3 ms·
I don't like Trump at all, but this kind of "outrage for the sake or outrage" article really makes the media look bad. The worst part of this bill, IMO, is tha
by jlarocco 8y ago
I don't like Trump at all, but this kind of "outrage for the sake or outrage" article really makes the media look bad.
The worst part of this bill, IMO, is that it includes hurricane relief funds in a bill otherwise targeting minor airline regulations.
But otherwise, as far as I'm concerned somebody who'd stuff a dog in an overhead bin and smoke e-cigarettes and talk on the phone all flight deserves to be thrown off the plane.
- khawkins 8y agoStapling bills together has been modus operandi for congress for decades. I'm not saying it's a good thing, but it's certainly not unique.
- perennate 8y agoTo me the article's tone sounded more surprised at how little coverage there was on the bill, than outraged at the bill's contents. In fact, I thought the article gave a quite positive view of the bill.
- djsumdog 8y agoYea it really did. They could have just left the entire Trump part out really. It's just a bill, that was passed and signed into law. Nothing unusual. It seems to help people and it's weird the Trump administration didn't try to do more marketing around it to make him look better.
- jlarocco 8y agoHonestly, I really don't see why it would get much coverage. Contrary to the article's hyperbole, it doesn't "radically change" anything, and I think most reasonable people would be in favor of the new rules. Mundane laws like this get passed all the time.