this is not true in these states. Wilson and Chattanooga got grandfathered in because they already built their network before the laws took effect.

You are using a rather limited definition for the work community. I live in NC, near Wilson but outside of any area they will probably service, however I can give you a perfect example of how terribly limited your definition is. I live in an area with the City designation of Garner NC, however I dont live in Garner, because I live across the Wake (Garner's county)/Johnston country line. I can walk to the Wake county side and bike to the city limits, but I am still in that postal area. This is also a fairly large area that straddles the county line. It would be pretty hard to not call my area part of the garner community. We still get a lot of garner names in our businesses and services.

Wilson made a profit last year....

8 pages of rules, 290+ pages of precedent, forbearance, and other non rules. You can see what the rules are on their website, if you actually cared, and did not just want to attack them...

Obama care was also not rushed. If you think the Republicans did not read it you are dead wrong. The we have to pass it to see whats in it comment was talking about the populace, not congress, but again I am sure you dont care about these facts.

And they are not preempting the ban. They can still ban it, but if they dont they cannot restrict it to imaginary boundaries.

What is the difference between creating a fast lane and creating a slow lane? there isnt really one...

not having been released yet is not the same thing as being kept secret...

You dont have to join the union just because the unions organizes there, however typically there is a vote that needs a majority of the members to vote yes before the union can setup shop, read about the VW plant in Tennessee.

If the court said it would have to be CLASSIFIED as a title 2 you would have a point, but it said they would have to reclassify it. That is an apples an oranges comparison to your analogy. It is like telling congress they would have to change law. It implies they have the authority to do something.

Intention and law to do something are 2 different matters. Congress never envisioned software patents in patent law, but apparently the law covers it. Just because congress did not intend for the internet to be covered does not mean the laws do not allow them to be covered. Intent rarely matters.

It is not just about netflix, it is actually not about them at all. The ISPs have bee caught throttling competing services, such as VOIP in the past and want to keep doing it. They also want to charge for access to me, their paying customer. This is wrong. The FCC tried to fix this without title 2 but verizon stopped that, well you reap what you sow.

Your ISP is not a free market with competition.

You are talking about different things... I am mostly talking about net capacity, not throughput. There is no limitation to the net capacity of bandwidth.

A) are you in a true competitive marketplace? If so, then ...you still raise the price if its costs you more customers, and therefore more profit then just eating the cost you still raise it?

Did you read your own quote?

Then there is 79 pages detailing rules that will not be actionable. More rules that the companies will not have to comply with and so on...

It was not an objection, it was a request for clarification.. Here is the snip it you conveniently left out: