why wont biden nominate anyone for the fcc

[rdking647]

Last edited Thu Oct 14, 2021, 04:11 PM - Edit history (1)

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/13/biden-inaction-gop-fcc-515847

[brooklynite]

1. He's busy doing other things?

You’re aware that the FCC has no authority over Fox News, OAN et Al? What would you like them to do?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

3. It's the latest line of attack, apparently

Lots of "Democrats" really upset about Biden today.

[rdking647]

12. if he keeps waiting the gop seizes control of the agency

the faa has no control over fox etc but they do have power over things like net neutrality etc...

[FoxNewsSucks]

2. I don't understand the delay in purging

ALL tRump- and GOP nominated holdovers.

It's commonly done anyway by new admins, but in this transition it was even more crucial to remove toxic destructive holdovers.

DeJoy is another example.

[MineralMan]

4. You seem far too eager to attack President Biden

for not doing things you say you think he should.

I've noticed that in more than one thread. Why is that?

[FoxNewsSucks]

6. You seem far too eager to perceive things as an attack.

Previous administrations have always removed their predecessor's people. It's a part of winning an election.

I'd welcome and gladly accept a good explanation for these current delays, but I haven't seen one. I can think of no good reason to leave any tRumpers in any position. Can you?

[MineralMan]

7. Not too eager, I think.

Who stays and who goes always depends on many factors. I'm not in Biden's position, so I don't have any insights into his decisions with regard to appointees of the previous guy. I doubt you have any direct access to his thinking, either.

He's pretty busy right now, it seems to me. I'm sure he's weighing many factors in deciding what is a high priority issue and what is not.

Why is DeJoy still at USPS? Well, it may well be that it's going to be very messy to toss him out at the moment. Biden can't just fire him, you know. Not every appointee can simply be fired by a new President. The process can sometimes be quite an issue.

My point is that neither you nor I know what the reasoning is that is being used. I'm focused on some big issues facing the Biden administration and hope he continues to focus tightly on those.

You seem focused on something else altogether.

[FoxNewsSucks]

8. Definitely too eager,

I voted for Biden, think he's doing a great job, and have stated those things before. Giving my opinion on a message board designed for that purpose is not an attack.

Of course we have no direct access. That's why we have to rely on the people we hire to run the government to do what we send them there to do.

And that's why Biden has people he can delegate responsibilities and tasks to - He's pretty busy, as you say. There are a number of "big" issues, one of which is the future of the post office. But since he is in fact busy, certain things should be handled by those he tells to take care of. Such as a "messy" procedure. It's been extensively discussed that DeJoy is not a direct appointment, but there is a procedure to follow for replacement. Comments by me and others aren't because we are unaware of that, but because in these cases no one at all is working on it. As I said, there is NO good reason to keep any tRumper holdover.

I'm curious what you think I'm focused on.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

9. S/he did say s/he didn't understand, and is asking for explanations ...

presumably to help with the aforementioned understanding.

Not everyone here is as 'up on' the details of the operation of government as some others here are.

Just saying.

[MineralMan]

10. Yes, I know. There are many here who seem to be taking

the same tack. Maybe you haven't noticed that. I'm not as sure of their motives as you appear to be. Just saying...

[Hugh_Lebowski]

11. I did not mean to assert any certainty of motives, I'm just going by the text of the message

If you're suspicious ... I'm sure you have your reasons my friend ...

[BlueJac]

5. Come on Joe