6 ms·

I don't see how this is different to all the pro net neutrality activism and lobbying going on, except that it's an opposition opinion. It also seems to play o

by kokey 12y ago

I don't see how this is different to all the pro net neutrality activism and lobbying going on, except that it's an opposition opinion. It also seems to play on the narrative that people who are against expanding regulation are not rational individuals, they are instead reduced to mere tools controlled by a pair of Koch villains intent on destruction of earth and society to make themselves richer.

themartorana 12y ago
The Republican Party and to a greater extent, the Tea Party, have mobilized a mostly-white, mostly-male, mostly-middle-to-lower-class pool of voters who are in many cases irrational - voting against their better interests in the name of conviction, mostly based on race and religion. It's why there is constant saber-rattling about "wedge issues" like abortion and "takers" despite a significant portion of Tea Party voters being around or below the poverty line, or reliant on some degree of public assistance. This army of people does often mobilize as a single unit, dictated to through the likes of Fox News. Talk about how black people want free "X" and you can get lots of people to fill out a form letter without trying. We're a Republic for the very reason that it was known that en-masse, often times people are irrational and do go against their own benefit for ideology. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/29/working-class-voters-america-republican http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/29/working-class-v...
- kokey 12y ago
  I don't see how this is different to a gullible online youth mobilized through videos and petitions. You just have to say evil corporations want to control and make you pay for things you want for free, devoid of details for people to make a rational decision with. This is from 2006: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOJnKgsWPGw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOJnKgsWPGw
- crusso 12y ago
  voting against their better interests in the name of conviction Yes, that's called having principles.
  - themartorana 12y ago
    ...and believing things without a shred of evidence is called "faith." And neither "faith" nor "principals" is an inherently good thing by definition - in fact some people might call "principals" based on "faith" or "religion" or "race" or "gender" or "greed" or "lack of education" or any other reason "dumb."
    - crusso 12y ago
      Yeah, I agree with that statement. It doesn't really connect with your previous post which was just a mouth-foaming political attack without any real substance.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
      - slayed0 12y ago
        and we have now fully devolved into the Fox News/MSNBC comment boards
        refurb 12y ago
        Good comment. Deleted my original, inflammatory comment.
  - nitrogen 12y ago
    Holding to destructive principles is not a virtue.
- cicero 12y ago
  What we need is that people vote not for their own self-interests, but for the common good. Otherwise, we will destroy our civilization while we each fight for a bigger piece of the pie.
- refurb 12y ago
  mostly-white, mostly-male, mostly-middle-to-lower-class This is a laughable statement. Let me address each point directly. During the last election, 33% of Hispanics voted for the Republican party[1]. 44% of women voted Republican[2]. And "mostly lower to middle class"? I though the Republican's were the party of the rich? Who do the rich vote for then? I strongly suggest you take a more open-minded approach to politics. [1]http://www.pewhispanic.org/2014/11/07/hispanic-voters-in-the-2014-election/ http://www.pewhispanic.org/2014/11/07/hispanic-voters-in-the... [2]http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/10/22/poll-women-plan-to-vote-for-republicans-in-midterms-n1908484 http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/10/22/poll-wo...
  - themartorana 12y ago
    I invite you to read the article I posted before commenting next time. I also invite you to understand that 33% in politics is a huge minority. 67% of Hispanics voting Democrat, in an election, make the Democrats the clear winner of that particular demographic. Finally, the "rich" are the top 10%, or 1%, or even 0.1% based on what particular income inequality chart you're looking at, leaving the entire bottom >=90% available for the demographics I mentioned.
    - refurb 12y ago
      33% Hispanic and 44% women (I noticed you didn't address that), don't constitute "mostly white and mostly male".
      - themartorana 12y ago
        I said the Republican and Tea Parties are predominantly white male. When you show me that minority amounts of women and minorities voted Republican, it only reinforces my point that the Republican and Tea Party bases are predominantly white and male.
        refurb 12y ago
        You and I have different interpretations of minority. Apparently 44% women is regarded as a "small share"?!?
debacle 12y ago
The Internet is going to be regulated either way. I would rather see it regulated by the FCC as a utility than by Comcast as an extortion racket.
0x5f3759df-i 12y ago
It is different because they are actively misleading people that do not understand the internet. They are using scare tactics and sensationalism by saying stuff like "net neutrallity is the obamacare of the internet".

