Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

cornyn.senate.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 144 posts

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#31

Post by anigbrowl »

danso wrote: post #25
anigbrowl wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His point is that the Obama administration actually did revamp the federal FOIA policy and got no credit for it, I think. But that's kind of by-the-by.

That wasn't my point...and while Obama has opened some new doors, the thinking in the journalism community is that his administration is actually more closed when it comes to raw request numbers: http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/156227/obama-ad... This is of course a quantitative measure...but given that Obama wrote a very direct order to officials to err on the side of openness, it's striking that that o…

In that case I can't figure out what your point was, but this is all sort of incidental anyway.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#32

Post by gyardley »

abraininavat wrote: post #22
gyardley wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or perhaps he's simply being responsive to his constituents here in Texas, some of whom took the time to urge him to act. I'm proud to have him as a Senator.

Seriously? You feel that his thinly veiled threats of violence to federal judges makes him a credit to your state? You think it's representative of the popular opinion in Texas to suggest that "None of your civil liberties matter much after you're dead"? Pretty low standards, eh?

Yes, seriously.

Are you bringing up something from 2005 to kick dirt over the rightness of Senator Cornyn's current actions? Whatever could be the point of this, besides counter-productive partisanship? Can a right action be taken only by people with pasts you deem fully worthy?

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#33

Post by honu »

The good news is that some good questions have been asked, and the reply will be available for scrutiny.

I'm not sure Cornyn was the best member of Congress to write this sort of letter. Yes, he is on the Committee of the Judiciary, but his political leanings might result in posturing that obfuscates the issues we care about. That being said, I'm glad someone asked.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#34

Post by tptacek »

miked wrote: post #28
tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates. The Entitled Party had complete control of the House and a 60 senator supermajority in the Senate for the first year of Obama's presidency, not to mention near complete control of the "news" media, Hollywood, television, the arts, the unions, etc, etc. If they wanted to introduce habeas rights fo…

I can't tell if this is a markov generator trolling me or not. All I can tell you is: I'm glad the questions are being asked, but don't go assuming John Cornyn is a friend to hackers.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#35

Post by tptacek »

gyardley wrote: post #7
tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

Or perhaps he's simply being responsive to his constituents here in Texas, some of whom took the time to urge him to act. I'm proud to have him as a Senator.

Then you're proud to have as a senator someone who compared gay marriage to marrying a box turtle.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#36

Post by tptacek »

jlgreco wrote: post #30
tptacek wrote: post #3

This is the same hyperpartisan Senator who was at the forefront of the effort to deny habeas rights to Guantanamo inmates; he was also involved in the Bush wiretapping scandal. Expect to see lots of superficial genuflection from Republicans towards the Swartz case; the GOP is in a constant low-grade conflict with the Democratic DoJ. Here, let me put it this way: what do you honestly think Aaron Swartz would think abo…

Enemy of my enemy is... well, quite possibly also my enemy.. but at least it is nice to see them fighting.

Totally fair point.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#37

Post by tptacek »

LiveTheDream wrote: post #4
danso wrote: post #2

It's worth noting that Cornyn, though not an official PIPA co-sponsor, wasn't someone who was much against it either (until after the blackout) http://projects.propublica.org/sopa/C001056

This seems like a good thing, no? A Senator listening to his constituents.

His constituents also wanted him to try to ban the NYC "ground zero mosque". He was happy to oblige.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#38

Post by danso »

anigbrowl wrote: post #31
danso wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That wasn't my point...and while Obama has opened some new doors, the thinking in the journalism community is that his administration is actually more closed when it comes to raw request numbers: http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/156227/obama-ad... This is of course a quantitative measure...but given that Obama wrote a very direct order to officials to err on the side of openness, it's striking that that o…

In that case I can't figure out what your point was, but this is all sort of incidental anyway.

Yeah, I was just meandering. The parent post had argued that this was little more than a hypocritical political ploy. I was saying, 'probably', because there's not much to politically gain from it other than to give the DOJ a black eye and because, I guess I just see Swartz as still being a "niche" issue to most people outside of the tech/academic senator.

But I thought it was fair to point out that Cornyn is no fairweather public-records fan. But of course, Swartz's JSTOR incident was not just a case of open-access (as it was in the PACER case). There's enough nuance here that I would've just assumed that a senator of Conryn's level would leave it be as there are many other political shitstorms going on (gun control, debt ceiling, etc etc)

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#39

Post by gyardley »

tptacek wrote: post #35
gyardley wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or perhaps he's simply being responsive to his constituents here in Texas, some of whom took the time to urge him to act. I'm proud to have him as a Senator.

Then you're proud to have as a senator someone who compared gay marriage to marrying a box turtle.

The other commenter on this thread is right - this is classic poisoning the well.

When a politician does something right - and Cornyn's letter asks far more pointed and on-point questions than I expected - the correct response is not to bring up everything you feel the politician has ever done wrong.

My views, your views, and Cornyn's views about gay marriage aren't particularly relevant here.

Re: U.S. Senator Questions Attorney General about Aaron Swartz

#40

Post by tptacek »

gyardley wrote: post #39
tptacek wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you're proud to have as a senator someone who compared gay marriage to marrying a box turtle.

The other commenter on this thread is right - this is classic poisoning the well. When a politician does something right - and Cornyn's letter asks far more pointed and on-point questions than I expected - the correct response is not to bring up everything you feel the politician has ever done wrong. My views, your views, and Cornyn's views about gay marriage aren't particularly relevant here.

The questions are great. The guy, though, is a horror. That's all I'm saying.
Post reply on HN