Engulfing the Internet..

WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
edited June 2010 in A Moving Train
What the hell is going on in our Country ? :evil: Why is the Gov involved with this at all ?? :shock: We are loosing our liberty. This president is completely OUT OF CONTROL !!!!! SO spill in the gulf is justification for this MARXIST administration to stifle our speech ??? :x
How in the hell can anyone still support this President. The supreme court has already ruled that the fcc does not have the power to do this and congress said it wasn't going to give it to them. Yet they think they can ?? Wise the fuck up People !!!!!! Cant you see that they want to control political speech better yet all speech ? Yet I bet thier are on some on here that have no problem with this.. :evil: :evil:

Engulfing the Internet
By The Prowler on 6.17.10 @ 6:10AM

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/06/1 ... e-internet


Despite opposition by a House of Representatives majority and a bipartisan group of Senators, the Federal Communications Commission on Thursday is expected to proceed with plans to impose federal government regulation of the Internet, which would essentially treat broadband networks -- and the companies that invested more than $200 billion in private capital to deploy them -- as utilities.
The commission's chairman, Julius Genachowski, and his staff have insisted that imposing federal regulations originally written in the 1930s for the telephone is the only way the Obama Administration can gain the "kind of oversight and control that we need," says an FCC staffer with ties to another Democrat commissioner. "Look at the Gulf oil spill, that's what happens when we let corporations just do their own thing without any accountability. We can't allow that to happen with the Internet. We won't allow it."
The vote to continue the review and comment process at the FCC is expected to be a party-line vote, with the two Republican commissioners voting against the proposed regulatory scheme.
Under the Obama Administration's plan, the FCC would be able to enforce so-called "net neutrality" rules, allowing the federal government to set how broadband and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) manage the networks. By bringing broadband and the Internet under FCC regulatory oversight, the FCC would also be able to impose policies related to speech or online business models.
"The American public really has no idea how devastating these policies are going to have on free speech and the Internet," says a Republican Senate staffer. "If they are able to impose these regulations, they would be able to impose a host of different regulations that would limit free speech online and essentially give the left the upper hand. First the auto industry, then health care and the financial services industry, now this."
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    What the hell are you talking about? The oil spill has nothing to do with this communications bill. This type of bill has been in the works for a long time and is just coming to the forefront of discussion/bill passing now. Under the last administration (non-marxist according to you i suppose?), they eased fcc regulations so that communications companies could grow in power via policy building and buying up other communications companies (ie monopolies)...remember the aol/time warner merger? Perhaps you should use the internet to learn and find out bout some more details about the topics before ranting bout them in sporadic and inconsistent statements? If you want to read a great book about the media in the US, read anything by this guy: http://benbagdikian.net/
    prfctlefts wrote:
    What the hell is going on in our Country ? :evil: Why is the Gov involved with this at all ?? :shock: We are loosing our liberty. This president is completely OUT OF CONTROL !!!!! SO spill in the gulf is justification for this MARXIST administration to stifle our speech ??? :x
    How in the hell can anyone still support this President. The supreme court has already ruled that the fcc does not have the power to do this and congress said it wasn't going to give it to them. Yet they think they can ?? Wise the fuck up People !!!!!! Cant you see that they want to control political speech better yet all speech ? Yet I bet thier are on some on here that have no problem with this.. :evil: :evil:
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    FiveB247x wrote:
    What the hell are you talking about? The oil spill has nothing to do with this communications bill. This type of bill has been in the works for a long time and is just coming to the forefront of discussion/bill passing now. Under the last administration (non-marxist according to you i suppose?), they eased fcc regulations so that communications companies could grow in power via policy building and buying up other communications companies (ie monopolies)...remember the aol/time warner merger? Perhaps you should use the internet to learn and find out bout some more details about the topics before ranting bout them in sporadic and inconsistent statements? If you want to read a great book about the media in the US, read anything by this guy: http://benbagdikian.net/
    prfctlefts wrote:
    What the hell is going on in our Country ? :evil: Why is the Gov involved with this at all ?? :shock: We are loosing our liberty. This president is completely OUT OF CONTROL !!!!! SO spill in the gulf is justification for this MARXIST administration to stifle our speech ??? :x
    How in the hell can anyone still support this President. The supreme court has already ruled that the fcc does not have the power to do this and congress said it wasn't going to give it to them. Yet they think they can ?? Wise the fuck up People !!!!!! Cant you see that they want to control political speech better yet all speech ? Yet I bet thier are on some on here that have no problem with this.. :evil: :evil:


    actually the aol/time warner merger happened under clinton....if i remember correctly the merger was finalized <2 weeks before bush took office
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    I believe it was proposed under Clinton but not approved by the FCC til early in the Bush administration in 00'. Certainly not trying to change the subject, if you are correct, so be it, my point is the greater issue at hand and that's this stuff has been going on for a long time and merely one link in a long chain of events of the past decade or two.
    actually the aol/time warner merger happened under clinton....if i remember correctly the merger was finalized <2 weeks before bush took office
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • blackredyellowblackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    I'll wait and see where this goes before believing some sky is falling blog... There is a month for open comments, and we all know how much weight the likes of AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and all of the other big internet providers have with our politicians...
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    FiveB247x wrote:
    I believe it was proposed under Clinton but not approved by the FCC til early in the Bush administration in 00'. Certainly not trying to change the subject, if you are correct, so be it, my point is the greater issue at hand and that's this stuff has been going on for a long time and merely one link in a long chain of events of the past decade or two.
    actually the aol/time warner merger happened under clinton....if i remember correctly the merger was finalized <2 weeks before bush took office


    right, this is just a little side topic to the op. but bush wasn't sworn in until jan of '01

    it's a long chain, not just 1 president really
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • Stypo420Stypo420 Posts: 519
    This is a Net Neutrality, the government is trying to sustain net neutrality. I believe a recent court ruling was going to allow service providers to decide how much band any given user or site gets. So in theory if your provider hated Pearl Jam they could make it so the site takes 3 days to load meanwhile all the Creed fans (all 15-20 of them one being the guy in charge of internet speed) would have damn near instant access to everything. The tyrannical government wants to keep things how they are right now, the GOP wants to block it because it's Obama and the stand to make out handsomely $$$$ in the end from the media giants.

    So OP do a bit more research try and break free of the conservative news bubble (especially if your listening to Alex Jones or Glen Beck) look outside of there even if you don't agree. I watch fox news several times a week to keep a pulse on that side of the political spectrum. Also please try and take a breath.
  • Nothingman54Nothingman54 Posts: 2,251
    Obama and his minions are very dangerous, they want to take everything we have. I have changed my political stans in the last 8 months or so. Change is coming, not the kind of change we need or want.
    I'll be back
  • Stypo420Stypo420 Posts: 519
    Obama and his minions are very dangerous, they want to take everything we have. I have changed my political stans in the last 8 months or so. Change is coming, not the kind of change we need or want.

    This might be hard buy WHY, why is Obama "dangerous" Why have you changed you political stance? I do support the president but agree that he is flawed just as the rest of us are. I would really love to hear what compelled you to change your political affiliation? It seems more often then not people with your views are not willing to back them up.
  • blackredyellowblackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    lgoose420 wrote:
    Obama and his minions are very dangerous, they want to take everything we have. I have changed my political stans in the last 8 months or so. Change is coming, not the kind of change we need or want.

    This might be hard buy WHY, why is Obama "dangerous" Why have you changed you political stance? I do support the president but agree that he is flawed just as the rest of us are. I would really love to hear what compelled you to change your political affiliation? It seems more often then not people with your views are not willing to back them up.


    It's always easier for the party who isn't in power to make their side sound so much better... 8 years of republicans, and everyone is a democrat and thinks republicans suck... give it 4-8 years of democrats in charge and everyone will be siding with the republicans and think the dems are worthless.

    You could play the average Fox News opinion show today along with the average MSNBC opinion show from 2006, and it's amazing how similar they sound... using the same buzzwords, hypotheticals, and idiotic half-assed comparisons to nazis and fascism and how the party in control is destroying our country. It's humorous really.

    It's because who ever is in charge does a terrible job and doesn't do anything really to help us and the alternative can't be any worse, right? well, it usually is...
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • Anyone who is against Net Neutrality is either ignorant of the issue or favors the rights of business over the average person.

    "Government regulation" in this case is keeping everything fair for everyone, instead of letting your internet connection be auctioned off to the highest bidder. Do you want Time-Warner subscribers to be the only ones that have access to Facebook? Do you want to have to pay for access to sites in addition to what you pay your ISP every month? Like cable TV and satellite TV tiers? Because that's what it's going to be in Net Neutrality fails.

    image.axd?picture=2009%2F11%2Fnet-neutrality-as-cable-company.jpg

    As they say, "All bits are created equal" and the government wants to keep it that way.
    "Money is no object," I said, "but I am on a budget."
  • Wow. I don't know if I've ever seen anyone argue against net neutrality other than the major carriers who want to start dividing the internet into pieces so they can charge us all extra for access.

    Do you not believe that once you pay to access the internet, you should be allowed to visit whichever sites you choose? Do you not believe that if a small business buys a domain and sets up a website that their customers - whoever and wherever they are - should not have to pay extra to be allowed to visit their website? Or that that same small business should not have to pay AT&T an extra service charge for their site to be accessible to anyone connecting via AT&T's network? Oh, and add a separate charge for each carrier. Do you not remember AT&T censoring Eddie Vedder at Lolla? Is that what you call freedom?

    Just goes to show that if they can find a way to spin it as "socialism" or "marxism" that they can get Tea Partiers riled up about anything they want. These mindless drones are now going to fight on behalf of AT&T's (or Verizon's, or Comcast's) right to cut them off from portions of the internet? They are a corporation's wet dream.
  • Stypo420Stypo420 Posts: 519
    Where did the OP go? :mrgreen:
Sign In or Register to comment.