|
Sen. Durbin’s dangerous idea could worsen the problem he wants to solve
Friday, Mar 7, 2025 - Posted by Rich Miller * Background…
* Durbin’s justification…
Whoa. Not the greatest video he’s ever posted. * Regardless, his idea is so ridiculous… 
|
- Roadrager - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 12:36 pm:
In so many ways, and seemingly more by the week, a man unfit and incapable for the moment.
- halving_fun - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 12:38 pm:
🤣 Glad this conversation starting
Does take too long to get to this place tho
What are the chances of term limits? Not at the federal level (Not too big on unilateral. Disarmament) but at least at the state level?
- Keyrock - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 12:39 pm:
Wow. Almost a Mad Libs speech.
If his aides and family want to avoid a Biden-like situation, they should talk to him about not running again and, frankly, about resigning now - while people still remember the good he did in his better days.
- Remember the Alamo II - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 12:40 pm:
Apparently fentanyl is the justification for every policy change coming out of DC right now.
- Ducky LaMoore - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 12:45 pm:
“In so many ways, and seemingly more by the week, a man unfit and incapable for the moment.”
That was my opinion starting in the Bush administration. Even when I agree with him, he has a way of making me second guess myself.
- charles in charge - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 12:49 pm:
Add Durbin to the list of elected officials lazily justifying all manner of policy proposals “because fentanyl.” See also the dumb ideas proposed by Senate Republicans highlighted in today’s “It’s just a bill” post.
It is so disconcerting to see this level of willful ignorance about a serious issue. Please educate yourselves and do better.
- Steve - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 12:51 pm:
This is a bizarre video. The logic here makes no sense. Should we get rid of 230 because people read restaurant reviews that may lead to obesity?
- Garfield Ridge Guy - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 12:57 pm:
Section 230 should stay in place anyway, but “because fentanyl” is an incredibly weak justification for making a change. Given the national atmosphere, Durbin’s charge here is absurd.
- Homebody - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 1:02 pm:
Success in politics is in no way related to having to know anything about any of the things you’re asked to vote on. In fact in many cases having actual knowledge or basic policy competence probably makes you less successful in politics.
- charles in charge - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 1:02 pm:
== Apparently fentanyl is the justification for every policy change coming out of DC right now.==
For years advocates on the front lines of the overdose crisis sounded the alarm about fentanyl, and the only response they ever got from elected officials were calls for increased criminalization (if they got any response at all). Now all of a sudden everyone’s a fentanyl expert and wants to use it to justify every bad policy idea they have. And they still don’t care about putting their political capital behind real solutions that would save lives. It’s shameful.
- TJ - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 1:13 pm:
Is Durbin just having a prolonged senior moment or something? 230 and fentanyl have nothing to do with each other.
Either that, or he’s bold faced lying about why he wants to actually do it and is fishing for excuses to justify it.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 1:17 pm:
===Is Durbin just having a prolonged senior moment or something?===
No idea, but what he’s doing is radical and destructive.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 1:27 pm:
As a friend said today, Man who’s never used the internet in the manner most people use the internet wants to regulate the internet
* convinced of his own genius way to regulate the internet
- H-W - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 1:36 pm:
Agree with Charles in Charge. Indeed, on another post, I jumped on that wagon by indirectly suggesting harsher punishment solves social problems (it does not).
In this case, everyone uses the internet for everything - literally. The internet is thereby not the problem. It is the abuse of the internet that is the problem.
Using X or Facebook or TikTok to say “hit me up” is not going to diminish by making all websites at risk.
Drug abuse is the problem, as is dealing drugs. Criminal activity using the internet is already criminal. Creating an assertion of “complicity” toward website owners who are unknowingly used by criminals for criminal acts is irrational. It also has nothing to do with the fentanyl problem, and thus, other things being equal, has nothing to do with the solution.
Deputizing all website owners will not solve the problem of drug abuse. But is will diminish the internet universally. Better surveillance (with pre-existing, probable cause warrants) is already allowed. Do better police work.
A solution involving add-on charges for using the internet to conduct illegal activities will not prevent people from using theSo treating all websites as equally culpable for fentanly
- TheInvisibleMan - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 1:39 pm:
He’s politicking.
He takes his want, getting rid of 230, which makes no sense to me even as a standalone issue.
Then he attached that to another buzzword to advance the thing he wants to accomplish.
In this case though, the audience here and much of the general public is able to easily recognize the end product he is putting out is nonsensical.
The IT crowd went through all this face-palming with Ted Stevens and his ’series of tubes’ gibberish back in the early 00s, when he was trying to convince the public QoS-Quality of Service would be good idea to apply to the general consumer internet.
- Morty - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 2:18 pm:
I’ve always felt Durbin is an empty suit.
- Jack in Chatham - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 2:27 pm:
Durbin is parroting the Anti-Defamation League line to eliminate Free Speech especially regarding the Palestinians.
- JS Mill - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 2:35 pm:
=He takes his want, getting rid of 230, which makes no sense to me even as a standalone issue.=
I know many support keeping 230 including Rich. I have a different perspective on the immunity (my words) that 230 gives these large social media platforms. I am not an elected official but I am a public official. Like teachers I am not elected but hired to do a job and, in current political parlance some have referred to those like me as an unelected bureaucrat (and it is used as a pejorative). But we are the people that do the business of governmental bodies. We show up for work everyday to make sure the doors are open and the work proceeds.
Social media has been used to savage many of us mercilessly. Sharing our addresses and flat out lying about us. The courts offer us little to know remedy, even in the case where threats are made (sure there are a few laws on the books but try and get the police or the SA to take them seriously). This behavior has caused a lot of harm and run countless good people out of our business. Not everyone is as dumb as I am and continues to stick with it. And maybe you think that is just the cost of doing business. I encourage you to give it a try.
While durbin fumbles about with nonsense and looks foolish, I do support the effort to make these companies and their robber baron leaders accountable for some of what they are doing to people.
My time is in this business is getting toward the end, but so many will never get there because of the massive damage that these companies do.
- ArchPundit - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 2:42 pm:
=== Man who’s never used the internet in the manner most people use the internet wants to regulate the internet
It’s like when the Utah legislature regulates alcohol.
- TJ - Friday, Mar 7, 25 @ 2:56 pm:
== It’s like when the Utah legislature regulates alcohol. ==
Durbin could at least have the common decency to bring a dirty soda to the table with his bad ideas then.