Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, May 16, 2018

The Senate approved a resolution Wednesday to nullify the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rollback, dealing a symbolic blow to the FCC's new rule that remains on track to take effect next month. The final vote was 52-47. As expected, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, joined Democrats in voting to overturn the FCC's controversial decision. But two other Republicans -- Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska -- also voted in favor of the resolution of disapproval

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

I guess all the Dems and 3 Repubs could be considered "bipartisan"... at a stretch.

So... the parties ARE the same!

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2018-05-16 05:30 PM | Reply

But, of course, it's only a Resolution in the GOP Sen supported by Dems. What McYurtle or the House will do with it may depend on how badly they want to win the mid terms if it becomes a voter issue.

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2018-05-16 05:32 PM | Reply

Are you in favor of an equal opportunity internet, or one controlled by a few large corporations?
This is a major policy difference between the dems and GOP.

#3 | Posted by bored at 2018-05-16 06:29 PM | Reply

Many media companies political views are to the left and without net neutrality these companies could slow down or make almost impossible to download more conservative viewpoints of their own. This is a important issue for both sides without net neutrality the only one that wins are big companies.

#4 | Posted by THomewood at 2018-05-17 02:40 AM | Reply

"Many media companies political views are to the left and without net neutrality these companies could slow down or make almost impossible to download more conservative viewpoints of their own. This is a important issue for both sides without net neutrality the only one that wins are big companies."

Yeah, conservatives are pushing for net neutrality. Hilarious! Not saying though that eventually they won't wish they had but most of them cater to the big corporations who just want to control the news and extract profits. Have conservatives ever done anything good for American? Ever? Name something, please! Anything!

#5 | Posted by danni at 2018-05-17 08:43 AM | Reply

Many media companies political views are to the left and without net neutrality these companies could slow down or make almost impossible to download more conservative viewpoints of their own.

#4 | POSTED BY THOMEWOOD AT 2018-05-17 02:40 AM | REPLY

It's not a Net Neutrality issue. "They" (google, facebook, etc) simply change the algorithm to reduce traffic. It's not limited to conservatives. This site's traffic has fallen in half since Fake News became a talking point and algorithms were changed in response.

#6 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-05-17 09:15 AM | Reply

Also, the senate voting to restore loophole riddled rules lobbied in by AT&T, Comcast, etc, is very darkly humorous. Fix them? F that, there's lobbyist money to collect here.

#7 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-05-17 09:17 AM | Reply

The big liberal Sitzkrieg, once again, on the side of the telecom companies who want to limit your access, charge you more and control the political message.

#8 | Posted by danni at 2018-05-17 09:35 AM | Reply

The problem now is that the House of Representatives has so many freedom hating right wing wackos.

#9 | Posted by danni at 2018-05-17 09:36 AM | Reply

The big liberal Sitzkrieg, once again, on the side of the telecom companies who want to limit your access, charge you more and control the political message.

#8 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2018-05-17 09:35 AM | REPLY

Ad hominem attacks on me don't fix the lobbyist created loopholes. Supporting the rule as is supports those lobbyist efforts. It's not the lesser evil.

#10 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-05-17 09:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

Symbolic posturing at best. That's all this is. Everybody in the Senate knows this won't pass the house and the president would never sign it.

#11 | Posted by eberly at 2018-05-17 10:05 AM | Reply

They want so much credit for doing nothing.

#12 | Posted by fresno500 at 2018-05-17 12:33 PM | Reply

Thanks for adding the video, Rogers. I'll have to see the flick.

#13 | Posted by Corky at 2018-05-17 01:55 PM | Reply

Symbolic posturing at best. That's all this is. Everybody in the Senate knows this won't pass the house and the president would never sign it.

#11 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Exactly. Then they can run on it in November. That's smart.

#14 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-05-17 02:48 PM | Reply

14

Agreed. There's no other reason for it. They can hit vulnerable member of the GOP with it in November.

