Terry -

OK, I ask you this in all honesty:

Are you satisfied with Jamie’s explanation?

I’m interested in your opinion, because I am not surprised at the explanation but not at all satisfied.

By the way, my wife is currently working up in your neck of the woods, so we all don’t have nearly as many excuses for not getting together for dinner some night.

Cheers,

Rob

By Rob Huddleston on 02.02.07 12:46 am

Yes, Rob, let’s have dinner. As far as your question re:am I satisfied with her explanation?

My post just deals with the Senator’s explanation. It is up to the reader/consituent/voter to decide what he/she thinks.

I think from her statements that she is leaving options open regarding the introduction of the bill. I asked if she would be pushing the bill and she said she didn’t anticipate its introduction. That isn’t a closed door…it’s leaving a crack open.

In other words, we still need to keep an eye on this bill even though the odds are that it won’t be introduced.  There may be merit in having a discussion on the issue.

By Terry on 02.02.07 5:06 am

[...] Over at Terry Frank’s, State Senator Jamie Woodson non-explains the retarded anti-free speech bill she tried to slip by with the help of Rep Briley. Briley was either 1) a toadie, 2) incompetent; or 3) a liar. Says the senator: The bill that Chairman Briley inadvertently filed was a working draft of legislation proposed to me by a third year student at The University of Tennessee College of Law. I received the request in November 2006, prior to the convening of this legislative session. The student�s concerns related to encouraging web-site owners to remove knowingly defamatory statements against individuals from their web-site. This appeared like a reasonable subject of legislative discussion to me. [...]

By SayUncle » The Tennessee Blogger Bill on 02.02.07 9:06 am

Didn’t we get an answer very similar to this from Rep. Hackworth during the last election cycle concerning some senior citizen legislation?

I like Sen. Woodson, but she needs to provide a name and a school rather than vague generalities.

It’s easy to pass the buck on to a student for lousy legislation, and maybe it’s true, but when it comes to something like this, where our freedom of speech is involved, I don’t think we can accept anything less than true and full disclosure.

By Wes Comer on 02.02.07 9:16 am

[...] Terry Frank, asked Sen Woodson why she introduced the bill, and posted this interview on her website: “The bill that Chairman Briley inadvertently filed was a working draft of legislation proposed to me by a third year student at The University of Tennessee College of Law. I received the request in November 2006, prior to the convening of this legislative session. The student’s concerns related to encouraging web-site owners to remove knowingly defamatory statements against individuals from their web-site. This appeared like a reasonable subject of legislative discussion to me.” [...]

By Bob Krumm » good news / bad news on 02.02.07 9:17 am

Public figures, including politicians, are considered fair game in the courts. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. You can’t tell me that during the political season the lies and innuendoes aren’t considered defamatory. Grow up, Woodson.

By TNOPINION on 02.02.07 11:10 am

I’m an idiot – she did mention the school.

I still don’t like it.

By Wes Comer on 02.02.07 12:27 pm

[...] As it turns out it’s all just a big misunderstanding >ahem<. From Terry Frank: I contacted Senator Woodson about the bill. She graciously answered the questions I had as regards to the origin and possibility of introduction and passage of the bill. Sen. Woodson says that Rep. Briley inadvertently filed the bill and that she does not anticipate the bill being introduced in the Senate. [...]

By wescomer.com » Archive » Woodson vs. the Blogosphere. Guess who’ll win. on 02.02.07 12:41 pm

[...] New comic fresh off the presses — check it out here. This time we’ll be visiting the not-too-distant future where Senator Woodson’s anit-blogger legislation has passed. Another reminder: make sure you grab the RSS feed for the comic so you’ll know when a new one is out. [...]

By wescomer.com » Blog Archive » New Comic on 02.02.07 12:49 pm

I smell buck passing B.S.

By Sad on 02.02.07 1:52 pm

Of course she left the door open to bring up a similar bill. They hate bloggers because they can’t control us like they do the mainstream press!

By brorobin on 02.02.07 2:01 pm

My post just deals with the Senator’s explanation. It is up to the reader/constituent/voter to decide what he/she thinks.

Sounds like you are scared to voice you opinion against your fellow conservatives. What is the point of having a blog if you are not going to have an opinion? You sound like a politician already with your non-answer Terry. You planning on running for an office in the near future?

By John on 02.02.07 6:34 pm

1) How does one “inadvertently” file such a bill? 2)The politicos may be looking for the tag number of the Mack truck that hit them if they pass some idiotic bill that stifles free speech! There are laws against libel. If a public figure feels besmirched, let them file a libel suit!

By The Rock on 02.03.07 7:46 am

The Rock: you asked: how do you inadvertently file a bill? I don’t know. My understanding is that a draft of a bill has to be taken to the legal department to be properly formatted as a bill. It is from that point that it is taken to be filed. I can understand inadvertently taking a bill you are not prepared to file with a stack of bills that you do intend to file. Legislators don’t necessarily file all their bills at once. That mistake could happen.

But the bill did have to be drawn up by legal…meaning that if it was in a format to be filed, it had already been through the legal department.

And John: You must be a first time reader of my site. I regularly take my own fellow conservatives to task…whether it be a U.S. Senator or a Mayor. In this particular case, you are unhappy that I didn’t rake Mrs. Woodson across the coals. But in this instance, she afforded me the interview. I felt my job in this case was not to editorialize, but rather provide her answers in a published format in the same polite format that she afforded me the interview.

Surely there is no shortage of opinion in the blogosphere without Terry Frank having to comment as well. I chose this post to be journalistic in nature, as I was offering new information.  That is the honest thing to do.

By Terry on 02.03.07 9:15 am

The legislators do have legislative counsel (lawyers) to consult with and help draft their bills. That this bill apparently whizzed through that process without illegalities being brought to the bill sponsors’ attention concerns me. This sort of thing is a waste of time and taxpayers’ money and other resources.

I do sympathize with people who have been lied about or otherwise defamed. I am a target myself. We do have laws against that sort of thing, and if those laws are insufficient to take care of irresponsibility and harm on the Internet, Americans will have to figure out a change in law that’s as fair and just to all as we can get in a free society.

And remember, you cannot silence opinion. That won’t work in our society, except in rare cases, and very rarely when a public figure is the target. If you have placed yourself before the public in any way on some relevant issue, it’s likely the courts would decide you are a public figure, meaning you have less recourse against defamation or invasion of privacy. But public figures do have protections.

I advise public figures to have their own Web sites on which they can answer their critics and to which they can direct reporters and bloggers. That is the way to get the truth out the way you want to tell it.

By Donna Locke on 02.03.07 11:27 pm

[...] do bills get filed “inadvertently?” Terry Frank posts Senator Jamie Woodson’s explanation of the anti-blogger bill that has her name as the [...]

By February, 2007 Archive « Right Minded Online on 08.08.08 8:58 pm