Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
September 02, 2014, 08:34:11 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Beemaster's official FACEBOOK page
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: who was behind the FCC over internet coup today?  (Read 3263 times)
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15121


Location: boring, oregon


« on: December 21, 2010, 09:35:03 PM »

in case you were off planet, the FCC took the first steps today to regulate the internet.  this, even after a federal court told them a few months ago that they did not have the authority to mess with the internet.

who was behind it?  bet you can guess before you even read this, but read it anyway.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703886904576031512110086694.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop=

By their friends ye shall know them.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
AllenF
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8119

Location: Hiram, Georgia


« Reply #1 on: December 21, 2010, 09:45:41 PM »

Ya I know who is behind it.  And after they control all media, they will remove all private ownership of most everything.  Then we will depend on big brother for all.
Logged
Tommyt
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 855


Location: TampaBay Fl


« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2010, 05:00:09 PM »

 I copied a small part of the article Of course its the dirty Liar in the white house shoving more things down the throats of Citizens of the USA
 I Pray they find something on him to Rid us of anymore of his destruction of this Great Country

Quote
Over 300 House and Senate members have signed a letter opposing FCC Internet regulation, and there will undoubtedly be even less support in the next Congress.

 The FCC has approved rules that would give the federal government authority to regulate Internet traffic and prevent broadband providers from selectively blocking web traffic. WSJ's Amy Schatz explains what the new rules really mean.
.Yet President Obama, long an ardent backer of net neutrality, is ignoring both Congress and adverse court rulings, especially by a federal appeals court in April that the agency doesn't have the power to enforce net neutrality. He is seeking to impose his will on the Internet through the executive branch. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, a former law school friend of Mr. Obama, has worked closely with the White House on the issue. Official visitor logs show he's had at least 11 personal meetings with the president
Logged

"Not everything found on the internet is accurate"
Abraham Lincoln
beemaster
Site Founder
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 6231


Location: Manchester, NJ

It is my pleasure to bring the forums to you.


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 22, 2010, 05:59:13 PM »

Interestingly I read the same title in your post as I did the Washington Post today ) yes... Beemaster gets RSS feeds from several sites) and it's getting old having the USA acting like it is not only the world police, but the big scary guy that is allowed to take what he wants from the buffet before everyone else can eat.

I mentioned this a long time ago, but it again applies: we need to dress all of Congress in Jackets like Nascar Drivers, showing off where all their interests really lie. And I mean the more a company contributes, the bigger the letters or logos. The prime spot in sports apparel is the full back of the jacket - that is where the EXXONs and CITIBANKS of Congress should be displayed.

We need to stop the madness, the US has to stop thinking it can make it's own rules to fit its own purpose. China doesn't allow Facebook and our government calls them Socialists (well maybe a bad example - lol) but we are running right toward Imperialism with our mad ideas of how we not only own the toys but no one else gets to play with them until we are tired of them.

I never fully agreed with the following, cause getting a politician that is as good for the people as he/she is for themselves is a rare thing, but: The only way to stop History from repeating itself is to vote everyone out and that means every time an election comes up, not when their term limits (if applicable) requires.

I guess Al Gore did invent the Internet and the patent belongs to the US - American thinking is that we are Blessed and we are, but it does not give us the right to dictate how something as marvelous as the Internet can be shared, used and divided. Sorry, get these bums out of office, starting with the lead bum in 2012.
Logged

NJBeemaster my YOUTUBE Video Collection
Follow us on TWITTER
SKYPE NJBeemaster - include your FORUM NAME in contact request
My Personal FACEBOOK Page


"All donations to our forums are greatly appreciated"
Please click HERE to help support our forum.
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15121


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #4 on: December 22, 2010, 06:54:12 PM »

the problem is that these alphabet agencies regulate, rather than legislate.  they are not accountable to congress or the people.  congress only has the power of funding.
because the members of these agencies are appointed by the president, they become an agent of his agenda.  he doesn't need to do anything as blatant as use executive power to have his way.  he only needs to appoint those who have the same agenda and his will is done. 

that's why thing like the health care bill, while passed by congress,  will be fully written and implemented by HHS.  HHS can pretty much do as it pleases because so much of the bill was TBD and the implementation was not written into the bill.  same with energy policy left in the hands of the EPA a DOE, etc. 

the best thing we could do for accountability and to reign in cost, would be to get rid of every one of these agencies.  if congress feels the need for these things, let them face the people with legislation.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Scadsobees
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3198


Location: Jenison, MI

Best use of smileys in a post award.


