Archive for MoveOn.org

Pro-abortion Cheaters in Texas Exposed (#Stand4Life)

Posted in Texas abortion clinics with tags , , , , , , , , on July 2, 2013 by saynsumthn

EXPOSED – H/T Operation Rescue:

Last week it was revealed that the raucous crowd that disrupted legislative proceedings in Texas last week, derailing a law that would ban abortions after 20 weeks, was whipped into an angry mob by leftist socialists and hold-ons from the anarchy-driven Occupy movement.

Now it has been discovered that a radical left-wing group with ties to the Obama re-election campaigns sought to hire outside agitators for pro-abortion mischief at the Texas Capitol as a new session has begun that will again attempt to pass abortion restrictions aimed at increasing safety for women and protecting late-term babies that can feel pain.

An ad on Craig’s List in Austin by “Grassroots Campaigns” sought to hire abortion activists for “our Pro Choice Campaign in Austin” offered to pay $1300-$2200/month.

The Craig’s List Ad was taken down sometime this morning after news of it began to circulate among pro-life activists on Facebook, but Operation Rescue archived the ad before it’s removal.

Craigs List Texas Abortion 1-7ad27582dd

On the Grassroots Campaigns web site, the group states that it works to hire activists in the areas of “environmental protection, LGBT equality, poverty and social justice.” It notes that it has joined forces with the radically liberal organization MoveOn.org and other leftist groups were heavily involved in the Obama re-election campaign as well as radical environmental groups.

Read Rest at Operation Rescue:

At Life News, they captured this:

ScreenShot2013-07-01at103755AM_zpsd0f53d76

Steve Ertelt writes, I called the number listed on the advertisement to get more information and was told this campaign is directly working with Planned Parenthood to bolster their efforts.”

That Planned Parenthood and abortion activists must pay for people to lobby the legislature is not surprising given a strong majority of Texans support the late-term abortion ban.

Van Jones launches Anti-Tea Party campaign with Moveon.org, SEUI, AFLCIO

Posted in Tea Party, Van Jones with tags , , , , , , on June 29, 2011 by saynsumthn

Truther, Self-described communist, and former Obama Green Jobs Czar Van Jones has a new mission, to start a progressive version of the Tea Party movement. Just like the real tea party, the Van Jones creation is based on economics. There are major differences though, being a progressive movement its basic premise is a lie, and instead of being a bottom up grass roots organization like the tea party, the Van Jones version is top down similar to the progressive philosophy that everything must be run by a central government.

Thursday night in New York City, Jones officially unveiled his “Rebuild the Dream” movement

“We are being lied to,” Jones said often throughout his hourlong presentation at the Town Hall theater in Times Square.

“We are not broke. We’re the richest country in the history of the world.”He says there are four lies that have been repeated so often that too many people now believe them .

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Highlights from the Rebuild the Dream Launch – …, posted with vodpod

African American Woman talks about Maafa21 which exposes eugenics, abortion as black genocide , and Planned Parenthood

Posted in Abortion, birth control in water, Black Conservative, Black Genocide, Black History Month, Black Victims, Eugenics, Life Dynamics, Maafa21, Planned Parenthood, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on March 3, 2011 by saynsumthn


Stacy Washington of MoveOnUp.org

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Radio host talks about Maafa21 exposing aborti…, posted with vodpod

Order Maafa21 Here

Moveon.org uses Coat Hanger abortion as scare tactic- when will they show the front alley abortions that kill women and babies?

Posted in Abortion, Defund Planned Parenthood, NARAL, Population Control, pro-choice, Pro-Life with tags , , , , , , , on February 16, 2011 by saynsumthn

In this video, MoveOn.org, ‘House’ star Lisa Edelstein down a long hallway dressed in 50s garb, Edelstein narrates the ad:
Decades ago, women suffered through horrifying back alley abortions. Or, they used dangerous methods when they had no other recourse. So when the Republican Party launched an all out assault on women’s health, pushing bills to limit access to vital services, why is the GOP trying to send women back … to the back alley?
The ad closes with a shot of Edelstein dressed in modern clothes, desperately reaching for a coat hanger in the closet.

