Showing posts with label Internet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Internet. Show all posts

Sunday, April 6, 2014

Progressive Agenda Cries Foul on Supreme Court Campaign Ruling: Remains Silent on Comcast – Time Warner Merger

Well it has been a while since anything really motivated me to post to my blog, but these items brought forth a need to ask why?  Why is the public so silent to the real loss of independent thought, personal choice and diversity?  These recent items in the national news require the reader to look for the nexus between political parties, media monopolies and big money influence over politics and social issues.
The media would have us fearful of the ability for individuals to give privately to political candidates of their own choice, but no fear is sown for mega-media monopolization.  Over the past ten years the progressive mafia have made it their business to whack anyone who they perceive to be a threat to their agenda.  Look at what happened to a Brendan Eich, CEO of Mozilla.  The fascist behavior and intolerance is on full display.  Pay attention!  Just like the actions of Mozzilla to one of their own, Time Warner and Comcast have deep ties to the Progressive Agenda and all who fail to grasp the danger of too big to fail in media, need to do their homework on how the progressive agenda is steam rolling America into a form of tyranny that she may not recover from.
Pay attention America.  While the main stream media cries foul with the left side of their mouth, their right side silently grins at the perceived brilliance of their actions that go unnoticed or heralded by their supposed opponents.  I ask why?  Do you?
YiT ~ Shelly

Supreme Court strikes down overall limits on political contributions

Published April 02, 2014 - FILE: June 20, 2013: The U.S. Supreme Court building, in Washington, D.C.AP
Supreme Court BIG TOP.jpgWASHINGTON –  The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, ruled Wednesday that limits on the total amount of money individuals can give to candidates, political parties and political action committees are unconstitutional.
The major ruling, which was hailed by Republican congressional leaders as a First Amendment victory, removes the cap on contributions, which was set at $123,200 for 2014. It does not change limits, though, on individual contributions for president or Congress, currently set at $2,600 per election.
Chief Justice John Roberts announced the decision, which split the court's liberal and conservative justices.
“Money in politics may at times seem repugnant to some, but so too does much of what the First Amendment vigorously protects,” Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “If the First Amendment protects flag burning, funeral protests and Nazi parades – despite the profound offense such spectacles cause – it surely protects political campaign speech despite popular opinion.”
The overall limits "intrude without justification on a citizen's ability to exercise `the most fundamental First Amendment activities,"' Roberts said, quoting from the court's seminal 1976 campaign finance ruling in Buckley v. Valeo.  Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome of the case, but wrote separately to say that he would have gone further and wiped away all contribution limits.
Others, though, described the ruling as a major blow to vital campaign finance rules. 
Continue reading article at this link.

How Comcast Bought the Democratic Party

A huge merger brought about by high-intensity lobbying goes unopposed.

By Matthew Continetti 
 

 


The communications giant Comcast announced in February that it would buy Time Warner Cable for $45 billion, creating the largest cable provider in America, with more than 33 million customers. That is about one third of the U.S. cable- and satellite-television market. FCC approval is required for the merger to go into effect. Critics of the deal say it would lessen competition and lead to even shoddier customer service. They are probably right, as all of us will soon find out, because there is little chance the merger will be stopped. Comcast, Time Warner, and their political fixers have spent years preparing for this moment — by buying off the Democratic party.
Comcast, which employs more than 100 lobbyists, spent almost $19 million last year on lobbying activities. Its president and CEO, Brian L. Roberts, is a golf buddy of President Obama’s, and a Democratic donor who has contributed thousands of dollars not only to the president’s campaigns, but also to the Democratic party of Pennsylvania, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the DNC Services Corporation, and to Steny Hoyer, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Bob Casey. Roberts’s executive vice president, David Cohen, is a former aide to Democratic bigwig Ed Rendell. Cohen skirts lobbying regulations through loopholes, has raised more than $2 million for Obama since 2007, and in 2011 hosted a DNC fundraiser at which the president called him “friend.” Cohen has visited the White House 14 times since 2010, including two visits to the Oval Office. He attended the recent dinner for President Hollande of France.
Cohen plays a major role in the Comcast Foundation, which has disbursed more than $3 billion since 2001, primarily to “groups that serve African-Americans, Latinos, and Asians” and other segments of the Democratic coalition. You will be surprised to learn that many of the groups to whom the Comcast Foundation has donated now support the proposed merger. Of the $33 million Comcast has spent on political campaigns since 1989, more than half, or some $18 million, has gone to Democrats. Barack Obama is No. 1 on the list of the top ten recipients of Comcast’s largesse. There are four Republicans on the list.
Continue reading article at this link.

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

The “Universal Access Fund!” Is it time to end this freebie?

The YouTube video says it all for me.  I’ve hyperlinked each local/federal representative to Bellingham/Whatcom County, if you wish to speak/write/e-mail them about this abusive add-on to all phone bills.

Congressman Rick Larsen (currently running for re-election)

Senator Maria Cantwell (currently running for re-election):

Senator Patty Murray (currently the 4th highest member of the Senate)

YiT ~ Shelly


Thursday, June 2, 2011

Judicial Watch Uncovers Link Between FCC / Net Neutrality / Progressive Organizations / Soros


Big surprise…what we all knew is verifiably true!  The best can be read in the comments section if you go to the link and check out the readers comments.  Better yet…leave one yourself.

Yours In Truth  Winking smile  Shelly


Conn Carroll: Documents show FCC coordinated 'Net Neutrality' effort with outside group

By: Conn Carroll 06/02/11 8:05 PM

Senior Editorial Writer Follow Him @Conncarroll

Documents made public yesterday by Judicial Watch describe extensive collusion by Federal Communications Commission officials with a left-wing advocacy group in a campaign to expand government regulation of the Internet.

The documents, obtained by Judicial Watch in a December 2010 Freedom of Information Act request, were created after Democrat appointees solidified their 3-2 control of the agency in March 2009.

Judicial Watch is a conservative nonprofit that specializes in using the FOIA and other avenues to expose corruption in government.

The coordination between FCC officials and Free Press, the advocacy group, was on behalf of a proposal that the agency assert authority to regulate access to the Internet as if it were a public utility in the interest of insuring "Net Neutrality."

Proponents said doing so would assure equal access for all Internet users by barring companies from offering preferred rates for higher delivery speeds. Other users, especially in communities with limited Internet access, would be forced to accept poorer service.

But critics said the proposal would actually give the FCC the first tool it needed to ultimately regulate content, and they argued that the FCC has no authority over the medium in the first place. It would be akin to forcing FedEx and UPS to treat all packages the same way the U.S. Postal Service does.

Free Press is the most vocal of a number of far-left and liberal advocacy groups that for nearly a decade have pushed numerous proposals for vastly increasing government regulation of the Internet


Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/06/conn-carroll-documents-show-fcc-coordinated-net-neutrality-effort-outside#ixzz1OBeSDjcD

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

www.Declarationentertainment.com

Please enjoy this interesting and informative video about how all things come back around in time.  Then click here and take some time to check out their new website dedicated to bringing the People entertainment for the rest of Us.

Yours in Truth  Winking smile  Shelly

The End of the Beginning

Friday, March 4, 2011

Republican Reactive Neutrality

Republican Reactive Neutrality

Nick R. Brown

by Nick R. Brown

I feel like, “We warned you,” is not quite poignant enough.  But well…we warned you.  Those of us in the free market technology policy sector have been trying to wake up various think-tanks and Republican politicians alike to the dangers of Network Neutrality for roughly 6 years now.  We were all ignored for the most part and now the reality is starting to sink in that Republicans will have to lie in the bed they made for themselves.

Thanks should be given to a few diligent organizations like the late Progress & Freedom Foundation led by Adam Thierer, Jon Henke’s Digital Society, and Information Technology & Innovation Foundation who have beat the drum tirelessly.  In the last year Americans for Prosperity can be applauded for their efforts to educate and build up a grassroots movement.  And organizations like CATO and Phoenix Center have provided key scholarly work.

Where was everyone else?

It’s not really a complex arithmetic to figure out that if you ignore an issue that you won’t make up any ground on the issue.  Net Neutrality was essentially ignored by our side and the result was that we lost the regulation battle.  Technology policy is not sexy.  Much of it is hard to understand.  Some of the time it is difficult for those of us that love technology to understand.  We dig through it though because we have a passion for it and desire to find ways to communicate what many times is a lot of “techie jargon” into a language that normal people speak.  This is no different than me trying to understand lawyer speak or this strange medical language that people like my father speak fluently.  The reality though is that amongst policy circles, tech policy guys are still the nerds, and many times we are pushed aside, the attitude by the mainstream policy folk is one of, “Go back and play with your gadgets and stay out of the way of the important issues.”

Then what happens is everyone wakes up one day, the Net is regulated, business models are destroyed, infrastructure is in the hands of the FCC and provider side innovation is most likely about to take a dive and gents like Kevin McCarthy (CA-R) stand up and say, “Why didn’t anyone tell us?!”  This is precisely what happened earlier this week when McCarthy wanted to know why various Internet providers were not doing more to help the Republicans fight against Net Neutrality.

(more…)

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Obama Administration Approves of the FCC Usurpation of the Legislative Process? Go Figure…The Road to Tyranny is Right Here in the U.S.of America

From a local blog that puts the latest move by regulators in the Obama era into perspective.  Just because the Congress is now supposed to be handed over to a ‘conservative’ majority, does not mean that ‘We the People’ can sit back on our laurels.  This past ‘lame duck’ session has been anything but lame; chaos might be a more appropriate descriptor of the ducks in D.C. right now!  Quackin-Up!

Yours in Truth  Winking smile  Shelly

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Time for the Alternet?

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has now circumvented checks by congress and the courts, in their bid to regulate the Internet. Started during the first big wave of the "progressive" movement with the Communications Act of 1934, the FCC has always been the government's tool for regulating technology, commerce, and of course, information. When it was first created, the FCC was regulating the then-new technologies of interstate and foreign telegraph, telephone, cable, and radio communications. Where in the Constitution did We the People give government the authority to do that?
By establishing a few strategic choke points on business, the government has very powerful control over content. Where in the Constitution did We the People give government the authority to do that? If radio stations want to keep their FCC license (i.e., stay in business), they have to comply with reams of technical, legal, business and content regulations. Even for a small mom-and-pop station, it requires at least one full-time employee just to stay in compliance. See section 73 and section 74 of the FCC Broadcast Rules. But wait, there's more! Much more! I know. I used to be the chief engineer (First Class Radiotelephone Operator License P1-13-10705) for just such businesses. The excuse given for this overwhelming government take-over in 1934 was to ensure freedom from interference and to set up international and interstate compatibility standards. Never mind the fact that the free market could have done the same, and in fact, was already moving in that direction. Where in the Constitution did We the People give government the authority to do that?

Click here to read the full article.

Here is another related article to the FCC’s unabashed take over of the internet and it’s freedom.  Shelly Winking smile

BELTWAY CONFIDENTIAL

Politics from the Nation's Capital

DeMint vows to reverse FCC's 'Internet takeover'

By: Mark Tapscott 12/21/10 2:33 PM
Editorial Page Editor

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-SC, says Federal Communications Commission should be renamed the "Fabricating a Crisis Commission," following a vote by the panel's three Democrats to approve proposed rules that amount to a hostile takeover of the Internet by a government agency acting illegally.

The proposal - misleadingly described by proponents as an attempt to insure "net neutrality" by guaranteeing equal access to the Internet - was introduced a year ago by Julius Genachowski, President Obama's appointee as FCC chairman.

A federal court has ruled that the commission has no authority to regulate the Internet, and a bipartisan group of senators and representives warned Genechowski not to attempt to impose a regulatory regime on the Internet earlier this year.

The move's legality was even questioned by FCC Commissioner Michael Copp, one of the Democrats who voted today with Genachowski, saying he considered voting against the proposal because it lacks a sufficiently defensible legal basis to survive a court challenge promised by major Internet Service Providers like Verizon, Microsoft, and AT & T.

But legal challenges by industry are likely to be much less of a problem for the Genachowski-led takeover than efforts in Congress to stop the FCC in its tracks.

That's clearly what DeMint has in mind, as he said in his statement released today following the FCC action:

“The Obama Administration has ignored evidence that this federal takeover will hang a millstone of regulatory and legal uncertainty around the neck of a vibrant sector of our economy.

"Proceeding on its own liberal whims rather than facts, this FCC has chosen to grant itself broad authority to limit how businesses can bring the internet to consumers in faster and more innovative ways.

“Americans loudly demanded a more limited federal government this November, but the Obama Administration has dedicated itself to expanding centralized government planning. Today, unelected bureaucrats rammed through an internet takeover, even after Congress and courts warned them not to.

“To keep the internet economy thriving, this decision must be reversed. Regulatory reform will be a top priority for Republicans in the next Congress, and I intend to prevent the FCC or any government agency from unilaterally burdening our recovering economy with baseless regulation.

"In order to provide the stability businesses need to grow, I will work with my fellow senators to see passage of my FCC Act, which would ensure that the FCC can only use its rulemaking powers where there is clear evidence of a harmful market failure, as well as the REINS Act, which would add the accountability of a Congressional vote before any government agency’s proposed major regulations may be finalized.”

If the FCC plan somehow manages to survive, it will almost certainly do for First Amendment liberties and the Internet what it did for them in regulating broadcast television and radio. Former CBS News president Fred Friendly's landmark book, "The Good Guys, the Bad Guys and the First Amendment," describes in great detail how the Kennedy and Johnson administrations used the FCC to silence conservative critics

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2010/12/demint-vows-reverse-fccs-internet-takeover#ixzz18pE2d8uM