen... and I claim all my Rights that I haven't lent to government. Which specifically includes: speech.

Although I would need someone to read my lengthy tracts while I snoozed off on a cot so that I could have my right to actually be at any proceeding... just wake me up for a clarification! And a judge would have a hard time saying *why* I should not be present as such as it involves me. No one ever stated that I had to be 'conscious' during the proceedings.... wake up as needed, more than happy to help folks in understanding my blather!

Well,if you ever need to set up a defense fund, I'll throw a couple of bucks your way. (grin)

J.