15 Comments

What a dangerous fellow this Make it So Joe is! To live his life never having to take full responsibility for the consequences of his decisions. He claims that he will “save our democracy” while he signs EOs and changes rules to satisfy his potential voters without a thought of the long term effects. At no time will we say, Joe was right. What a frightening state of affairs.

Expand full comment

The double-talk is so blatant, it's infuriating to hear how many people simply repeat it without question. Trump has been turned into Thanos, a mythical all-powerful entity that, by mere dint of being installed in the White House, could single-handedly erase the Constitution.

Meanwhile, Biden et al are the ones working triple-time to do exactly that.

Expand full comment

I entirely agree with the premise of this column, except there are two points that I have to disagree with:

1) While the "flinging open [of the] southern border" may indeed be a result of "Orange Man Bad" thinking, there is a compelling reason to support large amounts of immigration to the developed world at this time:

https://www.wsj.com/world/birthrates-global-decline-cause-ddaf8be2?st=odtr755u7kkdhk1&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Now the MAGA morons tell this story this way: "the non-working classes want to come to the U.S. and live off the American taxpayers for the rest of their lives". And, unquestionably, a few actually do want to do that. But it seems unreasonable -- in fact, insane -- to believe that the majority of people from dangerous, less-developed countries would take all of the risks to get here simply because they thought they'd never have to work again. (I've met people who were lawyers in their home countries who work as domestics here, and that isn't the kind of change in status that you would elect unless you really wanted to be here!)

And yet: as you note, Biden has allowed this mass migration without any planning whatsoever. As a result, some jurisdictions that have laws which provide for state-sponsored welfare for homeless have become "target destinations" for all of the new arrivals, which is bankrupting those jurisdictions. This could have been anticipated and planned for. Heck, a capable administrator would have taken that into account before beginning the policy. The fact that the Biden administration has done apparently nothing in this regard (except complain about Southern governors facilitating immigrant transit to the "giveaway" locations) supports your main thesis: Biden has no idea how to administer his own administration's policies.

Expand full comment

2) Even though Biden is terrible at this, you seem to assume that Trump would be better because he's had management experience. And yet: we have four years of Trump to judge by. What evidence do you have that he would be better? Yes, he followed different policies . . . which were in the process of increasing consumer costs fairly dramatically . . . and at the end of his term, basically the entire world was shut down, apparently due to a virus resulting from lab work sponsored and funded by one of his administration's top public health officials. Are those examples of good management practices?

I think it's more likely that we're screwed either way.

Expand full comment

I expected the "trump-better" presumption, but Trump has a different "problem" from a management perspective (one I blogged about back when). He comes from a business background, but a government is not a business. It's not a competitive entity, where deals are made to maximally benefit itself. Trump governed that way, unfortunately, as most obviously evinced by his "Buy America" push, tariffs, and other protectionism. Trump's first term was very decidedly a mixed bag, and his pandemic response was bad, but I'm not going to hang the Wuhan Lab funding on him, simply because I have no reason to believe he knew anything about it, and plenty to conclude that the Faucis of the time would have not bothered to tell him.

The sheaf of policies I see from Biden - now and in another term - are more "perilous" to the Republic, IMO, than what I figure another Trump term would produce. The "green" push is a rolling disaster that is already diminishing our living standards, and will wreak economic havoc should Joe have another four years at it. Ditto for several other areas, and I cannot let go the "reward" that the years of law fare and lies would produce should Joe win again.

Yes, if Trump wins, the next four years are going to be unpleasant, but I believe at this juncture that four more years of Biden (or Harris) would be disastrous.

Expand full comment

I don’t disagree with anything you wrote that is critical of Biden. I would only point out that Trump laid the foundation for the Afghan withdrawal, and, in fact, tried to accelerate the process so that all U.S. Forces would be out of Afghanistan by the time he left office. I fault Biden because he could have at least paused Trump’s scheme and evaluated, but, he executed Trump’s plan because he, too, wanted out.

I don’t see how either of these clowns is “better.”

Expand full comment

No disagreement. And, frankly, we should have gotten out of Afghanistan a long time ago. The problem I tried to illustrate is that the withdrawal was not "managed." It was decreed, with an arbitrary timetable and no allowance for what was actually happening as the process went along.

Expand full comment

I'm on the side of robust immigration, and always have been. Not only does our below-replacement fertility rate demand it, I've known more than my share of immigrants who have come to work, to live in the American fashion, and to prosper via their own efforts.

That said, I do believe that there is more than a little moral hazard driving the current wave, in that migrants are right to expect that there will be a public-funded safety net for at least a while.

"Never have to work again" is an exaggeration, and it creates a false dichotomy. So, I disagree to some extent that there isn't a pretty decent number of migrants expecting support.

But, as to the rest, yes.

Expand full comment

For Joe right now it’s all about winning Michigan.

1) Abandon Israel

2) Keep affordable Chinese EVs off the market.

Expand full comment

"more heavily subsidized"

Expand full comment

I view Joe as more Locutus of Borg with Obama and Soros running the Hive Mind.

Expand full comment

Incidentally, we just rewatched "Margin Call" the other night. Still holds up. I want to know more about how it came together - it's such a conspicuous cast and script (not to mention production design, etc.) Some of its death-of-capitalism lines are a bit wishful thinking, but overall still a powerful movie.

I would also protest the mingling of Biden and Capt. Picard - surely there's some other comparison one can make rather than bringing Capt. Picard into this mess - but Patrick Stewart has already done enough damage to his character's rep all on his own. Let them all eat woke-cake and choke on it.

Alas, we'll all have to take a bite, given current trajectories. Even if we win we lose and vice versa.

Here's hoping for a final act plot twist not-presently-guessed before November. (Oh, I bet we'll get one, either way! Be careful what you wish for. Alas, any option seems squarely in the center of 'worsen situation' at present.)

Expand full comment

It's not Picard himself, just his catchphrase.

Picard would say "make it so" to reasonable ideas and wise suggestions, and he would adjust. Biden originates his "make it so," reality notwithstanding.

Expand full comment

I understand. If the show "Picard" did not exist, I'd object for the reasons describe, but don't for the reasons described. He's earned any association with Biden anyone cares to make.

Expand full comment

As for November, I still have my "long shot" prediction that Joe will tap out at or after the convention. But - ballot access deadlines may kibosh that.

Expand full comment