4 ms·

I hope at this point people agree this has gone well beyond partisanship. Having a private citizen unilaterally gutting government agencies is an affront to th

by tw04 2y ago

I hope at this point people agree this has gone well beyond partisanship. Having a private citizen unilaterally gutting government agencies is an affront to the checks and balances of a functioning democracy.

roenxi 2y ago
Which check or balance do you think is being ignored here? The point of the executive branch is to be the one where unelected and loosely vetted administrators work. Congress is mostly voted officials, the judiciary is the group that are carefully vetted for cultural fit and the executive is where the messy parts happen with oversight from the other two government branches. It is where people like Musk are supposed to be working - the president thinks he a good person to be wielding power.
- WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
  > Which check or balance do you think is being ignored here? Which check + balance is being adhered to? Which actions aren't in violation of the constitution, are operating fully with stipulated oversight and clearly operate within established best practices? This should be trivial to provide from the Most Transparent Administration Ever.
  - roenxi 2y ago
    I don't think "All of them and everything" is really a serious attempt at a response. But a non-serious question demands an unserious answer! Trump hasn't been impeached this time round, for example, so that is check and balance that is being adhered to. And he gave the State of the Union speech which is an action unambiguously in line with the constitution. So there you go, there are checks that are holding and actions taken that are constitutional.
- danorama 2y ago
  So if it's government as usual they won't mind adhering to the Privacy Act of 1974 like every other agency, right?
  - roenxi 2y ago
    I assume they're cool with it. Why wouldn't they be? Musk + Trump probably don't care, it isn't data on them. Hire a bunch of interns and get them on the job.
    - danorama 2y ago
      My sense is they're going to shred any requests like this or just send back a "No Responsive Records" response for every one and dare someone to try to call them on it. But I envy your trusting nature.
artificialLimbs 2y ago
It was clearly told to the American people that this would happen before the election, repeatedly. This is what the American people voted for.
- bickfordb 2y ago
  Nope
  - ldoughty 2y ago
    Yep? I mean it's threatened every time by Republicans. But it's usually just grandstanding... Take Obamacare for instance. It was threatened to be repealed constantly, over and over, But even when they had full control and could do whatever they wanted it still survived.. at the end of the day, the elected officials know that it hurts their own people more to appeal it, so they just give the issue lip service and tweaks and fly a giant mission accomplished banner from the deck of their ship. So on one side, I agree with you, who would think that they actually follow through with what they were saying over and over on the campaign trail.... And now they have.
    - krapp 2y ago
      "I never thought the party that's been saying for 20 years that they want to reduce government to the size where they can drown it in the bathtub would ever do anything drastic..."
- someothherguyy 2y ago
  Yeah, they voted for all this too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes. It doesn't make it right. Last term it was, "He is your president you have to support him". Now it is, "The American people voted for this" All the same meaningless phrases that do nothing to discuss issues, just an appeal to the masses. Political sentiment has never been static. We'll see what people think when inflation sky rockets, they max out their credit, etc, and they have fewer social programs to reach out to for help. You can follow along here: https://www.realclearpolling.com/latest-polls https://www.realclearpolling.com/latest-polls
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
mateus1 2y ago
Topics mentioning DOGE and Musk are being quickly flagged here in HN, so I don’t think there is much hope for discourse here.
- rcpt 2y ago
  I don't think flagging automatically kills posts, no?
  - pogue 2y ago
    It's still here, and anyone who finds HN posts by rss or other means will see the headline, url & have access to this discussion (although it might be closed to replies by then)
- _fs 2y ago
  Its completely obvious that a bot army is gaming the system. Posts are flagged within minutes of posting
  - throwawa14223 2y ago
    I am in the habit of flagging anything related to American politics. It never leads anywhere and seems orthogonal to HN.
    - _fs 2y ago
      Yea, I got tired of people attempting to make comments like this and wrote a script to quickly analyze past comment history to see if they were truly being honest. You have consistently and reliably posted your political views here. Please don't try to pretend that you hate the political discourse now that people are critical of your guy.
      - throwawa14223 2y ago
        First not my guy. I'm not left enough to vote for Trump. Second I can both flag and comment as I did here.
Spivak 2y ago
I guess the argument for is that this is isomorphic to an outside contractor being granted access, providing a list of cuts, and the prez signing off on it. I don't like it but it seems like a difference in semantics and paperwork so I'm not sure if going after it is meaningful.
- stvltvs 2y ago
  That's not a description of the status quo ante. Prior Presidents more or less respected the need for independent agencies within the Executive, and the courts upheld the right of Congress to direct how money is spent meaning the President couldn't arbitrarily shutter an agency created by law written by Congress.
jfengel 2y ago
They don't. Very little has actually changed. For the people who voted for this, "unilaterally gutting government agencies" was what they voted for. For people who didn't vote, they don't seem to be saying, "Gosh, I didn't realize this would happen."

by tw04 2y ago

roenxi 2y ago

Which check or balance do you think is being ignored here? The point of the executive branch is to be the one where unelected and loosely vetted administrators work. Congress is mostly voted officials, the judiciary is the group that are carefully vetted for cultural fit and the executive is where the messy parts happen with oversight from the other two government branches. It is where people like Musk are supposed to be working - the president thinks he a good person to be wielding power.

WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
> Which check or balance do you think is being ignored here? Which check + balance is being adhered to? Which actions aren't in violation of the constitution, are operating fully with stipulated oversight and clearly operate within established best practices? This should be trivial to provide from the Most Transparent Administration Ever.
- roenxi 2y ago
  I don't think "All of them and everything" is really a serious attempt at a response. But a non-serious question demands an unserious answer! Trump hasn't been impeached this time round, for example, so that is check and balance that is being adhered to. And he gave the State of the Union speech which is an action unambiguously in line with the constitution. So there you go, there are checks that are holding and actions taken that are constitutional.
danorama 2y ago
So if it's government as usual they won't mind adhering to the Privacy Act of 1974 like every other agency, right?
- roenxi 2y ago
  I assume they're cool with it. Why wouldn't they be? Musk + Trump probably don't care, it isn't data on them. Hire a bunch of interns and get them on the job.
  - danorama 2y ago
    My sense is they're going to shred any requests like this or just send back a "No Responsive Records" response for every one and dare someone to try to call them on it. But I envy your trusting nature.

artificialLimbs 2y ago

It was clearly told to the American people that this would happen before the election, repeatedly. This is what the American people voted for.

bickfordb 2y ago
Nope
- ldoughty 2y ago
  Yep? I mean it's threatened every time by Republicans. But it's usually just grandstanding... Take Obamacare for instance. It was threatened to be repealed constantly, over and over, But even when they had full control and could do whatever they wanted it still survived.. at the end of the day, the elected officials know that it hurts their own people more to appeal it, so they just give the issue lip service and tweaks and fly a giant mission accomplished banner from the deck of their ship. So on one side, I agree with you, who would think that they actually follow through with what they were saying over and over on the campaign trail.... And now they have.
  - krapp 2y ago
    "I never thought the party that's been saying for 20 years that they want to reduce government to the size where they can drown it in the bathtub would ever do anything drastic..."
someothherguyy 2y ago
Yeah, they voted for all this too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes. It doesn't make it right. Last term it was, "He is your president you have to support him". Now it is, "The American people voted for this" All the same meaningless phrases that do nothing to discuss issues, just an appeal to the masses. Political sentiment has never been static. We'll see what people think when inflation sky rockets, they max out their credit, etc, and they have fewer social programs to reach out to for help. You can follow along here: https://www.realclearpolling.com/latest-polls https://www.realclearpolling.com/latest-polls

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

mateus1 2y ago

Topics mentioning DOGE and Musk are being quickly flagged here in HN, so I don’t think there is much hope for discourse here.

rcpt 2y ago
I don't think flagging automatically kills posts, no?
- pogue 2y ago
  It's still here, and anyone who finds HN posts by rss or other means will see the headline, url & have access to this discussion (although it might be closed to replies by then)
_fs 2y ago
Its completely obvious that a bot army is gaming the system. Posts are flagged within minutes of posting
- throwawa14223 2y ago
  I am in the habit of flagging anything related to American politics. It never leads anywhere and seems orthogonal to HN.
  - _fs 2y ago
    Yea, I got tired of people attempting to make comments like this and wrote a script to quickly analyze past comment history to see if they were truly being honest. You have consistently and reliably posted your political views here. Please don't try to pretend that you hate the political discourse now that people are critical of your guy.
    - throwawa14223 2y ago
      First not my guy. I'm not left enough to vote for Trump. Second I can both flag and comment as I did here.

Spivak 2y ago

I guess the argument for is that this is isomorphic to an outside contractor being granted access, providing a list of cuts, and the prez signing off on it. I don't like it but it seems like a difference in semantics and paperwork so I'm not sure if going after it is meaningful.

stvltvs 2y ago
That's not a description of the status quo ante. Prior Presidents more or less respected the need for independent agencies within the Executive, and the courts upheld the right of Congress to direct how money is spent meaning the President couldn't arbitrarily shutter an agency created by law written by Congress.

jfengel 2y ago

They don't. Very little has actually changed. For the people who voted for this, "unilaterally gutting government agencies" was what they voted for. For people who didn't vote, they don't seem to be saying, "Gosh, I didn't realize this would happen."