Jump to content

obama Wants To Take Over The Internet...

smitty

By smitty
in Political Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

bullets13
bullets13

pretty typical article from one of these websites: riles up the conservative reader without explaining what is happening or why? A whole article bashing the net neutrality movement and its supporters,

CraigS
CraigS

I agreed that the government being involved is a slippery slope. ... but if you read through the entire cartoon you'll see why. ... it's no different than the so called state run media so many complai

EnlightenedMessiah
EnlightenedMessiah

Which is why I said in post #6, the consumer gets screwed either way. This isn't a black and white issue. Kudos to the guys willing/capable of using their brains rather than scanning article headlines

Posted Images

smitty

smitty

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Smitty,

Can you explain to me what net neutrality means?

Thanks

One can put any title on it that sounds good.  One can put lip stick and pearls on a pig.  But it's still a pig.  Answer me this, other than the military, what does government do that is actually good?  As I see it it, every thing they've tried is bankrupt.  And the point of the article was that if soros is involved to the tune of that amount of money, well, it can't be good for America. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullets13

bullets13

Posted
Posted
pretty typical article from one of these websites: riles up the conservative reader without explaining what is happening or why? A whole article bashing the net neutrality movement and its supporters, but no explanation as to what it actually is. Not that any of their readers need an explanation to hate something Obama's behind.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted

pretty typical article from one of these websites: riles up the conservative reader without explaining what is happening or why? A whole article bashing the net neutrality movement and its supporters, but no explanation as to what it actually is. Not that any of their readers need an explanation to hate something Obama's behind.

 

Is this good or bad in your opinion, and why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RETIREDFAN1

RETIREDFAN1

Posted
Posted

pretty typical article from one of these websites: riles up the conservative reader without explaining what is happening or why? A whole article bashing the net neutrality movement and its supporters, but no explanation as to what it actually is. Not that any of their readers need an explanation to hate something Obama's behind.

 

99% of Conservatives reading the article already KNOW what net neutrality is and disagree with it wholeheartedly........the only inaccuracy in the thread's title is that "obama" should be changed to "out of control federal tyrants".......He's not doing this alone.........:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smitty

smitty

Posted
  • Author
Posted

In other words you have no idea what it is, typical.

You are the definition of a low information voter.

I know exactly what the title would infer.  But that's not what it's going to do.  Do you believe it would achieve net neutrality and not actually make it worst?  Again -- if a socialist like obama and soros wants it then it has to bad for America.  The name was titled Net Neutrality so the "Low Information Voter" would fall for it and actually think it's gonna help... 

PS -- they want to use Title II of the "1934" Communication Act to broaden control of the internet.  This is "government" control.  Gives me warm and fuzzy feeling...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smitty

smitty

Posted
  • Author
Posted

pretty typical article from one of these websites: riles up the conservative reader without explaining what is happening or why? A whole article bashing the net neutrality movement and its supporters, but no explanation as to what it actually is. Not that any of their readers need an explanation to hate something Obama's behind.

The article just exposed soros as being financially behind this push.  So, are you saying that this article is wrong and soros is not funding millions to to get this passed?   If this is wrong, please show us the truth...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EnlightenedMessiah

EnlightenedMessiah

Posted
Posted
This forum must have the 10% of low information voting conservatives who don't know what it is then, because I've yet to see someone explain it to me.

All I see is the usual "Obama bad, conservatives smart" lines repeated over and over.

99% of Conservatives reading the article already KNOW what net neutrality is and disagree with it wholeheartedly........the only inaccuracy in the thread's title is that "obama" should be changed to "out of control federal tyrants".......He's not doing this alone.........:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullets13

bullets13

Posted
Posted

99% of Conservatives reading the article already KNOW what net neutrality is and disagree with it wholeheartedly........the only inaccuracy in the thread's title is that "obama" should be changed to "out of control federal tyrants".......He's not doing this alone......... :)


I highly doubt that 30% of the conservatives reading the article know what it is, and if they do, they have a knowledge of it based on information gleaned from low information articles such as this one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EnlightenedMessiah

EnlightenedMessiah

Posted
Posted
Can you explain what it is first? Surely if you don't like it then you must have an understanding of what it means.. Right? Oh wait. Obama bad, conservatives smart. I forgot.

Smitty posted an article that you two want to bash but rather than bash the article and why we conservatives don't understand it, try explaining the merits in net neutrality that you obviously see that we don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CraigS

CraigS

Posted
Posted

Can you explain what it is first? Surely if you don't like it then you must have an understanding of what it means.. Right? Oh wait. Obama bad, conservatives smart. I forgot.
 

I'll bite! I'm not real sure what it is, at least not enough to KNOW what it means to the future of the internet.

 

With that said, I will agree with the statement "Obama bad" and that I do understand, and have plenty of reasons to think so.

 

But, if you'll be so kind as to explain "net neutrality" to me, I'll then decide if Obama gets a plus, or yet another negative.

 

I can surely say, I agree with the stance that other than our military, not much the Feds get involved with works, so I am skeptical about the Feds getting involved....however you choose to explain it to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted

Can you explain what it is first? Surely if you don't like it then you must have an understanding of what it means.. Right? Oh wait. Obama bad, conservatives smart. I forgot.
 

 

Read back where I said anything about it one way or another...I didn't.

 

You jumped in to bash the article so why don't you explain why instead of your usual deflection.

 

Or Buddy Garrity, since you like the comment he made and must agree with it, you explain why this is a good thing for the internet since he won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullets13

bullets13

Posted
Posted

I'll bite! I'm not real sure what it is, at least not enough to KNOW what it means to the future of the internet.
 
With that said, I will agree with the statement "Obama bad" and that I do understand, and have plenty of reasons to think so.
 
But, if you'll be so kind as to explain "net neutrality" to me, I'll then decide if Obama gets a plus, or yet another negative.
 
I can surely say, I agree with the stance that other than our military, not much the Feds get involved with works, so I am skeptical about the Feds getting involved....however you choose to explain it to me.


I appreciate your honesty. And that being said, I respect the fact that you generally have your finger on the pulse of current issues, even if you and I may butt heads on them from time to time. So if you aren't familiar with the issue, then I think it's safe to say that many, if not most folks aren't familiar with it either. And this is the whole point of my issue with this article... I don't have a problem with someone having a stance one way or the other on this issue, but I do have a problem with a propaganda site spending this much time and effort into riling up their readers without making ANY effort to actually educate their readers on the issue. This article is fodder for mindless sheep.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Buddy Garrity

Mr. Buddy Garrity

Posted
Posted

Read back where I said anything about it one way or another...I didn't.

 

You jumped in to bash the article so why don't you explain why instead of your usual deflection.

 

Or Buddy Garrity, since you like the comment he made and must agree with it, you explain why this is a good thing for the internet since he won't.

Im waiting for his first question to be answered. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EnlightenedMessiah

EnlightenedMessiah

Posted
Posted
Usual deflection?

Not a single conservative in this topic has explained to me what net neutrality means! How can you say you don't see the merits when you don't even understand the issue?

Lumraiderfan has confirmed his status as a low information voter, congrats!

Read back where I said anything about it one way or another...I didn't.
 
You jumped in to bash the article so why don't you explain why instead of your usual deflection.
 
Or Buddy Garrity, since you like the comment he made and must agree with it, you explain why this is a good thing for the internet since he won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted

Usual deflection?

Not a single conservative in this topic has explained to me what net neutrality means! How can you say you don't see the merits when you don't even understand the issue?

Lumraiderfan has confirmed his status as a low information voter, congrats!
 

 

An article was posted, you didn't like it but won't say why when questioned...usual deflection.

 

Why don't you explain to us what net neutrality is...google it if you need to...there are tons of articles on it.

 

I'm a low information voter???  Good one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Member Statistics

    45,985
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    SVD Beaumont
    Newest Member
    SVD Beaumont
    Joined


  • Posts

    • PhatMack19
      Road to Omaha

      By PhatMack19 · Posted

      Where were the 8 Omaha teams in D1's preseason top 25 poll... 2. Florida 8. A&M 9. Tennessee 13. N.C.State 14. Virginia 15. North Carolina Kentucky - unranked Florida State - unranked
    • Englebert
      Will Biden Be The Democratic Nominee For President?

      By Englebert · Posted

      That TDS is really flaring. Now do Biden. You have way, way, way more material. And keep that bitter "you are better than me" jealousy tone you have with Trump. You know Biden, the one you want everyone to vote for instead of Trump. Somehow you didn't acknowledge my pleas for you to die a painful death. I was quite certain that is how you would have interpreted my previous post. I guess when your focus is Trump 24/7, nothing else matters.
    • Englebert
      Phelan and Karl Rove!

      By Englebert · Posted

      I have a better one. The point that nobody wants to acknowledge is that Dems are crossing over to vote Trump in the primaries and in the general so he will win the presidency. That way Trump will get the blame when the Dems implement their sinister plan to deport all of the minorities in the country. They have already laid the groundwork...convincing everyone that Trump and Republicans are racist (without providing any proof). Then it will be just a matter of time to execute their White supremacy plan of the great purge of the dirty, unwashed, heathen, non-Whites that roam freely in this country. I think my theory is more viable than your theory. Maybe we can get some other ridiculous scenarios so we can start a poll.
    • CardinalBacker
      Will Biden Be The Democratic Nominee For President?

      By CardinalBacker · Posted

      But that’s what Trump’s fanboys don’t understand.  When he talked about sexually assaulting women, y’all laughed it off as “locker room talk.”  When it was proven that he raped E. Jean Carroll, you cried that it was all an injustice… a lie. Even though he’d already confessed to doing the same thing to other women.  John McCain has suffered and sacrificed more for his country than practically anybody, except possible gold star families… and Trump called him a loser or something to that effect. “Oh, it was a joke that no one was supposed to take seriously.” But when Trump, after disrespecting the sacrifices of one of our most valiant, y’all are like “just because Trump didn’t go to Omaha Beach doesn’t mean he isn’t pro military!” Really? All you have to do is listen to what he said about McCain’s service. Not McCain as an opponent, not McCain’s political views… about the fact that the man was tortured, probably raped, and who knows what all else for over five years for swearing an oath and putting on the uniform.  But all of y’all supposedly “pro military” people just laughed along with Trump. “Good one, Sir! Maverick my new-hind! Filthy Rino!”  I don’t understand how the same people (y’all) who probably always say “thank you for your service” to any veteran still support a guy who craps on the ones who suffered the most on our behalf.  It’s baffling. 
    • Englebert
      Will Biden Be The Democratic Nominee For President?

      By Englebert · Posted

      Wow. Do you actually believe your little scenario has any chance of alleviating you of your moral immaturity? Deflection at it's best...or worse. You seem to be a sad case. If you died today, I would be remiss if not attributing your cause of death to severe TDS, and of course, Covid. Look at that. I just made a joke about your death. You did not get offended. Nobody was offended. Not one person will accuse me of being hateful towards fellow human beings. But yet, you hate Trump because he made a similar crude comment about McCain. You tried to attribute that comment as evidence Trump hates the military. What grade level of schoolchildren do you think is laughing at you for that "less that adolescent" (hint, hint) comment. You used one crude comment in an attempt to justify your TDS. Now, when called on it, you try to deflect the whole topic. You are certainly not having any fun with this, but you sure are providing entertainment for the board. It's a shame you can't join in on the fun. I think even Big Girl might be to the point of giggling at the shamelessness you are exhibiting.

  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...