When Bill McCollum opted to seek re-election for Florida Attorney General over throwing his hat in the ring for Senate, happiness pulsated with every beat of my heart.
"Our team has made great strides combating internet child predators, gangs and mortgage and Medicaid fraud, and in providing consumer protection. But there is more to do," he said. "Unless circumstances change it is my intention, at the appropriate time, to announce that I will be seeking re-election as Florida’s Attorney General.”
Old Bill signed on as member of "a task force created by 49 state attorneys general to look into the problem of sexual solicitation of children online has concluded that there really is not a significant problem."
Turns out "Academics have identified a phenomenon that they call a “moral panic,” referring to situations in which the media and policymakers overreact to a perceive risk or threat that in fact is not as great it is popularly portrayed."
Policymakers like Bill.
Cyberbullying has been identified as a far more prevelant threat to minors.
Will Bill McCollum try to downplay his part in the creation of moral panic among Florida's parents? Most likely through the implementation of cyberbullying laws that I expect to sweep through the state legislature once they dig Florida out of the financial crater they've buried us all in.
But before I shamelessly continue my plug for your vote, allow me to mention an interesting point made by Ecolux over at BlogCatalog.
I voted for you. Terrible how Bundy impacted the lives of so many of us in college in Florida at the time. I had trouble finishing school, switched to night school because I couldn't sleep! Very strange time. Wouldn't be the same today with Twitter and all the support we could have!
With all the technology available now, would Bundy have been apprehended quicker and would women have been alerted more expeditiously? More importantly, would young women have listened and taken the necessary precautions to engage in more discriminating social behavior?
I would imagine--once the crime scene photos were leaked and forwarded via camera phone, computer, lap top or whatever else we've got going out there--the answer is a most definite yes. Or a most definite, I certainly hope so.
On with the Frog's shameless promotion....
Scroll down to the end of the listed nominees and think about pulling down the screen and voting for SF. Saturday, January 31st is designated as the last day to vote.
While over at SFDB, stick around and read a few posts by a few of Florida's best bloggers. I'm hanging out in the high cotton and believe me, I appreciate the inclusion!
Democrats in the U.S. House released a broad outline of what they hope to include in the 2009 stimulus bill and it contained many ideas Obama promised during the campaign, including $6 billion to weatherize "modest income" homes. Typically, weatherizing a home means improving its insulation and window seals so the home retains heat or air-conditioning better. This usually means utility bills drop.
Sounds great, right?
Sure, unless the county where an applicant resides dictates additional "criteria" to qualify for federal funding.
Any person who must register with the Brevard County Sheriff’sOffice or the Florida Department of Law Enforcement under Florida Statute 773.13 as a person convicted of a felony in any court of this state or any person who has been convicted in a federal court or in any court of a state other than Florida or in any foreign state or country, which crime, if committed in Florida, would be a felony; or Any person listed by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement as a sexual predator or a sexual offender as provided for under Florida Statutes 775.21, 943.0435, 944.606, or 944.607.
13. In addition, Brevard County further requires that “if any household member is a convicted felon, he or she must have his or her Civil Rights restored or must have been pardoned in order to receive assistance.”
The kicker?
The courts ruled in favor of the county indicating such restrictions could be added, although the feds stated otherwise.
Per the Department of Community Affairs, Tallahassee:
"In particular, 10 CFR s, 440.22 sets for the criteria for which dwelling units are eligible for weatherization assistance, based on the income level of the family unit dwelling in the unit. A local provider may not add eligibility requirements which are more restrictive than the federal requirements."
Barack Obama declared his national commitment to weatherize at least 1 million low-income homes each year for the next decade..."which can reduce energy usage across the economy and help moderate energy prices for all." FOR ALL. AS IN NO EXCLUSIONS.
Even in Brevard County, Florida.
Any legal types out there wishing to review this case, shoot me an email. I'll point you in the right direction.
It's 11:30 PM and your cell phone rings. You don't recognize the number and let the call go to voice mail.
The phone rings again. Same number. This time, you answer the call.
It's probation standing at the front door. It's not your assigned PO, but two unknown others who wax philosophic that technically--because you didn't answer the phone--they have the power to violate your probation.
The above scenario played out with my loved one last night. It is unusual in the respect that no one other than the assigned PO has ever come calling IN FOUR YEARS to conduct a curfew check or any other charming supervisory duty.
Living in a rambling 1920's bungalow, persons knocking at the front door of my family member can't be heard on a good day. Add electric heat running at full force and the ring of the land line proves inaudible over the vibrating hum of the home.
The cell phone was the last avenue of communication.
If not for the fact that quite obviously he had been awakened, AG Bill McCollum could've chalked up one more statistic towards recidivism because my loved one literally didn't have his own house in order.
Not to mention the wait in jail for a month waiting for a judge to dismiss the charge. Wave good-bye to your job in an economic time where good employment is a handcuff away for those waiting to snatch yours up.
Be hypervigilant.
Don't put yourselves in the position of becoming a statistic.
And be careful out there. We may have a constitutional attorney in the White House but as far as Florida goes, our lawmakers enjoy keeping their constituents in the dog house.
Crist reversed $16.2 million in "public safety" cuts, a move that he said would preserve the jobs of 118 probation officers. However, the restoration came too late to save the jobs of 66 rookie probation officers who were laid off the day after the special session ended, the result of a previous round of cuts. (Florida Today, 1/27/09)
"For a long time now, there's been too much secrecy in this city."
Just because a government agency has the legal power to keep information private does not mean that it should.
And with that, President Obama threw open the doors to a newly transparent government.
Hmmm. Did Barack Obama just give the Florida Department of Law Enforcement the power to reseek access to Mark Foley's computers?
“Starting today,” Mr. Obama said, “every agency and department should know that this administration stands on the side not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known.”
"But these historic measures do mark the beginning of a new era of openness in our country," Obama said. "And I will, I hope, do something to make government trustworthy in the eyes of the American people, in the days and weeks, months and years to come."
Sure sounds like the FDLE should go for it.
***
In an attempt to deliver on pledges of a transparent government, Obama said he would change the way the federal government interprets the Freedom of Information Act. He said he was directing agencies that vet requests for information to err on the side of making information public — not to look for reasons to legally withhold it — an alteration to the traditional standard of evaluation.
Reporters and public-interest groups often make use of the law to explore how and why government decisions were made; they are often stymied as agencies claim legal exemptions to the law.
***
The new president effectively reversed a post-9/11 Bush administration policy making it easier for government agencies to deny requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act, and effectively repealed a Bush executive order that allowed former presidents or their heirs to claim executive privilege in an effort to keep records secret.
(...)
Advocates for openness in government, who had been pressing for the moves, said they were pleased. They said the new president had traded a presumption of secrecy for a presumption of disclosure.
“You couldn’t ask for anything better,” said Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, an advocacy group that tangled frequently with the Bush administration over records. “For the president to say this on Day 1 says: ‘We mean it. Turn your records over.’ ”
I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.
Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often, the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forebearers, and true to our founding documents.
So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.
That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.
These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land -- a nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights.
Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America: They will be met.
On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.
On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.
We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.
In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of shortcuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the fainthearted -- for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things -- some celebrated, but more often men and women obscure in their labor -- who have carried us up the long, rugged path toward prosperity and freedom.
For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life.
For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth.
For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sahn.
Time and again, these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction.
This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions -- that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.
For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act -- not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.
Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions -- who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them -- that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account -- to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day -- because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.
Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control -- and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart -- not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.
As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expediency's sake. And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: Know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more.
Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.
We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort -- even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.
To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West: Know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.
To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.
As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us today, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages. We honor them not only because they are guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service; a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves. And yet, at this moment -- a moment that will define a generation -- it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all.
For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter' s courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.
Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends -- hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism -- these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility -- a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world; duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.
This is the price and the promise of citizenship.
This is the source of our confidence -- the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.
This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed -- why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent Mall, and why a man whose father less than 60 years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.
So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America's birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:
"Let it be told to the future world ... that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive... that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it]."
America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.
--President Barack Obama, Inaugural Address January 20, 2009
1. Jimmy Carter’s inauguration was distinctive for a few reasons. First of all, he was the first president to be sworn in by a nickname. Second, his Inauguration Day parade included a Macy’s Parade-like balloon of a peanut to celebrate his past. And third, his wife, Rosalyn, was also the only First Lady (in recent history, anyway) to wear an old gown for the swearing-in ceremony. Seeing no reason it shouldn’t be worn again, she wore a dress she had worn to a gubernatorial ceremony in Georgia.
