There was a time when I considered Al Franken to be among a select group of politicians I could look to for bold, informed leadership on many progressive issues.
Notice the past tense.
Why has Franken lost my favor? These two items should suffice:
1) Franken is among those who voted for the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) – which many think authorizes the military to detain U.S. citizens at home without due process.
(While Franken gets credit for voting for the Udall Amendment, which would have stricken this from NDAA, Franken proceeded to vote for NDAA with the provision still standing.)
2) Franken is a co-sponsor to the odious PROTECT IP Act, which would give the Department of Justice the authority to "force search engines, browsers, and service providers to block users' access to websites that have been accused of copyright infringement – without even giving them a day in court."
This from a man who has been a primary champion of net neutrality.
Which leads me to ask, "What happened?"
If you'd like to ask Mr. Franken himself, feel free to email him.
And if you think he's worthy of defending on these matters, please, I'm all ears.
------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter @David_EHG
------------------------------------
Author's Note 1:
While this is a post questioning Franken's stance regarding these two issues, it is also a post inviting people to offer thoughtful defenses.
Please refrain from ugly character assassinations or ugly attacks. After all, as some have pointed out, Udall himself voted for NDAA after his amendment was shot down. That's not to excuse Franken's vote, in my eyes. But it should be enough for us to engage with measured tones.
Author's Note 2:
Thanks to dhl's post, I present this video which explains quite well how bad the internet bill is:
Author's Note 3:
Here is Franken's floor speech in which he explained his original support for the Udall Amendment and his opposition to the detention provisions:
