- Sep 16, 2012
- 59,625
- 53,499
- 3,605
The OP thought striking down Net Neutrality was a good idea just because Obama likes it...no other reason
Obama is a shill of the international banking cartel and the globalists. He is no different than Romney was, nor is he any different than Bush I, Bush II, or Clinton. To be for something just because a president is against something indicates a lack of independent thought or an inability to think critically.
Quite frankly, I am not so sure Obama is for net neutrality. Just because he SAYS he is for net neutrality doesn't mean he is.
Hilary Clinton said at one time she was opposed to some of the principals of NAFTA, yet she fully supported it. She was the major player in negotiating and drafting the TPP, which is more onerous and odious than NAFTA. It will do to the economy and America's sovereignty ten times over what NAFTA did to it.
Just because a politician says something, doesn't mean that is what they believe or will act on. They say things all the time to get elected. There is every indication that this administration purposely made these regulations very weak to destroy net neutrality. If you ask me? No, this administration IS NOT for net neutrality, it does not serve the interests of the NSA or the security state.
How do you win the war against Alternative Media? End Net Neutrality.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyjnEm8DZkI]Hillary Clinton: US Losing Information War to Alternative Media - YouTube[/ame]