Eight members of Congress that voted to kill broadband privacy are now leading the charge to kill Net Neutrality as well

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai is advancing a plan to kill net neutrality and let ISPs like Comcast and Verizon slow down or censor websites and apps. His plan would make the Internet slower and more expensive, and it would make censorship for profit the norm. We can stop this like we stopped SOPA, TPP, and ACTA. We just need to make it clear that Pai’s plan is toxic so that no one in Washington wants anything to do with it. Here’s what we can do. There are 8 members of Congress currently egging the FCC on and helping Pai gut net neutrality. They recently put their names on a <a href="https://energycommerce.house.gov/news-center/press-releases/bicameral-leaders-comment-pai-s-internet-regulations-announcement">statement of support</a> or expressed their support in a <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3728775-GOP-Member-Toolkit-FCC-Open-Internet-Order-5-2017.html">document of anti-net neutrality talking points</a> to show that Pai has some congressional backing. They’re hoping we don’t notice and that they won’t face a backlash, so we need to call out these members of Congress now to make sure other members of Congress stay away. That way we can starve Pai of the congressional backing he needs to push through his plan. Here are the 8 members of Congress that are publicly supporting Pai’s attack on net neutrality: <ul> <li>Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/repgregwalden">@RepGregWalden</a>; phone: 202-225-6730)</li> <li>Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/MarshaBlackburn">@MarshaBlackburn</a>; phone: 202-225-2811)</li> <li>Sen. John Thune (R-SD) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/johnthune">@johnthune</a>; phone: 202-224-2321)</li> <li>Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/rogerwicker">@RogerWicker</a>; phone: 202-224-6253)</li> <li>Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/speakerryan">@SpeakerRyan</a>; phone: 202-225-3031)</li> <li>Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/cathymcmorris">@CathyMcMorris</a>; phone: 202-225-2006)</li> <li>Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/reptomgraves">@RepTomGraves</a>; phone: 202-225-5211)</li> <li>Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/boblatta">@BobLatta</a>; phone: 202-225-6405)</li> </ul> All of these representatives and senators voted for the recent broadband privacy repeal bill as well. (Note: Paul Ryan did not formally vote on the broadband privacy bill because, by custom, the Speaker of the House does not vote on legislation unless their vote would be decisive. But, as Speaker, Ryan was responsible for bringing the bill to the floor to be voted on.) Call their offices, tweet at them, post on their Facebook walls. Tell them you are appalled by their support for Ajit Pai’s plan to kill net neutrality and that you will do everything in your power to hold them accountable for destroying the Internet. We can’t let these members of Congress get away with supporting Pai’s plan, or else other members of Congress will think it’s safe to support it as well. We know the cable lobbyists are trying their best to get everyone in Congress to support Pai’s plan. It’s up to us to stand up and make them think twice before they mess with the Internet. EDIT: <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/6e8wta/eight_members_of_congress_that_voted_to_kill/di8hxda/">u/pperca rightly points out</a> that another 8 senators have co-sponsored a bill that would repeal net neutrality. While their bill isn’t an explicit endorsement of Pai’s plan at the FCC, it’s basically a thinly veiled way of supporting Pai, so they deserve to be called out too. <ul> <li>Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/SenMikeLee">@SenMikeLee</a>; phone:202-224-5444)</li> <li>Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/JohnCornyn">@JohnCornyn</a>; phone:202-224-2934)</li> <li>Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/TomCottonAR">@TomCottonAR</a>; phone:202-224-2353)</li> <li>Ted Cruz (R-TX) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz">@SenTedCruz</a>; phone:202-224-5922)</li> <li>Ron Johnson (R-WI) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/SenRonJohnson">@SenRonJohnson</a>; phone:202-224-5323)</li> <li>Rand Paul (R-KY) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/RandPaul">@RandPaul</a>; phone:202-224-4343)</li> <li>Thom Tillis (R-NC) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/SenThomTillis">@SenThomTillis</a>; phone:202-224-6342)</li> <li>Ben Sasse (R-NE) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/SenSasse">@SenSasse</a>; phone:202-224-4224)</li> <li>James Inhofe (R-OK) (Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/JimInhofe">@JimInhofe</a>; phone:202-224-4721)</li> </ul> EDIT 2: If you want to submit a comment to the FCC in support of net neutrality, and contact your lawmakers at the same time, you can use this site: <a href="https://www.battleforthenet.com/">https://www.battleforthenet.com/</a> <hr/>**评论：** rise_up_now: <pre>Don't you find it funny, that right after they did away with a law that prevented ISP's from storing and selling personal information of users, that personal information was then "stolen" and used to provide astroturfing bots real names to comment on how repealing Net Neutrality is such a good idea. Convenient and not related at all? I don't think so.</pre>abrownn: <pre>Hi there, looks like you've been shadowbanned. This was not our doing. You'll have to contact the admins via the sidebar of <a href="/r/reddit.com">/r/reddit.com</a> to appeal your site ban. I've approved your comment in the meantime. Edit: ಠ_ಠ I go for lunch and suddenly RIP inbox. I'll try and answer everyone's general questions below. No, I don't know why the user was banned. They were shadowbanned prior to the comment (<a href="/u/likesbreakfast">/u/likesbreakfast</a> explains it well below). No, we can't do anything about it. Their comment was buried at the bottom when there were a dozen others, I thought this would get zero attention and just wanted to be a bro and let someone know what's up. Many things can get you shadowbanned, it's usually spam, doxxing, or harassment.</pre>Young_Laredo: <pre>Was the shadow ban related to or because of this comment? I'm confused.</pre>LikesBreakfast: <pre>The shadowban is completely unrelated to the comment, and happened well before it. The moderators are simply manually approving his comments and providing a courtesy notice.</pre>NuclearCoffee77: <pre>Wtf, it's 2017 and shadowbanning is still a thing for accounts that aren't bots or spammers? </pre>thewhishkey: <pre>Some accounts get caught in the spam filter, as mine did.</pre>BelleAriel: <pre>How does that happen? </pre>howtojump: <pre>Because no system is perfect. </pre>thewhishkey: <pre>All I know was that my account got "incorrectly flagged as spam".</pre>Doctursea: <pre><blockquote> 2017 and shadowbanning is still a thing </blockquote> No that's why you can get it appealed super fast, they've been trying to get rid of old shadow bans though.</pre>throwaway_ghast: <pre>Probably happened before this comment but I'm not sure.</pre>xternal7: <pre>Before. Mods know he's shadowbanned because his comment needed approval.</pre>KantoBorn: <pre>Laredo? 956?</pre>sk_starscream: <pre>Odd to see Laredo being mentioned... Or its referencing the Galaxy Quest character</pre>MNGrrl: <pre>It probably wasn't a great idea to post this like this because now his good points have been threadjacked. </pre>thefonztm: <pre>This is basically a standard mod comment regarding approving a shadowbanned user's comment. Seen it dozens of times. I thought <a href="/u/spez">/u/spez</a> said shadowbans are done, or at least they won't be using them on 'real users' anymore. Of course, I have no idea when or why <a href="/u/rise_up_now">/u/rise_up_now</a> was shadowbanned.</pre>Jaschndlr: <pre>I just realized last week that my account had been shadowbanned for the past several months. I emailed the admins and got a response within 24 hrs saying my account had gotten caught up in some kind of spam filter? I'm not a high volume poster at all so I really don't understand how that could have happened, but they got it fixed for me.</pre>Famixofpower: <pre>Why was he shadowbanned?</pre>Natanael_L: <pre>Admin decision</pre>Zoklett: <pre>I recently found out I've been banned from twoxchromosomes and they couldn't even tell me why, I never post in there. The fact that they had no legitimate answer/reason for it doesn't stop them, though.</pre>Prophet_Of_Loss: <pre>Same. Apparently they autoban if you post in certain subs.</pre>HitchikersPie: <pre><a href="/r/The_Donald" rel="nofollow">/r/The_Donald</a> probably</pre>DirectTheCheckered: <pre>I can see your post, you don't seem to be shadowbanned anymore.</pre>sumting_gun_wong: <pre>Pretty sure the mods simply enabled the comment. If I try to view his account, I get errors as if it doesnt exist.</pre>SJ_RED: <pre>Yup, same here. </pre>SirJefferE: <pre>I thought the point of shadow banning was that you couldn't tell whether or not you were banned. If it's as easy as checking the account name from another location, what's the point? </pre>QuestionsEverythang: <pre>Because you yourself would not know you were banned until someone else told you. And it's rare for a mod to actually tell you.</pre>aquoad: <pre>Unless you look for your posts from a not logged in browser.</pre>LikesBreakfast: <pre>Shadowbans are meant for spambots, and not real human beings. Unless you knew to check, you would never know you were shadowbanned, hence why they made that policy change.</pre>SirJefferE: <pre>No, I get that. It's just that programming a ring of bots to double check whether any accounts in your the ring are banned sounds pretty easy, but a person just casually posting without knowing that he's banned is almost never going to check. An antibot system that's easy for bots to avoid and annoying for people to notice just seems weird to me. </pre>thefonztm: <pre>Don't even bother with a ring of bots (assuming you mean other fake accounts). Just automate checking the user page from from a single bot not logged in/related to reddit. I get the feeling they aren't gonna look hard enough to find your checker and then implement send the user pages to only it. I'm an idiot in the technical issues, but even I know freeproxies(dot)urmom counter their counter, so their counter is pointless to waste time on. God, <a href="/r/Iamverysmart">/r/Iamverysmart</a> is calling my name right now. XD</pre>tehlemmings: <pre>You guys are over estimating how advanced the average spam bot is. </pre>Popopopper123: <pre>Mods can see shadowbanned comments and make them visible manually.</pre>devperez: <pre>You can see his comment, not his profile. He's still shadowbanned.</pre>Tri_Harderrr: <pre>if representatives are in the pocket of a corporation they should be dismissed - who stands to benefit from their actions? not citizens, the US population has been bullshitted into complacency by the media.