« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Rush Limbaugh on Net Neutrality

Rush Limbaugh weighed in on Net Neutrality. As to be expected, he’s against it. A kindly listener has uploaded it to Blip for us:

Writing quickly here, I’ve only read a transcript given to me. Sadly I think he gets some points wrong. First, Net Neutrality isn’t yet a content-level fairness doctrine, but it’s true that if the FCC does as expected and deems ISPs no longer to be information services, then nothing will stop them from regulating content on the Internet the same way they regulate content on television. But they’re not trying that yet, because they’re still just getting the camel’s nose under the tent right now.

Basically, Rush is reading what is applied to ISPs as applying to websites. Websites don’t yet have to treat everyone equally under the plan of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, but your ISP does. And Google doesn’t want anyone to be able to charge you more depending on what strain you put on the network, as some perverted left wing notion of fairness, to echo what Rush said yesterday.

But still, I’m heartened that Rush is getting people thinking about Net Neutrality. Too many on the right have bought into the bland-sounding technobabble that Free Press and Google have been putting out, without seeing the neo-Marxism behind it. Traditional Marxists wanted control of the means of production of goods. Neo-Marxists want control over the production of information, because ours is an information-based economy today.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • fpete13527

    Genachowski/Obama are starting the endgame for this the same way they are doing everything else. Cry that free market is evil becaue they are charging more for more use. The nerve of them to charge more for more service! Obama will give you all you want for free, just like health care.

    The more I think about it, the more discusted I get that there are people complaining about bandwidth. Many cable companies and DSL providers will give you cable/phone and 10MBps internet bandwdith for under $75 month. (That is unreasonable????)

    In Obama’s world you get all the bandwidth you want….for a while, There is just one catch….Obama will later tell tell you what is allowed on the service…. or not. Also, HE will then tell you that NOW you CAN’T have quite as much bandwidth.

    Later, there will of course need to be priorities as to WHAT is allowed on the internet. But, who is best to decide that better than Obama progressive government.!! The programming will be absolutely varied and free though…as long as it falls under the categories of ACORN, ALINSKY, CLOWARD/PIVEN, and MAOIST rules. AS long as you stay in that sphere…the skies the limit!!! Endless possiblites for free speech!

    So with Obama free government internet……there is freedom for everyone!
    And…….if there are any changes needed, Congress can simply create a new bill……and the bill won’t even have to be voted on….it will be DEEMED.

  • Next93

    If we’re talking about the fabric of the network (hubs, routers, and name servers) not giving preferential treatment to packets based on source or destination addresses, I’m all for that.

    That’s the paradigm that has, for the first time since Gutenburg, made “freedom of the press” a real right for people who don’t own printing preses – it’s what opened up the net to alternative news sources, put the Drudge Report on an equal footing with MSNBC, and taken the monopoly power away from the alphabet networks.

    Under the current system, the ISPs can charge consumers based on bandwidth, and a site owner can be charged based on traffic by his ISP, I don’t have any problem with that, but the idea of an an ISP to charge the originating node for delivering packets is just a Bad Idea

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    “Net neutrality at the packet level” has nothing to do with Net Neutrality as pushed by Google, Free Press, and the Genachowski FCC.

    It’s just a lie they tell to get conservatives to back neo Marxism.

  • Next93

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the Marxists re-defined the term, but in my network courses the term “net neutrality” applied to how packets are handled.

    So what, ecactly, is the FCC trying to implement? Honestly, I don’t understand what the debate is about.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    But basically the FCC is planning to declare it has the same regulatory power over the Internet that it has over television and radio.

    From there they’re going to grant themselves the authority to be the decider of winners and losers in all routing disputes in America.

    They also plan to take full control over pricing of Internet services and which packages are made available.

    That’s just for starters.