Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Steve_Seattle

CONTENT ISN’T ARGUED HERE!!! It’s not even an issue.

The speed to access content is.

Without Net Neutrality, ISPs could limit the speed at which you enjoy FR!!!!

This isn’t a damn mystery! It’s all on the FCC.gov website...with webcasts of them telling you what they’re doing!

I watched it all day today and I’ve yet to hear anyone say anything about cutting content they don’t agree with. Under Net Neutrality, they couldn’t anyway!


40 posted on 02/26/2015 12:17:15 PM PST by ReganDude (Give me liberty or give me death!! Cruz 2016!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: ReganDude

I admire your blind faith in this administration.


43 posted on 02/26/2015 12:20:23 PM PST by headstamp 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: ReganDude

You will soon see Obama and his FCC start giving “net neutrality” waivers to some of his best buddies (Soros), just like they did with Obamacare.

When the government is the gate keeper, they will pick the winners and losers. Enjoy your internet access while you still have it.


45 posted on 02/26/2015 12:26:58 PM PST by Flavious_Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: ReganDude

The big issue here for me is process: the FCC just jammed a square peg into a round hole in appropriating for itself (in great secrecy) the power to do so under an unapplicable statute dating from the 1930s.

Cue the image of Arthur crowning himself king. And remember that a government powerful enough to give you everything you want is also capable of taking away everything you have.

This is a clear intrusion, another such intrusion, by this Administration upon the Constitutional rights, duties and perogatives of the Legislative Branch

As to the functional impact of this, all it does is transfer the power to restrict or deny access to places like FR from the ISPs to the government. I trust the ISPs a lot more in that matter, given past Progressive attempts to use the government to stiffle free speech, like the Fairness Doctrine.

And on top of that, THEY built the networks. Why should they be forced, by government fiat, to provide access to sites if they choose not to?


65 posted on 02/26/2015 12:48:20 PM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: ReganDude
"CONTENT ISN’T ARGUED HERE!!! It’s not even an issue."

Of course not, and so they say. And you can keep your doctor, and Obama opposes gay marriage.
71 posted on 02/26/2015 1:43:37 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: ReganDude

If all I am doing is Email and web browsing, and all my company is doing is doing is Email and web browsing, then (a) I nor more customers are requiring the owners of the telecom pipes to push through the huge mountains of data connected with streaming video connected to some of the most profitable advertizing on the net, so why shouldn’t I enjoy better rates at a certain speed than hugely profitable Netflix and its telecom pipe hogging business model.

Oh - and all the “net neutral” companies, from Netflix to Google to Amazon DO charge different rates to different customers that make special deals for those rates. They like “free enterprise” for themselves but want the services they need price-controlled as a public service.


77 posted on 03/03/2015 1:49:59 PM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson