Critics of the government say that the $ 500 million credit from Russia should have gone to develop industry, instead of going to the construction sector.

Critics of this type of argument have tended to point out that this is just a standard criticism of representative democracy — a democratically elected government will not always act in the direction of greatest current public support — and that, therefore, there is no inconsistency in the leaders ' positions given that these countries are parliamentary democracies.

Critics of the government charge that the government indicted Milken's brother Lowell in order to put pressure on Milken to settle, a tactic condemned as unethical by some legal scholars.

Critics of the privilege claim its use has become a tool for the government to cover up illegal or embarrassing government actions.

Critics accuse him of arrogance, economic mismanagement, and unduly favouring the federal government relative to the provinces, especially in trying to control the oil wealth of the Prairies.

Critics of the Seventeenth Amendment claim that by altering the way senators are elected, the states lost any representation they had in the federal government and that this led to the gradual " slide into ignominy " of state legislatures, as well as an overextension of federal power and the rise of special interest groups to fill the power vacuum previously occupied by state legislatures.

Critics argue this in turn undermines the freedom and importance of Members of Parliament ( MPs ) in day-to-day legislating, making the cabinet the only organ of government where individual legislators can aspire to influence the decisions of the government.

Critics argued that the system was open to abuse as most NDPBs had their members directly appointed by government ministers without an election or consultation with the people.

Critics claim the tax cuts worsened the deficits in the budget of the United States government.

Critics of the government cite mis-management, corruption, and the pull out of the power agency's French partner at the beginning of 2002.

Critics of Milošević claimed that the government continued to be authoritarian despite constitutional changes, as Milošević maintained strong political influence over the state media.

Critics contend that a government requiring or promoting this phrase violates protections against the establishment of religion guaranteed in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Critics of the policy of economic liberalization pursued during the Menem Presidency argued that Argentina's economic woes were caused by neoliberalism, which had been actively promoted by the U. S. government and the IMF under the Washington Consensus.

Critics of libéralisme argue that governmental intervention is necessary for the welfare of workers ; they point out that great gains in workers ' rights were historically achieved by government intervention and social mobilization, as during the Popular Front.

Critics allege that the government is seeking to use the Shura Council as a liberal bulwark to prevent clerical domination of politics.

Critics of Acheson have argued that the speech seemed to say that South Korea was beyond the American defense line, so that American support for the new Syngman Rhee government in South Korea would be limited.

Critics have also questioned the validity of the war's stated objectives, such as a supposed link between the country's Ba ' athist government and the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, and its possession of weapons of mass destruction " certified " by the Niger uranium forgeries.

He won great acclaim ( nominated for a Golden Globe and an award by the New York Film Critics Circle in the category of Best Actor ) as Alex, a young hoodlum brainwashed by a dystopian British government of the near future.

Critics such as Anthony Giddens highlight the place of regional producers of media ( such as Brazil in Latin America ); other critics such as James Curran suggest that State government subsidies have ensured strong local production.

Critics further contend that the controversial policies are fundamentally anti-democratic in that it is not for the United States or any other country or coalition of countries to determine what trade laws Iraqis must live by, and that such rules can only be legitimate if passed initially by an elected Iraqi government free of foreign occupation and domination.

Critics of the welfare state claim that, in relieving citizens of personal responsibility for their own welfare, the government has inadvertently encouraged irresponsible and immature attitudes, with the result that squalor, ignorance, and idleness are common.

Critics of this idea often say this approach is overly broad in scope.

Critics of nuclear disarmament say that it would undermine deterrence, and if nuclear weapons were completely eliminated, it would destroy the current Nuclear peace the world is experiencing and would make the large Conventional wars, common before the Nuclear age, far more likely.

Critics like Ken Binmore say that this cognitive dissonance is apparently not very strong, since people often knowingly ignore the interests of faraway societies quite similar to their own, and that the " ought " above only applies if one already accepts Singer's basic premises about the equality of various interests.

Critics say that analogous problems with meta-analysis have been documented in medicine, where it has been shown different investigators performing meta-analyses of the same set of studies have reached contradictory conclusions.

Critics say that Menzies ' success was mainly due to the good luck of the long post-war boom and his manipulation of the anti-communist fears of the Cold War years, both of which he exploited with great skill.

Mill says, “ as between his own happiness and that of others, utilitarianism requires him to be as strictly impartial as a disinterested and benevolent spectator .” Critics say that this combination of requirements leads to utilitarianism making unreasonable demands.

Critics say that security improvements have been the least of the project's expense.

Critics say editorial anonymity gives the publication an " omniscient tone and pedantry " and hides the youth and inexperience of those writing articles.

Critics of nuclear disarmament say that it would undermine deterrence.

Critics of the revised plan say that it ensures sugarcane will be grown in the Everglades for at least another decade.

Critics such as Susan Blackmore and Ray Hyman say that the results are inconclusive and consistently indistinguishable from null results.

Critics say that prong three likewise fails to consider male athletic interest in spite of its gender-neutral language, as it requires that the university fully and effectively accommodate the athletic interests of the " underrepresented sex ", despite the fact that ED regulations expressly require that the OCR consider whether the institution " effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of members of both sexes ".

Critics say that most of the Church's claims are designed to harass Suppressive Persons, people who impede the progress of the Scientology movement.

Critics say many of the central issues are unresolved or open to interpretation.

Critics say the Pentagon's use of media firms such as Rendon blurs the line between public relations and propaganda.

Critics of GMOs and corporations say that these rights give already powerful corporations an even greater advantage, and in a way which disrupts millennia-old agricultural practices.

Critics say that Armstrong confused the two Covenants and selectively picked which aspects of the two Covenants to keep.

Critics say such a barrier does not always exist in practice, however.

Critics argue that there are vast differences between the kind of ethics that are applied in, say, the modern labour movement or the anti-globalization movement, and those that would be applied by any believer in the literal interpretation of the Qur ' an.

" Critics of Campus Watch say that it is a pro-Israel lobbyist organization involved in harassing, blacklisting, or intimidating scholars critical of Israel.

Critics say the scheme was paranoid, colonial, illegal, and immoral — and truly caused the " blowback " suggested in the pre-coup analysis.

Critics say that " teaching to the test " disfavors higher-order learning.