Tag Archives: Joe Biden

political news

Run, Joe, run for the White House

Hillary Clinton is looking suddenly a bit less invincible as she ponders whether to run for president next year.

Is it time, then, for Vice President Joe Biden to ramp up his own interest in seeking the Top Job?

Sure. Why not?

http://news.yahoo.com/biden-should-run–now-221648790.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory&soc_trk=tw

That’s the case being made by Matt Bai, a veteran political reporter, who writes that Biden should run “and run now.”

There’s something so very un-Democratic Party-like in anointing someone to the presidential nomination when there’s so much over which to argue.

Hillary Clinton does present a formidable record to present to Democratic voters. But as we’ve learned in recent days, she does present some vulnerabilities. The email kerfuffle has revealed an apparent penchant for secrecy that can be exploited.

Biden, given his own penchant for garrulousness, would seem to be the anti-secrecy candidate.

He’s also an experienced politician. Biden served more than 30 years in the Senate before being elected vice president in 2008. He’s held key Senate chairmanships, leading the Judiciary and Foreign Relations committees. Biden is known to be a foreign policy expert and one who has built many relationships over the years with key foreign leaders.

The political equation, though, is getting murky. Clinton is going to speak about the email matter later today. Perhaps she’ll put the controversy to rest — although no one believes the right-wing mainstream media will let the matter go so quickly.

Meantime, the vice president of the United States — who’s let it be known that he’s interested in the working in that Oval Office — should get ready to rumble.

 

International news, political news

Note to Dems: Don't boycott Bibi's speech

The upcoming speech by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to a joint session of Congress is taking an interesting — and unfortunate — turn.

Some leading Democratic lawmakers say they’re going to stay away from the March 3 speech. They won’t hear what Bibi has to say to them, including whether to impose stricter sanctions on Iran while the U.S. is leading a negotiating effort to end Iran’s nuclear program.

Vice President Biden won’t attend; his office said the VP will be traveling abroad when Netanyahu speaks to the joint session. I can’t help but wonder: Did the vice president schedule the overseas trip before or after Netanyahu’s speech was scheduled?

Don’t go there, Democrats.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/232065-dems-lining-up-to-skip-netanyahu-speech

Yes, Netanyahu is wrong to have accepted the invitation from Republican House Speaker John Boehner — who also was wrong to invite him without advising the White House. What’s more, Netanyahu is wrong to pressure Congress to act over the objections of the White House, which believes increasing sanctions now would undermine its efforts to disarm the Islamic Republic of Iran.

But is staying away from the speech the right approach to protesting? I’m inclined to think Democrats ought to hear — in person — what the prime minister has to say. They don’t have to stand and cheer when he delivers an applause line; Republicans undoubtedly will do enough cheering to fill the House chamber.

Come on, Netanyahu is the head of government of a leading U.S. ally, after all, and he deserves an audience — even if the invitation he accepted was not in keeping with American diplomatic and political tradition.

 

International news, political news

A mistake, yes; a disgrace, no

Ron Fournier of the National Journal has managed to put the kerfuffle over the White House’s error in not sending a high-profile marcher to the Paris “unity rally” in its proper perspective.

President Obama and the White House senior staff made a mistake, he writes, but there was no “disgrace,” as some of the president’s critics on the right have called it.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/obama-s-mistake-is-no-disgrace-20150112

I’ve stated already that the White House needed to have sent a high-level emissary to march in the rally that commemorated Western resolve in the face of terrorism in the wake of that horrifying massacre at the Charlie Hebdo magazine offices.

The error of omission, though, did not signal a lack of resolve or a lack of support for France of other nations victimized by these hideous monsters.

Fournier notes that the U.S. ambassador to France did attend the rally. But then he adds: “Personally, I’ve got no problem with the U.S. ambassador representing my country in Paris. If it was my call to make, I would have put (Vice President Joe) Biden on a plane. But did Obama let the world down? Take a breath. After all this country has done for Europe in the last century, let’s not confuse a mistake with something more meaningful.”

Let’s understand, though, that we’re about to embark on another presidential election campaign. I’m virtually certain that Republicans running for the White House are going to ensure that this episode doesn’t fade away.

For all any of us know, they’re likely to blame Hillary Rodham Clinton — the presumptive Democratic frontrunner — for all of it.

 

International news

Where were POTUS and VPOTUS?

The right-wing media are going to have a serious field day with this potential error of omission.

Still, the question persists: Why weren’t the president and/or vice president of the United States among those attending the “unity rally” in Paris today?

The rally held in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo massacre was meant to demonstrate western resolve in the fight against terrorist madness. German Chancellor Angela Merkel was there, along with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu … among many others who joined the throng of hundreds of thousands of French citizens.

The U.S. ambassador to France was there. OK. That’s good, too.

It might be that critics will have a point that if a rally was important to draw heads of state and government from around the world, it would have added amazingly poignant symbolism to have the leaders of the Free World at the front of the pack of dignitaries.

Secretary of State John Kerry happened to be in India attending an important meeting there with our Indian allies. I’ll give him a pass.

President Obama and Vice President Biden? They well might have been able to adjust their schedules to attend this rally to demonstrate against a murderous rampage that has shaken the world.

 

national news

Officers' death 'touched soul of nation'

Vice President Joe Biden said this week that the deaths of two New York City police officers “touched the soul of the nation.”

I’m not entirely sure what he means by that, but the deaths did spark an additional — and much-needed — national conversation about the right and wrong ways to respond to controversy involving law enforcement.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/biden-ny-officers-deaths-touched-soul-of-nation/ar-BBhfTb1

The vice president attended the funeral of Rafael Ramos, one of two officers gunned down in Brooklyn the other day by a goon who was responding to the choking death of Eric Garner in a Staten Island confrontation with officers. Garner’s death and the grand jury decision not to indict the officer who choked Garner to death, coming on the heels of the Ferguson, Mo., shooting of Michael Brown, has contributed a lot of unrest, violence and further criminal activity.

Ramos’s death along with fellow officer Wenjian Liu has touched many Americans at many levels. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo called the shootings “an attack on all of us.”

There can be no silver lining to be found in this incident, other than to call attention to the lawless response to perceived wrongs done by the criminal justice system.

The grand jury — in my view — erred on not indicting the officer who choked Eric Garner to death. No responsible individual, though, responds by attacking other police officers in the cowardly manner that resulted in the deaths of Ramos and Liu.

It does my heart some measure of good to see these officers honored. They were heroes of the first order. And yes, their deaths have touched our soul.

 

military news, national news, political news

Hagel bids awkward adieu at Defense

Talk about an awkward moment.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel resigned today amid media reports that he was forced out by the White House that reportedly was unhappy with the way he communicated foreign policy strategy. Then, in an extraordinary attempt at trying to look happy about his departure, he stood with President Obama and Vice President Biden, both of whom heaped praise on their “friend.”

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/24/politics/defense-secretary-hagel-to-step-down/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

This is how you play the game in Washington, or I suppose in any government power center.

Hagel will stay on until the next defense secretary gets confirmed by the Senate.

And here is where it will get real interesting.

A cadre of bomb-throwing Republicans are vowing to block future presidential appointments in retaliation for Obama’s executive order on immigration this past week. The bomb thrower in chief, of course, is the Texas loudmouth Sen. Ted Cruz, who did qualify his threat by saying he wouldn’t object to key national security appointments.

Well, someone must tell me if there is a more important national security post than that of defense secretary. I can’t think of one.

I have zero confidence that Cruz will step aside and let this next appointment get the kind of “fair and thorough” confirmation hearing he or she will deserve.

But let’s hope for the best.

As for Hagel, I’m sorry to see him go. I rather liked the fact that an enlisted Vietnam War combat veteran was picked to lead the Pentagon. I also appreciated that Obama reached across the aisle to select a Republican former senator for this key post. I thought Hagel acquitted himself well under extreme pressure when the chips were down. He was at the helm during a time of enormous change at the Pentagon.

Our military force is still the strongest in the history of the world. I am quite certain we will maintain or position as the world’s pre-eminent military power.

Now, let’s find a successor and get the new person confirmed.

national news, political news

Take heed, Mr. Majority Leader

1 Comment

Mitch McConnell has wanted to become majority leader of the U.S. Senate.

I feel the need to remind the Kentucky Republican to be “careful what you wish for.”

He’s about to have his hands full. Not so much from Democrats, who are licking their wounds and trying to regroup from the pounding they took at the polls Nov. 4. No, McConnell’s worries well might come from within his own Republican caucus.

I’ll sum it up in two words: Ted Cruz.

Cruz is the freshman Republican from Texas who has delusions of grandeur, specifically the White House. He wants to be president someday. Maybe he’ll make a run for it in 2016. He might wait until 2020 and then go full force if a Democrat wins the ’16 contest.

But here’s ol’ Mitch, vowing to take President Obama up on a request to sip some Kentucky bourbon with the new majority leader. I believe deep down that McConnell really wants to “work with” the president. But he’s got that goofy caucus within his GOP caucus that won’t hear of it.

This is the tea party wing, led by Cruz.

It still amazes me that this freshman loudmouth has gotten so much attention in so little time.

Cruz wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act and replace it with … um, well we don’t know. He said something the other day about “net neutrality” is like “Obamacare for the Internet,” whatever the bleep that means. He seems to oppose immigration reform, which is odd given that he’s an immigrant from Canada.

Here’s the thing with Cruz. He isn’t alone in thinking this way. He’s just managed to become the mouthpiece for many of the hard-righties within the Senate who think as he does.

McConnell is more of an “establishment” guy. He’s actually got friends within the Obama administration, one of them being, for example, Vice President Biden, with whom he served in the Senate until Biden was elected VP in 2008.

So, the question can be asked of Majority Leader-to-be McConnell: Is the job you coveted really worth having if you’re going to have to fend off the challenges from your own extremist wing?

Good luck, Mr. Majority Leader.

 

 

 

International news, military news

VP says he's sorry to Turkish leader

Vice President Joe Biden has apologized to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan for remarks he made that supposedly implied that Turkey intentionally let weapons slip into Syria and into the hands of Islamic State terrorists.

I am dubious of the need for the vice president to say he’s sorry. I’m mostly dubious that what he said actually implied any intent on the Turks’ inability to stop the flow of arms from their country into Syria.

Biden apologizes to Turkish leader

He had said that Turkey had let fighters migrate from Turkey into Syria carrying arms and munitions. Erdogan took the vice president’s remarks as suggesting the Turks did so intentionally.

Biden said that wasn’t what he meant and he has “clarified” his statement to Erdogan. I am hoping we’ve made peace with our critical ally.

Therein lies the reason for the apology in the first place.

Turkey is allowing use of its air space to launch strikes against ISIL targets in Syria. The Turks also are planning to provide actual military support as well. Indeed, the Turks arguably are the strongest military power (excluding Israel) in the entire Middle East. Turkey has demonstrated over many, many years to be a fierce, resilient and capable military force in any conflict in which it has been engaged.

The U.S.-led coalition now fighting ISIL in Syria and Iraq will need the Turks’ know-how and ferocity if it intends to destroy the heinous terror organization.

Thus, the apology.

International news

Security issue crosses a new border

Well, it seems that border security isn’t just an American problem.

Vice President Biden said recently that Turkey has allowed fighters to cross into Syria to join the Islamic State in its fight against the world. His statement drew a sharp rebuke from Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, who has demanded an apology from the vice president.

http://thehill.com/policy/international/219780-turkish-president-demands-apology-from-biden

Erdogan’s take? He said, according to The Hill: “‘Foreign fighters have never entered Syria from our country. They may come to our country as tourists and cross into Syria, but no one can say that they cross in with their arms,’ Erdogan continued, saying the country had prevented 6,000 suspected jihadist members from entering the country and deported another 1,000.”

This sounds vaguely familiar.

There might be a serious semantic problem that needs to be clarified.

Critics of the Obama administration keep harping on the “porous” southern border with Mexico, yet ignore that U.S. border agents are rounding up illegal immigrants daily and have been returning them to their home countries in record numbers. Is the border really “porous” if we’re catching people coming here illegally? Just asking.

Now we hear about border security issues in one of the most dangerous places on Earth. Syria years ago erupted into civil conflict. It’s been bloody and ruthless. Neighboring nations ought to be locking down their own borders with Syria, particularly with news of the thousands of foreign fighters joining the hideous forces waging battle against the tyrannical regime of Bashar al-Assad.

So, what did the vice president say? He criticized Turkey and Arab nations for supporting Sunni militant groups that turned out to comprise fighters from around the world.

I’ll give the vice president the benefit of the doubt on this one. He may have been asserting that Turkey needs to do a better job of securing its borders with a nation at war with itself. These conflicts have ways of spilling over into neighboring nations.

So, if the Turks are our allies, then they need to demonstrate their commitment to joining the fight by locking down their border and ensuring the foreign fighters don’t enter the Syrian battlefield from Turkey.

national news, political news, State news

Who's going to jump in '16?

It’s getting fun watching the prospective candidates for president in 2016 start hedging whether they’re actually going to make the plunge.

The latest apparently is Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who might run for the Republican nomination in two years.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/219692-rubio-decision-to-run-in-2016-wont-depend-on-bush

Rubio says his decision won’t depend on whether former Florida Gov.Jeb Bush decides to run. Rubio says he hasn’t talked to the former governor, but the fact that he’s talking about it at all suggests — to me, at least — that he’s got Jeb on his radar.

So, let’s ponder these other possibilities:

* U.S. House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan says he likely won’t run if his 2012 Republican presidential nominee running mate Mitt Romney jumps in. No word from Romney what he plans to do if Ryan goes ahead with a run.

* Vice President Joe Biden likely will consider backing out of the Democratic contest if former senator, former secretary of state and former first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton decides to go for it.

* Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas wants to seek the GOP nomination, but will he go if another talkative Texan, lame-duck Gov. Rick Perry jumps into the race?

* And is Perry going to make the leap if Cruz decides it’s his time to run?

Of all the fascinating what-ifs to ponder, I’m interested mostly in the Texas two-step that might play out between Perry and Cruz.

Perry’s been to the well once already. He flamed out badly before the first primary took place in New Hampshire. He’s trying to re-craft his brand. Cruz is the still-quite-new junior senator from Texas who entered the upper congressional chamber in January 2013 with his mouth blazing away. He hasn’t shut his trap since.

Both of these guys have never seen a TV camera they didn’t like. Cruz is especially enamored of the sound of his voice and the appearance of his face on TV.

It’s going to be tough for both of them to run for president, each trying to outflank the other on the right wing of their already-extreme right-wing party.

Who will jump in first? And will the other one back away?

And what about Ryan and Romney, Biden and Clinton, and Rubio and Bush?

This is going to get tense.