EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 9538
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On December 15 2017 21:33 farvacola wrote: Luckily, these idiots will quickly find out that the work of a federal judge is difficult, time consuming, and pays far less than its private practice equivalents. I'd bet very few of Trump's nominees sit on the bench for longer than a decade. That's still plenty of time to do plenty of damage though. these schmucks couldn't hack it. i've dealt with some pretty ridiculous lawyers before, but none of them were nearly as bad as i-haven't-actually-done-anything-since-law-school guy. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21682 Posts
Good of him to tell us... | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
The FCC’s radical and foolish action today to reverse network neutrality protections means that we have lost an important battle in the war for an open internet. But that war is far from over. Today’s FCC vote means that we will start to see the telecommunications companies intruding more on how we use the internet and becoming much more aggressive in their efforts to make money off their role as online gatekeepers. But nobody should think that network neutrality is dead. We at the ACLU and our allies will be fighting back — at the federal, state, and local level — to restore the protections that the FCC has now eviscerated. And there is plenty that citizens can do. But the clock is now ticking because Americans may soon begin to see negative changes in the internet they’ve always known. www.aclu.org I recommend reading the whole thing through. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On December 16 2017 01:11 LegalLord wrote: The ACLU has a good post on the whole net neutrality matter. www.aclu.org I recommend reading the whole thing through. It’s missing Congressional action in the form of legislation. The FCC shouldn’t have the power to classify ISPs as communications providers or utilities (or not) at its whim. Using legislation from more than half a century ago, no less! | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23229 Posts
On December 16 2017 01:22 Danglars wrote: It’s missing Congressional action in the form of legislation. The FCC shouldn’t have the power to classify ISPs as communications providers or utilities (or not) at its whim. Using legislation from more than half a century ago, no less! I don't quite remember, do you support the Republican rationale for repealing net neutrality? Why or why not? | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On December 16 2017 01:22 Danglars wrote: It’s missing Congressional action in the form of legislation. The FCC shouldn’t have the power to classify ISPs as communications providers or utilities (or not) at its whim. Using legislation from more than half a century ago, no less! Huh. Danglars saying old legislation is meaningless because its too old. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On December 16 2017 01:28 WolfintheSheep wrote: Huh. Danglars saying old legislation is meaningless because its too old. Oh, no it’s doing just fine with telephone monopolies. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On December 16 2017 01:25 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't quite remember, do you support the Republican rationale for repealing net neutrality? Why or why not? FCC should have never gotten involved, to be honest. Congress is way late on this topic. Congress, and not some panel of five, should be responsible for government regulation of the internet. I think people found out the drawbacks of political appointees running things, now that Trump is in power. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9649 Posts
On December 16 2017 01:40 Plansix wrote: Color me shocked, Russia asseting control over areas with enemies of western powers and allowing them to operate freely. Never seen that before. The exact same thing happens in reverse. I have no idea why anyone would be surprised. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 16 2017 01:53 Jockmcplop wrote: The exact same thing happens in reverse. I have no idea why anyone would be surprised. Almost like we have an adversarial relationship and people should stop pretending Russia will do us a solid. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On December 16 2017 00:05 Plansix wrote: https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/941682118303854592 There’s clearly a political case being laid out in advance as a hedge against whatever may come out of the Mueller investigation. I guess they don’t trust the 9/11 FBI Director or law enforcement generally. | ||
| ||