2. Zachary Taylor refused to be sworn in on a Sunday, because he was very strict about “keeping holy the Sabbath.” The position of president couldn’t just be vacant until Monday, so the President Pro Tempore of the Senate
, David Rice Atchison, was brought in as a pinch hitter. There’s some debate as to whether this actually makes him the 12th president and Zachary Taylor the 13th, but obviously, it’s generally accepted that he doesn’t count. He didn’t even stake claim to the title, and repeatedly told people that he slept through most of his day as president. He must have had a good sense of humor about the whole thing, though, as evidenced by the inscription on his gravestone. Picture by Wikipedia user Umbricht
3. Calvin Coolidge had some interesting people swear him in as president. The first time, after Warren G. Harding died in office, Coolidge was sworn in by his notary public dad. They were at a farm in Vermont and had to conduct the whole thing by kerosene lamp. The second time, he was sworn in by former president William Howard Taft, who was chief justice of the Supreme Court at the time.
4. Thomas Jefferson walked to and from his own inauguration.
5. Warren G. Harding was the first to arrive at his inauguration via car.
6. When Andrew Johnson was inaugurated as vice president, he was totally trashed. He was very ill from typhoid fever and drank whiskey to try to numb the aches and pains a little. Except he overdid it and ended up slurring his way through his oaths. Then he tried to swear in the new senators
, but got too confused and had to let a Senate clerk complete his duties instead. “The inauguration went off very well except that the Vice President Elect was too drunk to perform his duties and disgraced himself and the Senate by making a drunken foolish speech,” Senator Zachariah Chandler reported. “I was never so mortified in my life, had I been able to find a hole I would have dropped through it out of sight.”
7. More than three tons of Jelly Belly jelly beans were used in Ronald Reagan’s inauguration in 1981. When he was governor of California, he developed a jelly bean habit because he was giving up smoking and the jelly beans helped distract him. He became known for it, so red, white and blue jelly beans were used for his inauguration celebrations. The blueberry Jelly Belly, in fact, was created just for this purpose.
8. Barack Obama may be using the same Bible to take his oath as Abraham Lincoln did, but Teddy Roosevelt still has one up on him: he actually wore one of Lincoln’s rings. John Hay, Roosevelt’s secretary of state, was also Abraham Lincoln’s private secretary (he was only 22 at the time) and was there when Lincoln was assassinated. Hay was given the ring by Mary Todd Lincoln and let Roosevelt use it in his 1905 inauguration.
9. The Adams presidents were apparently sore losers. When their successors were inaugurated, both John Adams and John Quincy Adams made it a point to be otherwise occupied far out of town.
10. In his inaugural address, James Buchanan announced that he wasn’t going to run for re-election. He was true to his word, and maybe that’s for the best: he’s continually ranked as one of the worst presidents the U.S. has ever had.
In honor of this year's Inauguration Address coming up, here is a link to a funny site to make your own speech - Mad-Libs style. If you generate a funny one, copy it and add it under comments!
Over at Change.Gov, the Citizens Briefing Book has closed. Thousands of citizen-generated ideas are headed for President Obama's desk. Read more here.
There's one more thing for you to do before tomorrow's historic inauguration.
On this Martin Luther King Day, tell your story.
Share your American Moment."Share your experiences and your ideas -- tell us what you'd like the Obama-Biden administration to do and where you'd like the country to go."
For those of us with families caught in the snare of the Adam Walsh Act and the resulting collateral damage in every aspect our our private lives, now is the time to tell your story. Take the opportunity to sit down and so so today.
Yes You Can.
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."
Senate Democratic Leader Al Lawson of Tallahassee demanded Friday that Charlie Crist veto $1.2 billion in budget cuts.
"The loss of 66 probation officers not only jeopardizes public safety, it puts more strain on law enforcement and our court system already stretched to the breaking point...These people are our first line of defense, the ones who monitor offenders released from prison, among them those charged with serious crimes, including sexual offenders."
His political segregation of the offender issue supports one of several findings by the Internet Safety Technical Task Force, a panel created by 49 state attorneys generals--including Florida's own Bill McCollum--to look into the problem of sexual solicitation of children online.
"Academics have identified a phenomenon that they call a “moral panic,” referring to situations in which the media and policymakers overreact to a perceive risk or threat that in fact is not as great as it is popularly portrayed"
(...)
It is critical that policy makers based actions on risks that actually exist, rather than on the risks that are hyped to generate ratings in the news media."
