G oog le BadWeB | Login/out | Topics | Search | Custodians | Register | Edit Profile

Buell Forum » Quick Board » Archive through September 07, 2021 » Former President 0. » Archive through November 12, 2014 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Oldog
Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2014 - 04:39 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Do you ever wonder if this is just bread and circuses to keep the electorate busy with unimportant stuff?,

Too bad the R's don't have 75 seats in the senate and 2/3's house,

Impeach and remove

cut the head off the snake dies....

He might get enough people mad enough to get removed with the immigration by fiat if he tries that.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fb1
Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2014 - 04:57 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

So you see no problem with buying a 1MB/sec Internet connection, and having your provider selectively degrade parts of it because they want to promote their own service over a competitors one?

Is this directed at me? If so: There are all kinds of problems in this country, but the biggest one right now is our so-called President. He has proven, at least to me, that he is NOT to be trusted. Period.

I remember before the election in '08 hearing about him, becoming curious, listening to him speak, and thinking, "Wow, this guy is amazing!"

I didn't vote for him, but I thought he had a lot going for him, and wasn't very surprised that he prevailed over McCain (aided by the savage media rape of Sarah Palin).

Well, it didn't take long to discover that the man is a fraud, a liar in the first degree, and HATES America. (Yeah, I know you already know all this stuff. : )) No surprise, considering what a fruitcake his mom was, and the very real possibility that Frank Davis was actually his father).

All of this is a long-winded way of saying: If 0bama is FOR it, I'm AGAINST it.

Yep, a pretty simplistic approach, and doesn't solve whatever problem you're having with your cable provider, but at this stage of the game I don't agree with ANYTHING Dear Leader says.

If your question wasn't directed at me, well, never mind. : )
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2014 - 07:56 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

It is a mistake to think Obama incompetent.

He is one of the greatest success stories in American History.

Product of a broken home, insane mother, absent father, got a free ride through life, ( do YOU know who paid for Harvard? ) cheated his way through frankly evil means into the state then Federal legislature, accomplished nothing, and became President Of The United States based a speech someone else wrote.

Once he took the Presidency, with massive foreign illegal bribe money, took over 1/6 of the economy, destroyed the reputation of the U.S. in foreign affairs, never signed a budget, yet will have gone into more debt than every administration combined for the last 230+ years, record unemployment, record food stamps, record illegal immigration. Presided over the theft of power from Congress, ( who everyone hates anyway ) and became the First American Dictator. Rule by pen and phone.

In every conceivable metric he has accomplished what he set out to do, and as promised to his faithful. ( in places like the Communist Party USA and the Purple is the New Brown shirts of the International Socialist Workers Party SEIU. )

Sure, he's lied to everyone on the planet and bragged he's good at killing people, supported rape gangs in multiple lands and in general proved he would be a total failure running a 7-11, but as High Supreme Dictator with a fanatical following, he's a massive success.

Do not underestimate him.

He now has the freedom, as he promised Putin, to finish the utter destruction of Western Civilization, and only the Society of Cincinnatus can stop him.

Then again I could be wrong. It's not like he shut down the space program and told NASA to make Muslims feel good about their contributions to science back in the 14th century.

What? That wasn't an acid trip flashback?

We are boned.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hootowl
Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2014 - 08:17 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Sifo...no. They won't notice. CNN didn't cover the story. I doubt the farther left outlets did either. The useful idiots will never know they've been had.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Cataract2
Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2014 - 10:20 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net_neutrality




"Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet; the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.
— Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) November 10, 2014
https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/531834493922189313





*Source: http://consumerist.com/2014/03/11/comcast-goes-on-capitol-hill-spending-spree-in-advance-of-merger-hearings/

















Source: http://knowmore.washingtonpost.com/2014/04/25/this-hilarious-graph-of-netflix-speeds-shows-the-importance-of-net-neutrality/






Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fb1
Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2014 - 11:08 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Sounds like Ted Cruz is in the beginning stages of being Palinized for 2016...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Reepicheep
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 06:49 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

It was a stupid statement for him to make. There are legitimate reasons to be concerned about the federal government "fixing" problems with broadband providers.

Comparing them to Obamacare is a poor and imprecise method to communicate them.

