Obama's so called "Net Neutrality" was a Big Fat Lie. Not Neutral at all.

Net Neutrality is a horrible law. Look past all the leftwing screaming and the death threats, the end isn’t coming; yes, humans will die, but not because of ending Net Neutrality. The law is flawed, clearly biased; it gives distinct advantage and power to an exclusive segment of the Internet industry, what is called the “edge” providers.  Google, Facebook, Twitter, you get the picture.

Know this; Net Neutrality is not neutral; it is not neutral at all.  It is a reasonable argument that the choice of its name was a tactical lie. And the masses of ignorant Americans, led by a shallow and often times worthless press, lapped it up.

In my informal surveys I find very few people that have a clue what Net Neutrality is all about; most articles I’ve read in the mainstream press are superficial and talk generalities in ways that support the lie of neutrality.  It’s pathetic.

Where to Start

Proponents of Net Neutrality talk about protecting against “throttling” and blocking and censorship. But they stop there, by an large they don’t explain any details, I will.

Blocking and Censorship

First off, I agree, blocking and censorship are big concerns, very big concerns. These are fundamental. Corporations do not have the right to usurp the principles of our country. They do not have the right to censor or control the subjects of open forum content.    … Hear, Hear! Human rights exceed corporate objectives and interests, always.  That’s how I see it.  

Throttling

That said, the throttling issue is way over hyped, Wow, just think a little past the basics here. Why wouldn’t I want the opportunity to trade speed for cost? Why is that so important? It’s not! This is mass propaganda, likely from the leftwing tech giants.  It’s over hyped and incredibly effective brainwashing. To witness such stellar mind control is scary to anyone that uses his or her brain. 

 

Misunderstood and poorly considered by many people (almost everyone I’ve asked). As far s I am concerned, the idea of controlling speed or providing preferential speed from the ISP is not a big concern. It wasn't to people back in 2015 when the rules went into effect either.  So why is it such a big concern now? Brainwashing, that is all.

So let’s get to the details of Net Neutrality, the details that matter.

Who was Governed by Net Neutrality?

The Internet is composed of two principle components the “access point” and the channels to content, called the “edge”. 

The access point is the business of “Internet Service Providers” or “ISPs”.  Large ISP's like Comcast and local service providers like Bend Broadband in Central Oregon, my ISP.

The other component of the Internet is the “edge” companies, where you land when you hit the Internet, Google for instance is my home page, That is the first edge of the internet for me. Twitter, Yahoo, Facebook. These are edge companies too, many others. 

 

As for principles of Net Neutrality Think about this, it’s all over the news. These companies have been known to censor, block, throttle and much worse. They can do so because Net Neutrality rules for the most part do not apply to them, only the ISPs are covered by the Net Neutrality regulations. That is wrong.

There it is the belly of the lie. It might come as a shock to you, after all these companies were such vocal supporters of the law.

They lie, they cheat, they deceive, they manipulate, they use psyops tactics to manage you. What more do the techno corporatist  have to do to get you to stop listening to them?

Think Outside The google ™

This is what is relevant, who is and who is not governed; others will talk about Title Two and the Communications Act of 1934 bla bla. Bla. It is all smoke, irrelevant smoke. The idea that the Internet be governed by laws that originated 85 years ago is fodder for fools. 

The Internet needs to be looked at for what it is, now in todays world with an eye towards tomorrow’s potential. Getting hung up on what laws from the past should apply indicates you’re dealing with the wrong people. We must stop the thinking of the past and reanalyze the methods of the past. 

Future Planning

I believe that the Internet does need to be regulated; but there is no immediate rush, just as there wasn’t anything pressing back in 2015 when Net Neutrality was imposed. A measured reasoned and fair set of rules applied to all would not be detrimental in my opinion. Speed options with competitive pricing would be great too.  

Unfair, unbalanced and patently biased, the old Net Neutrality rules, that is bad, bad for the Internet and for society future itself. 

Regulations must be done in an even handed way. Full transparency is possible today and the society should have access to these discussions. The full light of day will keep the fascists away.  

