Lurker > ImaAskAQuestion

Antifar posted...

More Republicans coming out on the side of Comcast
https://twitter.com/SteveScalise/status/941402382449115136
https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/941417218600038400

Cruz's last term confirmed.
---

Just curious

https://twitter.com/BrendanCarrFCC/status/941415004536037377

I swear this guy was picked up from 4Chan.
---

Just curious

Title I says hi.
---

Just curious

_OujiDoza_ posted...

https://twitter.com/SenMarkey/status/941378914185895936

"I plan to introduce a Congressional Review Act resolution that would restore the Open Internet Order and reverse the @FCCs historic mistake of repealing #NetNeutrality. This fight is far from over."



"My fellow @SenateDems will fight the @FCCs repeal of #NetNeutrality in courts and in the halls of Congress. We will not allow massive broadband corporations to throttle our democracy."

https://t.co/jyhYvFDZzS

Washington (December 14, 2017) Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a member of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, and 15 other Senators today announced their plan to introduce a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution that would undo todays action by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and restore the 2015 net neutrality rules. Today, the FCC approved an item that guts the 2015 Open Internet Order, which the D.C. Circuit Court upheld in 2016. The Open Internet Order prohibited internet service providers from setting up internet fast and slow lanes and ensured they could not block or slow down internet traffic.

Donald Trumps FCC made an historic mistake today by overturning its net neutrality rules, and we cannot let it stand, said Senator Markey. Without strong net neutrality rules, entrepreneurs, inventors, small businesses, activists and all those who rely on a free and open internet will be at the mercy of big broadband companies that can block websites, slow down traffic and charge websites fees in order to increase their profits.

We will fight the FCCs decisions in the courts, and we will fight it in the halls of Congress, continued Senator Markey. With this CRA, Congress can correct the Commissions misguided and partisan decision and keep the internet in the hands of the people, not big corporations. Our Republicans colleagues have a choice - be on the right side of history and stand with the American people who support net neutrality, or hold hands with the big cable and broadband companies who only want to supercharge their profits at the expense of consumers and our economy.

A copy of the CRA can be found https://www.markey.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/CRA%20Net%20Neutrality%20.pdf.

Senator Markeys resolution of disapproval would rescind FCC Chairman Ajit Pais item and fully restore the Open Internet Order. CRA resolutions allow Congress to overturn regulatory actions at federal agencies with a simple majority vote in both chambers. In accordance with the Congressional Review Act, the Senators will formally introduce the resolution once the rule is submitted to both houses of Congress and published in the federal register. Congressman Mike Doyle (D-Penn.) plans to introduce a CRA resolution in the House of Representatives.

Other Senators co-sponsoring the CRA resolution include Senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii.), Richard Blumenthal (DConn.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.)

I fucking love my senators.
---

Just curious

I just went an email to my AG and will be trying to be more active in contacting. I am happy I live in Massachusetts because it is almost guaranteed we go Washington State's route against this ruling.

We have state rights. Like we did with gay marriage, we had that legal here before it was federally legal. This is something that even if the FCC is to make illegal, we as states have our rights too. I have faith in my AG. She's incredibly active.
---

Just curious

---

Just curious

Anonymous actually just responded to this.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/anonymous-plans-destructive-cyberattack-fcc-protest-net-neutrality-repeal-1651333

Of course, nothing will actually happen.
---

Just curious

LoneCourier2281 posted...

I have a shitty senator so he'll definitely vote against it.

Who? Toomey? Toomey is the one I just wanna punch.
---

Just curious

---

Just curious

3khc posted...

Who voted for the FCC

People who voted for Trump, who pushed Pai into leadership.

Although, I blame Obama too for throwing Republicans in as a Democrat. Sucks Republicans cannot be trusted.
---

Just curious

I want to see more. Here's some examples:




---

Just curious

https://www.avclub.com/the-fccs-ajit-pai-now-openly-mocking-net-neutrality-pro-1821278546
---

Just curious

Tambien. Muy frio.
---

Just curious

I feel kind of good about it. I always suck on the audio portion of the tests though. My listening comprehension is too slow. I do a LOT better with text and pick up on writing and reading a lot faster.
---

Just curious

Kahn is gone far, far, faaaaaaaar too early.
---

Just curious

Akagami_Shanks posted...

Do you want to tell the class how you always end up in trouble with the mods

It's simple. I am vocal and refuse to censor myself.
---

Just curious

Akagami_Shanks posted...

Fernando Castille lmao

Philando Castile

I said "Or something like that" .... I dunno. I just know of the incident. Just like I don't know the victims of the school shootings, the movie theater shootings, or the concert in Vegas.

My point is still there.
---

Just curious

Like I always say and people refuse to accept it.... I am not racist. I am openly judgmental of everyone regardless of skin color. I just side with justice and justice is just not always on the side of black individuals as I see it. I may not agree to the escalation of murder for some of them, but I believe that if you are going to commit a crime, you are saying through action that "I am willing to take the punishment as far as it brings me." .... If you aren't willing to possibly lose your life over holding up a convenience store, then maybe you shouldn't do it. Sure, you shouldn't be killed for doing it, especially if you didn't kill anyone yourself.... but you know you will eventually face cops and the cops...

A - Don't know if you are armed.
B - Need to prevent escalation of the event.
C - Close the environment off from the public.
D - Make sure everyone within that area is safe.

To do all of this, they need to be armed and ready for whatever occurs. You could be a psycho. You could have a hostage. And let's be honest. Those deaths in the media have mostly been black people instigating these police problems and could easily have avoided them by.... I dunno, not holding up stores at gunpoint.

That being said, I do side with many like that one down in Louisiana who was innocent, and that black guy who was pulled over and shot.... Fernando Castille or something like that? That's bullshit and the cops should have been fully tried and found guilty. (If they haven't already. I don't usually follow up on these cases) ....

So yeah. I tend to believe I stand moderate. I refuse to instantly side with someone willing to break the law. You do that, I am instantly not your ally. Same with cops. Until you break the law, I'll be your ally.

And again....

Akagami_Shanks posted...

she said fuck white people

I said "those" white people.

There's a massive difference between the general statement and adding the word "those" in the middle of it.
---

Just curious