Joe Biden for Vice President

Gail Collins, editorial writer for the New York Times, wrote about Barack Obama’s promise to bring us all together. Did we think, she asked, that he would bring us all together in left field?

I am happy and relieved that Obama chose Senator Joe Biden as running mate. Biden is honorable, experienced and has served in the Senate for over thirty years. Senator Obama could have chosen a running mate whose qualification was being opposite, thereby achieving ‘balance’. That seems to be the quick and dirty method the News uses to avoid the hard work of actually reporting. Flat earth vs Galileo. We report, you decide.

I think Senator Obama made a good choice. I did a quick search and found this. My good friend from Vermont says that she cast her first ever vote for Joe Biden in 1972 and she has never regretted it.

About these ads

8 thoughts on “Joe Biden for Vice President

  1. Biden is also pugnacious,and often puts his mouth in motion without engaging his brain.The Republicans will have a field day with his quotes.
    Don’t forget this is the man who had to withdraw from a Presidential race for plagiarizing a speech by Neil Kinnock of the British Labor Party.
    Biden is as entrenched a “system” politician as one could find.Not much “change” in this selection.
    From my point of view as a McCain supporter this is better than selecting Hillary,who has a huge following.(I can’t imagine why but there it is.)

  2. Mr. Bernstein makes some important points about the selection of Mr. Biden. Of course I have sour grapes in that Mr. Obama did not select the real foreign policy expert, our Governor, Bill Richardson, but that is the nature of the game We are frankly happier to have Bill here rather than in Washington–he is a good Governor. In an interview, Mr. Richardson was a bit surprised he was not selected. After listening to an interview with the Governor of Virginia, I noticed he also seemed to express surprise HE was not selected. I assume this means that Mr. Obama, always a bit vague about what he actually means, may have overstated his interest in all the candidates he interviewed. The only candidate not surprised, seems to have been Ms Clinton, although she actually received 18 million votes in the primaries and if the disputed states are counted, she atually won. Mr. Biden, after spending millions of dollars received about 9 thousand votes (I think he spent more that $2,000 for every vote he received.

    In Congress, the term “expert” has a political and longevity meaning and is not necessarily an indication of real accomplishment in any topic. Mr. Biden’s career has been all politics–36 years in office, hardly an indicator of “understanding” what America and Americans need. Mr. Biden wanted to split Iraq into 3 independent regions, opposed Obama on the appropriation vote for funding the troops,and I guess voted against the surge. He said Mr. Obama lacked the experience to be President, and that “on the job training” for President would not work. During the campaign, he expressed surprise that Mr. Obama was “clean” and “spoke well”–bad move Joe. In another interview he said John McCain was a leader.

    Mr. Biden has never evidenced “scholarship” or research skills, except when he found Mr. kinnock’s speech, as Mr. Berstein notes, and liked it so much that he made it his own without telling anyone it was not his speech. Mr. Obama seems to have had the same problem with other people’s words.

    After the attacks by Mr. Obama on Mr. McCain’s housing situation (mostly his wife’s properties), I was impressed by the televised views of the Biden compound with all its acres and houses. His Mom’s house (he owns it) has a value of about $1.3 million, even in this depressed market, about one-half the value of the Biden mansion, and the compound is likely $5 million in all. Mr. Obama’s mansion is $1.4 million and was acquired with the help of Mr. Resko. His holdings in D.C. and hawaii are unclear. Mr. McCain’s wife seems to own 6 houses and condos; fewer than Ms Heinz-Kerry. Mr. McCain married a beer heiress, Mr. Kerry a ketchup widow.

    Politics is as lucrative as anything else it seems, except perhaps sports and film or oil. One wonders why the Land of the Free needs millionaires to govern us. The truth may be that those who govern us seem to become millionaires (75% of those in Congress).

  3. Let’s see…the last two Repub vice presidents. J Danforth Quayle and Richard Cheney. Quayle was considered an excellent choice because..Dang, that’s a really good question. Why did Poppy pick him? Because he was completely undistinguished?

    And Richard “Dick” Cheney. Why did George II pick him? Oh, right, he didn’t. Cheney was in charge of the committee to select a VP, and decided he was the best possible candidate. Now, either that’s true, or it’s not, and either way, it’s frightening, don’t you think? If he was, what does that say about the Repub party. If he wasn’t, why did Geo-boy acquiesce?

    And let’s not forget the top of the ticket. A man who does not know how many houses he owns. Come on. He doesn’t know? Is he a confused old man? Or did he lie, insinuating that he didn’t know when he knew full well. This is a man who has changed substantive positions 74 times (and counting) since the beginning of the year. A man who opposes bills that have his own name on them.

    (The website “Carpetbagger Report” has a full and complete list, as compiled by the blogger Steve Benin. Although he has just recently–like last Friday–moved to the “Washington Monthly” website, so the list may be there.)

    Also, your top man has been a Washington insider for 3 decades now. He’s been on the inside so long he was mixed up in the Keating scandals back in the 80s.

    And, right, it’s not John’s money, he married it. After divorcing his first wife. And your boy Rush Limbaugh accused Kerry of being a “gigolo” for marrying Theresa Heinz. Guess the shoe’s on the other foot, now, eh?

    And McCain thinks anyone making $3 million/year is “middle class.” That kind of gives you a big clue about what his perspective on wealth is, doesn’t it?

    So is Biden a perfect choice? No. But then, who would have been? Hillary? And bring out the wrath of the entire RW attack machine? Not so much.

    And who was Dole’s VP pick?

    Look, Biden has his problems, but he’s a far superior choice to either of the two, ahem, “gentlemen” that the Repubs have put up for their last two stays in the White House.

    Hey–Mitt Romney. Then it can be the dual-$100 million-plus ticket. Two guys with so much money that they can bail out Goldman-Sachs or whomever the next big business is that gets in over its head.

    And I love how lots and lots of money is a virtue in a Republican, but somehow bad for a Dem. Guess you folks still think that FDR was a traitor to his class.

  4. Klaus-you make assumptions without basis if you were addressing me.If you weren’t,my apologies.I haven’t listened to Rush Limbaugh in about 15 years because he is a windbag and often fact-deficient.
    I didn’t vote for Bush/Cheney and I thought Quayle was a poor choice.
    Why do liberals always go for the equivalence argument instead of discussing a single issue.
    Hillary could’ve been a better choice because devil that she is,she can get a lot of otherwise sane people to vote for her.
    Biden has never been very popular,except maybe in Delaware,and that is because he brings home the pork.He has real integrity problems.
    Obama should have picked Jim Webb.
    Cheney has always sucked in my book,so why bring him up?He is a draft-dodging neocon.
    I will never vote for a democrat again for national office until they drop the anti-gun,pro-illegal alien,nanny state position they have taken.

  5. Joe, I was conflating your response with Donald W’s response, so some was for you, some was for him.

    You know, I’m really glad that both you and Donald W comment here so frequently; you both have a lot of good insights, but when it veers into politics, I get a bit riled sometimes.

    What’s wrong with the Dems’ stand on guns? We have way too many of them floating around. The NRA refuses even to consider minor precautions, like mandatory locks. Look, I grew up in a house with guns. When I was about 12, my dad let me take out the .12 gauge and see what it was all about. Before he did, he told me “never point a gun at anyone unless you intend to kill them.” Point taken.

    But why the need for citizens to go about armed to the teeth? Handguns are for shooting peoople, so why not put sensible restrictions on guns in metro areas? Why not some restrictions on buying guns at gun shows, instead of allowing anyone with the cash to walk off with firepower? What about the kid at Va Tech, with a history of mental illness? How was he able to get a gun?

    That’s not anti-gun. That’s putting restrictions on a dangerous tool. We restrict access to driving; why not guns? Why is that so awful?

    It’s not the Dems that are pro-illegal. It’s businesses–who overwhelmingly vote Repub–that are pro-illegal. Think we’d have this problem if Wal-Mart wasn’t pro-illegal? They come here because they can get a job. No job, they don’t come. So it’s the businesses that are resisting reform. This is one area where George II doesn’t play with the radical right–because his corporate masters don’t want illegal immigration restricted. And Repubs have had much more clout than the Dems have had for the past decade. You got a problem with illegal immigration, blame the Repubs.

    And what do you mean by nanny-state? A state that doesn’t let you starve whey you’re 55 and get booted from your decent-paying job? A state that’s concerned about whether the air you breathe, or the water you drink is toxic? Or whether the cars you drive are safe? Or whether your employer doesn’t force you to work 20 extra hours for free? Or a state that believes that preventative medicine is so much more cost effective than preventable trips to the emergency room? Or a state that doesn’t allow the very few at the top to suck up all the benefits of increased productivity?

    Which of those things do you oppose? Or favor? The fact of the matter is that unregulated markets do not lead to competition. Exactly the reverse. They lead to oligarchy. Morgan and Carnegie and the rest of the robber barons thought that competition was wasteful, and did everything possible to stifle it. And they largely succeeded. Why do you think that wouldn’t happen again?

    Are you better off than you were 8 years ago? The Census Bureau’s report on Income, Poverty, and Health Care came out today, and the vast majority of people are doing worse than they were 8 years ago. For the first time in history, the median wage did not surpass its previous high point. Productivity has increased by double digits in this century, but median wage is falling. Where are those gains going? To the top of the economic pyramid.