The National Abortion Rights Action League, NARAL, lied about women dying from illegal abortions . This is what Bernard Nathanson, one of NARAL’s founding members said

“We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal, enlightened, sophisticated one,” recalls the movement’s co-founder. “Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60 percent of Americans were in favor of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority. We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000, but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000.”

“Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalizing abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1,500 percent since legalization.”

The REAL face of Choice:
Vodpod videos no longer available.

Some “Choices” are Just Wrong !!!!! Warning Ver…, posted with vodpod

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Video : Murder case- Abortion doc- State Health…, posted with vodpod

Isolated incident? Another LEGAL abortionist has license yanked !
1/25/2011

The Orange County Register is reporting that Anaheim abortionist Dr. Andrew Rutland, accused by the California Medical Board of homicide in the death of an abortion patient, has agreed to surrender his medical license for a second time.

Rutland, 67, will give up his license effective Feb. 11, rather than face disciplinary proceedings for allegations of gross negligence in the death of Ying Chen, who suffered a toxic reaction to anesthesia in 2009. Board documents allege that the storefront San Gabriel clinic was not equipped to handle emergencies, and that Rutland failed to recognize her reaction, adequately attempt resuscitation or promptly call 911.

Chen’s death in August 2009 was initially classified as accidental. But in June 2010, the Los Angeles County chief medical examiner reclassified the death of the 30-year-old Chinese immigrant as a homicide.

Previously, in a letter, Rutland described Chen’s death as an “unpreventable complication.”

The latest settlement agreement says Rutland acknowledges the board could establish “factual basis” for one or more charges, with the exception of homicide.

Sandi Gibbons, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office, said possible criminal charges remain under review.

The reclassified cause of death is one of several challenges Rutland has faced since Chen died.

A year ago, the medical board obtained a court order barring Rutland from performing surgeries or delivering babies. To test his compliance, the board sent an undercover investigator to his Chula Vista clinic. She pretended to be pregnant and asked for a surgical abortion, which Rutland refused to perform. He instead offered a “pharmaceutical abortion” via a tablet.

Around the same time, Rutland was forced to find a new colleague to oversee his practice, a condition of his probation after his license was reinstated. Rutland’s practice monitor, Dr. Christopher Dotson, had himself been disciplined in the death of a mother who bled to death after giving birth. The board said staff had erred in allowing Dotson to serve in that role and he was removed.

Independently from the Medical Board, Operation Rescue conducted an undercover sting of its own on February 3, 2010, wherein a woman posing as a potential abortion customer received an appointment for a surgical abortion with Rutland for later that day.

Operation Rescue immediately contacted the Medical Board and submitted a copy of the recorded conversation.

Listen to the call

Rutland’s attorney told the LA Times that Rutland’s daughter was actually doing the surgical abortions, but in the call made by Operation Rescue, the receptionist “Rhea” indicated that the caller’s appointment would be with Dr. Rutland, referring frequently to “him.” There was no mention of another physician.

In August, Chen’s family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Rutland.

Originally, Rutland’s clinic opened up following the eight year battle to close another a “shop of horrors” run by , Bertha Bugarin, who was sentenced to seven years in state prison for posing as a doctor and performing illegal abortions. Read More Here – Story below:

Recently in Pennsylvania, abortionist Kermit Gosnell’s clinic was also called a “Shop of Horrors” and closed after YEARS of failed inspections and monitoring:

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Philadelphia Abortion Doctor Charged With 8 Cou…, posted with vodpod

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Philadelphia abortion doctor accused of murderi…, posted with vodpod

According to Operation Rescue President Troy Newman, the decision to pull Rutlan’s medical license, “was many years in coming. It is a victory for women and babies who will never have to be subjected to his shoddy, back-alley practices.”

Rutland was first licensed in California in 1973. His license was revoked in 2002 after two babies died due to his negligence. At that time he was also charged with, frightening women into agreeing to unnecessary hysterectomies, botching surgeries, lying to patients, falsifying medical records, over-prescribing painkillers and having sex with a patient in his office.
In 2007, Rutland reapplied and was granted a new license.

“This was a huge mistake by the board,” said Newman. “It ended up costing one woman her life. I think it would be tough to sleep at night knowing that.”

Perhaps that is why the Board aggressively pursued Rutland after 30-year old Ying Chen died from a reaction to anesthesia at a dirty San Gabriel acupuncture clinic in August, 2009. It attempted to suspend his license on an emergency basis, but a Judge instead ordered Rutland not to commit surgical abortions while allowing him to continue prescribing the abortion pill.
Operation Rescue caught Rutland offering abortion appointments and reported him to the Medical Board.

In June of last year, the medical examiner reclassified Chen’s death as a homicide. The Board filed an amended complaint to reflect that. The Board charged that Rutland did not adequately secure Chen’s consent for a second trimester abortion or recognize the severity of her condition. He attempted the abortion at an unsafe facility that did not have proper emergency equipment or trained staff, and did not call for emergency care in a timely manner.

Rutland has not been criminally charged, and in his surrender agreement, Rutland did not admit to guilt on the homicide count. The District Attorney told reporters that a criminal case is under investigation.

This news comes on the heels of the arrest of the arrests of Kermit Gosnell and nine of his employees for murder and other violations of the law of an eerily similar nature to Rutland’s.
“The political climate that has shielded abortions for decades is changing. Boards and prosecutors who once yawned at allegations of abortion abuses are now turning a keen eye toward them,” said Newman. “These cases send a strong message to abortionists everywhere that they are no longer above the law.”

Read the Surrender Order and Complaint

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

As for Rutland’s assistant- one needs to do a closer look at him as well:

The California Medical Board allowed an Anaheim ob-gyn who regained his license after the death of two newborns to be monitored by a doctor who had himself been disciplined for a patient’s death.

Board rules require that doctors serve as monitors only if they have no record of disciplinary action. In this case, the board let Dr. Christopher C. Dotson of Los Angeles help oversee Dr. Andrew Rutland’s five years of probation.

________________________________________________________

More on the wonderful abortion doctor:

strong>According to the State of California: Administrative/Disciplinary Action

Case Number: D1 2006 176260
Description of Action: ACCUSATION AND PETITION TO REVOKE PROBATION FILED. THE PHYSICIAN HAS NOT HAD A HEARING OR BEEN FOUND GUILTY OF ANY CHARGES.
Effective Date of Action: DECEMBER 24, 2009

Case Number: 20 2006 176260
Description of Action: LICENSE SURRENDERED ON 10/24/02; LICENSE REINSTATED AND PLACED ON FIVE YEARS PROBATION ON 10/25/07 WITH VARIOUS TERMS & CONDITIONS. DR. RUTLAND IS PROHIBITED FROM ENGAGING IN THE SOLO PRACTICE OF MEDICINE.
Effective Date of Action: OCTOBER 25, 2007

UPDATE JAN 8, 2010

READ: Abortion doc banned from doing abortions after death of patient, retains license to practice medicine

Andrew Rutland here : Allegations Of Molestation, Negligence Haunt Chula Vista Abortion Clinic

and here: California Abortionist to face medical board after death of abortion patient

and EVEN More here: Patients’ trail of pain: List of lawsuits against Dr. Rutland far exceeds the norm, and the litigation tells a sad tale

___________________________________________________________________

As for abortionist Christopher C. Dotson…according to the website for the abortion clinic: Eve Surgical Center

Eve’s abortionist: “Christopher C. Dotson, Jr., M.D., is a pioneer in reproductive health care. He is certified by the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, a member of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American College of Surgeons and the Los Angeles Obstetrical and Gynecological Society. He has taught residents at Cedars Sinai Medical Center and at the local medical schools for over thirty years.”

And get this ladies and gentlemen….”Presently his energies are devoted to overseeing the program at Eve Surgical Center and serving as a member of the Board of Directors of the National Abortion Federation.” ( NOTE: Wait a second – doesn’t NAF brag that they “oversee” the safety standards of abortion clinics nationwide? )

According to the OC Register: Dotson, 78, completed five years of probation in 2005, part of his settlement of negligence allegations stemming from a mother who bled to death after a Caesarean section and a separate case of a stillborn baby. (NOTE – Well… no wonder he has such a high NAF Rating- a woman died )

The Register obtained Dotson’s disciplinary records last week and asked the medical board on Jan. 27 why a previously disciplined doctor was allowed to serve as monitor. On Tuesday board spokeswoman Candis Cohen responded, saying probation staff had erred and Dotson has now been removed as Rutland’s practice monitor.

