# Net neutrality???



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Ajit Pai, one of two Republican Commissioners on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), inferred in a tweet that President Barack Obama's secret, 332-page "Net Neutrality" document is a scheme for federal micro-managing of the Internet to extract billions in new taxes from consumers and again enforce progressives' idea of honest, equitable, and balanced content fairness.


For the full story: http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/ ... t-neutral/

Maybe this will get the younger generation to take notice. I suspect it will be like the neutrality they imposed on broadcast to our soldiers in the middle east. They made that politically neutral by denying them Rush Limbaugh. Some may scream that it was good to do so, but your favorite program may not be far behind. This is little different than burning books that gets liberals upset. Will they be upset about this? I doubt it, like sheep they will just trust their herd dog Obama.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Now we will wait to see how this plays out.

But how do you think that the government will get more money for the mass spending they are doing. MORE TAXES... and since E-commerce is how things are going now adays. They need to get their fingers into it. Look at the Amazon, Ebay, all the bidding sites, etc. Then look at grub hubs, ordering pizza online, etc. Some of this has taxes and some doesn't. They want to get in on everything. Or they want to tax the companies for using this technology.

But like you stated... most will just ignore it and pay for it.

One thing that has gotten me lately and got me thinking. especially when I saw a tv commercial. the one with the tax company and the boston tea party. Where they are yelling... no taxation with out representation. Gets me thinking... do the people in Washington really represent the common people or voters?? I think many don't now a days. They represent the interest groups and the people who contribute to their campaigning or who donated the most. Not the average joe... or the average American.

Like I have stated many times before.... If you are a dem or a rep... you are only representing about 40% of the population. The other 60% is the other party's or neutral. So really when they vote on "party lines" they are not representing the populous. So where is our "taxation with representation" that our founding fathers fought for???


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Chuck you hit on one of my pet peeves. I think 75% of the people are not happy and represented. I look at the democrats and think of them as the party with few morals. They kill children in the womb and call it pro choice rather than what it really is. On the other hand I look at republicans and see the far right as money worshipers. The gap divides Americans. I can't vote for democrats because of abortion and gay marriage so I hold my nose and vote republican. The parties have moved so far a part that most of America has not fallen through a crack, they have fallen through a chasm. I wish a third party could be successful.

I like the anti abortion and definition of marriage by our legislature in North Dakota, but I'm not happy that they would do anything for a buck. Al Carlson in our legislature appears to me to be a puppet for the oil industry and agriculture interests. I think he forgets he is a servant and thinks he is a ruler. Not that much unlike Obama, but with a different set of values.


----------