    This is the result of 30 years of Republican “supply side” economics. And McCain wants to continue these same policies. Why are you OK with that? You work harder, work smarter, shouldn’t you share in the rewards? And if that’s what you mean by “nanny state”–one that ensures you get rewarded for your efforts vs allowing oligarchs and plutocrats to take it all, then I’ll take the nanny state, thank you very much.

    So maybe it would help if you define your terms.

  6. By “nanny state” I am referring to politicians who make things comfortable for themselves at our expense while deciding that they know “what is best” for us.Of course I don’t oppose reasonable laws against pollution,child labor,safe working conditions,etc.I am not even a Republican,let alone an “oligarch”.I don’t drive a fancy car,nor live in luxury like Ira Magaziner and then preach to us common folk what kind of medical plan we need.I get along on a pension from the Federal government where I pay for health insurance and a VA disability payment each month.I resent the indoctrination of children in our schools with politically correct propaganda.Boys in particular are drugged down with little justification if they show any degree of unruly behavior.
    Guns?Don’t compare firearms rights to driving,which is not a right.We have all the gun laws we need.Nobody is going to tell me to put a gun lock on a firearm that is in my home.I had to have firearms in the house due to my job,so I taught my children the danger of handling them.I never had a problem.If there is an issue involving children and access to firearms,it is the responsibility of the owner to secure them in a location where children cnnot get at them.Virginia Tech?If people on campus had been armed the damage would have been greatly reduced.The campus cops were unarmed thanks to political correctness,and people died.The shooter should never have been able to purchase a firearm with his history,but thanks to our “privacy”rights pushed by the ACLU,the gun dealer had no information to refuse a sale.
    The advocates for illegal aliens make no differentiation between criminal aliens and ordinary illegals(who are also in violation of law).Immigration is not a racist notion-every country on earth has these laws and in most places(including Guatemala and Mexico)they are very harshly enforced.it is a simple matter of national security.We have an absolute right to control access to our country and to know who is here and remove those who don’t belong here.
    Obama promises a lot of very nice sounding benefits for everyone and his only way to pay for it is to increase taxes.My wife and I don’t have anything like a six figure income combined,but I expect Obama will screw us over really badly on taxes.he accused ICE of “terrorizing communities”-he is talking about sworn US agents crrying out their assigned duties as specified by Congress and the Executive Branch and confirmed in case after case by the Judiciary.For that alone I would never vote for him.It’s probably none of your business,but just so you know,I have responsibilities to family members affected by the crap economy-they don’t “collect”from the taxpayer,but they barely get by.I can’t afford more taxes to go into the legislative sh*thole,do you understand that?Obama has never known hardship.Having dark skin doesn’t guarantee you ever had to struggle-it is more likely,I’ll give you that,but in his case it doesn’t apply.
    McCain is not a continuation of the idiot offspring in the White House.He is a man of courage and has dealt with adversity aside from his POW ordeal.Just being a naval aviator flying off a carrier speaks volumes.He has a track record in Congress I generally agree with,although he has sponsored some legislation I thought was terrible.He was royally screwed by the Buch-Rove gang in 2000.If Obama can play kissy face with Biden and the Clintons who called him inadequate and untested,I guess McCain has to pay lip service to the Bushies-but get this:when Nelson Mandela was released from prison,he gave an attaboy to Joe Slovo and the communists because they had his back for years and he knew he had to do it;but he paid them no mind thereafter,because he was no communist-he was a peacemaker and a great statesman.He knew further dalliance with them would derail his plan for national reconciliation. McCain has to do a little fence mending,but he will bring in his own people-don’t look for the neocons to keep power with him.
    I can’t think of anything else right now,except to say that I believe VERY few shootings are committed with legally purchased firearms unless they are stolen.Suicide is an exception,but how is that preventable?

  7. I forgot one thing-different restrictions on 2nd amendment rights in metro areas?Tell me another constitutional right you would delimit by where the citizen resides?I got a news flash for you-people in metro areas really need the means to protect themselves-the police sure don’t protect them.
    I saw a neat bumper sticker;”911-20 minutes/Glock-3 seconds”
    My dad was a real left wing liberal all his life and yet he thought gun control was utter insanity.He always owned a firearm and was no danger to anyone not threatening him,same as myself.Nancy and I discussed this previously and were not much in disagreement at all.

  8. Biden is a good choice for Obama.

    This will be an oratorical battle much like JFK v Nixon except this time you’ll have two guys on the Dem side who have the panache to connect with average Americans.

    If John McCain picks Mitt Romney as his VP, the GOP is about as dead as a doornail.

Comments are closed.