Posted on 02/12/2015 5:51:55 AM PST by LeoMcNeil
The Democrats on the FCC are working towards the creation of massive regulations on the internet. Preparing them in secrecy, they apparently have 322 pages worth of regulations that they’re prepared to vote on later this month. Meanwhile at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) Democrats want to create massive regulations for speech on the internet. Apparently the Democrats aren’t happy with recent Supreme Court decisions which limit the government’s ability to prohibit people from donating money to campaigns and PAC’s. Their solution is to have government regulate internet speech. Some of the rules they’re talking about would regulate blogs, even sites such as the Drudge Report which provide both news and campaign activity.
What we’ve seen over the last six years is that the Democrats don’t trust the American people. They don’t trust our ability to purchase a health insurance policy that suits our individual needs without the state telling us what must be included in that policy. They don’t trust our ability to access and use the internet without massive government involvement. They don’t trust our ability to vote without massive government regulations dictating what we may hear in a campaign, how we may hear it and who may tell it to us. What is clear is that the Democrats don’t trust freedom or free people. If freedom and free people were trusted by the Democrats, they wouldn’t be proposing massive laws regulating us.
Let’s face it, the Democrats don’t trust our ability to hear unregulated political arguments. They think we’ll get swept up with whoever spends the most money. Interestingly, Obama spent more than the Republican nominees in 2008 and 2012. He orchestrated the first billion dollar presidential campaign. Of course, money Democrats spend isn’t really their problem. They want to regulate the speech of their opponents. If that means regulating what bloggers who may be associated with campaigns, so be it. If that means regulating the Drudge Report, the Democrats are all in favor. They don’t trust people to hear political speech that hasn’t been regulated by the state.
For all the whining about money in politics, a remarkably small amount is actually spent. Proctor and Gamble spends more money each year hawking dish soap than is spent on political campaigns by all candidates in the US. P&G spends over $9 billion a year in advertising. In 2012 Obama raised just over $1 billion, Romney just under $1 billion. While the media loves to play up how many millions PAC’s have in the bank, they don’t spend combined $1 billion a year on all activities. Most Congressional races see candidates raise a few million dollars to spend on all aspects of their campaign, most Senate races cost less than $10 million to run. Let’s stop pretending like money is overflowing in politics, it simply isn’t. Even if all momentary regulations were ruled unconstitutional and financing of campaigns, parties and PAC’s doubled political spending wouldn’t come close to what P&G, GM and Kraft spend combined selling soap, cars and cheese.
The Democrats proposals in the FEC are all about control. It’s just like McCain-Feingold, which of course was supported by plenty of moderate to liberal Republicans. The purpose is control over what the American people hear and when we hear it. The left and their media partners blow the issue of campaign advertising way out of proportion and offer government regulation as a solution to a problem that does not exist. In reality, they want to control what we hear and from whom we hear it from. The fewer speakers there are, the easier it is to control content. Thus the Democrats want the FEC to regulate bloggers who may be affiliated with campaigns. They want to regulate news outlets who may have political affiliations. They want to regulate money, as though it’s overflowing in the political world. In the end, the left in this country doesn’t trust you to think for yourself and as such they want to limit what you can hear.
Money in politics and guns among the citizens scares Washington for the same reason, it prevents their total control of the country.
If they were as interested in controlling porn as they are in controlling us they would be demonstrating they are driven by principle. The porn industry, however, is unabashedly pro Obama. They will never try to control filth, only truth.
> “The purpose is control over what the American people hear and when we hear it.”
The gold nugget of truth stands out. And if they are given this power they will abuse it and keep milking more money out of it until our FCC taxes are staggering. That coupled with the Obamacare tax will be stifling. I predict mass suicides coming if things continue at the present rate. I do not like the America we have become, at all.
I'm tired of unquestioned support of big business - in many ways they are as destructive as the left.
My concern is that aristocrats, and royalty and those with the most money and power have throughout all of world history made disarming the people a priority. It is more in their interest to remove power and threats, than to give the people the right to bear arms. So I’m conflicted on this issue of allowing unlimited money into politics. Money does influence if not control politics and it can lead to policies that are not beneficial to we the people.. Human nature doesn’t change.. An armed populace is a political force.
“For all the whining about money in politics, a remarkably small amount is actually spent. “
Yeah, only about $5 BILLION DOLLARS. So small an amount that I believe they should not even bother spending it, and should just send it to me.
I agree. Big business is global and about profits not the USA. Many prefer less national sovereignty, more open borders, and open immigration without regulations. They prefer bailouts and don’t mind crony capitalism. These are things that many corporate CEOs support that are in direct opposition at least to my conservative principles.
Does that proposed “law” have to go through both congress and the senate? If so, either speaker (Bohner or McDonald) could pull a Harry Reid on them and never bring it to a vote. DOA?
It’s not that Rats don’t trust the people, it’s that they want to stack the deck in favor of themselves.
Let’s put $5 billion into perspective. Proctor & Gamble spent $9 billion just to advertise dish soap and laundry detergent last year. NFL revenues are $9.5 billion. Obama’s proposed budget is nearly $4 trillion, the US economy as a whole is around $15 trillion. Yeah, $5 billion is a lot of money to you and I. But it isn’t that much in the larger scheme of things. Especially when it’s split among 1000 candidates for Federal office.
They are not creating law but regulation. Congressional action is not required. It is, according to Obama and by virtue of precedent, within his power to control the WWW by personal fiat. That is how serious the matter is. We have surrendered our free speech to a tyrant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.