GOP Concedes to Obama on Net Neutrality

[flowers]

Just great!...another cave........wonder how long this site will last

It won't be long. They way he is pushing that judge for a stay they have a timeline they need this done by to rule the 2016 election cycle.

[mystery-ak]

You do know the link you provided shows that anonymous supports net neutrality, yes?

Ah...yes I do...I just found it for you....

[mystery-ak]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/25/hillary-clinton-endorses-fccs-title-ii-designation-for-the-internet/
HILLARY CLINTON ENDORSES FCC’S TITLE II DESIGNATION FOR THE INTERNET



NOW I KNOW I AM AGAINST IT!

Rush is starting in a few minutes...I need him to tell me what to think today......................./s

[aligncare]

Net neutrality is a good thing and you don't completely understand the issue if you think otherwise. The GOP caved because a lot of their voter base understands the net neutrality issue and didn't want them to side with the cable companies. Without net neutrality the government and cable companies would have been able to secure even more control over the internet. The entire argument that this will somehow lead to higher taxes is complete baloney probably made up by somebody that was being paid by cable companies to figure out a way to mislead people on this issue.

No, not necessarily higher taxes, but increased cost to use the Internet. Forget the eight dollar Netflix or the preponderance of no or low cost web services. Soon with the so-called neutrality, the Internet is going to start costing big dollars to use. Guaranteed.

[mystery-ak]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/414380/fcc-chair-refuses-testify-congress-ahead-net-neutrality-vote-andrew-johnson

FCC Chair Refuses to Testify before Congress ahead of Net Neutrality Vote

 by Andrew Johnson February 25, 2015 10:19 AM

Two prominent House committee chairs are “deeply disappointed” in Federal Communications Commission chairman Tom Wheeler for refusing to testify before Congress as “the future of the Internet is at stake.”

Wheeler’s refusal to go before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday comes on the eve of the FCC’s vote on new Internet regulations pertaining to net neutrality. The committee’s chairman, Representative Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah), and Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton (R., Mich.) criticized Wheeler and the administration for lacking transparency on the issue.

“So long as the chairman continues to insist on secrecy, we will continue calling for more transparency and accountability at the commission,” Chaffetz and Upton said in a statement. “Chairman Wheeler and the FCC are not above Congress.”

The vote on the new Internet regulations is scheduled for Thursday. The FCC’s two Republican commissioners have asked Wheeler to delay the vote to allow more time for review. The changes would allow the commission to regulate the Internet like a public utility, setting new standards that require the provision of equal access to all online content.

[Dexter]

No, not necessarily higher taxes, but increased cost to use the Internet. Forget the eight dollar Netflix or the preponderance of no or low cost web services. Soon with the so-called neutrality, the Internet is going to start costing big dollars to use. Guaranteed.

We already have net neutrality. The cable companies want to get rid of it so they can raise prices and make more money. That's what corporations do; they find ways to make more money. Do you think they'd support getting rid of net neutrality if it was going to bring/keep their prices down, or is it more likely they want to get rid of it because they know they can bring their prices up? What information supports your belief that continued net neutrality will lead to higher costs?

[flowers]

We already have net neutrality. They want to get rid of it so they can raise prices and make more money. What information supports your belief that continued net neutrality will lead to higher costs?

What has the government ever controlled that didn't raise the price? Name me one please Dex, just one.

[Dexter]

What has the government ever controlled that didn't raise the price? Name me one please Dex, just one.

I don't support the regulations they are attempting to pass. You need to understand how to separate that from net neutrality; they are not the same thing.

[mystery-ak]

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/02/dear-fcc-rethink-those-vague-general-conduct-rules
Dear FCC: Rethink The Vague "General Conduct" Rule

[Bigun]

I don't support the legislation they are attempting to pass. You need to understand how to separate that from net neutrality; they are not the same thing.

There isn't any legislation Dex!  Just the FCC imposing NEW regulations on the internet!

[Dexter]

There isn't any legislation Dex!  Just the FCC imposing NEW regulations on the internet!

Those regulations do not = net neutrality. Regulations on the internet are bad; net neutrality is good. They are trying to muddy the entire thing up so they can turn people like you against net neutrality.

[Bigun]

Those regulations do not = net neutrality. Regulations on the internet are bad; net neutrality is good. They are trying to muddy the entire thing up so they can turn people like you against net neutrality.

Or perhaps to confuse people like YOU into supporting new regulations because they THINK it will be "net neutrality"!

[Dexter]

Or perhaps to confuse people like YOU into supporting new regulations because they THINK it will be "net neutrality"!

I already said I don't support the regulations. People like me understand that net neutrality is already in effect. It's already the law of the land. The cable companies want to change that.

[Bigun]

I already said I don't support the regulations. People like me understand that net neutrality is already in effect. It's already the law of the land. The cable companies want to change that.

Do you understand that the FCC is calling these new regulations they want to impose "net neutrality" Dex?

[Dexter]

Do you understand that the FCC is calling these new regulations they want to impose "net neutrality" Dex?

Do you believe net neutrality already exists or no?

https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&site=&source=hp&q=define+net+neutrality&oq=define+net+&gs_l=hp.3.0.0l10.449.2598.0.3373.14.12.1.0.0.0.173.1368.0j10.10.0.msedr...0...1c.1.62.hp..4.10.1271.0.LiHwPpjdghU

They are trying to add new regulations to net neutrality; that's what you don't understand. I don't support added regulations, but net neutrality (which already exists) is a good thing. They have somehow convinced you that net neutrality is synonymous with the regulations they want to pass, but that is simply not true.

[flowers]

I don't support the regulations they are attempting to pass. You need to understand how to separate that from net neutrality; they are not the same thing.

Name one thing the government stuck its nose in that was improved.......please name me one?

[Dexter]

Name one thing the government stuck its nose in that was improved.......please name me one?

You apparently didn't read my post.

I don't support the regulations they are attempting to pass.

I can increase the font size if you manage to not see it again.

[flowers]

You apparently didn't read my post.

I can increase the font size if you manage to not see it again.

OK But you said.....

Net neutrality is a good thing and you don't completely understand the issue if you think otherwise

I say......what has the government gotten its hands on that made it better? 

[Dexter]

OK But you said..... I say......what has the government gotten its hands on that made it better?

You don't understand what net neutrality is. The government is trying to add more regulations to the net neutrality that already exists. Net neutrality helps to prevent the government from meddling in the internet.

[flowers]

You don't understand what net neutrality is. The government is trying to add more regulations to the net neutrality that already exists. Net neutrality helps to prevent the government from meddling in the internet.

that is all gone the minute FCC gets its way.

[aligncare]

You don't understand what net neutrality is. The government is trying to add more regulations to the net neutrality that already exists. Net neutrality helps to prevent the government from meddling in the internet.

You are either engaging in deliberate misinformation or are woefully naive. No one knows yet what the proposed regulations are! The text of the regulations have been held secret. We won't know what they are until the new regulations are already in place.

Is this what you expect from an open government? What are they hiding? What are they afraid of? 

[aligncare]

...and one more: What is wrong with the Internet that needs new government regulations?

[mystery-ak]

You don't understand what net neutrality is. The government is trying to add more regulations to the net neutrality that already exists. Net neutrality helps to prevent the government from meddling in the internet.

We all understand that..it is the new regulations..over 300 pages that no one has read....

[Dexter]

You are either engaging in deliberate misinformation or are woefully naive. No one knows yet what the proposed regulations are! The text of the regulations have been held secret. We won't know what they are until the new regulations are already in place.

Is this what you expect from an open government? What are they hiding? What are they afraid of?

I don't support the new regulations at all. I do however support net neutrality; net neutrality is a good thing.

[Dexter]

We all understand that..it is the new regulations..over 300 pages that no one has read....

So you support net neutrality but oppose the new regulations?