Re: OBAMANET Coming...Big Gov to 'Fix' the Net...Progressives are all getting that 'Warm all Over Feeling' Again!

Ubiquitous

unread,

Feb 24, 2015, 5:06:13 PM2/24/15

to

dfag...@gmail.com wrote:

>I'd report the specifics of Obamanet...but it's not info that's
>available to the public...but...it is rumored that "If you like your
>ISP...y

Just another attempt to nullify the First Amendment by the Left.

And you posted this off-topic article here because?

--
The old Soviet leaders had it right. Our destruction comes from within:
Moochers, parasites, and Obama.

Shadow

unread,

Feb 24, 2015, 5:36:18 PM2/24/15

to

On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:06:13 -0600, web...@polaris.net (Ubiquitous)
wrote:

>dfag...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>I'd report the specifics of Obamanet...but it's not info that's
>>available to the public...but...it is rumored that "If you like your
>>ISP...y
>
>Just another attempt to nullify the First Amendment

They were all trumped by Phear and the Treason ACT.
[]'s

PS cross post to narco-addict removed, in case he smokes it.
Don't want him falling off the wagon AGAIN.
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

jennykershaw

unread,

Feb 25, 2015, 10:45:21 AM2/25/15

to

On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:06:13 -0600, Ubiquitous wrote:

> dfag...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>I'd report the specifics of Obamanet...but it's not info that's
>>available to the public...but...it is rumored that "If you like your
>>ISP...y
>
> Just another attempt to nullify the First Amendment by the Left.

tell me, then, sockmeister, was the classification of ordinary telephone
service as a title ii communications service instead of a title i
information service also an 'attempt to nullify the first amendment by
the left'? what sort of censorship do you hallucinate is happening when
you talk on the phone?

Ubiquitous

unread,

Mar 4, 2015, 10:08:05 AM3/4/15

to

jennyk...@nobody.spams.me.invalid wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:06:13 -0600, Ubiquitous wrote:
>> dfag...@gmail.com wrote:

>>>I'd report the specifics of Obamanet...but it's not info that's
>>>available to the public...but...it is rumored that "If you like your
>>>ISP...y
>>
>> Just another attempt to nullify the First Amendment by the Left.
>

>was the classification of ordinary telephone service as a title ii
>communications service instead of a title i information service also
>an 'attempt to nullify the first amendment by the left'? what sort
>of censorship do you hallucinate is happening when you talk on the
>phone?

You're talking apples and oranges, unless this is a weak attempt at a
strawman argument. A more apt comparison would be the so-called
"Fairness Doctrine", another attempt to nullify the First Amendment.

--
So to recap:
Iraq is imploding
ISIS is spreading
Russia is expanding
The US is being invaded
Vets are dying
IRS is lying
And Obama is giving nukes to Iran

jennykershaw

unread,

Mar 4, 2015, 5:21:04 PM3/4/15

to

On Wed, 04 Mar 2015 10:08:03 -0500, Ubiquitous wrote:

> jennyk...@nobody.spams.me.invalid wrote:
>>On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:06:13 -0600, Ubiquitous wrote:
>>> dfag...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>>>I'd report the specifics of Obamanet...but it's not info that's
>>>>available to the public...but...it is rumored that "If you like your
>>>>ISP...y
>>>
>>> Just another attempt to nullify the First Amendment by the Left.
>>
>>was the classification of ordinary telephone service as a title ii
>>communications service instead of a title i information service also an
>>'attempt to nullify the first amendment by the left'? what sort of
>>censorship do you hallucinate is happening when you talk on the phone?
>
> You're talking apples and oranges, unless this is a weak attempt at a
> strawman argument. A more apt comparison would be the so-called
> "Fairness Doctrine", another attempt to nullify the First Amendment.

no, because there is no regulation of content providers.

only the pipe providers are being regulated, and only to tell them that
they have to treat a gig of a customers traffic the same no matter who or
what is on the other end. a gig of traffic to netflix or a gig to some
obscure site or a gig to the telcos own video site must all be treated
the same. same speed. same price per gig, if metered. and if theres a cap
a gig is a gig is a gig.

they can still charge a customer more for more gigs, or for faster
speeds, but the more gigs or faster speeds apply no matter who the
customer is communicating with online. they cant sell you a plan where
you get 5mbps to netflix and 20mbps to everyone else, either its 5 to
everyone or 20 to everyone but 20 can still be priced higher than 5.

and they cant block sites outright.

First Post

unread,

Mar 4, 2015, 6:12:59 PM3/4/15

to

Redirecting followups to a single group is a sure sign that you're
just another dumbassed troll.

And who you gonna blame when Netflix still lags due to heavy traffic
loads as it always has?
A big pipe doesn't matter when the server you're connecting to is
overloaded and is incapable of sending 20Mbps in the first place.
But then you idiots think everything in the world from weather to
disease is all the result of someone elses politics.

jennykershaw

unread,

Mar 4, 2015, 8:18:32 PM3/4/15

to

except when its a sign that the posters news server wouldnt let them post
the first time saying followup-to required, so the user did whatever
seemed necessary to get the darn thing to work, of course.

Ubiquitous

unread,

Mar 9, 2015, 7:12:14 AM3/9/15

to

Someone's sockpuppet wrote:

>It's best not to help the trolls and/or the wingnuts who are trying
>to spread their propaganda far and wide through crossposting

Oh, the irony!

--
So to recap:
Iraq is imploding

Measels is spreading

Russia is expanding
The US is being invaded
Vets are dying
IRS is lying

And Obama is fundraising & golfing
http://www.jonmcnaughton.com/obama-foreign-policy/