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

[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.

Guilty.

I didn't know what it means, and upon finding out, I'm pretty much in favor of it.

I didn't either for a while. That's the danger of reading articles -- you find stuff out.
Of course the GMU approach is much easier --- just go

 

[BlackSand]

Oh ... So you are one of those people who thinks the Government tells you the truth instead of what they think you want to hear ... Like, "We have to pass the bill so we can see what is in it." You probably believed you could keep your healthcare plan and doctor if you liked them as well.

No, I'm one of those people who doesn't believe in making up a lot of crap that isn't there.

You just believe in giving the government the opportunity to screw it up ... Nobody knows what they will do including you.

Thanks for admitting that. It's the first step. And all the more reason making shit up is invalid as argument. We can't just each plug in our own arbitrary content to what is clearly not at all present. My question has been "where is it present"? And the answer is -- it ain't.

Admitting what ... I indicated we didn't need to give the government the opportunity to screw it up.

If you want to suggest the when Congress wrote legislation establishing the Veteran's Administration, they included the fact we should have waiting lists long enough soldiers would die before they saw a doctor ... Then you would have a point. If legislation had been passed giving the IRS instructions to single out certain political parties for special consideration and abuse their audit authority ... Then you would have a point.

My point was that the only thing we do know for sure is that they will abuse their power, screw things up and back-door whatever they can get away with. We don't need more legislation ... We need the government to leave crap alone.

And as I've been asking all day -- how do you "screw up" or "take over" or "tax" the internet by taking no action? And I've still got zero answers.

I see you're still stuck on deflections to irrelevancies. Maybe that's because your argument has no substance. There's no there there. If there were it would be a simple matter to just answer the question with some... substance.

"President Obama has come out in support of reclassifying internet service as a utility, a move that would allow the Federal Communications Commission to enforce more robust regulations and protect net neutrality. "To put these protections in place, I'm asking the FCC to reclassifying internet service under Title II of a law known as the Telecommunications Act," Obama says in a statement this morning. "In plain English, I'm asking [the FCC] to recognize that for most Americans, the internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life."

Argue with what President Obama means ... He is the one supports "more robust regulations" ... Not me.

You cannot say it isn't in there or what they want when it is there and at least what they say they support.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Hey I cant get onto USMessageboard anymore, what happened?
Company: That site hasnt paid to be fast so we dont offer it anymore.
How do I get it back because I like going to that site to debate.
Company: Find someone who carries it fast for free or play by our rules. You can always go to another site. How about the Huffington Post message board? Its faster because they paid to be faster

When the fuck did that ever happen to you or anyone?

You're right, lets wait until that happens THEN fight it.

I switched from Cable to FIOS, 2 months later I received a personal visit from the cable company asking if I would switch back. That's what the free market does

My friend switches back and forth about every 18 months...he has HD TV with DVR & premium channels (HBO and sports, IIRC), fast internet service...about $70/month.

 

[Plasmaball]

Obama's problem is he never knows when to shut his hateful and ugly mouth

He can go to hell he isn't running the show anymore

you dont even understand the topic...

 

[Pogo]

No, I'm one of those people who doesn't believe in making up a lot of crap that isn't there.

You just believe in giving the government the opportunity to screw it up ... Nobody knows what they will do including you.

Thanks for admitting that. It's the first step. And all the more reason making shit up is invalid as argument. We can't just each plug in our own arbitrary content to what is clearly not at all present. My question has been "where is it present"? And the answer is -- it ain't.

Admitting what ... I indicated we didn't need to give the government the opportunity to screw it up.

If you want to suggest the when Congress wrote legislation establishing the Veteran's Administration, they included the fact we should have waiting lists long enough soldiers would die before they saw a doctor ... Then you would have a point. If legislation had been passed giving the IRS instructions to single out certain political parties for special consideration and abuse their audit authority ... Then you would have a point.

My point was that the only thing we do know for sure is that they will abuse their power, screw things up and back-door whatever they can get away with. We don't need more legislation ... We need the government to leave crap alone.

And as I've been asking all day -- how do you "screw up" or "take over" or "tax" the internet by taking no action? And I've still got zero answers.