It leans towards confirming my worst fears about a Republican takeover.

I don't want knee jerk partisanship, politics, and incorrect statements in order to "win". I want facts, substance, and thoughtful insight.

The latter will lead to effective fiscal conservative leadership and limited government.

I want conservatives to be the grown ups in the room...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 07:26 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

>>>>I want conservatives to be the grown ups in the room...

I . .. . frankly . . . at this point . . would settle for just grownups.

This is why the likes of Christie, Cruz and Hillary are, in my opinion, almost impossible to elect. They make great fun on YouTube . . . but pretty much fade quickly when called on to provide substance.

We deserve better leaders.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Cataract2
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 07:26 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Yes, it was a very stupid statement for him to make (might tell you something about the person) and from the sources provided I think a logical conclusion can be made as to why he made them. It's also not just him making those statements. I see those statements being made on here, I see those statements being made elsewhere (like the Louisiana congressman (R) http://tinyurl.com/km6d6nw ).

Seriously, does anyone use their brains anymore?

BTW, this has topic has been getting discussed long before Obama mentioned it. The fact that you lot are going nuts about it now tells me how well you stay "informed". The fact that he did bring it up and you lot are tripping over yourselves to be against it without even thinking about it or doing any level or research on the subject tells me one thing. You have Obama Derangement Syndrome.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 08:04 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

The cost of bandwidth (data usage) must be allowed to be passed to the consumer for cable/DSL/FIOS just as it is for cell phone and satellite plans. Expecting the same internet plan at the same price to service the occasional browser and email user no differently than the all day youtube and Netflix watcher would be anti-free market.

But we already have varying costs for different connection speeds. As long as the govt isn't gaining more power or trying to set prices, if govt is strictly mandating only that Internet service providers at all levels neither artificially limit access nor throttle bandwidth for some sites but not others, then I'm all for it.

Like FB though, I'm extremely wary of unforeseen consequences and the ever increasing reach of the toxic over-reaching tentacles of our federal govt.

They've lied to us repeatedly, intentionally mislead all of America; the result being that they trashed my perfectly wonderful medical insurance, took more of my income, forced me to invest numerous hours of my precious free time researching and enlisting new medical insurance with features I neither need nor want.

So forgive me if I have joined the chorus of "no" when it comes to our liar in chief.

Let them produce an actual bill; let it be short and concise, and let it be responsibly, freely/openly vetted for all to see. Then, and only then would I begin to trust.

"Never let a crisis go to waste."

Well, now we have a new crisis in the making, don't we? : (

I think Cruze's point is dead on accurate.

I also expect him to offer a solution to the very valid concerns about corrupt manipulation of Internet access by ISPs.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fb1
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 09:01 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

It was a stupid statement for [Cruz] to make.

Reep, what else did he say along with that statement? Link please. Cruz is no idiot (although 0bama is), and is one of the few true friends that you, I, and the rest of conservative America has in Congress. He's sharp as a tack, well educated, well spoken, and has consistently proven he's got our conservative backs, even when the media is piled on top of him humping him like there's no tomorrow. I can tell this issue is important to you, and I admit I don't know the facts. But to blanket condemn Cruz, especially with the 2016 presidential election just around the corner? Not me. He's being Palinized.


Like FB though, I'm extremely wary of unforeseen consequences and the ever increasing reach of the toxic over-reaching tentacles of our federal govt.

Amen, brother. It's as simple as that, heavy on the toxic.


I think Cruz's point is dead on accurate.

I also expect him to offer a solution to the very valid concerns about corrupt manipulation of Internet access by ISPs.


I suspect he has, but the media wants us to focus solely on his comparison to 0bamacare. Whoever came up with this plan (I assume Axelrod is still on retainer?) is brilliant. The absolute WORST thing that could happen to the people hiding behind the Democrat curtain is that this country nominates and elects a true conservative president in 2016. There are only a few folks with the horsepower presently to pull this off, Cruz being one of them (they nuked Allen West's chances back in 2012, the dirty, rotten, miserable bastards).

If we're going to be allowed to swing back to Republican in '16, the bad guys will want someone like Christie or J. Bush, you know, pretend conservatives. A Cruz, or a Scott Walker, will never do.

Cruz is being Palinized. I don't watch MSNBC (I don't watch any of them), but I'd be willing to bet they're at the forefront of the Palinization process. They are vicious animals, that bunch.

I wonder how many degrees of separation there are between that cute little cartoon above and the White House. Four? Three?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hootowl
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 09:03 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Help me read that graph. Because it looks like speed for other ISPs in the graph dipped and rebounded at the same time, not just Comcast. Is that collusion between the ISPs or an issue with Netflix's equipment?

(Message edited by hootowl on November 12, 2014)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hootowl
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 09:07 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

For the record, I am in favor of granting ISPs the right to step on certain traffic. For example, bot net command and control traffic. The ISPs know what that looks like, and can easily drop it, but are legally prevented from doing so. That's ridiculous. They also know where most of the malicious web sites are, and could easily protect their customers from them. But they can not. That would be discrimination. Ridiculous.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fb1
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 09:17 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Some insight into the creator of that cute little cartoon above:

quote:

[Matthew] Inman grew up in northern Idaho. His mother, Ann, who describes him as “really, really shy,” would buy rolls of butcher paper and give her sons red and black pens to draw with. For hours at a time—usually wearing a dinosaur costume left over from Halloween—he would draw elaborate scenes of stick figures murdering each other. Black for characters, red for blood.

...Over time he learned how to exert his [creative] power more deliberately to reward or punish those he felt deserved it. Last December, when a young BuzzFeed contributor named Jack Stuef wrote a sloppy profile of The Oatmeal (erroneously calling Inman a “staunch Republican”), Inman responded by calling Stuef an “uninspired, bottom-feeding ass.” Fans dutifully piled on, sending a firestorm of hate mail, death threats, and juvenile slurs. Stuef hasn’t written for BuzzFeed since.



Source: http://www.wired.com/2013/05/ul_readoatmeal/all/

So, the cartoon dude is not a staunch Republican. But, you already knew that.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Reepicheep
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 10:20 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I don't think conservatives are served well by dismissing and discounting views based on their source.

There are either facts in something, or there aren't, and finding and extracting them will help us build a better country.

One of the reasons we lost the debate about the ACA long enough for that abominiation to be passed was because we dismissed obvious and correct concerns about the current system. We lost credibility. Then had a difficult time highlighting the liberal lies that really were lies.

More chillingly, I think this same approach massively blew it for us during the whole post 9/11 reaction. 90% of what liberal idiots were spouting was nonsense. 10% wasn't. We should have done the work to tease out the 10% and done better.

So here should be the conservative position on Net Neutrality...

1) There are valid concerns regarding defacto monopolies by broadband providers in many markets.
2) Federal intervention in this space has already created some really stupid rules and some very bad outcomes for consumers.
3) The cable industry has proven they will behave badly (DeFacto collusion) if given the chance (for example a lack of alacarte tiering options, selective blocking, etc).
4) Bad behavior and decisions by cable companies don't scale well, are very difficult to actually enforce, and will be resolved by the free market. They may be awful for a while, then will be fixed as a natural course of events over time.
5) Bad decisions by a Federal government scale really well, get enforced at the point of a gun, and will just keep getting worse until very painful things are done to overturn them.

I am a conservative, not an anarchist. I think there is are some necessary roles for government to achieve balance and control, but I think it is a monster that is always only a half step from turning into a tyrant, and that it should be chained and starved everywhere possible.

Net Neutrality is a real solution to a real problem that creates other real problems. Most of those problems can be traced back to Federal control, some of those problems can be traced back to greedy assholes at cable companies.

That's the discussion we should be having.

As to the full context of the Cruz quote, I frankly don't really care. ACA was a constitutional and individual travesty for America and Americans. Net Neutrality is slapping more duck tape on a car already covered with duck tape. They aren't on the same planet.

I look at that quote the same way I would look at somebody saying "that car dealer raped me on the trade in". I don't care if it's accurate or not, you are an idiot for saying it that way.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fb1
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 10:43 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

As to the full context of the Cruz quote, I frankly don't really care.

