Discussion: FCC Votes To Repeal Obama-Era Net Neutrality Regulations

TPM Article Topics
#295

There’s a problem with this concept. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I started up an Internet link while the departmental systems administrator in grad school. After running this as a local initiative for several years, central IT decided to get into the game and operate the link for the entire campus. I was persuaded to move over and take on the role of manager of the project. In one of our first conversations, the CIO asked me how I intended to hire some folks “with five years experience on the Internet”. I patiently explained to him that five years ago, there were three techs in the province with experience on the Internet, and they all worked for me. So yeah, we hired them, too.

The lesson here should be plain. We can reestablish “the State Department”, but it’ll take years to rebuild the institutional knowledge and teach people that it’s okay to lift their heads up out of the foxhole again. Trust takes as long as experience to rebuild.

So the sooner we get started, the better!

4 Likes
#296

No, non, nein, nyet! Shame them, as in “Are you happy now? Do you see what you have done? This is why we can’t have nice things!” Much better in the long run - just ask any Catholic… :wink:

3 Likes
#297

It’s funny. I joined TPM in either 2010 or 2011. I saw Josh on TV and just thought he was so smart and so calming, and I just wanted to read his thoughts. I was like, “Who is this cool cucumber in a bowl of hot sauce?” I lurked a bit and then dove right in. I honestly don’t know how I would’ve gotten through the last 3 elections with any semblance of sanity without TPMers. I’ve learned more on this website about politics than anywhere else. As I used to say all the time, come for the articles, stay for the comments.

6 Likes
#298

I don’t agree with this, at least as it applies to TPM, which is the only place i can speak to. I think the people here are genuinely what they are. Those of us who are occasionally dickish are most certainly that way IRL. There is a permanent record of what you say here, so actually you might want to be more carefull how you approach things, especially if you wish to make it a regular part of your life.

4 Likes
#299

I just wanted to tell you that I’m a complete idiot where it pertains to technology or how any of it works. Computers, the internet, it just makes my eyes glaze over. I really enjoyed your long post and feel like I learned a lot. All your posts in this topic have been informative. I appreciate that. Thanks!

#300

Yeah, but my FB page is actually worse than I am here. Shawty mean.

3 Likes
#301

Hah, did I write “Bull Mouse”? I kind of like it, too. Will not correct it.

I agree with @squirreltown. It’s not just unfair, but it would be strategically self-inflicting to blame the Dems for the lack of action climate change.

It’s true that a handful of Democrats from coal states sided with ALL Republicans to slow a 2010 vote on carbon pricing after the Democratic House at passed Waxman’s very good bill. But it’s simply illogical to blame the overwhelming majority of the officeholders in an entire party when a very small minority from that party sided with the other party to block action that the overwhelming majority of Democrats supported vigorously.

After the Senate’s inability to pass carbon pricing in 2010, for the rest of Obama’s two terms, both congressional chambers were led by Republicans who made no secret of the fact that it was they who blocked climate change action. In fact, in some crucial cases, the Democratic minority fought like hell to prevent the GOP from doing even more damage. And the GOP attacked Democrats for their “war on coal.” So honestly, I don’t know where you’re coming from on that.

Also, let’s not forget that – despite the intransigence of the Republican Congress – President Obama managed to get the U.S. headed in the right direction when it came to climate change. He was instrumental in the Paris Accord, and I can tell you firsthand that he did more than all previous presidents combined to advance clean energy and energy efficiency.

Far from “pushing” Democrats to do what they’ve already been trying to do, Greens would – as I thought we agreed above – harm Democrats. Let’s not forget that the single actual achievement of the Green Party was to get George Bush elected over Al Gore – a guy who ended up winning Nobel Peace Prize for his work on climate change.

For an example of what could happen, just look at Missiouri, where Democrat Claire McCaskill generally supports climate action and faces a very, very difficult re-election battle. If she loses next year because, say, a Green Party Nader wannabe attacks her from the left and takes 0.5 percent of her vote, Missiourians will be left with a corrupt, hard-right, climate-denying senator. Thanks, “Greenies.”

And Greenies would be just as bad if they went after Manchin, who votes where his constituents want him to vote on energy issues (i.e. badly). Because the total piece of shit who would replace Manchin will be far more extreme on climate issues, far worse on a host of other issues, and – most importantly – will vote for McConnell, which means more anti-climate horrors.

