Net Neutrality Finally on the Chopping Block

from IBD:

Net Neutrality Advocates Are Modern-Day Snake Oil Salesmen

When FCC Chairman Ajit Pai announced plans to repeal the Obama administration’s heavy-handed “net neutrality” regulations, critics acted as if the world were coming to an end. Actual consumers, however, aren’t likely to notice any difference, because the “problem” those rules were supposed to solve has always been wildly exaggerated.

Net neutrality sounds at first blush like a noble goal. Internet service providers shouldn’t, the argument goes, be allowed to favor some traffic over others, either by throttling speeds, charging more or taking any other action that discriminates against bits of data crossing their network.

But to enforce the rules, the Obama administration had to treat ISPs as if they were monopoly phone providers, which let the government not only impose net neutrality requirements, but gave it sweeping authority to regulate everything the ISPs did. read more

New Sheriff at the FCC Will Undo Net Neutrality

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

Free speech has been on the lips of many these days. In conservative circles, it has usurped most other news. To some extent it should, for without it, where would we be?

Of the many free speech issues, none has received more press than has the UC Berkeley vs. Anne Coulter flap. This issue goes to heart of free speech and the Constitution.

The right claims that Ms. Coulter has the right to speak and that her “speech” should be protected, just as any leftist speaker would be. Of course at Berkeley, a leftist speaker would more likely be canonized than protested and shut down.

While the issue of Anne Coulter’s right to speak at Berkeley and her guaranteed safety is an important one, a recent Trump appointment that may affect all our free speech should be getting a lot more press than the college speaking circuit. read more

A Delusional Fed Governor

By: the Common Constitutionalist

John Williams was on Fox News Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo. Williams is the chief of the San Francisco Federal Reserve.

Maria asked him about job growth in the United States. She asked: “Where are the jobs in this country?” Williams started, right out of the gate, as if towing the Obama/democrat party line by saying: “Last year was an amazing year for job growth,” proudly proclaiming that there were 3 million jobs Williamscreated.

I don’t know whether he actually believes this to be an “amazing” accomplishment, but his tone sure gave every indication.

Breaking that yearly 3 million number down – that’s an average of 250,000 jobs created per month. He then claimed that not all were low paying jobs either. These were also good paying jobs.

I have no doubt that some were high paying jobs, but we all know that percentage is minuscule. Sadly there was no question or push back of that claim by Bartiromo.

What he also neglected to mention is that number, 250,000 falls far short of what’s needed just to maintain, much less grow. That number is about 350,000 per month – 400,000 or more to catch up to pre-recession levels. Remember the recession? Possibly not, being that we are supposedly 6 years removed.

Aren’t these Fed Governors are supposed to be the smartest guys (and gals) in the room? read more

Doomsday for Conservatives

By: the Common Constitutionalist

If it’s not End Times for the world, it certainly may be for conservative America.

First – the world. Just take a look around.

Look at what the former KGB operative and current supreme leader of mother Russia is doing. You may recall last week that Vladimir “Pooty-Poot” Putin ordered two Russian Bear bombers to buzz Great Britain. RAF Typhoon fighters had to be scrambled to chase them off. Awarship few days earlier, a Russian warship had to be escorted by the U.K. military through the English Channel. I’m sure it just made a wrong turn at Iceland. At the same time the British government is discussing cuts in their defense spending. They might want to rethink that strategy.

Putin is on the march and actively testing the west’s ability and fortitude to repel him should he decide to begin to take more territory. This Russian situation is a lot more serious than is being advertised. One stupid mistake from some overzealous official on either side – and the missiles start flying.

Then there are the many faces of terror that threaten the entire west. Personally, I think most, if not all of Europe is doomed, owing not only to their spineless “go along to get along” attitude toward Muslims in general, but also their admittance of so many Muslims into their countries. I am certainly not the only one who feels this way. read more

What’s Wrong with a Well Regulated Internet?

by: the Common Constitutionalist

It will be great! Take the Second Amendment. You know – “A well regulated Militia…” Instead, we can change it to read “A well regulated Internet, being necessary for the continuation of free access (defined by the FCC) to the World Wide Web, the right of the people to high-speed service shall not be infringed, except by the FCC.”

Okay – enough tomfoolery. Right now, as you read this, the Internet as it is currently comprised, is the very definition of freedom and free speech. ItNet-Neutrality has revolutionized expression.

20 years ago, I could never have imagined having the ability to go on the Internet, build a website and just start expressing myself. And anyone (well, almost) on the planet can access that information. It’s astounding! That’s real freedom. The founders would be proud.

One of the major complaints is, without net neutrality, cable and phone companies can and will charge content providers an extra fee for delivering content. Well, for the little to average guy, in my opinion, that isn’t going to happen. That fee will be reserved for large streaming services like Netflix, YouTube, Amazon, etc. read more

Net Neutrality: An Old Idea for a New Era

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Of net neutrality, Obama said: “In plain English, I’m asking [the FCC] to recognize that for most Americans, the internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life.”

And of course anything that is essential in life must be regulated by the government. It’s the Progressive way.

net neutralityThe lefts argument appears to be that “net neutrality” is essential because all internet traffic, no matter what it is or where it comes from, should be treated equally. And who wouldn’t be for equality? I mean really. Only racists and bigots and homophobes – you know – free market conservatives would be against equality (as defined by the left).

See, in the utopian world of the socialist, every one is equal – equally miserable, and those on the internet who innovate and profit unequally must somehow be doing so without thought or consideration of the collective.

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La) said in a statement that the President’s attempt “to have the FCC reclassify broadband Internet as a public utility is yet another example of the Obama Administration’s radical effort to have the government take over more aspects of our economy where there is no justification. Title II reclassification would have a chilling effect on the Internet, which is a sector of our economy that has thrived under the current light-touch regulatory model, and sends the wrong message that regulation trumps innovation in the Internet ecosystem. The best way to guarantee a vibrant Internet economy is by keeping the federal government out of the way, not getting it more involved. The FCC should not allow itself to be bullied into embracing this dangerous proposal that will harm our economy.” read more