1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's because it doesn't accept inputs from conversations. It will remember what you said for the length of the conversation but it does not incorporate anything you say into it's data set by design.

1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

Brave, unbowed, unbroken. We need a million more like him. Well done young man.

1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

Have a good rest sir. I'll do the same. You clearly do not understand the nature of power.

1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

In that case I would be happy to respond to your pivot as soon as you acknowledge that the President does indeed have the power to fire an employee at FEMA.

1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

Was this intended for me or for a different conversation with someone else? I only ask because it is so far off the point.

1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

At most, the President can exert his power of office over the Secretary of Homeland Security and have them fire the person at FEMA, but that's about it.

LMFAO

1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm looking for an acknowledgement that the President indeed has the power to fire an employee at FEMA. Very simple.

1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well hell, going by your margins there, the President has the power to to do a shit ton of things that aren't legal, and aren't ethical, and that he shouldn't do.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Does that make it legal? No. Does that make it ethical? No. Just because he can, does it mean he should? No.

No argument here. However your original assertion that I took issue with was that the President did not have the power to fire an employee at FEMA. Even saying it was a matter of grade school Civics that he couldn't. You have not demonstrated that fact at all and now you have pivoted off the point.

1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

It seems to me that when we say someone has the power to do something it means they have the authority or leverage to make that thing happen. I do not understand how the President does not have the authority or leverage to fire an employee at FEMA. (Granting the just cause argument.)

1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

Please explain what conflict of interest would arise in the President directing his Secretary of Homeland Security to fire a particular employee or group of employees. Assuming he had just cause, of course.

3
Cardinalix 3 points ago +3 / -0

The Secretary of Homeland Security answers directly to the President.>

My point exactly.

2
Cardinalix 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'll assume you realize now although you didn't acknowledge it that the President does. Therefore the President would be the top of the hierarchy of the bureaucracy. This suggests to me that he indeed has the power to hire and fire at FEMA. Which you asserted he did not.

3
Cardinalix 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yes, I know that I can look this up. Do you know what the Socratic Method is? Who has the authority to hire / fire the Secretary of Homeland Security sir?

2
Cardinalix 2 points ago +2 / -0

Could you please tell me who does have authority to hire and fire in FEMA if the President does not?

4
Cardinalix 4 points ago +4 / -0

Is FEMA not a government agency? Does it not fall under the executive branch? I'm really asking, I'm curious why he wouldn't have authority.

1
Cardinalix 1 point ago +1 / -0

God, I hope not. You'd never hear the end of it from insufferably arrogant lefty political commentators.

3
Cardinalix 3 points ago +3 / -0

Couldn't agree more. Courage and a sense of morality. She is not beyond saving.

2
Cardinalix 2 points ago +2 / -0

What about it? Trump is pro-life and his Supreme Court overturned the federal abortion protection of Roe v Wade. The largest pro-life step taken in my lifetime, so why shit all over him?

2
Cardinalix 2 points ago +2 / -0

Amen to that. We have been attacked on every level for decades. I pray for a turn of the tide.

2
Cardinalix 2 points ago +2 / -0

It would look like what it always looks like: insults, then screaming (or petulant silence) then violence.

view more: Next ›