[jonomw]

He obviously is intelligent if he has made it this far, but taking everything he says, I can't regard him as more than an idiot.

He says contradictory things. He says he supports an idea but doesn't support the act of enforcing it. His apparent ideology is in direct conflict with his actions. He either fundamentally misunderstands the situation, is majorly corrupt, or is simply malicious (which I doubt).

[anigbrowl]

It's good to give people the benefit of the doubt - once. If they persistently behave in perverse fashion, then it's also OK to conclude that they're assholes.

[bkeroack]

> He says he supports an idea but doesn't support the act of enforcing it.

I support the idea of being faithful in your marriage, but I'm 100% opposed to the federal government enforcing this. How is that contradictory?

[jonomw]

I understand your point and will address it, but I think you chose a bad example. I don't think anyone thinks that government on any level should enforce a marriage (as in, forcing two people to stay wed). On the other hand, Pai thinks that some of these things should be regulated, just not by the FCC or the federal government.

The problem is, there isn't another place for the regulation to happen. The FTC simply does not have the expertise or resources and the internet needs broad conforming rules to perform well, so a state-by-state solution would prove disastrous.

[studentrob]

Businesses are not people and do not deserve the same freedoms granted to individuals.

When you give a private entity the right to trample on individual rights, the individual's rights are weakened.