Boehner’s decision to invite Netanyahu to address Congress without first consulting the sitting president has no precedent in American history. Because it’s unconstitutional. The Constitution says that the president “shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers” from foreign governments.

Both sides are pressing for net neutrality and anything that's telling you otherwise is just propaganda. Conservatives say it's the thought police and liberals say it's corporate sellouts. The truth is that both sides do want net neutrality, they just want it in different ways. Here's some great commentary from /u/keypuncher about the Republican side, he puts it much better than I ever could:

The first group as all for net neutrality as a concept, but believes that Obama's "Net Neutrality" as implemented by the FCC, will result in government regulation of content on a political basis. The reason for this belief is that we know the government has already been working on doing precisely that, via the Truthy Project and the current FEC effort to regulate bloggers and private individuals' political speech. This is the view I personally hold.

The second group believes that the internet should be allowed to grow via the free market, and that pure "net neutrality" would stifle that. Of course this group would also be against a version of net neutrality that did the same thing and allowed the government to stifle political speech.

On the liberal side, they want the exact same thing, less corporate greed in the system, but it is their view that this can only be achieved via government oversight. This approach comes with higher budgets, less individual liberty, and the risk of censorship and the like, but is also more likely to go according to plan because it happens unilaterally and bypasses a lot of different factors along the way.

I like net neutrality, everyone does. Being opposed to net neutrality is like being opposed to education. It's just the matter of delivery that people are disagreeing on.

If you ask me, the only part of the net neutrality decision that matters is the ability to strike down monopolies, the rest of it shouldn't have even been a discussion. I get internet from a very small ISP and they're fantastic. We had fiber here in rural Appalachia long before they even announced Google Fiber in any other part of the state.

/r/worldpolitics Thread Link - blogs.reuters.com