Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: A DU Challenge---Draft Net Neutrality Rules better than the FCC-- [View all]RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)44. So the president is powerless?
So he's absolved of saying one thing and doing something else? I see where you're coming from.
The business Obama needs to look after is the little guys', not Comcast, et al.
He is obviously not paying attention to what the poor need, but rather what the rich wish to hoard.
Hate saying this about the man, but damn, it's true.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
113 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
No. We should not. Appeals take years, and rules that address the current legal situation
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#4
Indeed--he can snap his fingers and take care of everything!!! He's godlike! nt
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#39
Since the FCC has been an independent executive agency with commissioners for a very long
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#46
Totally there with that....currently trying to end my service....it's going kinda like this...
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#5
And blame Obama. Let's not forget that Obama is supposed to be Superman, and outwit all
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#12
And somehow, some way, he should control all the courts and dictate their decisions!
greatauntoftriplets
Apr 2014
#14
Absolutely!! Obama should be a dictator when we really, really need him to be....
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#20
Schtick has replaced actual content. But I sense a turning tide. I think some DUers realize they
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#28
I think Putinistas are those who post crap from RT and the like in support of Putin, whilst
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#42
I haven't shot down anyone's idea....but I have pointed out the difficulties
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#74
That's your opnion and you're welcome to it. But don't mischaracterize those who disagree
Armstead
Apr 2014
#80
And I aparently committed the sin of using a grasshopper, too, to illustrate
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#82
OMG!!! Thank you for that!! I should know better than to trust the YouTube!!! nt
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#32
Copps has been advocating for that for years, but he still hasn't come up with a
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#11
I don't get your focus on the FOX case, the court upheld the FEC's ability to regulate indecent
TheKentuckian
Apr 2014
#57
The Fox case reaffirmed the idea of industry reliance. That's the hurdle you face
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#77
It is all about the votes, the FCC is the body vested to make such designations, they were the body
TheKentuckian
Apr 2014
#94
I suspect if Mr. Copps had a winning legal strategy, we'd be reading about it.
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#106
Michael Copps is correct. They don't need any more compelling justification for
GoneFishin
Apr 2014
#29
And I think you do that by offering municipal broadband. Because as I outlined above, I don't think
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#17
That is the point, to chase our tails. This is all about taking the pressure off the Federal level
TheKentuckian
Apr 2014
#95
That's a pretty good summary of what is going on--I would agree that the chance of the Congressional
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#16
You know I don't answer your questions, Sabrina, but I will be happy to grade your efforts
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#19
Of course I could do better than a Corporate, Cable lobbyist at the FCC. I did not appoint him.
sabrina 1
Apr 2014
#21
Was I appointed to the FCC without my knowledge? The Cable Lobbyist already wrote the rules
sabrina 1
Apr 2014
#24
Because he is a corporatist who is to the right of Reagan. He always favors corporate profits
GoneFishin
Apr 2014
#30
Perhaps the same reason he appointed Rs who want to privatize the USPS to the Postal Commission?
merrily
Apr 2014
#103
You spend a lot of time explaining how we can't have a nice Internet. Why?
DisgustipatedinCA
Apr 2014
#34
No, I actually don't think reclassification is a bad idea---but as I noted upthread, I've yet to see
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#37
Declare that the Internet (orginally developed by government) is an essentil public utility...
Armstead
Apr 2014
#40
I think you do that by short circuiting the legal fights and pushing for municipal broadband.
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#43
Well, I actually think municipal broadband is a localized fight that is winnable, city by city.
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#47
Obama should have the FCC declare the Internet a publicly owned utility. Nationalize it. Period.
ancianita
Apr 2014
#48
Municipal broadband is good only as a supplement to fighting for universal net neutrality,
GoneFishin
Apr 2014
#51
She moved them to the land of make believe by trying to assert that the FCC doesn't own designation
TheKentuckian
Apr 2014
#60
Awesome, Josh...tell me how you get the commission votes for that. Then, tell me
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#84
It's not defeatism....it's called legal strategy. You actually need to have one other than
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#87
Have you seen this? "Before you rant about Comcast/Netflix issue being related to Net Neutrality..
Cha
Apr 2014
#67
Oh Manny....if Congress didn't include the public option, should the President
msanthrope
Nov 2014
#112