« Reply #5 on: December 22, 2010, 09:49:07 PM »

Who is John Galt?  rolleyes
Logged

Rick
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15121


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #6 on: December 22, 2010, 10:00:36 PM »

Yup.  Just about time for the producers to head for the hills.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
FRAMEshift
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1681


Location: North Carolina


« Reply #7 on: December 30, 2010, 09:01:53 AM »

in case you were off planet, the FCC took the first steps today to regulate the internet.


I mentioned this a long time ago, but it again applies: we need to dress all of Congress in Jackets like Nascar Drivers, showing off where all their interests really lie. And I mean the more a company contributes, the bigger the letters or logos. The prime spot in sports apparel is the full back of the jacket - that is where the EXXONs and CITIBANKS of Congress should be displayed.


So who do you think will be running the internet if the government does not?  Big corporations are not your friend and you have much more control of government than you do of those companies.  At least you CAN vote out the guys in government.

Oh, and although Gore did not actually claim to have invented the internet (http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp)

he did lead the legislative changes that made it possible in the beginning.  In 1988 he sponsored legislation that set up inter-university computer networks that eventually grew into the internet.  In 1992 he sponsored legislation that opened the internet to commercial use outside of universities.  That second law is what made the internet explode worldwide.  Private industry did not and never could have created the internet, because it was not just a matter of technology but a matter of massive scale cooperation.  Companies are too short sighted and too dedicated to controlling stuff to ever cooperate like that.

I remember when Steve Ballmer (CEO of Microsoft) recounted a discussion with his mother about the internet.  When he explained it to her, the first question she asked was "who owns it?"  That's the world Baller grew up in.  That's how companies think.  Everything has to be owned.

The internet, and especially the wireless internet, is a common carrier.  Companies use the public airwaves to send information.  Those public airwaves are and have to be controlled by government.  Corporatism is far worse than socialism, capitalism, or any other ism you can think up.
Logged

"You never can tell with bees."  --  Winnie-the-Pooh
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15121


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2010, 11:17:14 AM »

the internet is the only truly free and free market thing going.  none of the things that the FCC claims to be worried about have happened....by their own admission.  however, they have made this power grab because they say this stuff MIGHT happen.

the "big corporation" argument is one of the  most stupid arguments ever and wholly invented by the left to deflect from government power grabs.  it is far easier to influence business with our pocketbooks than to do anything about government "regulation" once they have gotten their paws on something.

it is a source of constant amazement to me, that so many are so willing to freely turn everything over to to the whims of the government, which we know to be repressive and power-hungry, because of the phantom "big corporation" argument.

look at the people involved and their history.  they have  wanted this for a very long time.  it's not even about money for them.  it's about control. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
FRAMEshift
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1681


Location: North Carolina


« Reply #9 on: December 30, 2010, 10:09:30 PM »

the "big corporation" argument is one of the  most stupid arguments ever and wholly invented by the left to deflect from government power grabs. 
Funny.  I thought the "big government" argument was invented by the right to deflect from corporate power grabs.  But that's just me.   grin
Logged

"You never can tell with bees."  --  Winnie-the-Pooh
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 5440


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 31, 2010, 07:06:36 AM »

Hmm,
In have been on the internet since 1994. It has changed tremendously(for the better the most part) as far as quality of service,content available,and business being transacted.If this is what happens when government stays out of it,I am all for it.
 There is not an argument to be made that only the rich can afford internet service.There is not an argument that internet service is a "necessity" in every home.There is no argument that a home has to have 6gig or better download speeds for educational needs. Most educational data can be transmitted over a standard dialup,and I think every school library has computer access for student work.
 It is not in commerce' best interest to make the internet too expensive,as it will directly limit access to a market that they can sell to.
 I no more think you should limit someones broadband access than you should be able to dictate wattage of the light bulb over the reading desk.
  I live in area that had a phone company subsidized with federal dollars. The phone equipment was so poor that i was not able to maintain a connection to my internet provider. I am not sure what the money went for,but it sure wasn't equipment modernization.
Fortunately for me,comcast invested in infrastructure and was able to provide me with an internet service that puts me on the information highway instead of the old dead end back road I was on.
  Should comcast have to hand over some of their profits to help that old phone company compete with them,or at least downgrade the  service to the least common denominator?  Sure thats what I would like to see happen!! NOT
 And this is the kind of thing you get with government intervention.
Logged
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 5440


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 31, 2010, 07:15:09 AM »

Who has ever been voted out of the EPA,FCC,DOE. These are all appointments. They are all pretty much self regulated.
You have a choice not to buy a companies products. You can make this choice every day.
 You can only vote for big office every couple years.
If a large group of people would boycott a company for two weeks,it would bring a radical change in a hurry.
This is what actually happened to car makers.They brought products to market at the price people did not want to pay. The market corrected itself,except for the fact Uncle Sam stepped in.
So who do you think is really standing for big corporations?The government can not tolerate pain in the market place as it directly affects the flow of cash into the government trough.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15121


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #12 on: December 31, 2010, 11:33:03 AM »

FRAME, there's an easy test to see who is right....besides knowing the history of this government takeover....which would be nice for you to learn,,,,

if you don't want to do that, look at results.  who ends up with the power?  it doesn't matter whether a company ends up in bed with the government by choice (insurance companies) or is forced (banking-loans), the end result is the same.  government gets the power.

why would a corporation even want to do business in this country anymore?  we have the 2nd highest corporate tax.  we have high labor costs.  we have prohibitive regulations.  add to that, if congress doesn't like you, you end up in front of them with some Marxist *itch threatening to uh-uh- (hint from another) nationalize your business. we used to have skilled labor going for us, but we don't have that anymore and our kids can't keep up in science  and math with the rest of the world.

every time the government gets involved in something to "help us" we get screwed and the government gets more power so that they can fix  what they screwed up.  the best current example would be the housing market.
government demands that risky loans must be made and underwrites the risk.  eventually, it all falls apart....who'd a thunk it?  and the end result is the under the guise of saving the industry, the government takes more power not only by regulation, but by taking part of the business of  banking away from them and dictating business practices.....which worked oh so well in the past.....

BTW did you know that another of the goals of the same people who are trying to get control of all communications, is to have a national banking system? 
they didn't quite  manage to get the "fairness doctrine" back in, but they are not going to control our one, free, form of communication....

another question:  if the court had ordered that DADT be immediately done away with by the military, and the military had ignored the court, what would you have thought of that?



Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
FRAMEshift
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1681


Location: North Carolina


« Reply #13 on: December 31, 2010, 10:47:43 PM »


they didn't quite  manage to get the "fairness doctrine" back in, but they are not going to control our one, free, form of communication....
Kathy, I probably agree with you on the fairness doctrine.  I don't want the government in the business of regulating free speech.  But that's not what I see as the central issue in net neutrality.  What I'm concerned about is that carriers will regulate speech of others on their networks.  These companies did not create the internet and they don't own the airwaves.  Net neutrality means (to me at least) that carriers can't choose who gets access to the bandwidth and who does not. 
Quote
another question:  if the court had ordered that DADT be immediately done away with by the military, and the military had ignored the court, what would you have thought of that?
Non-sequitur?  Not sure what your point is.  The President must enforce the law as decided by the courts.  If the military ignores the President, that means courts martial from the top down. However, I never expected the courts to order immediate canceling of DADT.  Are you saying something else? 

Our troops have been serving in Afghanistan side by side with openly gay soldiers from many countries.  Haven't been any problems, as far as I know.  I think ending DADT is going to be a non-story.  No big deal.
Logged

"You never can tell with bees."  --  Winnie-the-Pooh
Vibe
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 264


Location: Little Rock, AR.


« Reply #14 on: December 31, 2010, 10:59:43 PM »

the "big corporation" argument is one of the  most stupid arguments ever and wholly invented by the left to deflect from government power grabs. 
Funny.  I thought the "big government" argument was invented by the right to deflect from corporate power grabs.  But that's just me.   grin
Actually neither is correct, and both are bad. Corporations are just fictional entities that the government treats as "people" - in truth they are just "mini-governments" in themselves - so Big-Corp is just a smaller version of Big-Gov - neither of which give much of a rats patootie for the rights of "mere" individuals.
Logged

The opinion of 10,000 men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject.
- Marcus Aurelius -
FRAMEshift
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1681


Location: North Carolina


« Reply #15 on: January 01, 2011, 09:48:06 AM »

The opinion of 10,000 men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject.
- Marcus Aurelius
So.... do you know anything about Marcus Aurelius?  grin
Logged

"You never can tell with bees."  --  Winnie-the-Pooh
Vibe
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 264


Location: Little Rock, AR.


