Obama’s Plan To Nationalize The Internet

• October 22, 2008

Mark Hopkins has an excellent article critical of Barack Obama’s plan to nationalize broadband internet access.
Economic and functional issues (such as: Wouldn’t it just be cheaper to let private enterprise handle internet access? And wouldn’t government-run internet be sort of like government-run postal service? Do we really want our internet experience to be about like our post office experience?) aside, what would government-run internet mean for online content?
The FCC is already pushing plans for a national wireless internet access initiative, and if that happened that would probably mean that the agency would want to extend the same sort of content controls it exercises over broadcast television and radio to the internet. Obama’s plan could come with the same sort of regulation.
Given Obama’s penchant for using lawyers and thug tactics to pressure and intimidate people he disagrees with, how much of a stretch is it to believe that an Obama administration would implement strict new regulations on online free speech?
Frankly, I’m not sure why there’s so much concern about internet access in this country. With plans available in most of the country for as cheap as $15/month, is access really a problem? The private sector seems to be handling the internet access issues just fine on its own.
Why would we want to fix what isn’t broken?
Unless, as I just mentioned, the real agenda here is less about expanding access than expanding government controls to the internet.

Tags: Politics

http://Array di butler

HG,

The main reason the Clinton’s policies were foiled was due thanks to the wonderful Newt Gingrich reigning them in.

Great post zsa zsa. The only thing I can think to add is that even though we follow this stuff closely, unfortunately there are tons of people who have no idea what is going on. Some just don’t care, some just don’t have the capacity to understand. We have the first black viable candidate for office. I like to think as a country that skin color doesn’t matter, but it unfortunately does to some. I understand why the blacks are so anxious to accept him, most just want to see him become president, regardless of his negative points. I have no problem with a black president. I truly wish he was someone I could get behind. Unfortunately his policies go against my core beliefs.
Jerry

The Feds have Far too much control over our lives as it is..

The more they control, the more they Screw things up..

If the Feds wern’t in control of who Banks could loan money too, the banks wouldn’t have loaned money to people who couldn’t pay it back. Enmass.

Everytime the Feds pass a Bill, they earmark it with more government waist.

The Fed is out of Control. Obama is not needed here.
McCain, is one of the few who have refused to earmark through the years. McCain says he’ll control spending.
I say, lets give someone like him the chance to do it. Someone who’s backed up the talk, with walk already..

Screw Obama.. Spread the wealth, my ass..
welder4

On a previous post I suggested we return to the idea that voting be limited to those who pay federal income taxes. It would be based on the amount of taxes you pay. The more in taxes you pay, the more your vote is worth. Heck, I don’t know maybe we could have a basic knowledge test in order to be allowed to vote. Kind of like when you take a citizenship test. I don’t think it is neccessary for everyone to follow all of politics, but wouldn’t it be logical for people who are voting to at least be informed on the basic issues? For some reason most people don’t understand that voting is not a right, but a privilege.
di butler on October 22, 2008 at 12:15 pm : I don’t think the idea of how much you pay in taxes should have anything to do with it but I am thinking at least you should know the issues each candidate has and who their running mate is , What we would get inasmuch as the taxes paid determines your clout would put it in the hands of the affluent and we have enough of that now . the richer you are the more your vote counts would stop us being a nation of equal rights and privilege. The people who were at a total loss to get it that Palin was not Obama’s running mate was appalling.What most people do not understand about rights is there is a responsibility that also comes with those rights . Same with driving a car it is not a right but a privilege. Voting on the other hand is a right of every American if they meet the age requirement and are not felons , felons would be voting if the democrats had anything to do with it . I don’t like it that people are clueless and vote but it is a right guaranteed if you meet the age and criminal aspects.
HG

It remains to be seen just what Obama could nationalize. We all thought the same thing about Clinton and while he tried to nationalize healthcare, he failed thanks to public outcry. Regardless, it seems that the ‘fear factor’ doesn’t work without a willing media to parrot the message. I don’t think independents are too worried about what Obama will attempt to do and the more we declare Obama’s intentions and the more they are ignored by the press, the more unattractive they become regardless of the facts.
http://www.sayanythingblog.com/ electnixon

Says who? That’s what we have now.
Monopolist pricing broadband.

The monopolists throttle broadband and
restrict access .

I have at least 3 different companies who are competing to bring me broadband internet. They send me flyers with reduced pricing, etc. I don’t use any of them because I also have at least 3 cell phone companies who compete to bring be broadband wireless.

Where’s the monopoly woof?

My parents used to have to deal with a monopoly from satellite since they are in a rural area. Guess what, there are two common satellite carriers and the phone company improved their services so that they could get in on the action. They now also have at least 3 choices.

Where’s the monopoly woof?
2Hotel9

Still waiting for all that proof of monopoly status of internet service providers. Were is it, woofie?

Here in rural west PA we have no less that 5 separate service providers, all constantly trying to get people to switch to them. We are currently using Embarq, they gave us an excellent deal on telephone, satellite TV and internet service. None of the others have beat their deal.

Let FCC stick its dick farther into the internet access companies and we will get a monopoly, prices will spiral upward, and the amount and variety of content will shrink.
2Hotel9

woofie lost its ass in this thread, as usual.

FCC and Democrats have been salivating over the prospect of blocking people’s access to information the government does not control.
RebTex

THe owning of a computer and the access to the internet are both extras.
THey shouldn’t be entitlements.
Anyone with a library card already has access to free internet & computers.
THe indigent can use them…& while they’re at it, they can pick up a book on earning your own way.
http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

Woof it would be worse under NOBAMA.
Bat One

Most people are limited to an areas franchise
holder.

And those franchise holder area limits were imposed and awarded by… wait for it… government!

We already have more than enough entitlements for which we do not have the wherewithall to pay. What happened to all that talk of fiscal responsibility that congressional Democrats were promising when they won two years ago?
http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

ashley, It is not that shocking IF you recognize the deliberate ignoring of facts the MSM continues to deny the public. Many people don’t have a clue as to all the things Obama is about OR what he has done in the Past or Present. They see him as a nice guy with a great smile who is looking for Hope and Change. They just don’t get that the change he speaks of is in fact more Big Government programs that the tax payers will ultimately have to pick up the tab for. How else will he get the money to pay for it? That is what he Hopes for. Although trying to get him to tell you exactly what that means might mean a fate much like Joe the plumber??? Interesting how the MSM go after Joe the plumber. BUT investigating Obama is off limits! Obama imagines he is running against Bush. His followers accept this notion and believe he is. IF Obama wins our future is certain Socialism and the Nationalizing of many industries.
ashley

I just am baffled that with all the accusations and “shaddy” actions or associations of Obama that people would even consider voting for him… it’s like everyone is fooled… it is just crazy to me that he has even made it this far… and very likely President… at this point the best word I can describe it as is “scary” because what will be will be…..
Bat One

WOOF doesn’t actually know jacksh*t about basic economics. He just likes to use the words now and then.
http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

US broadband access is 30 times more costly than in Japan

Wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that in the US, customers are spread out more than 30 times that of the tiny, densely populated islands of Japan, now, would it?

WOOF doesn’t actually know jacksh*t about basic economics.

And his not knowing is increasing exponentially!
HG

It does seem like many are fooled and no doubt many are… democrats are a slight majority of registered voters. Independents on the other hand tend to be more pragmatic. They are likely reacting to the crappy economic conditions and the republicans failure to reign in spending when we had a majority.
ashley

That is what is shocking that everyone hates the way the government has been doing things and running programs and spending exorbitant amounts of money… but let’s have MORE government… control more of our lives??? I guess if people don’t do the research on their own they won’t know what Obama is all about and just see the pretty smile… but in my opinion cold eyes… which are the window to a man’s soul… anyway, although there is surely a flaw in our current government … I don’t think more government is the answer… I don’t want the fundementals of our Great Country to change either!!!
posterior_sling

Is it just coming to light exactly what all-digital TV is all about? It has intrigued me from the get-go that government was so disposed to created a law governing TV. Just what is their interest in abolishing analog? I’m sure their motivation will be manifest in time to come. Feeling social yet?
di butler

