Judge Napolitano and Shelly Roche Discuss Net Neutrality on Freedom Watch

From: BreakTheMatrix
http://bytestyle.tv/node/189 - The gov't is ramping up it's efforts to monitor and control our activities online.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Dollar
• Economic
• Stimulus
• Republic
• Democracy
• America
• Sovereignty
• US
• Health
• Fed
• internet
• Alex
• Ron Paul
• 911
• towers
• congress
• executive
• Documentary
• game
• Terror
• war
• Depression
• freedom
• bank
• global
• change
• president
• flu
• empire
• state
• world
• nation
• police
• explosive
• united
• 1776
• tech
• building
• national
• gold
• silver
• we
• are
• patriot
• fire
• truth
• military
• government
• Peace
• quarantine
• election
• selection
• law
• vote
• care
• tyranny
• time
• report
• operation

[FieldMarshalB]

@coolibrary Do you have any problems from the currently unregulated (uncontrolled) internet that exists? Have you ever been unable to get to a sight because your provider is preventing it? I never have, and if I did, I would change providers. The whole debate has taken on an ironic tone where the free internet is a supposed problem, and the government has labeled their alternative where they would control the internet as neutral, implying the net today is not neutral. What a feat!

[madass888]

@coolibrary

Big business don't like free markets, because free markets means free competition and it's easier for smaller guys to enter. Regulation only helps big companies to control the market, because only they have the resources to abide these laws. This keeps out competition from smaller guys. For example the toy industry. All the testing that's required keeps small business out, because they can't pay the laboratories.

[coolibrary]

I cannot believe how far into stupidity people in our country have fallen. Or maybe he and others like him are being paid by mega corporations to speak on their behalf? The FCC seeks to "regulate" only to keep corporate America from limiting our freedom to access of information REGARDLESS of how much money we make. When the "free market" is dominated by mega rich corporations that squeeze out burgeoning competition, then we all become slaves to only a few and then our knowledge is truly limited.

[TheNavigateur]

Defending freedom for companies to limit your freedom! Didn't we try that once? It was called slavery. What a douchebag this Napolitano is.

[noogie123]

@milkmandan77 bush isn't actually a conservative in terms of political philosophy, hence why i said that these terms are over used etc. He is a conservative in the common usage of the word,a social conservative for sure, but i used it to highlight that some things so called "progressives" are for (repeal of patriot act) should be supported, and they are not aiming for some totalitarian socialist state.

Who are the marxists + proof? (note that socialists are not necessarily marxists)

[noogie123]

@milkmandan77 Actually, since i don't live in the US, i am not a regular consumer of either side of your hyper partisan "news" media. So don't try and fit me into one of your inaccurate stereotypes.

Although, on a scale of bullshit masquerading as news, fox beats any other cable "news" network hands down (Andrew napolitano and John stossil are the only two who i have some respect for)

[milkmandan77]

@noogie123

BZZZ. wrong answers. from bush being a conservative to not having heard of obama's marxist cabinet members, you have officially been watching wayyy too much rachel maddow.

[noogie123]

@milkmandan77 and yes, "progressives" favor a bigger role for the state, but a bigger role does not mean they are incrementally trying to bring about a totalitarian regime (and yes i have read the road to serfdom). Also, dont forget that it was a so called "conservative" president that instituted the patriot act, arguably the biggest encroachment on civil liberties in the US ever, which was opposed far more by so called "progressives".

btw such labels over used and somewhat meaningless.

[noogie123]

@milkmandan77 utter rubbish, you have been watching way too much fox news. I am by no means an obama supporter, but to imply he is a marxist or a socialist just shows a profound ignorance of what those terms actually mean. Who are the supposed "ultra socialist/marxists" in his cabinet?

yes the state naturally tries to increase its power, but the issue of net neutrality is not a government takeover, it is not socializing the internet, it is preservation of the current system.

[milkmandan77]

@noogie123

net neutrality is a signature move of the progressive movement. 'progressive' means in tiny, unnoticeable increments, tending towards "progress," i.e. socialism.

NN is step one out of forty, and step forty is the complete nationalization of the internet and media, hugo chavez style.

it is a well-known fact that obama has packed his cabinet with ultra-socialist/marxist thinkers that praise thugs like hugo chavez and mao, and they want power over YOUR internet.

obama = enemy within