Elect Barack Obama
Impeach Bush & Cheney!
"Google" your Voter Registration
Register to Vote
Vote Early-Absentee-Nov4
Visit the Democratic Party
User loginNavigation![]() "The 35 Articles of Impeachment and the Case for Prosecuting George W. Bush" is available for $12; a free downloadable PDF is also available. |
Joe BidenI 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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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.
|
Ending 21st Century Discrimination
Ending 21st Century Discrimination
http://www.joebiden.com/issues/?id=0025
Joe Biden believes that no one in this country should be discriminated against because of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or disability. He believes that government has an obligation to ensure that individuals are free from discrimination and that fundamental principle – that freedom and justice should be equally applied to each American. He would
Joe Biden Has a Plan for the War
Iraq: A Way Forward
http://www.joebiden.com/issues/?id=0009
President Bush does not have a strategy for victory in Iraq. His strategy is to prevent defeat and to hand the problem off to his successor. As a result, more and more Americans understandably want a rapid withdrawal, even at the risk of trading a dictator for chaos and a civil war that could become a regional war. Both are bad alternatives.
There is a third way that can achieve the two objectives most Americans share: to bring our troops home without leaving chaos behind. The idea is to maintain a unified Iraq by federalizing it and giving Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis breathing room in their own regions. The central government would be responsible for common interests, like border security and the distribution of oil revenues. The plan would bind the Sunnis - who have no oil -- by guaranteeing them a proportionate share of oil revenues. It would convene an international conference to secure support for the power sharing arrangement and produce a regional nonaggression pact, overseen by a Contact Group of major powers. It would call on the U.S. military to withdraw most U.S. troops from Iraq by the summer of 2008, with a residual force to keep Iraqis and their neighbors honest. It would increase economic aid but tie it to the protection of minority rights and the creation of a jobs program and seek funding from the oil-rich Gulf Arab states. The new, central reality in Iraq is deep and growing sectarian violence between the Shiites and Sunnis. In last December's elections, 90 percent of the votes went to sectarian lists. Ethnic militias increasingly are the law in Iraq. They have infiltrated the official security forces. Massive unemployment is feeding the sectarian militia. Sectarian cleansing has forced at least 250,000 Iraqis to flee their homes in recent months. At the same time, Al Qaeda is now so firmly entrenched in Western Iraq that it has morphed into an indigenous jihadist threat. As a result, Iraq risks becoming what it was not before the war: a haven for radical fundamentalists.
There is no purely military solution to the sectarian civil war. The only way to break the vicious cycle of violence - and to create the conditions for our armed forces to responsibly withdraw -- is to give Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds incentives to pursue their interests peacefully. That requires an equitable and viable power sharing arrangement. That's where Joe Biden's plan comes in. This plan is not partition - in fact, it may be the only way to prevent violent partition and preserve a unified Iraq. This plan is consistent with Iraq's constitution, which provides for Iraq's 18 provinces to join together in regions, with their own security forces, and control over most day-to-day issues. This plan is the only idea on the table for dealing with the militia, which are likely to retreat to their respective regions. This plan is consistent with a strong central government, with clearly defined responsibilities. Indeed, it provides an agenda for that government, whose mere existence will not end sectarian violence.
The example of Bosnia is illustrative. Ten years ago, Bosnia was being torn apart by ethnic cleansing. The United States stepped in decisively with the Dayton Accords to keep the country whole by, paradoxically, dividing it into ethnic federations. We even allowed Muslims, Croats and Serbs to retain separate armies. With the help of U.S. troops and others, Bosnians have lived a decade in peace. Now, they are strengthening their central government, and disbanding their separate armies.
The course we're on leads to a terrible civil war and possibly a regional war. Joe Biden's plan is designed to head that off. He believe it is the best way to bring our troops home, protect our fundamental security interests, and preserve Iraq as a unified country.
The question for those who reject this plan is simple: what is your alternative?
A Five Point Plan for Iraq
1. Establish One Iraq, with Three Regions
2. Share Oil Revenues
3. Convene International Conference, Enforce Regional Non-Aggression Pact
4. Responsibly Drawdown US Troops
5. Increase Reconstruction Assistance and Create a Jobs Program
Plan for Iraq: What It Is - and What It Is Not
Some commentators have either misunderstood the Plan, or mischaracterized it. Here is what the plan is - and what it is not:
1. The Plan is not partition.
In fact, it may be the only way to prevent a violent partition - which has already started -- and preserve a unified Iraq. We call for a strong central government, with clearly defined responsibilities for truly common interests like foreign policy and the distribution of oil revenues. Indeed, the Plan provides an agenda for that government, whose mere existence will not end sectarian violence.
2. The Plan is not a foreign imposition.
To the contrary, it is consistent with Iraq's constitution, which already provides for Iraq's 18 provinces to join together in regions, with their own security forces, and control over most day-to-day issues. On October 11, Iraq's parliament approved legislation to implement the constitution's articles on federalism. Prior to the British colonial period and Saddam's military dictatorship, what is now Iraq functioned as three largely autonomous regions.
But federalism alone is not enough. To ensure Sunni support, it is imperative that Iraqis also agree to an oil revenue sharing formula that guarantees the Sunni region economic viability. The United States should strongly promote such an agreement. The final decisions will be up to Iraqis, but if we do not help them arrange the necessary compromises, nothing will get done. At key junctures in the past, we have used our influence to shape political outcomes in Iraq, notably by convincing the Shiites and Kurds to accept a provision allowing for the constitution to be amended following its adoption, which was necessary to secure Sunni participation in the referendum. Using our influence is not the same as imposing our will. With 140,000 Americans at risk, we have a right and an obligation to make known our views.
3. The Plan is not an invitation to sectarian cleansing.
Tragically, that invitation has been sent, received and acted upon. Since the Samarra mosque bombing in February, one quarter of a million Iraqis have fled their homes for fear of sectarian violence, at a rate now approaching 10,000 people a week. That does not include hundreds of thousands of Iraqis - many from the professional class - who have left Iraq since the war. Only a political settlement, as proposed in the Plan, has a chance to stop this downward spiral.
4. The Plan is the only idea on the table for dealing with the sectarian militia.
It offers a realistic albeit interim solution. Realistic, because none of the major groups will give up their militia voluntarily in the absence of trust and confidence and neither we or the Iraqi government has the means to force them to do so. Once federalism is implemented, the militias are likely to retreat to their respective regions to protect their own and vie for power, instead of killing the members of other groups. But it is only an interim solution, because no nation can sustain itself peacefully with private armies. Over time, if a political settlement endures, the militia would be incorporated into regional and national forces, as is happening in Bosnia.
5. The Plan is an answer to the problem of mixed cities.
Large cities with mixed populations present a challenge under any plan now being considered. The essence of the Plan is that mixed populations can only live together peacefully if their leadership is truly satisfied with the overall arrangement. If so, that leadership will help keep the peace in the cities. At the same time, we would make Baghdad a federal city, and buttress the protection of minorities there and in the other mixed cities with an international peacekeeping force. Right now, the prospect for raising such a force is small. But following a political settlement, an international conference and the establishment of a Contact Group, others are more likely to participate, including countries like Saudi Arabia which have offered peacekeepers in the past.
6. The Plan is in the self-interest of Iran.
Iran likes it exactly as it is in Iraq - with the United States bogged down and bleeding. But the prospect of a civil war in Iraq is not in Tehran's interest: it could easily spill over Iraq's borders and turn into a regional war with neighbors intervening on opposing sides and exacerbating the Sunni-Shiite divide at a time Shiite Iran is trying to exert leadership in the Islamic world. Iran also would receive large refugee flows as Iraqis flee the fighting. Iran, like all of Iraq's neighbors, has an interest in Iraq remaining unified and not splitting into independent states. Iran does not want to see an independent Kurdistan emerge and serve as an example for its own restive 5 million Kurds. That's why Iran - and all of Iraq's neighbors -- can and should be engaged to support a political settlement in Iraq.
7. The Plan is in the self-interest of Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.
The Sunnis increasingly understand they will not regain power in Iraq. Faced with the choice of being a permanent minority player in a central government dominated by Shiites or having the freedom to control their day-to-day lives in a Sunni region, they are likely to choose the latter provided they are guaranteed a fair share of oil revenues to make their region viable. The Shiites know they can dominate Iraq politically, but not defeat a Sunni insurgency, which can bleed Iraq for years. The Kurds may dream of independence, but fear the reaction of Turkey and Iran - their interest is to achieve as much autonomy as possible while keeping Iraq together. Why would Shiites and Kurds give up some oil revenues to the Sunnis? Because that is the price of peace and the only way to attract the massive foreign investment needed to maximize Iraqi oil production. The result will be to give Shiites and Kurds a smaller piece of a much larger oil pie and give all three groups an incentive to protect the oil infrastructure.
Joe Biden Empowering Women to Take Charge/WILL DEFEND ROE V WADE
Empowering Women to Take Charge
http://www.joebiden.com/issues?id=0021
Joe Biden: Empowering Women to Take Charge
Stopping Violence Against Women: Joe Biden led the fight to criminalize violence against women and to hold batterers truly accountable by writing the ground-breaking Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) in the 1990s. It encouraged states to set up coordinated community responses to domestic violence and rape; spurred states to pass hundreds of laws prohibiting family violence; and provided resources to create shelters so battered women abused by husbands and boyfriends had a safe place to go. The law also established a national hotline for abused women that over 1.5 million have used for help. By training law enforcement and prosecutors to treat abuse like the crime it is by arresting and convicting abusive husbands instead of telling them to take a walk around the block, and by empowering women to make changes in their lives, domestic violence is down 50 percent and rape is down 60 percent nationwide. However, there remains work to be done, so in 2007, the Senator introduced the National Domestic Violence Volunteer Attorney Network Act, an innovative initiative that would recruit volunteer lawyers and match them with domestic violence victims.
Working for Equality in the Workplace: Joe Biden has fought to level the playing field for women at work through legislation punishing sexual harassment and working to end pay inequity. Today, women still face pay inequality, earning on average 77 cents for every dollar a man makes doing the same work. In an effort to address this discrimination, Joe Biden is a strong supporter of the Paycheck Fairness Act and the Fair Pay Restoration Act which works to prevent pay discrimination by strengthening penalties should it occur and fixing a Supreme Court decision that makes it more difficult for women to bring pay discrimination cases. Joe Biden also supported increasing the federal minimum wage from $5.15 where it had been stuck for 10 years to $7.25 an hour, giving more than 7 million women a pay raise in 2007.
Helping In The Workplace And At Home: As a father who parented small children on his own, Joe Biden knows first-hand the challenges of balancing work and family. He recognizes that it can be especially difficult for women, who often make the health-care decisions, take the kids or elderly parents to see the doctor, or stay at home when someone is sick. Joe Biden believes we need to provide all workers, including women, with the flexibility they need to both take care of their families and remain working For this reason, he fought for the Family and Medical Leave Act that has given 50 million workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to look out for a sick family member. As there are many more workers who cannot afford unpaid leave, he is co-sponsoring the Healthy Families Act, which would require employers with 15 or more workers to provide seven paid sick days to care for their own or their families’ medical needs.
Attracting More Teachers and Nurses: Approximately seven million women serve in two professions – teaching and nursing – and both are facing shortages. We lose 250,000 teachers every year, half are leaving within five years of entering the profession. Joe Biden wants to reverse this trend by establishing programs to provide mentoring to all beginning teachers, and by giving scholarships to defray college costs to those who commit to teaching in high-needs schools. Joe Biden believes that we need to reduce class size and pay our teachers more, as they do in many nations around the world. Joe Biden was an early supporter of the Nurse Reinvestment Act, which would fund scholarships for nursing students, and promote public information programs to encourage people to enter the nursing profession.
Protecting Opportunities for Girls In Sports: Thanks to Title IX, which guarantees equal opportunities in college athletics, over 150,000 women today participate in intercollegiate sports teams. Committed to fairness on the fields and courts, Joe Biden has opposed recent efforts to chip away at Title IX protections.
Ending the War In Iraq: 10,000 women are serving in Iraq today and Joe Biden has a plan to honorably bring home the troops, without leaving chaos behind.
Judging the Judges: As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Joe Biden has been a voice of opposition to the Reagan and two Bush Administrations’ attempts to pack the federal courts with judges committed to a narrow view of the Constitution that denies women equal protection under the law.
Joe Biden: Standing With Mothers and Children
Supporting New Moms: Joe Biden knows raising healthy and happy children takes help. As President, he will make two years of pre-k available to all parents and expand early childhood development programs. Joe Biden wants to make two years of pre-school available to all parents. Currently, 900,000 students are served by Head Start, and he would double that to 2 million; currently, 60,000 toddlers are served by Early Head Start, and he would quadruple that to nearly a quarter of a million. He has advocated for more resources for the Women, Infants, and Children program that provides food, nutrition counseling, and access to health services to pregnant women, new mothers, and their infants.
Cracking Down on Deadbeat Dads: While the federal government cannot ensure that children have a father at home, it can help ensure those children have their father’s financial support. As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Joe Biden worked to steer two major child support initiatives into law – one made it a federal crime to cross state lines to avoid paying child support; the other ensured that state courts honor the child support order of other states.
Giving Parents the Tools to Protect Their Kids: Joe Biden has worked over the last two decades to help parents protect their kids from sexual predators. In 1994, he required every state to establish a registry for convicted sexual offenders; in 1996, he helped create the national registry of sexual predators, so these criminals could not move from state to state to avoid being tracked. In 2003, he increased funding for Child Advocacy Centers with the Victims of Child Abuse Act. And in 2006, he authored the Adam Walsh Act to ensure convicted sex offenders can’t slip through the cracks by establishing registration requirements.
Joe Biden: Caring For Women’s Health
Waging War Against Breast Cancer: Joe Biden, through his efforts to promote early detection and quality treatment, has been a leader in fight against this deadly disease that that afflicts more than 200,000 women every year. His efforts include:
Defending Roe v Wade: Senator Biden supports the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade that protects a woman’s right to choose to terminate a pregnancy. Believing family planning could help prevent many unwanted pregnancies, Senator Biden has consistently supported Title X – the nations’ family planning program -- that provides information, services, support, and research for family planning.
Biden in Top Tier in Iowa With Legislative Endorsements
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20070917&Category=NEWS&ArtNo=709170353&Template=printart Biden aiming for 'buzz' with Iowa strategySenator hopes politicos' endorsements translate into support at caucusesBy NICOLE GAUDIANO, Gannett News ServicePosted Monday, September 17, 2007
DAVENPORT, Iowa -- Sen. Joe Biden grabbed Iowa state Sen. Frank Wood's hand, slapped his shoulder and looked him in the eye.
"Look me over," Biden said, standing inches away from Wood at an August picnic for the Scott County Democrats. "If you can't, you can't, but I'd like to have a shot."
Hoping to boost his chances in the first state to choose a Democratic presidential nominee, Biden has been making an aggressive pitch for Iowa lawmakers' support that's producing some surprising results.
While polls place Biden at the back of the eight-candidate Democratic pack, he's in the top tier in Iowa when it comes to legislative endorsements. He received his eighth last week from the state's Democratic House Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy of Des Moines.
As of Friday, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York had 16 legislative endorsements in Iowa, while former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina had eight and Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois had 10, according to their campaigns.
Biden's "experience, especially foreign-policy experience, is just unmatched," said McCarthy, a Polk County prosecutor who helped engineer the Democratic takeover of the Iowa Statehouse last year. "I think he's the most competent to handle the situation in Iraq."
Legislative endorsements are a key part of Biden's strategy for a surprise Iowa caucus showing in January, which he hopes will give him momentum to succeed in other states.
