So the “media reform” movement paid for research that backed its views, paid activists to promote the research, saw its allies installed in the FCC and other key agencies, and paid for the FCC research that evaluated the research they had already paid for. Now they have their policy. That’s quite a coup. – John Fund, ‘The Net Neutrality Coup’
In a move that would have made Hitler and the Nazis proud, an unelected group of men at the FCC has just voted for government takeover of the internet through ‘Net Neutrality’. What we have been watching for the last two years is the ramped up war campaign against us, the American people. The Constitutional ‘Rule of Law’ no longer applies in America as bondholders lost their contractual interest in the great collapse of 2008, the federal government can now force you to buy health insurance through Obamacare, the congress has just turned over the food supply chain to the FDA and Secretary of HHS, the Federal Reserve is stealing your wealth through devaluation of the dollar, and now the lines of communication have been compromised by people that know better than you. It sure looks like a war campaign doesn’t it?
The Federal Communications Commission’s new “net neutrality” rules, passed on a partisan 3-2 vote yesterday, represent a huge win for a slick lobbying campaign run by liberal activist groups and foundations. The losers are likely to be consumers who will see innovation and investment chilled by regulations that treat the Internet like a public utility.
There’s little evidence the public is demanding these rules, which purport to stop the non-problem of phone and cable companies blocking access to websites and interfering with Internet traffic. Over 300 House and Senate members have signed a letter opposing FCC Internet regulation, and there will undoubtedly be even less support in the next Congress.
Yet President Obama, long an ardent backer of net neutrality, is ignoring both Congress and adverse court rulings, especially by a federal appeals court in April that the agency doesn’t have the power to enforce net neutrality. He is seeking to impose his will on the Internet through the executive branch. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, a former law school friend of Mr. Obama, has worked closely with the White House on the issue. Official visitor logs show he’s had at least 11 personal meetings with the president.
The net neutrality vision for government regulation of the Internet began with the work of Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor who founded the liberal lobby Free Press in 2002. Mr. McChesney’s agenda? “At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies,” he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. “But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.”
A year earlier, Mr. McChesney wrote in the Marxist journal Monthly Review that “any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself.” Mr. McChesney told me in an interview that some of his comments have been “taken out of context.” He acknowledged that he is a socialist and said he was “hesitant to say I’m not a Marxist.”
For a man with such radical views, Mr. McChesney and his Free Press group have had astonishing influence. Mr. Genachowski’s press secretary at the FCC, Jen Howard, used to handle media relations at Free Press. The FCC’s chief diversity officer, Mark Lloyd, co-authored a Free Press report calling for regulation of political talk radio.
Free Press has been funded by a network of liberal foundations that helped the lobby invent the purported problem that net neutrality is supposed to solve. They then fashioned a political strategy similar to the one employed by activists behind the political speech restrictions of the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign-finance reform bill. The methods of that earlier campaign were discussed in 2004 by Sean Treglia, a former program officer for the Pew Charitable Trusts, during a talk at the University of Southern California. Far from being the efforts of genuine grass-roots activists, Mr. Treglia noted, the campaign-finance reform lobby was controlled and funded by foundations like Pew.
“The idea was to create an impression that a mass movement was afoot,” he told his audience. He noted that “If Congress thought this was a Pew effort, it’d be worthless.” A study by the Political Money Line, a nonpartisan website dealing with issues of campaign funding, found that of the $140 million spent to directly promote campaign-finance reform in the last decade, $123 million came from eight liberal foundations.
A federal court has ruled that the commission has no authority to regulate the Internet, and a bipartisan group of senators and representives warned Genechowski not to attempt to impose a regulatory regime on the Internet earlier this year.
The move’s legality was even questioned by FCC Commissioner Michael Copp, one of the Democrats who voted today with Genachowski, saying he considered voting against the proposal because it lacks a sufficiently defensible legal basis to survive a court challenge promised by major Internet Service Providers like Verizon, Microsoft, and AT & T.
But legal challenges by industry are likely to be much less of a problem for the Genachowski-led takeover than efforts in Congress to stop the FCC in its tracks.
That’s clearly what DeMint has in mind, as he said in his statement released today following the FCC action:
“The Obama Administration has ignored evidence that this federal takeover will hang a millstone of regulatory and legal uncertainty around the neck of a vibrant sector of our economy.
“Proceeding on its own liberal whims rather than facts, this FCC has chosen to grant itself broad authority to limit how businesses can bring the internet to consumers in faster and more innovative ways.
“Americans loudly demanded a more limited federal government this November, but the Obama Administration has dedicated itself to expanding centralized government planning. Today, unelected bureaucrats rammed through an internet takeover, even after Congress and courts warned them not to.
“To keep the internet economy thriving, this decision must be reversed. Regulatory reform will be a top priority for Republicans in the next Congress, and I intend to prevent the FCC or any government agency from unilaterally burdening our recovering economy with baseless regulation.
“In order to provide the stability businesses need to grow, I will work with my fellow senators to see passage of my FCC Act, which would ensure that the FCC can only use its rulemaking powers where there is clear evidence of a harmful market failure, as well as the REINS Act, which would add the accountability of a Congressional vote before any government agency’s proposed major regulations may be finalized.”
If the FCC plan somehow manages to survive, it will almost certainly do for First Amendment liberties and the Internet what it did for them in regulating broadcast television and radio. Former CBS News president Fred Friendly’s landmark book, “The Good Guys, the Bad Guys and the First Amendment,” describes in great detail how the Kennedy and Johnson administrations used the FCC to silence conservative critics.
And for all of us stupid moos that need the ‘Net Neutrality For Dummies’ primer:
Every once in a while, they slip up, and tell you what they are really thinking…and we should be worried.
I have been fretting since I realized some three months ago that the Republicans are going to take control of the Senate as well as the House, and Mitch McConnell and John Boehner are going to be ‘the leadership’ for the country. How scary is it to know that the two branches of the same party (Big Government) are sparring so as to appear to be enemies? How scary is it to know that we are moving from the whips and electric cattle prods of Nancy and Harry’s regime to the velvet gloved iron fist of McConnell and Boehner?
If Americans want real change in Washington, Sen. Jim DeMint and Rep. Ron Paul should be the leadership team to push the agenda that demands a rollback of 100 years of progressive nudge and stops the ‘global governance’ crowd from delivering a fatal blow to America’s sovereignty through debt.
A McConnell/Boehner team is not written in stone; it’s just more District of Criminals ‘business as usual’.
Boston University economist Laurence Kotlikoff says U.S. government debt is not $13.5-trillion (U.S.), which is 60 per cent of current gross domestic product, as global investors and American taxpayers think, but rather 14-fold higher: $200-trillion – 840 per cent of current GDP. “Let’s get real,” Prof. Kotlikoff says. “The U.S. is bankrupt.”
Writing in the September issue of Finance and Development, a journal of the International Monetary Fund, Prof. Kotlikoff says the IMF itself has quietly confirmed that the U.S. is in terrible fiscal trouble – far worse than the Washington-based lender of last resort has previously acknowledged. “The U.S. fiscal gap is huge,” the IMF asserted in a June report. “Closing the fiscal gap requires a permanent annual fiscal adjustment equal to about 14 per cent of U.S. GDP.”
McConnell and Boehner are creatures of Congress who are not driven by any desire to live at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
McConnell frets, however, about controlling expectations among tea party activists likely to want—and quite possibly demand—that bigger GOP numbers in Congress produce big things: a swift repeal of the health care reform law; a massive U-turn on federal spending; and immediate action to reduce the national debt. Tea party darling and likely freshman mover-and-shaker Marco Rubio of Florida, for instance, summed up the movement’s ax-wielding gusto in July: “Every day we postpone acting decisively to rein in wasteful spending and cut the debt, we pile even more on the backs of millions of young Americans.”
In one sign of conditional unity, Sen. Jim DeMint, the South Carolina Republican who backed many tea party candidates in open defiance of McConnell and other GOP leaders, says he isn’t spoiling for a leadership fight. But note the qualification. “I have no intention of challenging the leadership,” DeMint told National Journal. “What I have done over the last year has ruffled a lot of feathers in our conference. The chance of me getting the votes is not realistic at this point.” But DeMint says that Senate Republicans must change the way they approach spending and do it soon, or tea party activists will lose faith and rebel even more.
“We have to understand, this is not so much a Republican victory.… I see it more as a realignment of American politics,” DeMint said. “We’re going to have more Republicans, and the composition is going to be more of a limited-government idea. The biggest challenge we have is to change the idea that senators are here to do what is best for their states, to get all they can for their states and the interests operating in their states.”
