Hollywood Studio Execs Upset That President Obama Didn't Stay Bought; Insist They Won't Donate More

from the bye-bye dept

Apparently, some Hollywood studio execs are so annoyed by the White House's statement against the current drafts of SOPA/PIPA that they're telling the press that they won't donate to President Obama's re-election campaign:
But Hollywood moguls told me they “didn’t know it was going to be as over the top as it was” and took this as a declaration of war. “We just feel very let down by the administration and Obama for not supporting us,” one studio chief explained to me. “At least let him remain neutral and not go against it until we can get the legislation right. But Obama went against it. I’m personally not going to support him anymore and not give a dime anymore,” another movie mogul who’s also a well-known Obama supporter told me this week.
There are many, many more quotes in the article, each one more jaw dropping than the next. Take this one, for example:
“God knows how much money we’ve given to Obama and the Democrats and yet they’re not supporting our interests. There’s been no greater supporters of him than we’ve been from the first day and the first fundraisers continuing until he was elected. We all were pleased. And, at its heart institutionally, Hollywood supports the Democrats. Now we need the administration to support us. This is a very important time for Hollywood.
This is yet another tone deaf response from Hollywood, of course. First, it shows exactly what they thought of this whole process: donate enough money and of course they expect the government to pass unnecessary, damaging, protectionist laws that favor the big donors. Making such an admission publicly... that's pretty dumb. Second, it appears they're ignoring the talking points about what a wonderful statement it was... and how it really meant we should just move forward with the current bills (despite the statement saying exactly the opposite).

Either way, these guys are living in denial. The article repeatedly quotes them blaming Google for this... and includes my favorite ridiculous quote of all:
As for other claims, we make 24. We don’t make national security problems.
Let's add back in the key point that this "mogul" missed: You make 24. You don't understand technology. You don't understand internet security. Your pointless desire to stop innovation does create national security problems. Just because you're ignorant of why doesn't change what the law you support would have done.

Either way, what a massive sense of entitlement from those folks from old Hollywood/old politics. When they buy a President, they like their President to stay bought, dammit. They don't want him listening to actual concerns and worrying about the consequences of the quixotic obsessions.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 9:02am

    "God knows how much money we’ve given to Obama and the Democrats and yet they’re not supporting our interests"
    Lol, they are just allowed to openly say this sort of thing in the U.S. with no consequences? I thought these sort of bribes were supposed to be at least a little hush hush, or that they should at least pretend that they were directly paying them to "support their interests".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:00am

      Re: Hushers

      To repeat myself from yesterday:
      They don't need to be sneaky--there aren't enough people paying attention to matter.

      Lately there's really hardly any secrets--just stuff which is severely under-reported. All the under-handed crap is right out there in the open, just not publicised.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        crade (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:03am

        Re: Re: Hushers

        I meant direct legal consequences, not just people disliking them consequences.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Hephaestus (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:10am

        Re: Re: Hushers

        Lobo - The thing that I find interesting, politicians and business types are currently saying things they wouldn't have 10 years back. With an attitude entitlement and elitism that borders on manic.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:27am

        Re: Re: Hushers

        i'd repost the ars link i posted that you replied that to, but i'm still busy hinging my jaw back after remembering that article and combining it with theese quotes.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Loki, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:07am

      Re:

      So in addition to extortion and blackmail, by their own words we can add bribery to the list of crimes they have essentially committed.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        PrometheeFeu (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 12:06pm

        Re: Re:

        I'm somewhat wondering if this might be quid-pro-quo... I mean, the implication is clearly that Obama can count on their money if he signs the bills. That has got to be illegal.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 9:10am

    The president caved on his support of SOPA for a simple reason. He is on the razors edge in the polls. The same people that got him elected, the 18-35 year old's, are the ones doing the protesting over SOPA and PIPA. If he alienates this base he loses the election.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      zegota (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:11am

      Re:

      I don't get why this is a bad thing. Aren't our elected officials supposed to represent their constituents? It always gives me a nice chuckle when people say "Well, he's only vetoing that because his voters want him to!" That's how our system was designed to work.

      But don't let that stop you from some good ol' Obama-hatin'!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Kiki, Jan 20th, 2012 @ 8:58am

      Re:

      I totally agree! How stupid are these "un-named" moguls.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 9:12am

    Also, if the president wins the election, expect him to pass SOPA or something like it, he has nothing to lose at that point.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      crade (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 9:23am

      Re:

      Would it will be any different if he loses? Obama is hardly the driving force here. The only chance of keeping this under control is if the people keep up the pressure.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Jay (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 9:48am

        Re: Re:

        Won't work after this campaign election cycle.

        We need a better voting system because the ones we have right now allow for people to stay bought. After this election, they'll renew the fight to get something like SOPA passed. They have the pleasure of waiting.

        It's time to change the voting system and destroy the incentives of so much money destroying our republic. How long can the tech sector spend money in Congress for favorable lobbying? How long until the tech sector becomes the Devil we know? That's the issue I have with this. Sure, the public is linked here, but let's be realistic for a second. If the movie industry took 100 years to change copyright to their favor, how can we ensure that the public has a say in new laws that criminalize them? We've needed a lot of changes and it won't all come from pressuring the president to change the law or threaten a veto.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          crade (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:02am

          Re: Re: Re:

          How do you expect to be able to change the voting system? By force? Good luck. Convincing the people who depend on the old system to do it? Not likely.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            crade (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:11am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Maybe if someone built a really good organizational platform on top of the current voting system that allowed using the current system in a more democratic way without actually changing the legal structure, you might be able to bind the electorate together under the current system and get people in who were willing to change it... ?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Hephaestus (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:15am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Most people just vote by party or for who ever looks good on the TV news. Tracking politicians every move, and keeping people informed of their actions is one thing that comes to mind. If people knew that their politician voted for a law that would cost the country a trillion dollars, and personally cost them xxx dollars. If they knew their politician voted for unconstitutional laws. How long do you think those politicians would stay in office?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              crade (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:16am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              We must think alike :)

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                Hephaestus (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:28am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                A lot of people are thinking this way. We are living in a system where the politicians have no fear of their constituents, openly lie, flaunt their corruption, all with no remorse or consequence. Bringing back fear and consequences is the only way to fix it. One perfect way to do this is to show people what their politicians are up to. My thought is a wiki setup like the CIA fact book(choose a country) for politicians. Set up with e-mail notifications, Facebook and Google apps, comments section to get people involved.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:38am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  I don't get why you guys don't have that already tbh, not the wiki, the reporting on votes.
                  Over here (Sweden) the Yes/No/Abstain keypresses are logged and is a matter of public record, we can literally see every single vote our representatives (and i use that word in the loosest meaning possible seeing as most of our new copyight laws came from the American Embassy) have made.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    Hephaestus (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:54am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    We do, we just do not have a convenient central place, for the average politically apathetic american, to find the information.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:41am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Well don't forget that the US has that bizarre system of bills that means a vote against, the SickKids Bill, happened because one twerp added an amendment to allow dumping of sewage in reservoirs, while another one added an amendment to ban abortions to teenage girls and between them all they actually dumped the part of the bill about providing medical treatment to children. But it would still count as a vote against something that sounds good.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  icon
                  crade (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:47am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Good.. But it needs charts, and graphs! Nice corruption summaries that show at a half a glance where their money comes from compared against how they vote on the issues. Most people will not want to spend too much time, you just need to make sure it's trustworthy, sourced and validated, some people, and eventually reporters, etc will continually delve into the details they question and hopefully build trust for the results for everyone else.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:51am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Be nice with a simple meter starting up for neutral and then going left for "voting in the interest of campaign donators" or right for "voting consistent with election promises" for each vote.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    Hephaestus (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:59am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    We need to make attention span proof. I have to start a Google+ page for this.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    •  
                      identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:00am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      Just lead with a summary and graphics, follow up with the details midpage.

                       

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                      •  
                        icon
                        Hephaestus (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:02am

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                        Have you seen the CIA fact book? I am thinking like that by politician instead of country. With a summary on top.

