It IS a free market (should be MORE so), for the fact that if one company comes in and completely saturates an area with an 1800MHz band coverage, there is nothing that gives another company the right to whine to the government because they can't play in the 1800MHz range. They can develop technology to use other frequencies, spend the money themselves on towers and equipment, and provide the same kind of service on different frequencies. If a company puts up a tower to specifically block another company's frequencies, there is a legal issue there that then falls under fair practice. Wired communications is also a free market as well. There is nothing that prevents someone from using their own money to construct another wired infrastructure on their own set of poles. Now, if a company deliberately cuts another phone company's phone lines to prevent them from working, again, there's a legal issue there that again falls under fair practice. Back to the point. AT&T's iPhone was developed by Apple, and AT&T entered into an agreement with them to carry their phone on the wireless network they created with their own money. There's no legitimate reason why government should force them to allow apps on their phones and on AT&T's network that the two companies feel would be a detriment to their profit. If google wants their app to be on a cellular network, no one is preventing google from creating their own wireless network with their own phone running their own apps. Now, one app from google isn't going to be the downfall of the iPhone and AT&T. It would behoove both the companies to work with google and make compromises, but, as a free market, government shouldn't FORCE one company to allow another company to profit off their own infrastructure. I heard so many times while working for competitors of AT&T about how bad AT&T is at restricting competition. I never saw it. All I saw was smaller companies whining when their own network wasn't as reliable as AT&T's because they refused to put the money and engineering into it that AT&T did. AT&T was a great scapegoat because they had the profit and the network before others did.

My point is, this is a free market. If AT&T and Apple want to screw their customers, what business is it of the government to be involved? Let the businesses screw their customers.

Understood. But how does the meat of this story involve the FCC?

Since when has the FCC become the government's "private company czar"?

hire back all the men/women that lost their job when the wind turbines were completed, have them take down every single waste of government subsidized pieces of junk, and voila! Solves multiple problems. No more ugly wind turbines killing bats and crapping up the horizon.

So artificially diverting water to areas without a substantial amount is a bad thing?

Is it just me, or does anyone else notice that the more a person presents themselves to be "green", the more they enjoy the idea of suppressing the freedoms of others? Ya know, something like "I'm so green, that I believe that people shouldn't be allowed to live in Arizona by their own free will."

Aparantly you've never heard of Juniper Networks. They're router solutions beat the pants off of Cisco for throughput and price, and, they're running FreeBSD on their routers.