corporate greed 

Ok, Comcast, AT&T, etc. have done some bad things by placing various filters on some of the services provided to users. And, every time they do, they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar and the people take them to task. When was the last time anyone in "The Government" got called out for stealing from the American public? And, in those very few times when it did happen, what were the repercussions?

Under government rule, the people get what the government decides. There is no innovation, no growth, and, since the government cannot afford to be competitive, no opportunity for competition.

Under capitalism, the systems and services evolve to meet the peoples needs, and to keep the businesses profitable. If, statistically 5% of the users take up 95% of the bandwidth, what's wrong with charging them more? Different IP packets, serving different types of services, demand different priorities. That is a technological fact. You can't legislate it away any more than you can vote to round Pi to 3.15 because it makes math easier.

Stand with Freedom: Oppose the oxymoronic 'Net Neutrality' 

Ok, so what we have here is the basic argument that is consuming America on all levels, and not just about Internet Neutrality. On one side, we have the capitalists who believe that "The Government" is the enemy and that "The Market" will balance everything out and solve all the problems. On the other side we have (for lack of a less antagonistic term) the anti-capitalists who believe that evil corporations will screw everybody in their quest for money and power, and the only solution is for "The Government" to take over and ensure everyone is treated fairly.
Let's take a look at history and see which view is more likely to be accurate:

For all of known history, individual large economic powers (cf. evil corporations) have existed for relatively short periods of time. While some have lasted for centuries such as the Rothschild banking houses, most have barely outlived their founders. These organizations reached their pinnacle of power by providing services that most people found useful and satisfactory, regardless of the fact that a small percentage of persons received less than adequate (if any) services. When an organization blocked innovation, they were either quickly surpassed and they fell (check out IBM, once the biggest seller of Business Machines in the world, now barely hanging on because they couldn't compete), or they populace rose up and broke the strangle-hold, as was done with the original AT&T. This was done through Government intervention, but WITHOUT Government take-over either outright or through massive legislation. As a matter if fact, the breakup of AT&T is the opposite of this net neutrality idea, and was to foster competition instead of equality of service. So, while there have been some bottle-necks, over time quality services become available to everybody, and the level of quality continues to increase.

Now, let's look at those services that are Government run or highly Government regulated:
Social Security: Started off with good intentions and a strong plan which, after less than 30 years turned to FAILURE
Medicare: Started off with good intentions and a strong plan which, after less than 20 years turned to FAILURE
Universal Health: FAIL (everywhere but here, where we will obviously do it different because everybody else just got it wrong - FAIL,FAIL,FAIL)
Banking: Started off with good intentions and a strong plan which, after less than 15 years turned to FAILURE - It wasn't the "fat-cat" bankers who got us in this current pickle, it was the Libs in Government who mandated that the banks HAD to loan money for housing to people THEY KNEW couldn't pay it back.)
Postal Service: FAIL - Raised their rates again today, and are talking about cutting delivery on Wednesdays and Saturdays
TVA: Started off with good intentions and a strong plan which, after less than 25 years turned to FAILURE
CCC: Started off with good intentions and a strong plan which, after less than 15 years turned to FAILURE
DMV/DOT: FAIL
U.S. Highway system: Started off with good intentions and a strong plan which, after less than 35 years turned to FAILURE

All these programs have the same thing in common: in order to be "Fair" and "Just" and help the lowest 10% get what everybody else had to pay for, The government "stepped in" and over-ruled the prevailing market forces. This worked fine for a relatively short period of time but, as the systems went more and more out of balance, the wobble and gyrations eventually caused system failure.

Every single time, in every single case, when "The Goverment" has taken over or massively regulated a service, either the cost has gone up and the quality has dropped like a rock, or the service itself has crashed and burned, leaving everyone without.

That's why I don't want the government messing with the internet, or the health-care system, or banking, or the auto industry or anything else. While a particular service may suck right now, capitalism will surely improve on it because it's in a business' best interests to do so. If company A doesn't give you what you want, Company B will come along a offer it. You may not like - or be able to afford - the solution (right now), but under capitalism, the quality will continue to go up and the cost will continue to go down. That is a proven historical fact.
The exact opposite is true of Government run systems. The only one in the U.S.A. that works worth a tinker's damn today is the Post Office and they do it by outsourcing to Federal Express!