Re: Exciting New Birth Control Method Called “S ocialism”

On 8/2/2026 10:58 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
> 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.
 >
Something got cut out out:

The president is elected by the entire country. Keeping departments 
under the president gives voters a clear way to hold the government 
responsible for how those departments run.

A single leader at the top stops different parts of the government from 
working against each other or ignoring public needs.

You should always vote for the party, not the man (or woman or 
whatever). YMMV.