Rick Perry picked for secretary of that one department he can't remember the name of... (Energy)
75 replies, posted
Don't cabinet picks still have to be approved by congress or something like that I can't imagine all of the questionable picks to make it through.
[QUOTE=Chonch;51525220]Okay, I think I get the strategy now. Trump campaigned on the concept of shaking up and downsizing the government, so he's appointing people to his Cabinet that want to limit or totally reverse the government's involvement in those areas.
A "foreclosure king" in charge of the Treasury, the biggest borrower in the world.
A hardline conservative for AG, heading up a massive backlog of federal cases to prosecute
A billionaire fundamentalist investor in charge of Commerce, responsible for a stagnant economy
A laissez-faire CEO at the helm of the DoL, which has been accused of some really blatant overreach recently
A private-education proponent responsible for the administration of public education (lol)
The chair of a budget committee presiding over a massively inflated healthcare system
A Russian oil baron directing the State Department, which has always had an anti-Russian bent
And now Rick Perry, who desired at one point to abolish the very department he's tapped to lead
If this is Trump's vision it suddenly makes a lot more sense.
[/QUOTE]
How in the holy loving fuck can you not see the danger they each represent?
A hardline conservative who is so fervently anti-pot and disregards all science and evidence showing it safer than alcohol, and hardline conservatives having a reputation for stepping all over peoples constitutional rights when it doesn't fit their agenda and force their beliefs on other people!?
A billionaire investor in charge of Commerce, who do you think he'll look out for!? The small businesses of the US or the big businesses who continue to outsource jobs and hide their money over seas!?
A laissez-faire CEO in charge of the Department of Labor, [I]which regulates workplace safety and ensures the welfare of workers so they aren't [B]exploited and abused by corporations [/B]who want to save every penny they can!?[/I]
A private education proponent who has more to gain by cutting if not outright eliminating public education so only the wealthy and rich can get a education and everyone else is told to fend for themselves? [B]When higher education is needed to make it somewhere in the world and without it we'll regress backwards to the age of feudalism!?[/B]
A man with Russian connections and influence in [I]charge of foreign diplomacy, and not just Russian relations?[/I]
Chonch, for the love of fucking god you can't be this out of touch.
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;51525777]Chonch, for the love of fucking god you can't be this out of touch.[/QUOTE]
I most certainly can. All of these bureaus still report to Trump, and Trump reports to Congress. If there's anything the last administration has taught me, it's that Congress trumps a radical President every single time. Your apocalyptic, over-formatted point of view is the only thing that is out-of-touch from my equally-credible point of view.
[QUOTE=Chonch;51525864]I most certainly can. All of these bureaus still report to Trump, and Trump reports to Congress. If there's anything the last administration has taught me, it's that Congress trumps the President every single time. Your apocalyptic, over-formatted point of view is the only thing that is out-of-touch from my equally-credible point of view.[/QUOTE]
Didn't stop Obama from using executive actions at times for certain issues like the Dream Act or his executive order on the gun show loophole.
The President can and will bypass Congress if they feel the need, and what is there about Trump that makes you think he won't bypass them if there is a democratic majority?
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;51525921]Didn't stop Obama from using executive actions at times for certain issues like the Dream Act or his executive order on the gun show loophole.
The President can and will bypass Congress if they feel the need, and what is there about Trump that makes you think he won't bypass them if there is a democratic majority?[/QUOTE]
I feel like Trump's ego might preclude his attempting to legislate by pen--you should note that many of our current president's orders are reportedly on the chopping block come January.
[QUOTE=Chonch;51525864]I most certainly can. All of these bureaus still report to Trump, and Trump reports to Congress. If there's anything the last administration has taught me, it's that Congress trumps a radical President every single time. Your apocalyptic, over-formatted point of view is the only thing that is out-of-touch from my equally-credible point of view.[/QUOTE]
Yea, and the Republican Congress isn't going to stand in the way of anything Trump wants outside of obvious Constitutional violations.
not to mention democrats in power are probably just gonna roll over. people can say 'oh but the democrats will try their hardest!' but that didn't really happen with bush at all, and they said that then as well.
[QUOTE=IrishBandit;51525988]Yea, and the Republican Congress isn't going to stand in the way of anything Trump wants outside of obvious Constitutional violations.[/QUOTE]
I find it hard to believe all, or even a simple majority of the 301 Republicans in Congress will approve 100% of Trump's vision for the future. This is a bold prediction though, so I'm gonna stay away from making these kinds of speculations and stick to what I know, or at least what I feel strongly about and have a few shreds of evidence for.
i tried to stay optimistic when he was voted in because i wanted to believe it couldn't be [b]that[/b] bad and spoke out about people rioting
im so sorry, i was ignorant and wrong
[QUOTE=IrishBandit;51525988]Yea, and the Republican Congress isn't going to stand in the way of anything Trump wants outside of obvious Constitutional violations.[/QUOTE]
their own law mandates that a sitting president and VP cannot profit from their position.
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act[/url]
2012 stock act, meant to bind obama and biden specifically extended conflict of interest laws to cover the presidency
they're not going to charge him with shit unless he were to actually go to times square and shoot someone
[QUOTE=Elspin;51522575]Remember Trump's comical claims about how he was going to get people that were somehow the best at what they do and yet we'd never heard of them? Like he had the seal team 6 of politicians hiding out in a secret bunker waiting to take office or something? What a joke[/QUOTE]
I well it determines on how you define "best at what they do". In this case, being the absolute destruction of the republic as we know it, I would say he couldn't have picked a better cabinet.
[QUOTE=fulgrim;51522616]How would this even work?
I keep seeing news about how Trump is doing dumb shit like appointing climate change deniers to lead the EPA and dumb hicks to lead scientists. And I just can't imagine these people kowtowing about trying to carry out whatever ridiculous instructions these insanely bad choices come up with.
How are they going to lead these departments without every member of said departments constantly telling them to shut up and fuck off until they know what they are talking about?[/QUOTE]
I imagine something like this is going to happen
[video=youtube;tSNsOJ4-VwU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSNsOJ4-VwU[/video]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.