Watch WHITE COLLAR on USA Tonight

Last week, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) took a historic step towards developing new rules to safeguard the free and open nature of the Internet, fulfilling a key campaign promise of President Obama's and kicking off a process that has been years in the making.

If adopted, the Commission's net neutrality protections will ensure that users have unfettered access to all lawful online content and applications. These measures, which will be crafted over the coming months by the FCC, are urgently needed to preserve the openness and competition that have made the Internet the most successful communications medium in human history.

Since its earliest days, the Internet has been guided by the principles of non-discrimination and freedom. That means that all ones and zeros are treated equally and special interests and Corporate America can't direct Internet traffic to serve their own purposes at the expense of the public.

From the very beginning of the Internet, this electronic equality has enabled users to innovate, to get their voices heard, to launch new services and business enterprises, and to participate in cultural communications across the planet. Whether you're in the Fortune 500 or the freshman class at the University of Massachusetts, the Internet treats your online activities in the same manner. Whether you're trading stocks or selling socks, the true genius of the Internet is that you never have to ask permission to innovate.

That has always been the genius of the Internet's architecture. But that genius is now under attack - threatened by the prospect that corporations will seek to erect roadblocks on the information superhighway, charging telecommunications tolls every time you visit your favorite website or blog or even watch a video clip. Some corporations are now seeking to provide fast Internet speeds only to those who can afford to pay. Such a two-tiered system would be a radical, wrong-headed departure from the Internet's historic rules of the road and a new financial burden on consumers.

As the Internet continues to evolve, we are now faced with a choice. Can we preserve this wildly successful medium and the freedom it embodies, or do we permit a few large corporations to fundamentally alter how the Internet has historically functioned? Do we retain a level playing field or do we allow the imposition of new fees and the artificial creation of slow lanes and fast lanes for content providers on the Internet?

I strongly believe that we must enshrine basic principles of openness and fairness into the rules governing how Internet service providers operate - giving the FCC the authority to be the proverbial cop on the cyber beat, to ensuring that these principles of freedom and competition are upheld in the marketplace. In this way we can preserve the best of what the Internet is even as it continues to evolve.

The FCC has taken an historic step. Still, we should also ensure that future administrations do not cast aside net neutrality rules. To prevent this from happening, I believe it would be useful to incorporate these principles into law. That's why in July, I introduced H.R. 3458, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act, along with my colleague in the House of Representatives, Congresswoman Anna Eshoo (D-CA). Our bill, which is also cosponsored by House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA):

• Stipulates that unfettered access to the Internet to offer, access, and utilize content, services, and applications is vital for consumers and our economy;

• States that our country's global leadership in high technology stems directly from Internet policies that embraced competition and openness, ensuring that telecommunications networks are open to all lawful uses by all users - policies that now may be under threat if the ability of Internet content, service, and application providers to reach consumers were frustrated by interference from broadband telecommunications network operators;

• Calls for the United States to adopt a clear network neutrality policy preserving the open nature of Internet communications and networks based on non-discrimination while also permitting Internet service providers to take action to protect network reliability, prevent unwanted electronic mail, and thwart illegal content consistent with the overarching principle of non-discrimination;

• Directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to promulgate rules that ensure that providers of Internet access service abide by the duties established in the bill, including not blocking or impeding consumers' ability to access lawful content, applications or service; not preventing consumers from attaching any lawful device that does not harm the provider's network; and providing consumers with detailed information about their Internet service;

• Makes clear that nothing in this legislation affects any law or regulation addressing prohibited or unlawful activity, including any laws or regulations prohibiting theft of content. Our bill applies these network neutrality principles only to lawful Internet content. It does not undermine carriers' ability to perform network management, nor does it hinder carriers' capacity to fight piracy, or spam, or impact parents' ability to utilize content controls.

The FCC is now in the early stages of developing the rules of the road for the Internet, and our bill, which directs the FCC to undertake such a rulemaking process to preserve the Internet's openness for all users, is a complement to the FCC's efforts. Now more than ever, as this historic process unfolds and the legislation advances, the voice of the online community - from bloggers to gamers, from artists to small business entrepreneurs, from software engineers to those folks who just sent their first email - now is the time to rise up to defend internet freedom. Anyone reading the words on this blog has a vital role to play - get your voice heard, register your opinion, express your viewpoint. The future of the Internet may depend upon it.

Poltroon was the Word of the Day on the O'Reilly Factor with Bill O'Reilly today. The definition was not given, but O'Reilly said it's something viewers should not be.

A quick trip to Dictionary.com tells us that the word means, "a wretched coward." Synonym: craven.

But today didn't just include an unusual word. The delivery of that word wasn't exactly smooth.

WATCH HERE:

I grew up under the impression that I was the best trick-or-treater in the whole wide world, because my grandmother invented it!

UNITED NATIONS — Talks between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and challenger Abdullah Abdullah have broken down, and Abdullah is likely to pull out of next week's presidential runoff, a person with knowledge of the talks said Friday.

An announcement could come as early as Saturday but more likely Sunday, the person said.

Abdullah, who was once Karzai's foreign minister, put forward several conditions earlier this week for the Nov. 7 election to be credible, but intensive talks between the two candidates and their supporters over the past few days broke down Friday, the person, a Westerner, said on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private.

Abdullah gave Karzai until Saturday to agree to the conditions, the person said.

The political stalemate in Kabul comes as President Barack Obama has been meeting with his advisers to try to determine U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, including troop levels. A weakened Afghan government will make it harder for Obama to get public support for his efforts.

