Obama Backs Net Neutrality (was Obama Backs Government-Run Internet)

and am severely disappointed in you SO You even changed the name of the thread, when threads are suppose to carry the actual title of the news article which this one did... I thought that was a T and C violation.....

this x10

and am severely disappointed in you SO You even changed the name of the thread, when threads are suppose to carry the actual title of the news article which this one did... I thought that was a T and C violation.....

When headlines are outright lies, even if reflecting the headline of a source, we have changed those in the past. It just hasn't been often enough where most would notice it.


thesaneone -- sorry, I accidentally hit edit, rather than quote/reply on your post.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

A private network is a dictatorship. Trust me, if you like it here don't go ruffling feathers. I have butted heads with the "Administration" a few times. The trick is as long as you can be civil and not bait,troll, or harass anyone you will be fine.


Also i haven't seen SO attack anyone personally. There were comments made but they were not directly stating your stupid.

Hey i guess everyone is entitles to their selective reality

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

That's nice and everything, but I would have told him that I own the site and I can do what I damn well please.

His crying after being caught in lies is distasteful.

originally posted by: TsukiLunar
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

That's nice and everything, but I would have told him that I own the site and I can do what I damn well please.

His crying after being caught in lies is distasteful.

I lied about nothing, and your posts are off topic and continue to be personal attacks......I guess we dont need moderation on this thread ...

Now that we understand the idea of re-classifying the "internet" to common carrier status, what's going to prevent "the government" from controlling the "security" issues recently hyped up?

Hopefully those extra measures won't cause any other problems.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

My apologies. I was under the impression I was commenting on the dishonest nature of the information you have presented in this thread.

Here I'll get the ball rolling again. What exactly do you disagree with Obama about in this situation?

a reply to: hangedman13

eh, I'd argue it would remove profit motive and put money into improving public internet infrastructure.

most of the money you pay to a cable company is pocketed by the executives and shareholders, who have no real reason to want to improve infrastructure because it's hard to get a foothold in a market that has such barriers to entry. (also telecoms collude and make deals on service areas).

originally posted by: TsukiLunar
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Classic. Called out on being dishonest and then claiming victim hood. Well played.

Like Obama is 'honest'

That was rich.

He's a GD politician like Cruz.

a reply to: xuenchen

I think the point of the CCR was to give all the providers a level playing field for equal opportunity and competition between companies...unless i missed something?

What security issues, all the recent hacks?

a reply to: neo96

Irrelevant dig at Obama is irrlevent. Please post information from a more sound standpoint.

originally posted by: shaneslaughta
a reply to: xuenchen

I think the point of the CCR was to give all the providers a level playing field for equal opportunity and competition between companies...unless i missed something?

What security issues, all the recent hacks?

This could affect the "level" playing field maybe:

Washington (AFP) - President Barack Obama said Tuesday the cyber attacks against Sony and the Pentagon's Central Command highlight the need for toughened laws on cybersecurity.

Obama made the comment as the White House unveiled a proposal to revive cybersecurity legislation stalled over the past few years.

Obama says hacks show need for cybersecurity law

Related thread:Obama renews push for cybersecurity law

originally posted by: TsukiLunar
a reply to: hangedman13

So we should allow corporations to have that power instead! It all makes so much sense now.

The fed is America's largest corporation. They act no different than any other, except they consider you working capital.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: angus1745

I am behind him 100 percent on this.

We are not about to become China any time soon. No matter what the idiotic power mad element in the Capital are baying for.

I cant believe intelligent people are actually advocating this......

Are you guys under rocks or something every time this guy comes out with another gov plan that ends in a sh*t storm?

I think its a case of not hating his policies because you hate him.

you know, like logical free thinking people do.

Obama could find a cure for a cancer and offer it free, majority on this board would still find a reason to attack him for it.

Dont believe me?

this post is a good example.

originally posted by: ISawItFirst

originally posted by: TsukiLunar
a reply to: hangedman13

So we should allow corporations to have that power instead! It all makes so much sense now.

The fed is America's largest corporation. They act no different than any other, except they consider you working capital.

Except that there are any number of ways in which the two are different. Your simple deconstruction fall on flat ears.

The internet is warming at an alarming rate due to man made carbon emissions. We have to take immediate drastic measures to prevent global internet climate change.

Citizens in places like Cedar Falls weren't happy with the internet access available to them by the large ISP's, so they decided as a community that they could do better and they did. The large ISP's didn't like that and lobbied state governments to pass laws to make that illegal. Why would the state care how it's citizens access the net? Why can't a group of citizens come together and work something out between themselves without the government dictating the terms? I thought a lot of the posters here are all about getting the government out of our lives, but from what I've read here, people are fine with it as long as it doesn't have Obama's name attached to it.

This "government-run internet" people are complaining about isn't some bloated bureaucratic federal program. This is about towns and cities setting up faster, more reliable, and most importantly cheaper internet access for it's citizens, and the various state governments telling them no. Nothing more. If a company isn't willing or able to meet it's customer's needs, then someone else will step up and fill that gap. Unless of course it's prohibited by state law which is what Obama is against.

originally posted by: thov420
This "government-run internet" people are complaining about isn't some bloated bureaucratic federal program. This is about towns and cities setting up faster, more reliable, and most importantly cheaper internet access for it's citizens...

Think of it more like municipal water and sewer.

It requires the Federal Government to step in, using Telecommunications Act Common Carrier laws/rules already on the books, to prevent cable and telco monopolies from stopping municipal Internet -- which has been accomplished in countless cities/counties across the country.

my entire problem with this whole thing is that this president is for it. I do not trust this administration or anything it does and i sure don't want them to get their claws in the internet anymore then what they already do. The internet is one of the few places one can search for info and have an honest debate. I sure as hell don't want the govt to dig their nails any deeper then it already is. I do not trust this govt period, republican or democrat, that is my biggest problem with this whole thing.

originally posted by: CB328
I can't believe the ignorance and stupidity in this thread. Allowing more local competition will drive down prices, just like it did for long distance when the government made the big carriers allow other companies to access their infrastructure.

It's not "government run" it's the government opening up markets for new businesses, which is nothing like Obamacare.

Hopefully this passes so I don't have to keep paying $45 a month for slow internet.

Yeah the ignorance and stupidity is showing.

The first paragraph says it all.

President Obama will travel to Cedar Falls, Iowa, on Wednesday to tout the ability of local governments to provide high-speed Internet to their residents.

That doesn't have jack snip to do with business being competitive.

The means the government providing a corporate product.

Lets follow that up with this:

"Laws in 19 states—some specifically written by special interests trying to stifle new competitors—have held back broadband access and, with it, economic opportunity," the White House wrote in a fact sheet. "Today, President Obama is announcing a new effort to support local choice in broadband, formally opposing measures that limit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadband infrastructure, including ownership of networks."

The US goverment doesn't like competition in the least.

They created the federal reserve.

They created SS.

They created medicare/medicaid.

ALL THAT KILLS competition.