A quick summary for the new readers, from June 19,
Julius Genachowski is a pawn of Marxist Robert McChesney. (did you ever notice how the Marxist groups always name themselves misleadingly? Like McChesney's group Free Press, which is dedicated to the destruction of a free press). They appointed the total tool Mark Lloyd (who vociferously praised Hugo Chavez) as Chief Diversity Officer. Doesn't this guy realize Chavez arrests people like him? Guess not. He figures he'll do the arresting. Tyrannies are cool if you get to run the gulag, right Mark?The left has been drooling over this idea for at least 10 years - I think I remember reading about this in the 90's. But there's no need for it; ISPs aren't blocking services from any site, it would be economic suicide. The 'net is the wonderful place it is specifically because the Fed.gov has kept its fat, ugly hands off it and private business developed it. I'm sure commies like Genachowski, Michael Copps (FCC Commissioner) and Robert McChesney honestly think the ISPs want to make customers mad, just like they think most food companies want to kill off their customers (S510), and that oil company executives want to kill their own children.
McChesney said in 2008 that net neutrality is just a part of his plan to destroy the capitalist system in the US
"McChesney wrote in the Marxist journal Monthly Review that "any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself." Mr. McChesney told me in an interview that some of his comments have been "taken out of context." He acknowledged that he is a socialist and said he was "hesitant to say I'm not a Marxist.""So since Net Neutality says that the ISPs may not discriminate against any legal 'net traffic (leaving the door open to shutting down any dissenting voices) here's a thought for the ISPs:
Right now, around 2/3 of the Internet traffic is Unsolicited Commercial Email: spam (this article measured 90.4%!). The way I read that statement, all of the filtering and fighting the ISPs are doing to keep spam under control will be illegal. Doesn't that say they have to let the spam flood the world? It's giving the leftists what they want: all legal traffic treated equally. Perhaps an ISP that's connected to the Fed.Gov buildings in the District of Criminals might let them drown in spam. Flood the congressional offices until the aides are demanding they do something. Maybe the congress will get rid of the stupid FCC takeover of the 'net and put the filters back in place.
As much as I hate spam (in my world, spammers should get the death penalty) maybe it would work. I hate spam as much as anyone. I had a web page 20 years ago, when you could put your email address on it and nothing happened. Then I started getting 50 spams a day, then 100, then 150... had to dump that address. But I could put up with it for a while to shut down the FCC.
Let's see ... in the last year, Congress didn't pass a budget. It seems that the Democrats weren't up to it, with a majority in the House and a fillibuster proof majority in the Senate.ReplyDelete
OK, those seem to be the new rules. Let's go with that.
The new Congress should pass a budget one department at a time. Departments that haven't been addressed yet should see a continuing resolution, at last year's budget, but for no longer than six months. Departments that are causing trouble - the EPA, FCC, DHS, etc, should be defunded, until the department rescinds these regulations.
Let 'em do what they want, if they don't care if they get paid or not.
Works for a start. I said a couple of weeks ago, I think the FCC has outlived its usefulness and could be taken apart.ReplyDelete
By refusing to create a budget, though, the congress is reinforcing their uselessness. That's their major constitutional responsibility, and they're afraid to let people see what the budget looks like?
"He figures he'll do the arresting. Tyrannies are cool if you get to run the gulag, right Mark?"ReplyDelete
As V.I. Lenin would define it, the central question of politics is "Who does what to whom?" We seem to be infested with these jackals, especially in the upper echelons of the unelected government consisting of the executive branch alphabet agencies. Want to make a rule? Go ahead, you don't answer to anybody that might be affected by it anyway. It may be illegal but if nobody can do anything about it then you get away with it.
I like Borepatch's idea of selectively defunding executive branch agencies that abuse their power. Checks and balances at work! My oldest daughter had some questions about the checks-and-balances system that was described in her civics textbook. I explained to her that such a system could only work outside of a politically polarized environment. When political ideologies are aligned within the branches, instead of each branch providing a check on the others they instead reinforce each other and create a three-headed ideological tyranny. This is a large part of why there are so many people angry with the .gov right now.
They can't stand having anything outside of their control, can they?
They are not capable of understanding how competition and free markets work. Absolutely incapable of grasping how something that isn't controlled by anyone could work positively.ReplyDelete
It's the same mindset that sees Enron means every business is corrupt, but doesn't see Lenin ordering the starvation of the Ukrainians or Mao ordering the deaths of millions meaning states are corrupt.
"Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely".
Is there a way to email you separately from "comments"?ReplyDelete
Sure email is SiGraybeard at gmail dot com with the usual symbols in place of the substitutes.
Thanks for pointing that out. I thought I had that on the right column - must have accidentally deleted it. I'll go fix that.