Saturday, September 19, 2009

Øbama's Internet

Here's the first blow to a Free Market Internet!

Fuck what they call it. It's Socialism on the Net!

Do. Not. Doubt. It.

We'd better make a LOT of noise about this, cause it's just their first step!

It's the "Fairness Doctrine" for the internet.

It means that if you want better, quicker, premium service, you can't buy it...because it won't be available....because providers can't offer it.....because it wouldn't be FAIR.

That's MY reading of Net Neutrality, anyway.

If I'm missing something...let me know.

The Gunslinger

27 comments:

  1. Thanks for the Tip! I've just posted on it as well.

    This is another 'outlawing by other means' measure - you don't need to outlaw free speech, you just need to make communication inconvenient or impossible.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Excellent blog-posts,btw,Van..."We're from the Federal Government,and we're here to help..." -yeah,right. The FCC should alter their letters to FUC-U. If actually tried to be implemented,THIS is the type of thing that could bring on dramatic harm of the violent sort that the drama queens of the Left have been obviously hoping for...tho,with History's ironic sense of humor, it'll probably come from one of their own...

    ReplyDelete
  3. It is worse than that. The government will also be determining "lawful content" according to the bill. That will include hate crime laws and diveristy rules (once the FCC passes those). This is natoinalization of the Internet with hooks for full government control. Google will control all access points. This is censorship on a massive scale.

    What after all is the biggest thorn in the Lefitst takeover? Free exchange of information on the Internet. UhOh.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mark Lloyd's diversity and localization censorship strategy is being shifted from talk radio over to this Internet legislation:

    http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/354459-FCC_Diversity_Exec_Won_t_Be_Working_On_License_Issues.php

    ReplyDelete
  5. Wow, er um, checking out your blog, I'm really actually somewhat frightened.

    Beyond a simplistic intellect and a love of violence; and apparently, a dislike of stating your actual name, do you have any credentials in reality? I mean, were you a Soldier, Sailor, Detective?

    Have you confronted violence personally?

    Or is there some intellectual credential (not published at your own expense) you'd like to reveal?

    Because as a man too oft experienced in inner City violence, a soon to be published Author and Detective of thirty years, I think you are A) Simple Minded, B) Not Exactly Sane, and amongst other unlovely things, C) A Phoney.

    My theory is that those in love with Guns are Physical Cowards mainly. Real Tough Guys tend to like them a lot less.

    So prove me wrong, Tough Guy.

    Kurt Ulysses Larsen
    The Detective In The Mirror
    www.KurtLarsen.net

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/59523-obama-open-to-newspaper-bailout-bill......Oh,boy! I know it's useless,but I wish ONE White House stenographer would ask "Do you not have ANY qualms about borrowing against future taxpayers' money to bail out those who try to sell what most citizens do not want, while expecting to get thanked for it?"

    ReplyDelete
  7. kul said "...ause as a man too oft experienced in inner City violence, a soon to be published Author and Detective of thirty yea..."

    Hey mr. detective par excelance, it seems to have escaped your attention that the 'tough guy' in question is actually a Broad (pardon me ma'am).

    Bet those inner city toughs are wowed by your woids too, eh? Bet your soon to be published fiction just draws a reader in...to... the... stor... zzzzz

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well, Van, the photos of Gunslinger did make me wonder, but I just though she was an effiminate male... but what does that hav to do with the main chance, or point?

    Lastly, my twenty-something, rather silly minded person, what's your credentials? Or your name?

    My point is that you're all Cowardly Loonies with no experience in real violence, which is why you all enjoy it like Virgins with Pornography.

    And by your profile, you have exactly no experience with violence or law enforcement, nor any intellectual credential.

    And my stories are beloved, suspensefull, and metaphorically complete - it would take you to long to read them, and you're too mean and self satisfied to enjoy them.

    So again, let me ask, any of you Blowhards got real experience in any of the matters you talk so much about?

    The Detective In The Mirror.

    ReplyDelete
  9. You are so out of it. Net Neutrality applies to Web Site owners and operators, not the consumer's service. You're comment betrays you're lack of understanding of the subject.

    Why, young lady, don't you spend a decade or two reading before you mouth off with bloodthirsty, stupid nonsense?

    Very Truly Yours,
    The Detective In The Mirror

    ReplyDelete
  10. And Van, by the way, I suppose you've not spent much time with inner city toughs, have you?

    What juveniles.

    Anyway, this is my last children. Try not to hurt yourselves, I'm reachable though my site.

    You all need some serious learning.

