Tag Archives: Joe Biden

Political Rants

Muddle in the middle.

If you’re as obsessive about politics as I am, you probably watched the “CNN Democratic Debates” this week, brought to you by CNN, hosted by CNN, and did I mention CNN was somehow involved? What the hell ever happened to the League of Women Voters, anyway? This notion of presidential debates being treated like commercial media properties is beyond ridiculous. Debates should not be some pre-packaged product served up by powerful corporations who benefit from the free-for-all media environment our bought politicians have built for them over the years. As if that wasn’t bad enough, the three purported journalists moderating the event were hell-bent on getting the various candidates to mix it up, posing questions that were, at worst, the equivalent of “Are you just going to stand there and let her say that about you?” and, at best, cheap rehashes of Republican party talking points. (Jake Tapper is such a freaking waste of space.)

Night one had the two progressive candidates plus what seemed like a legion of also-rans and never-heard-of-ems. Bernie and Warren both did fine, given the full-on frontal attack both were subjected to from the Frackenlooper chorus and the “moderators” (they kind of gave that term a new meaning, come to think of it). I thought Warren was, once again, particularly sharp, agile. Delaney appeared to be the main foil, and he got roasted once or twice, despite Tapper and company’s best efforts to cue him up as the reasonable alternative to what they consider to be radicalism, but which is no more radical in the main than the types of policies Eisenhower was comfortable supporting. Night two was cast as a re-match, in essence, between Harris and Biden – I saw CNN’s run-up to the main event, and it was a cross between reality show and prize fight promo. Ridiculous.

Never-Trump windbags attempt to school dems

The whole spectacle told us more about our prevailing media culture than it did about the candidates’ positions. One small example – in a brief discussion of the Green New Deal and related legislation, one question centered on the idea that the bill would entail guaranteed government jobs with benefits. As the candidates responded, the super showed the question as something like: “Should the Green New Deal include guaranteed government jobs with paid vacations?” These people are so steeped in the neoliberal myth of our current “prosperity” (based on millions of crappy jobs) that the very concept of stable work with benefits seems bat-shit crazy to them.

Speaking of bat-shit crazy, the CNN shills were outdone by their counterparts on Morning Joe on Thursday morning. Joe, Mika, and the whole crew were appalled by the previous night’s performance, saying the candidates were attacking Obama all night. Not sure they saw the same debate as I did, but this is the type of input Democrats should expect from never-Trump Republicans like Scarborough: We should rewind back to 2008 and stay right there, folks. Take that from someone who endlessly criticized Obama from one end of his presidency to the other. Oh … and here comes uber-moderate Claire McCaskle (sp) to tell us how to win in swing states like Missouri, which she lost only last year.

What an enormous pile of shit.

luv u,

jp

Political Rants

Debatable.

I’m starting this post while watching the first Democratic debate.  Too many candidates, of course – I think that’s obvious. It’s kind of dizzying, frankly. John Delaney wants to double the earned income tax credit … whoopdee doo, right? What the hell is that fucker doing there? He wants to keep what’s working, like … private health care? What the fuck. This is like some kind of game show.

Highlights? Well, on night one, Elizabeth Warren put in a strong performance, but with nine colleagues to compete with on time – and sixty second answers – it’s hard to get to a substantive level on any issue. Foreign policy was, as always, a rough spot, with questions about “red lines” and “duty to protect”. In my mind, this points to one of the biggest drawbacks of these corporate-sponsored, major network hosted candidate forums. The questions strongly reflect what the mainstream media considers the broadly held political consensus on major issues.

With respect to foreign policy, when Lester Holt asks candidates where they would draw a “red line”, he’s drawing on the Syrian war debate during the Obama administration, when hawks backed the president into a corner of his “red line” comment, hoping to get another American invasion of the middle east out of it. Obama disappointed them, but has been called out for “fecklessness” ever since by the Joe Scarboroughs of the world. The idea that there should be some “red line” beyond which we plunge ourselves into a murderous, costly, and self-destructive conflict is simply ludicrous. I’m not a huge fan of Tulsi Gabbard, but she was the only one on that stage that seriously pushed back on that and on the “humanitarian intervention” question.

Probably six too many.

Then there was the question, again from Holt, to Elizabeth Warren about whether she would agree to any restrictions on abortion. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work out the premise for that question. Trump has been running around the country, describing with glee his fairy stories about newborn infant executions at the hands of craven women and their nefarious abortion doctors.  This question was an attempt to get the candidates to weigh in on mythical late-term abortions, and thankfully no one took the bait, though I wish one of these candidates would just swat that bullshit down, once and for all.

The second debate was kind of a crap show. I will return to that in next week’s installment.

luv u,

jp

Political Rants

Rundown.

The first Democratic debates will take place in less than two weeks, so I thought it might be appropriate for me to do a rundown on the various contenders. No, I’m not going to comment on all 24 (or is it 25?) – just the ones that rise to the top of my tiny mind. I am not using any polling or fundraising criteria to make this determination. My standard is a simple one: if I know nothing about you, I will not express an opinion; if I do know something about you, I may not express an opinion. Sound fair? Great … here goes.

Joe Biden. I’m not a huge fan of the former vice president, though I will admit that in 1988 I was more than ready to vote for him over some of the other flaccid contenders. His record in the Senate is worse than patchy, with odious votes on the crime bill, the Iraq war, the bankruptcy bill, and so on, though it was worse than mere voting, as he presided over committees with jurisdiction over various pieces of destructive legislation. In spite of his cultivated “regular Joe” image, he’s quite cozy with Wall Street and high tech, and is kind of a gaffe machine besides. My biggest hope for him is that he is made to debate either Sanders or Warren.

Bernie Sanders. Clearly my favorite in this field, both from a policy standpoint and from a consistency / trustworthiness perspective. Bernie has fought the good fight for decades and would make a great president. (He even came out in support of Lula this past week – extra points!)

Elizabeth Warren. She is certainly among the smartest, most considered candidates in this group, and has very well articulated policies. Haven’t heard much out of her on foreign policy, but all will be revealed, I suspect.

Shake your fist all you want, Joe. I ain't buying.

Kamala Harris. Says some okay things and has proposed one or two serviceable policies, but at present there isn’t a lot of there there, and aspects of her record are troubling – particularly her failure to prosecute Steve Mnuchin’s mortgage bank when she was California attorney general. A bit Obama-like in that people tend to project progressivism onto her.

Cory Booker. Problematic on education privatization and financial services. Okay on criminal justice reform and reparations.

Pete Buttigieg. Smooth talker, that mayor Pete. Has said some good, vague things, and some not so good. His record as mayor is not so hot, but let’s see what he says.

What about Frackenlooper and the others? That’s what next week is for. Assuming we’re not at war with Iran by then. Lord help us.

luv u,

jp