Well, I'll back off and call it a night, it was just supremely irritating, after seeing something like this passed, that the top comment on hacker news is saying the real bad guys are the ones who voted against it. I'll take you at your word that that wasn't your intention.

I feel your pain: the truth is often supremely irritating.

And the contrarian always feels wise.

The truth is that the democrats voted against this and Obama publicly threatened to veto it. But you're wise in your cynicism that "they're all the same" and this is a trick to lull us into something worse.

I don't understand why you're so eager to ignore the policy that the Obama administration supports. I am, for what it's worth, an Obama fanboy. But it does not surprise me that Constitutional scholar or not, single-payer health care supporter or not, our Administration does not know how to "secure cyberspace", and actually has terrible and counterproductive ideas on how to do it.

The White House said in the message where they signalled the veto! that part of their issue with the bill was that it didn't go far enough. Did you read that message? The whole thing? No? Why are you upset at me for reading it?

I already addressed that message. Words are cheap, especially when pre-empting the accusation of "soft on security". Votes are action.