Posted by Tina
The new FCC head will deregulate the internet.
During the Bill Clinton presidency, when the public internet was brand new, Republicans and Democrats agreed, the internet should remain free. They worked together to pass the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Members of both parties agreed that the United States would, “preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet . . . unfettered by Federal or State regulation.” Unfortunately, our nation has taken a severe downward turn since then.
After 911 George W Bush became the war president. Faced with an unprecedented enemy he responded as the times seemed to warrant. Once it was determined that the surprise attack was made possible by a wall that separated our intelligence agencies He determined to better empower them by forming the Department of Homeland Security, another federal bureaucracy. His conservative ideas to reform social Security and the economy took a back seat to national security concerns.
Power in politics moved sharply left at an alarming rate during the Obama years. Though we were still technically at war, his leadership was rooted in fundamental transformation of our nation, an effort to destroy the foundations of our country. America didn’t see the reality of his plans, even though Obama openly touted it. After all, who in the land of the free, would ever oppose the ideal of freedom? Who would oppose the notion that all men are created equal and have the right to pursue happiness, unfettered by an overbearing tyrannical government? Our nation was founded by people who had come to America to escape the control and oppression of the king. Over time it grew in strength to become a powerful example of the miracle of freedom, giving birth to a thriving and vibrant middle class and innovation unlike the world had ever seen. Who would vote to destroy that?
As it turns out quite a number of people in America voted for it twice. A number of them can be found in our governments bureaucracy. Following the fundamental transformer’s rise to power, we witnessed emboldened department heads, people who hate freedom and competitive free markets. We know now that they prefer socialism. We know that they prefer redistribution of wealth. We know that they rely on special interest groups and the concept of “the struggle”… a concept that demands an enemy. We know that the enemies designated today are white conservatives, Christians, cops, and corporations. In the last eight or we discovered that what we suspected all along was true, there are people in the bureaucracy that use (misuse) their power to oppress and control our lives. Lois Lerner and her circle of activists at the IRS (Justice Department, OSHA, and ATF) targeted conservative Americans to block their participation in an election cycle, to harass and deny them free speech. We’ve seen conservative speakers run off the stages and disallowed to speak. We’ve watched agitators shout people down and attack them with bottles, rocks, and even guns.
We know that there are representatives in Congress who want the government to “take over” large swaths of American industry and enterprise. The Black Caucus is filled with members who think exactly as Maxine Waters does. In eight years we saw energy sectors controlled and nearly put out of business. We saw the takeover of the healthcare insurance industry. We watched as the middle class disappeared.
We know that billionaire George Soros has used the power of his billions to fund activists: Occupy Wall Street, Ferguson ($33 mil), and both Black Lives Matter and anti-Trump/Never Trump. These organized protests were fueled with his money. Soros denies his involvement but he’s covered by a thin veneer. He funds hundreds of nonprofits that are directly responsible for promoting and funding the activism.
Today another America hating bureaucrat was unveiled (at least to me) in an article about the FCC and Net Neutrality. See the article by Sean Morgan of Breitbart, “FCC Votes to Begin Net Neutrality Repeal,” which informs of the intention to overturn the “Open Internet Order” put in place by Democrat Tom Wheeler’s FCC in 2010. That order reclassified the internet as a public (government) monopoly. A clue to the mindset behind the regulation can be found in an activist quoted by the new FCC Chairman, Ajit Pai. Sean Morgan reports:
During the Chairman’s speech announcing his proposal to end net neutrality, he referenced Robert McChesney, the founder of Free Press, and his group’s wish for the government to monopolize the internet. Pai explained that McChesney openly bragged about taking over the internet. He said, “At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to eliminate the telephone and cable companies. We are not at that point yet. But, the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.”
Robert McChesney even said, “In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles.”
To put McChesney’s influence on net neutrality in context, he was cited 46 times in the Obama net neutrality order.
McChesney…Free Press, another George Soros sponsored activist organization…is boiling over with of ideas to undermine freedom:
He suggested spending $35 billion on federal subsidies for public media outlets. He also proposed creating a journalism branch of AmeriCorps and said it would be a good idea to give each American a $200 news voucher which could be given only to publicly-owned media outlets.
“Advertising is the voice of capital,” McChesney said in a 2009 interview with the Socialist Project. “We need to do whatever we can to limit capitalist propaganda, regulate it, minimize it, and perhaps even eliminate it. The fight against hyper-commercialism becomes especially pronounced in the era of digital communications.”
There’s no way to know how many people working across the vast bureaucracy of the various governmental departments there are. But clearly it only takes a few to undermine our freedoms and set the stage for widespread government control. The Democrat Party has fully embraced the radical left and it’s radical socialist agenda. The two men they chose to run the DNC prove it. See here and here.
This corruption and lurch to the radical left is the reason Donald Trump was elected. It’s the reason Republicans were given control of both houses of Congress over the last two elections. Donald Trump and those he has appointed, are doing their part to reduce government overreach and return power to the people. He’s doing what he can to drain the swamp. For that he has my continued support.
You won’t like it when you find out what you have to pay for productive access. Of course, you’ll be able to gain unproductive access very cheaply, and you can spend the rest of your life waiting for your page to load … if it ever does.
Tina, you really are unconscionably dim. This is only more of ” the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
The rich got rich and the poor, and the middle class, got poorer in the last eight years under your favored policies.
You sing the same tune but where really is the proof? There will always be rich people.
Under Obama’s socialist policies the thing that disappeared is a vibrant middle class.
