141–150 of 249 posts
Our government is literally falling in a matter of weeks. It's being assaulted, and we're all just standing by.
The people spoke very clearly in November: they wanted this.
Unfortunately they either didn't read the fine print, or concluded that it was a price they were willing to pay. I suspect it is more the former.
As Obama said, elections have consequences.
I gather that I'm further right than much of the HN crowd, having been on the edge of the Tea Party movement &c. The presence of the Citrus Caesar and the billionaire boys is due to substantial, ongoing problems. The U.S. Government, like any code base, has accrued much cruft over the last century. Whether or not DJT has any lasting positive effect isn't knowable yet. The risk of this current course being a cure wors…
Mitch McConnell made it his personal mission to prevent "substantive reform" of any kind from being passed through the Senate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
What is wrong with being reappointed to the same job for 22 years? What if she's just...competent? Your argument seems to be that anyone having the same job for that long must be corrupt in some way, but you don't provide anything to support that premise. Ironically, you're implicitly endorsing the resort to illegal means for her removal, rather than following the process defined in law.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> With regards specifically to Phyllis Fong, I have no confidence that an Inspector-General that occupied the office for twenty two years straight[1] can ethically perform their prescribed role. I am in complete agreement with her termination, we need someone (anyone) new and different in there. Are you "in complete agreement" because of actual things Fong did, or because you think that 22 years experience in a posit…
Yes.
An Inspector-General is in charge of inspecting and auditing, as the name would suggest. That requires being impartial in absolute terms, because you must be able to call out problems no matter how inconvenient they are.
Being in a position of power means an inevitable accrual of reputation and influence, and 22 straight years of accrual is ridiculous. Her excessively long tenure is also unusual; the longest-serving Inspector-General besides her served for 8 years, shortest being 2 years not counting acting IGs, average is about 4 years each IG not counting her 22 year tenure.
So yes, I support her termination because her long tenure lends me no confidence she can perform her duties ethically anymore. There must be a regular changing of the incumbent to head off the office being bought or otherwise corrupted. There are millions of other D.C. bureaucrats to replace her with, and even more Americans overall. There is no reason to keep her specifically for this long and I daresay that the lack of a term limit for this office has to be an oversight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is my big struggle with all of this. His first term I felt America was duped by a con man so protested and made a fuss on social media. Americans saw the first four years and astonishingly decided they wanted more of it, by a decent margin. So while I absolutely hate what is going on right now this seems to be what the people wanted. I question each day whether that needs to be respected or we should resist. I a…
[flagged]