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

On Sun, 2 Aug 2026 13:12:38 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On 8/2/2026 1:03 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2026 12:53:58 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> On 8/2/2026 10:57 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2026 10:37:31 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 8/1/2026 11:01 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/1/26 10:54 AM, Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i'm not really sure how firing and rehiring the entire govt every 4
>>>>>> years could ever be efficient... these aren't orgs that can be replaced
>>>>>> by competition dud. they run integral systems within society that we
>>>>>> actually do depend on
>>>>>>
>>>>>> besides... this is not really really the point of electing a president.
>>>>>> the president does not set policy, the president just leads the org that
>>>>>> enacts the policy set by congress. if the bureaucrats are making
>>>>>> decision, then policy needs to change, and congress should be doing
>>>>>> that, not the president
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ofc, no one guarantee a govt ideals from the 1700s would scale forever.
>>>>>> i don't think inducing fed employee churn is a meaningfully resolution
>>>>>> to our problems wilson
>>>>>
>>>>> The president is not inferior to the congress. He does get to set the
>>>>> policies of his administration and that's what the people elected him to
>>>>> do. If his policies conflict with what congress wants, the congress can
>>>>> pass laws, override his veto, and set the budget to fund what they want
>>>>> to happen. And the president has to live within those confines.
>>>>>
>>>>> No one wants to fire the entire federal bureaucracy every time a new
>>>>> president is elected. But what the president should be able to do is
>>>>> replace those he sees as opposing what the people elected him to do.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's not the way it is now. People in the executive branch bureaus
>>>>> literally cannot be fired if they actively oppose the president's
>>>>> policies and try to roadblock them. That's the current law.
>>>>
>>>> That's odd.  It seems himbo did exactly that, continues to do exactly
>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> But:   fired if they actively oppose the president's policies and try
>>>> to roadblock them.
>>>>
>>>> Policies are not laws.  I would say, that Fed employees should stay
>>>> within the laws, and if it should be their job to decide a certain
>>>> thing, they should not be punished for doing that.
>>>>
>>>> Of course it gets really nasty if the pres then comes back and
>>>> attempts to scrounge up some excuse to prosecute his critics.
>>>> Investigations are supposed to be based on reasonable suspicions,
>>>> rather than a search for a suspicion.
>>>>
>>>>> That's anti-democratic. Because those people are hardly answerable to
>>>>> anyone, actually. Their jobs are protected. It's very difficult for them
>>>>> to be fired individually. They are practically beyond the control of the
>>>>> elected government, unless the entire bureau is ended.
>>>>
>>>> I don't see how you can say that in light of recent pres actions.
>>>>
>>>>> That permanent administrative apparatus isn't coequal to or above the
>>>>> president. It wasn't supposed to be outside of his purview. The congress
>>>>> gets to approve executive branch cabinet level positions. Those cabinet
>>>>> officers then get to run the bureaus that congress gave them
>>>>> responsibility for. The president can later fire any of the cabinet
>>>>> officers at any time without approval by congress. It's set up that way
>>>>> because, while they need to be approved by congress, they work for him.
>>>>
>>>> Didn't you unsay yourself here?  Sure, himbo has been firing at will
>>>> and hiring his sycophants.  That is not enough for you?
>>>>
>>>>> Those administrative bureaus were deliberately put inside the executive
>>>>> branch under the cabinet officers instead of being under the direct
>>>>> control of congress. They literally work under the president and that's
>>>>> the way the congress set them up.
>>>>>
>>>>> That specific organizational structure was created for a reason. Those
>>>>> orgs need to be directed and managed and the congress didn't want that
>>>>> responsibility. They knew then and they know now they can't do that job
>>>>> because they can hardly effectively manage themselves.
>>>
>>> Trump has not been firing at will because he is prevented from doing so
>>> by law, unfortunately.
>> 
>> So you assert.  I say he takes full responsibility for that shit elon
>> was doing for him.  And if he were to tell his sycophant department
>> head fire somebody, guess what?  That counts too.  He doesn't even get
>> to claim plausible deniability.
>
>Becoming even more incomprehensible while refusing to provide any 
>evidence for what you claim to be true is not going to convince anyone 
>you know what you're talking about.

Himbo is responsible.  If you can't comprehend that, I suggest you
take your blinders off.
-- 
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