    ReplyDelete
  11. In four comments old Kurt Ulysses Larsen, the ancient and wise calls me/us: "blowhards", "children", "juveniles", "bloodthirsty", "mean", "self-centered", "silly-minded", "not exactly sane", "phoney", "simplistic intellect", "lover of violence" "cowardly loonies" and "slow readers" (I love that one!)

    Yep....he's a Liberal.

    But he really, really likes himself. That's nice for him.

    ReplyDelete
  12. krul said "You are so out of it. Net Neutrality applies to Web Site owners and operators, not the consumer's service."

    And so of course that means that only their rights will be violated, everyone elses will be just fine.

    I think you've already identified yourself so clearly that I don't need to say anything more.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I checked the link,as well,started doing some searching for "KUL" and "Mr.Pollens" thru tracing sites I got from an ACTUAL p.i....Got bored,tho,not worth the time. A real investigator doesn't make presumptions (never suppose) without information,let alone the name-calling without backing it up in logic-derived...fuck it,probably just a dink wanna-be. The GID Theory in action...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Addendum...I even spent a few minutes co-relating between your siteometer hits with KUL address listings and p.i. directories (maybe-links in Missouri and Texas)...like I said,got bored. Posts were not p.i. professional in tone. 'nother troll,I guess. "Show's over,folks,nothin' to see,move along"

    ReplyDelete
  15. Nice try Children, and the real PIs don't need to conform to the notions of inexperienced children.

    MA P-376 expired on March 31, 2007, as I let it lapse for two years while I wrote - A new completed action is in front of the department and I will be officially, personally licensed, again within six weeks, and am now operating under the umbrella license of more than one Detective, except I have not accepted any cases while I finish my second novel.

    I notice all of attacked my credentials, and none given their's....

    Silly children who have never had to experience, confront, or use violence, nor written any serious literature or researched and scholarly work. I'm a fifty one year old detective who just sold a collection of short stories, am about to finish my second novel, and already have a reporting gig lined up in the Middle East.

    You kids seem to enjoy playing with guns... and your selfish, ignorant ideas.

    Each to his own. But any one who doesn't know who I am, doesn't know the business in Boston.

    Identity Philosophy, like Identity Politicis, is that thinking revolving around certain central axioms having to do with self identity - you won't be tough by talking bloody and playing with guns. You must go out and do dangerous things, or create real art or science. Otherwise, why do we care about your opinion?

    So again, I started asking for anyone to confess their name and their credentials - none of you have done anything but tear down (in your own anxious imaginations, not reality) my credentials.

    Anyway, Children, coffee is over and I have real work to do.

    The Detective In The Mirror.

    ReplyDelete
  16. And you know, I just wanted to know whether any of you Advocates of Gun Slinging violence had any experience with Violence (I don't believe anyone not competent in unarmed combat should be allowed to carry a handgun). I openly stated my professional (yes, I am a professional, although many have said my manner isn't - fortunately it's not a License issue) opinion that most Gun Nuts were Physical Coward, and invited you er, Enthusiasts to prove me wrong - Instead you attack me. Again, any of you Violently Fantasizing Loonies got any real world eperience with Violence (like me)?

    My sincere interest in that question is the only reason I'm playing with you Sophomoric Philosophers, anyone care to pony up some facts?

    The Detective In The Mirror.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anyone who enters shooting their mouth and making as many assumptions as you have... if you were involved in law enforcement, it's probably a good thing you're retired... or in your own words "...why do we care about your opinion?"

    If you've written any serious literature, I'm pleased to be considered unserious - and with these being examples of your own words,

    "I AM THE SIXTH GRANDSON OF ULYSSES, brother to Jack’s more famous Larsens, Wolf and Death. I don’t know if Literature’s lost brother was as arrant a knave as the other two: family legends agree he was a cunning Thief, and most will grudgingly admit he fought only when provoked, but was then ferocious. Some say he was named Ulysses, and some say another Name, but none disagree that the Brothers were Sailors all, and great Philosophers. My name is Kurt Ulysses Larsen, and I’m Ulysses Larsen’s seven times son, but I’m not a Sailor: I’m a Private Detective. The Philosophy comes free with the Service. "

    ... romantic realism isn't what comes to mind... monty python is.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Ulysses, honey, why so angry? As Van says, you walked into our house "shooting your mouth off", and seem surprised no one likes you. Didn't your mother teach you any manners. As a guest in our house....yer doin' it wrong.

    I don't brag about my accomplishments or my skills because it's crass, classless, and nobody's business. I have also learned that the biggest braggarts are almost always the least able. You might want to keep that in mind.

