FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

Post by lokar » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:34 PM UTC

s3r3nity wrote: post #242

skyfaller wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to disagree that the Republicans do not have a plan. They have a very clear and public plan: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025 Yes, they spend a lot of energy on obstructing the government from functioning, and creating a naked kleptocracy to use the government to funnel money into their own pockets. But they are also moving openly towards a fascist dictatorship with very specific ideas about how soci…

> But they are also moving openly towards a fascist dictatorship Democrats have been calling on Biden to increase his power through just writing Executive Orders to act on their platform, and bypass all other branches of government...but THAT's not dictatorship?

Post by Gormo » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:36 PM UTC

Ericson2314 wrote: post #201

SeanAnderson wrote: post #13

I'm happy this reversal occurred, but I am exhausted by the continuous flip-flopping of legislation depending on which party is in charge. Feels like we're stagnating as a nation by going in a circle rather than finding commonality to go forward. Maybe it's always been this way though and I'm just getting old enough to be bothered by it?

Proportional representation, multiple parties, and parliamentary system (no legislative executive divide) can fix this.

Post by asynchronous » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:39 PM UTC

jonathankoren wrote: post #10

zer00eyz wrote: post #3

FCC rules... The other day it was FTC and banning non competes, there's also talk right now on the home page regarding KYC and an executive order. I would love for us to be able to get back to making laws in the US. Executive orders and agency rulings are a bad way to run a "democratic republic"

In case you are unaware, but congress has been DEEPLY dysfunctional for the past 30 years, and has been getting worse every session. Even this week it was shocking news that a bipartisan bill managed to even come to a vote. This is what happens when the party that doesn't have the White House chooses obstruction and enforces the the Hastert Rule. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hastert_rule

Post by StillBored » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:39 PM UTC

whatshisface wrote: post #238

the_gastropod wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to tell you this, but if you can believe it, they're for the second time now, electing the most sadistic candidate to represent their party. This guy has promised to deport millions of people, put them in "camps", use the military to quell "woke" protests, etc. The sincere Conservative electorate had every opportunity to choose a less-sadistic option. They chose. OP's characterization is perfectly valid.

Trump supporters resonate with that rhetoric because the rent is too high, groceries are too expensive, and inflation doesn't seem to apply to wages. The causes of unrest haven't changed in thousands of years, but they can be convenient to forget.

Post by iaaan » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 8:41 PM UTC

the_gastropod wrote: post #246

hathawsh wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you think that is a very cynical view? The party or parties you disagree with may not share your views, but they do have many things in common with you. In order to build bridges with other parties, it's important to believe that the majority of people who get involved in government, regardless of party, are motivated primarily by the desire to serve their neighbors and their country; otherwise they would find…

Look, I'm not saying the Republican Party are Nazis. But let's just imagine they were. Would we still have to believe they were good-faith actors just trying to improve their country? I do not believe the majority of Republican politicians today are trying to improve the country. I think the majority are self-serving, self-interested, and corrupt. This isn't the party of George Bush—who I disagree with about virtuall…