Obama administration policing the web? What would that look like?

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009, authored by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-WV, is a Senate bill that could potentially provide President Obama, or presumably any other President, with a "kill switch" for online traffic. According to Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, the bill Senate's bill originally, "empowered the president to essentially turn of the Internet in the case of a 'cyber-emergency,' which they did not define."

The proposal has ignited a firestorm of protest from critics of the Obama administration. Senator Rockefeller tried, in a prepared statement, to make clear his intentions, "I know the threats we face. Our enemies are real. They are sophisticated, they are determined and they will not rest." These are strong words; meant to let us know that the democrats are on the job, looking out for our national security in a world threatened by Islamic terrorists. At least that is presumably what Rockefeller's words are meant to convey.

But given recent rhetoric from the left, can we safely assume that "enemies" as defined by a democrat Senator are the same as the enemies that most sane Americans fear?

Take, for example, Hapless Harry Reid telling the Las Vegas Review-Journal's director of advertising, Bob Brown, "I hope you go out of business," at a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce luncheon in late August.

Or how about the words of Nancy Pelosi, who accused American citizens attending town halls and questioning the President's health care plan, "nazis."

Then there was the little matter of the White House web site targeting pretty much anyone else who does not conform to the President's leftist agenda.

"There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov. "

Of course after the outrage that anyone could have foreseen, the White House decided to allow themselves a re-do, and posted an updated version of the statement a few days later.

UPDATE: As part of our effort to push back on the misinformation about health insurance reform, we've launched WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck. It's full of videos and tools you can use to share the facts with your friends and family. Check it out.

Much friendlier. Now there is no reason to feel afraid.

In early 2006 Google rolled out a China-based version of its search engine which blocks content that does not adhere to Beijing's censorship laws. Google released a statement that read, in part, "In order to operate from China, we have removed some content from the search results available on Google.cn, in response to local law, regulation or policy."

Interestingly, during the 2008 election, Google chief executive officer Eric Schmidt announced his support for the then Illinois senator, Barack Obama. Schmidt spoke along side of Obama's technology adviser Julius Genechowski in Charlottesville. Obama "sees technology as the key part of a solution to almost every problem we face," Genechowski said. "He believes in using technology to make the government more transparent, more participatory and thus more effective."

Is it not possible, that in a sudden "cyber-emergency" the Obama administration could request that his supporter, the chief executive officer of Google, offer Obama some of the same assistance given to Beijing? Perhaps targeting troublesome sites who are engaged in "rumors" and "casual conversation" that run contrary to the policies of the White House? Fox News? Rush Limbaugh? Town Hall?

After all, it would not be necessary to shut down the entire Internet when it would be so easy to simply silence those nagging voices of dissent. That certainly would help make government--in Obama's eyes--more "effective."

When democrats talk of enemies, it is not well to assume that they mean who you mean. Look back on their words and actions. Or look in the mirror--perhaps their enemy is you.

---

UPDATE 2009-09-02 8:43 PM:

The day after I wrote this post a story came on FOXNews' The O'Reilly Factor regarding a blog post on the barackobama.com site. The blog, titled "2 PHONE CALLS ON 9/11 - Illinois! (Health Care Organizing Event)," which admonishes supporters of the Obama health care plan to join in on a phone campaign on September 11, Patriot Day, mysteriously disappeared from the Obama web site during the course of the FOXNews broadcast. Fortunately, the cached version on Google was still available, so I was able to pull up the text and save it as a PDF for you to view.

In the post, those who oppose Obama's plan are called, "Right-wing Domestic Terrorists" and are compared to the terrorists who attacked America on 9/11.

"All 50 States are coordinating in this – as we fight back against our own Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists who are subverting the American Democratic Process, whipped to a frenzy by their Fox Propaganda Network ceaselessly re-seizing power for their treacherous leaders."

This is yet another example of how liberals view those with opposing viewpoints. Note that they refer to Fox News as the "Fox Propaganda Network." Surely the folks who penned this beauty would think nothing of censoring a news network which they believe may be spreading "misinformation." All for the public good, of course.