Home | About | Donate

Net Neutrality Ruling Finally Rights a Terrible Wrong


Net Neutrality Ruling Finally Rights a Terrible Wrong

Michael Copps

“For the reasons set forth is this opinion, we deny the petitions for review.” Those were the sweetest words I’ve heard in a long while, as the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit turned down the ridiculous efforts of the big telecom companies to derail the Federal Communications Commission’s open-internet — or “net-neutrality” — rules.


The next phase is stopping TPP and TTIP, seeing how corporate tribunals enabled by them will undo the progress made on net neutrality.


You said what I just intended to say.

I think this is the seminal question…

But I also want to thank Mr. Copps for fighting the good fight.

I wish all those hard working Americans who see in Paul Ryan some kind of shining knight got see past his Evangelical Christian Mask to the scoundrel that he is… ready to further slice and dice unions, do the bidding of the Koch Brothers and his money masters, and as the article explains, destroy Net Neutrality.

What a guy…


Agreed! It seems like no matter what progress we make on issues the TPP and TTIP loom overhead to rip them all apart. It is the most foul thing and wouldn’t you know it, a Democrat has done this. A Dem is willing to throw all his little crumbs he’s doled out to us, in the blink of an eye.


We have to fight hard and long to protect the internet. You know it is a lifeline and they do too. They would surly love being able to cut off the news that we see, like the news we hear and thus bury descent. This is one of my greatest fears.
All hands on deck with this one people it’s a move to cut us out and cut us off from communication with each other.


I can’t let this sentence go…

The word surly should be surely.

And descent means to sink low… (opposite of ascent).

You mean dissent: opposition to existing, standard policies, political or otherwise.

People CAN improve their writing. And I don’t think anyone is done any favors when this kind of thing is just given a pass.

In theory, we’re all alive to uplift each other and sometimes sparing is necessary (as seen in elegant Martial Arts matches) so that each “contestant” is thereby forced to hone his own game.


Eliminate “got”


While ‘got’ works I believe ‘could’ “see past” or ‘were able to’ “see past” is a smoother way to express your idea.


Thank you for reading my comment. Your critique of my spelling is surprising though, kind of reminds me of a teacher I had.
But since I’m not trying to compete or write essays I’m not really too excited about whether a word is spelled perfectly. My comments are usually written because I feel passionately about something so the spelling is the least of my worries. But thanks for the correction.