I'm not sure being so open is all that good. I'm sick of not being able to unsubscribe to forums, message boards, etc etc. there alerady is censorship on them now anyway so freedom of speech is dwindling from the every constant "do not offend". Yet at the same time there is way too much offensive remarks. I just don't know anymore and don't forget almost everyone uses the same search engines anyway. Is it really the Gov't controlling or the the Corporations?
3:12 - This host is retarded. Unfortunately, this Sen McConnell doesn't have a TELEPROMPTER telling him what to say, when to say, by his WRITERS, ie--Obama. Also, this video makes no sense. He continues to say "THEY'RE LYING! IT'S THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THAT!!!" but actually never explains himself what it means... Smarty pants. I recommend this Steven Crowder's "Can I Haz Interwebz" video. Actually accurate and intelligent.
This dumb little man is hilarious. He is so busy trying to attack republicans he doesn't see all his democrat friends slowly eating away his freedoms through regulation. Lobbyist aren't the problem, government officials making laws are the problem. We wouldn't have to worry about net neutrality if the government couldn't force us to do things through regulation.
Yeah, net neutrality and stem cell research is why I would never vote republican. If the democrats would get rid of their gun control schemes, harden up on the illegal immigration and stop the affirmative action, then I'd actually vote for them.
However, we see here it wouldn't make a lick of difference. Corporations don't want net neutrality, so their errand boy starts tearing it down.
F*ck off Obama. Sorry I rarely use profanity. But the 'little voices' should not be state protected by these types of laws. The NY Times has millions of readers, yet my little voice cannot be heard on its front page. Why shouldn't NYT be coerced by the state to portion off a section of their front page to different groups who want to use NY Times for their purpose? The internet is what it is *precisely* because of lack of state coercion. Wake up and stop selling off the country you built.
I'm thinking you're just raving about Obama...The internet is going no where, and cannot be "owned" or controlled by any one person OR government...This video just tells you how fucking paranoid and dishonest governments, and/or political parties can be...
@deetjay1 wouldnt that be nice, but if the last hundred years is any indication, governments wont stop until theyve convinced the ignorant masses the internet needs their 'protection' just like theyve done to radio and tv.
Go for it! Governments have under estimated their own people before...Think of the tree...That's the public air waves...radio and television...Think of that tree as a part of the world's forests...THAT is the world wide web!...Control that! THAT is also where your rebellion against mediocrity and enslavement is growing...Ignorant people need not apply!
So what's your proposal? BAN ALL EVIL PRIVATE INTERNET SERVERS? FCC SHOULD BE THE ONLY INTERNET COMPANY? How about a Single Payer Internet System huh? Yeah let's Nationalize the net. NOT!!!!! If Verizon Censors you CANCEL YOUR SUBSCRIPTION. If the Government is your only way of getting online and you don't like their service you can't go anywhere else.
I love how you bash capitalism and evil corporations then put a commercial on at the end.
@andrihb Enforcing net neutrality means allowing the state to dictate private entities peaceful expression.
If I build an ISP for the express purpose of allowing fans of Justin Bieber to text each other, this is now illegal and the state will force me to use my own-built technology for the benefit of non Bieber fans. When the state tells you what you can and cannot say with your own property, its not protection of free speech, its its destruction.
@andrihb Actually hes right, as the proposal is now it may not be direct control, but it allows it to become that eventually because it sets a precedent for what level of involvement the government can have with the internet. This is a slippery slope and its crazy to think this will not eventually lead to government control of the internet. The point of the internet and why its great is because its not subject to regulation. The architecture is completely open and needs to stay that way.
How are people supposed to believe that the REPUBLICANS cave in to sponsorship, when TYT uses sponsorSHIP with the netflick et cetera ads during EVERYING SINGLE YT video?
Hypocrites much?
Of course, I'll enjoy sifting through several dozen YT email responses, providing threats again me. This video is valid, it's sad it's been value has been diminished and invalided through many by the pre and trailing ads.
@StillAware "So what can we do to keep Net Neutrality? C'mon people let's do something about it! This is still America, isn't it?" In the short-term we can rabble, calling our representatives, protest in the street, etc. But, in the long-term we will need to change the structure of corporations. The people at the top of the corporate pyramid are calling all the shots and we often only find out what they did long after it's done. Unions should be democratic and should be on the board, I think.
The first thing I will do is cancel my internet and if everyone follows we might be able to stop them. We all must stick together I hope for once in this country we can do this or it will get worse.
you fucking propaganda cocksuckers, Obama wants the power to sensor the internet because he cannot defend his failed liberal economic policies on there merits
I know in Canada the CRTC recently reversed a decision that protected smaller ISPs from Bell Canada who wanted to charge wholesale ISPs, the same rate they charge their own customers.
Bell Canada has invested a lot in broadband infrastructure in Canada, and I have no problem with them recouping their initial costs and making a profit, but Bell claims they have they right to manage their networks, but they will choke out competition, by making ISPs just an extension of themselves.
@USMC2375 The internet was net neutral with the government forcing net neutrality since it's inception.
But you're a conservative, so naturally inbreeding took place in your family tree and you were home schooled because "pappy didn't want you book lurnin", so blind ignorance is your forte'.
Why don't you look into what net neutrality is, how it helped netflix, video streaming sites like youtube and how it protected VOIP from ISPs trying to kill it in it's infancy
@elfornse Ideally govt law would keep businesses in check and make laws against them poisoning people, businesses that buy off the regulators remove the protections people have.
The good regulation becomes business friendly deregulation leading to injuries and death.
Removing ALL regulation doesn't fix the problem that the deregulation caused, it just removes the ability of people to protect themselves.
@elfornse When industrial giants are caught poisoning people they can spend millions on lawyers to cover up the damage and get away with killing people.
Removing regulations against pollution would just mean that there are fewer people that would catch on that the giant is murdering people, people would still die but it just wouldn't be called a crime and there wouldn't even be a show trial.
@elfornse Saying businesses won't break laws if there isn't a government to regulate them would be like saying there would be no crime if there were no police or courts to arrest criminals.
When judges aren't elected or bought by a business (that's what, 2% of judges?) then the business has far far more resources to fight claims against them.
If the govt doesn't stand up for the people, who will? Corp pockets are deeper than peoples letting them get away with literal murder.
@elfornse That's what happens when corps BUY the govt.
The megacorps bought the govt to write pro business laws.
The pro business laws are championed by "free marketers" but they wind up giving disproportionate power to the businesses letting them crush people.
The fed is an organization run by banksters to protect banksters, I agree on the FED, prison time...or a firing squad, personally I'd go with the firing squad.
Our govt is an appendage of the corps they're supposed to regulate
@elfornse How can a DRO protect the victims of bank of americas fraduclosure crisis?
They're foreclosing on homes that have mortages paid off...
Yes people are getting kicked out of homes with fully paid off mortgages, people are being billed for their neighbors mortgages and people paying down their mortgage get double billed but it's never properly accounted for.
Thanks to regulatory capture and deregulation noones doing anything about this.
@elfornse Violence of government regulations is the funniest thing that I've ever heard.
When government doesn't take action and corporations had a problem they would use the pinkerton detectives as "dispute resolution organizers" and kill people until the strike ended.
What you want isn't realistic, it's a pipe dream, people need real world solutions not your fantasy land crap.
You think business is more honest than it really is. I know govt is corrupt, but business corrupts it.
Net Neutrality does not allow a government takeover up front, but it does allow the government to get its foot in the door for further regulation. You give the government an inch and takes a light year, as history shows us.
@dffykvn So Comcast is doing something you disagree with and you think they should be violently forced to do otherwise.
Tell me how you can make this metaphysical leap. Comcast slowing down access? Switch to a new ISP. Not that I actually think you would grasp basic economics.
