"Part of what being a leader does is to instill confidence is to demonstrate what he or she knows what they are talking about and to communicating to people ... this is how we can fix this," Biden said. "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said, 'look, here's what happened.'"
I certainly feel better knowing that come next November, I might have a savvy politician like Joe Biden explaining complex financial matters to me. And also, how the governor of New York managed to get his own financial show ten years before the first regularly scheduled television broadcast.
Hat tip Jesse Walker -- and Stuart Buck, who wonders why Senator Biden didn't mention Abraham Lincoln's inspiring dispatches from the front lines at Valley Forge.
Imagine if Sarah Palin said something this stupid.
Imagine if Sarah Palin held a press conference.
Oh, wait, she isn't allowed to by her owners.
Or maybe Jeezus told her not to.
Fred, we don't have to imagine it. Palin and McCain have been babbling out idiocies together for almost a month now.
Yeah, yeah, it's Fairness Doctrine time on the gaffes front. But something tells me Joe Biden knows there was no TV in 1929 and that the stock market crash and the Depression were actually not simultaneous. Nothing tells me that John McCain knows that the community reinvestment act of 1977 was not actually responsible for the credit crisis of 2007-8.
If you look on Youtube, you can get pretty good black-and-white footage of Julius Caesar taking a quick break from fighting the Battle of Waterloo to share a few words with Jon Stewart and the best f@!&ing news team ever.
Am I the only one surprised by the fact that the reaction in this thread to what is obviously just a stupid (but funny) mistake is "the other side is worse"? Really? Without even an admission that, "yeah, that's dumb"?
*Can* we all agree that what Biden said was monstrously stupid? If we can, isn't the only rational thing to say "yeah, sorry, hosed that one up, won't happen again"?
(Contra brooksfoe, I would wager Biden does NOT know that the stock market crash and the Great Depression were not simultaneous, but that's because I have a low opinion of politicians of all stripes.)
Screw the historical misunderstanding - just check out the GRAMMAR of that first sentence. Yeesh.
More impressive to me was Joe Blow's confession today that he and Barry don't actually mean any of that clean coal baloney.
Let the Chinese burn our coal for their electricity. We'll hang out here in the dark whenever the sun is dim or the wind subsides to do our part in saving the world. Oh, and we'll send the Chinese our clean coal technology to keep them from fouling our air. That'll be really important during future heat waves when we all have to open our windows to cool off -- for lack of electricity.
Sell our coal to the Chinese and give them our technology. Then reinstate the drilling ban and continue buying gas -- oh, not that we'd have to do such a deplorable thing -- from reliable friends like Saudi, Venezuela, perhaps Iran.
It'll be rough living in an economy powered only by dreams. But, oh, how great it will be to be loved in the world again.
Obiden-Pelosi. Short-change we can believe in.
Here's another Biden gaffe, Biden: "We're not supporting clean coal". What an idiot. It's not as if Obama needs to win any states that produce coal, right?
After 35 years in Washington, you can't chalk up his continual gaffes to a lack of experience. Biden is just not very bright. It was irresponsible for Dems to nominate someone as inexperienced as Obama for president and on top of that they want us to elect a dunce to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.
Fred writes: "It was irresponsible for Dems to nominate someone as inexperienced as Obama for president and on top of that they want us to elect a dunce to be a heartbeat away from the presidency."
Fred voted for Dumbya and Reagan twice. Fred loves dunces.
I therefore conclude that the real Fred did not write that post.
The real Fred is busy trying to finish "Goodnight, Moon."
I don't seen that he called him president Roosevelt in that statement. I imagine the stock market crash was a big story that the governor of New York might have wanted to have talked about, however much ahistorical right-wing douche bags want to deny that.
I should just like to point out that the first two years after the Crash in '29 FDR was mostly praising Hoover. His criticisms were mainly that HH didn't go far enough in his interventions.
So if FDR had been on TV in early in the Depression he would have called out Hoover for not restricting the money supply enough or restraining international trade with sufficient vigor.
Also, he was rich (owned more than 1 car).
"....on top of that they want us to elect a dunce to be a heartbeat away from the presidency."
Posted by Fred | September 23, 2008 9:54 PM
And you did, Fred, you did. In 2000, remember?
None of this holds a candle, neither in depth of thought nor in execrable English to:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/oh-that-joe--12.html
Money quote: "Biden said that he's 'done more than any other senator combined' for trial lawyers.
'There are two people -- you've heard me say it before -- two groups that stand between us and the barbarians at the gate,' Biden said. 'It's you and organized labor. That's it.'
I am in awe.
"And you did, Fred, you did. In 2000, remember?"
I've heard Cheney called many things, but never a dunce.
Fred defends his god: "I've heard Cheney called many things, but never a dunce. "
Yeah, no one could ever impugn the intelligence of a great genius who said, "The insurgency is in its last throes."
That was in May 2005.
He's a dunce. He's just an extremely ruthless and greedy one. He's the Goering of the Dumbya Era.
MLJ, please stop calling hte other commenters names or I'll have to ban you again.
Megan, I haven't called any other posters any names in this thread. The "dunce" in my 11:40 post is Dick Cheney, and I don't think he posts here much.
"Fred voted for Dumbya and Reagan twice. Fred loves dunces.
I therefore conclude that the real Fred did not write that post.
The real Fred is busy trying to finish "Goodnight, Moon.""
That counts as name calling. No personal insults, or I ban.
Megan, I'll expect you to be this proactive when dealing with all of the wingnuts who say - over and over again - that anyone to the left of Dick Cheney is a socialist or somesuch twaddle.
Mental Giant
Hey, I voted for W twice, too. I might have voted for someone else if the Democrats had nominated someone better than Kerry or Gore. Good Grief people, give us a CHOICE!
MLAJ uses what he thinks others have voted for as an indication of something other leftists and his fellow travelers understand as an indictment. I say, let him claim. For those who disagree with his characterization, it's as if he were calling a Halal-honoring Muslim a pig-hating speciesist ideologue: an insult that only he would find objectionable if applied to him.
