Stop Listening to the Shriekers: Nothing Will Happen Because Net Neutrality Rules Are Gone

Based on what you’re reading on Twitter, Facebook and elsewhere, the world is coming to an end. No, not because of tax cuts. Those are only going to kill people. The world will come to an end because FCC Chairman Ajit Pai will do away with rules put in place by the FCC in 2015. Those rules effectively created the net neutrality so many have been seeking for nearly ten years.

The question, naturally, is “Why?” I’ll be damned if I know.

I’ll hand it to those who started the debate. Net neutrality sounds great. “Hey, why shouldn’t the internet be neutral? FREEEEEEDOM!!!”

When you dig deeper, you’ll find the term doesn’t have much meaning. It’s not a legal term, and it came about mainly because some people began hyping the notion ISP’s were going to try and corner the market and take over the internet and price it according to their whims and desires. The result would be content providers having to charge consumers exorbitant amounts of money for access.

If you search the hashtag #NetNeutrality on Twitter today, you’ll see ridiculous examples of people claiming we’ll be paying for access to Twitter and Facebook as well as paying a fee to stream each movie we want to watch on Netflix as opposed to a flat monthly fee. Imagine Dr. Venkman, from Ghostbusters: “Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together…..mass hysteria!” 

Except it’s all overblown poppycock. 

Just think about this for a moment. President Obama took the internet, which blossomed between 2000 and 2015, creating an environment where people could do almost anything online and do it with super fast speeds at relatively low prices. Along comes the government savior, telling us the best thing for consumers is to subject the internet to rules under a law from 1934, created at a time when people couldn’t make a phone call without the use of two hands. 

There’s no reason to get into the amazingly dull legal details of why the Obama administration did this. Let’s just say they tried in 2010 to regulate the internet one way under FCC rules. The Supreme Court said, “Sorry, dude. Only Congress can do that.” Obama and his flunkies went back to the drawing board and five years later (by which time, the internet continued to flourish as did content providers and ISP’s) they got the bright idea to regulate the internet as a utility. They did so under antiquated rules that make it easy to impose taxes — oops — fees that would no doubt be passed on to consumers (just like mobile phone carriers do).

The rules were put in place to solve a problem that didn’t exist. 

That is the bottom line. People cannot tell you why the rules were necessary. They can only offer hypotheticals as to why the rules are necessary. But that’s like a cop pulling over a person with a new sports car and writing them a ticket because they might drive 125 mph in a 70 mph zone two weeks from that moment.

The internet didn’t require the nanny state before 2015. The system thrived in a competitive environment. People have so many choices in determining what content they want to watch and how they want it delivered. Everybody benefits. Everybody will continue to benefit once the rules get lifted.

If the ISP’s do what the fearmongers claim, then the government can deal with it if necessary. Until then, sit back, relax and enjoy.

The post Stop Listening to the Shriekers: Nothing Will Happen Because Net Neutrality Rules Are Gone appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


BREAKING: Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand Calls On President Trump To Resign Over Sexual Assault Allegations

If you’re a Republican, you see the move as cynical. If you’re in the resistance movement, you may be thinking, “It’s about time!” If you’re somebody looking at the political tea leaves you’re thinking, “This is why she called on Franken to resign,” or “She’s running for president in 2020.”

Whatever you think, New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand became the first Senator (and likely not the last) to call on President Trump to resign over allegations of sexual assault. Megyn Kelly interviewed three women who accused Trump of assaulting them, and it’s likely not the last we have heard from the women who accused Trump last year during the presidential campaign:

Here is what she said according to CNN:

Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York told CNN on Monday that President Donald Trump should resign over allegations of sexual assault.

“President Trump has committed assault, according to these women, and those are very credible allegations of misconduct and criminal activity, and he should be fully investigated and he should resign,” Gillibrand told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour in an exclusive interview.

“These allegations are credible; they are numerous, ” said Gillibrand, a leading voice in Congress for combating sexual assault in the military. “I’ve heard these women’s testimony, and many of them are heartbreaking.”

If he does not “immediately resign,” she said, Congress “should have appropriate investigations of his behavior and hold him accountable.”

This will likely set the president off on Twitter. The question of course is, how much can he continue to deny the allegations and call the woman liars before more credible information comes out.

The post BREAKING: Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand Calls On President Trump To Resign Over Sexual Assault Allegations appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Paul Nehlen, Who Lost In A Primary Against Paul Ryan By 68 Points, Tells A Journalist To Kill Himself

Paul Nehlen is a certified #MAGA loser. He’s one of those dopey GOP primary challengers that come along from time to time, talk tough and then get creamed when the voting starts. Nehlen challenged Speaker Paul Ryan in 2016. He kicked off his campaign with a goofy video of him riding a motorcycle around Janesville and blaming Ryan for the departure of business. Because you know, Ryan’s a globalist.

Nehlen engaged in other silly behavior such as challenging Ryan to arm-wrestling contests. He was precisely the kind of candidate that Trump faction boys loved. The younger Trump supporters who still live with Mom and don’t have a job and love to blame their laziness and ineptitude on globalists and Mexicans. Nehlen received support from the usual suspects, including the usual gaggle of Trumper bozos and media outlets such as Breitbart.

Nehlen got trounced in the primary. Ryan got 84.1 percent of the vote while Nehlen received 15.9 percent of the vote.

A 68.2 percent margin of victory. Nehlen doesn’t like when people say things to him on Twitter that aren’t slobbering #MAGA approved compliments. John Podhoretz of Commentary got in a dig at Nehlen when he tweeted:

To which Nehlen responded:

So here is a guy looking to unseat the Speaker of the House and he’s on Twitter telling journalists to kill themselves.

Classy.

 

The post Paul Nehlen, Who Lost In A Primary Against Paul Ryan By 68 Points, Tells A Journalist To Kill Himself appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Watch: Nancy Pelosi Takes GOP Tax Bill Histrionics To A Whole New Level (VIDEO)

While the GOP Congress considers a relatively modest tax cut plan, the left remains true to form, writing off anything Republicans do as a death knell for the average American.

It is hard work keeping up with all of the people Republicans want to kill with their legislation.

That sounds funny because it is funny. Democrats continually make themselves look like fools by pretending impending GOP legislation will actually cause people to die. Forget about Ponce de Leon and the Fountain of Youth or the Holy Grail. The Democrats have discovered what gives people eternal life: Increasing taxes.

All kidding aside, from a political perspective, it works well for Republicans when Democrats are so unhinged. Only a fool believes a modest reduction of individual tax rates and a corporate tax reduction will have people dropping dead in the streets. Such tomfoolery plays directly into the hands of Republicans who will use the Democratic blather as a means of painting them as extremists.

House Minority Nancy Pelosi gave the GOP ammunition when asked during a press conference about the GOP tax bill. The reporter asked about Democrats discussing a modest tax cut in very apocalyptic terms and here is what she said:

“The debate on health care is life, death. This is Armageddon. This is a very big deal because you know why? There’s really a very hard way to come back from this.”

Nancy later backtracked saying, “The only reason it isn’t the end of the world is because America is a great country and the greatness of America and the fact that God is always with us is what give us hope.” 

But the damage was already done.

Democrats will find it very difficult to take back control of the House or Senate if everything President Trump or Republicans in Congress do is met with a hair-on-fire reaction.

It’s their funeral. (Pun intended)

The post Watch: Nancy Pelosi Takes GOP Tax Bill Histrionics To A Whole New Level (VIDEO) appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


TAX BILL: Rand Paul Comments on Passage of Senate Plan

Liberals are in total freakout mode this morning as the Senate passed their version of a tax cut bill last night. Unless the House passes a new bill that matches the Senate plan, the next step is a conference committee where differences get hammered out. The House and Senate will pass new bills that match and President Trump will sign it.

Senator Rand Paul was a tough sell on tax reform, but he supported the final Senate version and voted affirmatively to support it. Here is what he said:

Senator Paul framing this as a foundation makes sense. The tax code will still be a complex mess even after the passage of this bill. Still, the collective freak out the left is having shows the GOP did the right thing.

The post TAX BILL: Rand Paul Comments on Passage of Senate Plan appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


From 2007 to 2009, Joy Reid Claimed Charlie Crist Was Gay and Tried To Out Him

Maybe Joy Reid’s view on homosexuality “evolved” over time as Barack Obama did with gay marriage. Her constant tut-tutting about tolerance and likening most conservatives to screeching bigots comes off more like projection when you read some of the blog posts she wrote before becoming a player on MSNBC.

Somebody unearthed her posts using the Wayback Machine and what the guy dug up were Reid’s posts about Charlie Crist. There was talk that John McCain might ask him to be his running mate. Crist was a still a Republican at the time and relatively popular in the state of Florida. The thought was he would help deliver that crucial state to McCain.