I throw insults because someone whos dumb enough to think that laws that protect against corporate predators = government violence
Taking you seriously only legitimizes idiocy
Tell you what, why don't you refute the fact that we've had an open internet since it was created and that it allowed new technology to thrive, new industries like VOIP that threaten the old power structure so they want to throttle it making us use old inefficient services that should die out
The govt forcing net neutrality on the telecoms is what we've had.
When the telecoms tried to destroy VOIP services because they were an inexpensive replacement for inefficient costly land lines the telecoms tried to kill VOIP, but the govt protected the fledgeling industry from being offed by people who wanted to protect their inefficient product instead of building a better one.
@dffykvn Looks like I've backed you into a corner now. Can't argue for your blighted position, so start strawmanning mine. I hope you enjoy living in a fascist dictatorship with no free speech.
@theVAGINAntichrist You mean a fascist dictatorship where corporations control what you're allowed to see, what programs you're allowed to use and what programs they won't let you access?
Yes thank you, that is exactly what I'm trying to prevent.
I'm glad you've seen the light and support net neutrality!
@theVAGINAntichrist You agree with me that a powerful group controlling what we can and can't see and do on the internet is a bad thing...
Which is why net neutrality has to stay in place so ISPs don't kill new businesses, prevent competition, perpetuate monopolies, prevent access to sites that disagree with their viewpoints...I'm glad you think we need to preserve a neutral net.
@theVAGINAntichrist So a telecom that provides internet service trying to throttle a voip competitor that threatens to replace their land line service isn't an anticompetative measure? It doesn't prevent a new industry from setting up shop, providing a better service and force the telecom to compete in quality?
@theVAGINAntichrist So instead of the telecoms providing a better cheaper land line service, or providing voip of their own, your definition of competition in the marketplace is the isps trying to throttle voip use so people were forced away from skype and other voip clients?
You have a funny definition of competition.....it's very different from the definition the other 99.9999999% of the human race uses.
@dffykvn False dichotomy, begging the question, and a strawman all in one comment. Thank you for providing some great examples of logical fallacies for the class. Amazing that some knowledge can finally be garnered from comments so bereft of intellectual thought. There is a diamond amid the rough.
Tell me, how is it that someone can be as mentally sterile as you are? Is it a brain size issue, maybe an early developmental head injury? I exclude the probability of willfull ignorance.
@theVAGINAntichrist I've repeated my question 10 times, I've asked it in different ways and explained my position every time...
So far you've called me a statist but haven't told me whether or not a telecom giant throttling programs it competes with is fair competition on an open market or an attempt at an anti competative monopoly.
I've said time and time again the death of net neutrality is an anti competative move by telecom giants to kill the free net...debate THAT, you haven't yet.
@dffykvn Looks like I've got you running in circles. As expected from a naive liberal, when your worldview is threatened by facts you resort to logical fallacies. Either selective myopia or mental retardation has hindered you in this discussion. It's funny watching a cult member squirm.
More like trying to find the right way to ask a question to get an answer from a brick wall.
I've defined net neutrality and explained how killing it stifles innovation and new business a dozen times but you can't seem to respond with anything other than calling me a statist, a liberal blahblahblah
You asked me for one example, I gave you two, you don't have a proper response to my examples so you're refusing to admit that you're wrong.
@theVAGINAntichrist Read up on Net Neutrality, don't listen to me just read 4 or 5 articles, not written by rush limbaugh about it and then form an opinion. This isn't a liberal or conservative issue it is a FREEDOM issue. I don't want anyone to be able to censor the internet not the government or private corporations. Prove to me you aren't a troll because you sure sound like one.
The only people I have talked to who are legitimately against net neutrality never seem to actually understand it
@KidOmniMan I don't read Rush Limbaugh. If it was profitable for ISPs to censor content, they would have been doing it already. But the internet naturally stays open and free because that is what the consumer wants. Using the government to force ISPs to be fair sounds nice, but it just gets the government's foot in the door for further regulation. 20 years down the line we could have a strict FCC regulated internet. This is the nature of government.
@theVAGINAntichrist So because you are afraid that the government may try to censor the internet in the future you want to give private companies the ability to censor it now?
If in the future the government tries to censor the internet the public, and by that I mean the people who vote and get involved in politics by making phone calls to their local representatives, you know the people that actually have the power in a democracy, will prevent it just as they will hopefully prevent this.
@KidOmniMan Private companies DON'T censor content. That's my point. If an ISP starts censoring content, it would immediately lose all of its customers. It's basic economics. Why get the government involved?
Also, the idea that one actually has power in American politics is a pipe dream. Look at the war, GITMO, corporate bailouts, and everything else that goes on in Washington. The government is a much bigger danger to open internet than private companies ever could be.
@theVAGINAntichrist "If an ISP starts censoring content, it would immediately lose all of its customers" Except for many Americans they only have one ISP to choose from.
@rylraven13 This is true, but if an ISP starts censoring content or cracking down on bandwidth for those Americans, that ISP would suffer significant PR issues and, in turn, lose customers who do have access to competitors. An ISP is out to make the maximum profit, and it is the most profitable to remain completely neutral.
Also, government enforced net neutrality is just another barrier to entry, so it would make it harder for new competitors to enter the market.
You prioritate the market above the right to information?
Well guess that's what every market drone does.
Yes all corporations is out for maximal profit but when there is no competitors, socalled a not free market, what do they have to fear in terms of cracking down on people like the PRC government.
haha I guess you live in the U.S, I doubt I'd ever have this discussion with a sane fellow EU citizen.
@underbjorn "You prioritate the market above the right to information?"
They go hand in hand in this discussion. ISPs are in the market for information. They try to sell people access to information through media called "the internet."
"Yes all corporations is out for maximal profit but when there is no competitors"
Everyone in America has access to satellite ISPs with plenty of competitors.
What, there are such areas in America? I know that cartel-creations and commercial monopolies operate in Africa and Asia to the drudge of the local population with the govt rendered useless by private sector lobbyists with huge capital backup to bribe and threaten.
But i didn't think it had gone that far in America.
I guess somewhere out in the woods here in Sweden, there are only one ISP as well, but then we have rigorous regulations to protect citizens' rights to information
@theVAGINAntichrist Yeah, the American government does a lot of shit the general population disapproves of but 60% of the American public doesn't even vote and out of the 40% that does very few get involved beyond that and most only vote democrat or republican. Because of this you have a government that knows it will not actually lose it's power. The reason why the government bends over backwards for business is because businesses take the time to voice their opinion where it matters.
@theVAGINAntichrist Until the general population learns how to actually use their government there won't be an effective one. Money may help get votes but without the actual votes you don't get to be in charge and politicians know this. It is really too bad that so few people are actually willing to vote for a party that they actually agree with. It's like believing that the only choice of beverage you have is Pepsi or Coke when you can actually pick Orange juice, tea, coffee or even water.
No offense, but you are like any selfstated conservative, you haul over only insults and moment 22-plauged statements that if answered makes you communist liberal socialist marxist nazi and if not, you state it anyhow.
Cult member is when you are dangerously attached to somebody, like Glenn Beck or Kim il-Sung.
@underbjorn Self-stated? Find me where I called myself a conservative. You assume everyone who disagress with you is a conservative? Have fun living in a world of nothing but black and white.
Dude, dude, I if somebody does see nuiances in social politics and so on. All extremism, both left and right, would be rendered useless if people opened up their eyes and saw it was not black and white, them or us.
But when giving commercial corporations actual control of public access to information they replaces the govt as the force people should FEAR. And I'd fear by God that day commercial corporations could censor my access to information.
@theVAGINAntichrist You are either a troll and have my deepest sympathies that you have nothing better to do than troll YouTube videos or you listen to Rush Limbaugh or any of the other "conservatives" that spew lies and half-truths and are unwilling to look at any argument or perspective beyond the first one you hear, which is pathetic. Being wrong is nothing to be ashamed of but not being able to consider that you may be wrong is pathetic. this isn't a conservative or liberal issue.
