About Me & This Website
My Positions
On Facebook
Contact Me

Articles
  Pro-Caucus Chairman
  Free the Delegates
  Social Security Unsoundness
  Clinton Surplus Myth
  Taxes, Rich & Poor
  Clinton Surplus Myth, Pt. 2
  Financial Crisis
  Obama's Economy
  More articles...

Videos
  Live: U.S. Senate
  Live: U.S. House
  America's Marines

Some Humor
  Time for Campaignin'

Amazing Bidenism of the Day   April 7th, 2009
When is a Biden interview ever a good idea?       

 
QUICK OBSERVATIONS

More observations...
 

Vice President Biden today said something that just about leaves me at a loss for words.

Vice President Joe Biden brushed aside recent criticism by predecessor Dick Cheney that moves by the Obama administration had put the United States at risk, telling CNN on Tuesday that the former vice president was "dead wrong."

"I don't think [Cheney] is out of line, but he is dead wrong," he told CNN's Wolf Blitzer. "This administration -- the last administration left us in a weaker posture than we've been any time since World War II: less regarded in the world, stretched more thinly than we ever have been in the past, two wars under way, virtually no respect in entire parts of the world.

"... I guarantee you we are safer today, our interests are more secure today than they were any time during the eight years" of the Bush administration.


How do you even respond to something like that?

The last administration left us in a weaker posture than any time since World War II? I'd say we were weaker when Clinton did nothing in response to the first WTC attack in 1993. Then we were hit again in 2001 after eight years of neglect. If we survive until September 11th, 2009 without a significant domestic terrorist attack, history will have demonstrated Biden 100% wrong: Clinton left us weaker, Bush made us stronger.

Other than that, the criticisms Cheney leveled we're (less regarded in the world, two wars under way, no respect) doesn't make us less safe. In fact, they are irrelevant to our safety. And I've seen no evidence that anything the Obama administration has done has made us safer. Cheney's claim that we're less safe is certainly open for debate, but more safe after about two months of the Obama administration? How so? Are we to believe that terrorists that were planning to strike us have thrown in the towel because Obama has announced the closure of Guantanamo Bay? Really?

... Biden said that he had no concerns that a recent uptick in violence in Iraq might affect plans to withdraw most U.S. troops from that country by the summer of 2010.

"I'm not worried about that at all. We will draw down along the timeline we suggested," the vice president said.


So our withdrawal from Iraq is not based on conditions on the ground, but is now set in stone? If terrorists start showing up again in Iraq and we leave anyway, how does that make us safer?

And in Afghanistan...

A report last week said Biden had warned about the possibility of getting into a quagmire, while military advisers pushed for more troops...

The vice president said that he condemned a new Afghan law that would allow men to rape their wives, but that those issues were not the focus of the U.S. presence in that nation. "I am not prepared to send American troops to die for that," he said.


I don't think military advisers would push for more troops for that either. But they're pushing for more troops. Are those troops going to be denied even though Obama, during the campaign, said Afghanistan was the front line in the war against terrorism? And aren't these the same people that feared a surge in Iraq would get us further into another Vietnam, into a quagmire. We ended up winning that, but now they're using the same excuse in Afghanistan?

We will win every war that we have the political resolve to win. Does the administration not understand that?

A day after North Korea's rocket test sparked alarm from world leaders, Biden called for a tougher response from Moscow and Beijing...

He added that China could "do a great deal more," although he was uncertain it would. "I think this puts the onus on China and Russia and South Korea and Japan, et cetera, along with us, to be bolder in our condemnation."


A nuclear-armed rogue nation is launching missiles that get closer to the U.S. mainland with every attempt. And that puts the onus on us to issue a bolder condemnation? Should we put it in italics? Boldface? Should we make the font red? I'm feeling safer already...

"I remember President Bush saying to me one time in the Oval Office, and he was a great guy, enjoyed being with him. He said to me, he said, 'Well, Joe,' he said, 'I'm a leader.' And I said, 'Mr. President, turn around and look behind you. No one's following.' People are beginning to follow the United States again as a consequence of our administration."


Really? In what? Obama asked for a reduction in nuclear arms and, instead, North Korea tested its advancing ability to delivery nuclear weapons. Obama wanted a strong U.N. response to North Korea but so far Russia and China have made that impossible . Obama wanted the G20 to support 2% of GDP in stimulus, but was basically rejected with a world less convinced that additional deficit spending is the solution. And while he was hoping for some troop support from allies in Afghanistan, that support was not to be found.

Who exactly is following us now that wasn't following us three months ago?

I have to pause and wonder whose brilliant idea it was to let Biden do this interview.

 Go to the article list