America voted for a dumpster fire — Democrats just need to let it burn itself out

Magats_Love_NHB

Let It Burn!

There’s a quiet but intense debate going on today in America, over how and whether the country will function over the next few years.

Despite Republicans having an ostensible House majority for the last two years, it has been Democrats who have done all the actual governing. More House Democrats than House Republicans have voted for the bills funding the government, authorizing our national defense programs and raising the debt ceiling. In short, the House Republican caucus has been so dysfunctional that neither Kevin McCarthy nor Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) could have kept the lights on without Democratic votes.

There is no reason to think the next Congress — with an even narrower House Republican majority — will be any different. So the question is, should congressional Democrats continue to bail out Republicans, or should they let them sink or swim on their own?


If Johnson wants to do something that’s good for America, shouldn’t Democrats lend him their support regardless of whether his own caucus backs him or not? Shouldn’t Democrats act responsibly even when Republicans won’t?

Surprisingly, there’s a correct answer here. And it comes, of all places, from the field of addiction recovery.

For the last two years, Democrats have thought they were acting in the country’s best interests by helping Republicans govern. They have not been. They meant well, but they have actually been protecting voters from the consequences of Republican dysfunction and enabling bad Republican behavior.

Republican politicians are now addicted to drama, outrage and “owning the libs.” When you shield addicts from the consequences of their actions, you’re not doing them any favors. All you are doing is enabling their addiction.

The same goes for their voters. Many are hooked on the political performance and continue to elect unserious, bomb-throwing zealots who pander on social media for the clicks and the television appearances. But Congress is not a reality television show. In real life, dysfunction has consequences.

The country won’t be on the road to recovery until it is allowed to experience those consequences. If that means giving free rein to the collection of clowns with flamethrowers that now passes for the Republican Party, so be it. Democrats should resist the urge to intervene when the inevitable happens and they set themselves on fire.


For the next two years, Democrats have no responsibility to govern. They should focus on politics instead and take a longer view of the country’s best interests. If, for example, House Democrats had allowed Republican dysfunction to shut down the government in September, they almost certainly would have won a House majority in November. A few weeks of furloughed workers and shuttered national parks would have been a small price to pay for an effective check against Donald Trump’s plans for an American autocracy. Democrats should be practicing tough love and allowing Republicans to inflict pain on themselves, even if that also inflicts some pain on the country.
 

There’s a quiet but intense debate going on today in America, over how and whether the country will function over the next few years.

Despite Republicans having an ostensible House majority for the last two years, it has been Democrats who have done all the actual governing. More House Democrats than House Republicans have voted for the bills funding the government, authorizing our national defense programs and raising the debt ceiling. In short, the House Republican caucus has been so dysfunctional that neither Kevin McCarthy nor Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) could have kept the lights on without Democratic votes.

There is no reason to think the next Congress — with an even narrower House Republican majority — will be any different. So the question is, should congressional Democrats continue to bail out Republicans, or should they let them sink or swim on their own?


If Johnson wants to do something that’s good for America, shouldn’t Democrats lend him their support regardless of whether his own caucus backs him or not? Shouldn’t Democrats act responsibly even when Republicans won’t?

Surprisingly, there’s a correct answer here. And it comes, of all places, from the field of addiction recovery.

For the last two years, Democrats have thought they were acting in the country’s best interests by helping Republicans govern. They have not been. They meant well, but they have actually been protecting voters from the consequences of Republican dysfunction and enabling bad Republican behavior.

Republican politicians are now addicted to drama, outrage and “owning the libs.” When you shield addicts from the consequences of their actions, you’re not doing them any favors. All you are doing is enabling their addiction.

The same goes for their voters. Many are hooked on the political performance and continue to elect unserious, bomb-throwing zealots who pander on social media for the clicks and the television appearances. But Congress is not a reality television show. In real life, dysfunction has consequences.

