Tag Archives: Net Neutrality

LAME DUCK – PART TWO

On August 24, liberal publication, Mother Jones, ran an article outlining things that the current president has done after January 2015 when he officially became a lame duck president. Of course, liberals think these things are great. The following is a discussion of five more of these items.

The current president successfully argued in favor of same-sex marriage before the Supreme Court: He did not. How can Mother Jones tell such a whopper? Of course he was against same-sex marriage when he was campaigning, but has now flip-flopped on the issue. The same-sex marriage ruling by the Supreme Court has put many Americans in direct conflict with their faith. We all know the story about the baker who would not bake a cake for a same-sex wedding. Instead of simply finding another baker, the couple, with the support of liberals, took steps to destroy the baker’s business. I have also seen some liberals calling for the firing of folks working at court houses who refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Americans shouldn’t have to choose between their livelihood and their faith. This ruling is a scourge.

The current president has put in place economic sanctions on Russia that have Vladimir Putin reeling: In December 2014, the current president said, through a spokesman, that he would sign newly passed legislation expanding measure intended to cordon off large Russian state firms from Western financing and technology while also providing $350 million in arms and military equipment to Ukraine as it battles a pro-Russian insurgency in its eastern regions. According to the New York Times, the president was not in favor of this legislation, but Congress passed the measure without opposition, making a veto politically untenable.

The current president pressured the FCC to approve net neutrality rules: According to thehill.com, a House appropriations bill released Wednesday would block the Federal Communication Commission from implementing its net neutrality rules until the courts weigh in on the issue. The rules, adopted earlier this year and supported by the current president reclassify Internet providers as utilities, and would prohibit broadband and mobile carriers from selectively blocking or slowing Web traffic. The rules also reclassify broadband as a regulated common-carrier service, instead of treating it as a lightly regulated information service, as the FCC has done for the past decade.

This government overreach measure is going to be tied up in the courts for a while. I wouldn’t exactly call this an accomplishment by the current administration.

Issued new EPA coal regulations: On Monday, June 29, 2015, the Supreme Court blocked one of the Obama administration’s most ambitious environmental initiatives, an EPA regulation meant to limit emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants from coal-fired power plants.

Industry groups and about 20 states had challenged the EPA’s decision to regulate emissions, saying the agency had failed to take into account the punishing costs its rule would impose. This is from the New York Times.

This was certainly not good for the middle class/working class. Thank goodness the highest court in the land has blocked it. However, on August 3, 2015, the current president and the EPA announced the Clean Power Plan – a historic and important step in reducing carbon pollution from power plants that takes real action on climate change. Here we go again…war on the middle class/working class.

Issued an executive order on immigration: In June Judges Jennifer Walker Elrod and Jerry Smith dealt a significant blow to the current president’s executive actions on immigration. The judges will also play key roles in deciding whether the controversial programs are legally sound. This is a lawless executive order that is being held up in the courts.

The above is more of this president’s attempt to destroy the middle class and make it difficult on small businesses.

Facebooktwitter

ON NET NEUTRALITY

The Federal Communications Commission past a set of Internet regulations known as “Net Neutrality” by a vote of 3-2 yesterday, February 26, 2015. What is Net Neutrality and what’s it going to mean to me are the questions most asked by private citizens such as myself.

According to USA Today, Net Neutrality is the principle that Internet Service Providers should give consumers access to all legal content and applications on an equal basis, without favoring some sources and blocking others. It prohibits ISPs from charging content providers for speedier delivery of their content on “fast lanes” and deliberately slowing the content from content providers that may compete with ISPs.

ISP stands for Internet Service Provider and is a company that provides you access to the Internet. Examples include ComCast, AT&T, Verizon, etc. Content providers include companies such as Amazon and NetFlix. In other words, content providers are companies that create and distribute content. I guess Wing Nut Gal is a content provider. Sometimes ISPs can also be content providers.

The regulations are 317 pages long, but it appears that only the commissioners have seen the regulations. According to TomsGuide.com, Net Neutrality is about treating all content on the Internet equally. Websites like NetFlix and Amazon won’t be given preferential treatment in relation to any other website, no matter how small. So, ISPs can’t give content providers preferential treatment/access to more bandwidth to the Amazons and the NetFlixes of the Internet.
This is like everything else the government throws out at us. It sounds good, but what are the unintended consequences or the intended consequences, for that matter. Since I started Wing Nut Gal, I’ve said this until I’m blue in the face. Our country was founded on the principle of limited government. Government would stay out of people’s lives and give the individuals room to take care of themselves and create wealth. So, anytime the government sticks its nose into something, we have to beware. Now, I’m not a libertarian. I’m a mainstream Republican. So, I realize that government has a role to play in a lot of aspects of our lives, but we’re headed down the road to becoming a socialist country where the government provides for its citizens womb to tomb everything. You don’t have to take responsibility for any aspect of your life, government will provide.

Do you think the government is going to stop with these 317 pages of regulations? If your answer is yes, I have some swamp land in Louisiana that you might be interested in. Eventually, it’s going to be costlier to access the Internet and it won’t be as user-friendly. Will certain types of speech be prohibited? I’m sure that somewhere within the government, some little bureaucrat monitors Wing Nut Gal. Could someone be watching me, monitoring my comings and goings? Am I on some kind of list? Will I be audited by the IRS while we have a Democrat administration?

I remember back during the later years of the Clinton administration, a government website was being developed. It was touted as the only website any of us would need to visit. It was a minor news story and didn’t get much traction. Once President Bush moved into the oval office, you never heard anything else.

I don’t want the government sticking its nose into the Internet. And even if these regulations sound good to you, please activate that second brain cell and think this thing through.

Facebooktwitter