What follows are a series of tweets that really cast Reid in an ugly light. The question is whether or not the press picks up on this and asks about it:

Now, remember, the left justifies this nonsense by falling back on the claim of “hypocrisy.” They’ll say Crist was a Republican and his policies were anti-gay and therefore, he wasn’t being “true” to himself by pretending he’s straight.

Except that’s not up to Reid or other liberals to decide and her derogatory remarks about Crist at the time, demand an explanation, if not an apology.

The post From 2007 to 2009, Joy Reid Claimed Charlie Crist Was Gay and Tried To Out Him appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


The New York Times Tweets Like a Democratic Party Operative Against GOP Tax Plan

Journalism reaches the public in a variety of ways. Whereas print, radio and television were the standard bearers for delivering journalism to people, the internet changed all the rules. Those changes are mostly positive.

Journalism also takes on many forms. Reporting, investigative reporting, lifestyle, pop culture and yes, even opinion writing all fits under the umbrella of journalism. The editorial page of the newspaper provides another journalistic outlet and one that represents the view of the organization. Nobody expects an editorial page to be free from bias. The role of an editorial page is to present a point of view about any number of issues and provide an argument to persuade readers to agree.

It’s no secret The New York Times presents a liberal point of view just as The Wall Street Journal takes a conservative stance on issues.

The Times took their liberalism to a whole new level on Wednesday. The editorial board took over the Times opinion Twitter account. They didn’t just express a point of view for The New York Times organization. They became active players in politicking, using the Twitter account to urge people to call Republican senators to vote against the GOP tax bill.

For just over two hours, the editorial board of the Times used their opinion account for the following:

Note how they even created a hashtag for their purposes. Some people called their behavior unethical, but that really isn’t the case. There were two concerns about what they did:

1. It’s nakedly partisan – By urging people to call senators and using a hashtag, the Times wasn’t taking a position on behalf of the organization, but instead took it to a level reserved for a political organization, not a news organization. The board used the opinion account. It is likely that not everybody who writes opinion for the Times agrees with their position. How hard would it be for them to create an account specifically for the editorial board and go with that? Instead, they chose to act like Democratic operatives instead of journalists.

2. It’s hypocritical – Anybody who reads The New York Times knows the editorial board strongly opposes the Citizens United decision. Here is a for-profit company engaging in the same kind of politicking they don’t want organizations like the NRA or the Koch Brothers to do. J.P. Freire, the former communications director for Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) sent out some tweets explaining this conflict:

Freire is absolutely correct. The newspaper utilized their resources to act on behalf of Democrats and against Republicans. They didn’t just take a position in an editorial. They blatantly engaged in the very kind of behavior they decry in other private businesses and organizations.

People are going to remember that, the next time The New York Times behaves like an arbiter of fairness.

The post The New York Times Tweets Like a Democratic Party Operative Against GOP Tax Plan appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Ben Sasse and Eight Other Senators Throw Down the Gauntlet on the CFPB

It appears Republicans are not going to allow Elizabeth Warren’s pet project operate as long as she, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are rallying around Leandra English. Contrary to the wishes of Warren and the Congressional Democratic leadership duo, Mick Mulvaney is the acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb) and eight other senators have sent a letter to Mulvaney saying if English prevails in court to say she is the acting director, they will take steps to see she will not be able to do any work so long as the constitutionality of the CFPB’s structure is litigated in court.

Sasse said:

“We don’t have four branches of government – we have three. King Richard can’t leave to run for office and handpick his successor without any say from the American people. There’s no clause anywhere in the Constitution like that.”

The text of the letter is below:

Dear Mr. Mulvaney:

Congratulations on your appointment to serve as Acting Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). We write because we are disturbed by efforts of a rogue CFPB employee to serve as Acting Director of your agency despite President Trump’s designation of you as Acting CFPB Director. Unfortunately, this rogue employee is trying to follow former CFPB Director Cordray’s example and run the agency as an unaccountable fourth branch of government. Should this employee prevail in court and successfully serve as Acting Director, we would support legislative efforts to invalidate any new rules finalized by the agency during this employee’s service, including the use of the Congressional Review Act. We would also fight to ensure that Congress defunds the CFPB until this employee has relinquished control of the CFPB.

This effort to stay on as Acting Director is especially concerning because more is at stake than interpreting the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998. Successful control of the CFPB would give this employee – as the single head of an independent agency who refuses to answer to the President – great, unconstitutional power to shape regulatory policy. As a recent Treasury Report argued, the CFPB faces “few of the traditional checks and balances necessary to restrain regulatory abuses and arbitrary decision-making,” including the annual appropriations process. As Judge Kavanaugh explained in PHH Corporation v. CFPB

[T]he single-Director structure of the CFPB represents a gross departure from settled historical practice. Never before has an independent agency exercising substantial executive authority been headed by just one person.

These recent events are a clear demonstration of the dangers of the CFPB’s unconstitutional, unaccountable structure. We believe in protecting consumers but disagreement about how to do so must not come at the expense of our constitution. Our nation’s founders instituted multiple checks and balances on the unrestrained use of executive power. This outrageous attempt to subvert your appointment as Acting Director of the CFPB violates those foundational principles.

Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to working with you as Acting Director of the CFPB.  

Sincerely,
Senator Ben Sasse
Senator Johnny Isakson
Senator Ted Cruz
Senator Rand Paul
Senator James Inhofe
Senator Dan Sullivan
Senator Mike Lee
Senator Roger Wicker
Senator Michael Enzi

Good for them. The CFPB is a joke. Democrats established it with the clear intent of implementing Democratic policies while purposely making it difficult for Congress (the Federal Reserve funds it) or the President (no “at will” firing) to reign in the agency.

Hopefully, this is just the first step in doing away with the agency altogether.

The post Ben Sasse and Eight Other Senators Throw Down the Gauntlet on the CFPB appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Air Force Finds They Didn’t Report Dozens of Convictions To Firearms Background Check System

Contrary to popular belief, gun owners, enthusiasts, collectors and yes, members of the NRA believe a criminal background check is a valid method of making it more difficult for somebody with a criminal record to obtain a firearm.

The background check, however, is only as good as the information that is in the NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) database. Unfortunately, the Air Force has been letting some of the convictions that should be reported to the database, slip through the cracks. After Devin Kelley shot and killed 26 people at a church in Texas, news broke that he passed a background check despite having a conviction for domestic violence.

Kelley’s conviction stemmed from an incident of him beating his wife and stepson while in the Air Force. They never sent the information to the F.B.I. to update the database. It turns out, that’s not the only one:

A review by the United States Air Force has found several dozen cases where the military failed to report service members convicted of serious crimes to the federal gun background-check databases, Air Force officials said on Tuesday.

“The error in the Kelley case was not an isolated incident and similar reporting lapses occurred at other locations,” the Air Force said in a statement. “Although policies and procedures requiring reporting were in place, training and compliance measures were lacking.”

There have been about 60,000 incidents in the Air Force since 2002 involving service members that potentially should have been reported to the federal background-check database. All of those incidents are now being reviewed by Air Force officials. Air Force officials were unable to say on Tuesday how many of those 60,000 cases have gone through the review process so far.

Again, the system is only as good as the data. There’s no excuse for any agency or state not to send this information along. If legislation can exist (on its own – forget “comprehensive”) that provides for penalties for not providing the data in a timely matter, shouldn’t Congress look into doing that?

 

The post Air Force Finds They Didn’t Report Dozens of Convictions To Firearms Background Check System appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Watch A Parade of Democrats Refuse To Say Franken or Conyers Should Resign

What is a little sexual harassment and groping among Democratic colleagues anyway? Let’s just be perfectly blunt about what is going on here: If any Republican in the House or Senate were accused of the same transgressions as Sen. Al Franken and Rep. John Conyers, the waiting line for Democrats to get on television to denounce them and demand the Republicans in question, resign.

No if’s, and’s or but’s.

If you want to do the “This is how we got Trump” game, watch how many Democrats can’t bring themselves to say, “Yeah, he should go,” about Conyers or Franken. It’s a pathetic display but not surprising:

Of course, all this does is provide a reason for Moore supporters to go out and vote for him. Forget about the equivalence of accusations. Franken admitting what he did and Conyers had to pay out settlements for claims made against him. The allegations against Moore, while credible are 40 years old and there’s no concrete proof it happened.

That is precisely how Moore supporters will look at the issue.

It appears the supposed “lessons learned” from the Bill Clinton mess are already forgotten.

The post Watch A Parade of Democrats Refuse To Say Franken or Conyers Should Resign appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State