Government

Report: ‘Net Neutrality’ Set to Become New Reality

According to initial reports from the Wall Street Journal, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is set to approve chairman Julius Genachowski’s proposed government regulations to implement a new “net neutrality” plan aimed at blocking internet providers from regulating web traffic:

The rules are expected to bar providers from discriminating against legal Internet traffic and require more transparency. They also would let broadband providers for the first time charge more to companies that want faster service for delivery of games, videos or other services.

Net neutrality has become a contentious issue as worries grow that large phone and cable companies are growing too powerful as Internet gatekeepers. Start-ups and small businesses that rely on the Internet to provide shopping, information or other services to consumers are particularly concerned.

The FCC has wanted to step in and act as an Internet traffic cop, but Congress has never given it clear authority to do so.

“We must take action to protect consumers against price hikes and closed access to the Internet—and our proposed framework is designed to do just that: to guard against these risks while recognizing the legitimate needs and interests of broadband providers,” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said in a blog post this month.

The proposal has split the five-member FCC board. The two Republican members say the proposed rules impose an unneeded burden and will discourage broadband investment.

Mr. Genachowski‘s two Democratic colleagues said his plan didn’t go far enough, particularly on rules covering wireless networks, but agreed to back it anyway.

Now that the proposed regulations are expected to pass, industry representatives and advocacy groups are expected to file a number of legal complaints.

In April, a federal appeals court tossed the FCC’s first effort to enforce net neutrality rules, saying the agency hadn’t justified its authority to act. The current proposal is expected to use a similar argument to the one used in the April case.

In May, the FCC’s general counsel said using a variation on the same argument was “a recipe for prolonged uncertainty” but FCC lawyers now say upon further consideration, they believe their plan will withstand challenge.

In addition to legal challenges, expect a battle in Congress over the new regulations, led by Republican opponents.  GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., posted this video Monday, urging Americans to oppose the new regulations:

Additionally, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, has suggested cutting off FCC funding needed to enforce the new rules and House GOP leaders have planned to hold hearings and propose legislation to block the agency’s proposed new rules.

But Republicans won‘t be the only ones to oppose the FCC’s new proposed rules. While many Republicans denounce the rules as an “interventionist over-reach by an activist federal regulator intent on asserting control over the internet,” a number of Demcorats — including Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn. — complain that the proposed rules are inadequate and will likely continue pushing for more stringent industry regulations.

Comments (185)

1 2 3 ... 5
  • pamela kay
    Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:02am

    This is not only wrong but frightening. Like the EPA the progressives will use both to claim that their hands are tied while thee cram this down our throats. Who can we contact to complain?

    Report Post » pamela kay  
    • bloptop
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:14am

      you’re not thinking clearly THE FCC IS TRYING TO PROTECT NET NEUTRALITY! Its what we’re using right now. The media is being consolidated into the hands of a few giant media corporations (nbc/universal, comcast, verizon, etc) who are trying to dictate what you watch, read etc. Our press is no longer a free press, journalism is dying as a result of these giant tyrannies. WAKE UP

      bloptop  
  • Ghandi was a Republican
    Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:01am

    Make the obama administration and holder liable for damages and the costs of all these legal challenges,,,,
    Take the proceeds and re-distribute it among the Wealthy..

    Report Post » Ghandi was a Republican  
  • Zytek_Fan
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:57pm

    Anonymous has some new work to do.

    Report Post » Zytek_Fan  
    • N37BU6
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:08am

      What’s that? Speed up the process?

      I think this one has to be dealt with in a less self-defeating way.

      Report Post » N37BU6  
    • Better_Red_than_Dead
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 2:18am

      Anonymous is highly supportive of net neutrality.

      Report Post » better red than dead  
    • Better_Red_than_Dead
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 2:20am

      *Just as an addendum, I want to make note that “Anonymous is highly supportive of net neutrality” inasmuch as a completely decentralized and non-organizational organization can (appear to) be.

      Report Post » better red than dead  
  • greggor
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:52pm

    It is time.
    They are done.

    Report Post »  
  • TEXAN1836
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:49pm

    ALL these “what Glenn said” you are missing the point, Its NOT Glenn, I love him, hes my Brother. Its not about Glenn.