Potpourri: Environmentalism, Obamacare and high school seniors

United Nations environmental figure reveals new goal

Its enemies dislike capitalism in great part because it is based, generally, upon people doing what they want when they want to, and the United States, even with this current infection of liberalism/progressivism, stands as a grand tribute to the blessings of capitalism. For some 150 years the United States’ capitalist economy has achieved what other nations and economic models dreamed of and promised, but never came close to.

Monarchs, dictators and other leaders dislike capitalist liberties, preferring to limit the freedom of their subjects. They are much easier to control that way. But that control produces harmful limitations.

Environmentalism is a great enemy of capitalism, not because of its ultimate goal so much as its irrational methodology, which has done so much damage to our nation.

Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, made an interesting admission, at a news conference last week in Brussels. She said that the goal of her convention is not to save the world from ecological calamity. That goal is instead to destroy capitalism.

"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution," she said, as reported by Investors Business Daily.

Bloomberg News, reporting on comments made by Ms. Figueres in an interview, wrote that China, in contrast to the U.S., is able to implement policies “because its political system avoids some of the legislative hurdles” other countries have. Or in other words, “Damn those freedom-loving capitalists!”

Environmentalists hope that a new international treaty will be approved at the climate change conference in Paris later this year. Environmental goals will be much easier to achieve if all nations sign on to the U.N. plan and agree to beat their citizen-subjects into submission, no matter how much unnecessary pain and suffering that entails.

It should be clear why the United Nations wants to kill capitalism, since that is the source of America’s ability to resist that power-hungry organization’s efforts to become a world government.

The U.S. needs to abandon the United Nations.

Obamacare co-ops going broke

Writing for The Daily Signal online, Melissa Quinn reported that after receiving $2.5 billion from the federal government, most of the 23 nonprofit insurance companies created under the Affordable Care Act are going broke. If they have to shut their doors, taxpayers will be responsible for an average of roughly $108 million for each of them.

The Daily Signal reported that leading insurance rating firm A.M. Best found that all but one of the co-ops experienced operating losses through September 2014. “A.M. Best is concerned about the financial viability of several of these plans,” the report states. The exception is Maine Community Health Options, which received $132.3 million from the government.

State requires students to pass citizenship test to graduate

Here’s an idea that deserves to be copied by the other 49 states and the District of Columbia. Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican, signed a law into effect last week that requires high school students to pass the same test immigrants must pass to become citizens in order to graduate, the first such law.

“Why is such a requirement thought to be necessary?” you may ask. Is there a rationale for why existing Americans should know less about their country than immigrants wanting to become Americans?

Consider that a survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center in 2011 found that “just 15 percent of Americans could correctly identify the chief justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, while 27 percent knew Randy Jackson was a judge on “American Idol.” Only 13 percent knew the U.S. Constitution was signed in 1787. And just 38 percent were able to name all three branches of government.”

To pass, students would have to correctly answer just 60 of 100 questions. Here are some examples:

·      How many amendments does the U.S. Constitution have?

·      If both the President and the Vice President can no longer serve, who becomes President?

·      Under our Constitution, some powers belong to the federal government. What is one power of the federal government?

                  To provide schooling and education

                  To issue driver's licenses

                  To make treaties

                  To build roads

·      Under our Constitution, some powers belong to the states. What is one power of the states?

·      Who was president during World War I?

The sponsoring organization, Civics Education Initiative, hopes all 50 states will be mandating the test by the 230th anniversary of the U.S. Constitution on Sept. 17, 2017.

Now the government wants to control the Internet

The Internet is one of the most successful modern creations, but whenever something is successful, the control freaks in Washington get all excited.

Under a scheme referred to as “Net Neutrality,” the Internet will be declared a “public utility” and the FCC then gets to decide what Internet service providers can charge and how they operate. Less freedom; higher costs: What’s to like about this? Let your Congressional Representative and Senators know you oppose Net Neutrality before the vote scheduled for February 26.

Will GOP Led House Overturn FCC’s Power Grab Of The Internet?

