Speaker Mike Johnson

[KLB]

It makes almost everyone angry as their lives are badly disrupted, air travel is disrupted, vacations are ruined, etc.

Most of that is simply not true. Most people never even know there is a shutdown. Of those that do, most know because of the news telling them how horrible it is.

Air Travel is not affected. Controllers and FTA security both work during a shutdown.

Some parks get shutdown, which could affect some travelers.

Then there were the dick moves like shutting down the WWII memorial in DC.

What exactly was affected that you were badly disrupted by last time?

 

[jamil]

Not quite. They didn't add any of the "new spending additions" the Dems also wanted. The Republican's don't have enough power in the current government to do anything worthwhile. The Dems control the Senate. The Dems control the Presidency. And the Republicans have only a tiny majority in the House. Their choices are "keep the status quo for now" or "destroy themselves instead by shutting down the government".

When there was a shutdown in the past, it badly harmed the Republican party and actually didn't accomplish any goals. The Dems will make sure to "shut down" the things that are visible to people (e.g. the National Parks) and give the Republicans a PR nightmare, which translates into a slaughter in the next election. When things are "shut down", it doesn't just make Democrats angry. It makes almost everyone angry as their lives are badly disrupted, air travel is disrupted, vacations are ruined, etc.

It badly harmed the Republicans because they have no messaging, and Democrats control the media. If Republicans had been able to go on all the talk shows and point out that it's government's discretion what to shut down. They chose to shut down things that people feel, for political gain. And then list the things left open that don't matter, against the list of things that do matter.

Also, if people are that reliant on government that's really their problem. When the government shut down, I did not notice any disruption in my life. Sucks for national parks goers, sure. But blame for that goes on the Democrats and would be placed there more if Republicans weren't so stupid about messaging.

 

[xwing]

Most of that is simply not true. Most people never even know there is a shutdown. Of those that do, most know because of the news telling them how horrible it is.

Air Travel is not affected. Controllers and FTA security both work during a shutdown.

Some parks get shutdown, which could affect some travelers.

Then there were the dick moves like shutting down the WWII memorial in DC.

What exactly was affected that you were badly disrupted by last time?

Air Travel was in fact quite disrupted, as the controllers and TSA started "calling in sick" and caused massive delays and flight cancellations. While they were "mandated" to work without pay (to be paid in arrears), a large number of them refused to do so. If the "shutdown" happened this week, we would go into the busiest travel season of the year with countless flight cancellations. (And this is in addition to all the national parks and memorials which are shut down.) The news would be plastered 24x7 with stories of woe and it would 100% be blamed on the Republicans.

And what's worse: It wouldn't actually accomplish anything. The Dems would have no incentive to deal in good faith. They would simply let the shutdown continue and spend all their time on PR.

 

[Ingomike]

It badly harmed the Republicans because they have no messaging, and Democrats control the media. If Republicans had been able to go on all the talk shows and point out that it's government's discretion what to shut down. They chose to shut down things that people feel, for political gain. And then list the things left open that don't matter, against the list of things that do matter.

Also, if people are that reliant on government that's really their problem. When the government shut down, I did not notice any disruption in my life. Sucks for national parks goers, sure. But blame for that goes on the Democrats and would be placed there more if Republicans weren't so stupid about messaging.

This presupposes that dumbed down society can understand the nuance…

 

[DadSmith]

 

[DadSmith]

NRCC hasn't seen slump in fundraising feared following McCarthy ouster

The campaign arms for House Republicans have not seen the massive slump in fundraising that many feared following the ouster of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).

www.washingtonexaminer.com

 

[DadSmith]

Speaker Johnson refuses to stand by when James Carville attacks his Christian faith as 'a bigger threat than al-Qaeda' | Blaze Media

House Speaker Mike Johnson refuses to sit idly and let Democrats attack Christians with bad-faith attacks.On Friday, Democratic strategist James Carville was speaking with Bill Maher when he offered his perspective on Christians like Johnson: They're "a bigger threat" than al-Qaeda."Mike Johnson...

www.theblaze.com

"It's twisted and shameful that a leading Democrat strategist says millions of Christians in America are a greater threat than foreign terrorists who murdered more than 3,000 Americans. The Democratic Party should condemn this. But they won’t" Johnson said.

 

[jamil]

Speaker Johnson refuses to stand by when James Carville attacks his Christian faith as 'a bigger threat than al-Qaeda' | Blaze Media

House Speaker Mike Johnson refuses to sit idly and let Democrats attack Christians with bad-faith attacks.On Friday, Democratic strategist James Carville was speaking with Bill Maher when he offered his perspective on Christians like Johnson: They're "a bigger threat" than al-Qaeda."Mike Johnson...

www.theblaze.com

"It's twisted and shameful that a leading Democrat strategist says millions of Christians in America are a greater threat than foreign terrorists who murdered more than 3,000 Americans. The Democratic Party should condemn this. But they won’t" Johnson said.

I think we should listen when they tell us their thoughts. Who is a danger to Democrat strategies? who is not down with the progressive wet dream? yeah. That's what I thought. But the islamic extremists are quite content to let ClownWorld™ happen in the US. Makes it easier for them.

 

[BugI02]

I think we should listen when they tell us their thoughts. Who is a danger to Democrat strategies? who is not down with the progressive wet dream? yeah. That's what I thought. But the islamic extremists are quite content to let ClownWorld™ happen in the US. Makes it easier for them.

2 Timothy 3:12

 

[SEIndSAM]

 

[DadSmith]

Speaker Johnson shows how Biden 'just lied again' after Biden accuses Republican of lying about corruption allegations | Blaze Media

House Speaker Mike Johnson brought a touch of reality to President Joe Biden's accusation that Republicans are using nothing but "lies" to smear him.After a brief speech at the White House on Wednesday, New York Post reporter Steven Nelson asked the president to respond to allegations that he...

www.theblaze.com

 

[jwamplerusa]

Speaker Johnson shows how Biden 'just lied again' after Biden accuses Republican of lying about corruption allegations | Blaze Media

House Speaker Mike Johnson brought a touch of reality to President Joe Biden's accusation that Republicans are using nothing but "lies" to smear him.After a brief speech at the White House on Wednesday, New York Post reporter Steven Nelson asked the president to respond to allegations that he...

www.theblaze.com

Call me when Biden is in criminal court. Till then none of this matters.

 

[Ingomike]

Call me when Biden is in criminal court. Till then none of this matters.

What exactly is the point of this post? Not sure I understand…

 

[jamil]

What exactly is the point of this post? Not sure I understand…

Seems obvious to me. He's skeptical any of it would amount to a hill-o-beans. I mean no matter what facts are discovered about the Biden crime family, Merick Garland's DoJ is not going to pursue a serious case against Biden. I think the skepticism is valid.

 

[KLB]

For now being impeached and removed from office is all you can get, and that would take a miracle

 

[indyblue]

Seems obvious to me. He's skeptical any of it would amount to a hill-o-beans. I mean no matter what facts are discovered about the Biden crime family, Merick Garland's DoJ is not going to pursue a serious case against Biden. I think the skepticism is valid.

I don't want to, but I have to

 

[Ingomike]

Seems obvious to me. He's skeptical any of it would amount to a hill-o-beans. I mean no matter what facts are discovered about the Biden crime family, Merick Garland's DoJ is not going to pursue a serious case against Biden. I think the skepticism is valid.

Then that should be said. I am confident “Merick Garland's DoJ is not going to pursue a serious case against Biden”. That is not how I read it and how some here have explained it. To me it is a snark directed at those actually doing the work to expose the corruption. They often are accused of political grandstanding here.

If folks do not know constitutional authorities of the various branches of government they may need to study the constitution a little more…

 

[jamil]

Then that should be said. I am confident “Merick Garland's DoJ is not going to pursue a serious case against Biden”. That is not how I read it and how some here have explained it. To me it is a snark directed at those actually doing the work to expose the corruption. They often are accused of political grandstanding here.

If folks do not know constitutional authorities of the various branches of government they may need to study the constitution a little more…

I mean you can think it means what you want. What is so evident that it's snark? I could be wrong, but it seems so obviously skepticism that anyone will be held to account.

It's not about how it should be. It's about how it is. Your confidence in my statement about the odds of actually bringing anyone to justice should help you understand the meaning of the post. I really don't think there's anything more to it, but I'll just leave it to the OP to correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Ingomike]

I mean you can think it means what you want. What is so evident that it's snark? I could be wrong, but it seems so obviously skepticism that anyone will be held to account.

It's not about how it should be. It's about how it is. Your confidence in my statement about the odds of actually bringing anyone to justice should help you understand the meaning of the post. I really don't think there's anything more to it, but I'll just leave it to the OP to correct me if I'm wrong.

Literally every time someone posts about something an investigation by congress reveals someone else says something like “and nothing will happen”. Those bodies are not constitutionally constructed to make anything “happen“.

If the subject of the initial post is the result of a congressional investigation then the post addressing it should designate who it is about, like “and with the corrupt FBI and DOJ nothing will happen”. As it is it seems those posts are directed at those the constitution does not empower to do anything as they are the only entity mentioned in the discussion…

I would like to hear what the OP was saying, instead of our interpretations…

 

[KLB]

Literally every time someone posts about something an investigation by congress reveals someone else says something like “and nothing will happen”. Those bodies are not constitutionally constructed to make anything “happen“.

If the subject of the initial post is the result of a congressional investigation then the post addressing it should designate who it is about, like “and with the corrupt FBI and DOJ nothing will happen”. As it is it seems those posts are directed at those the constitution does not empower to do anything as they are the only entity mentioned in the discussion…

I would like to hear what the OP was saying, instead of our interpretations…

Except for removing the President from office, but we know nothing will happen there.