Child on child cyberbullying proved more prevalent.
As such findings also run counter to Florida AG Bill McCollum's political cyber policy, our state legislators--including Al Lawson --and congressional representation--specifically, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, PROTECT Our Children Act--are unlikely to be provided a copy of the ISTTF report, Enhancing Child Safety and Online Technologies.
"...this study says what most intelligent people have been saying since the first time they saw this horrible (yet incredibly compelling) television program (To Catch a Predator): If NBC, their subcontractors Perverted Justice, or the police forces working these stings had any interest in protecting actual young people, they'd be surfing the web for real teenagers doing risky things (like chatting with predatory adults) and notifying each child's parents."
The anti-intellectuals have been in charge for eight long years, but 5 days before Obama is sworn in as the 44th President of the United States, the most heinous, cruel, reprehensible scam to be pulled on this country's citizens is finally revealed as a "moral panic" invented by politicians, law enforcement and the media.
The Internet Safety Task Force year long report--Enhancing Child Safety and Online Technologies--has America's Attorney Generals--including Florida AG Bill McCollum--scrambling to explain the findings of the inquiry the AGs themselves commissioned.
Our soon to be sworn in VP Joe Biden and Florida's very own Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz are themselves responsible for passage of the The PROTECT Our Children Act (S. 1738)
“We need to think of this as a war,” said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (FL-20). “A war we must wage against sex predators, a war for our children. I fought for the passage of this law so that we could train federal, state and local police forces to lift the digital fingerprints left by child sex predators so they can be put behind bars.”
Deb. That statement is a flat lie.
"A task force created by 49 state attorneys general to look into the problem of sexual solicitation of children online has concluded that there really is not a significant problem."
Biden. Wasserman-Schultz. McCollum. John Walsh. Mark Lunsford. Mark Foley. George Bush.
Podcast: Harvard Law's John Palfrey on Internet Safety Task Force Report
Harvard Law Professor and former Berkman Center director John Palfrey has been a busy guy. For most of the past year he has chaired the Internet Safety Technical Task Force which, as I explain in this longer post, just released a report showing that predator danger for kids is not what a lot of people feared.
A recent report by the Internet Safety Technical Task Force says that child exploitation on the Net and elsewhere is worrisome but online social networks, such as Facebook and MySpace, are not to blame for the bulk of it since most reported cases predated their existence.
Among other findings: children are unlikely to be propositioned by adults online unless they are willing participants and are already at risk because of poor home environments, substance abuse or other problems. And, despite some high-profile cases (for example, MySpace was sued in 2006 lawsuit by a 14-year-old girl who said she was sexually assaulted by a 19-year-old man she met on the site, according to Reuters), "bullying and harassment, most often by peers, are the most frequent threats that minors face," both online and offline."
A report released Wednesday by a task force set up by MySpace Inc. paints a surprisingly benign picture of the online security and privacy threats faced by children. But the report's conclusion — that some of the common concerns about those threats may be overstated or misplaced — is drawing sharp criticism from some quarters.
Eggs on Their Faces
Perhaps the most scathing critique came from South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster, who blastedthe report for creating a "false sense of security" about online child safety. In a letter (download PDF)addressed to a working group of the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG), which commissioned the report early last year, McMaster asserted that the task force's findings are "as disturbing as they are wrong."
How many of these cases were cyber sting operations involving no actual children?
In South Carolina, at least, Internet predators "pose a clear and present danger" to children, McMaster wrote. He noted that a task force of 43 state and local law enforcement agencies formed in South Carolina in 2004 has made 147 arrests for online child solicitation thus far. Sixty-six of the arrested individuals have been convicted to date, while the rest are awaiting trial, McMaster said.
From the periodical that ignited the fear with Cyber Porn, July 3, 1995
1. On the mistaken belief that sexual overtures on the Web come largely from older adults : "The actual threats that youth may face appear to be different than the threats most people imagine. More problematically, media coverage has regularly mischaracterized research in this area, thus contributing to inaccurate perceptions of what risks youth face. This problem was most visible in the public coverage of the Online Victimization studies done at the Crimes Against Children Research Center...These reports are frequently referenced to highlight that one in five or one in seven minors are sexually solicited online. Without context, this citation implies massive solicitation of minors by older adults. As discussed below, other peers and young adults account for 90%-94% of solicitations in which approximate age is known. Also, many acts of solicitation online are harassing or teasing communications that are not designed to seduce youth into offline sexual encounters; 69% of solicitations involve no attempt at offline contact. Misperception of these findings perpetuates myths that distract the public from solving the actual problems youth face."
(...)
This extensive, yearlong study can be essentially summarized thusly: don't be overly reliant on technology to keep your kids safe from technology. There's no one quick answer — age verification, filtering, etc. — that will keep children from harm. And with few exceptions (exceptions that are usually latched on to and tarted up by the media), the perils children face online are no greater those they face in the real world every day. The song remains the same, moms and dads — it's your responsibility to make sure your kids aren't getting into something they can't handle. Don't blame the medium.
As reported by eAdvocate, "A task force created by 49 state attorneys general to look into the problem of sexual solicitation of children online has concluded that there really is not a significant problem."
Ouch.Bit in the political buns by your own commissioned task force.Karmic, to say the least.
And that's just the beginning.
I just wonder if McCollum will admit his use of "moral panic" to deliberately mislead the public regarding the online sex offender issue should he run for U.S. Senate in 2010?
Read on. (And make certain to run your cursor over the bold fonts for links galore).
"The (Final) Report (Enhancing Child Safety & Online Technologies) includes a quotation from remarks that an Attorney General made to the Task Force about (50,000) sex offenders on a social network. Although the Report briefly, and appropriately, explains why the quoted figures are not persuasive data, the assertions made warrant further analysis."
(...)
"The “50,000 sex offender” figure, as well as misleading statistics suggesting that many minors have been sexually solicited online, commonly appear in press reports and the rhetoric of lawmakers, but as the Task Force Final Report correctly shows, those much-touted numbers in fact do not translate into significant actual risk to the minors online. There are, without question, risks for minors online, but those risks are not significantly different than offline risks, and most minors are very safe in the major online social networks. As the Report details,the most significant risk online is for minors who already engage in risky sexual behavior offline."
"Academics have identified a phenomenon that they call a “moral panic,” referring to situations in which the media and policymakers overreact to a perceive risk or threat that in fact is not as great it is popularly portrayed. A 2008 academic article applied the theories of “moral panic” to the furor over social networks and child safety. See Alice Marwick, “To Catch a Predator: The MySpace Moral Panic,” First Monday 13(6): article 3 (2008), available online at http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2152/1966. In her article, Marwick analyzes the public anxiety about social networking and concludes that it is indeed a “moral panic” that reflects an overreaction to the actual threat that exists. She concludes:
the furor over MySpace is disproportionate to the amount of harm produced by the site. Indeed, the furor over online predators seems also to be disproportionate. Rather than focusing on nebulous “predators,” it seems that parents, teachers, and social workers should emphasize identifying and preventing abuse in specific, local community settings. This fits Goode and Ben–Yehuda’s model of moral panics.
Marwick’s conclusion – that the public concern about social networking is an overreaction to the relatively low risks that such sites in fact present – is precisely born out by the findings of the Task Force’s Research Advisory Board. It is critical that policy makers based actions on risks that actually exist, rather than on the risks that are hyped to generate ratings in the news media."
A key threshold fact is that virtually all speech on social networks – even speech among minors or between minors and adults – is completely lawful and constitutionally protected, and predatory speech constitutes only a tiny percentage of the mass of vibrant, constructive speech that happens every day on SNs. Thus, any law or government mandate that would restrict or burden access to SNs would bear a strong presumption of unconstitutionality.
First Amendment
Under the framework set out in 1997 by the U.S. Supreme Court in the seminal Reno v. ACLU decision, online speech receives the highest level of First Amendment protection. Based on that decision, numerous courts over the years have struck down a broad range of laws that sought to protect minors online, because there are better and less burdensome ways to protect children.
Privacy
Beyond the constitutional concerns that would be raised by a mandate to use a given technology, many of the technologies raise very serious privacy concerns, in particular by forcing the collection of sensitive data about minors and adults.
Like most of the politically obsessive, I watched the outtakes of the final press conference held by George Bush.
One observation.
How coherent and well-spoken "the Decider" becomes when defending his unconscionable actions taken over his eight years in office!
The Bush that stood before the press Monday was the same old Bush that stood before America a couple of years ago and couldn't quite express one decision he would make differently, although a war based on a lie raged large in the Middle East.
