![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Book-Political-Spectrum-Hazlett.jpg\")
<\/a>The internet, remember when it first started, when people really, really got into it? I\u2019m talking about being able to browse websites, the first browser was Mosaic, then Netscape came along with theirs, and everything was free. Newspapers published websites with the exact content of their published editions and more. Everything came online. Everything, data and information being added, and nobody was charging anything for it, which was their big mistake.<\/p>\nThey created the idea that if it\u2019s on the internet, it\u2019s free. Now they\u2019re having to charge for it, put things behind pay walls, they\u2019re having trouble because of so many years. But the point is, it wasn\u2019t regulated and look how fast it grew. And look how fast the tech improved. And look how widespread available it became. And when it became so powerful, when it became so widespread, when it became of age and had demonstrable influence, that\u2019s when the left wants to get their grubby, crusty paws on it and start regulating it for their political benefit.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s not about your provider shutting down data speeds to you while speeding them up for some corporate customer. If you want to pay for it, you\u2019ll be able to get it, just like in anything else in a free market. And if you can\u2019t afford what you want now, you work harder and maybe someday you will be able to. But there\u2019s always gonna be an option, until the government gets involved.<\/p>\n
BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n
RUSH: I just want to give you one example here to go along with the net neutrality discussion or explanation that I offered in the first half hour of the program. The left is pushing net neutrality \u2019cause they want the government to regulate the internet on the premise that the private sector is mean, it\u2019s unfair, it overcharges, it kills its customers, it puts its customers at risk, all of the typical bromides you get from the left.<\/p>\n
So they want the government regulating it just like they want the government regulating health care. If you like Obamacare, if you like the government in charge of all that they\u2019re in charge of, then you ought to welcome net neutrality. But I\u2019m telling you, if you like being able to purchase what you want, when you want it, if you like technological innovation, if you want things continuing to improve and innovate, modernize, and get cheaper along the way, then you must oppose net neutrality.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s misnamed. It has nothing to do with what the left actually wants. And I\u2019m gonna give you an example of government regulation retarding and practically stopping technological innovation. The example I\u2019m gonna use comes from professional Hazlett\u2019s book, and it\u2019s about cellular. Think back, your own life. What is your first memory of either seeing a cell phone or actually having one? I\u2019ll tell you mine. It was 1985 or \u201986. And I was in Sacramento.<\/p>\n
I was at a Sacramento Kings basketball game. And I forget the cell provider that we had back then, but the sponsor — and I happened to run into this guy, and he was telling me about the latest thing, cellular phones. And he had one with him. And he was able to call whoever he wanted. I was able to hear it, make the call. I was dazzled. I said, “No kidding.”<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/RushNetNeuNetflix.jpg\")
The thing is, he had this giant brick in his pocket that was the battery. And he said he had another battery that was in his car. And I said, “Well, how long does this last?” He said, “Well, you really shouldn\u2019t use it when it\u2019s not attached to the battery.” But he just wanted to demo it. It wasn\u2019t even on the market yet. He was just demoing this for me. I said, “Man, I gotta have one of these. I gotta have it, I gotta have it.”<\/p>\n
What I didn\u2019t know — and this was 1985 or \u201986, folks. Cellular telephone communications, cellular communications technology was announced by the FCC in 1945. There was an article in the Saturday Evening Post. In 1945, the big announcement of the invention, discovery, whatever you want to call it, of cellular technology, which uses, of course, wireless spectrum, radio frequencies. It took until the 1980s for the government to license operators to use cellular communications.<\/p>\n
AM radio stations are licensed. Television stations are licensed by the FCC. And the owners and operators of those stations have to pass every five or 10 years, I don\u2019t know what it is now, license renewal exam basically on how well they\u2019re serving the community. It\u2019s almost become pro forma now, but the point is the government\u2019s in charge of it, the licensing. So the inventors of cellular couldn\u2019t do anything with it until the government licensed it! And the minute it was discovered, all other forms of communication, particularly land line telephones, began pressuring the government and regulators to squash it.<\/p>\n
They didn\u2019t want the competition. This is not unnatural. It\u2019s the same thing that happened to FM radio. FM radio was invented 25 years before the first FM radio was sold. A consortium of AM radio station owners put pressure on the federal government to shelve the entire FM technology, which it did. Lobbyists and people of influence, the special interests in communications succeeded in burying two innovative forms of communication technology to the benefit of current, or at the time, operators, which in these cases were AM radio and land line telephones. But wait. There\u2019s more after this.<\/p>\n
BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n
RUSH: We\u2019ll get to the phones here just shortly, but I want to give you the bare essential details of the cellular story just to understand what can happen when the government starts regulating the internet. It\u2019s trying to even now, and they want to get their entire mitts — well, this government doesn\u2019t. The Obama government, the left wants to. This is Trump getting rid of what Obama was trying. This is Trump and Ajit Pai at the FCC getting rid of the first planted roots, if you will, of the blossoms that would lead to government regulation and control of the internet.<\/p>\n
So cellular announced by the FCC in 1945. It didn\u2019t hit the market \u2019til 1985. It was 40 years, the commercial market. Now, when the cellular technology finally got out, it\u2019s just amazing what happened. Cellular was never thought, by regulators, by the government people in charge, it was never thought to be mass market. It was thought to be for walkie-talkies in the military and law enforcement. But the regulators never thought it would have mass market application.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Internetwifi-lady.jpg\")
The FCC assumed that cellular would be a plaything for the rich, it\u2019d be very limited. In 1980, a McKenzie & Company study commissioned by AT&T said that there would be fewer than a million wireless subscribers in the U.S. by the year 2000. And this study by McKenzie was used to suppress the technology and keep it from the market. Well, by the year 2000, there were over 109 million wireless subscribers, well more than the “fewer than a million” that AT&T predicted.<\/p>\n
So that\u2019s what the old Ma Bell monopoly, AT&T, thought that it was not gonna have popular application, something strictly for the rich, and that\u2019s what the old regulators thought. So they went very slow. When this wireless technology was finally unleashed, it became obvious the market was far too complex for regulators to manage. At the same time, the regulators didn\u2019t have the interest in managing cellular where people talked to one another. They wanted to control broadcasting, which is commercial and where there is money changing hands, where one broadcasts and one listens.<\/p>\n
But with person to person communications, they didn\u2019t see any value in that. They thought that had already been handled with land line phones, and that\u2019s all there was ever gonna be needed. And if you needed in-the-air communications for airplanes and things like that, that already existed. But person to person, they weren\u2019t even thinking about consumers. By the 1980s there was beginning to be serious deregulation, not just the U.S., but around the world. And with deregulation came competition, and that\u2019s when cellular finally hit the marketplace, when it was deregulated, when the regulators figured there\u2019s no reason for us to police this \u2019cause nobody\u2019s gonna want it.<\/p>\n
Bureaucrats are not visionaries. Barack Obama and his merry band of bureaucrats are not visionaries. They are pessimists. They deter new ideas. It is said that we conservatives are the ones that don\u2019t innovate and don\u2019t modernize, that we want to conserve the old-fashioned ways. Wrongo! It is the left that deters new ideas, particularly innovative technological ideas. I\u2019m talking about not the inventors. I\u2019m talking about liberal government regulators who exist to protect existing industries. Because you know who really is purchased when a new technology comes is members of Congress. They\u2019re the first people that are bought.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/ObamaSpyPIX.jpg\")
And if you want that to continue to grow, if you want Obamaism to be in charge of what you can and can\u2019t do and where you can and can\u2019t do it and how much you can or can\u2019t pay for it on the internet, then by all means support net neutrality. But it isn\u2019t neutral. It isn\u2019t innovative. It isn\u2019t creative. And it\u2019s gonna end up being expensive as hell for mediocrity.<\/p>\n
BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n
RUSH: We\u2019ll start with Matt in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. Hi. Great to have you here, sir.<\/p>\n
CALLER: Hey, Rush thanks for having me on. How\u2019s it going?<\/p>\n
RUSH: I\u2019m doing great.<\/p>\n
CALLER: Very good. Hey, I won\u2019t take a whole lot of time because you already had most of the points straight out correct which kind of upsets me when I see all these things going around the internet with net neutrality and everybody saying we have to keep it, we have to keep it. So I thank you for getting the information out there. I run a small regional ISP, so we compete directly with the cable companies, directly with the internet companies.<\/p>\n
RUSH: All right. Wait. Forget what you said about not taking up much time \u2019cause I\u2019m gonna use you here as an opportunity for people to understand what goes on. You are a regional ISP.<\/p>\n
CALLER: We are.<\/p>\n
RUSH: People don\u2019t even know what that is: internet service provider. Regional — you said you do compete directly with the big guys, the cable companies. So tell everybody, what do you do? What is a regional ISP? Who are your customers?<\/p>\n
CALLER: Okay. So our customers are ones that for whatever reason have decided they don\u2019t want to go with the cable company or the phone company. A lot of times it\u2019s the cord cutters because we focus on one thing and one thing only and do it well, and that\u2019s internet service. So we don\u2019t bundle TV, we don\u2019t bundle phone and that\u2019s just our business model at the moment. Some regional internet providers do. We\u2019ve just decided not to.<\/p>\n
RUSH: Wait, hang with me here. I\u2019m gonna assume here that there\u2019s some people that still don\u2019t know what you do. So you provide — forgive the term. You\u2019ll understand what I\u2019m saying here — you provide the Wi-Fi for people in their home, right?<\/p>\n
CALLER: Correct.<\/p>\n
RUSH: Right.<\/p>\n
CALLER: We are a replacement to any of the big-name companies that you can go to out there. We provide through own network that we build the internet service to somebody\u2019s house that they can plug their Wi-Fi router into or get the Wi-Fi from.<\/p>\n
RUSH: Are you not sharing wires in the neighborhood with the cable companies, you\u2019re not sharing cable, you run your own cable?<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/RUshInternet.jpg\")
CALLER: Correct. So in our case we have a hybrid network. We\u2019ve got some fiberoptic lines and then we also do wireless. So we\u2019ve got towers all around town. We\u2019ve got equipment on there, and we basically terrestrially connect customers through the wireless connection.<\/p>\n
RUSH: Why did you decide to do this as a business? Why did you want to compete against these people that can lower their prices \u2019cause they have so many customers? Why did you want to do this?<\/p>\n
CALLER: Because they don\u2019t. So we see — and every day I sit here in the office when I\u2019m in the office and I hear people taking phone calls on our sales lines. And it\u2019s just the same thing over and over and over, which is we want to get away from the big company X because our bill just keeps going up every month. And so people are upset with the poor customer service, they\u2019re upset with their bills going up, with their bills not being consistent every month, and it not being a local company. And so that\u2019s the niche that we fill.<\/p>\n
RUSH: Are you making money?<\/p>\n
CALLER: Oh, yes. Absolutely. We make very good money. We employ five people here so we\u2019re provide business and employment for the local community —<\/p>\n
RUSH: You\u2019re in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. How many customers do you have?<\/p>\n
CALLER: Just north of about 1,500.<\/p>\n
RUSH: How many more would you like to have?<\/p>\n
CALLER: So I don\u2019t know the answer to that question. It\u2019s something I\u2019ve thought about often.<\/p>\n
RUSH: ‘Cause there\u2019s a limit, right? I mean, you\u2019re up against the big boys who are already running television cable or other forms of TV into their houses. And you don\u2019t —<\/p>\n
CALLER: Correct.<\/p>\n
RUSH: — provide that, so there has to be a ceiling on the number of customers you can have, so that has to affect your business plan.<\/p>\n
CALLER: There is, but what affects it more is I want to make sure that however big we may grow, we don\u2019t stop providing good, local customer service to our customers.<\/p>\n
RUSH: And what is good customer service for your customers? They never drop coverage? Your coverage is always there, rain or shine? What is good customer service for you?<\/p>\n
CALLER: So certainly that can differ by who the customer is. But, in my opinion, good customer service is you call in if you have an issue — which certainly that comes up, even with us — and you talk to somebody who knows what they\u2019re doing. They\u2019re not in a call center someplace just reading a script. And then hopefully we can get out to you within a couple of hours and get your issue resolved. You know, if you call in with a billing issue we get it resolved right away. We\u2019re not encumbered by layers of management and procedures and scripts that need to be followed.<\/p>\n
RUSH: Okay. So why are you opposed to so-called net neutrality?<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/ObamaDictatorNetNeutrality.jpg\")
CALLER: So on the face of things net neutrality sounds really good. It makes sure we get access to Netflix and cat videos and all kinds of things people like on the internet. But as you have said before, it\u2019s government encumberment. And if you look back at things like the telephone, there\u2019s something called a USF or universal service fund, as well as a ton of other taxes that are on your telephone bill. We don\u2019t have any of those on internet currently. However, if the internet —<\/p>\n
RUSH: But they want to. They want to apply those Title II regulations from the phone service from 1937 to internet service today and they want to be able to charge for the same things that rural telephone service, now rural internet service, everybody pays so those people get it for nothing.<\/p>\n
CALLER: Correct. So if we continue down the Title II rabbit hole with net neutrality and the government intervention in the internet, eventually you\u2019re going to see these taxes in your bills going up from, you know, all of these USF funds and other federal funds.<\/p>\n
RUSH: But you would lose the ability to be price competitive with your competitors, correct?<\/p>\n
CALLER: No, no, not at all. We are privately funded. We have never taken a dollar —<\/p>\n
RUSH: No, with net neutrality you would, you would be forced to be raising your prices?<\/p>\n
