Sounding good to Congress and looking good for the shallow masses is not the same as having something substantive to say. He generally just parrots the party li

Sounding good to Congress and looking good for the shallow masses is not the same as having something substantive to say. He generally just parrots the party line, and once in a while you get an article like this, where it looks like he tries to articulate something new, and it either ends up totally inscrutable, or completely banal. Meanwhile, his non-lobbying activities of the last 30 years include some rather disturbing things, such as a long stint on ICANN's board of directors. Have all the respect you want for his early contributions, but you've got three decades of evidence that he really has nothing substantive to add.