Comcast-NBC Merger Approved By FCC 268
AndyAndyAndyAndy writes "It seems that the FCC has approved the proposed merger between Comcast and NBC, effectively kicking apart hopes for protection against 'pipes and their water' frameworks. Pres. Obama's 2008 goal also goes ignored: 'I strongly favor diversity of ownership of outlets and protection against the excessive concentration of power in the hands of any one corporation, interest or small group.' The Dept. of Justice is also onboard, leaving little hope that this will be stopped."
Monopolies... (Score:5, Informative)
It is in the interest of governments to allow monopolies, it is much easier to order 1 big entity to cough up certain needed information or to force them to execute the government plans, than a lot of small entities.
This revolving door between big corporate US and the government (fascism) is starting to be a real burden on the people, all we have to wait for now is government to draw the wrong cards and finding that in reality their power is more and more subdued by the corporates.
But then, the people lost already 50 years ago when Ike proclaimed his farewell speech, this is just the final stage of that losing battle.
Re:WTF (Score:5, Informative)
"Democrats" and "Republicans" haven't run anything in the United States for at least a few decades.
These terms are only used for betting purposes now. Political power belongs to people for whom limiting terms such as "party" or "ideology" have no meaning.
Today, power is vested with people whose names are not widely known. "Dems" and "Repubs" are little more than handy punching bags that can be blamed for problems so the people in power won't be disturbed.
Re:Fuck It. (Score:4, Informative)
LMFAO avian protocalls. I've heard of sneakernet but that's funny. +1
Kids these days, don't know nothing [wikipedia.org].
Re:WTF (Score:5, Informative)
It seems it's not - according to TFA, the decision was approved with 4 - 1 votes. Michael Copps was the only one to vote against. I salute him.
Re:Monopolies... (Score:4, Informative)
big corporate US and the government (fascism)
For the love of all that's holy, that's not what fascism is. Fascism is a political philosophy in which the state is the primary component. In a fascist system, there are no true property rights and business owners can lose everything if they are proscribed by a powerful individual.
Fascism has more in common with communism (they're both totalitarian systems in which the state is the most important element) than collusion between business interests and government. That's more of a mercantilist system.
Re:Obama: liar, weak, or naive? (Score:5, Informative)
Can you be specific about which ideals he's gone back on?
Here's a summary of the ones I know of, based on Politifact:
1) Stimulus package. Passed, and current estimated at having added 3.5M jobs to the economy.
2) Raise taxes for people making over $250k/year. He ultimately caved rather than let the GOP cut off unemployment checks to millions of people.
3) Health care reform. Done, though lacking the public option he had touted on the campaign trail. He tried to get it, but ultimately Lieberman and a few others wouldn't budge.
4) Keep lobbyists out of the system for at least two years from their last job. I don't know how, or if, he ever intended to do that one. Oddly, he mainly talked about it after he was elected. Maybe he just really didn't understand how DC works...
5) Establish consumer credit safeguards. Done (for credit cards, mortgages, and student loans).
6) Allow bankruptcy courts to modify predatory mortgages. He tried, but it got voted down in the House. Badly.
7) Cap and trade. Filibustered to death in the Senate.
8) Immigration reform. Hasn't really been addressed. The DREAM act was by no means comprehensive reform.
9) Increase investment in science and technology. Considering he's increased science budgets by around $75 billion over the past two years, I'd say he's stuck by that one.
10) Repeal DADT. Done.
11) More transparency in the government. He has stood by that one, just not to the extent that most people on Slashdot want. "More transparency" doesn't mean putting Assange in charge of the NSA. You can now find freely available audits on the use of the stimulus funds, for example. Good luck tracing the TARP money sent out under Bush.
12) Net Neutrality. Let's be honest. While this is probably the top of Slashdot's agenda, it's likely the bottom of his. He hasn't touched the issue much one way or the other.
So of the top 12, there are 3 that he hasn't really tried to accomplish: Cutting down on lobbying, reforming immigration, and net neutrality. I'd say telling the truth 75% of the time is remarkably good for a politician, pathetically low as that standard may be.
Re:Obama: liar, weak, or naive? (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a pretty good list: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-broken/ [politifact.com]
The ones I especially care about are:
No. 234: A five-day reading period for proposed legislation.
No. 491: Provide an annual report on "state of our energy future"
No. 517: Negotiate health care reform in public sessions televised on C-SPAN
No. 518: Create a public option health plan for a new National Health Insurance Exchange.
No. 525: Introduce a comprehensive immigration bill in the first year
Also, from this list: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=91286 [wnd.com]
Probably the most important to me is #10: greater government transparency.
And from John Stewart: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/01/08/jon-stewart-bashes-obamas-broken-campaign-promises [newsbusters.org] : Closing Gitmo within a year of his campaign promise being made.
It's also interesting to note the things which I felt he'd promised, but which PolitiFact (which I generally trust) has no record of:
It would seem that I confused the general image he projected with actual promises on some important issues.
Re:Fuck It. (Score:4, Informative)