Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston

~~~

~~~

Friday, November 14, 2014

Stupid things John Boehner and Ted Cruz Tweeted



Boehner tweeted:


"An open, vibrant ‪#‎Internet‬ is essential to a growing economy, and ‪#‎netneutrality‬ is a textbook example of the kind of Washington regulations that destroy innovation and entrepreneurship. Federal bureaucrats should NOT be in the business of regulating the Internet. Not now. Not ever."



Ted Cruz did essentially the the same thing recently: 


Senator Ted Cruz ✔ @SenTedCruz Follow "Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet; the Internet should not operate at the speed of government. 10:43 AM - 10 Nov 2014 


(BTW, Tailgunner Ted accepted mucho dollars from Comcast, what a surprise that he would support corporations over people.)



Here are some of the comments from Republicans and Libertarians on Tailgunner Ted's idiotic remark:


Ed P As a Republican who works in the tech industry I can say that this statement shows you either have no idea what you are talking about or you are bought and paid for by the American Cable monopoly. This is amazingly an stupid statement and is disheartening. 

Keith F Ted, I am as conservative as they come…. I want government out of just about everything… and I hate to say it, really hate to say it, but Obama is right on this one. I do not want my access and internet speed controlled by my ISP. It will be. The internet has been an open forum with little to no restrictions, that will change and not for the better. Bottom line, do not go against freedom of the net just because Obama is for it. Even an old blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile. 

Joey C As a Republican whom also works in IT like Ed… You have no clue what you are talking about or you are company bought and paid for. 

Jinnie M Goddammit, stop making my party look like morons and look up net neutrality. It doesn’t mean what you and your speechwriters think it means. 

Sam A Senator Cruz, you are wrong on this one. As a conservative voter and IT professional, I can assure you that Net Neutrality is a GOOD THING. Internet providers (who are also content owners) can’t be trusted (as has already been proven) to allow consumers equal access to content from their competitors. This is why the government needs to ensure Net Neutrality as it protects the consumer from the bias of their Internet provider. This is especially true since we don’t have real competition in this space.


And here are some reactions to Boehner's stupid Tweet -- most of them from irate Republicans!:


Sean B: As a Republican, this rhetoric is absolute garbage. #netneutrality isn’t a regulation, it is our current reality and should stay that way. As much as it pains me to say this, you and Senator Ted Cruz need to wake up and realize that making every issue a partisan issue is the problem here. Give back the $107k to Comcast and then talk about this issue objectively. 

Tracie B: You act as tho the republican rhetoric is caused by their misinformation..They KNOW exactly what net neutrality is and want to get rid of it… 

Jack C: This is why I, as a lifetime conservative, HATE the current GOP. The people pay for a fair internet. 

 Lawrence B: You have no clear concept of what is going on. I am a republican and I work/live/use the internet for over 30 years. This is a scam by Comcast and their ilk. I support net neutrality, I don’t support Obama. Our leaders have been bought. 

 Frank P: Sure, Mr. Speaker. And all our Interstate Highways should be privatized and turned into toll roads owned by airline companies. What could possibly go wrong? 

 Mick T: But you do want to regulate a woman’s body. 

John M: This man has no idea what he’s talking about. Not surprising considering his age, his alcoholism, and his politics. Idiot. 

 Patricia R: Again, Boehner, you lead your voters to believe you’re on their side when you’re definitely throwing them to the wolves of Wall Street. Think on this. Let’s deliver electricity at different rates. Rich people’s stuff runs faster than poor people’s stuff. That’s the same concept. The Internet needs to be treated like a utility where every citizen gets treated equally. There is no need for preferential treatment. Corporations are crooks veiled in laws written on behalf of them by men like you. WE NEED TO REIGN IN AND REGULATE THE POWER OF THE CORPORATIONS.





It's only a little over a week since the minority of a minority put more of these clowns in charge of the legislative branch of the government, and the first thing out of the gate, a U.S. Senator and the Speaker of the House look like horses' asses, talking about an important issue about which they know NOTHING!


Luckily, we have a president who does know something about this issue:




Obama Wants To Reclassify The Internet By Turning It Into A Utility



President Obama is FOR net neutrality, so naturally the GOP is AGAINST it. 

Mr. President, you should have come out against net neutrality so that these cement heads could then be for it and fall over themselves to get it passed. But never mind, their reaction to this no-brainer makes them look like the craven idiots that they are and exposes their obstructionist agendas.


WARNING!

The Cray-Crays are going to fight this with ignorance and misinformation, too!

26 comments:

Jerry Critter said...

All you have to do is look at the rest of the world to see what the lack of Internet regulation has given us. We have some of the slowest and most expensive Internet services in the world.

It reminds me of our health care system.

Shaw Kenawe said...

And it reminds us how the GOP is always on the wrong side in these issues.

Dave Miller said...

Shaw... and others... I'm not sure what we need to do to get speeds and access like is available elsewhere, but I darn sure know giving control to cable and internet providers is not a viable solution.

For a group that rails against giving control of health care to health care providers, I struggle with their seeming acquiescence to this plan...

Shaw Kenawe said...

We voters all know that the problem in politics is money. Just take a look at the link in this post that exposes both Democrats and Republicans and the amounts of $$$ given to them by the big cable companies.

The Supremes and our government have told us that the guy with the biggest bankroll will run things in this country, and we the people have rolled over like good little puppies and accepted it.

Dervish Sanders said...

"This statement shows you either have no idea what you are talking about or you are bought and paid for by the American Cable monopoly"???

"Or"???

I think it's pretty clear they DO know what they're talking about and are lying... and will continue to lie about not being completely in the pocket of the plutocrats... so long as they are allowed to get away with it.

Heck, we've got some people who continue to argue that the GOP isn't obstructing but that Obama is just really bad at negotiating with Republicans - or that what he's advocating for is bad and that the Republicans are doing their job in stopping bad legislation.

There are a lot of people out there who are either gullible or just not paying attention.

Rational Nation USA said...

John M: This man has no idea what he’s talking about. Not surprising considering his age, his alcoholism, and his politics. Idiot.

And this style of rhetorical expression is exactly as inappropriate as that of FreeThinke and Lisa et all.

Other than that B&T really either do not know what they arev talking about or they are in the pockets of the ISP.

okjimm said...

RN...they are in the pockets. $$$$$$$$$
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/11/12/republicans-dont-want-their-leaders-working-with-president-obama-at-all/
Tickle Tricle economics.

Most rank and file Republicans have taken the bait and do not want anything proposed by Obama to succeed, even if it is their own best interest.

Mr. Not Conservative said...

RN, the problem is not in John M.'s rhetorical expression but in the cupidity of Cruz and Bohner.

Rational Nation USA said...

It is understood precisely where the problem is Mr. Not Coservative.

The negative rhetorical flair does nothing to add to a rational discusion.

Sorry you missed that Mr. Not Conservative.

Dervish Sanders said...

John M: ...Not surprising considering his age, his alcoholism, and his politics. Idiot.

RN: And this style of rhetorical expression is exactly as inappropriate as that of FreeThinke and Lisa et all.


I don't know that Boner's age has anything to do with this discussion, but everything else John M said is accurate. One can quite easily find very credible articles on the internet concerning Boner's alcoholism. And the reality of the GOP serving the concerns of the wealthy is frequently discussed on this blog.

Given these facts, I think this "inappropriate" charge - as well as comparing what John M said to content from Lisa's blog - is ridiculous.

Rational Nation USA said...

Frankly DS, I do not care what your opinion is. As such ths will be the last time I respond to your comments directed at me on this or any other blog.

Even if by chance you are right.

Flying Junior said...

I somewhat innocently tangled with a couple of gun guys on this issue over at mikeb's place. They seriously believe that regulation, even in this instance, is the poison pill. Lack of regulation = net neutrality = freedom.

It was actually an article by yahoo news (pop science/celebrity gossip/girls in bikinis,) a decidedly fringy news source, that fingered Obama as not so neutral to my republican friend. I pointed out that the NYT article on the same item was more clearly understood. Crickets.

They're ready to go to bat. Only the industry leaders really know what's good for us. Don't forget that Comcast just merged with Time Warner Communications. I'm not saying they don't do a lot of wonderful things. My best shot at high-speed fiber optics internet access would be A,T&T. But still, I would have to combine it with television line-up to get any kind of a good deal. I can't just get internet and a landline, for instance.

Regulation is about consumer protection. Without telecommunications being classified as a public utility, my grandparents in Claremore Oklahoma never could have afforded telephone service in the 1960s. If net neutrality goes the way of the Dodo, expect to see a lot more of the little swirling dots on your favorite videos than the content itself.

Shaw Kenawe said...

"They seriously believe that regulation, even in this instance, is the poison pill. Lack of regulation = net neutrality = freedom."

I think it's more "They seriously believe" what they are told to believe. You clearly stated the problem -- dubious news sources, and of course, the incessant messaging from the right wingers that all things government are bad.

I don't know one techie who is against net neutrality, and I trust their judgement more than right wing partisans.

Shaw Kenawe said...

And here's the real reason there's any controversy on this subject:

"In the wake of President Obama's recent public endorsement of net neutrality, Gizmodo has released a report highlighting the campaign contributions received by politicians from the nation's four major telecom companies.

As per the report, both Democrats and Republicans received over $8 million from companies like Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Verizon, AT&T, and their trade group the National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA) in this year's election alone.

What's particularly concerning is that money doled out by these companies directly reaches politicians like Ted Cruz, who is on the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet, which handles internet governance and FCC oversight.

The following table breaks down exactly how much telecoms gave to the election and reelection campaigns of the politicians tasked with overseeing the already industry-friendly FCC:


Republicans AND Democrats are in bed with the cable companies on this issue.


Table and the rest of the report is HERE

skudrunner said...

"They seriously believe" what they are told to believe"

I guess "they" are the republicans or would it be the obama supporters since "they" have been lied to about everything but still march in step.

There are far to many lies to name and now an obama insider has admitted that the american people are stupid, must be the obama voting block, because obamacare is nothing but lies and obama sat in on the discussions. Botox Nancy didn't know the person even after he was featured on her web site and she made reference to him.

Remember that bright light in the Boston tunnel just may be a train heading youir way. Guess it is all Bush and fox news who is to blame.

Shaw Kenawe said...

"...and now an obama insider has admitted that the american people are stupid..."

I was waiting for someone to come here with phoney indignation on this ridiculous issue.

It won't fly here.

For the past 6 years, on almost every right wing, Tea Party blog and right wing internet news site I've visited, I've read nothing BUT the claim that the American people are "stupid!"

And those sites promote that claim because Mr. Obama was elected TWICE!, therefore, say the right wingers, "THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE STUPID!"

When the right wingers find out that someone who supports the other side says THE EXACT SAME THING!, they get all indignant, because only THEY can say that the American people are stupid!

"There are far to many lies to name..."

Please. Spare us the phoney umbrage. The Cheney-Bush presidency gave us non-stop lies for 8 years, several of which led to the disastrous Iraq War. To be upset over this fake controversy shows us once again how farcical the righties are.

"Guess it is all Bush and fox news who is to blame."

Well, finally, a sliver of truth.

Dave Miller said...

Speaking of lies Skud, a few of us came across a site that posted what even FOX News said was inaccurate and false info. After pointing it out and offering proof, comment moderation was instituted, effectively banning us from commenting.

On another site which you frequent, a post was up about missionary kids being tortured in the Middle East by ISIS. Since I too am a missionary, I have lots of contacts to whom I can reach out for info.

The entire incident was false, fake and made up. After pointing this out, I was told I was wrong and even if the post was not true, it should stay if only to get people praying.

Here's the problem. The "truth" these folks wanted did not fit the facts our conservative folks wanted, so they went with what Lisa has called "False Facts".

If you have some proof that what Shaw has posted is false, bring it up. But you have a history of deflecting by referencing other issues without dealing with post at hand.

Why is that?

Flying Junior said...

That's quite a table Shaw. Makes a nice microcosm of U.S. politics.

I have been enjoying a recent lecture by Noam Chomsky in which he states that the United States is being governed by one party with two factions. This is the business party. The democratic faction is made up of the same elements that once made up the moderate wing of the republican party. The republican party is so completely off the charts that it has little or no connection to constructive governance. He stated that the republican function is simply to block any meaningful change and that this has been a remarkably effective strategy.

Shaw Kenawe said...

"He stated that the republican function is simply to block any meaningful change and that this has been a remarkably effective strategy."

Did Chomsky also talks about the GOP's other strategy? To throw up as many impediments to voting (especially for minorities) so that they can win local elections? That's a strategy as will and has been remarkably effective.

Ducky's here said...

Folks, riddle me this.

McConnell has a potential problem.

SCOTUS is likely to rule that subsidized state insurance exchanges are illegal due to a technicality in the Affordable Care Act's wording.
Kentucky has a very popular exchange and I believe it is subsidized.
How does Mitch explain it to his constituents when they lose their health insurance?

I imagine he can scream and holler about "activist judges" and use this as an excuse to block Obama's nominees but they are going to be blocked as soon as the new Senate is sworn in at any rate.

What is Mitch to do?
Really, this is going to be a real look into the guts of the machine.

Ducky's here said...

As far as voting impediments go, North Carolina is the case study and the voting restrictions may well have carried the election for the right.

Look for it to be the template.
With the voting rights act being struck down there isn't anything in their way.

Shaw Kenawe said...

What the conservative governors and politicians in red states have done to their poor citizens is a disgrace. Withholding a chance to buy affordable health care and to access health care through Medicaid expansion just to deny President Obama any success is beyond shameful, IMO, it's criminal.

They've used the poor as pawn to get at the president.

Who in their right minds would want to associate with despicable people like that?

Shaw Kenawe said...

On the subject of this post: Here's more from BigTechie:


"...the president has proposed that the FCC invokes “title II of the Telecommunications Act” in order to make Internet access a utility. That would put it in the same category as electricity, heat, and hot water. The argument, essentially, is that the Internet has become a vital part of every American citizen’s life, and limiting access to the Internet would threaten the well-being of those citizens.

It’s an argument that’s almost impossible to deny. Most private companies rely on the Internet in some way to communicate with their customers, while public entities throughout local, state, and the federal government use the Internet to inform people about services and requirements. Because of how dependent we all are on the Internet, changing the way it works in the name of greater profits would do Americans a great disservice.

Furthermore, it’d be tough for ISPs to argue that the president’s idea would hurt their business considering they haven’t operated without net neutrality yet. It’d be one thing if pay walls and throttling had already become a widespread practice, but since net neutrality is still in place, it would still be business as usual for ISPs – for the most part, anyway."

Dave Miller said...

Ducky... Mitch pulled off the ultimate jiu jitsu in Kentucky... He got them to believe that Obamacare was bad and that that Obamacare in their state was a state program, so it was good.

I'm amazed... while he railed about repealing Obamacare, he praised the state program, of another name, that was Obamacare...

And we're told the Dem voters lack cognitive skills...

The Surfer Dude said...

the tea party doesn't support net neutrality? what a surprise. if it makes sense, they're against it. bunch of twilights

Shaw Kenawe said...

"And those sites promote that claim because Mr. Obama was elected TWICE!, therefore, say the right wingers, "THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE STUPID!" Not all, just 51.1 percent, you know that decisive majority" --skudrunner
at 9:45 AM, Nov. 17, 2014

Four U.S. presidents have won over 50% of the popular vote twice in the last and current century

Obama First President Since Eisenhower to Win 51% of Vote Twice


Not even Ronald Reagan achieved what Mr. Obama achieved.

Insult and taunt all you like, but facts are stubborn things. Mr. Obama's achievement is one for the books.

The win by the T-GOPers was a win they achieved through voter suppression and dark money and it was, in the end, a minority win.

Let's see how they do in 2016 when the entire nation votes.