The Make-Believe Administration

 

Many ideas have been battling in my brain regarding the Biden administration. In trying to make sense of it, I realized that there was an ideal way to describe what has been going on. For the Left, it’s all make-believe. Whether their actions are practical, realistic, helpful; whether they will improve the lives of our citizens; whether they will make us a stronger and more resilient country—are all irrelevant. It is like watching a child playing with tinker toys, creating funny and weird figures that are fun but meaningless. Or watching them create card castles and then watch how far they can go before the entire structure collapses. When it does, they can always pick up the cards and start all over.

Only playing with the future of our country is not a game.

Let’s start with immigration. Biden’s policy will likely provide amnesty for illegal aliens. Homeland Security Secretary Majorcas has told migrants we want you to come; just don’t come now, which is like laying down the welcome mat. Housing for these migrants is quickly filling up, approaching 100%, with children being assigned to close quarters (and not safe spacing). Migrants with Covid-19 have reportedly been released into the country. There is clearly a crisis at the border, but the administration prefers to call it a challenge. Word-smithing the situation doesn’t change the fact that a disaster is imminent. And of course, come policies have changed to reverse actions by Donald Trump.

Then we can look at Iran. Biden assumes there will be some give-and-take with Iran that will justify our re-entering the Iran deal. There is no basis for even considering our re-entering the deal. Does Biden want to befriend Iran? It won’t happen. In fact, he will alienate most countries in the Middle East. Does Biden really think he can stop Iran’s developing a nuclear bomb?—it won’t work. Iran tells lies and sees no problem with making promises that they have no intention of keeping, to the U.S. or any other country. At this point, any realistic country knows that Iran can’t be stopped. But our re-entering the deal reverses a decision by Donald Trump, and will only frustrate the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, as well as other countries in that part of the world.

And there are the efforts surrounding climate change. We gain nothing at all by re-entering the Paris accords, and we are expected to comply with its requirements. It ignores the fact that we have made tremendous progress in limiting emissions, and gives other countries a pass for the foreseeable future in improving their own emissions. There is no accountability for anyone. Stopping the Keystone Pipeline has already put workers out of work; we can now use more dangerous, dirty and costly methods for transporting the oil. But it does reverse a decision by Donald Trump.

And finally there is Covid-19. Decisions are no longer about science. They probably never were. But the “experts” keep making up new policies so they can feel like they are actually doing something to maintain their power; they’ll just say they’re trying to save our lives. Masks at this point are probably stupid. Double masks are insane. We can now agree that they really don’t know what they are talking about, so they keep digging bigger holes filled with inanity. And they expect us to follow along. In spite of the fact that the virus is now likely less lethal (even the variants). But then Biden trusts the experts. The problem is, we don’t trust them or him.

* * * * *

I am aware that there are people higher than the Biden administration that might be pulling the strings of power. But Biden, his handlers, and the rest of his administration are playing the game of make-believe. There are many more actions that show the lack of maturity, foresight, wisdom, and practicality of the Biden Administration’s actions: rejoining the World Health Organization, systemic racism in law enforcement, the obscene provisions in the supposed Covid relief bill, to name a few. To review a straightforward summary as of February 25 of his executive orders, go here :

So far, Biden has signed more than 50 executive actions, 22 of which are direct reversals of Trump’s policies. Most of these actions have addressed the novel coronavirus, immigration and equity.

Biden defends the number of executive actions he has issued as necessary to undo what he considers ‘bad policy’ inherited from Trump, especially on immigration.

To date, nine of his 11 actions regarding immigration are reversals of Trump’s policies.

Biden has denied his actions are attacks on Trump. But the numbers speak for themselves. His decisions reflect the pettiness, the lack of analysis, and his lack of consideration of the impact on the American people, especially the middle class.

That’s why it’s clear to me that we are dealing with people who prefer to live in a state of “make-believe,” where outcomes are not relevant and people are only an inconvenience.

It allows you to toss the tinker toys into a pile, whenever you wish.

Unfortunately. they hope to bury us under the pile.

Sorry Mr. Biden. I live in the real world.

Published in Domestic Policy
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 47 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Jim McConnell Member
    Jim McConnell
    @JimMcConnell

    I keep shaking my head in wonder at how the greatest country in history has come to be “led” by such clearly unqualified (by any objective measure) people as Biden and/or Harris. You could list the accomplishments of the two of them on a matchbook cover. What happened?