                         

                        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                        •  
                          identicon
                          Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:04am

                          Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          From a design POV i'd start with like the last 5-10 issues voted, click them and you get a breakdown of the vote, click an individual senator/rep and you get how they voted and if it's by the money or the will of the people.

                           

                          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                        •  
                          icon
                          crade (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:08am

                          Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          You could also have it so you can sum up the corruption scores by party and you could flip the charts around too and find out which companies send the most money to the politicians with the highest corruption scores.

                           

                          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                          •  
                            identicon
                            Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:18am

                            Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                            This is actually how the press should operate, that is their mandate.
                            Keep tabs on the Government and report to the people.
                            Nowadays they seem more interested in HIDING it from the public.

                             

                            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    Hephaestus (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:00am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    We also need to make it so people can delve down into details. Be seriously funny if this is the beginning of something that changes world politic.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  indieThing, Jan 20th, 2012 @ 4:27am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  I totally agree, I've had the occasional daydream of such a site myself. One day, if I ever get the time I may even code it up.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              crade (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:26am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              So how come you haven't started a project yet? Just need something wikipedia-ish, have a way for people to enter info, requirement for including sources and check validation if possible, link in any relevent data sources you got, throw together some summaries and charts and you are off to the races :)

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Jay (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:17am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            The first is to try for a Constitutional convention.

            The second is an Amendment that specifically changes the voting system.

            The first part is the money in politics. The second is the system itself. Good luck indeed. -_-;

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Toot Rue (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:49am

      The Hollywood and Obama show

      Exactly right. Obama wins back the young people crowd, saves Hollywood some money since they are going to support him regardless, and after he is reelected they'll seal the deal.

      Political theater at it's finest.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Hephaestus (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:04am

        Re: The Hollywood and Obama show

        "The Hollywood and Obama show" - the title for a great parody

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Chimpbarak McOsamaBurton, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 12:26pm

        Re: The Hollywood and Obama show

        Look.

        It's simple.

        ALL politicians are greedy, backstabbing traitors. They would sell your Grandmother to the glue factory if it meant $$ or votes. (which = $$)

        The only thing that politicians and big business care about or listen to is $$ or the loss thereof. If you really want them to prick their ears to what you as a citizen need or care about, you must speak the language of $$.

        Therefore, let it be formally announced and made forever resolute: If we really want change, we must as a group CEASE THE CONSUMPTION OFF ALL FOR-PROFIT MEDIA UNTIL THE POWERS THAT BE ACT IN A RESPONSIBLE MANNER.

        I'm totally serious. If we think that "not voting" for a candidate will change anything at all, we are fooling ourselves. The candidate that we DIDN'T vote for will make the change the corporations wanted, and thank us for not voting for his competitor.

        Politicians come and go, but laws are changed by the immortal beings who survive every election and live on to push their agenda. Who are these "Immortals"? Why, the Corporations you silly child.

        The Immortals have all the rights of a mortal human being, but none of the downside of having that pesky shelf-life we call mortality. Over the decades, they change and churn from within, yet their mind and eye remain fixed on the ultimate and never ending goal: $$

        Make the $$ go down, and that eye fixes it's gaze upon you like the eye of Sauron. It wants to know WHY and what can be done to make the $$ go back up. That is ALL that it cares about.

        But we are such a pitiful lot: grubbing about on the ground for a little something to eat and some warmth at night and in between, a little entertainment for our tired souls.

        But we have to go on a FAST if we are to convince the eye of the Immortals that it is THEIR VERY ACTIONS which cause the $$ to go down. Once they see this, they will act swiftly and with great purpose to have those laws switched back, and they will instruct their minions in the halls of legislature to make it so.

        Going after the "president", if that is indeed his real title (I prefer "lackey"), is a fool's errand. If we "succeed", his replacement does the bidding of the Immortals, and we fail.

        The only way to truly succeed is to force the Immortals to their knees by banding together and REALLY keeping our $$ in our pockets. MASS BOYCOTTS. CASH OUTS. BLACK OUTS. And convincing as many as will listen that the little entertainment that they get from their purchases is a deal with the devil, and will result in REAL HARDSHIP, REAL JOB LOSSES, AND REAL INSECURITY, not the so-called versions that the media companies *say* will come to pass.

        Business has never been better for them, yet they cry that the sky is falling. Why? Because they care not about how well things are, just how much better they could be.

        This is the only thing they have EVER cared about. Or ever will.

        CBMOB

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Jeff (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 9:28am

    I was going to make a snarky reply, but I'm just utterly at a loss for words. The unbridled hubris of this "un-named" hollywood mogul is breathtaking. I don't even know where to begin to express my disillusionment, anger and frustration at the clueless, corrupt morons in charge of this country (with their fingers on the big red button to boot).

    I need to go away and think about this - we (the people) have the power to change the system, but we just can't be bothered to exercise our control - and this is the result.

    I almost feel like I'm going through the five stages of grief on learning that the country I love is dead... Only I'm just finishing the denial and moving to the anger stage...

    sigh

    what next??

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Kevin H (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:27am

      Re:

      Revolution?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:30am

      Re:

      Hollywood is VERY powerful.Obama instantly took the Keystone Pipeline off the table to try and mend fences with Hollywood. But the gatekeepers and masters of the entertainers could care less aparently.

      Could Hollywood actually change and lobby the right.. Well they already are. They are powerful enough to buy everybody.. Yeeesh.

      Silicon valley won the battle but not the war. The Hollywood studio execs will be back (Hollywood Terminator pun intended).

      If only Google would have totally went dark. All the revenue lost from businesses who count on customers from their search results would have been staggering. There would have been so much negativity directed at Washington it would have lit a fire so big it would have burned up SOPA & PIPA forever! If only that would have happened... Dare to dream!!!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:01am

        Re: Re:

        No, the negativity would have gone towards Google. There is a LOT of small businesses that also rely heavily on Google.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 12:54pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          I can’t disagree with your logic. There would be some people who would be upset with Google if they had gone to the extreme Wikipedia did.

          However, if you are a small business owner, what makes the most sense? Biting the hand that feeds you or contacting your representatives and telling them to not muck around with your cash flow?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:58am

      Re:

      You put into word what I couldn't. I congratulate you sir.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Suja (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:02am

    can someone just please take these MAFIAA crooks out back and shoot them already? they are worse than friggin' fleas on a dog

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:05am

    Wow, they sure sound like a bunch of whiners.

    Maybe if they got the bill right in the first place, Obama wouldn't have been forced to go against it? Too many times they tried to abuse the law to the point of breaking and eliminate due process so they can catch "pirates" faster. And now they whine that someone actually stoop up to them?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Don, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:06am

    Obama re-election

    I really hope Obama gets re-elected; but he probably won't.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      demented, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:38am

      Re: Obama re-election

      What good will it do? If he signed the NDAA, he'll happily sign SOPA or a similar bill as soon as it crosses his desk. And if he's reelected, he will just do whatever he feels like... like dispensing with our liberties.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Doug D (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:10am

        Re: Re: Obama re-election

        As much as I am not Obama's fan, I'm not sure anyone in Washington is any better. They're all doing away with our liberties wholesale and we keep voting them back into office anyway.

        I'm still a fan of term limits. Maybe if you know you will be "one of the masses" in a few years you'll be a little more careful about what laws you write for "everyone else" to follow.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Nigel (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:10am

    Keith Olberman

    I pinged Mike with a link to this so he may pick it up but this was last night. The first 20 minutes was dedicated to SOPA.

    http://current.com/shows/countdown/videos/markos-moulitsas-on-sopa-pipa-and-the-battle-for- control-of-the-internet

    Ron Wyden is the first guess but I only saw a transcript. Its likely on the site somewhere though.

    Nigel

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:15am

    Notice how he says WE can get the legislation right, as if he is a legislator.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    mischab1, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:23am

    Am I the only one who suddenly feels more inclined to vote for Obama again? :-P

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Gwiz (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:24am

    The Internet Changes Everything...

    We may be entering uncharted waters and the blackouts yesterday may have just been the beginning.

    There is now a website to crowdsource lobbying in Washington for the common people on issues that concern them. Finally, a way to combat powerful corporations on their home court.

    http://www.wethelobby.com/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      demented, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:41am

      Re: The Internet Changes Everything...