It's like being accused of being a brutish, blood-thirsty omnivore by a dogmatic vegetarian. The response is, "Yeah? So what. Now pass the prime ribs." Frivolous nonsense insults hurled only to energize the choir.
FWIW, as assumed in another thread by MLAJ, I didn't vote for Dubya except in the '04 primaries. I voted Libertarian in the general. Although I didn't vote in the US elections in '00, I would likely have taken Bush over Goracle. But I can't really promise that Bush would have gotten my vote, as I often throw the Libertarians a bone to protest the two diabolical duopoly parties driving our politics.
Either way, MLAJ seems to disapprove of Iraqi Freedom, whereas I still do not. My preference would have been for a real conclusive ending to Desert Storm, but hey, sometimes second- or third-best choice is all we get in politics.
MarkG euphemizes: "Either way, MLAJ seems to disapprove of Iraqi Freedom, whereas I still do not. "
My suspicion is that the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead and the 2 million or so who are refugees don't use the foolish and disgusting slogan "Iraqi Freedom" to describe the neocon clusterfuck Dumbya's gang began, but then who gives a damn about human costs when it gives Wolf Blitzer more airtime?
Medals of Freedom for everyone!
I would guess that he was thinking of Roosevelt's policy during the banking crisis right when he came into office in 1933 (you know, declaring a bank holiday, creating FDIC), rather than the stock market crash in 1929.
That counts as name calling. No personal insults, or I ban.
The first 10,000 personal insults were pushing it, but that 10,001st really crossed the line.
John,
Still, can you point to his 1933 television address on the banking crisis? This is a lame brained thing to say, there really is no defending it.
It doesn't prove Biden is an idiot, just lazy with his history like - I dunno - everyone. He speaks without pretense, and that can be good, but it does result in things like that or insulting Indian to their faces.
Dan writes: "The first 10,000 personal insults were pushing it, but that 10,001st really crossed the line."
It's probably a personal insult to say that I've made 10,000 personal insults here, since I quite obviously haven't. But then I guess that's just another example of Republican truthiness.
Skully says: "He speaks without pretense, and that can be good, but it does result in things like that or insulting Indian to their faces."
Skully is referring to Native Americans, not Indians (or their faces) as found on the sub-continent halfway around the world.
So a pretty brazen nitpick against Biden--who most everyone knows is no Einstein--is worth taking time out from what we're all expecting to be a pretty good "omnibus" post about the alleged financial meltdown?
So a pretty brazen nitpick against Biden--who most everyone knows is no Einstein--is worth taking time out from what we're all expecting to be a pretty good "omnibus" post about the alleged financial meltdown?
"He speaks without pretense, and that can be good, but it does result in things like that or insulting Indian to their faces."
Well, yeah, without pretense, but also without thinking, knowing what's he's talking about, or having much awareness of how his comments will be perceived. Which set of deficits should be a deal-breaker for a national politician. When I combine his tendency to act a fool with the nasty drug bills he's pushed through (the RAVE Act was really his baby) about the only good thing I can say about Biden is ... well, Obama would be a relatively young president and seems to be in excellent health.
Biden has a point here. A real president would be out in front of this, selling the bailout package to the American people -- or at least looking to drive the narrative and educate while the details get hashed out. I can't imagine either Obama or McCain staying mostly silent and cooped up in the WH while all this is going on. Can you, Megan? Seriously?
As I said in the 'FBI investigates' post: politicians may be stupid about most things, but they possess the one skill that has gotten them this far: putting their fingers in the air and testing the political winds. And the political winds are populist and angry. As usual, the Dems will push it too far with "homeowner relief" or some such blah blah, which is just a bailout for people who made bad personal finance decisions. I think that would overplay their hand badly. What I am sensing is a general disgust at what is rightly seen as one entity WashingtonWallStreet. Freddie and Fan execs made millions; Lehman execs made millions; lots of people sold/flipped houses and walked away with plenty of cash. And at the end, the rest of us, who had nothing whatsoever to do with this are left holding the bag? Total and utter bullshit. The next few weeks will show who has the best political instincts of all. No bailout. For anybody. Period.
Yes, Biden made a historical Gaffe.
But I think the analogy that Megan uses afterwards is a bit over the top.
Stock Market Crash (1929), FDR takes power 1933 and declares Bank Holidays and FDR spoke to people through the radio not the TV primarily if I remember--all within the context of what is seen on a long time frame as part of the great depression. Thus, while wrong in the details (in some important ways I agree), he did not make a major historical error of fact--at least not in the same sense of Megan claiming that President LIncoln (1861-65) was back fighting the Revolutionary war in the 1780's... That would be quite a much bigger historical error--and Biden's mistakes were not on that grand a scale...
Point out his gaffe and correct him.. but the exagerration doesn't help.
I agree with John from Concord. While Biden clearly got his dates (and facts) mixed up, what is wrong with the sentiment? I think in these troubled times, someone needed to step up and explain (in simple terms) what the hell is going on. A lot of people are not convinced why they should give the most incompetent administration in history another 1 trillion without any explanation (very bad, doom, gloom, too complex for you, etc. don't count). Unfortunately neither Obama nor McCain have shown any leadership on this; McCain even less so (he seems to be completely over his head). All that is happening is the rush to blame someone/anyone.
Nitpicking is a sure sign of love.
I think Biden and Obama are both out to sabotage the democratic ticket.
Brooksfoe: "Nothing tells me that John McCain knows that the community reinvestment act of 1977 was not actually responsible for the credit crisis of 2007-8."
While the CRA of 1977 is almost certainly not responsible, the CRA of 1977 together with it's 1995 and 2005 revisions may be responsible.
Incidentally, the 1995 revisions were the ones that allowed mortgage backed securities to incorporate subprime loans.
There are few people I wouldn't vote for over a congressman.
