- Thread starter
- #61
I agree with the OP's point. I suppose an employer's blocking certain sites might be considered justifiable. Porn sites, gaming sites, chat/messaging, etc., -fine. I can see a rational reason for such action on the part of an employer who wants to get a full day's work out of his/its employees.
I can see NO rational reason for blocking sites that contain "controversial" political opinions.
I'm not sure that we can jump from this to the conclusion that "the government" (i.e., the Obama administration) is necessarily in favor of this particular, narrow action on the part of TSA or that such will become established policy for all government agencies.
Frankly, I don't think this present action by TSA would survive an ACLU lawsuit, if it came to that.
You could be right, but I think it would survive an ACLU lawsuit because it is within an employer's prerogative to control the use of the employer's computers in the employer's office. Not that the ACLU is likely to bring a lawsuit against any agency in the Obama Administration anyway.
And I didn't jump to a conclusion that this WILL become an established government policy, but I am pretty skittish when it comes to an overreaching government these days.
Again, I am pretty sure that you guys on the Left would not be so complacent or unconcerned if this was the Bush administration and we found that a government agency was restricting their employees from viewing only liberal opinion sites while conservative ones were not blocked.
And if that happened in conjunction with credible rumors that the Administration was consdiering ways to control and regulate the whole internet, do you not think you on the Left would not see that as sinister? Even dangerous? Possibly even the first step in controlling content of information made available at all levels of government including the schools?
Again, is it not best to stop them at the dinner roll?