CALLER: Correct. Correct. Yes we would have to put taxes on there, we would have to raise prices, we\u2019d have taxes that potentially would change from month to month, and so people would be back to complaining about surcharges and taxes on their bill, even with us.<\/p>\n
RUSH: I appreciate your answering my questions. They have 1,500 customers in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, and net neutrality, so-called, would force him to abide by Title II federal regulations, which, Title II dates back to the 1930s. It was how the phone companies, Ma Bell and the original land line phone apparatus was regulated by the federal government. But the key to it is not 1937; it\u2019s federal government. Title II allows federal government total regulatory control over the internet, which they don\u2019t have now. They\u2019re starting to because Obama began the initiation of so-called net neutrality rules.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/CordCuttingSHORT.jpg\")
But he mentioned Netflix. This is a good example of how the pro-net neutrality people have everybody scared. As you know, Netflix, if it\u2019s not the most popular, it\u2019s on its way to being the most popular provider of television programing, video, movies, TV shows, you name it, for people that don\u2019t have to subscribe to a cable company or a satellite service or what have you. And the pro so-called net neutrality people have got these customers scared to death that Netflix is going to somehow be throttled, that the phone companies will come in and the other ISPs, Comcast, AT&T, you name it, will be allowed to throttle Netflix\u2019s speeds so that you will not be able to watch as smoothly, as conveniently, with as good download speeds and so forth.<\/p>\n
They try to threaten people that the thing they like most will be damaged, will be taken away from them. And then they add to it, “But not for everybody because the rich will be able to pay Netflix for a special wire, special cable, special high speed service, whereas you can\u2019t, and then Netflix will be only concerned with their high paying customers that won\u2019t care about average middle class customers.” All of this is just scare tactic BS. It\u2019s not in Netflix\u2019s best interests for any of that to happen.<\/p>\n
Now, you might say, “But, Rush, Netflix signed on for it.” Of course! They also signed on to global warming. They\u2019re all scared to death of a highly powerful regulatory federal government. Of course they signed on to climate change. Of course they signed on to all this stuff, and if they think customers are signing on to it, they\u2019ll do that too.<\/p>\n
I mean, if company X thinks that most of its customers believe in climate change, then company X is gonna start making their customers believe they care about it, too, and there will be climate change specials and climate change promotions and climate change consciousness in advertising. The whole thing is a racket. But it\u2019s a scare tactic meant to frighten people into believing that the monthly rate they pay will not be enough to get decent-enough download speeds to be able to watch video that doesn\u2019t buffer or get interrupted. And that\u2019s not at all what any of this is about.<\/p>\n
It is net neutrality and the federal government regulating that would determine who gets what when by virtue of regulation. And the evidence of regulation in any industry is clear for anybody to see. But in the telecommunications business especially. The innovative technology that\u2019s been stifled by decades, such as FM radio or cellular technology — and those are just two examples. Anyway, I appreciate the call, Matt.<\/p>\n
BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n
RUSH: Josh in Reading, Pennsylvania. You\u2019re next, sir. It\u2019s great to have you with us on the EIB Network. Hi.<\/p>\n
CALLER: Good afternoon, Mr. Rush. It is an honor and a privilege. I\u2019ve been listening to you for years. And while I don\u2019t always agree with you, I love your facts. I must say that you, sir, keep me factually informed. I thank you for that.<\/p>\n
RUSH: Well, I appreciate that. Thank you very much out there, Josh.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/00-EIB-Callers-2.jpg\")
CALLER: I wanted to just really touch base. I really believe you are kind of off base on this net neutrality thing. I just wanted to throw something out at you and see what you think about this. Net neutrality is not about what you\u2019re describing in the sense that it\u2019s about, “Oh, I want to pay more for a hundred gigs of service versus 25 megs of service or anything like that.” Quite simply: Net neutrality is about no filter, no throttle.<\/p>\n
It actually would impact you the most, I think, because the concept being, if this net neutrality is repealed and gotten rid of, the mainstream media and the companies that own these ISPs — like Time Warner, Comcast, all these plases — can artificially throttle the websites that you choose to go to. So if I want to listen to say RushLimbaugh.com and get a podcast and they see now that, “Oh, we\u2019ve got traffic here and we don\u2019t agree with any of that,” now we\u2019re gonna throttle it so that I can\u2019t listen to your podcast unless I pay extra for it.<\/p>\n
RUSH: Now, it\u2019s interesting that you bring this up, Josh. You are very shrewd. This became one of the first actually realized aspects of net neutrality, and because it was so effective as a statement of opposition, it was dropped. Let me see if I can explain here. The original application or the original intent to sell net neutrality was the Obama administration being upset at Fox News. Now, Fox News… Not digitally, but Fox News cable TV. But that\u2019s just a way to hook you to what coming next.<\/p>\n
