WSJ Gets It Wrong
Monday, December 15th, 2008 by Harry Lewis
They prednisolone should also speak with their doctor if they experience side purchase clozapine online effects due to statins that affect their daily life. A buy cheap petcam (metacam) oral suspension online person should speak with their doctor to find the best buy viagra internet treatment options if they are experiencing kidney failure. If a buy cost from india child has symptoms of PANDAS for over a week, a order metronidazole gel doctor may order a blood test to see whether the cheapest pyrantel pamoate child had a preceding streptococcal infection. A doctor may also zofran for sale prescribe certain medications to help manage high blood pressure associated order levitra from canada with PSGN. During this procedure, healthcare professionals pass a small buy remeron tube with a camera through the urethra to look inside purchase viagra without prescription the bladder. People may wish to seek help from a mental.
A Wall Street Journal story about a proposed agreement between Google and Internet Service Providers suggests that Google is pulling a double-cross, given its prior commitment to Net Neutrality. Unfortunately the details of the proposal haven’t been made public. But the consensus of the knowledgeable is that the WSJ misunderstands what is going on and that Net Neutrality is not threatened by Google’s proposal. A greater worry is perhaps about the implications of Google’s increasingly monopoly power over bits, but that wouldn’t mean that its packets got delivered faster than those of some minor player.) Thanks to Steve Schultze for pointing me to this collection of comments.