President Bush made a pitch for universal broadband recently, a vital tool in the war on terror:
Remember, we’re still in a battle against ideological extremists who use terrorism as a tool to frighten, scare, kill people such as us who love freedom. And, therefore, what I’m telling you is as broadband expands, it’s going to enable us better to protect our homeland, which is a vital concern of any of us in our government.
He pitched three technologies, 1) powerline:
We need to use our power lines better. They go everywhere. It seems to make sense, doesn’t it, if what you’re looking for is avenues into the home. Well, electricity goes into the home. And so one great opportunity is to spread broadband throughout America via our power lines.
and 2) WiFi:
We’re setting up a wi-fi hot zone, which means our citizens are more likely to be more productive than the citizens from a neighboring community. It’s a great opportunity.
and enhanced cellular data services:
Another kind of wireless broadband would be more wide-ranging. It would be based on mobile wireless. It wouldn’t depend on a physical connection to an existing cable or telephone modem as wi-fi does.
In response, John Kerry pitched his three preferred forms of communication, telegraph, telephone, and tell-a-woman.
sounds like a meager attempt to detract from important news to me. there is a loose-at-best connection between expanding technology and the war on terror. this kind of tangent has no place in the environment bush and his cohorts are responsible for creating.
oh well, i cant expect much.
You could work on your grammar, spelling, and punctuation even though computers are beyond you.
what is the point in critiquing syntax?
This grammar lesson brought to you by George Bush, in that article:
“We want to make sure our radars work well.”
But who can forget these favorites:
“They said this issue wouldn’t resignate with the People. They’ve been proved wrong, it does resignate.”
“Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take
dream.”
It’s just further proof that you don’t need a full understanding of English grammar in order to
….become president. 🙂
“Radars” is a perfectly good word, Mike – it’s the plural of “radar” and refers to multiple radar installations.
If you’re going to play the language snob, you’ll need to develop some language skills, actually.
You don’t have to be a language snob to point out our president has had terrible grammar in the past. Matt tried to make a comment above, and all you have for a rebuttal is a critique of his grammar ?
Bush throwing a term like ‘wi-fi’ into his remarks sounds like an attempt to be in-with-technology. His remarks make it (both wi-fi and broadband) sound as if government could actually do something to change the adoption of those technologies, which it can’t.
There is a reason why ‘America ranks 10th amongst the industrialized world’ in subscriber lines, and it is for various reasons, but it’s not just because the US government is blocking that technology. His comments make it sound as if government and government alone can get broadband to rural areas, and I’d be surprised if you agreed with that.
Mike, you’re
a moronuninformed. I work in the invention department of a major networking company that’s right in the middle of Wi-Fi, 3G+, UWB, and Powerline networking, and from where I sit there’s lots that government can do to increase the adoption and spread of broadband, such as releasing more unlicensed spectrum, promoting standards, and offering tax breaks to carriers.The US needs to catch-up in this area, the Bush Administration knows it, and they’ve been far and away the best Administration we’ve ever had for broadband.
I’m well aware of your field, Richard. If I wasn’t, then I’d be blind/deaf, because you’re constantly reminding people of that here on this blog.
I remembered reading about this in the past:
“Wireless is a last-resort technology, and we shouldn’t kid ourselves that it’s anything to use when there’s a wired alternative.” (that’s you)
either way, it doesn’t change that Bush attempts to be tech-savvy when he and his administration has put technology on the back burner these past 4 years. The telco industry stills sucks when compared to Europe, and the broadband adoption/innovation still sucks as well. I will agree that government could do more to help, but having these sorts of things actually happen in reality will be up to the private sector.
Put in other words, it’s not like there are some incredible amount of technology that isn’t happening because the Fed is blocking it…it’s not as if companies are just aching to get their broadband/wireless technology out the door, and the only problem is the Fed.
If that was the case with government, then the lobbyists would have taken care of it right away, just like they do every day in the automotive safety legislation.
p.s. calling me a moron doesn’t support your point that Bush is a wonder for all to see by putting “wi-fi” in his remarks.
?Wireless is a last-resort technology, and we shouldn?t kid ourselves that it?s anything to use when there?s a wired alternative.?
Truer words have never been spoken, unless they are: “the Bush Administration has done more to stimulate the rollout of broadband than any Adminstration in history.”
And just for the record, Al Gore didn’t invent the Internet.
“Bush has not always been so friendly to broadband wireless interests. Critical to current US trials of broadband wireless technologies such as WiMAX are grants from the US Rural Internet Access Authority, whose remit is to bring broadband access to the most remote areas of the country, and which is increasingly looking to WiMAX as its best option.
However, Bush has long eyed these grants as budgetary fat. While his government plans to award $11.3m in broadband grants to 34 rural communities in 20 states by mid-2004, to en-able them to provide residents with computers and Internet access, the proposed 2004 budget calls for cutting the $20m total rural broadband grant program to $2m in 2004-5. The government argues that rural subsidies deter operators from investing in rural areas, and that a freer market would speed the adoption of 802.16a.
As the market matures, there is a case that the role of public grants may decline as broadband wireless, for the first time, gains the potential to support free market operators without subsidies, because of the lower cost of equipment, higher demand for broadband data (and possibly voice) services and the avail-ability of commodity silicon.
For instance, Qwest, which sold its rural telephone business some year ago, is considering launching a service for the North West combining WiMAX BWA with satellite for TV and back-haul.
So, Mike…you just don’t like Bush saying “wi-fi”, is that it?
In France they pronouce it “we-fee”. Frogs are funny little bastards.
No, I don’t care if he said “wi-fi” or “802.11x” or any other moniker. The fact that he mentions it, and Bennett (and his ilk) seem to point and say “See ?! This President TOTALLY gets it!!” is what bothers me.
I’m not arguing that Kerry does, either, or probably will. My complaint isn’t even Bush-related, it’s political speech related. It just feels like a meaningless include to win support, which is great if he ends up meaning it, but I have a feeling he won’t.
Love him or hate him, you have to admit that W. sticks to his word more than any other president in the history of civilization.
Ask ole Saddam about that.
oh, you must be referring to that oh so successful no child left behind thing.
yeah, he really came through on that one huh.
Bush was governor of a fairly advanced technological state, one that is actually installing we-fee in their state-owned rest areas that populate the interstates. Bush was governor of Texas when Austin boomed beyond control (and was gone when it busted flat 🙂 Why do you just naturally assume that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about? Is it because he’s just dumb and could never grasp these concepts?
More to the point of RB’s post, what is Kerry’s technology plan/stand? Entrepreneurs? Small business?
Anyhoo…as a semi-rural dude, it’s nice to see a real problem talked about, and it’s even nicer that it’s Big Dummy Bush.
“Love him or hate him, you have to admit that W. sticks to his word more than any other president in the history of civilization.” –Bennett.
some examples of sticking to his word:
“I don?t think nation-building missions are worthwhile.” — Source: Presidential Debate at Wake Forest University Oct 11, 2000
A – “I want justice. And there’s an old poster out West, I recall, that says, ‘Wanted: Dead or Alive.'” [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01″
B – “I don’t know where he is. You know, I just don’t spend that much time on him? I truly am not that concerned about him.? [President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
but I digress. I don’t know what Kerry’s plan is…but from his site (which sounds the same as Bush):
“Reallocate Spectrum. Wi-Fi networks at home are becoming cheaper, a Wi-Fi phone has been developed, and schools nationwide are setting up Wi-Fi hot spots to connect their students to the Internet. The potential for this and other technologies that could operate in unlicensed spectrum is limitless. However, our spectrum rules are designed on the notion that spectrum is a finite, scarce resource. Kerry will work to make more spectrum available for experimentation with new, more efficient technologies and radios. He also believes that the Federal government could reallocate spectrum and make it available for third generation wireless phone networks.”
?I don?t think nation-building missions are worthwhile.? ? Source: Presidential Debate at Wake Forest University Oct 11, 2000
Nation building is not worthwhile. Fighting terrorists is. Gaining a mighty strong military foothold in the Middle East is. Liberating a people and putting a tyrant in chains (and a nice Sand Hill Road VC dress-up outfit) is.
So, do you reckon Kerry knows what all that stuff means? Whatever — it’s nice to see that he’s at least cognizant of the possibilities.