    • #1
  2. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Jim McConnell (View Comment):

    I keep shaking my head in wonder at how the greatest country in history has come to be “led” by such clearly unqualified (by any objective measure) people as Biden and/or Harris. You could list the accomplishments of the two of them on a matchbook cover. What happened?

    This time around, Jim, I think it was the hatred of Trump. Anyone else would do.

    • #2
  3. Paul Stinchfield Member
    Paul Stinchfield
    @PaulStinchfield

    Susan Quinn: Biden assumes there will be some give-and-take with Iran that will justify our re-entering the Iran deal.

    Leftists like Biden start with from the assumption that the world’s problems are America’s fault* and that if America has enemies it is because America has done something wrong. (Although I would not be surprised to learn that Biden has taken payola from the mullahs via his son Hunter.)

    * Or the West’s fault, or Israel’s fault, and so on.

    • #3
  4. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Susan Quinn:

    Or watching them create card castles and then watch how far they can go before the entire structure collapses. When it does, they can always pick up the cards and start all over.

    Only playing with the future of our country is not a game.

    I think this is part of the problem.  Legislators are more often than any other profession, I tentatively believe, are lawyers.  While a society having good lawyers is a great benefit and provide a worthy service, I am led to understand that the US has more lawyers than all other countries combined.  And I understand that law school focuses on winning either side of a case, not on promoting a pure justice.  This is very like game-playing.

    What is more, more and more legislators are being schooled in “political science” which appears not to have a specialized body of knowledge other than the history of government, and the technical aspects of of the ins and outs of working a particular government; it includes no specific moral or ethical perspective.  Ultimately, it is getting paid for shuffling around legal mandates to effect change, even when change is not necessary.  And it is in essence playing a game with what they do not have, rather with others’ lives and their money, and is essentially non-productive.

    What do legislators do when every law that’s fit to enact have all already been enacted?  They make laws that are unfit.

    Climate change and even covid are the perfect examples of creating reasons to make more laws and to justify their existence and their pay.

    • #4
  5. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Flicker (View Comment):
    And I understand that law school focuses on winning either side of a case, not on promoting a pure justice. This is very like game-playing.

    Indeed. But those of us who believe that real-life is what matters, not games, will continue to protest their actions.

    • #5
  6. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    At one time, making a lot of new laws was deemed foolish and wasteful. Now, passing lots of legislation is seen as “productive.” Few people seem to care whether they make a difference: helping the country, or hurting it.

    • #6
  7. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    At one time, making a lot of new laws was deemed foolish and wasteful. Now, passing lots of legislation is seen as “productive.” Few people seem to care whether they make a difference: helping the country, or hurting it.

    Yes, this is true, I think.  And nowadays there are fewer laws passed, but those few are larger and all encompassing.  800-page covid relief bills roll up a lot that has nothing to do with covid relief.  And it seems that the actual substance of these bills is readjusting who get money and power.

    • #7
  8. Goldgeller Member
    Goldgeller
    @Goldgeller

    Very interesting post– I share a lot of your policy concerns. I’d like to just comment briefly on legislation parts in this thread because they were interesting. I think when we look at long stretches of US governance (includes but isn’t limited to legislation) we’ve always had a really active and distributive government at all levels, it was just done largely through patronage and strong party control (simplification I know).

    The rise of observable amounts of legislative activity, though a double edged sword, is really the story of creating more a rule-based government and impersonal government that was subject to interest group pressure and oversight (some say it’s representation but I’m trying to be value neutral). Forcing the governance into the open (as legislation) changes the terms of policy debate by presumably allowing for more interest groups to pressure politicians. What this means is that the total amount of governance, if it shifted, shifted because it is now being measured (as legislation) and is now open to far more debate (some say accountability). This creates a cycle where many interest groups now get multiple bites at an apple, creating more legislation. 

    Of course, when politicians make laws now they have to apply to everyone, and that comes with both positive and negative externalities. If parties could engage in more direct and opaque patronage, that would create drawbacks of its own; but it might also get rid of some of the negative externalities of lots of legislative activity (something I think we all are increasingly skeptical of). I don’t know. Patronage did work. Would it work now?

    • #8
  9. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    I think I understand your points, @goldgeller. Are you saying that patronage and party control of legislation has changed to interest groups forcing their interests through legislation? That seems to be likely, to me. But–

    Goldgeller (View Comment):
    Of course, when politicians make laws now they have to apply to everyone, and that comes with both positive and negative externalities.