What's that old adage about "arrogance diminishes wisdom"?
When historians look back on the incredible eight years we have survived under Dubya, my hopes are that the man is depicted for who he really was.
Not as some sort of Presidential Will Rogers, but as a doddering dangerous fool who took the world far too close to the edge of reason.
George Bush is packing it up, but should he (and his) also be lawyering up?
On Sunday, Obama had this to say to This Week's George Stephanopoulos in response to a citizen question inquiring about a future criminal investigation of Prez 43's administration:
(...)
"...there should be prosecutions if “somebody has blatantly broken the law” but that his legal team was still evaluating interrogation and detention issues and would examine “past practices.”
Mr. Obama added that he also had “a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.”
“And part of my job,” he continued, “is to make sure that, for example, at the C.I.A., you’ve got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don’t want them to suddenly feel like they’ve got spend their all their time looking over their shoulders.”
No comment from the White House at this writing.
Reportedly, George is very busy taping boxes closed for Laura.
Kenneth Quinnell over at Florida Progressive Coalition has an eye for spotting a desperate bill aimed directly at local school systems..
His take on HB 5005A - Education Funding, offered by Florida legislators during the special session as a solution to raise revenue for education:
"...I don’t like this bill and I would certainly vote against it. First off, it allows local school boards to reduce salaries for all school employees in able to make up for “emergency” financial shortfalls."
Florida Today's Talk to Me is all over it as well.
The controversial educational funding (or unfunding) bill is all the talk this special session. Guess who is targeted?
School districts.
Here's the gist of the bill. Districts reflecting budgets of what the state considers an emergency level fund balance shall be mandated to cut the salaries of School Board members, administrators and employees (including teachers) until said balance is restored.
This old Frog has a bit of inside scoop herself, offered up on the down low. Apparently, the first couple of days this week, legislators went through the cursory motions, allowing the public to beg our lawmakers to spare public school funding, to search for additional funding elsewhere, i.e. cigarette tax.
Wednesday, our Florida legislators did what they do best. Didn't listen to one word that was said and flat cut the budget and drained the trust funds.
"It was evident before the special session started that decisions had been already made. New revenue sources were not on the table as options. It was simply, "cut budgets and drain trust funds time."
One Senator was reported to have suggested that "...this session was nothing compared to what was coming in March."
On the upside, if the trust funds are now zippo, the revenue has to come from somewhere. Which should prove interesting.
Legislators getting good spin for standing up for Florida's schools:
Representatives Martin Kiar (who this blog supported when he first ran a few years back), Ron Saunders, Dwight Bullard, Gwyn Clarke-Reed, along with Senators Larcinia Bullard and Rudy Garcia. These lawmakers sit on the Pre-K-12 Appropriations Committee for the House and Senate and reportedly, are in the fight waging war against educational funding cuts.
Jeb Bush is one decider who actually read the writing on the wall.
His record and shadowy business dealings, i.e. Lehman Brothers(bailout?)were mere bush league fodder for bloggers and an energized Obama base primed and ready to drag out the dirty laundry into the Sunshine.
And he knew it.
Fortunately for Florida, old 666 cited "family and business" as reasons not to seek the Senate seat that Mel Martinez will vacate in 2010.
After the late afternoon announcement, Hardball's Chris Matthews just couldn't seem to wrap his mind around the Bush back out, stating the former Governor was so popular in Florida, the path to the Senate would have been a mere cakewalk.
Chris, stop talking, start listening and do your homework.
Florida is falling apart financially. And Mr. Big Stuff made many decisions on behalf of his fat cat friends that can be attributed to our blue state falling into the red.
During his eight-year reign as governor of Florida, Jeb Bush fashioned an economic time bomb. On his way out the door he lit the fuse. His handiwork will soon devastate this state and visit unprecedented suffering on its people. It will be a nightmare, part of which will imperil the public schools, the operation of local governments and the state retirement system.
...if he could have, Jeb Bush would have relieved Florida’s wealthy persons and corporate entities of their entire tax burden. As it stands he came very near his goal. Tax loopholes created during his administration for corporate income now shelter between $500 and $600 million that was counted as revenue before. $600 million more was lost to the state when Bush eliminated the tax on intangible properties (stocks and bonds) in January 2007."
The damage the Jeb Bush legacy has inflicted upon Florida is indefensible.
Good riddance and oh, happy day for the rest of us.
