Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
This would be treason. Yes, it would. The bureaucracy, in an ideal world (yes, yes), doesn't get to make decisions that fall along the lines of open revolt against their elected masters.
|
As if focusing on one ego-maniacal obfuscationist wasn't making life difficult enough.
I have to laugh at the suggestion of people making career decisions as being treason. A presidential candidate asking for a foreign nation to intervene in an election, is okay, and not treason. A president-elect with with obvious ties to that same regime is okay, and not treason. But several high ranking bureaucrats choosing to resign from their jobs and walking away from their chosen vocation, well that's treason? No, that's a freedom of choice. Suggesting that these individuals are committing treason by exercising their free will of where they want to work, that's just god damn fascist from the word go. People have no explicit responsibility to remain in a position within the bureaucracy if they feel they no longer can morally provide services to the state, regardless of the leadership. That is called liberty. Look it up.
Now, let's engage in a multi-page ####fest over peter's complete misinterpretation of political philosophy.
