Prelude: Wait, what is it that the 38% approve of? A new Quinnipiac University poll—yes, yes, I know: polls— purports to show that President Biden’s performance as President thus far is approved of by 38% of the public. I don’t understand this at all. Ten per cent or less would be reasonable; after all, there are a lot of inattentive morons out there. But 38%? Amazing. It has taken nine months of Joe Biden for the rest of the public to figure out that we elected Joe Biden, and a diminished version at that, which is like saying that Donald Trump isn’t as straightforward as he used to be. Biden has 32% approval with independents: based on what? The superb Biden policies on illegal immigration? His foreign policy expertise? His strict observance of facts, like yesterday when he claimed that vaccinated people couldn’t infect others with the Wuhan virus? His administration’s respect for free speech rights, as the Justice Department attempts to intimidate parents who oppose school curricula that will teach that the united States is racist? 39% approve of Biden’s handling of the economy, with inflation soaring and the national debt nearing 20 trillion. 42% say the administration is competent! Competent at what?
The best that I can figure out is that Biden is competent at not being Donald Trump, and Trump Derangement runs so deep that this is sufficient for almost 40% of the public to call across-the-board failure and ineptitude “good.” Do they really trust this guy? Do they really feel secure know his steady hand is at the helm? His handlers/puppeteers try not allow him to speak unless he’s reading off a teleprompter. During an Oval Office meeting with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Johnson took questions from the British press while Biden looked on, but when reporters directed questions to Biden, they were shut down. Do American approve of that? Incredibly, 44% believe Biden is honest. Biden has never been honest, and his lies have been constant and obvious, including his denials that his black sheep son isn’t the influence-peddling crook he obviously is. “Biden was seen as far more trustworthy than his predecessor. Sure, he made his share of gaffes. But that was part of his authenticity,” says The Hill. You know, authenticity, like using sets to pretend he’s in the white House when he isn’t…
I don’t get it.
1. Dear Pope: Butt out. A representative for Pope Francis urged Republican Missouri governor Mike Parson to grant clemency t condemned triple murderer Ernest Johnson, telling Parson in a letter that the Pope “wishes to place before you the simple fact of Mr. Johnson’s humanity and the sacredness of all human life.” Parson refused to intervene, and Jackson was executed by a fatal injection.He guilt was never in doubt: Jackson shot three people during an unsuccessful robbery attempt, then attacked them with a claw hammer. Police found two victims in the store’s bathroom, and the third in a cooler. The Pope abuses his position and influence by attempting to interfere with our justice system, not that this the first time a Pope has tried it. It’s not even the first time in Missouri: in 1999, during his visit to St. Louis, Pope John Paul II persuaded Democratic Gov. Mel Carnahan to grant clemency to Darrell Mease, weeks before Mease was to be put to death for a triple killing. Just think: in 1960, Presidential candidate John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, had to convince voters that he would take orders from the Pope. At least this Pope had a reasonable argument for sparing Johnson. “Racial justice” activists and Missouri members of Congress, Cori Bush and Emmanuel Cleaver—I don’t really have to tell you their party affiliation, do I?—sought mercy for Johnson because he is black, and living in such a racist country made him do it.
There were some valid arguments for letting Jackson live—he has the IQ of a sponge, for example—but the appeals of the Pope, who was sticking his Holy Nose where it doesn’t belong, and the likes of Bush and Cleaver, who were arguing for a precedent that would mitigate all crimes committed by blacks, would have tipped the scales for me in favor of execution.
2. Did you ever wonder how the U.S. was allowed to lock up “War on Terror” detainees indefinitely at Guantanamo, while periodically having some of them tortured? One reason appears to be that the U.S. Supreme Court had no idea what was going on, as oral argument in United States v. Abu Zubaydah demonstrates. You can read the transcript, available here).
3. Speaking of SCOTUS…the Court affirmed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (and the later denial of a motion for consideration), rejecting a silly lawsuit designed to give D.C. residents a vote in Congress. The suit was frivolous, because it asked that courts over-rule the Constitution on constitutional grounds. It says right in the piece of parchment that House representation is limited to ‘the people of the several States.” Allowing the District to have a voting member requires an amendment, which isn’t going to happen. Congress does have the power to make D.C. a state.
In an entertaining post, Prof. Turley focuses on the incompetent or dishonest Washington Post story about the decision. He writes in part,
“There has long been a problem with the one-sided coverage of these challenges and past unconstitutional proposals in Congress. Stories often present a distorted account of the constitutional debate in echoing the views of those advocating for judicial or legislative intervention to give D.C. residents a vote in Congress without statehood. The Washington Post article downplays the significance of this loss while repeatedly insisting that it does little to undermine further efforts at legislative interventions…the Post repeatedly spins the decision as “only affirm[ing] the finding, by a three-judge panel made up of federal judges in D.C., that Congress is not constitutionally required” to give D.C. residents a vote. Again, the lower court went well beyond just saying that Congress was not required to give a vote. It repeatedly stressed that it cannot do so even if it wanted to because the Constitution limits votes to “the people of the several states”…In rejecting a new statutory argument, the Court again reaffirmed the fundamental rejection of this claim: ‘It was that premise – that residents of the District qua residents of the District are not among “the people of the several States” – that informed our conclusion that Plaintiffs’ equal-protection law claim was pretermitted by the Constitution’s own dictates.’ None of that was even intimated, let alone recognized, in the Post coverage. As with past coverage, the suggestion was that this was not a major loss and there are still grounds for legislatively securing a vote. Notably, this is simply a failure to report the actual tenor and holding of the lower court decision that was summarily upheld by the Supreme Court. It is a recurring problem….Court reporting today is increasingly marked by one-sided accounts that ignore countervailing views or even judicial holdings. That only tends to fuel the anger of readers who were never fully informed of contested claims or the weight of opposing precedent. They then assume that it must be raw ideology or the bias of the courts when these claims fail.“
Nah, there’s no mainstream media bias!
4.. New York Times Ethics Quote of the Year, or “KABOOM!” In its lead editorial piece today, the Times published Dartmouth sociology professor Brooke Harrington’s angry assessment of the significance of the massive Pandora Papers leak. The quote: “Each successive leak drives home the same message: Abandon any hope that government will serve the people or that the rule of law will be applied equally to all, the foundational premises of modern government.”
How can the Times publish this as it continues to use its power, influence and biased reporting to push the public to accept more government regulation of their lives and liberty, as they cite, like Dr. Fauci, the need to give up selfish individual freedom for “the greater good”? From Obama’s in-your-face birthday party extravagance, to S.F. mayor London Breed’s explanation that she partied maskless in violation of her own edicts because she “felt like it,” to Hunter Biden openly selling his paintings to anonymous parties seeking government access, U.S. politicians and elected officials have repeatedly proven that the professor’s analysis is correct. The massive hypocrisy and lack of integrity it takes for a newspaper to simultaneously admit that governments should not be trusted and that we should support a more powerful, intrusive and less accountable government is mind-blowing.
And that’s where it’s hard to see how Biden, who turns 79 years old next month, turns this around by making his arguments on how to fix X, Y and Z and beyond.
“Battered on trust, doubted on leadership, and challenged on overall competency, President Biden is being hammered on all sides as his approval rating continues its downward slide to a number not seen since the tough scrutiny of the Trump administration,” Quinnipiac polling analyst Tim Malloy candidly observed in a statement after the poll was released.
And that’s the thing: Biden was seen as far more trustworthy than his predecessor. Sure, he made his share of gaffes. But that was part of his authenticity, his charm, his ability to connect with people, according to the argument made by more than a few political pundits in selling the Biden brand.
Just 44 percent of Americans now believe Biden is honest, down 7 points in the same poll in April.
Add it all up, and we have a flailing economy, rising inflation, rising crime, essentially an open border and a mess in Afghanistan. While all of this is happening, the president and vice president are shielded from the public outside of tightly scripted events. Democrats also are in the midst of a civil war and, despite controlling the House and Senate, can’t get a massive spending bill across the goal line.
Things are looking brutal indeed for this administration.
If these polls and others like them are any indication, Team Biden needs to make some serious changes, and quickly — because whatever plan it had to script this presidency clearly isn’t working.