Politicspoliticskekkekistankekistanishadilayreeeeepepedanklordfroggod

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 11:24 AM

 

While the Left was celebrating a dying law

White House backs FCC plan to reverse Obama-era ‘net neutrality’ rules

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/18/wh-back-fcc-reverse-obama-era-net-neutrality-rules/

61 replies, 2155 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 61 replies Author Time Post
Reply While the Left was celebrating a dying law (Original post)
I814U2CY Jul 2017 OP
Hamer555 Jul 2017 #1
Fiendish Thingy-BC Jul 2017 #2
I814U2CY Jul 2017 #3
quad489 Jul 2017 #5
Ruby Jul 2017 #4
GoodKraic Jul 2017 #6
Ruby Jul 2017 #7
I814U2CY Jul 2017 #8
Nostrings Jul 2017 #9
bfox74 Aug 2017 #29
GoodKraic Jul 2017 #10
Ruby Jul 2017 #14
Independent.mind Jul 2017 #15
Ruby Jul 2017 #17
Nostrings Aug 2017 #42
Ruby Aug 2017 #44
OneLoudVoice Jul 2017 #20
I814U2CY Jul 2017 #21
OneLoudVoice Aug 2017 #22
I814U2CY Aug 2017 #23
OneLoudVoice Aug 2017 #24
I814U2CY Aug 2017 #25
OneLoudVoice Aug 2017 #26
I814U2CY Aug 2017 #27
OneLoudVoice Aug 2017 #28
I814U2CY Aug 2017 #32
OneLoudVoice Aug 2017 #36
Mr.Solis Aug 2017 #37
I814U2CY Aug 2017 #39
OneLoudVoice Aug 2017 #53
I814U2CY Aug 2017 #54
OneLoudVoice Aug 2017 #56
Nostrings Aug 2017 #43
OneLoudVoice Aug 2017 #55
Nostrings Aug 2017 #57
OneLoudVoice Aug 2017 #58
Nostrings Aug 2017 #59
OneLoudVoice Aug 2017 #60
Nostrings Aug 2017 #61
Independent.mind Jul 2017 #11
I814U2CY Jul 2017 #12
Independent.mind Jul 2017 #13
I814U2CY Jul 2017 #16
Independent.mind Jul 2017 #18
I814U2CY Jul 2017 #19
exindy Aug 2017 #30
exindy Aug 2017 #31
I814U2CY Aug 2017 #33
exindy Aug 2017 #34
I814U2CY Aug 2017 #35
Mr.Solis Aug 2017 #38
exindy Aug 2017 #40
Mr.Solis Aug 2017 #41
exindy Aug 2017 #47
Nostrings Aug 2017 #45
exindy Aug 2017 #46
Nostrings Aug 2017 #48
exindy Aug 2017 #49
Nostrings Aug 2017 #50
exindy Aug 2017 #51
Nostrings Aug 2017 #52

Response to I814U2CY (Original post)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 11:32 AM

1. I don't understand why anyone who uses the internet is for this.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Original post)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 11:50 AM

2. Are you for the reversal of net neutrality?

You know it could mean that all your RWNJ sites , with the exception of Fox, might end loading at dial up speeds, or be blocked altogether?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy-BC (Reply #2)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 12:04 PM

3. Seeing how the Left used the IRS and campaign finance law to try and silence conservatives

 

they are not to be allowed to set rules for the internet.

Had Hillary won the anti-CNN memes would probably be investigated as hate crimes inciting violence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #3)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 12:33 PM

5. Yep, in lefty world, CNN is considered too big to fail and must be saved at all costs....

...just like UAW-GM, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Original post)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 12:16 PM

4. Fantastic.

It'll be awesome when corporations can completely control what we're allowed to see. The freedom to decide for ourselves is highly overrated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ruby (Reply #4)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 01:24 PM

6. Because no government would ever try to control what you see right?

Let me ask my Chinese friends.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoodKraic (Reply #6)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 01:27 PM

7. I don't live in China.

I live here. And I don't want anybody controlling what I can see on the internet. Not corporations and sure as hell not the United States government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ruby (Reply #7)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 02:03 PM