Welder,

On a previous post I suggested we return to the idea that voting be limited to those who pay federal income taxes. It would be based on the amount of taxes you pay. The more in taxes you pay, the more your vote is worth. Heck, I don’t know maybe we could have a basic knowledge test in order to be allowed to vote. Kind of like when you take a citizenship test. I don’t think it is neccessary for everyone to follow all of politics, but wouldn’t it be logical for people who are voting to at least be informed on the basic issues? For some reason most people don’t understand that voting is not a right, but a privilege.
tothestars2

It’s already here! Just try to get an opposition viewpoint on the ONE posted on cnn, abc, cbs, msnbc, or any of the lefts tentacles. You may get on for a week or two before the ss locks in on you and silences your voice.
Bat One

The argument that the federal government needs to take monopoly control of the internet to improve the service and reduce the cost is obvious nonsense. We only need to look at the US Postal Service to understand just how ridiculous that is.

The real reason this is being proposed can summed up with three short examples: Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Pajamas Television.
ashley

Shit… we ain’t seen nothing yet… if Obama is elected… scary!!!!
Lance

Says who? That’s what we have now.
Monopolist pricing broadband.

The monopolists throttle broadband and
restrict access .

Monopoly? I can think of 3 choices right off the top of my head for broadband …AT&T, Comcast, and HughesNet. Perhaps you should reacquaint yourself with the word monopoly.
http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

Sounds like a good way to police the populice and if you/they/we say something NOBAMA doesn’t like he can have you investigated. I don’t like it one bit. Since when did the USA sign up for socialism?
atease

The word used above most correctly is control. That is what any nationalization of the internet would be about. Content. The left controls the education system at both the primary and secondary levels. The internet offers too many opinions that differ from most of what is taught today. That is dangerous to anyone who wants control.

atease
welder4

The monopoly would be the federal government, they want control of all things . I am hoping that the polls are slanted and it is just a ploy to get people to stay at home. I voted yesterday so I am out of the picture except to try and wake some people up .Limbaugh said it best this is going to be close but we can still win , if McCain gets his wheels rolling we can defeat Obama. I am 64 years old and I have never seen the corruption and the associations that would have destroyed a candidate just 8 years ago, and Obama has plenty of baggage to go around . the biggest problem is no experience it is like turning the country over to a five year old child. Of course some of the posts I have seen here shows me five year old’s have better sense then the people that post and flame and look down their noses at any one that has a different idea , and the idea we can survive a Marxist president is merely foolish. They do not understand that if we go the socialism route we will fail as all socialist countries have in the past . any where you have socialism you have political prisoners and they rarely get out of jail . A radio station sent people out to ask questions in Harlem and they switched the platforms around and three of the people said yes they would stand with Obama and those issues , they even ask them if they had a problem with Palin being Obama’s VP and they said no not at all I think she is very good .So we have people voting that has not a clue what or who they are voting for .
http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

Today Nationalize the internet! Tomorrow the World! Obama “hopes” to “Change” the American way of life. Hopefully he will show his birth certificate soon! Two more weeks until the election. I hope people will wake up and change their minds about voting for Obama. Government is NOT the solution. It IS the Problem!
WOOFX

Wouldn’t it just be cheaper to let private enterprise handle internet access?

Says who? That’s what we have now.
Monopolist pricing broadband.

The monopolists throttle broadband and
restrict access .
WOOFX

I have at least 3 different companies who are competing to bring me broadband internet.

The exception. Most people are limited to an areas franchise
holder.

The US now ranks 16th (and falling) in broadband subscribers per capita. US broadband access is 30 times more costly than in Japan, on a price-performance basis. Leading broadband nations share two main characteristics: an aggressive national broadband policy and true competition based on a separation of retail network services and wholesale network transport. Some also have subsidies.
WOOFX

An alphabet soup of Federal intelligence agencies
are already monitoring your internet usage.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=736079378 Daniel Ammons

However, one might do well to remember how well nationalized broadband has worked in other nations: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-03-31/tech/broadband.south.korea_1_broadband-plan-south-korea-broadband-internet?_s=PM:TECH

Of course, countries without freedom of information (China, Iran, etc.) might have nationalized broadband but it is regulated and stifled. Democratic countries don’t have the clout to impose that sort of thing.

SayAnythingBlog.com

Obama’s Plan To Nationalize The Internet

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments