Biden’s mistakes or following bad advice?

Joe Biden could have been a good president. But as a registered Democrat, I think he made too many wrong decisions. Some wonder that maybe he was following bad advice both before and after his election.

First off, did he pick the best person to be his running mate in using gender and ethnicity rather than governing experience and qualifications as the main selection criteria? There is always the running question whether senators make good presidents, or vice presidents for that matter. Once Biden was elected it appeared he quickly wanted to do away with as many vestiges of the Trump presidency as possible by executive order. Right out of the gates he did away with Trump’s largely successful immigration stances and stopping the border wall construction. He stopped the Keystone pipeline construction which some see as the precursor to rising gasoline prices while entertaining potential forced obsolescence of the fossil fuel industry in mandating electric mobility.

In hindsight suppose Biden had not made those decisions, perhaps the four years of illegal migration and high gas prices and inflation might not have occurred. I keep asking myself whether these moves were really Joe Biden’s or him getting questionable advice. There are a number of other decisions one could raise issue with him especially lacking self reflection on his mental acuity. Getting older is not a sufficient reason for someone to not do their job. I never thought age itself was a factor, but advisers taking advantage of age is another matter.

— Michael Ernest, Catonsville

A predicament for Ukraine — and for us

Sorry, have I missed a discussion in the media — particularly in The Baltimore Sun — about the Ukraine problem? We made a decision nearly three years ago to back our ally Ukraine with weapons as Russia began an unprovoked invasion of that sovereign nation, our purpose being to quash any hopes by Moscow to aggress further into Europe. Now, with a dazed Russia planning to use North Korean troops in a great new offensive, Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy implores the West for more missiles and the approval to take the battle into Russia.

As fate would have it, on Jan. 20 we’ll have a new and isolationist president, Donald Trump, who in nearly so many words has stated his view that Ukraine and the rest of Europe will be on their own, NATO be damned. But the U.S. has been the mainstay of Ukrainian defense thus far, helped greatly by NATO nations worried for their own freedom — lost to the Soviets after World War II.

The Biden administration can give the go-ahead to Ukraine’s plan, which might deliver a real setback to Russia. But there are three serious risks: Russia’s Putin has again rattled the nuclear sword; second, a cutoff of our support now or in two months may mean the fall of Ukraine and consequent internal bloodbath when Moscow takes over and third, our own nation in another shameful departure similar to the one from Afghanistan, this time withdrawing what materiel we can get out.

On the other hand, Trump — he thinks he is Putin’s buddy — may intercede in the Ukraine-Russia conflict and may by coercion broker an armistice, ceding some portion of that nation to Russia. Trump, who puts the saving of troops’ lives above the liberty Ukrainians have fought so tenaciously for, will gloat, and so will Putin; however, Europe and probably the world will shame us — and eastern Europeans will continue to fear Moscow’s intent to push west toward a new Russian empire.

Unfortunately, our ally Ukraine has been eclipsed in the media by more compelling news. But whatever we decide will shake our world — and its view of the U.S. So is anyone inclined to discuss the path our nation should take now?

— Bruce Knauff, Towson

Baltimore County government

Your editorial lambasting Baltimore County government for not being responsive enough to citizens was certainly correct about the council controlling redistricting but it left out their control of development when they receive immense amounts of campaign donations from developers (“Put public interest first in Baltimore County leadership decisions | STAFF COMMENTARY” Nov. 8). To characterize these procedures as self-serving is an understatement.

However, I must take issue with your complaint about the replacement of the county executive with someone who will not run in the next election in which at least three council members are rumored to be candidates. It seems to me that we will get much better governance from someone who is looking to do the job in front of them rather than looking ahead to the next election. Even only two years of that is to be preferred to governance as it stands in this country.

— Alan L. Katz, Owings Mills