Bingo. Mainstream media 1, Cruz 0.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fb1
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 10:51 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)


quote:

Proposed Water Rule Could Put ‘Property Rights of Every American Entirely at the Mercy’ of EPA
Ron Arnold, November 12, 2014

It seems incredible, but a single missing word could turn a water law into a government land grab so horrendous even a U.S. Supreme Court justice warned it would “put the property rights of every American entirely at the mercy of Environmental Protection Agency employees.”

The missing word is “navigable.” The 0bama administration is proposing a rule titled “Definition of ‘Waters of the United States’ Under the Clean Water Act,” which would strike “navigable” from American water law and redefine any piece of land that is wet at least part of the year, no matter how remote or isolated it may be from truly navigable waters, as “waters of the United States,” or WOTUS.

The proposed rule would provide EPA and the Corps of Engineers (as well as litigious environmental groups) with the power to dictate the land-use decisions of homeowners, small businesses and local communities throughout the United States. There would be virtually no limit to the federal government’s authority over private property.

The proposed rule has ignited a firestorm of protest. Agricultural and business interests, free-market think tanks, state agencies, attorneys general and governors have joined the “Ditch the Rule” movement and demanded it be withdrawn.

The Obama administration is conducting an aggressive shield campaign to downplay the proposed rule’s huge negative impacts...

[R]ecently, a group of 25 U.S. senators called out the Obama administration for misleading Americans on the proposed rule. In a scathing letter to the EPA and the Corps, the senators detailed the administration’s deceptions and bias...

...Two weeks before the Senate 25 called out the EPA, the attorneys general of 11 states and the governors of six states sent a similar letter to the EPA and the Corps.

...Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma’s attorney general and a leader in drafting the states’ letter, told The Daily Signal, “The proposed ‘WOTUS’ rule unlawfully and unconstitutionally asserts federal control over local water and land by needlessly replacing state and local land-use management with top-down, federal control.”

“Unlawful” and “unconstitutional” are not words attorneys general use lightly. When asked to size up the overall issue, Pruitt said, “The WOTUS rule appears to be another attempt by federal agencies to implement an agenda through regulations to affect land-use decisions that should be left to the states and private property owners.”



Source, more: http://dailysignal.com/2014/11/12/proposed-water-r ule-put-property-rights-every-american-entirely-me rcy-epa/
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Reindog
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 10:54 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)



Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Reindog
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 11:03 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Welcome back, Cataract2.

On the subject of Net Neutrality, the arguments on both sides are obfuscated making it impossible to know what is the correct course. However, I agree with FB1. Over the past six years, one can only come to the inexorable conclusion that Obama is a liar and an extreme narcissist. Virtually, every thing he believes and his resulting actions is bad for The United States of America and the American People in general.

You are obviously pro-Obama, so argue your case.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Reindog
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 11:08 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

From TheHill:

Obama 'looking forward' to immigration order

By Justin Sink, November 11, 2014

President Obama is “looking forward” to taking executive action on immigration, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said in an interview published Tuesday.

“The president is disappointed that this legislative solution won’t be achieved, but the president is looking forward to taking executive action on his own, to solve as many of these problems as he can,” Earnest told Fusion.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/2 23697-obama-looking-forward-to-immigration-order
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fb1
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 11:13 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Man, do a search for "cruz net neutrality" and you'd think the world was coming to an end. Mainstream media eleventy billion, Cruz 0.

But, there are a few voices out there floating well above the stench. This is one of them:

quote:

Ted Cruz was right about net neutrality: It is a little like Obamacare, after all
By Brian Fung, Nov 11, 2014

On Monday, Ted Cruz lashed out at President Obama's call for aggressive regulation of Internet service providers by comparing that effort to the president's signature health-care law. It was pure red meat for conservatives.

...It's popular to bash Cruz's attempt at political theater. But what if we gave the senator the benefit of the doubt? In fact, net neutrality really is a lot more like Obamacare than you might think. Here's how.



Source, more (including the "Here's how"):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/ 2014/11/11/ted-cruz-was-right-about-net-neutrality -it-is-a-little-like-obamacare-after-all/
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Reindog
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 11:14 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Politically, it is a trap to impeach Obama because there won't be enough votes for conviction. Sad, because this entity some call Obama deserves to be serving hard time for crimes against The United States of America.

