What to do with Senator Durbin? [Amended]

By Erick Posted in Comments (56) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

You might find it hard to believe, but RedState contributors do not all agree on a lot of topics. Senator Durbin on our front page is one.

Several contributors feel like there are some commenters who are good and decent people, but who will be upset enough by the spectacle or still upset by other things Senator Durbin has done to want to have it out with him on the front page.

A few really didn't want us to give him access to our front page.

Still others of us have thought that the issue of internet regulations pertaining to open spectrum and net neutrality are not really conservative vs. liberal as many would have us believe.

I for one lean heavily toward net neutrality, though I suspect I'm in the minority here. My personal feeling is that I give AT&T and Cox Communication enough of my money, I should not have to pay extra to access Google or iTunes. But that's just me.

In any event, we recognize that some of you might not be so keen on the idea of Senator Durbin on our front page. We also recognize that some of you will want to have it out with him. We respectfully request that you do not.

There is a time and a place for the fight. There is a time and a place for unrelated questions. But Senator Durbin's post that will show up today is not it.

We applaud his willingness to reach out to RedState readers with a good sense of humor and a healthy dose of optimism that all the interested parties might be able to come up with a bipartisan solution to balancing the right of the ISPs to make money off their network with the right of the public to access the internet at a competitive rate via the oligopololistic market.

BTW, if you really feel the need to take it up with us, click the "call me" button on the front page, found in the middle column. Otherwise, if you just have to vent, *this* diary is the appropriate place, not Senator Durbin's post.

over at Gitmo.

"Scott Thomas" - The New Republic's Winter Soldier

when, exactly, do the Ds expect to begin the process of draining the swamp.

I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.

www.mymanmitt.com
www.race42008.com
Member of Romney for President Faith and Values Steering Committee-an unpaid advisory position, that does not require an endorsement.

Since Senator Durbin is battling for internet access to provide communication for everyone will he also battle against the "fairness doctrine" efforts of his colleagues which is really designed to restrict speech.

Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you. Washington Elected Elite

If Sen, Durbin has any interest in fiber optics I would really like to know why not ONE Democrat in the Senate or in the House is bringing legislation that DNI, CIA, and DHS are pleading for with respect to changing the antiquated FISA law for better monitoring of foreign terrorists. Out of respect to RedState I will not threadjack this on Durbin's front page story, but this lack of bi-partisan cooperation on an important national security loophole disturbs me a lot!

"We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders -- or at least made great headway."
Fred Thompson

My biggest problem with Dick Durbin is that whenever I hear his name I think if Dirk Diggler of Boogie Nights. In fact, "Dick Durbin" might have even been a better choice for the movie.

We need more debate and talk - and while this site isnt the place for it (debate) - I certainly welcome anyone who is willing to *listen* to our voices.

I just pray this isnt a stunt and we are listened to.

If we are, then I think it takes a big step forward for our society in general.

probably ought to be shot for treason before his trial and certainly afterward (I'm undecided about cutting his buttons off), but I did respect his office in my posts on his thread.

It should at least be amusing to see his response(s).

Stay away from that "shot for treason" crap, please. That's moby language, and it's silly hyperbole and inappropriate.

Please be specific relative to how he should be charged.

FWIW, I have no use whatsoever for Senator Durbin. I find his comments relative to the US military to be horribly offensive, I find his judgment in pretty much everything to be sorely lacking. That isn't the standard for a charge of treason, however.

Flogging such charges undermines legitimate arguments and positions.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

I have to say, I'm impressed with the civility & respect shown toward Sen. Durbin in his thread. I wonder if the KOS kids would treat one of our own in like manner.

www.scottbomb.com
Click here to donate to the Fred Thompson campaign.

You are being used. Durbin will not listen to you (except where you agree with him), but will point to his involvement here as reaching out to find common solutions blah-blah.

Net neutrality is a bald-faced attempt to extend governmental power to regulate the Internet. It will not work as desired.

--
Gone 2500 years, still not PC.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

Let's maintain some perspective here and stay away from comparisons to Nazi leaders. It's silly, inappropriate and offensive to anyone whose family was harmed by the Nazis. And it's spelled "Goebbels", by the way.

hobgoblin of small minds.

More Americans are dead today thansk to Duubin's gerbels-like efforts to embolden our enemies. Jusy as dead as the dead at the nazis hands.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

You're being an a*s. To compare Durbin to Goebbells is just STUPID, ok. At first I thought you were just engaging in dumb, offensive hyperbole. Now it seems that you actually see no difference on the morality scale between the two men, or at least are trying to make that case. Either way, not something to be proud of. And I'm not going to bother arguing with you about the distinction, because it's beyond obvious and if you don't see it (or insist on pretending not to see it), there's no point in discussing it with you.

spelling errors? Wouldn't want to offend desecendents of a Nazi? Durbin puts out disinformation and untrue propaganda for US enemeis just as gerbils did.

btw, sticks and stones will...but words...

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

You're a fool, period.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

you are impersonating a moby

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

And apparently you're still smoking some of their pot.

are the better sniffer outer of traitors!

god bless

what dog training school did you attend?

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

don't need to sniff it. You're nonsensical comments are a dead giveaway that you're high as a kite. I'm telling your mom. You'll be grounded for sure.

"your" comments, that is. Yeah, I'm correcting my spelling again. Ha Ha Ha! Now go eat ten bags of Doritos.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

you're just IMAGINING it's grape, you pot-smokin', tie dye wearin', non-showerin', commie pinko hippie.

bubble bath takin', former dem, now rabid right wing convert caucasian vodka redbull, southern comfort whiskey sour high powered lawyer business tycoon!

never wore tie dye

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

Gamecock hands down.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

Don't be too proud of Cowboy's praise. First, he ain't the smartest cow on the ranch. Second, he'll take any opportunity to try (in vain) to needle me, always in an utterly unclever manner.

I am not the smartest on the ranch. You believe you are the smartest man on Redstate. You are not. I AM able to recognize a pile BS when I see it. I have seen it from you from the git go.

LOL. When you see "a pile of BS" you must think you're looking in the mirror. But BS has a higher IQ.

clever little boy. Nighty night Brooksie.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

3rd base impersonator said to Rootser, 3 comments ago:

And I'm not going to bother arguing with you about the distinction, because it's beyond obvious and if you don't see it (or insist on pretending not to see it), there's no point in discussing it with you.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

You don't see me arguing with you on that point, genius, do you? Just toying with you on mindless stuff (your level) for my amusement.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

You probably couple it with five cans of Red Bull

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

I don't for one minute believe the Senator is actually seeking out our opinions on this. I don't believe it anymore than I believe the senate welcomed the publics opinion on the immigration bill. Net Neutrality, has become something very much like the DMCA. Some very powerful entities (Cable and Telcos) have a business model they want to implement. That model requires they be allowed to exert greater control over the consumer and they have decided to pay our elected reps to get it.

My own position on net neutrality is pretty simple. We have given government granted rights of way to companies and allowed them to build toll roads. Now the companies want to start charging not just by size of the cargo but how valuable they perceive it to be. Imagine if the post office x-rayed your package and said your going to make some money on that so we are going to charge you more.

Not everybody on the right side of the political spectrum shares my view, thats fine. The problem is we have shown the senator exactly where the faultlines are in the right. What will come of this is a bill that has portions crafted to neutralize any united opposition from right leaning internet users.

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

>>>What will come of this is a bill that has portions crafted to neutralize any united opposition from right leaning internet users.<<<

You saw the conversations that took place here yesterday. I wouldn't say there was a consensus amongst the population of RS about what the "right" thing to do is (and I use "right" in both ways... :-) ). On each point there was a pretty good split of opinion.

And I'm confused about your posting - you seem to be opposed to the net neutrality concept, yet your comments indicated that you're opposed to businesses "exerting greater control over the consumer." Well, that's precisely what net neutrality legislation is intended to head off. ISPs and telcos would like to give higher priority to internet traffic for sites, content, etc. that THEY control, rather than providing a "neutral" pipe where all traffic travels equally. The strict capitalists here believe that such prioritization is acceptable since they were the ones that built the backbone in the first place, so they should control how it's used. Others believe it should be more like the "common carrier" model, where a company constructed a backbone (like railroads, the POTS system, etc.) with governmental support, and it's now in the best interest for consumers to have that infrastructure shared for competitive reasons.

So if you are supporting a neutral net transport where all traffic would flow equally, with no (potential) carrier-imposed restrictions, you should be supporting net neutrality. If you support the right of the ISP/telco to do what they want with their backbone, and/or you simply have a problem with governmental intervention in this issue, then you should be opposed to net neutrality.

Wikipedia, while not the be-all, end-all of information, does seem to have a decent writeup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality.


...when they see me they'll say, "There goes Loren Wallace,
the greatest thing to ever climb into a race car."

One I vigorously and have consistently supported net neutrality. As you can see here or here

What we have done is laid out exactly where the splits are in the right leaning position on this issue. (no regulation vs anti monopoly vs No new government programs). In effect we have laid bare our wedge issues.

The attempt by monopoly carriers to take greater control of the internet is and old fight and one that they have been persistent about. I remember when ATT tried to reintroduce LMS to preemptively kill the internet in the late 70's. Comcast regularly blocks ports for the services usually to force you to buy their competing product. Bellsouth now ATT has been all over the place what you can do with a DSL connection. As a final note if you have a cable modem you may find with your unlimited access plan you can actually use it too much and be cut off.

The worry is once again we wind up with a system where the CABLE and TELCO companies are in an even more secure position with even less incentive to innovate.

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I just wanted to make sure I was understanding you correctly, and to somewhat disagree on the Durbin thing. I don't think he can craft legislation to counteract the Right, because even the Right doesn't agree on the proper approach. I think you can be sure that Durbin will propose legislation that will increase governmental participation in broadband "policy", but as you and I demonstrate, not every single conservative believes in a strict hands-off approach.


...when they see me they'll say, "There goes Loren Wallace,
the greatest thing to ever climb into a race car."

Is that it feels too much like the "Fairness Doctrine". Government Enforced Neutrality is not a good thing no matter how you slice it.

"It's a book about a man who doesn't know he's about to die, and then dies...
...But if the man does know he's going to die and dies anyway. Dies, dies willing, knowing he can stop it, then...
Well, isn't that the type of man you want to keep alive?"
Karen Eiffel, Stranger Than Fiction

if there was unlimited competition for ISP/telco services. However, this is not the case. As has been brought up numerous times in these exchanges, most folks have only one or two options for broadband service delivery, unless they happen to live in a major metro area like Chicago or NYC where there are multiple DSL providers. So if I don't like the controls the broadband provider is placing on my internet connection, it's not like I have a lot of options.

The Fairness Doctrine question has to do with the public's ability to choose a political message for themselves. They DO have the choice - if they don't like Rush, they can switch stations and listen to NPR or read the NYT. There is no monopoly in political messaging. There IS a virtual monopoly or duopoly in broadband, so the "choice" in many cases simply doesn't exist. If I don't like the fact that Verizon is throttling access to YouTube so their own video service gets priority, I can't necessarily go to another broadband provider - there's a fair chance that they're the only game in town. So my ability to choose has been restricted by monopoly.


...when they see me they'll say, "There goes Loren Wallace,
the greatest thing to ever climb into a race car."

That's the result of government regulation.
The answer is not More government regulation.
That's how we got where we are.

"It's a book about a man who doesn't know he's about to die, and then dies...
...But if the man does know he's going to die and dies anyway. Dies, dies willing, knowing he can stop it, then...
Well, isn't that the type of man you want to keep alive?"
Karen Eiffel, Stranger Than Fiction

of government intervention. Installing a telecom infrastructure across the United States is not something that most companies can undertake on their own - this is why the AT&T (formerly Bell Systems) phone network is there. One company did it, and the government helped, in part because of the same exact issue we're seeing with broadband - an unwillingness to provide ubiquitous service because of profitability issues with rural areas. Few companies have the resources or the governmental sponsorship to run a parallel telecom infrastructure across the country. The same thing is true of CATV systems...while in some metro areas this has happened, it is far from commonplace. Just look at the reluctance of CATV companies to install into a NEW subdivision for evidence of issues with profitability.

One of the primary reasons (not the ONLY reason) that telecomm-related monopolies exist is because of the difficulties of building a nationwide infrastructure...NOT because of governmental regulation. Yes, in some cases such as local franchise agreements for CATV, government has contributed to the problem. But this is far from universally true.


...when they see me they'll say, "There goes Loren Wallace,
the greatest thing to ever climb into a race car."

You would need to do something to encourage new entrants into the market.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

"It's a book about a man who doesn't know he's about to die, and then dies...
...But if the man does know he's going to die and dies anyway. Dies, dies willing, knowing he can stop it, then...
Well, isn't that the type of man you want to keep alive?"
Karen Eiffel, Stranger Than Fiction

If people are saying the existing vendors stink, why must government intervene? Once the market is opened up (I wish), let the market flourish on its own.

Encouragement will only be needed if we only pretend to open up the market with new regulations or worse, nationalization of parts of the industry.

Hooray!

That works and can just wait until your capital equipment is in place and drop their prices low enough to ensure you have to eat the carrying costs ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service