LogFAQs > #928949016

Mead posted...

And people from different parties agreeing on issue doesn't automatically make the issue more valid.

More often than not, it does

Seems to be an all or nothing situation.

Either they're joining forces b/c the issue is that valid and important and the consensus is obvious, like in this case.

Or in some cases...b/c both sides are gravely wrong and don't have Americans' best interests at heart.
Examples:
1) SESTA/FOSTA
https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/4/13/17172762/fosta-sesta-backpage-230-internet-freedom

Instead of directly targeting websites known to facilitate sex trafficking, the FOSTA-SESTA hybrid essentially sets up a template for broad-based censorship across the web. This means websites will have to decide whether to overpolice their platforms for potential prostitution advertisements or to underpolice them so they can maintain a know-nothing stance, which would likely be a very tricky claim to prove in court.

The bills language penalizes any websites that promote or facilitate prostitution, and allows authorities to pursue websites for knowingly assisting, facilitating, or supporting sex trafficking, which is vague enough to threaten everything from certain cryptocurrencies to porn videos to sites for perfectly legal escort services. (In fact, one of the bills main supporters, the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, is arguably using the bill as a path to attack consensual adult pornography, which it has characterized as violent, degrading, and a public health crisis.)

2) The FY 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, which allows for indefinite detention of American citizens and which sailed through Congress with massive veto-proof bipartisan majorities
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2012#Controversy_over_indefinite_detention