More of Eve’s Docs – you may want to be aware of: Josepha Seletz, M.D. is Board Certified by the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology and is a fellow of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. She is a member of the National Abortion Federation, the Los Angeles County Women’s Medical Association, and the Los Angeles Obstetrical and Gynecological Society.” ( NOTE: Wow…2 NAF members working at the same place for the price of 1…the women in the care of Rutland and Dotson must have been in very safe hands – NOT !)

Dr. Seletz has been on staff at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology for more than 15 years. Before limiting her practice to abortion services, she had a full OB/Gyn practice including gynecological surgery and high-risk obstetrics.”
(NOTE: Can’t wait to read what pops up on her next)>

Gee…Dotson sounds like a top-notch doc. If you are marketing abortions to unsuspecting women, then I guess that trick works..but a little research shows that on October 25,2000 The LA Times wrote this about Dotson: Dr. Christopher C. Dotson Jr., Los Angeles: Committed acts of unprofessional conduct during the care and treatment of two obstetrical patients. Revocation of license stayed, five years’ probation. Effective June 16. But perhaps among abortionists, this National Abortion Federation Board Member is one of the “best”. ( Just Say’n!)

Click here to confirm his position with NAF

and Here ( Page 19)

________________________________________________________________

According to: Reporting on Health writer William Heisel:

“Dotson was among the rarest of the rare, a doctor who had been reported to the medical board by his hospital. Hollywood Presbyterian Hospital in Los Angeles said Dotson had been negligent in the treatment of multiple patients. He lost his privileges to practice there.

One of Dotson’s patients died following an abortion in February 1992. The board said that Dotson failed to adequately examine her and should have classified her case as high risk. Because he did not, the board said, the patient ended up bleeding severely from her uterus. Dotson was not prepared to respond. He did not have the right equipment, and he was not able to give her a blood transfusion quickly enough.

This may sound familiar. Rutland also is accused of negligence during an abortion and of failing to adequately examine the patient, Ying Chen. “Key information is missing from the patient’s history such as height, weight and last menstrual period,” the board wrote. “There is no record of the ultrasound examination.”

The board said Rutland “failed to respond in a timely manner in performing appropriate resuscitative measures and obtaining the assistance of emergency personnel.” He also failed to give her an oxygen mask and failed to call 911 quickly enough. Rutland has maintained throughout the medical board and criminal cases that he did nothing wrong in the treatment of Chen.

Might the similarities between their cases have made Dotson sympathetic to Rutland’s plight?

The similarities don’t stop there. Like Rutland, Dotson also has been sued multiple times by patients claiming injury or wrongful death.

In 2005, the week before Dotson’s probation was set to expire, a 34-year-old attorney named Oriane Shevin visited Dotson’s clinic, Eve Surgical Center in Los Angeles, according to records filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court. She was given RU-486, the two-stage abortion drug, and sent home. Shevin took the first part, mifepristone, orally on June 9, 2005, and inserted the misoprostol into her vagina on June 10. She developed a widespread infection and severe bleeding, dying on June 14 at Encino-Tarzana Regional Medical Center, court records show. ( SAY AGAIN? NOT the Same Abortion Clinic which had two National Abortion Federation Members and One Board Member on staff- couldn’t happen there – could it?)

Dotson was sued on behalf of Shevin’s two young children, and he, along with another doctor and the surgical center, settled the case on July 12, 2007.

Two months later, Rutland was given his license back, with restrictions, and Dotson, fresh out of probation, was given the job of overseeing Rutland’s practice.”

________________________________________________________________________

Read a New York action against Christopher C. Dotson (Jr.) ( Click here and see his address is Eve Surgical Centers ) – Here

Back to the OC Register Story, “The board has accused Rutland of not knowing the appropriate dose of anesthesia and failing to properly attempt to resuscitate Chen, who died in August. Rutland denies he was negligent.

Dotson wrote a letter to the medical board’s enforcement unit Oct. 9, vouching for Rutland’s record keeping and saying Chen died “in spite of appropriate resuscitation efforts.”

“In my opinion, Dr. Rutland is taking his probation very seriously and doing everything he can to more than meet the requisite requirements,” Dotson wrote. ( NOTE: Now there is that typical National Abortion Federation attitude: The abortion patient death is just a “complication” and not to be taken seriously…after all…it is only an “isolated” death unlike the murder of a few abortionist, who are typically male, and make money for NAF)

( More on that great NAF Board Member) The OC Register continues the report: In 1992, a pregnant woman was admitted to Centinela Hospital in Inglewood with bleeding. Dotson performed a C-section, but she continued to lose blood. Lawyers for the board said Dotson failed to identify her as high-risk based on her medical history or give her enough transfused blood. Additionally, he closed her abdomen and sent her to recovery instead of monitoring her and calling for a hematologist.

After her condition worsened she was taken back to the operating room for a hysterectomy. She suffered a heart attack and died of hemorrhaging.

At the time this was originally researched, Abortionist Rutland has been instructed to submit the name of a new monitor for board approval. ( Hmmm…I wonder who he would have selected? Another NAF member ?)

Read rest here

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Previous Stories: California Abortionist to face medical board after death of abortion patient

Abortion doc banned from doing abortions after death of patient, retains license to practice medicine

And : California: Abortion doc with dead patient monitored by abortion doc with dead patient, huh?

And: Allegations Of Molestation, Negligence Haunt Chula Vista Abortion Clinic

Congressional Black Caucus, Blue Dogs Join Conservatives to Oppose Internet Regulations ( Net Neutrality)

Posted in free speech, Net Neutrality with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 22, 2009 by saynsumthn

(CNSNews.com) –
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer

Two groups of House Democrats that are not always on the same political page have joined forces to oppose federal regulation of Internet traffic currently under consideration by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

The FCC is moving forward with plans to approve “net neutrality,” rules that essentially would prohibit Internet service providers from charging add-on fees to certain Web sites for accessing their networks. Advocates of net neutrality argue that without new rules, a duopoly of cable and telephone companies can “discriminate” against certain Web content.

But 72 House Democrats, all members of either the centrist Blue Dog Caucus or the more liberal Congressional Black Caucus, signed a letter to the FCC charging that “net neutrality” regulations would stifle competition.

We remain suspicious of conclusions based on slogans rather than substance, and of policies that restrict and inhibit the very innovation and growth that we all seek to achieve,” the members of each caucus said in a joint letter to the FCC last Thursday.

Opponents of the regulations say the rules would likely slow down the Web, make it tougher to block spam, create the need for more government bureaucrats as new bureaucratic rules tend to require, and discourage investment in broadband technology.

Democrats such as Reps. Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Henry Waxman of California have supported the regulation. Republicans have mostly led the opposition, with Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Charles Grassley of Iowa writing a letter to the FCC last week cautioning against the regulation.

But the letter from Democratic House members last week used some of the same arguments Republicans have advanced.

A decade ago, broadband was a nascent service, and only one percent of U.S. households connected to the Internet through broadband lines,” the letter from Democratic lawmakers said. “Today, by contrast, roughly two-thirds of Americans connect through high speed connections that are available to 95 percent of households.”

Signatories included prominent Democrats such as Reps. Health Shuler of North Carolina, Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, Bernie Thompson of Mississippi, Baron Hill of Indiana, Ed Towns of New York, Silvestre Reyes of Texas, and Alcee Hastings of Florida.

While we have further to go as a nation in extending the benefits of broadband to all, it is our strong belief that continued progress in expanding the reach and capabilities of broadband networks will require the commission to reiterate, and not repudiate, its historic commitment to competition, private investment and a restrained regulatory approach,” the letter continued.

Supporters of net neutrality rules include the left-wing MoveOn.org and the media reform group Free Press. Opponents include the pro-free market group Freedom Works and the conservative Family Research Council.

Primarily, the battle lines are drawn between ISPs such as Verizon and AT&T that want the freedom to charge fees to high volume Web sites to expedite connection speed, and major Web companies such as Google or Amazon.com that have a lot of traffic but want to avoid paying those fees.

The letter from the CBC and the Blue Dogs sparked anger from net neutrality supporters such as Gigi B. Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, a liberal advocacy group on digital issues. She accused them of betraying their constituents.

It’s a pity that 72 members of the Blue Dog Caucus and the Congressional Black Caucus are deserting one of the fundamental planks of President Obama’s platform — a free, open and nondiscriminatory Internet,” Sohn said in a statement.

