Hacker News Reader

Comment by vowelless | Hacker News Reader

I think the headline is a little wrong or maybe I am misreading it. It's not the case that someone went to the website and deleted climate change references; but rather, there is a new web site which doesn't have any references.

As the article itself says :

> To reiterate: It is normal that the site is completely new; it is notable that climate change is not mentioned on any one of Trump's new pages

View on HN

Thanks for pointing this out, I missed it on my first read-through. The framing of this article implies that the Trump administration scrubbed the references first thing rather than roll out their new version which had no references to climate change.

I'm as ready as half the country to despise this administration but I'll save my outrage for things that are actually malicious.

The act of replacing the website is normal, but the content of the replacement is malicious.

How do you define malicious in this context? I see the content (from summaries, I haven't read it) as 100% self-consistent for the Trump administration.

It is, and the Trump administration's position on the climate is malicious, in that it will cause harm to the majority of humanity.

Title should have been: "Things from previous administration we agree about is not on new administration web site."

No, title should have been "Trump and his dipshit administration don't give two shits about global warming, our children be damned" (edit: Didn't realize there are this many trump supporters here) (edit2: People who think only "rational" emotionless discussion is appropriate here are living a fantasy. People don't think their way into movement.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com