« Reply #16 on: January 01, 2011, 09:53:09 AM »

The opinion of 10,000 men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject.
- Marcus Aurelius
So.... do you know anything about Marcus Aurelius?  grin
Mostly what the other 9,999 tell me. Cheesy
Logged

The opinion of 10,000 men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject.
- Marcus Aurelius -
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15121


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #17 on: January 01, 2011, 11:35:38 AM »

FRAME, the court ruled that the FCC had no authority over the internet.  that was the point of  my DADT question. 

do you really think it's a good idea for the govt to interfere in something that is, and has been, working very well, because something MIGHT happen? 

we also now have the UN wanting to regulate the internet.  if we have a government that believes nothing should exist without government regulation, and a UN that wants to jump in a regulate also, just where do you think this will end?  it will end with this one free thing, gone.

the government does not fix things.  it regulates and then spends the rest of time writing new regulations to fix the things screwed up by the old regulations.  regulation drives up cost and stifles innovation.  then there is this pesky thing about the FCC legislating by regulating.  they are not voted in.  they are appointed.  they are an arm of whatever the exec. branch wants done. 

regulation of communications has been a wet dream of the far left forever.  they openly talk about it at socialist and communist conferences. that's why getting the fairness doctrine back was at the top of their list.  they are still talking about regulating talk radio.   what was out of their reach?  the internet.  it was not under the FCC.  the court  verified that the FCC did not have authority.  by what authority  have they done this?  is this not what dictators do?

vibe is correct about corporations.  my point is about the evil corporation argument.  substitute bourgeoisie for evil corporation and you have the same argument.  the same argument with the same goal.  that is, to redirect the masses toward a created enemy as the government takes more and more power.  if government can convince you that everything they do is for your own good, you will not care what they do..

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
FRAMEshift
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1681


Location: North Carolina


« Reply #18 on: January 01, 2011, 11:15:14 PM »

FRAME, the court ruled that the FCC had no authority over the internet.  that was the point of  my DADT question. 

do you really think it's a good idea for the govt to interfere in something that is, and has been, working very well, because something MIGHT happen? 

Ah, sorry I was a little slow to pick up your intent.  I'm not sure that's what the court actually said, but if so, the FCC ruling will be challenged again in court.  These things go back and forth for awhile.

It's not a "might happen"  There are already instances of flow control on broadband networks.  Comcast etc are testing the waters to see if they can get away with censoring your speech.  The answer should be no.  Right now they are claiming they want to limit the big users.  If that's true, they could just introduce metered charges.  No, they want to pick WHO gets to say WHAT on their network.  And the problem is that it is almost invisible.  They don't tell you they are blocking you.  They just do it and you have no idea why your stuff is not getting through.  And when they were caught, they at first denied they were doing it at all.  Then they claimed they had a right to do it.  Sneaky guys.

Quote
regulation of communications has been a wet dream of the far left forever.  they openly talk about it at socialist and communist conferences.
And you've been to these conferences have you.  grin  Do they talk about the secret "gay agenda" too?  Oh Kathy, you are too much.   grin
Logged

"You never can tell with bees."  --  Winnie-the-Pooh
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15121


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #19 on: January 02, 2011, 12:53:36 AM »

you can do your own youtube searches and look at the socialist USA and communist USA sites.  they are pretty open about what they are doing and about working with the democrat party to do it.

if you looked at the people and organizations that were behind this FCC thing, (they are in the article) you see that they are all progressive groups with the usual suspects behind them.  soros being perhaps the most notable, not just because of this, but because he's also buying into various media outlets. 

you seem like an intelligent person yet you give the  impression that you feel you need the government to look out for you.  some evil profit seeking company might take advantage of you if your beneficent government doesn't step in a act in your best interest?  do you really believe the government acts in the best interest of the individual?  our founders sure didn't.  that's why they wrote a constitution designed to LIMIT government and protect people from it.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.374 seconds with 22 queries.

Google visited last this page August 23, 2014, 11:53:11 AM
anything