The country won’t be on the road to recovery until it is allowed to experience those consequences. If that means giving free rein to the collection of clowns with flamethrowers that now passes for the Republican Party, so be it. Democrats should resist the urge to intervene when the inevitable happens and they set themselves on fire.


For the next two years, Democrats have no responsibility to govern. They should focus on politics instead and take a longer view of the country’s best interests. If, for example, House Democrats had allowed Republican dysfunction to shut down the government in September, they almost certainly would have won a House majority in November. A few weeks of furloughed workers and shuttered national parks would have been a small price to pay for an effective check against Donald Trump’s plans for an American autocracy. Democrats should be practicing tough love and allowing Republicans to inflict pain on themselves, even if that also inflicts some pain on the country.
The first six months of Trump's administration will reveal the direction of the country. Specifically how much the Republican Congress supports his nominees and agenda.
 

There’s a quiet but intense debate going on today in America, over how and whether the country will function over the next few years.

Despite Republicans having an ostensible House majority for the last two years, it has been Democrats who have done all the actual governing. More House Democrats than House Republicans have voted for the bills funding the government, authorizing our national defense programs and raising the debt ceiling. In short, the House Republican caucus has been so dysfunctional that neither Kevin McCarthy nor Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) could have kept the lights on without Democratic votes.

There is no reason to think the next Congress — with an even narrower House Republican majority — will be any different. So the question is, should congressional Democrats continue to bail out Republicans, or should they let them sink or swim on their own?


If Johnson wants to do something that’s good for America, shouldn’t Democrats lend him their support regardless of whether his own caucus backs him or not? Shouldn’t Democrats act responsibly even when Republicans won’t?

Surprisingly, there’s a correct answer here. And it comes, of all places, from the field of addiction recovery.

For the last two years, Democrats have thought they were acting in the country’s best interests by helping Republicans govern. They have not been. They meant well, but they have actually been protecting voters from the consequences of Republican dysfunction and enabling bad Republican behavior.

Republican politicians are now addicted to drama, outrage and “owning the libs.” When you shield addicts from the consequences of their actions, you’re not doing them any favors. All you are doing is enabling their addiction.

The same goes for their voters. Many are hooked on the political performance and continue to elect unserious, bomb-throwing zealots who pander on social media for the clicks and the television appearances. But Congress is not a reality television show. In real life, dysfunction has consequences.

The country won’t be on the road to recovery until it is allowed to experience those consequences. If that means giving free rein to the collection of clowns with flamethrowers that now passes for the Republican Party, so be it. Democrats should resist the urge to intervene when the inevitable happens and they set themselves on fire.


For the next two years, Democrats have no responsibility to govern. They should focus on politics instead and take a longer view of the country’s best interests. If, for example, House Democrats had allowed Republican dysfunction to shut down the government in September, they almost certainly would have won a House majority in November. A few weeks of furloughed workers and shuttered national parks would have been a small price to pay for an effective check against Donald Trump’s plans for an American autocracy. Democrats should be practicing tough love and allowing Republicans to inflict pain on themselves, even if that also inflicts some pain on the country.
How bad must your candidate have been that America preferred a dumpster fire to a cackling kamal and a tampon. You people.NEVER stop to think before you speak. It's a sign of weak mindedness
 

There’s a quiet but intense debate going on today in America, over how and whether the country will function over the next few years.

Despite Republicans having an ostensible House majority for the last two years, it has been Democrats who have done all the actual governing. More House Democrats than House Republicans have voted for the bills funding the government, authorizing our national defense programs and raising the debt ceiling. In short, the House Republican caucus has been so dysfunctional that neither Kevin McCarthy nor Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) could have kept the lights on without Democratic votes.

Irrelevant appeal to popularity fallacy. Republicans generally don't want to spend like drunken sailors and expand government at every turn. Democrats do.
There is no reason to think the next Congress — with an even narrower House Republican majority — will be any different. So the question is, should congressional Democrats continue to bail out Republicans, or should they let them sink or swim on their own?