So, no. I totally disagree with you. Greens would help Republicans destroy the planet. And frankly a Sanders-ite campaign against any of the red states senators who are fighting for their lives this year would be just as self-destructive. Because … ain’t no Bernie Sanders-type that’s gonna win in West Virginia or South Dakota.

4 Likes
#302

I’ve dipped in and out of TPM since the early '00s. I didn’t become a regular here until '07, and I wouldn’t be anyplace else now though I didn’t hang around much between the two elections.

Now I’m all into it again and I miss y’all when I don’t talk to you for awhile.

3 Likes
#303

Thank You! I’m always pleased when I can draw analogies and lessons from the geek world for those living in other “Alternate Reality Planes”.

I also like to tell people that, as an IT management type, the most important class I ever took in college was actually “cultural anthropology”. It allowed me to understand folks I’d otherwise never fathom for a moment (I’m looking at you, Marketing team!) The Sales types were easy (we just describe them as “coin operated”), but those marketing guys, I mean - another tribe, amirit?? :smile:

3 Likes
#304

If you had a dog in a Network Operations Center he could tag all the cat videos to ride on a slow boat to nowhere. Once you have that concept, then apply it to business transactions, emergency communications, news, phone calls, Russian propaganda, credit card processing, I Love Lucy reruns. Who gets to choose what gets through the tubes? At this point, the Internet is critical infrastructure. Who would support a system where a dishonest gatekeeper could decide Budweiser trucks get to cross the bridge and ambulances do not? (Oh, Chris Christie already tried that. Did not go over well.) We need turnout in the 2018 elections to help create a Republican House caucus so small they will be able to meet in a broom closet.

1 Like
#305

Barry Commoner on the Citizens Party ticket in 1980 is more the model I am thinking about. I don’t dispute that Obama, in this area as in many others, is an outlier. Having gone door to door for most Democratic candidates since Carter, I got the sense as an environmentalist that he and Gore were the ones who were most serious about it. I don’t think the party as a whole prioritizes it enough.

I don’t know why you went down to the Senate level – I doubt Greens run in SC, but I’m not sure my argument even begins to work unless the third party can influence the major parties and bring independent ideas into the process and public consciousness. I’m not sure one could even begin to argue that for state races.

Too often when talking about challenges to the party or its frontrunner, the effect at the ballot box is the only thing that counts. But elections are much more complex. I realize Sanders did not go the third party route, but I think that he exemplifies the way in which a candidacy can affect the race prior to the final vote count. And one effect can indeed be to throw the race – I just don’t think that is the only one or that the causality is always clear.

#306

It’s really too bad that Ralph Nader wasn’t run over by a semi in 1999. Many hundreds of thousands—if not over a million—of dead Iraqis and Syrians would be alive today, and thousands of American military wouldn’t be dead or physically or mentally maimed.

3 Likes
#307

I listed those third parties that got more than 5%. You read that as “gets no more than 5%”. And pluckyinky and thunderclapnewman like this? Ye Gods.

#308

Oh G_d, one can of worms at a time…

1 Like
#309

First, I said “gets no more than ~5%” which (a bit snarkily) implied some wiggle room. But regardless, I see no definition of “major” where parties who don’t get elected to national office and only ever act as spoilers can be called “major.” If they’re getting above 5%, then they could maybe argue that constitutes a “minor party,” but it would be an enormous stretch to suggest that they are in any way “major” unless they were legitimately within striking distance of winning a few elections. That’s a thoroughly silly argument.

2 Likes
#310

Fine. Let’s not beat it into the ground. Hopefully we will have an impeachment soon, and third parties won’t matter for a generation.

1 Like
#311

This is totally OT but I think it is well worth passing on:

I know I’m glad.

4 Likes
#312

First Degree. Excellent. No fucking around

2 Likes
#313

Nope - the DA upped from second degree and he’s facing possible life and he ought to get it. He purposely ran over her.

3 Likes
#314

Hey, I don’t mind if there’s still 100 of them left, provided we can squeeze them all into the broom closet at the same time… :wink:

1 Like
Comments are now Members-Only
Join the discussion Free options available