    Report Post »  
  • TEXAN1836
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:46pm

    If our leaders have any say in it…its flawed…

    Report Post »  
  • rojotx
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:44pm

    So they think this will let them control the content, I DON’T THINK SO!! This will just cause more loses for “them”! Funny part will be watching the “left” bloggers scream about this if it is done.

    Report Post » rojotx  
  • RusHube
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:44pm

    Glenn said it a long time ago, these politicians are irrelevant. Odictador and company are running this country just Chavez, bypassing the Morons in Congress with legislation that will further their Progressive agenda!! I believe in non-violence, but this s*#t is hard to take. Stay CALMmmmmmmm.

    Report Post » RusHube  
    • bloptop
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:51pm

      you are automatically discredited if you listen to what glenn beck has to say

      bloptop  
    • trilateral-my-ass
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:34am

      Communist bloptop, go back to the USSR.

      Report Post »  
    • Kasey
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 5:45am

      Why do you come to a website that is co-founded by Glenn Beck and tell people that they are wrong for listening to anything he has to say? I don’t like keith olberman or chris mathews, but I don’t go find their websites and make a point to tell people they are wrong. I like the way you troll.

      Report Post » Kasey  
    • booger71
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 10:51am

      you are automatically discredited if you listen to what glenn beck has to say

      Do your own homework, read the bill

      Report Post » booger71  
  • Teen Conservative
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:41pm

    why are we get this CRAP slammed down our throats? the Founders are rolling in their graves.

    Report Post »  
  • bloptop
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:40pm

    nobody should be against net neutrality. it is what is currently in place (FREE OPEN NEUTRAL INTERNET) the FCC is protecting the free internet from giant corporations like verizon and at&t who want to dictate the broadband speeds and censure certain sites and applications that they don’t deem fit. Please people this has NOTHING to do with a “government takeover” its simply putting certain regulations on giant corps who control our media system with powerful lobbyists. SUPPORT A FREE PRESS AND THE DEMOCRATIZATION OF THE MEDIA!!!

    Report Post » bloptop  
    • trilateral-my-ass
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:32am

      Haha, B.S. Communist propaganda, bloptop.

      Report Post »  
    • One1
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:42am

      No BLOPTOP, This is how it starts. What they want is Governmental control. The history of the world is Totalitarism and Dictatorships. America is the exception.

      Report Post »  
    • Better_Red_than_Dead
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 2:13am

      He’s right, though. One of the biggest arguments I see Glenn often make against net neutrality is that “the Internet is fine as it is.” Well, that’s because net neutrality was the de facto way the Internet was run since its inception. Net neutrality has been the law of the Internet for the past several decades, only recently was it challenged. It does not allow the government to control access to content, it prevents ISPs from controlling access to content. It’s basically a law designed to prevent monopolistic behavior, which is antithetical to the free market. I don’t understand why so many, Glenn included, oppose it.

      Consider the merger of Comcast and NBC Universal – what if it happens, and then they decide that Glenn Beck‘s website and The Blaze deserve no bandwith because they don’t like his content, thereby blocking Comcast internet users from accessing his sites. They would be allowed to do that. With net neutrality, they would not.

      Report Post » better red than dead  
    • Vie_En_Ras
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 3:08am

      Aw, gee Red, that’s the thing. Don’t want a monopolistic internet… man, well, everyone seems to be flocking to _insert site here_ because they have the best _insert perk here_, but that’s not fair to this other poor site, so let’s limit bandwidth to that first site so others have to go to the other site just to be fair.

      It would be like you wanting to go to netflix for the new movie that was just released, but since it’s clogged up, they direct you to a different online video site – which might not have the movie you‘re wanting or you don’t have a subscription to… but since you really want to watch it, you’ve got to shell out more money for THEIR subscription because at the moment, they’re the only ones you can get to. But you’re just fine with this. No problem.

      PLEASE. Net Neutrality is a foothold to this sort of hell. First this, then that. Next thing you know it‘s ’we don‘t like what this site’s saying so we‘re directing all browsers to this other site that will ’give them the truth‘ because people don’t know what they want.’

