Jeez, you people are so wound up over political dogma that you have no clue as to what the real issues are. The net neutrality debate (the real one) has nothing to do with censorship (by the government anyway). It has everything to do with information technology (I have my doubts as to the mental capacity of readers of this board to understand the technical discussions) and also the economics of the internet, related to both those that provide infrastructure for delivery, as well as those that develop on produce content for delivery.

For the record, my own feeelings: Too much government intervention will produce a quagmire that puts a drag on innovation of one of the greatest technical achievements of human kind, at least from the the standpoint of access to information and communication. On the other hand, no regulation could result in a degradation of services for the average user, in preference for premium services.

If you would like to start actually learning something about the real debate on this issue, you could start here:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20013212-38.htm...
http://www.pcworld.com/article/202970/googleveriz...

Does anyone here actually know what the Net Neutrality debate is really about? It's odd that none of the major technology players and their stance is mentioned, rather a pile of crap and irrelevant associations.

So at the end of this article, a good little drone will equate net neutrality with being another evil liberal agenda.

A thinking conservative would say this: The net works great right now in it's current form. People are happy paying a modest monthly fee (i.e. a utility) to access the information and services available on the internet. If they want to subscribe to a particular site or sites that have specialized or premium content, they are free to do that. Therefor, that works, and that system should be conserved.

President of what?

Ann Coulter is nothing more than a spoiled brat. Conservative politics in this country will flounder, coming across as the party of shrill, idiotic malcontents until people stop encouraging the likes of Coulter and others of her ilk.

I have no idea why anyone that considers their self to be a serious conservative gives any credence to anything Coulter has to say, other than acknowledging that she may have some value as an entertainer.

I do indeed. Same horse with a slightly different color. They play their side of the fence for the same reason - $$$$$$$.

This is really a great site. It provides a venue to keep you folks occupied so that you're not out on the streets.

As for Coulter, when are you going to understand that she's in it for the money - she's understands there is a market for her act, and she's taking advantage of that fact.