A little food for the average Liberal to chew on.

1. 60

   tobey100posted 12 years ago

   Just last month the Federal Communications Commission did what a federal court informed them they did not have the authority to do, they voted to set up regulations for the internet and gave their initiative a placid little name, "Net Neutrality".  Way back in the summer of 2010 the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (notice they're Progressive, not Liberal) managed to get 95 democrats to agree to support the upcoming federal regulation of the internet.  November 2 of 2010 all 95 democrats LOST.  All 95.
   
   Trend or Warning?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Wow.
      If that's true, it doesn't sound like a coincidence to me.  Sounds more like a warning for sure.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Texasbetaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Do you even know what net neutrality is? What was passed was not regulating the internet, it was keeping it free.
      
      The pledge reads as follows: "I believe in protecting Net Neutrality - the First Amendment of the Internet. The open Internet is a vital engine for free speech, economic opportunity, and civic participation in the 21st century. I stand with millions of working families and small businesses against any attempt by big corporations to control the Internet and eliminate the Internet's level playing field. In Congress, I'll fight to protect Net Neutrality for the entire Internet - wired and wireless - and make sure big corporations aren't allowed to take control of free speech online. Mark me down as a 21st century Internet champion!"
      
      Your Republicans called it regulation, because you respond to those words without thinking. It was the Republicans who were cool with business regulating the internet themselves by deciding what content you could and could not view. Seriously folks, it only takes a little effort to understand what the heck is going on.

      replyreport
      1. 83

         kerrygposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Pwned indeed!
         
         Tobey, I highly recommend you read up on Net Neutrality. This is a hugely important issue for internet marketers and online writers such as, oh, every single active member of HubPages.
         
         http://www.savetheinternet.com/
         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality

         replyreport
         1. 0

            EmpressFelicityposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            So basically, the opponents of Net Neutrality want to turn the Internet into something like today's cable/satellite TV services, where you have to buy access to bundles of channels rather than just being able to visit any channel you like, anywhere.

            replyreport
            1. 83

               kerrygposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Yes.

               replyreport
            2. 93

               Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Yes, that's part of it, but it's not all of it.
               
               For example, Comcast wants its customers to get fast paid movie downloads. That's important now and it is becoming more important every day.  They'd like to throttle back other traffic (like you downloading the same movie from Netflix) so that their stuff works better.
               
               If all you want to do is watch Comcast movies, their wishes would be wonderful for you and them.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  EmpressFelicityposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Comcast is presumably an ISP in the US that also does film downloads?  Eeek.  Outrageous! 
                  
                  I think of the Internet as being a bit like one's electricity supply - you can run any appliance you like from your electricity supply, so why shouldn't you be allowed to download any type of films etc. you like off the Internet, and pay whoever provides said films etc.?
                  
                  

                  replyreport
   3. 0

      Texasbetaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Now, chew on that for a while.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         LMAO ROFL

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Doug Hughesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            What's amazing is that after a lie is exposed, a deception revealed, a fraud undone, they move without shame or penalty to the next con game.

            replyreport
            1. 93

               Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Ayup.
               
               Of course this particular subject is complex, and I really don't expect your average Tea Party ranter to have much understanding of it, so it does not surprise me that they will just assume malice without investigation.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Jim Hunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Stop with the RHETORIC and VITRIOL you're INFLAMING me.

                  replyreport
                  1. 93

                     Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     If all I had to go by was your avatar pic, I might be worried
                     
                     However, while there may be some folks here who wouldn't surprise me if they "went postal", I would be quite surprised if you did.
                     
                     Is there some particular reason you want to derail this thread and turn it to that other controversy?

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        Jim Hunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Just seemed rather useless to call into question the intelligence of the "average" Tea Party member.
                        
                        Please continue with the rhetoric.

                        replyreport
                        1. 93

                           Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           So what's your informed opinion on net neutrality, Jim?

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              Jim Hunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              My opinion is I will not waste my time worrying about things I have no control over.

                              replyreport
                              1. 93

                                 Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 Oh, I forgot: It's the evil government that controls that. Nothing to do with you.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 60

                                    Jim Hunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                    I certainly have no control over the internet.
                                    
                                    I have no control over the control of the internet.
                                    
                                    How did you get what you said from what I said?

                                    replyreport
      2. 76

         Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         pwned!

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            This is not the first time and since he didn't learn from the past I'm sure it won't be the last.

            replyreport
      3. 86

         Ms Deeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Ohhhh, is it that, Texasbeta? Like what EmpressFelicity says?

         replyreport
   4. 67

      Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I'm wondering what recourse we have over the FCC since it ignored the federal court.  I don't put it past the Obama regime to ignore other rulings as well if it's starting to control a new media outlet.  Since this affects the communication companies, I'm surprised they have rolled over and let it happen.

      replyreport
2. 79

   Mighty Momposted 12 years ago

   Maybe those 95 Democrats lost for other reasons.
   Like maybe they were featured on Sarah Palin's crosshairs map

   replyreport
3. 64

   I am DB Cooperposted 12 years ago

   To the people on here who think it's a good thing that supporters of net neutrality lost their seats: do you even know what you're rooting for anymore? This isn't about Team Democrat vs. Team Republican, there are real issues at stake.
   
   Net neutrality is an attempt to prevent internet providers from creating different tiers of the internet. Without legislation, ISPs would be able to give preference to certain websites (let's say Google for this example) while throttling traffic to other websites (let's say Hubpages). Visitors to Hubpages would get much slower service while visitors to Google would get very fast service. ISPs could charge website owners to have their websites load faster and/or they could charge individual customers, who would have to pay more if they want to be alloted more bandwidth to visit what the ISP deems "premium websites", which would be defined however the ISP wants to define it.
   
   The fact is, unless you're stealing wifi from your neighbors, you already pay for access to the internet. If the ISPs are losing money, they should charge more for this service. They should not be picking and choosing which websites should cost more to visit (and basically targeting websites that can afford to pay up and need lots of visitors to pay the bills) or throttling the bandwidth for certain websites. If certain users are using too much bandwidth, throttle them or don't offer an unlimited bandwidth plan. They should not have control over what people are able to access online. This isn't China.

   replyreport
   1. 93

      Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Unfortunately, the right automatically hates whatever their puppetmasters tell them to hate.
      
      It's called GroupThink and it keeps their brains from hurting.

      replyreport
4. 60

   Joe Badtoeposted 12 years ago

   I thought the topic was about net neutering!??
   
   I got excited by the idea that we could endorse neutering some folk who can't stop disrupting forums and appear desperate to ensure they appear in virtually every topic on HP whilst contributing nothing but sarcasm to the debate?
   
   I was about to put forward a couple of people to be the first ones to be neutered.....
   
   Right wing fundamentalists can step forward now and save me naming them.....
   
   The Kams (keyboard activated morons) need to lose their ability to procreate then we can get back to a world of peace and understanding.
   
   Times like this I wish I was a Veterinary surgeon I would enjoy my work. Think I was too late for one of the Kams as it looks like his op was done without anaesthetic.
   
   (curtains on stage slowly opening...and..here they come).

   replyreport