McCain on Net Neutrality, Copyright, Iraq

An anonymous reader writes "Sen. John McCain kicked off the All Things Digital conference Tuesday night with some interesting comments about net neutrality among other things. His take: there should be as little government regulation of broadband as possible. The market should be allowed to solve the Net-neutrality issue: 'When you control the pipe you should be able to get profit from your investment.'"

Comments

Re:Ted Stevens?

[Doc Ruby]

How is that fair?

Which Democrat lied us into a war (since Johnson, over 40 years ago)?
Which Democrat lied us into unsupportable debt? Clinton led us into an unprecedented surplus that Bush and his Republicans converted into unsupportable debt.
Are you really going to compare Democrats' mixed corporatism with Republicans' effective fascism?

The "present government" has already turned around some of the Republican monopoly government's last 6 years, after only a few months. That Republican government showed that there is a choice between the two parties, even if only between bad and unacceptably atrocious.

Re:Ted Stevens?

[Doc Ruby]

Ah, the Anonymous Republican Coward says Bush a liberal, and then wants to be taken seriously as he quotes Rush Limbo. Limbo, is that you?

Let's see, Clinton made the budget, and the policies that stoked the Internet bubble into real growth, but somehow Republicans made all that surplus. Debatable, but then how come they squandered it all, the moment they got a Republican president to go with their congressional majority? The answer is that it was Clinton who not only fixed the budget that 12 years of Reagan/Bush had driven into more debt than ever before all put together. Simple deduction settles the debate: Clinton made the surplus, even more a triumph considering the subsequent debt Republicans created once they had full control: even more than the 12 Reagan/Bush debt years.

According to A.Republican.C, Clinton firing missiles at Osama was a way to distract us from Monica, but the Republican Congress impeaching him over Monica wasn't a way to stop him from fighting Osama. That kind of logic only makes sense to a person seeking an excuse to talk about Monica's vagina and a cigar for more than a decade.

Clinton's Attorney General botched an attack on Texas theocrats armed to the teeth, somehow casting doubt on Clinton's surplus (the only subject that isn't a strawman in this discussion), but Bush Jr's AG rigging the DoJ for a "Permanent Republican Majority" on America's public time doesn't bear mention. Funny how "Clinton's" CIA and FBI ignored Clinton's attempts to kill Osama, but somehow the same agencies helped Bush invade Iraq without your noticing. It's almost as if they cared more about their budgets the Republican Congress fed them across both administrations. I guess the Pentagon's playing the same game was hard for you to notice, but more likely trying to pretend the Pentagon obeyed a Democrat instead of the Republicans is too hard for even an Anonymous Republican Coward to spew on Slashdot.

I'm not even going to address your mass of strawmen about Carter, except to say that he wasn't nearly as bad as Bush, either Sr or Jr, or Reagan, who multiplied (many times) the relatively small economic problems Carter inherited from Nixon/Ford's combo of Vietnam, Watergate, and OPEC. Oh, and Carter's SEC was run by Bill Casey, who then ran Reagan's campaign and his CIA.

Then you call Bush a liberal. Priceless.

Wading through more gibberish that shows you were molested by a priest in the early 1990s, and can't separate its reality from your rambling strawman fantasies...

Trapped in that nightmare with you is indeed Bush Sr's gambit to bait Iraq into a war we could wage against them, which war has never ended (you heard about Iraq this century, right?). Funny how Clinton managed to disarm Saddam and reduce his military to one we could invade and defeat in a week.

But since I've got my marbles, I remember how Carter protected the Shah who was kicked out by a revolution caused by 25 years of the CIA colluding with him to torture. Funny how Carter deposing him looked just like Carter offering him refuge, and getting targeted by the Ayatollah who did depose the Shah. And funny how you hate Carter as much as one of these Iranians you imagine you know something about. Khomeini, is that you?

Finally, you do score points for catching Brzezinski's confession that he helped create the Qaeda for Carter - but not as many as for spelling his name right. But of course you ignore the fact that Brzezinski's gambit worked, accelerating the doom of the Soviet Union, while the Qaeda could have then been shut down by the incoming Reagan CIA/Pentagon. But instead, while Robert Gates wasn't too busy covering up Iran/Contra for your boys, he was busy turning the Qeystone Qaeda into a trained, armed, funded, propagandized permanent fixture that took over Afghanistan when Gates' bestest nuclear spy buddies in Pakistan's secret police deposed the old government for them. Whew! Even when you're right, Anonymous Republican Coward, you're wrong. Robert Gates, is that you?

No, of cour

Re:Why is parent modded up?

[Doc Ruby]

OK, all you've got is flamewar and flamebait (and whining about the + mods of the post you're arguing with). But here's some history, so you aren't so lonely.

Let's look at the wars since there have been both Democrat and Republican parties:
Civil War: Lincoln (R)
Spanish/American: Roosevelt (R)
WWI: Wilson (D)
WWII: Roosevelt/Truman (D)
Korea: Truman/Eisenhower (D/R)
Vietnam: Johnson/Nixon/Ford (D/R)
Central America: Reagan/Bush (R)
Iraq Sr: Bush Sr (R)
Kosovo: Clinton (D)
Afghanistan: Bush Jr (R)
Iraq Jr: Bush Jr (R)

OK, let's tally them up. 6/11, or 54%, Republican, 3/11, or 27%, Democratic, 2/11, or 18%, shared. Looks like Republicans are the war party.
But let's look closer - not all wars are entirely bad. Lincoln's Civil War might have been the least bad option, even if it's still going on in elections today, but he was a long time ago (the first Republican president), and Bush is no Lincoln. Roosevelt's Spanish American War hooked up America, but it killed over a million Phillipinos unnecessarily, among surely many other atrocities never even recorded - and started off with the US blowing up the Maine in Cuba, like bombing Pearl Harbor ourselves. Nice cashin, but just about the warringest, and all Republican. WWI was Democratic, but as beneficial and probably as necessary by the time we joined, like the best parts of the Civil and Spanish/American wars, courtesy of a Democrat. WWII also a "good war", and all Democratic - despite Republicans siding with appeasement, and then trying to flip the script for the rest of history. Truman's Korean War was a Democratic boondoggle, but Republican Eisenhower didn't fix it: we're still at war there, and now they're nuclear, and probably our greatest threat, thanks to Republican Bush (despite Democrat Clinton actually containing them). At best a tie. Vietnam is definitely a tie between warmongers Johnson and Nixon, and even Republican Ford took years to wind it down after it was over. Reagan/Bush waged war across Central America without even admitting it, illegally. Probably the most Republican war of all. Clinton won his Kosovo war without even a single American casualty, and stopped another genocide in Europe. Iraq Sr was created by Bush Sr, baited by Bush Sr, and half-ended by Bush Sr: another (bad) point for Republicans. OK, Afghanistan should have been a sadly "good" war, but Bush abandoned it, after ignoring all his chances to prevent it while "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US". Abandoned it for the Iraq War, which, on further reflection, does take the crown as the Republicanest war of all.

So not only are Republicans much more warring than Democrats. Their warring is both more unnecessary and immoral than Democratic warring, and much more losing. Republicans haven't really won a war since Roosevelt, while Democrats haven't lost one.

So no wonder you still think McCain's "maverick" persona could have been something more than just an act. You've drunk the Republican koolaid. I guess that you're developing a tolerance. If only you had developed a similar resistance to war, or at least Republican war history.