I’ve been meaning to write about Sprint and the alliance it’s making with the shady, fringe left. Well, since that alliance is against AT&T, and trying to bring government down on AT&T, they’ve started to do the work for me with their myth busting posts. Part 1 takes down fringe left group Public Knowledge and its testimony to the Senate. AT&T illustrates how absurd it is to criticize the firm for planning to run three networks in parallel: “2G” GSM, “3G” UTMS/HSPA, and “4G” LTE. Guys, this is why we need more spectrum: innovation and growth. But, the radical left would rather we all suffer just to lash out for socialism.

Tech transitions take time. AT&T points out that when the FCC-mandated end of life came for “1G” analog cellular service, there were a million of their customers still using it. Just imagine how many people would be disrupted if the radical left imposed an arbitrary end of life for GSM!

AT&T’s myth busting Part 2 takes on Sprint directly. You may recall that Sprint went to the FCC demanding cheap and easy access to its competitors’ networks (via “data roaming”), a request the FCC granted, resulting in Verizon suing. Well, Sprint previously argued that this access, even before the FCC order, was sufficient to make it unnecessary for Sprint to improve its own network, while now Sprint argues the AT&T/T-Mobile deal must not go through because it allegedly endangers its access to buy service for its customers. Says AT&T: “For whatever reason, Sprint has chosen to lease rather than to build. But that is a strategic decision by Sprint, not a reason for government regulation or intervention here.”

Speaking of competition, Chuck Grassley wants to smother LightSquared in the crib and deny Americans that much more competition.

Pair of quick hits to close out the night: Our old neo-Marxist friends at Free Press are so far left that they’re being excluded from the Sprint/fringe left coalition against AT&T. Wow. Even the left is realizing that “Free Press is utterly unworthy of consideration or affiliation.”

Unfortunately the FCC is still infected with the radical ideology Free Press has been flogging:

Wouldn’t it have been fantastic if the FCC had adhered to the PRA – and engaged the process before, rather than after?

Wouldn’t it have been even more fantastic if the FCC had adhered to their legal limits – and never in the first place voted themselves wired and wireless Internet Overlords?

Indeed it would have.