So the Tea Party is Helping Get rid of Net Neutrality...

[Wacky Quacky]

Anyone who argues against Net Neutrality is not in favor of individual freedom. You are exposing yourself as being in favor of freedom for business to do anything they want, not for people to have freedom. Real patriotic of you. Be proud.

If someone owns a business they're not an individual anymore?

What freedom is being taken away from you if an ISP restricts certain sites?

 

[RDD_1210]

Since when is the internet a right? You have the right to all the information you can gather, but it's not the governments job to make sure you can get that information from your bedroom.

The bolded part is all you needed to say. The rest doesn't make sense and has nothing to do with anything. Thanks for proving my point.

Equating the internet with freedom of information is a pretty far stretch. What about the people who create and post those sites? Do you think you have a "right" to force them keep those sites up for your informational awareness, or maybe you'll sue them for infringing on "freedom of information" if they take it down? What about the domains that host the sites, will you force them to host sites against their will?

Of course not, dumb and irrelevant point. If information is out there, it should be accessible to all, not to be defined and restricted by who pays more to access it. I love the hypocrisy of the "individual liberty" crowd.

 

[RDD_1210]

Anyone who argues against Net Neutrality is not in favor of individual freedom. You are exposing yourself as being in favor of freedom for business to do anything they want, not for people to have freedom. Real patriotic of you. Be proud.

If someone owns a business they're not an individual anymore?

What freedom is being taken away from you if an ISP restricts certain sites?

Freedom to access information regardless of economic or social status. How this isn't clear to you is amazing.

 

[Oddball]

Freedom to access information regardless of economic or social status. How this isn't clear to you is amazing.

The freedom to do so doesn't give you a right to bandwidth supplied by someone else.

Go to the library and get a book.

 

[KissMy]

Without Net Neutrality one thing is for sure. Telecoms & cable companies will throttle & surge packets to see to it that VOIP & streaming video will never right again so you will hook your land-line telephone & cable box back up in order to communicate.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Net Nuetrality has nothing to do with the government controlling something. If has to do with preventing corporate interests from controlling your access by charges on where you visit.

What entity enforces this prevention that you seek?

I am quite comfortable with the FCC proposing tiers for different types of content, I am completely uncomfortable with allowing providers to control access to types of content.

I checked the libertarian position and I am suprised by it. Individual freedom can be as quickly eroded by major corporations as by the government. And it isn't long before the major corporations can be coopted by the government in the pursuit of "national security". See the phone company actions under Bush. The Cato Institute has become so reflexively anti-government and pro-corporation they have lost site of the point which is to protect our individual freedoms.

Having open net nuetrality laws which are in the daylight and regulated by the FCC with all eyes upon them is far superior to corporate control which can be manipulated in the dark. The internet was a huge advancement in freedom of speech and allowing net nuetrality to be taken away so that corporations can make more cash is indefensible.

Wow! An intelligent post! Who would have thought this would be found among the Bumper-Sticker Intellect of "No government is good government" and "You Tea Party Haters have vitrol!" (I found that particularly amusing from that there feller who was tryin so hard ta sound all interlektual and stuff).

Yes, there are times to have government! OMG
But if your every thought has been programmed by someone else, that's going to hard to figure out.

Nice post.

 

[Oddball]

Without Net Neutrality one thing is for sure. Telecoms & cable companies will throttle & surge packets to see to it that VOIP & streaming video will never right again so you will hook your land-line telephone & cable box back up in order to communicate.

What's in it for them to do that, when there are so many other options?

 

[Oddball]

What entity enforces this prevention that you seek?

I am quite comfortable with the FCC proposing tiers for different types of content, I am completely uncomfortable with allowing providers to control access to types of content.

I checked the libertarian position and I am suprised by it. Individual freedom can be as quickly eroded by major corporations as by the government. And it isn't long before the major corporations can be coopted by the government in the pursuit of "national security". See the phone company actions under Bush. The Cato Institute has become so reflexively anti-government and pro-corporation they have lost site of the point which is to protect our individual freedoms.

