A good week for Rights

[P@triot]

Courts strikes down the liberal misery known as Net Neutrality and they demand probable cause for digital content at borders. Who knows - maybe next they won't allow Obama to act like a dictator and bypass Congress!

U.S. appeals court strikes down FCC net neutrality rules | Reuters

Courts rule Reasonable Cause required for digital content | Computerworld

 

[Kosh]

The Federal Communications Commission's open Internet rules, also known as net neutrality, required Internet service providers to give consumers equal access to all lawful content without restrictions or tiered charges.

U.S. appeals court strikes down FCC net neutrality rules | Reuters

I am for doing away the Monopolization of the internet. However since Comcast now own NBC and is still one of the far left propaganda sources, what does one expect.

I would love to see more competition for cell phone service and internet access.

 

[Publius1787]

Courts strikes down the liberal misery known as Net Neutrality and they demand probable cause for digital content at borders. Who knows - maybe next they won't allow Obama to act like a dictator and bypass Congress!

U.S. appeals court strikes down FCC net neutrality rules | Reuters

Courts rule Reasonable Cause required for digital content | Computerworld

This looks to be next. http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...mas-nlrb-recess-appointments.html#post8464351

 

[P@triot]

The Federal Communications Commission's open Internet rules, also known as net neutrality, required Internet service providers to give consumers equal access to all lawful content without restrictions or tiered charges.

U.S. appeals court strikes down FCC net neutrality rules | Reuters

I am for doing away the Monopolization of the internet. However since Comcast now own NBC and is still one of the far left propaganda sources, what does one expect.

I would love to see more competition for cell phone service and internet access.

[MENTION=42632]Kosh[/MENTION] - you must not have been paying attention to Net Neurtrality if you are for this:

The FCC is being inundated by a special interest group ironically named Free Press, whose goal it is to limit America's free press and freedom of speech. This special interest group also claims that it's due to special interest groups that it has become necessary for them to intervene on our behalf.

Free Press is an oxymoron started by an oxy-Marxist. His name is Robert McChesney. In addition to co-founding Free Press, he's also the former editor of The Monthly Review. This is a self-proclaimed, independent socialist magazine — I don't want to call names — an openly Marxist publication. It sounds like free press advocate so far, doesn't it?

McChesney, in his own words: "Any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself. There is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles"."

Again, here's Free Press co-founder Robert McChesney in his words, quote: "We need to do whatever we can to limit capitalist propaganda, regulate it, minimalize it and perhaps even eliminate it."

It's about eliminating traditional, constitutional points of view from the public arena. But that's not the way it's being built. It is about stopping debate. But nobody will tell you that. It's about ending free speech. It is about Marxism.

Net Neutrality Pits Free Speech Against Free Press | Fox News

 

[SmedlyButler]

Huh? Why do you label Net Neutrality a "liberal misery"? You would prefer an internet commercialized like cable tv? The web has been revolutionary as a medium for the democratization of knowledge and information because it has been open and mostly unfettered. You like China's model better?

And read your own headline, the court requires "reasonable" cause, not "probable cause". I'm thinking you don't even know the difference. Either way it would be interpreted as a minor victory for ACLU types. And trying to conflate either headline with any Obama action is pathetic nonsense.

Grow up.

 

[Politico]

Damn scumbags.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Good news. The internet is a place for free exchange of thoughts and ideas, as well as for commerce. The internet extends far beyond American borders. You can't regulate something the whole world uses on a daily basis.

 

[Politico]

No you just make them pay extra for it.

 

[JoeB131]

The Federal Communications Commission's open Internet rules, also known as net neutrality, required Internet service providers to give consumers equal access to all lawful content without restrictions or tiered charges.

U.S. appeals court strikes down FCC net neutrality rules | Reuters

I am for doing away the Monopolization of the internet. However since Comcast now own NBC and is still one of the far left propaganda sources, what does one expect.

I would love to see more competition for cell phone service and internet access.

[MENTION=42632]Kosh[/MENTION] - you must not have been paying attention to Net Neurtrality if you are for this:

The FCC is being inundated by a special interest group ironically named Free Press, whose goal it is to limit America's free press and freedom of speech. This special interest group also claims that it's due to special interest groups that it has become necessary for them to intervene on our behalf.

Free Press is an oxymoron started by an oxy-Marxist. His name is Robert McChesney. In addition to co-founding Free Press, he's also the former editor of The Monthly Review. This is a self-proclaimed, independent socialist magazine — I don't want to call names — an openly Marxist publication. It sounds like free press advocate so far, doesn't it?

McChesney, in his own words: "Any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself. There is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles"."

Again, here's Free Press co-founder Robert McChesney in his words, quote: "We need to do whatever we can to limit capitalist propaganda, regulate it, minimalize it and perhaps even eliminate it."

It's about eliminating traditional, constitutional points of view from the public arena. But that's not the way it's being built. It is about stopping debate. But nobody will tell you that. It's about ending free speech. It is about Marxism.

Net Neutrality Pits Free Speech Against Free Press | Fox News

Oh, look everyone, Poodle is seeing Marxists under his bed again.

My big problem with the internet is that it is the biggest purveyor of bullshit out there.

And there's no one really fact checking it.

And, no, this is not a left-right issue.

 

[Seawytch]

Rotty's correct...it was a good week for rights.

Oklahoma’s Ban on Gay Marriage Is Unconstitutional, Judge Rules

 

[NYcarbineer]

Good news. The internet is a place for free exchange of thoughts and ideas, as well as for commerce. The internet extends far beyond American borders. You can't regulate something the whole world uses on a daily basis.

You need to do some research.

 

[hazlnut]

Courts strikes down the liberal misery known as Net Neutrality and they demand probable cause for digital content at borders. Who knows - maybe next they won't allow Obama to act like a dictator and bypass Congress!

U.S. appeals court strikes down FCC net neutrality rules | Reuters

Courts rule Reasonable Cause required for digital content | Computerworld

Yes, we know, the GOP really hates Free Market economy.

 

[P@triot]

Huh? Why do you label Net Neutrality a "liberal misery"? You would prefer an internet commercialized like cable tv? The web has been revolutionary as a medium for the democratization of knowledge and information because it has been open and mostly unfettered. You like China's model better?

And read your own headline, the court requires "reasonable" cause, not "probable cause". I'm thinking you don't even know the difference. Either way it would be interpreted as a minor victory for ACLU types. And trying to conflate either headline with any Obama action is pathetic nonsense.

Grow up.

No - I would prefer an internet not controlled by Dumbocrats who are puppets on a string controlled by a self-admitted Marxist. Perhaps you should learn what Net Neutrality is and who is behind it before commenting? But then again, if you actually did that, you wouldn't be an uninformed Dumbocrat.

 

[R.C. Christian]

And the commies come out from beneath their rocks in this thread.

 

[P@triot]

Rotty's correct...it was a good week for rights.

Oklahoma’s Ban on Gay Marriage Is Unconstitutional, Judge Rules

As we've already covered SW, gays have enjoyed every right that straights have since the begging of the U.S. They enjoyed free speech, right to bear arms, protection against seizure, and 100% of all other rights.

But, like all homosexuals and liberals, you believe you are special and entitled to more than the "little" people who are "beneath" you.

Now here is an idea - why don't you dodge that question again about how you plan to discriminate against (and I quote) "consenting adults" which happen to be muslim and want 17 wives. And I forget, what was your plan again when the muslim makes the claim that an employee not providing free healthcare for all 17 of those wives is "discrimination"? Yeah - ole [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION] never wants to discuss these realities. Because she's smart enough to realize it exposes her as a deplorable hypocrite. She always ends with the evasive and nonsensical "I wish them luck".

 

[P@triot]

Huh? Why do you label Net Neutrality a "liberal misery"? You would prefer an internet commercialized like cable tv? The web has been revolutionary as a medium for the democratization of knowledge and information because it has been open and mostly unfettered. You like China's model better?

What an absolutely absurd thing to say. It always amazes me how ignorant and completely uninformed Dumbocrats are on a topic, yet their willingness to weigh in on that topic anyway.

We already have the freest internet in the world. It is not censored in any way like China and Iran. It is not blocked in any way like China and Iran. So what "problem" exists that Net Neutrality is addressing?

Net Neutrality is trying to implement China's model. Yet, you are so ignorant of what Net Neutrality actually is, you're supporting exactly what you're against (typical fuck'n moron Dumbocrat).

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I really do not see how anyone could be in favor of this. IF the government hadn't already created a cartelized monopoly of providers, then i would say great. But that's not the case. You have no competition in ISP, and a growing monopoly in content providers. This will create syndicates that will attempt, through negotiations, deals to squash competition. Most notably, through video streams and news outlets.

You can bet that we will see less competition, and therefore less innovation in these arenas due to this. It's simply another form of the government completely fucking up what they attemtp to touch.

Soon, we'll all have no choice but to get content from Google and other giant congloms. Because through provider negotiations, they will bury competition in slow speeds, etc...including barring certain providers outright, through cost dumping.

 

[R.C. Christian]

The internet is a threat to the NWO or whatever name you prefer to give it which is why people like the Senator from WV are in so much of a hurry to censor it. It is the best and last conduit of free speech and expression since the printing press.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Most of you wingers appear to believe that net neutrality means the opposite of what it really means.

I suggest you read this:

Net Neutrality Ended Yesterday. Here's What It Could Mean For Gamers - Forbes

 

[PoliticalChic]

Huh? Why do you label Net Neutrality a "liberal misery"? You would prefer an internet commercialized like cable tv? The web has been revolutionary as a medium for the democratization of knowledge and information because it has been open and mostly unfettered. You like China's model better?

And read your own headline, the court requires "reasonable" cause, not "probable cause". I'm thinking you don't even know the difference. Either way it would be interpreted as a minor victory for ACLU types. And trying to conflate either headline with any Obama action is pathetic nonsense.

Grow up.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing (Alexander Pope)...

...in your case, it's everything.



"Phil Kerpen, of the conservative think tank, Americans for Prosperity, blasted the FCC for being in bed with Free Press: ‘AFP was reacting to an email sent out under FCC Spokeswoman Jen Howard’s name by Free Press discussing FCC’s intent to advance net neutrality regulations. Free Press is a well-known advocate of government intervention in the Internet and Howard’s attempt to have one foot in and one foot out of government at the same time is outrageous.

“Free Press was founded by left-wing extremists who want to destroy private ownership of the media and the Internet. It was bad enough that the Federal Communications Commission hired Free Press’s former spokesperson, Jen Howard. Now we see that she is still apparently working for Free Press,” said AFP Policy Director Phil Kerpen. “Now that Howard is running the press office for FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski it is shocking that she would still be a soldier for a left-wing advocacy group.”

Free Press is the brainchild of Robert McChesney who wrote a column last year advising President Obama: “In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick-by-brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles.”

“The FCC has put on a false front that it is honestly interested in the public’s feedback on its efforts to regulate the Internet,” said Kerpen. “Today’s revelation that it is sharing employees with a group that is dedicated to destroying our free market system is unacceptable.” ‘
FCC Official Spokeswoman Still Working for ?Free Press? « Common American Journal



Wise up.