Here it comes! Obama says FCC should reclassify internet as a utility

[Pogo]

Are you saying that the Internet should not be regulated? Are you saying that Internet freedom is "safer" in corporate hands?

Corporations don't care if you are Republican or Democrat. They don't care about your politics.

YOU BET I DON'T CARE!

What is it with you liberals that you think the government is so pure as the wind driven snow?

You have yet to essplain how the story says anything remotely like your paranoia fantasy.
Just sayin' -- you got work to do.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's a hint:

 

[teapartysamurai]

"to protect net neutrality".

I'll bet every one of you either is in favor of net neutrality, or doesn't know what it means.

Yeah Yeah Yeah, that's the Trojan horse they are using.

and you know it.

 

[Pogo]

"to protect net neutrality".

I'll bet every one of you either is in favor of net neutrality, or doesn't know what it means.

Yeah Yeah Yeah, that's the Trojan horse they are using.

and you know it.

Speculation/slippery slope fallacy.

/thread

 

[teapartysamurai]

Are you saying that the Internet should not be regulated? Are you saying that Internet freedom is "safer" in corporate hands?

Corporations don't care if you are Republican or Democrat. They don't care about your politics.

YOU BET I DON'T CARE!

What is it with you liberals that you think the government is so pure as the wind driven snow?

You have yet to essplain how the story says anything remotely like your paranoia fantasy.
Just sayin' -- you got work to do.

Because it isn't the first article of how the Democrats want to grab control of the internet.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703395204576023452250748540

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you like the fact that you're paying 100 bucks a month, or around that, for your cable's 200 channels of CRAP 90% of which you don't even want,

by all means, give those sorts of companies more power of internet service and pricing.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Here's a hint:

And they have the freedom to feel that way.

But do the Democrats on the FCC have the right to grab the internet and force what they want REGARDLESS of what Corporations or the American people want?

 

[Freemason9]

Are you saying that the Internet should not be regulated? Are you saying that Internet freedom is "safer" in corporate hands?

Corporations don't care if you are Republican or Democrat. They don't care about your politics.

YOU BET I DON'T CARE!

What is it with you liberals that you think the government is so pure as the wind driven snow?

You seem to be a tad bit unhinged.

 

[Stephanie]

Well they got control of our health care so of course the commies want to control the Internet.

will the people rise up and stop them? to be seen

 

[teapartysamurai]

If you like the fact that you're paying 100 bucks a month, or around that, for your cable's 200 channels of CRAP 90% of which you don't even want,

by all means, give those sorts of companies more power of internet service and pricing.

I HAVE THE FREEDOM TO DECIDE TO DO THAT!

I love how hypocritical you liberals are.

You don't care that OBAMA FORCES YOU TO PAY THAT AND MORE FOR HIS EXPENSIVE HEALTHCARE OR FACE IRS FINES.

But the idea that we have the FREEDOM to decide what prices we pay on internet.

OH WE CAN'T HAVE THAT!

Liberals care about freedom? That's a riot!

 

[jon_berzerk]

If you like the fact that you're paying 100 bucks a month, or around that, for your cable's 200 channels of CRAP 90% of which you don't even want,

by all means, give those sorts of companies more power of internet service and pricing.

you certainly are not mandated to buy such services

yet

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's a hint:

And they have the freedom to feel that way.

But do the Democrats on the FCC have the right to grab the internet and force what they want REGARDLESS of what Corporations or the American people want?

If you think the corporations want what you want you are farther gone than you've already made apparent.

 

[Pogo]

Here's a hint:

And they have the freedom to feel that way.

But do the Democrats on the FCC have the right to grab the internet and force what they want REGARDLESS of what Corporations or the American people want?

That makes no sense except in Oppositeland.
Read your own article.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Are you saying that the Internet should not be regulated? Are you saying that Internet freedom is "safer" in corporate hands?

Corporations don't care if you are Republican or Democrat. They don't care about your politics.

YOU BET I DON'T CARE!

What is it with you liberals that you think the government is so pure as the wind driven snow?

You seem to be a tad bit unhinged.

And the liberals always try to make the subject about you when they can't refute the op.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Here's a hint:

And they have the freedom to feel that way.

But do the Democrats on the FCC have the right to grab the internet and force what they want REGARDLESS of what Corporations or the American people want?

If you think the corporations want what you want you are farther gone than you've already made apparent.

Yeah, because it's corporations we have to "fear" not the government right?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you like the fact that you're paying 100 bucks a month, or around that, for your cable's 200 channels of CRAP 90% of which you don't even want,

by all means, give those sorts of companies more power of internet service and pricing.

I HAVE THE FREEDOM TO DECIDE TO DO THAT!

I love how hypocritical you liberals are.

You don't care that OBAMA FORCES YOU TO PAY THAT AND MORE FOR HIS EXPENSIVE HEALTHCARE OR FACE IRS FINES.

But the idea that we have the FREEDOM to decide what prices we pay on internet.

OH WE CAN'T HAVE THAT!

Liberals care about freedom? That's a riot!

Remember the 90's? Remember the big fight to deregulate cable? Remember how the cable companies claimed it would result in much more competition, better choices, more value,

for YOU? Well, it passed.

How'd that work out for you?

 

[Katzndogz]

obola may want to take over the internet it's just not likely that he will be able to do it. obola is not exactly the most popular man in the US today and internet regulations will piss off some serious money.

Take the tech donations out of the democrat wallets and it just might go the way of the Whigs.

Don't be so sure that those "techs" can't be lied to and promised some crap to go along with it.

After all insurance companies were promised a pack of lies to go along with Obamacare, even though the real game is to put insurance companies out of business.

But the insurance companies believed the lies and I bet the techs would too.

Promise them easy money or power and they can be just as easily convinced.

I think the techies are smarter than that. No more Google or Facebook, the end of Twitter, as these become government owned.

 

[Pogo]

Well they got control of our health care so of course the commies want to control the Internet.

will the people rise up and stop them? to be seen

And how would this proposal do that, Steph?

Aye --- there's the rub.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you like the fact that you're paying 100 bucks a month, or around that, for your cable's 200 channels of CRAP 90% of which you don't even want,

by all means, give those sorts of companies more power of internet service and pricing.

you certainly are not mandated to buy such services

yet

You guys can rant against your own interests, based on some ideological creed you're locked into, all you want.

Just remember you were warned.

 

[teapartysamurai]

In 1998, the FCC told Congress that the Internet should properly be understood as an “information service,” which allows for a relatively low level of government interference, rather than as a “telecommunication service,” which could subject it to the sort of oversight that public utilities get (as my Reason colleague Peter Suderman explains, there’s every reason to keep that original classification).The Internet has flourished in the absence of major FCC regulation, and there’s no demonstrated reason to change that now. That’s exactly why the parade of horribles—non-favored video streams slowed to an unwatchable trickle! whole sites blocked! plucky new startups throttled in the crib!—trotted out by net neutrality proponents is hypothetical in a world without legally mandated net neutrality.

Apart from addressing a problem that doesn’t yet exist, if you are going to pin your hopes for free expression and constant innovation on a government agency, the FCC is about the last place to start. For God’s sake, we’re talking about the agency that spent the better part of a decade trying to figuratively cover up Janet Jackson’s tit by fining Viacom and CBS for airing the 2004 Super Bowl.

Net Neutrality Don t Let the FCC Control the Internet - Reason.com