Go to Making Light's front page.
Forward to next post: Open thread 113
Subscribe (via RSS) to this post's comment thread. (What does this mean? Here's a quick introduction.)
Comments? Views? Opinions?
I was convinced earlier that my first choice, Tim Kaine, was a terrible idea when it was pointed out to me that "Obama-Kaine" is phonetically too similar to "Oh Boy McCain." So "Obama-Biden" dodges that bullet.
Although on that score maybe he should have picked Romney - Obama-Romney's got a nice ring to it. (I assume McCain will now pick Romney.)
Biden -- I'm not excited, but I think it's a reasonable choice. He's supposedly got high approval ratings among the kind of Democrats and Independents where Obama could use help (most importantly older voters). He's willing to go on the attack. Most importantly, he's reasonably qualified to be president.
Safe choice. Old white guy long in government.
I was hoping for Al Gore or Hillary Clinton.
Won't change my mind--still voting Obama.
Jane
I am unfortunately reminded of the contrast between Dukakis and Bentsen.
What? Nobody asked Joe, that non-partisan extraordinaire? Or is it that he has already promised that dance to Johnny?
He's the guy who plagiarized a Neil Kinnock speech and bombed out of the 1988 race, isn't he?
I meant Joementum, not Joe Biden. Too many Joes around.
He was a safe choice ---experience, gravitas, male. I'm sure the corporatist wing of the Democratic party is ecstatic.
For me, Biden still has to do a lot to atone for his support of the awful 2005 bankruptcy bill.
I think it's a brilliant choice. Yes, I was mad at him for the Credit Card Company Welfare Act, but he's the Senator for Wilmington, Delaware, after all. But I'd be hard pressed to find any politician at the national level I wasn't pissed off at for something.
He's my kind of Democrat, actually, even with his flaws.
He shoots his mouth off, often effectively.
I think he's the perfect "Obama is one of us, so quit screwing around with the appalling notion of voting for McCain, for chrissake" choice.
Thank God Obama didn't cave to pressure and pick an old white guy! Oh, wait....
Actually, I have no idea who this Biden is. I'd vote for Obama even if he chose Sauron as his running mate.
Biden makes a decent Tommy Lee Jones to Obama's Wil Smith.
Alex @ #1: If we're looking at running mates' names for the phonetics of it all, I'm not sure Biden is a good choice either. I'm sure those people who try to equate Obama with Osama will have a field day trying to associate Biden with Bin Laden. (To all of which I say "ugh.")
Looking at Biden as an actual person, I have to admit I have very little idea what he stands for. I'm sure that will change over the next few days, though, regardless of whether I look him up or not, because I listen to the news a lot.
Really. I'm surprised. Not displeased, because Biden does supply the things I think Obama lacks. But I think I'd fallen into the 'Biden can't win' trap. Can the Democrats win by running two candidates who don't apologize for being smart, well-informed, and competent?
Could someone please wander over to the LJ and fix the html over there.
POLITICAL HURDLES
NEWSWIRE--Barack Obama has selected U.S. Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware as his intended vice-presidential ticket-mate.
Using track as a guide,
Judge the running mate's stride
As he sprints between north and deep south:
Can he dash down a phrase,
Trot it out where it pays,
Yet avoid running off at the mouth?
www.newsandverse.com
Light verse, ripped from the headlines
I'm ticked off at Biden for his racist comments. He was the one who made that "first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean" remark, after all. He also made a remark about having to have a "slight Indian accent" to go into a Dunkin' Donuts or 7/11. Those things left a bad taste in my mouth about him.
On the issues, he's all right. Some things I don't like, more things I do.
I really wanted Hillary Clinton for VP, but I've been cheerleading either an Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ticket since the very beginning.
Anyway, I should have known anything I want in politics is automatically impossible. Obama won the primary, but immediately embarked on a campaign of disappointing me, so that was pretty much a wash -- I got the man, but not what I'd wanted out of him. Oh, he's still a thousand, a million times better than McCain. I think of him like Bill Clinton -- Clinton disappointed me so many times that I actually cast a protest vote in 2000. Given that I was 18, given that I was a pretty naive idealist, that's what spurred the protest vote -- but the disappointments were valid. Yet I would re-elect Clinton instantly if it were physically and constitutionally possible. Disappointment at centrist compromises is still miles better than the kind of clstrfck we have now.
But, you know. I was inspired. I thought maybe we actually had a chance to make something good happen. Now it's going to be the same old same old.
I think I'm going to go re-read "Conscience of a Liberal" and cry because the only person who actually gave a shit about politics transforming anything is dead.
(In case it wasn't obvious, this particular rant is not solely or even mostly caused by the selection of Biden. It's been building up for a while and the selection of safe, centrist white dude for VP just kind of opened the valve.)
Oh, and my boyfriend had signed up for the text message. It arrived at 3:30 AM. He said his reaction was "You're texting me at 3:30 AM to tell me it's Biden?" (As Digby says, if it wasn't Jesus Christ or Elvis, it would've been a letdown. I would add Hillary Clinton and Al Gore to that list, and maybe the spirit of JFK.)
Really, the 3:30 AM text was not a good move. We're all about Obama in this household, but my boyfriend had to get up for work at 5 AM. Might work for college kids, partying before the start of classes.
God, I've become such an old fogey.
I'm going to go have some coffee and breakfast and see if I feel better after that.
Caroline -- Biden is to the left of most of the Dems who ran (except Edwards and Kucinich). They're all centrist.
Very few of us, maybe the youngest of us in here, maybe not, will ever live to see the progressive United States of America we'd all love to see. For a long time, that was a very great disappointment to me. I mean, jeezus, I get one life on this planet and I have to use it all up living in a time when most of my progressive values are dissed by my country?
But I'm over that now. I'm not going to live to see it. Sorry about that, Mike.
And so my choice is to give up, or deal with it and do the best I can right now to help bring about, maybe a little sooner than otherwise, the world I want to see.
It's been freeing. I don't have to get depressed or Oppressed by the constant set-backs.
Biden isn't perfect. But he's pretty damned good.
Even if he is a 62 year old white guy.
I invite all of you who are thinking "what a disappointment" to go read up on Biden's personal story. I don't know about you, but I've got a tremendous amount of respect for the guy. He's a good Democrat who is perfectly capable of (and, my guess is, enthusiastic about) helping Obama move the ball down the progressive field a few yards ("and a cloud of dust").
More than that, I respect him as a human being who has seen a lot more of the good and the really bad that life has to offer than I will probably ever see.
I was hoping he'd pick Hillary. Purely for his own self interest.
By which I mean that the kind of right-wing nutjob who'd think the country would be better off without an 'uppity'[1] president would balk at handing the job to a woman. And especially to a woman named Hillary Clinton.
Having an Old White Guy Veep reinforces the 'handing the country back to the right folks' vibe such a guy would get.
[1] and all y'all[2] know what I mean by that.
[2] my own choice for a second person plural would be ye, but I'm speaking transatlantic[3] here
[3] Although I'm trans-pacific at the moment, being in Hong Kong.
[4] Unlinked footnotes are usually a key indicator that I'm straying into alt.fan.pratchett territory.
Nina Katarina @ 11... Biden makes a decent Tommy Lee Jones to Obama's Wil Smith.
Or a decent Kevin Kline to Obama's Wil Smith. Which would make Kenneth Branagh into John McCain, alas.
::boggles:: He's a freaking plagiarist!
I can't believe the Democrats are seriously making me consider voting for McCain. ::head, meet desk::
I don't like him. I never have liked him. But, you know, I voted for Joe freaking Lieberman for VP in 2000; I guess I can stand this.
Caroline, #17: Really, the 3:30 AM text was not a good move.
Maybe it was a compromise with the media.
"Sure, you don't get to learn my VP pick before the hoi polloi... but how about if I send the text in the middle of the night, when you guys are very nearly the only people checking their cell phones?"
Fine choice, not perfect. A bit to the left of most of the Democrats who ran this year, thankfully. The guy makes mistakes, but tends to owns up to them with less bullshit and artful dodging. Biden, Sharpton and others continue to be heavily criticized and dismissed for small mistakes or gaffs made early in their careers, and it's nice to see someone like Biden being taken seriously again.
I remember in 2005 or so--before McCain shelved those parts of his head that were level--when there was buzz around a possible Biden-McCain ticket, I was interested.
But I was secretly hoping for a surprise choice in Madeleine Albright. Ah well.
ADM @ 18, oh, I know. Obama himself is centrist. I'm just grumpy about the whole thing this morning.
I was convinced earlier that my first choice, Tim Kaine, was a terrible idea when it was pointed out to me that "Obama-Kaine" is phonetically too similar to "Oh Boy McCain." So "Obama-Biden" dodges that bullet.
Obama bin biden.
As a 60 yr. old white guy myself, I'm very disappointed in Obama and his Choice in Biden. His last chance to get my vote was to select Caroline Kennedy...Now I'll vote Green with Cynthia McKinney...at least she shares my values and this country is certainly goin' down the tubes, anyway.
I would have been happier if he'd picked someone who wasn't a corporate tool. However, what else can you expect when the inside-the-beltway consultants move into a campaign?
(I would have been a lot happier if he'd picked Dean.)
Oh yeah: for those of you who are saying you'll vote for McCain because of this:
Take another look at that choice, because McCain is Bush on steroids, with the steroid side effects hitting. Even Biden as VP is better than that possibility.
Castration equipment time... 51% of the population is FEMALE. This does NOTHING to promote the interests of people without testicles.
How does Yet Another White Male reduce the alienation felt by so many women regarding the nomination of Barack Obama and persuade them to vote for Obama, rather than staying home or voting for eight more years of the abominable "leadership" currently in the Executive Branch of US Government?!
And what were Biden's votes on FISA, Samuel Alita, Mr Roberts, the reworking of Medicare such that it was a giveaway of taxpayer money to the drug companies, etc.?
#22 harmonyfb: I can't believe the Democrats are seriously making me consider voting for McCain. ::head, meet desk::
Nobody's making you consider voting for McCain. That's you making yourself consider it.
If you are going to consider voting against the best interests of the country, at least take responsibility for your own actions.
PJ Evans @ 31 -- THANK YOU! (Papawhale, you should be listening here)
And honestly ... As much as I hate corporate tools, Biden represents Delaware. I think, considering the population there, there's an argument to be made that he's voting his constituency's interests. I may not like those interests, but I wouldn't be surprised or offended if the representative for District whatever in Utah tended to vote for things Mormons support.
I see that this thread has already gotten acquired a I'm-not-TOTALLY-happy-with-the-Democratic-ticket-so-I'll-go-vote-for-someone-who's-sure-to-lose-and-thus-will-help-elect-McCain-but-at-least-I-vote-my-principles post.
Serge, I don't care so much about the voting Green post, I'm more worried about the voting McCain post above that one.
#35 Serge:
Yeah, I used to think it was the Corporate Media, or Corporatism in general, or Religionism, or Racism or Homophobia or Sexism or a bunch of other stuff that kept progressive causes down. Now I see it's our own almighty consciences.
Don't get me wrong. I think having a conscience is a great thing. I even have one myself, on occasion.
But then, you know, there's politics in the United States of America.
Paula Lieberman @ 32... On the other hand, a Democratic white guy is better for women than a Republican white guy. And frankly, a Democratic white guy is better for women than a Republican woman would be. How many women are in positions of power in the current Regime? Oh, and did you know that, in French, 'régime', as in 'régime de bananes', can mean 'bunch'? How appropriate for that assemblage of simians in the White House.
I Am Not An American, but... AFAICT, Biden's a fine choice. He's experienced, smart, and can play the role of an attack dog well, allowing Obama to look high-minded and presidential.
Did people truly think that Gore would get the VP slot, by the way? He's already been there and done that. And I honestly think he's much more valuable as an "elder statesman" type, free to campaign about the climate change without being beholden to anyone else's policies and politics (as would happen if he became Obama's VP).
I'm with Jane Yolen. Right now, there is very little Obama can do to prevent me from voting for him. This isn't to say that he should try. This whole "run to the right" thing is so unseemly. It's not like he was particularly liberal to start with.
Either Clinton or Gore would have been more interesting. However, I doubt either of them were interested in the job. Gore finds himself with more influence now as a former VP than he had as the sitting VP. Hilary Clinton will undoubtedly become either the Majority Leader, a Supreme Court Justice, or both (not simultaneously, of course) someday. Either one sounds more interesting than being VP.
Alex Wilson #25: But I was secretly hoping for a surprise choice in Madeleine Albright
Madeleine Albright? The woman who, when asked how she felt about her policies having killed over half a million children in Iraq, said she thought "the price was worth it"? No thanks.
Caroline #26: Obama himself is centrist.
Obama is firmly a rightist. Just because the population in Washington is drastically skewed to the right doesn't mean our language has to be. I mean, good god, when Biden, who supported the 2005 bankruptcy bill, can be described as being to the left of most of the candidates from the supposedly liberal party, there's something severely wrong.
Michael Weholt #37:
Perfect is the worst enemy of good, and sticking to ideological purity even at the expense of actually achieving anything is a common problem with politics.
Caroline @ 36... Yeah. Then again, neither kind of vote would do us (ad the US and Earth) much good.
#38 Serge
I wasn't referring to my vote. My vote is stuffing my nose with filtration plugs in my nose etc. etc. and voting for Obama who I am highly unethusiastic about, because the prospect of a McCain Presidency I regard as anathema.
I was referring to the women who have publically said that they are thinking about voting for McCain, some of them even further alienated to be actually campaigning actively for McCain, in anger at the media promotion of Obama over Sen Clinton and the caucuses and delegates going for Obama over Clinton even where the primary voting had Clinton with a majority in the state, and in Obama getting the nomintion.
They were furious at there not being a woman on the ticket, and there still not being a woman on the ticket, what alleviation is there for their fury? The big swing vote group that helped put the Schmuck in office and helped keep him there (paired with the election tampering of a partisan Supreme Court and vote fraud in Ohio respectively) was female voters, who'd voted for Gov. Clinton to become President Clinton over a second term of Noxious-vegetation-the-first* and voted Bill Clinton a second term as President also.
There are some EXTREMELY vocal women who have formed pressure groups promoting McCain, who claim to be bitter about Hillary Clinton not being nominated, and a male nominated instead. A woman in second place on the ticket would likely have not only neutralized their claims that the Democrats have disenfranchised women and rely on the work of women but only as workers and never give them actualy positions of authority and control, but would have perhaps caused the disaffected women, to promote a Democratic ticket with a woman on it.
That is, with claims that the Democrats exploit women's work and fail to give them the recogition and positions of power women deserve based on dedication and work, an all-male President/Vice President ticket is strong evidence supporting the veracity of the claim. If there were a woman on the ticket, however, the claim would lose a large amount of its credibility.
* There is a tradition in my ancestry of not Naming the Evil Ones. My father and grandfather made a pair of ENORMOUS wooden "greggers" --noisemakers--used in Jewish services on Purim, to help blot out the name of the villain in the Esther story--the service leader or assistant serves as example for all the schoolkids who each has a small metal one, there are gears inside and swinging them rotates the head of the device making LOTS of noise to blot out the villain's name.
It is a very ancient tradition, to do the following things: not speak the name of the miscreant, use a term of opprobrium to refer to the miscreant, blot out the name of the miscreant. This is only for miscreants of severe and pernicious offense--I think that the current occupant of the White House and because of his tenure, is father also, belong to that category.
Using a Name invokes the spirit of the Named. I'm not all that certain, the entity in the White House isn't demon-possessed....
Michael Weholt @ 37... I thought it was all those things you mention that got in the way of progressive causes. As for cconsciences, well, like you said, this is politics, and politics are about compromises, and I'll never get my ideal candidate, and neither will any of the people around here so we compromise. Is 'compromise' a bad word, a stain on one's soul?
Atticus Finch: Do you know what a compromise is?
Scout: Bendin' the law?
Atticus Finch: [slightly bemused] Uh, no. It's an agreement reached by mutual consent. Now, here's the way it works. You concede the necessity of goin' to school, we'll keep right on readin' the same every night, just as we always have. Is that a bargain?
If Atticus Finch can withstand compromises, I can.
ethan @ 41
Heck, Biden's to the right of most of the party members. The consultants and the other folks who actually make the decisions for the party are all from that inside-the-beltway zone where they've lost touch with reality. They think that having no daylight between the Democrats and the Republicans is a good idea, even with guys like Nader getting votes by saying 'there's no difference between them' (and there really is a difference: look at the list of speakers for the two conventions).
I was convinced earlier that my first choice, Tim Kaine, was a terrible idea when it was pointed out to me that "Obama-Kaine" is phonetically too similar to "Oh Boy McCain." So "Obama-Biden" dodges that bullet.
It is said, with how much accuracy I do not know, that Alf Landon was persuaded against choosing the then-governor of New Hampshire, Styles Bridges, as his running mate in 1936 because of worry that the Democrats would start singing "Landon Bridges falling down."
Whenever Biden used the speech, he cited Kinnock, and the emotional power of the words were magnified by the fact that the words could apply to an American Senator and a British MP along with many people in the audience. But one time, Biden forgot to cite Kinnock when he read the speech, and Michael Dukakis's campaign slammed him for it. Shortly thereafter, someone dug up an old record showing that Biden had been accused of plagiarism in law school, though conveniently ignoring the fact that Biden had been cleared of any wrongdoing. By the time Biden refuted both charges, the damage had been done, and Biden had been forced to quit the race.There's more at the link.
I suggest that all Obama supporters should try extra-hard over the next ten weeks to remember that his first name is spelled "Barack," not "Barak."
Both names are equally respectable, but "Barak" comes across to many people as just a little bit more exotic and foreign, which is why the Republicans are making that "mistake" just as often as they can get away with. Accordingly, the spelling reference on our posting form has been amended.
I can definitely work up some enthusiasm for an outcome which gets both of them off of the judiciary committee.
Serge @ #45: I thought it was all those things you mention that got in the way of progressive causes.
They do, sure. But not insurmountably so. We've seen in poll after poll that the American people are far more in favor of progressive causes -- single-payer health care, ending the war in Iraq, public education -- than they are in favor of conservative values. Just the other day I saw an astonishing poll that the majority of Americans now feel that religion should be kept out of politics.
It's all there waiting for us on a big, fat dinner plate. All we have to do is acknowledge that we need to work incrementally (albeit as fast as we can) toward snatching up that tasty and nutritious meal.
All good things come to those who WORK for them.
Or, at least, a lot of really bad things come to those who don't choose to work for the best good they can get.
"the only person who actually gave a shit about politics transforming anything is dead"
Gee, thanks.
Caroline @ 16: I think I'm going to go re-read "Conscience of a Liberal" and cry because the only person who actually gave a shit about politics transforming anything is dead.
Yeah, I miss Paul Wellstone, too.
Paula @ 32:Castration equipment time... 51% of the population is FEMALE. This does NOTHING to promote the interests of people without testicles.
Really? I don't have testicles, and I have no trouble distinguishing which team of candidates will promote my interests. Then again, I missed the memo that explained why I had to prefer Clinton over Obama based on my gender and hers.
OK. Holding self back by main force, and Not. Going. There.
But sheesh.
Paula, Biden wrote the Violence Against Women Act, and he and Barbara Boxer pushed it through the Senate. How good a bill is it? Check out all the nasty things Rush Limbaugh has to say about it. The right wing hates it. Here's a diary at Daily Kos about the Act. Biden may be an old white guy, but he's only 4 years older than I am. And yeah, he's done things I don't like, but hell, I've done things I don't like. I think he'll do.
Belatedly, I feel I should expand on my rather terse #52.
What I meant was: Caroline, I think I can make a pretty good guess about what Paul Wellstone, author of Conscience of a Liberal, would have said to your silly claim that only one person ever cared about "politics transforming anything." I think Wellstone would have told you to stop whining and organize.
Also, stop insulting every other living progressive by claiming that only one person was ever up to snuff. I mean, what a thing to say.
By the way, my grumbling should not be taken as an incitement to do something silly with your vote. If you live in a state that matters, for the love of god please vote for Obama. I don't, so I'm not, but if I did, I would.
Paula@32: "And what were Biden's votes on FISA, Samuel Alita, Mr Roberts, the reworking of Medicare such that it was a giveaway of taxpayer money to the drug companies, etc.?" Well, Google tells me...
Biden voted against the FISA changes.
Biden voted against confirming Alito.
Biden voted against the Medicare drug-benefits fiasco.
That last link has a bunch of useful summaries and linkages, by the way. My take: He's bad on abortion rights, mediocre on overall budget priorities, better than I'd realized on civil rights this decade and apparently actually learning something, fairly good on corporate oversight except when it's industries funding him, okay on crime and justice (and as with civil rights, seems to be learning), ditto on the War on Some Drugs, okay on education, pretty good on energy, quite good on the environment, ditto on family issues (in particular, strong on parental leave protection and more attention to domestic violence), so-so on foreign policy apart from war (learning, but more slowly than in other areas), very good indeed on trade (willing to back trade agreements that actually have environmental and worker protections with teeth in them, and not otherwise), so-so on gun control, very much better than I'd realized on health care, remarkably good overall on national security stuff with a few glaring failures to complement a generally strong record, not especially good on immigration though slowly drifting toward sanity, very good on labor, decent on social security, pretty good on tax policies and priorities, remarkably good on tech policy and infrastructure.
So, with a few minutes' searching, I find that there's a lot to like about Biden despite his supporting a vile, unjust war and toadying to the credit industry. I actually feel substantially better about his selection than I did last night.
I mean, I want an administration prepared to launch investigations and then impeachments and war crimes trials. But I already knew that Obama wasn't going to do that. And I already knew that his advisors will be pushing him away from peace and justice on that front. Biden doesn't actually make that any worse and turns out to be in favor of a bunch of things I am on other fronts. Very much making the best of an awful situation, and I remain unenthusiastic about the whole campaign...but there are things to approve of in this guy's history, and he may actually help prod an Obama administration toward good works it might otherwise neglect.
Biden's vote for the War in Iraq is why I am not voting for the Obama/Biden ticket. I made a pact that I'd never vote for someone who illegally put America into war. Biden & Clinton both voted in support of the military authorization.
I am going to be voting for the Cynthia McKinney & Rosa Clemente, the first all-female, all woman of color ticket in the history of the United States. As least the Green Party isn't trying to be centrist.
Al Giordano has an excellent post (as usual) up at The Field:
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/biden-second-chance-the-everyman
Wherein he addresses the "plagiarism" issue:
Biden had, on previous occasions, credited the Brit, Neil Kinnock, with the words, but on subsequent moments did not. "Plagiarism" was the charge - hardly the kind of thing that would have sunk a candidate today, but in 1988 - when a less politically savvy public didn't understand that most politicians don't write their own speeches - it was devastating. Biden dropped out of the presidential contest and didn't enter it again until last year. But by then it seemed more a Last Hurrah; a kind of revival tour for a one-hit wonder pop group from the 1980s.
Yet the words in that 1988 speech were essentially true, if not original. He was the first Biden to go to college. He did descend from coal miner country. This was a man with the class resentment that comes naturally to being born from below. And as the national media vetting process will disclose in the coming days, after 36 years in the US Senate, he's still one of the poorest US Senators: he never availed himself of the back-door personal enrichment techniques that most of his colleagues - Democrat and Republican - have utilized. Beyond class resentment, he retains a sense of class solidarity. His wife since 1977 never went into Washington lobbying: she remained a public schoolteacher.
Next graf has info I was unaware of:
Biden has also lived personal tragedies that would have splat most people like watermelons tossed from the sixth floor of a Wilmington tenement: between his first US Senate election in 1972 and being sworn in, his first wife and three small children were in a gruesome car accident. Mrs. Biden and his daughter died, his two boys were wounded, and he became a single father. Biden never quite entered the Washington DC culture so seductive to his peers: commuting from Delaware to DC, always coming home at night.
Another plus is that since Biden has run for President before, the corners of his closets have been pretty well explored already.
