From the telco point of view, "consumers" are connected to "content" over the internet by three different pipes: (1) the big connection between "content provider" and a backbone; (2) the backbone itself (the biggest pipe of all); and (3) the connection between the "consumer" and the backbone. 

The network neutrality debate is about the third segment -- the piece between home and backbone.  That piece is offered by (at most) a duopoly in the U.S. -- large cable and phone companies who aren't competing very hard.  The Bells are the result of anticompetitive behavior (and are quickly re-monopolizing), and the cablecos have been the beneficiaries of exclusive franchises for a long time.

The telcos say:  Don't create regulation that is worse than the problem!  So far, all these abuses you're worried about are theoretical.  Google is well-armed -- they can sue if there's a problem in the future. And "consumers" are used to reaching Google and other "content providers," and they'll complain if they can't.

The two simple, sound-bite responses to the telco point of view:

1.  You've Told Us to Assume Abuses.  Ed Whitacre, CEO of AT&T, said:  "There seems to be a mentality [on the part of online companies] that they can put more and more through our pipes for free. . . We're the ones who built the network. You cannot make that sort of investment if you can't make a return on the capital. They're more than welcome to use our networks, but if they do, they're going to have to pay. It's not free." 

This means that carriers plan to charge "content sources" for crossing their broadband access points to reach "consumers."  That's differential treatment.  In the context of the market control that the telcos have, that will be immediately abusive -- of course they'll favor their own content and try to make exclusive deals.

2.  Don't Turn the Internet Into a Cable System.  What's all this about "consumers" and "content"?  We know that Americans like to post material of their own online.  Almost 50 million of us have already done that, and teenagers have grown up with interactive media -- almost 60% of them have created and shared content online. We're users, not consumers.  You're dimming our expectations -- we don't expect to be able to upload with ease, and we wish we had the same kind of broadband access as South Korea.

A third, meta-is-bettah point is this:  The telcos are wrong to think of the internet as a combination of three pipe segments.  Instead, as David Weinberger says:

The Internet is a medium only at the bit level. At the human level, it is a conversation that, because of the persistence and linkedness of pages, has elements of a world. It could only be a medium if we absolutely didn't care.