The original net neutrality was the left trying to say that all points of view had an equal opportunity to be heard or should, and it was pitched as an effort to make sure that all points of view would have an equal access to all customers out there. This was one of the original pitches. It was a pitch that was oriented in… It was a distraction. The purpose of this pitch was to distract you from what was really intended. It was a misdirection play. The left was very clever in this.<\/p>\n
You\u2019re very wise out there, Josh, to remember this. Your mistake is believing that it\u2019s genuine. This is how they sold net neutrality. They sold it on the basis that… You know, the left owns everything in media except talk radio and cable news, and they want to own it all. They\u2019re very upset by the fact that they can\u2019t compete in talk radio, and they didn\u2019t want this imbalance to happen on the internet. So as leftists are wont to do, they promote equality and fairness and sameness.<\/p>\n
Net neutrality was originally proposed and positioned as a way to make sure that all points of view were easily accessed, that no point of view would be discriminated against or denied. When in fact, the leftists want control of the internet for the exact opposite. They want to do just that. They do want to be able to punish — and they\u2019re already doing it! Look at Facebook and Twitter and how they unfairly punish certain conservatives, certain tweets, certain posts if they\u2019re found to be “offensive” under liberal definitions of offensive.<\/p>\n
In fact, I\u2019m glad you mention this, because it\u2019s exactly the way it was — one of the ways in which it was — originally pitched, as fairness and equality for all points of view. But the leftists are not interested in fairness or equality at all points of view because they don\u2019t consider conservatism a legitimate point of view. They don\u2019t consider conservatives legitimate or Republicans legitimate. They want to be able to control the internet precisely to do what you say, Josh, that they didn\u2019t want to do. They do want to police content. But net neutrality is actually about much more than that.<\/p>\n
That original pitch was, as I say, a misdirection play. Net neutrality is, in the end, a desire by leftists to regulate and control the internet and to politicize it to their advantage, as they have and are trying to do with everything else. The latest example is the National Football League, and you see how the left\u2019s attempts to corrupt that are succeeding. So I have to… You know, Josh, I had totally forgotten that aspect of this.<\/p>\n
I remember having a conversation with a commissioner of the FCC five or six years ago, and this was one of the areas we discussed, that this was an attempt by the pro-net neutrality people, to get people to buy into it, that it was all about political points of view being equally available and accessible, when that\u2019s just a smoke screen, a total smoke screen. Josh, I\u2019m so glad you called. I really appreciate that you were able to wind your way, weave through the mess that is our phone lines today and get through.<\/p>\n
BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n
RUSH: No, no. I was being serious. The guy reminded me of one of the original pitches for net neutrality. It was to make sure… This is how they tried to get everybody on board with it. Look, the left always uses misdirection. You know, folks, in a sane world, everybody would oppose net neutrality simply because of who\u2019s proposing it. The left is proposing it. Liberalism is responsible for it. It\u2019s their idea. That, in our world, should automatically disqualify it.<\/p>\n
And when I come along and tell you why is icing on the cake. And one of the original pitches was, “Well, we just want to make sure that every political point of view is treated equally and is not bottled up or obstructed or what,” when that\u2019s exactly what they want to do with the power that they\u2019re gonna have! Look at the Fairness Doctrine. Look what they\u2019re trying to do with Fox News already and what they\u2019ve been trying to do with talk radio for 25 years. All because they don\u2019t control it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
RUSH: Net neutrality is misnamed. There's nothing "neutral" about it. The government controls it. The government regulates it. If you like government regulation, if you like how government regulation retards things, slows things down, gums things up, causes mistakes to be made, then by all means support net neutrality.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":58,"featured_media":255905,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[12,1],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n
Net Neutrality Explained Via Professor Hazlett's Great Book: The Political Spectrum - The Rush Limbaugh Show<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Net Neutrality Explained Via Professor Hazlett's Great Book: The Political Spectrum - The Rush Limbaugh Show\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"RUSH: Net neutrality is misnamed. There's nothing "neutral" about it. The government controls it. The government regulates it. If you like government regulation, if you like how government regulation retards things, slows things down, gums things up, causes mistakes to be made, then by all means support net neutrality.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/FB-FB-112717-Hazlett.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dean Karayanis\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"28 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/\",\"name\":\"The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"description\":\"Excellence In Broadcasting\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/FB-FB-112717-Hazlett.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/FB-FB-112717-Hazlett.jpg\",\"width\":600,\"height\":315},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/\",\"name\":\"Net Neutrality Explained Via Professor Hazlett's Great Book: The Political Spectrum - The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2017-11-27T14:50:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-28T21:04:42+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/adbb9034c9d7e1664c3043e01a8558b5\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Net Neutrality Explained Via Professor Hazlett\\u2019s Great Book: The Political Spectrum\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/adbb9034c9d7e1664c3043e01a8558b5\",\"name\":\"Dean Karayanis\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c57ead9ad0125e01994eebf78da1b5f9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c57ead9ad0125e01994eebf78da1b5f9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dean Karayanis\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/dkarayanispremierenetworks-com\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Net Neutrality Explained Via Professor Hazlett's Great Book: The Political Spectrum - The Rush Limbaugh Show","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/","twitter_card":"summary","twitter_title":"Net Neutrality Explained Via Professor Hazlett's Great Book: The Political Spectrum - The Rush Limbaugh Show","twitter_description":"RUSH: Net neutrality is misnamed. There's nothing "neutral" about it. The government controls it. The government regulates it. If you like government regulation, if you like how government regulation retards things, slows things down, gums things up, causes mistakes to be made, then by all means support net neutrality.","twitter_image":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/FB-FB-112717-Hazlett.jpg","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dean Karayanis","Est. reading time":"28 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/","name":"The Rush Limbaugh Show","description":"Excellence In Broadcasting","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/#primaryimage","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/FB-FB-112717-Hazlett.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/FB-FB-112717-Hazlett.jpg","width":600,"height":315},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/#webpage","url":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/","name":"Net Neutrality Explained Via Professor Hazlett's Great Book: The Political Spectrum - The Rush Limbaugh Show","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2017-11-27T14:50:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-28T21:04:42+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/adbb9034c9d7e1664c3043e01a8558b5"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/11\/27\/net-neutrality-explained-via-professor-hazletts-great-book-the-political-spectrum\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Net Neutrality Explained Via Professor Hazlett\u2019s Great Book: The Political Spectrum"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/adbb9034c9d7e1664c3043e01a8558b5","name":"Dean Karayanis","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c57ead9ad0125e01994eebf78da1b5f9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c57ead9ad0125e01994eebf78da1b5f9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dean Karayanis"},"url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/dkarayanispremierenetworks-com\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255897"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/users\/58"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=255897"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255897\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":256032,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255897\/revisions\/256032"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media\/255905"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=255897"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=255897"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=255897"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/650-071317-Hazlett-Book.jpg\")
I had a great interview with Professor Thomas Hazlett, my friend from the old Sacramento days who has written a book. I would really recommend, and I\u2019ve recommended it two or three times, his book, The Political Spectrum, Thomas W. Hazlett<\/a>. In fact, it\u2019s written for laymen in its verbiage, thereby easy to understand, and it\u2019s a history of the regulation of the telecommunications industry.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/RushNetNeutralitySmash.jpg\")
<\/a>If you want the fastest internet you can go out and ask if your provider provides gigabit Ethernet. And if he does and you find out what it costs and you want to buy it then you damn well expect that your download speeds with gonna be gigabit ethernet. You\u2019re paying for it. If you don\u2019t care how fast your internet speeds are, you can go el cheapo.<\/p>\n