Further down in Al's blog, there's a post about how Senate committee posts shift if Obama-Biden wins and JB becomes VP:
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/if-its-biden-theres-a-consolation-prize-dodd-and-maybe-you-too
Suffice to say, Yeah, I'll take that!
Patrick, you're right. I was in an awful mood this morning. Your terseness helped snap me out of it.
Update: further poking around indicates that Biden plagiarized in college, in 1965, roughly a third of a 15-page paper. A 1987 New York Times article has him talking about it.
The campaign speech thing still strikes me as a load of nothing; just some crap that was thrown against the wall. Now it's washed off, but everybody only remembers that it was there. Maybe I should regret voting for Dukakis, who threw it, only I still remember who he was running against.
RSW @ #58: Biden's vote for the War in Iraq is why I am not voting for the Obama/Biden ticket.
Unlike some Democrats I could name, Biden over year ago said he effed up in voting for that war.
I made a mistake. I underestimated the influence of Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the neocons; I vastly underestimated their disingenuousness and incompetence. So Bush went to war just the way the neocons wanted him to--without significant international backing."I made a mistake". You can't get much clearer than that.
I hope to god you have the luxury of living in a state where the election isn't going to be close.
Expanding on #60 -- you're quite right, that is a ridiculous thing to say. I can only explain that I've been feeling down in the dumps about the possibility of real change, and Wellstone is one of the only voices I've heard that actually made me feel hopeful. I was indulging in some rather bitter hyperbole and yes, it was silly.
I really do appreciate the way you always say "Snap out of it and fight." Seriously. Can I hire you to call me on the phone once a day and say that?
46, P J Evans,
They think that having no daylight between the Democrats and the Republicans is a good idea, even with guys like Nader getting votes by saying 'there's no difference between them' (and there really is a difference: look at the list of speakers for the two conventions).
That's a nice rhetorical device you've got there. Mind if I play with it?
The mental image that goes with "no daylight between" for me, does like this:
[left]------Nader--------DemDemDem[Center]DemDemDemRepRepRep--Rep--RonPaul---RepRepRep ---[right]
That's a particularly accurate image, and an unsurprising one. Dem's are centrists, and ceding ideological territory to the right is one of the reasons we got stuck with Bush. If we want to move our country to the left, we're going to need a bigger boat - er - I mean we'll need a viable leftist political party we can villify so we can close the gap with them too.
Michael Weholt @ 51... All good things come to those who WORK for them. (...) Or, at least, a lot of really bad things come to those who don't choose to work for the best good they can get.
Or sometimes you work your butt off and you get nothing but grief for it, or it works out and you aren't recognized for it.
On the other hand, if you don't work toward something, it's untoward to complain if things don't work out.
So, of course, you keep trying.
Like Mickey Mouse.
(But I've always prefered Donald Duck.)
Biden more than passes my litmus test: he's not just against torture, he's disgusted by it. And he thinks waterboarding is torture.
The soft bigotry of low expectations R us.
I've been voting since 1980. Since then, I have never really felt I was voting for the candidate I wanted (except for caucusing for Kucinich in a primary). Instead, I have always voted for the best choice, because dammit, the other one has always been worse. Carter may not have been perfect, but I knew he was better than Reagan.
Anybody who does not want to continue the fiasco that has been the last 8 years cannot afford the luxury of voting for anybody other than Obama. A vote for a third-party candidate, or an abstention, is a vote for McCain, plain and simple.
On the subject of the vice president, my opinion is pretty much the same as the opinion of Cato the Antifederalist...
"The establishment of a vice-president is as unnecessary as it is dangerous. This officer, for want of other employment, is made president of the senate, thereby blending the executive and legislative powers, besides always giving to some one state, from which he is to come, an unjust pre-eminence."
—Antifederalist Paper No. 67.
What do you think of his age? 62 already, he's probably not going to be in a position to run for President once Obama (hopefully) completes two mandates, which means:
1) he won't have an interest in backstabbing Obama or producing that terrible "Dem split on issue X" media narrative much loved by Joe Lieberman and FoxNews.
2) the next Dem candidate will be free to position himself without the sort of baggage that a VP can have (like Gore in 2000).
So all in all, it's a good choice: safe enough for the corporativists, leaves Barack free to be the "good cop" on progressive issues without seriously risking anything.
Nina @11 and Serge @21
No, no, Obama is Wil Smith, Biden is Tommy Lee Jones - and McCain is the giant cockroach they have to defeat!
Magenta Griffith @ 70... McCain is the giant cockroach
...which was played by Vincent d'Onofrio.
Alex @25
But I was secretly hoping for a surprise choice in Madeleine Albright. Ah well.
It'd be terribly awkward to nominate somebody for Vice President who isn't eligible to be President. She was born in Czechoslovakia.
Here's a post about Biden's work against domestic violence: What you probably don't know about Joe Biden. Not that he's perfect, but this seems like a very good reason to support him.
The mental image that goes with "no daylight between" for me, does like this:
[left]------Nader--------DemDemDem[Center]DemDemDemRepRepRep--Rep--RonPaul---RepRepRep ---[right]
I'm always a bit confused by the idea that Nader is on the left. He really isn't. Not in his chosen outcomes (I think pretty much everyone would agree that the contradictions have been heightened enough for anyone who's paying attention to see a difference between the extremism of the two parties. Somehow Ralph still doesn't), and not in a great many of his positions. He's appallingly bad on choice, he kept his mouth firmly shut in the runup to the war (granted he did write that one OpEd piece in the WaPo about getting a baseball team for DC), and the guy who was too pure for Gore hangs out with freaking Grover "date rape" Norquist.
When I'm feeling kind, I think all those tuna fish lunches have given him a mercury problem. Pretty much all the time I think he's determined to punish Democrats for not taking him seriously enough.
Sadly, he's decided the best way to do that is to do whatever he can to keep Republicans in office, and to hell with the most vulnerable people in our society who can't afford to use government as a way to settle scores.
People whose hearts are on the left don't do that, JMO.
Serge @38:
Re "Republican women": Coulter? *shudder* (I still think that if that's what Republicans mean by a strong woman, it's no wonder they're so anti-.)
ethan @56:
I am deeply afraid that we can't afford any "protest votes" this time. (See recent polls claiming McSame would win on economic issues (????!).)