#15 | Posted by eberly at 2018-05-17 03:01 PM | Reply

"Ad hominem attacks on me don't fix the lobbyist created loopholes. Supporting the rule as is supports those lobbyist efforts. It's not the lesser evil."

Saving net neutrality is absolutely necessary, adjustments can be made later. Priorities. Waiting for some fairy tale perfect fix is the road to net neutrality being taken away permanently.

#16 | Posted by danni at 2018-05-17 03:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Exactly. Then they can run on it in November. That's smart."

Every time a Republican loses his seat the solution gets closer.

#17 | Posted by danni at 2018-05-17 03:12 PM | Reply

Ad hominem attacks on me don't fix the lobbyist created loopholes. Supporting the rule as is supports those lobbyist efforts. It's not the lesser evil.

#10 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG

Your are such the sensitive little snowflake.
I'm so old I remember when you extremeist right wingers used to "pretend" to be tough guys.
Being on team Orange Adolf has made you soft.

#18 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2018-05-18 01:41 AM | Reply

Sitz has such a weird agenda. Net Neutrality is phony, making agriculture part of IP law is good for humanity, electric cars pollute more than regular ones.

Sitz do you represent certain parties in a fiduciary capacity with your posts?

#19 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-18 01:45 AM | Reply

Sitz has such a weird agenda. Net Neutrality is phony, making agriculture part of IP law is good for humanity, electric cars pollute more than regular ones.

#19 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2018-05-18 01:45 AM | REPLY

It's fairly moderate.

The OIO isn't Net Neutrality. During the OIO packet filtering, zero-rating, and bandwidth shaping were all in use. It was upheld in court. There is no reason to believe it will be adjusted in the direction of Net Neutrality.

IP law is not evil. In agriculture it has created both highly beneficial and highly controversial products.

Electric cars have slightly less pollution if it's solar, wind, geothermal, or nuclear power. They're 30% too heavy for their power density. The weight loss is easy to engineer, but has always failed to sell. The best aggregate environmental benefits come from turning 8mph SUVs into 25mpg hybrids.

I have an amount of responsibility that would terrify you.

#20 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-05-18 12:23 PM | Reply

"During the OIO packet filtering, zero-rating, and bandwidth shaping were all in use."

Net Neutrality doesn't forbid those things. It frowns on doing them for reasons other than technical issues and limitations related to capacity planning and management.

You surely know that, so why try to make this disingenuous argument?

You're a pretty consistent stalking horse on just about every issue you weigh in on. You know what a stalking horse is right? It means you're hiding your true motives.

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-18 12:41 PM | Reply

"IP law is not evil."

Straw man.

"In agriculture it has created both highly beneficial and highly controversial products."

Geneticists created those things.
IP law is just a legal framework.
Highly beneficial is a dubious claim; notably, beneficial for whom? IP holders, at the cost of everyone else.

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-18 12:43 PM | Reply

Highly beneficial is a dubious claim; notably, beneficial for whom?

#22 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2018-05-18 12:43 PM | FLAG:

Geneticists created it as part of a business model. Everybody benefits. No IP protection, no product. No product, no golden rice, no garden gems, no new gmo potato that's cuts fungicide use by 90%, no NUE crops to reduce nitrogen runoff, increased land usage from smaller yields and crop loss, etc.

#23 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-05-19 10:02 AM | Reply

Net Neutrality doesn't forbid those things. It frowns on doing them

#21 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2018-05-18 12:41 PM | FLAG:

"the idea, principle, or requirement that Internet service providers should or must treat all Internet data as the same regardless of its kind, source, or destination."

All of those don't treat the traffic as the same. The only reasonable exclusion is denial of service attacks. Unfortunately that's not what has happened under the OIO, so it doesn't deserve support, nor the moniker of Net Neutrality.

#24 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-05-19 10:05 AM | Reply

So your argument is with the definition and the definition alone. Sure.

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-05-19 02:22 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort