As “president,” poor decrepit Joe Biden can’t entirely avoid public appearances, as he pretty much did during the campaign. But when he tries to speak publicly, the results are, to put it politely, concerning. Here (via PJ Media), Biden tries to read his teleprompter on the “Restaurant Revitalization Fund.” It isn’t pretty: …(only :41 second)
It is obvious, I think, that Joe Biden has less mental acuity than the average high school student. And, unlike the average high school student, he is moving in the wrong direction. For how long will our slavish press continue to pretend that this poor fossil is, in a meaningful sense, our president?

Don’t be silly. They will pretend until the day Biden drops. The real question is, how long they can continue to fool many Americans?

https://redstate.com/streiff/2021/05/06/liz-cheneys-removal-as-gop-conference-chairwoman-is-part-of-her-strategy-to-win-re-election-to-the-house-n375145?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=onsite&utm_campaign=719

Good exposition of the situation in re Cheney now vs Cheney in her first no-confidence vote, but the bottom line is HOW she plans to win re-election.

She’s sowed division in her caucus and is obviously currying favor with Democrat voters in Wyoming as well as appealing to deep-pocket Democrats for campaign funds. If she loses her primary, which seems likely, expect her to launch an independent or write-in campaign.

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2021/05/05/meghan-mccain-and-others-rant-about-liz-cheney-show-they-have-no-idea-whats-actually-happening-n374991

Rather, what this is actually about is simple. Cheney is the #3 Republican in the House. That job requires three things. That person must be a great fundraiser and an excellent recruiter. Cheney is neither of those things. Also, that person must be able to put their personal feelings aside and push a congruent message for the caucus to rally around. Cheney has also failed miserably at doing that, choosing instead to make her own profile the priority.
…
Regardless, Cheney does not define how big the GOP tent is. In fact, Elise Stefanik represents a broader swath of the electorate (i.e. a bigger tent), to the point where many conservatives are very skeptical of her. Still, the point here isn’t an argument over policy. It’s about leadership and being able to do the job that Cheney holds. If she can’t do it, and it appears she can’t, she needs to be removed. Meanwhile, Stefanik has shown herself to be an excellent fundraiser who gets results on the campaign trail. It’s not any more complicated than that.

I also give Stefanik props for her defense of The President in the first impeachment (what an entry in Guinness: first – and I hope only – president to be impeached twice, both being frivolous harassment, and was acquitted twice), and haven’t really looked into her policy positions, so will pass on that for the nonce.

Anyway, the fund-raiser observation tied in with this one.

https://www.thenewneo.com/2021/05/05/the-legislature-has-become-obsolete/#comment-2553957

“One thing I read from time to time is that the Republican floor leaders (who are useless human beings six-ways-to-Sunday) are admired by members because they’re vigorous fundraisers. We have this institution called the Republican National Committee, which has a three digit staff. Why are our parliamentary floor leaders devoting their time to running fundraisers in any constituency but their own?” – Art Deco

Indeed.

What X or Y had to say or do about Trump is almost an obfuscation.

Which one doesn’t want America flooded with Third World Immigrants? That’s pretty much all anyone needs to know. Demographics towers over all other issues for anyone concerned about the world their grandchildren will inherit.

I guess could also ask which one is against Pointless Foreign Forever Wars, but don’t want to appear greedy.

“No changes to their roles or the organization are planned. They will continue to work together to shape and approve foundation strategies, advocate for the foundation’s issues, and set the organization’s overall direction,” the foundation said in a statement.

However, it’s possible the foundation, founded in 1994, could spin off another charity if the divorce is not amicable, according to some charity experts.
—
“The only thing Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation grant recipients should be concerned about is ROI (return on investment) on the philanthropic investment,” said Louise Furrow of Seattle Pacific University.

Oh, … they’re investing in charity. As long as the return is high enough. Good to know.

Correct. Got name mangled up with Paul Graham of Y Combinator startup incubator fame.

Paul Allen was a Mensch. Was apparently very shy but had many friends and did a lot quietly for various charities. Also didn’t pretend that he didn’t own mega yachts for holding riotous parties on.

Gates has the Yachts, and employs a full-time vacation spot scout, but keeps it all down low so that he can pontificate better to us plebs.

Ryan held consequential positions. The position she’s slated for is largely ceremonial.