JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | Small, unintrusive government
Why is this -republican- getting the federal government involved in state and local issues that the fed has no business being in? |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI | Better question: What does party affiliation have to do with anything? |
|
Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-02-18
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| reply to JakCrow
said by JakCrow  :Why is this -republican- getting the federal government involved in state and local issues that the fed has no business being in? Why are you advocating against a bill that would stop another government official from passing a law banning every community from wiring itself for broadband?
Seems kind of backwards to argue against the government getting involved after they've already begun to.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn
iPod Shuffle=iPos
I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 6200+ |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
1 edit | This is a state and local level issue. AND it looks like a nice conflict of interest too. Imagine that... |
|
Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-02-18
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| said by JakCrow :This is a state and local level issue. I understand that. You're saying that it's ironic that a republican (who would usually advocate for state rights) is getting involved with an issue that should only concern that state. You're insinuating that there's some hypocrisy here, right?
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn
iPod Shuffle=iPos
I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 6200+ |
|
Topmounter
Sent By Grocery Clerks
join:2001-02-20
Evergreen, CO
 ·Cox HSI
| reply to JakCrow
Obviously it is not just a state / local issue right now.
Any law, whether it is for or against it makes it a national issue. It would be nice to see a law defining it as not a national issue.
--
"If PCs are hard, then Macs are flaccid" -bb |
|
broadbanderexpanderc
@66.100.x.x
| reply to JakCrow
Conflict of interest? Not for McCain. Conflict of interest YES for Sessions, the individual whose already trying to regulate broadband by BANNING local governments altogether from setting up their own broadband networks. Funny that an ex SBC employee whose wife owns more than $500,000 in stocks would do such a thing. McCain and Launtenberg are simply reacting to corrupt legislation, attemping to insure city's rights to set up their own utility infrastructure. |
|
ieolus
Support The Clecs
join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA | reply to Primis1
Because Republicans are SUPPOSEDLY for smaller government. Don't act stupid.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
| reply to Nerdtalker
said by Nerdtalker :said by JakCrow :This is a state and local level issue. I understand that. You're saying that it's ironic that a republican (who would usually advocate for state rights) is getting involved with an issue that should only concern that state. You're insinuating that there's some hypocrisy here, right? You are correct. |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
| reply to broadbanderexpanderc
said by broadbanderexpanderc:
Conflict of interest? Not for McCain. Conflict of interest YES for Sessions, the individual whose already trying to regulate broadband by BANNING local governments altogether from setting up their own broadband networks. Funny that an ex SBC employee whose wife owns more than $500,000 in stocks would do such a thing. McCain and Launtenberg are simply reacting to corrupt legislation, attemping to insure city's rights to set up their own utility infrastructure.
Yes. Conflict of interest on Session's part. I should have made the clearer. |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| reply to ieolus
In case you missed the boat, it's a Republican (McCain) and a Dem (Lautenberg) taking up a side against a Republican (Sessions). Party affiliation is fairly irrelevant in this case it seems and it's other interests that are drawing the lines.
Also, I can't really believe you're at all surprised that McCain would be involved against something like this. Either that or you haven't followed politics at all in the past few years... McCain's still railing against the cableco's over ala carte' at last check. This is right in his wheelhouse.
And as for Sessions' involvement, it's well-documented why he's interested in his side... |
|
BonezX
Basement Dweller
Premium
join:2004-04-13
Canada | more business affiliation then party affiliation.
that and he should not be able to make anything that SBC is pushing. |
|
IT Guy
Ow, My Balls
Premium
join:2004-07-29
Las Cruces, NM
clubs: | reply to ieolus
They promote smaller government when their party isn't the majority makeup of the government. |
|
Glenn
I'D Rather Be Skiing
Premium
join:2000-10-05
Wallingford, CT | reply to JakCrow
Everyone knows McCain is a democrat in disguise. |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | Yes. I've heard many "conservatives" say that of him. Though real conservatives don't make such silly claims. |
|
ronpin
Imagine Reality
join:2002-12-06
Nirvana | reply to IT Guy
They also promote for-profit wars -- when their kids don't have to fight.
--
When Clinton lied -- no one died. |
|
IT Guy
Ow, My Balls
Premium
join:2004-07-29
Las Cruces, NM
clubs: | Didn't you know? War is good for the economy.  |
|
anon7007
@rr.com
 from:
ronpin
| reply to ieolus
"Because Republicans are SUPPOSEDLY for smaller government. Don't act stupid."
I've heard this before, but everything I have seen, the Republicans are the ones that pass more laws giving Goverment all the more control.
Its also just like the Republicans calling the Democrats liberals. When everything I have seen, its the Republicans that are so "liberal" with all the money thrown around. |
|
anon7007
@rr.com | reply to JakCrow
What we need now is the goverment to quit taking money from the RIAA/MPAA. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| reply to JakCrow
McCain ever the populist is greasing the skids for a presidential run.
Well, he might as well kiss it goodbye. He stabbed enough party faithful in the back last month to ever win any national primary.
PS- I flirted with the idea of supporting McCain in 2000 and even signed on with his campaign to receive info. |
|