Will GOP Led House Overturn FCC’s Power Grab Of The Internet?
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

This week the Federal Communications Commission took the first step in taking control of the Internet by the US Government. Their “Net Neutrality” regulation tromps all over the U. S. Constitution and is a slap in the face of the US Courts, which, earlier this year, in very clear terms, told the FCC that they (the FCC) do not have the authority to regulate the Internet.

The fact that it is NOT LEGAL would stop most agencies from boldly forging ahead with plans to grab as much power as is possible for an already near omnipotent government that is out of control and bordering on tyranny.

For nearly 30 years of my adult life I toiled in the broadcast industry. Every day of those years I was conscious of the Federal Communications Commission staring over my shoulder constantly. I knew that the continued existence of my job, and the business for which I worked, depended upon the whim of the commissioners, or as we would, from time to time refer to them -- the “Commissars” of the FCC. As far as a broadcaster’s job was concerned and the license of the broadcaster and the broadcast station was concerned – THE FCC WAS GOD! An infraction of their rules could and, more often than not, could/would mean a gut-wrenching fine and the revocation of a broadcast station’s license.

Lifting the license of a station means that station would go dark, off the air, out of business. Your professional life was in the hands of an all-powerful federal agency that had the power to regulate with those regulations having the force of law.

Regulations “with the force of law” are just the same as any other law. But there is a HUGE difference that has concerned me for many years. Those regulations were not passed out of Congress and did not require the President’s signature to become law. In effect, an agency that has the power to regulate, such as the FCC and a number of other regulatory agencies within the US government, are little “kingdoms” with their “serfs,” the citizens who have to try to stay within the terms of those laws in order not to be fined, or lose their jobs or licenses.

It concerns me greatly that those agencies even exist. There is no place in a constitutional republic for agencies that can simply make-up laws and enforce them with impunity and with the blessing of Congress.

The Commissars … ‘er ... Commissioners … of the FCC are a government within THE GOVERNMENT. They are a group of un-elected individuals acting as a mini-government. There is something inherently wrong about that. But that is what we have with the FCC and a large number of other government agencies.

In our opinion those agencies, among them the FCC, should be stripped of their power to issue regulations with the force of law. If they feel there is a need for a regulation, then they should make their case before Congress and ask Congress to consider making such a law.

As it is today, the FCC appears to be drunk on power. The commission is controlled by the Democratic Party, which, itself, was inebriated on power right up to November 2nd, 2010 when the people of the US said: “ENOUGH!” But, the FCC, apparently, did not get the message. Or, if they did, they have chosen to ignore it. My money is on the latter.

There is a better than even chance the courts will overturn the “Net Neutrality” regulation passed this week by the FCC. Why ... because it is unconstitutional and outside the mandate of the Federal Communications Commission… period.

Senator Jim DeMint, a Republican of my home state of South Carolina has said he intends to stop the Net neutrality power grab by the FCC. In a statement released by Senator DeMint following the issuance of the Net Neutrality regulation by the FCC this week the Senator said the following:
“The Obama Administration has ignored evidence that this federal takeover will hang a millstone of regulatory and legal uncertainty around the neck of a vibrant sector of our economy.

"Proceeding on its own liberal whims rather than facts, this FCC has chosen to grant itself broad authority to limit how businesses can bring the Internet to consumers in faster and more innovative ways.

“Americans loudly demanded a more limited federal government this November, but the Obama Administration has dedicated itself to expanding centralized government planning. Today, unelected bureaucrats rammed through an Internet takeover, even after Congress and courts warned them not to.

“To keep the Internet economy thriving, this decision must be reversed. Regulatory reform will be a top priority for Republicans in the next Congress, and I intend to prevent the FCC or any government agency from unilaterally burdening our recovering economy with baseless regulation.

"In order to provide the stability businesses need to grow, I will work with my fellow senators to see passage of my FCC Act, which would ensure that the FCC can only use its rulemaking powers where there is clear evidence of a harmful market failure, as well as the REINS Act, which would add the accountability of a Congressional vote before any government agency’s proposed major regulations may be finalized.” (SOURCE)

Senator DeMint is “dead-on.” These agencies need to be cut-off at the knees.

