Joe Biden

You’re Scaring Me, Obama: Let the Bush Years Die

Heather Wokusch — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:39:34 -0500

To be honest, Obama, you lost me when you voted for the PATRIOT Act reauthorization in 2006. You lost me again when you voted for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) amendment in 2008. And you lost me every single time you voted for yet more war funding.

Don't even get me started on your vote for the $700 billion Wall Street bailout.

I cast a ballot for you in November, but I just can't share in this moment of collective euphoria over your election.

So, if your transition team really wants feedback on "where President-Elect Obama should lead this country," here's a Top Five list:

1. Dump the Bush Doctrine and don’t start more wars

You've made it clear that the US has to "take out Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants if we have them in our sights" and you’ve argued for "more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11."

What exactly does that mean?

Take troops out of Iraq and shove them into Afghanistan? Further destabilize Pakistan?

The whole idea of preemptive war (a.k.a. the Bush Doctrine) has no place in a civilized society and must be laid to rest, along with those sacrificed in Bush's military adventurism these past eight years.

Yet your approach to preemptive war, Mr. Obama, is nuanced at best.

During the January 2008 Democratic presidential debate, you said that if the US had "actionable intelligence" and Pakistan didn’t "take on Al Qaida in their territory," then "I would strike." You added, " And that's the flaw of the Bush doctrine. It wasn't that he went after those who attacked America. It was that he went after those who didn't."

No, the flaw of the Bush Doctrine is that it's just plain wrong. We've learned that the hard way.

2. Ditch the warmongers

What's with all of the hawks in your new administration?

You presented yourself as a peace candidate and then chose Joe Biden as your VP. Yes, he brought in the white male vote, but he also backed the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Just last month Biden warned that if you were elected, there would be "an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy." He said that you would make some "incredibly tough decisions" that could alienate the Democratic base, because if decisions are "popular, they're probably not sound."

In other words, a popular decision, one that the majority of the people wants, is probably not a good decision. Democracy to Biden…

And then there's Robert Gates, widely rumored to be staying on as your Defense Secretary. Questions about Gates’ role in Iran-Contra, not to mention his skewing of intelligence about Russia, still linger.

But especially disturbing is his recent push for beefing up the US nuclear arsenal: "As long as other nations have or seek nuclear weapons – and can potentially threaten us, our allies and friends – then we must have a deterrent capacity that makes it clear that challenging the United States in the nuclear arena, or with weapons of mass destruction, could result in an overwhelming, catastrophic response."

Let's get this straight: if other nations are even imagined to "seek" nuclear weapons, that "could result in an overwhelming, catastrophic response" from the US.

Obama, you've often insisted on taking "no options off the table" in dealing with Iran. How does Gates' proposal for the preemptive use of nuclear weapons factor in there?

While we're on the topic of warmongers in your midst… Rahm Emanuel as Chief of Staff? Yet another hawk, hell-bent on Iran and enamored with nuclear weapons.

And now we've got Clinton as Secretary of State.

Why is it that none of the 23 senators and 133 House Reps who voted against the war in Iraq are even on a short-list for these critical posts?

3. Close Guantanamo – and the whole system of secret prisons

Shutting down Gitmo is said to be a priority for your new administration. Terrific.

But what about Bagram? What about the other CIA "black site" secret prisons set up in Afghanistan, Thailand, Eastern Europe and elsewhere? What about the CIA torture flights? Will those end too?

Closing Gitmo also raises questions over how "high value" defendants will be handled. Your administration is reportedly considering setting up an alternative court system to deal with sensitive cases. But what safeguards will be in place to be sure that this new system won't degenerate into kangaroo courts, like Bush's military commissions?

It's a disturbing signal that you’ve appointed John Brennan, who has supported extraordinary rendition and warrantless wiretapping, to help review intelligence agencies for your administration. As former CIA and State Department analyst Mel Goodman noted, Brennan "sat there at [former CIA Director George] Tenet's knee when they passed judgment on torture and abuse, on extraordinary renditions, on black sites, on secret prisons. He was part of all of that decision making."

And this is who will help lead us out of this mess?

You've criticized the use of torture, yet reportedly will not bring criminal charges against those who authorized or conducted torture during the Bush years. Your administration doesn't see it as politically expedient, and Bush might give "preemptive" pardons anyway.

But can we really end this dark chapter in our nation's history without even an investigation? A Truth Commission, perhaps? Providing blanket immunity to all low-level and senior government officials won’t prevent possible war crimes from happening again. Quite the opposite.

4. Expose Bush & Co., and ditch the national surveillance state

Speaking of war crimes, how about Bush, Cheney and the rest? You'll soon be given access to Bush-era secret orders and opinions authorizing everything from surveillance to detention. You'll no doubt rescind many, to great fanfare, but what about sharing this evidence of Bush-year excesses with the public?

Yes, Bush could file a lawsuit and invoke executive privilege, but it's worth the fight. The only other option is shielding Bush & Co., similar to how you will reportedly shield those government officials involved in torture. But the public deserves to know. And if Bush administration officials violated the law, they should be prosecuted.

Now, back to your vote for both the PATRIOT Act reauthorization in 2006 and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act amendment in 2008. These and other rollbacks in domestic civil liberties under Bush are inexcusable and must be addressed. We'll be waiting for you to do that.

5. Choose Main Street (not Wall Street)

Just this month you promised Americans that they can "turn the page on policies that have put the greed and irresponsibility of Wall Street before the hard work and sacrifice of folks on Main Street."

Yet, as Bloomberg notes, "almost half the people" on your Transition Economic Advisory Board "have held fiduciary positions at companies that, to one degree or another, either fried their financial statements, helped send the world into an economic tailspin, or both."

This includes, for example, Anne Mulcahy and Richard Parsons, both of whom were Fannie Mae directors when the company fudged accounting rules. Ditto for another of your team members, William Daley.

Mulcahy and Parsons additionally held executive posts when their companies (Xerox Corp. and Time Warner Inc., respectively) got busted for accounting fraud by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Also on your team is Richard Rubin, who as Bloomberg notes, was "chairman of Citigroup Inc.'s executive committee when the bank pushed bogus analyst research, helped Enron Corp. cook its books, and got caught baking its own. He was a director from 2000 to 2006 at Ford Motor Co., which also committed accounting fouls and now is begging Uncle Sam for Citigroup-style bailout cash."

The list of questionable appointees to your Transitional Economic Advisory Board goes on and on, begging the question: Is this really the best you could come up with? How about Joseph Stiglitz, Sheila Bair, Nouriel Roubini or James K. Galbraith, for starters? Someone who represents labor?

Meanwhile, we're stuck with this nasty bailout bill – which you voted for.

Others, such as Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), realized the bill's problems and voted against it. Feingold said that the Wall Street bailout legislation, "fails to reform the flawed regulatory structure that permitted this crisis to arise in the first place. And it doesn’t do enough to address the root cause of the credit market collapse, namely the housing crisis. Taxpayers deserve a plan that puts their concerns ahead of those who got us into this mess."

Feingold was right.

In short, Mr. President-elect, you promised "Change we can believe in," but across the board it's looking a lot more like "Business as usual."

Biden On Fire

Bob Fertik — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 10:05:31 -0400

Biden channels Democratic outrage for 3 lovely minutes:

Biden Wants Prosecutions for Bush's Crimes

Bob Fertik — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 14:17:10 -0400

At a town-hall meeting in West Palm Beach, Florida, Joe Biden promised investigations - and possible prosecutions - of Bush's crimes.

Looking to the future but with one eye on the past, Biden also promised that an Obama-Biden government would go through Bush administration data with "a fine-toothed comb" and pursue criminal charges if necessary.

"If there has been a basis upon which you can pursue someone for a criminal violation," he said, "they will be pursued, not out of vengeance, not out of retribution - out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no one, no attorney general, no president, no one is above the law."

How long will it take for the Republican Party and the Corporate Media to unleash a vicious counterattack on Biden and Obama?

Joe Biden Accepts VP Nomination

Bob Fertik — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:45:12 -0400

What an incredible introduction by Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden!

Joe Biden excerpts:

As we gather here tonight, our country is less secure and more isolated than at any time in recent history. The Bush-McCain foreign policy has dug us into a very deep hole, with very few friends to help us climb out.

Should we trust John McCain's judgment when he says there can be no timelines to drawdown our troops from Iraq - that we must stay indefinitely?

Or should we listen to Barack Obama, who says shift responsibility to the Iraqis - and set a time to bring our combat troops home?

Now, after six long years, the Bush administration and the Iraqi government are on the verge of setting a date to bring our troops home.

John McCain was wrong. Barack Obama was right.

Obama Chooses Biden

Bob Fertik — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:18:19 -0400

Joe Biden isn't a progressive, which is why he got nowhere in the primaries. He's awful on bankruptcy and puts corporations before people on financial issues. And he voted for the invasion of Iraq.

Even so, he has some good points:

Biden has called the Bush administration “the worst administration in American foreign policy in modern history, maybe ever. … Every single thing they’ve touched has been a near disaster.” And in an interview last year, he suggested that “we should be acquiring and accumulating” information “for possibly bringing criminal charges against members of this administration at a later date.”

Biden is the 30th most progressive Democrat over his Senate career, which puts him ahead of 20 other Democrats including Dianne Feinstein (31), Jon Tester (32), Harry Reid (39), and Evan Bayh (44).

Biden is a good debater with a good sense of humor, and took down GOP frontrunner Rudy Giuliani with his famous description of every Giuliani sentence: “a noun, a verb, and 9/11.” No doubt he will eventually apply the same formula to McCain: a noun, a verb, and POW.

Joe Biden

Kathyschroeder — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:31:12 -0400

I hope that we can all have constructive discussions about all of the candidates as we get closer to the primaries. The 2008 Election will be the most important vote we will cast in our lifetime. Earlier I had posted various positions that Joe Biden has taken on various subjects. I think we all need to take a hard look at each candidate and where they are on the issues. I am a lifelong Democrat and will vigorously support our party no matter who is nominated by the process. We all have particular issues we are passionate about, but I hope that we can approach this process in a pragmatic way. This forum is strictly for everyone to voice their thoughts, suggestions, opinions and views about all of the presidential candidates, voicing the contrasts of all of the presidential candidates.

Joe Biden at the Harkin Steak Fry

September 16, 2007

**Remarks as Prepared for Delivery**

This past week as the saying goes: “the earth moved under our feet”.

George Bush made it clear – he will not end the war in Iraq.

If there was ever any doubt, now there is none.

One of us on this stage will have to stop the war he started.

3,780 dead;

27,848 wounded.

This war must end.

Four years and $20 billion later, Iraq’s army still cannot stand on its own, and its police are totally corrupt and should be disbanded.

Nine months into the surge – and there are still:

1,000 sectarian attacks per week

Assassinations of leading figures, including the assassination Thursday of the leading Sunni tribal Sheik who organized the fight against Al Qaeda Iraq in Anbar

And Shia militias – uncontrolled – still marauding and murdering

Iraqis are still no closer to a political settlement than they were 3 years ago.

They continue to murder each other and flee their homes in record numbers.

Yet this President had the audacity to look the American people in the eye last Thursday and say:

My strategy is working.

I’m going to continue to risk the lives and limbs of 130,000 of our brave men and women indefinitely.

That is unconscionable.

You know – in Iraq – the military refers to those who’ve been killed in action – as fallen angels.

How many more angels must fall – before this war ends?

And to add inst to injury when Gen. Petreaus was asked – how continuing the president’s policy wod make us safer – he was speechless.

The fact is – it makes us more vulnerable.

But I have a plan that will make us safer:

Start to bring our combat troops home now;

Get them out of the middle of a civil war;

Focus them on securing Iraq’s borders and protecting American’s in the green ZONE;

Recognize that Iraq is incapable of being governed from the center;

Focus on 3 regions – giving them local control over the fabric of daily lives –police, education, jobs, religion;

And Start a diplomatic surge – get the world’s major powers to convene an international conference on Iraq – bring in Iraq’s neighbors to focus on a regional settlement.

And always, always, protect our troops and care for our veterans.

Only when we end this war can we finally turn our attention to the challenges that genuinely threaten our security:

Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan

The spread of weapons of mass destruction around the world

Confronting Putin’s totalitarian instincts

Stabilizing the sub-continent of India

And Securing our homeland by immediately implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 commission

Doing these things – –will not only make us safer – they will allow us to reestablish our credibility in the world.

This is President Bush’s war.

But it is America’s future.

One of us on this stage is going to have to end this war and secure that future.

And what we say and do – the remainder of this campaign – will affect our ability to do that when we are president.

Folks – getting this right, is more important than the presidential aspirations of any one of us on this stage.

And one more thing,

We must recognize – that until we end the divisive politics this war has spawned,

We will be unable to build a consensus – here at home – to accomplish the goals we all share:

Universal health care;

Secure retirements;

Access to college;

Strong unions to guarantee a growing middle class;

Energy security – to free us from the iron grip of oil oligarchs ;

And an end to global warming – to literally save humanity.

This is what we stand for as a party.

These are America’s values.

And I will fight – with every fiber in my being – to keep America focused on the values that unite us.

The American people are ready.

And so am I.

For not once in our history have the American people ever let their country down.

It has been the historic role of the Democratic Party – from Jefferson to Jackson – Roosevelt to Kennedy to remind Americans of that legacy, to summon us to that moment, to make America, once again, the light of the world.

And I pledge to you, as your president that’s what I will do.

God Bless America. And May God Bless Our Troops.

Click here for more photos of Joe at the Harkin Steak Fry

Moderator Hurls Mostly SPIT Balls In First Democratic Presidential Candidate Debate

thepen — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 00:13:32 -0400

After listening to the questions asked by Brian Williams in South Carolina at the first debate of announced Democratic presidential contenders, one has to wonder how much worse the moderation would have been if it had been on the Fox Network.

There was hardly an inane smear, knock, superficial or unfair attack made against any of these candidates that Williams did not go OUT of his way to highlight or demand that they defend themselves against. We had the price of haircuts, misquotes about positions on Palestine, ties to Walmart, not to mention an entire segment on Giuliani's despicable "die under Democrats" rhetoric from yesterday, instantly elevated to the status of accepted mainstream gospel and framed as such. If most of the questions had been prefaced with the words "Karl Rove says" their slant could not have been more obvious. Even the questions selected from viewer emails seemed to be selected with that criteria in mind.

When Williams was not doing that he left no stone unturned trying to dredge up a virtual laundry list of every possible divisive wedge issue he could work in, positions on abortion, guns, illegal immigration, and even the confederate flag. The few other actual issues touched on were exploited as an opportunity to hurl other accusations, for example on the health care issue one of stealth tax raising intentions. The energy issue he tried to turn into an Al Gore, how dare you own a light bulb witch hunt, and so on.

And in his grandstand play of the night Williams painted a grim scenario of two American cities wiped out by Al Qaeda and demanded to know how each of these candidates would retaliate. The question itself was custom designed to drive fear into the heart of what deserved to be a thoughtful debate on the issues, and to substitute blind ignorant rage for sound policy. It had to be TWO cities of course because we've ALREADY lost one and a half cities under George Bush. The question begged the answer of what kind of revenge would you take, as if revenge were a policy goal. How fitting from the mouthpiece of a company in the nuclear weapons business.

To their credit each of the candidates demonstrated in turn that they are infinitely more qualified to be president of the United States than Bush ever was, and managed for most part to say what they wanted to say, as opposed to what Williams was trying to bait them into saying. We only wish one of them had called him out directly on the slant of the questions, especially the Giuliani smear.

Williams made one huge mistake, trying to embarrass Kucinich about his Cheney impeachment stance, and Kucinich hit it out of the park with some of the best passion we've heard from him yet. Likewise with Gravel, where Williams practically chortled at the chance to pick a fight on stage between the candidates, but instead gave Gravel his own moment to shine as an uncompromising antiwar choice.

What we NEED to do is take the debates out of the hands of right wing spin kings and get some moderators who aren't so bent on warping the whole affair. It's hard to imagine as long as self-interested corporations are the sponsors. But at least tonight our candidates were able to hold their own.

Biden To Bush: "You're leading us off a cliff. Stop!"

Bob Geiger — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 14:11:35 -0400

Clearly having had enough of Republican colleagues putting their blind loyalty to George W. Bush ahead of American opinion and the lives of our troops, Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) gave a powerful speech on the Senate floor Wednesday in which he ripped the GOP for their failure to lead and fulfill their duties to our country.

Saying "our troops don’t lose wars, bad polices, bad leadership loses wars," Biden, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, let loose during comments before the vote to even open debate on the Democratic proposal to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq by this time next year.

Here's Biden on the Senate's responsibility to the troops:

"They should have the courage to stand up and tell the administration, they have had a God-awful policy, they have put our troops in a position that, in fact, has made it virtually impossible for them to succeed at the outset.

"They deserve a policy. They deserve a plan. There is no plan. We went to war with too few troops, we went to war unnecessarily. We went to war with these men and women ill-equipped, they're coming home ill-served.

"It's about time we have the courage to stand up and say to the president 'Mr. President, you have not only put us in harm's way you have harmed us! You have no policy, Mr. President'

"I'm so tired of hearing on this floor about courage. Have the courage to tell the administration, 'stop this ridiculous policy you have.'"

More Biden on the folly of the Bush-McCain Doctrine of sending yet more troops to Iraq:

"This is a cycle of self-sustaining sectarian violence that 20,000, 30,000, 50,000, 100,000 Americans will not be able to stop. This is ridiculous. There is no plan. I ask the president and everyone else who comes forward with a plan, whether it's 'capping' or 'surging' or whatever they have, what will answer the two-word test? Then what? Then what? Then What?

"What happens after we surge these women and men? And by the way, you say General Patraeus is one who believes… He may be the only one who believes this is a good idea! Virtually nobody else thinks it's a good idea."

And on how Bush is breaking the U.S. military:

"So as long as the president keeps us on this ridiculous path, taking us off a cliff -- I ask my colleagues, does anybody think they're going to be able to sustain keeping American forces in Iraq, at 160,000, for another year and a half? What do you think? What do you think is going to happen in Tennessee, in Delaware, in Illinois?

"Are we gonna break this man and woman's army? What are we gonna do here? How many times are we going to ask those 175,000 to rotate, three, four, five, six, seven times?"

And he ends with what every person in Congress should be saying right now: "Mr. President, you're leading us off a cliff. Stop!"

I haven't always been a fan of Joe Biden's and don’t know that I'll ever quite forgive him for the hideous Bankruptcy bill passed a few years ago, but this is a passionate, long-overdue speech that it's good to hear from a Senate Democrat. It's certainly the way all Democratic candidates for president should be talking.

You can see the full video of Biden's speech at the bottom of this post at BobGeiger.com.

Rice Summoned To Senate Foreign Relations Committee Today

Bob Geiger — Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:31:31 -0500

In what will undoubtedly prove to be an awkward bit of timing for her, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will go before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee today, where she can expect to be grilled on George W. Bush's speech last night, in which he announced an escalation of the Iraq war, despite most of the country, the Congress and his top Generals in the field disagreeing with that approach.

Rice can also expect to be quizzed on the conduct of the war so far, as well as what she intends to do on some sort of diplomatic outreach to Syria and Iran -- you know, given that her job is supposed to be about establishing relationships with other countries that actually benefit the United States and not just about waging war.

Russ Feingold (D-WI), a committee member and an outspoken critic of the entire Iraq debacle, will certainly be chomping at the bit to ask Rice some tough questions.

"Congress must bring an end to what has been one of the greatest foreign policy mistakes in the history of our nation," said Feingold, in response to Bush's speech last night. "The President continues to deny the devastating impact that keeping our brave troops in Iraq is having on our national security. The American people have rejected the Administration’s Iraq-centric foreign policy. It is time to bring our troops out of Iraq and refocus on defeating the global terrorist networks that threaten this country.”

What should also make for some interesting questioning, is a unique dynamic of five announced and possible presidential candidates sitting on the Foreign Relations Committee and acutely aware of how unpopular the Bush administration is with the American people and their chance to ask tough questions at exactly the right time.

Sitting on the committee with Joe Biden (D-DE), who has already announced his candidacy, are Chris Dodd (D-CT) -- who just announced this morning -- John Kerry (D-MA), Barack Obama (D-IL) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE).

"Everybody is going to want to get their voices heard," said one Democratic aide. "It’s going to be time for everybody to step up and propose ways forward in Iraq."

And if Rice is looking for friendly Republican faces on the committee, she may want to glance away from Nebraska Republican Chuck Hagel, a high-decorated Vietnam Veteran, who has been a harsh critic of Bush administration policy in Iraq for two years. Here's what Hagel said just yesterday about the Bush-McCain doctrine of escalating America's involvement in Iraq:

“I am opposed to the escalation of American involvement in Iraq, including more U.S. troops. This is a dangerously wrong-headed strategy that will drive America deeper into an unwinnable swamp at a great cost. It is wrong to place American troops into the middle of Iraq’s civil war.

"It is not in America’s national interest to increase our troop presence in Iraq. The President’s strategy will cost more American lives, sink us deeper into the bog of Iraq making it more difficult to get out, cost billions of dollars more, further strain an American military that has already reached its breaking point, further diminish America’s standing in the Middle East, and continue to allow the Iraqis to walk away from their responsibilities."

This experience with actual oversight may not be easy for Rice, who has for her entire tenure as Secretary of State appeared before Republican-led Congressional committees more inclined to ask probing questions like "how was your weekend?" and "seen any good movies lately?" so we'll see how this goes today.

But Congress actually operating the way it's supposed to and holding the executive branch of government accountable… What a concept.

You can read more from Bob at BobGeiger.com.