Yes, I now have a knee-jerk response to this kind of analysis

Biden speak

This came up over the weekend, and I meant to post something about it at the time, but just had too much going on. Before it gets too far in the past, I’m just going to put it up for discussion, and if y’all take it up, I’ll join in and say more.

Howard Weaver, a retired VP from McClatchy newspapers with whom I frequently trade tweets, brought this to my attention on Sunday:

Howard’s reaction to it was, “A pointless, reflexive inside-the-beltway example of savvy swagger. Stop it, @nbcnews

It certainly hit a nerve with me. I jumped in with:

I may have overreacted a bit. A bit. But there’s a reason.

Look, folks, Joe’s going to do some things wrong, and when he does, people should call him on it. I don’t think all the evidence is in on his administration’s failure to go after MBS over Jamal Khashoggi’s killing, but there’s plenty there to challenge, so have at it.

But this nonsense I keep hearing saying Joe Biden is somehow failing in his “unity” pledge when Republicans decide not to vote for something he advocates is ridiculous.

Mind you, in NBC’s defense, they didn’t quite say that — they suggested this bill isn’t bipartisan because it didn’t get bipartisan support. You can certainly assert that, and support it. And if this was the only thing I’d seen about it, I wouldn’t even take notice of it. And if you called it to my attention, I might even agree. But I see it within a context of multiple assertions about that poor, deluded (or dishonest) Joe Biden and his stupid, or alleged, belief in bipartisanship — a bunch of yammering we’ve been getting from all sides ever since (and even before) Inauguration Day. That makes it come across differently.

It gets asserted repeatedly by people on the left who don’t want any bipartisanship and see Biden as a doddering old fool for believing in it (something deeply rooted in the campaigns of all that huge crowd of people Joe had to overcome to get the nomination), and people on the right who claim, every time Biden expresses what he believes instead of what they believe, that he’s a big, fat liar. And media types who prefer that the two sides fight, because in their book that makes a better story — or certainly a story that’s easier to cover in their usual, simple-minded manner.

And it’s stupid, and I’m tired of it. Tired to the point that I react negatively to something that even suggests it.

So that’s the way my knee’s jerking these days. How about yours?

60 thoughts on “Yes, I now have a knee-jerk response to this kind of analysis

  1. bud

    Since Brad loves these false equivalency screeds that grossly mischaracterize those of us on the left to make us somehow just as irresponsible as the whacko extremists on the right let me clarify. Liberals don’t have a natural aversion to bipartisan cooperation. What we were concerned with was that Biden would waste time and energy trying to endlessly compromise with a group that clearly has no good faith interest in compromise. That was a major failing during Obama’s tenure. Biden spent an inordinate amount of campaign energy asserting that he could work with Republicans. That was disconcerting. But to his credit Biden seems to now understand the folly of attempting to work with this bad faith bunch. So once again we see an example of some type of journalistic code that mandates equivalent treatment to both sides of the political divide. And again we see how misguided that approach is.

    1. Brad Warthen Post author

      OK, now I will clarify.

      First, there is no “false equivalency” here.

      Second, nowhere did I say that “those of us on the left” are “just as irresponsible as the whacko extremists on the right.”

      Let me clarify what I was talking about by quoting one of the sources from the left:

      What we were concerned with was that Biden would waste time and energy trying to endlessly compromise with a group that clearly has no good faith interest in compromise. That was a major failing during Obama’s tenure. Biden spent an inordinate amount of campaign energy asserting that he could work with Republicans. That was disconcerting….

      And let me add that it was not disconcerting for me. In fact, it was a prerequisite. No one else talked like Joe about these things, which is why no one else was qualified.

      Thanks for giving me this opportunity to clarify…

  2. Doug Ross

    Please explain which parts of the $1.9 TRILLION dollar bill represent an attempt to unify the country? Which aspects are in there to make it worth voting for by Republicans?

    Joe’s already backed off $15 minimum wage (good- it’s a stupid idea that will kill jobs in many areas of the country) and has scaled back the $2000 per person to $1400 with a lot more restrictions… plus the bill is FILLED with pork and special interest giveaways that have ZERO to do with COVID. He (well, his staff since I doubt Joe would recognize her) is working hard to push Neera Tanden for OMB director… using up his political capital as a newly elected President on a bureaucratic appointment.

    Anyway, if someone could wake Joe up and let him know it would be great if he came out of the bunker now that he’s had his vaccine, that would be helpful. Are we still going to be in tough shape until Christmas, Joe? Literally anyone who wants a vaccine will get it before July. If it ends too soon, he might not be able to claim much credit for what was already in place before he took office.

    1. Brad Warthen Post author

      You say the strangest things. You must be following news from another planet or something, the way you describe Joe and what’s going on.

      But as for your question:

      Well, I don’t know which parts they like best, but the plan is polling at almost 70 percent approval, with some individual proposals polling closer to 80. Which means plenty of Republicans like it.

      I learned those and other facts listening to The Daily today. They had a fairly extensive discussion of it. I made it through, even though it was about money.

      I don’t think it’s possible to come up with a stimulus plan that libertarians like Doug will like, though…

      1. Brad Warthen Post author

        Of course, Doug didn’t ask me whether I like it.

        You know, it makes me nervous — anything that big kind of does, with the debt as high as it is.

        But so many people — economists and such — who know a lot more than I do about this stuff saying it’s needed, I’m willing to go along.

        I’m sure if I pored through it line by line, I’d find things I wouldn’t like — as I would in any large, complex piece of legislation. As any reasonable person would. Something I think Doug doesn’t understand about the legislative process — or if he understands, he doesn’t LIKE it — is that when a large group of people, with lots of different opinions, participate in such legislation, there are going be lots of things a reasonable person would like, and a lot of things that he wouldn’t. There’s no way you’d like it all unless you’re deluding yourself, and no way you should expect to. This is true even in a piece that has been largely put together by the administration, as this has. Joe will have things in it that encourage Rep. X to support it, and other things to draw backing from Rep. Y.

        I’m glad the $15 minimum thing won’t be in it. Although I wouldn’t necessarily vote against it if it were. As I say, I’m not persuaded either way on that.

        Note how I got all the way through that without saying outrageous negative things about the president, or anyone else…

        1. Barry

          Yes- of course- there are things that I wouldn’t necessarily support but overall it’s needed and I’m fine with it.

          Just as when my wife and I decide to buy something, we compromise. There are things she might like or want, and things I like and want, we reach agreement. I don’t get to make the entire decision and neither does she make the entire decision.

          That’s the way it works.

      2. randle

        I want to clarify a few things after reading Doug’ s post.
        76% of the population backs the stimulus plan, according to the Morning Consult. Other polls reflect the same strong support throughout the country. That is unity.
        The stimulus amount proposed by the ex-president and supported by the Democratic Congress was for $2000. $600 has already been approved; the new stimulus bill will include checks for the remaining $1400 ($1400 + $600 = $2000), as promised by the current president, Joe Biden. No one has backed off anything. The president has repeatedly explained this to those who persist in misrepresenting him. I have heard him.
        President Biden has pulled Neera Tanden’s nomination. How ridiculous to suggest he doesn’t know who she is.
        Also, no need to wake the president up. He’s an early riser, keeps regular office hours (9 a.m. to 7 p.m.) and takes his briefing books home with him. He frequently holds press conferences, where he explains policies in detail and handles questions with candor, humor and grace. He also gives frequent speeches outlining his goals, one of which is unifying a divided country. He has been in office about 45 days; already he enjoys a 61 percent approval rating, according to a Harvard/Harris poll; a number the former guy could only dream about. The majority of the country is unified behind him because he replaced a practically non-existent vaccine program with a functioning one. Biden has secured the necessary vaccines to cover the entire adult population of the country by May, whereas his predecessor actually turned down additional vaccines after buying a ridiculously small amount. Biden has created an effective distribution plan, which is now among the best in the world, with about triple the number of people being vaccinated every day than during the previous administration.
        It may fit some fictional narrative to continue to say that the president is out-of-touch or ineffectual, but it is not grounded in reality now, nor was it ever.
        Perhaps Doug is confusing chaos and blathering with solid achievement. In that case, he may want to read this article in The Atlantic, extolling the virtues of a boring president, such as we can only hope that President Biden will be.