It is clear that as long as the Obama Regime controls the FCC, conservative voices will be seen as a threat. The FCC has made clear its intention to silence those voices, in any way it can, until the elected officials of the people dismantle their agency and relegate it to the dustbin of history.

J. D. Longstreet

Obama’s FCC Threatens Internet Freedom

Obama’s FCC threatens Internet Freedom
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

We have issued this warning until we are nearly blue in the face, yet, somehow, Americans still do not seem to grasp the fact that there is, currently, a stealth attack on the First Amendment by the US government.

We have warned, time and time again, that a free Internet is an immeasurable threat to the liberal-socialists who currently control the US government.

Let me try, once again, to help my readers understand why I am convinced the Federal Communications Commission is such “a clear and present danger” to freedom of speech in the United States.

The Congress bestowed upon the FCC the power to issue regulations, and to make it worse, the Congress declared that the regulations issued by the FCC would have the force of law. Now, what that means is simply this: The FCC CAN MAKE LAW ON ITS OWN! It does not need to wait for Congress to introduce a bill, debate that bill, then vote it up or down, nor wait for the President to sign it into law. The FCC can issue the regulation and set a date for it to become law, and on that date -- IT BECOMES THE LAW OF THE LAND!

The ability to make law that affects everyone in the United States is an awesome power. When that power is abused, or misused, especially when it is misused to serve a form of government other than the constitutional republican government we enjoy in the United States, then it becomes a danger to the citizens of the US.

I am very afraid that is exactly where we find ourselves today with the FCC about to begin regulation of the Internet.

Understand something very important. The US Congress has never given the FCC the right to regulate the Internet! And, in May of 2010, three hundred-plus members of Congress told the FCC to stop their attempts to regulate the Internet. Basically, the Congress told the FCC THEY (The Congress) would regulate the Internet.

For a time, over the summer, the FCC seemed to acquiesce to the demand of Congress. Now, it seems, their acquiescence was only a form of camouflage.

In an article published in the Wall Street Journal December 19th, 2010, Robert M. McDowell, a Republican commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission, says this:

“Still feeling quixotic pressure to fight an imaginary problem, the FCC leadership this fall pushed a small group of hand-picked industry players toward a "choice" between a bad option (broad regulation already struck down in April by the D.C. federal appeals court) or a worse option (phone monopoly-style regulation). Experiencing more coercion than consensus or compromise, a smaller industry group on Dec. 1 gave qualified support for the bad option. The FCC's action will spark a billable-hours bonanza as lawyers litigate the meaning of "reasonable" network management for years to come. How's that for regulatory certainty?” (SOURCE)

Commissioner McDowell goes on to say: “On this winter solstice, we will witness jaw-dropping interventionist chutzpah as the FCC bypasses branches of our government in the dogged pursuit of needless and harmful regulation. The darkest day of the year may end up marking the beginning of a long winter's night for Internet freedom.”

Call it “Net Neutrality,” or whatever you wish, but, as a conservative, I believe Net Neutrality is just the first step in government control of the Internet including censoring speech, which does not toe “the party line” of the Democratic Party.

It is a sad commentary on the state of the nation when its very own government holds the citizens in contempt as the Obama Regime so obviously does.

Another word, which so aptly describes the FCC and the Obama Regime, which spawned today’s version of the FCC, is – TYRANNY!

C. S. Lewis, that great British author (Of whom – I am NO FAN.) once said this: “... Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." (I give Mr. Lewis credit where he deserves it. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day!)

“Net Neutrality,” believe me, will be the beginning of the end for the Internet… at least, as we know it.

The Internet is NOT BROKEN. The government should keep their hands off it. We implore you to not be taken in by the liberal-socialist’s claims that they want the Internet to only be “fair.” If they haven’t already, they will soon be claiming their efforts at regulation of the Internet is all “for the children.” It is the same old smoke screen and the same old propaganda the left uses time and time again to get what they want, which ultimately, is a citizenry that is nothing more that slaves to their socialist form of government.

