Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You’re the one who brought up FDR, my dude. It’s not whataboutism to address a topic explicitly mentioned by the other party.

I personally don’t see the case for saying the Constitution doesn’t authorize government funded media under the General Welfare clause. I can see where there might be room for disagreement, but that clause is pretty broad. Whereas interstate commerce is a lot clearer, and the reasoning in Wickard v. Filburn is pretty transparent bullshit made to reach a desired conclusion. In terms of Congress exceeding its enumerated powers, the latter is vastly worse.

 help



> You’re the one who brought up FDR, my dude

VOA was established by FDR?

> the General Welfare clause.

the general welfare clause is pretty clearly in the header of article 1 section 8, with the specific enumerated welfare provisions following it.

anything outside of those provisions (e.g. making a non-apporpotioned income tax, making a law that makes alcohol illegal, why not just have those be authorized as "general welfare"?) needs a Constitutional amendment otherwise its just congress creating a power for itself out of whole cloth.

look at this point the government pretty clearly breaks every other part of the Constitution except for the pomp and circumstances around the oath of office, so we know where the real priorities lie.


> VOA was established by FDR?

Are you serious? You mentioned FDR by name.

> You could equally make the argument "it took three generations to unpick and fix the FDR bullshit".

You made the comparison. I made my own comparison. Then you accused me of "whataboutism" for following your lead.

I don't have the energy for this bullshit.


read carefully.

"it took three generations to unpick and fix the FDR bullshit [establishing VOA]".


Ah, so "the FDR bullshit" was specifically about VOA. That was not clear. I thought it was a reference to New Deal policies more broadly. Write more carefully.

Actually, in your reply in the other subtree, you added "(among other things)" so it appears I understood it correctly the first time, and it was a reference to New Deal policies more broadly.


yes and the comment i originally responded to talks about Trump/DOGE in a broad sense, which is also more than just VOA. actually doge is unwinding quite a bit of FDR bullshit it turns out so my analogy is a nice mirror.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: