So when the "Net neutrality betrayal" nonsense is proven to be a lie...

[TheWraith]

...just as the "Obama is a homophobe who wants DADT to continue" nonsense was proven to be a lie...

...who should I see to collect my apology?

[Imagevision]

1. Well we'll know tomorrow won't we...

[cherokeeprogressive]

2. Why in the world would anyone apologize to YOU? n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Is still dubious the FCC has the authority it claims to do what is proposed, let alone some more

far reaching.

[Forkboy]

4. LOL...good Lord.

:rofl:

[EFerrari]

15. This is why we can't have nice things.

lol

[Warren DeMontague]

5. They said they would protect net neutrality while treating wireless/cell networks differently

and what they did was,

they protected net neutrality--- WHILE TREATING WIRELESS/CELL NETWORKS DIFFERENTLY!!!


GOOD GOD, MAN, HOW CAN ANYONE ABIDE THAT LEVEL OF BETRAYAL?!?!?!?


:sarcasm:

[TheKentuckian]

16. That is what they said after Google and Verizon decided how they wanted to be "regulated"

Considering the evolutionary course of the web, it is fairly crappy.

[Warren DeMontague]

17. People are misrepresenting what this is, either deliberately or because they don't understand it.

Now, if the outrage is about a different regulatory structure pertaining to wireless connectivity, like cell phones, fine. But much of the hyperbole seems predicated upon the idea that this implies a change in the fundamental way the internet as most of us know and currently use it; it isn't, or at least I haven't seen any real evidence that it is. Rather, for the first time it codifies the situation we have had up to this point, i.e. net neutrality.

It's a different deal for cell phone networks and the like; no question. But that's not the same thing.

[TheKentuckian]

21. Do you understand that most of the under and unserved areas will depend on wireless?

Are you noting that we are trending wireless?

Essentially, you are okaying limiting net neutrality to the current and likely temporary delivery mode. A similar agreement when the internet most of us knew and used went out over POTS lines would mean no broadband.

You are accepting a precedent that doesn't carry the spirit of what we know and experience to future and present systems of delivery.

Your shortsightedness is no excuse to run cry hyperbole.

[Warren DeMontague]

22. I do, and I'm not weighing in on that aspect of it. That's not my point.

My point is, it's misrepresenting the deal to say it affects the internet as it exists, now.

[TheKentuckian]

23. The whole conversation is mostly about going forward.

Though we are talking today. As we type I'm using a wireless connection as are many on tablets, laptops on wireless, and smartphones plus the few million that at this very moment are relying on wireless connections as their home based connection (and paying a pretty penny, much more than a broadband/dsl subscriber) because of the massive holes in broadband coverage.

When creating laws you want to codify principles that then can act as precedent as things grow, adapt, and change over time. The permitted change would impact the internet we know and use now because there is only one internet, this allows or encourages multiple.
The present internet is an ever growing, ever evolving colony organism and this cave in to the principle of net neutrality puts a hell of a dent in that and will make it more likely that the very people that need an unfiltered, neutral as possible shaping aka rural America will continue to be herded.

Eventually, suburban and urban users will also be affected as the delivery technology evolves. The cable to your house isn't the internet but rather your access point to it.
I think some folks are being hustled into conflating the two and missing the concept that the internet is being directly affected even if your individual delivery system won't see changes at this time.

It is the big picture that must be attended to, the wires to houses and transmissions to wireless devices are details.

[Warren DeMontague]

24. Also, this is identical to the arrangement they've been talking up for months.

Which kind of undercuts the 'betrayal' logic, as well.

But we shall see, what this plays out as.

[TheKentuckian]

26. The argument made for months is a bastardization cooked up in a backroom deal with "stakeholders".

It is the principal being betrayed not the phony bologna that was just cooked up that folks have been bitching about the whole time.

[Autumn]

6. " collect my apology?" Is someone lying about YOU?

Why are YOU owed an apology? Do you think YOU are Obama? Why are YOU owed anything at all?

[TheWraith]

10. How about for all the times I've been called a cheerleader, an Obamabot, a blind follower...

...an apologist, et cetera, all for things that it later turned out I was RIGHT about, but nobody gave a shit.

In any event, you miss my point, and I can't help but think it's deliberately.

[Autumn]

11. Lot of people are right about things, some are wrong.

No one is owed an apology for being right about what a politician does. As for what he will do, hell, we don't know what the future holds. Different people will see different things in what he does based on their experiences. We are all just posters on a message board, some with different opinions. :shrug: I didn't miss your point, you take a politicians life and career personal, unless you know him, it's not personal, because he don't know you from shit, we are just the masses to them.

[apocalypsehow]

14. Just. Don't. Get. It.

:thumbsdown:

[crim son]

7. Just as soon as this uninsured person

sees tangible benefits from Obama's magnificent HCR. Maybe 2013?

[Imagevision]

8. Best-Buy doesn't like shoppers using "The Find" to compare prices on smart phones

[Major Hogwash]

9. Torches and pitchforks at the ready, sir!! Let's roast 'em and toast 'em!

And then skewer them through their skeevy little hearts!

[Mortos]

12. Very few of the Obashers will ever admit they are wrong

They will just find some obscure part of the success they don't like and blow it out of proportion or move on to the next thing they will mischaracterize and blow that out of proportion. Some are never satisfied with President Obama and never will be until they have run him out of office (which won't happen until he meets the term limit in 2016).

Obashers is a word I made up. Feel free to use it liberally.

[apocalypsehow]

13. Good question. My prediction: there will be no apology, just a lot of cranky snarling. Followed by

the next big lie, posted in a flurry of indignant OP's.

[Scurrilous]

18. K & R

:thumbsup:

[uncle ray]

19. the poster above who is K&Ring any thread on the matter

without reading them first, such as this one.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Marr]

25. I don't know-- did you apologize after the tax cut sell-out?

Or the Insurance Bailout-- er-- Healthcare "Reform" legilsation? Or when any of the other items Obama's biggest fans dismissed as paranoia and encouraged everyone to ignore actually came to pass?