Anyone with any doubt that Sen. Biden is the most qualified, this should convince you:

[ginchinchili]

Biden strikes the right balance

By Nat Hentoff
November 12, 2007

Of all the analyses and cheerleading I've seen on the presidential race, a column in the April 19 Des Moines Register by Richard Doak, a former editor there, made the fundamental point: "Who will defend the Constitution? That should be the litmus test." He continued: "Most of the candidates, especially the leading Republicans, have failed to press any qualms about the claims of absolute executive power by President Bush and Vice President Cheney."

My candidate for the presidency is low in the polls and has received only marginal press coverage. He should stand out, to begin with, because since 1991, while serving in the Senate, Joseph Biden has been an adjunct professor of constitutional law at the Wilmington, Del., campus of Widener Law School. Our Constitution is not broken. It is, however, being continually fractured by the Bush administration. Especially important, therefore, is for the next president to deeply understand how we can and must be safe from terrorism while remaining a free people under the rule of law, not according to whoever occupies the White House.


You can read the entire article here:
http://washingtontimes.com/article/20071112/EDITORIAL07/111120001/1013/EDITORIAL

[BrklynLiberal]

1. If he does make it to President, perhaps Attorney General would be a good option.

[Atman]

2. I think posts like these are downright comical.

Do you really think the rest of us have just been sitting around waiting for the right couple of paragraphs from the Moonies, or NYT, or wherever? There is one of these every day. "For those of you who still support your own dumb-ass candidate, this article will convince you you're wrong!" LOL!

Hopefully anyone at least intelligent enough to be able to read and navigate a message board will be looking at every possible resource they can regarding their chosen candidate, not any one single article, news report, press release or endorsement.

Besides, everyone already knows Kucinich is the most qualified, because I read it in another post somewhere.

.

[Debi]

3. Yes, the last thing we want here on DU is people advocating for thier chosen candidate

we'd rather have smartass responses to our posts.

Thank you.

[Atman]

4. That is not at all what I said, Debi

It was the way the op -- and so many others -- state their support, as if the only thing standing between their candidate and the Oval Office is a few numb nuts who haven't read an article in the Moonie Times. It implies that everyone is just an ignorant fool because they haven't read the article, and said article will bring about an epiphany that will be undeniable and will cause said ignorant fools to see the error of their ways.

My reaction, quite frankly, is but one example. The tone of the OP's sub line said it all for me...because personally, I think Biden is seriously, seriously lacking in Presidential qualifications regardless of what other good things the op might feel about him. Don't TELL ME I'm just wrong and misguided. Lay out your case, state it clearly and allow me to compare and contrast it with the information I've learned about the other candidates.

In this case, the style trumped the substance. Don't try to change the meaning of what I said, please. It's unbecoming.

.

[Debi]

10. Have you considered that it might be the OP's opinion?

Your comments speak for themselves. You have the choice of reading or not reading the posts that have unsavory subject lines. Instead you chose to read the post and respond in a snide manner. I don't believe the subject line implies ignorance of the readers, but rather a desire to provide yet even more information about their candidate of choice. WHERE did the poster call or even imply you were WRONG OR MISGUIDED? Take your insecurities (masked by pomposity) elsewhere and allow posters to openly support their choice.

[youthere]

6. No, but it might be the tipping point for someone who is considering this candidate..

And I gotta'give you extra points for the Kucinich comment. That was some funny chit.

[ginchinchili]

7. Boy, we're not a little frustrated, are we?

Posts like my original post here are mostly aimed at those who are, using this thread as an example, considering giving their support for Joe Biden, but aren't convinced, that's the key word, convinced. Thus, "those of you who aren't convinced..." This is understood by most, but as you have demonstrated, some need it pointed out and explained to them. That's ok. That's how we learn.

As for Rep. Kucinich, I have a lot of respect for the man, but no matter how qualified a candidate may be, if he or she isn't first qualified to win in a primary, the rest is merely academic. However, looking at this objectively, Kucinich wants to be put in charge of handling the very dangerous and complex problems overseas, particularly in the Middle East, and in Pakistan. It begs the question, how much foreign policy experience does Mr. Kucinich have? The answer is either none, or his supporters need to post some of these comical posts like this thread in order to educate us on Dennis's foreign policy experience. Frankly, if he has little or none, he's not qualified to be put in charge of our responsibilities over there, and we do have responsibilities over there, like it or not.

As for his domestic qualifications, I saw a recent poll that put the economy ahead of Iraq as the #1 issue on the minds of American voters. I seem to recall something about Cleveland's budget running in the red when Mayor Kucinich was in charge there. Not exactly the kind of track record we need during these economically volatile times nationwide. If you want to claim that "everyone already knows Kucinich is the most qualified" perhaps you should try backing it up with some evidence stuck in silly posts. Or perhaps we should just rely on your unsubstantiated claim. Perhaps we should start investing billions of dollars in landing strips for Mr. Kucinich's friends from outer space.

[ellacott]

9. Kucinich was my mayor when the city went into default

It was actually the right thing to do. Even though it took us years to recover even his adversaries grudgingly admit it was the right thing to do.

This happened because the corporate power companies wanted to buy our city power plant. Kucinich refused to allow it to be sold. In retaliation the power companies pulled their backing out of the city but Kucinich never gave in.

Cleveland Public Power is still an alternate choice for Cleveland residents.

This reminded me of Clinton and shutting down the govt.

[ginchinchili]

15. Thank you for refreshing my memory on that.

I do recall hearing that before.

I really do admire the guy, and I was just playing with a rude poster about the outer space thing. It doesn't bother me in the least that Kucinich believes he saw a UFO. I believe I have, too. I can't prove it, but it was sure behaving like no jet I've ever seen before. It's not a claim I go around telling people about, not because I'm embarrassed or afraid they won't believe me--I could care less about that. It's just not that it's not a big deal to me. Now, if I came face to face with an alien, that would be a different matter.

Frankly, if I was running for president and was asked that question, well, I guess I'd answer it honestly, that it didn't look or behave like a plane, but who knows what I was actually seeing. I thought it was a pejorative question and only hindered why we have these debates in the first place. It was unfair to Rep. Kucinich. It would be like if rumors about Hillary's sexuality were circulating and Russert asked her about a weekend she spent with a female friend. It smacks of Republican dirty tricks.

[Atman]

20. Playing with a rude poster about the outer space thing, though the rude poster...

NEVER MENTIONED UFOs!

Great, awesome deflection! You make jokes about DK and UFOs and then manage to pawn them off on me.

Fucking BRILLIANT!

You should run for office yourself, perhaps as Biden's running mate.

:eyes:

.

[Steely_Dan]

44. Have you Considered Decaf?

[Atman]

16. So you heap actual condescension atop your initial implied codescension

"those of you who aren't convinced..." This is understood by most, but as you have demonstrated, some need it pointed out and explained to them. That's ok. That's how we learn.

Yikes! But what your condescending little jab fails to address is that I am one of the very people you're trying to reach. I have "doubts about Joe Biden." What did you do to convince me, as you said you would do in your subject line? You did nothing but post an article. Ironically, the fact that said article appeared in a well-known right-wing rag actually lends it more credence than your post itself. Or does it? Should an endorsement of a Dem via any right-wing mouthpiece make me feel better about that candidate? Probably just the opposite, as we've seen with Ms. Clinton. If the right like 'em, I don't.

Biden has done incredible harm to millions of Americans through his unabashed support of the Usery Industry and his repeated rubber stamping of Bush appointees after lengthy on-camera diatribes railing against them. Why would you expect such an article would go un-refuted, and people would suddenly be convinced? After all, that is what your sub-line implies. No, STATES. Read this, it "should convince you." Well, it didn't convince me!

Now, moving on to your Kucinich comments, the irony gets neck-deep. Okay, maybe only waist deep, but still deep. DK certainly had some serious problems in Cleveland. But guess what? He was elected again after the reality was brought to fore. And btw, I'm very surprised you couldn't see the sarcasm in my final sentence, despite the lack of a smiley. It only goes to further demonstrate that you're not that serious about digging deep, just bashing those with whom you disagree while grasping at any straw to advance those whom you support.

But of course...I could be wrong.

.

[ginchinchili]

19. Yeah, you're wrong.

[Atman]

21. So, you DIDN'T make jokes about DK funding landing strips for space aliens?

But then you DID acknowledge that you were totally wrong about what he did in Cleveland?

And you accused me of...whatever...

Jesus Christ, hang on, I'm gonna need to put on my flip flops to even begin to understand what you're on about!

:rofl:

.

[ginchinchili]

23. Good luck.

[Atman]

26. WTF?

"Good luck?"

What's up, you just ran out of things to say? What do I need "good luck" for?

If you have something to say that will convince me that Biden is worthy of my vote, why don't you tell it to me? I read the article. It's a good read. But I think there is still a LOT Joe has to answer for, and you're certainly not helping your chosen candidate by resorting to "DK wants to build landing strips for aliens" crap.

Don't tell me why DK is a nut -- I may not vote for him anyway! -- do what you promised in your sub line, and tell me why Biden is your guy! You said this thread would convince the doubters, it was right in your sub line, but you've obviously failed to do so. So start convincing! Give it your best shot! But I promise you, it will take a lot more than just telling me why you hate the other candidates. Tell me why you LOVE YOUR CANDIDATE, and why I should, too.

Is that too much to ask?

.

[ginchinchili]

32. No, I just ran out of time to waste with you. WTF?!!! lol

[ellacott]

27. He wasn't elected again

He survived a recall election. He did run for re-election but lost to George Voinovich.

[Atman]

28. You're right. I stand corrected.

It was the recall I was thinking about. Thanks.

.

[ginchinchili]

33. WTF?

[Atman]

36. "I meant to do that!"

Is Pee Wee Herman your ghost writer?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

So you got nothin'. Good enough. Thanks for playing.

.

[jillan]

8. This article comes from a pulitzer prize winner & an author of over 30 books - it is not just ginch.

saying this.

[IronLionZion]

11. yes, how do you think I joined the Biden camp?

I wouldn't have even considered him if it weren't for DUers sharing information about him that caused me to look further into his record and his platform.

[Atman]

17. Great!

That's excellent. No sarcasm at all. I'm glad you came around to finding a candidate you like. Personally, I'm looking at the mortgage crisis in this country, and Biden's hand in it. He was, after all, one of the key people voting in favor of the bankruptcy law change which is part and parcel to the mortgage crisis, as people find that paying off a stupid credit card bill will help them out more than paying their mortgage. Biden directly helped heap a world of shit on the shoulders of a lot of Americans. Is it the only thing he's done as a Senator? Of course not, but it sure seems to point out some serious problems with his priorities.

I am done with candidates who put the interests of massive corporations above the interests of the American people! Period. Biden can bloviate all he wants about his foreign policy experience, but even in that arena he just keeps rubber stamping Bush's appointees who help continue our nation's freefall.

That's my opinion. Refute it, without resorting to "Dennis believes in UFOs!" silliness. I'll worry about that position when the Martians are attacking. Or not.

.

[Think82]

22. Ummm....

"Biden keeps rubber-stamping Bush's appointees?" What planet did you come from? He voted NO on Gonzales, was the first ot call for his resignation, (as well as rumsfeld's), and is opposed to Mukasey. All the candidates missed the surprise 11 pm vote scheduled by reid.

In terms of the bankruptcy Bill, Biden did not sponsor it, though he is from Delaware, and the credit card companies bring in a lot of jobs ot his state. Biden also worked in an amendment to the bill (which was going ot pass anyway) to protect single mothers from deadbeat dads who declare bankruptcy. He's not pure on that issue, but I feel you (and others) are letting 1 vote keep you from missing out on the best candidate we have hadin a long time.

Also, Foreign Policy IS the big issue in this election.Make no mistake about it. Iraq. Iran. Pakistan. Who do you want in charge?

[IronLionZion]

24. I'd love to

http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Joe_Biden_Corporations.htm

pay special attention to this stuff:
* Declare a debtor eligible only for Chapter 13, as anyone financially capable of paying back their creditors at a rate that still allows them to earn above their state's median income
* Place domestic support obligations such as child support and alimony amongst the first priority claim category of non-dischargeable debts on a debtor filing for bankruptcy
* Require debtors to pay for and attend credit counseling prior to filing for bankruptcy
* Cap home equity protection at $125,000 if the debtor purchased a house within 40 months of filing for bankruptcy.
Vote to pass a bill that would require debtors able to repay $10,000 or 25 percent of their debts over five years to file under Chapter 13 bankruptcy (reorganization and repayment) rather than Chapter 7 (full discharge of debt).