</pre>salty-band-aid: <pre>when i click on your username, it says your account doesn't exist</pre>Kefflin: <pre>That's what shadowbanning does</pre>blackAngel88: <pre>Is there a reason for that? What's the point of shadowbanning when it's so easy to check if you are shadowbanned or not?</pre>airspitter: <pre>It's suppose to be for spam bots so that they continue spamming on that account (instead of making a new one) and don't realize that they are banned.</pre>thecodingdude: <pre>Only for bots that are really, really poorly coded, because it's so trivial to check if somebody is shadow banned you could literally go to <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/rise_up_now.json">this</a> URL by making an unauthenticated request and automatically detect you're shadowbanned. At this point, most bots probably check if they're shadowbanned (say every 5 minutes) and could make a new account automatically, it's not difficult.</pre>kuhndawg8888: <pre>its actually fucking astonishing to interact with these bots. they usually comment once or twice with blanket statements about how it's such a good idea, but stop commenting as soon as you bring up facts.</pre>pperca: <pre>don't forget the Senate <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/technology/331483-republicans-introduce-anti-net-neutrality-legislation">http://thehill.com/policy/technology/331483-republicans-introduce-anti-net-neutrality-legislation</a> Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) Ted Cruz (R-Texas) Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) Rand Paul (R-Ky.) Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) James Inhofe (R-Okla.) </pre>pipsdontsqueak: <pre>You know, I'm sensing a common theme with all these legislators but I can't quite put my finger on it... </pre>phpdevster: <pre>Really struggling to identify the common thread here.</pre>pipsdontsqueak: <pre>R you sure? </pre>luhem007: <pre>Really Ridiculous</pre>danceeforusmonkeyboy: <pre>Those Rapscallians. </pre>uzuzuzuzu: <pre>Honestly guys, it doesn't matter if there's a common theme. What these people are doing is...what's the word? Reprehensible?</pre>Jackster1209: <pre>Revolting?</pre>uzuzuzuzu: <pre>Repulsive is also a good fit.</pre>OCedHrt: <pre>Don't you see it? Oh...wait.</pre>PlushSandyoso: <pre>whatever could you mean? Both parties are just the same pig in a different dress, right? barf Republicans are destroying the Internet. I can't wait until major data centres emigrate elsewhere. More jobs for us in Canada. Edit: Not interested in diversion tactics and whataboutism. Take that shit out of here and keep the topic on hand.</pre>iShouldBeWorkingLol: <pre>Shout out to South Park for teaching us that elections are pointless because we just get to choose between a giant douche an a turd sandwich. barf</pre>flyafar: <pre>But guys! Surely the answer between right and wrong is somewhere in the middle :O</pre>EditorialComplex: <pre>"Well, Glaxthor the All-Devouring wants to eat a thousand babies, and you don't want to eat any... guess we'd better compromise and only eat five hundred!"</pre>Classtoise: <pre>And just like in that episode, people forget that a Douche might be unpleasant but it serves a purpose and does something useful. A shit sandwich is just nasty and smells bad.</pre>wwwhistler: <pre>Republicans are destroying the <del>Internet</del> country</pre>Gamilon: <pre>YarrrrrR...what could it be...</pre>PowerOfTheirSource: <pre>I think I can put my finger on it. I bet if you thought really hard, you could too.</pre>totallywontstabyou: <pre>They all seem to have an R next to their names, but I don't know what it's supposed to mean. Maybe Russian? I can't think of anything else it could be.</pre>protoopus: <pre>at least the filth are consistent.</pre>emajn: <pre>If we are being fair they doing what they are paid to do, thanks citizen united!!!</pre>garthpancake: <pre>Come on Texas. What's it gonna take to get rid of Ted fucking Cruz?</pre>pperca: <pre>young people getting out to vote. As long as long time (R) continue to choose elected officials nothing will change. </pre>voyeur4thelulz: <pre>Speaking of, Beto O'Rourke is a really compelling former congressman from Texas and he's planning to challenge Cruz in 2018! To any interested Texans out there I highly suggest you get involved in his campaign ASAP</pre>aggie1391: <pre>If it was a contest between Jesus (D) and Lucifer (R), Texas would literally elect Satan himself. It's starting to slowly improve, but it's at best a decade away from being competitive. </pre>KeyboardFingi: <pre>Is it possible to organize dates where we mass mail and petition these places? When SOPA rolled around it wasn't so much that thousands of people were voicing their opinion but the the action itself became the news and that really helped spread awareness. </pre>Goldy1025: <pre>Rand is dead to me</pre>clockwork_coder: <pre>He was never any good. Even his name is a lie; he's gotten his position based purely on nepotism rather than merit.</pre>pperca: <pre>was he ever alive? He's all talk and stabbing the country in the back.</pre>GentleJay: <pre>Just be reminded that if they are not your representative then they do not represent you and will likely have zero reason to listen to you.</pre>hexiron: <pre>If you are a constituent, be reminded they still do not represent you and probably feel like they have zero reasons to listen to you.</pre>GentleJay: <pre>Possibly. But if you are NOT a constituent then they most certainly will not listen to you.</pre>Treacy: <pre>I wonder how much money they took from Comcast and Verizon.</pre>Tonberryc: <pre>Most of them accepted less than $20k. However, the real power of lobbyists is the promise of a lucrative position with one of their organizations after the elected official's term in office comes to an end. Basically, they say "we'll support your campaign with a sizable, yet inconspicuous donation, but we have a fantastic 6-figure position waiting for you when you leave office."</pre>comebackjoeyjojo: <pre>There are many avenues to corruption these days, and the two listed above me are at the top. Also consider, that 20K donated to X Senator could have instead given to his previous/next opponent, depending on their vote. That's a 40K swing, which could make the difference in a close election. Also, being friendly to one industry can create opportunities with other, like-minded oligarchs. And don't forget Super PACs. Playing ball pays off a lot more than it not playing, and if there is little political liability for doing so, then why not?</pre>LegionVsNinja: <pre>"... or your family.."</pre>PEbeling: <pre>This 100%. In term of Ajit "my mug is infamous because I sad so" Pai, he was a Verizon attorney before running for office. So I only assume he has a nice package awaiting him.</pre>DyelonDyelonDyelon: <pre>My AP gov teacher who used to work for a congressman way back in the eighties and she said that the money for the campaign isn't the big part, as the money isn't enough to buy a whole lot just as is. What it does buy for the lobbyist is much, much closer access to the public official where they essentially operate like local "experts" on their business and industry. This is useful for congress as they can't possibly be experts in every given field they must represent, but when the lobbysists seek to reign in their opponents and future rivals with legislation they've essentially written the usefulness is quickly filled with corruption. </pre>emajn: <pre>And there in lies the problem with citizens united. I can go to my representatives office, I can place calls, I can write letters, but I can't provide a big bag of cash. It's bribery pure and simple.</pre>cowmandude: <pre>If you can prove quid pro quo then you can already prosecute them under the current law. If you can't then its impossible to differentiate bribery from unrelated free speech of shareholders and hiring of highly skilled and knowledgeable people(which most congressmen are).</pre>emajn: <pre>In my eyes to dumb it all down, the rich employ politicians, who appoint the lawmakers, and enforcers. The lawmakers and enforcers protect the interest of all those involved above them and within thier own ranks. If you do not come from political status, money, or law enforcement you are simply not apart of the club.</pre>vriska1: <pre>If you want to help protect NN you can support groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU and Free Press who are fighting to keep Net Neutrality. <a href="https://www.eff.org/">https://www.eff.org/</a> <a href="https://www.aclu.org/">https://www.aclu.org/</a> <a href="https://www.freepress.net/">https://www.freepress.net/</a> <a href="https://www.fightforthefuture.org/">https://www.fightforthefuture.org/</a> <a href="https://www.publicknowledge.org/">https://www.publicknowledge.org/</a> <a href="https://demandprogress.org/">https://demandprogress.org/</a> also you can set them as your charity on <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/">https://smile.amazon.com/</a> also write to your House Representative and senators <a href="http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/">http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/</a> <a href="https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state">https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state</a> and the FCC <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/about/contact">https://www.fcc.gov/about/contact</a> You can now add a comment to the repeal here <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/filings?proceedings_name=17-108&amp;sort=date_disseminated,DESC">https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/filings?proceedings_name=17-108&amp;sort=date_disseminated,DESC</a> here a easier URL you can use thanks to John Oliver <a href="http://www.gofccyourself.com">www.gofccyourself.com</a> you can also use this that help you contact your house and congressional reps, its easy to use and cuts down on the transaction costs with writing a letter to your reps. <a href="https://resistbot.io/">https://resistbot.io/</a> also check out <a href="https://democracy.io/#!/">https://democracy.io/#!/</a> which was made by the EFF and is a low transactioncost tool for writing all your reps in one fell swoop and just a reminder that the FCC vote on 18th is to begin the process of rolling back Net Neutrality so there will be a 3 month comment period and the final vote will likely be around the 18th of August at least that what I have read, correct me if am wrong</pre>throwaway_ghast: <pre>What even is the point, Republicans have all the power now, they can simply ignore all these comments and go along with fucking us over anyways. We'll have to wait until 2018 when we can actually get some Dems in the office to protect NN and privacy.