What the f**k are you on? I'm libertarian and getting the government involved in this matter will cause a loss of more rights than gain more. How about the government has no right to regulate private property? Stupid left-wingers, guess you shouldn't have paid for the cables now? You deserve to get f**ked by the government and telecoms.
Asking the old men in congress that at best think the internet is a series of tubes clogged by porn to make legislation about it while the deep pockets of the telcom companies roam the halls of congress is a sure fire way to end up with something bad.
What personal freedoms are being limited? There is no "right" to internet connectivity; indeed, forcing neutrality on network owners would be a violation of *their* rights.
Net neutrality is government forcing people to use their property in a certain way, rather than letting them choose what to do with it. If that isn't regulation, I don't know what is.
So because "the collective" wants something, they should be able to use the government to force others to give it to them? How is that fair to the people who own the internet infrastructure? Net Neutrality violates their property rights.
Allow me to restate that comment: Barack Obama is the only presidential nominee who is willing to violate the constitution to get votes - get him into office, and he will force service providers to give up their property rights so that you will feel better.
scheissenMar 28, 2008
What the f**k are you on? I'm libertarian and getting the government involved in this matter will cause a loss of more rights than gain more. How about the government has no right to regulate private property? Stupid left-wingers, guess you shouldn't have paid for the cables now? You deserve to get f**ked by the government and telecoms.
akiratheoniMar 28, 2008
If you've read ziveeman's comments and understand net neutrality, he actually knows what he's taking about.
justaboutrealMar 29, 2008
only half?
johnmearnsMar 29, 2008
Asking the old men in congress that at best think the internet is a series of tubes clogged by porn to make legislation about it while the deep pockets of the telcom companies roam the halls of congress is a sure fire way to end up with something bad.
logandurandMar 31, 2008
What personal freedoms are being limited? There is no "right" to internet connectivity; indeed, forcing neutrality on network owners would be a violation of *their* rights.
logandurandMar 31, 2008
Net neutrality is government forcing people to use their property in a certain way, rather than letting them choose what to do with it. If that isn't regulation, I don't know what is.
logandurandMar 31, 2008
So because "the collective" wants something, they should be able to use the government to force others to give it to them? How is that fair to the people who own the internet infrastructure? Net Neutrality violates their property rights.
logandurandMar 31, 2008
Allow me to restate that comment: Barack Obama is the only presidential nominee who is willing to violate the constitution to get votes - get him into office, and he will force service providers to give up their property rights so that you will feel better.