"I grabbed this headline, national parks in chaos after — it's a Washington Poststory," the Ohio Republican replied. "Here's the first paragraph, California National Park, the Trump administration fired the only locksmith on staff."
"Next sentence, he was fired, he was the sole employee with keys and institutional knowledge needed to rescue visitors from locked restrooms," he continued. "Now, if that is it, I mean, that's the best you can do. The real question is how do visitors get locked in restrooms? I mean this is how ridiculous some of this thing is!"
Jordan admitted that "maybe there have been some mistakes made, but I think the intensity and the focus on getting rid of the wasteful spending, the one guy who can unlock people who somehow get locked in a restroom at a national park, this is ridiculous!"
So leave visitors locked in the bathroom to teach ‘em a lesson? Leave the bathroom locked to all visitors until a locksmith can be found and brought in from the nearest town? (Here’s a clue Mr. Representative from Ohio: many of the national parks west of the Mississippi are in sparsely populated rural areas . There aren’t necessarily any conveniently available locksmiths around.) Alternatively, they can just get a sledgehammer and batter the door down. Then wait for approval for a new door, hire a carpenter, and pay to have the door replaced. In the meantime, no bathroom access.
Which of these scenarios is less ridiculous than having a locksmith readily available?
And I’m going to repeat myself: DOGE is not Congress. It is in apparent violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act. Even Trump has no authority to authorize these cuts and layoffs. He certainly can’t delegate such authority to Elmo.
And while we’re talking about useless Gym (what law has he ever sponsored?):
The majority of recipients of Medicaid are children, the elderly, and disabled persons.Jim Jordan: "We're not looking to make cuts to Medicaid, but certainly work requirements are something that I don't view as cuts. Work requirements are just common sense." pic.twitter.com/YWNYCNVRaQ
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 23, 2025
By this rational, Congress could pass legislation to fund an agency, the president could veto it, and Congress could override the veto. But then the president could still eliminate the agency, rendering the override null. That is a fundamental change of power that even our corrupt SCOTUS is unlikely to endorse.Well, Trump is doing what the GOP wants done so…what’s the problem? I mean, if you can’t pick and choose what parts of the Constitution to follow, why be in power at all, huh? 🤔
By this rational, Congress could pass legislation to fund an agency, the president could veto it, and Congress could override the veto. But then the president could still eliminate the agency, rendering the override null. That is a fundamental change of power that even our corrupt SCOTUS is unlikely to endorse.
ReplyDelete