Obama Admn FCC votes to end Net Neutrality. More lies from O-twink

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/05/15/fcc-approves-plan-to-allow-for-paid-priority-on-internet


 

[Soul Crusher]

"I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more than any other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists — and won. They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president."
 
- Barack Obama, Speech in Des Moines, IA 
November 10, 2007 
 
Tom Wheeler, ex-lobbyist for cable and wireless industry, and the current Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission was appointed by Barack Obama in November 2013. During Barack Obama's presidential campaign Wheeler spent six weeks in Iowa aiding his campaign efforts and went on to raise over $500,000 USD for both of Obama's campaigns.

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/15/fcc-net-neutrality_n_5331278.html



 

[Soul Crusher]

Obama is as corrupt as it gets  - evidence - not one lib will defend this

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/10/7185933/fcc-should-reclassify-internet-as-utility-obama-says

[Shockwave]

This is bad.... ive been watching this one.... this isnt good.

Say goodbye to freedome of information as we know it.... unless youre going to pay all the different telecom companies to give access to your website.

This is goinf to cripple tons of small business' ran on the internet, as well pretty much ejd the idea of anyone putting up information free to access..

Horriblr, horrible idea.... de facto cencorship via corporation.

[Soul Crusher]

This is all about Obama trying to choom his way to more control over the web.  F him eternally - worst pos ever in my lifetime to hold office

[Shockwave]

This is all about Obama trying to choom his way to more control over the web.  F him eternally - worst pos ever in my lifetime to hold office

Nah, its about corporate ownership of cyber real estate.

Its a way for companies to lay claim to the intentet, to partition it up and sell it off like real estate. Dont have the money to both create your website AND pay the telecom companies a premium to allow ebd users access to it? Sorry, youre out of luck.

Just another way for the Telecom giants to take even more control over the frontier that is cyberspace. Now they get to decide which websites are going to be accessible and how much its going to cost.

Running an Ebusiness will no longer just be the startup cost of building and maintaining the website, now theyre going to have to pay the Telecom giants to allow their site to even be visited by end users.

Want total access for everyone?
Gotta pay them all the Telecom companies.

Oh wait, service too slow? Gotta pay extra for EACH telecom company to speed up access, which will NEVER equal the amount a major company like Costco or Walmart can pay.

Telecom companies dont like your politicial messags? Well, now they dont have to allow access to your website.

Same shit North Korea does, only companies calling the shots instead of Dear Leader.

Its bad, and itll fundamentally change the way the internet functions. Say goodbye to the internet being the last true forum for freedom of speech and freedom of information, that ship has sailed. Now itll be freedom of speech and info to the highest bidder.

[The True Adonis]

This is bad.... ive been watching this one.... this isnt good.

Say goodbye to freedome of information as we know it.... unless youre going to pay all the different telecom companies to give access to your website.

This is goinf to cripple tons of small business' ran on the internet, as well pretty much ejd the idea of anyone putting up information free to access..

Horriblr, horrible idea.... de facto cencorship via corporation.

Uh, that is the opposite of what Obama wants to do. 

[The True Adonis]

Nah, its about corporate ownership of cyber real estate.

Its a way for companies to lay claim to the intentet, to partition it up and sell it off like real estate. Dont have the money to both create your website AND pay the telecom companies a premium to allow ebd users access to it? Sorry, youre out of luck.

Just another way for the Telecom giants to take even more control over the frontier that is cyberspace. Now they get to decide which websites are going to be accessible and how much its going to cost.

Running an Ebusiness will no longer just be the startup cost of building and maintaining the website, now theyre going to have to pay the Telecom giants to allow their site to even be visited by end users.

Want total access for everyone?
Gotta pay them all the Telecom companies.

Oh wait, service too slow? Gotta pay extra for EACH telecom company to speed up access, which will NEVER equal the amount a major company like Costco or Walmart can pay.

Telecom companies dont like your politicial messags? Well, now they dont have to allow access to your website.

Same shit North Korea does, only companies calling the shots instead of Dear Leader.

Its bad, and itll fundamentally change the way the internet functions. Say goodbye to the internet being the last true forum for freedom of speech and freedom of information, that ship has sailed. Now itll be freedom of speech and info to the highest bidder.

Obama supports Net Neutrality. I think you guys have no clue what you are talking about.  If you are worried about the above, you should support Obama.

Republicans want the tiered internet and has always been so.  You have it wrong.

[The True Adonis]

Nah, its about corporate ownership of cyber real estate.

Its a way for companies to lay claim to the intentet, to partition it up and sell it off like real estate. Dont have the money to both create your website AND pay the telecom companies a premium to allow ebd users access to it? Sorry, youre out of luck.

Just another way for the Telecom giants to take even more control over the frontier that is cyberspace. Now they get to decide which websites are going to be accessible and how much its going to cost.

Running an Ebusiness will no longer just be the startup cost of building and maintaining the website, now theyre going to have to pay the Telecom giants to allow their site to even be visited by end users.

Want total access for everyone?
Gotta pay them all the Telecom companies.

Oh wait, service too slow? Gotta pay extra for EACH telecom company to speed up access, which will NEVER equal the amount a major company like Costco or Walmart can pay.

Telecom companies dont like your politicial messags? Well, now they dont have to allow access to your website.

Same shit North Korea does, only companies calling the shots instead of Dear Leader.

Its bad, and itll fundamentally change the way the internet functions. Say goodbye to the internet being the last true forum for freedom of speech and freedom of information, that ship has sailed. Now itll be freedom of speech and info to the highest bidder.

Here Shockwave and Soul Crusher:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/net-neutrality

Seriously, how did you guys get it so wrong?  I have seen most Republicans totally wrong on this subject and you both are as well.  Why is this the case?

[Archer77]

Obama supports Net Neutrality. I think you guys have no clue what you are talking about.  If you are worried about the above, you should support Obama.

Republicans want the tiered internet and has always been so.  You have it wrong.

Big problem is he wants to put the internet under the jurisdiction of the FCC. And if you think the FCC wont regulate content you're crazy.

[The True Adonis]

Big problem is he wants to put the internet under the jurisdiction of the FCC. And if you think the FCC wont regulate content you're crazy.

Not a problem at all.

What I am concerned about is the stupidity regarding this subject.  They all have it backwards.  If Soul Crusher actually read the article he would see that Republican lawmakers want to end net neutrality whereas Obama and the Democrats want to preserve it, keeping the internet free from tiered service.

How can we re-educate them here?  Seriously, Shockwave and Soul and others, you have it backwards and don`t even realize it.

[The True Adonis]

Man, I am worried because I think this issue is too difficult to grasp for most (though it shouldn`t be).

Here, I will lay it out for people who don`t understand:


Obama and Democrats=Free Internet, Net Neutrality, No barriers to access, No Tiered service.

Republicans and Morons=Pay by site, End Neutrality, Barriers to access, Tiered Service, Bandwidth restrictions, Do whatever ISP`s want

[Archer77]

Not a problem at all.

What I am concerned about is the stupidity regarding this subject.  They all have it backwards.  If Soul Crusher actually read the article he would see that Republican lawmakers want to end net neutrality whereas Obama and the Democrats want to preserve it, keeping the internet free from tiered service.

How can we re-educate them here?  Seriously, Shockwave and Soul and others, you have it backwards and don`t even realize it.

Net Neutrality is good. As you said the Republicans want to end it.  However, FCC involvement is not so good.  Under ideal circumstances Id prefer Net Neutrality without interference from the FCC. I wonder if this is a faustian deal.

[The True Adonis]

From today:

[The True Adonis]

Its so bad really.  I see it on tons of sites where the Republicans have either no clue what Net Neutrality is or have it totally backwards.

This is one thing Obama is trying to protect and everyone should support him on.

[The True Adonis]

[The True Adonis]

[ Invalid YouTube link ]

[240 is Back]

This is all about Obama trying to choom his way to more control over the web.  F him eternally - worst pos ever in my lifetime to hold office

I'm fairly certain the Repub house (and soon to be House Senate) will stop him on this.

[Shockwave]

Not a problem at all.

What I am concerned about is the stupidity regarding this subject.  They all have it backwards.  If Soul Crusher actually read the article he would see that Republican lawmakers want to end net neutrality whereas Obama and the Democrats want to preserve it, keeping the internet free from tiered service.

How can we re-educate them here?  Seriously, Shockwave and Soul and others, you have it backwards and don`t even realize it.

the last information i read was on the bill the FCC was going to vote on was to END net neutrality and was being lobbied by thr main telecom companies to give them the ability to control sale and meter access to the internet.

Unless this is a different issue, in which case i could be way off.

[Shockwave]

Cmon adam, i want more than a .gov propaganda article full of rhetoric and a video of Obama talking. I want to see the actual words of the legislation being voted on.

[The True Adonis]

I'm fairly certain the Repub house (and soon to be House Senate) will stop him on this.

No, the opposite is true.  Morons on like Ted Cruz want to end Net Neutrality.

http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net_neutrality

[The True Adonis]

Cmon adam, i want more than a .gov propaganda article full of rhetoric and a video of Obama talking. I want to see the actual words of the legislation being voted on.

Republican Morons have a history of this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/09/business/media/09broadband.html

House Votes Against ‘Net Neutrality’

[The True Adonis]

Cmon adam, i want more than a .gov propaganda article full of rhetoric and a video of Obama talking. I want to see the actual words of the legislation being voted on.

You have grasp of the issue somewhat, you just have the players mixed up.  You guys should be supporting Obama for wanting to preserve Net Neutrality and against the Republicans, Ted Cruz and anyone else trying to do away with it.

Example:

 "Representative Lee Terry, a Nebraska Republican, said during the debate that supporters of the F.C.C.’s order wanted “to give the F.C.C. power over business plans,” by restricting the ability of broadband service companies to offer tiered service, for which customers pay based on the amount of Internet bandwidth they use.

Just as a customer at a fast-food restaurant pays more for a large Coke than for a small one, Mr. Terry said, Internet companies should be free to charge customers more if they consume a greater amount of bandwidth because of heavy use of features like streaming video."