—————Your view that every decision runs on liberal/conservative ideological lines continually brings up contradictions.-———————
I don’t look at it that way. Progressivism is a cancer, and it’s in both parties.
—————The FCC is AGAINST Comcast on the net neutrality issue.—————
Only on the surface. Comcast seems to be positioning to be the preferred candidate if/when the time comes for an internet-as-a-utility.
Have you seen any changes to MSNBC since comcast took over? I haven’t. And I don’t doubt the reasons why that is.
——————If the FCC thought Comcast was a liberal bastion, and made decisions only on ideological lines, they would logically not want net neutrality since they could then count on Comcast censoring conservative views——————
Why only control comcast when you can control the whole thing?
As I mentioned above; MSNBC. And NBC. Comcast isn’t trying to change them. NBC/Comcast like any other progressive media company, is more than willing to go down with the ship.
If Comcast were really just simply the corporation you paint them to be, we’d already have a second fox news. The simple fact is that MSNBC doesn’t attract viewers. Fox does.
—————If they support something that retains freedom, like net neutrality——————
There’s no evidence of that. The facts point in the other direction.
———————It save us energy to fight them on issues that actually help them reach their goal.——————
With everything they’re saying, and with as hard as they’re fighting for this, it’s clear that net neutrality does help them reach their end goal.
-——————Think of it this way. When the ACLU was defending the rights of that Christian street preacher, would you have found it necessary to go to court in opposition of the ACLU’s position?——————
I would have given a serious consideration to it, yes. If anything, I would put out any information that I could find as to the ACLU’s real goal.
I don’t believe any preacher should go to jail for simply preaching.
But I have huge doubts as to if this was any preacher. I can’t find what church he comes from, but my gut instinct tells me that this guy comes from a social justice church.
That’s the problem. None of these things are ever as they seem, primarily because of the huge uphill battle to reach the truth that the media represents.
Searching using different terms, I can’t dig beyond the surface of the Shawn Miller case. So the only thing that’s left standing is the left wing media’s/ACLU’s reality.
Seriously, you're going all conspiracy theory on me now. No facts can get through, all must be bent to support the conspiracy. If net neutrality is liberal, and if liberal companies do everything based on liberal ideology above profit, and a liberal company opposes it, well, you have to start making stuff to reconcile the logical conflict.
But I have huge doubts as to if this was any preacher. I can’t find what church he comes from, but my gut instinct tells me that this guy comes from a social justice church. That’s the problem. None of these things are ever as they seem
That's the problem for you, they're usually exactly what they seem. Let's pick an extremely non-progressive case. How about Edwin Crayton in Louisiana, a Christian protesting about Wal-Mart's support of homosexuals? How about St. Petersberg, Florida in 2007, when Christians wanted to protest a gay pride parade and the city tried to stop them? What about the Christian Missouri library employee who was disciplined after refusing to be involved in Harry Potter promotions? The ACLU defended all. Were those "social justice"? I have many more, all quite clear.
I can’t dig beyond the surface of the Shawn Miller case. So the only thing that’s left standing is the left wing media’s/ACLU’s reality.
If the facts don't match the theory, then keep digging and go on the assumption that you just haven't found all the facts yet. You are a conspiracy theorist.