See how well that worked for either party in the past. It's one of the reasons today the Democrats are out of power.
If Johnson wants to do something that’s good for America, shouldn’t Democrats lend him their support regardless of whether his own caucus backs him or not? Shouldn’t Democrats act responsibly even when Republicans won’t?

Define "good for America." Was the nearly $2 trillion in new spending Biden was handed in 2021 "good for America?" If Johnson wants to defund a significant portion of the federal bureaucracy and get rid of it, is that "good for America?"
Surprisingly, there’s a correct answer here. And it comes, of all places, from the field of addiction recovery.

For the last two years, Democrats have thought they were acting in the country’s best interests by helping Republicans govern. They have not been. They meant well, but they have actually been protecting voters from the consequences of Republican dysfunction and enabling bad Republican behavior.

Myopic at best, ignorant at worst. The Left--the Democrat party today--operates largely, if not entirely, on the principle of What's ours is ours, what's yours is negotiable. That is, it won't compromise on anything where it has to give up something it wants.
Republican politicians are now addicted to drama, outrage and “owning the libs.” When you shield addicts from the consequences of their actions, you’re not doing them any favors. All you are doing is enabling their addiction.

This is myopic too. Two impeachments, the Jan 6 committee... The Left of the Democrat party are the ultimate drama queens. They do shit daily that isn't in the best interests of the nation.

The same goes for their voters. Many are hooked on the political performance and continue to elect unserious, bomb-throwing zealots who pander on social media for the clicks and the television appearances. But Congress is not a reality television show. In real life, dysfunction has consequences.

Look no further than the Left of the Democrat party for those "bomb-throwing zealots who pander..."
The country won’t be on the road to recovery until it is allowed to experience those consequences. If that means giving free rein to the collection of clowns with flamethrowers that now passes for the Republican Party, so be it. Democrats should resist the urge to intervene when the inevitable happens and they set themselves on fire.

The country will never recover so long as the Left has political power. That's a provable fact from dozens, hundreds, of other Leftist governments running (ruining?) things in nations around the world.
For the next two years, Democrats have no responsibility to govern. They should focus on politics instead and take a longer view of the country’s best interests. If, for example, House Democrats had allowed Republican dysfunction to shut down the government in September, they almost certainly would have won a House majority in November. A few weeks of furloughed workers and shuttered national parks would have been a small price to pay for an effective check against Donald Trump’s plans for an American autocracy. Democrats should be practicing tough love and allowing Republicans to inflict pain on themselves, even if that also inflicts some pain on the country.
Democrats have responsibility to govern where they were elected. Your version is nothing but a childish tantrum--so frequent the case on the Left when they fail to get their way--to fight adults trying to act responsibly.

As for a government shut down, ask Newt Gingrich how well that worked...
 

There’s a quiet but intense debate going on today in America, over how and whether the country will function over the next few years.

Despite Republicans having an ostensible House majority for the last two years, it has been Democrats who have done all the actual governing. More House Democrats than House Republicans have voted for the bills funding the government, authorizing our national defense programs and raising the debt ceiling. In short, the House Republican caucus has been so dysfunctional that neither Kevin McCarthy nor Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) could have kept the lights on without Democratic votes.

There is no reason to think the next Congress — with an even narrower House Republican majority — will be any different. So the question is, should congressional Democrats continue to bail out Republicans, or should they let them sink or swim on their own?


If Johnson wants to do something that’s good for America, shouldn’t Democrats lend him their support regardless of whether his own caucus backs him or not? Shouldn’t Democrats act responsibly even when Republicans won’t?

Surprisingly, there’s a correct answer here. And it comes, of all places, from the field of addiction recovery.

For the last two years, Democrats have thought they were acting in the country’s best interests by helping Republicans govern. They have not been. They meant well, but they have actually been protecting voters from the consequences of Republican dysfunction and enabling bad Republican behavior.

Republican politicians are now addicted to drama, outrage and “owning the libs.” When you shield addicts from the consequences of their actions, you’re not doing them any favors. All you are doing is enabling their addiction.

