Rep. Lamar Smith Decides Lying About, Insulting And Dismissing Opposition To SOPA Is A Winning Strategy

by Mike Masnick
Techdirt
Jan. 05, 2012

It appears that SOPA sponsor Rep. Lamar Smith has decided that his best strategy continues to be to ignore any and all criticism of SOPA and pretend that none of it "is legitimate." That's kinda funny since we've shown, in great detail, where many of the problems in the bill are (see here, here and here for example -- all of which cite specific language from the bill). And yet, according to Smith:

"The criticism of this bill is completely hypothetical; none of it is based in reality," Smith said in a statement to Roll Call. "Not one of the critics was able to point to any language in the bill that would in any way harm the Internet. Their accusations are simply not supported by any facts."

We've done exactly what he's claimed we haven't -- as have numerous other parties, including famed Constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe, who also cited specific language in the bill. Ditto with former DHS Assistant Secretary, Stewart Baker, who also cited language from the bill about how SOPA will cause significant security problems for the internet.

It makes you wonder: just who does Lamar Smith think he's fooling?

Does he really think that if he just keeps on repeating these blatant lies someone, somewhere, will believe them?

From there, he goes from the ridiculous to the absurd by claiming that the widespread outcry over SOPA is just a "vocal minority," rather than any legitimate movement against the bill:

"It’s a vocal minority, he said. "Because they’re strident doesn’t mean they’re either legitimate or large in number. One, they need to read the language. Show me the language. There’s nothing they can point to that does what they say it does do. I think their fears are unfounded."

Hundreds of thousands of letters sent? Nearly 90,000 calls in a single day? This is not a "vocal minority." This is a large and growing segment of the population who is very, very concerned. And, they have shown him the language, contrary to his blatantly false claims. Dismissing the concerns of pretty much the entire tech sector and their users (not to mention the folks over at Reddit...) doesn't seem wise. It seems like someone who doesn't understand the internet, not just in trying to regulate it, but in how the internet can be used to rally support against those who seek to damage it.