Look, I know, even before I click on the “post” button, I am going to be accused of “fear mongering” by the left. Allow me to assure you that fear of tyranny is a fear worth “mongering!”

Yes, we live in America. But tyranny is always hovering, just out of sight, waiting for a single moment of weakness to grasp freedom by the throat and throttle it … even in America -- ESPECIALLY in America.

We desperately need the Congress to geld the FCC at the earliest possible moment. Allow the free market to continue to build the Internet into the most successful enterprise on the globe, while, at the same time protecting American’s constitutional right to free speech. After all, the ultimate goal of the FCC, in our opinion, is the squelching of America’s free speech on the Internet -- and on America’s airwaves.

J. D. Longstreet

Obama’s Assault On The INTERNET Has Begun

Obama’s Assault On The INTERNET Has Begun
A Commentary By J. D. Longstreet

******************

It is called “Net Neutrality.” On April 6th, 2010, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the Federal Communications Commission has no regulating authority over how any Internet provider manages its network -- period!

So what IS Net Neutrality? There is as good an explanaiona as I have found at the Wise Geek’s website. You’ll fine it HERE.

The importance of this issue is the protection of freedom. Will the Internet remain free, or will the government regulate it? That is the question. Obama’s minions are salivating at the opportunity to regulate the hell out of the Internet and shut up commentators such as “yours truly.”

The courts told the FCC this week to “stand back,” and keep their hands off the Internet. But, do not think, for one second, they are about to allow a little thing like the law to get in the way of a take over of the Internet -- not for one second. Already, they are looking at regulating the Internet as a public utility.

Look, we warned and warned and warned that Obama’s Marxist buddies in the FCC and the Congress would come after free speech on the Internet. Well, here they come!

Socialist/Marxist/Progressive Congress persons and Senators are scrambling to get in line to do fulfill Obama’s wish to control the Internet and the free speech on it. They can see the Mid Term Election looming on the distant horizon of November and they know they have limited time to strangle free speech on the Internet with their Marxist chains. Think I’m blowing smoke? Think again. They are vowing to do whatever is necessary to see that the Federal Communications Commission is handed control over providers of Internet services.

“In the long run, we may need a new legal and regulatory framework for broadband,” said Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), chairman of the Commerce Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet. “I know the Congress did not intend for cable and telephone broadband Internet service providers to fall outside the authority of the FCC to protect consumers.”

Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), a senior member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, later said the court’s decision “must not be the final word.” Markey went on to say that he would: “continue to work with my colleagues in Congress to provide the commission any additional authority it may need to ensure the openness of the Internet for consumers, innovators and investors.”

Obama’s cohorts have run into a wall of resistance, however from the republican side of the aisle. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas said: “I hope the FCC Chairman will now reconsider his decision to pursue expanded commission authority over broadband services in current proceedings before the agency.”

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee said: “the 1996 Telecommunications Act explicitly directs the government to “preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by federal or state regulation.”

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, appointed by Obama with net neutrality as his top priority, has indicated he will try to reclassify broadband in the communications statute passed by Congress in 1996 to broaden the FCC’s authority over the service.

There is a MUST READ article concerning this topic at “The Hill.” We encouraged you to read it and digest it. You will find it HERE.

The dems will certainly claim this new power grab is to “protect the citizens” from the big corporations. You can see it coming. Don’t fall for it. It is, as we say, a power grab. The new socialist government in America is bound and determined to control the Internet. It scares the hell out of them -- and with good reason.

The government controls the press in America today. The Mainstream Media may have voluntarily given themselves over to control of the government, but -- in the long run -- it makes no difference. Because, for the first time in America, we have a government controlled mainstream media.

On the other hand the citizen journalists on the Internet are disseminating the news, unedited and unfettered, and it has become an effective weapon against the socialists/marxists controlling the American government today.

Obama’s government MUST crush the Internet and they can, and WILL, do it through the FCC unless they are stopped.

J. D. Longstreet