House chaplain forced out by Ryan

[Theo520]

I find it self evident in the speech, given it’s wording and timing.

 

[JoshuaIsLord]

Asked whether differences in politics were a factor in his ouster, Father Conroy said: “I do not want to politicize this. I have thoughts about it, but I am not contributing to that.”

He took some what the High Road.

 

[JoshuaIsLord]

“May all members be mindful that the institutions and structures of our great nation guarantee the opportunities that have allowed some to achieve great success, while others continue to struggle,” he prayed. “May their efforts these days guarantee that there are not winners and losers under new tax laws, but benefits balanced and shared by all Americans.”

Trying to discern what was so political about this prayer.

 

[Feanor2]

I guess the tea partiers can appoint a Protestant Work Ethic apologist now.

 

[JoshuaIsLord]

I guess the tea partiers can appoint a Protestant Work Ethic apologist now.

What should be disturbing is a Catholic ousting a Catholic Priest.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

You mean “as the Republicans seem to say…” There is no objective evidence he was aligning with the Democrats…unless you have some?

do we know everything that goes on in congress? the article said ryan would not have pulled him if pelosi objected. she didn’t until he did it. more political grandstanding. why didn’t pelosi put a stop to it when she could have?

Ryan’s and Pelosi’s offices agree that Pelosi was told in advance that the chaplain was leaving.
AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for Ryan, said it was Ryan’s decision, but declined to offer a reason for the move. She added that Pelosi and her office “were fully read in and did not object.”

“The speaker told Leader Pelosi that he would not move forward with the decision if she objected and she chose not to,” Strong said.

Strong is a spokesman for Paul Ryan. You are relying 100% on info from one side. You are trying to shift the blame to Pelosi, but I’m not buying it - not until you show me a quote from Pelosi herself that says she also wanted the chaplain to resign.

 

[Theo520]

I’m pretty confident ryan’s office would have passed this by the opposition first.
He understands the optics, and hasn’t a history of impulsive actions

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I’m pretty confident ryan’s office would have passed this by the opposition first.
He understands the optics, and hasn’t a history of impulsive actions

A Pelosi aide confirmed she was given advance notice by Ryan but disputes that she could have prevented Conroy’s resignation. Pelosi made clear to Ryan she disagreed with the decision and told the speaker she had heard only positive feedback from members about Conroy, according to the aide.

Summary: It was Ryan’s decision alone.

 

[Theo520]

Summary: It was Ryan’s decision alone.

I’m sure it was his decision and we don’t know if the objection was tepid or vociferous.

We also don’t know all the issues at play, I think there must be more than one speech behind the move. Ryan is not that impulsive.

 

[lmachine]

do we know everything that goes on in congress? the article said ryan would not have pulled him if pelosi objected. she didn’t until he did it. more political grandstanding. why didn’t pelosi put a stop to it when she could have?

And if you read on past what you quoted:

Pelosi’s office disputed that the Democrat did not object.

“Leader Pelosi was given advance notice by Speaker Ryan," said a Pelosi spokesman, but she “also made it clear to Speaker Ryan that she disagreed with this decision.”

How is this “shilling for the Dems?” –

“May all Members be mindful that the institutions and structures of our great Nation guarantee the opportunities that have allowed some to achieve great success, while others continue to struggle,” Conroy said at the time. “May their efforts these days guarantee that there are not winners and losers under new tax laws, but benefits balanced and shared by all Americans.”

If that’s shilling for the Democrats than Republicans are just admitting they aren’t looking out for all Americans.

We also don’t know all the issues at play, I think there must be more than one speech behind the move. Ryan is not that impulsive.

The article also notes some Republicans were upset that he invited a Muslim to give a prayer.

 

[upant]

Strong is a spokesman for Paul Ryan. You are relying 100% on info from one side. You are trying to shift the blame to Pelosi, but I’m not buying it - not until you show me a quote from Pelosi herself that says she also wanted the chaplain to resign.

what?

ryan took full responsibility. how is that shifting blame?

she is at fault because she is politicizing it. she had a chance to stop the removal but didn’t. she set him up for a round of politicking

And if you read on past what you quoted:

you also see:

“The speaker told Leader Pelosi that he would not move forward with the decision if she objected and she chose not to,” Strong said.

she may have disagreed but didn’t veto it as it appears she could have.

If that’s shilling for the Democrats than Republicans are just admitting they aren’t looking out for all Americans.

nonsense!

