Comments on: John Kerry's real tech agenda

CNET News.com's Washington watcher, Declan McCullagh, examines what Kerry was doing and saying about tech before he announced his bid for the White House.

That doesn't really help anyone

Dear Declan,

You write "The danger in this sort of industrial policy is that a Washington politician, even one who appears to be as intelligent as Kerry, may end up making the wrong call."

That's very interesting and all, but this article is a little late. Perhaps in the primaries, when there was still a choice of some eight democratic candidates, it would have been nice to have a comparison.

Or are you Implying that Bush is a better alternative? Come on, let's be serious.

As it is, President Bush is hands-down *WAY* more tech-unfriendly than Kerry. When the choice is between consumer freedom or corporate sponsorship, Bush will actively sponsor large corporations. When the choice is between consumer freedoms and privacy invasion, well Bush has already revoked many freedoms.

For freedom loving techs, there really is no alternative to Kerry - wrong calls and all.

Neither did that

The essence of a debate is evidence. While you may disagree with the article, at least the author provided examples to back up what he was saying.

Your evidence against Bush appears to be what you believe Bush _will_ do. Rather than spewing out generalizations, it would greatly improve your argument if you pointed to facts.

You say Bush is " *WAY* more tech-unfriendly," yet you give no evidence. Allegations without proof do nothing to help your case.

If you wish to make allegations, site specific instances or bills. Relying on broad generalizations will only win you the support of people who already agree with you.

[Razzl]

Declan misses the biggest points...

Declan is one of those cranky anti-government tech folks who tries really hard to bash politicians whenever he can, so it's actually reassuring that he couldn't find much to excite us on this story.

This whole tech biography of Kerry just shows what we already know about our Congress as a whole: that they're a bunch of middle-aged non-tech-savvy guys trying to make industrial policy for an industry that doesn't know what it wants. There's nobody in Congress who can satisfy the tecchies every time, or even understand what they want a lot of the time.

The 2 most important points in the article jumped right out at my end-user eyes: that Kerry wants to preserve the tax exemption on Web commerce, which seems to me like it ought to induce paroxisms of joy and thunderous endorsements from Silicon Valley as the one truly simple and effective technology policy the government can put in play; and that the tech industry only accounts for 8% of the US economy, which makes it clear why no politician worries too much about this primadonna posturing from the Tech sector to begin with.

Amen

Couldn't agree more.

[wallerich]

Right winged zealots rejoice

This article is so biased, I have to wonder if Sean Hannity helped you write it. What a pile of crap. Nothing but incomplete, one-sided attacks, many filled with inaccuracies and false statements, all intended to somehow prop up a pathetic partisan attack. Why not just come out and accuse Kerry of being a baby killer.

The transparency of right-winged hatred, particlarly the sad focus on Hollywood and Silicon Valley, as though these people (except for Arnold, of course), are somehow all of the same ilk, and deserve the hate that the TV hate mongers like Hannity spew out on a daily basis.

I'm surprised you didn't attack Kerry for speaking French. As Hannity pointed out the other day "France is an enemy of the United States", it goes without saying that anyone who disagrees with this perfect president is, of course, an enemy to this country. When did the republican party lose all integrity and respect for our Constitution?

You people should be ashamed of yourself. At least Michael Moore doesn't pretend to be "fair and balanced", like you creeps.

Right winged zealots rejoice

Mr. Wallerich,

Your response to this article was spoken like a true, left-leaning, liberal, feel-good Democrat. You should go with Al "I invented the Internet" Gore and the rest of the liberal Hollywood bunch and go to another country. Say....Iraq

[cincytee]

Huh?

I read a list of votes on technology-related issues John Kerry made during his Senate tenure. What did you read, because it was obviously not remotely related to the article (which, for the record, I thought was bland enough not to be able to offend anyone, regardless of political bent).

Are you applying for FCC Chaiman's job?

What did GW do regarding technology other than suggesting to land on moon again, when his poll numbers headed south.

[mpotter28]

just what are you talking about

you actually think anybody running for president actually understands any of this. Bill gates has been in the industry all of his life and its not to hard to defend the idea that what he really understands is marketting and profits not science or ethics. The real problem is the bills arn't being proposed for the good of the american people but for the good of a special few (ask orin hatch ). The real question is does anybody in either party have enough intelligence to make decisions if given the correct facts. The vast amount of evidence seems to indicate that your average president has the effective intelligence of a fish (to be fair people tend to vastly overestimate the amount of power the position has).
Frankly I don;t see what analysing voting records has to do with anything as it seems to be based on whatever realm of unreallity that is special to washington (and in the past london,paris,rome, ulan bator(look it up hint: we would rather drink ourselfs to death than rule china).
Further more you didn't seem to mention that the current president seems to view technolgy as means of controling and spying on everyone and has in fact passed or attmpted to pass legislation that would make the USA the luddittes of the western world.

[mitchgrrt]

Science issues are as important as technology issues

I liked your article. Most of all it's refreshing
to see someone in the press digging in and
writing about the details of issues, instead of
the horse race aspects of the political campaign.

I do think you missed one important area.
Kerry is pro-science. He supports stem cell
research, which the current administration has
crippled. More importantly he supports the
idea of government agencies that will rely on
scientific facts, rather than ideology, to
guide their regulations. The current
administration is anti-science and anti-
intellectual in ways that are really scary.

To me, Kerry's support for science is a
good reason to vote for him and a very big
differentiator between him and Bush.

- Mitch Gart

That's right

Bush is pandering to a group of idiots, hoping ignorance will win the white house.

[phlewis]

Bush policy supports MS monopoly

Let's not forget the Bush Justice Department sweetheart deal that essentially let Microsoft off the hook for any substantial penalties despite the fact that MS was found guilty of numerous antitrust violations. The Bush JD even threatened the European Union with trade sanctions after the EU found MS guilty of antitrust violations over there earlier this year. If you support the proposition that the open source movement is a good thing, then the preference for Kerry over Bush is clear.

thank the man upstairs...

You're all missing the most important point needed to be said here. Terrorism and liberialism. It's sure a good thing we'll have 4 more years of President Bush. All of this is meaningless because we'll all be blasted into the stone age by terrorist, all of us left to barter with chickens and pigs. Although it's unclear how each candidate stands on technology, we DO know how each candidate stands on defense. One has proven himself as a strong leader, the other flip-flops and can't make up his mind. A stick and a rock will be the only tech thing the cockroaches will have left to work with. We won't have a country with president Kerry because the terrorist will walk right on in and kill us all. Without a country technology is worthless.