You'd probably like this part:
Rated 32% by the US COC, indicating an anti-business voting record.

Kucinich is 15% by COC,

No one here like Bush, but he's still president, and he still gets to appoint people. Now, the United States needs an Attorney General, we really do. Sure I don't like torture, but how long can we go without an attorney general? Are we going to just block everyone Bush appoints because we don't like him? You can go crazy trying to do stuff like that. But we don't want our Democratic president to have his or her appointees blocked do we? When someone elects the president, they are also electing the executive branch and possible a few supreme court justices. Congressional approval is for judging their qualification for the job, not on their personal views. This is one of the few things I disagree with DUers on. Mukasey may be a torturer, but he's qualified to be attorney general. Roberts may be anti choice or whatever, but he's a very qualifed chief justice and I breathed a sigh of relief that Bush chose him instead of some radical. Alito is just an asshole and I opposed him. Delaware elected Biden because they trust his judgement on these things. It's up to him to weigh his choices and vote accordingly, and he did so.

[Atman]

29. "Mukasy may be a torturer but he's qualified to be AG."

Holy fucking shit. If you can't see how that sentence just turns itself inside out, I'm just baffled. If Mukasy is a torturer, he is NOT qualified to be AG! "America does not torture!" Remember those words? And it ain't just America...it's been that way for 500 years, until little Georgie paid off another crony with god knows what.

But you know what? I'm not playing this. I want to know BIDEN's qualifications. Mukasy is an entirely different thread. Several of them, actually. If you can't advance Biden's bona fides without resorting to tearing down another candidate, what is the point? It's just another "He's not as bad as the other guy" argument. I don't want to settle for the lesser of seven evils. I want someone GOOD from the get-go. It may not be DK, or Obama, or Biden, or any of them. Tell me why I SHOULD vote for Biden, without mentioning any other candidate's name or position. Can you do it?

.

[conservdem]

40. Biden is against divers licensees for illegal aliens.

He's got excellent experience. I think he will get independent votes and can win in the general election. He's not perfect, but I am supporting him.

[Steely_Dan]

43. So, Let Me Ask You

If by chance Biden earned the nomination of our party, would you vote for him in the general election? Would you vote for his opponent? Would you not vote at all?
Just curious.

-Paige

[ellacott]

5. Thanks for the article

I didn't know he was an adjunct professor.

[frazzled]

12. Nat Hentoff is a pretty kooky old guy: pro-Iraq invasion, anti-abortion

I used to read Nat Hentoff in the Village Voice back in the 60s and 70s. I remember having read some dust-up stuff about hin in recent years, so I refreshed my memory:

n February 2003, Hentoff signed a letter circulated by Social Democrats, USA advocating the removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq on human rights grounds, citing reports detailing Hussein's disregard for fundamental liberties. In March and April of that year Hussein was deposed by a US-led invasion, launching the ongoing Iraq war. In summer 2003, Hentoff wrote a column for the Washington Times in which he supported Tony Blair's humanitarian justifications for the war. He also criticized the Democratic Party for casting doubt on President Bush's pre-war assertions about Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction in an election year.
Despite what are generally considered liberal views on domestic policy and civil liberties, Hentoff developed views opposed to abortion,

His endorsement of Biden doesn't mean much to me, given his addled views on other subjects.

[frazzled]

14. Oh, and he also called the judicial decision on Terri Schiavo "murder"

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0513,hentoff,62489,6.html

[ginchinchili]

18. If my memory serves me right, he has also been a strong voice...

advocating a greater effort on our part to do more to facilitate the prevention of genocide in Darfur. I think that's a good thing myself. Perhaps your one sided depiction of this writer of 30 books and Pulitzer prize finalist for commentary is a bit misleading. No wonder you don't like Sen. Biden; he's a strait shooter. You are not.

[frazzled]

25. No, it's not that I'm not straight-shooting: I am against the war and pro-choice

My point is that if you posted this article to convince us that Biden is the one, you chose someone with a range of crackpot ideas (some good, some bad), who would hardly be convincing to me or others. That's all.

An endorsement from someone whose stances are so different than mine is not compelling.

[ginchinchili]

30. Fair enough. He's a strange guy to me as well,

but I certainly find it difficult to buy into a wholesale dismissal of the man's opinion on Biden because there are some opinions of his I don't agree with. He's a very intelligent man and whether you agree with his position or not, he does carefully research his topics and gives good, compelling reasons for his positions.

Yes, I posted the article in support of Sen. Biden, but I did so to share the information this writer shares in his piece, not to encourage you to base your opinion on whether or not you like the writer. If you argued that he was using false information, then I could understand. Otherwise, it's just an example of trying to kill the message by killing the messenger, unless you state otherwise, which you didn't.

I'm more interested in the facts pointed out in the article than I am the writer's opinion. If, for example, someone advocating that we do more to stop genocide in Darfur and provided a link to this man's series of articles on the topic, I wouldn't respond to the poster by saying that this guy's a nut and his research on this topic means nothing to me because years ago he said this or that. I mean, just because I disagree with him on some positions doesn't mean I'm going to write him off on every position he takes, nor would I assume he's right because of past positions I did agree with him on. He's got good credentials and he backs up his position on Biden with facts. But, hey, that's just me. I try to be a fair and open-minded guy.

[PatSeg]

31. This is just ONE of many articles posted about Senator Biden

It hardly represents all the opinions of all of the Biden supporters here. It was not meant to be "compelling", just another article of interest.

Those of us who came to support Biden, did so after a lot of research. One article would hardly influence my opinion.

[calteacherguy]

13. Obama taught constitutional law as well.

I do think that's very important for the next President.

I'm very impressed with Biden's response to the Pakistan crises.

[PatSeg]

34. Very important indeed

Of all the things we stand to lose, the constitution is first and foremost.

[sandnsea]

35. I agree

In that NH poll, Obama is not doing well on experience. I think he's got to talk more about Illinois and the impact specific legislation had there. It's amazing to me that he was a civil rights lawyer, which doesn't count as experience, but 3 or 4 big cases of Edwards does count. Or Hillary's nonprofit work for children, while Obama worked at a local community center. Or this info on Biden teaching, whereas Obama has the same experience. Weird the way everything the man has ever done ends up being dismissed as nothing.

[gateley]

37. Boy, sorry I missed out on this one! A lot of very impassioned posts!

Hats off to all of you who partook - sincerely! I know it can be draining and infuriating so I commend you all for your effort and contributions.

:toast:

[tomp]

38. emphatically and entirely unconvinced

your point is that i should be convinced by this.

hentoff's point is that biden is the most qualified and he offers this:

--biden is a professor of constitutional law
--(asserts that) no one is more interested than biden in returning us to the rule of law
--biden supports the denunciation of moveon.org

and you thought that would convince anyone of biden's superior "qualifications"?

what's the matter with you?

[ginchinchili]

39. You're right. For a moment there I thought the restoration of our Constitution was important.

Silly me. Thanks for helping back to my senses.

[tomp]

41. are you being intentionally obtuse...

...or is this a congenital problem?

where is the "qualification" you speak of? why, for instance, should i change my support for kucinich, who has been harping on, and working on, issues of constitionality for as ong as i can remember, who has introdiced impeachment proceedings in the house, and who always refers to the constitution and the threat to our democracy in his speeches and debate points?

are you suggesting i should change my support because biden is a constitutional professor?

this thread is about you convincing us. so go ahead. so far you have failed miserably. in fact, i have to wonder about biden when i see where his support is coming from.

[Steely_Dan]

42. Please Educate Me

Where do you see Biden's support coming from?

Secondly...
I think you take the OP too literally. Yes, indeed, it states that the OP wants to "convince" you. But seriously, I'm sure that the OP respects your decision. The OP is to pass on information concerning the candidate of choice for THEM. There was nothing there that trashed you or any other candidate. Excuse me for saying, but it makes you sound a bit defensive which I'm sure you didn't intend.

I happen to like your candidate very much. Kucinich has long demonstrated his dedication to the Constitution and for this, he is respected by most if not all on this board. Just because someone says that Biden supports the Constitution does not imply in any way that other candidates do not.

-Paige