5 ms·

.. isn't "the voice of the white house" the voice of the nation? You seem to believe the White House wasn't voted into power and somehow does not have America'

.. isn't "the voice of the white house" the voice of the nation? You seem to believe the White House wasn't voted into power and somehow does not have America's best interest at heart. Don't forget to remain just as critical when the next president takes office.

trhway 10y ago
>.. isn't "the voice of the white house" the voice of the nation? >You seem to believe the White House wasn't voted into power and somehow does not have America's best interest at heart. your statement sounds just like the propaganda from my childhood in USSR. Substituting the voice of the governing body for the voice of the nation has been a kingpin of any totalitarian state known to date.
tristanj 10y ago
> isn't "the voice of the white house" the voice of the nation? Hardly. Only two of the ~4000 people who work for the White House are actually elected. A further dozen or so need to be approved by congress. The rest are chosen without the consent of the people.
ekianjo 10y ago
> You seem to believe the White House wasn't voted into power and somehow does not have America's best interest at heart. Voted in power by a bit more than 50% of voters, of which only 60~70% amongst the registered ones bothered to vote. That's a minority no matter how you look at it. And on top of that, people under a certain age are not considered able to vote - and in certain times women and people of different races were removed from voting either. Add to this that a president can do the total opposite of what he was elected for, and there is no guarantee at all that you get what you voted for even if you were in the lucky minority who "won".
Bartweiss 10y ago
> somehow does not have America's best interest at heart Not at all. You only have to believe that the White House isn't guaranteed to have America's best interest at heart. We don't emphasize a strong and independent press because the President is always evil, or un-American. We emphasize it because we elected Nixon, and we could elect someone far worse than him. (We may well have just done so.) Like maintaining a military in times of peace, we benefit from maintaining a free press as long as there is the possibility of a White House working against our best interests.
metaphorm 10y ago
and yet there is much disagreement about what actions are in America's best interest. and even then, why are you so confident that politicians and bureaucrats are motivated by "America's best interest"? Even supposing they are, and do not have complicated and conflicting motivations (as most human beings tend to), why are you so confident that they know which actions ought to be taken to advance those interests?

trhway 10y ago

>.. isn't "the voice of the white house" the voice of the nation? >You seem to believe the White House wasn't voted into power and somehow does not have America's best interest at heart. your statement sounds just like the propaganda from my childhood in USSR. Substituting the voice of the governing body for the voice of the nation has been a kingpin of any totalitarian state known to date.

tristanj 10y ago

> isn't "the voice of the white house" the voice of the nation? Hardly. Only two of the ~4000 people who work for the White House are actually elected. A further dozen or so need to be approved by congress. The rest are chosen without the consent of the people.

ekianjo 10y ago

> You seem to believe the White House wasn't voted into power and somehow does not have America's best interest at heart. Voted in power by a bit more than 50% of voters, of which only 60~70% amongst the registered ones bothered to vote. That's a minority no matter how you look at it. And on top of that, people under a certain age are not considered able to vote - and in certain times women and people of different races were removed from voting either. Add to this that a president can do the total opposite of what he was elected for, and there is no guarantee at all that you get what you voted for even if you were in the lucky minority who "won".

Bartweiss 10y ago

> somehow does not have America's best interest at heart Not at all. You only have to believe that the White House isn't guaranteed to have America's best interest at heart. We don't emphasize a strong and independent press because the President is always evil, or un-American. We emphasize it because we elected Nixon, and we could elect someone far worse than him. (We may well have just done so.) Like maintaining a military in times of peace, we benefit from maintaining a free press as long as there is the possibility of a White House working against our best interests.

metaphorm 10y ago

and yet there is much disagreement about what actions are in America's best interest. and even then, why are you so confident that politicians and bureaucrats are motivated by "America's best interest"? Even supposing they are, and do not have complicated and conflicting motivations (as most human beings tend to), why are you so confident that they know which actions ought to be taken to advance those interests?