3 ms·

Are there no legitimate criticisms of government largess? Has the media not been complicit in terrible debacles which we now know of, such as selling false pret

Are there no legitimate criticisms of government largess? Has the media not been complicit in terrible debacles which we now know of, such as selling false pretenses for war? If you want to take that (partisan?) tack, you might turn it around and observe that both halves of the media take their turns being in opposition.

pjc50 5y ago
I noticed that the anti-government line from the right didn't stop when they got into power. This NYT headline sums it up quite nicely: "Trump, Head of Government, Leans Into Antigovernment Message" https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/us/politics/trump-coronavirus.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/us/politics/trump-coronav... They're not against the government, they speak out against the concept of government itself.
- krapp 5y ago
  >They're not against the government, they speak out against the concept of government itself. Nothing in that article describes Trump or the Republican Party speaking against the "concept of government itself." That would make them anarchists, which clearly they are not. The article points out numerous pro-government positions by Trump and implies that his position on the legitimate purpose and scope of government, rather than being founded on a rigid anti-government ideological core, is entirely transactional. The same guy who supported political protests against vaccination procedures and his opponent's election was shouting "LAW AND ORDER" from Twitter and sending troops into Portland... to crack down on political protesters. And as far as the Republicans themselves go, the party is famously pro-military, pro-police, pro hardline stances on drug enforcement and immigration, and pro Constitution. The only form of government they consistently oppose are social programs (with the exceptions of agricultural subsidies and the GI bill), spending related to arts and sciences, public education and anything else they consider "leftist" (or more simply, anything their political opponents support.)
- aww_dang 5y ago
  Yes, and as you recall the NYT and other partisan sources spent much of his administration alleging that he was a Russian agent. They also claimed he didn't win the election legitimately. Before that, there was a similar theory advanced that Obama wasn't a citizen. Your point is a partisan one and you use a partisan source to back it up. All while ignoring similar behavior from the opposing side. Both sides criticize and question the legitimacy of government when in opposition. The point stands. Separate from the partisan nonsense, it is possible that government overreaches. There are legitimate criticisms of government largess. However, blanketly categorizing these criticisms as anti-government is also nonsense. Especially if it is in pursuit of a nakedly partisan point.

pjc50 5y ago

I noticed that the anti-government line from the right didn't stop when they got into power. This NYT headline sums it up quite nicely: "Trump, Head of Government, Leans Into Antigovernment Message" https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/us/politics/trump-coronavirus.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/us/politics/trump-coronav... They're not against the government, they speak out against the concept of government itself.

krapp 5y ago
>They're not against the government, they speak out against the concept of government itself. Nothing in that article describes Trump or the Republican Party speaking against the "concept of government itself." That would make them anarchists, which clearly they are not. The article points out numerous pro-government positions by Trump and implies that his position on the legitimate purpose and scope of government, rather than being founded on a rigid anti-government ideological core, is entirely transactional. The same guy who supported political protests against vaccination procedures and his opponent's election was shouting "LAW AND ORDER" from Twitter and sending troops into Portland... to crack down on political protesters. And as far as the Republicans themselves go, the party is famously pro-military, pro-police, pro hardline stances on drug enforcement and immigration, and pro Constitution. The only form of government they consistently oppose are social programs (with the exceptions of agricultural subsidies and the GI bill), spending related to arts and sciences, public education and anything else they consider "leftist" (or more simply, anything their political opponents support.)
aww_dang 5y ago
Yes, and as you recall the NYT and other partisan sources spent much of his administration alleging that he was a Russian agent. They also claimed he didn't win the election legitimately. Before that, there was a similar theory advanced that Obama wasn't a citizen. Your point is a partisan one and you use a partisan source to back it up. All while ignoring similar behavior from the opposing side. Both sides criticize and question the legitimacy of government when in opposition. The point stands. Separate from the partisan nonsense, it is possible that government overreaches. There are legitimate criticisms of government largess. However, blanketly categorizing these criticisms as anti-government is also nonsense. Especially if it is in pursuit of a nakedly partisan point.