By John Q. Hosedrinker 
During the ongoing government shutdown, President Trump has remained largely uninvolved, unlike his approach during a previous shutdown where he actively negotiated with lawmakers. While the government remains closed, Trump has focused on other matters, including foreign policy initiatives, which has drawn the attention of critics. Some Republicans are calling for Trump to take a more active role in negotiations, as the shutdown’s impacts intensify, while Democrats use the situation to criticize his priorities. Trump’s focus on other projects, like a new White House ballroom, further highlights the stark contrast between his current actions and the urgency of the shutdown.
Read the original article here
The Government Is Closed. The President Is MIA.
Well, here we are. The government is, effectively, closed for business. And the President? Well, he’s “missing in action,” or at least, that’s how it feels. There’s a surreal quality to it all, a sense of disconnect as if the engine of the country has stuttered and stalled. The irony isn’t lost on anyone, that while the machinery of governance grinds to a halt, the person at the helm seems to be elsewhere.
The absence is palpable. You can feel it in the day-to-day operations, the services that aren’t being provided, the decisions that aren’t being made. Federal employees are on hold, and the impact will be felt by everyone. Within hours of the first day of the shutdown, everyone knows. It’s a fundamental shift, a clear sign that things aren’t operating as they should.
The comments surrounding this situation are varied, and understandably, a bit frustrated. Some people are asking, half-jokingly, if the locks can be changed, if we can just move on without him. The lack of leadership is very apparent. The idea of him being “MIA” is often a loaded one, with the understanding that he’s not actually *missing* in the traditional sense. He’s overseas, some say taking bribes, some speculate about his activities. Either way, his absence from the responsibilities of the office is glaring.
There is a sense of disbelief, of a situation that seems almost unbelievable, but it’s happening. Many people are expressing that the public and media are normalizing the insanity of the situation. People are questioning the motives and the allegiances of those in power, and the effect it has on the nation’s direction.
There’s the sentiment that the situation is a symptom of a larger problem. The focus shifts to the power and influence of those with immense wealth. The feeling is that the priorities of the country are being dictated by those at the top, while the needs of the average citizen are being overlooked. This has led many to the realization that they are starting to agree with small government, when that is not the point. The narrative of wealth accumulation and its effects on the moral missions of the nation is central to a lot of people’s concerns.
The situation has many wondering who is actually in control. The thought that those around him, the advisors and confidantes, are making the decisions, is very apparent. The question arises of how we can continue functioning under such conditions. Is there a way to bring in new leadership that can fix the mess?
The president’s current state is being mocked and joked about, and at the same time, this is not a situation that is taken lightly. There is a sense of absurdity, a feeling that this is almost a parody of leadership. His priorities seem elsewhere.
There’s talk of what might be done in the meantime, with calls for policy changes that would benefit the public. Some are calling for Medicare for All and tax increases, hoping to take advantage of the situation. Some are asking about who is still operating and who is paying them.
The conclusion is that the situation is not normal. The government is closed, the president is MIA, and the country is left to grapple with the fallout. The hope is that this ends soon, before the damage is too great.