There is little or no doubt in my mind that the Obama Administration is one of the most corrupt and clear and present dangers to the United States Constitution and our American freedom. Now, they have taken the first steps to control political speech that would tell the truth about government tyranny and about the corruption of politicians.
The FCC has voted along party lines, three to two, to regulate broadband internet access as if it were a 1935 telephone company; complete with special interest influence from lobbyists, mysterious taxes, and ever-changing tariffs that stifle competition and allow carriers to charge higher premium prices for what could be termed “commodity” information packets. All in the guise of keeping the internet open and free.
Abuse of authority?
In Obama’s hypocritical assertion that he would run the most open and transparent administration in history, it appears that Commission Chairman, Tom Wheeler, himself a lobbyist, refused to testify before Congress prior to the vote – and refused to release over 300 pages of the regulation prior to the vote.
As Nancy Pelosi so famously said, “But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.” Of course, the devil is in the details and it is likely that the FCC may try to impose some form of content control over pornography to establish their “right” and “duty” to regulate content much as they do for prime time television. It would be the height of hypocrisy for the progressive socialist democrats to claim that they are “doing it for the children,” as the Obama administration sits idly by while Muslim terrorists (the words Obama refuses to speak) rape little girls and bury little boys alive.
How do we know that the FCC, in this or subsequent administrations, will not abuse their authority in such a manner as to screw consumers as they have with the regulation of the telephone industry? Whose to say that the lobbyists who protect the aging and obsolete telephone industry do not continue their process of not maintaining copper wiring and allowing their networks to deteriorate while turning to internet protocols that make us all more vulnerable in time of natural or man-made disasters?
The regulation of political speech …
Now that the government has established their authority over the internet, what’s likely to be next as we approach a presidential election cycle that is of the utmost importance to the progressive socialist democrats? In my view, the FEC, Federal Election Commission, will now propose rules on internet-based political speech near election dates – the only time that an apathetic public seems to be turning away from celebrity actors and starts paying attention to celebrity politicians.
So where are the rules?
The FCC was quick to rule on the regulation, quick to issue the statement’s of the five commission members, but not so fast to publish the exact rules that it is enacting. Here is what the FCC’s says …
The "Open Internet" is the Internet as we know it. It's open because it uses free, publicly available standards that anyone can access and build to, and it treats all traffic that flows across the network in roughly the same way. The principle of the Open Internet is sometimes referred to as "net neutrality." Under this principle, consumers can make their own choices about what applications and services to use and are free to decide what lawful content they want to access, create, or share with others. This openness promotes competition and enables investment and innovation.
The Open Internet also makes it possible for anyone, anywhere to easily launch innovative applications and services, revolutionizing the way people communicate, participate, create, and do business—think of email, blogs, voice and video conferencing, streaming video, and online shopping. Once you're online, you don't have to ask permission or pay tolls to broadband providers to reach others on the network. If you develop an innovative new website, you don't have to get permission to share it with the world. <Source: FCC>
Note the selective use of the word “free” and re-defines free as having non-proprietary standards. The real definition of free should include “be free from interference of government in standards, methods, practices, taxes, and regulation.”
The most dangerous words that are spoken is “lawful content” because that is a legislatively-determined restriction passed and promulgated by self-serving, corrupt, and partisan politicians. Protecting children from unrestricted access to pornography is one thing, curtailing political speech to protect the current regime from disclosure of malfeasance and criminal activities is quite another. Especially on issues of soft tyranny.
Your tolls to broadband providers is rolled into the pricing.
Bottom line …
We will need to wait until the final rule is released and published in the Federal Register and analyzed. But this does not bode well for the consumers nor American citizens.
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius