Net Neutrality is communist plot...

[Lukey]

To "spread the bits around" - I'm not the least bit shocked, are any of you?

But such voices have been drowned out by left-wing activists who want to manage the Internet to achieve their political objectives. The most influential of these congregate around the deceptively named Free Press, a liberal lobby co-founded in 2002 by Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor. His goals have always been clear. “At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies,” he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. “But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.” Earlier in 2000, he told the Marxist magazine Monthly Review: “Our job is to make media reform part of our broader struggle for democracy, social justice, and, dare we say it, socialism.” When I interviewed him in 2010, he admitted he is a socialist and said he was “hesitant to say I’m not a Marxist.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414483/comrades-net-neutrality-john-fund

Hahaha! No, you Obama supporters aren't Marxists. Why would we think that???

 

[zzigzzag]

To "spread the bits around" - I'm not the least bit shocked, are any of you?

But such voices have been drowned out by left-wing activists who want to manage the Internet to achieve their political objectives. The most influential of these congregate around the deceptively named Free Press, a liberal lobby co-founded in 2002 by Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor. His goals have always been clear. “At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies,” he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. “But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.” Earlier in 2000, he told the Marxist magazine Monthly Review: “Our job is to make media reform part of our broader struggle for democracy, social justice, and, dare we say it, socialism.” When I interviewed him in 2010, he admitted he is a socialist and said he was “hesitant to say I’m not a Marxist.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414483/comrades-net-neutrality-john-fund

Hahaha! No, you Obama supporters aren't Marxists. Why would we think that???

Connect those dots, Lukey. Maybe you'll get to name the new constellation. "McCarthy" has a nice ring to it.

 

[Lukey]

Connect those dots, Lukey. Maybe you'll get to name the new constellation. "McCarthy" has a nice ring to it.

Yeah, just because there's commies under every rock we turn over in the Obama Administration doesn't mean he's a commie, right?

 

[Sgt Staples]

To "spread the bits around" - I'm not the least bit shocked, are any of you?

But such voices have been drowned out by left-wing activists who want to manage the Internet to achieve their political objectives. The most influential of these congregate around the deceptively named Free Press, a liberal lobby co-founded in 2002 by Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor. His goals have always been clear. “At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies,” he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. “But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.” Earlier in 2000, he told the Marxist magazine Monthly Review: “Our job is to make media reform part of our broader struggle for democracy, social justice, and, dare we say it, socialism.” When I interviewed him in 2010, he admitted he is a socialist and said he was “hesitant to say I’m not a Marxist.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414483/comrades-net-neutrality-john-fund

Hahaha! No, you Obama supporters aren't Marxists. Why would we think that???

 

[write on]

To "spread the bits around" - I'm not the least bit shocked, are any of you?

But such voices have been drowned out by left-wing activists who want to manage the Internet to achieve their political objectives. The most influential of these congregate around the deceptively named Free Press, a liberal lobby co-founded in 2002 by Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor. His goals have always been clear. “At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies,” he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. “But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.” Earlier in 2000, he told the Marxist magazine Monthly Review: “Our job is to make media reform part of our broader struggle for democracy, social justice, and, dare we say it, socialism.” When I interviewed him in 2010, he admitted he is a socialist and said he was “hesitant to say I’m not a Marxist.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414483/comrades-net-neutrality-john-fund

Hahaha! No, you Obama supporters aren't Marxists. Why would we think that???

What? I see net neutrality as a roadblock against total control of online propaganda by right wing fascists.

The internet is already owned by a few right wing oligarchs. They could, and would, throttle down the speed of liberal leaning, if not disallowing any access, websites while allowing right wing sites complete speed and access.

 

[Lukey]

What? I see net neutrality as a roadblock against total control of online propaganda by right wing fascists.

The internet is already owned by a few right wing oligarchs. They could, and would, throttle down the speed of liberal leaning, if not disallowing any access, websites while allowing right wing sites complete speed and access.

That is patently absurd...

 

[BitterPill]

That is patently absurd...

The irony.

 

[Dawg]

What? I see net neutrality as a roadblock against total control of online propaganda by right wing fascists.

The internet is already owned by a few right wing oligarchs. They could, and would, throttle down the speed of liberal leaning, if not disallowing any access, websites while allowing right wing sites complete speed and access.

I'm glad the dem/lib @FCC voted FOR the 323 page socialist regs........

young folks addicted to net....................they will destroy dem/libs

 

[JuliefromOhio]

The Federal Communications Commission will allow some cities and towns to set up and expand municipal Internet services, overruling state laws that had been put in place to block such efforts.
The commission granted petitions by Chattanooga, Tenn., and Wilson, N.C., to overturn laws that restricted the ability of communities in those states to offer broadband service. In all about 20 states have passed such laws. The decisions don’t affect the other states, but they do set a precedent for consideration of similar petitions in the future.

now were those states which forbade cities to set up and expand municipal internet services COMMIEs or FASCISTs?

 

[Jen]

To "spread the bits around" - I'm not the least bit shocked, are any of you?

But such voices have been drowned out by left-wing activists who want to manage the Internet to achieve their political objectives. The most influential of these congregate around the deceptively named Free Press, a liberal lobby co-founded in 2002 by Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor. His goals have always been clear. “At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies,” he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. “But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.” Earlier in 2000, he told the Marxist magazine Monthly Review: “Our job is to make media reform part of our broader struggle for democracy, social justice, and, dare we say it, socialism.” When I interviewed him in 2010, he admitted he is a socialist and said he was “hesitant to say I’m not a Marxist.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414483/comrades-net-neutrality-john-fund

Hahaha! No, you Obama supporters aren't Marxists. Why would we think that???

For the entirety of Obama's presidency the framework for a Communist government has been put into place. Every time a nation topples into Communism the leaders believe that "this time it will work". And with all of the framework in place, our leaders now are arrogant enough to believe it yet again. Who is complicit? Is it just Democrats? I don't know the answers, but if you look back at how the GOP loudly complained about how Obama was breaking the law and flouting the Constitution but did nothing substantial to stop him, I have to believe that just about everyone in DC is on the same page in taking us down the Communist road. When the time comes to make it happen, there will be barely a whimper in protest.

And on some level I will agree that it is time. If people are ready to elect someone as their president who will promise them things (cell phones, etc) that they should be buying for themselves, then they are drones who need to be told what to do in every aspect of their life and that is what Communism does.

 

[zzigzzag]

Blah blah blah....

It's about preventing internet providers from being able to play companies against each other and pick winners and losers based on who can afford their best product. Whoever can afford the fastest service sets the rate and everyone else has to cough it up or settle for lesser service.

I thought Lukey was for small businesses and entrepreneurs. Says so all the time.

Actually, he's for twisted semantics and Rush Limbaugh.

Fairness is a dirty word. Especially if the gummint is regulating it. As we all know (except us commies), corporations are most trustworthy when they regulate themselves.

Same old plutocratic crap.

 

[worldlymrb]

What? I see net neutrality as a roadblock against total control of online propaganda by right wing fascists.

The internet is already owned by a few right wing oligarchs. They could, and would, throttle down the speed of liberal leaning, if not disallowing any access, websites while allowing right wing sites complete speed and access.

You're crazy if you think a govt that gave $85B a month to Wall Street and trillions in liquidity to foreign money changers is interested in making anything fair for the little guy.

 

[Lukey]

Blah blah blah....

It's about preventing internet providers from being able to play companies against each other and pick winners and losers based on who can afford their best product. Whoever can afford the fastest service sets the rate and everyone else has to cough it up or settle for lesser service.

I thought Lukey was for small businesses and entrepreneurs. Says so all the time.

Actually, he's for twisted semantics and Rush Limbaugh.

Fairness is a dirty word. Especially if the gummint is regulating it. As we all know (except us commies), corporations are most trustworthy when they regulate themselves.

Same old plutocratic crap.

I'm for capitalism and, in case you can't read, the guy who started this ball rolling said it was designed to remove the capitalist control of the internet. It's about reducing the profitability of investing in network infrastructure so it can become a government function. It's about eliminating the market's ability to determine winners and losers, and putting those decisions in the hands of bureaucrats. And it's about increasing government control over what we can see and do on the internet. "Fairness" is a Marxist dog whistle to rally the collectivists in pursuit of statism.

 

[Spamature]

I'm for capitalism and, in case you can't read, the guy who started this ball rolling said it was designed to remove the capitalist control of the internet. It's about reducing the profitability of investing in network infrastructure so it can become a government function. It's about eliminating the market's ability to determine winners and losers, and putting those decisions in the hands of bureaucrats. And it's about increasing government control over what we can see and do on the internet. "Fairness" is a Marxist dog whistle to rally the collectivists in pursuit of statism.

Reducing profitability ?

Do you know the profit margin for providing broadband in 94 cents on the dollar ? NoRobber baron or even actually robber turns that kind of profit ?

 

[Lukey]

Reducing profitability ?

Do you know the profit margin for providing broadband in 94 cents on the dollar ? NoRobber baron or even actually robber turns that kind of profit ?

Don't try throwing completely fabricated financial information around me in an effort to indict, convict and execute capitalism, there comrade. I have a very well tuned bullshit detector and that number smells like it came out of Alinsky's ass.

 

[Spamature]

Don't try throwing completely fabricated financial information around me in an effort to indict, convict and execute capitalism, there comrade. I have a very well tuned bullshit detector and that number smells like it came out of Alinsky's ass.

Hmmm?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/time-warner-cables-97-pro_b_6591916.html

 

[Lukey]

Hmmm?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/time-warner-cables-97-pro_b_6591916.html

Hmmm indeed. That is gross profit margin. It does not include the cost of building out their network. You want to speculate about what that stuff costs? Sheesh!

You can always count on Marxists to distort a company's financial reports in their feverish attempts to stamp out its profits.

 

[Spamature]

Hmmm indeed. That is gross profit margin. It does not include the cost of building out their network. You want to speculate about what that stuff costs? Sheesh!

You can always count on Marxists to distort a company's financial reports in their feverish attempts to stamp out its profits.

That is a separate issue. Also the buildout cost would be split amoung all the services carried by the network. Video and phone both use it too.

 

[Lukey]

That is a separate issue. Also the buildout cost would be split amount all the services carried by the network. Video and phone both use it too.

No it isn't - they don't "net" 97% like you tried to suggest.

 

[Spamature]

No it isn't - they don't "net" 97% like you tried to suggest.

They do when it comes to the cost of providing that service over their infrastructure.