</pre>Ibreathelotsofair: <pre>2018 campaigns start in 6 months and the house is looking down the barrel of a blue wave. Now is exactly the time to rattle cages. </pre>AnOnlineHandle: <pre>All 3 levels of US government power were taken by Republicans when for nearly the entire election cycle, they were facing a blue wave. As an Australian who is slightly ahead of the curve on how this goes (Fox started here), don't get your hopes up. Close to the election is when the absolute drama comes out, people feel bad for doubting conservatives when their crocodile tears become endless, and somehow the historically hated group carves out another cycle in government.</pre>omgwtfisthiscrap: <pre>As hopeless as it may feel, now is actually the time to make the most noise about this issue. This needs to still be a primary issue in 6 months when the campaigning for the 2018 elections start, that way they cant sweep it under the rug. At that point the blatant bullshit they have been pulling will actually start to hurt them, whether they like it or not, as peoples votes will actually have a real impact they cannot ignore.</pre>Automationdomination: <pre>That's strange, they're all Republican. Who woulda thought. </pre>GiuseppeZangara: <pre>That can't be right, I was told that both parties were the same.</pre>nontoxicreddit: <pre>They are only the same when Republicans are forced to see indisputable facts. They can't ever stray from the party line.</pre>tripletstate: <pre>Even comedy the safe place that's supposed to point out reality won't even be honest. I'll never watch Southpark again with their bullshit that both parties are the same.</pre>GiuseppeZangara: <pre>I mostly agree. I understand that it is the only safe way for a comedy to deal with politics. You don't want to alienate a chunk of your audience by favoring one candidate or party over another, but at the same time it legitimizes voter apathy. Why vote when both candidates/parties are equally bad? I was listening to the commentary for the Simpsons Halloween episode with the political segment, "Citizen Kang", and one of the writers actually said it's basically the only political stance that comedies make and that he wasn't a fan of it.</pre>Chrisgomez182: <pre>a lot of people don't realize that when they started making fun of PC culture 2 seasons ago, in the first episode, Cartman tells Kyle something along the lines of "we are just two white guys making fun of things we've never had to deal with" I feel like a lot of people missed that point. </pre>AStrangerWCandy: <pre>That's South Park for you! Always safe comedy!</pre>IronChariots: <pre>but muh giant douche and turd sandwich</pre>ManiacMac: <pre>Did you watch the entire season? </pre>Sardonnicus: <pre>Republican's.... the people you can count on to throw you under the bus and sell your civil rights away to giant corporations.</pre>giverofnofucks: <pre>I know, right. It's like the media is so biased. They never report on 8 democrats trying to kill net neutrality!</pre>solepsis: <pre>Which ones are those?</pre>Dont____Panic: <pre>The ones the biased media won't report on. You know? The ones that... I mean Fake news amirght? fuckin' muslims taking over the government. Better than Crooked Hillary. MAGA .......... -.-</pre>TechnologyEvangelist: <pre>Secret. Muslims. You know where there is another wall? Muslimlandia. </pre>IAmDarkridge: <pre>Oh yeah the ones cheering in New Jersey on 9/11. Those ones.</pre>Alexlam24: <pre>Something something Seth Rich</pre>MayIHaveAHug: <pre>And keep your government hands of my Medicare, communists.</pre>RhllorTheLordOfLight: <pre>DAE BENGAZI</pre>EditorialComplex: <pre>Ben Ghazi and the Buttery Males.</pre>lapekes: <pre>Fucking Paul Ryan</pre>peepyopoo: <pre>Ryan is easily the biggest douche bag in the House.</pre>idonotwanttoregister: <pre>He's just Ayn Rand's host-body.</pre>ThatDistantStar: <pre>I love this description</pre>fosiacat: <pre>R R R R R R R R</pre>reghartner: <pre>I am sick of this giant country. The closest of these assholes is 750 miles away, all of them voted in by easily fooled rubes. Yet I get fucked in the ass, too. </pre>eazolan: <pre>Welcome to the Small Government party.</pre>themast: <pre>If only we had one...</pre>comebackjoeyjojo: <pre>Voice your concern to your own Senators/ Congresscritter.</pre>Kaiosama: <pre>I am actually in favor of cutting ties with a number of southern and midwestern states. The West/Northwest would thrive, obviously. But I think we'd fare pretty well as our own country here in the north-east. </pre>ZyglroxOfficial: <pre>Take me with you!</pre>mechewstaa: <pre>I live in Ma and I honestly hope this happens one day. I think the New England states would do just fine on their own. I don't see it ever happening, but I'd love it</pre>Resistir: <pre>America doesn't exist anymore. America was created when 30 million people were living within a few hundred miles of each other in 1776. It is now 2017 and 330 million people simply CAN NOT have a cohesive government that is made to benifet all people. Instead the rich oligarchy of America has splintered the less fortunate and working class into political parties with their massive influence of money and power concentrated towards only putting people in the GOP that benefit their interest. America is fucking over. Get over it. The US is controlled by billionaires and no amount of internet shit talking or giving donations to regular politicians is going to change that. Stop believing America exist. </pre>uwhuskytskeet: <pre><blockquote> America was created when 30 million people were living within a few hundred miles of each other in 1776. </blockquote> Sorry if this is pedantic, but it was closer to 2.5 million people.</pre>gynoplasty: <pre>There were 30 million in the original 13 colonies?</pre>Szos: <pre>And as usual, every last one of these worthless assholes is a Republican.</pre>clearvanity: <pre>Hmm 8/8... Probably still a coincidence /s</pre>leova: <pre>16/16 actually.....</pre>KC-Royals: <pre>Good luck. I emailed my senator and he agreed with all of my points but said he was against treating the internet as a utility. It is pointless with these pricks. </pre>BlackDiamond93: <pre>Least you got a response....Ron Johnson didn't respond to me</pre>iauu: <pre>Now this post gets the tone right. I defend Net Neutrality of course, but most information I've seen defending it is overly bloated and have explanations that are too confusing. The important part here is that the end of Net Neutrality means that ISPs will be able to censor any website they don't like and slow down any website that doesn't pay them. You can explain your 'internet is a highway' or 'it's like water plumbing' analogies all you want, but make sure to get the important point across. This post is great because it explains it perfectly and shows you exactly how to help the cause.</pre>sysadminbj: <pre>Gotta secure employment after public service. What better way then to do favors for companies with yuge pockets. </pre>calsosta: <pre>If you don't I can, but we should put a list together of who gave money to who, and then who took a job with what company after leaving their public office. I'd be pretty interested to see who was ACTUALLY bought.</pre>MastaMayne: <pre>Jesus fucking Christ I swear to god Ted Cruz and John Cornyn are the biggest goddamn shit stains in congress and I'm ashamed that they represent my state. Also I'm even more ashamed that we still have a fucking constituency voting for these absolute twats. Literally every side that they have taken on voting has directly hurt their constituents. HOW LONG WILL LOBBYING BE LEGAL HOLY FUCK</pre>AnArcher: <pre>When are they up for reelection? </pre>MastaMayne: <pre>Cruz in 2018, and Cornyn in 2020. They fucking suck balls</pre>AnArcher: <pre>I don't live in Texas. But what are you doing to support whoever it is running against him? I'm asking seriously, not sarcastically.</pre>MastaMayne: <pre>Up until this point just voted. This next cycle I'm prepared to financially support whoever the fuck is running against them with my meager amount of money as a 21 year old</pre>Yiano: <pre>I wonder how much they were bribed by the companies Oh right haha, this is the US. No one cares</pre>wolf_pac_oregon: <pre>Pretty hopeless, huh? Well, the good news is that state legislators still care about their constituents for the most part and they can actually do something about this huge corruption problem. Learn more: <a href="/r/WolfPAChq">/r/WolfPAChq</a> </pre>ValorPhoenix: <pre><ul> <li>Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) - $155,100</li> <li>Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) - $84,000</li> <li>Sen. John Thune (R-SD) - $215,000</li> <li>Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) - $151,800</li> <li>Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) - (not listed as apparently he didn't vote as speaker)</li> <li>Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) (McMorris-Rogers, Cathy) $75,900</li> <li>Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA) (John Graves R-GA $34,000)</li> <li>Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH) - $91,000</li> </ul> Amounts are for the last election cycle--not lifetime totals, which are much higher. Only Republicans that voted against internet privacy a few months ago are listed, there will need to be a new list for this vote. <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/29/15100620/congress-fcc-isp-web-browsing-privacy-fire-sale">https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/29/15100620/congress-fcc-isp-web-browsing-privacy-fire-sale</a></pre>silenti: <pre>As someone in a blue as fuck state, is there anything more I can actively do other than donate to opposing campaigns?</pre>corneliuscardoo: <pre>Submit a comment to the FCC stating your opposition to their plan to kill net neutrality: <a href="https://www.battleforthenet.com/">https://www.battleforthenet.com/</a></pre>PM-ME-YOUR-YOGAPANTS: <pre>Have a civil discussion about Net Neutrality with people you know, especially those who aren't technically inclined. Explain to them what it means, in simple analogies (maybe something like "Imagine if the phone company decided to block you from calling Grandma because she went to Costco instead of Walmart. Or if when you did call Grandma, it was always on a super static-y line that drops out every other word. It's like that.") You may not be able to change their mind right away, but they may eventually get it, or at least think about it. And it's not an "us vs. them" thing, nor a "take that Obama" thing. It's an everyone thing.</pre>FowD9: <pre>8 congressmen: R R R R R R R R... but I was told to vote third party because both parties are the same?!</pre>GunzGoPew: <pre>Oh, they're all republicans. But Reddit told me both parties were exactly the same!</pre>edwartica: <pre>Dear Eastern Oregon, could you please stop electing Walden? Sincerely, the rest of the state.</pre>MereMemetics: <pre>shit... these people are ruthless.</pre>majorchamp: <pre>Easy to copy and paste <blockquote> .@RepGregWalden @MarshaBlackburn @johnthune @RogerWicker @SpeakerRyan @CathyMcMorris @RepTomGraves @BobLatta Why do you hate America? </blockquote></pre>B-rizzle: <pre>"Why do you hate the American Public" I think is more accurate. They like America, because selling out the American Public is going to yield them all very high paying and secure jobs.</pre>Soup-Wizard: <pre>Just called Mcmorris-Rodgers office and spoke to an intern. Let's hope he actually "passes along my concerns to the Congresswoman" </pre>DarthSatoris: <pre>Let's be realistic, he won't. Interns that take calls are a buffer that congress put in place to keep out all the noise, and if they have categorized "Net Neutrality issues" as noise, no intern is going to bother them with it, lest they be kicked out the door and replaced with a more compliant peer.</pre>madcaesar: <pre>If you use the internet and you continue to vote REPUBLICAN despite the shit they keep doing I want to sincerely tell you to go fuck yourself. Republicans have nothing to hide behind anymore. You don't give a shit about family values, or financial responsibility, or small government. You stand for nothing except hate and bigotry. Fuck you.</pre>egalroc: <pre>Hell, you don't even have to guess anymore when it comes to who's fucking over Americans. It's always Republican shysters leading the charge to please their money masters. </pre>ChipAyten: <pre>Waddja know, all "R"s. Only getting what we paid for.</pre>YRuafraid: <pre>Let me guess.... they're all from....... the GOP!! Fucking trash party with inbred trash who vote for them</pre>Joelico: <pre>OK I don't care I I get downvoted to hell but FUCK THE GOP!!! They have no self respect. Most of them got to where they are by gerrimandering and scare tactics. They look at the camera and lie when even themselves can't believe the shit they're saying. They are holding back the impeachment until all of their crappy agenda is competed. It has become the party of corporate greed and death.</pre>latuk: <pre>Yep, there is an R next to the state they are from on all of them. Vote against ALL republicans in ALL elections.</pre>BoredomIncarnate: <pre>You seem to have Paul Ryan's contact info duplicated in place of Bob Latta's info, <a href="/u/corneliuscardoo">/u/corneliuscardoo</a> .</pre>corneliuscardoo: <pre>Fixed. Thanks!</pre>majorchamp: <pre>.@SenMikeLee @JohnCornyn @TomCottonAR @SenTedCruz @SenRonJohnson @RandPaul @SenThomTillis @SenSasse @JimInhofe Why do you hate America?</pre>ajs427: <pre>These cunts deserve worse than simply losing an election, if they ever do lose one.</pre>bbmcc: <pre>FUCK America. Land of the free my asshole. </pre>Jynx3: <pre>Both parties the same huh....</pre>Justice-its-self: <pre>Nothing matters anymore. Money talks and the Republicans pushing this bill are paid lots of it by the company's that want this law passed. Nobody's opinion or thoughts on the matter is revelant to them Unless you're making big donations to them. </pre>sooper_human: <pre>Fucking republicans</pre>FerrariSempai: <pre>You mean eight bribed traitors.</pre>DanbalMeori: <pre>Surprise surprise, not a single democrat. Fuck the GOP.</pre>heimdal77: <pre>All these people are doing is basically waving large banners saying yes we are on the ISPs pay roll and there is nothing you can do about it. It is almost guaranteed that just about every one of them have nice cushy jobs waiting for them with the ISPs or other companies so they don't give a shit about peoples opinions or votes. Or they just figure they have their states so gerrymandered that there is virtually no way they could lose a election.</pre>Jamesleach: <pre>Government for the people... /s lol</pre>Based_Kek: <pre>Where is your freedom america?</pre>FreedomsPower: <pre>It's being sold to the highest bidder, namely the super wealthy. The current leadership in Congress are the biggest pro wealthy sellouts I've ever seen since I started following politics </pre>TheCrushSoda: <pre>Thank god for these patriots amirite??</pre>thank_mr_skeltal_bot: <pre>also thank mr skeltal for good bones and calcium<a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/tmsbmeta/comments/5xnirl/about_thankmrskeltalbot/">*</a></pre>RGPlays: <pre>I'm trying my hardest to reconcile the fact that while "both parties are the same anyway lol", yet only Republicans seem to be trying to kill the internet. Any help?</pre>Jaybonaut: <pre>They are Republicans? Shocking. /s</pre>snegtul: <pre>Dear Republicans, fuck off. Sincerely, all people with a brain.</pre>PopeKevin45: <pre>Every one of these low life democracy hating scumbags are shameless. They will not change their ways no matter how many calls or emails we send or how dumb the idea is . We do not have enough money to be of the least bit of interest to them. They're all libertarian corporate fascists who don't give two shits about people, ethics or democratic values. They know they can count on lying, cheating, smear campaigns and their monumentally stupid base to win re-election in there gerrymandered districts. Get the fuck off our asses and vote. That is the only real hope.</pre>AsinineToaster27: <pre>You have the wrong Twitter for Bob Latta. That's Paul Ryan's Twitter handle next to him.</pre>aquoad: <pre>I'm curious about specifically how they gain from this - are any of them substantial owners of the telecom companies that benefit, or are they just doing it for direct cash payments or in-kind favors like board memberships?</pre>slasher372: <pre>Is this the type of thing that only needs a simple majority in the Senate? Are there some Democrats that would vote for it?</pre>corneliuscardoo: <pre>It's actually being done at the FCC right now. Thing is, the FCC can't do it without political backing. If Congress turns against the FCC, this plan will be dead. No one supports killing net neutrality besides politicians who have been bribed by the telecom industry. But public pressure can be stronger than than those bribes. </pre>ztc0611: <pre>I was excited that for once a Kentucky person wasn't on there, didn't last long!</pre>literally_said: <pre>Government for the people...</pre>Bubbaganewsh: <pre>So glad the Canadian FCC backed down on net neutrality. At least our government gets it but then they aren't as profit driven as the US government seems to be.</pre>Icelandspar: <pre>It seems that an entire american generation values money above all else </pre>mbaker54: <pre>I think it's time that we started protesting. For one I don't know a lot of people who are actually up to date on what's happening. I don't even see that much coverage on this. </pre>edwardc4: <pre>There is nothing left to do. Calling these people, submitting complaints, it means nothing. 2.4 million complaints, no fucks given. At this point, I leave it up to the brave shadowy figures to make their life online public as fuck, expose them, ruin them with hacking. Maybe that will wake them up</pre>MoonStache: <pre>I love that people without even a fundamental understanding of how the internet actually works get to be in charge of how it is regulated! /s</pre>swiftlyslowfast: <pre>"Mommy, why do republicans want to steal everything from us" "Because Timmy, the rich are hurting, some of their stuff is not covered in gold yet. If we don't eat this week, another republican can shit in a gold toilet, and that is the right way honey."</pre>howdycousin: <pre>This doesn't change until they are dragged out of their homes and lynched for their treason.</pre>savagedan: <pre>Please note they are ALL Republicans </pre>ccbeastman: <pre>hm, and not a single dem. not that they're much better but this partyline bullshit will be the death of consumer freedoms/rights in america. edit: <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/11/democrats-and-republicans-sharing-b/">https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/11/democrats-and-republicans-sharing-b/</a></pre>Deep-Thought: <pre>They are much better though.</pre>Greater_Sword: <pre>It's absolutely delusional to think otherwise than the fact that net neutrality as we know it is over. You can comment or write to anyone you want, but unless you're putting a 100k dollar check in your envelope as well your voice and opinion means nothing</pre>jonomw: <pre>Short-term, yes, net neutrality has little hope. Long-term though, there is still hope. The real long-term goal of net neutrality was not the passage of the rules in 2015 by the FCC. Net neutrality was still on shaky ground back then and until recently, we have been waiting eagerly to see it actually fully enforced. The real long-term goal is legislation that cements net neutrality into law. FCC backed rules are only so strong and we have known that they were subject to this sort of reversal. Unfortunately, we have yet to have the political environment that would allow such bill to pass.</pre>yoder1611: <pre>Oh look at all the R's. Not surprised. Edit: Guess I get downvoted for stating reality? ok</pre>Overkill782: <pre>As an outside (Australian) it really seems like Republicans are only interested in destroying freedoms. There actions speak louder than any of their rhetoric... why are they in power?</pre>Beiberhole69x: <pre>Because their base thinks they will actually do what they say instead of stabbing them in the back like they do once they get into office.</pre>Zygore: <pre>When my family asks why I'm not a Republican anymore - I'm going to pull up this post.</pre>Superego366: <pre>Has any Republican representative ever changed their mind based on their constituency? I've written my represenatives, called, faxed etc. and I always get a canned response that basically says "I'm not going to do that." I'm still going to keep writing, but it seems like they never give a shit. I just want to know that one of them has flipped on an issue because the people they represent didn't like it.</pre>Mankriks_Mistress: <pre><blockquote> Here’s what we can do. There are 8 members of Congress currently egging the FCC on and helping Pai gut net neutrality. They recently put their names on a statement of support or expressed their support in a document of anti-net neutrality talking points to show that Pai has some congressional backing. </blockquote> <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3728775-GOP-Member-Toolkit-FCC-Open-Internet-Order-5-2017.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3728775-GOP-Member-Toolkit-FCC-Open-Internet-Order-5-2017.html</a> This is the link from the quoted text in the OP. Could someone please read through their "facts" and tell me why they are wrong? Play devil's advocate here, if I'm a dumb/uneducated user, reading through these "facts" seems like enough evidence that I should support this.</pre>hab12690: <pre>If you are not a constituent then they will not even make a record of your call. Call YOUR representative and senators and ask them to speak up about it. If you need help finding out who your rep is, use this link. <a href="http://www.house.gov/" rel="nofollow">http://www.house.gov/</a></pre>Omgwtflolzz: <pre>I mailed Wicker, my senator, the last time we had a fight for net neutrality. I got back some bs form letter about how net neutrality stifles business, blah, blah. He's fully in the pockets of the telecoms and there's no way this shit hole won't get reelected until he decides to stop running. On behalf of Mississippi, I apologize for that cancerous old idiot. </pre>

用户登录

今日阅读排行

一周阅读排行

最新主题