Meanwhile another groups of socialists just gave Obama over $3 million to speak at the Global Food Innovation Summit in Milan, Italy. Yeah those socialists really know how to sacrifice.
Some pigs are more equal than others.
Don’t blather.
There is only so much bandwidth. If IP’s are allowed to have premium and un-premium traffic, which lane are the poor people going to be in? It is only more of “you can’t play if you can’t pay” … which is fine in Vegas, but if our USPS had been allowed to carry on like that, there would be no “First World”, or there would, but only Great Britain and France would be in it, not us.
The regulation that we’re talking about was not about equality in terms of bandwidth. It was about creating a government monopoly that eventually had the power to rid the world of Matt Drudge and the like.
If we do create regulations they should not help to create any kind of monopoly or fascist control as in, “We need to do whatever we can to limit capitalist propaganda, regulate it, minimize it, and perhaps even eliminate it,” or, “…give each American a $200 news voucher which could be given only to publicly-owned media outlets.”
Fascism, ever heard of it? It lives in your party.
Oh Boy, you have been sold a bill of crap.
Net Neutrally regulations preserve net access to small business, new businesses, blogs, and small players . How would you like it if CNN & MSNBC could control all the news on the internet? How would you like it if bloggers (you!) would be effectively shut out? That is what the new FCC Chairman Ajit Pai wants to do.
We need to preserve Net Neutrally, preserving equal access for everyone.
Wake up and smell the hypocrisy.
The very fact that “net neutrality” was to place the internet under goofernment control raises the question of why goofernment control is needed in the first place and should be treated with great skepticism. The NN kind of goofernment control is similar to that which was used in the old USSR and in Germany in the 1930’s. Those pushing NN are already screaming that Drudge be banned.
Worst words to hear: I’m from the goofernment and am here to help.
Following that statement, the first question should be “Help WHO?”
Amen
That is Amen to Jim.
J Soden. You are so wrong. What makes you think wall street profits are more important that keeping the Internet a level playground?
You are so anti gov and pro big corporation profits you vote against your own family’s future.
All that happened was the Internet was declared a Public utility so a couple of corporations could not create lanes that make sure big money can afford their content to be seen and yours gets buried.
Wake Up!
We The people are suppose to be the gov, not a profit driven corporation
Net Neutrality regulations solved a problem that didn’t exist. It’s always suspicious for me when government does this. The words Net Neutrality were chosen very carefully…it made us all feel warm and fuzzy…protected. However, the intent behind those regulations was not neutrality but a government monopoly.
Those who are in favor of repealing the regulations are not in favor of harming small business and small players or giving advantage to the big companies. They have no desire to block anyone out. They want to encourage investment so small people will be better served.
Prior to the era of Ronald Reagan the (Democrat controlled) FCC had rules in place that insisted on a balance in political reporting. Sounds like a great idea but the effect at local radio stations was boring programming that didn’t sell. Eventually radio stations abandoned political content in favor of cooking shows. The people were not served by the rules; they were shut out. Television maintained “balance” in their political shows by inviting a token representative of the opposition (Republican Party) to join the three Democrat guests and the interviewer. Television is visual. The token got few questions and little air time. It wasn’t a balanced presentation at all but had the illusion of balance. .The people were not served, they were manipulated. During that time Democrats held control of the Congress for forty years until the Gingrich revolution of 1994.
Republicans are in favor of free speech and expression and equal access. As I understand it, new regulations will be written to protect small players, to encourage investment by smaller providers so they have an opportunity to compete and grow.
Pai comes across as a man with an open mind who works with people from both parties and whose only agenda is equal access for all Americans. A good article, followed by an interview with him is here. The writer covers both sides of the argument in the article and asks good questions.
Tina you need help
explain these new regulations…
Go ahead and try
we stopped new regulations you speak nonsense
and I do not mean cut n paste propaganda
Tina, you have no idea what you are talking about, as evidenced by this post, wandering hither and yon, and offering not a single fact to support your prejudice. It’s not a matter of what deregulators want to do. It’s a matter of what 300 years of capitalist history has PROVEN that they will do.
I swear, you live in a world that has never existed … a definition of delusional.
Without government oversight (regulations) internet access will inevitably become monopolized. Access will eventually be controlled by one or two nationwide providers, thus eliminating competition, customer choice, and increased profits to the provider. Nothing wrong with this.
Yes
Nothing changed. The internet is the same. It was simply put as a Public Utility.
What we have here is a Push to allow a few corporations to bully content for profit.
I was being sarcastic when I wrote “Nothing wrong with (AT&T)” having a monopoly on communication services. This would be awful for consumers. However I do have about 300 shares of AT&T that I bought years ago. So my selfish side would love for the price to continue to climb. LOL… I’d have to sell AT&T to afford communication access.
Communication services must have regulatory oversight to ensure a competitive market.
EXCUSE ME?
You are now officially speaking fascism…
#Clueless
I was one of the 4 Million who shut down the last attempt to allow a couple of corporations who had nothing to do with creating the internet control the content. Create lanes where only money gets your content noticed?
ect ect
Someone needs to deprogram this Tea Party Bull
How about a free and open internet?
How many tax dollars went into creating it? Heck even UStream started as a way for families to talk to soldiers overseas.
Sorry but you are not for the people
YOU ARE DEAD WRONG
I Stand Tall in my Statements
Hey TTP,
You talking to me?
Pete
no response to the Post
Sorry if you mistook it.
Answer This.
What changed about the internet after we won the last battle?
Why do you want to have to pay more to get your content seen above the poorer people?
What is your beef with the internet as it is and what are the changes you think will happen and how do they benefit you?