I see you're still stuck on deflections to irrelevancies. Maybe that's because your argument has no substance. There's no there there. If there were it would be a simple matter to just answer the question with some... substance.

"President Obama has come out in support of reclassifying internet service as a utility, a move that would allow the Federal Communications Commission to enforce more robust regulations and protect net neutrality. "To put these protections in place, I'm asking the FCC to reclassifying internet service under Title II of a law known as the Telecommunications Act," Obama says in a statement this morning. "In plain English, I'm asking [the FCC] to recognize that for most Americans, the internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life."

Argue with what President Obama means ... He is the one supports "more robust regulations" ... Not me.

You cannot say it isn't in there or what they want when it is there and at least what they say they support.

-- Does that sentence come in English?

 

[Plasmaball]

The FCC should never ever be able to touch anything involving the internet. All we need is for them to get their censoring paws on it and pffft! away it goes.

they are the reason the internet is the way it is. another dope who doesnt understand the issue

 

[Plasmaball]

Right, give the government more power to regulate the internet. Sounds real "neutral."

another one who doesnt understand the issue

 

[Plasmaball]

Right, give the government more power to regulate the internet. Sounds real "neutral."

The Democrats like Clinton and Obama spent their entire regimes stuffing the government with like minded leftist radicals like themselves.

That was one of Bush's biggest mistakes. Not taking the time to clean out that nest of snakes.

They would LOVE to stop any and all freedom they can.

All it takes is for us to go back to sleep after the election sure that the Republicans will take care of it.

They won't. We have to make them!

The Republicans would love to have power over the internet as well. Complete separation of net and state is the only way.

sigh...

 

[BlackSand]

No, I'm one of those people who doesn't believe in making up a lot of crap that isn't there.

You just believe in giving the government the opportunity to screw it up ... Nobody knows what they will do including you.

Thanks for admitting that. It's the first step. And all the more reason making shit up is invalid as argument. We can't just each plug in our own arbitrary content to what is clearly not at all present. My question has been "where is it present"? And the answer is -- it ain't.

Admitting what ... I indicated we didn't need to give the government the opportunity to screw it up.

If you want to suggest the when Congress wrote legislation establishing the Veteran's Administration, they included the fact we should have waiting lists long enough soldiers would die before they saw a doctor ... Then you would have a point. If legislation had been passed giving the IRS instructions to single out certain political parties for special consideration and abuse their audit authority ... Then you would have a point.

My point was that the only thing we do know for sure is that they will abuse their power, screw things up and back-door whatever they can get away with. We don't need more legislation ... We need the government to leave crap alone.

And as I've been asking all day -- how do you "screw up" or "take over" or "tax" the internet by taking no action? And I've still got zero answers.

I see you're still stuck on deflections to irrelevancies. Maybe that's because your argument has no substance. There's no there there. If there were it would be a simple matter to just answer the question with some... substance.

"President Obama has come out in support of reclassifying internet service as a utility, a move that would allow the Federal Communications Commission to enforce more robust regulations and protect net neutrality. "To put these protections in place, I'm asking the FCC to reclassifying internet service under Title II of a law known as the Telecommunications Act," Obama says in a statement this morning. "In plain English, I'm asking [the FCC] to recognize that for most Americans, the internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life."

Argue with President Obama means ... He is the one supports "more robust regulations" ... Not me.

You just believe in giving the government the opportunity to screw it up ... Nobody knows what they will do including you.

Thanks for admitting that. It's the first step. And all the more reason making shit up is invalid as argument. We can't just each plug in our own arbitrary content to what is clearly not at all present. My question has been "where is it present"? And the answer is -- it ain't.

Admitting what ... I indicated we didn't need to give the government the opportunity to screw it up.

If you want to suggest the when Congress wrote legislation establishing the Veteran's Administration, they included the fact we should have waiting lists long enough soldiers would die before they saw a doctor ... Then you would have a point. If legislation had been passed giving the IRS instructions to single out certain political parties for special consideration and abuse their audit authority ... Then you would have a point.

My point was that the only thing we do know for sure is that they will abuse their power, screw things up and back-door whatever they can get away with. We don't need more legislation ... We need the government to leave crap alone.

And as I've been asking all day -- how do you "screw up" or "take over" or "tax" the internet by taking no action? And I've still got zero answers.

I see you're still stuck on deflections to irrelevancies. Maybe that's because your argument has no substance. There's no there there. If there were it would be a simple matter to just answer the question with some... substance.

"President Obama has come out in support of reclassifying internet service as a utility, a move that would allow the Federal Communications Commission to enforce more robust regulations and protect net neutrality. "To put these protections in place, I'm asking the FCC to reclassifying internet service under Title II of a law known as the Telecommunications Act," Obama says in a statement this morning. "In plain English, I'm asking [the FCC] to recognize that for most Americans, the internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life."

Argue with what President Obama means ... He is the one supports "more robust regulations" ... Not me.

You cannot say it isn't in there or what they want when it is there and at least what they say they support.

-- Does that sentence come in English?

I have said we don't need more regulation ... You said it didn't say anything about more regulation ... President Obama says he supports the move because it it provides the opportunity for more robust regulation.

If you want to argue that it doesn't include more regulation ... I suggested you argue with the President.

Hope that cleared it up for you ...

.

 

[Plasmaball]

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?

derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr you literally are just spewing talking points and nothing more.

 

[Pogo]

You just believe in giving the government the opportunity to screw it up ... Nobody knows what they will do including you.

Thanks for admitting that. It's the first step. And all the more reason making shit up is invalid as argument. We can't just each plug in our own arbitrary content to what is clearly not at all present. My question has been "where is it present"? And the answer is -- it ain't.

Admitting what ... I indicated we didn't need to give the government the opportunity to screw it up.

If you want to suggest the when Congress wrote legislation establishing the Veteran's Administration, they included the fact we should have waiting lists long enough soldiers would die before they saw a doctor ... Then you would have a point. If legislation had been passed giving the IRS instructions to single out certain political parties for special consideration and abuse their audit authority ... Then you would have a point.

My point was that the only thing we do know for sure is that they will abuse their power, screw things up and back-door whatever they can get away with. We don't need more legislation ... We need the government to leave crap alone.

And as I've been asking all day -- how do you "screw up" or "take over" or "tax" the internet by taking no action? And I've still got zero answers.

I see you're still stuck on deflections to irrelevancies. Maybe that's because your argument has no substance. There's no there there. If there were it would be a simple matter to just answer the question with some... substance.

"President Obama has come out in support of reclassifying internet service as a utility, a move that would allow the Federal Communications Commission to enforce more robust regulations and protect net neutrality. "To put these protections in place, I'm asking the FCC to reclassifying internet service under Title II of a law known as the Telecommunications Act," Obama says in a statement this morning. "In plain English, I'm asking [the FCC] to recognize that for most Americans, the internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life."

Argue with President Obama means ... He is the one supports "more robust regulations" ... Not me.

Thanks for admitting that. It's the first step. And all the more reason making shit up is invalid as argument. We can't just each plug in our own arbitrary content to what is clearly not at all present. My question has been "where is it present"? And the answer is -- it ain't.

Admitting what ... I indicated we didn't need to give the government the opportunity to screw it up.

If you want to suggest the when Congress wrote legislation establishing the Veteran's Administration, they included the fact we should have waiting lists long enough soldiers would die before they saw a doctor ... Then you would have a point. If legislation had been passed giving the IRS instructions to single out certain political parties for special consideration and abuse their audit authority ... Then you would have a point.

My point was that the only thing we do know for sure is that they will abuse their power, screw things up and back-door whatever they can get away with. We don't need more legislation ... We need the government to leave crap alone.

And as I've been asking all day -- how do you "screw up" or "take over" or "tax" the internet by taking no action? And I've still got zero answers.

I see you're still stuck on deflections to irrelevancies. Maybe that's because your argument has no substance. There's no there there. If there were it would be a simple matter to just answer the question with some... substance.

"President Obama has come out in support of reclassifying internet service as a utility, a move that would allow the Federal Communications Commission to enforce more robust regulations and protect net neutrality. "To put these protections in place, I'm asking the FCC to reclassifying internet service under Title II of a law known as the Telecommunications Act," Obama says in a statement this morning. "In plain English, I'm asking [the FCC] to recognize that for most Americans, the internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life."

Argue with what President Obama means ... He is the one supports "more robust regulations" ... Not me.

