Republicans are bound and determined to prove that with regard to Net Neutrality they are complete bone heads. Consider that the new Speaker of the House, speaking in front of the “Send your Money To Jesus” association, said that he will basically go to his grave attempting to make sure that big ISPs own the Internet.
He said that if he can’t override the new rules, he’ll cut FCC funding. If that doesn’t work he’ll “continue railing” against a “government takeover of the Internet.” Again, if you haven read any of my takes on Net Neutrality, calling Net Neutrality provisions a government takeover of the Internet is like calling the First Amendment a government takeover of speech.
(Original article here at the ever wonderful arstechnica.com.)
Is there any wonder which powerful lobbies are at work and who’s pockets are being lined here?
I cannot for the life of me fathom the bizarre IRRATIONAL thinking that causes this guy to assert that “freedoms are now under attack by power structures in Washington populated with regulators who have never set foot inside a radio station or television studio.”
Pardon me? Has he even read the FCC document?
Take note. Whenever these people talk about Net Neutrality, all they do is preach about the regulatory bogeyman. They never discuss in any detail whatsoever what Net Neutrality actually means. If they did, they’d have to explain just how rules that essentially say there will be no tampering with the Internet are somehow restricting freedom. The Republicans are spewing some serious Orwellian double-speak on this one.
In a nutshell they are saying that the only people who should regulate the Internet are the people who own the wires.
Lovely. We all know how well that works. Take me back to the old days when AT&T dictated the telephone network with an iron fist that only allowed their devices on the network. Rotary dials. No answering machines. A choice of colors as long as it’s beige or black.
His speech was full of crap about god, yes. It appears Jesus is not in favor of Net Neutrality as well. Jesus is on the side of Time Warner, Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, ETC. Hmmm…. maybe these zealots see the Internet as some sort of modern Tower of Babel and feel it is their job to knock it down for god. Can’t have us pesky humans talking to one another, now can we?
Not only was Jesus’s position on the matter made clear, the speaker’s speech was full of out and out lies like:“…’Network neutrality,’ they call it. It’s a series of regulations that empower the federal bureaucracy to regulate Internet content and viewpoint discrimination. The rules are written vaguely, of course, to allow the FCC free reign…”
There is absolutely nothing in the FCC’s Net Neutrality rules that even mentions controlling content other than to say it should all be treated as equal! It’s clear this moron is utterly clueless on this issue, or worse he just doesn’t care and it’s a convenient scapegoat/distraction from other issue, like, how are those spending cuts coming eh?
What is the FCC actually proposing in the 170 page document?
i. Transparency. Fixed and mobile broadband providers must disclose the network management practices, performance characteristics, and terms and conditions of their broadband services;
ii. No blocking. Fixed broadband providers may not block lawful content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices; mobile broadband providers may not block lawful websites, or block applications that compete with their voice or video telephony services; and
iii. No unreasonable discrimination. Fixed broadband providers may not unreasonably discriminate in transmitting lawful network traffic.
You can get the full document here.
That’s what Jesus is angry about. That will somehow limit our freedom. This is an assault on free enterprise.
It should be clear from this that religion has no place in discussions concerning Net Neutrality. Putting Net Neutrality in the context of religiion is absurd at best. Based on this display, my confidence in this new speaker is worse than my confidence in the last one and that says a great deal.
He even called Net Neutrality “The Fairness Doctrine for the Internet.”
This was an absolutely disgusting performance.
Net Neutrality is a technical issue which I guess means you can say anything you like to an ignorant audience.