by kokey 12y ago

themartorana 12y ago

The Republican Party and to a greater extent, the Tea Party, have mobilized a mostly-white, mostly-male, mostly-middle-to-lower-class pool of voters who are in many cases irrational - voting against their better interests in the name of conviction, mostly based on race and religion. It's why there is constant saber-rattling about "wedge issues" like abortion and "takers" despite a significant portion of Tea Party voters being around or below the poverty line, or reliant on some degree of public assistance. This army of people does often mobilize as a single unit, dictated to through the likes of Fox News. Talk about how black people want free "X" and you can get lots of people to fill out a form letter without trying. We're a Republic for the very reason that it was known that en-masse, often times people are irrational and do go against their own benefit for ideology. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/29/working-class-voters-america-republican http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/29/working-class-v...

kokey 12y ago
I don't see how this is different to a gullible online youth mobilized through videos and petitions. You just have to say evil corporations want to control and make you pay for things you want for free, devoid of details for people to make a rational decision with. This is from 2006: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOJnKgsWPGw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOJnKgsWPGw
crusso 12y ago
voting against their better interests in the name of conviction Yes, that's called having principles.
- themartorana 12y ago
  ...and believing things without a shred of evidence is called "faith." And neither "faith" nor "principals" is an inherently good thing by definition - in fact some people might call "principals" based on "faith" or "religion" or "race" or "gender" or "greed" or "lack of education" or any other reason "dumb."
  - crusso 12y ago
    Yeah, I agree with that statement. It doesn't really connect with your previous post which was just a mouth-foaming political attack without any real substance.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
    - slayed0 12y ago
      and we have now fully devolved into the Fox News/MSNBC comment boards
      - refurb 12y ago
        Good comment. Deleted my original, inflammatory comment.
- nitrogen 12y ago
  Holding to destructive principles is not a virtue.
cicero 12y ago
What we need is that people vote not for their own self-interests, but for the common good. Otherwise, we will destroy our civilization while we each fight for a bigger piece of the pie.
refurb 12y ago
mostly-white, mostly-male, mostly-middle-to-lower-class This is a laughable statement. Let me address each point directly. During the last election, 33% of Hispanics voted for the Republican party[1]. 44% of women voted Republican[2]. And "mostly lower to middle class"? I though the Republican's were the party of the rich? Who do the rich vote for then? I strongly suggest you take a more open-minded approach to politics. [1]http://www.pewhispanic.org/2014/11/07/hispanic-voters-in-the-2014-election/ http://www.pewhispanic.org/2014/11/07/hispanic-voters-in-the... [2]http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/10/22/poll-women-plan-to-vote-for-republicans-in-midterms-n1908484 http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/10/22/poll-wo...
- themartorana 12y ago
  I invite you to read the article I posted before commenting next time. I also invite you to understand that 33% in politics is a huge minority. 67% of Hispanics voting Democrat, in an election, make the Democrats the clear winner of that particular demographic. Finally, the "rich" are the top 10%, or 1%, or even 0.1% based on what particular income inequality chart you're looking at, leaving the entire bottom >=90% available for the demographics I mentioned.
  - refurb 12y ago
    33% Hispanic and 44% women (I noticed you didn't address that), don't constitute "mostly white and mostly male".
    - themartorana 12y ago
      I said the Republican and Tea Parties are predominantly white male. When you show me that minority amounts of women and minorities voted Republican, it only reinforces my point that the Republican and Tea Party bases are predominantly white and male.
      - refurb 12y ago
        You and I have different interpretations of minority. Apparently 44% women is regarded as a "small share"?!?

debacle 12y ago

The Internet is going to be regulated either way. I would rather see it regulated by the FCC as a utility than by Comcast as an extortion racket.

0x5f3759df-i 12y ago

It is different because they are actively misleading people that do not understand the internet. They are using scare tactics and sensationalism by saying stuff like "net neutrallity is the obamacare of the internet".