      Thank u for the link!

      I think nothing like yesterday has ever happened before, and that is what scares the Hollywood types and political fat cats. They hope it was a fluke... but if it's not, they are in trouble.

      Hence the tantrum Hollywood types are throwing.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 5:28pm

      Re: The Internet Changes Everything...

      Unfortunately, if citizens have to start paying to petition against bad laws, it just confirms that the government has failed in its very core and basic duties to the people.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Gwiz (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 5:53pm

        Re: Re: The Internet Changes Everything...

        Unfortunately, if citizens have to start paying to petition against bad laws, it just confirms that the government has failed in its very core and basic duties to the people.

        That is a really good point.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:26am

    "As for other claims, we make 24. We don’t make national security problems. "

    1. 24 ceased production in 2010! Stop living in the past!
    2. If it's not a national security problem (which I agree), why the hell does DHS get involved?!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:31am

    'of course they expect the government to pass unnecessary, damaging, protectionist laws that favor the big donors. Making such an admission publicly... that's pretty dumb.'

    Yes, but at least they are being honest about it. That's the first time I've seen the industry tell it like it is. The fact that our government is for sale to the highest bidders it the elephant in the room that nobody likes to acknowledge; as ugly as the truth is, it is better to express the truth.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Mesonoxian Eve (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:36am

    I nominate Al Gore for 2012.

    He invented the internet. He stood against SOPA/PIPA.

    I feel, as president, he'd protect it for 4 more years.

    ...

    My straight faced remarks are getting hard to hold.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Gwiz (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:51am

      Re:

      I feel, as president, he'd protect it for 4 more years.

      He might protect the Internet, but if he pushes the UN's Agenda 21, then there would only be about 10 to 20 percent of us left to enjoy it.

      http://www.infowars.com/al-gore-agenda-21-and-population-control/

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 12:19pm

        Re: Re:

        mmmm, yeah

        "The rabid “environmentalists” behind the green agenda intend to take all human activity and put it into a box called “sustainable development”."

        Whereas all the others want to go outside the box into unsustainable development?

        Bad box.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 2:18pm

        Re: Re:

        Please tell me you're not seriously citing infowars as your source.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Gwiz (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 5:48pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Please tell me you're not seriously citing infowars as your source.

          I've been known to wade into the "tinfoil waters" now and then. Viewing issues from all sides allows one to make educated opinions.

          That article caught my eye and I found it to be a fairly convincing argument, even a bit scary, especially after digging around in the UN publication on Article 21.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:40am

    This shows just how much entitlement is involved in Hollywood, and a lot of billionaires, in donating to political candidates, with the expectation of making hundreds of millions in return on investment.

    Our country would be much better if we had a public finance system and banned ALL kinds of campaign contributions and third party spending. But unfortunately the Supreme Court is filled with 5 morons who insist on corrupting politicians and making the problems even worse by throwing away the flood gates.

    To them the damn to stop the flow of corporate cash worked so well that we can now destroy the damn to sell the parts for some extra cash, and the water behind the damn will stay put where it is without the damn to hold it back.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    anonymous, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:43am

    'They don't want him listening to actual concerns and worrying about the consequences of the quixotic obsessions.'

    or doing what he bloody well should have done/be doing all the time. supporting the people! just because they dont have money to contribute to campaign funds doesn't mean they can be ignored. they are the ones that do the voting, after all!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 10:49am

    Isn't this a blatant admission to bribing a public official? Shouldn't the justice department be ordering investigations and the FBI be making arrests when they issue statements like these?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    qyiet (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:26am

    Award that man points

    for correct use of the word quixotic. Well done sir.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:49am

    The show 24

    I find this statement particularly amusing given how annoying I remember finding most of the unrealistic and absurd computer-related techno-babble on that show...

