There’s already a conspiracy theory brewing over net neutrality (FCC wants to regulate )

washington Post ^ | February 27 at 6:30 AM | By Brian Fung

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Why won't they release the rules?!?!

It's been less than 24 hours

[TigerClaws]

Aren’t leftists the ones calling Bush a Nazi and telling us the Patriot Act spelled the end of our country?

They’re okay with unlimited executive power as long as Obama is running things?

Hypocrites.

[Biggirl]

Because a court challenge is brewing.

[a fool in paradise]

Why won't they release the rules?!?!

It's been less than 24 hours since the Federal Communications Commission voted to approve strict new regulations on Internet providers, but that's the leading question coming from its critics.

TRANSPARENCY

They won't release them to us (but they do to billion dollar marxists like those at Google).

Crony Fascism

FU BO

[OneWingedShark]

Thought you might find this of interest.

[OneWingedShark]

Transparency... means you can’t see it.

[a fool in paradise]

PING

[MarkL]

A more important question is “why didn’t they release the rules BEFORE the vote, unless they wanted no transparency. The only reason for the secrecy was the knowledge that there would be a public outcry over the actions of the FCC.

I have one simple question for the FCC. Why would the public be concerned by the same government that found a ridiculously expensive while totally incompetent contractor to develop an eCommerce site that doesn’t work, when that same government decides to regulate the Internet.

Bad things are coming.

Mark

[G Larry]

When you’re already spying on Americans and the IRS is attacking Conservatives, and you have provably lied about keeping your Doc and your Insurance under Obamacare, its pretty damn reasonable to be suspicious about an Internet takeover bill that they won’t even let us read the new rules.

[tallyhoe]

Transparency... means you can’t see it.

Or You can see right through it!!!

[YHAOS]

“Conservatives are demanding that the FCC release a full copy of the regulations that it's planning to impose on companies such as Comcast and Verizon — and taking the agency's silence as evidence of a cover-up.”

A reasonable conclusion.

BEEP!

[Steve_Seattle]

"Conservatives are demanding that the FCC release a full copy of the regulations that it's planning to impose on companies such as Comcast and Verizon — and taking the agency's silence as evidence of a cover-up."

How outrageous that "conservatives" - OR ANYONE ELSE - should ask for a copy of the regulations!!! I can't believe the way that the MSM kisses Obama's butt. I'll say it again, and "Hello, FBI!" - I wish the planes on 9/11 had crashed into the NYT and WP instead of where they did. We'd probably have better press coverage now.

I mean, the press is actually taking a demand for disclosure as unreasonable and marginal! The world has flipped upside down.

[kaehurowing]

It’s not a theory.

[1010RD]

Impose on companies such as Comcast? These crony monopolists love government. They rely on government for their very existence.

Local municipalities give Comcast a cable monopoly.

[cripplecreek]

Gonna play hell with high bandwidth online gaming.

[1010RD]

Wheeler channeling Pelosi: We have to enforce the rules to show you the rules.

[Steve_Seattle]

This actually frightens me, when we have a major media outlet basically ridiculing the idea that the federal government has any obligation to release the content of a major, non-military regulation, and treating those who demand such release as basically irrational!

[bugman]

Obama’s definition — Transparency means you can’t see it.

[Rio]

Mignon?

[Steve_Seattle]

"Obama’s definition — Transparency means you can’t see it."

Good one. Because it's true. Spookily true. And the media keep on smooching him.