Re: Exciting New Birth Control Method Call ed “Socialism”

On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 15:04:45 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On 8/1/2026 2:25 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>> On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 13:54:31 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> On 8/1/2026 1:17 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 12:44:34 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 7/31/2026 5:13 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 16:18:26 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm talking about the deep state functionaries who are virtually
>>>>>>> unfireable wanting to maintain their system of permanent employment and
>>>>>>> control.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Himbo has demonstrated that no such level exists in government.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In fact, in terms of control, the election of himbo twice confirms
>>>>>> that.  If they had control, that would not have happened.
>>>>>
>>>>> Influence =/= control.
>>>>
>>>> Significant influence is lacking then.  Himbo's presidency proves that
>>>> much.
>>>>
>>>> You are hedging now.  Tara might even say fudging.  Now put that
>>>> marble back where it was.
>>>
>>> The right answer is to make all of the executive branch employees
>>> fireable by the person in charge of the executive branch. The congress
>>> won't do that but they should.
>> 
>> You mean that the entire bureaucracy should be under himbo's control.
>> So, what is higher than the heads of bureaus?  Replace the head of
>> fbi, irs,  cia, epa, etc plus much of the workers below that.  Is
>> there a layer above the heads of departments?  What has been missed?
>
>It's not personalized for Trump, it would apply to all presidents and of 
>course you know that.
>
>> I happen to think that such agencies should be independent and not
>> subject to political whims which change as the wind blows, and be free
>> to make informed decisions rather than political ones.  But I don't
>> get what I want do I?
>
>Ha! As if the bureaucrats don't make political decisions.

You forgot to tell me what has been missed.  What that essentially
means is that your deep state does not really exist.  If himbo
couldn't kill it by replacing department heads and firing thousands,
it was never really there.

>How about the citizens getting what they want? 

What we understand is that citizens don't know what to want.  Hunters
want a forest full of deer and they don't think past what that means
in terms of consequences.  They simply want what the want.  Perhaps
you can begin to see how a country needs a longer term vision than
short term self interest.  Maybe you can.  Perhaps your ideological
commitments are interfering again.

>The president is the only 
>elected person voted on by the entire country. It's a unique office in 
>that regard. The congress is a weak and vacillating bunch, often 
>deliberately avoiding doing the will of the people. For reasons that 
>often don't have anything to do with the best interests of the country 
>or the people.

serving short term self interest, which you told me earlier today is
actually a good thing.

>At any rate you're mostly getting what you want in this. The president 
>has very little control over the staffing of the executive branch. Which 
>means he doesn't get to have much say over what they actually do. And 
>what they do is often for their personal benefit and not that of the 
>country or the people.

The problem is then compounded many times over when the pres himself
does what he does for exactly those same reasons.  So, a more powerful
pres is not the answer.

"Which means he doesn't get to have much say over what they actually
do."

The intention was that agencies would be free to make informed long
term decisions free of political influence.  That, like congress has
been largely coopted.  Like with the SC there needs to be a body of
decision makers who can be free of influences outside of what the law
says, or what science says.  But not any more able to solely decide
issues than other parts of government.   Separation of powers.  So
frustratingly inefficient and subject to capture by special interests.
"Power does not corrupt, but foolish men corrupt power".  

Again, the hope is that there will be enough ethical not-foolish
people among the thousands of people in federal government to avoid
total disasters.  But that remains only a threatened hope at this
point.

That hope is severely threatened when people like you want to
concentrate power in one part of one branch, because the certainty is
that, if not this time, then certainly the next time or the next time,
the dreaded fool who wants to corrupt power will be in charge.

>I will continue to think that system is kind of stupid and anti-democratic.

You want an all powerful pres.  First you need to find a human being
able to wield such power ethically.  

Your mission should you choose to accept it is to find such a
not-foolish man.  Good luck.  We get those much less often than once a
generation.  Maybe it can only happen after a civil war or a
devastating economic depression.  Because dire events can sometime
bring forth hidden resources of empathy and ethics.  Not that you
would agree with what such a not-foolish man might want to do, I
suspect.
-- 
Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain
Don't get political with me young man
or I'll tie you to a railroad track and
<<<talk>>> to <<<YOOooooo>>>
Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?
dares: Ned
does not dare: Julian  shrinks in horror and warns others away