Begala: AT&T, NSA, & Net Neutrality genre: Six Degrees of Speculation
Paul Begala just made an excellent comment on CNN. He pointed out that the large telephone companies that have agreed to cooperate with the administration on domestic surveillance may have an ulterior motive. Begala reminded viewers that the phone companies are looking to remove net neutrality and would need the support of the administration to get that done. His point is that these companies and the administration are playing "we scratch your back and you scratch our backs." It certainly sounds like a plausible scenario.
Here is the actual quote from CNN:
BEGALA:
That's a very good point.
And the Democrats are going to have to point out that this is a classic Republican move, not a national security move. Big government is getting into bed with big business. We're talking about AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth. AT&T, by the way, wants to take over the Internet and start charging for access to the Internet, which Internet pioneers desperately oppose.
So, now, if you are running AT&T, and the president of the United States comes to you and says, hey, why don't I spy, why don't I snoop through your files there, and you want him to give you permission to control the Internet, that's a really lousy alliance politically for the Republicans, to be seen as big government in bed with big business.
Daniel DiRito | May 11, 2006 | 2:50 PM
Comments
1 On May 11, 2006 at 9:47 PM, johnsnakecusak wrote —
I think it's interesting that of the four phone service providers, only Qwest had the guts to tell the NSA no.
Qwest asked NSA to get the Fisa court to okay the transfer of information, and the NSA told them they didn't think it would be approved. So they said No again.
Everyone who is concerned about this betrayal by our phone service providers should check out an alternative phone provider. Most major cable internet and cable tv providers offer phone service, there's Vonage, and hundreds of Internet Phone providers.
Check them out, they are cheaper and don't forget to ask if they turn their records over to ATT, Bell South, Verizon or the NSA before you sign up.
Now is the time to make a stand and a protest.
2 On May 12, 2006 at 9:03 AM, Jimi wrote —
Daniel, nice post over at Think Progress. To me the Democrats are trying to get some kind of 'truth' out of the black hole called Washington. The Republican's are so incredibly well versed in spin, the lies being put forward held together by a minuscule granule of 'truth' that facts have little chance of being heard (not escaping).
Now if the Democratic Party could craft every message tying corruption to the other Party, that would be a feat worthy of praise. Sadly, the Scarecrow and Lion seem to be crafting their media policy. More American's need to look behind the curtain and have a bottle of Alka-seltzer ready.
3 On May 12, 2006 at 9:35 AM, Daniel wrote —
John,
Thanks for your comments. I was actually surprised that Qwest didn't participate. Being from Denver, they have had a number of problems over the last several years. I don't know if the decision not to participate was a thoughtful one or if they simply got it right by luck. Maybe other readers have some additional information on the Qwest decision?
I hope to hear more of your thoughts.
Daniel
4 On May 12, 2006 at 10:00 AM, Daniel wrote —
Jimi,
Thanks for the plug of my Think Progress comment...much appreciated. The Democrats just don't seem to be able to craft a consistent message that works...I can't decide if it is the nature of the party such that we simply can't agree on one message or if we don't have the right messengers.
I'll go out on a limb and make an observation...I think Nancy Pelosi is a horrible messenger. I've watched her for some time now and I saw her on Meet The Press this past Sunday...she simply doesn't have the presence of a strong messenger. Her answers were hesitant and pensive and she appeared to be taken aback time and again by Russert. I know many don't like Russert...but blaming him for being able to put politicians on ths spot is a cop out.
Harry Reid is better, but not by much...he lacks any believable passion when he speaks...it seems too rehearsed. And while I'm putting my neck out on the chopping block, I don't see Howard Dean as an effective speaker. Sometimes he nails it...but many times he gets nailed for speaking before thinking. IMHO, I think his ego gets the best of him at times.
Regarding crafting messages, take a look at this prior posting and let me know if you agree. The last two paragraphs are the most relevant part to read. You can find the posting here.
Daniel
5 On May 12, 2006 at 10:53 AM, johnsnakecusak wrote —
Daniel, as I understand it, the principal reason that Qwest denied the NSA request was a fear of lawsuit from Qwest customers, if it was discovered that personal information had been released to our spys. And also the resulting stockholder's reaction to those possible lawsuits and their effect on the value of stock was imagined.
I think that ATT, Bell South and Verizon should have considered this downside of their cozy arrangement with the NSA, because class-action lawsuits are sure to come.
From what I know, Qwest's previous problems have been in the area of the CEO's personal misconducts, not the corporation itself. Correct me if I'm wrong on that.
6 On May 12, 2006 at 12:38 PM, Daniel wrote —
John,
Thanks for the update. The Qwest explanation makes sense...while not necessarily the most noble reason, it is nonetheless a valid one.
You are right that much of the Qwest trouble surrounded former CEO Joe Nacchio...he really did a number on the company from what I understand.
There is an old Italian saying, "When a fish goes bad, it starts with the head." Seems to fit the Qwest situation and many others that come to mind.
Thanks for your comments.
Daniel
7 On May 12, 2006 at 4:13 PM, Jimi wrote —
I think crafting the message into 30 second soundbites works up to a point. The money quote you wrote..if you craft a message that appeals to a majority constituency and then repeat that message religiously…you will keep those voters even if you don’t deliver so long as you keep saying that you want to and you will.Bingo! I think the Democrats do not have a person with the 'mojo' and 'chutzpah' to deliver a message without the fear it will be thrown back in their face and not being able to react(Pelosi). I also think we (the majority of Americans) have/are reaching a point that when a politician opens their mouth we can no longer suspend our disbelief.
Sen. Obama (from my home state) may just be able to fill such a large pair of shoes, if the Party would allow such a junior member to reach so high. But I know for a fact that he toes the Party line without exception(that I am aware). In the mean time the Democrats have tepid people throwing cottage cheese. I also wrote a small piece about crafting the message here.
8 On May 13, 2006 at 2:26 AM, johnsnakecusak wrote —
My fellow Illinoisan, Jimi, holds the same hope for Obama that I do. I join him in that thought.
Also agree with the thoughts on Pelosi, at such a time of possibilities for the Democratic Party, and libetarian principles in general, it is unfortunate to not have stronger, more united voices at the helm on the Democrat side.
Pelosi and Reid have done a great job of keeping the Republican majority in check and have managed to keep the majority in a position of defending itself.
But when it is time to speak up, Pelosi and Reid lack the voice. Howard Dean is ineffective, at best, in his role, a tremendous disappointment. The three most important jobs in the party and not a clear speaker in the bunch.
We need a strong clear voice like Obama's, with the guts to say what needs to be said and proclaim authentic Democratic principles to catch voter attention.
Trackback Pings
© Copyright 2024
Post a comment