NeverEnufWTF

Back in the 1970s, when the cable companies wanted to expand, there was massive backlash from the over-the-air television networks. Because cable was a new-ish technology with little competition in its niche, the government stipulated that, in order to foster growth without competition, any cable company wanting to do business in the marketplace must deliver cable to every home (no matter how rural) in the areas it would serve. Over time, this mission has eroded to the point where growth and competition are effectively meaningless terms; meanwhile, the rates consumers pay for comparatively crappy broadband service has done nothing but go up. ISPs are handing out stock dividends like candy instead of plowing the profits back into expansion and advanced tech.

My question is: why is the FCC dragging its feet in declaring ISPs to be common carriers; i.e., why is the FCC protecting corporations, instead of acting in the best interests of US consumers?

We publish according to our promise to sources for maximum impact

This right here is probably why most people no longer trust you. I understand not naming sources, but if those sources are untrustworthy, and you publish for your source's "maximum impact", how are we, as outsiders, to judge whether your source is credible and -- by extension -- your organization? To a lot of us, you now seem like shills.

Edit: Seriously, I'm done arguing with you chuckleheads who fucking refuse to read what I wrote. I'm not implying the emails are false. I'm implying that Wikileaks is acting like an apparatchik.

It is hard not being able to toss the baseball with my 5 year old son.

Try the National Beep Baseball Association site: (www.nbba.org/equipment.htm)

Did you and your brother ever catch the one-armed man?

Given that the then-US ambassador to Paraguay lost his wife on that flight, I'd think the Bolivians and State Dept would be fingering each others' buttholes to get this done.