I'm reading "Trump order pushes forcible hospitalization of homeless people/Trump’s executive order could increase hospitalization of homeless individuals with mental health and substance use disorders" (WaPo).
Looking for an existing tag that will fit this issue, I stumbled on "Trump's urban renewal." That could work for this... but what was it that led me to create it?
The oldest post with that tag was "Asking for the black vote" back in August 2016.
More relevant to today's post is this from July 2019: "'We have to take the people... And we have to do something... We may intercede. We may do something to get that whole thing cleaned up.' Said Trump, about the homelessness in San Francisco and L.A."
"We cannot ruin our cities. And you have people that work in those cities. They work in office buildings and to get into the building, they have to walk through a scene that nobody would have believed possible three years ago.... When we have leaders of the world coming in to see the President of the United States and they’re riding down a highway, they can’t be looking at that. They can’t be looking at scenes like you see in Los Angeles and San Francisco."
I ran across that at WaPo, where the headline is, "Trump paints a dark picture of homelessness in cities: 'We may intercede.'"
Dark, they love that world. Trump is painting it, painting it dark.
And what is the intercession? What does it mean to "take the people"? I assume it was just an awkward, unformed thought, and it could have been fleshed out to something like, We have to take care of the people or We have to take the people as they are, and they are troubled, some are sick, some are mentally ill, it's a complicated problem.
The commenters over at WaPo think the worst of him. They paint him dark:
This is the key quote: “We have to take the people,” he said. “And we have to do something.”And:
I dread what that means ...
Trump only seems concerned with people having to experience the presence of the homeless rather than caring about homeless people. This attitude exemplifies how superficial he is, both mentally and emotionally. Oh, and the economy is great!
He said "We may intercede" 6 years ago, and now, here he is, interceding. It's not an impulsive or random distraction. It's another one of those things he's been thinking and talking about for a long time.
પોસ્ટ્સ
83 ટિપ્પણીઓ:
Finally. Perhaps we can now speak and act rationally about irrationality.
So, with the cuts to Medicaid, who is going to pay for all this extra hospitalization? Or are they just going to ship these people out to one of our new concentration camps?
The movement away from asylums in the 70s and 80s was a tragedy for both the mentally ill and America's cities.
I blame Ken Kesey and Jack Nicholson
Basically, Trump is more concerned with creating Potemkin Villages rather than actually address the underlying issues.
Out of sight, out of mind.
Isn't this what the Soviet Union used to do to dissidents?
As my post quotes, "Dozens of states... includ[ing] states controlled by Democrats," "have added to or expanded involuntary commitment laws during the past decade."
There's a growing consensus about this. I didn't quote the details about Oregon, California, and New York state:
"Oregon state lawmakers... are pushing forward with a bill that would make it easier to force someone who is a danger to themselves or others into treatment. In California, a law went into effect this year expanding the criteria for who is eligible for involuntary commitments.... In New York, state lawmakers this year cemented earlier state guidance that allowed first responders to involuntarily commit people with severe mental illnesses who cannot meet their own basic needs such as obtaining medical care, shelter or food. The law was pushed by Gov. Kathy Hochul (D), who has faced criticism regarding public safety against the backdrop... a push by Mayor Eric Adams for more forced commitments."
If you're doing partisanship, look around and see what your fellow Democrats are saying about this.
Advertisement
Even if you disregard the quality of life issues that law abiding people have to deal with, these proposals should have near universal support just on compassionate grounds. Drug treatment and incarceration can be life saving for the people who need them.
The law was pushed by Gov. Kathy Hochul (D), who has faced criticism regarding public safety against the backdrop... a push by Mayor Eric Adams for more forced commitments.
If you are claiming that Hochul or Adams are some kind of bleeding heart liberals (or even moderately liberal), you are just delusional.
Thanks to Hollywood (that alone should raise alarms) the American political class adopted the frankly lunatic notion that insane people are sane enough to know they are insane and in need of treatment and supervision. Two pictures in particular drove our politics crazy over craziness, The Snake Pit (1948) and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975). The plot of both films -- ironically, perhaps not -- turn on the device of a malicious nurse exercising totalitarian control over a helpless psychiatric patient. Through these fictional polemics, our political class decided there is a human right to be mad as a hatter and at liberty to interact with society, no matter how socially disruptive one's madness is so long as no one is set ablaze in a subway car.
Forgive the outdated conservatism, but why is homelessness a federal issue, and why should any federal funds be spent on it?
Trump: We need to actually do something about these people.
Dems: We need to have the appearance that we are doing something about these people. S
"If you're doing partisanship, look around and see what your fellow Democrats are saying about this."
"If Trump's for it, I'm against it" is the kind of argument made by idiots.
Freder writes, "...you are just delusional."
And Freder is just is a simpleton if he thinks such a puerile semantic tantrum is persuasive.
As usual, Trump's detractors trot out the parade of horribles as early as possible, not because they fear he will be a horrible failure, but because he might succeed in most people's eyes.
Leftists are unaware of or ignore this law of economics - the more you subsidize something, the more you get of it.
"If Trump's for it, I'm against it" is the kind of argument made by idiots.
So is "Well some conservative Democrats are for it, so you should be too"
Physically incapable of self-improvement. Welfare.
Mentally Incapable of self-improvement. Treatment.
Homelessness resolved. Inflation through debt controlled.
The Left builds a business - a very lucrative business - out of drug addiction and homelessness in some blue states… an example of this is Calunicornia. Billions of taxpayer dollars spent (no one knows where this money specifically went) to no effect, other than facilitating more addiction and more homeless people.
No accountability. A BIGGER problem.
Whatever Trump meant by "we have to take the people"; it seems more obvious that progressives rather offer those people a lifetime on the streets or MAID. What Trump is offering is to get them off the streets and help with their addiction. And it is more than just forced hospitalization. Mike Rowe recently interviewed Trump's former Energy Secretary Rick Perry, who is working on things out of the box for conservatives to help fight addiction, including the use of psychedelics banned by the US.
Maybe you think forced hospitalization and use of psychedelics to cure mental problems is horrible. I can understand. But the other option right now seems to be a life of misery on the street, debilitating addiction, and an offer of a quick end either medically administered or through overdose.
The Democrats do not care about people... and they def do not care about our VETS.
Democratics care about 2 things: Power and self enrichment.
and a third thing - lying to gain those 2 things.
Denver Mayor Mike Johnston sucked up millions and millions to build tiny houses for homeless drug addicts. This is so drug addicts can do their drugs and die in private.
Now - Denver is in a financial hole. But right on Q- the corrupt liar left blame Trump.
Just another example (as if we needed one!) of the Democrats’ grift and graft.
Trump only seems concerned with people having to experience the presence of the homeless rather than caring about homeless people
I’m going to agree with this. Do better…My school bus used to drive through the local funny farm and I remember thinking it looked like the typical new england college campus. Not bad, only one building had bars. What was horrible was what was tried. I’d like to think even my worst political enemies would do better now, especially considering the current alternative. Maybe they’d just try to institutionalize political opponents, I don’t know. In college I tried being a do-gooder but was quickly disillusioned at the enabling of the addicts while those with mental illness were pushed to the back of the help line…they have ‘rights’ I was told…
Maybe the one that is delusional is the one that is in attack mode 100% of the time, unable to even consider the evidence that runs contrary to his blind outrage. Perhaps the delusional one prefers his delusions more than the real world around him. Concentration camps? My goodness, you're excitable.
good!
Best President, EVER!
now release the Epstein files!!!
Sebastian writes, "...why is homelessness a federal issue."
Billions of dollars are spent by the Feds every year on some aspect of homelessness, real or imagined, for decades with little to show for the money up the spout except more homeless people doing greater damage to the social fabric of the nation. If Sebastian really thinks Trump is unduly politicizing this issue at the federal level, I would suggest his due attention has no been paid.
We need to revive the state mental hospital system. Allowing the homeless to live in this manner isn’t some statement about individual autonomy, it’s cruel. If someone is chronically homeless, they are experiencing significant issues such as mental health, substance abuse and/or justice system involvement that prevents them from accessing employment, housing, healthcare and other basic needs. Providing a safe place that not only gets them off the streets but provides a pathway for recovery is both humane and cost effective when compared with the status quo.
Democrats don't care about our vets.
Democrats allowed millions of unvetted illegals in - along with child sex trafficking, human trafficking, and massive drug trafficking. This forces the homeless population to explode.
Trump attempts to solve some of it - and the hate-filled corrupt left explode in rage.
What's the alternative, Planned Loonyhood? State-assisted abortion of these social "burdens" would provide immediate and forward-looking relief.
"If you are claiming that Hochul or Adams are some kind of bleeding heart liberals (or even moderately liberal), you are just delusional."
They are members of the Democratic Party who are capable of getting elected in the deep blue state that is New York. Of course, I can imagine people who are more left wing, but they haven't gotten elected... yet. Here comes Mamdani though. Maybe Trump is hoping to Mamdani-proof NYC.
Sebastian: “ Forgive the outdated conservatism, but why is homelessness a federal issue, and why should any federal funds be spent on it?”
Good point. At least part of the order seems to involve stopping federal intervention in the form of so-called “harm reduction” programs that are really paraphernalia-supply programs.
So many of the bums live under, alongside, or even on interstate highways, train tracks, and other transportation infrastructure, so you would have a commerce clause justification. If it works for 55mph and 21yo drinking age, it should work for this. And hey if some Dems want to defeat this new program in court and it leads to overturning the national drinking age, win-win!
Might also be able to make a civil rights argument? Localities’ current handling of these people doesn’t help them and just punishes them for being mentally ill? So the fedgov as the ultimate guarantor of individual rights must step in?
Finally, a lot of homeless hangouts are in the plazas in front of federal buildings in big cities. Trump could direct FPS and other federal LE to take direct action as they are a security threat (terrorists could hide out in the encampments until they suddenly unmask and attack, etc).
Just some ideas.
RR
JSM
Pro-Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness... and promoting the general Welfare without DEIst bigotry, are conservative principles. #HateLovesAbortion
Let's call it back to the 60s--which was a time where states, including California, closed their mental hospitals and ended involuntary commitment. Instead of housing the mentally ill in state mental hospitals we now let them sleep on the streets.
Ideally, this service would be provided through charity, but as a progressive problem with collateral damage, it may best be serviced through a national consensus.
Back in Philadelphia's Good Old Days, Frank Rizzo pulled the bums off the streets at least twice: once when the President (Nixon, probably) was coming to town and at least once when it got so cold there was a danger of many of the street people freezing to death. The courts, of course, screamed.
Another gift from the Warren Court, this reversal is way overdue.
I'm taking this opportunity to agree with Kakistocracy 100%.
Don't sit on a hot stove waiting for the next time.
Skeptical Voter: yes, it was a Baptist-bootlegger coalition involving lefties and libertarians who wanted to free the different drummers, plus R fiscal conservatives, plus civil rights people who wanted to take away a tool that could be used to harass POC’s, plus socialists who figured street-based services would create more government jobs in the long run.
Need a different coalition to reverse it: POCs tired of seeing these people ruin their hoods, upper middle class people even more tired of it (since the bums go to places where the locals won’t give them an ass kicking or a bullet), fiscal conservatives who realize residential care is cheaper in the big picture, veterans rights groups, etc.
RR
JSM
I frankly do not understand the idea that it is an act of compassion to allow drug addicts to continue taking drugs unabated, or to allow the homeless to live in squalor on the streets and along the freeway exits in California. Please someone convince me of your true concern of the individuals by allowing that. Freder F seems to feel it socially beneficial to maintain the visibility of the problem. But FF, if one solves the problem the visibility goes away. Or do you place a priority on visibility over an actual solution?
And waiting for a far-left District Court Judget in stop the Executive order in 3..2....1....
They are members of the Democratic Party who are capable of getting elected in the deep blue state that is New York.
Apparently, your understanding of the politics of New York is based on New Yorker cartoons. Your view seems to be limited to your experience in Manhattan and Brooklyn (and only parts of each). I bet you have never even been to Staten Island or Queens. And less than half the population of New York lives in New York City. You really need to spend more time outside NYC if you think that New York is "deep blue".
I bet you have never even been to Staten Island or Queens.
Um fredo; I know you randomly show up to be a shitshow. However, I figured you've been here enough to know Althouse lived for a long time in NYC. Maybe you should stop with the random insults and actually make a thoughtful post about the topic. You won't, because that would require a character you don't possess, but as this is a post about trying ways to stop addiction... well, I'll least try once to help you with yours.
Or do you place a priority on visibility over an actual solution?
I don't see that any of you (or Trump) have proposed an "actual solution". With the wholesale and deep cuts that have been implemented over the last six months, at best Trump's solution involves warehousing people. Where is the money for building a new mental hospital system going to come from, especially when Medicaid (which is how treatment would be paid for) is being gutted?
However, I figured you've been here enough to know Althouse lived for a long time in NYC.
And apparently, she hasn't been outside the liberal parts of NYC, and forget about upstate. Only someone who has no idea what New York (state and city) politics would claim that New York State is "Deep Blue". Look at the freaking New York congressional delegation. Schumer and Gillibrand are moderate milquetoasts. And for every AOC from NYC you've got a Hakeem Jefferies. I would also remind her that Elise Stefanik is also from New York.
Homelessness is one of many geese that lay golden eggs. Trump is talking about cooking that goose. To the folks who collect those eggs, Trump is the crazy one.
The Dems and their pet leftmediaswine are only interested in painting Trump “dark.” They have no interest in dealing with the problems of homelessness because it will make Democrats look bad.
Schumer is "moderate"???
And, BTW, anyone that shoots up in public IS "a danger to themselves or others". Increase the Baker and/or Marchman Acts to 30 days or more.
Remote Tribal nations should set up detox facilities—good job training for tribal members, and addicts can go through sweat lodges, spiritual regrowth, rehab and be away from dealers. The Fed could pay for this nd sure beats casinos and per-cap payments.
Schumer is "moderate"???
Sure as shit is. I noticed you seem not to contest my characterizing Gillibrand as moderate.
Freder Frederson said...
They are members of the Democratic Party who are capable of getting elected in the deep blue state that is New York.
Apparently, your understanding of the politics of New York is based on New Yorker cartoons. Your view seems to be limited to your experience in Manhattan and Brooklyn (and only parts of each). I bet you have never even been to Staten Island or Queens. And less than half the population of New York lives in New York City. You really need to spend more time outside NYC if you think that New York is "deep blue".
Freder supports censorship because disagreeing with him makes him very angry. He can’t even admit that New York is skewed massively Democrat. The fact that Republicans exist in New York makes him angry and makes republicans responsible for everything wrong in New York.
Ann is far to the left politically. Look at how Freder reacts to dissent from a left of center perspective. Look at his posts on this thread. It is clear freder would volunteer to run the reeducation camps.
Do yourself a favor and read your posts freder. You are so vicious and hateful. That hate is consuming you. You are actually ascribing hate to other people as projection.
There is a reason why all of us Kennedy democrats are leaving the democrat party.
Freder Frederson said...
Schumer is "moderate"???
Sure as shit is. I noticed you seem not to contest my characterizing Gillibrand as moderate.
It is near impossible to think critically and rationally when you are as consumed by hate as freder is.
Spending a lot of money, while accomplishing absolutely nothing is very on brand for Democrats, amirite?
“Schumer is "moderate"???”
Chuck Schumer is a Grade AAA asshole is what he is.
Ha HA!!!
https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1948547488937296065
I don't follow KG as much as I am aware of Schumer ... so I don't comment on things I know little or nothing about. Some might want to take that path before they make themselves out to be ignorant.
Its always fascinating to read headlines. It gives you insight into the cultural acceptance of framing. This headline could have easily be written as,
"Among surge in mentally ill homeless being abandoned in many cities, Trump enables an easier pathway to provide patients with the medical care they need to stabilize."
or,
"Among increasing concerns for crime and safety driven by mentally ill homeless who are left alone by cities and police, Trump provides easier pathway for hospitalization and healthcare."
I think that drugs and crazyness are just too much fun and people won’t go to shelters because they might get cured. We. End a drug like Ozympic that would completely cure addiction and a lot of them might get to like being normal.
Even a “vaccine” that a child could get that makes them immune to the effects.
“Democrats don't care about our vets.”
The dummy has never heard of the PACT Act.
Chuck Schumer is a Grade AAA asshole is what he is.
Wow, I agree with Iman for once.
Ann is far to the left politically.
Is she among the thirty percent of the population you have targeted for deportation or execution?
Other than being moderately pro-choice, in what way is Ann "far to the left". When she started this blog, she was all in on supporting Bush's war in Iraq (and voted for him in 2004). The lying that got us into the war didn't seem to bother her, and even Bush's torture regime she dismissed as no big deal. We know she voted for Clinton (which took her a while to confess to, almost as if she was embarrassed by her vote). She cast no vote for president in 2020 and refuses to say (apparently even to her husband) who she voted for 2024. She has been a staunch defender of Trump.
And, of course, she was a devoted fan of Rush Limbaugh.
I just saw a very sad and homeless woman at 120th and West Dodge Road in Omaha. Dodge is Omaha's main east-west street.
Erving Goffman _Asylums_ was the book that led to institutionalizing being banned, by people not understanding the book. The book pointed out that nobody in institutions is doing what the institution says they are doing, but it's a point about every institution, not just asylums. It was just using totalizing institutions as a clean case to look at.
Excellent book, you won't regret reading it.
“ The presentation of self in everyday life.” Goffman is one of the greats. Just a glance at this comment section reveals One of his observations, i.e. the discrepant voice. There are those who are incapable of agreement. Kind of like Groucho Marx and his “whatever it is, I’m against it.”
"Chuck Schumer is a Grade AAA asshole is what he is."
I remember when Schumer was first gaining national visibility - back in the '90s, I think - there was a saying that the most dangerous place to be in Washington DC was between Schumer and a media camera.
tim maguire @8:50: I do too. The old horror of warehousing mentally ill and chronically ill and the disabled need not happen again in the day of cellphones. Our system of subjecting these people to under-regulated individual "care" homes, or leaving the disabled to live isolated in some cheap motel or condo, or doing nothing at all, is in most cases a lonely hell on earth. Bring back orphanages too. I've seen some unspeakable things on home visits.
Also, remember when 80% of the Bronx was burned?
We have subsidized the homeless industry for many years now. And in most urban centers, it is indeed an industry, where more money is funneled into it based on increasing the number of homeless.
The industry has no incentive to solve the problem or even reduce it. They'd be cutting their own economic throat.
Ann is far to the left politically.
Even giving wide latitude for the results we see of her cruel neutrality, this characterization of our hostess is wrong. She has the remarkable ability of any good lawyer or law professor to both see and convincingly argue both sides of any argument.
Even so, I would place her securely in the center of political thought, not excluding choice and sexual preference. Perhaps in her younger years, she was a boomer macramé librul, but not today.
- Krumhorn
Freder Frederson said...
So, with the cuts to Medicaid, who is going to pay for all this extra hospitalization? Or are they just going to ship these people out to one of our new concentration camps?
New concentration camps is fine solution. Put them in Nevada and fill them with libraries, 7/11s, and liquor stores
New concentration camps is fine solution. Put them in Nevada and fill them with libraries, 7/11s, and liquor stores
It is nice that I can usually count on someone to make a callous comment that reinforces my point that you really don't care about helping people, you just want them to go away.
Lock up drug addicts for 30 days. They will be physically over the addiction. Some will stay that way.
Put mentally ill in a facility under drs. care. Some will be able to function with correct drugs, they may choose to continue their meds.
Provide a job and 6 months free shelter for non addicted, non psycho bad luck, laid off, broke ass, evicted normal person.
So, with the cuts to Medicaid, who is going to pay for all this extra hospitalization?
Name the cuts to Medicaid. Be specific.
Thank god. Finally something that has a chance in hell of actually helping these people.
Since I know I'll never get an answer to my question, there are no 'cuts.'
The main changes to Medicaid are kicking off the illegals and laying out some work requirements for able-bodied people in order to continue receiving the bennies.
A be specific command to Freder is like garlic to a vampire -- one whiff and he's gone like morning dew.
An earlier post pointed out movies propagandized the evils of mental institutions. That's true but was also a cottage industry of writers and reporters generating articles, books and documentaries about how bad things were inside. This was unfair, they said, these people need to be mainstreamed. So, now they have been mainstreamed out onto the streamed and what have we learned? We learned they will reproduce the same squalor and marginal existence outside as inside. Why? Because they are crazy or drug addled.
“Wow, I agree with Iman for once.”
You’d be wise to visit a local Tribal Casino, Fredo. This is obviously your Lucky Day!
"Since I know I'll never get an answer to my question, there are no 'cuts.'"
The left defines "cuts" differently. If the BBB included increased spending for Medicaid but not as much as the left insisted on, that would be "cuts" to them.
Iman said...
"The Left builds a business - a very lucrative business - out of drug addiction and homelessness in some blue states… an example of this is Calunicornia. Billions of taxpayer dollars spent (no one knows where this money specifically went) to no effect, other than facilitating more addiction and more homeless people."
Go to Venice Beach. You'll get pan handled and accosted every step of the way. Now go to Newport Beach. No homeless anywhere.
"Basically, Trump is more concerned with creating Potemkin Villages rather than actually address the underlying issues."
Potemkin Villages? You mean like when Atlanta moved them out for a fresh face when hosting the Olympics? Or California when Xi came to visit?
OK Freder, explain how the current efforts are working out so well for both the homeless and the non-homeless. And don't give me crap about the programs out there that are targeting homeless. Find me a success story. What are the "underlying issues" you claim are being ignored? Bet we've all seen that list for decades. Bet that list is incorporated into justifying the billions and billions already spent while the problem swells beyond belief.
Yeah, that Trump guy sure is bad. So, tell me how California has solved the problem. Democrats control virtually every lever of government. Seems like decades ago a San Fran mayor, Gavin something, had a plan and spent billions on it. Surely they have developed a Freder approved way of dealing.
Or is this like Communism? Great idea, just never done right.
"Ideally, this service would be provided through charity, ...".
Yep. Ideally a LOT of governmental programs would be provided through charity.
But most (at least local) charities insist on RESULTS.
The large scale governmental ones do not. Measuring success by "all the money was spent" is less impressive. especially when the money was not spent on the actual problem.
But at least the trough was kept full for the correct friends and family.
Full Moon, you're actually describing something close to what we do with the bad-luck cases right now. The disabled and chronically ill are permanently trapped in hellholes that make me cry even typing about them. The homeless advocates are predatory, hateful animals: even Atlanta's government eventually shut them down.
It's loneliness. Look, even in the despicable Cockoo's Nest (and remember Jack Nicholson's character was a rapist, by the way), what made these men, for the most part, happy? Community. Camaraderie.
I spent some time visiting and communicating with a severely disabled young man who was central in and at the Presidential signing of the ADA. He was so proud of the photo. But he was so lonely; he was apologetic to even call me. My soul (a 1965 Comet, see above) bled for him. Ironically, thanks to his political work, he lived all alone in a retirement condo facility. I spent some time, never enough, with him. His elderly neighbors, all speed-walking couples with kids and grandkids, would stop by constantly to pretend to change a lightbulb or bring him his mail, as he was blind and in a motorized wheelchair, though smart and intuitive and funny. I forgave those men their old guy shorts. More than one time, they confronted me at my car and pled with me to get him somewhere with people like himself. I tried: there was no such place.
This is not OK. It's how my brilliant and sensitive brother lived his whole life with my folks, then alone for seven years until he died, despite all my efforts, after the early deaths of my parents, both also chronically ill. It's not OK to be wheelchair bound, blind, angry, unstable, but mostly just lonely.
It's also not OK to warehouse Downs Syndrome women in an old "hotel" to "respect their freedom," where predatory men quickly figured out they could get sex for a pack of gum. The women all died of AIDS, a few blocks from the Jimmy Carter Center of preening choices and bad poetry, and two blocks from MLK's home. They deserved a safe place and people to watch over them. Trying to explain over and over again how to take the pills (then made for male physiology and not as effective in females) took years off my life. If you have money, send it to Dazon Dixon at Sisterlove. Ignore her politics: she's a saint.
Damn the ACLU to the hells they have created. No: damn them worse ones.
I'm of the opinion that we need to allow involuntary commitment. While they're in the system, have them evaluated and directed to appropriate care for 30, 60 or 90 days. If their addiction or psychosis is so severe that they can't manage on their own, or in transitional housing, keep them in an appropriate facility. The optimist in me hopes that we can provide better and more compassionate care than we did in the 50's and 60's. The pessimist in me understands that the number of people that need compassionate care far outnumbers the population of folks able to provide such care, particularly at low wages.
ટિપ્પણી પોસ્ટ કરો
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.