Slashdot Mirror


White House Responds To Net Neutrality Petition

bostonidealist writes "The White House has officially responded to a We The People petition created on January 15, 2014, which urged the President to 'direct the FCC to classify ISPs as "common carriers"' after the D.C. U.S. Court of Appeals 'struck down the Federal Communications Commission's open internet rules.' The White House statement says, 'absent net neutrality, the Internet could turn into a high-priced private toll road that would be inaccessible to the next generation of visionaries,' but notes, 'The FCC is an independent agency. Chairman Wheeler has publicly pledged to use the full authority granted by Congress to maintain a robust, free and open Internet — a principle that this White House vigorously supports.'"

7 of 245 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Translation: Piss off, Peasants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    >I love how Obama signs 100 executive orders a day

    Your post was satire, right? In reality, Obama has issued less executive orders per year than every other modern President.

    >he can't be bothered to ask the Cable and Telecom Monopolist he appointed to chair the FCC to do anything.

    It's like you didn't even read what he said, or just assume he *means* the opposite of what he says...but given your past history of inaccuracy....

  2. Re:Translation: Piss off, Peasants by Cordus+Mortain · · Score: 5, Informative

    I call BS. On average Obama signs only 38 executive orders per YEAR. On average only one more than Bush, and 10 less than Reagan https://www.politicususa.com/2014/02/16/myth-busted-analysis-reveals-president-obama-behaving-dictator.html

  3. Translation... by stox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comcast sent us more campaign donations than you did.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
  4. Re:Translation: Piss off, Peasants by JMJimmy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Check your facts - while he's spent more than any other president, the spending is only 11.2% more than Bush. His new spending, removing existing spending he inherited from Bush in 2009, is $203 billion (2005 adjusted $) and the total since that high point has reduced 5%. By comparison Bush increased spending (again, adjusted) by 33% in his first term and 34% in his second. Regan increased spending 41.2% during his presidency.

    Adjusted for inflation, Obama has increased the budget by a lower % than any president since Herbert Hoover.

  5. Re:Translation: Piss off, Peasants by whistlingtony · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I do love how, to prove Obama is bad (and he IS bad, just for REAL reasons... ), people trot out the debt. Yes. It's high. Yes, Obama spent a lot of money. But lets face it, the deficit is going DOWN, not up. He inherited a mess, he's cleaning it up, and if we want to blame anyone, we should blame the folks that repealed the Glass-Steagal act (which includes Clinton) for creating our gigantic mess.

    If you want to hate on Obama, stick to real facts. There are plenty of reasons to hate on Obama. But he's not responsible for the accumulation of all the debt that came before him, nor is he responsible for the economic situation that we find ourselves in. Go blame the assholes that deregulated an industry that almost immediately started creating a gigantic economic bubble and then begged for help when it popped.

  6. Whining diatribes by do-nothing people by whistlingtony · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This thread is going to be full of whining. Lots of blame. Lots of arguing. Lots of links to sources.... but no action.

    Wolf-PAC.com. Go. sign up. DO SOMETHING. I drove an hour today to get to my state capitol, visited my state rep, and asked him to sponsor legislation to call for an article V convention to FIX the problem. The problem isn't and R or a D next to someone's name. It's that money buys influence. It's that our reps are elected almost completely based on who raises the most money. And that isn't their fault. It's YOURS.

    You vote based on partisan hackery and don't bother to educate yourselves. You're all fired up to argue on the internet, but can't be bother to call your damn rep and tell them what's on your mind. And to boot, you vote based on made up knee jerk reactions. They're playing you like a fiddle. Ok, mostly the Right here, I really do have to show my bias. :D Really, a Muslim? A secret Muslim? F'ing stupid... but the laziness crosses party lines.

    Fix your brain, get off your ass, and go FIX IT. Stop whining on the internet. Stop arguing uselessly with random strangers on the internet. It wasn't even that hard to call my rep, get a meeting, and start working on a solution.

    Sorry, I'm a little frustrated by all the stupid arguing. Also, the stupidity. Go. wolf-pac.com. Sign up. Work with the people in your state (many of whom are in the OTHER party, and you'll hang out with them and discover they're actually quite intelligent and put a lot of thought into their beliefs).

  7. Re:Translation: Piss off, Peasants by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What some people on the right wing mean by "small government" is - small enough to drown in a bathtub. They believe government is "in the way" and the less there is of it the better. These people are so naïve about human nature that they actually believe social harmony can be obtained via absolute freedom, oddly that is the same problem the extreme left wing "flower power" people had when I was a kid. They expect that people will be fair minded with each other when government gets "out of the way". They think people will respect property rights, etc, without any enforcement. They think a gun rack over the mantelpiece will be a deterrent to an aspiring warlord. Basically they live in a thought bubble blown by people who want to control them, but to do that they must first tear down the protections afforded by the existing social structure.

    Now here's the funny/ironic part, these people think a center-right president is the one with the radical agenda!

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.