Megan,
Clearly, you didn't listen to the piece before parroting it. The bad grammar in the quote doesn't match what Biden actually said. Listen to it yourself.
Next time you might want to verify this type of thing before you just lift it from some political hack and use it to make fun of someone's grammar. It makes you look gullible and naive.
Jim
Biden's right as others have commented. Where is Bush, our leader, on this?
I also don't blame McCain and Obama for not speaking more. How much information do they have? If they have as much information as the taxpayers who have the responsibility to provide the money, there is nothing the candidates can say.
The best summation of the crisis was on another blog: "Pretty nice economy you have here. It would be a shame if something happened to it."
Megan,
Since there is no thread for this, I thought I'd ask here. You have cited Intrade in the past as though it had some sort of relevance to this election. It's pretty clear that Intrade is being intentionally manipulated to depress the value of Obama shares (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/intrade-betting-is-suspcious.html). Just wondering if you'd like to comment, reevaluate your former position, etc.
Thanks,
Peter
At least Biden didn't say FDR "stood up" on television blah blah blah. That would have been superdunceful.
"Where is Bush, our leader, on this?"
Bush has made a couple of statements on this, flanked by Bernanke, Paulson, and Cox (you might have caught this picture on the cover of the NY Times this weekend, if you looked), but he is wisely deferring to Bernanke and Paulson on this. They are better able to sell a rescue on Capitol Hill than he is, so he'll let them have the spotlight. Once a deal is done, I'd expect a speech.
"At least Biden didn't say FDR "stood up" on television blah blah blah. That would have been superdunceful."
Well, Biden did ask handicapped PA state senator Chuck Graham to stand up a couple of weeks ago. Here's the video. Biden is such a clod. Great executive decision in picking him, Barry.
No, I'm referring to Biden's insulting and racist comment - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG8RUP31oIY
"You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking."
However,
Where Barry does lack in executive decisions, he more than makes up for in extended penises - I don't need to remind the readers of Steve Sailers comments on this matter.
I must admit I'm torn - and probably would be - on taking a mixed race penis. I'm hoping that the length is African and the girth is European.
I'm also hoping that it, like it's owner, leans to the left.
Fred, you have the strangest dreams for a Cheney fan. Haven't Dumbya and Dumbya reamed you enough yet?
Jasmine,
I'm a realist; there's a lot of cultural differences.
Not least Barry would want to get down with some soul music, whereas I only get relief with a banjo strumming away in the background.
I'm not sure how we would work that out.
Fred,
If I can bang a tambourine with you, you've got yourself a threesome.
Geeze. Anyone deriding Biden for poor communication but missing the 'television address' remark is not in any position to be calling others lame or stupid. Roosevelt was indeed the first President to appear on TV . . . in 1939. Looking back up the page, I don't see that any detractors caught that. So much for crowing about the mistakes of others. Further, from the wiki:
I think it's pretty obvious that Biden was doing a rough paraphrasing of what happened. Further, coinciding with the end of Hoover's term, we have Franklin saying in his inaguration address:
And of course, this has very little to do with Biden's point; presumably no one disagreed with it, hence the ill-considered personal attack on Biden which was yet another backfire against the people behind it. Geeze. If you're going to make these sort of lame attacks - about on the level of flaming someone for spelling or typos - would it be too much to ask to at least do it properly. How many times have flamers been doubly derided when their attacks on someone based upon spelling have themselves contained misspellings and typos?
An unbelievably petty and mean-spirited post. And echoed by - well, you know who you are.
ML+J,
I don't appreciate your 10:48 post impersonating me.
I don't appreciate the impersonations at 10:48 OR 10:59.
It's obvious I would be part of the horn section.
SoV,
Biden was wrong on the timeline, who was president, and the medium which he spoke. You have found a tangential link 10 years later (about a different topic) and an inaugural address which is in no way the president making a special announcement. You conclusion is that Biden misremembered all of these things but meant all of them and this proves... that he gets confused easily?
This isn't a damning moment for him, just agree that he was wrong and move on.
Sure, Bush, Bernacke, and Paulson have muttered a few platitudes. Paulson's now forcefully repeating his request (demand?) for money and authority.
They can describe the cure, but they can't (or won't) describe the disease, its cause, and what will be done to prevent the disease in the future.
Two seconds of googling show that Paulson said the subprime mortagage fallout was largely contained in March 2007. What does he know now that he didn't know then? When did he learn it? (Last Friday?) It would be fair to share his new found knowledge with his financial partners, the taxpayers.
Even in full 'blame the lying poor people mode', a contributing factor seems to be giving money to people without considering whether the money would be paid back. Congress should not make the same mistake.
But let's focus on Biden's grammer. That is what is really important right now.
Who's focusing on the grammar? It's pretty obvious that most people are aghast at the ridiculous historical misunderstanding/misstatement.
Look, people, it's funny. That's all.
Skullberg, I'll actually respond this once to show why I regard you as someone who is not serious or even worth replying to. Let's break this down, shall we? You said:
But in fact, you didn't know that there was no television of consequence in 1933:
No, you didn't know it, did you? To quote someone else, "this is a lame brained thing to say, there really is no defending it." And yet, we now have this charming bit of insolence:
Skullberg, over the course of merely a few months, you have said some extremely, er, unorthodox and controversial things. Never once have you admitted that you were wrong, or rash in your postings, or that maybe you should apologize for intemperate remarks. Someone has suggested that I just ignore you. And that just is what I will continue to do, until you make some sort of effort to clean up your act. Don't even try to make this about tribalism or politics, this is all about you, and the way you handle yourself. This is about, god forbid, at long last taking some sort of responsibility for your actions.
As we use to say back in 70's,
Later. Much.
This topic certainly went downhill fast.
Of course, it didn't have very far to go.
Seriously, Megan, this is worth your time? Snickering at the fact that Biden said that FDR spoke on television, where if he had accurately said FDR spoke on the radio there would have been no issue?
This is called focusing on trivia. You focus on the "gaffe" and ignore the larger point, which is that a true leader (unlike GWB) would be out explaining the financial crisis and what is being done about it. (Personally, I think GWB has no frickin' clue what's going on, as usual, and his approval rating drops every time he goes on TV so it's probably for the best that he's staying out of the picture.)
Why not just go all the way, and call Obama and Biden Beavis and Butthead? In fact, Butthead once said "there's always been TV, there's just more channels now."
As we use to say back in 70's,
Later. Much.
Posted by ScentOfViolets | September 24, 2008 11:19 AM
And here I thought it originated with Martin Riggs in "Lethal Weapon." In the scene where he comes close to blowing his own brains out in his grief for his wife. Which is kind of how I feel after some of these pointless, useless, soul-destroying discussions.
It appears that the Left is much better than the Right in terms in defending their politicians when they screw up. Perhaps it is because the Left is more creative or literate.
Unfortunately, the Left's superior abilities are a net harm throughout history. For example, consider the Left's torrid defense of another Joe that hailed from the Soviet Union.
No, sorry, my generation is responsible for a great many linguistic atrocities, and this is one of them. Right up there with 'far out', or JJ's 'Dyn-o-mite', or 'making the scene', or radical, gnarly, etc.
SoV,
I did know there was no TV in 1933 - that's why I asked the unanswerable question. You see, it points out that a TV address was impossible. You can read it however you like, but just because you missed the condescension doesn't mean it wasn't there (or here).
Huh??? Please point out what I should apologize for?
Pretending to be me, while sucking off Fred and banging a tambourine.
That would get you the death penalty in Alabama.
Uh huh. Looks pretty good to me, the television thing notwithstanding. As I have just documented, and you apparently did not bother to read.
And you know, I haven't seen any posts from you on the verbal gaffes of any of a number of people who far more richly deserve it, but just happen not to be democrats. Why should anyone take you seriously when you're so willing to go hyper-partisan over something so unbelievably petty?
MnZ writes: "It appears that the Left is much better than the Right in terms in defending their politicians when they screw up. Perhaps it is because the Left is more creative or literate.
Unfortunately, the Left's superior abilities are a net harm throughout history. For example, consider the Left's torrid defense of another Joe that hailed from the Soviet Union."
While the right always hated Stalin because he defeated Hitler, I always hated them both because they were grotesque mass-murdering bastards with a penchant for torture.
(I know mass-murder and torture have been taken off of the Bad Things list for most conservatives, but that wasn't always the case.)
Skullberg, I just posted your own quote. I'll happily do so again:
You didn't know that TV wasn't around, period. If you did, you would have said so. Notice you don't - even now - have either the grace or the commonsense to say that you phrased what you wrote poorly, and that's why it sure _looks_ like you didn't know about the history of television broadcasting. Why, that would be admitting that you were even a teeny bit wrong. You're like a monkey who could get out of a trap if only he would let go of the banana, but won't.
No, it's pretty clear you didn't know about the TV thing. If you did, you would have apologized for the verbal gaffe with which you made your comment. Not a difficult concept.
"This is called focusing on trivia." Fair enough, liberalrob. Are you promising to say the same thing if President Bush or Sarah Palin makes some dumb mistake in speaking?
Listen, you aren't going to believe me, but I knew FDR was the first prez on tv and did so in '39. I also knew that Hoover was on TV before that in '27 as Sec of Commerce. My point has always been that there is no way to defend this dumb comment.
And so now we have people like MikeR denying, even after it is posted, that yes, FDR did indeed address the people about the underlying root causes, just as Biden said.
No, it's not particularly elitist to look down on people who behave like that.
Wow - I thought that Megan or her minion was going to police up all the sockpuppeting / imitating.
Joe Biden regularly prattles on about his education (ie false CV and las school plagarism) and his high IQ. He is so historically ignorant that he does not know who was (or wasn't) the President in 1929. He also does not know that TV was not a medium to the masses until after WWII. I do not claim to know exactly when TV was invented - I do recall that there were various experimental models in the 1930s, here in the US and in Nazi Germany. I don't know the dates that they were tested - and I was not at the Chicago World's Fair. I do know that you would have to have the intelligence of a gnat to believe that there was a wide TV audience in the US prior to WWII. Even if FDR, as governor of NY, had spoken on some experimental TV in 1929, it would have been heard by almost nobody. That Biden thinks he can just make this crap up in some sort of stream of conciousness/fiction writing on the fly speaks volumes as to the utility of his vaunted "experience". Biden has been in the Senate longer than I have been alive, and yet has learned nothing except that a safe-seat Democrat can say any random crap he wants wihout consequences. I am pretty sure that even vacous Barry shudders every time Terrets Joe opens his yap.
Uh huh. Looks pretty good to me, the television thing notwithstanding. As I have just documented, and you apparently did not bother to read.
I read it, it was an incredibly grasping defense of a very obvious mistake.
And you know, I haven't seen any posts from you on the verbal gaffes of any of a number of people who far more richly deserve it, but just happen not to be democrats.
Why should anyone take you seriously when you're so willing to go hyper-partisan over something so unbelievably petty?
Was I the one that posted a researched defense on why Joe Biden thought that FDR got on TV to defend the stock market crash? No, I attributed it to a mistake and found it humorous, and nothing else.
I'll explain this slowly and simply...to be hyper-partisan, one would first have to be a partisan. And to accuse someone of hyper-partisanship in this case, it would make sense to first confirm that the supposed hyper-partisan isn't actually an Obama supporter. Which he is.
Can you twist your mind around that concept? You know, being an Obama supporter and thinking Joe Biden made a stupid mistake (BTW which he did and your defense is embarrassing)?
Irony is obviously lost on you.
At least Biden didn't say FDR "stood up" on television blah blah blah. That would have been superdunceful.
Posted by kentuckyliz
Actually, Roosevelt stood up a lot at rallies and Conventions. He wore leg braces, and was assisted walking by two "handlers", who were sometimes family members, then had a device to "lock" his legs at a lecturn.
If TV existed, FDR would have likely been filmed standing, while TV would be banned from points like where he had to be hauled out of a car like a sack.
As for Biden, he uncorked another gem yesterday speaking to a group of trial lawyer fatcats.
Praising them and the unions as the only forces restraining the "Capitalist Barbarians at the Gate". Commending them on being a great force..compelled by a need to serve the weaker...
Gotta love the guy. Loose cannons are fun to watch in action.
defend = explain
MikeR wonders: "Are you promising to say the same thing if President Bush or Sarah Palin makes some dumb mistake in speaking?"
Palin isn't allowed to speak, apart from stale reiterations of the speech that was written for her to read at the Convention. Oh, and she said "Charlie" a lot in her one unscripted interview.
Dumbya has made hundreds of dumb mistakes in speaking. Biden will have to make one a day for the next 8 years to catch up.
Biden's point was clear even if his example was historically inaccurate. I wouldn't get upset by this.
Riiiiiiiggght. You're just so believable. It's not as if you haven't made countless other idiotic gaffes just on this blog alone, just in the last year. The guy who said that if kids refuse to turn in their homework that it's at least partly the teacher's fault? The guy who said "Doesn't change the fact that I'm smarter than Odumba.", the same guy who insisted that Obama was a legacy admission to Harvard when he didn't go to college there, the same Obama who graduated magna cum laude from the law school? The same guy who - well, has said any of a number of witless things now wants to claim that _this_ time he really knew it, no matter how poorly the post was written to reflect that fact? And you want people to give you the benefit of the doubt this time because you're such a nice considerate fellow, eh?
My daughter would have been embarrassed at this special pleading when she was eight.
liberalrob:Seriously, Megan, this is worth your time? Snickering at the fact that Biden said that FDR spoke on television, where if he had accurately said FDR spoke on the radio there would have been no issue?
Um. The fact that FRD wasn't president during the Crash of '29 is a major gaffe for anyone that aspires to being President or VP. Especially if they think themselves to be smart and educated. If you studied the history of the time at even a high school level, you know that FDR's famous "fireside chats" were on radio, not TV. Biden is proving himself to be someone that speaks first and thinks second. Hardly a good characteristic for a leader of the Executive.
From Wikipedia: The first commecial TV stations were in NYC in 1941. (There were limited experimental broadcasts earlier.) The production of TVs was suspended in the US during WWII and resumed later. It wasn't until 1954 that all US states had at least 1 TV station. Most states got their first station in the late 40s or early 50s.
Lefties who feign disappointment that President Bush hasn't pontificated enough for their tastes on the financial crisis doth protest a little too much. First, the important thing is that two highly competent, and highly-respected Bush appointees -- Ben Bernanke and Hank Paulson -- have been working the problem. Second, their proposed solution requires bipartisan support in Congress. Since Congressional Dems have hysterically turned Bush into a bogey man, it wouldn't make any sense for Bush to go overboard in publicly wrapping himself around the proposal. It's like in business, if you have a client who irrationally hates someone, you don't send that guy to close the deal with them; you let that guy hang in the background and you send someone else.
And now the back-pedalling starts. In fact you said: "It's pretty obvious that most people are aghast at the ridiculous historical misunderstanding/misstatement." No, downgrading your tomfoolery won't get you out of this one. Nor, may I add, does it make you look especially credible to sneer at someone because they actually documented their claims. In fact, I'd say it pretty much makes you look like an anti-intellectual loser type. Finally, my 'research', such as it was, took perhaps two minutes of googling and posting - go to google, type in franlin roosevelt. Not a tremendous effort. Well, not for some people.
Yeah. What has that got to do with being against Biden? What distressing leaps of logic you have.
Chuckle. I'm neither a Biden nor an Obama supporter. I'm just someone who believes you shouldn't go around randomly shooting their mouth off.
Nice to know, btw, that you think Roosevelt _didn't_ do exactly what Biden said he did in his inaugural address. Or that Roosevelt was not the first president to appear on TV. How lame is that? (Maybe the wiki's not good enough for you.)
That's like Gore mistakenly conflating two times he was in Texas at a disaster, why - gasp - what a horrible, idiotic mistake the dimbulb made!
You made a mistake. Own up to it and move on.
Or is this good advice only when it's applied to someone else?
Half of what comes out of Joe Biden's mouth is embarrassing. This is not news.
Back to more important matters -- does anyone know enough about what's going on in Congress to comment on what this bailout is really going to look like? My impression is that the original Treasury plan is dead, and that something along the lines of the Swedish model, with the government taking an equity stake is probable.
Also, isn't Bernanke's description of the government's pricing and management of these illiquid assets inconsistent with the reverse auction process described by the Treasury?
Cite? Never said that... I know the thread you are referencing, but I never stated such causal relationships existed.
Does this require an apology? I fail to see why?
I still think his admission to Law School was flavored by his father's high profile attendance there.
Legacy admits aren't all failures, no one said they were.
That's quite the boatload of evidence there, and I still failed to see what required an apology.
The 'Odumba' remark was snark, since it is all the rage to make stupid nicknames for people based on how smart we think they are. You'll note that was used in one thread and as a retort to someone being smarter than Dumbya. That would be context and nuance, both things you fail to grasp, as evidenced here by your willingly bad faith misreading of my comments.
It's fair to laugh at Biden. All politicians should be scrutinized and when appropriate, laughed at. They aren't gods and they shouldn't be worshipped. If Palin ever moves off of the talking point lies that Megan's colleague Andrew Sullivan has documented, Palin will generate new laughter as well.
Biden's main point is valid.
You are all in awe of my sophistry. Admit it. Instead of admitting that Joe Biden is a dullard, I pointed out that what he said made perfect sense, if you substitute "TV" for "radio", and move the data from 1929 to the mid 1930s. Which is the same as saying that Joe Biden would be a brilliant man if you replaced is dull mind with a brilliant man's mind. Of course, it's an indefensible position, as that last sentence demonstrates; my goal is wide open to ridicule, my goal tender on the bench. So I resort to rhetorical forechecking, accusing my opponents of dishonesty and backpedaling, etc. How long until their puck slips through? How long can I keep this up?
Watch and see!
Biden was a bad VP pick because VP picks need to have discipline. Biden has little discipline, which is why he is constantly yapping in a stupid fashion. It is possible that Palin suffers from the same fault, but it is being better hidden at this time.
did he make his point how Bush is a moron?
yes
despite any anachronism
Biden was a bad VP pick because VP picks need to have discipline. Biden has little discipline, which is why he is constantly yapping in a stupid fashion. It is possible that Palin suffers from the same fault, but it is being better hidden at this time.
But being able to hide it consistently is evidence of having discipline. Being able to remain on script for weeks at a time? That's discipline.
It's not evidence of anything other than discipline, however...
No, it's not a bad-faith reading; your own words condemn you. What you want is for people to make an exception for you and accept your explanation, despite the fact that what you wrote and what you say you wrote are different. Iow, you're an intellectually lazy hypocrite who's willing to let tribalism triumph over all.
_That's_ why I haven't bother responding to you. And why from henceforth, I will again ignore you. Oh, I will point out that it is precisely you and people with your intellectual habits who are ruining the country. Thanks heaps.
Congressional Dems turned Bush into a bogey man? Maybe that explains why they keep caving in to his demands all the time: they're afraid of what he might do if they cross him. His finger is on the button, after all. He might nuke Iran in a fit of pique.
Bernanke and Paulson may be working the problem, but the public isn't buying what they're selling. Not that they need to sell it to the public.
Fred writes: "Lefties who feign disappointment that President Bush hasn't pontificated enough for their tastes on the financial crisis doth protest a little too much. First, the important thing is that two highly competent, and highly-respected Bush appointees -- Ben Bernanke and Hank Paulson -- have been working the problem. Second, their proposed solution requires bipartisan support in Congress. Since Congressional Dems have hysterically turned Bush into a bogey man, it wouldn't make any sense for Bush to go overboard in publicly wrapping himself around the proposal. It's like in business, if you have a client who irrationally hates someone, you don't send that guy to close the deal with them; you let that guy hang in the background and you send someone else."
Congressional Republicans can't get far enough away from Dumbya these days, Fred old sport, so your pretense that it's only 'hysterical Dems' who recognize him for the worthless toxic bungler he is is just silly.
There's nothing irrational about viewing Dumbya with contempt. There's nothing wrong with pointing out that he's done his best to flush this country down the toilet. That you're one of his few remaining fans is very funny.
Oh, and while Bernanke is generally respected, Paulson is a frigging hack who has been part of the problem all along. That he has also been bagged lying in public about the no-oversight provision in the initial administration proposal shows he's just as worthless as the rest of Dumbya's sick and sorry crew.
"Bernanke and Paulson may be working the problem, but the public isn't buying what they're selling"
The public isn't that bright and demands to be pandered to. That's not the specialty of Bernanke or Paulson but of Congress.
Lincoln didn't issue inspiring dispatches from the front lines at Valley Forge. He issued podcasts.
"Oh, and while Bernanke is generally respected, Paulson is a frigging hack who has been part of the problem all along."
The world's richest Democrat and Obama supporter, Warren Buffett, disagrees with you. He says he'd like whoever wins the presidential election to keep Paulson on. "You don't find talent like that everyday", says Buffett.
But what's Warren Buffett's opinion of the Treasury Secretary mean in comparison to Moe's? ML&J far exceeds Buffett's talent in coming up with puerile names for public figures.
Skullberg writes: "I still think his admission to Law School was flavored by his father's high profile attendance there."
That makes no sense and you have no evidence for it, but keep on believing it. It amuses me that you're that desperate.
Barack's father didn't go to the Law School, of course. You're engaging in pure fantasy.
"The 'Odumba' remark was snark, since it is all the rage to make stupid nicknames for people based on how smart we think they are. You'll note that was used in one thread and as a retort to someone being smarter than Dumbya. That would be context and nuance, both things you fail to grasp, as evidenced here by your willingly bad faith misreading of my comments."
"(W)illingly bad faith misreading" is not a phrase that should be used while downplaying the intellect of others. It's redundant gibberish. Perhaps "willful misreading" is what you meant to say.
I'm always here to help.
I know what I wrote and what I meant. I'm not asking for excuses, since none are necessary. You misread it, you cling to that that because it makes you feel superior. I asked a question I knew the answer to (unlike your pal Krugman) because it was impossible for such an address to be made.
Nice, way to raise the discourse!
Also, I note you didn't respond to my response to your post about the things I said. I'm still waiting for your cite? I assume you'll conveniently start your ignoring again just so you won't have to respond.
Fred writes: "The world's richest Democrat and Obama supporter, Warren Buffett, disagrees with you. He says he'd like whoever wins the presidential election to keep Paulson on. "You don't find talent like that everyday", says Buffett.
But what's Warren Buffett's opinion of the Treasury Secretary mean in comparison to Moe's? ML&J far exceeds Buffett's talent in coming up with puerile names for public figures. "
Buffett is investing $5 billion in Goldman Sachs, Paulson's old firm. Paulson may be in a unique position to make Buffett a shitload of money if he manages to keep his job.
Follow the money - that's always been Buffett's main interest.
BTW, I wonder how Lincoln came across to the average American, living in their double-wide in 1863, watching the Gettysburg Address on their Sony Big-Screen?
Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?
Best,
Chris
SG, hiding it by greatly limiting access is like being being a disciplined eater by locking oneself in an empty room, and sliding the key under the door. I don't pay enough attention to day to day campaigning to know whether Palin's discipline is more attributable to a regular pracice of conciously monitoring, and thus limiting, one's behavior, or from simply physically guaranteeing that nothing remarkably stupid can be said to the press. I knew, however, from observing Biden for a couple of decades, that the esteemed Senator shares with the typical three year old the ability to limit behavior. Obama, on the other hand, is nothing if not cautious, which is why his pick of Biden surprised me so much.
This is the poorest excuse for a comments section I've run across lately. You people spend more time with petty one-upmanship than addressing anything of substance. Biden is a goof. He's been a goof for decades, if not his entire life (I've only been wtching him since 1988). This was a very funny gaffe, among many gaffes he has made. If he were the VP nominee of the Republican Party, the election would have been over a while back.
It makes plenty of sense, we don't know what kind of student he was at Occidental and Columbia, though probably an above average one.
Do you have any evidence that President George W Bush didn't get into Yale or HBS on his own merits?
You're right. I forgot that Harvard University and Harvard Law School are entirely disparate and unrelated entities. I keep assuming they are related, same with Harvard Business School. Mea culpa.
I will also note that spending many, many, years in the the United States Senate is about as a bad a training ground, for what may be the world's most difficul executive position, as can be imagined. The job of a Senator is mostly to preen, pander, and bloviate, as only the usually non-acountable can; sort of like a liberal arts graduate student with a scholorship and a trust fund, only more pretentious. The best reason I can think of in support off voting for Obama is that he has spent less time in the World's Most Obnoxious Deliberative Body than either his opponent or running mate, never mind the fact that Obama's record of schievement, between leaving law school, ans starting his Presidential campaign, is exceedingly thin.
hiding it by greatly limiting access is like being being a disciplined eater by locking oneself in an empty room, and sliding the key under the door.
I don't think it's a fair analogy. She's not been in some "undisclosed location", she's regularly speaking in front of large crowds and followed by the press. The press rides on the same plane as she does. And they're all chomping at the bit to get her to say anything, preferably some gaffe (like talking about FDR getting on TV to discuss the Stock Market Crash). Yet through it all, she's stayed on script. I know I couldn't do it.
Like I said, it doesn't demonstrate anything but discipline, but discipline it does demonstrate. At some point it becomes reasonable to infer that she doesn't have anything to say, although I don't believe it's to that point yet.
a great genius who said, "The insurgency is in its last throes."
Actually, he said the regime remnants were a movement in its last throes, and he was right. Saddam was captured, tried, and executed a little while later.
I'm sure we're much better off with the guy that said the surge was going to fail than the guy who backed the surge.
Obama is less qualified than Sarah Palin, and Joe Biden is less qualified than the crazy aunt you keep in the attic.
Will Allen types: "The best reason I can think of in support off voting for Obama is that he has spent less time in the World's Most Obnoxious Deliberative Body than either his opponent or running mate, never mind the fact that Obama's record of schievement, between leaving law school, ans starting his Presidential campaign, is exceedingly thin."
Yeah, Will, he's been a real slacker.
Sheesh.
And would it be too much to ask the cons here to OCCASIONALLY post something that isn't filled with misspellings and atrocious grammar? I realize such things aren't important to people who think Sarah Palin isn't a joke, but you're all embarrassing yourselves.
Like I said, SG, I don't know whether the press has access to her on the plane, or if she is seperated from them nearly all of he time. I'll be me more impressed if she has a few press conferences in which she maintains discipline.
Barack's father didn't go to the Law School, of course. You're engaging in pure fantasy.
Are we talking about his real father? Or his father figures the insane Rev Wright, the Communist Frank Marshall Davis, and William "I'm proud to be a terrorist" Ayers?
Speaking of family, why is the millionaire Barack telling us we need to take more from the rich to give to the poor, when his own brother lives in a Third World shack on a dollar a day watching all his friends die around him?
Oh, I don't think the press has access to her, even on the plane. But to be able to continually walk by the same faces, pleading with you to say something - anything - but give them nothing? Day after day? That's impressive in a strange sort of way.
Although, given that the press has tried climbing into her (and her daughter's) vagina, perhaps it's a bit easier to keep a mental barrier up than I'm giving credit for.
Moe, feel free to name a really impressive accomplishment, especially one of an executive nature, between Obama's time in law school and his current campaign.
Sorry for the typing/grammar. I'm a poor multi-tasker.
Technically defends Cheney with (what else?) lies:
" a great genius who said, "The insurgency is in its last throes."
Actually, he said the regime remnants were a movement in its last throes, and he was right. Saddam was captured, tried, and executed a little while later."
Cheney made the "last throes" comment on May 31st, 2005. Hussein had been in custody since December 13th, 2003.
You're wrong. Again. He said what I said he said, and you really should get over it.
By the way, Saddam was executed on December 30, 2006, so you're also wrong about "a little while later."
Maybe once your "new computer smell" has faded you'll learn how to look shit up and avoid such problems.
Megan, there are seem to be kindergartners commenting on your blog. They're the ones talking incessantly about "Dumbya." Look for "four-eyes" and "retard" next.
(And yes, I presume I will now be banned for insulting kindergartners...)
MoeLarryAndJesus: Goodness gracious you're an obnoxious little twat. Has it ever occurred to you that others might take you more seriously if you weren't such a rude dickhead? Or are you only interested in feeding your internal demons by harassing others via the safe anonymity of the Internet?
Yes, Megan, personal insult, but this is the first and (likely) last time I'll post here and that needed to be said.
Will Allen writes: "Moe, feel free to name a really impressive accomplishment, especially one of an executive nature, between Obama's time in law school and his current campaign."
I can't name one that will impress you, chuckles, because the only things that impress you are genocide and stealing money from poor people.
That his career doesn't impress people like you is one of the best reasons to vote for him as far as I'm concerned.
The Den Mother types: "Megan, there are seem to be kindergartners commenting on your blog."
Even when I was actually in kindergarten I never used the "there are seem" construction. Spiffy work, Den.
One more time, cons. Pay attention, please. When denigrating the intelligence of others it helps if you maintain basic literacy discipline.
Now go back to playing at freerepublic.com.
Hey, Dawnfire82, has it ever occurred to you that hypocrisy is not an admirable character trait?
Ms. McArdle, using the same logic you applied to a McCain gaffe (one about a foreign leader, not a historical fact about the United States), you must conclude that Biden has Alzheimer's.
Moe, for a guy who complains about the grammar/spelling of others, it is remarkable that you so frequently demonstrate such exceedingly poor reading comprehension.
The irony of someone who fully advocates and participates in the theft of Persian Gulf oil accusing others of supporting theft is always amusing, however.
MLJ>While the right always hated Stalin because he defeated Hitler,
I double dog dare you to repeat that in the presence of my 84 yr old Republican father who hit the beach on D-Day. He's still in damned good shape and would no doubt kick your whiny leftie ass.
BJ quotes and writes: "MLJ>While the right always hated Stalin because he defeated Hitler,
I double dog dare you to repeat that in the presence of my 84 yr old Republican father who hit the beach on D-Day. He's still in damned good shape and would no doubt kick your whiny leftie ass."
I can take any 84 year old on the planet.
Meanwhile it was lefties who led the war that your father participated in. After Pearl Harbor the Axis was beaten in less than 4 years.
The morons in the present administration aren't that capable.
Someone asked me about why I’d pick on poor Joe B. for gaffes. And for that matter why I’d pick on Obama for things like “57 states”. This happened to be the same person who had been forwarding me the “Bushism of the Day” blog entry until I pointed out that most of the Bush gaffes, real or invented, were the difference between formal writing & off-the cuff remarks & that the failure to know the name of the head dogcatcher of Wassupisstan was not a gaffe. And, OK, Gore’s “Inventing The Internet” was not a gaffe; it was a lie. This did not satisfy her; she simply thought that my standards had slipped.
Same thing happened with Ike vs. Adlai.
Joe Biden is not that stupid; he knows FDR was not pres and that TV was not around.
But,by a number of these idiotic remarks he can withdraw claiming a brain tumor or whatever and so make way for Hiliary,and at the same time garner alot of sympathy for his condition-----which happily will prove amenable to prompt cure after the election!
MLJ
You said
"While the right always hated Stalin because he defeated Hitler"
Um, no we hate Stalin because he was Hitler's evil twin, ya see.
A quick look at the comments reminds me why I shouldn't waste my time reading comments.
Gore’s “Inventing The Internet” was not a gaffe; it was a lie
And by that I assume you mean "those who said he had said it, those were the ones who lied".
Meanwhile it was lefties who led the war that your father participated in. After Pearl Harbor the Axis was beaten in less than 4 years.
The "left" of which you speak would not recognize today's left. They would be horrified by the associtation.
John Mc writes: "The "left" of which you speak would not recognize today's left. They would be horrified by the associtation."
They'd be a whole lot more horrified by today's right.
Anyone with any semblance of human decency would be.
Have a nice torture-free day and read the Constitution. I'm sure you can find it online.
Anyone see Obama's presser? He just said the next president is going to be responsible for dealing with the financial system in 40-something days. Does he understand that the new president won't take office until Jan 20th, 2009?
Have a nice torture-free day and read the Constitution.
Ha! MLJ rides the torture horse again. Poke him with something to which he has no response and
he trots out the same tired old nag every time.
They'd be a whole lot more horrified by today's right.
Yeah right-- tell that to the ghosts of the German spies that FDR had summarily shot (after a Constitutionally appropriate interrogation no doubt) and buried in unmarked graves in Long Island, or any Jap soldier unfortunate enough to be taken alive (temporarily) by US soldiers. They'd have considered waterboarding to be a Caribbean vacation.
I'm sure you too can find this information online
"Imagine if Sarah Palin held a press conference.
Oh, wait, she isn't allowed to by her owners.
Or maybe Jeezus told her not to."
So, in other words, you have no response to the blog entry. So glad you decided to weigh in anyway, but please direct your partisan drivel away from people who, you know, actually have something to say.
The first comment is right: we'd never hear the end of this if it came from Palin. This also goes for the half dozen gaffes he's committed in the last week. Let's try to have at least a modicum of consistency when evaluating VP choices.
"Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds."
Hard to let that softball go by...
Toby Ziegler would be horrified that you were using his name. If he were a real person.
And that oft-used quote is the refuge of the inconsistent.
"Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds."
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds." Didn't you see Next Stop, Wonderland?
SoV,
As I predicted - faced with having to defend himself, declares himself above it and trots of victorious. Discretion IS the better part of valor.
Evil exists.
All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
Evil Exists. You wouldn't know it by watching Moe and Larry. Jesus, however, would name it and warn you of it.
Evil exists. War on evil. Hate evil. Love compassion. Love truth. Spread hope. Cheer bravery. Protect the week and infirm.
Hate evil.
MoeLarryAnd... sed, ""Imagine if Sarah Palin held a press conference." Oh, wait, she isn't allowed to by her owners. Or maybe Jeezus told her not to."
Moe, don't be consumed by jealousy, it's one of Seven Deadly Sins, after all. (In case you need an update on basic historical and cultural information, as obviously your Fearful Leaders do, you might want to check out the Brad Pitt documentary on the subject, from your local library.)
Moe, it's NOT your fault that the World's Smartest Man chose America's Dumbest Politician for his second banana. That's just the breaks.
But, thanks for the petulant bile...
xo
ps, maybe there is a reason that Chief Joe "Sitting Bull" Biden had to steal information, both in Law School -- where he received an "F" in a course -- and in his presidential campaign, where he merely had to drop out after stealing Kinnock's family history?!!
Could it be that -- just like his buddy Obama & the Tin Man -- there ain't a whole lotta room upstairs for any additional information, once you program the brain for the autonomic responses?!!