McCain introduces bill to block Net neutrality

[Excrement_Cranium]

Republican strategy is to paint Net neutrality as government 'control' of Internet

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) introduced a bill in the Senate on Thursday that would effectively allow Internet service providers to slow down or block Internet content or applications of their choosing.

The move came the same day as the federal government decided to move forward on an official Net neutrality policy that would prevent ISPs from making those types of decisions.

The FCC's new rules would prevent ISPs, for example, from blocking or slowing bandwidth-hogging Web traffic such as streaming video or other applications that put a strain on their networks or from charging different rates to users.

Full Article Here (http://rawstory.com/2009/10/mccain-net-neutrality/)

No fan of Raw Story... anyway... sounds perfectly conservative to call this trimming big government while pandering to big business.

Fatten the pockets of the fat cats on the backs of the American people? Perfect!

[mountain_rage]

This week, media watchdog Media Matters criticized (http://mediamatters.org/research/200910210026) conservative news host Glenn Beck for what it said was Beck's allegation that Net neutrality is a "Marxist plot," and that the point of Net neutrality is to "control content," a perspective that prompted MediaMatters and other observers to question whether Beck understands the principle of Net neutrality.
In his announcement today, McCain appeared to agree with the notion that Net neutrality represents regulation and control, rather than a lack thereof.
His bill "will keep the Internet free from government control and regulation," McCain said, as quoted (http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/mccain-bill-aims-block-fcc-action-net-neutrality/2009-10-22) by Phil Goldstein at Fierce Wireless. "It will allow for continued innovation that will in turn create more high-paying jobs for the millions of Americans who are out of work or seeking new employment. Keeping businesses free from oppressive regulations is the best stimulus for the current economy."


Clearly they don't know what the hell they are debating. There might be some legitimacy that it will slightly hamper the investment in broadband infrastructure, although this is highly unlikely. If innovation can't keep up with the demand at current price points the prices will just increase. Demand is strong, and people are willing to pay for the service. The harm from not forcing neutrality of the lines is far greater to the economic power of a country. If you start hampering internet content, you will be encouraging start ups like Google, Facebook, Youtube, etc to set up shop in another country that understands the importance of guaranteed access to the lines without unfair hindrance. Especially considering the vested interest of the ISP's running tv and telephone services which are in direct competition to many online offering.

[El Comandante]

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) introduced a bill in the Senate on Thursday that would effectively allow Internet service providers to slow down or block Internet content or applications of their choosing.

First Sarah Palin and now this.... This is a guy who has admitted that he doesn't even know how to use the internet.

This is what happens when AT & T is the 7th largest contributor to your presidential campaign ( $201,438) I guess this favor was "earmarked". McCain has fallen far... :guilty:

[moneoa]

McCain should stick to french fries while his wife sticks to Heinz Ketchup

[Excrement_Cranium]

First Sarah Palin and now this.... This is a guy who has admitted that he doesn't even know how to use the internet.

This is what happens when AT & T is the 7th largest contributor to your presidential campaign ( $201,438) I guess this favor was "earmarked". McCain has fallen far... :guilty:

You know how conservatives cry about "fleecing the American people" through taxes? Taxes that are then evilly redistributed to the American public through loans for education, small businesses and community development; construction and upkeep of infrastructure.

Well, you see, it's only OK to fleece the American people if that money goes into the pockets of Corporate campaign contributors, or companies that these congressman and senators (or former VP) have been employed by or have heavy ties to.

That's fair and balanced.

[don webb]

.

Yep, not one Community Organizer out there ever took a dime from companies that there congressman and senators have been employed by or have heavy ties to.

Hell we're lucky if we can get em to pay their Taxes....:bukkake:

.

[DrewWilson]

I seem to recall some articles in the past that suggested that the Republicans are (paraphrasing) "declaring a war on the internet" by doing everything they can to stop net neutrality.

Totally agree with MR, the good news is that the internet is global. Once telecoms start dictating what content people can access at what speeds, web services and businesses that use the internet will flee the US like the plague. From an economical perspective, this is the last thing the US needs right about now and will increase the amount of dependence on other countries to keep the country afloat. You want web services? You gotta connect to countries like Sweden. Want customer service? Go to India. Want a house to be built, go to Canada. Want to do some banking? Go to Switzerland. The continued outsourceing of US power will increase because of any legislation that outright blocks net neutrality, further gutting any actual importance the country has on the world stage.

Of course, it's a non-partisan issue as the other party will just politely nod their heads since Holleywood is so deeply rooted on the other side of the floor.

Good news is that at least other countries will say, "Thanks."

[mountain_rage]

I seem to recall some articles in the past that suggested that the Republicans are (paraphrasing) "declaring a war on the internet" by doing everything they can to stop net neutrality.

Totally agree with MR, the good news is that the internet is global. Once telecoms start dictating what content people can access at what speeds, web services and businesses that use the internet will flee the US like the plague. From an economical perspective, this is the last thing the US needs right about now and will increase the amount of dependence on other countries to keep the country afloat. You want web services? You gotta connect to countries like Sweden. Want customer service? Go to India. Want a house to be built, go to Canada. Want to do some banking? Go to Switzerland. The continued outsourceing of US power will increase because of any legislation that outright blocks net neutrality, further gutting any actual importance the country has on the world stage.

