6 ms·
It's mostly how our Republican governments work.
by sxates 9y ago
It's mostly how our Republican governments work.
- ganoushoreilly 9y agoBoth sides are guilty of this, anyone who believe one party is less in it for fame, power, and money, than the other is just as naive as those that voted in our current president.
- leereeves 9y ago> just as naive as those that voted in our current president. So you feel both sides are guilty, but not Hillary?
- jetpks 9y ago> Both sides are guilty of this, This republican excuse for poor government is so tired. Further, from the third paragraph in the article: > But during the Obama administration, the FCC determined repeatedly that broadband isn't reaching Americans fast enough, pointing in particular to lagging deployment in rural areas. So no, it's not really both sides here. There is very clearly one side doing a shit job.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- pilsetnieks 9y agoIt's a false equivalency. One party's appointee fought for net neutrality and tried to regulated the ISPs as a utility; the other's is now actively dismantling everything his predecessor had accomplished, not even trying to pretend it's not in the ISPs' interests.
- ganoushoreilly 9y agoI'm speaking in a broader sense. Both parties have agendas, many of which behind closed doors equate to self improvement and consolidation of power. They just wrap the turd up in a red or blue bow.
- blhablhablha 9y agoThis is doubling down on the false equivalence. The phrase "broader sense" is a weak counter to the accurately identified flaw in your approach.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- enraged_camel 9y agoThis whole "both parties are equally bad" meme needs to die, as it is categorically false.
- tormeh 9y ago>Both sides are guilty of this, anyone who believe one party is less in it for fame, power, and money, than the other is just as naive as those that voted in our current president. This idea is not only false but also poisonous to democracy. If it becomes dominant then the US will be vulnerable to revolution. While I think an overhaul of the constitution is about time, a revolution is usually highly unpleasant. If all democratic choices are equally bad, then you have two choices left: Resignation or revolution. This is kind of what Trump is about, I think: A lot of angry people wanted to see if they could vote for something else than the traditional two ideologies that they regarded as equally bad.
- ganoushoreilly 9y agoHave you worked for the government, have you been behind closed doors with representatives of both parties? I have and you're foolish if you don't think they have similar agendas with fringe conflicts.
- tormeh 9y agoObviously they do. Power corrupts and we all know this. The question is whether they are equally bad.
- s73ver 9y agoNo. This both-sidesism is laughably wrong. There are extremely clear distinctions between the two parties. Anyone claiming they are the same is either intellectually lazy or corrupt.
- charlieflowers 9y agoWell, ok, fair point. You're forcing me to better articulate myself (I'm not the GP, but still...). It's not that they're "the same," but they've come to reach a homeostasis that protects each side while not truly fixing hard problems. They may not have sought that out intentionally, but now that they're in it, they're intentionally, happily, staying in it. The end result is, we're watching a play, where each side has some powerful dramatic lines full of tense conflict, but it's all fake and they're really cooperating to keep everything pretty much the same.
- muninn_ 9y agoIdk why you're being downvoted. Even if the parties have a disagreement it is usually just superficial. Both are still in favor of things like bombing, for example, both wanted TPP (and Trump killed it, funny enough) and a myriad of other things. They aren't exactly the same, but they are on a lot of matters.
- s73ver 9y agoThey're being downvoted because their point, and yours, is absolutely bunk. You pick one or two token things on which they agree, and ignore an entire host of issues on which they have significant differences.
- muninn_ 9y agoYou missed what I wrote. Of course they disagree on things, but those things are largely superficial. They don't disagree, for example, on foreign policy. They don't disagree on the NSA collecting bulk data, they don't disagree on promoting corporate welfare. They disagree on some important things too, like environmental policy, but that's just a matter of who is paying who. Calling this "absolute bunk" just demonstrates you don't know what you're talking about.
- croon 9y agoI could copy, paste and format, but I'll just link this comment instead, because it's pretty thorough in showing how wrong that idea is: https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/6s1mge/10_members_of_congress_rake_fcc_over_the_coals_in/dl9mphu/ https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/6s1mge/10_membe...
- yellowapple 9y agoSorry, I wasn't aware Nancy Pelosi is a Republican.
- malchow 9y agoOr thank Democrats for advancing pork-laden public-private partnership regional cable monopolies that gave rise to the copper behemoths of today. Don't try to make this partisan.