and a link to the actual Proposal for "on combating the sexual abuse, sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, repealing Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA"
Liberal is used as a descriptive term in the US while in this case it’s part of a party name. Party names don’t have to – for various historical reasons – reflect the current political positions of a party (think US party names). That’s especially the case in current European democracies with proportional representation. All the parties have very similar positions close to the center, it’s easy for any one party to end up to the “left” or “right” of other parties on any one issue.
(Liberal also doesn’t have the same meaning in Europe as in the US. Liberals in Europe are usually socially permissive as well as economically permissive – like Libertarians in the US. But that doesn’t have anything to do with the point you are making – Malmström’s position is not exactly socially permissive.)
Oh, sorry. I promise, no more bad assumptions. I should have just written that party names are not a good predictor of political positions and left it at that :)
No prob.
It's sad to see that Internet Freedom is really being attacked transversely by all political sides, on every continent. Always with the lame excuse of child pornography. I still haven't decide whether this is the Intellectual Property mafia lobbying or perhaps politicians start to be really afraid of the internet.
Yeah. The part about the bill also extending to block political opposition gave it clearly away for me. Possibly hidden motives aren't typically announced in campaigns.