And this is where DeMint is spoiling for a confrontation. He wants Republicans to cut spending no matter what effect those reductions have on their home-state constituents. He says this would be a “definitional” culture shift among Republicans, and he considers the pledge made by all the Senate GOP candidates—including relative moderates such as Mark Kirk of Illinois and Carly Fiorina of California—to adopt the no-earmarks policy the beginning of that change. DeMint sees earmarks as a symptom of a deeper problem: the structural bias for more discretionary spending and the clout that comes with it.
To reverse that trend, DeMint wants to upend generations of bipartisan logrolling. What’s his ask? That GOP leaders permanently exclude themselves from the Appropriations Committee, which allocates non-entitlement spending. If that rule had been in place during this Congress, three GOP leaders would have been kicked off Appropriations—McConnell, Tennessee’s Lamar Alexander, and Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski. “If we are going to cut spending, we have to take the power away from those responsible for spending,” DeMint says. “We have to say no to a power base that can be corrupting over time, not in the sense of anything criminal, but in the sense that your focus is spending and not cutting.”
McConnell was icily noncommittal about DeMint’s idea: “We will debate any rule changes brought before the conference.” Kyl is downright opposed. “That suggests there’s something wrong with [the current system],” he said. DeMint’s point is that there is, in fact, something wrong with the current system. Thus, Senate Republicans may find themselves divided over their own rules even before they begin to grapple with Obama over spending, tax rates, or entitlements.
UPDATE: I’m even more worried now. Chuck Schumer as the Senate Leader?
Glenn has a studio audience today discussing getting off the couch and voting in next week’s election. He has powerhouse constitutional conservatives, Michele Bachmann, Jason Chaffetz, and Jim DeMint as guests speaking to what they need to help them as they go into the lion’s den in the District of Criminals.
I am so glad to see more libertarians on the screen these days, and am thrilled to post Judge Napolitano’s initial FreedomWatch show on a major cable news station.
The Judge definitely has the right focus for today’s initial show where he asks the question of whether social conservatives like Sarah Palin can find common ground with strict Constitutionalists like Dr. Rand Paul and Dr. Ron Paul, and how this will effect the November elections.
Please feel free to allow Ed Rendell’s lies about tea party attendance roll right off your back like water off a duck. He is just doing his masters’ bidding and attempting to influence people’s thinking that the tea party movement is just a small, fringe element that can’t do any harm. Let them; the quiet time is now, they will hear the roar in November.
I must, once again, state for the record that I have been an indie for a very long time, and have never been registered as a republican. In keeping with the discussion that was started on the last post about O’Reilly and a third party, here is information that may clarify my position about registering as a republican for the 2010 and 2012 elections. Republicans are not going to leave their party, and the tipping point for conservatives getting control of said party appears to have been reached. So what would be the best way to keep Obama from getting re-elected; join a third party or join the republicans? You tell me.
Rasmussen has released poll results this morning about South Carolinians’ views of their senators.
Two of the most influential Republicans in the U.S. Senate these days come from South Carolina, Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham. But Graham’s efforts to work with majority Democrats on some issues has angered many GOP voters in the state, even prompting efforts to censure him.
Fifty-one percent (51%) of Republican voters in South Carolina say the GOP should be more like DeMint, who’s a staunch conservative, than like Graham, according to a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state.
Thirty-two percent (32%) of the state’s Republican voters think the party should model itself more after Graham, and 18% are not sure which one is the best role model.
Among all voters in the state, 38% say Republicans should be more like DeMint, while 32% say they should be like Graham. Thirty percent (30%) aren’t sure.
Sixty-five percent (65%) of South Carolina Republicans have a favorable view of Graham, but 85% feel that way about DeMint. Republicans are nearly twice as likely to have a very favorable view of DeMint compared to his fellow GOP senator – 57% to 30%.
Perhaps more tellingly, 18% of GOP voters have a very unfavorable view of Graham, while just three percent (3%) say the same of DeMint.
The circus in Washington surrounding this issue continues, and I am wondering if anybody else is asking the important question, “Why is this such an emergency when we know that this healthcare reform is not going to reduce the deficit, create jobs, or help the economy?” It is more than obvious that this is just another plank in the fascist platform that is called “Government Takeover” by the liberal left wing of the Progressive Socialist Democratic Party formerly known as the party of slavery; The Democrats. Don’t believe me, look it up here and here!
Remember Bambi and Nancy keep talking about the three fronts: Energy (Cap and Trade), Education (Americorps and HR3221), and Healthcare reform (Obama DeathCare). They just didn’t tell you that they were going to take over large segments of the economy like banks, financial institutions, car companies, insurance companies, set pay for executives, appoint umpteen czars, etc. If you are thinking this all just happened by accident and some cosmic perfect storm created this, go here and find out what has been going on under your noses.
