|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
![]() |
Echo In Light
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 11:26 AM Original message |
US Court Rules Against FCC on 'Net Neutrality' |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nemo137
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 11:28 AM Response to Original message |
1. This is bad news |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BanzaiBonnie
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 11:37 AM Response to Original message |
2. Welcome to corporate America - Fascism |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cascadiance
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 11:47 AM Response to Original message |
3. Time to look at some impeachments of some justices! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 01:31 PM Response to Reply #3 |
14. really? on what grounds? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cascadiance
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 01:49 PM Response to Reply #14 |
15. Didn't say there were grounds. But I think we should look to see if we DO have grounds! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 02:22 PM Response to Reply #15 |
18. and how do we look to see if there are grounds? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cascadiance
![]() |
Wed Apr-07-10 03:52 PM Response to Reply #18 |
27. Well on decisions that have potential for great harm down the road, they should be scrutinized! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
thotzRthingz
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 02:24 PM Response to Reply #3 |
19. actually, i think its time for congress to enact laws which give the fcc the needed authority |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cascadiance
![]() |
Wed Apr-07-10 03:56 PM Response to Reply #19 |
28. Freepress.net thinks there's a third option that the FCC can do to reverse Bush's FCC's actions... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
prairierose
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 11:50 AM Response to Original message |
4. This is very bad news..The Supremes have to be... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
City Lights
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 11:51 AM Response to Original message |
5. Fuck corporate Murika. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cayanne
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 12:01 PM Response to Original message |
6. And we know how the SCOTUS will rule nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 12:04 PM Response to Original message |
7. I don't think it is a bad ruling. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 12:57 PM Response to Reply #7 |
8. Concur, but some care needs to be taken on how broad the FCC regulates things |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
backscatter712
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 01:06 PM Response to Reply #7 |
9. Good luck with that... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
brendan120678
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 01:09 PM Response to Reply #7 |
10. I agree with what you're saying... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 01:18 PM Response to Reply #10 |
11. Yeah sometimes the right decision is not the popular one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tomp
![]() |
Wed Apr-07-10 12:21 AM Response to Reply #7 |
25. sure, and which particular politicians are going to vote against the interests... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Greyhound
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 01:29 PM Response to Original message |
12. You'd think this would get some attention on DU, wouldn't you? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 04:45 PM Response to Reply #12 |
21. It is, considering the number of threads on it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Greyhound
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 07:04 PM Response to Reply #21 |
22. Wow, I see what you mean. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
conspirator
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 01:30 PM Response to Original message |
13. Kick. This is important. The Elites cannot allow the internet to continue. Is too dangerous. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 02:48 PM Response to Reply #13 |
20. Living up to your name? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
damntexdem
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 01:59 PM Response to Original message |
16. This needs to be addressed by Congress. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
upi402
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 02:02 PM Response to Original message |
17. WTB an opposition party... /nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Odin2005
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 07:05 PM Response to Original message |
23. K&R |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff
![]() |
Tue Apr-06-10 07:09 PM Response to Original message |
24. Net Neutrality is arguably the intent of the Telcom act of 1996. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Echo In Light
![]() |
Wed Apr-07-10 08:15 AM Response to Reply #24 |
26. Yes, the one that maybe a few hundred out of three hundred million were even slightly wary of |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sat Sep 07th 2024, 07:07 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC