Comments on: House Democrats take aim at FCC practices

Politicians question commissioners' views on topics ranging from the AT&T-BellSouth merger to the NSA spy program and Net neutrality.

[rich015]

Pai;nfully apparant

It's becoming painfully apparent that Democrats in control of Congress is only interest in attacking the Bush Administration. I cannot see where they are making a single useful contribution to the nation. Instead of their 100 percent focus on going after Bush and taking orders from the far left lunatic fringe , they should be investigating the Hollywood pals and the record industry who, single handedly have set out to destroy the internet.

[blkmagik98]

painfully apparent

Take another drink of that Kool-Aid, rich....

[dondarko]

yeah..

apparently you don't care about unreasonable search and seizures(it's in the constitution by the way), which is what Democrats are taking on by looking into the NSA data aggregation, wiretaps, etc. See when you allow the government to freely go through your phone conversations, financial and medical records, where you eat, what you wear, without providing proof of you doing any wrongdoing(which is what NSA program is) THAT IS CALLED A POLICE-STATE.

On the notion of Net Neutrality...all they are doing is trying to protect the consumer/us citizens/legal residents from being charged for something purely imaginary at this point.

Speaking of the music and video/movie industry...I think it was the Republicans that passed DMCA, the stupidest law that is hampering inventions and not to mention allowing that same industry to charge up your behind for downloading music/videos or buy dvds.

nuff said

[rich015]

Pai;nfully apparant

It's becoming painfully apparent that Democrats in control of Congress is only interest in attacking the Bush Administration. I cannot see where they are making a single useful contribution to the nation. Instead of their 100 percent focus on going after Bush and taking orders from the far left lunatic fringe , they should be investigating the Hollywood pals and the record industry who, single handedly have set out to destroy the internet.

[blkmagik98]

painfully apparent

Take another drink of that Kool-Aid, rich....

[dondarko]

yeah..

apparently you don't care about unreasonable search and seizures(it's in the constitution by the way), which is what Democrats are taking on by looking into the NSA data aggregation, wiretaps, etc. See when you allow the government to freely go through your phone conversations, financial and medical records, where you eat, what you wear, without providing proof of you doing any wrongdoing(which is what NSA program is) THAT IS CALLED A POLICE-STATE.

On the notion of Net Neutrality...all they are doing is trying to protect the consumer/us citizens/legal residents from being charged for something purely imaginary at this point.

Speaking of the music and video/movie industry...I think it was the Republicans that passed DMCA, the stupidest law that is hampering inventions and not to mention allowing that same industry to charge up your behind for downloading music/videos or buy dvds.

nuff said

[fafafooey]

More Democrat cheerleading by CNet

They are Democrat lapdogs.

[assman]

why..

because they report the news? they report republican news as well, it just happens to be bad news 24/7 -- not their fault.

[dondarko]

???

I mean where they supposed to write "House Republicans" even though they are not? CNet covers whoever is making impact on the technology world, good or bad. Just because Republicans are on the receiving end doesn't mean you shouldn't take it as a man and actually listen to what is the actual issue. Sounds to me like you're a Republican lapdog and you think and say what you have been spoonfed. Think for yourself and how things affect you(or will affect your children/grandchildren) not what they tell you. geez

[fafafooey]

More Democrat cheerleading by CNet

They are Democrat lapdogs.

[assman]

why..

because they report the news? they report republican news as well, it just happens to be bad news 24/7 -- not their fault.

[dondarko]

???

I mean where they supposed to write "House Republicans" even though they are not? CNet covers whoever is making impact on the technology world, good or bad. Just because Republicans are on the receiving end doesn't mean you shouldn't take it as a man and actually listen to what is the actual issue. Sounds to me like you're a Republican lapdog and you think and say what you have been spoonfed. Think for yourself and how things affect you(or will affect your children/grandchildren) not what they tell you. geez

[assman]

Wow.

Wow. It never ceases to amaze me to hear people utter lack of concern for the rights garanteed them when becoming an American citizen. There are rules to protect those rights and prevent corruption, and you view it as "an attack on the Bush administration". Well duh, it's an attack on the authoritarian policies put into place and finally someone is doing something about it. I'm very thankful for the democrats.

[MIGuy]

RE: Wow

Good post assman. The Shrub administration has corrupted and controlled every agency in the U.S. government. Like you, I am thankful something is being done about it.

[assman]

Wow.

Wow. It never ceases to amaze me to hear people utter lack of concern for the rights garanteed them when becoming an American citizen. There are rules to protect those rights and prevent corruption, and you view it as "an attack on the Bush administration". Well duh, it's an attack on the authoritarian policies put into place and finally someone is doing something about it. I'm very thankful for the democrats.

[MIGuy]

RE: Wow

Good post assman. The Shrub administration has corrupted and controlled every agency in the U.S. government. Like you, I am thankful something is being done about it.

[cidman2001]

It's all such a joke....

I'm a self-professed independent.(We grow a lot of those in Vermont)...
I think what we are seeing is the balance of power and common sense shifting back to the middle. What I'm unsure of is how we let the fringes of both side become the "voice of the people". No matter which side is on the losing side of the whipping, the end result is the same...they all get richer.
I'd like to know why telecom services are so expensive and why doesn't every house in America have broadband access. If I were on that committee, I would want to know why regulators have allowed companies like Verizon to roll out FIOS (50mb fiber optic to your house) in metro areas when there are rural customers that are still on dial-up. To make matters worse, the existing phone lines can barely maintain quality levels for phone service. Never mind data service.
I can answer the question for you....it's not profitable. Furthermore, these companies aren't afraid to say this as they cash in record profits. This is a pathetic transparent excuse. If these Congressman had any nads, they would pass legislation mandating the FCC to ensure nationwide broadband coverage before any of the coveted wireless frequencies are auctioned or any more fiber is run. As a slight sidebar...what the hell do you need 50mb service to your house for? There are people who are still stranded on 56k dial-up. Where's the compassion? I say that the FCC shouldn't give any more "hand outs" to its teleco buddies until we have reasonable broadband and wireless coverage nationwide.

[dondarko]

see

the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. and you know the rich are representing the mostly poor. go figure that...

[BigEfromdaBigEZ]

More Independence required

As a conservative independent, I must disagree. If the people want all people to have broadband pass a law and make the gov't pay for it like we do defense & social security, etc. Making a gov't task off-budget, so it looks free, even if by using obscure fees (telecom access tax) to make the private sector do it just means it may not be done as gov't intended.
And I have a "need" for 50MB internet, but don't have it. Why, I live in a suburb of a smaller city (New Orleans). If I need a doctor, I drive to one. If I need a doctor every day I need to MOVE closer to where the doctors are! So, if I NEEDED broadband I should move to where it is available, if none is.
But on the original subject - the Dems are right on this one, to a degree. The FCC is pitiful in enforcement, but the Dems want some of the laws just for local financial rape and pillaging, such as local rules on broadband selection. Again, where we live in LA the local gov'ts are corrupt so all one needs to do is pay off a set of politicians & voila - we get no consumer choice, poor service, & no voice. If we had more than one company I feel things would be better for us in da flood zone.

[cidman2001]

It's all such a joke....