The people who those members of Congress represent are the most at risk from the closed, controlling Internet that the phone and cable companies want,” Sohn continued.

The constituents of these members of Congress have the fewest choices of providers and access to the least competition. They have the lowest Internet data speeds; they have the diminished opportunity to use the Web to its fullest potential. They are being betrayed,” she said.

Speaking to the Brookings Institute on Sept. 21, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski stressed the need for net neutrality rules.

I am convinced that there are few goals more essential in the communications landscape than preserving and maintaining an open and robust Internet,” Genachowski said.

In view of these challenges and opportunities, and because it is vital that the Internet continue to be an engine of innovation, economic growth, competition and democratic engagement, I believe the FCC must be a smart cop on the beat preserving a free and open Internet,” he added.

But FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell strongly disagreed, saying there is no need for new Internet regulation.

The premise outlined in Chairman Genachowski’s speech is that the Internet is broken and the government has to fix it,” McDowell told a gathering at the conservative Heritage Foundation last week.

For the average consumer, are they being frustrated in some way, other than their broadband speed is too slow?” McDowell said. “Can they go to any site and download anything they want? For the vast majority of consumers, the answer is yes.

So if you want to envision a place where the Internet helps foster democracy, where it helps foster prosperity, where it can be a tool for raising the human condition, in a free and open manner, if you want to envision that, I think that exists today,” he added.

Internet service providers such as Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon Wireless argue that technological innovation is putting more and more pressure on bandwidth capabilities. As more people demand more services, such as streaming video at greater speed, the ISPs have to make more financial investments for Internet infrastructure.

The sites that tend to clog up the information highway the most – those with high volume – are most likely to be asked to pay an add-on fee to the ISP if there are no net neutrality rules.

Instead of passing the costs of those investments to the customer, the big ISPs could ask Google or Microsoft to pay extra for the use of its network. That’s because Google and similar high volume Web sites use more bandwidth than smaller sites. These high volume sites, thus, could slow connections speeds for users accessing other lower-traffic Web sites.

On the other hand, if a net neutrality regulation or law is passed, the ISP could not recoup more of those costs from Google, Microsoft or other tech giants. So the cost of adding lanes to the information highway would be passed on to consumers.

Advocates of net neutrality point to three major instances of what they consider abuse by the cable and telephone companies.

In 2004, the North Carolina telephone company, Madison River Communications, blocked its customers from using the popular Internet telephone service Vonage. Vonage complained to the FCC, and almost immediately the commission stepped in. Madison River paid a $15,000 fine to the FCC to settle the matter and vowed to stop blocking Vonage or any other competitors.

In September 2007, Verizon Wireless rejected a request from the NARAL Pro Choice America for a five-digit “short code.” These codes allow users interested in hearing messages from a business, movement, or politician to sign up and receive free text messages. The reason Verizon gave for the refusal is that it “does not accept issue-oriented (abortion, war, etc.) programs.”

Upon reversing itself, Verizon spokesman Jeffrey Nelson told The New York Times that the policy imposed in this instance resulted from an “incorrect interpretation” of a policy “designed to ward against communications such as anonymous hate messaging and adult materials sent to children.” Nelson said. “The decision to not allow text messaging on an important, though sensitive, public policy issue was incorrect.”

In late 2007, Comcast slowed the traffic for some subscribers who were downloading large files that were clogging the network. BitTorrent, creator of a popular file sharing program, allows users to exchange these big files on the Web. Those big files use a lot of capacity, which slows down other Web traffic.

To tackle this problem, Comcast slowed down the transmission of the big files shared on BitTorrent. This allowed its other traffic to move more quickly, but BitTorrent complained.

Comcast and BitTorrent worked out an agreement in April 2008, without a government solution, which allowed file-sharers to use Comcast’s network and not slow down the service for other users. However, the FCC still ordered Comcast to stop blocking or slowing files. Comcast is appealing the FCC order in federal court.

The three cases cited time and time again were resolved,” McDowell told CNSNews.com. “There are an incredible number of net communications every day. If we are looking at any misconduct, whether it’s intentional or not, as soon as the spotlight is shined on them, it would go away. We have more and more competition.

“If there is a bad actor out there acting in an anti-competitive way, then consumers would have a choice of other Internet providers,” McDowell added.