Well, OK... there's obviously one little check. Like, the staff of these organizations are literally not getting paid right now because of a funding impasse. So, obviously there's some regular oversight about who gets what kind of funding.
And come to think of it, all these organizations and jobs were created by act of congress and/or executive prerogative, with scope prescribed by the relevant orders and law.
But who are congress and the executive accountable to anyway? And who writes these so called "laws"? Who are the laws accountable to?
Wait. They're written by members of congress? And carried out by the executive? Huh. OK, but other than that, totally unchecked! Again, who are "congress" and the so-called "president" accountable to? Who made them "officials"?
Oh, yeah. Voters.
So actually, there isn't any defensible sense in which one can say "unchecked" at all, actually.
Now that we're here, it's almost as if the only way one could use the term "unchecked" is if they're not using language in an attempt to actually describe the world, but out of intent to characterize inaccurately without a supporting argument. Propagandize. Or, I suppose, if one had already had one's mind hijacked by such propaganda.
But who would suspect that someone named "rattlesnakedave" might actually be engaging in that sort of commentary?
"Trump is doing this and is unstoppable" is a false narrative and is the reason that "Trump is compromised by Russia" is a senseless explanation.
...seriously? Give me a break.
Redditors moving to hackernews can be called immigrants as they behave much in the same way. They have their own culture and background which they bring with them. Of course, they may assimilate but it doesn't seem to be working too good lately.
I personally have wound up on hackernews maybe 5 years ago, but I have definitely seen a decline in discourse over the last three years or so specifically.
I generally don't interact much as I often feel like there are people far more knowledgeable on a particular topic than myself and my comments would be little more than noise. You seem to have taken a similar path with most comments being on political topics, with echoes of champagne socialism.
Fundamentally, I came here for the technology. I understand that discussions of politics are inevitable on this post in particular, yet I dread the day when the comments will be reduced to "orange man bad" as is the case on Reddit.
Perhaps, I am just afraid of progress.
No, you're getting older and more mature even as the HN audience becomes younger and less so. It reminds me of the original "rage comic" subreddit which was devilishly clever until it became popular, and you could see in real time as people started talking about issues that affect younger and younger cohorts, until I finally saw boring middle-school drama in the subreddit (long after I left).
This is exactly what happens with both parties. It's a byproduct of the party system.
Republicans: small government, better business environment, etc
Democrats: strong social safety net, everyone pays their fair share, etc
Athenian offices were strictly term-limited, except for the position of general. People apparently felt that having military experience in that role was more valuable than the benefit of term limits would make up for, and it's hard to blame them for that.
But the general, able to serve for life, the only island of stability in the government, accumulated all the political power. This mostly defeated the purpose of having term limits on any office.
American presidents are term-limited, but American political parties aren't, and policy -- in terms of the solutions, but also in terms of the questions that get asked -- is set by the parties. I think this is more than just a coincidence.
On the other hand, Senators and Congressmen are not term-limited, but they don't seem to accumulate much in the way of political power.
(Also, senators are congresspeople.)
Maybe so, but "Congressman" is the title for someone who sits in the House of Representatives, while someone who sits in the Senate is a "Senator".
The Republicans are far more unified. It is both their strength and their weakness.
Or not. What about the Trump faction vs. the RINO's.
Republicans are split: libertarian, nationalist, religious
There are factions in the Republican Party, but for various reasons they are much more prone to have the non-dominant faction submit meekly to the dominant faction in terms of most actions in government, and even most public statements outside of contested primary campaigns. And even there the actual policy disputes are often not front and center.
Which brings things back to the substantial advantage that the more rural states give the Republicans in the senate, which would have a good shot and ending the shutdown if they wanted to.