26 ms·
He’s the scapegoat for all the other government officials on both sides of the aisle who have had their pockets filled up by the telecom industry.
by huntertwo 8y ago
He’s the scapegoat for all the other government officials on both sides of the aisle who have had their pockets filled up by the telecom industry.
- foobarbazetc 8y agoCame for “both sides”, was not disappointed.
- sdhgaiojfsa 8y agoIf they are really filling the Dems' pockets, the money's not buying them much influence, is it?
- stickdogg 8y agoLol. I don't know if they necessarily care about influence on this topic more than they do money in their pockets.
- jonny_eh 8y agoExcept in this case it was only FCC board members from one party that voted for the repeal, I'll let you guess which one.
- lopmotr 8y agoI guess the party the won the election and therefore has legitimate authority from the citizens to do that. It sounds like a much more fair and accountable system than giving the power to people who are neither elected nor appointed by elected people.
- Clubber 8y agoRight, but the OP said both parties were responsible, which isn't true, since the FCC board voted repeal on party lines. GOP seats voted repeal net neutrality, Dem seats voted to keep. I'm a firm believer that both parties have their hands dirty in one way or the other, but in this instance, it doesn't seem to be so in this case.
- thatcat 8y ago> It sounds like a much more fair and accountable system than giving the power to people who are neither elected nor appointed by elected people. This response is kind of ironic in context of net neutrality being repealed considering it is a decision which empowered those who are neither elected nor appointed by elected people against the will of the overwhelming majority of the citizens.
- SimbaOnSteroids 8y agoI mean the party that won in a system designed to make them win.
- stickdogg 8y agoThat is a whole different debate. We could discuss for hours who: "legally won the election".
- huntertwo 8y agoYou’re right, I had my facts wrong. However, although not necessarily the case here, voting against certain guaranteed to pass measures is just talking the talk, not really walking the walk. Democrats don’t really push for anti-corporation policy in general.
- aerotwelve 8y agoWould you have preferred the Democratic commissioners had voted for the repeal? I'm not sure what else they could have done here.
- jumelles 8y agoThe two parties are NOT the same.
- boomboomsubban 8y agoEffectively, both partie:s current position is "let the courts decide." The Republicans are outwardly hostile to it, but the Democrats have only pushed the issue when they knew it couldn't pass or would go to court.
- aerotwelve 8y ago> the Democrats have only pushed the issue when they knew it couldn't pass or would go to court. Net neutrality was part of Obama's presidential platform, and the first attempt at codifying NN rules happened under his first FCC commissioner in 2010. Both parties are not the same with respect to net neutrality.
- boomboomsubban 8y agoObama cosponsored a bill in 2006, as Democrats knew that anything else would leave the decision unsure. A bill was introduced in 09, when the Democrats could have ensured net neutrality, but it never got further than that. The Democrats have publicly embraced net neutrality, but have done nothing to ensure it. Even in 2016, the Democrats official stated position was to do nothing, leaving it in the hands of the courts. Both parties actual actions have the same results.
- aerotwelve 8y ago> The Democrats have publicly embraced net neutrality, but have done nothing to ensure it. Even in 2016, the Democrats official stated position was to do nothing I don't know where the "Democrat's official stated position" comes from, but I have a pretty good idea as to why Democrats weren't talking often about NN in 2016: Wheeler's FCC solved the problem. The ninth circuit upheld the 2015 rules. That's not nothing.