The runoff election in Afghanistan became necessary after widespread fraud in the first-round of voting in August resulted in thousands of Karzai's ballots being invalidated, pushing him below the required 50 percent margin to win. Concerns have been raised about a possible repetition of the ballot-box stuffing and distorted tallies in the second round.

Abdullah complained Monday that there were no assurances that the November vote would be fairer than the first balloting. The story was first reported by CNN.

One of Abdullah's demands was to fire the head of the Karzai-appointed Independent Election Commission, Azizullah Lodin, within five days.

He said Monday that Lodin has "no credibility." But Lodin has denied allegations of bias in favor of Karzai, and the election commission's spokesman has already said Lodin cannot be replaced by either side.

Abdullah also wanted changes in several ministries and a power-sharing deal, the person close to the talks told The Associated Press.

Abdullah was pressing for a power-sharing agreement with Karzai instead of a vote, but Karzai refused, insisting instead on a vote and then a power-sharing agreement, the person said.

A senior U.S official, speaking on condition of anonymity, wouldn't comment on the likelihood of Abdullah pulling out of the election.

"The U.S. remains committed to working with the Afghans to conclude their Presidential election process. If the two candidates agree a solution that is acceptable to both of them, in the interests of Afghanistan and is constitutionally sound, then that is a matter for them," the official said.

Despite the massive fraud and rejected ballots, Karzai's vote in the first round was far higher than Abdullah's and he is widely expected to win the runoff.

This year's election – the first run by Afghans since the ouster of the Taliban – was supposed to affirm the government's credibility. Instead, the massive fraud raised questions about the Karzai administration just as U.S. officials are debating whether to send more troops.

The Taliban, who threatened voters during the August balloting, have warned Afghans that they risk further attacks if they do not stay away from the polls next week. On Wednesday they targeted a U.N. guest house where 34 staff – including a number of U.N. election workers – were sleeping. Eight people were killed in the assault, five of them U.N. staff members.

___

Associated Press Writer Matthew V. Lee contributed to this report from Washington.

NEW YORK — Andre Agassi used crystal meth periodically for "a year or so," the eight-time Grand Slam champion revealed in an interview with People magazine.

In his upcoming autobiography, Agassi admits he used crystal meth in 1997 and failed a drug test – a result he says was thrown out after he lied by saying he "unwittingly" took the substance.

"If you're going to tell your story, you owe it to yourself to tell it honestly," Agassi told the magazine in its latest issue. "Especially if you're going to call it 'Open,'"

New excerpts published Friday reveal Agassi wore a hairpiece that nearly fell off at the 1990 French Open, became jealous during ex-wife Brooke Shields' appearance on "Friends," and how Shields put a photo of Steffi Graf – now married to Agassi – on the fridge for motivation to get in better shape before their wedding.

"It's a photo of the perfect woman, she says" Agassi wrote. "The perfect woman with the perfect legs – the legs Brooke wants."

Agassi also explains how he and Shields begin dating shortly after Christmas 1993 and connected by sharing their experiences with pushy parents. He also reveals that he stormed off the set of "Friends," becoming jealous when Shields had to lick actor Matt LeBlanc's hand.

"Have some more hand. I'm out of here," wrote Agassi, who said he consulted Shields on the book.

"A lot of our recollections were the same, but not the interpretations," Agassi told the magazine. "I tried to turn a harder lens on myself than on anyone else."

And it was the camera lens that haunted Agassi.

The tennis star's brother was sent running around Paris to find bobby pins to keep Agassi's disintegrating spiked-mullet weave from coming off his head before a match in the 1990 French Open.

"Of course I could play without my hairpiece. But after months of derision, criticism, mockery, I'm too self-conscious," he wrote. "Image Is Everything? What would they say if they knew? Win or lose, they wouldn't talk about my game. They'd only talk about my hair. I can close my eyes and almost hear it. And I know I can't take it."

NEW YORK — Regulators shut nine banks Friday, including Los Angeles-based California National, as the still-weak economy produces a stream of loan defaults.

The banks were units of privately held FBOP Corp., a Chicago-based bank holding company.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation said U.S. Bank in Minneapolis agreed to assume the deposits and most of the assets of the banks.

The banks are mostly in the West and had combined assets of $19.4 billion at the end of September.

The closings boost the number of failed U.S. banks this year to 115. The nine banks closed Friday were the most the agency has shut in one day since the financial crisis began taking down banks last year. In 1989, at the height of the savings-and-loan crisis, the FDIC closed 534 banks, or about 10 a week.

Besides California National Bank, the banks involved in the latest round were Bank USA, NA, in Phoenix; San Diego National Bank; Pacific National Bank in San Francisco; Park National Bank in Chicago; Community Bank of Lemont in Illinois; North Houston Bank, Madisonville State Bank, and Citizens National Bank in Teague, all in Texas.

Deposits as of Sept. 30, totaled $15.4 billion. The nine banks had 153 offices, which will reopen as U.S. Bank branches Saturday.

FDIC spokesman David Barr said that because U.S. Bank assumed all the deposits, the plan will feel like a merger for customers.

"It's not a merger, but it walks like a merger and quacks like a merger," he said.

Failures have been especially concentrated in California, Georgia and Illinois. While the pounding from losses on home mortgages may be nearing an end, delinquencies on commercial real estate loans remain a hot spot of potential trouble, regulators say. If the recession deepens, defaults on the high-risk loans could spike. Many regional banks, especially, hold large concentrations of these loans.