        Or he could study Henry VII of England, one of England’s greatest and least-exciting kings. Henry Tudor left his country and his people in a far better state at the end of his reign than when he assumed the throne by doing the hard work of governing. So far, President Biden is doing the same.

        1. Doug Ross

          76% of people supporting a bill that they have ZERO idea what it contains is meaningless garbage polling. I bet I could drop those numbers pretty quickly if those who were polled were given the breakdown of what the $1.9 trillion means, who gets it, and all the items that are unrelated to COVID. Wanna bet?

          Everyone loves getting “free” money especially when it comes from other people (the minority of Americans who actually pay the taxes that fund the federal government).

          Joe may be an early riser but I’m not sure he’s up to the challenge of being President. He’s great at signing papers put in front of him or reading off a teleprompter… but there is no indication that he has had an original thought in at least a decade. He’s a figurehead doing the bidding of the wonks and shadow government.

          I watched him stumble through his recent town hall. He’s about what you’d expect for a geriatric adult.

          1. Guy

            So much for irony. You basically repeat the Same post every time with some replay of the tired theme of “everyone loving ‘free’ money” and some lame BS about Sleepy or Tired Joe, then you have the gall to speak of someone else never having an original thought??? Oh brother, how lame can one dude be?

            1. Doug Ross


              Thank you for reading all my posts. I have enough gall to put my name on my posts. Someday maybe you’ll grow a pair.

              Meanwhile, Americans received $1800 total stimulus during Trump’s last year and will only get $1400 (to a smaller group of people) under Mopey Joe.

              1. bud

                Gay??? Really Doug I think it’s time for an intervention from the host.

                Since all you seem capable of is snarky insults and have no clue how to craft an actual argument I’ll help you out. The conservative argument against the bill is that an un-funded bill this large will be inflationary. I can respect that argument. However conservatives have made this same argument for decades about everything and it’s largely failed to materialize. Maybe the 50th time will be the charm. But even given that risk the danger of a tanking economy is the better argument.

                1. Barry

                  Oddly, Fox Business started saying inflation wasn’t something to worry about during trump’s spending spree.

                  Now they are concerned about it again. LOL

              2. Bill

                Either way you got a bone to pick, can’t you leave that to somebody else?
                I don’t need you to duck my sick or to help me feel good about myself
                Big gay heart, please don’t break my big gay heart
                Big gay heart, please don’t break my big gay heart
                Why can’t you look after yourself and not down on me?
                Do you have to try to piss me off ’cause I’m easy to please?
                Why can’t you look after yourself and not down on me?

              3. Guy

                I read all posts. I also notice that rather than deal with my response you revert to the other tired argument of posting my name. I cannot do that for reasons not up to you. I also do not resort to name calling, so not posting my name should not be an issue.

                I will continue to read all posts and point out ironies and the like as they are presented. I hope you have a great day!

          2. Brad Warthen Post author

            There’s a lot to unpack there ($1.9 billion stimulus bills always make Doug grouchy), but let’s just deal with the first sentence: “76% of people supporting a bill that they have ZERO idea what it contains is meaningless garbage polling.”

            I’m going to be generous here and pretend that Doug didn’t say “ZERO idea,” which is an absurd assertion that immediately disqualifies everything else he’s saying. Let’s take out the hyperbole and pretend Doug said “little idea,” and then proceed to consider the rest.

            Doug expects people to shut up unless their knowledge of a thing is sufficiently informed, and he has a rather exacting standard. He expressed this standard in a separate comment written right after this one:

            Ok, bud, without Googling, tell me the top five items and what they cost in the bill. Give us the breakdown of the 1.9 trillion.

            For emphasis, he followed that with an insult to Bud’s character, which I will not repeat here.

            But let’s get back to the statement at hand.

            As I suggested in another recent comment, there are things about representative democracy that Doug either doesn’t understand or emphatically rejects (and I’m pretty sure it’s the latter).

            One of them is the central, core idea that what elected representatives are supposed to do is go to the capital and study a bill or an issue until they know and understand it better than they did before, and better than the people who elected them do. This is the way things work in a modern, complex society: We don’t all grow food anymore. We don’t all study medicine, or master air-conditioning repair. Other people do those things for us, while we specialize in the things that we do, and charge the farmers and doctors and HVAC people for doing. Things are too complicated for everyone to do everything. We all specialize.

            Similarly, elected representatives are chosen to spend time studying issues and learning far, far more about them than the average person who gets a call from a pollster. (And if you doubt that it’s practical for an elected rep to learn “far, far more” about public policy than the average person on the street, you have definitely never been sent out by a sadistic editor to do “man-in-the-street” interviews. I have.)

            This is, to a great extent, fine. It’s not the job of the average person on the street to decide whether to vote for this bill or not.

            That brings us to Doug’s one point that makes some sense: He says a poll that asks people what they think of a complex bill without knowing it in demanding even obsessive detail (knowledge that I assure you Mr. Average does not possess, and is not expected to possess) is, as he puts it, “garbage polling.”

            Of course, by that standard all polling on complex, detailed legislation is “garbage polling.” The only really helpful information one can obtain from a poll is to get someone to tell you for whom he or she plans to vote. That’s something the average person actually knows, or will know, assuming he or she votes.

            And that’s what the average person is SUPPOSED to know. The average person’s job is to decide which person will be elected to go gain expertise on complex issues, and make the decisions regarding those issues.

            So why is such polling done? Because elected representatives themselves (and others) like to have some idea what the vaunted “people” want in a broad sense, so they can decide whether there is support for a course of action. But all they really need to know is whether people want an enormous bill to knock out COVID and kickstart the economy, or not. Because, even though Doug thinks only he and four or five other folks are paying taxes for all this, it’s the population as a whole that is on the hook for such an enormous bill. So a little indication of people’s inclinations is good to have.

            Saying no one should have an opinion on this that should be heeded unless they can meet a sort of “literacy test” of detailed knowledge of the bill is pretty much the same as saying such a bill should never, ever be passed — because that ain’t gonna happen. And I suppose that would suit Doug.

            There are a bunch of other points I could make on this subject, but I’m going to get back to work now. If y’all are interested in pursuing any of this further, I’ll try to rejoin you later…

            1. Doug Ross

              You would approve of anything Joe said… you’re like one of the MAGA fools Trump referenced who wouldn’t care if he shot someone.

              I stand by my statement that nobody who was polled knows anything (yes, ZERO) about what is in it.

              The representative democracy you love (when it supports the things you love like wars and high taxes), is based on career politicians trading other people’s money to get whatever they want. It’s not bargaining when just under half the elected representatives don’t vote for it. Its pure partisan posturing.

              Joe will end up being somewhere between Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter in his ability to lead the country.

              1. Brad Warthen Post author

                I’m “like one of the MAGA fools,” huh?

                And bud is characterized by “Of course you’d support it. You’d support anything that other people pay for.”

                And “Guy” is “Gay?”

                Y’all know how, under my civility policy, I allow more leeway — but not unlimited leeway — to people who use their full, real names?

                Well, Doug seems determined to find out how MUCH leeway, doesn’t he?

              2. bud

                Both Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford are regarded with great respect today. So If that’s where Biden winds up that wouldn’t be so bad. I can absolutely guarantee you that Biden will be regarded far higher than Trump.

                1. Barry

                  Biden hasn’t started any wars. Economy seems to be headed toward recovery.

                  My life is doing ok.

                  Good job.

  3. bud

    Except for Doug we all seem to agree that this legislation is broadly popular with the American people. That doesn’t make it good legislation of course. Many terrible pieces of legislation had popular support. But when coupled with support from experts this does seem like a worthwhile bill. But the point Brad stubbornly refuses to acknowledge is just how completely today’s GOP is not a good faith actor in the legislative process at this juncture. That should be the story journalists should be reporting, not some nonsense about how liberals were concerned about Biden’s timidity in dealing with Republicans.

    1. Doug Ross

      Ok, bud, without Googling, tell me the top five items and what they cost in the bill. Give us the breakdown of the 1.9 trillion.

      Of course you’d support it. You’d support anything that other people pay for.

      1. Doug Ross

        The whole concept of sending money to people who never lost their jobs in the past year is beyond stupid. More money should go to those who have actually been impacted financially – unemployed, small businesses, landlords who weren’t allowed to evict tenants. The latest proposal says anyone who made under $75K will get a check… even if you worked the whole year. It’s so easy to be Santa Claus when the magic tax elves keep printing money.

        It’s criminal that a company like Barstool Sports has raised $35 million to support 300+ small businesses (but focusing on places that have been in business for many years and only hurting because of inconsistent, non-science based government lockdown bureaucracy). That’s where the billions should be going – not to people who’s primary struggle in the last year has been working from their home office.

        And give a hazard pay bonus to all the workers in hospitals, grocery stores, etc. who proved they were essential — not to teachers who refused to go to work in environments that were proven to be safe.

        1. Barry

          “The whole concept of sending money to people who never lost their jobs in the past year is beyond stupid. ”

          Not really. It’s one of the few things I agreed with Trump on. Of course Trump did it backwards and did not tell his own GOP Senate leaders of his plan, except by surprise, which sunk the chances of it passing.

          The sole purpose isn’t to give money to people that lost a job. Part of the strategy is for the money to pump up the economy.

  4. Brad Warthen Post author

    By the way, I told Howard Weaver that I had walked back what I’d said to him on Twitter, just a bit.

    His response:

  5. Ken

    Ok, I’ve been patient. But the post I submitted over 24 hours ago still isn’t up. Even though I provided a new email address JUST FOR YOU.

    Are you really this petty?

    1. Brad Warthen Post author

      Well, it’s a bit hard to answer your kind and diplomatic question, since this is the only comment I find waiting in the pending queue.

      You may want to try sharing your previous again, since I can’t see it.

      Did you use your “Ken” identity, or another?

      And are you saying you created a new email address just for me, instead of simply giving me your regular, true address? I ask because that would hardly be in the spirit of what I asked…

  6. Doug Ross

    The State reports that the Department of Labor is investigating $63 BILLION in fraudulent unemployment claims from the initial COVID bills. I know that’s no big deal to most of the people on the blog but to put it in perspective, that is more than the revenue for the year for companies like Lockheed Martin ($58B), Hewlett Packard ($55B), and Prudential Financial (63B).

    No big deal. It’s just other people’s money.

    1. Barry

      Release of PPP loan recipients’ data reveals troubling patterns

      Tenants paying rent at Trump Organization and Kushner Companies properties are beneficiaries of PPP loans.

      “ The analysis found that tenants paying rent at properties owned by the Trump Organization as well as the Kushner Companies, owned by the family of Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, benefited financially from the program.”

    1. Doug Ross

      1.1 million spent on contracted hotel rooms vs 63 billion stolen in unemployment funds. Which interests you more? Considering that “hotels have historically averaged a GOP margin of 11.6 percent.” and that only a fraction of that would/could/might end up in Trump’s pocket, we’re talking what, $25k? Trump donated his entire salary while president back to the government: $100K to each of these.


      Q1 National Parks Service
      Q2 Department of Education
      Q3 Health and Human Services
      Q4 Department of Transportation

      Q1 Department of Veterans Affairs
      Q2 Small Business Administration
      Q3 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
      Q4 Department of Homeland Security

      Q1 Department of Agriculture
      Q2 U.S. Surgeon General’s Office
      Q3 Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health
      Q4 Department of Health and Human Services

      But, really, keep focusing on Trump. I know it’s hard to live without his daily presence in your (and much of the media’s) life. We all need hobbies, I suppose. Some hobbies are productive, others are just a sign of mental illness.

  7. Barry

    Trump’s DC Hotel Is Jacking Up Rates For QAnon’s Next Special Date

    For some QAnon conspiracy theorists, March 4, 2021 is a date circled in red Sharpie on the calendar. The truly devoted believe that, on this special date, Donald Trump will be sworn in as the 19th president of the United States

    At the Trump International Hotel in Washington DC, the least expensive room option is the deluxe king, ranging in size from 350 to 475 square feet. At this time of year, it normally runs anywhere from $476 to $596 per night.

    Interestingly, on March 3 and 4, the same room is selling for $1,331 per night. That’s 180% above the base rate and more than double what you’d pay any other night in February or March, according to the hotel’s website.

    The March 4 rate hike appears to be exclusive to the Trump International, notes Zach Everson in his 1100 Pennsylvania newsletter, which has diligently tracked the comings and goings at Trump International since the early days of Trump’s presidency. When Everson surveyed other DC luxury hotels — Four Seasons, Hay Adams, and St. Regis — he found that those hotels’ rates remain close to the norm on March 3 and 4.

    1. Doug Ross

      These Trump leftovers just don’t fill the gullet like the old made up ones, do they? Tiny morsels of rage don’t get the blood pumping.

  8. Ken

    Third attempt to post:

    The Irresponsible Party has no basis to expect bipartisanship. Its members have undermined their party’s credibility multiple times both before and after Election Day. And they have continued to do so, as the language Rep. Jeff Duncan’s chose for his most recent constituent newsletter shows:

    “President Biden’s call for bipartisanship and unity throughout his campaign and inauguration speech was clearly empty words. Congressional Democrats have continued to push their most hyper-partisan priorities forward without regard for Republican input.
    H.R. 1 is titled the ‘For the People’ Act when it should be the ‘For the Swamp Politicians’ Act. The Democrats have shown us time and time again they will go to any length to secure total power over your lives. H.R. 1 would not restore public confidence in our elections. It would simply put the 2020 election on repeat. The Democrats designed this bill to keep their radical majority in Congress by lowering the bar on election integrity in all 50 states.”

    “It would simply put the 2020 election on repeat” – the clear indication being: they will continue to cheat in order to win, just like in 2020.

    As one insightful observer put it, the Irresponsible Party is a “fiercely intractable minority” that is undeserving of the trust necessary to participate in policy making, let alone good governance:

    “The willingness of most congressional Republicans to endorse Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the November election and their unwillingness to convict Trump for his role in the violent putsch of January 6 may be horrifying. But these choices are also clarifying. There can be no illusions of accord, or even of civilized dispute. There is only a minority that will do everything in its considerable power to thwart, to wreck, to undermine.”

    1. Brad Warthen Post author

      That’s your third time, but it’s the first one I’ve seen.

      And now I see why. The first two are in spam.

      I don’t know why. You only have one link in the comment, and I’ve got it set now to allow five.

      Maybe the filter didn’t like the alternative name you tried to use. I don’t see anything else that would have made the software suspicious. This time you just used “Ken,” and here it is…

  9. Brad Warthen Post author

    By the way, as I said above, criticize my boy Joe when he deserves it.

    For instance, I see a letter-writer got on his case today for accusing the governors of Texas and MIssissippi of “Neanderthal thinking.”

    Joe shouldn’t have done that, because it insults Neanderthals:

    To the Editor:

    You report in “Biden Denounces States for Lifting Orders on Masks” (front page, March 4) that the president likened the decisions to “Neanderthal thinking.”

    President Biden unfairly besmirches the Neanderthals, who were in the business of inventing tools for survival, not rejecting them.

    Doyle Stevick
    Columbia, S.C.

    We have smart people here in Columbia, SC…

    1. Bryan Caskey

      Which policy is more Neanderthal in pandemic control — allowing Texans to make up their own minds about masking up, or releasing COVID-positive illegal immigrants into the state?

      1. Bryan Caskey

        One would think that a basic reason for border control would be to keep folks with contagious disease from freely coming across the border. ICE didn’t even bother to test? Maybe a less Neanderthal approach would be to test first and keep those who are contagious from getting out into the general population. Once released from ICE custody, however, that option disappears.

        1. Brad Warthen Post author

          How did we get on immigration?

          I thought this was about the governor of Texas saying, “It is now time to open Texas 100 percent.” And the governor of Mississippi taking a similar step.

          At least, that’s the context in which I heard about what Joe said…

            1. Bryan Caskey

              NBC has the story:

              “BROWNSVILLE, Texas — Miriam Izaguirre, a 35-year-old asylum-seeker from Honduras, crossed the Rio Grande at dawn Monday with her young son and turned herself in to the authorities.

              A few hours later she was released, and the first thing she did was take a rapid test for Covid-19 at the Brownsville bus station. They told her her test came out positive….”

            2. Bryan Caskey

              Illegal migrants are being tested for the coronavirus after they are released into the general population to travel to cities and towns across the U.S.

              Isn’t this counter to how people entering the U.S. via air travel are handled? In order for citizens and non-citizens to enter the United States through air travel, there are strict COVID-19 policies in place, including proof of a negative COVID-19 test result or documentation of recovery from COVID-19 before they board a flight to the United States.

              Why isn’t that same standard taken into account for illegal migrants who are caught and then released at the southern border?

              1. Barry

                Is this new? It sounds as if this policy isn’t new under Biden. But maybe it is. I’d like to read about the policy change on testing.

                BTW- the numbers of crossings have been consistently in the 70,000-80,000 range since October. (Numbers peaked in May 2019 at 144k)

                1. Bryan Caskey

                  It sounds new based on HHS internal documents.

                  “Documents from the Department of Health and Human Services show how quickly the number of child migrants crossing the border is overwhelming the administration’s stretched resources.

                  Driving the news: In the week ending March 1, the Border Patrol referred to HHS custody an average of 321 children per day, according to documents obtained by Axios. That’s up from a weekly average of 203 in late January and early February — and just 47 per day during the first week of January.

                  The same documents, dated Tuesday, say the shelter system is at 94% occupancy and expected to reach its maximum this month.”

                  Trump’s administration used pandemic regulations to justify immediately turning away adults and unaccompanied children at the border. Biden’s administration has kept that rule for single adults — but rescinded it for kids.

                  1. Barry

                    Trump got hammered because of the treatment of kids.

                    Biden has to find a way to avoid that as best as possible- even though it’s an almost impossible situation.

              2. Barry

                By the way

                “the Dept. of Homeland Security planned to use emergency funds to support efforts to test migrants in Border Patrol custody but, Texas had not approved the grant.”

                So it appears the Texas Governor is standing in the way, not Biden.

                1. Barry

                  And the ironic thing is – Trump could use Greg Abbott‘s coffee cup as a bed pan and Greg Abbott would express thrilling amazement at how lucky he was that Trump had decided to grace his coffee cup with a personal touch from the Almighty.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *