Washington Examiner had an article today about an imaginary group supposedly teaching people how to use vandalism against ICe in Chicago. There is a Facebook page put up by someone with people making suggestions along those lines ( an ICE operation? Is anyone actually dumb enough to advocate crime on FB?) but the actual groups doing training are very scrupulous about document only--do nothing that could justify an arrest. Kid Twat is quoted in another article bemoaning unAmerican youth. There was another Kirk-deification piece about those mean Dems who aren't being sufficiently worshipful of Saint Charlie of Free Speech for Conservatives. This is Goebbels-style propaganda and it is a multiple times a day occurrence every fucking day and has been for decades.
But if I call it out for what it is, supposedly I'm being as bad as or the same as the haters.
Fuck no.
Maybe the Republican party wouldn't have degenerated into the corrupt, fascist, anti-Constitutional front for religious extremists and oligarchs that it is today if the rest of us had spent the last twenty-five years LOUDLY DENOUNCING THEIR FASCIST PROPAGANDA instead of trying to be "reasonable" while politely engaging in discussion of issues.
This is, in many ways, the dynamic that defines reactionary centrism: the right must be understood, but never blamed. The left can be blamed, but need not be understood. One thing that follows from this is a hyper-sensitivity about treating the right fairly. John Rentoul, for instance, the chief political commentator for the Independent, is no cheerleader for Reform UK. Yet his theory of how to defeat the party often involves scoldingthe left for directly stating the nature of the threat: “Oh dear, m’lud: It’s never a good idea to call people Nazis if they are not Nazis” (that might sound like a mean-spirited parody of a British establishment type, but it’s actually the title of one of his columns).
This being just a taste, not the sum total of what I think is apropos. Again, worth a read.
The purpose of the guidelines is to provide direction to ICE to help them prioritize who they will pursue, and why. The guidelines state that enforcement should be directed toward people who *pose a threat* to the public.
Mayorkas further observes, correctly, that there are 11 million undocumented people in the US. I hope we can all agree that it's not practical to find and deport 11 million people. So choices have to be made.
Go after people who are a threat.
I live very close to large immigrant communities. For a number of years, I lived in the Point neighborhood in Salem MA, which was then and still is a largely Dominican community. I attend a church that has about a 60% Latino congregation. I've volunteered at a local food bank whose clientele includes Dominicans, Brazilians, Haitians, Russians and other Eastern European folks. Also plain old white bread Americans who need access to free or cheap food.
I am aware of the issues around immigration, aware in general of the problems it creates, and also aware of how we benefit from immigrants.
The sticking point for immigration - the place where it is hugely problematic, rather than just one of several issues to deal with - is at the southern border. Because it's closer to the countries that many migrants come from, and because people can basically just walk there.
I absolutely understand that the issues facing someone living in a border area in TX or AZ or CA are different than the issues facing me. I'm surrounded by migrants, but they aren't wandering homeless through my neighborhood in large numbers. Or any numbers.
It's a problem of a different quality.
My understanding is that the Biden policies exacerbated the problem *at the southern border*. Maybe exacerbated it a lot, i don't have numbers. If you want to blame him for that, I will recognize that as a fair point. He did take steps to remedy that, as you point out "because of an election". He recognized he was vulnerable there.
And Trump prevented those changes from taking place. Because of an election.
Politicians' minds are concentrated by elections. Not ideal, but that's the reality.
The approach Trump and Miller are taking right now is creating holy f***ing havoc where I live. People afraid to leave their homes, afraid to send their kids to school, afraid to go to work. Not just illegal people, but literally anybody brown, anyone who speaks Spanish or speaks English with an accent.
People who were born in this country, and who have lived all their lives here. Afraid to go out of the house. Because ICE under Trump and Miller are a freaking terroristic goon squad.
Illegals are seized, citizens are seized, anybody who looks like they might possibly by Latino.
I sometimes attend a standing weekly demonstration at the local ICE facility in Burlington MA. It's basically an office building, with no facilities for holding people. The agreement ICE has with either the leaseholder or the town (not sure which) is that nobody will be held overnight, or at least for more than a day.
People are held there for many days. Weeks in some cases. They sleep on a concrete floor with a Mylar blanket. Many in one big room, with one toilet that offers minimal privacy. No place to shower. No medical facilities. No kitchen.
Undocumented people, people who are not citizens but have legal status, and citizens. All picked up and held in this shithole.
ICE has been unresponsive to requests from the town to inspect the facility. They have refused entry to members of Congress.
They are an unaccountable violent militarized goon squad.
I'm sympathetic to folks who live in southern border areas. I have family that lives in a southern border area, and they often feel that things are out of control.
But what Trump and MIller are doing is not making things any better. It's freaking mayhem.
Long post, sorry for that. Need to get some of this crap off my chest.
Wjca summed up my own response about Afghanistan. The only thing I'd add is that blame could be assigned not just to Biden, not just to Trump, but also to Bush II who got us into that war without a clear mission.
Were we after Al Qaeda? The Taliban? Were we there just to eliminate a threat to the US? Or are we going to transform Afghanistan into a modern liberal republic?
I'd add Rumsfeld, who had his own vision and agenda for "modernizing the military" which ended up leaving the effort short on resources.
And I'd add all the war mongering creeps in the Bush II administration who took 9/11 as their free pass to invade Iraq.
So, all of them.
And if you want to keep the (D) vs (R) score even I'll add Carter, who funded and armed the mujahadin - the proto-Taliban - to stick it to Russia.
That's about 50 years of history landing in Biden's lap. It was a mess, because everything about our engagement with Afghanistan has been a mess. He did well to get us the hell out of there.
On a different topic, I'm all in favor of "green pork". The fossil industries have had a stranglehold on our public energy policy for decades, they are going to do everything they can to make sure every freaking ounce of fossil fuel that is still in the ground gets extracted and burned, because most of the book value of those companies is based on doing exactly that.
We've passed several milestones in the advent of our new climate, and we don't appear to be making much progress in slowing any of that down. The market does not appear to be getting it done, so I'm fine with the public sector - government - stepping in.
Non-partisan discussion of Biden's border policies.
The summary is that Biden went back to policy before Trump, which hadn't much differed between Republican and Democratic administrations. Calling that an "open-border policy" is not factual.
So if you like Trump, yes, you'll think Biden wasn't cruel enough. But you wouldn't switch from your previous support for Democratic candidates because Biden agreed with the presidents you'd previously supported.
"There was a way to do it safely. Biden had a date in mind and stuck with it. He owns it."
First, there was? Care to share how it might have been done safely?
Second, Biden didn't have a date in mind. Trump (before he left) had established the date. Biden was stuck either totally reworking the pullout, or trying to execute what he was handed. In retrospect, he should have abrogated the pullout agreement Trump had made, and created a viable plan. And just accepted the fact that he would be totally trashed for doing so.
Did it go badly? No question. But from where I sit, Trump owns it. Or would, if he ever accepted responsibility for anything.
When is it appropriate for a nation to borrow? What is accomplished with the money that is borrowed?
Totally valid questions. I was simply focusing on "indifference to deficits." And I think Biden was a mixed bag. I don't cast much if any blame on the COVID spending bills themselves, whether by Biden or Trump. But BBB was such a grab bag. I didn't mind the pure infrastructure components. The resulting IRA was anything but its name. That was simply too much given the huge amount of spending on COVID, IMHO. And that's even before one considers the green pork.
As to the effects of Biden’s “open border policy” on illegal immigration: there were none, because there was no such policy.
This statement just beggars belief. Biden invited the border rush during his campaign. He ended the Remain in Mexico program on day one. He refused to finish construction of the wall. He ordered no deportations in the first 100 days. His administration (Mayorkas) stated that the unlawful presence was not by itself a basis for an enforcement action. Forget the law. Mayorkas expanded parole unlawfully, extending it well beyond the statutory framework. CBP Mobile One anyone? Asylum lost its meaning. We all saw it. This was the top issue for a lot of voters.
I don't understand why you are playing cute with this one, Pro Bono. You acknowledge legal immigration was larger under Trump. Great. The issue is not legal immigration, which most Americans find unobjectionable and welcome.
As for Afghanistan, it was the execution of the withdrawal, as you likely know. There was a way to do it safely. Biden had a date in mind and stuck with it. He owns it.
Trump gets along with other authoritarians, but that’s no guarantee they are always going to be bff.
Trump is nobody's friend, for an instant let alone forever. An admirer, sure. But the instant there's an advantage to him, he'll throw anyone under the bus. There are, after all, plenty of other authoritarians to admire and try to emulate.
Well, at the risk of scoffing at Godwin's law, Hitler and Stalin were buddy buddy until they weren't. Trump gets along with other authoritarians, but that's no guarantee they are always going to be bff.
One could say the same about Netanyahoo. He is on very good terms with Hungary's Orban and the Polish far right despite both using stoking antisemitism as a standard domestic tool (and His Orangeness has begun to more or less copy-paste Orban's anti-Soros talking points lies too). The important thing is that they are all fellow authoritarians.
Trump cheerfully stokes Islamaphobia. But I doubt that he cares about the issue of religion, any religion, personally.
On the other hand, Qatar, like the Emirates and like Saudi Arabia, are totalitarian states. And Trump admires totalitarians, being a wannabe one himself. So he has no problem making deals with them. Any kind of deals -- doesn't matter if they're in the national interest or not, as long as they benefit him personally.
"Elite", like "Woke", is a purposefully hazily defined word. Like woke, its used to denigrate a class of people as Them, the Problem. To obscure, rather than enlighten.
Elite does have a real definition, but its so broad as to be pretty useless. Its a sub-group of people with exceptional skill in some endeavor, but the usual meaning is a class of people with some combination of exceptional wealth, privilege, and status. Power is assumed in any combination. In this definition there is no single Elite, but the use of the word always implies it, because the point is to accuse The Elite of abusing their power for their benefit and the detriment of The Rest Of Us, the common clay of the West. Whether its a Harvard professor brainwashing midwestern students, movie stars sticking their noses where they don't belong, or a billionaire doing billionaire things, the Elite are shoving things down our collective throat.
Actual elites have power, whether through politics, wealth, or celebrity, though the 3 naturally go together. The people who can directly affect our lives from a distance, who convince us who we should trust and believe. The people we look up to, because we want to or we have to.
And Michael has some more measured points as well, which I will put here for reference
Is there an alternative? No one else will lease us enough space for the air base we operate there. Parking a carrier in the Persian Gulf is at least impractical, and may not be able to fly everything we fly out of Qatar. Iran has already launched missiles at Qatar once because of our presence. That one was face-saving, but if you were Qatar, wouldn’t you want a “we’ve got your back” guarantee in the event of real attack? Even more pressing, perhaps, since Iran signed security agreements with Pakistan, who has nukes and ballistic delivery systems that can reach Qatar.
When is it appropriate for a nation to borrow? What is accomplished with the money that is borrowed?
The feds spent a lot of money under Biden. We took on a lot of debt. And for that, we came out of the COVID pandemic with a robust economy, much more so that peer nations. Big investments in infrastructure.
Trump is loading the country up with debt in the interest of making Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanent. Qui bono? I mean, we'd all like more cash in hand at the end of the month, but what are we cutting to make that happen? If you're making a middle class wage and you end up with an extra 3% a year, but your local hospital closes and your health insurance premium doubles and your public infrastructure in general goes to shit, are you better off?
And FWIW, the highest level of debt-to-GDP ratio in recent years was first quarter of 2020 - 132.8%. Who was POTUS then? Also FWIW, I don't have a problem with the national debt spiking up 1Q 2020 because we were in the middle of a freaking plague. Nonetheless, those are the numbers.
When the nation borrows, what is done with the money? Are we investing in the future? Or are we starving the public sector and assuming the public sector will just pick up the slack? And if so, will it?
bc:
1) Legal immigration was lower under Biden than Trump. As to the effects of Biden's "open border policy" on illegal immigration: there were none, because there was no such policy.
2) Trump was and is keen on deficit-funded tax cuts. Biden was keen on deficit-funded spending. Biden at least was spending the money to boost an economy which had been depressed by COVID (and it worked). Neither should be attractive to a deficit hawk.
7) Yes, the US is a net exporter of natural gas, a net importer of oil. But the oil imports are not because of reduced domestic production - it reached a record high in 2023 (the last year I've found data for).
6) (I left this out before because I didn't know about it). So far as I know, shoplifting is not a federal matter - it's nothing to do with the president.
I imagine we could get somewhere near a consensus on these things, if we discussed them for long enough. And that at most it would support Ackman's preference for some of Trump's policies where they favour the things Ackman likes, such as burning fossil fuels. And we could go through the whole list similarly.
The one thing I clearly agree with him about is his distaste for the Ds' nomination of Biden in 2024. That's a reason to vote for the obviously dementing Trump rather than Harris?
One more jab: (3) is ridiculous - he voted for Trump because Biden implemented the withdrawal from Afghanistan which Trump had committed to?
What are your thoughts about the unilateral defense agreement with Qatar?
Is there an alternative? No one else will lease us enough space for the air base we operate there. Parking a carrier in the Persian Gulf is at least impractical, and may not be able to fly everything we fly out of Qatar. Iran has already launched missiles at Qatar once because of our presence. That one was face-saving, but if you were Qatar, wouldn't you want a "we've got your back" guarantee in the event of real attack? Even more pressing, perhaps, since Iran signed security agreements with Pakistan, who has nukes and ballistic delivery systems that can reach Qatar.
It seems weird to me to be discussing whether or not Omelas was in better shape under Biden or under Trump when the part of the story that is being ignored in order to make this response is that Trump has decided that too few children have been tortured in order to make Omelas great, and that Biden was a pussy for having not had the courage to grab more kids to torture in order to launch Omelas into high gear towards greatness.
Oh, and everyone else in the world sucks compared to Omelas and needs to jump on the kid torturing regime ASAP or else their countries are going to sink just like Omelas under Biden.
<i>What are your thoughts about the unilateral defense agreement with Qatar?</i>
I'm going to lift up Michael's comment to the front page, with some comments from me. I think it is a very interesting topic and one that might bring out a lot of discussion.
I have a few questions about blog format that you mentioned bc, so I hope I can ask you later about that, but I did want to point out one thing
I guess it depends on who you read. I do think there is some truth here (Trump being somewhat indifferent in the first term), but I think Biden was far worse than Trump.
I'm guessing that COVID spending could be debited 50/50 to Trump and Biden, but the article doesn't mentions the CHIPs act or the Infrastructure Investment act. Also, I had to look, but another program that significantly increased debt was the PACT act https://www.va.gov/resources/the-pact-act-and-your-va-benefits/
One has to wonder how all these things are going to fare after the DOGE CF.
So yes, all of these things increased the debt under Biden, but you can't wave your hand and have the underlying issues disappear. That heritage page is pretty disingenuous, imo.
I don't think your comments are as much wrong as ignoring the full picture.
1) Immigration. Immigration was higher in Trump’s first term than in Bidens. Ackman is wrong.
Immigration was higher? By what metric? Legal or illegal? I think naturalizations were higher under Trump in his first term, but illegal border crossings in the south were way up under Biden as soon has he changed remain in Mexico. He hid some of those by granting parole where it had not been granted before. And Biden changed course right before the election. See more here:
2) Trump in his first term showed himself to be indifferent to the national debt. Ackman is wrong.
I guess it depends on who you read. I do think there is some truth here (Trump being somewhat indifferent in the first term), but I think Biden was far worse than Trump. Frex:
Ben Meiselas pops on on my youtube list quite a lot, while I'm watching chess or cycling videos. I must click on enough of his stuff for it to keep being suggested to me.
But he's not really my cup of tea. Ever since the primaries he's been announcing several times a week that Trump is failing. It's not sufficiently contemplative for me.
bc: Criticizing a side for “othering” by what seems to be to be “othering” of another sort isn’t a winning proposition.
Criticizing Nazis for "othering" Jews by politely refraining from "othering" Nazis is surely a losing proposition -- if the audience is mainly Nazi supporters. People might support the Nazis for all sorts of reasons other than Jew hatred, you see.
I'm sorry to tell you, bc, that those of my fellow Americans who are indifferent to, never mind approving of, the Gestapo tactics of Dear Leader's brown-shirted (literally!) masked thugs will always be "others" to me. If they choose to shrug off fascism, how would you advise people like me to reason with them?
Whatever your advice might be, I say this much is true: they are more likely to listen to you than to me. We godless America-hating soshulist anit-fascists are automatically suspect. Assuming you are anti-fascist yourself, maybe you should caution them about "othering". Maybe you can point out to them that the fascism is part of a package deal with the tax cuts for billionaires (and whatever else) they voted for. If it turns out that doing that gets you "othered" by them, welcome to the club.
Well! I'd barely heard of this Ben Meiselas guy before, but it looks like he may be getting the message across - bigger audiences than Joe Rogan apparently. What do any ObWi people think of him?
On “Let’s start calling a thug a thug”
Washington Examiner had an article today about an imaginary group supposedly teaching people how to use vandalism against ICe in Chicago. There is a Facebook page put up by someone with people making suggestions along those lines ( an ICE operation? Is anyone actually dumb enough to advocate crime on FB?) but the actual groups doing training are very scrupulous about document only--do nothing that could justify an arrest. Kid Twat is quoted in another article bemoaning unAmerican youth. There was another Kirk-deification piece about those mean Dems who aren't being sufficiently worshipful of Saint Charlie of Free Speech for Conservatives. This is Goebbels-style propaganda and it is a multiple times a day occurrence every fucking day and has been for decades.
