Well hello! Glad you've dropped by. Feel free to have a good read, but you should know that
I'm no longer writing on this blog. The new blog is over here: Pursuit of Redemption.

Tag: Biden

I hope Biden's Daughter Enjoys Her Drugs

Posted by – 3/30/09

…because I really don’t care what she does. And neither should the media. I’m thoroughly impressed that none of the media outlets took Ashley’s friend up on her offer to provide video of the young Biden snorting coke (though I suspect that many outlets chose to ignore the story for political rather than principled reasons). Ashley Biden isn’t running for office. She’s not set to lead this county. She’s most certainly an adult.

Let’s put pressure on our political leaders in relevant ways, not through underhanded attempts to discredit them. The angry left’s feigned outrage over Bristol Palin’s un-planned teen pregnancy in an attempt to sully Sarah Palin was just plain dirty politics. During the entire campaign, I heard not a single substantive argument against Sarah Palin coming from the left and their MSM allies (and as much as I like her, even I could give you some). It was all foam-at-the-mouth and self-righteous indignation.

Let’s not do the same to the Biden family.

Still in the tank: reactions to the two debates

Posted by – 10/5/08

Is anyone else enjoying the dramatic irony of the mainstream media’s reactions to the VP debate when compared with the first presidential debate? We’re supposed to believe that Biden vs. Palin came down to substance vs. style. If you’re not sure which one is the positive, I don’t blame you. When the libs watched the VP debate, it was incredibly clear: the man with substance was the winner. When they watched the presidential debate, it was also incredibly clear: the man with nuanced style was the winner.

Nevermind the baseless authority with which Biden spoke and rattled off facts — ones that are easy to come by, of course, given their incipience in Joe’s head — the Dems absolutely loved him. And since the mainstream media is packed to the brim with Dems, what do you expect the columns might be filled with this week?

So they’re in love with factless substance now? Great.

Obama, on the other hand, seems to know very little about a lot of things. And though Palin’s been blasted over the last few days for her folksiness and inability to adhere to the Dems pre-determined agenda, somehow every one of Obama’s absolutely show-stopping public train wrecks have been swept under the rug. Nothing to see here, move it along. Shoo.

Obama’s teleprompter-powered speeches might make some weak in the knees, but his reticence does nothing to impress me. I suppose I can’t blame him. Every time he reacts instinctively, he tends to be wrong. Iran? Wrong. Georgia? Wrong. Freddie and Fannie? Wrong.

Yeah, gotta love that nuance. And all that substance from the Senatorial veteran. Facts don’t matter in the Obamanation. It just has to sound right.

Biden wants to reduce principal on mortgages?

Posted by – 10/3/08

Did I really hear Biden correctly last night? Of all the gaffes, missteps, and exaggerations from last night, I’m not hearing anyone discussing this one.

Number two, with regard to bankruptcy now, Gwen, what we should be doing now — and Barack Obama and I support it — we should be allowing bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate you’re paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe.

- CNN Transcript of the VP Debate

Any financially minded people want to clear this up for me? Am I way off base here and Biden is actually referencing a well researched position on possible fixes for this crisis, or did Joe Biden just make the wild recommendation that bankruptcy courts be able to change the amount owed on a house? Does that apply for any kind of debt? Can I get some of that action?

Without Pre-conditions? "I would."

Posted by – 10/3/08

I liked Joe Biden’s answers in the Democrat’s debate much more. Hillary had it right, too. She wouldn’t meet without pre-conditions, just as no one with any kind of foreign policy experience would do.

Because I think it is not that you promise a meeting at that high a level before you know what the intentions are. I don’t want to be used for propaganda purposes. I don’t want to make a situation even worse.

Wrong again!

Posted by – 10/3/08

Yup, that’s me. I got it wrong again. Turns out the Veeps looked more presidential to me than either of the heads of their respective ticket. Yeesh.

Of course there was Biden, the foreign policy hand of his ticket, getting his math on Afghanistan wrong. Not that I had the numbers with me, but when Biden let this one out, I immediately said, “You know, that doesn’t sound right, and if he’s wrong, he’s gonna get nailed on that.” Welp, he was wrong.

3 weeks of Iraq – $6.3 billion
7 years of Afghanistan - $150.5 billion

(UPDATE: More on Joe’s ignorance of Lebanon. And Joe being wrong on Gaza and the West Bank.)

He also doesn’t seem to have nearly as firm a grasp on the Constitution as he appeared to have during the debate. To answer Gov. Palin’s famous question, “What does a VP do?” Ace responds, “Under the Constitution, the VP only has two things to do: break ties in the Senate and wait for the President to die.” More information on Ace’s blog, but essentially almost nothing Biden laid out concerning the VP in the Constitution was correct.

I think the best thing that could’ve happened with the moderator, Gwen Ifill, was the news coming out so close to the debate that she has a book about the historic nature of Obama coming out on inauguration day. I think it forced her to be fairly even handed. She was just as tough on Biden as she was on Palin, and certainly didn’t produce the kind of underwhelming questions that her colleague did the week previous. One thing of note: she didn’t ask any questions on energy, which was odd. Not to worry, Gov. Palin took it upon herself to answer one (or several) anyway.

I think Palin did much better than most people expected, given the public perception of her based on several poor interviews. I have a tiny little conspiracy theory about that. Can I share? I know it sounds ridiculous, but McCain is known for enjoying the fun of tactics, maneuvers, and outflanking professional observers. Do you think there’s a chance that the campaign intentionally set her up to appear less than impressive before the debate? I dunno. Just a thought. (UPDATE: Justin Hart at Culture 11 seems to share my conspiratorial thought: “She basically had to show up and not get sick on camera.”)

Biden did fairly well, in my opinion. None of his toes tickled the back of his throat once all night. For Anchor Joe to come off a debate with nary more than a couple stutters is a miracle. Maybe a miracle of modern medicine, even. Brokaw’s pre-debate analysis: Joe needs to be succinct. “And for Joe Biden to be succinct, he may have had to undergo a gene transplant today.”

Who won? Oh, that depends so much on the rubric you use to determine a debate winner. The Governor is still a Rorschach test. Few that hated her before have changed their minds. It’s all in the undecideds; strategically, that’s really the only demographic either campaign should care about now. Just like with the first post-debate polls, the results are all over the place. Here’s one from Frank Luntz’s focus group:

I think the real winner will be whoever gets a sizable boost in the polls after this. I was impressed enough with Palin’s performance, but ultimately, all that matters is the results of the election come November 4th. Every little thing up to that is merely a chess move.

A more important question is…

Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.

More cozy tankie-ness for O and the media

Posted by – 9/29/08

As he exited the hotel for his dinner break, Biden was asked “Senator, can we get your reaction to the House bill not passing?” 

Biden interrupted the question with a “Hey folks,” to reporters and then said “Oh, things are going well.”

Prior to Biden’s departure, the press was moved further away from the hotel’s exit, perhaps far enough away that it prevented Biden from clearly hearing the question.

How wonderfully helpful of this reporter to give Anchor Joe the benefit of the doubt here. Meanwhile, every major news agency has folks on the ground in Alaska and Arizona desperately searching for any scrap of evidence that can bring down the McCain-Palin ticket. I’m serious, the media’s on their last leg this election cycle.

Palin's ratings bested Obama

Posted by – 9/4/08

So, in keeping with the Dems’ constant comparison of their ticket leader with the Republicans’ veep, I present this Nielsen report. Apparently, Obama’s speech garnered an impressive 38.4 million viewers. Certainly nothing to sneeze at. But the still virtually unknown Palin pulled in over 40 million. I submit that this obviously doesn’t bode well for the Obama/Biden ticket, but could even end up being a problem for McCain if he doesn’t play his cards right. I suppose, though, if there are enough people like me out there — people hoping that, at most, he’s a one-term president that can launch her into an 8 year term and are voting for the ticket because of that hope — he doesn’t really care.

UPDATE: Despite the complaints of Democrats about how much of a meanie she was in her speech, Rasmussen released these polling results on 9/5/08:

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of voters say that Palin’s speech helped McCain’s chances of becoming President while only 10% believe it hurt those prospects.

And this:

Forty percent (40%) now say that Palin is ready to be President, if necessary. That’s up from 29% last week. Forty-nine percent (49%) say the same about Biden.

However, following the Wednesday night speech, voters are fairly evenly divided as to whether Palin or Obama has the better experience to be President. Forty-four percent (44%) of voters say Palin has the better experience while 48% say Obama has the edge. Among unaffiliated voters, 45% say Obama has better experience while 42% say Palin.

Think about that. Only 40% of voters think Palin’s ready for the Presidency. Impressive for a newcomer perhaps, but damning for Obama considering that same poll revealed that people are divided on who’s got more experience — comparing a Presidential candidate to a Vice Presidential candidate! Clearly not a glowing endorsement of Obama.

On her convention speech

Posted by – 9/4/08

I think Outside the Beltway’s got a great redux of Palin’s speech last night. He lays out her exaggerations and the criticisms from the left, but rightfully adds,

Politics ain’t beanbag and convention speeches aren’t objective analysis.  Palin’s speech, like Obama’s, was good political theater that accomplished its goals.

Honestly, what’s your problem with last night’s speech, Dems? That she was mean? Come on, this is politics. Her attacks were against the ticket, not the ticket’s family members, so it was fair game. Of course you’ll have a problem with her speech, but it wasn’t meant for you. It was clearly meant to rally the base, and from the responses I’m reading, it accomplished the task. Maybe she didn’t cover things you wanted her to cover, but save that criticism for the end of the convention. (I’m still waiting to hear how Obama’s tax and spend plan that targets “the rich” isn’t going to be passed along to the end consumer, but alas…)

You shouldn’t be excited that everyone’s all over Palin’s speech. You should be worried that no one cared when Biden delivered the same thing.

Dems, on the wrong side again

Posted by – 8/27/08

It turns out, when the media isn’t day in, day out reminding us how horrible things are in Iraq, Americans tend to think things are improving. And the recent results in this ongoing poll by Rasmussen suggest that the Democrats are on the wrong side of the debate again. Perhaps the Democrats are totally right. Their correctness here is totally irrelevant. But their being at odds with the American people on yet another issue is one more nail in this election’s coffin. So here’s on more reason they’ll lose come November:

Fifty-four percent of American voters have confidence that America and her allies are winning the War in Iraq. That’s the highest it’s been since Rasmussen began tracking confidence in the war only a year after it began, in January 2004. Americans seem to be able to separate the War in Iraq from their appreciation (or lackthereof) for the President. Only 30% credit him with doing well in Iraq.

So this doesn’t bode well for a party that continues to hoop and holler about getting out of Iraq. Again, whether they are right on this issue doesn’t matter. With their very negative vocal message about Iraq, one would assume that they’re preaching to an America filled with people fatigued by the War, and that’s just who their rhetoric implies they are targeting. But according to Rasmussen, this is only 17% of voters. Down from 47% this time last year. Yipes. Looks like the Dems just keep have bad timing with their platform.

Pelosi continues to argue, in less than a welcoming fashion, that drilling here will only produce a $0.02 drop at the pump 10 years from now, even after Bush’s symbolic release of the Executive Order against drilling has so far dropped prices by over $0.43. (Their argument is short sited anyway. It assumes that for some magical reason, we won’t need oil 7-10 years from now.)

Apparently they want the country’s energy needs to be powered by hopes and dreams, just like Obama’s increasingly lackluster campaign. They certainly don’t want to use clean, cheap nuclear. They preach the solution to energy prices is in renewable energy. But even renewable energy isn’t “green.” And as furiously as it’s rolled out, it’s not enough to meet the government mandated minimum. Sure, an energy system with a diversity of sources is a great solution; you just can’t cut out the vast majority of sources (oil, coal, nuclear) and expect the economy to not collapse. (Even the most hopeful goals for renewable energy peg it around 33%.)

Obama chose Biden, and even ardent Obama supporters are upset. The polls are showing it, too. Since the Democratic VP pick, McCain for the first time overtook Obama in the polls. That’s pretty astounding considering Obama held a 15 point lead over McCain only two months ago.

The Dems seem to be so agenda-driven (so much of it a result of drinking Al Gore’s kool-aid), yet continue to claim to be the party of the people, of the working man. But to a person who can barely make ends meet, their carbon footprint is the last thing on their mind.

So my prediction is that, amazingly enough and after 8 years of people complaining about Bush, the Democrats will lose this election too. It could be thanks in part to the wonderful job the Democrats have done, no promises kept, since they took power of Congress two years ago. (Congressional approval is at a staggering 18%, sooooo much lower than the President’s.)

Talk about catering to special interests. Democrats, you have made yourselves irrelevant. Get ready to hand the Presidency over to McCain as a result.