Liberals blame Bush era policies for the economic mess we’re in right now, as well as a raft of other problems. Conservatives (rightly) blame the economic mess on Democrat policies, and highlight the problems caused by other legislation, such as ObamaCare and the Porkulus. Altogether, though, notice that government tends to create more problems while supposedly solving others. Enter the FCC
The Federal Communications Commission appears poised to pass a controversial set of rules that broadly create two classes of Internet access, one for fixed-line providers and the other for the wireless Net.
You know, if it’s “controversial”, then perhaps it’s not the best of ideas to pass it. This isn’t similar to issues like passing the Civil Rights Act (which Democrats opposed): how many people can honestly complain that they have been denied access, not including those who cannot afford broadband……hmm, could there be an ulterior motive?
The proposed rules of the online road would prevent fixed-line broadband providers like Comcast and Qwest from blocking access to sites and applications. The rules, however, would allow wireless companies more latitude in putting limits on access to services and applications.
Just writing out loud, but, does that mean that they couldn’t block access to sites run by Islamic jihadis, as required by other federal law?
Net neutrality, broadly speaking, is an effort to ensure equal access to Web sites and cutting-edge online services. Mr. Genachowski said these proposed rules aimed to both encourage Internet innovation and protect consumers from abuses.
Supporters of net neutrality always speak of abuses, yet, they are short on actual, specific examples, particularly egregious ones that cause harm.
“These rules fulfill a promise to the future — to companies that don’t yet exist, and the entrepreneurs that haven’t yet started work in their dorm rooms or garages,†Mr. Genachowski said in remarks prepared for the commission’s meeting on Tuesday in Washington. At present, there are no enforceable rules “to protect basic Internet values,†he added.
When Liberals start speaking of promises to the future, be scared, very scared. Something else is going on, and, generally, it is not what you think, and their intent is something else.
Notably, the rules are watered down for wireless Net providers like AT&T and Verizon, which would be prohibited from blocking Web sites, but not from blocking applications or services unless those applications directly compete with providers’ voice and video products, like Skype.
F.C.C. officials said there were technological reasons for the wireless distinctions, and that they would continue to closely monitor the medium.
So, when those applications and services start running up the bandwidth, and the companies are losing money out the ying yang, then what? Well, then the Law Of Unintended Liberal Consequences kicks in, and the first people to whine like a kid who wants to open his present NOW will be……liberals, who’ll demand more government regulation, making the situation worse.
Then there is Senator Clown, er, Franken, who provided his own high end whine, saying the rules to give government heavy involvement in Internet service weren’t strong enough, and would essentially allow wireless carriers to *GASP* run their businesses in a way to make money. And
Mr. Franken and other critics say the rules come with major caveats; for instance, they would allow for “reasonable network management†by broadband providers. And they would discourage but not expressly forbid something called “paid prioritization,†which would allow a media or technology company to pay the provider for faster transmission of data, potentially creating an uneven playing field.
Guess who sets the limits for “reasonable network management”? Government. Like ObamaCare, this is a medium step towards heavy government involvement in control of the Internet. That’s the endgame. Just imagine if Conservatives wanted more government involvement in what Hollywood and the entertainment industry produces.
the economy ? Teach the Stock Market, Wall Street and corporate profits had a sweeeet year. And thanks for keeping their taxes low. They are America. And Teach it was democratic lmajority ed Congress that passed the Civil Rights Act and it was a Democratic POTUS that signed it. More Dems voted for it than did GOP. After this the dems lost their lock on the South, although of course they cemented their black vote. White Southerners have ever since never forgiven the Dems for passing that Act.
Yep, it’s a power grab – plain and simple. An early performance goal for the 112th is the legislation plainly stating the FCC has no authority to regulate the Internet.
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”
And thanks for keeping their taxes low.
I guess you believe that people should be taxed differently. So much for the 14th Amendment, eh?
And Teach it was democratic lmajority ed Congress that passed the Civil Rights Act
The 1964 Bill was a watered down version of the 1959 Bill that the GOP put forth. The defeat of that bill was led by Kennedy and the Democrats. The earlier bill was defeated solely on a political basis and had nothing to do with “equal rights.”
The “Democratic majority” that you speak of could not passed the bill without GOP support. In fact, as a percentage, more GOP’ers voted for the bill than Democrats.
Johnson signed the bill even though he had made it known that he was personally against it, but felt that the Senate would overide his veto.
White Southerners have ever since never forgiven the Dems for passing that Act
Your ignorance is astounding. If that were the case, than why are there more hate crimes against blacks as a percentage in the so called “liberal north” than in the South?
Here’s a quick history lesson for you, Skippy… first black member of the House. Republican. First black member of the Senate. Republican. First woman to be nominated for President for a major political party. Republican. First Hispanic in the Senate. Republican. Banning of slavery by the 13th Amendment – proposed, advocated for and eventually passed by Republicans.
In Brown vs the Board of Education, the Federal government’s lawyer was a Republican, appointed by a Republican president. Arguing against Brown (and eventually losing) was the a Democratic lawyer who ran for president in 1924.
I can go on and on and on.
The problem is that people of your ilk – (we call them bigots) – don’t know history and don’t care to know it. You would rather live in your bigoted and racist ignorance.
[…] FCC To Vote On Net Neutrality Today, Create Problem Where None Existed - Pirate's Cove […]
I opposed the health reform and this is another invasion of the free market. When will the world wake up and realize our govt. does not hold any secret keys to effective management. They usually make things WORSE. As a grown adult I’m quite capable of managing myself on almost all my own affairs.