I don't get it either. Ron Paul is against net neutrality. However, he is against the Patriot Act which allows the erosion of civil liberties aided by technology. I want to know his position on intellectual property. It looks like he is anti-special interest, that is good.
Independent
· 1 year ago
The TV brought about the era of personality politics and charisma campaigns. The internet is driving more of the voting bloc toward policy, economic charts, and open-discussion about the merits of ideas. The TV dominates the vote still, but its power is now in relative decline for the first time since it arrived on the scene... And Ron Paul's TV ads were no where near as good as his best YouTube ads.
The fear with "net neutrality" is that giving the federal government the power to regulate (and essentially censor) the internet is far worse than letting ISPs and web hosts work out their own market-based deals.
Verad
· 1 year ago
Online, with the anonymity of the internet, folks are much more willing to speak and actively follow their interests. Offline, folks are far more likely to follow the herd so as to not seem "kooky" or "unrealistic."
belle
· 1 year ago
As someone once said: "If voting changed anything it would be illegal." That Ron Paul is the leader by a huge margin as the choice for President says more about our election system than anything else. We are truly a banana republic with a one-party system (Republicrats).
Vote for a third-party candidate if you want to send a message. A vote for either McCain or Obama is like the choice between pneumonia or cancer. Either one can kill you, so choose otherwise.
Chris H
· 1 year ago
Ron Paul is the thinking man's candidate.
John Howard
· 1 year ago
Our Author writes:
"...I just don’t get the online/off-line disconnect."
It exists because government controls primary elections, but does not (yet) control the internet. All the little two-party whores who control and count the primary votes have been perfecting their art for 200 years. No one except those chosen by the mainstream media will be allowed to win.
But the internet is so new and so simple that truth has won out temporarily. It will not be allowed ever again. It has been an embarrassment to the ruling class. Expect to see extensive internet-controling legislation as soon as the new whores are in the white house, if not sooner.
The two parties are like two mafia families. They fight over who runs the rackets. But they agree on the rackets. They will soon make a racket of the internet - in a bipartisan effort. They will probably be screaming about stopping child pornography so no one will dare to oppose them.
Most Americans will (as usual) fall for the scam of voting for the lesser of two evils and will (as usual) vote for more evil.
Ron Wallace
· 1 year ago
Here is what's coming down if I get your support, (or that of a wealthy investor):
National Referendums: valid privately registered voters who vote by tel, cell, text, pc, kiosk, etc. These massive petitions are too cumbersome. We need referenda that can be voted on with just a keystroke or two. Painlessly. We could do one a day and make our votes binding, once people see how powerful it is. If we don't do this, Congress will cage us ... and we wont even know what hit us. We get closer by the day. Help me get 'er done!
Li
· 1 year ago
"I don't get it either. Ron Paul is against net neutrality."
The thing is, is "net neutrality" really what you think it is? The history of government regulation for the "public interest" is also the history of the eventual concentration of power in the hands of a few. The first thing to remember is that a strong centralised government is not and never can be truly "neutral", and decentralised and competing interests cannot artificially impose restrictions with the same ease.
All Comments
The fear with "net neutrality" is that giving the federal government the power to regulate (and essentially censor) the internet is far worse than letting ISPs and web hosts work out their own market-based deals.
Vote for a third-party candidate if you want to send a message. A vote for either McCain or Obama is like the choice between pneumonia or cancer. Either one can kill you, so choose otherwise.
"...I just don’t get the online/off-line disconnect."
It exists because government controls primary elections, but does not (yet) control the internet. All the little two-party whores who control and count the primary votes have been perfecting their art for 200 years. No one except those chosen by the mainstream media will be allowed to win.
But the internet is so new and so simple that truth has won out temporarily. It will not be allowed ever again. It has been an embarrassment to the ruling class. Expect to see extensive internet-controling legislation as soon as the new whores are in the white house, if not sooner.
The two parties are like two mafia families. They fight over who runs the rackets. But they agree on the rackets. They will soon make a racket of the internet - in a bipartisan effort. They will probably be screaming about stopping child pornography so no one will dare to oppose them.
Most Americans will (as usual) fall for the scam of voting for the lesser of two evils and will (as usual) vote for more evil.
National Referendums: valid privately registered voters who vote by tel, cell, text, pc, kiosk, etc. These massive petitions are too cumbersome. We need referenda that can be voted on with just a keystroke or two. Painlessly. We could do one a day and make our votes binding, once people see how powerful it is. If we don't do this, Congress will cage us ... and we wont even know what hit us. We get closer by the day. Help me get 'er done!
The thing is, is "net neutrality" really what you think it is? The history of government regulation for the "public interest" is also the history of the eventual concentration of power in the hands of a few. The first thing to remember is that a strong centralised government is not and never can be truly "neutral", and decentralised and competing interests cannot artificially impose restrictions with the same ease.