But if I call it out for what it is, supposedly I'm being as bad as or the same as the haters.
Fuck no.
Maybe the Republican party wouldn't have degenerated into the corrupt, fascist, anti-Constitutional front for religious extremists and oligarchs that it is today if the rest of us had spent the last twenty-five years LOUDLY DENOUNCING THEIR FASCIST PROPAGANDA instead of trying to be "reasonable" while politely engaging in discussion of issues.
"
May be apropos to the current discussion:
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/70966/what-is-a-reactionary-centrist-does-uk-have-them
This being just a taste, not the sum total of what I think is apropos. Again, worth a read.
"
His administration (Mayorkas) stated that the unlawful presence was not by itself a basis for an enforcement action.
People LIke Me always make this point when immigration comes up, but since I am a Person LIke Me, I guess I'll make it again.
Being in the United States without some kind of legal status is a civil, not a criminal, violation.
Law enforcement, at all levels, needs to prioritize where they will direct their efforts. Resource are not infinite, so choices have to be made.
Here is a discussion of the policies instituted under Mayorkas:
https://www.valverdelaw.com/unlawful-status-alone-should-not-be-the-basis-for-an-enforcement-action-under-new-guidelines
The purpose of the guidelines is to provide direction to ICE to help them prioritize who they will pursue, and why. The guidelines state that enforcement should be directed toward people who *pose a threat* to the public.
Mayorkas further observes, correctly, that there are 11 million undocumented people in the US. I hope we can all agree that it's not practical to find and deport 11 million people. So choices have to be made.
Go after people who are a threat.
I live very close to large immigrant communities. For a number of years, I lived in the Point neighborhood in Salem MA, which was then and still is a largely Dominican community. I attend a church that has about a 60% Latino congregation. I've volunteered at a local food bank whose clientele includes Dominicans, Brazilians, Haitians, Russians and other Eastern European folks. Also plain old white bread Americans who need access to free or cheap food.
I am aware of the issues around immigration, aware in general of the problems it creates, and also aware of how we benefit from immigrants.
The sticking point for immigration - the place where it is hugely problematic, rather than just one of several issues to deal with - is at the southern border. Because it's closer to the countries that many migrants come from, and because people can basically just walk there.
I absolutely understand that the issues facing someone living in a border area in TX or AZ or CA are different than the issues facing me. I'm surrounded by migrants, but they aren't wandering homeless through my neighborhood in large numbers. Or any numbers.
It's a problem of a different quality.
My understanding is that the Biden policies exacerbated the problem *at the southern border*. Maybe exacerbated it a lot, i don't have numbers. If you want to blame him for that, I will recognize that as a fair point. He did take steps to remedy that, as you point out "because of an election". He recognized he was vulnerable there.
And Trump prevented those changes from taking place. Because of an election.
Politicians' minds are concentrated by elections. Not ideal, but that's the reality.
The approach Trump and Miller are taking right now is creating holy f***ing havoc where I live. People afraid to leave their homes, afraid to send their kids to school, afraid to go to work. Not just illegal people, but literally anybody brown, anyone who speaks Spanish or speaks English with an accent.
People who were born in this country, and who have lived all their lives here. Afraid to go out of the house. Because ICE under Trump and Miller are a freaking terroristic goon squad.
Illegals are seized, citizens are seized, anybody who looks like they might possibly by Latino.
I sometimes attend a standing weekly demonstration at the local ICE facility in Burlington MA. It's basically an office building, with no facilities for holding people. The agreement ICE has with either the leaseholder or the town (not sure which) is that nobody will be held overnight, or at least for more than a day.
People are held there for many days. Weeks in some cases. They sleep on a concrete floor with a Mylar blanket. Many in one big room, with one toilet that offers minimal privacy. No place to shower. No medical facilities. No kitchen.
Undocumented people, people who are not citizens but have legal status, and citizens. All picked up and held in this shithole.
ICE has been unresponsive to requests from the town to inspect the facility. They have refused entry to members of Congress.
They are an unaccountable violent militarized goon squad.
I'm sympathetic to folks who live in southern border areas. I have family that lives in a southern border area, and they often feel that things are out of control.
But what Trump and MIller are doing is not making things any better. It's freaking mayhem.
Long post, sorry for that. Need to get some of this crap off my chest.
"
Wjca summed up my own response about Afghanistan. The only thing I'd add is that blame could be assigned not just to Biden, not just to Trump, but also to Bush II who got us into that war without a clear mission.
Were we after Al Qaeda? The Taliban? Were we there just to eliminate a threat to the US? Or are we going to transform Afghanistan into a modern liberal republic?
I'd add Rumsfeld, who had his own vision and agenda for "modernizing the military" which ended up leaving the effort short on resources.
And I'd add all the war mongering creeps in the Bush II administration who took 9/11 as their free pass to invade Iraq.
So, all of them.
And if you want to keep the (D) vs (R) score even I'll add Carter, who funded and armed the mujahadin - the proto-Taliban - to stick it to Russia.
That's about 50 years of history landing in Biden's lap. It was a mess, because everything about our engagement with Afghanistan has been a mess. He did well to get us the hell out of there.
On a different topic, I'm all in favor of "green pork". The fossil industries have had a stranglehold on our public energy policy for decades, they are going to do everything they can to make sure every freaking ounce of fossil fuel that is still in the ground gets extracted and burned, because most of the book value of those companies is based on doing exactly that.
We've passed several milestones in the advent of our new climate, and we don't appear to be making much progress in slowing any of that down. The market does not appear to be getting it done, so I'm fine with the public sector - government - stepping in.
YMMV, that's how I see it.
"
Non-partisan discussion of Biden's border policies.
The summary is that Biden went back to policy before Trump, which hadn't much differed between Republican and Democratic administrations. Calling that an "open-border policy" is not factual.
So if you like Trump, yes, you'll think Biden wasn't cruel enough. But you wouldn't switch from your previous support for Democratic candidates because Biden agreed with the presidents you'd previously supported.
"
"There was a way to do it safely. Biden had a date in mind and stuck with it. He owns it."
First, there was? Care to share how it might have been done safely?
Second, Biden didn't have a date in mind. Trump (before he left) had established the date. Biden was stuck either totally reworking the pullout, or trying to execute what he was handed. In retrospect, he should have abrogated the pullout agreement Trump had made, and created a viable plan. And just accepted the fact that he would be totally trashed for doing so.
Did it go badly? No question. But from where I sit, Trump owns it. Or would, if he ever accepted responsibility for anything.
"
Russell:
When is it appropriate for a nation to borrow? What is accomplished with the money that is borrowed?
Totally valid questions. I was simply focusing on "indifference to deficits." And I think Biden was a mixed bag. I don't cast much if any blame on the COVID spending bills themselves, whether by Biden or Trump. But BBB was such a grab bag. I didn't mind the pure infrastructure components. The resulting IRA was anything but its name. That was simply too much given the huge amount of spending on COVID, IMHO. And that's even before one considers the green pork.
"
As to the effects of Biden’s “open border policy” on illegal immigration: there were none, because there was no such policy.
This statement just beggars belief. Biden invited the border rush during his campaign. He ended the Remain in Mexico program on day one. He refused to finish construction of the wall. He ordered no deportations in the first 100 days. His administration (Mayorkas) stated that the unlawful presence was not by itself a basis for an enforcement action. Forget the law. Mayorkas expanded parole unlawfully, extending it well beyond the statutory framework. CBP Mobile One anyone? Asylum lost its meaning. We all saw it. This was the top issue for a lot of voters.
I don't understand why you are playing cute with this one, Pro Bono. You acknowledge legal immigration was larger under Trump. Great. The issue is not legal immigration, which most Americans find unobjectionable and welcome.
As for Afghanistan, it was the execution of the withdrawal, as you likely know. There was a way to do it safely. Biden had a date in mind and stuck with it. He owns it.
On “The Qatar that plays like butter”
Trump gets along with other authoritarians, but that’s no guarantee they are always going to be bff.
Trump is nobody's friend, for an instant let alone forever. An admirer, sure. But the instant there's an advantage to him, he'll throw anyone under the bus. There are, after all, plenty of other authoritarians to admire and try to emulate.
"
Well, at the risk of scoffing at Godwin's law, Hitler and Stalin were buddy buddy until they weren't. Trump gets along with other authoritarians, but that's no guarantee they are always going to be bff.
"
One could say the same about Netanyahoo. He is on very good terms with Hungary's Orban and the Polish far right despite both using stoking antisemitism as a standard domestic tool (and His Orangeness has begun to more or less copy-paste Orban's anti-Soros
talking pointslies too). The important thing is that they are all fellow authoritarians."
Trump cheerfully stokes Islamaphobia. But I doubt that he cares about the issue of religion, any religion, personally.
On the other hand, Qatar, like the Emirates and like Saudi Arabia, are totalitarian states. And Trump admires totalitarians, being a wannabe one himself. So he has no problem making deals with them. Any kind of deals -- doesn't matter if they're in the national interest or not, as long as they benefit him personally.
On “Brought to you by your latest captain of industry”
"Elite", like "Woke", is a purposefully hazily defined word. Like woke, its used to denigrate a class of people as Them, the Problem. To obscure, rather than enlighten.
Elite does have a real definition, but its so broad as to be pretty useless. Its a sub-group of people with exceptional skill in some endeavor, but the usual meaning is a class of people with some combination of exceptional wealth, privilege, and status. Power is assumed in any combination. In this definition there is no single Elite, but the use of the word always implies it, because the point is to accuse The Elite of abusing their power for their benefit and the detriment of The Rest Of Us, the common clay of the West. Whether its a Harvard professor brainwashing midwestern students, movie stars sticking their noses where they don't belong, or a billionaire doing billionaire things, the Elite are shoving things down our collective throat.
Actual elites have power, whether through politics, wealth, or celebrity, though the 3 naturally go together. The people who can directly affect our lives from a distance, who convince us who we should trust and believe. The people we look up to, because we want to or we have to.
On “The Qatar that plays like butter”
And Michael has some more measured points as well, which I will put here for reference
Is there an alternative? No one else will lease us enough space for the air base we operate there. Parking a carrier in the Persian Gulf is at least impractical, and may not be able to fly everything we fly out of Qatar. Iran has already launched missiles at Qatar once because of our presence. That one was face-saving, but if you were Qatar, wouldn’t you want a “we’ve got your back” guarantee in the event of real attack? Even more pressing, perhaps, since Iran signed security agreements with Pakistan, who has nukes and ballistic delivery systems that can reach Qatar.
On “Let’s start calling a thug a thug”
"No one else will lease us enough space for the air base we operate there."
Thank you Michael. That makes sense, and I appreciate your calling it out.
"
"I think Biden was far worse than Trump."
When is it appropriate for a nation to borrow? What is accomplished with the money that is borrowed?
The feds spent a lot of money under Biden. We took on a lot of debt. And for that, we came out of the COVID pandemic with a robust economy, much more so that peer nations. Big investments in infrastructure.
Trump is loading the country up with debt in the interest of making Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanent. Qui bono? I mean, we'd all like more cash in hand at the end of the month, but what are we cutting to make that happen? If you're making a middle class wage and you end up with an extra 3% a year, but your local hospital closes and your health insurance premium doubles and your public infrastructure in general goes to shit, are you better off?
And FWIW, the highest level of debt-to-GDP ratio in recent years was first quarter of 2020 - 132.8%. Who was POTUS then? Also FWIW, I don't have a problem with the national debt spiking up 1Q 2020 because we were in the middle of a freaking plague. Nonetheless, those are the numbers.
When the nation borrows, what is done with the money? Are we investing in the future? Or are we starving the public sector and assuming the public sector will just pick up the slack? And if so, will it?
"
bc:
1) Legal immigration was lower under Biden than Trump. As to the effects of Biden's "open border policy" on illegal immigration: there were none, because there was no such policy.
2) Trump was and is keen on deficit-funded tax cuts. Biden was keen on deficit-funded spending. Biden at least was spending the money to boost an economy which had been depressed by COVID (and it worked). Neither should be attractive to a deficit hawk.
7) Yes, the US is a net exporter of natural gas, a net importer of oil. But the oil imports are not because of reduced domestic production - it reached a record high in 2023 (the last year I've found data for).
6) (I left this out before because I didn't know about it). So far as I know, shoplifting is not a federal matter - it's nothing to do with the president.
I imagine we could get somewhere near a consensus on these things, if we discussed them for long enough. And that at most it would support Ackman's preference for some of Trump's policies where they favour the things Ackman likes, such as burning fossil fuels. And we could go through the whole list similarly.
The one thing I clearly agree with him about is his distaste for the Ds' nomination of Biden in 2024. That's a reason to vote for the obviously dementing Trump rather than Harris?
One more jab: (3) is ridiculous - he voted for Trump because Biden implemented the withdrawal from Afghanistan which Trump had committed to?
"
What are your thoughts about the unilateral defense agreement with Qatar?
Is there an alternative? No one else will lease us enough space for the air base we operate there. Parking a carrier in the Persian Gulf is at least impractical, and may not be able to fly everything we fly out of Qatar. Iran has already launched missiles at Qatar once because of our presence. That one was face-saving, but if you were Qatar, wouldn't you want a "we've got your back" guarantee in the event of real attack? Even more pressing, perhaps, since Iran signed security agreements with Pakistan, who has nukes and ballistic delivery systems that can reach Qatar.
"
It seems weird to me to be discussing whether or not Omelas was in better shape under Biden or under Trump when the part of the story that is being ignored in order to make this response is that Trump has decided that too few children have been tortured in order to make Omelas great, and that Biden was a pussy for having not had the courage to grab more kids to torture in order to launch Omelas into high gear towards greatness.
Oh, and everyone else in the world sucks compared to Omelas and needs to jump on the kid torturing regime ASAP or else their countries are going to sink just like Omelas under Biden.
"
<i>What are your thoughts about the unilateral defense agreement with Qatar?</i>
I'm going to lift up Michael's comment to the front page, with some comments from me. I think it is a very interesting topic and one that might bring out a lot of discussion.
"
I have a few questions about blog format that you mentioned bc, so I hope I can ask you later about that, but I did want to point out one thing
I guess it depends on who you read. I do think there is some truth here (Trump being somewhat indifferent in the first term), but I think Biden was far worse than Trump.
I'm guessing that COVID spending could be debited 50/50 to Trump and Biden, but the article doesn't mentions the CHIPs act or the Infrastructure Investment act. Also, I had to look, but another program that significantly increased debt was the PACT act
https://www.va.gov/resources/the-pact-act-and-your-va-benefits/
One has to wonder how all these things are going to fare after the DOGE CF.
So yes, all of these things increased the debt under Biden, but you can't wave your hand and have the underlying issues disappear. That heritage page is pretty disingenuous, imo.
"
Pro Bono:
I don't think your comments are as much wrong as ignoring the full picture.
1) Immigration. Immigration was higher in Trump’s first term than in Bidens. Ackman is wrong.
Immigration was higher? By what metric? Legal or illegal? I think naturalizations were higher under Trump in his first term, but illegal border crossings in the south were way up under Biden as soon has he changed remain in Mexico. He hid some of those by granting parole where it had not been granted before. And Biden changed course right before the election. See more here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2024/02/11/trump-biden-immigration-border-compared/
2) Trump in his first term showed himself to be indifferent to the national debt. Ackman is wrong.
I guess it depends on who you read. I do think there is some truth here (Trump being somewhat indifferent in the first term), but I think Biden was far worse than Trump. Frex:
https://www.heritage.org/debt/commentary/the-lefts-7-trillion-lie-biden-far-outpaces-trump-racking-the-national-debt
7) The USA has been a net fossil fuel exporter since 2019. Ackman is wrong.
Well, there is a difference between coal, LNG and crude oil, right? The US is still a net crude oil importer. It was headed down until 2020.
On “The Mother-in-law defense”
Ben Meiselas pops on on my youtube list quite a lot, while I'm watching chess or cycling videos. I must click on enough of his stuff for it to keep being suggested to me.
But he's not really my cup of tea. Ever since the primaries he's been announcing several times a week that Trump is failing. It's not sufficiently contemplative for me.
On “Let’s start calling a thug a thug”
bc: Criticizing a side for “othering” by what seems to be to be “othering” of another sort isn’t a winning proposition.
Criticizing Nazis for "othering" Jews by politely refraining from "othering" Nazis is surely a losing proposition -- if the audience is mainly Nazi supporters. People might support the Nazis for all sorts of reasons other than Jew hatred, you see.
I'm sorry to tell you, bc, that those of my fellow Americans who are indifferent to, never mind approving of, the Gestapo tactics of Dear Leader's brown-shirted (literally!) masked thugs will always be "others" to me. If they choose to shrug off fascism, how would you advise people like me to reason with them?
Whatever your advice might be, I say this much is true: they are more likely to listen to you than to me. We godless America-hating soshulist anit-fascists are automatically suspect. Assuming you are anti-fascist yourself, maybe you should caution them about "othering". Maybe you can point out to them that the fascism is part of a package deal with the tax cuts for billionaires (and whatever else) they voted for. If it turns out that doing that gets you "othered" by them, welcome to the club.
--TP
On “The Mother-in-law defense”
Well! I'd barely heard of this Ben Meiselas guy before, but it looks like he may be getting the message across - bigger audiences than Joe Rogan apparently. What do any ObWi people think of him?
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/oct/11/podcaster-ben-meiselas-on-taking-on-the-maga-media-and-winning-the-ratings-battle
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.