Technology

Senator John Thune is the patron saint of bullshit and his remarks on net neutrality are lies

Senator John Thune is an asshole.

You will have to forgive my blasphemy, but the most transparent scam in American political history unfolds before us and it is difficult to analyze the information coming out of the post-truth world that Washington DC has become.

"It's both terribly interesting and interesting, terrifying"

According to VICE, TNW Conference is quite the event

Let me start again: The US Senate today voted 52-47 in favor of a Congressional Review Act (CRA) to rescind the repeal of the neutrality of the net. But, according to Senator John Thune, he had to do it miraculously in the House (which just may not be heard) and, more than that, to go in disbelief, the President will veto it. This is not a people win.

We have already said that the neutrality of the net is dead and it is time to move on . Because the real fight is not for the neutrality of Obama, it is against Marsha Blackburn .

Before moving on, it is worth noting that the following GOP Senators voted to send the resolution to the House: Susan Collins, John Kennedy and Lisa Murkowski. Well done to them for worrying about the problem.

But today, there is no solution: it is a drama. In the hours leading up to today 's vote, senators on both sides were invited to debate the idea of ​​net neutrality. When I started writing this, I had listened to the debate for about three hours.

Here are the three reasons why most GOP Senators urged Democrats to vote against the ARC, according to Thune (paraphrased for brevity).

First : Network neutrality made it more difficult for ISPs to access broadband in rural areas.

This is obviously false. It is shocking to think that anyone on the planet buys this line, because of how many times . .. this has been shown as a pure and simple lie. But Thune says it with a lot of passion, and that's enough to convince some people.

Second : It was based on the rules of the era of depression for the telephone companies.

He says that "the regulations of the 30s put in place during the Great Depression to prevent Ma Bell from having the monopoly of a telephone company" do not apply in the modern world of today. He finds it incredible that someone might think that they are doing it.

Really John? You can not believe that people care about laws, rules and regulations that are older than the technology they're talking about, even if you can not explain what's about them? On the one hand, he is an asshole. Here is an organization chart that I have done to demonstrate as much:

And on the second of three hands (there is too much stupidity for two), he is even more an asshole. Protecting consumers never goes out of fashion. In addition, the 2015 Net Neutrality Bill was based on these same protections, but the terminology was obviously updated – the terms "strangulation" and "fast lanes" did not apply to Ma Bell. . The small bookstores of the 30s did not fear that the phone company would slow down the words coming out of their phones in exchange for more money from Amazon .

But, if you look at the third hand, maybe he has a point. According to its logic, the second amendment is quite old-fashioned. He could use a new look by sober minded people who are not hungry for guns. What are you saying? This is a non-starter? Oh, well, that's what we felt about net neutrality.

Third : Come on. Eh? Let's go there! Trust us. Seriously, look at our face: why would Verizon do something that would hurt his clients just for more money? I will never give up, I will never let you down. I will never go back and never give up.

Seriously, Thune stated that the reason Net Neutrality should be repealed is that the telecommunications companies have promised not to strangle, accelerate, block, or prioritize legal internet content, so it does not matter. there is no reason to apply the regulations. Trust them. In the eye .

The reality is this: even though John Thune can not give a truth-based reason for supporting the abrogation of net neutrality, he has 928,428 – each of them dollars .

He would have saved taxpayers a lot of time and money if he and the other GOP majority voters, rather than spending their half of the debate lying, they just dumped bags of money. money on the floor and pointed at the cash.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.