WaGuns.org

CurtisLemansky wrote:I think what we have is what I like to call the O'Reilly Factor. Fox News and Ted Cruz don't like this, so anyone else that objects must just as fucking horrible as them. Great logic.


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

They do drive a lot of the anti Net Neutrality propaganda, and at least in the case of Cruz, are well funded by Comcast.

kf7mjf wrote:

CurtisLemansky wrote:I think what we have is what I like to call the O'Reilly Factor. Fox News and Ted Cruz don't like this, so anyone else that objects must just as fucking horrible as them. Great logic.


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

They do drive a lot of the anti Net Neutrality propaganda, and at least in the case of Cruz, are well funded by Comcast.

But you have to realize that just because we don't welcome this action with open arms, doesn't mean we are them or have the same motives or have been brainwashed by Fox News. Seeing as most of your arguments involve railing against them, you clearly aren't getting it.


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

A great number of people are though. Broad sweeping generalizations are broad and sweeping.

kf7mjf wrote:A great number of people are though. Broad sweeping generalizations are broad and sweeping.

Sure, but that has nothing to do with me. Sorry I don't fit your labels, buddy.


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

Since I wasn't quoting or citing you, but making a broad and somewhat cliched, yet specific set of statements, then one can presume those words were directed more at those types of people, rather than yourself.

kf7mjf wrote:Since I wasn't quoting or citing you, but making a broad and somewhat cliched, yet specific set of statements, then one can presume those words were directed more at those types of people, rather than yourself.

Oh, so you weren't saying everyone with a specific viewpoint must have a tinfoil hat, love Fox News and will worship the next republican in office? Guess I need to get my eyes checked..


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

It was a broad generalization, and typically broad generalizations are not taken word for word literally and depend upon greater contextual meaning.

kf7mjf wrote:It was a broad generalization, and typically broad generalizations are not taken word for word literally and depend upon greater contextual meaning.

But you applied this "broad generalization" to a specific group of people with a specific viewpoint on this forum. Can't talk your way out of it now.


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

Whatever. Until Cruz opened his Comcast paid mouth, most objection to Net Neutrality came from the big ISP's. Then suddenly it became an anti government issue nearly overnight. Wow.

I'm with the people that are saying this is bullshit. There is more to this and we will all find out the hard way. Obama may not currently be a dictator but congress is proving that if he wanted to be they would talk in the media about it and do nothing.

Are you guys capable of having a discussion without getting shitty with each other? If so, please do it. If not, let me know.

The tone of the conversation needs to be dialed back.

kf7mjf wrote:Whatever. Until Cruz opened his Comcast paid mouth, most objection to Net Neutrality came from the big ISP's. Then suddenly it became an anti government issue nearly overnight. Wow.

Right after unelected bureaucrats asserted their regulatory authority over the Internet. Weird.

Answer me this, what purpose does a "general conduct" rule serve net neutrality? How will it not be an avenue for abuse?


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

MadPick wrote:Are you guys capable of having a discussion without getting shitty with each other? If so, please do it. If not, let me know.

The tone of the conversation needs to be dialed back.

I apologize, I don't respond well to insultingly broad generalizations.


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

CurtisLemansky wrote:

kf7mjf wrote:Whatever. Until Cruz opened his Comcast paid mouth, most objection to Net Neutrality came from the big ISP's. Then suddenly it became an anti government issue nearly overnight. Wow.

Right after unelected bureaucrats asserted their regulatory authority over the Internet. Weird.

Answer me this, what purpose does a "general conduct" rule serve net neutrality? How will it not be an avenue for abuse?


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

From what I see, it is standard boiler plate for "don't abuse the law". Seriously, look at other Title II utilities for an answer on how this works.

Can the antigovernment people enlighten me on this - vast majority of you is against government involvement in almost anything - because you think the government will screw it up - except for the military - which you think is important enough for a trillion a year spending. How is it that the government is good at military, but cannot be trusted with anything else?