Obama has made it clear that he is only interested in all out war with the incoming Congress. He will get it. If the Conservatives are smart, they will defund his actions which is precisely what the Founding Fathers intended. Let this pResident veto the Congressional passed bills which will make America stronger to frame the 2016 election.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Reindog
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 11:18 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

The hyperbole hurled against Senator Ted Cruz is an echo experienced by Palin, Cain, West, Romney, and anyone who dares stand up to the corrosion of Progressivism.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 11:22 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Net Neutrality like BOCare? I really don't know or care how they can be compared. Here's the bottom line. BO and his minions have admitted to consistently lying about BOCare to get it passed, admitting that it would never have passed, if not for the deception and lack of transparency. This is who you want to be in charge of controlling the internet, that controls so much of our information? I don't think so. I wouldn't let someone associated with this administration walk my dog!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 11:24 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)







Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Oldog
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 11:31 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I agree with Reepi on the Cruz statement its not really a good way to express it, In Bill's case he is far more knowledgeable on the net and security than most.

I think that Cruz may have wanted to say that the fed getting involved via the current administration is a bad idea

I am unhappy with the main local isp (TWC) the rates constantly creep up and the infrastructure has been in place for years, my own bill seems to go up every three months, BTW I have dumped cable tv and only use streamed programming.
Why pay for TV and then sit thru commercials, when it was free that was ok, If we pay for it why should we have to?

If the price gouging nonsense with my health care is not stopped I may go dark as my health insurance will be what my house payment is.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fb1
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 11:50 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Cruz's statement was a tweet - I believe you're limited to the length of a tweet. It sums it up nicely, and certainly got everyone's attention. I'm with Sifo: I wouldn't let B0, or ANYONE who agrees with him, walk my dog, much less reclassify the internet as a utility so the FedGov could take it over (I mean, what could go wrong?).

Reep, not trying to be an arse, we're both on the same side, but that statement from Cruz, I'm curious what your original source was, i.e. where did you hear/see it?

Oldog: Me 'n D are self-employed, and our medical insurance was literally killing us. (Mine just went up 254%, and I DON'T get to keep my doctors...). Pardon my language, but 'em. Here's our solution: http://www.libertyhealthshare.org/
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Fb1
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 11:55 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

PS:

I think that Cruz may have wanted to say that the fed getting involved via the current administration is a bad idea.

He did. : )
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Reindog
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 12:06 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Reepicheep
Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 - 12:26 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I saw it on the news. Which is exactly where everyone making tweets knows a stupid tweet from a political figure or celebrity is going to go. It's the whole point of them creating a twitter feed.

Compare the two:

Net Neutrality: A narrow additional rule for companies that are often defacto monopolies and that are in an already heavily regulated space, that precludes some specific and demonstrated anti-competitive behaviors.

Now on to Obamacare:

Obamacare makes people morally opposed to abortion pay for abortions.

Obamacare makes many many peoples medical expenses increase by thousands of dollars yearly.

Obamacare has robbed affordable coverage from millions of Americans (who had coverage before, but now can't afford it because of government forced changes to the plans).

Obamacare represents a defacto government takeover of something like a quarter of the US economy.

Obamacare was passed by flat out lies (not spin, easily provable lies) by a partly that freely admitted they didn't know what was in it when they passed it.

Obamacare sets a new entitlement program that will explode the national debt, and basically has sold several years of my children's future life into economic slavery.

Sigh.

People don't need to agree with me that it was a stupid statement for Cruz to make.

But I can assure you I didn't come to the conclusion that it was stupid because I am a puppet of the mainstream media, I came to that conclusion because I deeply understand both issues, and believe it was stupid to compare them. Are there some parallels? Sure, if you drop 7 decimal places from one when you compare it to the other. In other words, it's a stupid comparison. ; )

Twitter is 140 characters, it is limited due to length limits on SMS messages many cellular providers used to enforce. How about this:

"Net Neutrality, because real problems created by big government will be solved by adding just a little bit more big government?"

(13 characters to spare : ) )
« Previous Next »

Topics | Last Day | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Rules | Program Credits Administration