In late 2006 -- before he announced his presidential candidacy -- he attended about 60 events in Iowa, mainly to help Democratic state lawmakers win back the Statehouse. According to McCarthy's count, Biden has appeared at more events for legislative Democrats than any other candidate.
Some of those lawmakers are now helping Biden.
"We're trying to create a buzz out here," said Biden, after speaking at a fundraiser barbecue in Ottumwa for state Rep. Mary Gaskill, who said she would settle on her candidate this month. "This is wide open, and these folks don't endorse if they think you're going to lose."
The importance of endorsements in Iowa is debatable. At a summer panel discussion of elected politicians and party activists at Wartburg College in Waverly, Iowa, the consensus was that they have little value, said Fred Waldstein, a political science professor at the college.
"At least in Iowa, the people will make up their own mind about candidates based upon personal observations and other more direct forms of learning," he said.
But Biden's political director, Danny O'Brien, said the state lawmakers who endorsed Biden "become our surrogates and help us connect with their constituents."
"But just as importantly, they help us send a message nationally as to what's going on in the early states in the face of tough national polls right now that don't have us in the top tier," O'Brien said.
State Rep. Elesha Gayman of Davenport said Biden's pitch for her blessing focused on foreign policy, his experience and "being a fighter, not one to back down from a situation."
"He was probably the more aggressive of [the candidates]," said Gayman, who met twice with Biden. "I had voicemails once a week for a month from him."
The message impressed but didn't sway Gayman -- or Wood -- who instead endorsed Obama. She liked Obama's "vision," while Wood liked "the idea that he's not Washington-ized."
But state Sen. Joe Seng of Davenport said he turned to Biden because of his leadership and 34 years of experience as a senator.
"Those three candidates don't even equal half his tenure in office," Seng said of Clinton, Edwards and Obama's combined years in the Senate. "If you're effective, you need to know the system."
State Rep. Jim Lykam, who was Biden's first legislative endorser, said he likes Biden's plan to "get us out of Iraq."
"Hillary and Obama are raising tons of money, but I think Joe's going to be peaking at the right time," said Lykam
Biden's legislative endorsements include Seng and seven representatives, a number that's "pretty surprising" to Edwards supporter state Rep. Andrew Wenthe, given Biden's standings in the polls and Obama and Clinton's superior investment of money and resources.
Even after running television ads in Iowa, Biden remained low on the list of Iowa registered Democrats, Democratic voters and Democratic caucus-goers, according to a Los Angeles Times-Bloomberg Poll released on Sept. 11.
Asked if the January Democratic caucus were being held today, 2 percent said they would vote for Biden, while 28 percent said they would vote for Clinton. Biden's number climbed to just 7 percent when respondents were asked who would be the best at ending the war in Iraq, his signature issue.
McCarthy doesn't give the polls a second thought, calling them "virtually meaningless" at this stage. As part of Biden's Iowa team, McCarthy said he will try to line up more endorsements for Biden and get supporters signed up for caucus night. He'll also help with national fundraising by showing that, despite low rankings in the national polls, Biden has support in Iowa.
"We know Iowa better than anybody else," he said. "The reason why we're putting our names on the line is we sense movement and we sense [campaign] infrastructure being built."
We want this forum to be an open discussion about all candidates
When we were preparing for this forum it was our intention that this forum not be limited to only discussions about Joe Biden. We want to have everyone express their opinions and views on all of the candidates.
I think this will be very beneficial to us all to know how others feel about the candidates and will give us all great insight on how the candidates differ in their vision for the United States and the world. We all look forward to the exchange of ideas and information.
I apologize that this was not outlined in the first post about the forum.
Open discussion?
Not when my concerns and posts have been deleted regarding Biden.
Hi Dove
In the rules section of democrats.com we have:
"There are two issues that fundamentally undermine our efforts to build a supportive community of progressive activists: abortion and Israel/Palestine."
Threads moving down those paths are removed. I assume that is what happened.
Jim
Kathy, sorry I didn't get back to our 'discussion' of Joe...
Biden, but I was awfully busy at the time. Let's explore Joe Biden and his various stands and problems a bit further.
Scheme for ending the Iraq War:
Joe wants to divide up the country in shares according to the population/culture/economy of the various areas. Each area would control much of what goes on in their territory. All three areas would then be under the control(loose)of a form of centralized Government. Is that the way you read it? An original plan by Joe? Actually, it wasn't Joe(up to his old tricks)Biden who thought this one up.
Back in the 30s and early 40s, there was a guy named Winston Churchill who proposed that Iraq be split up just this exact way. Churchill's proposal is almost, to the letter, what Joe Biden has proposed. Prior to splitting Iraq up as he thought best, Churchill ultimately came up with a better idea--the unitary government and country that exists prior to Georgie's ill-conceived invasion. Biden's idea might have been revolutionary some 70 years ago.
The civil war has been raging in Iraq for about 1200 years by the way. The Irish are not the only stubborn people on the earth ya know.
As to the plagerism I mentioned that Joe was guilty of, your citations showed that many people use 'one-liners' from other sources without giving credit where credit is due. That is almost acceptable considering the vast amount of quotable sayings 'out there' that date from the end of prehistoric times. Joe didn't, with that speech, use just a line or two. He used the entire speech.
Joe Biden is, as I've said, a political opportunist. Before making statements or proposing any bill, he wets a finger and holds it up to see which way the political wind is blowing. His voting record, over time, shows that he is frequently a supporter or denier on both sides of major issues.
google:
joe biden's voting record
Pages and pages showing his stance of support on both sides of issues. His votes, as a result are not consistant, have never been consistant, and will not be consistant in the future.
Biden is a DLC Democrat. If you do not understand what the DLC is and how bad it is for this country, then do some research on it. If you were to search the archives here on this site, volumes have been written about the adverse effects of the DLC and Al From on the Democratic Party.
Joe probably takes care of the people in his own state. As for national issues, he is usually behind the curve.
It is not in our collective best interests to even consider Joe given the history of his flip-flop voting record.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Louis Pasteur
Dear Grinch
First, Senator Biden is not claiming that this is an original idea of his. He is merely relating historical evidence that the only way these kinds of state problems have been solved is via a "loose" confederation of states such as he has described in his proposal which is posted on this forum, under a form of weak or loose central governmental authority. Alot of other people have made similiar proposals in the past. Sen. Biden just has the intellectual fortitude to state his case for dealing with a virtually impossible situation created by Winston Churchill's Imperialistic Great Britian. Moreover, this is evidence of Joe Biden's capacity for leadership. Afterall, it was he who initiated the resolution in the Senate which received 76 votes. He has wisely recruited Senator Brownback as a co-sponsor of that resolution. That is leadership.
Since the death of Mohammad the division among Shiites and Sunni among other demoninations within Islam has raged to fill the vacuum left by his death. Going on for more than 1400 years and it will continue as long as there are Shiites and Sunni and other denominations within Islam.
Some kill to make their point, others debate. Extremists within Islam and almost all religions stoop to violence psychological or otherwise to gain their will.
As to the plagerism......Biden merely neglected through oversight to give attribution. There was nothing malicious in that action. That does not mitigate what Ronald Reagan did on a regular basis over and over nor does it mitigate Robert Kennedy's quoting Shaw without attribution. So step down off your high horse and lets get serious about our conversation of issues.
Dear Grinch, don't just say it is there, to google, be specific and post these so called proofs of your argument and then, one more time, let me emphasize all politicians are opportunists. That is a reality not a rarity. You can look at virtually every single candidate for office and find where they have voted on more than one side of issues, especially given the fact that bills never get to the floor without numerous committee votes and amendment votes on the floor which may appear to the novice to be inconsistent votes.
Well, please cite some of the dangerous things that the DLC has accomplished. Don't just say there are volumes of accusations, cite some of them and elaborate with facts. Al Gore, Bill Clinton, a significant number of the house and senate have been with the DLC. That is because they do not see radical right wing or left wing mumbo jumbo approaches to the issues and problems.
Again, Grinch, please state the evidene you have that prove that Joe Biden is behind the curve, Just don't give your negative hyperbole, post facts, not just what you think the facts are, documentation, where is it. I look forward to you presenting facts not just opinion. It is a learning excercise for all of us if we provide hard facts. By the way it is Senator Biden's first obligation to represent his state. Afterall they are the ones who elected him. He didn't just walk into the senate one day and state "I am a Senator now and all I care about is Delaware" So, show me The Curve and prove your point that Joe is behind the curve. Many in the Senate on both sides of the isle and in American intelligenicia think differently.
Again, Grinch, what are his flip flops, show me some. List them. You don't have to call Karl Rove to get your information. It is fairly well known that the Republicans fear Joe Biden as a presidential nominee far more than the other candidates.
Look forward to facts not just conjecture.
I recommend you read an old book by Ebenstein called TODAYS ISMS....it shows how a demogogues argue, they engage in the big lie, gliterring generalities, convoluted logic, and half truths. That seems to be your method in this discussion. Read the book...you will learn alot about intelligent conversation and debate
Biden did not neglect to mention the source of his speech...
in fact, initially, he denied that it was stolen. That move failed when people posted the entire speech from that of the British labor leaderalongside that of Joe Biden. Biden was discredited big time when that happened. Again, to include a word, a sentence, an entire puote from the material of others is not unknown. Not many however have the chutzpah of Joe Biden who stole the entire thing. You mention Reagan and his stolen quotes: Reagan didn't write his own speeches...and a Class B Hollywood actor, Reagan just read the script. Go back through Reagan's stuff and you fine that the speeches he gave when chasing the California Governor's slot and the ones he used in pursuit of the Presidency were the same...just about word for word. In this matter, you can stick with your opinions and call them facts if you wish.
As to Biden's plan to save Iraq, has he ever called it Churchill's plan? Even once acknowledging that the plan was the work of another? NO, he has not. The Biden plan as it is called, as it is understood and used throughout the net, remains the Biden plan.
Islamic authorities worldwide have debated the matter at great length over a period of years. Partitioning Iraq will not work, they say. Problem is that the Kurds control the oilfields and the counties income. Churchill decided that partitioning Iraq would not work. Offhand, I would say that Biden is no Churchill. Have you heard Biden say that this was Churchill's original plan for the country of Iraq.
As to the DLC, you seem to like them, Thats fine, but you will find that the DLC'ers are off to the far right of our party. They are the corporatists. Most have voted for most everything that Bush has asked for in all areas.
As for Joe's voting record, I gave you the keywords that would take you to page after page--some supporting Joe and some not. Up to you to check those pages out. They are there waiting for you.
Bottom line is: if you like Joe Biden--by all means vote for him. If you like the DLC without doing basic research, so be it. Al From of the DLC has publically stated many times that he hates the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party--i.e., we the grassroots Dems.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Dear Grinch
Dear Grinch, prove to me where Joe Biden said he did not steal those words. Second, Ronald Reagan may not have written his own speeches but he was responsible for every word that came out of his mouth whether he knew what he was saying or not. Same goes for Kennedy, and Biden as well, we grant you that. But what is good for the goose is good for all of the geese. Not just the one you don't like. Prove that he denied it.
Grinch, it is the Biden Plan, period. You brought up Churchill, where did he get his plan, did he steal it. After all Churchill flunked out of school and made bad grades? This is Biden's Plan now and he has never claimed it was Churchill, Kennedy, Reagan's plan, the point is this.....Biden has a plan.....where is everybody elses plan for that part of the world. So why don't you dig up Churchill's plan and compare the two word for word.
Grinch, you forget what you wrote, you brought up Churchill and I merely commented on the history of it because you were wrong.
What Islamic Authorities are you referring to, please name them and then quote them.
The Kurds do not control all of the oilfields of Iraq, they only control the fields in the Kurdish Area. The largest fields are in the Shie sector. The Sunni sector is supposedly devoid of resources but even that is not necessarily true because they are just now beginning to prospect and test to see if there is oil in that region. Some believe there may be significant deposits. But, Biden's plan, which Churchill had no idea about, because oil was not even a significant notion in those days, is that the oil resources of the free sectors be distributed equally based on population between the three sectors. So the Biden plan differs significantly from Churchill in that respect. Grinch, go back and read what you said and then re-read my response, your confused.
Grinch, first of all you assume alot without knowing the facts. Prove what you say about the DLC. You also don't know my mind nor my heart. I posted their position so you could see exactly where they stand instead of putting your personal spin on it. And, I haven't told you one way or the other how I feel about the DLC, but they are not on the far right as you have stated.
Grinch, this is not a mystery, you say you gave me keywords, you said Biden was wrong on all of the votes, now you say differently, if you want to make a point, you put the information in. It is not my job to prove your point. If you can, prove it, it doesn't have to be a manefesto, just prove your statements up. That is not my job. I did not make the accusations, you did.
Please show me the quote from Al From and document it here on this site. I doubt that Harold Ford is on the far right wing fringe of the Democratic Party.
When we make accusations we have to back them up with documentation. Not just KarlRovian conjecture and spin.
Grinch, are you Bill O'Reilly or Shawn Hannity? You seem so far off the page.
Churchill is important in the area...
it was he and the Raj who assembled Iraq as a country.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Dear Grinch, Churchill did not assemble Iraq
Read the following: http://www.theava.com/04/0526-gertrude-bell.html
Gertrude Bell and the Birth of Iraqby Chris Calder
America has its Founding Fathers; the modern nation of Iraq has a peculiar kind of Founding Mother.
Or maybe she was a national nanny. For Iraq's Founding ... Someone ... was not Iraqi, but a red-haired, Oxford-educated mountaineer, an honored poet and opponent to suffragettes, an Arabist and proud British imperialist named Gertrude Bell.
Gertrude Bell designed — literally drew onto the map — the country that America is now trying to (perfectly Orwellian term) "rebuild." She did so via her mastery of Arabic, Persian and Turkish; her deep knowledge of the Arab tribes and friendships with their sheiks; through the immense influence she carried with the leadership of the British Empire.
She was one of the world's most powerful women at the beginning of the 20th century, a key shaper of the version of the Middle East over which our soldiers are killing and dying, for us, right now.
Even that brief, incomplete resume hints at why Bell's name rarely makes the feminist pantheon. But why the mention of Gertrude Bell or of the West's first invasion of Iraq is so rare these days is harder to understand.
Though maybe, in this age of the Memory Hole, not.
* * *
Gertrude Bell crossed Arabia when that land was largely a blank patch on Europe's maps. She traveled alone, it's said, but that's not counting the train of servants, from cooks to armed guards to muleteers, all Arab, who followed her across the desert over more than a decade. Miss Bell, as she was known formally for her 58 years, dined on china even when she traveled by camel. And she always sent for the latest fashions from London even after she had lived as Khatun, a particular kind of great lady, in Baghdad for many years.
Bell very genuinely fell in love with the people of Arabia. (When she first visited the area, the land was a set of vilayets, or provinces of the Ottoman Empire). Bell's fascination and affection were returned, and she received a warm welcome from people who might have shot a lone male British explorer.
Bell's biographer, Janet Wallach, recounts the first journey Bell took from Jerusalem to Damascus in 1900: "In the heart of the mountains called the Jebel Druze, she rode through one tiny village after another, causing a stir as she passed the white-turbaned, black-robed men. At Miyemir she stopped to water her horse. The veiled women, dressed in their long blue and red robes, were filling their earthenware jugs, dipping them into the pool. Gertrude dismounted, and a young man about 19 approached; like all the Druze men and women, he had outlined his enormous eyes in black kohl. The beautiful boy took her hands, and, to her surprise, kissed her on both her cheeks. Other men followed, shaking her hand, eager to inspect the stranger."
Bell was hooked, it was clear, when she wrote at the end of her trip from Damascus, "with the desert almost up to its gates, and the breath of it blowing in with every wind, and the spirit of it passing in through the city gates with every Arab camel driver. That is the heart of the whole matter."