The same goes for their voters. Many are hooked on the political performance and continue to elect unserious, bomb-throwing zealots who pander on social media for the clicks and the television appearances. But Congress is not a reality television show. In real life, dysfunction has consequences.

The country won’t be on the road to recovery until it is allowed to experience those consequences. If that means giving free rein to the collection of clowns with flamethrowers that now passes for the Republican Party, so be it. Democrats should resist the urge to intervene when the inevitable happens and they set themselves on fire.


For the next two years, Democrats have no responsibility to govern. They should focus on politics instead and take a longer view of the country’s best interests. If, for example, House Democrats had allowed Republican dysfunction to shut down the government in September, they almost certainly would have won a House majority in November. A few weeks of furloughed workers and shuttered national parks would have been a small price to pay for an effective check against Donald Trump’s plans for an American autocracy. Democrats should be practicing tough love and allowing Republicans to inflict pain on themselves, even if that also inflicts some pain on the country.
The Republican presidents of the 21st century left office with the economy in tatters, and left it to Democats to clean up the mess
 
Bullshit you're retarded. Clinton left with a surplus that's all you got. Biden out us in the toilet you moron

I've never seen anything worse than America over the last 4 years. The abject poverty on the streets, people dying on the sidewalk. My people are unable to get groceries (you may know what groceries are since Trump recently went on tour explaining the new term) and so we can't eat. When they started closing down the corporations and we got to 80% unemployment I thought nothing could get worse.

But it did. When the sasquatches invaded the cities and started to kill the provisional governments that had been set up in the aftermath of the protests about the killing of a black person by a cop on the street. We thought the ANTIFA government was bad when they FORCED sex change operations in the schools, but we were in for a REAL surprise when Sasquatches descended on our towns and made even going out after dark a dangerous proposition.

Then we found out it was CANADIAN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS who were FEEDING the sasquatches and leaving TRAILS OF SANDWICHES leading from the mountains into the cities. They were trying to DESTABILIZE OUR ALREADY WEAKENED SOCIETY.

But the worst part over the last 4 years is that there have simply NOT been enough rapists helping us run the country. It's WHY WE ARE IN THE STRAITS WE ARE TODAY. America runs on two things: gas station coffee and rapin'.

THANK GOD Trump has been re-instated. SOON our national nightmare will be over. And FINALLY penises will be LEGAL ONCE AGAIN!!!

3Vn6pTf.jpg
 
I've never seen anything worse than America over the last 4 years. The abject poverty on the streets, people dying on the sidewalk. My people are unable to get groceries (you may know what groceries are since Trump recently went on tour explaining the new term) and so we can't eat. When they started closing down the corporations and we got to 80% unemployment I thought nothing could get worse.

But it did. When the sasquatches invaded the cities and started to kill the provisional governments that had been set up in the aftermath of the protests about the killing of a black person by a cop on the street. We thought the ANTIFA government was bad when they FORCED sex change operations in the schools, but we were in for a REAL surprise when Sasquatches descended on our towns and made even going out after dark a dangerous proposition.

Then we found out it was CANADIAN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS who were FEEDING the sasquatches and leaving TRAILS OF SANDWICHES leading from the mountains into the cities. They were trying to DESTABILIZE OUR ALREADY WEAKENED SOCIETY.

But the worst part over the last 4 years is that there have simply NOT been enough rapists helping us run the country. It's WHY WE ARE IN THE STRAITS WE ARE TODAY. America runs on two things: gas station coffee and rapin'.

THANK GOD Trump has been re-instated. SOON our national nightmare will be over. And FINALLY penises will be LEGAL ONCE AGAIN!!!

3Vn6pTf.jpg
Thanks joe biden
 

There’s a quiet but intense debate going on today in America, over how and whether the country will function over the next few years.

Despite Republicans having an ostensible House majority for the last two years, it has been Democrats who have done all the actual governing. More House Democrats than House Republicans have voted for the bills funding the government, authorizing our national defense programs and raising the debt ceiling. In short, the House Republican caucus has been so dysfunctional that neither Kevin McCarthy nor Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) could have kept the lights on without Democratic votes.

There is no reason to think the next Congress — with an even narrower House Republican majority — will be any different. So the question is, should congressional Democrats continue to bail out Republicans, or should they let them sink or swim on their own?


If Johnson wants to do something that’s good for America, shouldn’t Democrats lend him their support regardless of whether his own caucus backs him or not? Shouldn’t Democrats act responsibly even when Republicans won’t?

Surprisingly, there’s a correct answer here. And it comes, of all places, from the field of addiction recovery.

For the last two years, Democrats have thought they were acting in the country’s best interests by helping Republicans govern. They have not been. They meant well, but they have actually been protecting voters from the consequences of Republican dysfunction and enabling bad Republican behavior.

Republican politicians are now addicted to drama, outrage and “owning the libs.” When you shield addicts from the consequences of their actions, you’re not doing them any favors. All you are doing is enabling their addiction.

The same goes for their voters. Many are hooked on the political performance and continue to elect unserious, bomb-throwing zealots who pander on social media for the clicks and the television appearances. But Congress is not a reality television show. In real life, dysfunction has consequences.

The country won’t be on the road to recovery until it is allowed to experience those consequences. If that means giving free rein to the collection of clowns with flamethrowers that now passes for the Republican Party, so be it. Democrats should resist the urge to intervene when the inevitable happens and they set themselves on fire.


For the next two years, Democrats have no responsibility to govern. They should focus on politics instead and take a longer view of the country’s best interests. If, for example, House Democrats had allowed Republican dysfunction to shut down the government in September, they almost certainly would have won a House majority in November. A few weeks of furloughed workers and shuttered national parks would have been a small price to pay for an effective check against Donald Trump’s plans for an American autocracy. Democrats should be practicing tough love and allowing Republicans to inflict pain on themselves, even if that also inflicts some pain on the country.
I thought dems loved dumpster fires.

Portland police declare riot on George Floyd death anniversary as fires set, windows smashed; arrests reported​




 
I thought dems loved dumpster fires.

Portland police declare riot on George Floyd death anniversary as fires set, windows smashed; arrests reported​




IDK. However, as a weapon trained by your parent's tax dollars, I understand why fire can be used as a weapon.

Fire, and the use of it, is what separates human beings from other critters. If you went to college, you'd understand this fact.

The fact you do not understand it is interesting, anymouse.
 
True. You don't know much.

However, as a weapon

Are you saying fire is a weapon?

How is a weapon trained? A weapon has no mind to train, much less fire.

by your parent's tax dollars,

My parents are dead. Even if they weren't what would my parent's tax dollars have to do w/ training weapons (which can't be done, weapons have no mind to train.)? Leave them out of this.
None of this makes an ounce of sense.

Now I see why you accuse half the board of being drunks.
You're obviously quite drunk at the moment.
 
Clinton, yes. Obama and Biden, no.
Actually that is not true. The dot com bubble burst in 2000. The country went into recession in March 2001. We didn't have a solid and growing economy in January 2001 and then in the span of a month go into a recession.
 
Actually that is not true. The dot com bubble burst in 2000. The country went into recession in March 2001. We didn't have a solid and growing economy in January 2001 and then in the span of a month go into a recession.
Clinton is a debatable case, Obama and Biden aren't. The metrics the Democrats, Left, and apologists for the three use are the same crappy ones they trot out for Biden now. When you look closer at the economy and take in other metrics, their claims are based on smoke and mirrors.
 
Clinton is a debatable case, Obama and Biden aren't. The metrics the Democrats, Left, and apologists for the three use are the same crappy ones they trot out for Biden now. When you look closer at the economy and take in other metrics, their claims are based on smoke and mirrors.
I don't see how it's debatable. The '01 recession certainly wasn't the worst in the country's history but a recession is a recession and it came about because the dot com bubble burst. Under no definition was the economy growing at that time.
 
Back
Top