Yesterday, the director of the CBO, Douglas Elmendorf, (also a former senior fellow at the Brookings Institute 2007-2009), was “invited” to the White House to meet with the resident’s “key budget and health advisors”, and outside experts to discuss “achieving cost savings in health reform”.
I am supposing that people would not be making such an issue about this visit if it weren’t for Bambi’s Chicago thuggery record. Here are just a few examples and don’t be fooled by the titles:
President Obama and his Democratic allies, scrambling to broker a health care deal Monday, finally got an upbeat assessment from Congress’ official scorekeeper when it said the plan for government-run coverage would not force out private insurers.
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer trumpeted the report from the Congressional Budget Office, Congress’ nonpartisan budget analyst, that said private insurers could survive competition from a government health insurance option – contradicting a chief criticism from Republicans.
“Now we’ve heard that the reform will represent a government takeover of health care. A point of fact: The opposite is true,” said Mr. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat.
Republicans have said the public health insurance option, which would likely have low reimbursement rates, would drive private insurers out of business.They argue that once private insurers are gone, the public option would be the only health insurance option. (emphasis mine)
Republicans touted a report from theLewin Group, a health research firm owned by an insurance company, that predicted 100 million people out of the 160 million now covered by employer-sponsored insurance would go to the government coverage.
Not so fast Bambi. This video I put up a few days ago with the very words from the democrats horses’ mouths:
Want to know the truth about the strategy to move every American onto single payer health care where a bureaucrat decides whether you live or die? Nothing says “the truth” like tape; always get tape:
Nothing says truth like dems talking about slowly and strategically moving everybody toward government controlled single payer health care because private insurers won’t be able to compete. I KNOW THEY WON’T, I work for a small business that is getting creamed by health insurance costs. If it comes down to the company surviving by moving everybody to the government plan or going bankrupt, I KNOW what my employer will do.
Moving on; Senator DeMint seems to be the only public person besides Sarah, Rush and Glenn to be doing a damn fine impression of Paul Revere, and raising the alarm about what is happening with the snake known as the Obama administration.
As anxiety about health-care reform was being expressed Monday on the medical center’s campus in this conservative suburb of South Carolina’s capital, Sen. Jim DeMint (S.C.) was sharpening his opposition to President Obama’s attempt to overhaul the health-care industry.
The Republican has used fiery rhetoric to create a sense of urgency on the matter, making himself a champion of conservatives in the process.
“I’m swinging on this issue,” DeMint said in an interview. “If I can stop a government takeover, I will. . . . It’s not personal. It’s not political. It’s about stopping a bad policy.”
Republican Senate leaders have distanced themselves from DeMint, saying they are opposed not to health-care reform but to the proposals Democrats are pressing. Sen. George V. Voinovich (Ohio), a retiring moderate, told colleagues Monday he thinks DeMint and other conservatives are to blame for the party’s downfall. And none of DeMint’s colleagues has endorsed his Waterloo comment.
Excuse me? Who decided John McCain was the champion of the Republican Party, or Colin Powell, or Michael Steele; none of which have any cajones to slow the momentum of the train wreck occurring to our nation? I still want to know what the Dems promised the Repubs to allow Bambi in office – was it this deathcare or Sotomayor?
The Democratic National Committee seized upon the remark, airing a television ad on cable stations here accusing DeMint of “trying to kill health-care reform” and “playing politics with health care.” The party announced on Monday that it had extended the ad through Friday, and a Democratic official said DeMint’s outspokenness is helping to recruit candidates to challenge him in 2010 when he faces voters again.
“We’re certainly not trying to quiet Jim DeMint,” DNC spokesman Brad Woodhouse said. “He’s given us a gift because we’re able to go to other Republican members and say, ‘Do you agree with Jim DeMint that health care should be used to break the president politically?’ I don’t think it at all has been helpful to the Republicans.”
So the dems are attacking Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint and whoever else is trying to expose the lies of the Obama Administration and his zombies in congress.
DeMint, 57, who before entering politics owned a small marketing business and struggled to negotiate affordable health-care coverage for his dozen or so employees, said fixing the system has been one of the main causes of his career. But he considers Democratic plans a threat to freedoms Americans treasure.
Since arriving in Washington in 1999 as a House member, DeMint has been on a crusade against the bureaucracy of the federal city. He sought to abolish the federal tax code and once staged a rally in his home town of Greenville, where he tossed all 17,000 pages of the Internal Revenue Service tax code from a hot-air balloon.
“I’m working with a lot of people up here [in Washington] who don’t really understand the health insurance market,” he said. “I don’t think anyone in his Cabinet, or Obama himself, understands the business. I’ve been around doctors all my life.
“We need some real health-care reform,” he added. “So, Mr. President, get your hands off of my health care and let’s make health insurance work better.”
James L. Guth, a political scientist at Furman University, said of DeMint: Health care “in many ways kind of crystallizes all of the concerns he used to start with. His first campaign slogan was ‘Bring Freedom Home,’ and he sees all of these government programs as a gradual encroachment of American freedom.”
Some medical professionals here in Lexington County agree.
“Whenever I mention it to patients, they are afraid,” said John G. Black, a longtime internist at Lexington Medical Center and president of the South Carolina Medical Association. “You could go to any state in the union and you could find patients and physicians who are afraid they will lose freedom in making medical decisions.”
A completely corrupt double standard in the Senate. Imagine that? If it wasn’t for HR2918 benefiting both sides of the aisle in a most luxurious manner, I might be more ecstatic about Sen. DeMint’s speech. As it is, I thank Sen. DeMint for pointing out just how much the Dems like to bend rules and ask that he vote against HR2918.
From an email I received today from Campaign For Liberty:
Earlier today, the first shot in our battle to pass Audit the Fed through the U.S. Senate was fired on the Senate floor by Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina.
Senator DeMint, who has a well-deserved reputation for taking the battle to the other side in the Senate, once again proved why he is such a valuable ally in our fight to bring transparency and accountability to the Federal Reserve.
A little while ago, the Senate voted to pass HR 2918, the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act. This $3 billion bill contains, among many other things, provisions for GAO audits on certain agencies.
Seizing on a chance to take quick action to bring Audit the Fed up for a vote, and with the GAO provisions in mind, Senator DeMint attached the full text of S 604, the Senate version of Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed bill, to HR 2918 as Senate Amendment 1367 before it was considered for final passage.
However, Senate Democrats refused to even allow a vote on the amendment! That’s right. The internationalist, Fed-loving elite in the Senate used a parliamentary tactic to shut down DeMint’s amendment.
After Senator DeMint brought Audit the Fed to the floor, Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska raised a “point of order” to prevent a vote, claiming that the amendment violated Senate Rule 16 by “legislating” on an appropriations bill. The Senate president agreed, and the amendment was shot down.
Senator DeMint did not back down, though, and directly challenged Senate leadership by pointing out the other GAO audits contained in the bill. As Senator DeMint listed them off, the Senate president was forced to agree with Senator DeMint that each one he described, all of which would be left in for final passage, also violated Senate Rule 16.
Which tells us at least one thing: the problem wasn’t with “legislating” on the bill or violating Senate Rules (which is commonly done). Shooting down the amendment was about preventing a thorough audit of the Federal Reserve for the first time in its history!
Senate leadership is hoping this issue will just fade away so they can get on to what they deem to be more “important” business, like dictating what kind of healthcare plan you and I can carry or passing destructive Cap-and-Tax legislation.
But the American people deserve answers on what the Fed has done with trillions of our tax dollars and what they are committing us and future generations to as part of their secret deals with foreign central banks and governments.
The leadership decided today to turn their backs on transparency, but our fight is just beginning.
As Senator DeMint made clear on the floor, the Audit the Fed bill has wide bipartisan support. He rightly warned the Senate that even if they delay today, they WILL have to deal with the issue on the floor.
It is up to you and me to back up Senator DeMint’s words by making sure the momentum continues to build and the bill comes up for a final vote.
The rejection of the Audit amendment is just the first battle in our war. Now is the time to really put the pressure on the U.S. Senate to Audit the Fed!
Senator DeMint fired the opening salvo and showcased the hypocrisy of the Senate for allowing other GAO audits to be included in the bill while refusing to even allow a vote on Fed transparency.
Again, we’re just getting started. Senator DeMint will keep fighting to pass Audit the Fed on its own or as an amendment, and we need to continue putting pressure on our senators to do everything in their power to achieve a floor vote!
Click here to sign our online petition. And visit our Audit the Fed action page for contact information to call, write, and fax your senators and urge them to support S 604 and to push for a final vote.