Having open net nuetrality laws which are in the daylight and regulated by the FCC with all eyes upon them is far superior to corporate control which can be manipulated in the dark. The internet was a huge advancement in freedom of speech and allowing net nuetrality to be taken away so that corporations can make more cash is indefensible.

Wow! An intelligent post! Who would have thought this would be found among the Bumper-Sticker Intellect of "No government is good government" and "You Tea Party Haters have vitrol!" (I found that particularly amusing from that there feller who was tryin so hard ta sound all interlektual and stuff).

You mean like implying that an opinion that doesn't match up with yours, or that you consider to be "intelligent", comes straight from Fox News, you sanctimonious gasbag?

 

[uscitizen]

So much for the claims they're different. That's a bit disappointing.

Tea Party Allies With Telecom Industry to Dump Net Neutrality

So dumping Net Neutrality and letting corps charge more for one site than another is congruent with what they preach, how?

Someone said if these people got their way that a corporatacracy would ensue and we'd all be screwed. Hmmm. Looks like they were right.

So, you guys get to yell "Hooray! We got less government!" while opening the door for MSN to charge more for visiting a Conservative site than a Liberal one. Brilliant.

Go ahead. Tell me how less government is ALWAYS a good thing...

Ahh no suprise, the Tea Partyers are mostly Ex Bush supporting Neocons.

 

[KissMy]

Without Net Neutrality one thing is for sure. Telecoms & cable companies will throttle & surge packets to see to it that VOIP & streaming video will never right again so you will hook your land-line telephone & cable box back up in order to communicate.

What's in it for them to do that, when there are so many other options?

There are not other options for most people. Telecoms own the backbone & long distance fiber. There is no getting around them.

 

[uscitizen]

Without Net Neutrality one thing is for sure. Telecoms & cable companies will throttle & surge packets to see to it that VOIP & streaming video will never right again so you will hook your land-line telephone & cable box back up in order to communicate.

What's in it for them to do that, when there are so many other options?

There are not other options for most people. Telecoms own the backbone & long distance fiber. There is no getting around them.

Yep 3 Telecoms mostly, bigger is better remember?
2 of them illegally wiretapped and got a legislative pardon for it.

 

[Oddball]

Without Net Neutrality one thing is for sure. Telecoms & cable companies will throttle & surge packets to see to it that VOIP & streaming video will never right again so you will hook your land-line telephone & cable box back up in order to communicate.

What's in it for them to do that, when there are so many other options?

There are not other options for most people. Telecoms own the backbone & long distance fiber. There is no getting around them.

You seem to have forgotten that Comcast lost their "throttling" lawsuit...It's the primary reason that telecoms went to tiered pricing structures for bandwidth usage.

If there's sufficient bandwidth in the pipeline, so to speak, there's absolutely nothing in it for the telecoms to limit access to it.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

The bolded part is all you needed to say. The rest doesn't make sense and has nothing to do with anything. Thanks for proving my point.

Equating the internet with freedom of information is a pretty far stretch. What about the people who create and post those sites? Do you think you have a "right" to force them keep those sites up for your informational awareness, or maybe you'll sue them for infringing on "freedom of information" if they take it down? What about the domains that host the sites, will you force them to host sites against their will?

Of course not, dumb and irrelevant point. If information is out there, it should be accessible to all, not to be defined and restricted by who pays more to access it. I love the hypocrisy of the "individual liberty" crowd.

So no more hiding your posts on Facebook then? I mean, if that information is out there then I should have the right to view it all I want.

What about cable. Are my rights being violated because I'm not paying enough for every channel?

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Anyone who argues against Net Neutrality is not in favor of individual freedom. You are exposing yourself as being in favor of freedom for business to do anything they want, not for people to have freedom. Real patriotic of you. Be proud.

If someone owns a business they're not an individual anymore?

What freedom is being taken away from you if an ISP restricts certain sites?

Freedom to access information regardless of economic or social status. How this isn't clear to you is amazing.

You know, as fun as this has been, I'm going to end it by showing you what the Freedom of Information Act actually covers:

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

It covers Government records only, not every bit of information in the world.

 

[KissMy]

What's in it for them to do that, when there are so many other options?

There are not other options for most people. Telecoms own the backbone & long distance fiber. There is no getting around them.

