Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does Ted Cruz not understand Net Neutrality?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • boost addict
    replied
    So wait a minute....one of the last, if not the last, bastions of freedom in this country and we wanna give the Feds an open door to regulate it.

    My internet works just fine and there is no way you can convince me the Feds would do anything but fudge it up. Constitutional authority or not.

    Don't go down this slippery road people.

    Leave a comment:


  • likeitfast55
    replied
    Originally posted by John -- '02 HAWK View Post
    so then your arguing about allowing the excessive commercialization and limiting of a communication system because its the right thing to do per your view of constitutional law?
    I believe that your understanding of the "Frost" theory of government is correct.

    Leave a comment:


  • YALE
    replied
    Originally posted by Forever_frost View Post
    Only if the service member is injured as a result. Did you know that if you don't have a service connected issue you get jack shit unless you pay for it? Seriously, the VA doesn't treat you for free unless you're service connected. Neat tidbit for today.

    Now, since you agree that that is a power of the Congress, then you will also read a bit further down where the constitution authorizes laws to carry out these enumerated powers, correct?
    But that's not all in the original constitution.

    Leave a comment:


  • John -- '02 HAWK
    replied
    Originally posted by Forever_frost View Post
    Evil? No, not evil. The government does what every organization does, try to grow and persist. This is a government doing what they do naturally.
    so then your arguing about allowing the excessive commercialization and limiting of a communication system because its the right thing to do per your view of constitutional law?

    Leave a comment:


  • Chas_svo
    replied
    Originally posted by Forever_frost View Post
    Only if the service member is injured as a result. Did you know that if you don't have a service connected issue you get jack shit unless you pay for it? Seriously, the VA doesn't treat you for free unless you're service connected. Neat tidbit for today.

    Now, since you agree that that is a power of the Congress, then you will also read a bit further down where the constitution authorizes laws to carry out these enumerated powers, correct?
    And unfortunately, one of the most abused. It seems like the cheaters get treatment, and the ones with legitimate issues get the runaround.

    Leave a comment:


  • Forever_frost
    replied
    Originally posted by John -- '02 HAWK View Post
    your only argument on this subject is constitution and evil government.
    Evil? No, not evil. The government does what every organization does, try to grow and persist. This is a government doing what they do naturally.

    Leave a comment:


  • Forever_frost
    replied
    Originally posted by YALE View Post
    Does the supporting of those armies extend past the term of their service, per the constitution?
    Only if the service member is injured as a result. Did you know that if you don't have a service connected issue you get jack shit unless you pay for it? Seriously, the VA doesn't treat you for free unless you're service connected. Neat tidbit for today.

    Now, since you agree that that is a power of the Congress, then you will also read a bit further down where the constitution authorizes laws to carry out these enumerated powers, correct?

    Leave a comment:


  • racrguy
    replied
    Originally posted by YALE View Post
    Does the supporting of those armies extend past the term of their service, per the constitution?
    Ooh, I know. Pick me. PICK ME!

    Leave a comment:


  • YALE
    replied
    Originally posted by Forever_frost View Post
    Okay we'll go Barney level.

    Does the constitution call for the raising and supporting of the Armies?
    Does the supporting of those armies extend past the term of their service, per the constitution?

    Leave a comment:


  • exlude
    replied
    Originally posted by Forever_frost View Post
    And remind me how the government handles competitors.
    Again, this is the line of thinking Ted Cruz is stuck in. Regulation is not ownership. You spring from point to point before even attempting to conclude one.
    Last edited by exlude; 11-14-2014, 10:37 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • John -- '02 HAWK
    replied
    Originally posted by Forever_frost View Post
    Actually, it shows I have a very good handle on how the federal government works
    your only argument on this subject is constitution and evil government.

    Leave a comment:


  • Forever_frost
    replied
    Originally posted by likeitfast55 View Post
    You seriously do not understand what this is about. The statement above shows this.
    Actually, it shows I have a very good handle on how the federal government works. I've spent over a decade studying it and being on the Hill and in the White House learning and studying. The federal government routinely fucks up wet dreams so why the faith that they'd get the internet right?

    I mean, it's not like they shut down a monument to veterans that the veterans paid for and staffed with volunteers right?

    Leave a comment:


  • Forever_frost
    replied
    Originally posted by YALE View Post
    Still doesn't say anything about creating a Department of Veteran's Affairs. Show me where it specifically says that.
    Okay we'll go Barney level.

    Does the constitution call for the raising and supporting of the Armies?

    Leave a comment:


  • Baba Ganoush
    replied
    I don't understand it, but I'll vote which ever way speeds up my porn streaming.

    Leave a comment:


  • likeitfast55
    replied
    National parks, you mean the national parks that were shut down and had armed police guarding from anyone visiting when Obama got upset about a budget issue? And what is to keep the internet from being the same? "Oh, the budget is due and so and so won't give in so we can't afford to enforce regulations on the internet so we're shutting it down."
    You seriously do not understand what this is about. The statement above shows this.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X