how-to block ads
|
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| reply to huntml
Re: I'd favor indemnifying the telcos...
said by huntml  :The immunity proposals are less about protecting the telcos' bottom line; that's secondary. What they are really about is quashing the lawsuits so the details of what the administration did/is doing will never_see the light of day. Nope, like pretty much everything else in Washington, it's about political posturing. You can be sure that everything you see from either side of the aisle for the next year is geared towards winning votes in the upcoming election. Dodd barely mentions the telcos, instead focusing fire on 'this administration'. When this administration is out of office, no one will care anymore about what the telcos did.
--
What's certain about Darwinism is that it would take less time for (1) a single-celled organism to evolve into a human being through mutation and natural selection than for (2) Darwinists to admit they have no proof of (1) - Ann Coulter | |
huntml
join:2002-01-23
Mullica Hill, NJ
 ·Comcast
4 edits | said by footballdude :
Nope, like pretty much everything else in Washington, it's about political posturing. You can be sure that everything you see from either side of the aisle for the next year is geared towards winning votes in the upcoming election.
Well, it *is* politics. It's no surprise that political posturing is a big piece of it.
quote:
Dodd barely mentions the telcos, instead focusing fire on 'this administration'.
And reasonably so, in my view. I am sure that the telcos are lobbying behind the scenes for immunity, but it's only the administration and its congressional allies who are publicly pushing for it.
On the other hand, Dodd didn't spare the telcos completely from criticism. His comments about their having legal departments who were not made up of first-year lawyers and pro bono workers, about Qwest's different stance from the other telcos, etc., were spot-on.
quote:
When this administration is out of office, no one will care anymore about what the telcos did.
I disagree profoundly. I think that part of the reason the telcos have been so quiet in not publicly lobbying for immunity is because they *know* that were they to do so it would have tremendous negative PR consequences.
I believe that this is ultimately going to pass, because the administration desperately wants it, and because Congress is largely bought and paid for, and a bunch of pussies to boot (you'd think that the Dems would've learned from how they rolled over on Iraq and how it's damaged their credibility, but that's another post); but I know that I personally am not going to forget, and I think that a lot of people feel the same way I do. | |
|