In general:
I am increasingly certain that anyone who casts a "protest vote" for McCain will be guilty of treason. I don't say that lightly: it's a serious charge, but McSame is seriously a disaster trying its hardest to happen to the US. Don't!
Incidentally, speaking as a Brit, I'd like to note that I think you dodged a bullet by avoiding ending up with Hillary Clinton on the ticket.
I think the USA is long overdue for a female chief executive ... but not the second coming of Margaret Thatcher (who put back the cause of women in British politics about a quarter of a century, single-handed).
I was hoping for Bill Richardson. Why the old white dude when he could have had the dynamic, youngish, somewhat Hispanic dude? Biden's not a bad guy, though he has a tendency to put his foot in his mouth (wasn't he the one who did the articulate black guy gaffe when he was talking about Obama?), but... I was hoping for something more interesting.
On the other hand, if it had been Richardson, I can just see all the far right white guys turning purple and screaming, "Look! Blacks and Hispanics! They ARE taking over!" Maybe that's why Biden was the safe choice, I dunno.
There's one woman I'd love to see in that office, and that's our own Darlene Hooley, representative from Oregon. She's dynamite, but she's also retiring, dagnabit.
As for Hillary, where I want to see her is on the Supreme Court.
Mark Wise #8: For me, Biden still has to do a lot to atone for his support of the awful 2005 bankruptcy bill.
Well, at least Biden voted against FISA 2008, unlike Obama (who, as far as I know, is unrepentant about that hideous gaffe).
Dean might have been ok (I'd have been ok with it, I don't know if Dean would, and I don't know who would replace him in the Party structure).
Gore... not gonna happen, and I'd be against it. It smacks of people who want Gore for Pres saying, "hey, he can pull a Cheney and be the real power," which is so not what we need.
Clinton... I don't know. There is something to be said for a woman on the ticket. There's also the sense that it's not being done because he thinks she's the best candidate, but to pander to all the people saying, "you have to pick a woman,", as well as giving a slight air of illegitimacy to his candidacy
(Digression) Honestly, the, "We are entitled, because we are women thing," sort of annoys me. It was a campaign. not an annointment. She ran, she did well; she lost. Losing is one of the risks, no one is entitled to be the candidate; just ask Leiberman (the way she, and Obama, handled Lamont didn't endear me to them, though I thought Obama did things better, but I digress. It was a factor in my not being happy with her as a candidate).
Would I like to see a woman in the White House? Sure. But not because she's a woman, rather because I believe in her a politician and a representative. I've never been truly of the opinion that Hillary Clinton represents what I want. Obama is closer. Dean is Closer. Edwards (among the lot) is closest.
Gore might be the best, but he, quite reasonably, isn't running.
Just being female (black, handicapped, possessed of invisible illness, etc.) isn't enough. I'm sorry that Clinton isn't what I want to see in office. I'm even sorrier that my not thinking so gets me excoriated as a woman hater, who doesn't care what they think(end Digression)
Politics is what it is. Having an older, white, "respectable" VP bothers me, because I am afraid the folks who don't like the idea of blacks in power will balk (even if subconciously) at having a Statesmenlike™ figure being bossed around by a black man. On that note I don't see it as a good idea.
But, to be honest, I don't see anyone on the national stage who could fill the role, who is female (I can't see Clinton sitting in the wings as VP. I don't think that sort of enforced second fiddle suits her, and I suspect she wanted to be asked, and would have turned it down.
So we have Biden, and we make the best of what we've got, which is all we ever get to do, because none of us has what it takes to stomach the years of shovelling crap to get to where we are positions to have to make the compromises needed to get elected to the national stage.
To #62 Michael Weholt:
A mistake that has caused thousands of deaths is not worthy of vice presidency. Biden voted to illegally give Bush the power to go to war and that is supposed to be excused with a simple "my bad"? When politician "eff up" they ought to be voted out, not given a promotion. Unlike Obama, Biden, or McCain, Cynthia McKinney was at the anti-war rallies before the war started. That is leadership that I believe in and that's leadership I will be voting for. Watching the media ignore her candidacy is truly amazing and shows just how controlled the American political system is.
Guys, I'm sorry. I've just realized that all of this crap I said isn't really about politics at all; other stuff is going on that I hadn't realized was upsetting me until just now, and the upsetness came out this way. No, I'm not sure how you can be upset by something and not know it either, but it is possible.
Please disregard what I've said in this thread, except for the part where I said Patrick was right, because he is right. I'd be happy to have it disemvowelled, not because it's flamey but because it's just stupid, irrelevant and inappropriate.
Carry on with the relevant conversation.
Caroline@81: I think that's true for a lot of us these days. Good for you for recognizing, and thanks for saying, but I hope you don't beat yourself up too much about it.
This is a very deeply discouraging election, with deeply discouraging implications, and it's easy for that to tangle up with all kinds of stuff.
Microscopic nitpick here: Will Smith. Wil Wheaton.
(I'd have preferred Barbara Boxer for Veep, but that wasn't happening.)
#74 ::: julia
I'm always a bit confused by the idea that Nader is on the left. He really isn't.
Ooops! Sorry, that post was in no way intended to be an endorsement of that man. That was sloppy thinking on my part, confusing the positioning of parties with their actual positions. Mea culpa.
Hmm. With all this talk about those itching to go third party, I find myself hoping VotePair starts organizing again this year. Poor substitute for something like instant runoff, but it's something.
In 2004 I voted for Kerry over my preferred candidate Cobb, and a Kerry supporter in a non-swing state agreed to vote for Cobb (no way of verifying that he did, but it's not like Cobb was one vote shy of taking either state...). I did Gore it in 2000, and, while Obama's not a perfect candidate for me, I will be voting for him without holding my nose. Hell, this independent might even send money to a major party candidate for the first time in his life.
In this choice I'd say that Obama is making an appeal to older white male democrats; he seems to be working on breaking the hearts of the young progressives who swept him to the nomination. Biden is not "change". Oh, he's not the worst, though also not the best*. He is at least a strong environmentalist. But he's an old white guy, whose major source of campaign funding* ($4.9 million) is lawyers and law firms. The second-largest source is financiers of various sorts (perhaps $2 m, depending on how you add it up). Issue positions. He's Catholic and waffles on abortion. (Women's vote? We don't need no stinkin'...oh, yeah, maybe we do.) Voted for bankruptcy "reform" (hmmm, guess the money from the financiers made a difference.) He's tough on crime, a drug warrior, and a foreign-policy hawk.
Sigh.
What I don't see in any of the choices and positions Obama has made is anything that's going to help him face the storms that his Presidency will weather--it's same-old, same-old all the way.
Ethan #41: "Madeleine Albright? The woman who, when asked how she felt about her policies having killed over half a million children in Iraq, said she thought "the price was worth it"? No thanks.
I didn't like her much either at first, due to this and some other things she said and did, mostly early in her term (and I think she said the above before she was even Secretary of State). But Albright's also someone who has admitted and learned from her mistakes (both while she was Secretary and after), which is something I value quite highly in government officials, much moreso than unbelievable stubbornness in fear of being labeled a flip-flopper. Absolutely not a perfect choice, but I like her better than most of the Democrats who ran for president this cycle.
Now, it's kind of a moot point, because she wasn't born a U.S. citizen (and couldn't be VP), but about that specific remark: "I must have been crazy … As soon as I had spoken, I wished for the power to freeze time and take back those words. My reply had been a terrible mistake, hasty, clumsy, and wrong … I had fallen into a trap and said something that I simply did not mean. That is no one’s fault but my own."
Randolph, that's what discourages me the most. It seems immediately obvious to me that the Republican machine will pick up where it left off in 2000 when it comes to sabotaging a Democratic administration, and there seems to be no preparation for this in the Obama campaign. I want a full Democratic press back against Republican dirty tricks, abuse of procedure, and all. I'm not holding my breath waiting, though.
I liked this comment by Caroline, above:
Disappointment at centrist compromises is still miles better than the kind of clstrfck we have now.
That kind of sums up how I feel about the upcoming election. Bush I and Clinton had many ugly flaws as people and leaders, and pushed a great many bad policies. But the last eight years have been something very different.
I often wonder how much of the last eight years is explained by W's inability, how much by his advisors, and how much by circumstances beyond his control. And I sometimes see W as a kind of tragic figure, like if a hardworking janitor somehow found himself drafted into being the chief of cardiology at the local hospital. W is apparently a pretty decent man on a personal level--faithful to his wife, done with his long-ago drinking and drug problems, with close friends and trusted advisors of all races and genders. He's just deeply unsuited to be president. The janitor would probably get fooled by reiki true-believers and magic vitamin con-men. W fell to neocon true believers and Chalabi.
I worry about Obama's lack of experience and his ideas, but at least the guy's clearly bright enough for the job. Biden looks to be, as well. The last eight years suggest that this might be kind-of important.
David Brooks and others of the nationalcrimesyndicate wanted Biden, and now they're glad they got what they wanted.
Love, C.
If a politician makes a mistake, I want him to admit it, and I want him to work to correct it. That should be enough. If he's on my side, I'm not going to ask him to beat himself up and spare his opponent the effort. And if he's on the other side and he admits a mistake, it's a miracle.
I would have preferred he choose a woman, at least partly as assassination insurance; my choice would have been Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas. But what's done is done.
And I'm afraid my first association to Biden is an old song by Murray Porath ("...he quoted Neil Kinnock, he / Wasn't too finicky / About giving credit, and so he went down"), but some of the links above seem to have addressed that issue adequately enough to reassure me. He's not a bad choice, just not my ideal one.
All told, it's not going to make any difference to my vote come November; we simply can't afford 4 more years of BushCo policies if we want to have anything left that resembles the America of the 1990s by 2012.
RSW @ #80: Biden voted to illegally give Bush the power to go to war and that is supposed to be excused with a simple "my bad"? When politician "eff up" they ought to be voted out, not given a promotion....
Like I said, I hope to god you don't live in a state where the election will be close. For your sake, really. If your vote, and your campaigning for McKinney, in any way helps McCain get elected, your actions will be the moral equivalent of voting with those Democrats who made the mistake of voting for the war.
Given what appears to be your harsh and unforgiving nature, I don't know how you'll be able to live with yourself.
As for Gore -- he chose Lieberman as his vp -- Lieberman that the rest of us knew was a plant and really one of the other side.
He isn't even pretending any longer. Lieberman's starring at their con this year.
He'd already been vp and his judgment still got him picking somebody who undercut him and the party at every opportunity.
It appears Gore's judgment is much better with climate change and technology and other important issues, than it is with character.
Love, C.
Andrew #72: "She was born in Czechoslovakia."
(sorry, I missed your post). What, nobody likes surprises anymore?
Minor point, doesn't change anything here: I believe birthplace is not actually a requirement for President or VP (McCain wasn't born in the States IIRC). The wording of the Constitution is they have to be born U.S. citizens.
Either way, you're correct. Albright is ineligible. But if the Republicans ever change the law so Schwarzenegger can run, I do hope the Democrats put Albright up against him.
Bruce Baugh at 88: That's right. We need to remember what the first months were like in the Clinton administration. Remember those nicely wrapped presents waiting under the White House Christmas tree, with Waco and Somalia on the inside? Remember the bipartisan effort on health care reform, and on ending discrimination against gays in the military? Those days are coming again. It's also important to keep in mind that the Democrats learned absolutely nothing from the experience. They are going to make all the same mistakes, only this time they will try even harder. Be sure to say this often, and where Republicans can overhear you.
Albright isn't a native-born citizen. Running with Albright would mean running with someone who isn't qualified to be president.
I'm a big Sebelius fan. It looks like the answer to "What's the Matter With Kansas?" is that at the time, Sebelius was only beginning to work on it. But that actually makes her a bad choice for VP, strategically, because she could do so much more for her state and for the nation by gaining and holding a Senate seat.
Alex Wilson: McCain (it seems) isn't actually qualified, under the letter of the law, but that's not stopping people.
This, however, (qualifications for VP) has been hashed before (when Bill Clinton's name was being tossed about), and the answer is, the VP is required to be qualified for the office of the president.
So Albright is out.
I'm hoping Sebelius runs in 2016.
Mike, Terry: Yes, Albright is ineligible, as has been mentioned. Thanks.
Terry, McCain is eligible, I believe. IIRC the importance of birthplace is a common misconception; Constitutionally, it's birth-citizenship that matters.
The Constitution does not allow a person who is not eligible to be President to be considered as a candidate for Vice President. Albright is not eligible to be President; therefore she is not eligible to be Vice President.
Oddly, the term-limiting amendment only says that e.g. Bill Clinton can't RUN FOR POTUS. I think it means he could run as Veep and take office if the POTUS resigned, but it's politically impossible, so we don't have to worry about the exact meaning of the wording.
RSW, your first two comments (at least under this email address and according to my search of the site) on ML are both in this thread, and both designed to get people to "vote their conscience" which is a meme we've discussed at length (and most of us have discarded). Your email is not a personal one, but a generic address for info at something called vote truth oh eight dot com.
You sure smell like astroturf to me.
And the media ignore Cynthia McKinney because she's (apparently) irrelevant to the final outcome. They'll start to pay attention to her if she looks like she might make a difference (unlikely).
Caroline, #81: I think you (and most of the younger people who voted for Obama's "change") have a perfectly reasonable beef with the man. He promised "change" and let you think it was the change you wanted. Older progressives have fewer excuses--we know that if progressive promises aren't spelled out in detail they haven't been made. I bet there's a lot of angry older women right now, too. Obama seems to figure he can win without the progressive vote. He's flirting with the young voters. The choice of Biden is an indication, that, once elected, Obama will go home with the rich old white guys with the money* and I think you've every right to be angry about it.
My attitude...well, I'm very tired of how the USA treats its progressives and intellectuals. So I think the thing to do, once Obama is elected, is hold his feet to the fire, all the while holding off the radical right. He's going to face problems which conservatism isn't able to address--he will need progressives. So, quid pro quo, let us therefore insist on space in the coalition. And continue to work on getting votes in the House and electoral reform.
#86 ::: Randolph:
Is there any handy place to check on what young progressives are actually saying?
As for Biden being a drug warrior, this is bad, but I suppose it's the way to bet with major US politicians.
Any ideas about what it would take to end the war on drugs, or at least slow it down?
Is there any way to get have non-evil airport security on the platform?
This is definitely good news/bad news. On one hand, Biden is vastly superior to the other two on the reported "short list" (Kaine and Bayh), either of whom would have been an unmitigated disaster.
On the other hand, Obama bypassed two vastly superior choices in Wes Clark (whom he and the soi-disant "centrist" leaders of the Democratic Party allowed the Republican attack dogs to chew up and spit out without a word of support) and Kathleen Sebelius.
On the gripping hand, John Edwards would have been a terrific choice if his actions hadn't made him unpalatable to the majority of Americans.
Overall, I can live with Biden.
Alex Wilson (#101): Terry Karney's referring to this argument.
To massively simplify it: the statutes in place at the time of McCain's birth gave citizenship to the children of US citizens born "out of the limits and jurisdiction
of the United States." The argument is that the Canal Zone was out of the limits, but within the jurisdiction; jus soli doesn't apply as it wasn't incorporated territory, and jus sanguinus must be in accordance with statute (which wasn't in effect for the Canal Zone at the time of McCain's birth).
The change necessary to apply jus sanguinus citizenship to Canal Zone births was passed in 1937, after McCain's birth.
Chin's argument there is that since it was retroactive, McCain wasn't a citizen at birth and therefore not a "natural born Citizen" per the Constitution.
My take is that a "strict constructionist" judge, like Scalia claims to be except when deciding Bush v. Gore, would have to rule him ineligible. According to McCain's own website, he would agree:
As President, John McCain will nominate judges who understand that their role is to faithfully apply the law as written, not impose their opinions through judicial fiat.My personal opinion is that the revised statute, by making the citizenship acquisition retroactive, is sufficient for the undefined "natural born" criterion.
Terry, McCain is eligible, I believe. IIRC the importance of birthplace is a common misconception; Constitutionally, it's birth-citizenship that matters.
Birthplace is important because of the 14th amendment to the constitution. I'm not anything resembling a constitutional scholar, but I don't think the constitution goes into specifics on all the other qualifications, which it seemed to have left to interpretation by court-precedent.
The NYT cited how McCain was given citizenship by a law conferring it on anyone born in US-controlled Panama. But according to the scholar it cited, it doesn't actually say anything about retroactively conferring native-born status.
I don't think pursuing this avenue to disqualify McCain would leave Obama a lot of slack to conduct his business with any kind of casualness, but the status of McCain's citizenship still seems open to judicial interpretation.
Paula Lieberman #32: After reading your comment about promoting the concerns of people without testicles, I'm reminded that Michelle Malkin -- who I believe is a woman -- has been urging Senator Obama to 'grow a pair'.
There is nothing which would make me not vote for Obama this year. All these worries about low-probability events and symbolism when the truth is: if McCain is elected, the Supreme Court will be gone as a last protection of minority rights, let alone reproductive rights.
There is no-one who could have been chosen VP who would have excited my interest (well, maybe George Clooney); the people I like best have already said no, publicly, repeatedly (Al Gore) and people I like for symbolic reasons are inelligible (Albright) or have no experience in elected office (Caroline Kennedy). This election matters too much to let my ego get in the way of the clear necessity to get the Republicans out of the White House.
Obama could have seriously lost me with his VP pic, but not gained much. He didn't lose me.
That said, I find I have something to add which hasn't been pointed out here:
One of the things we want from Obama is to use the newly-increased Democratic majority in Congress to ram a metric buttload of legislation through Congress asap. The VP is President of the Senate. A well-liked veteran like Biden can be a material asset to the Obama Administration.
That said, can we move on the the imporant question?
The economy is in the toilet. The war is in the toilet. The budget is in the toilet. etc. So why is Obama polling a lead in the low single digits??
I should have amplified: I don't think (irrespective of the actual laws) McCain ought to be disqualified. As I u
Comments on Biden: