Does Ted Cruz not understand Net Neutrality?

[matts5.0]

Didn't read the thread.
My problem with government control of anything, is bullshit government bureaucracy and how inefficient and ineffective it is, that and censorship, the government has been trying to pass sopa, cipa, and all these control measures to basically censure the Internet, even using China as its model for censorship.

[YALE]

He and the repubs are in control of the board, they dont have to sacrifice a pawn to somebody who has lost most of the board. If he wants show what he's about, he should be doing right all the time. Instead this move just reinforces that he is the wrong candidate to the middle left who are lining up to vote for a motherly figure

Fair point. I still like him.

[Forever_frost]

Except it has been used repeatedly to regulate commerce, so try again. At this point, the use of the commerce clause applies almost entirely to trade, including intrastate trade.

Has been used but is not what the clause actually says. It was about states trading, the writings of the time are very clear on this.

[CexMashean]

So, when does our internet get better? Anyone have the scoop on that?

[YALE]

Didn't read the thread.
My problem with government control of anything, is bullshit government bureaucracy and how inefficient and ineffective it is, that and censorship, the government has been trying to pass sopa, cipa, and all these control measures to basically censure the Internet, even using China as its model for censorship.

SOPA and PIPA passing are not the same thing as a government agency regulating an industry it already oversees.

Has been used but is not what the clause actually says. It was about states trading, the writings of the time are very clear on this.

The horses are out of the barn, and the Supreme Court agrees with me, so what irrelevant argument would you like to make next? Get your representative to draft a bill neutering the clause in question, and lobby to get it through. Don't just cry in the mud like a spoiled kid at the unfairness of it all.

[Forever_frost]

The Supreme Court also said internment is constitutional. The document agrees with me. Guess which our Founders thought was more important.

[John -- '02 HAWK]

SOPA and PIPA were spawned by the RIAA, some of the big media companies, and ISPs as being attempts to overreach and stop piracy and establish the legal footings for the proposed service fees and paywalls. These acts are what brought net neutrality from being the "Information wants to be free" concept to a rallying point

[CWO]

http://www.iflscience.com/technology/spacex-will-soon-be-launching-satellites-unfettered-low-cost-internet

[YALE]

The Supreme Court also said internment is constitutional. The document agrees with me. Guess which our Founders thought was more important.

No it doesn't. Your interpretation of it agrees with you. Who should we presume knows more about it? Constitutional scholars with decades on the bench, or you?

[talisman]

The Supreme Court also said internment is constitutional. The document agrees with me. Guess which our Founders thought was more important.

Guess which one actually is more important, in 2014? I don't get why you go on these rants. They just make you look like a person that doesn't understand how the world works. We all get it, you're a big fan of the Constitution. You don't have to prove it every time something political is being discussed by sticking your head in the sand and just repeating Constitution over and over again.

[Forever_frost]

No it doesn't. Your interpretation of it agrees with you. Who should we presume knows more about it? Constitutional scholars with decades on the bench, or you?

It was written so that even the farmers of the day could understand it. It is in English and simple. It doesn't need or permit interpretation.

[YALE]

It was written so that even the farmers of the day could understand it. It is in English and simple. It doesn't need or permit interpretation.

It is amazingly simple. It reads, "among the several states." It doesn't say, "prohibits states from taxing each other." That has more to do with the General Usage Clause of Article I. It doesn't say, "can't regulate the internet."

[Strychnine]

Today

- AT&T Inc on Wednesday raised pressure on the U.S. telecom regulator's work on new "net neutrality" rules, saying it would stop investing in new high-speed Internet connections in 100 U.S. cities until the Web traffic rules are settled.

We can't go out and invest that kind of money deploying fiber to 100 cities not knowing under what rules those investments will be governed," Stephenson [at&t ceo] said at an analyst conference.

[Forever_frost]

It is amazingly simple. It reads, "among the several states." It doesn't say, "prohibits states from taxing each other." That has more to do with the General Usage Clause of Article I. It doesn't say, "can't regulate the internet."

Is this regulating trade among the several states? If it's not, it falls under the 10th amendment. The federal government has no authority.

[John -- '02 HAWK]

Today

Now is when Magnus should post the speed chart

Also sounds like a monopoly needs to broken up again