Six times over the next 12 years, Bell rode across Arabia, until she knew the doings of the sheiks better than those of British society. She became a renowned figure among the tribes, a Person, she liked to say. She got to know the intricacies of their alliances and rivalries:
"For the moment, at least, the Beni Shakr were her friends. Five years earlier they had called her a "daughter of the desert." Now, as she lunched in her tent, enjoying a meal of curry served on fine china, washing it down with a glass of wine, one of the Beni Shakr joined her, and they sat together, drinking coffee, smoking her Egyptian cigarettes, and talking of the bloodthirsty Druze. At nightfall the desert turned cold and wet; she wrapped herself in her fur, slipped a hot water bottle between her sheets, and went to bed."
A few days later Bell visits the very same Druze at their desert castle and finds them readying for battle against the Beni Shakr, whose tents she has just left.
"One (Druze fighter) noticed Gertrude. He strode up and raised his sword above his head. 'Lady!,' he cried, 'the English and the Druze are one'."
"'Thank God!,' she answered, 'We too are a fighting race'."
* * *
In 1914, the British indeed brought war to Mesopotamia. From their long-held (since the 17th century) base in Basra, they sent an army north along the Euphrates River toward Baghdad. But here's where things stop looking like an old Imperial expedition and more like the nightmare battlefield of the 20th century. Over three months, the British lost 25,000 men during a siege at Kut. It was, at the height of British power, the nation's biggest military disaster to that time.
Iraq was a battleground in the First World War for one reason.
As Wallach describes the British position at the beginning of the war, their "unrivaled navy delivered goods around the world and brought home three-quarters of (the country's) food supply. To maintain its superiority, in 1911 the First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill, had ordered a major change, switching the nation's battleships from coal-burning engines to oil. Far superior to the traditional ships, these new oil-burning vessels could travel faster, cover a greater range, and be refueled at sea; what's more, their crews would not be exhausted by having to refuel, and would require less manpower."
Wallach continues, "Britain had been the world's leading provider of coal, but she had no oil of her own. In 1912, Churchill signed an agreement for a major share in the Anglo-Persian oil company, with its oil wells in southern Persia and refineries at Abadan, close to Basra. It was essential for Britain to protect that vital area..."
* * *
Unlike the American invasion 90 years later, the British drive to Baghdad was slow and excruciating. But after three months they captured the city and for a while things were calm, especially when compared to Baghdad today. Gertrude Bell, for instance, was given the title "Oriental Secretary" to the British government three months after the invasion ended. She rode her horse alone along the banks of the Euphrates River each morning at 6am before dressing for work.
At the office, she met with an endless stream of sheiks and religious leaders. Relying on her decade-plus experience in the desert, she discovered from these men, always men, their views about the future of the country, their needs, the needs of their people, and reported all to the British High Commissioner.
But the British either wouldn't or couldn't put together an Iraqi government. In truth, they weren't totally convinced they wanted to sponsor an Iraqi state at all. Churchill favored letting most of Iraq go, fortifying only the oil fields near Basra.
A year and a half went by under British military rule before the tribes along the Euphrates rebelled. In a town called Dair, British soldiers arrested the mayor. The townspeople, Wallach writes, "blew up the oil dump, wounding 90 people, released all the prisoners from the jail and attacked the British army barracks. When the Political Officer tried to make peace in the town, the sheiks attacked him in a fury. Just as they were about to kill him, two British airplanes flew overhead, spraying the town with machine-gun fire."
Iraq was Britain's testing ground for the use of aircraft against guerrilla fighters and their villages (another of Churchill's pet ideas). The British spent the 1920s, 30s, 40s and most of the 50s bombing and strafing desert outposts in Iraq. What does it say about the nature of progress that Britain and the US spent the 1990s doing essentially the same thing?
* * *
Examining Britain's occupation of Iraq for clues to the future of America's is a murky prospect. One interesting detail, though, is that a couple of years after Britain's occupation began, the British public rebelled against the cost of the war. Officials started looking for ways to cut costs quickly. Churchill (again Churchill) called a conference in Cairo, inviting 40 experts on Mesopotamia: 39 men and Gertrude Bell.
Many officials wanted to pull out of Mesopotamia altogether, except for the Persian Gulf. Bell and a few others, like T.E. Lawrence, argued for making and backing an Arab kingdom in Iraq. Bell's party eventually persuaded Churchill that Arab monarchies with British power behind them would make for a more stable region, cheaper in the long run as a provider of oil.
After the Cairo Conference, according to Wallach, "almost everything (Bell) had wished for now had a chance of coming true. The country would consist of all three vilayets — Baghdad, Basra and Mosul; the Sunnis, Shiites, Jews, Christians and Kurds would be united under a Sharifian king; and Iraq, rich, prosperous and led by Faisal, would be a loyal protégé of Britain. If Gertrude could bring it all off, it would be more than interesting, it would be a model for the entire Middle East."
* * *
Back in Iraq, "model for the entire Middle East," British soldiers were putting down the rebellion, killing an estimated 10,000 Iraqis. Most towns went again under British control; those which didn't were razed with explosives. But the Iraqi resistance would not die, until the British were driven out more than 30 years later.
Furthering its plan to establish Arab kingdoms, Britain chose the sons of Sharif Hussein, Faisal and Abdullah, to be its native allies in the Middle East. Faisal was put on a throne in Damascus and crowned ruler of "Greater Syria." Abdullah was crowned king of Transjordan.
The Arab government in Damascus lasted just under two years. (Jordan exists to this day, with Abdullah's great grandson on the throne.) But in 1921, the French kicked out Faisal's administration. Presented with an out-of-work king (Faisal) and a country dangerously adrift (Iraq), the British decided to put the two together. They organized a long, public processional for Faisal from Basra to Baghdad, hoping that by the time the tour was completed, Faisal would generate enough excitement among the public to allow the British to crown him "by acclamation" and get away with it.
Once again, Gertrude Bell was in the thick of the plans. She attached herself as advisor to Faisal and oversaw everything from the daily round of appointments to the furnishings of the new royal palace in Baghdad.
* * *
The wrench in Britain's plans was named Ibn Saud. A powerful chieftain who had also been in the pay of the British for decades, he refused to submit to Faisal's rule. The lands that his tribes and flocks roamed were not Iraq, he claimed, but Arabia, and his own.
All other methods failing, the British decided to carve a kingdom for Ibn Saud out of Transjordan and Iraq. The following passage describing how the deal was made is worth quoting at length. It is Wallach's description of the birth of the modern Middle East, with hints of how things could have been:
"Ibn Saud's slaves prepared for (Cox's) arrival. Lavish white tents of various sizes were pitched in the sand for sleeping, bathing, dining and entertaining; thick carpets were laid, luxurious furnishings installed and ample supplies of fresh fruits, Perrier water, Cuban cigars and Johnny Walker Scotch were stocked for (Cox.)
"The negotiations over the boundary lines went on for five days and nights while Cox, dressed in his suit, bow tie and felt fedora, served as a mediator between the robed representatives of Iraq, Kuwait and Arabia. Ibn Saud demanded that the borders be based on tribes, not territory, and according to his scheme, two groups — Fahad Bey's Anazeh and part of the Shammar — would belong to Arabia, regardless of how far north they traveled. The two tribes would become a movable border, expanding and contracting, adjusting as they searched for grazing grounds; the border would change according to their nomadic needs. "East is East and West is West," Kipling had written, and the two were never farther apart. To Cox and the British, the notion of property revolved around territory, but for Ibn Saud and the Bedouin, the idea of property was tied to people.
"No progress could possibly be made, and by the sixth day Sir Percy lost his temper. With only Major Dixon at the meeting, he berated Ibn Saud as if he were a schoolboy. At the rate both sides were going, he told the perfumed Arabian ruler, nothing would be settled for a year. Ibn Saud was on the verge of tears; Sir Percy Cox was his father and mother, he cried, the one who had made him and raised him from nothing to the position he held. He would surrender "half his kingdom, nay the whole, if Sir Percy ordered."
With that, Sir Percy took hold of the map. Carefully drawing a red line across the face of it, he assigned a chunk of the Nejd to Iraq; then to placate Ibn Saud, he took almost two thirds of the territory of Kuwait and gave it to Arabia. Last, drawing two zones, and declaring that they should be neutral, he called one the Kuwait neutral zone and the other the Iraq neutral zone. When a representative of Ibn Saud pressed Cox not to make a Kuwait neutral zone, Sir Percy asked him why. "Quite candidly," the man answered, "because we think oil exists there." "That," replied the High Commissioner, "is exactly why I have made it a neutral zone. Each side shall have a half-share." The agreement, signed by all three sides at the beginning of December 1922, confirmed the boundary lines drawn so carefully by Gertrude Bell. But for seventy years, up until and including the 1990 Gulf War involving Iraq and Kuwait, the dispute over the borders would continue."
* * *
With the creation of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Iraq, the map of the modern Middle East was complete. The British managed to keep their royal surrogates in Iraq until 1958, when military officers shot the young king (Faisal's grandson), his regent and prime minister.
Gertrude Bell stayed on in Iraq, though her influence waned. Faisal, once he settled into power, needed his motherly British advisor less. Gertrude Bell's main project became the archeological collection that formed the core of the Baghdad Museum. She also took an interest in women's schooling and, before the sanctions and war of the past two decades, Iraqi women indeed had relatively great power and independence within the Muslim world, based largely on education. Of course now, under America's reign of light, both the museum and women's economic position are trashed.
Gertrude Bell died in May of 1924 at the age of 58. Her achievements were already, literally, written in stone. But she died outside the glow of power, using an extra dose of sleeping pills, Wallach writes, "to wipe away the dreary future."
One thing the British were never able to do is to inspire in the mass of Iraqis the vision of a western style democracy for their country. Now America seems to be failing at the same thing, and many Americans ask why.
Perhaps for an answer we should look homeward.
Plenty Coup was a Crow Indian chief. His people, like Iraqis today, were impoverished in their own land and ravaged by war because they stood between Western expansion and the prime resources of the day. Plenty Coup talked about a different war, in a different time. Yet his words resonate. In many ways it has been the same war for all these years:
The Americans, he said, "spoke very loudly when they said their laws were made for everybody, but we soon learned that although they expected us to keep them, they thought nothing of breaking them themselves. They told us not to drink whisky, yet they made it themselves and traded it to us for furs and robes until both were nearly gone. Their Wise Ones said we might have their religion, but when we tried to understand it we found that there were too many kinds of religion to understand, and that scarcely any two white men agreed which was the right one to learn. This bothered us a good deal until we saw that the white man did not take his religion any more seriously than he did his laws, and that he kept both of them just behind him, like Helpers, to use when they might do him good in his dealings with strangers. These were not our ways. We kept the laws we made and lived our religion. We have never been able to understand the white man, who fools nobody but himself."
(This article is based almost completely on Desert Queen: The Extraordinary Life of Gertrude Bell, Adventurer, Advisor to Kings, Ally of Lawrence of Arabia, by Janet Wallach, Random House, 1996.)
Kathy, you are partially
Kathy, you are partially correct with your long-winded "history lesson," but it is like saying Lawrence "assembled" Saudia Arabia. Like Lawrence, Gertrude may have been a player in the Middle East (with her uncle's influence and support) but the political powers that formed the "official" geographic boundries of the Middle East former colonies as we know them, are essentially as Grinch has stated:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq
"Britain granted independence to Iraq in 1932, on the urging of King Faisal, though the British retained military bases and transit rights for their forces. King Ghazi of Iraq ruled as a figurehead after King Faisal's death in 1933, while undermined by attempted military coups, until his death in 1939. The United Kingdom invaded Iraq in 1941, for fear that the government of Rashid Ali might cut oil supplies to Western nations, and because of his strong ideological leanings to Nazi Germany. A military occupation followed the restoration of the Hashemite monarchy, and the occupation ended on October 26, 1947. The rulers during the occupation and the remainder of the Hashemite monarchy were Nuri al-Said, the autocratic prime minister, who also ruled from 1930–1932, and 'Abd al-Ilah, an advisor to the king Faisal II."
It also appears that we are getting off-track from the topic of this node.
Thanks Bill, your right
Your right, I went a bit too far but only to make the point to Grinch that Biden's plan is a plan, not Churchills plan. Also to point out the impossiblity of bringing democracy to this nation should have been recognized by the leadership that the voters of our own country have put into power. We were doomed before we ever occupied Iraq. The past is prologue.
That is one reason I feel it is so important that we have a Congress and White House in 08' that will bring our troops home and start tending to domestic policy. Every candidate's "plan" must be scrutinized and no assumptions made about how we will end this occupation.
We will stay on topic.
Kathy, here is the Wiki article on the DLC...
Tyhis is a source that will tell you moree about this misguided(to say the least)organization.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council
If you read it carefully and note the circumstances, the positions taken by this organization, and also carefully note the heads of the organization, then you will have an idea of just how dispicable this outfit really is.
Research is out for me at this time. I have an infection in my good eye that started a few hours ago...and now has blocked sight temporarily in that eye. Had 3 eye surgeries over the past 12 weeks and things are still subject to daily changes.
Anyway, read the Wiki entry and go on from there.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
Dear Grinch
I am so sorry about your eye. You need to take care. I am so tired right now. I will get back with you tomorrow, after I read the info you sent and we can talk some more.
I will read this and check some other sources and be back tomorrow. Take care and catch you tomorrow.
The New Democrat Credo
Dear Grinch, what is so dangerous about the mission of the DLC. I took this from their website and agree with it. What is there not to agree with in this statement. In your reply, please be specific. The Democratic tent should be large enough to house all ideas, hopes and dreams, not just those of the far right and far left....the lunatic fringe.
The New Democrat Credo
In keeping with our party's grand tradition, we reaffirm Jefferson's belief in individual liberty and capacity for self-government. We endorse Jackson's credo of equal opportunity for all, special privileges for none. We embrace Roosevelt's thirst for innovation and Kennedy's summons to civic duty. And we intend to carry on Clinton's insistence upon new means to achieve progressive ideals.
We believe that the promise of America is equal opportunity for all and special privilege for none. We believe that economic growth generated in the private sector is the prerequisite for opportunity, and that government's role is to promote growth and to equip Americans with the tools they need to prosper in the New Economy.
We believe that government programs should be grounded in the values most Americans share: work, family, personal responsibility, individual liberty, faith, tolerance, and inclusion.
We believe in community; that we can achieve our individual destinies only if we share a commitment to our national destiny. We believe in an ethic of mutual responsibility in which government has an obligation to create opportunity for citizens, but citizens have an obligation to give something back to the commonwealth.
We believe America has a responsibility to lead the world toward greater political and economic freedom.
We believe that as advocates of activist government, we need to reinvent government so that it is both more responsive and more accountable to those it serves and to the taxpayers who pay for it.
Kathy, you obviously have
Kathy, you obviously have not researched the real DLC agenda. New Democrats have taken our Party very far to the right, and they call it "centrism." They have been very vocal in marginalizing the Demcoratic National Committee (DNC), and believe that Dr. Howard Dean, and we blog activists, are extreme lefties -- the "lunatic fringe" as they call us.
The DLC and its members are self-appointed "leaders," and have taken control of our Party's Primary Election process by becoming a clearing house for corporate "donation" money. The DNC is the only entity that represents the true views of traditional Democrats, and whose delegates and leaders are elected by the grassroots.
The DLC is the organization that gave us Joe Lieberman, Rahm Emanuel, Evan Bayh, Feinstein, the Nelsons, et al, and is actively promoting their poster girl, Hillary, for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. See this node for more information on the DLC, and their parent organization, Will Marshall's Third Way Progressive Policy Institute (PPI): http://www.democrats.com/node/10456
Regardless of what they post on their website, Al From and the DLC are an insidious fifth column inside the Democratic Party, and have been directly responsible for the wide split in the Democratic Party, and all of our electoral losses since Bill Clinton (over a decade). Do not fall for their claptrap, as they are the Democratic "representatives" in Congress who have enabled their hawkish neocon counterparts in the BA -- and called it "centrism."
They also control the DSCC, and the DCCC -- two other pseudo-Democratic "leadership" organizations which act as bagmen for corporate "donations," and give Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid their marching orders (i.e. "impeachment is off the table").
Biden seems to have distanced himself somewhat from the DLC (just as Bill Clinton did near the end of his second term when Lieberman/McCain demanded that we invade Iraq) but that remains to be seen...
Dear Grinch
Just to give you a little info about my own beliefs, I want impeachment, but I know and understand that it cannot be done with the current numbers in the House and Senate.
I would love nothing more than to see this present administration being marched out in handcuffs and charged with the crimes they have committed.
2008 is critical. We must take control of the Congress and the White House, if we do not I fear what the outcome will be. If we tried to impeach now it would explode in our face and I am just not willing to take that chance.
Protecting the Environment
Protecting the Environment http://www.joebiden.com/issues/?id=0015
Joe Biden’s Plan For Passing On A Cleaner, Greener World To Our ChildrenFocus on Climate Change: Joe Biden is continuing his strong environmental record by leading the effort to pass the most aggressive bill in the Senate to reverse global warming -- the Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act. The Act would limit greenhouse gas emissions and help avert the major problems warming of our planet could cause – such as altering growing seasons; redistributing natural resources; and lifting sea levels.
Lead the World Forward: Global warming requires a global solution. Joe Biden believes the US must take a leadership role in international climate treaty negotiations, and make it a top priority. As chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, he wrote a bipartisan resolution directing the President to return to international negotiations and reclaim a leadership role in the fight against global warming. If we don’t engage countries like China – which is building one new coal-fired power plant a week – we will not solve the global warming crisis.
Reduce Power Plant Emissions: Joe Biden wants tougher standards for power plant emissions. He supports the Clean Power Act which would require power plants to achieve specific reductions in emissions of sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and mercury.
Make Cars and Trucks More Fuel Efficient: Joe Biden wants to improve fuel efficiency by upgrading to a better system that combines protection for U.S. automobile manufacturing jobs with predictable increases in fuel efficiency standards for cars, SUVs, and light trucks. The new system would set fuel economy standards based on vehicle elements such as size and weight, with individualized fuel economy targets that increase by about one mile per gallon each year – reaching a 40 mpg average by 2017.
Build Vehicles with Environmentally-Friendly Energy: Joe Biden wants to increase the number of vehicles that can use ethanol and alternative fuel. He wrote legislation directing automakers to gradually increase the number of flexfuel vehicles -- those able to use both regular gasoline and blends of up to 85 percent ethanol (E85). His legislation also requires major oil companies to install E85 pumps at gas stations, and would boost the use of homegrown fuels in our national fuel supply by raising the renewable fuel standard benchmarks. Joe Biden also recognizes that renewable energy – like wind, solar and geothermal –use energy more efficiently, and he supports using and developing these types of energy.
Protect Alaska’s Wildlife: For many years, Joe Biden has fought to permanently protect from oil and gas drilling one of the world’s last great wilderness areas -- the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. Joe Biden does not believe the uncertain oil recovery justifies the risk of potentially great harm to this rich environment.
Make Polluters Pay for Cleanup: Joe Biden believes that we need to reinstate polluter-pays Superfund fees, so that polluters pay for the cleanup of toxic sites, not taxpayers. Reinstating the polluters-pay program will expand cleanup operations.
Exchange Debt-for-Nature: Recognizing the global nature of the climate change crisis, Joe Biden wrote a plan that provides debt relief to developing nations in exchange for protecting tropical rainforests that are critical to the global climate.
Defend Clean Air and Water: Joe Biden has opposed and will continue to fight attempts to roll back environmental safeguards and threaten the quality of our air and water. He fought the Administration’s plan to gut the New Source Review standards by allowing power plants to avoid their obligations to install modern pollution controls. Joe Biden also supports limiting exports of mercury to stop the harmful pollution of our oceans with mercury.
Biden said in a letter that
Biden said in a letter that his top priorities were families and teaching children about the Bible.
We can do better than voting for him.
Biden probably won't support separation of church and state, and I am sick and tired of religious influence on the government and its policies.
He also seems to be a sef-described family values person- he can give lip service to LGBT rights, but will he allow me to get married to womever I want?
Progressives can do better than to vote for Biden, and they should do better.
Olivia, could you please
Olivia, could you please provide a link, or some sort of attribution, for this "letter" you keep talking about?
If you want anyone to believe your accusations, then you must provide something to substantiate them besides "he said in a letter."
Biden may be many things -- among them a DLC "centrist" and a political panderer -- but he doesn't appear to be a fanatical Catholic Bible-thumper.
Biden Campaign Announces 10th Iowa Legislative Endorsement
BIDEN CAMPAIGN ANNOUNCES 10th IOWA LEGISLATIVE ENDORSEMENT
Published: 09/27/2007 http://www.joebiden.com/newscenter/pressreleases?id=0180
Rep. Roger Thomas Praises Biden’s Leadership on Iraq
Des Moines, IA (September 27th, 2007) – Crediting Sen. Biden’s successful passage of his Iraq federalism plan yesterday in the U.S. Senate as the “deciding factor”, the Biden Campaign today unveiled its 10th state legislative endorsement with Rep. Roger Thomas of Elkader. Rep. Thomas joins a chorus of nine other state legislators who look to Sen. Biden’s plan for Iraq as the only credible option to begin to bring our troops home without leaving chaos behind.
“Sen. Biden showed true Presidential leadership yesterday with the passage of his Iraq amendment” said Rep. Thomas. “He worked with members of both parties in building a consensus, ultimately giving them the confidence to do the right thing and begin to shift the direction of U.S. policy in Iraq. I know the people of Iowa respect that kind of Presidential leadership.”
“In the time I’ve spent with Sen. Biden, I’ve been fortunate to get to know him on a personal level – and continue to be moved by his determination, caring personality and boundless knowledge of the key issues of the day. As chair of the Economic Growth Committee here in the state, I believe we need a president who has a deep understanding of the real economic circumstances most Americans are confronting.” Thomas continued.
Thomas, first elected to the state legislature in 1996, serves on the Local Government, Veterans Affairs, and Ways and Means Committees, and also as Chair of the Economic Growth Committee.
“With the war in Iraq being the number one issue on the minds of Iowa caucus-goers, the legislative endorsements Sen. Biden is accumulating here is sending a strong message of who they believe is best equipped to solve the problems we face – both at home and abroad” said Political Director Danny O’Brien. “Their support also underscores their confidence in Sen. Biden ultimate success in the Iowa caucuses and beyond.”
This latest endorsement comes just three days after the Biden Campaign unveiled Representative Polly Butka of Clinton, the highest ranking female elected official in the state behind the Lieutenant Governor.
Thomas joins nine Democratic legislators in a growing list of elected officials supporting Joe Biden in the Hawkeye state: State Sen. Joe Seng (Davenport), House Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (Des Moines), Speaker Pro Tem Rep. Polly Butka (Clinton), Rep. John Whitaker (Hillsboro), Rep. Doris Kelley (Waterloo) Rep. Lisa Heddens (Ames), Rep. Jim Lykam (Davenport), Rep. Mike Reasoner (Creston), and Rep. Dick Taylor (Cedar Rapids).
I am really impressed with Joe Biden
I am new to this site, but I am researching all I can about the candidates. So far I am strongly leaning towards Joe Biden. I watched the debate and he is the only one with a real plan and had the guts to go after Guiliani. Biden was right about Rudy, he doesn't know anything about foreign policy, but he is an expert on divorce.
Also, my folks say that Hillary cannot win if nominated and I don't think i can take another republican controlled congress and Bushlike White House.
My VOTE IS WITH JOE.....GOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!! JOE!
joe biden
i also have concluded hillary cannot get the independents or moderate republicans votes < but joe biden was able to get 26 republicans to vote for his iraq resolution and that shows leadership he also has integrity and credibility and will do well with middle america i worry that hillary will drive all the people who might not vote because they are unhappy with the republican party to the polls just to vote against her we need everyvote because we already know the reps will do anything to win even if it means disinfranchizing voters or cheating this election will be close and we need the independents
Dear RJ2008
Welcome to the Joe Biden forum. I was just about to log off for the night and caught your post. You have made a very good point. I think this is a very important issue that should be discussed. We need all of the moderates, swing votes and independents. her negatives could certainly engergize their base and that is something we cannot take a chance on.
I think your right that we could get a lot of Republican & Independent votes this election due to the present administration and the damage that Bush and Cheney have done to our country. I also agree with you that someone with those kind of negatives could drive the votes away and we could lose the White House.
Just to share a short story I spoke to a swing voter who stated that he could vote for Joe Biden, but couldn't vote for Hillary Clinton. That is frightening to hear. I think Joe Biden is the best candidate and can win in 2008.
This is the most important election in our lifetime. We have to get it right in 2008. Keep posting....we need more voters like you to voice opinions and discuss issues.
I know we are all in a bit
I know we are all in a bit of panic mode right now, but let's remember that how a candidate breaks (Right or Left) when they are elected, depends on the extent to which we have made the case for the Left and the true nature of the candidate (either Left, Right, or malleable).
The problem with capitulation is that it never changes the conversation:
If I were running for President I would not be wooing moderate Republicans with moderate Republican speak (except at the very last moment ;) This only reinforces the Right's world view even if it produces some immediate additional votes. A price will be paid later when attempting to push through a more Left agenda against the Right's world view.
Instead, an appeal from the Left to the moderate aspect of the voter would go something like this:
The above does not flesh out a complete platform of course but it does suggest a new world view. A change that STILL tugs at moderate voters who know in their gut that work should pay, that capital is needed THROUGHOUT the entire socioeconomic ladder in order to spur ingenuity.
-------------------------
I'm fine with a switch to sprint mode. When we are all pragmatists. I simply hope we all remember the consequences of sprinting too long or too soon when we are out to CHANGE this Nation.
I assure you that Rush did not wear kit gloves wooing the left to institute the changes that he and his ilk succeeded in.
People can be truly Right or Left, BUT this need not separate us on many issues that the faux Conservatives have split us on.
joe biden
problem is if hillary wins we risk the whitehouse i think any of our candidates would make a good president but who is the most electible , tested, and ready day one we cant underestimate the reps we have to be smart hillarys negatives are just too high she would make a good pres and shes certainly qualified and a great debater but make no mistake about it if any one is trying to appeal to the moderates and independents its her more than any of the others because shes smart politically and knows she has to get some of those votes to win , if obama could get the nom he could win mayebe even edwards but he may be too liberal for the mainstream and now that hes opted for public finance a, he may be right on priciple but he cant go the distance richardson is qualified and has picked up some momentum but is he really electible? so if you analyze the entire group who in a time of war with a mess in the middle east has a plan for iraq with bi partisan mainstream support? who is strong and qualified on defense ? who has shown leadership on all the key issues? its biden i was always an obama person and i do think he would bering change and would be great but he cant get past hillary maybe he will and that would give me peace of mind but if he doesnt we have to change the dynamic and get someone in there that can beat hillary and win in the general if biden had money and everyone read his book they would know he has character integrity and is a leader its not a popularity contest or a college fraternity or sorority we have to be smart we have to win the white house so we have to think this through like a chess game amd have a strategy to win the general election can hillary do that? why take the risk can obama? better chance than hillary for sure - can edwards? maybe too far to the left and now has a financing issue even though i love him and his wife - can the others? the only one in the others group that i think could for sure win the general is biden and i really dont have a dog in the fight i just want the dems to win if we dont - imagine who the next supreme court justices will be- our home phones will for sure be tapped how big will guantanamo prison be and how much more can we turn the world against us and will we start a bully fight with iran ? the only way to be sure these things dont happen is to win the whitehouse to me the number one issue is electibility everything else is behind that - just follow the money andthe no bid contracts and for sre the reps will keep the war going to me ending the war responsibly is the number one issue after winning and i truly believe the best and most qualified person to do that is joe biden he just needs some momentum and i am hoping some of you will agree with me
Dear RJ2008
Good post. Let me add a few thoughts. Even if we can elect Biden or anyother Democrat we have to understand that until we get a working majority in the Senate nothing can be done.
That means we must have 60+, even with Biden as president in order to stop the Republicans from invoking the rules of the Senate, that means filibusters, etc., remember it takes 60 votes to invoke cloture, that means end debate and vote on a bill. Right now, the reason the Democrats cannot make anything happen in the senate is because we do not have the numbers to end debate (in other words invoke cloture), even with Biden as president he cannot make the Senate do what he wants to without the Democratic Party in power with 60+ vote to end debate, (in the Senate).
We have a working majority in the House now but under current circumstances the house can pass anything they want to pass and the Senate can block it.
We just need to know the rules of the game, sadly most of the extremists ON THE FAR LEFT AND FAR RIGHT of the political spectrum don't know the rules of the game or don't want to know them. I repeated myself purposefully for emphasis.
BIDEN FOR PRESIDENT!
joe biden
olivia if u read joe bidens new book promises to keep you will see he is a firm believer in the separation of church and state and i agree with you we cannot have another religous nut in the whitehouse but remember if gwb hadnt found religion - he wouldnt have found the ten steps and he would still be best buddies with jim beam ( that is if he isnt still best buddies now ) frightening isnt it - yikes
Biden, A Republican, War and Taxes.
Question:
What will Joe Biden do as President, with regards to the two largest issues of our time, our Nation's Economic Power and our Nation's Military Power, that a Republican President will NOT do?
In case it has not been noticed, the electorate has already moved to the point of desiring to elect either a Democrat or Republican who will:
1) End the War in Iraq
AND
2) Repair the hole in our Nation's Tax code/Treasure.
So with regard to these two mega issues, is Biden going to do more than a Republican?
Dear Jim
If you can walk, talk and chew gum one can be far more affective than any Republican we have in office or any Republican running for president. But to answer your post:
Under Ronald Reagan and all of profligate spending and massive borrowing (he was a borrower and spender) the middle class shrunk to the lowest post depression levels, the poor class expanded at the fastest rate since the depression and the rich got richer, millionaires became billionaires and they did not invest in this economy or infrustructure, they prepared to send our companies overseas so they could pay slave labor in third world countries.
The national debt grew at the fastest rate in history until George H. Bush became president and he broke all of Reagans records as far as national debt and budgets were concerned.
Bill Clinton passed a tax increase in 1993 and the American economy for the next nine years was the strongest and fastest growing economy in US history.
He had four balanced or surplus budgets. Bill Clinton's policies put 22 million people to work, NEW JOBS.! And he eventually had two significant surplus budgets, that is the first time that had happened since LBJ's last budget of 1968.
Republicans claim that Bill Clinton's success was as a result of the .com boom and under George W. Bush they screech and claim that this economic growth period we are in now is a result of his tax cuts. They discount the fact that we have been in the middle of an insurance company boom, an oil company boom, and drug company bom and home building boom.
Which makes the so called .com boom look like little league baseball.
How do they, the republicans justify their claim that these tax cuts are the cause of economic growth, of the current economic growth in the face of Bill Clintons 1993 tax increases and the subsequent economic boom? How do they jive that claim with Ronald Reagan's 1986 tax and fee increases which were the biggest in history relative to the total economy and the subsequent economic growth that occurred? The reality is that the tax policy and spending policy (fiscal policy) have much less to do with economic growth than the feds monetary policy, (the fed is NOT under the White House Control), the cost of energy, world events, war, and international trade policy which have everthing to do with the national econ