Of course, it's a non-partisan issue as the other party will just politely nod their heads since Holleywood is so deeply rooted on the other side of the floor.

Good news is that at least other countries will say, "Thanks."

The other worry is that ISP's don't only control their own traffic, but the traffic piggy backing on their network. They could theoretically slow down data from competing ISP's, any international traffic coming in, etc. Basically this is the freedom to totally destroy the internet within the U.S. My statement is in regard to companies that have global reach. Rather than have their main server in the U.S. they will set up outside the U.S. to better be able to support countries without 2 tier internet. By being outside the restricted area, they are only slowed down when they want to send traffic into the U.S.

[El Comandante]

Republican strategy is to paint Net neutrality as government 'control' of Internet

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) introduced a bill in the Senate on Thursday that would effectively allow Internet service providers to slow down or block Internet content or applications of their choosing.

The move came the same day as the federal government decided to move forward on an official Net neutrality policy that would prevent ISPs from making those types of decisions.

The FCC's new rules would prevent ISPs, for example, from blocking or slowing bandwidth-hogging Web traffic such as streaming video or other applications that put a strain on their networks or from charging different rates to users.

Full Article Here (http://rawstory.com/2009/10/mccain-net-neutrality/)

No fan of Raw Story... anyway... sounds perfectly conservative to call this trimming big government while pandering to big business.

Fatten the pockets of the fat cats on the backs of the American people? Perfect!

I just noticed how twisted these people really are. . . It's smoke and mirrors. If you go to the Drudge report the big headline has a picture of Julius Cesar and it says: Julius at FCC wants to "Regulate" Internet.

The actual story it links to is this:

WASHINGTON/CHICAGO, Oct 22 (Reuters) - U.S. communications regulators voted unanimously Thursday to support an open Internet rule that would prevent telecom network operators from barring or blocking content based on the revenue it generates.

The vote came despite a flurry of lobbying against the net neutrality rule by telecommunications service providers like AT&T Inc (T.N (http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=T.N)), Verizon Communications Inc (VZ.N (http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=VZ.N)) and Qwest Communications International Inc (Q.N (http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=Q.N)), which say it would strip them of the ability to manage their networks effectively and would stifle innovation and competition.

The full FCC slate of three Democrats, led by Genachowski, and two Republicans voted in favor of issuing a proposed network neutrality rule for public comment.
But the two Republicans, Robert McDowell and Meredith Attwell Baker, did express concern with the content of the rule, saying they do not share the majority's view that the Internet is showing breaks and cracks and that the government is the best tool to fix it. They also questioned whether the FCC has the legal authority to regulate the Internet network.

http://www.reuters.com/article/regulatoryNewsConsumerGoodsAndRetail/idUSN2237873320091022

It's all very clear now. McCain is in the pocket of AT$T.

[don webb]

I just noticed how twisted these people really are. . . It's smoke and mirrors. If you go to the Drudge report the big headline has a picture of Julius Cesar and it says: Julius at FCC wants to "Regulate" Internet.

The actual story it links to is this:

http://www.reuters.com/article/regulatoryNewsConsumerGoodsAndRetail/idUSN2237873320091022

It's all very clear now. McCain is in the pocket of AT$T.




It’s not just McCain or Republcans who oppose Net Neutrality. Democrats of all stripes are jumping on against it.

When Obama's FCC Diversity Czar has frequently praised Hugo Chavez as a 'role model, and at the same time has been taking over and shutting down radio and tv stations, and other Czars and administration officials openly praising dictators and genocidal communist maniacs as their role models. I have to think twice about this one, maybe three times?

:sad:

Anyway, A letter from 72 House Democrats -- an unusual alliance of Blue Dogs and the Congressional Black Caucus -- warns that the new regulation could stifle innovation and slow the expansion of broadband, presumably by cutting into telecoms' profit margins.

On the politics, the administration has walked into a battle between the Netroots and progressives -- already angry over things like the public option -- and their allies at Google, which is tightly tied to this White House; and parts of labor, conservative Democrats, and some minority leaders, who -- backed by the established carriers -- argue that the policy could slow broadband deployment to underserved areas.

In the background: The Blue Dogs and others may be worried about conservative claims that the regulation is actually an elaborate plot for government control of the Internet.

http://www.publicknowledge.org/pdf/dem-letter-20091016.pdf

[Excrement_Cranium]

I just noticed how twisted these people really are. . . It's smoke and mirrors. If you go to the Drudge report the big headline has a picture of Julius Cesar and it says: Julius at FCC wants to "Regulate" Internet.

The actual story it links to is this:

http://www.reuters.com/article/regulatoryNewsConsumerGoodsAndRetail/idUSN2237873320091022

It's all very clear now. McCain is in the pocket of AT$T.


Thanks for that. Like I said, I don't quite enjoy Raw Story as a source.

[moneoa]

Hey my McCain French fry and Heinz Ketchup joke was funny goddamn it, you all don't know funny from your asses :icon16:

[DrewWilson]

Hey my McCain French fry and Heinz Ketchup joke was funny goddamn it, you all don't know funny from your asses :icon16:

*puts hands in the air*

Don't shoot! I'm laughing now! Hahahaha!

*sweats*