8. That's why it's a bad idea to let the government camel's nose into the tent.

 

At least with corporations we can force them to compete in the market. The government, by definition, is a monopoly -- with guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #8)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 02:09 PM

9. That is how I see it as well.

To me, the lesser evil in that equation is glaringly, bleedingly obvious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #9)

Sat Aug 12, 2017, 05:04 AM

29. I actually got that hand one time - playing four-handed!

Then I got it another time playing on a Palm Pilot (remember those) version.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #8)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 02:11 PM

10. Exactly my point.

It's funny how for some people corporations are always a source of evil but governments never are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #8)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 02:57 PM

14. I have exactly one choice for internet providers where I live.

Theres no competition whatsoever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ruby (Reply #14)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 03:11 PM

15. That is a big problem

In a lot of places

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Independent.mind (Reply #15)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 03:20 PM

17. It's the same everywhere I've ever lived.

I don't understand why anyone would think killing net neutrality is a good idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ruby (Reply #17)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 12:33 PM

42. Because 999 times out of a thousand, government is worse than corporations, Ruby.

Sure, that bowl of ice cream looks great now, but once it melts and gets all government nastied up, it wont look so good.

Like obamacare. Or gun control. Or any of a thousand other things that you or I or any other poster could name.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #42)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 12:41 PM

44. Comcast might be the exception.

They are literally Satan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #8)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 08:01 PM

20. LMAO

Government is less a monopoly than Comcast.

Heck, right here where I live, Ive got no less than 5 different governments vying for my tax dollars. And only one Cable internet provider.

And if you dont care for our government.. you can always go somewhere else and live under some other government you think you'd prefer. There are hundreds of them.

Monopoly. Lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #20)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 08:04 PM

21. They're not vying for your tax dollars. They set the rate, you pay. Period.

 

You can't declare you don't like the fed then elect to send your dollars to the city instead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #21)

Wed Aug 9, 2017, 09:03 PM

22. And I cant declare I dont like Comcast

and send my dollars to any other cable internet provider.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #22)

Wed Aug 9, 2017, 10:28 PM

23. An antitrust exemption provided by government. But you can get satellite.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #23)

Thu Aug 10, 2017, 04:19 AM

24. Ha. With the cloud cover here?

Since they can't even reliably provide satellite TV here, I'm pretty sure internet is a pipe dream. good luck with that.

I suppose I could move somewhere else. Just like I could If i didnt like the government here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #24)

Thu Aug 10, 2017, 05:48 AM

25. "I suppose I could move somewhere else."

 

Not if you lived in Leftist paradises such as Cuba or Venezuela.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #25)

Thu Aug 10, 2017, 08:39 AM

26. Ha.

There are several Cuban in my community, and even a couple Venezualans, who would seem to be living proof otherwise.

Regardless. There are many corporations with as much or more power than governments. Both have played active parts in killing folks, both "legally" and illicitly. Often in collaboration, no less.

The idea of giving these corporations free reign to determine what information that I will be allowed to access via a service that I am paying them for is problematic. Particularly when it comes down that these particular corporations often have monopolies, or have been proven to be working together.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #26)

Thu Aug 10, 2017, 10:00 AM

27. You're accusing Comcast and CenturyLink of murdering people?

 

By Kek's spotty hide you infants are such -- infants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #27)

Sat Aug 12, 2017, 04:53 AM

28. Wouldnt know about those two

But plenty of other corporations have.

But you go on trusting the unaccountable to control every aspect of your life. I'm sure that will work out great for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #28)

Sat Aug 12, 2017, 08:40 AM

32. Government is unaccountable. Ever hear of sovereign immunity? How about The Chemist's War?

 

Or the fact you Marxists murdered 100 million people in the last century?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #32)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 01:15 AM

36. Ah, the ravings of a wishful thinker

Authoritarians murdered a whole lot of people, all through history. Most conservative, but some marxist (which, despite your assumptions, i am not).

But then, unlike my actual folk, You RW love authoritarians. Yall elected yet another one here. Your folk cant seem to help themselves. It usually ends in plenty of blood spilled, and yall cheer it every time. Its a little sad, a little scary, and a whole lotta hypocritical.

Some of us would like to have accountable government. But your type won't allow for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #36)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 01:34 AM

37. Can you describe what you mean by "Most Conservative"?

Communist?
Military Dictatorship?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #36)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 07:14 AM

39. Conservatives aren't authoritarians. Please explain for us how small government authoritarianism

 

is supposed to work.

Then explain how a government that forces the outcomes you seek does not become authoritarian.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #39)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 05:11 PM

53. Most conservatives are terribly authoritarian

I think we all know the small government thing is nonsense, always has been. Conservatives never actually shrink government, they only shift resources to areas that increase their power.

Worship at the alter of power and kowtow to authority. Its the Conservative way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #53)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 06:37 PM

54. You're thinking of Republicans.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #54)

Tue Aug 15, 2017, 03:06 AM

56. They are included, along with the rest of the conservatives.

Ive yet to meet a conservative who doesn't bask in the subserviant glow of authority. That includes the supposed "libertarians". They may not care for one specific authority or another, but I have yet to meet one who doesn't make every excuse for the misdeeds of their (usually violent) authority figure of choice.

Their libertarianism only extends as far as their greed and desire to be unencumbered in their ability to take advantage of others. It never extends into allowing others with differing opinions to have freedom or into taking responsibility for the results of their choices and actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #22)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 12:35 PM

43. You can declare you don't like them and decline to do business with them.

Try that with uncle sugar once and let everyone know how it works out, once you're released.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #43)

Tue Aug 15, 2017, 03:01 AM

55. No, I really cant

Thanks for playing, you lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #55)

Tue Aug 15, 2017, 03:08 AM

57. Yes you can. You aren't their slave, and you aren't required by law to do business with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #57)

Tue Aug 15, 2017, 04:21 PM

58. No, I really can't.

Reality prohibits your fantasy.

I'm curious if you apply your logic to the ACA market place.. you aren't required to do business with them, you can quit any time, you aren't their slave.. right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #58)

Tue Aug 15, 2017, 04:24 PM

59. Yes, you really can.

You are neither required by law to have internet nor is it a requirement for survival.

So yes, yes you can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #59)

Tue Aug 15, 2017, 04:27 PM

60. Nope

It actually is a requirement. But thanks for trying again and again to countermand reality.

Its been fun. But unless you have something new to bring, other than repeating incorrect assertions.. Im gonna have to call this conversation done, on my part.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #60)

Tue Aug 15, 2017, 04:29 PM

61. A requirement of something optional which you choose.

Not a requirement of law or a necessity for living.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Original post)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 02:24 PM

11. Please explain your interpretation of net neutrality

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Independent.mind (Reply #11)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 02:26 PM

12. One more lie the left masquerades as fairness but will inevitably corrupt

 

to limit dissent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #12)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 02:37 PM

13. In regards to specific regulations

I would like to know what your interpretation of the regulations and the impact of those regulations are

I don't think everyone really understands what net neutrality is and how it can impact the way they use the Internet.

As you are advocating for the rollbacks it is an opportune time to explain to others what specifically is being rolled back, how it will impact them and why those rollbacks are a good thing.

Teachable moment as they say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Independent.mind (Reply #13)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 03:19 PM

16. The interpretation is: Congress never authorized the FCC to create the "net neutrality" rules

 

now being discussed. Ergo the supposition that the Left will accumulate to itself powers it is not entitled to possess based on nothing more than their runaway extremist ideology has been proven true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #16)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 04:17 PM

18. The regulations in question do exactly what?

Prevent speed throttling?
Provide the same access to that speed for all customers?

Explain the parts of the regs you advocate for repealing

When I support a position I am happy to discuss why, maybe everyone isn't like that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Independent.mind (Reply #18)

Wed Jul 19, 2017, 05:11 PM

19. There is no statutory authority to impose the regulations.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Original post)

Sat Aug 12, 2017, 07:52 AM

30. Guy afraid of gov't hides hides behind comcast

Since the idea of EQUALITY seems to be a difficult concept for those fighting for freedom to grasp, I thought a movie depiction of what happens without laws would be in order:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to exindy (Reply #30)

Sat Aug 12, 2017, 08:00 AM

31. Note the attitude toward taxation

of the privileged class at about the 2:00 mark.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to exindy (Reply #31)

Sat Aug 12, 2017, 08:41 AM

33. Don't care. Didn't watch.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to I814U2CY (Reply #33)

Sat Aug 12, 2017, 08:43 AM

34. Not surprised

really hard to let go of an ingrained opinion.

Easier to just ignore a disparaging word.

No matter, cons aren't good at analogies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to exindy (Reply #34)

Sat Aug 12, 2017, 08:45 AM

35. It not fact. It's whatever the writer wants to pretend is real.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to exindy (Reply #30)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 01:38 AM

38. Equality is only good for the lesser in the equation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Solis (Reply #38)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 09:54 AM

40. King George thought that way also.

Pesky Bill of Rights.

Gets in the way of birthrights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to exindy (Reply #40)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 12:21 PM

41. I should have been more specific

Equality of outcomes is only good for the lesser in the equation.

The bill of rights guarantees equality of opportunity, which is the only equality compatible with freedom and should be vigorously maintained.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Solis (Reply #41)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 02:24 PM

47. Change the word "created"

in the declaration of independence to "born".

The USA was founded on the idea of non-nobility. No automatic lordships.

But that has been replaced by subservience to money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to exindy (Reply #40)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 12:44 PM

45. It should get in the way of a whole lot of things that it doesn't.

Yet we live in a world where "shall not be infringed" has come to mean "we can infringe with in reason (and we'll define what's within reason)", when the entire point of the exercise was to forbid that power from the federal government on top of not explicitly authorizing it, in the first place.

Governmental power will ALWAYS be a greater threat than corporations, so long as the words sentences and phrases contained within the bill of rights have a "meaning of the day".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #45)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 02:22 PM

46. I've been screwed by corporations a whole bunch more than gov't.

If you're living on your knees there isn't much difference whether the guy has a uniform or a suit on.

You're still on your knees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to exindy (Reply #46)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 02:41 PM

48. You just approve of the government screwing you get, so it doesn't go in the 'screwed' tally.

I suspect you and I define " living on your knees" very differently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #48)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 02:48 PM

49. I don't think you understood what I wrote.

You misread it. I am opposed to ALL forms of slavery, no matter the source. I have civil rights against subjugation by the gov't. None against corporations. Hel, we're not even allowed to strike against some corporations and enforced by the gov't

Try again.

Slavery was NEVER a gov't activity. It may have been sanctioned, but was never an active policy.

In fact, the labor movement of the last century wasn't against subjugation by the gov't. It was against corporate exploitation.

History is a bich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to exindy (Reply #49)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 03:00 PM

50. I understood it full well.

"Try again. "

LOL.

" I have civil rights against subjugation by the gov't. None against corporations."

I guess if subjugation is your only concern, and the sole definition of "living on your knees", you might have a point.

Then again, if you limit yourself to the modern day, say the last 30 years, you don't have any point at all, considering that outside obamacare, YOU AREN"T FORCED TO DO BUSINESS WITH ANY SPECIFIC CORPORATION. Loved the mandate, did you?

Not so for government and its monopolies.

"History is a bich."

Yup, and now she is going to be a bitch to you:

I'll stack up a list of governments I compile against a list of corporations you compile, and I'll beat you somewhere between 100 to 1 and 10 thousand to 1 with sheer numbers, as to which has killed more over recorded history.

But corporations...they're the real evil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #50)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 03:46 PM

51. WTF are you blathering about?

YOU AREN"T FORCED TO DO BUSINESS WITH ANY SPECIFIC CORPORATION

Feel free to change your internet provider.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to exindy (Reply #51)

Sun Aug 13, 2017, 03:49 PM

52. I can change my provider any time I like. What are YOU blathering on about?

Again:

I'll stack up a list of governments I compile against a list of corporations you compile, and I'll beat you somewhere between 100 to 1 and 10 thousand to 1 with sheer numbers, as to which has killed more over recorded history.

Any time you like.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspoliticskekkekistankekistanishadilayreeeeepepedanklordfroggod