You cannot say it isn't in there or what they want when it is there and at least what they say they support.

-- Does that sentence come in English?

I have said we don't need more regulation ... You said it didn't say anything about more regulation ... President Obama says he supports the move because it it provides the opportunity for more robust regulation.

If you want to argue that it doesn't include more regulation ... I suggested you argue with the President.

Hope that cleared it up for you ...

No, actually the quoted article said that. The writer of that article.
You continue to have nothing but Speculation/Slippery Slope. Nothing on the merits.

 

[Plasmaball]

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

i thought that happened in the midterm?
You are too stupid for this conversation.

 

[Plasmaball]

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!

you dont have the freedom to pay what you want. They are all basically the same prices.
furthermore you still dont understand the issue. You never will.

 

[Contumacious]

AFTER THE ELECTION of course.

Obama says FCC should reclassify internet as a utility

President Obama has come out in support of reclassifying internet service as a utility, a move that would allow the Federal Communications Commission to enforce more robust regulations on it and protect net neutrality. "The time has come for the FCC to recognize that broadband service is of the same importance and must carry the same obligations as so many of the other vital services do," Obama writes in a statement this morning. "To do that, I believe the FCC should reclassify consumer broadband service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act — while at the same time forbearing from rate regulation and other provisions less relevant to broadband services."

Obama says FCC should reclassify internet as a utility The Verge

You libs can say "calm down, it's just an attempt to regulate broadband!"

Oh that's the Trojan Horse that Democrats will use to justify it. But it won't stop there! DOES IT EVER STOP WITH LIBERALS ONCE THEY TASTE A NEW POWER?

he Myth of Net Neutrality

"Al Gore says that legislation ensuring "net neutrality" is "needed for the revitalization of American democracy." Techno-vegan Moby (music artist) says without it, the "egalitarian" Internet would disappear. Even Mallory from Family Ties, Justine Bateman, thinks "the freedom to access the site of any organization from Planned Parenthood to the Christian Coalition is going to end."

"But just what the hell is net neutrality-and is all that is good and holy about the Internet really imperiled if legislation guaranteeing it isn't passed? Network neutrality is necessary, say its supporters, to make certain that all data on the Internet is treated equally and to protect users from information discrimination on the part of Internet service providers who will slow down or even block access to certain sites."

12:15 AM

OGB community

 

[JFK_USA]

He trying to keep a free and open internet so the cable companies don't block what websites you can go to you idiots. Apparently corporations should have that power according to nutters.

 

[BlackSand]

No, actually the quoted article said that. The writer.

Well you have a point there ... And the writer probably cannot be trusted any more than the President.

Touché ... More speculation

.

 

[BluesLegend]

He trying to keep a free and open internet so the cable companies don't block what websites you can go to you idiots. Apparently corporations should have that power according to nutters.

Obama is a liar why should we believe anything spewing from his lying sewer mouth?

 

[Plasmaball]

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

Yes.

Far safer.

Do you think the government should own all newspapers? Why or why not? Are you saying that news is "safer" in corporate hands, than disseminated by our glorious rulers?

they wouldnt own the internet....How dumb are you

 

[Plasmaball]

Instead, providers would be stuck allowing consumers to use the internet as they want to, using whatever services they like without any penalty. If that sounds pretty great, it's because that's basically how the internet has worked up until now.

The two sentences above make no sense. Net neutrality would mean providers would be stuck doing what they're doing now? If allowing consumers to use the internet as they want to, using whatever services they like without any penalty, is how the internet has worked up until now, then leave it alone. It's working just fine.

it means companies like Comcast and Verizon couldnt slow down your bandwidth with you log onto netflix. Which they did till netflix paid them to use their lines.

 

[Jarlaxle]

oh fuck!

Know what the problem really is?

Da po' can't afford an IP Address!!!

Find someone passionate about Net Neutrality and you'll find someone illegally downloading media - every last time.

Amazon and NetFlix have reached agreements are are paying for the bandwidth they consume, the ONLY ones throwing a hissy are the punks on the Bit Torrents.

My brother is for Net Neutrality...he doesn't download media (except his Netflix and Amazon accounts), but he's a serious online gamer, which uses lots of bandwidth.