THE EXACT OPPOSITE IS TRUE.
Net neutrality is what we have now. Net neutrality means that small sites load on your screen as rapidly as do the big sites. Net Neutrality means that small businesses and do-it-yourself web site owners (such as yours truly) won't have to pay a huge "tax" to the big carriers in order to avoid slow downloads.
If congress overturns net neutrality, say goodbye to the net as we now know it. Say goodbye to the last refuge of dissent.
The real group protecting the internet is SAVE THE INTERNET. I created an ad which leads to this site. (The ad was neither commissioned nor approved by www.savetheinternet.com, although I'm sure they won't mind.) Feel free to put the code on your site. In Firefox, just go to to View/Page Source, then scroll down until you see the words a href="http://www.savetheinternet.com/ (In Internet Explorer, you will want View/Source.) Copy the entire paragraph, and paste it into the HTML for your blog or web site.
Here's what the ad looks like:
Click on the image and you'll visit the good guys, not the phonies.
Shame on any blogger who accepts advertising designed to deceive. THAT MEANS YOU, JOSH MARSHALL. The best blogger on the net should know better. Would you accept a falsehood-filled ad from a holocaust revisionist? That's not a rhetorical question. Would you?
9 comments:
Are you suggesting that professor Lefty is ok with wiretapping if it is done under a Democrat Admin?
Why are you filing a civil rights complaint?
"...hating the government to the point of shirking your responsibility of supporting your country."
Tell that to the Germans during the Nazi era.
The problem is GOVERNMENT wiretapping. Why would I care if it is under a Dem of Repug government? Wasn't she wiretapped under Nixon and LBJ? It has little to do with the phony Right/Left brainlock so nicely displayed by both you and the professor.
I won't delete Frontline because his comment demonstrates a certain mentality -- a certain type of incoherent thinking associated with rightists.
First, the topic of my post was not wiretapping but net neutrality. Frontline put his comment in the wrong damn place.
Second, the question of nomenclature -- should we use "wiretap" or some other word to describe what the NSA is doing? -- is of only limited interest. "Wiretap" is probably not quite the right word -- but frankly, I don't much care.
Third, the only "proof" for this absurd "no wiretapping" assertion concerns an old story involving King -- as though THAT has anything to do with the current NSA debate.
Fourth: Taps on King were initiated by J. Edgar Hoover, although they were approved by RFK, who acted based on Hoover's deceptive information, and who later expressed regret. All of which occurred BEFORE the FISA system became law.
Fifth, anyone accusing ME of vitriol should turn on any AM radio. Visit any book store. Visit the right-wing sites that openly call for the physical elimination of liberals. Visit the Dominionist sites which call for an end to democracy. The vitriolic right-wing bloggers and book-writers are the ones who get funding. THEY are the ones emulating Goebbels.
Just what our country needs, another frivolous lawsuit.
Does Frontline Joe realize that the "civil rights" he takes for granted exist only because the Democrats got them codified into law?
OK, back to the Internet issue. I agree completely. It's shamefull the number of "liberal" and "progressive" blogs who are running the flash ad by the big telecoms. They are allowing an ad to run on their site that is full of lies.
I'm boycotting any site that carries these ads.
"In the same manner, your blog is focused on hating the government to the point of shirking your responsibility of supporting your country. And you do it with all the style and skill of Hitler's Goebbels."
"Hating the government" ? Isn't that what the right-wing Republicans have been telling us to do for years? Or did they only mean Democratic or liberal government?
Frontline Joe, lots of us here *do* hate (or, at least, despise) the corrupt, incompetent and self-serving administration of GWB. But that's hardly the "government" -- it's more like a cabal which has *betrayed* the government AND the people and the Enlighenment principles on which the American system is built.
But geez, those liberals are a nasty lot, aren't they? They control every aspect of American life, even the classroom! That's why all 3 branches of government are currently being run by left-wingers, why left-wingers dominate every corporate board in the country, and why every major media output in the country is owned and operated by radicals who hate the U.S. government (that is, when the Democrats are in power).
Good luck on your fantasy cruise....
Frontline Joe suggests Cannonfire expresses 'vitriol'. I suggest it speaks truth to power. Check Frontline's website, unfortunately called 'Adventures in Social Work', where he states "I was there when the likes of Jane Fonda and John Kerry lost the Vietnam War for our country...". He claims to be a professional social worker in northern California. I question the assistance the underprivileged would receive should they be a minority or voice an opinion that may be construed as 'liberal'. People like Nathan Cohen, considered the Father of Social Work in America, and Saul Alinsky would spin in their graves to think this mentality would be working in the social work field under the guise of 'helping people'.
It would be the height of irony if Frontline Joe were really a social worker. Every social program ever organized and funded in the US was a product of liberalism and the Democratic Party. Plus, if the government was shrunk to its proper size, as Republicans insist it should be, FJ would be out of a job.
Way to go fj, you seem to have successfully highjacked the thread. Go to faux news now and pleasure yourself, little turd.
For the record and back to the relevant subject, Joseph, I strongly agree. I seriously wish some of the "progressive" bloggers would provide the honesty that they so vehemently demand from others. It's such a copout to say they're not responsible for the contect of advertisers, unless the ads are "too" offensive.
IBM took money from the nazis, and used their technology to identify the Jews, compile information on their ancestral lines, and run the concentration camps. They did so for the sake of profit.
Oh, I know. That's so tooootally different. Right.
Kim in PA
Look, it's not like that obvious astroturf site is going to fool the sort of person who goes to TPM and here (except maybe comment trolls, but they're beyond help)
I wouldn't mind if this site, or any other liberal blog site, ran ads supporting George W Bush.
Why not take their money? We're not stupid enough to fall for their shit.
Post a Comment