Net neutrality = censorship = government takeover. What's inaccurate? I know what the measure says it will do, and it's a bunch of bullshit. Making Internet searches fair, gimme a break.
@elfornse You mean corporations, some of which have more power than governments nickel and diming consumers into poverty with inadequate competition to reduce prices?
Corporations have more power and influence than governments.
There has to be a group that looks out for the people, unforntunately due to regulatory capture the government is coming down more and more on the sides of the corporations.
Telecoms writing internet law is like enron writing energy legislation, it ends badly.
its all perception cenk the dink's idea of freedom on the internet is the government limiting what private companies can do with the services they provide. If an ISP wants to sell faster website connections to big corporations so that they make more profit (the ISP) they have a right to do that.
cenk = pro socialism. every word he says is ridiculous.
You think there aren't Liberal\left "thinktanks" that are lobbied? COME ON SON.
@lennydiko Then again you brain dead conservatards don't know the definition of socialism, you just get the definition from whatever oil tycoon your tea bagging organization is fellating that day.
@donroche LOL, you contradict yourself. You say the internet should be lawless and open like the sea, then you say it should be owned and closed like a house. Either one or the other.
Has Obama ever not caved in on anything? Seriously the asshole whenever he proposes anything it's a compromise to start. From compromise it goes to bending over backward. From bending over backward it goes to groveling and selling out. Then the asshole crows fucking victory? He hasn't won a fucking thing. START and the repeal of Don't ask Don't Tell were done deals. And big fucking deal. Health care, financial reform and the rest are total losses. Goodbye democrats. And good fucking riddance!
Not when said companies deny you your right. Someone will start a new company? Yes and that can grow nation wide in how long and not be destroyed in competition?
@aSingleDallasGuy"LOL In your world business is always out to screw people right? The govt never is right? Try not paying you coming soon healthcare tax and let me know what your friendly IRS govt agent has to say about that. Business can't throw you in jail. But your nice govt can"
That was your straw man. I never said anything like that.
And once again, net neutrality was so NO ONE would mess with the internet. Once again you're lying.
@xxashyy I doubt Cenk is controled by such powerful companies as Audiobook and Gamefly. And I doubt those companies have any interest in controlling political news.
I have one theory: our corporate masters told the GOP to allow Obama to pass repealing of DADT. They did that because it was becoming too obvious that Obama is their puppet. If they force him too much and people becomes wary, Obama will become useless. DADT does not affect corporations, so it was a good issue to allow him to "win" so he can give some appearance of strenght to his voters while he keeps doing the corporations' bidding.
The most important issue to internet users, and that faggot in office just handed it over. That's fucking it, I'm sending that asshole knee pads for Christmas because the only position he's holding is the Lewinsky!
the jews are going to destroy the internet like the newspapers they already own everything, they are going to make people license for websites also that is in the jewish cyber security bill
The internet is great precisely because it is unregulated, they are going to regulate it and destroy it. Just like they destroyed TV and radio. People will have to be licensed to start websites, The Cyber security bill destroyed the internet as well.
Net Neutralility" in your mind means govt control to assure neutrality. How stupid is that? First off the govt isn't neutral, thus their involvement would mean the exact opposite. I know, what you really want is for govt to get their grubby hands on commerce to grab more taxes. That turns you on! In your world the internet would be socialist like your utopian dream for everthing else. There should be a separation clause in the constitution that the govt must stay away from the internet!
@AmericanNohbuddy ... Yeah and so? This is just another example of liberals giving something a feel good name like the dream act, net neutrality, etc..... These deceiving names have NOTHING to do with the ultimate intentions. C-O-N-T-R-O-L. That's all liberals want. Their facsist govt to tell them what to do, when and how to do it. This is every liberal's wet dream!
@AmericanNohbuddy. No I didn't. This is a slick way of what I just said. This so called Net Neutrality would allow the govt to intervene and control things on the internet based on some FCC idiot's view. My point is the govt should stay away and shut up. Liberals think the govt should be involved in every little thing as if the govt can do no wrong. Let consumers make their own choices. If Comcast of whomever does something consumers don't like then they won't ptronize them. That's capitalism.
@AmericanNohbuddy .... Then they don't patronize them either. Get it? Isn't capitalism grand? Look whom I am asking! LOL In your world business is always out to screw people right? The govt never is right? Try not paying you coming soon healthcare tax and let me know what your friendly IRS govt agent has to say about that. Business can't throw you in jail. But your nice govt can.
So you go into straw man arguments and the whole "IRS/taxation is evil and they put you in jail" thing because you didn't back up your claims and know that net neutrality is so no one messes with the internet.
watch the video again when he explains what it is, or actually look up what it is. And not on something like "free republic" or "conservapedia"
@AmericanNohbuddy ... the IRS can't put you in jail if you do not pay your taxes? That's a strawman? Welcome to reality. You are too brainwashed to keep making the point that the net neutrality goal is for your govt to control the internet, namely commerce. As a liberal I'm sure the idea that you will have to start paying more taxes for your online porn makes it doubly sexy. But for us normal people some FCC nutwad deciding anything is a turnoff.
@aSingleDallasGuy "LOL In your world business is always out to screw people right? The govt never is right? Try not paying you coming soon healthcare tax and let me know what your friendly IRS govt agent has to say about that. Business can't throw you in jail. But your nice govt can"
That was your straw man. I never said anything like that.
And once again, net neutrality was so NO ONE would mess with the internet. Once again you're lying.
@aSingleDallasGuy People like you make me sad, using corporate talking points and claiming they are your own opinions. Either that or you get paid to say stupid stuff like this by your own corporate sponsor. In any case you help prove and show what is wrong with America.
@ss4linkftw ... Corporate talking points? Yeah they all collude right and get together and fix everything, is that your schitzo view? How dare I present capitalism when your alternative is marxism where your hero govt can come in amd make everything so great! The truth is the exact opposite. Like a liberal you are expecting the govt will grant you internet access for FREE! Right? Just like your so-called free healthcare which you will soon get a bill for, or go to jail. LOL
@aSingleDallasGuy So, you WANT the corporations to take control of the Internet and cut off or limit access to websites that have been publicly available, unless you pay and extra $40 a month for Google like you'd pay for Showtime or HBO on digital cable television? I like capitalism and all, but it shouldn't be applied to the Internet. The Internet should stay a place where you can speak your mind, or be an ass, all you want without any extra charge to speed up access to fucking Google.
@Aarixan ..... Good grief! Corporations run many, many things today. What is different about this? If corporations cut off access guess what? They bring in less money. The FREE market is the only way to make the internet work for everyone. Again, if you choose a different corporation that will hurt the one you left. Competition is what makes capitalism sexy. To a marxist I know only govt run things turn you on. But try this sexy capitalism for a while. You wont go back.
@aSingleDallasGuy You are being naive (or ignorant) about corporate influence in business and politics. There is a fundamental difference between a corporation and a small family business. One hires a few hundred workers; the other hires thousands to millions. One may influence a city or county government; the other influences politics on a state, national or global scale. If one corporation is finding loopholes for profit, chances are others are on their way to finding them, too.
@aSingleDallasGuy Conservative = people who don't know shit about shit.
The net was neutral until corps killed net neutrality, we need the govt to reinstate it and penalize corps that throttle service and prevent data discrimination and tiered schemes.
But that's too complicated for simple people like you.
@dffykvn. LOL. Wow, that was so intelligent! My dad can beat up your dad! LOL. You want the govt to run everything if you had it your way. You NEED the govt to run your life, tell you when, how and where to do things. Because you are too pathetic to run it yourself. You expect to be handed *FREE* stuff that other people will provide you. You hate the idea of profit and capitalism. You think a govt run utopian society exists and you want a ride on that gravy train. You failed the reality check.
@aSingleDallasGuy I don't like it when some multi millionaire thinks he can rob thousands of people because idiots like you believe in the Divine Right of Money.
@dffykvn .... Great, so there is Karl Marx, Joseph Stalin and you who share the same view. Feeling proud? Since this is the very founding of our country and the basis of our existence, it is you on the outside looking in. It's too late, read the constitution. If you don't like it move to Cuba. Oh wait, maybe not. I saw they are now trying to move to capitalism and allow people to own businesses and make evil profits. I'm not sure where a nut like you can move to now.
We had regulated capitalism which worked pretty well until the last decade where you fascists (Mussolini's word for the marriage of Corporate and State power) took over.
Regulated capitalism isn't communism.
Maybe if you weren't homeschooled you'd know that....
But yer pappy said you dont need no book lurnin....then went off to fuck his wife who just happened to be his cousin, sister and mother rolled into one.
@dffykvn ..... "We had regulated capitalism which worked pretty well until the last decade" What? This govt regulates everything including you mom! "Had"? You are just mad because it isn't total regulation... aka... Marxism control. It's liberals who are much closer to fascism than conservatism. Fascism is a product of control. Conservatism wants less of it and liberals want more. Do the math! I realize I can't fix stupid with you, but all I can do is try.
I'm not sure being so open is all that good. I'm sick of not being able to unsubscribe to forums, message boards, etc etc. there alerady is censorship on them now anyway so freedom of speech is dwindling from the every constant "do not offend". Yet at the same time there is way too much offensive remarks. I just don't know anymore and don't forget almost everyone uses the same search engines anyway. Is it really the Gov't controlling or the the Corporations?
TheKtikat 4 months ago
3:12 - This host is retarded. Unfortunately, this Sen McConnell doesn't have a TELEPROMPTER telling him what to say, when to say, by his WRITERS, ie--Obama. Also, this video makes no sense. He continues to say "THEY'RE LYING! IT'S THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THAT!!!" but actually never explains himself what it means... Smarty pants. I recommend this Steven Crowder's "Can I Haz Interwebz" video. Actually accurate and intelligent.
petitepashi 5 months ago
This dumb little man is hilarious. He is so busy trying to attack republicans he doesn't see all his democrat friends slowly eating away his freedoms through regulation. Lobbyist aren't the problem, government officials making laws are the problem. We wouldn't have to worry about net neutrality if the government couldn't force us to do things through regulation.
thebestsumoeva 6 months ago
This guy sucks. Get to the fucking point!
DaddySaysTo 7 months ago
Ironically brought to you by netflix! The people who will most benefit from allowing people to use however the fuck much bandwidth they want.
Bros. Think back to the late 90s and early 2000s, I don't want some 2020 FCC chairman telling me what kind of content is acceptable.
s0beit 9 months ago
Yeah, net neutrality and stem cell research is why I would never vote republican. If the democrats would get rid of their gun control schemes, harden up on the illegal immigration and stop the affirmative action, then I'd actually vote for them.
However, we see here it wouldn't make a lick of difference. Corporations don't want net neutrality, so their errand boy starts tearing it down.
TheCarambah 10 months ago
this is one of cenk's best! schmock! lol
monadbornslippy 1 year ago
F*ck off Obama. Sorry I rarely use profanity. But the 'little voices' should not be state protected by these types of laws. The NY Times has millions of readers, yet my little voice cannot be heard on its front page. Why shouldn't NYT be coerced by the state to portion off a section of their front page to different groups who want to use NY Times for their purpose? The internet is what it is *precisely* because of lack of state coercion. Wake up and stop selling off the country you built.
rbairos1 1 year ago
@rbairos1
Because they do not own the NY Times...How about you let me take over a GM plant and make a special car just for me...Sounds fair...
deetjay1 2 days ago
@deetjay1 obama doesnt own the internet either,thats why the state has no moral ground to licence it. I think youve misread my post?
rbairos1 2 days ago
@rbairos1
I'm thinking you're just raving about Obama...The internet is going no where, and cannot be "owned" or controlled by any one person OR government...This video just tells you how fucking paranoid and dishonest governments, and/or political parties can be...
deetjay1 1 day ago
@deetjay1 wouldnt that be nice, but if the last hundred years is any indication, governments wont stop until theyve convinced the ignorant masses the internet needs their 'protection' just like theyve done to radio and tv.
rbairos1 15 hours ago
@rbairos1
Go for it! Governments have under estimated their own people before...Think of the tree...That's the public air waves...radio and television...Think of that tree as a part of the world's forests...THAT is the world wide web!...Control that! THAT is also where your rebellion against mediocrity and enslavement is growing...Ignorant people need not apply!
deetjay1 3 hours ago
So what's your proposal? BAN ALL EVIL PRIVATE INTERNET SERVERS? FCC SHOULD BE THE ONLY INTERNET COMPANY? How about a Single Payer Internet System huh? Yeah let's Nationalize the net. NOT!!!!! If Verizon Censors you CANCEL YOUR SUBSCRIPTION. If the Government is your only way of getting online and you don't like their service you can't go anywhere else.
I love how you bash capitalism and evil corporations then put a commercial on at the end.
GokuFievel32 1 year ago
@GokuFievel32 Do you have any idea what enforcing net neutrality means? You need to read up on it because you're not making any sense right now.
andrihb 1 year ago
@andrihb Enforcing net neutrality means allowing the state to dictate private entities peaceful expression.
If I build an ISP for the express purpose of allowing fans of Justin Bieber to text each other, this is now illegal and the state will force me to use my own-built technology for the benefit of non Bieber fans. When the state tells you what you can and cannot say with your own property, its not protection of free speech, its its destruction.
rbairos1 1 year ago 2
@andrihb Actually hes right, as the proposal is now it may not be direct control, but it allows it to become that eventually because it sets a precedent for what level of involvement the government can have with the internet. This is a slippery slope and its crazy to think this will not eventually lead to government control of the internet. The point of the internet and why its great is because its not subject to regulation. The architecture is completely open and needs to stay that way.
Konman91316 9 months ago
I just left a message w/ TYT - on the voice mail.
How are people supposed to believe that the REPUBLICANS cave in to sponsorship, when TYT uses sponsorSHIP with the netflick et cetera ads during EVERYING SINGLE YT video?
Hypocrites much?
Of course, I'll enjoy sifting through several dozen YT email responses, providing threats again me. This video is valid, it's sad it's been value has been diminished and invalided through many by the pre and trailing ads.
firewallx 1 year ago
@firewallx Can I ask you something... Are you being serious? You might be insane..
andrihb 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I favor free and open internet. I like the internet the way it is now. This is why I OPPOSE the Net Neutrality regulations.
saper321 1 year ago
@saper321 Lol you're such an idiot. You didn't even watch or understand this video did you?
firewallx 1 year ago
@firewallx
Maybe it is you who doesn't understand Net Neutrality and what it is really about. Did you think about that?
saper321 1 year ago
So what can we do to keep Net Neutrality? C'mon people let's do something about it! This is still America, isn't it?
StillAware 1 year ago
@StillAware "So what can we do to keep Net Neutrality? C'mon people let's do something about it! This is still America, isn't it?" In the short-term we can rabble, calling our representatives, protest in the street, etc. But, in the long-term we will need to change the structure of corporations. The people at the top of the corporate pyramid are calling all the shots and we often only find out what they did long after it's done. Unions should be democratic and should be on the board, I think.
tstruss912 1 year ago
were as bad as any country for spin propaganda and BS
ccm800 1 year ago
The first thing I will do is cancel my internet and if everyone follows we might be able to stop them. We all must stick together I hope for once in this country we can do this or it will get worse.
lorraine1074 1 year ago
I AM REALLY SICK OF OBAMA
tommypickles09 1 year ago
you fucking propaganda cocksuckers, Obama wants the power to sensor the internet because he cannot defend his failed liberal economic policies on there merits
theygunaHATEME 1 year ago
@theygunaHATEME "Censor," not "sensor" dummy.
drgorman 1 year ago
I mean the whole example is deadborne:
ISP: *cracks down on costumers bandwith usage somehow*
Costumer: *complains*
ISP: *shuts down information of the complaint to the public*
And voíla no PR issues to worry about.
It's all simple corporate maneuvering to ensure a stable costumer base.
But on the other hand it is a clear threat to modern democracy where the citizens' access to information is key to make f.e political choices.
underbjorn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@underbjorn "ISP: *shuts down information of the complaint to the public*"
How?
"But on the other hand it is a clear threat to modern democracy where the citizens' access to information is key to make f.e political choices."
Yes, and I contend that the state is a bigger danger to information than private organizations. I've already explained why.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
I know in Canada the CRTC recently reversed a decision that protected smaller ISPs from Bell Canada who wanted to charge wholesale ISPs, the same rate they charge their own customers.
Bell Canada has invested a lot in broadband infrastructure in Canada, and I have no problem with them recouping their initial costs and making a profit, but Bell claims they have they right to manage their networks, but they will choke out competition, by making ISPs just an extension of themselves.
Joxman2k 1 year ago
I'm going to sound bite "You're a sucker" and use it on my own web show. =P
catscan189 1 year ago
@USMC2375 The internet was net neutral with the government forcing net neutrality since it's inception.
But you're a conservative, so naturally inbreeding took place in your family tree and you were home schooled because "pappy didn't want you book lurnin", so blind ignorance is your forte'.
Why don't you look into what net neutrality is, how it helped netflix, video streaming sites like youtube and how it protected VOIP from ISPs trying to kill it in it's infancy
Facts make you nervous
dffykvn 1 year ago
@USMC2375 We had a socialist internet since the internet starts, that's what allowed it to be innovative and thrive.
It kept corporations from screwing their users and punished them when they tried.
Removing net neutrality damages the free market by introducing monopolistic methods of controlling the net.
Why do you hate the free market Mr Fuhrer?
dffykvn 1 year ago
@elfornse I agree with you completely.
If that were possible things would be a million times better.
But right now banishing corporations into the abyss is as likely as getting every world leader to hold hands and sing koombayah.
Even if govt dissolved (which won't happen) the corps have more power than governments.
Our one world government isn't a government, it's a collection of multinationals with countries bowing and scraping to them.
Dismantling the safety net helps THEM.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@elfornse Ideally govt law would keep businesses in check and make laws against them poisoning people, businesses that buy off the regulators remove the protections people have.
The good regulation becomes business friendly deregulation leading to injuries and death.
Removing ALL regulation doesn't fix the problem that the deregulation caused, it just removes the ability of people to protect themselves.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@elfornse When industrial giants are caught poisoning people they can spend millions on lawyers to cover up the damage and get away with killing people.
Removing regulations against pollution would just mean that there are fewer people that would catch on that the giant is murdering people, people would still die but it just wouldn't be called a crime and there wouldn't even be a show trial.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@elfornse Saying businesses won't break laws if there isn't a government to regulate them would be like saying there would be no crime if there were no police or courts to arrest criminals.
When judges aren't elected or bought by a business (that's what, 2% of judges?) then the business has far far more resources to fight claims against them.
If the govt doesn't stand up for the people, who will? Corp pockets are deeper than peoples letting them get away with literal murder.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@elfornse Your solution is the total dissolution of the government...
But that would just create a power vaccuum which would let the rich use their power to make themselves modern kings queens and dukes.
I'd go for dissolving the FED, arresting corrupt regulators, arresting businessmen engaged in bribery, arrest politicians that accept these bribes.
We need a competant government to protect us from powerful business interests.
Right now the govt is a corporate appendage
dffykvn 1 year ago
@elfornse That's what happens when corps BUY the govt.
The megacorps bought the govt to write pro business laws.
The pro business laws are championed by "free marketers" but they wind up giving disproportionate power to the businesses letting them crush people.
The fed is an organization run by banksters to protect banksters, I agree on the FED, prison time...or a firing squad, personally I'd go with the firing squad.
Our govt is an appendage of the corps they're supposed to regulate
dffykvn 1 year ago
@elfornse How can a DRO protect the victims of bank of americas fraduclosure crisis?
They're foreclosing on homes that have mortages paid off...
Yes people are getting kicked out of homes with fully paid off mortgages, people are being billed for their neighbors mortgages and people paying down their mortgage get double billed but it's never properly accounted for.
Thanks to regulatory capture and deregulation noones doing anything about this.
How can the "free market" solve this?
dffykvn 1 year ago
@elfornse Violence of government regulations is the funniest thing that I've ever heard.
When government doesn't take action and corporations had a problem they would use the pinkerton detectives as "dispute resolution organizers" and kill people until the strike ended.
What you want isn't realistic, it's a pipe dream, people need real world solutions not your fantasy land crap.
You think business is more honest than it really is. I know govt is corrupt, but business corrupts it.
dffykvn 1 year ago
Net Neutrality does not allow a government takeover up front, but it does allow the government to get its foot in the door for further regulation. You give the government an inch and takes a light year, as history shows us.
Too bad liberals never read history.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist Too bad you haven't read history...
Like the history of the internet...
That worked pretty damned well while the net was neutral for it's ENTIRE lifespan up until recently.
But don't let liberal facts and the always liberal reality get in the way of your conservative utopia
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn Show me one instance in which an ISP blocked information, slowed down someone's access or otherwise discriminated against someone.
P.S. lol you can't
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist I can't? Really?
Right off the top of my head I'd say Netflix.
Comcast is slowing netflix down.
When more and more ISPs pick winners and losers content will become more and more limited killing off innovation.
The vibrant net we have now is thanks to the power of innovation that the equal playing field of a neutral net.
Don't be sad, facts and reality are conservatives natural enemy, reality doesn't support your bullshit fantasy.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn So Comcast is doing something you disagree with and you think they should be violently forced to do otherwise.
Tell me how you can make this metaphysical leap. Comcast slowing down access? Switch to a new ISP. Not that I actually think you would grasp basic economics.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist Violent?
What violence?
How is telling a corp to not discriminate against content violent?
Man you're a pussy, maybe being the big bad govt telling you you can't drive drunk on moonshine is violent.
The internet was able to prosper because shit like that wasn't allowed.
We don't want to be serfs to corporate lords, create your fantasy modern feudal society in some other country, just leave america alone.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn dffykvn translated:
"My worldview is threatened by facts so I will throw insults. I also don't understand emergent systems so I will mock any disagreeing viewpoint."
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist
I throw insults because someone whos dumb enough to think that laws that protect against corporate predators = government violence
Taking you seriously only legitimizes idiocy
Tell you what, why don't you refute the fact that we've had an open internet since it was created and that it allowed new technology to thrive, new industries like VOIP that threaten the old power structure so they want to throttle it making us use old inefficient services that should die out
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn "laws that protect against corporate predators"
It's an excuse to get the state's foot in the door for further regulations on the internet. Just like the state always does.
"we've had an open internet since it was created and that it allowed new technology to thrive"
Yes, and you want to end that by getting the government involved. It must hurt being that stupid.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist Do you know what net neutrality is?
Please, read up on it.
The govt forcing net neutrality on the telecoms is what we've had.
When the telecoms tried to destroy VOIP services because they were an inexpensive replacement for inefficient costly land lines the telecoms tried to kill VOIP, but the govt protected the fledgeling industry from being offed by people who wanted to protect their inefficient product instead of building a better one.
The wrong side of history
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn So a company wants to operate in a way that you disagree with, so you want to violently force them to do otherwise. Enjoy being a fascist.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist No a company operated in a fascist way.
Opposing fascism isn't fascism.
Why would you support a company killing a competitor to protect an inefficient system?
What do you have against innovation and freedom?
Do you believe we should treat CEOs like monarchs?
Why do you hate freedom and the free market so much?
Why do you want to make anti competative moves legal and make the free market less free?
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn Looks like I've backed you into a corner now. Can't argue for your blighted position, so start strawmanning mine. I hope you enjoy living in a fascist dictatorship with no free speech.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist You mean a fascist dictatorship where corporations control what you're allowed to see, what programs you're allowed to use and what programs they won't let you access?
Yes thank you, that is exactly what I'm trying to prevent.
I'm glad you've seen the light and support net neutrality!
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn "I know you are but what am I?"
Stay classy, liberals.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist You agree with me that a powerful group controlling what we can and can't see and do on the internet is a bad thing...
Which is why net neutrality has to stay in place so ISPs don't kill new businesses, prevent competition, perpetuate monopolies, prevent access to sites that disagree with their viewpoints...I'm glad you think we need to preserve a neutral net.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn "ISPs preventing competition"
lol
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist So a telecom that provides internet service trying to throttle a voip competitor that threatens to replace their land line service isn't an anticompetative measure? It doesn't prevent a new industry from setting up shop, providing a better service and force the telecom to compete in quality?
Really?
Nah you can't be THAT ignorant.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn Yes, it's called competition in the marketplace.
Learn to economics.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist So instead of the telecoms providing a better cheaper land line service, or providing voip of their own, your definition of competition in the marketplace is the isps trying to throttle voip use so people were forced away from skype and other voip clients?
You have a funny definition of competition.....it's very different from the definition the other 99.9999999% of the human race uses.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn False dichotomy, begging the question, and a strawman all in one comment. Thank you for providing some great examples of logical fallacies for the class. Amazing that some knowledge can finally be garnered from comments so bereft of intellectual thought. There is a diamond amid the rough.
Tell me, how is it that someone can be as mentally sterile as you are? Is it a brain size issue, maybe an early developmental head injury? I exclude the probability of willfull ignorance.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist You're amazing, you still haven't said how I'm wrong.
You haven't said anything to disprove that this is just an anti competative move by the telecom industry.
Maybe I missed the part where you said how telecoms throttling VOIP and netflix AREN'T anti competative measurs....where was that again?
Why don't you try arguing against my points for once.
Let me guess your response, you won't tell me how it's fair for them to throttle but you will say something about me.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn A statist talking about fairness. These comments are hilarious. Keep em coming.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist I've repeated my question 10 times, I've asked it in different ways and explained my position every time...
So far you've called me a statist but haven't told me whether or not a telecom giant throttling programs it competes with is fair competition on an open market or an attempt at an anti competative monopoly.
I've said time and time again the death of net neutrality is an anti competative move by telecom giants to kill the free net...debate THAT, you haven't yet.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn Looks like I've got you running in circles. As expected from a naive liberal, when your worldview is threatened by facts you resort to logical fallacies. Either selective myopia or mental retardation has hindered you in this discussion. It's funny watching a cult member squirm.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist Running in circles?
More like trying to find the right way to ask a question to get an answer from a brick wall.
I've defined net neutrality and explained how killing it stifles innovation and new business a dozen times but you can't seem to respond with anything other than calling me a statist, a liberal blahblahblah
You asked me for one example, I gave you two, you don't have a proper response to my examples so you're refusing to admit that you're wrong.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn The Vaginachrist is a troll, don't waste your time.
KidOmniMan 1 year ago
@KidOmniMan "I don't understand emergent systems so anyone who disagrees with me is a troll."
Very mature way of looking at the world.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist Read up on Net Neutrality, don't listen to me just read 4 or 5 articles, not written by rush limbaugh about it and then form an opinion. This isn't a liberal or conservative issue it is a FREEDOM issue. I don't want anyone to be able to censor the internet not the government or private corporations. Prove to me you aren't a troll because you sure sound like one.
The only people I have talked to who are legitimately against net neutrality never seem to actually understand it
KidOmniMan 1 year ago
@KidOmniMan I don't read Rush Limbaugh. If it was profitable for ISPs to censor content, they would have been doing it already. But the internet naturally stays open and free because that is what the consumer wants. Using the government to force ISPs to be fair sounds nice, but it just gets the government's foot in the door for further regulation. 20 years down the line we could have a strict FCC regulated internet. This is the nature of government.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist So because you are afraid that the government may try to censor the internet in the future you want to give private companies the ability to censor it now?
If in the future the government tries to censor the internet the public, and by that I mean the people who vote and get involved in politics by making phone calls to their local representatives, you know the people that actually have the power in a democracy, will prevent it just as they will hopefully prevent this.
KidOmniMan 1 year ago
@KidOmniMan Private companies DON'T censor content. That's my point. If an ISP starts censoring content, it would immediately lose all of its customers. It's basic economics. Why get the government involved?
Also, the idea that one actually has power in American politics is a pipe dream. Look at the war, GITMO, corporate bailouts, and everything else that goes on in Washington. The government is a much bigger danger to open internet than private companies ever could be.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist "If an ISP starts censoring content, it would immediately lose all of its customers" Except for many Americans they only have one ISP to choose from.
rylraven13 1 year ago
@rylraven13 This is true, but if an ISP starts censoring content or cracking down on bandwidth for those Americans, that ISP would suffer significant PR issues and, in turn, lose customers who do have access to competitors. An ISP is out to make the maximum profit, and it is the most profitable to remain completely neutral.
Also, government enforced net neutrality is just another barrier to entry, so it would make it harder for new competitors to enter the market.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist ---
You prioritate the market above the right to information?
Well guess that's what every market drone does.
Yes all corporations is out for maximal profit but when there is no competitors, socalled a not free market, what do they have to fear in terms of cracking down on people like the PRC government.
haha I guess you live in the U.S, I doubt I'd ever have this discussion with a sane fellow EU citizen.
underbjorn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@underbjorn "You prioritate the market above the right to information?"
They go hand in hand in this discussion. ISPs are in the market for information. They try to sell people access to information through media called "the internet."
"Yes all corporations is out for maximal profit but when there is no competitors"
Everyone in America has access to satellite ISPs with plenty of competitors.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@rylraven13 ---
What, there are such areas in America? I know that cartel-creations and commercial monopolies operate in Africa and Asia to the drudge of the local population with the govt rendered useless by private sector lobbyists with huge capital backup to bribe and threaten.
But i didn't think it had gone that far in America.
I guess somewhere out in the woods here in Sweden, there are only one ISP as well, but then we have rigorous regulations to protect citizens' rights to information
underbjorn 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist Yeah, the American government does a lot of shit the general population disapproves of but 60% of the American public doesn't even vote and out of the 40% that does very few get involved beyond that and most only vote democrat or republican. Because of this you have a government that knows it will not actually lose it's power. The reason why the government bends over backwards for business is because businesses take the time to voice their opinion where it matters.
KidOmniMan 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist Until the general population learns how to actually use their government there won't be an effective one. Money may help get votes but without the actual votes you don't get to be in charge and politicians know this. It is really too bad that so few people are actually willing to vote for a party that they actually agree with. It's like believing that the only choice of beverage you have is Pepsi or Coke when you can actually pick Orange juice, tea, coffee or even water.
KidOmniMan 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist ---
No offense, but you are like any selfstated conservative, you haul over only insults and moment 22-plauged statements that if answered makes you communist liberal socialist marxist nazi and if not, you state it anyhow.
Cult member is when you are dangerously attached to somebody, like Glenn Beck or Kim il-Sung.
underbjorn 1 year ago
@underbjorn Self-stated? Find me where I called myself a conservative. You assume everyone who disagress with you is a conservative? Have fun living in a world of nothing but black and white.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist ---
Dude, dude, I if somebody does see nuiances in social politics and so on. All extremism, both left and right, would be rendered useless if people opened up their eyes and saw it was not black and white, them or us.
But when giving commercial corporations actual control of public access to information they replaces the govt as the force people should FEAR. And I'd fear by God that day commercial corporations could censor my access to information.
underbjorn 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist You are either a troll and have my deepest sympathies that you have nothing better to do than troll YouTube videos or you listen to Rush Limbaugh or any of the other "conservatives" that spew lies and half-truths and are unwilling to look at any argument or perspective beyond the first one you hear, which is pathetic. Being wrong is nothing to be ashamed of but not being able to consider that you may be wrong is pathetic. this isn't a conservative or liberal issue.
KidOmniMan 1 year ago
Finally..... using that Antoine Fischer audio.
Zombie1990 1 year ago
Obama didn't cave on shit. These bitches are working together on all this. They will get fucked up in due time.
Shavard3 1 year ago
.......... .......... zzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzz
mrchiefofsinners 1 year ago
wait, I thought net neutrality was a good thing? and FCC did the right thing by making sure internet companies couldn't limit your traffic. No?
Fig1024 1 year ago
republicans can suck my liberal testicles
jflrsvt 1 year ago
Net neutrality = censorship = government takeover. What's inaccurate? I know what the measure says it will do, and it's a bunch of bullshit. Making Internet searches fair, gimme a break.
dgallegos4201 1 year ago
@elfornse You mean corporations, some of which have more power than governments nickel and diming consumers into poverty with inadequate competition to reduce prices?
Corporations have more power and influence than governments.
There has to be a group that looks out for the people, unforntunately due to regulatory capture the government is coming down more and more on the sides of the corporations.
Telecoms writing internet law is like enron writing energy legislation, it ends badly.
dffykvn 1 year ago
its all perception cenk the dink's idea of freedom on the internet is the government limiting what private companies can do with the services they provide. If an ISP wants to sell faster website connections to big corporations so that they make more profit (the ISP) they have a right to do that.
cenk = pro socialism. every word he says is ridiculous.
You think there aren't Liberal\left "thinktanks" that are lobbied? COME ON SON.
someone punch cenk in the face so he wakes up.
lennydiko 1 year ago
@lennydiko
lol
sure, the question is and also the debate is, "do they have the right to do that?"
Since you just answered the most important question without basis of reasoning, you win (?)
YoungSpotUBrock 1 year ago
@lennydiko So you want to make it legal for corporations to censor the net?
You want to give corporations the power to slow down what you have access to?
You want comcast to have the right to make their competitors sites too slow to access?
There will be no competition if everyone does it.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@lennydiko Then again you brain dead conservatards don't know the definition of socialism, you just get the definition from whatever oil tycoon your tea bagging organization is fellating that day.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@donroche LOL, you contradict yourself. You say the internet should be lawless and open like the sea, then you say it should be owned and closed like a house. Either one or the other.
MastermindX 1 year ago
Demint started the recession
boricuamm707 1 year ago
I am not up on this issue. What can I read?
Mikums2 1 year ago
@elfornse Are you high?
What other body can protect from private sector abuses, crimes and coverups?
The problem is when businesses buy politicians.
dffykvn 1 year ago
Has Obama ever not caved in on anything? Seriously the asshole whenever he proposes anything it's a compromise to start. From compromise it goes to bending over backward. From bending over backward it goes to groveling and selling out. Then the asshole crows fucking victory? He hasn't won a fucking thing. START and the repeal of Don't ask Don't Tell were done deals. And big fucking deal. Health care, financial reform and the rest are total losses. Goodbye democrats. And good fucking riddance!
hamnose 1 year ago
Yes. Republicans pushed for this idiocy, but in the end Barack didn't firght strongly agst it.
I fear our country is truly being run by big companies & their lobbyists.
DillonDee1 1 year ago
Now the Obama zombies realize they voted for an empty suits.
jobrien2001 1 year ago
Cenk, Cenk, Cenk They are regulating it, to keep it free.
Soon, if you disagree, they will shoot you to keep you alive.
...makes perfect sense to me. But then again, I am The Computer Nazi!
The truth is the world wide web was working just fine and that's the reason our loving gobernment got involved.
TheComputerNazi 1 year ago
@TheComputerNazi you call yourself 'thecomputernazi' like it is supposed to mean something but you have no videos? maybe you should get on that?
canadianeh24 1 year ago
@canadianeh24
I'm on it, Sir Website should be up in a few days too.
Happy Holidays!!! Canadianeh24 Thanks for the interest.
TheComputerNazi 1 year ago
@TheComputerNazi You know it was operating just fine UNDER net neutrality....
The corporations won in court to kill net neutrality which leads to a tiered internet.
If the FCC grew a sack and reinstated true net neutrality and told the businesses to fuck off the internet WOULDN'T change at ALL.
dffykvn 1 year ago
i blame capitalism
AAAstudios2 1 year ago 10
...Republicans are destroying everything...
brb suicide
MyOldName 1 year ago 2
@ricky0317
So keeping net neutrality the way it is, where not the government or companies screw over people, is a bad thing?
AmericanNohbuddy 1 year ago
@ricky0317
Not when said companies deny you your right. Someone will start a new company? Yes and that can grow nation wide in how long and not be destroyed in competition?
AmericanNohbuddy 1 year ago
obama=punk ass
fashizze 1 year ago
Not only did he go in the back seat. He took off his pants, bent ovah and spelled R.U.N!
Fuck you Obama!
MobRulesNow 1 year ago
In light of McConnell's speech, perhaps a nickname for Republicans should be "government alarmists"
DAK4Blizzard 1 year ago
you have no where to run, we lookin for you, we gone find u, so you can run and tell that, home boy
TheAce1082 1 year ago
George W Bush and Barack Obama, the scarecrow and the lion.
MagnesDrachen13 1 year ago
Obama caves for the 457th time?
Gee, there's a shock.
Saaduk92 1 year ago
@donroche That's the point of making a law that prevents companies from controlling parts of the sea and only letting certain ships through.
MastermindX 1 year ago
Finally, the best side of Cenk.
Had a good day?
FormerlyKnownAsNopez 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@aSingleDallasGuy"LOL In your world business is always out to screw people right? The govt never is right? Try not paying you coming soon healthcare tax and let me know what your friendly IRS govt agent has to say about that. Business can't throw you in jail. But your nice govt can"
That was your straw man. I never said anything like that.
And once again, net neutrality was so NO ONE would mess with the internet. Once again you're lying.
AmericanNohbuddy 1 year ago
@xxashyy I doubt Cenk is controled by such powerful companies as Audiobook and Gamefly. And I doubt those companies have any interest in controlling political news.
MastermindX 1 year ago
I have one theory: our corporate masters told the GOP to allow Obama to pass repealing of DADT. They did that because it was becoming too obvious that Obama is their puppet. If they force him too much and people becomes wary, Obama will become useless. DADT does not affect corporations, so it was a good issue to allow him to "win" so he can give some appearance of strenght to his voters while he keeps doing the corporations' bidding.
MastermindX 1 year ago
. . . and that's game folks from now on we're just rearranging the deck chairs
deathreaver3356 1 year ago
The most important issue to internet users, and that faggot in office just handed it over. That's fucking it, I'm sending that asshole knee pads for Christmas because the only position he's holding is the Lewinsky!
Mortello 1 year ago
Canton Ohio stand up!!!!!!!!!!!
AcheronErebus 1 year ago
Land of the free my ass.
Moue666 1 year ago
the jews are going to destroy the internet like the newspapers they already own everything, they are going to make people license for websites also that is in the jewish cyber security bill
Graham6762 1 year ago
Yo dawg, I heard Obama loves to cave. So we put Obama inside a cave, so he can cave in while a cave caves in on him.
bb1televator 1 year ago 2
The internet is great precisely because it is unregulated, they are going to regulate it and destroy it. Just like they destroyed TV and radio. People will have to be licensed to start websites, The Cyber security bill destroyed the internet as well.
Graham6762 1 year ago
The internet is the only thing unregulated and it is awesome, the FCC will just ruin it you ruinous idiots.
Graham6762 1 year ago
whats with the adds. you sell out!!
AUSfreemanAUS 1 year ago
@AUSfreemanAUS
no ads mean no money for them.
AmericanNohbuddy 1 year ago
if this shit happens, i grab my nauget and join alqueda. ill go shootin up the white house.
cooldudewitpot 1 year ago
Obama knows what he is doing independents decide elections and he is trying to appeal to them which is smart if you ask me!
wishinglies 1 year ago
Obama is black as caca and sucks like wokka flocka. OOOOOOOH
OldmanMaestro 1 year ago
Net Neutralility" in your mind means govt control to assure neutrality. How stupid is that? First off the govt isn't neutral, thus their involvement would mean the exact opposite. I know, what you really want is for govt to get their grubby hands on commerce to grab more taxes. That turns you on! In your world the internet would be socialist like your utopian dream for everthing else. There should be a separation clause in the constitution that the govt must stay away from the internet!
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy
did you watch the video?
AmericanNohbuddy 1 year ago
@AmericanNohbuddy ... Yeah and so? This is just another example of liberals giving something a feel good name like the dream act, net neutrality, etc..... These deceiving names have NOTHING to do with the ultimate intentions. C-O-N-T-R-O-L. That's all liberals want. Their facsist govt to tell them what to do, when and how to do it. This is every liberal's wet dream!
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy
then you ignored what he said it is. You don't want it to keep it the way it is now?
AmericanNohbuddy 1 year ago
@AmericanNohbuddy. No I didn't. This is a slick way of what I just said. This so called Net Neutrality would allow the govt to intervene and control things on the internet based on some FCC idiot's view. My point is the govt should stay away and shut up. Liberals think the govt should be involved in every little thing as if the govt can do no wrong. Let consumers make their own choices. If Comcast of whomever does something consumers don't like then they won't ptronize them. That's capitalism.
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy
And what if the company they want to go next does the same thing? It isn't just comcast that wants this.
net neutrality is so they don't screw over people, its the way it's been forever.
Notice how he said "so the government can't meddle with the internet" along with the companies. Which you ignored or lied about
AmericanNohbuddy 1 year ago
@AmericanNohbuddy .... Then they don't patronize them either. Get it? Isn't capitalism grand? Look whom I am asking! LOL In your world business is always out to screw people right? The govt never is right? Try not paying you coming soon healthcare tax and let me know what your friendly IRS govt agent has to say about that. Business can't throw you in jail. But your nice govt can.
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy
So you go into straw man arguments and the whole "IRS/taxation is evil and they put you in jail" thing because you didn't back up your claims and know that net neutrality is so no one messes with the internet.
watch the video again when he explains what it is, or actually look up what it is. And not on something like "free republic" or "conservapedia"
AmericanNohbuddy 1 year ago
@AmericanNohbuddy ... the IRS can't put you in jail if you do not pay your taxes? That's a strawman? Welcome to reality. You are too brainwashed to keep making the point that the net neutrality goal is for your govt to control the internet, namely commerce. As a liberal I'm sure the idea that you will have to start paying more taxes for your online porn makes it doubly sexy. But for us normal people some FCC nutwad deciding anything is a turnoff.
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@aSingleDallasGuy "LOL In your world business is always out to screw people right? The govt never is right? Try not paying you coming soon healthcare tax and let me know what your friendly IRS govt agent has to say about that. Business can't throw you in jail. But your nice govt can"
That was your straw man. I never said anything like that.
And once again, net neutrality was so NO ONE would mess with the internet. Once again you're lying.
AmericanNohbuddy 1 year ago
Comment removed
AmericanNohbuddy 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy People like you make me sad, using corporate talking points and claiming they are your own opinions. Either that or you get paid to say stupid stuff like this by your own corporate sponsor. In any case you help prove and show what is wrong with America.
ss4linkftw 1 year ago
@ss4linkftw ... Corporate talking points? Yeah they all collude right and get together and fix everything, is that your schitzo view? How dare I present capitalism when your alternative is marxism where your hero govt can come in amd make everything so great! The truth is the exact opposite. Like a liberal you are expecting the govt will grant you internet access for FREE! Right? Just like your so-called free healthcare which you will soon get a bill for, or go to jail. LOL
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@aSingleDallasGuy Thanks for proving my point.
ss4linkftw 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy You are incredibly wrong on SOOOO many levels. I don't even know where to begin. Wow
MagnesDrachen13 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy So, you WANT the corporations to take control of the Internet and cut off or limit access to websites that have been publicly available, unless you pay and extra $40 a month for Google like you'd pay for Showtime or HBO on digital cable television? I like capitalism and all, but it shouldn't be applied to the Internet. The Internet should stay a place where you can speak your mind, or be an ass, all you want without any extra charge to speed up access to fucking Google.
Aarixan 1 year ago
@Aarixan ..... Good grief! Corporations run many, many things today. What is different about this? If corporations cut off access guess what? They bring in less money. The FREE market is the only way to make the internet work for everyone. Again, if you choose a different corporation that will hurt the one you left. Competition is what makes capitalism sexy. To a marxist I know only govt run things turn you on. But try this sexy capitalism for a while. You wont go back.
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy You are being naive (or ignorant) about corporate influence in business and politics. There is a fundamental difference between a corporation and a small family business. One hires a few hundred workers; the other hires thousands to millions. One may influence a city or county government; the other influences politics on a state, national or global scale. If one corporation is finding loopholes for profit, chances are others are on their way to finding them, too.
DAK4Blizzard 1 year ago
@DAK4Blizzard He's conservative, he doesn't know anything about the real world only conservative fantasyland.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy Conservative = people who don't know shit about shit.
The net was neutral until corps killed net neutrality, we need the govt to reinstate it and penalize corps that throttle service and prevent data discrimination and tiered schemes.
But that's too complicated for simple people like you.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn. LOL. Wow, that was so intelligent! My dad can beat up your dad! LOL. You want the govt to run everything if you had it your way. You NEED the govt to run your life, tell you when, how and where to do things. Because you are too pathetic to run it yourself. You expect to be handed *FREE* stuff that other people will provide you. You hate the idea of profit and capitalism. You think a govt run utopian society exists and you want a ride on that gravy train. You failed the reality check.
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy
God, do you troll everywhere and anytime?
Can you do something productive instead of shitting off your talking points?
YoungSpotUBrock 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy I don't like it when some multi millionaire thinks he can rob thousands of people because idiots like you believe in the Divine Right of Money.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn .... Great, so there is Karl Marx, Joseph Stalin and you who share the same view. Feeling proud? Since this is the very founding of our country and the basis of our existence, it is you on the outside looking in. It's too late, read the constitution. If you don't like it move to Cuba. Oh wait, maybe not. I saw they are now trying to move to capitalism and allow people to own businesses and make evil profits. I'm not sure where a nut like you can move to now.
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago
@aSingleDallasGuy Who the hell is talking about Communism?
We had regulated capitalism which worked pretty well until the last decade where you fascists (Mussolini's word for the marriage of Corporate and State power) took over.
Regulated capitalism isn't communism.
Maybe if you weren't homeschooled you'd know that....
But yer pappy said you dont need no book lurnin....then went off to fuck his wife who just happened to be his cousin, sister and mother rolled into one.
dffykvn 1 year ago
@dffykvn ..... "We had regulated capitalism which worked pretty well until the last decade" What? This govt regulates everything including you mom! "Had"? You are just mad because it isn't total regulation... aka... Marxism control. It's liberals who are much closer to fascism than conservatism. Fascism is a product of control. Conservatism wants less of it and liberals want more. Do the math! I realize I can't fix stupid with you, but all I can do is try.
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago