Skip to main content

biden photo: biden biden.jpg

The Biden, unleashed:

In remarks made on Tuesday night at a fundraiser for Massachusetts Senate candidate Ed Markey in front of an audience of donating (doting?) Democrats, Biden went for the jugular.

In a reference to Al Gore, who introduced Biden at the Washington, D.C., event, Biden said, "This man was elected president of the United States of America," according to the pool report.

"But for the good of the nation, when the bad decision, in my view, was made, he did the right thing for the nation," Biden continued.

Biden was just getting warmed up:
“Al, you set an example for this country that is going to live as long as recorded history, about the man who won by a decision that I think constitutional scholars now and in the future will conclude was an ill-fated decision,” Biden said. “The way you stepped up, it was amazing.”
This is pretty amazing stuff coming from a sitting Vice-President--to take a hammer to the very legitimacy of the prior Administration.  Don't think we've ever seen anything quite like that before.  Of course, it also helps when it happens to be true.

Nor did the Biden stop there.   He characterized the divide between Democrats and the modern Republicans, once merely differentiated by competing principles, as akin now to an unbridgeable abyss.

It’s a pretty simple proposition: The United States of America, and the state of Massachusetts, does not need another Republican in the Senate,” Biden said, also according to the pool report. “I’m being straight about this. This is not your father’s Republican Party. It really is a fundamentally different party. There’s never been as much distance, at least since I’ve been alive, distance between where the mainstream of the Republican congressional party is and the Democratic Party is. It’s a chasm. It’s a gigantic chasm.

And still more of the knife did the Biden twist:
[T]he last thing in the world we need now is someone who will go down to the United States Senate and support [Texas freshman Sen.] Ted Cruz, support the new senator from Kentucky—or the old senator from Kentucky," Biden said, referring to freshman Sen. Rand Paul and veteran Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

“Think about this,” he said. “Have you ever seen a time when two freshman senators are able to cower the bulk of the Republican Party in the Senate? That is not hyperbole.”

Yow!

Originally posted to Dartagnan on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 05:14 PM PDT.

Also republished by Massachusetts Kosmopolitans.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (315+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    One Pissed Off Liberal, alice kleeman, kalmoth, KayCeSF, Hammerhand, asterkitty, annan, arizonablue, puakev, divineorder, jjellin, scott5js, pat bunny, SquirmyRooter, on the cusp, billybam, Ishmaelbychoice, JekyllnHyde, sewaneepat, Lost and Found, Glen The Plumber, ItsSimpleSimon, PsychoSavannah, Pandora, YucatanMan, solesse413, randallt, Alexandre, lcrp, scribeboy, devis1, fenway49, pixxer, Susipsych, belinda ridgewood, DRo, tcdup, peachcreek, MRA NY, Joieau, OLinda, Im with Rosey, The Marti, Bill in Portland Maine, lavorare, skybluewater, blueoregon, JayRaye, SueM1121, Raggedy Ann, Radiowalla, Texknight, TLS66, Yellow Canary, kerflooey, Lefty Ladig, psnyder, moose67, 3goldens, NYFM, Dobber, dmhlt 66, cybersaur, Onomastic, howabout, gulfgal98, myboo, radical simplicity, thomask, gramofsam1, doroma, doingbusinessas, science nerd, night cat, peagreen, Matt Esler, Involuntary Exile, weatherdude, markdd, wader, palantir, Timaeus, begone, ChemBob, Chitown Charlie, Lujane, Empower Ink, mconvente, ColoTim, murphy, majcmb1, oxfdblue, el cid, zerelda, 88kathy, doraphasia, Shippo1776, IndyinDelaware, bnasley, maybeeso in michigan, Nowhere Man, Jim R, Redfire, Rosaura, Karl Rover, tin woodswoman, Zinman, Liberal Thinking, BYw, No one gets out alive, Ginny in CO, Haningchadus14, Dragon5616, muddy boots, greengemini, susakinovember, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, Steveningen, WVUCavalier, sawgrass727, ladybug53, Caneel, Emerson, CanisMaximus, prgsvmama26, jplanner, camlbacker, nomandates, think blue, PeterHug, BlackSheep1, dotsright, yet another liberal, nirbama, Bud Fields, madhaus, NapaJulie, outragedinSF, Jeff Y, PrahaPartizan, Pam from Calif, serendipityisabitch, sceptical observer, rat racer, mmgth, riverlover, SoonerG, earicicle, Kitsap River, NonnyO, radarlady, defluxion10, Johnny Nucleo, Sprinkles, cordgrass, Matt Z, mofembot, Lilyvt, kharma, rbird, isabelle hayes, Linda1961, Pariah Dog, sodalis, YaNevaNo, Smoh, WarrenS, Rooe, TomP, Syoho, DefendOurConstitution, Nag, bongojazz, 2thanks, IL clb, JBL55, TFinSF, msdobie, TexMex, Foundmyvoice, lexalou, Byron from Denver, gchaucer2, Hillbilly Dem, Winter Rabbit, Getreal1246, Habitat Vic, tung sol, Rogneid, SottoVoce, evilstorm, Leftcandid, escapee, middleagedhousewife, Desert Rose, Kevskos, tobendaro, gloriana, bronte17, Tom Anderson, Fe, petulans, kathny, California06, wasatch, wlkx, TX Unmuzzled, jennifree2bme, cosette, Lily O Lady, wintergreen8694, jfromga, srelar, marleycat, madmsf, avsp, Luma, Oh Mary Oh, celdd, Sunspots, chmood, Shotput8, spooks51, terabytes, Cassandra77, Ignacio Magaloni, Loudoun County Dem, Beetwasher, Ahianne, MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel, cececville, JTinDC, kevinpdx, Debby, CPT Doom, Keone Michaels, nzanne, Imhotepsings, multilee, DBunn, Ohiodem1, polecat, Debbie in ME, Youffraita, Clytemnestra, CoolOnion, Hill Jill, mbh1023, Fury, ichibon, GeorgeXVIII, Nica24, caul, bryduck, Arahahex, Mr MadAsHell, AoT, MrLiberal, Sun Tzu, TracieLynn, Jimdotz, sostos, Nespolo, etatauri, Front Toward Enemy, Ed in Montana, LarisaW, blukat, Catkin, LillithMc, Dodgerdog1, rb608, Knucklehead, J M F, Catte Nappe, GAS, BvueDem, chicating, rlb, Buckeye54, dsb, jeanette0605, StateOfGrace, dragonlady, PatConnors, FindingMyVoice, retLT, madgranny, sdf, tommyfocus2003, slowbutsure, elziax, xaxnar, lost, Davui, snazzzybird, greycat, teabaggerssuckbalz, elwior, aimeehs, SherwoodB, filkertom, lungfish, Brian82, stlsophos, Overseas, legendmn, trumpeter, Bionic, roses, catly, psyched, weck, deltadoc, Notreadytobenice
  •  "Not your father's Republican party" (119+ / 0-)

    That can't be said enough. Nixon, if he showed up today, would be disqualified by his intelligence and competence, and might not even be sufficiently full of hate to suit today's party.

    Freedom isn't free. Patriots pay taxes.

    by Dogs are fuzzy on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 05:22:34 PM PDT

  •  Good for Joe (14+ / 0-)

    But I'm not impressed. Bush hasn't been President for over four years.  Enough. The misadventures of the previous administration are well known. You ran to fix it, not double down on it. This stuff is red meat for the left to distract them from other, um, issues. Get your own house in order, Joe.

    Anyone who falls for this is a sap.

    Black Holes Suck.

    by Pi Li on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 05:33:23 PM PDT

      •  Yeah, its not like it could ever happen again (27+ / 0-)

        Right?

        Any Democrat who thinks Dems should "get over it" will feel differently when it happens again in their time.  

        Kudos to Joe for the way he spoke out and came to Gore's defense back in 200!  Oh, wait...

        "If you can't take their money, eat their food, drink their booze and then vote against them, you have no business being in DC."

        by Betty Pinson on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:10:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ouch. Don't remind me of that Senate decision. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          aimeehs, teabaggerssuckbalz

          I'm from FL, and was in FL at the time. I've never felt the same about government.

          Defending the theft of our freedom by the government is not a legitimate difference of opinion on a political matter -- it is a deeply un-American attitude that deserves nothing but scorn and derision.--Dallasdoc

          by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 11:52:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That was the eye opener, wasn't it. (0+ / 0-)

            The Supreme Court violated the law and ignored the principles of democracy.  

            One Senator would have been enough to change matters, to challenge admission of the purported electoral college votes, to actually do the right thing and require all the votes to be counted.

            There wasn't a single one.

      •  I'll never get over it--I know people who were (32+ / 0-)

        involved.  Tomorrow, I hope to visit a friend who started the absentee ballot suit that remains the forgotten story in that travesty.

        That doesn't mean, however, that this speech particularly moves me.  Biden's always been good at these stemwinders--I heard him give 1 at the '87 FL Dem Jefferson-Jackson Dinner while I was there for Paul Simon.  Let's focus on deeds more than words.

        Given the dubious legitimacy of W/Cheney, then why are so many or their policies being ratified?  If, as was noted here tonight, Biden believed that the 2006 equivalent of PRISM was an invasion of our civil liberties, why is it okay now?   Why did the president under which Biden serves openly challenge existing policies in 2007, only to continue them since 2009?

        I'm too old and too jaded to get worked up over a red meat speech given to the party faithful when there's so little behind it.

        Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

        by RFK Lives on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:45:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  i love your comments! (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sunny skies, RFK Lives

          Gitmo is a Concentration Camp. Not a Detention Center. Torture happens at Concentration Camps. Torture happens at Gitmo. How much further will US values fall? Where is YOUR outrage at what the United States does in OUR names?

          by snoopydawg on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 10:56:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Must be re-stated: (4+ / 0-)
          Given the dubious legitimacy of W/Cheney, then why are so many or their policies being ratified?  If, as was noted here tonight, Biden believed that the 2006 equivalent of PRISM was an invasion of our civil liberties, why is it okay now?   Why did the president under which Biden serves openly challenge existing policies in 2007, only to continue them since 2009?
          The utter MEEKNESS with which Gore - and in '04, Kerry - calls both elections into question.  Neither one fought for the votes to be counted or re-counted for the sake of the people who voted for them.  The highly-placed politicos (Biden among them) should have opened their big mouths THEN..., should have fought tooth and nail NOT to pass the unconstitutional and illegal laws in effect now that they just can't quite seem to repeal as easily as they quickly passed them THEN.... not all these years later.

          Most of the Dems in power now are namby-pamby narcissists, every bit the corporate stooges their Repuke counterparts are.

          If that were not so, then by the end of January 2009 the following illegal and unconstitutional legislation would have been repealed:  AUMF, office of faith-based initiatives, Patriot Act, MCA '06 (and we'd have habeas corpus back!), FISA fiasco '08 (the illegal wiretapping Obama voted FOR should have stopped then), and MCA '09 would not have been put into effect (and why our Cretinous Congress Critters voted FOR that illegal and unconstitutional crap is beyond my ability to comprehend).

          I'm FAR more angry about what our Cretinous Congress Critters are doing to us by not giving us back our constitutional rights than I am of any common criminals they're elevating to importance by calling them "terrorists."

          "Feels like" the executive and legislative branches are planning on taking our rights away from us permanently and giving all the power to the corporations who have taken over so many government functions.  If they leave these illegal and unconstitutional "temporary laws" in place long enough, extend them often enough, are they hoping we'll get used to being without our rights so they can then permanently take them away and rewrite our Constitution...???

          Like I said: it's not the common criminals I'm afraid of.  It's our Cretinous Congress Critters who are abusing their powers on top of the executive branch abuses of power the legislative branch is approving (or giving up, like AUMF - only Congress can declare war, or not, and only Congress can approve monies for two years of war) by giving the executive power, and the judicial branch that is giving not only corporations personhood and first amendment rights with their money, but approving the executive branch's abuses of power.  What?  Are we going to "elect" a new dictator every four years?

          We need to go back to where we were before the $COTU$ decision of 12 December 2000, and that means repealing - in full - all the bad laws made after that - laws which were supposed to be temporary to deal with the alleged threat of common criminals using low-tech weapons like box cutters who were magically elevated to more dangerous criminals by calling them 'ter'rists,' at that.

          I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

          by NonnyO on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 02:52:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I've never understood this line (10+ / 0-)
            The utter MEEKNESS with which Gore - and in '04, Kerry - calls both elections into question.  Neither one fought for the votes to be counted or re-counted for the sake of the people who voted for them.
            Gore fought all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, and lost. There are legitimate questions about his legal strategy, but it wasn't crazy given Florida law -- and it almost worked.

            Kerry lost in Ohio by over 2 points. He had no obvious legal basis to fight for a recount, and no good reason to think that things would turn out differently if he somehow obtained one.

            Of all the things that people criticize Gore and Kerry for, I don't understand this one.

            Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

            by HudsonValleyMark on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 03:59:49 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  There were still thousands of people (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              trumpeter, NonnyO

              wanting to speak when the "investigation" into the Ohio election shut down.  I don't just disbelieve Florida 2000, I disbelieve Ohio 2004.  I disbelieve the numbers on 2008- I think Obama won by a lot more- by a supermajority that was diminished by whatever election scheming the repubicans had managed, and I saw Karl Rove's ashen face on election night, 2012, when he couldn't believe the fix the republicans had paid half a billion dollars for had failed.

              I understand Kerry had no obvious legal basis to mount a challenge, but what is beneath contempt is the way investigations were shut down.

              •  I don't know which investigation you mean (0+ / 0-)

                I can't actually tell whether you are criticizing Gore and/or Kerry, or simply making separate but related points. (Just reporting, so we don't talk past each other.)

                I also don't know specifically what it means to disbelieve Ohio 2004. I think Bush really did get more votes. I even think Bush probably would have gotten more votes if there had been plenty of voting machines all over the state. Some of the other what-ifs are harder to assess. For the people who didn't get to vote, or whose votes weren't counted, for reasons beyond their control, the election was unfair regardless of anything else. However, I don't think that the net effect of willful shenanigans was very large, and that's after spending a lot of time plowing through the arguments of people who disagree.

                I don't think that Obama won by a lot more in 2008. I don't think that Rove thought the 2012 election had been fixed in Romney's favor.

                DKos has had some nasty meta wars on election fraud, and some people have been banned at various times for "conspiracy theory." I don't think that believing that millions of votes were stolen in 2004 and/or 2008 is or should be a bannable offense. What tends to chap my hide (whether or not it is bannable) is when people have posted as if anyone who doesn't already "know" that millions of votes were stolen in 2004 (or whatever) must be an idiot, a naif, and/or a shill. You didn't do that at all.

                Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

                by HudsonValleyMark on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 11:53:40 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Congress is the policy-setting branch. (0+ / 0-)

          The claim that they simply rubber-stamp the executive's initiatives is a deception to shift blame from themselves.
          Cheney started out as a power-grubbing Rep. and stayed power-grubbing to the end.
          Let's not forget that the V.P. is technically a member of the legislative branch.

          We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

          by hannah on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 03:54:52 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'll never get over it either (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lost and Found, RFK Lives

          Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D.
          Drop by The Grieving Room on Monday nights for support in dealing with grief.

          by TrueBlueMajority on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 05:25:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  If he really believed what he said, why (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SheilaKinBrooklyn, RFK Lives

          wasn't he willing to ceritfy the Congressional Black Caucus' challenge to the Electoral Vote in 2000. IIRC, the CBC challenge required only one Senatorial sponsor for the entire ratification of the electoral college to be placed on hold.

          I'd like to hear Biden's defenders answer that little niggling question, after they get through answering how it was that Biden allowed Clarence Thomas's nomination to get out of the Judiciary Committee. Jee-bus.

      •  Indeed (0+ / 0-)
        That's nice to hear that you think that the Bush v. Gore decision is old news.
        I do. It is.

        And yes, I'm not the only one who thinks it's time to get over it.

        Black Holes Suck.

        by Pi Li on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 08:21:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  No offense, but we can walk and chew gum. n/t (14+ / 0-)

      "Watch what you say or they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, fanatical, criminal..."-7.75, -5.54

      by solesse413 on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:07:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  true enough in general but not for this instant (0+ / 0-)

      mabye, because he was complementing Gore, who was literally right in front of him.

      Biden thinks out loud, and Gore's presense provided the context.

      He wasn't using it to process the past or drag us back there.

    •  He's at a fundraiser. Go figure. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kevskos

      collards, meat, butter, sourdough, eggs, cheese, raw milk

      by Tirge Caps on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 10:19:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The Bush v. Gore decision gave new life to (2+ / 0-)

      the segregationists. It's ironic that it came from a part of the country that wasn't even a state before the Civil War. But, what that tells us, I think, is that segregation is not necessarily race-based. Superficial characteristics just make it easier to distinguish one group or segment from the other or others. And it is the segmentation that is desired. Populations have to be divided into parts in order to conquer and rule them, which is, of course, the main objective of the status-dependent elites.
      Segregation dies hard for the simple reason that it is essential to some people ruling other people. Republicans are segregationists because they are into ruling. It's the party, Biden was accusing because, just as birds of a feather flock together, the Republican party is where segregationists have come to roost. They're all over the country. Washington is where they go to make mischief.
      Segregation is not about the individuals or groups being singled out or excluded. Segregation is about people defining groups and fomenting antagonisms for the purpose of asserting their own authority to rule. That is, because people are unruly, they, via the rule of law (a deception), get to rule. It's a well-known pattern -- common in abusive households. Spouses dominate each other by threatening the children. Republicans seek to dominate by threatening the elderly, the indigent and women.
      The modern Republican party has only one objective -- power. And, since power, to be felt, has to hurt, Republicans are out to inflict damage.

      We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

      by hannah on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 03:48:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Florida WAS SO a state before the Civil War! (0+ / 0-)
        On March 3, 1845, Florida became the 27th state of the United States of America.
        And if you're thinking of Texas, it joined the Union in 1846.

        When you're going full-on anti-authoritarian, you can't afford to get careless.

        States that joined the Union DURING the Civil War:

        West Virginia - 1863
        Nevada - 1864
        States that joined the Union AFTER the Civil War:
        Nebraska - 1867
        Colorado     - 1876
        North Dakota - 1889
        South Dakota - 1889
        Montana     - 1889
        Washington (state) - 1889
        Idaho - 1890
        Wyoming     - 1890
        Utah - 1896
        Oklahoma - 1907
        New Mexico - 1912
        Arizona - 1912
        Alaska - 1959
        Hawaii - 1959

        If it's
        Not your body,
        Then it's
        Not your choice
        And it's
        None of your damn business!

        by TheOtherMaven on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:28:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  It may not be a big fuckin' deal (0+ / 0-)

      but it's the truth, and most Amercians can't handle the truth.  Good for Biden on giving it to them.

      "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

      by Subterranean on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:17:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Biden isn't exactly Mr. Squeaky Clean either- as (0+ / 0-)

      much as I like the guy personally, who can forget the 1988 election, Biden having to bow out of the race due to Biden's blatant plagiarism and outright blatant lies:

      Biden lifted Kinnock's precise turns of phrase and his sequences of ideas—a degree of plagiarism that would qualify any student for failure, if not expulsion from school. But the even greater sin was to borrow biographical facts from Kinnock that, although true about Kinnock, didn't apply to Biden. Unlike Kinnock, Biden wasn't the first person in his family history to attend college, as he asserted; nor were his ancestors coal miners, as he claimed when he used Kinnock's words. Once exposed, Biden's campaign team managed to come up with a great-grandfather who had been a mining engineer, but he hardly fit the candidate's description of one who "would come up [from the mines] after 12 hours and play football." At any rate, Biden had delivered his offending remarks with an introduction that clearly implied he had come up with them himself and that they pertained to his own life.
        http://www.slate.com/...
         Face it, a politician is a politician is politician, they all suck, every damn lying ass one of them, it's just some seem to suck less because they're better at lying  then others.
         Obama and his FISA vote during the 2008 primary sure spoke plenty to me. He did say if elected he'd revisit the entire FISA law- he sure did, expanded the hell out of it. And transparency? phtt... only when and if it suits him or he gets caught up in shit.
         Always going to vote Dem but it really sucks voting for someone that truly sucks only because they suck less than the alternative.

      Be the kind of person your dog thinks you are.

      by teabaggerssuckbalz on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:33:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Typical of this administration (13+ / 0-)

    all words, no action.

    I didn't abandon the fight, I abandoned the Party that abandoned the fight...

    by Jazzenterprises on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 05:52:09 PM PDT

  •  On social issues, the divide is indeed vast. (12+ / 0-)

    But on economic issues, there is very little difference. And what differences there are, are marginal not fundamental.

    •  Is assassinating citizens an economic issue? (4+ / 0-)

      Because both parties agree that the Emperor, er, President, has the right and authority to assassinate Americans who get in the way.  With "due process," of course.

      Obama has become the new Decider.

      •  Since the Cold War, (10+ / 0-)

        the two parties have been indistinguishable on national security stuff. There is general uniformity on those things. Both parties are interventionist, support a large and expansive military and intelligence apparatus, and adhere to American Exceptionalism.

        •  I've got to disagree with this... (0+ / 0-)
          the two parties have been indistinguishable on national security stuff.
          Did both of them authorize the killing of American citizens?

          Other than that little difference, yeah, I'd agree that they are "indistinguishable" in our current war on terror world we live in.

        •  nonsense (5+ / 0-)

          do you think Gore would have invaded Iraq? There i also the question of competence. It is hard for Republicans to make the right decisions for this world when they really do not live here.

          Join the War on Thinking. Watch Fox News- John Lucas

          by Jlukes on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 10:59:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Gore on Iraq: (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            NonnyO, Kevskos

            "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

            Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

            "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

            Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

            That's Al Gore saying the exact polar opposite of what the weapons inspectors were saying at the time.

            Most of the Democratic establishment supported the Iraq War and didn't turn against it until it became a total mess. Gore also supported Bush I's war and the no-fly zone.

          •  Gore would not have invaded Iraq, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Jlukes

            absolutely -- see his speech in CA a year or so after the election, he was emphatic about this. If we'd focused on Afghanstan (and the Pak border), the world would now be a different place.

            I also believe his Admin would have thwarted 9/11 -- keeping Richard Clarke in place, taking seriously the memo on "OBL determined to strike in the US," not hiding on vacation, etc.

            In hindsight, he should have requested a statewide recount. Christopher Warren was out of his league, too much of a statesman for the scrum in FL. But it's hard to see what they could have done, when up against the 5 Republican Supreme Court justices. Call for protests in the street? That would alienate much of the public (even many cautious Dems), and wouldn't overturn the ruling.

            FL-2000 was a political watershed, for the country.

        •  And actually, during the Cold War, (0+ / 0-)

          it was the Dems who were the hardliner military interventionists.

          "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

          by bryduck on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:04:14 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  They were different during the Cold War, though. (0+ / 0-)

          I guess you're right if you mean "since the end of the Cold War" -- post-1993 -- but DURING the Cold War, the Democrats were noticeably better at rejecting "national security" bullshit.

      •  Assassinating citizens? What is it about (0+ / 0-)

        citizenship that is so sacrosanct?  You engage in efforts to destroy the country or to attack it and you're still a good guy cuz you thought getting that piece of paper would protect you?  This isn't Betty White being targeted, even David Koch avoids the infamous kill list.  I'm guessing the soldiers who were plotting to kill Obama aren't on a kill list.  

        Targeting the people who are already known to have killed many citizens is not quite the nefarious plan you think it is.  My friend who was blinded (and who's body is still in constant pain) in the 1998 Nairobi bombing was pretty relieved that OBL was dead.  We mostly live such soft, protected lives we don't have a clue what it's like to live in poverty, pain, or hunger.  If we did we'd never for one second save our outrage for NSA spying and blithely ignore hungry kids and hungry seniors and depressed wages for the majority.

        I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

        by I love OCD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:39:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Because we have this thing called (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SouthernLiberalinMD, trumpeter

          the Constitution that is supposed to prevent it from happening to US citizens . . .

          "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

          by bryduck on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:05:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Do we? And how is that working out (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            teabaggerssuckbalz

            for retirees who can't afford food, or citizens up against stand your ground laws, or women who die from complications of pregnancy but can't have abortions because their state outlawed them?  Kill lists are just fine if they're unwritten and the victims aren't droned I guess.  

            The problem here is Obama believed in that "more transparency" thing he talked about and he admitted what other presidents hid and did anyway.  Given the response I'm guessing future presidents will learn from his mistake.  

            I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

            by I love OCD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 11:16:52 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Targeting and killing 14-year-olds (0+ / 0-)

          because they happen to be related to someone who .... you THINK is a terrorist, but who you have never charged with a crime....

          I can't count how many ways that's wrong.

          Look up al-Alwaki

      •  Apparently. So is indefinite detention. (0+ / 0-)

        And monitoring all my communications.  What's next, showing my papers at multiple checkpoints?

        Defending the theft of our freedom by the government is not a legitimate difference of opinion on a political matter -- it is a deeply un-American attitude that deserves nothing but scorn and derision.--Dallasdoc

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:01:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  So? (8+ / 0-)

    What exactly is the practical impact of Biden's partisan rhetoric? The better response would be if the Obama administration would reject the Bush admin's policies on domestic spying.

    "The problem with posting quotes off the Internet is you never know if they're genuine."--Gen. George Washington at the Battle of Gettysburg, February 30, 1908

    by Aspe4 on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:13:17 PM PDT

    •  Obama did reject Bush's domestic spying policies (13+ / 0-)

      in 2008.  

      Once elected, not so much.

      And today?  It goes on, broadened, deepened, and more entrenched.

      "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

      by YucatanMan on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:25:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Exactly, It's All Political Rhetoric for the Fans (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        YucatanMan

        I wish I was a Democratic hyper-partisan, then I wouldn't worry so much about the fucked up things Democrats do.

        "The problem with posting quotes off the Internet is you never know if they're genuine."--Gen. George Washington at the Battle of Gettysburg, February 30, 1908

        by Aspe4 on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:31:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Telecom immunity wasn't rejected. /nt (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        drklassen

        Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
        I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
        —Spike Milligan

        by polecat on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 08:16:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's called speaking the truth (0+ / 0-)

      Why do you deprecate it as "partisan rhetoric"?

      Biden's just the VP. He can't make Obama not be a functional equivalent of Bush. The power that Cheney had as VP was an exception.

      This is not a bloodless process. — Barack Obama, at the launch of the Hamilton Project....

      by Alexandre on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:30:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  They already did. It's just possible everything (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      aimeehs

      you think is happening isn't happening. The holes in Snowden's story are being revealed.  I'd suggest we not elevate him to noble whistleblower status unt we have more facts.  

      I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

      by I love OCD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:43:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Why do you twist everything into (0+ / 0-)

        a discussion about personalities?  This isn't about Snowden, any more than it's about Obama.

        This is about winning a small fight against the national security Godzilla.

        What are you doing to fight the dangerous and counterproductive error of treating dirtbag terrorist criminals as though they were comic book supervillains? I can't believe we still have to argue this shit, let alone on Daily Kos.

        by happymisanthropy on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:13:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Right, even if it's Mickey Mouse and (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          aimeehs

          not Godzilla.  I get that.  

          I'm fine with talking about and taking action against our surveillance state.  We need less fear and more reality about safety, rights, and who knows what about what.  We don't need to assume Snowden's a brave whistleblower until we know more about him and his motives.  

          The bottom line is mostly this has been common knowledge for at least seven years and predictable for twelve years.  And seven years ago safeguards were put in place to prevent wholesale spying on every citizen.  I'm interested in knowing if they're effective, if the people still think they're necessary or if it's time to scale the whole enterprise back, if we are in fact safer.  

          I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

          by I love OCD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 11:27:20 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Snowden is one of OVER SIX SEPARATE whistleblowers (0+ / 0-)

            Don't believe him?  Ask Thomas Drake.  Don't believe Drake?  Ask Binney.  Don't believe Binney?  Ask Klein.  Et cetera.

            http://www.dailykos.com/...

            So I think we can assume that Snowden is a brave whistleblower simply because he's keeping good company.

            But there is ZERO evidence of this:

            And seven years ago safeguards were put in place to prevent wholesale spying on every citizen.
            That's just fictional.  There is no evidence of any safeguards.  Yeah, some proven liars (such as Clapper and Cheney ) have made this claim.  But all the evidence is that the NSA is spying, wholesale, on every citizen.

            Please pay attention.

  •  Biden is wrong: Gore did the wrong thing (27+ / 0-)

    by not fighting the coup d'état performed by the SCOTUS. Gore didn't defend our freedom, and we have never regained it.

    This is not a bloodless process. — Barack Obama, at the launch of the Hamilton Project....

    by Alexandre on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:17:15 PM PDT

    •  I have to agree. If Dems had fought in 2000, (11+ / 0-)

      we may have been a different country today.

      At the very least, perhaps the rule of law would be a bit more alive.  

      He did win, after all. The Supreme Court decision was a piece of crap.

      "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

      by YucatanMan on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:26:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe not so much (4+ / 0-)

        The Dems never really fought against the Bush abuses.
        No holds, no filibusters, no fight.
        Not like the thugs do when they are not in power.
        They signed on to the AUMF & the Patriot Act.
        In 06, they ran on rolling back those abuses but once in power did nothing.
        Even after the war was seen as a lie, the tortures and illegal wiretaps, they did nothing.
        Except to continue to fund the war.

        Gitmo is a Concentration Camp. Not a Detention Center. Torture happens at Concentration Camps. Torture happens at Gitmo. How much further will US values fall? Where is YOUR outrage at what the United States does in OUR names?

        by snoopydawg on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 11:06:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  What else should he (could he) have done? (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TLS66, TFinSF, wishingwell, Ahianne, aimeehs

      I really do wonder this... once the Supreme Court has ruled on a question of law, that's the end of the road, isn't it? What further "fighting" was there to do, that would have made him president?

      •  The rule of law is based upon the will of the (9+ / 0-)

        people. The SCOTUS decision of Bush v. Gore was clearly not an application of law, but a judicial coup. In a healthy democracy, the people would not have accepted that decision.

        By decrying the SCOTUS decision for what it was—a coup—Gore could have mobilized the people to preserve their freedom.

        This is not a bloodless process. — Barack Obama, at the launch of the Hamilton Project....

        by Alexandre on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:36:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Dream on ... (11+ / 0-)

          sure, there were a lot of people who would have happily demonstrated.  Unfortunately, there were even more Homer Simpsons who could not be bothered to get away from their reality shows.

          Should Gore have appealed to the International Court of Justice?  The GOP and the press would have had a field day with that?  Do you remember a man named Lopez Obrador in Mexico, who lost the election of 2006, angrily called for demonstrations and declared a "parallel government"? He was virtually laughed off the political stage.  Yes .. he had much less of a case than Gore, but it goes to show this is not just a U.S. phenomenom -- people accepting what they're told to accept.  Gore fought for 34 days, even when people were urging him not to.  Remember the actions and statements of then-DNC Chair Rendell and then-DSCC Chair Torricelli? They sounded like Republicans.

          "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

          by TLS66 on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 07:10:26 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And let's not forget that Gore was unloved (9+ / 0-)

            by many.  The press painted him as stiff, a fabricator, a technocrat, aloof, aristocratic, blah, blah, blah.  Whereas Bushit
            was a good ol' boy, the kind you would slap thighs with and toss down a few cold ones.  

            The "liberal press" were the worst offenders of all.  I don't think Gore had the wind behind his back.  I don't think Democrats would have gone to the barricades for him.  

            It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

            by Radiowalla on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:12:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  "unloved" is putting it extremely mildly. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Radiowalla

              Check the Daily Howler's archives to see how vicious the attacks were.

              "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

              by bryduck on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:07:57 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  God, how true, how true! (0+ / 0-)

                I practically lived at the Daily Howler during that time.  It was my only tether to reality.  Bob Somerby was the only one to fully chronicle what was going on in the run up to the 2000 election.  Too bad he never wrote his book and too bad the "liberal" press still doesn't realize what a sorry role they played.

                Now I've gotten my blood pressure up again.....

                It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

                by Radiowalla on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 01:19:20 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I was amazed at the one-sided coverage in 2000 (0+ / 0-)

                  The press, almost to a man, was out to get Gore.  They did give Gore a brief period of positive coverage after the Democratic convention in L.A., but made sure to end it well in advance of the first debate with a bogus story of Gore lying about his dog.  That was on September 21.  The only other time the press so unaminously hated a candidate was when Nixon ran in 1960 and 1968.  You'd have thought Gore kicked someone's dog.

                  "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

                  by TLS66 on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 01:27:34 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  it wasn't for him. it was for us. (0+ / 0-)

              it would have helped if the banner-carrier had been there too, that's all I'm saying. Him giving in made it much harder to do the work.

              Defending the theft of our freedom by the government is not a legitimate difference of opinion on a political matter -- it is a deeply un-American attitude that deserves nothing but scorn and derision.--Dallasdoc

              by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:08:37 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Were demonstrating. The question is not (0+ / 0-)

            whether it would have been easy, nor whether we would have won, but whether we should have fought. Yes. We should have. And speaking as someone who was fighting on the ground in FL, it would have been a hell of a lot easier with more leadership than just the CBC.

            Nothing against the CBC, of course.

            Defending the theft of our freedom by the government is not a legitimate difference of opinion on a political matter -- it is a deeply un-American attitude that deserves nothing but scorn and derision.--Dallasdoc

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:06:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  we were demonstrating nationwide (0+ / 0-)

            some "air support" as it were, would have been greatly appreciated.

            And if "dream on " is your response, when do you think it would be easier, or strategically better, to fight what's been happening to us since that day?

            Defending the theft of our freedom by the government is not a legitimate difference of opinion on a political matter -- it is a deeply un-American attitude that deserves nothing but scorn and derision.--Dallasdoc

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:07:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Hey, I was ready to help fight (0+ / 0-)

              I was ready to attend demonstrations and wave signs on the street even if I got taunted for it.  However, the average American is a Homer Simpson who simply can't be bothered to get out of his La-Z-Boy and do that.

              "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

              by TLS66 on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:53:40 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I guess I'm saying we were organizing (0+ / 0-)

                in fact it was the first grassroots organizing I'd ever done where it was being run through the internet. It was called "Trust the People" and they had synchronized protests on Saturdays across the country. Then the site got hacked, everyone in TTP started distrusting each other, and the whole thing fell apart. We weren't as digitally savvy in 2000.

                When I say air support, I mean people like Gore, like Bob Graham, like the Senate generally, like the Democratic party in particular, like more of the press.

                Defending the theft of our freedom by the government is not a legitimate difference of opinion on a political matter -- it is a deeply un-American attitude that deserves nothing but scorn and derision.--Dallasdoc

                by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 02:17:22 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  The mistake (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sunny skies, drklassen, Willinois

        was showing up to argue the case at the SC.  If they had no showed the coup it was would have been apparent to everybody.  When Gore sent a legal team to argue at the court it validated the SC standing.  

        Hold a presser and say you did not go to the court because it had no standing in the case.  File active cases in the court that did have standing, the FL State SC.  Keep getting on TV and demanding all the votes be counted.  

      •  The Constitution makes it clear (0+ / 0-)

        that the US House has final authority in approving Presidential elections. They have done so several times before in American history. The time delay hurt no one. The Supreme Court had no legitimate reason to step in. Gore could have pushed for a full and accurate recount to continue and then push the House to vote for the real winner.

        •  That process was short-circuited in 1876 (0+ / 0-)

          See Tilden v. Hayes. Instead of doing a full House count, the buck was passed to a 15-man committee: 5 Representatives, 5 Senators, and 5 members of the Supreme Court.

          Here's how the fix went in (from Wikipedia):

          The majority party in each house named three members and the minority party two. As the Republicans controlled the Senate and the Democrats the House of Representatives, this yielded five Democratic and five Republican members of the Commission. Of the Supreme Court justices, two Republicans and two Democrats were chosen, with the fifth to be selected by these four.

          The justices first selected a political independent, Justice David Davis. According to one historian, "[n]o one, perhaps not even Davis himself, knew which presidential candidate he preferred."[6] Just as the Electoral Commission Bill was passing Congress, the legislature of Illinois elected Davis to the Senate. Democrats in the Illinois legislature believed that they had purchased Davis's support by voting for him. However, they had made a miscalculation; instead of staying on the Supreme Court so that he could serve on the Commission, he promptly resigned as a Justice in order to take his Senate seat.[7] All the remaining available justices were Republicans, so the four justices already selected chose Justice Joseph P. Bradley, who was considered the most impartial remaining member of the court. This selection proved decisive.

          ...The commission first decided not to question any returns that were prima facie lawful.[5] Bradley joined the other seven Republican committee members in a series of 8-7 votes that gave all 20 disputed electoral votes to Hayes, giving Hayes a 185-184 electoral vote victory. The commission adjourned on March 2; two days later Hayes was inaugurated without disturbance.[5]

          With that as a precedent, it's not surprising that the Supreme Court felt justified in deciding the whole ball of wax in 2000.

          If it's
          Not your body,
          Then it's
          Not your choice
          And it's
          None of your damn business!

          by TheOtherMaven on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 01:36:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not a precedent. (0+ / 0-)

            The House voting to use it's authority to create a committee is in no way similar to nor a precedent for the Supreme Court completely usurping authority from another branch of government. Did the House vote or in any way voice support for the Supreme Court deciding the 2000 election? No.

            •  But that's not the way they did it in 1800 or 1824 (0+ / 0-)

              Passing the buck to a "select committee" that included Supreme Court members was the entering wedge for the Supreme Court to think it could decide the election all by themselves.

              1876 made 2000 possible.

              Once you break a precedent, it's very difficult to patch it back up again.

              If it's
              Not your body,
              Then it's
              Not your choice
              And it's
              None of your damn business!

              by TheOtherMaven on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 06:53:33 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  1876 is infamous in the annals of disgrace (0+ / 0-)

            And the selection of "Rutherfraud" B. Hayes ushered in what is known as the "Gilded Age", the age of unfettered corporate abuse of the people.  He also gave up on federal attempts to stop Jim Crow and abandoned the principles of the Republican Party.

            Just as 2000's election theft seems to have ushered in the Second Gilded Age.

      •  In our system CONGRESS is the final arbiter (0+ / 0-)

        People don't actually understand this, but under our Constitutional system, Congress has both the right and the power to override the Supreme Court, and it has done so.  

        This is the same as the system in the UK at the time when the Constitution was written; Parliament can override the courts there, but only does so under extreme circumstances.  An election theft would be such a circumstance.

        For some things, it's just a matter of passing a new law.

        For others, it's a matter of impeaching the Supreme Court members.

        For a rare and extreme few, it's a matter of stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction.

        For Bush v. Gore, an election theft, it was merely a matter of getting one Senator to join the Congressional Black Caucus in challenging the electoral college vote submissions.

    •  No, Gore had no choice but to bow out after (11+ / 0-)

      the Supreme Court decision.

      None.

      •  That kind of thinking has gotten us to where (5+ / 0-)

        we are now: with the Bill of Rights shredded, living in a police/surveillance state under permanent war.

        The Turkish people are protesting against their elected Prime Minister, because he openly despises them. The American people should have done the same after the Bushies stole the election in 2000. Gore should have explained that to them. The SCOTUS making an obviously arbitrary, unlawful decision based on nothing on politics was obviously not the rule of law, but a judicial coup. To preserve the rule of law, the American people should not have accepted that decision.

        By accepting that decision, the American people resigned themselves to being powerless, to our democracy being a sham.

        Think of it, for four (or perhaps eight) years, the United States did not have a legitimate government. How can a free people live with that?

        This is not a bloodless process. — Barack Obama, at the launch of the Hamilton Project....

        by Alexandre on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 07:13:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It had been too long since the last coup in the US (0+ / 0-)

          Most Turks have living memories of several coups in the recent past.

          The fact that the US had not had a coup since 1876, and had not even had a state-level coup since the 1890s, meant that people were frankly shell-shocked by the coup in 2000.

          The next coup will NOT draw the same reaction.

      •  That's patently false (5+ / 0-)

        And no other country in the world would understand the argument that Gore had "no choice" but to quit after an egregiously wrong decision by a partisan judicial body.  

        In other places, populations have frequently had to stand up and fight hard for an elected leader to take office when many elements of the system (executive, judicial, legislative) attempted to place an un-elected leader in office.

        It is called democracy.  

        Leaders and peoples always have a choice.  They can fight for it, or they can take the smoother road of warm elite approval of not rocking the boat (or the stock market), eroding a few more values away in the name of being "honorable".  This display of "honor" will surely convince those unable to think that the fundamental value of pliancy and submission to oligarchic power has been preserved.

        Ah yes, "the system worked".  Boy did it.

        •  [citation needed] (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TFinSF
          And no other country in the world would understand the argument that Gore had "no choice" but to quit after an egregiously wrong decision by a partisan judicial body.
          If that's true, you should be able to produce some really interesting quotations backing it up, from scores of leaders around the world urging Gore to disregard the Supreme Court ruling and... well, I'm not sure. Just Win? Declare martial law?

          Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

          by HudsonValleyMark on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 04:07:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Abundant citation provided (0+ / 0-)

            Democracy is always a work in progress.  You do not build democracy by looking the other way when its pillars are hacked away.  

            It wasn't up to Al Gore to do anything.  My issue is not with him.  It is with us.  As believers in democracy, voting rights, and the rule of law, we regular Americans should have taken to the streets to protest the soft coup that was installed by a cabal of elite judicial cronies.  

            So it's not to world leaders that we need to look for citation of what a democratic people do when an election is stolen.  It's to involved citizens around the world.  So, what have they done when elections in their countries were stolen?

            I don't have to look further than 2 months ago.

            What happens when the Supreme Court of your country affirms a Presdential election independent observers analyze as fraudulent?

            If you want to build democracy in your country, you might consider getting up off your couch and protesting.  Or you could do nothing and leave the oligarchy comfortable in its knowledge that its population is passive and that future anti-democratic actions (things like, oh, disenfranchising minority voters and building giant secret surveillance devices) can be easily achieved.

            But they guy in Kenya's not so bad, right?  The silly Kenyans should just accept him and go home.

            The decision cleared the way for Kenya's richest man to take the top job in east Africa's biggest economy, but left Western powers with the headache of dealing with a leader charged with crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court.
            Oh, my.  But surely other Western leaders in the democracy-lovin America-ish part of the world will help out the protesters, right?
            Western donors, worried about a nation seen as a vital ally in the regional battle against militant Islam, also congratulated Kenyatta. But they have said his indictment in the Hague will complicate their relations.
            Ah, well, never mind.  

            Everywhere in the world, it is up to regular people to fight for a more democratic process and more free lives.  Nowhere will the oligarchy just hand that over to you.  Nowhere will a benevolent leader simply accord them to you.

            The sooner we as Americans re-learn that lesson, the better.

            Here is just a tiny, tiny sample of a few places in the last few years where the populations have built pro-democracy movements when elections were stolen.  Success does not come overnight.  But anti-democratic forces are only reigned in when a citizenry shows they cannot simply operate at will forevermore.  So we better get to work!:

            - Malaysia

            - Ukraine

            - Russia

            - Iran

            •  (ducks goalposts) (0+ / 0-)

              If you have no issue with Gore, then your original statement seems to be inoperative.

              What exactly are you alleging that Kenyans did in response to that ruling? Your link cites "hundreds of stone-throwing youths" in one Kenyan city, some of whom apparently "looted shops and burned tyres." (I don't know if that reporting is fair, but hey, it's your link.) Impact on the election outcome? Nil. Impact on "build[ing] democracy"? None demonstrated. A model for "pro-democracy movements" in the United States or elsewhere? Not so obvious. Your point? Heck if I can tell.

              Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

              by HudsonValleyMark on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 07:22:38 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Democracy means action, not excuses for inaction. (0+ / 0-)

                To be fair, yes, I did originally say leaders elsewhere fought harder for democracy.  I don't want to personalize this to Al Gore.  But in general, I do not find the Democratic Party leaders fought that hard for democracy in 2000 (or in subsequent years).  

                I provided multiple links, many of which covered peaceful movements.

                Not surprisingly, you seized on the one (out of five!) examples I provided that referred to violent unrest.  Perhaps you could explain why non-violent resistance to a stolen election in your opinion is a poor model for building democracy?

                I am against violence.  

                But Kenya is a less stable country, with a long history of political violence and repression.  Forms of non-violent protest have yet to develop and become protected and respected.  It is not a "model" for us.  But it does represent a more engaged citizenry than us Americans.  They were willing to take action. We may admire that courage, while still acknowledging the type of action taken stands room for improvement.

                No one admires our courage in 2000.

                The long history of building republics and more democratic forms of living is fraught with failures and spectacular defeats.  Many of them had lasting impacts on the global movement toward democracy.  All of them had more impact than armchair  defeatists telling anyone and everyone who wants to fight for democratic processes that it is not worth it and it is best to stay on the couch.  

                If democrats throughout history had abided by your view, we'd be bowing and scraping to monarchs still.  

                But you say everyone should just accept undemocratic results and do nothing.  The positives for your vaunted inertia?  Heck if I can tell.

                •  I "seized on" the example you actually discussed (0+ / 0-)

                  I agree that that isn't surprising, but I don't think it's a character defect.

                  But it does represent a more engaged citizenry than us Americans.  They were willing to take action.
                  According to your evidence, the vast majority weren't -- or at least they weren't willing to take that action, nor is there any particular reason why they should have been. And, lest there be any misunderstanding, I think that is completely unreasonable as a litmus test of Kenyans' commitment to democracy, and apparently you do too. So the handwave that Kenyans "were willing to take action" and Americans weren't doesn't make much sense to me. I know many Americans who have taken sustained action since 2000 -- including people who protested after Bush v. Gore -- and I imagine you do too. Why fixate on one riot? Seriously, why?
                  But you say everyone should just accept undemocratic results and do nothing.
                  I said no such thing, and anyone who bothers to read this far can see that I didn't. What is the point of saying something that obviously isn't true?

                  I don't think your smug judgment that Americans in December 2000 somehow fell short of worldwide standards is especially democratic -- and I don't think many Malaysians, Ukrainians, Russians, or Iranians would feel insulted by my saying so.

                  Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

                  by HudsonValleyMark on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 12:10:42 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  We're kind of turning this into a polemic (0+ / 0-)

                    So I'll let you have the last word after this comment -- then we can carry on in private messages if we so feel...

                    I'll note that you did not really respond to my invitation to explain why non-violent resistance to a stolen election is a poor model for building democracy.

                    The proper time to react to a fraudulent election is when the fraud occurs.  People in the five countries I cited did so.  We did not (in any significant way).

                    The reason I developed the Kenyan example further was because the circumstances mirrored ours -- election fraud occurred, terrible candidate won, Supreme Court backed victory.  So in March they were in the shoes we were in as of early 2000.  

                    Neither you or I know how many people in Kenya disagreed with the outcome, nor indeed how they might have expressed their disagreement.  But a significant number took to the streets -- regrettably, in a violent manner.  If an equally significant number had taken to American streets in a non-violent manner, consequences would only have been healthy for democracy regardless of the result.

                    People whose democracies are fragile or barely existent seem to show more courage in such situations.  Perhaps they perceive something is genuinely at stake in elections, something worth defending.  They take immediate action.  And "sustained action" in subsequent years could not be more beside the point.  You can't retroactively protest a stolen election years after the fact.

                    My distressed judgment that Americans in 2000 did not exhibit a vigorous and courageous response to a stolen election is entirely democratic.  I look around the world and see other people who respond with courage.  Those responses are to be admired.  

                    •  OK, once more (0+ / 0-)
                      I'll note that you did not really respond to my invitation to explain why non-violent resistance to a stolen election is a poor model for building democracy.
                      I don't believe it, so why would I attempt to "explain" it?
                      The proper time to react to a fraudulent election is when the fraud occurs.  People in the five countries I cited did so.  We did not (in any significant way).
                      I'm not convinced that that is true. How were the U.S. demonstrations in reaction to Bush v. Gore less "significant" than the Kenyan riot? This is not obvious. Some of your other examples may be better, but that isn't obvious either. None of those situations seems very comparable to Bush v. Gore.
                      But a significant number took to the streets...
                      According to your source, the number was "hundreds." How many Americans protested?

                      I haven't even addressed the issue of how many Kenyans actually thought that the election was stolen; I think we agree that we don't know. That should have some bearing on how we assess their courage.

                      People whose democracies are fragile or barely existent seem to show more courage in such situations.  Perhaps they perceive something is genuinely at stake in elections, something worth defending.
                      I don't know that the Kenyans, Malaysians, (etc.), and Americans of your imagining resemble the actual people all that closely. I think you're being pretty harsh on Americans.

                      Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

                      by HudsonValleyMark on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 02:44:38 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  In the US people were shell-shocked. (0+ / 0-)

                      We didn't know what to do, more or less.  The last time a national election was stolen in the US was 1876!

                      People in other countries had experience.

      •  See above. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        drklassen

        No show for the SC was the option.  Once they showed up you are right, had to accept the courts ruling.

    •  And we didn't really defend Gore (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Matt Z, Dartagnan, Wisdumb, wishingwell

      Alas, too many Democrats were seduced by the siren song of Nader and showed little enthusiasm for Gore.  It was the Republicans who were hungry and angry and determined to gain the White House.

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 07:05:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Now that we're crying over spilled milk (0+ / 0-)

        I might as well mention that what lost Gore his own and neighboring states was the pro-gun control policy of the Clinton administration.

        I would blame that (when it comes to the Electoral College) rather than Nader. (This is not to say that I am against gun control.)

        This is not a bloodless process. — Barack Obama, at the launch of the Hamilton Project....

        by Alexandre on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 07:27:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  All he needed were a few hundred (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Alexandre, wishingwell

          of the the 90,000 Florida votes that went to Ralph Nader.  
          That's all.  
          Or a better Supreme Court.  He had everything he needed, including the popular vote.  I don't blame him at all.

          It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by Radiowalla on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 07:30:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Actually, all we needed was for the votes (11+ / 0-)

            to be properly recounted. The coalition of newspapers that got a legal decision to allow that to be done, established that when the whole state was recounted, Gore won. It was reported in the NYT in 11/01, buried in an article ~ p 17.

            There is no mistaking the amount of planning that went in to the Florida set up. The media was totally complicit in pushing Bush (Lapdogs, Boehlert, Blinded by the Right, Brock). His cousin got the perfect seat on FOX to call the election too early. The rest of the media followed. Then the "Brooks Brothers" (R congressional aides) were flown to Florida by Delay, et al, to stage those bizarre demonstrations to stop the recounts. The press and pol meme was that it had to be settled quickly, while the polls showed a resounding majority of Americans were willing to wait for the recount.

            20/20 hindsight, the oil people and other 1% wanted their candidate in the WH.  (Had Gore pushed his climate change position, the fossil fuel counter campaign would have been beyond dirty.) They got him and damn, did he deliver.

            "People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed and redeemed; never throw out anyone. " Audrey Hepburn "A Beautiful Woman"

            by Ginny in CO on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:48:16 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Or the SC could have followed the Constitution (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              drklassen

              That's what really sticks in my craw. There is a clearly defined process for disputed elections - it goes to the House. Now, the House was GOP led in 2000, but enough GOPers indicated they would follow the will of the people that George W's people couldn't count on winning there, so the fight became about recount processes (none of which would have produced a statistically valid result, winning percentages, no matter which method you chose, were always smaller than the margin of error for the voting process). The SC should have, IMHO, turned down the case and remanded the issue to its appropriate branch of the government, but that didn't happen.

              A government that denies gay men the right to bridal registry is a facist state - Margaret Cho

              by CPT Doom on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:57:31 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Another thing that hurt Gore, in this case (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Alexandre, drklassen

          with progressives, was his bizarre silence during the campaign about his signature issue, climate change.  No doubt he was badly advised, but...

          What time he lost from a policy perspective was certainly mitigated to some extent by An Inconvenient Truth.

          "And now we know that government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob." -- FDR

          by Mogolori on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 08:14:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Far more Democrats (3+ / 0-)

        fell for the siren call of Bush, but somehow it's still Nader's fault.

        You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

        by Johnny Q on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 11:33:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  In my book, yes, it is still Nader's fault. (0+ / 0-)

          It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by Radiowalla on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 08:00:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, that makes it easy. (0+ / 0-)

            You can ignore the real, the frightening threat of Bush and the people who stood behind him and engineered this, and you also get to blame it all on scruffy people who stand to the left of the Democratic party. You don't have to question the Democratic party, and you don't have to focus much on the really, truly frightening enemy. You get to blame voters, and not even the ones who voted for Bush. People who were exercising the right to the franchise, rather than people who were subverting it. This is a crap position.  It's Nader's fault for running a campaign, it's a tiny portion of the electorate's fault for voting for him--not, of course the fault of the Democrats who voted for Bush!--and definitely NOT the fault of the fucking coup that destroyed our democracy.

            Defending the theft of our freedom by the government is not a legitimate difference of opinion on a political matter -- it is a deeply un-American attitude that deserves nothing but scorn and derision.--Dallasdoc

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:14:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Goddammit! this is not about Nader. (0+ / 0-)

        More Democrats voted for Bush than Nader. Stop distracting the issue. The "siren song" here is the constant referring back to Nader when what we're talking about is Republicans destroying our electoral process, and ultimately our democracy.  Nader is at best a bit player in the real story of what happened, and yet people focus on him like a laser.

        Defending the theft of our freedom by the government is not a legitimate difference of opinion on a political matter -- it is a deeply un-American attitude that deserves nothing but scorn and derision.--Dallasdoc

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:11:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I agree with you, but in Gore's defense (0+ / 0-)

      as he said on the radio at the time (I think it was NPR), the only challenge left on the table after SCOTUS and the Senate went along with Bush, was revolution.

      Think about that for a minute.

      I still agree with you, but I can understand why he made the decision he did.

      Defending the theft of our freedom by the government is not a legitimate difference of opinion on a political matter -- it is a deeply un-American attitude that deserves nothing but scorn and derision.--Dallasdoc

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:03:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The real question is why the Democrats in the (0+ / 0-)

      Senate sat on their hands in the face of a clearly partisan and unconstitutional SCOTUS decision. That was one of the worst moments, politically, of my life.

      Defending the theft of our freedom by the government is not a legitimate difference of opinion on a political matter -- it is a deeply un-American attitude that deserves nothing but scorn and derision.--Dallasdoc

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:04:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I love what Biden said, but I honestly don't see (12+ / 0-)

    what it means today.  Al Gore was elected president over 12 years ago.  I would honor him the same way. A lot of democrats would.

    Kudos to a major Democratic figure putting this thought out there in broad daylight. I have to agree he is completely right. But what does this do?  Really, it is wonderful statement of the truth. The history remains.

    I'd like to hear some other truth right now.

    The White House does need a major distraction from surveillance scandals, so why not toss out a red meat bone to the left? Maybe a shiny object will shut down the videos with Obama debating himself. Maybe it will cause a major, meaningless dust-up with the Repuglicans so that a whole new media battle plays out and something  else gets pushed out of the news.

    Then again, Biden is my favorite off-scripted pol, so maybe he's just being Tell it like it is Biden.  Good for him!

    "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

    by YucatanMan on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 06:20:30 PM PDT

      •  Little did I know how much it would (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Karl Rover

        apply to so many things these days.  

        Oh well... time for a nice long night's sleep. Every day brings new revelations. Let's hope for some good ones!

        "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

        by YucatanMan on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 08:25:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I'm not really getting a false flag vibe here. (16+ / 0-)

      I think Biden was basically conveying exactly what he believed.   It's an unusual event to be introduced by Al Gore, and it seems to me like Biden is using that event to say something he's probably believed for a long time.

      •  You may be entirely right. I don't mean to (6+ / 0-)

        disparage the diary at all. I do sincerely apologize if it sounds that way.  Biden could be just being Biden.  I'm glad he said it.  

        And I'm glad it hasn't become a place-taking distraction away from what's happening to our country.  There are severe long-term issues, including what Biden mentioned and so much more, that we cannot afford to neglect any longer.

        "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

        by YucatanMan on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 08:23:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  That and there are still a lot of (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        NonnyO, Dartagnan, wishingwell, YucatanMan

        people other than die hard GOP, who haven't seen the evidence he won. A lot have just filtered anything about that as CT.

        "People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed and redeemed; never throw out anyone. " Audrey Hepburn "A Beautiful Woman"

        by Ginny in CO on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:52:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  True! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      YucatanMan

      The whole thing about spying on us is getting too hot for Obama and his surrogates to handle.  They know we know he's doing the same exact thing as Dumbya, Dickie, and the Bushista cohort did to us, and no one's taking that lightly.

      Toss out another topic for Moronic Media to chew on:

      The White House does need a major distraction from surveillance scandals, so why not toss out a red meat bone to the left?
      I totally agree with Biden that Gore was elected and the whole thing was handled wrong... in 2000... the time/place the rights of the voters should have been discussed.  [I don't mind hearing about it again, but then I can hold more than two topics of conversation in my head at any one time, and Moronic Media personnel can't, so this needs to remain a side topic for now....  And Gore did NOT make the right decision in 2000 to step aside, but that's beside the point.]

      Hopefully, this won't be too much of a distraction away from the very real problem of spying on ALL of us that needs to be resolved..., and the FACT that our Cretinous Congress Critters need to REPEAL AUMF, Patriot Act, MCA '06, FISA fiasco '08, and MCA '09, and ALL telecoms need to STOP spying on us on the say-so of an elected official who's acting every big as shamefully as Dumbya and the Bushistas did.

      I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

      by NonnyO on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 03:19:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  All Gore surrendering to the Bushies (10+ / 0-)

    in 2000 is not something I'd characterize as doing "the right thing for the nation."

  •  Go Joe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dartagnan, Amber6541, wishingwell

    America, We blow stuff up!!

    by IndyinDelaware on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 08:31:53 PM PDT

  •  To all the emoprogs here.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lastman

    ..yes Obama is still continuing the Patriot Act. But what about the other issues? I mean really after all the shenanigans of the Tea Party over the past 4.5 years, do you all still need to be convinced that the chasm between the two parties has never been wider? Do I have to list "birthers", climate change deniers, personhood bills, self-deportation, legitimate rape, attacks on teachers, the Paul Ryan "death voucher" budget, etc etc.

    •  emoprogs? (3+ / 0-)

      what names do I get to call you? How about:...

      Dick.

      This Rover crossed over.. Willie Nelson, written by Dorothy Fields

      by Karl Rover on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:06:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What's an emoprog? (3+ / 0-)

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:14:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  From the Urban Dictionary. (7+ / 0-)
        Emo Progressive (or "emoprog") is a self-described liberal or progressive, often with libertarian leanings, whose political orientation is to be angry, dissatisfied and unhappy with the state of the nation at any given time, because in their view, liberal policies are not being implemented quickly or forcefully enough. They have particular contempt for Democratic presidents.

        Emoprogs are ideological purists who disdain compromise and incremental change, which they see as "selling out" liberal ideas like full employment, an end to all wars, state secrets, and liberal social policy.

        Emoprogs dislike Republicans but reserve their greatest disdain for Democratic presidents, whom they relentlessly attack for not meeting a set of ideological goal posts that are constantly adjusted to ensure that the president will be deemed a disappointment, "not progressive enough" or "just like a Republican" no matter what policy achievements are made......

        http://www.urbandictionary.com/...

        There's more that you may find interesting.

        "Compassion is not weakness, and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism." Hubert H. Humphrey

        by Onomastic on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:41:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  You know, any time I see someone slinging out the (10+ / 0-)

      insults like that, it's a tell to me that the comment isn't really about policy or problems.

      I'm sick to death of that, no matter who is doing it.

      I get being frustrated as hell. I get being outraged and hurt and feeling overwhelmed at times. Oh, how I get all of it.

      But Insults and cheap shots are far too easy.

      Working to solve the problems we face isn't.

      I'd like to see far less of the former and far more of the latter.

      So, for the love of god, can all the crap treatment of one another please stop?

      "Compassion is not weakness, and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism." Hubert H. Humphrey

      by Onomastic on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:28:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I really wanted to send this to top comments, (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Kevskos, Onomastic, wishingwell

        however it would have called attention to the insult slinger and that would be as wrong as was slinging the insult in the first place.

        I'm sick to death of that, no matter who is doing it.
        I'm right there with you, dear heart.  Right there.  I am tired of community members who not only get away with vile name calling insults, but the hundreds of others in this community that support and even applaud it.  

        We do not all agree on every issue 100% across the board -- ever.  Civil and respectful discussions do lead to solving problems.  Nastiness never does.  Nastiness leads to more nastiness and anger and division.  Just take the tea party the insulter above referenced as an example.

        For a day and a half I clicked the button to collapse the Recommended section on this website.  That was a first for me.  I never dreamed I would have to do that rather than face a person calling me a [cussing] idiot and so many others gleefully jumping on board.

        I'm sick to death of that, no matter who is doing it.

        As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them. John F. Kennedy

        by JaxDem on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 02:47:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes well said Jax ! I agree, the name calling (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Onomastic, JaxDem

          and insults being hurled at one another especially in the past week or two here has been way over the top.  I stop by in for a short while and when I start to see the name calling and insults flying around, I know it is time to leave for the day.

          Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

          by wishingwell on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:30:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  There are people who are doing more than (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JaxDem, wishingwell, Wee Mama

            leaving for the day. Good people who care deeply about this country and its problems. Community builders and activists.

            This keeps up all that will be left is FP posts and those who talk loudly but offer no answers as to how we fix the problems we have.

            I have yet to see any good faith discussion on how we change things given the factors in play.

            How do we get rid of the Patriot Act and Citizens United? How do we repeal or change the  Telecommunications Act of 1999?

            How do we stop the pillaging and plundering of rights in states like Wisconsin, Michigan and North Carolina?

            It's all connected and until we address that, we're just mouthing off and not doing anything constructive.

            "Compassion is not weakness, and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism." Hubert H. Humphrey

            by Onomastic on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 08:03:50 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  The assumptions people are making about one (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JaxDem

          another are mind boggling. The hypocrisy of it all even more so.

          That's not political activism. That's BS.

          Sorry.

          Thank you for your thoughtful response, JaxDem.

          I really am sick of all of it.

          It's so ego centric and far from helpful.

          "Compassion is not weakness, and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism." Hubert H. Humphrey

          by Onomastic on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:57:39 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I am an emoprog and proud of it! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NonnyO, Desert Rose, Kevskos

      I don't care if President Obama was perfect on 999 out of 1000 issues.  I will oppose him on that one issue.

      There is also the question of scope.  If the President does 100 good things, but supports one really bad policy, then that one offsets the other 100.  The NSA abuses fall into that category.

      So call me an emoprog all you want, I will wear that as a badge of honor!

      The president has said he "welcomes the debate" about the NSA revelations.  He should take it one step further and lead that debate.

      To the NSA douchebag who is reading this: "Those who give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

      by Indiana Bob on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 02:49:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Obama has done most of that stuff. (0+ / 0-)

      God, I don't want to have to go through the list, but he's been on the wrong side of most of those issues.  It's depressing.

  •  Politicians Catch Up With Reality (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NonnyO, Kevskos, Amber6541

    Slowly.

  •  Who is this radical Joe Biden fellow? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tool, TJ, happymisanthropy

    This is one brave man who has the courage to stand up before a high-paying audience of self-selected Democratic party militants and rattle his Demo saber about events safely 13 years in the past.

    He's definitely not the kind of guy who would be in the pocket of big banks.  Surely his Senatorship is built on a state economy constructed of progressive values and not a cynical and outrageous tax haven for over fifty percent of American corporations.  

    Oh wait.

  •  Biden would make a solid POTUS (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Matt Z, Amber6541, wishingwell

    I guess i'm one of the few who'd gladly vote for him in a primary.

  •  today's Republican party (4+ / 0-)

    are terrorists, terrorizing the American people

    My heroes have the heart to live the life I want to live.

    by JLFinch on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 02:32:42 AM PDT

  •  I supported Biden in the primary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Amber6541, wishingwell

    and still don't regret it for for a second.

  •  The only reason Bush is a free man .. . . (2+ / 0-)

    is Joe and his running mate don't have the guts to enforce the laws against murder, torture and warrantless wiretapping.

    I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever. ~Thomas Jefferson

    by bobdevo on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 03:43:41 AM PDT

  •  Did the right thing for nation - ha! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pakalolo, Wisdumb, Kevskos, Lily O Lady

    How did that work out for all of us?    Biden is typical of self-congratulatory Democrats, and Gore is just typical of what Democrats do when confronted - run away.

    They all talk a good game.  What they say when they campaign has absolutely nothing to do with how they operate.   Obama made this abundantly clear and must hold the record for flip=flopping faster than any president.

    What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Elizabeth Warren 2016

    by dkmich on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 03:49:16 AM PDT

    •  Yeah, he kinda did. (0+ / 0-)

      Al Gore did not roll over. He fought for 35 days to get those Florida votes counted. The country was becoming very divided and stressed. He chose to "accept" the horrible 5-4 SCOTUS decision, because where else could the fight have gone? To the streets? He knew he had carried Florida, knew the decision was wrong, and he said he disagreed with it in his concession speech (the greatest speech of his life). But he did put the country first; he honored the Constitution and the separation of powers. And since then, he's tried to save the planet, that's all. Mild-mannered Al Gore, the real Superman - my hero.

  •  We kept TELLING you all (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dartagnan, Amber6541, wishingwell, whybaby

    how great Joe is.  "Bankruptcy bill!" they whined back.  

    You may now all bow and thank Delaware.

    "Republicans are poor losers and worse winners." - My grandmother, sometime in the early 1960s

    by escapee on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 05:51:19 AM PDT

  •  Goerge W Bush, the selected, not the elected. (4+ / 0-)

    If I had one wish, Republican men would have uteruses.

    by Desert Rose on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 06:07:02 AM PDT

  •  Watergate was about Republicans (0+ / 0-)

    engaging in behaviors that would sway an election in favor of their candidate. So I think it is your father's Republican Party.

    "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

    by Lily O Lady on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 06:37:47 AM PDT

  •  I like Biden (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dartagnan, Front Toward Enemy

    If it comes down to a choice between him and Hillary, I will be very torn.

    He's so hot, and she's so cold.

    Hopefully, somebody else will come along so I don't have to make that call.

    The guy I'd really like to see step out is Sheldon Whitehouse, he seems like an extremely thoughtful, solid guy.

    He's got a real good name for the job, too, let the bad puns begin.

    "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

    by jkay on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 06:38:04 AM PDT

    •  I like Joe, but... (0+ / 0-)

      ...I'm hoping for Hillary, just because I'm more convinced she'd win.  Either would make a good president, though.

      Main thing is to keep the Republicans out, we can't afford to have them in office anymore.  Like, ever.  

      "Glenn Beck ends up looking like a fat, stupid child. His face should be wearing a chef's hat on the side of a box of eclairs. " - Doug Stanhope

      by Front Toward Enemy on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:35:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I love watching the Republican party commit (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, Front Toward Enemy

    suicide.  Faced with the option of becoming reasonable, they double-down on being
    crazy.

  •  I eagerly await our President (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tool, happymisanthropy

    asserting the same things, and prosecuting the crimes committed by Bush and his henchmen.

    I'm not holding my breath, though.

    "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

    by happy camper on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:17:29 AM PDT

  •  Joe Biden would be better than Hillary for sure! (0+ / 0-)

    Hillary is going to run and we have had enough of these roll over and compromise dems.  Perhaps Joe would be better?  I'm pretty much over Hillary.

  •  Yeah, but I disagree with this... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dartagnan, happymisanthropy, gmfp

    "But for the good of the nation, when the bad decision, in my view, was made, he did the right thing for the nation..."

    That's kind of what Ford said when he pardoned Nixon, that for "the good of the country" he wanted to "move forward."

    That's not good for the country, it's treating the citizens like babies.  We can handle a hard fight, and it certainly wasn't in the interest of the country to allow Bush to be appointed by the Supreme Court.

  •  Nice "pillow talk" ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gmfp

    Typical Dem Establishment rhetoric :  the more private the venue, the tougher the talk -- you should see the awful things Dems say in fundraising letters that you never hear on MSNBC.

    And even so ... "although the selecting of GWB as president was WRONG ... at the time it was RIGHT "for the country."

    Boooyah!  Take that, former President Bush!!  All of whose works we deplore, but don't exactly repudiate.

  •  Once again, Joe nails it. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dartagnan

    On all counts.

    The "not your father's Republican party" thing is especially true.  The GOP's almost not even a party anymore, it's more of a cult.  I live among Republicans and their politics have become so entangled with their religion, and their religion has gotten so radicalized, that they're almost "fundamentalist Republicans."  They'll deny any historical record to keep believing what they want to believe about politics the same way they'll deny the fossil record to keep believing what they want to believe about science.  

    If you could bring Abraham Lincoln back from the dead, I think he'd be horrified to see what his party's turned into.  They're not just wrong anymore, they're like flat-earthers.  A so-wrong-you-have-to-be-insane kind of wrong.

    "Glenn Beck ends up looking like a fat, stupid child. His face should be wearing a chef's hat on the side of a box of eclairs. " - Doug Stanhope

    by Front Toward Enemy on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:32:46 AM PDT

  •  am i the only one... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    whybaby

    who wishes, (and believes we woud have better legislative  and electoral outcomes) that joe biden had been elected president in 2008 and re-elected in 2012?...so that vice-prez O could have understudied how to actually BE a president?

    joe B would have hammered home and sold public option healthcare, gun reform...as it is, joe is the one doing the selling, the negotiating and heavy lifting anyway---he's the one that forced O's hand on marriage equality, and who knows what else, and i'm thinking there might have been a few wall st prosecutions, too--and he wouldnt have put up w/boehner and mcconell's obstructionist BS for a month, much less 5 yrs...and who knows, we may not even have had to go thru the whole tea-thug thang in 2010, and it's heinous aftermath

    yeah, 8 yrs o joe wouldnt have sucked, w/ a more experienced and connected obama waiting in the wings...and 16 yrs of a dem in the WH...because despite all the Hillary worship, it's not a lock in 2016

    so yeah, dont even get me started on if gore had been prez instead of bush..al gore was practically raised to be prez, he knew how govt worked, and he put country first, even if it meant sacrificing the presidency for the mistaken belief that there was a greater good being served ..W was raised to party and demand everything he wanted and expected to get it..."the decider" ...ah, the american voter...
    back to reality

  •  Wasn't there an article yesterday or today about (0+ / 0-)

    how W is being viewed more favorably than Obama now? I couldn't bring myself to read it.

  •  Love Joe Biden (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dartagnan, whybaby

    A Gem

  •  Hi, Dartagnan, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dartagnan

    have they let you become a musketeer yet?

    On a more serious note, bravo for Biden for being braver than much of the D. C. political establishment and actually saying the obvious thing that too few people in that establishment have dared to say since 2000.

    "Optimism is better than despair." --Jack Layton, the late Canadian MP, liberal, and Christian.

    by lungfish on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:21:31 PM PDT

  •  Sandra Day O'Connor (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dartagnan

    would seem to be in agreement with him on Bush, according to reports.

  •  Uncle Joe tells it like it is (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dartagnan

    I've always loved Joe Biden. Uncle Joe speaks truth, and with his whole passionate heart. And yes, he's right, of course: Al Gore was the best President we never had. I've never gotten over it. And I'm not sure when the country ever will.

skybluewater, Sharoney, sdf, JekyllnHyde, Ed in Montana, PrahaPartizan, Bill in Portland Maine, filkertom, Radiowalla, dragonlady, murphy, teacherken, Timaeus, Liberal Thinking, Nina Katarina, Pandora, lost, madmsf, PeterHug, Sprinkles, Emerson, Wintermute, genethefiend, celdd, eeff, etatauri, TX Unmuzzled, polecat, HootieMcBoob, JLFinch, Morgana, bronte17, Zinman, evilstorm, TracieLynn, sponson, BlackSheep1, wonkydonkey, susakinovember, whenwego, CoolOnion, farmerhunt, roses, Arun, Ignacio Magaloni, retLT, Fe, jennifree2bme, Chitown Charlie, Cedwyn, Alna Dem, wader, pollwatcher, Lilyvt, Redfire, Texknight, kharma, Getreal1246, psnyder, Nag, Rithmck, annan, NYC Sophia, Subversive, lungfish, pat bunny, Noodles, cosette, yet another liberal, astronautagogo, Evolution, NYFM, Steven Payne, defluxion10, Catte Nappe, kalmoth, MagentaMN, riverlover, Brian82, outragedinSF, Matt Esler, zerelda, ybruti, Sembtex, Kitsap River, randallt, Hillbilly Dem, KayCeSF, NapaJulie, solesse413, Josiah Bartlett, sawgrass727, CPT Doom, maybeeso in michigan, radarlady, 3goldens, escapee, ichibon, caul, LarisaW, SherwoodB, ChemBob, YucatanMan, Dobber, Kevskos, Beetwasher, majcmb1, Pam from Calif, Sun Tzu, Fury, Gordon20024, Kayakbiker, Overseas, CompaniaHill, markdd, Savvy813, Shotput8, Ginny in CO, FindingMyVoice, sodalis, Rogneid, mrchips46, kathny, xaxnar, Jim R, begone, SoulCatcher, Knucklehead, snazzzybird, tarheelblue, Debbie in ME, Keone Michaels, myboo, Kingsmeg, cybersaur, Clytemnestra, tung sol, tobendaro, Yellow Canary, liberalconservative, AoT, sleipner, The Wizard, Im with Rosey, Rosaura, el cid, boatsie, tommyfocus2003, sceptical observer, middleagedhousewife, think blue, IL clb, doingbusinessas, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, suspiciousmind, WarrenS, blueoregon, jjellin, Tom Anderson, markthshark, PatConnors, NonnyO, One Pissed Off Liberal, Sapere aude, Habitat Vic, peagreen, Loudoun County Dem, camlbacker, devis1, ColoTim, offgrid, gloriana, puakev, LillithMc, jeanette0605, Jimdotz, bnasley, mbh1023, tcdup, gchaucer2, cececville, madgranny, on the cusp, TomP, Empower Ink, Winter Rabbit, mconvente, JaxDem, GAS, Youffraita, Foundmyvoice, Involuntary Exile, elwior, mmgth, lavorare, moose67, Lujane, Jeff Y, catly, mofembot, petulans, phrogge prince, Notreadytobenice, sewaneepat, BYw, Nica24, palantir, billybam, dmhlt 66, watercarrier4diogenes, JBL55, legendmn, MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel, multilee, J M F, greengemini, divineorder, CanyonWren, Ohiodem1, earicicle, rbird, DefendOurConstitution, prgsvmama26, elziax, TheOpinionGuy, oxfdblue, kevinpdx, sfarkash, jfromga, Dragon5616, astral66, Lefty Ladig, Amber6541, FogCityJohn, TFinSF, The Jester, serendipityisabitch, estreya, gramofsam1, piers, 4CasandChlo, Luma, Lost and Found, cordgrass, gulfgal98, pixxer, ItsSimpleSimon, DiegoUK, SoonerG, Johnny Q, nirbama, DrTerwilliker, kenwards, ericlewis0, petesmom, science nerd, Oh Mary Oh, Pakalolo, Onomastic, kerflooey, Front Toward Enemy, Hill Jill, I love OCD, Liberal Capitalist, spooks51, slowbutsure, sostos, Mr MadAsHell, asterkitty, lexalou, California06, trumpeter, boomerchick, marleycat, Ace Nelson, thomask, BarackStarObama, muddy boots, SueM1121, MRA NY, createpeace, wintergreen8694, bluedust, sound of progress, Imhotepsings, StateOfGrace, JoeEngineer, Sunspots, stlsophos, DRo, Auriandra, Davui, No one gets out alive, deltadoc, YaNevaNo, weatherdude, chmood, JTinDC, isabelle hayes, sreeizzle2012, peachcreek, belinda ridgewood, geojumper, Arahahex, doroma, bryduck, avsp, arizonablue, Glen The Plumber, Australian2, Hammerhand, Sue B, Lily O Lady, nomandates, argomd, Linda1961, JayRaye, weck, alice kleeman, howabout, Constantly Amazed, Smoh, IndyinDelaware, ET3117, Demeter Rising, rigcath, Rooe, Ishmaelbychoice, pipercity1, night cat, The Marti, Dodgerdog1, gnosticator

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site