    If I had (a lot) more free time, I'd create a little video clip with a mix of computer security experts explaining what's wrong with SOPA/PIPA and then characters from 24 explaining that no, they'd just fix that by "looking at the binary" and such.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Bob Webster (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:50am

    Votes trump donations every time, as long as you have enough votes.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 12:04pm

    There has to be a way for a Democrat like myself to let it be known, I am vehemently opposed to SOPA/PIPA in its current form. I love Hollywood, I am opposed to piracy, and I am equally and vehemently against censorship of the Internet. This being said why do I have to be Democrat or Republican to openly defend my constitutional rights. I am an American, I am a Christian, I am Gay, and I am a patriot. Mr. President I support you and I still support Hollywood and the mediocre job they are currently doing and calling it entertainment. I can like both, If you are in my sandbox then you need to start playing fair. I'll not tare down your castle if you will not tare mine. Hollywood has a child like mentality. Wish they would could reconsider their approach to this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Violated (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 12:07pm

    Warfare

    Now you know why Rupert Murdoch has been bitching. He is one of the main people who has been writing these checks.

    These days they have been sending the President messages like "Fuck You Obama" and "Millions paid only to be betrayed"

    It seems it could be in the President's re-election interests to turn against Hollywood and that depends on if the Tech Industry can fill the gap.

    Open Warfare it is. Where this dice lands we have yet to see but clearly those in Congress cannot have failed to have got the public message by now.

    Most of the public hate politics and just wish they could do their job without trying to ruin everything. It seems they cannot even do that right.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    jupiterkansas (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 12:13pm

    Have we reached that point where Hollywood has so over-played its hand that it loses all credibility and Washington turns their back on them and stands up for the little guy?

    That's how it always happens in the movies.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 12:38pm

    And with that the justice department shuts down megaupload and charges the people who run the site.

    That is one way to keep all happy, go with tech industry with law and kill one of Hollywood's top enemies.

    And who said Obama couldn't please both.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 2:00pm

    money or power, hmmm...power or money hmmm...hmmm...money or power,

    D'OH...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 19th, 2012 @ 5:04pm

    Wow, the shills are staying far away from this one, eh?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    RobShaver (profile), Jan 19th, 2012 @ 11:13pm

    Boycott movies

    I pledge to not go to a single movie in the theater this year, 2012. Care to join me watching NetFlix?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    The Luke Witnesser, Jan 20th, 2012 @ 4:34am

    Here lies the truth about SOPA/PIPA that even TechDirt has yet to report: what MPAA, RIAA, and Hollywood execs do not want you to see.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJIuYgIvKsc
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzS5rSvZXe8

    The truth behind why these big companies responsible for SOPA and PIPA are also responsible for piracy itself is far more insidious than even their outmoded business model.

    Can you say, do as I say so I can crush you under heel?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    SomeGuy, Jan 20th, 2012 @ 8:35am

    "Bought"

    "When they buy a President, they like their President to stay bought, dammit."

    Actually, I'm pretty sure they were just licensing him. Did they check their EULA?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Dave P, Jan 20th, 2012 @ 12:33pm

    Dosh, lolly, filthy lucre, folding stuff.

    Speaking as an impartial UK observer.....eh - what's that? SOPA and PIPA bills abandoned? Yay! :-) :-) :-) Break out the champagne!
    (Oops, mask slipped there). To continue...Can anyone explain to me the difference between "contributing to campaign funds" and "bribery"?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Gary, Jan 20th, 2012 @ 6:50pm

      Re: Dosh, lolly, filthy lucre, folding stuff.

      very little

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      LC (profile), Jan 20th, 2012 @ 11:38pm

      Re: Dosh, lolly, filthy lucre, folding stuff.

      @ Dave P
      No. They aren't dead. They're only shelved. There's a difference.

      Dead means dead.

      Shelved means:
      - They could rear their ugly heads again, perhaps under a different name, within a few months to a year.
      - They'll be sneaked in little-by-little with other, possibly irrelevant bills.

      Until at the very least, Rep. Smith, Sen. Leahy and every last sponsor/supporter of the bills who hasn't since backed down are removed from their seats, expect the bills to return. But even then, the American public will have to remain vigilant.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    LC (profile), Jan 20th, 2012 @ 11:28pm

    Weird.

    I'm surprised they said that straight to the press. This sort of stuff is done under the table.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Jim, Jan 21st, 2012 @ 6:23am

    Jesus, I don't think these articles could work in any more unattributed quotes if they tried.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This