Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9045 total)
100 online now:
nwr (1 member, 99 visitors)
Newest Member: maria
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 887,082 Year: 4,728/14,102 Month: 326/707 Week: 57/197 Day: 1/16 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Biden Presidency
Percy
Member
Posts: 20217
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 106 of 150 (885128)
03-24-2021 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Taq
03-23-2021 6:40 PM


Re: Excuses For Abuses
Taq writes:

From a logistics standpoint, it would be extremely difficult to administer vaccines that require two doses weeks apart.

Sure, but for any migrants permitted to remain in the country, what other choice is there? Whether vaccination would be provided would depend upon age, just as it does for Americans. Illegals already living in the country are eligible for the vaccine in at least some jurisdictions - I wasn't able to find national information on that.

Do you think this will encourage even greater numbers to cross the border?

Yes, more humane treatment would encourage more migrants to cross the border. It will be a challenge.
Sure, bringing down the hammer would discourage immigration, but is that who we are?

I wanted Biden to succeed Trump as president for many reasons, but one of them was that Biden was a humane and compassionate person. If he's not going to behave that way then as far as immigration goes Trump may as well still be president.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Taq, posted 03-23-2021 6:40 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Taq, posted 03-24-2021 6:36 PM Percy has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8488
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


Message 107 of 150 (885138)
03-24-2021 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by Percy
03-24-2021 3:40 PM


Re: Excuses For Abuses
Percy writes:

Sure, but for any migrants permitted to remain in the country, what other choice is there?

I would imagine that they may not know who is staying in the country and who may be deported immediately. Then you have the issue of tracking individual people who may not have IDs and may not be fully cooperative, and they are being moved from shelter to shelter. I completely agree with your sentiments, but the pragmatic side of me grimaces at the thought of how to follow through with it.

Yes, more humane treatment would encourage more migrants to cross the border. It will be a challenge.
Sure, bringing down the hammer would discourage immigration, but is that who we are?

Good question. Is it politically viable for Biden to let all of these immigrants into the country and the millions more that would surely follow? I think it would be political suicide which says a lot about where our country stands on the issue.

In a practical sense, could we take in every person across the globe that wanted to immigrate to the US? I highly doubt it. So where do we draw the line? I don't know if there is a good answer to that question.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Percy, posted 03-24-2021 3:40 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by AZPaul3, posted 03-24-2021 7:10 PM Taq has not yet responded
 Message 119 by Percy, posted 04-01-2021 7:28 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5974
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 108 of 150 (885140)
03-24-2021 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Taq
03-24-2021 6:36 PM


Re: Excuses For Abuses
but the pragmatic side of me grimaces at the thought of how to follow through with it.

Don't. Use the J&J one jab vaccine.

I agree we need to establish more consistent, logical, politically doable immigration policies, whatever that is. But we don't have to be detestable ogres to our guests waiting for us to pull our heads out of our. We have only known about this problem on the southern border for two generations. Almost 50 years now. A major infrastructure should have been in place. So now, we have to play catch up to the humanitarian situation at many times the cost.

But, we are Americans. We can do this. We can be humane and hospitable before we ship them back to hell.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Taq, posted 03-24-2021 6:36 PM Taq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by jar, posted 03-24-2021 7:41 PM AZPaul3 has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33406
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 109 of 150 (885141)
03-24-2021 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by AZPaul3
03-24-2021 7:10 PM


Re: Excuses For Abuses
It's kinda worth noting that we already handle many many many many times the illegal migrant quantities daily.

In 2015 Hidalgo County alone handled over a half million northbound truck crossings, over four million passenger vehicles and over two million foot crossings. That was pretty much the norm; we have a constant stream already crossing legally.

The other ports just in Texas handled over three million trucks, over thirty million cars and over fifteen million foot crossings.

Those are just the NORTH bound numbers; people coming from Mexico into the US. And those are just Texas border crossings.

The issues are the same, people cross he border for work, shopping, family and tourism.

It's a paperwork and supplies crisis.

The solution is a procedure to handle the paperwork and supplies.

It really is that simple.


My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by AZPaul3, posted 03-24-2021 7:10 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by AZPaul3, posted 03-24-2021 9:03 PM jar has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5974
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 110 of 150 (885143)
03-24-2021 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by jar
03-24-2021 7:41 PM


Re: Excuses For Abuses
I loved the food in Laredo. I remember that huge flag. A lot of the people I was working with would leave about 3pm, cross the border to go home for lunch and siesta, and return about 5pm to finish out the day at, well, major bank IT rooms, there wasn't really a finish to the day. We had to look at the schedule and see if we could kinda fake one.

I also remember the horn-blasting symphony of the backed-up trucks on the 4-lanes of solid 18-wheelers stretching miles up the highway all pointing south. Back-ups used to last for hours.

Honk, honkhonkhonk...honk, honkhonk, honkhonk ... honk, honkhonk ... for hours. A true cultural delight.

You are right, of course, we have the infrastructure for mass crossings. But not enough dedicated to the issue of controlled immigration humanely conducted.

The supplies would follow after the processing of the paperwork, and we could get on with caring for these people and all those kids.

So who has the paperwork?


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by jar, posted 03-24-2021 7:41 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by jar, posted 03-24-2021 10:00 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply
 Message 115 by Phat, posted 03-27-2021 2:24 PM AZPaul3 has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33406
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 111 of 150 (885144)
03-24-2021 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by AZPaul3
03-24-2021 9:03 PM


Re: Excuses For Abuses
There's no reason there couldn't be a building on the US side of each crossing where those without the right paperwork could be directed. The buildings should house medical facilities and staff experience in the infectious diseases that are likely to be encountered. It would be our best interest to vaccinate those entering who cannot show prior vaccinations.

What paperwork would be needed would be an agreement from the migrant to obey US laws. Then the migrant could be finger printed and issued an identity card with a photograph.

What this entails are US jobs, jobs that would pay well and provide a service.

Frankly it's a win win. New US jobs are created and a pathway to US citizenship initiated.

Once the individuals are documented and vaccinated and in general treated like humans they can be sent on their way to join family or friends or get jobs or go to school or raise a family; things all folk would like.

Sure, there will also be some bad apples but believe it or not we also already have systems in place to deal with those who break laws as long as they are not rich or politicians.


My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by AZPaul3, posted 03-24-2021 9:03 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Percy, posted 03-25-2021 9:33 AM jar has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20217
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 112 of 150 (885147)
03-25-2021 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by jar
03-24-2021 10:00 PM


Re: Excuses For Abuses
Migrants apprehended on the southern border are placed into one of three categories:

  • Unlikely to qualify for refugee or asylum status. They are returned to Mexico.
  • Deserving of evaluation for refugee status.
  • Deserving of evaluation for asylum status.

Those in the latter two categories should be medically evaluated and treated, processed, then either held in detention, or more often prior to Trump, released into America pending their hearing, which will determine whether they get to stay in the US. I imagine that many of them spend the time awaiting their hearing preparing to disappear into the great maw of America if their application is turned down. This doesn't bother me because I believe a great many of them arrived at our borders out of pain and desperation, and whether they're able to qualify for refugee/asylum status feels like too much a crapshoot should be considered fair. If we're not going to treat them fairly then they are only behaving rationally by not trusting us and making plans for the worst.

The refugee/asylum strategy requires, in large part, on telling a convincing story of how chaotic and unsafe your home region was, likely without benefit of documentation. How many people can do that effectively, especially through a translator? Here's a description of how difficult it is from Who Is Eligible for Asylum or Refugee Protection in the U.S.?:

quote:
To establish eligibility for asylum or refugee status under U.S. law (8 U.S.C. § 1158), you must prove that you meet the definition of a refugee (under 8 U.S.C. § 1101).

In brief, this means showing that you are either the victim of past persecution or you have a well-founded fear of future persecution. In the case of past persecution, you must prove that you were persecuted in your home country or last country of residence.


You've arrived with only the clothes on your back. How, other than your words, are you going to prove you were persecuted? I imagine a family all telling the same story or different aspects of the same story has a much better chance than a lone man simply telling his tale, but I don't really know. How does a Border Patrol official assess the truth/falsity of a story for which there is no evidence from people he's unfamiliar with?

We don't really know for sure how cruel it is to turn migrants back into Mexico or return them to their home country. No one is tracking them and seeing how many of them or their family group are still alive a year later. Are we just repeating the same ghastly error of turning away the ship full of Jewish refugees on the St. Louis in 1939? Eventually they were able to disembark here and there in Europe where it's estimated that a quarter of them died in Nazi death camps.

I sense that most in this thread want to treat those seeking refugee or asylum status compassionately. After that it varies with some not seeing how compassion is possible given current resources.

But we know the resource problem isn't true. If Mexico invaded then within days (hours?) our southern border would be saturated with troops and personnel and transports and tents and the Army Core of Engineers and construction and coordinators and supply officers and etc. etc. etc. We can do this, so let's do it.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by jar, posted 03-24-2021 10:00 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by jar, posted 03-25-2021 10:33 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 114 by Percy, posted 03-27-2021 9:19 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33406
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 113 of 150 (885148)
03-25-2021 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by Percy
03-25-2021 9:33 AM


Re: Excuses For Abuses
Remember, Mexico has agreed to build an effective wall and to enforce it; but along the original boundary/border.

Percy, most of the needed processes are already in place and the only issue holding things up are the ***** in Austin and DC.

It would talk some time to fully implement a solution but so far no attempts have been made to do so by either the States or the Federal governments.

While we might want compassion right now there is ZERO chance of getting compassionate responses from either governments until a complete overhaul of the management structure of the BP/HS/and ICE can be completed and the total upper level Texas government is canned.


My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Percy, posted 03-25-2021 9:33 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20217
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 114 of 150 (885191)
03-27-2021 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by Percy
03-25-2021 9:33 AM


Re: Excuses For Abuses
Apparently the Biden administration is continuing the "Trump-era pandemic policy of immediately sending asylum-seekers back to Mexico or their home countries without due process, otherwise known as expulsions." I assume the same goes for those requesting refugee status. It's not being enforced as strictly as under Trump, but I couldn't find figures. See One Night At The Border Shows How Immigrants Are Hoping Biden Will Treat Them Differently: “We Have To Take That Risk”.

From what I can gather, the reason the current problem is mostly one of migrant children is because the Trump-era policy of expelling them has been discarded while the rest of the policy is still mostly being followed. The article says that some parts of Mexico have stopped accepting expelled families with children under 6, so we're obviously still expelling families with children.

I didn't vote for being only 40% or 50% or 60% or whatever it is less inhumane than Trump. We should build up our ability to deal with the migrant influx until we can treat everyone humanely and compassionately. The Biden administration should provide the public some evidence (through media access - I never expected the Biden administration would need reminding of this) that this is happening.

As an aside: I don't like the bulldog approach of Biden's press secretary, Jen Psaki. That's just more Trump-era stuff. Sure, she's nicer and more open than Sarah Sanders or Kayleigh McEnany, but that isn't saying much. She can irrationally defend the indefensible with the best of them.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Percy, posted 03-25-2021 9:33 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Inactive Member


Message 115 of 150 (885192)
03-27-2021 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by AZPaul3
03-24-2021 9:03 PM


How Many Is Too Maany?
AZ writes:

we have the infrastructure for mass crossings. But not enough dedicated to the issue of controlled immigration humanely conducted.

I am all in favor of controlled legal immigration, but the challenge is as to how many people we should let in and at what rate?

One Night At The Border Shows How Immigrants Are Hoping Biden Will Treat Them Differently: “We Have To Take That Risk”
From the link:

quote:
People say, 'Don't come, it's too dangerous,' but there are no options for us back home," Kevin, a 28-year-old Honduran man who made the journey with his wife and son, told BuzzFeed News. "We have to take that risk."

Immigrants, especially an increasing number of children, are making a gamble that the confusing and disparate enforcement of border policies will mean they will be lucky enough to slip through and stay rather than be sent back to dangerous Mexican border cities, or separated from their loved ones. The higher number of immigrants being met by Border Patrol agents after crossing into the US have led to bipartisan calls for President Joe Biden to do more to dissuade them from making the journey in the first place.

But Kevin, who asked to only be identified by his first name, said he didn’t know what the political environment was in the US and maintained that he would’ve made the journey anyway. Holding his son in his arms, Kevin tried to calm his wife's nerves by reminding her to breathe. In a scramble to get out of the inflatable raft, she had fallen into the water.

Kevin was a barber in Honduras and made enough to support his family, but the coronavirus pandemic put him out of business. Then two hurricanes pummeled Central America, destroying their home. They tried rebuilding, but the double whammy of the pandemic and the hurricanes forced them to leave their home in January.



I am in favor of humanitarian aid as a moral duty, but I also know that there are limits. Its a bit like inviting people to stay at your house. You can support only so many. Too many and your life gets disrupted, your food gets eaten, your expenses increase, and you are forced to share with an unknown number.

Our people should have some say as to what that number is.

Percy writes:

...We should build up our ability to deal with the migrant influx until we can treat everyone humanely and compassionately.

And I maintain that in a literal sense everyone is too many. Again, it is like my house analogy and how many people you would be willing and able to let in your front door. It most certainly can never be everybody.

Granted we need a young and strong group of hard workers who will help support those of us old enough to retire on social security. Perhaps we need some sort of rule that in order to be allowed to work here, taxes must be collected and social security need be paid by these workers and future citizens.

Edited by Phat, : added Percy


"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by AZPaul3, posted 03-24-2021 9:03 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by jar, posted 03-27-2021 3:38 PM Phat has not yet responded
 Message 117 by AZPaul3, posted 03-27-2021 3:53 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33406
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


(2)
Message 116 of 150 (885194)
03-27-2021 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Phat
03-27-2021 2:24 PM


Re: How Many Is Too Maany?
Phat writes:

Perhaps we need some sort of rule that in order to be allowed to work here, taxes must be collected and social security need be paid by these workers and future citizens.

Think Phat.

Do illegal migrants buy anything at the Slop & Shop?

Do they ride on buses?

Do they rent homes?

Do they buy clothes?

Are their employers required to deduct taxes from what they are paid?

Think Phat.

The reality is that even the illegal migrant farm workers DO & HAVE paid taxes and into Social Security and Unemployment Compensation and Property Tax and road taxes and sales taxes. The difference is that they are denied getting many of the services those taxes pay for.

Stop listening to the Snake Oil Salesmen, Christian Apologists and Right Wing Carny Barkers.


My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Phat, posted 03-27-2021 2:24 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5974
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 117 of 150 (885195)
03-27-2021 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Phat
03-27-2021 2:24 PM


Re: How Many Is Too Maany?
I am in favor of humanitarian aid as a moral duty, but I also know that there are limits.

As for numbers, I'll let others decide that until my coronation.

Until then we give humanitarian aid to however many for however long.

We're a rich and a smart country. We can do this without much of a strain. Make the immigration centers humane, safe. We can throw a million bureaucrats into the "Welcome Centers" and get these people processed, by whatever standards, and get them going on their new life or give them the boot.

Its a bit like inviting people to stay at your house.

It's more like making room for new family in the house. You may have to build some additions to your societal floor plan ... and enjoy just a whole lot of really good new food.

Our people should have some say as to what that number is.

You do know what representative democracy means, yes?

I think we’re on the same page here Phat. Treat them well while they're here and let the people decide how many.

Except the kids. Kids get an automatic pass.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Phat, posted 03-27-2021 2:24 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 4702
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 118 of 150 (885200)
03-27-2021 11:25 PM


Biden's Re-election, Really?
Maybe this would also be appropriate for the Post-Trump thread. Whatever.

One of the right-wing press "gotcha" questions to President Biden was about whether he was planning to run for re-election. After all, Trump made that announcement almost immediately.

So why hasn't Biden already registered for re-election already? Because he's not running a huge money-making (or money-sucking) grift like Trump was always doing.

Trump's "campaign" was nothing more than a means of funneling donation money into Trump's properties and hence into his own pocket. That included charging for office space on Trump-owned properties that was never even used.

So Trump filed for re-election the earliest that he possibly could not only to put into operation that cash cow again, but also to provide a money laundering channel to receive bribes under the guise of "campaign donations."

Trump's publicity company for his billion-dollar campaign (out of which millions of dollars disappeared) was paid millions of dollars for producing nothing. My understanding is that it is being or will be investigated for money laundering.

Trump's latest "PAC", which was ostensibly created to support his legal battles but actually he can use that money any way he wants, raises another interesting question about money disappearing. The term I heard used was "cost of funding", which must be called something else because Google'ing brought up nothing. Every single charity has overhead expenses which must be paid for. Most charities try to keep that overhead as low as they can (though decades ago I heard rumors that one well known charity had overhead charges about 90% of its donations). Trump's PAC has a "cost of funding" expense of 60%. So given their stated receipts of about $700 million, that means that they skimmed about $420 million right off the top. Where did that money get funneled off to?

Biden is not Trump. He has no scam to fund by filing for re-election early.


  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20217
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 119 of 150 (885289)
04-01-2021 7:28 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Taq
03-24-2021 6:36 PM


Re: Excuses For Abuses
Taq writes:

Percy writes:

Sure, but for any migrants permitted to remain in the country, what other choice is there?


I would imagine that they may not know who is staying in the country and who may be deported immediately.

Unless "deported immediately" includes the possibility that they could remain in detention for more than a short while, those who are deported immediately shouldn't be a vaccination problem. Those who are allowed to remain should be vaccinated. You raised logistics as an issue, I think meaning just difficulties in general with vaccination. Solving it could involve housing them for 3-4 weeks until they get the second shot, or giving them the J&J as AZPaul3 suggests, though that one's having production problems at the moment.

Then you have the issue of tracking individual people who may not have IDs and may not be fully cooperative, and they are being moved from shelter to shelter. I completely agree with your sentiments, but the pragmatic side of me grimaces at the thought of how to follow through with it.

This all feels very manageable for the greatest country in the world, but that doesn't mean we can do it without making a concerted effort. We have to at least try, and right now it looks like we're not trying.

Non-minors are not a serious problem right now because when Biden tried to let everyone stay it was challenged in court and the Trump rules invoking the pandemic emergency held sway. Most non-minor migrants are being returned to Mexico right now.

Yes, more humane treatment would encourage more migrants to cross the border. It will be a challenge. Sure, bringing down the hammer would discourage immigration, but is that who we are?

Good question. Is it politically viable for Biden to let all of these immigrants into the country and the millions more that would surely follow? I think it would be political suicide which says a lot about where our country stands on the issue.

What we have is a humanitarian crisis. It demands that we respond with humanity, not cruelty a la Trump and like so many people who have been persuaded by him to deny any humanity to people in crisis.

The US admits around a million immigrants a year from around the world. I don't think we'd have much trouble absorbing all the people fleeing conditions in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Border patrol agents apprehend one or two hundred thousand illegals each year. Even if a huge proportion of migrants who try to cross are successful, say half, that's still only maybe two or three hundred thousand illegals each year. It seems manageable.

In a practical sense, could we take in every person across the globe that wanted to immigrate to the US? I highly doubt it. So where do we draw the line? I don't know if there is a good answer to that question.

It might be better to ask if we could take in everyone around the world who wanted to come here who was in the middle of a humanitarian crisis. I don't know how many that is, but we should work with our allies to come up with programs to reduce unrest, famine, etc., and also to share the immigration load. And the UN should be involved. Everyone else who wants to come can follow the normal immigration channels.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Taq, posted 03-24-2021 6:36 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20217
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 120 of 150 (885410)
04-11-2021 2:10 PM


Sundays Will Never Be The Same
By that I mean Sundays will never be the same as they were under Trump. I usually watch one or two of the Sunday morning political programs. I like ABC's This Week and NBC's Meet the Press best, but I also listen to Fox News Sunday and CBS's Face the Nation a fair amount of the time.

The one big change across all these programs is that we no longer see senior administration officials start talking and never stop, often using the initial question as just a launching point for the messages they wanted to get across. Kellyanne Conway and Rudy Giuliani were its most infamous, intense and enthusiastic practitioners, but pretty much all Trump officials took that approach, like Peter Navarro, Stephen Miller, Sarah Sanders, Kayleigh McEnany, Mick Mulvaney, Steve Bannon, and on and on. And many of the more prominent Republican members of Congress followed the same playbook, like Ron Johnson, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz.

And then there's the lies. Most were mendacious, but even some of the most well meaning people caused a great deal of damage. I know she meant well, and she didn't talk over her interlocutors, and I don't think she knew she was doing it, but Deborah Birx spread some key misinformation while trying to speak publicly while not getting on the wrong side of Trump. Because of this it took her longer than Fauci to find herself on the outside looking in, but her careful wording didn't prevent her eventual banishment.

I won't miss Chuck Todd on Meet the Press trying to break in for five straight minutes of a Kellyanne Conway answer, uttering "but...but..." every ten seconds or so. Sunday mornings are much more pleasant now, but more importantly, more informative.

I do wish that press secretary Jen Psaki would be more informative and less aggressive in interviews. She can come across more as the administration's defender than its spokesperson.

Best Sunday host at breaking in and not allowing a guest to ramble on for minutes? Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday.

--Percy


  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021