    Do you mean everyone can try to take a piece of the pie? That may be true, but politicians will decide who they’ll listen to and those interest groups they’ll ignore. If you’re a Leftie group, the Dems will help you out; if not, forget it.
    Does that sound about right?

     

    • #9
  10. Goldgeller Member
    Goldgeller
    @Goldgeller

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    I think I understand your points, @ goldgeller. Are you saying that patronage and party control of legislation has changed to interest groups forcing their interests through legislation? That seems to be likely, to me. But–

    For both: to extent, yes. Before and even in the wake of Reconstruction if you wanted something you’d ask your party’s politician and you could probably get it as long as the courts didn’t get involved. Re: interest groups, that’s true but I wanted to argue that interest groups attack legislation at all its stages and force all sorts of compromises and changes (including totally random ones) into a bill because the goal is to get your hooks into something that might pass. But they also do this kill more legislation.

    Goldgeller (View Comment):
    Of course, when politicians make laws now they have to apply to everyone, and that comes with both positive and negative externalities.

    Do you mean everyone can try to take a piece of the pie? That may be true, but politicians will decide who they’ll listen to and those interest groups they’ll ignore. If you’re a Leftie group, the Dems will help you out; if not, forget it.
    Does that sound about right?

    That sounds right, but what I wanted to get across was that legislation that makes sense for one group, often legally can’t just be limited to that group, so it has to apply to more people and more places than actually makes sense, is warranted, or is useful. You can’t do bills of attainder but Congress actually did what was basically that all the time. But since they can’t, but would like to, they end up painting with too broad a brush.

     

    • #10
  11. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Goldgeller (View Comment):

    That sounds right, but what I wanted to get across was that legislation that makes sense for one group, often legally can’t just be limited to that group, so it has to apply to more people and more places than actually makes sense, is warranted, or is useful. You can’t do bills of attainder but Congress actually did what was basically that all the time. But since they can’t, but would like to, they end up painting with too broad a brush.

     

    So an example would be the Covid bill, renamed the America First bill, which threw in everything but the kitchen sink. Got it.

    • #11
  12. DonG (2+2=5. Say it!) Coolidge
    DonG (2+2=5. Say it!)
    @DonG

    Jim McConnell (View Comment):

    I keep shaking my head in wonder at how the greatest country in history has come to be “led” by such clearly unqualified (by any objective measure) people as Biden and/or Harris. You could list the accomplishments of the two of them on a matchbook cover. What happened?

    It happened, because the powerful elites that run this country have stopped working from the shadows.  When you see Biden and Harris, think about how our Corporate Overlords run your life.    What happened, is that the veil has been removed.  Take the Red Pill.

    • #12
  13. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    DonG (2+2=5. Say it!) (View Comment):
    It happened, because the powerful elites that run this country have stopped working from the shadows. When you see Biden and Harris, think about how our Corporate Overlords run your life. What happened, is that the veil has been removed. Take the Red Pill.

    You’re right @dong. They aren’t hiding anymore. They lie repeatedly and don’t care what anyone thinks. As long as they get what they want, anything goes.

    • #13
  14. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Last week’s “information” event was so telling; Joe makes the comment, “Are we going to have questions?” and then the “blue screen of death” appears. (Whoops! Technical Difficulties!  Move along!  Nothing to see here folks!)  As far as I know Fox news was the only outlet that mentioned the incident.

    For all the good our media does, we may as well have 1984-style “Telescreens” in our homes.  

    • #14
  15. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Last week’s “information” event was so telling; Joe makes the comment, “Are we going to have questions?” and then the “blue screen of death” appears. (Whoops! Technical Difficulties! Move along! Nothing to see here folks!) As far as I know Fox news was the only outlet that mentioned the incident.

    For all the good our media does, we may as well have 1984-style “Telescreens” in our homes.

    That was so bizarre! But as usual, the media says, nothing to see here, move along.

    • #15
  16. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    At one time, making a lot of new laws was deemed foolish and wasteful. Now, passing lots of legislation is seen as “productive.” Few people seem to care whether they make a difference: helping the country, or hurting it.

    Yes, this is true, I think. And nowadays there are fewer laws passed, but those few are larger and all encompassing. 800-page covid relief bills roll up a lot that has nothing to do with covid relief. And it seems that the actual substance of these bills is readjusting who get money and power.

    You know more about it than I do but from what I’ve read, the few laws that are passed are so open-ended that they are implemented by bureaucrats who tend to interpret them according to their own whims.  The more open-ended they are, the more “plausible deniability” a congressman has when it comes election time.

     

    • #16
  17. RushBabe49 Thatcher
    RushBabe49
    @RushBabe49

    Every action by President Trump immediately attracted lawsuits which shut them down. Where are our lawyers suing to stop every one of Biden’s executive orders?  Dozens of judges appointed by Trump should be sympathetic to such suits. 

    • #17
  18. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Last week’s “information” event was so telling; Joe makes the comment, “Are we going to have questions?” and then the “blue screen of death” appears. (Whoops! Technical Difficulties! Move along! Nothing to see here folks!) As far as I know Fox news was the only outlet that mentioned the incident.

    For all the good our media does, we may as well have 1984-style “Telescreens” in our homes.

    That was so bizarre! But as usual, the media says, nothing to see here, move along.

    And there’s this, which I think is even worse.

    Where is John Gill when you need him?

    • #18
  19. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    Flicker (View Comment):
    And it seems that the actual substance of these bills is readjusting who get money and power.

    That’s what the Biden administration is all about, Sue and Flicker, “readjusting who gets money and power.”  Our money.  Power over us.

    • #19
  20. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    For all the good our media does, we may as well have 1984-style “Telescreens” in our homes.

    You already do.  “Alexa, what time is it?”  And there’s a video monitor on your desktop computer.  Mine has a piece of paper taped over it; I remove the paper when I perform telemedicine.

    • #20
  21. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Last week’s “information” event was so telling; Joe makes the comment, “Are we going to have questions?” and then the “blue screen of death” appears. (Whoops! Technical Difficulties! Move along! Nothing to see here folks!) As far as I know Fox news was the only outlet that mentioned the incident.

    For all the good our media does, we may as well have 1984-style “Telescreens” in our homes.

    That was so bizarre! But as usual, the media says, nothing to see here, move along.

    And there’s this, which I think is even worse.

    Where is John Gill when you need him?

    Good Lord, this is so frightening…

    • #21
  22. Ray Gunner Coolidge
    Ray Gunner
    @RayGunner

    CACrabtree (View Comment):
    For all the good our media does, we may as well have 1984-style “Telescreens” in our homes.

    Homes?  We have them in our pockets!

    • #22
  23. Ray Gunner Coolidge
    Ray Gunner
    @RayGunner

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Last week’s “information” event was so telling; Joe makes the comment, “Are we going to have questions?” and then the “blue screen of death” appears. (Whoops! Technical Difficulties! Move along! Nothing to see here folks!) As far as I know Fox news was the only outlet that mentioned the incident.

    For all the good our media does, we may as well have 1984-style “Telescreens” in our homes.

    That was so bizarre! But as usual, the media says, nothing to see here, move along.

    And there’s this, which I think is even worse.

    Where is John Gill when you need him?

    I was waiting for this TOS reference!!!

    • #23
  24. Ray Gunner Coolidge
    Ray Gunner
    @RayGunner

    Susan Quinn:

    That’s why it’s clear to me that we are dealing with people who prefer to live in a state of “make-believe,” where outcomes are not relevant and people are only an inconvenience.

    It allows you to toss the tinker toys into a pile, whenever you wish.

    So true, SQ!  And I think it has something to do with how insulated our elite managerial class is from the real world consequences of their word-based livelihoods.  It seems to me the most common biography of our managerial elites involves leafy suburbs, prep schools, and the Ivy League.  Then it’s on to prestigious internships and elite graduate schools.  Then it’s well remunerated careers in government, academia, non-profits, and media.  There is not a trucker, restauranteur, outside sales rep, or electrician among them.  Our elite managerial class inhabits a comfortable, word-based world, where the hard realities don’t sting because they lives lives in which the hard realities are someone else’s problem.

    • #24
  25. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Ray Gunner (View Comment):
    There is not a trucker, restauranteur, outside sales rep, or electrician among them. Our elite managerial class inhabits a comfortable, word-based world, where the hard realities don’t sting because they lives lives in which the hard realities are someone else’s problem.

    I agree, @raygunner. What is so odd to me, though, is they weren’t all born into the elite. They had to begin somewhere, and it’s likely that at some point earlier in their lives they were deplorables just like us. But instead of building on those early experiences, remembering the heart of a life filled with industry, hard work and morals, they despise their pasts. And ultimately they become a deplorable class themselves, filled with arrogance, disdain and hunger for power. It is sad for them and tragic for this country.

    • #25
  26. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Ray Gunner (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Last week’s “information” event was so telling; Joe makes the comment, “Are we going to have questions?” and then the “blue screen of death” appears. (Whoops! Technical Difficulties! Move along! Nothing to see here folks!) As far as I know Fox news was the only outlet that mentioned the incident.

    For all the good our media does, we may as well have 1984-style “Telescreens” in our homes.

    That was so bizarre! But as usual, the media says, nothing to see here, move along.

    And there’s this, which I think is even worse.

    Where is John Gill when you need him?

    I was waiting for this TOS reference!!!

    Happy to oblige.

    • #26
  27. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Ray Gunner (View Comment):
    There is not a trucker, restauranteur, outside sales rep, or electrician among them. Our elite managerial class inhabits a comfortable, word-based world, where the hard realities don’t sting because they lives lives in which the hard realities are someone else’s problem.

    I agree, @ raygunner. What is so odd to me, though, is they weren’t all born into the elite. They had to begin somewhere, and it’s likely that at some point earlier in their lives they were deplorables just like us. But instead of building on those early experiences, remembering the heart of a life filled with industry, hard work and morals, they despise their pasts. And ultimately they become a deplorable class themselves, filled with arrogance, disdain and hunger for power. It is sad for them and tragic for this country.

    This behavior is a function of underlying character so there will naturally be some who come from the backgrounds you describe who cannot resist the allure of the despotic reign. The reversal of this in Donald Trump was a very intriguing feature that confused many people because he has never been able to dispense with his bullish demeanor when crossed. 

    • #27
  28. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    This behavior is a function of underlying character so there will naturally be some who come from the backgrounds you describe who cannot resist the allure of the despotic reign. The reversal of this in Donald Trump was a very intriguing feature that confused many people because he has never been able to dispense with his bullish demeanor when crossed. 

    Although Donald Trump liked the trappings of the elite, and liked socializing with them (although certain ones had disdain for him), he often displayed blue-collar behavior in certain situations. I wonder if he developed that as a coping mechanism when the elite showed their dislike for him, or if they disliked him because of his unrefined behavior?

    • #28
  29. Unsk Member
    Unsk
    @Unsk

    When you try to talk now to a Progressive Democrat and argue from a factual basis they more often than not will tell you that you have gotten your set of  “fake news” facts that from some  crazed Alt-Right Wingnut Website which is another way of saying your ‘facts” are not factual ,  but  their beliefs they likely  will assert have been founded on rock solid credible information and narratives supplied  by the time tested esteemed Major Media, no matter how obviously censored that media is or how obviously contradictory or obviously nonsensical those Left Wing “facts” are.

    They often absolutely refuse to consider any alternative to the “Make Believe”. Logic or evidence no longer matters, only the “Make Believe” narrative matters, and so it should not come as any sort of shock that our “esteemed” leaders like Delusional Joe Biden and/or his sidekick in charge Kamala, can propose such ridiculous policies. 

    • #29
  30. Cow Girl Thatcher
    Cow Girl
    @CowGirl

    CACrabtree (View Comment):
    You know more about it than I do but from what I’ve read, the few laws that are passed are so open-ended that they are implemented by bureaucrats who tend to interpret them according to their own whims. The more open-ended they are, the more “plausible deniability” a congressman has when it comes election time.

    This is very critical. We are NOT a nation governed by law. We’ve become a nation managed by bureaucracies! I read a very informative article about this sometime in the last few years…sorry I can’t remember who wrote it, or where I read it…

    But, the point was that the laws that get passed aren’t necessarily the problem or the solution–it is all about how the whole thing is implemented and that is what the bureaucrats do. The bills often state that “such and such actions will be done according to the directions of [some agency]”. So, your office gets funded, and at the end of the fiscal year you have to show what was done with that money and how productive you were so your next budget isn’t shorted, etc. etc. 

    It’s a never-ending type of self-perpetuating fungus–just growing and growing. Agency heads get rewarded for action and evidence. Spending all of your budget and generating lots of reports will get you more people and budget increases. 

    I’ll stop now….

    • #30