The article also notes some Republicans were upset that he invited a Muslim to give a prayer.

muslims deny the deity of Jesus. should a buddhist (etc.) be given the same opportunity? was a christian prayer given the same day?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Strong is a spokesman for Paul Ryan. You are relying 100% on info from one side. You are trying to shift the blame to Pelosi, but I’m not buying it - not until you show me a quote from Pelosi herself that says she also wanted the chaplain to resign.

what?

ryan took full responsibility. how is that shifting blame?

Read what I wrote. It’s right there. You even quoted it. I was not saying Paul Ryan is shifting the blame. I said you were shifting the blame when you said:

she is at fault because she is politicizing it. she had a chance to stop the removal but didn’t. she set him up for a round of politicking

As a Pelosi spokesman said, Pelosi did not have a chance to stop it. I know you would much rather talk about Pelosi, but the story is really just about Ryan.

 

[lmachine]

nonsense!

If Republicans actually believed their tax bill benefited all Americans then they wouldn’t consider the House chaplain praying that all Americans benefit from the tax bill to be partisan.

muslims deny the deity of Jesus. should a buddhist (etc.) be given the same opportunity? was a christian prayer given the same day?

Praying for you.

 

[upant]

As a Pelosi spokesman said, Pelosi did not have a chance to stop it. I know you would much rather talk about Pelosi, but the story is really just about Ryan.

as i said she politicized it. which one is lying?

If Republicans actually believed their tax bill benefited all Americans then they wouldn’t consider the House chaplain praying that all Americans benefit from the tax bill to be partisan.

why would the chaplain indicate there would be winners and losers in the tax bill if he wasn’t picking sides? he obviously doesn’t agree with the gop view of how to address the issue.

Praying for you.

thank you, i need them

 

[lmachine]

why would the chaplain indicate there would be winners and losers in the tax bill if he wasn’t picking sides? he obviously doesn’t agree with the gop view of how to address the issue.

He simply prayed that the House make sure the tax bill benefited all Americans very early in the legislation process. He said nothing about the Republican or Democratic view of addressing the issue. Again, if you think saying that legislation that affects all people should benefit all people is a Democratic position then you’re just acknowledging the Republican position is not to benefit all people.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

As a Pelosi spokesman said, Pelosi did not have a chance to stop it. I know you would much rather talk about Pelosi, but the story is really just about Ryan.

as i said she politicized it. which one is lying?

My guess is the spokesman for Ryan. Can you imagine Ryan actually asking Pelosi for permission to dismiss the chaplin? That is the least imaginable outcome. Similarly I cannot imagine Pelosi consenting to dismiss even if she were asked.

 

[upant]

He simply prayed that the House make sure the tax bill benefited all Americans very early in the legislation process. He said nothing about the Republican or Democratic view of addressing the issue. Again, if you think saying that legislation that affects all people should benefit all people is a Democratic position then you’re just acknowledging the Republican position is not to benefit all people.

winners and losers

he was showing his opposition to it

i am saying if you claim there are winners and losers you are picking a side.

we know the dems position doesn’t support all people especially people of religion.

My guess is the spokesman for Ryan. Can you imagine Ryan actually asking Pelosi for permission to dismiss the chaplin?

yes, i can imagine ryan actually asking pelosi for permission to dismiss the chaplin. he has no reason to lie, he took responsibility. he didn’t need her ok. what does he have to gain by it? he is done.

i can also see pelosi talking out both sides of her mouth as she does on the abortion issue.

i don’t trust pro-choice catholics?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

winners and losers

he was showing his opposition to it

i am saying if you claim there are winners and losers you are picking a side.

You can give up on the winners and losers prayer. Paul Ryan himself said that no one prayer was responsible for his decision.

yes, i can imagine ryan actually asking pelosi for permission to dismiss the chaplin. he has no reason to lie, he took responsibility. he didn’t need her ok. what does he have to gain by it? he is done.

Did Paul Ryan himself actually say he would not have dismissed the chaplin without Pelosi’s OK? I don’t think so. I think the whole story about asking permission of Pelosi was from Strong, the spokesman. I suspect Strong just misspoke or got the story wrong. Pelosi was notified as a courtesy. That is all. There was no waiting for her OK.

 

[lmachine]

i am saying if you claim there are winners and losers you are picking a side.

No, you’re not picking a side. What a bizarre interpretation of some pretty simple language. And that’s in addition to the fact that he didn’t say there were winners and losers, he urged all legislators to craft legislation that didn’t result in winners and losers. If Republicans believe their tax bill did that then they shouldn’t have a problem with Conroy’s prayer.

 

[Theo520]

Of course there are winners and losers. Rich people who lost their SALT deduction were clear losers.

You can’t draft such legislation so that everyone thinks they are a winner.