      FCC, GET OFF MY INTERNET!

      Report Post » Vie_En_Ras  
    • Better_Red_than_Dead
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:02pm

      @VIE_EN_RAS

      No. NO. The scenario you described is literally what net neutrality is designed to prevent. What you just described is exactly what the ISP and telecomm industries have been saying they’re going to do once net neutrality is out of the way.

      Again – “net neutrality” was the operating law of the Internet for virtually all of its history. Through the entirety of the 90s and 00s the government enforced net neutrality. Was it a tyrannical hell? No, because that’s not what this law is.

      I do not understand your guys’ arguments against net neutrality. The scenarios you are afraid of are literally what the law is designed to prevent.

      Report Post » better red than dead  
  • Stephen
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:35pm

    We are better then that LIBS R DISGUSTING

    Report Post » Stephen  
  • Darkclown
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:30pm

    Most liberal plans never bear fruit anyway so I wouldn’t worry too much. Liberals aren’t as smart as they think they are. Most think the ‘free market’ is where they hand out government cheese. *<{[=0)

    Report Post » Darkclown  
  • Deda1
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:30pm

    We need to begin disbanding these federal organizations that the Constitution does not give power to and we need to begin to ignore groups like the FCC, EPA and Education Dept.

    Report Post »  
  • ADDICTED TO TRUTH
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:29pm

    Gosh that was scary, I thought I was in agreement with Al Franken there for a minute…..shew!

    Time to write some love letters guys!

    Report Post » ADDICTED TO TRUTH  
  • CaptainSpaulding
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:28pm

    We tried it the little people’s way.

    And we found they can’t be trusted to say the right things.

    So we’re going to be taking those rights until you learn how to handle them.

    Now pay your taxes, we need raises. :)

    Report Post »  
  • TulsaYeeHaw
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:27pm

    Don’t post that crap.

    Report Post »  
    • wash1776
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:41am

      If you are talking to me. MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS.

      Report Post »  
  • TulsaYeeHaw
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:26pm

    Disobey their rules. EnMass. It is nearly time for total civil disobedience.

    Report Post »  
    • AngryMobOfOne
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:22am

      “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed. ”

      ~Justice Field, NORTON v. SHELBY, 1886

      Report Post »  
    • UlyssesP
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:54am

      You have part of an answer. Non-violent electronic virtual revolt.

      Report Post » UlyssesP  
  • Aiser
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:25pm

    I am ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGED!!!!. Think of a secular democracy like Turkey with net neutrality laws. It wasn’t until recently that they un-banned youtube. Barrack Hussein Obama’s liberal agenda has by far been the MOST RADICAL, MOST DANGEROUS president and administration in this nations history. The answer is to privatize not nationalize.

    Report Post » Aiser  
  • Modawg734Blue
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:25pm

    Who gave the FCC the authority to pass a law. Where is this written in the Constitution, Mr. President, Congress makes the Law, period. Seperation of powers. Congress, defund the FCC. Supreme Court, All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. Which part of ALL did the FCC not understand? The first Ammendment is being violated also.

    Report Post »  
    • CatB
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:44pm

      Time for Congress to step up .. before they are completely neutered.

      Report Post »  
    • One1
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:29am

      MODAWG734BLUE
      My setiments exactly. Who elected these fools to anything that they can dictate. We are the Government (The People) and we do not want this. It is not American.

      Report Post »  
  • Darkclown
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:23pm

    Maybe it’s time to re-vamp the FCC. By the way, Mitch is kinda cute.

    Report Post » Darkclown  
    • fred43
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:47am

      i agree we should tell our reps to just not fund the fcc problum gone

      Report Post » fred43  
  • DashRipRock
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:22pm

    Defund the FCC

    Report Post »  
    • neverending
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:50pm

      that would be a start.

      Report Post »  
    • ozz
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 2:38am

      Defund all of those federal acronyms aside from defense and the mail. Just about every thing else is unconstitutional. Let the states be states. Let them legislate the rest and let Americans vote with their feet. Don’t like a law…..no prob..move to a state that does it differently.

      Report Post » ozz  
  • Quad-rip-legic
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:16pm

    I hope that all hackers, do what you can to shut it down and go after those that supported it.

    Report Post » Quad-rip-legic  
    • Better_Red_than_Dead
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 2:14am

      The vast majority of the hacker community supports net neutrality.

      Report Post » better red than dead  
    • Vie_En_Ras
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 3:12am

      If by ‘vast majority’ you mean ‘mother’s basement mouth breathers who think socialism is cool and refer to the holocaust as ‘lolocaust”, SURE, I’ll give you that.

      Report Post » Vie_En_Ras  
    • Better_Red_than_Dead
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:06pm

      Well, that WOULD be the majority.

      Report Post » better red than dead  
  • Modawg734Blue
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:15pm

    Add your comments

    Report Post »  
  • poverty.sucks
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:12pm

    What ever Google and Obama want, block oppose that.

    Report Post » poverty.sucks  
  • CatB
    Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:10pm

    So FCC oversteps and they just get away with it?

    Report Post »  
    • cheezwhiz
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:18pm

      Just like the EPA,
      its the file-pushers running this country

      Report Post » cheezwhiz  
    • squeaker
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:21pm

      YEP…. government can do what ever they want when ever they want…. not a damn thing can be done to stop it

      Report Post »  
    • TXPilot
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:21pm

      “We are the government….we are here to help……We must save you from indecent Conservative opinion……..porn is ok though”………just another nudge towards a totalitarian state.

      Report Post » TXPilot  
    • GeauxAlready
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:39pm

      .
      Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, has suggested cutting off FCC funding

      May I suggest cutting off something else……………

      Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
    • Deutscher
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:40pm

      @tx. I think you are confusing the Fairness Doctrine w Net Neutrality

      Report Post »  
    • CatB
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:40pm

      Can you imagine the outrage if this was the “Bush” FCC?

      Report Post »  
    • jzs
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:46pm

      Please everyone, please, try to understand what net neutrality is. Net neutrality means that no one, not the government, not your service provider, can censor what you can access on the internet.

      The big service providers would love to prevent you from accessing parts of the internet, like China does. But it’s not because they are communist pigs, it‘s because they don’t want you accessing websites run by their competitors. Of course they would let you access any website, but they’d charge you a premium, and perhaps they’d have their computers give your specific request a low priority. So you could still, after having paid the extra amount each month, access any website, but you’d be discouraged from doing so because the access is so slow.

      The is about the freedom of Americans to access, or create and run, any website without additional financial penalty or long waits to visit any website that your provider views as a competitor. It’s about freedom, and whether you want the huge communication companies to reap additional profits with the loss of freedom. This has nothing to do with the government. This has to do with huge companies being able to take your internet access away unless you pay them more.

      Read up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality

      jzs  
    • A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:47pm

      No matter who the Marxists use to create the crisis they’re looking for, let’s not forget that it was the Obama Administration who did it. They are American enemies number one when it comes to the collapse of America – let’s not lose focus when the time comes.

      President Bush, when you “abandoned some of your free market principles”, you set us up even further for this crap. Shame on you.

      The RINOs in office who compromised with the Progressives, you have made a deal with America’s enemies. These elected of the Left had no intention of fulfilling their oaths to the Constitution, and as such, they were not, and are not, to be treated as fellow servants of the People, but as the treasonous snakes they are. You, too, have helped destroy this once great country.

      Allegiance to the Republic, for which our Flag stands.

      Report Post »  
    • nhall729
      Posted on December 20, 2010 at 11:53pm

      LOL, Wow, I couldn’t imagin Bush trying to pull this off!!!!

      Report Post »  
    • nptden
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:00am

      Yep, you got it…..They should get the Karl Marx award this year…for implementing his guidelines of Control though Committees and Agencies. That‘s why he loved ’America’. He saw how to beat the Constitution, and govern. You don’t need a revolution, just control the elections, create departments and of course use the ‘mindless’ beauracracy’.

      Report Post » nptden  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:07am

      @JIZS:In their net neutrality quest, Genachowski and two of his fellow Democratic appointees are working to expand government power into an area where the commission has no jurisdiction, under the guise of solving a problem that does not exist. Meredith Baker, a Republican FCC appointee, summarized the situation well: “We have two branches of government — Congress and the courts — expressing grave concerns with our agency becoming increasingly unmoored from our statutory authority. By seeking to regulate the Internet now, we exceed the authority Congress has given us and justify those concerns.” Incoming House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., has called on the FCC to “cease and desist.”

      This exercise in government opacity and overreach is already damaging the economy. As major telecommunications and Internet service companies prepare to roll out new fourth generation (4G) wireless service for millions of customers, these unelected bureaucratic commissars are recklessly creating doubt about the future value and profitability of those companies’ investments. They are also discouraging future investments that need to be made for the Internet to continue its phenomenal growth.Obama is directing this power grab
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-mW1qccn8k

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
    • jzs
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:17am

      I was just explaining net neutrality, and sent a good link. Want to talk about that?

      I feel kind of silly responding to statements to the effect that President Obama is anti-Christ to be honest.

      Report Post » jzs  
    • A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:17am

      JZS,

      You posted the same thing, pretty much, in the comments section here:
      http://www.theblaze.com/stories/fcc-chair-calling-ceos-to-garner-support-for-net-neutrality/

      To which I responded with:

      JZS,

      “Net neutrality guarantees your freedom to see anything on the net. Lack of net neutrality means that your service provider decides what you can access on the net. Look it up. This is a question of whether we want to be like China, with internet access limited to what the government wants you to see (in our case, service providers) or whether you have the liberty to see whatever you choose.”

      JZS, the Internet is not a right because it costs money to run. Someone worked to put up the lines, and someone works to keep everything going.

      The Internet IS A COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE, and as such, those who own the equipment used to connect to it – i.e. the Internet Service Providers – get to allow or deny access to whomever they like. Freedom means I don’t have to sell you jack, or allow you access to anything I own.

      Further, you don‘t ensure that government doesn’t control the media by allowing them to regulate it.

      It’s about time for those pitchforks.

      Report Post »  
    • davecoolworld
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:18am

      JZS….you are a mole. Do piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining. You are part of the propaganda machine. If you don’t realize this is dangerous, you are very stupid and should not be allowed out alone. There are anti-trust laws to prevent monopolies. This violates the first amendment. The second amendment will make us whole again. Maybe I should say people like you will more holey when the revolution you started comes to a head.

      Report Post » davecoolworld  
    • nhall729
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:21am

      @JZS on the surface your argument seems to make sense, but let me give a try shining some light on it.
      1.)Internet access is not a right. Trying to make it a right will create the same consequences as trying to make any other good a right. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IK44Lcla98
      2.)Wikipedia talks about the academic principle of network neutrality which has significant differences from what the FCC is proposing. One for example is that the FCC is giving itself the power to limit a news stations advertisement income by not allowing the news station to regulate peoples internet access to their own content (this removes their TV viewers incentive to watch their TV shows as they can get everything off the internet). Note this is different than the academic principle in that its the information creator that loosing rights to regulate their content. http://biggovernment.com/smotley/2010/10/27/the-aclu-is-wrong-net-neutrality-is-about-government-control-of-internet-content/
      FCC Commissioner Michael Copps and Art Brodsky have both publicly spoken about targeting Fox news using this tactic.
      3.)We won’t really know what toys the FCC gives themselves to play with until they go ahead and do it. The point is their foot is now in the door and manipulating information on the internet is now just a phone call away for the president.

      Report Post »  
    • davecoolworld
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:25am

      JZS……his icon is karl marx….need I say more?

      Report Post » davecoolworld  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:28am

      When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion – when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing – when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors – when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed. Ayn Rand

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
    • nhall729
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:30am

      @davecoolworld
      I don’t see why you are concluding that JZS is a mole. His point is, I believe incorrect, but one I believe many honest libertarians that do their homework get stuck on. Getting good information on net neutrality is very difficult as I have seen myself.

      Report Post »  
    • joseph Fawcett
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 12:34am

      @ JZS

      It is about the FCC making any rules and taking control of the internet at all. Once done once it will start making more rules and more and before we know it it will not be free access at all to any website it will be goverment controlled. The FCC should stay out of it, and leave it alone, hands off, it regulates the airwaves, not cable or the internet. I believe the less the goverment is in control the better it will be. We are not stupid, and if a company wants to control it unfairly we have the power to correct it, by choosing the competition. We did that with MaBell, I remember when there was only one phone company and then when it got broken up it went to pot. We the consumer did that not the goverment. The FCC should stay out of our lives as much as possible and let us the people decide what we want and don’t want. But it won’t, it sees a power grab right now before the people we have elected to change the course we are on. They will make every effort to take control and we will make every effort to block them too!

      http://www.josephfawcettart.com western artist

      Report Post » joseph Fawcett  
    • General K
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 4:44am

      When are these BOZO congressmen, or someone going to stop this stuff? Bypassing our system is just totally wrong. Someone must find a way. When will this nightmare end?

      Report Post »  
    • Dustyluv
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 6:13am

      Government control of ANYTHING will result in disaster. If you think it’s good, move to Cuba or Venesuela to see how good government control works…

      Abolish the FCC, FDA, EPA and DHS and we will be on our way to a little recovery…

      Report Post »  
    • EP46
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 6:39am

      CONGRESS PREVIOUSLY SAID NO NO NO
      JUDGES SAID NO NO NO
      YET THEY GO AHEAD by using “REGULATIONS”

      DO NOT FUND

      Report Post »  
    • tower7femacamp
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 6:53am

      and Just like the FDA

      Report Post » tower7femacamp  
    • guyperram
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 7:35am

      IZS: I am sorry you believe that is what it is about. Actually it is the first regulation to limit freedom of speech. Shortly hereafter, they will begin the closing down of anything the party in power doesn’t like. Use China as your example. If you need other examples the are very easy to find (Iran, Saudi, Venzeuala.)
      This is the 6th of 7 objectives they need to have in place in order to complete the take over. Once they get away with this, the Republics time is measured, at best, in months.
      Once control is established over their 7th objective, then they need a serious problem (which they have been working on, i.e; QE1, 2, 3.) to occure, causing the bottom up effect, thenthe middle calls out for help, and the top (the controlers of the whole thing) come down and “fix” the problem.
      For examples of this, see Weimar Germany‘s take over by the NAZI’s (perfect example) Cheklosloviaka, Cambodia, etc. This is the tried and proven way to overthrow a government.

      Report Post »  
    • BeckIsNuts
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 8:19am

      JZS, that’s the spin CNN and the other big government apologists are putting on it. Here’s another perspective from the WSJ:

      “Nothing is broken that needs fixing, however. The Internet has been open and freedom-enhancing since it was spun off from a government research project in the early 1990s. Its nature as a diffuse and dynamic global network of networks defies top-down authority. Ample laws to protect consumers already exist. Furthermore, the Obama Justice Department and the European Commission both decided this year that net-neutrality regulation was unnecessary and might deter investment in next-generation Internet technology and infrastructure.

      Analysts and broadband companies of all sizes have told the FCC that new rules are likely to have the perverse effect of inhibiting capital investment, deterring innovation, raising operating costs, and ultimately increasing consumer prices. Others maintain that the new rules will kill jobs. By moving forward with Internet rules anyway, the FCC is not living up to its promise of being “data driven” in its pursuit of mandates—i.e., listening to the needs of the market.”

      Report Post »  
    • mikem1969
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 9:03am

      Once again, a government created orgaanization over steps its bounds and screws businesses. Imagine that.

      Report Post »  
    • Ditto Head
      Posted on December 21, 2010 at 11:01am

      I’d just like to say that, with the exception of a very few, you people are morons. “Net Neutrality” is a GOOD thing! It’s the way the internet has always been, and, will continue to be. It means that ISPs cannot discriminate against content, and charge premiums for access to the most popular sites. Why don’t you dinks do a little research before you go spouting your frenzied, paranoid gobbledygook.

      Report Post » Ditto Head  
    • shortdog24
      Posted on December 22, 2010 at 6:27am

      The Federal Communism Commision.

      Report Post »  
1 2 3 ... 5

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love