You seem to have forgotten that Comcast lost their "throttling" lawsuit...It's the primary reason that telecoms went to tiered pricing structures for bandwidth usage.

If there's sufficient bandwidth in the pipeline, so to speak, there's absolutely nothing in it for the telecoms to limit access to it.

I don't know about the Comcast suit but I know what AT&T did to an Electric Coop who started providing WIFI fiber & wire network service. AT&T had the only spare fiber capacity in the region that would carry packets from the coop's switch to a major switch like Chicago or St. Louis. When AT&T found out that the coop was reaching some of their AT&T phone service areas, they throttled their fiber speed & told the coop they would only have limited bandwidth if they provided service to any area that AT&T provided dial-tone to. It was ok to provide service to Century-Tel customer areas.

Teleconference & Goto meeting would be impossible unless you paid up or subscribe to their AT&T service.

 

[Oddball]

That scenario sounds to me like there is only enough bandwidth to go around for ATT to deal with on their system...Why should they care if Century-Tel's lines got overloaded?

 

[KissMy]

That scenario sounds to me like there is only enough bandwidth to go around for ATT to deal with on their system...Why should they care if Century-Tel's lines got overloaded?

No AT&T had & still has plenty of dark fiber. They wanted the coop to provide high speed service to their rival CenturyTel's customers so those customers would shut off their expensive & slow dial-up phone service & go with high speed internet with VOIP. Since the coop agreed to not provide service to AT&T areas, AT&T allows them all the fiber & speed they want.

 

[Oddball]

OK....Gotcha.

Then it's a matter of ownership of the lines.

You change that by declaring them rights-of-way, reimbursing whomsoever installed them and opening it up for all comers....Which, of course, presents a whole different set of challenges, viz. capacity, maintenance, etcetera.

However, the one thing that's sure to make a bad situation even worse is to put a bunch mouth-breathing federal bureaucrats in charge of it all...Little to no track record of that tree bearing anything but rotten fruit.

 

[IndependntLogic]

I am quite comfortable with the FCC proposing tiers for different types of content, I am completely uncomfortable with allowing providers to control access to types of content.

I checked the libertarian position and I am suprised by it. Individual freedom can be as quickly eroded by major corporations as by the government. And it isn't long before the major corporations can be coopted by the government in the pursuit of "national security". See the phone company actions under Bush. The Cato Institute has become so reflexively anti-government and pro-corporation they have lost site of the point which is to protect our individual freedoms.

Having open net nuetrality laws which are in the daylight and regulated by the FCC with all eyes upon them is far superior to corporate control which can be manipulated in the dark. The internet was a huge advancement in freedom of speech and allowing net nuetrality to be taken away so that corporations can make more cash is indefensible.

Wow! An intelligent post! Who would have thought this would be found among the Bumper-Sticker Intellect of "No government is good government" and "You Tea Party Haters have vitrol!" (I found that particularly amusing from that there feller who was tryin so hard ta sound all interlektual and stuff).

You mean like implying that an opinion that doesn't match up with yours, or that you consider to be "intelligent", comes straight from Fox News, you sanctimonious gasbag?

LOL. Well Hi Oddball! I see your post are as on point and intelligent as always
Boy, I must have really gotten under your skin for you to become such a little groupie and follow me everywhere like this! TYTYTY.
See, the difference between you and me is simple. I can show posts on this very board, where I said to a Conservative who had an opposing point of view, "You're right. I was wrong." or "That's a great point and after doing some research, I've changed my mind!". That's what people who think for themselves are capable of.
Whereas as you are such mindless sheeple, that ALL your opinions are fed to you, so you can't have an open-mind or ever acknowledge opposing points of view from a Liberal or even Independents, as being valid. Your thought masters are not there to give you permission to think that way.
It's okay Oddball! The world needs stupid assholes like you! Otherwise, who would be around to defend Whackmann buy Eskimo Barbies' books!
Have a Nice Day! Your BFF

 

[Oddball]

Fuck off, dickhead.

As you can see, I was having an intelligent conversation with someone who doesn't act as though he's the smartest dicksmoker in the room.

Now, go take two heaping tablespoons of get the fuck over yourself and call us in the morning.