    And as for who should own a gun, you fly in the face of the entire point of the handgun....It's The Great Equalizer.

    The handgun gives a granny a chance to survive an attack by a gangster. A handgun gives a mommy and child a chance to fend off a car jacking meth head. A handgun gives someone in a wheelchair the chance to stop a mugging. A handgun give a small woman a chance to defend herself against a 250 lb rapist.

    The entire POINT of the exercise is to give the small, the weak and the otherwise vulnerable an EQUALIZER to defend themselves against the criminals, bullies and physical brutes.

    And...your idea is to only put guns in the hands of young strong dudes who can already kick your ass with Kung Fu?

    Love your logic.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I should have noticed before...

    "Silly children who have never had to experience, confront, or use violence, nor written any serious literature or researched and scholarly work."

    Ignore for a moment how silly and baseless these assumptions are...Is this not an odd juxtaposition of ideas?

    I fear our guest might, in fact, be a little, er, unwell.

    ReplyDelete
  20. No, my experience is that people with unarmed combat experience don't actually like to carry firearms, are hesitant to use them (they have other tools) and that cowards with guns are the most unpredictable dangers in the world.

    I don't want grannies or children or old or weak men defending themselves with guns, I want the guns taken off the streets, and the streets safe... Exactly what Earp wanted, remember?

    And I say again, if you've had no experience of violence, what are you but boodthirsty, voyeuristic amateurs spouting nonsense about your own fantasies and what you see on the silver screen?

    I mention my credentials because you all seem to have none whatsoever when it comes to violence.

    And got that right, I'm glad it's more writing than Detective work now, believe you me.

    Anyway, there's a huge difference between chatroom rhetoric and Detective work, if you've ever been there.

    Lastly, I do apologize for coming on so strong, but having had guns occasionally shoved in my face I am really tired of people who never go into dark alleys pushing their ever increasing ubiquity - my inner city is a shooting gallery, and will those guns stop supposed, imagined tyranny if the 101st lands on Beacon Hill with facist intent? Get real. The cities are death zones for your gun fantasies, and that does make me angry.

    But that's why I spend most of my time on a 'bike or with a book.

    Larsen

    Kurt Ulysses Larsen

    ReplyDelete
  21. The problem is presumptions. A person does not always lay out all his/her experiences/biography on "profiles" on websites,sometimes for "legal" reasons,sometimes for personal reasons. I understand that there are,as you state, "voyeuristic amateurs" blah blah,and a difference between "chatroom rhetoric" and Detective Work....Maybe I had my own presumptions (tho I DO disagree with most of your conclusions). All said and done,I understand the "bike and a book" thang,believe you me...

    ReplyDelete
  22. No offense, Ulysses, but I don't think the grannies or mommies or old men or young ladies give much of a shit whether YOU think they ought to have a chance at life and survival in an encounter with a violent criminal.

    Who are YOU to make that kind of choice for them?

    And part of good training is making the commitment (before you have to) to shoot when you need to.

    Dithering is death.

    I approve of EVERYBODY being armed. I also approve of EVERYBODY being trained.

    But let's not forget the foremost reason we have the Second Amendment...to guarantee a government under the control of the people.

    And the first step of incipient tyrants is disarming the citizens.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I know that you are all going to be terribly shocked by this but here goes.

    Guns were banned in England and had to be handed in to local police stations a number of years ago.

    Unfortunately the crooks didn't get the memo.

    And believe it or not. Violent crime is on the increase.

    Imagine that.

    Life is Short but Wide.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Blueyedblonde said "And believe it or not. Violent crime is on the increase."

    "B-b-b-but... it sounded like such a good idea! 'Ban guns and no gun violence can follow'... it seems so clearly true... how can it not be!?"

    They start with a conclusion that isn't rooted in reality, and are surprised when the reality of the situation proves it was a stupid idea to begin with.

    Nothing more dangerous than stupid smart people.

    ReplyDelete
  25. And nothing more annoying than stupid people with college degrees.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I was a sailor, for 20 years. Does that make me more qualified than those who have never served in the active US military to carry a firearm?

    Yes?

    Funny. My firearms training in the US Navy was a single day at the range, with a .45/.22 and an M16, both of which were so worn out we were lucky to hit paper. When we did our instructors were ecstatic.

    I shot more out of uniform than in.

    And lest we forget, the "only one" was a professional who managed to forget the four rules long enough to shoot his own stupid self in the leg.

    ReplyDelete
  27. The political/military brass, believe it or not, hates guns.

    Troops on base, even in war zones, can't carry loaded guns!

    ReplyDelete