I'm a self-professed independent.(We grow a lot of those in Vermont)...
I think what we are seeing is the balance of power and common sense shifting back to the middle. What I'm unsure of is how we let the fringes of both side become the "voice of the people". No matter which side is on the losing side of the whipping, the end result is the same...they all get richer.
I'd like to know why telecom services are so expensive and why doesn't every house in America have broadband access. If I were on that committee, I would want to know why regulators have allowed companies like Verizon to roll out FIOS (50mb fiber optic to your house) in metro areas when there are rural customers that are still on dial-up. To make matters worse, the existing phone lines can barely maintain quality levels for phone service. Never mind data service.
I can answer the question for you....it's not profitable. Furthermore, these companies aren't afraid to say this as they cash in record profits. This is a pathetic transparent excuse. If these Congressman had any nads, they would pass legislation mandating the FCC to ensure nationwide broadband coverage before any of the coveted wireless frequencies are auctioned or any more fiber is run. As a slight sidebar...what the hell do you need 50mb service to your house for? There are people who are still stranded on 56k dial-up. Where's the compassion? I say that the FCC shouldn't give any more "hand outs" to its teleco buddies until we have reasonable broadband and wireless coverage nationwide.

[dondarko]

see

the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. and you know the rich are representing the mostly poor. go figure that...

[BigEfromdaBigEZ]

More Independence required

As a conservative independent, I must disagree. If the people want all people to have broadband pass a law and make the gov't pay for it like we do defense & social security, etc. Making a gov't task off-budget, so it looks free, even if by using obscure fees (telecom access tax) to make the private sector do it just means it may not be done as gov't intended.
And I have a "need" for 50MB internet, but don't have it. Why, I live in a suburb of a smaller city (New Orleans). If I need a doctor, I drive to one. If I need a doctor every day I need to MOVE closer to where the doctors are! So, if I NEEDED broadband I should move to where it is available, if none is.
But on the original subject - the Dems are right on this one, to a degree. The FCC is pitiful in enforcement, but the Dems want some of the laws just for local financial rape and pillaging, such as local rules on broadband selection. Again, where we live in LA the local gov'ts are corrupt so all one needs to do is pay off a set of politicians & voila - we get no consumer choice, poor service, & no voice. If we had more than one company I feel things would be better for us in da flood zone.

[MIGuy]

Cheerleading Lapdogs?? HUH??

Fafa...this is news about an actual event. It is not an attack by CNet. Get a grip. You shouldn't lose control when you see "Democrats" in a headline. Calm down.

[MIGuy]

Cheerleading Lapdogs?? HUH??

Fafa...this is news about an actual event. It is not an attack by CNet. Get a grip. You shouldn't lose control when you see "Democrats" in a headline. Calm down.

[ewelch]

As oppsed to...

...a republican syncophant such as anyone who makes similar
claims as you are here?

[ewelch]

As oppsed to...

...a republican syncophant such as anyone who makes similar
claims as you are here?

[BigEfromdaBigEZ]

Let's all get along

If we dropped Dems & republicans from the story hopefully on a tech site like the the convo would go 2 FCC is supposed to administer telecom based upon gov't laws. There are legislative procs on handling interpretation issues. Making a communication issue into a media circus for sound bites probably won't solve the problem. Both parties are wrong here - the FCC is not enforcing rules because they are spending too much time researching (& allowing) questionable mergers (do they add consumer value?) while the Dems are steamed they may lose some local political clout (money, bribes, power) if something that probably should be national (broadband, cable access, phone services, etc.)is administered nationally. Why do we always think one group HAS to be right just we oppose the other group? BOTH parties are wrong here! More concerned about self-preservation (Dems) or self-perpetuation (Repubs) than the people and their duties!

[BigEfromdaBigEZ]

Let's all get along

If we dropped Dems & republicans from the story hopefully on a tech site like the the convo would go 2 FCC is supposed to administer telecom based upon gov't laws. There are legislative procs on handling interpretation issues. Making a communication issue into a media circus for sound bites probably won't solve the problem. Both parties are wrong here - the FCC is not enforcing rules because they are spending too much time researching (& allowing) questionable mergers (do they add consumer value?) while the Dems are steamed they may lose some local political clout (money, bribes, power) if something that probably should be national (broadband, cable access, phone services, etc.)is administered nationally. Why do we always think one group HAS to be right just we oppose the other group? BOTH parties are wrong here! More concerned about self-preservation (Dems) or self-perpetuation (Repubs) than the people and their duties!