Biden: "This is about celebrity... You know in your heart I'm more qualified than any of these guys

[Tejanocrat]

up top. I know you can’t say yes or no, but I know you know."

He charged that The Times and other newspapers rarely mentioned him in political stories, ensuring his lackluster performance and obscurity. When a reporter suggested that Biden had a chance to make his case to Iowa voters, he shot back that it was a dishonest assertion.

"Don’t be a phony, OK?" he said.





I never cared for Biden on ideological grounds, but he was always the most candid and will be missed at tomorrow's debate.

I hope Biden resurfaces in some meaningful role involving foreign policy.

[wtmusic]

1. Well now we know he's not so hot in the grace category nt

[Tejanocrat]

2. Grace is highly over-rated. In a fight, I'll take candor over grace any day.

P.S. -- Sorry about Dodd. I really liked Dodd.

[wtmusic]

3. Agree.

Grace would not be tops on my list, although the lack thereof tends to rear its ugly head in foreign policy dilemmas.

[TwilightGardener]

9. Ouchie--you're right. That would be a problem for a SoS.

[Inuca]

33. I am sure Biden

does not speak to heads of state the same way he speaks to annoying journalists that piss him off.

[ginnyinWI]

4. any smart Dem president will fit Joe in somewhere.

He was to be Kerry's Sec. of State--and if it's Obama, I trust he'll do something with Joe.

[LittleClarkie]

12. I hope both Biden and Kerry have a place in the next administration

That would be sweet.

[ginnyinWI]

32. Hi, LC!

Long time no see :hi:

[LittleClarkie]

94. Hey hun

Eh, I'm here and there.

:hi:

[DianaForRussFeingold]

30. Really? See Kyl-LIEberman Amendment...

--Senator Clinton voted in favor of the Kyl-Lieberman amendment "to press the army toward war with Iran. This was an important step, for her, and a vote as closely considered as her vote to authorize the bombing and occupation of Iraq." when Biden and Edwards takes her to task on the vote, she just smiles'


-- Obama didn't show up to vote for, or against, the Kyl-Lieberman amendment... (he just hides out) -- the amendment passes without him and so it goes...

WHY? Why, weren't they smart enough to take Joe's advice on a foreign policy issue, as important as The Kyl-Lieberman Amendment?

Hmmm...will fit Joe in somewhere.
I hope it's Biden...

[lapfog_1]

5. Too some extent, it was his candor that sunk him.

Unfortunately, we (the public) really CAN'T handle the truth. And we don't vote in great numbers for those who speak it. Joe is a great guy, and he is right about so much (especially in foreign policy areas), but he isn't the type of person to give a great emotional speech which is, for the most part, content free.

If you want to hear someone give a great speech which has real content, listen to the JFK speech about why he was a liberal... Mike Malloy (I think) played it on his program a long time ago and it was just wonderful.

Thanks to Joe for running, I wish he hadn't dropped out because come this summer, there may NOT be a clear winner at the convention. But I understand that campaigns are now so expensive... and time consuming, they are hard on everyone involved.

Dennis is the next to suffer from the "too much truth telling".

[Stop Cornyn]

6. I think he just had the bad luck of being inside the beltway for three decades prior to a change

election.

That, and the bankruptcy bill REALLY hurt. I could have gotten past the other stuff, but the bankruptcy bill was the straw that broke the camel's back for lots of Democrats.

[jillan]

7. Good for him. He's right, and everyone knows that.

2008 will be known as the year the media picked the President.

Just ask Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, Gravel, Richardson, Paul and the others.

Even last week when Biden was drawing crowds bigger than Hillary's - it was hardly mentioned.

Sorry if I sound bitter, I am.

And to the Dodd supporter who posted on this thread, I am just as sorry about Dodd.
Biden praised Dodd last nite in his concession speech.

[TwilightGardener]

8. Oh, Joe--please be gracious. You are a lucky and powerful guy--

don't be bitter.

[PatSeg]

11. Someone needed to call the media what it is

and I'm quite sure he did it graciously, but he's not one to mince words. He said what a lot of us were thinking for months now.

[1corona4u]

17. Agreed, and for the others in this thread.....

to quote myself, one part of a letter, I sent to Joe this morning- my thoughts on the media issue;

"The media also decided this result in Iowa, and I fully expect the rest of the country to follow suit. After all, why do all of that research on a candidate, when the media has already supposedly done it, and eliminated those who didn't meet their "criteria". This is such a travesty. Fair media coverage needs to be a part of election reform. I realize that these are private companies, but it's the same as election fixing in my mind. The media had their agenda in this race, it was obvious, and it worked. The media has had such an influence, that I think there should be minimum requirements on time reporting for each and every candidate. Additionally, if there's a debate, all candidates need to be included, not just the ones whom the media chooses. We saw this too much this time. That's way too much control for the media to have. If they don't agree to that, then the all of the debates need to be taken to a govt. channel, where all parties can be heard."




And since Joe is heavily involved in election reform, perhaps they picked the wrong person to ignore. We shall see.

[2rth2pwr]

24. Was Joe barred from the debates? I thought he was there

maybe I forgot.

[Kat45]

39. He was in the debates, but they hardly asked him any questions.

They directed about 90% of the questions to their top three candidates, with the other 10% divided up among the rest. In one debate, Biden actually got the least amount of time, which was measured--I think it was about 7 minutes in a two-hour debate.

[Stop Cornyn]

13. Who wants to be known as a good loser? Biden should speak his peace after months of holding tongue

more successfully than I thought he could, let a fella vent a little.

[wtmusic]

15. Venting would be OK if he was right

It's not "about celebrity" Joe, otherwise this Senator who popped out of the Illinois woods would not be kicking the ass of a vet pol like you.

Pretty damn small of him (compare to Dodd's resignation).

[Steely_Dan]

18. Yeah, You're Right

Biden's an asshole.

-P

[jillan]

22. Paige - please tell me you forgot to add this

:sarcasm: to your post...

[Steely_Dan]

29. Of Course...

I thought it was obvious.

I'm just very pissed off right now.

Sorry.

-Paige

[AspenRose]

44. If it's not about celebrity

Then why does said Illinois senator tour with Oprah?


Come on, now.

[wtmusic]

58. I dunno...why doesn't Biden tour with anyone? nt

[AspenRose]

62. Same reason Dodd didn't

It's about the issues and credentials, not about the celebrity.

At least it *should* be about the issues and credentials, and therein lies the problem.

[Bjorn Against]

10. I was not a Biden supporter but he is right...

The media did not treat him fairly. At least on paper him and Richardson were the most qualified candidates, that doesn't mean I think they were the best candidates but they did have the most impressive resumes. Yet the media barely mentioned them, and thus ensured they had no chance of winning. Our media chose our candidates for us, and Biden deserved much better as did the rest of us.

[alarimer]

89. And now they are doing the same thing to Edwards

because he is not their anointed choice. And he is becoming too blunt as well, especially in regards to corporations which really pisses the corporate media off.

The corporate media is just a bunch of assholes and it's good Biden is calling them on it. I will not have our nominees chosen by the media because they hang out with Oprah or whomever else.

[katty]

14. I like Biden, he's so experienced-pls make him Sec of State

[2rth2pwr]

16. "You won't have Biden to kick around anymore"

Good God, Biden has been running for President since 1988! He has has been heard far and wide for a loooong time and rejected over and over again.

A true narcissist at heart and to the very end.

So long, see you at the 7/11.

[1corona4u]

21. Shove it.

[2rth2pwr]

60. Some of his supporters are just like him

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0XUEMUnvWY4

[1corona4u]

69. And some of his haters are just plain ignorant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOXzyTGsC1c

[livvy]

19. See this frog? It ain't gettin' any happier.

What he said was right, and unless you're being dishonest with yourself, I can't see how anyone could deny it.

Tejanocrat, I'm not directing this to you, please understand that, but I know there are some on this thread who will accuse him of sour grapes. It's bullshit.

The media chose the candidates, special interests funded them, the Repugs helped skew the results in Iowa by changing their on-sight registrations and participating in the caucus, and we lost the best hope this country had for real, honest to Buddha change.

No, this frog is not a happy amphibian.

Call me bitter, too. It's not because I'm a sore loser. It's because I'm very concerned about what has happened to our country, and I wanted change. I'm a realist, and Biden was the reality candidate.

[2rth2pwr]

25. If you go by resume Richardson has more of a case. nt

[frogcycle]

35. not

sorry

[2rth2pwr]

42. is too. nt

[Horse with no Name]

20. I read a post on another blog last night that pretty much summed it all up

Paraphrased it said that MSM chose two candidates for us. Two candidates that the republicans thought they could beat handily.
Obama and Hillary.
However, Edwards kept floating to the surface (because of his run with Kerry, at least he had electorate recognition)...so they were forced to give him a tiny sliver of the publicity--with as much of it as negative as they could make it.
The other candidates...Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, Richardson...have not been given enough exposure for people to make an informed decision.
Undoubtedly, had ALL of the candidates been given the same, equal, unbiased coverage as was given to Obama and Hillary...essentially things would look a lot different today.
I completely agreed with the article.
I personally don't care for Richardson. At all. But it is because of his association with Valero as well as his refusal to allow the voting machines to be looked at. I can't get past that. However, I would say the majority of the electorate would have no problem with either of these issues, and, if had the exposure, he SHOULD have been a frontrunner.
Same with Biden. Not to enumerate the reasons I don't like him, but he is Presidential but was never given the opportunity.
It is a crying shame that our country is being forcefed two candidates when we had others that could have been contenders.

[Tejanocrat]

27. Agreed. Biden and Richardson were off my list for purely ideological reasons but they should have

been suitable for most other people who aren't left-wing nutjobs like I am, and the media has run this "first black president vs. first woman president" meme into the ground.

[Forkboy]

23. And he's pretty much correct.

[robcon]

26. Sour grapes. It's sad.

n/t

[Inuca]

36. Not sour grapes

the truth

[Mike03]

28. Biden is correct, but I wish he wouldn't articulate it this bluntly

Biden is a class act. He doesn't need to point this out in such a direct way. His subtext as the best, most qualified candidate should speak for him.

Anyone who has any doubt need only read his book.

[Alexander]

31. Biden lost because he acts like an asshole.

The best thing about Kucinich is his wife? That's not funny, it's the sign of a jerk.

This and many other flippant comments is the reason why he went nowhere.

He's not as funny or witty as he thinks he is.

[frogcycle]

74. as opposed to where Kucinich is going?

[frogcycle]

34. damned if I can find anything even slightly wrong with that comment

but then again, Edwards didn't blow kisses at Obama, so I guess the pointless drivel is being distributed evenly

[frogcycle]

37. nobody knows the context, nobody knows

the body language, nobody knows whether he smiled when he said it

And even if he bit the guys head off, so the fuck what?

Most of the reporters are no better than papparazzi. They would not know an actual statesman if their lives depended on it.

This thread is like the idiotic one the other day when he interjected 'God bless her" in a comment about hRC and a bunch of lamebrains went off with how sexist and condescending it was. The man uses that expression more often than athletes say "you know."

get a fucking life, people.

[ToeBot]

38. Qualifications don't mean shit if no one will vote for you,

Now he can go back to shilling for the banks. I'd be happy to never see the smug ass ever again.

[AspenRose]

45. Yeah, that "shilling for the banks" really helped him financially didn't it

Helped him so much he had to drop out of the race due to lack of money.

It's not Biden who's the darling of Wall Street....

:eyes:

[BeyondGeography]

40. It's a change election and Biden has been in Washington since 1972

no amount of media coverage would have helped him on that score.

[1corona4u]

46. I wouldn't go getting all cocky if I were you.....

this race isn't over yet....

[WheelWalker]

51. You got THAT right, girl.

[BeyondGeography]

68. Who said the race is over?

this is about why it's over for Joe, and Dodd, for that matter.

[joe_sixpack]

57. I've been around long enough

that it seems every election is a "change" election. That is, at least until the winner takes office. The only change I'll be glad to see is Bush out of office. Other than that, I want action, not worn out slogans.

[BeyondGeography]

67. Thank you, wizened one

Now, back to the 2008 election cycle:

==In the NEP entrance poll conducted at a random sample of precincts, 52 percent of Democratic caucusgoers called a candidate's ability to bring about needed change the top quality. Obama trounced the competition on this score, with more than half of "change-voters" supporting him as they entered a caucus. Far fewer, 20 percent, said a candidate's experience was what mattered most to them.==

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/03/change_trumps_experience_in_io.html

Not Joe's year.

[joe_sixpack]

70. Ok now, I want to make sure I get this lesson right

How do you measure a candidates ability to bring about change if they've never changed anything? Does it count if they've changed their minds often? I'm assuming it's the number of times they use the word "change" in a speech then. I must admit my naivety, I mis underestimated the power and influence of this powerful bloc known as "change-voters". Are they the new "Soccer-Moms"?

[BeyondGeography]

71. Don't talk to me; it seems those change-minded Iowans went all goofy over Obama

and a meaningful result occured last night because of it.

Any theories? Are they stupid?

[joe_sixpack]

73. No, my problem is not with them

it's with what's become of our election process. I'm happy for Obama. He worked hard, he does have personality and he may make a good president if he gets that far. At the core of my disappointment is the suspicion that voters might somehow be coerced into thinking that certain candidates are unelectable, and therefore pay little attention to them from the start. I think in some ways that is what happened to Dean in the last primary. I knew from the beginning, that even though I thought Biden was an excellent choice, he might not be exciting enough or have the same appeal for others. I had hoped that his experience, practical knowledge and straight forwardness would cause more people to take a look at him.

[frogcycle]

75. they assumed that talking about change

implied ability to bring it about

are they stupid? I guess one day we'll know

just as soon as we define what is to be changed from what to what, we can determine whether that assumption is valid.

until then, i would say they are not stupid, just trusting souls

let me see, lots of people trusted gwb because he talke a good line about bringing people together...

hmmm. some of us have sufficient memory to understand that blind trust IS stupid

[Kat45]

41. Again, Joe is right.

I'm very upset about the whole primary/election process. Why should a tiny number of people in a small state (that in unrepresentative of the rest of the country) get to dictate who the rest of the country will get to vote for? And the media immediately anointed the biggest money-raisers as the front-runners long before a single vote (or caucus choice) was cast. And of course, those who were able to raise big money quickly had to get it from corporations and people with big money. So gee, who is really choosing our candidates, and therefore our president--the people or the moneyed?

[2rth2pwr]

48. I didn't see many corporations in the homes of people caucusing last night

Even here on DU he consistently polled lower than everyone except maybe Gravel.

[joe_sixpack]

59. I beg to differ

especially in the latter polls, if I'm not mistaken, he outpolled Hillary.

[2rth2pwr]

61. Oh jeez, I thought at first you had seen some corporations there

I don't remember him outpolling Hillary but that doesn't surprise me here at DU. I just missed it I guess, I have to admit that the top 3 were the names I most was looking at.

[joe_sixpack]

63. You actually thought Hillary more qualified than Biden?

I'm not being facetious, but I'd be genuinely curious as to why?

[2rth2pwr]

65. Being elected President is not a job that the Country has looked at as

requiring any specific background or job history. We have always elected based on who we judge to be the best able to lead, surround themselves with strong people who are excited to work for that person. there are many intangibles that don't translate to a job resume. Richardson had a dream resume but came across as a drunk frat guy.

[joe_sixpack]

66. How do you judge who is best to lead, if not

by background or job history? I'd think a resume would have some weight to it when we are talking about one of the most important jobs in the world. It sounds like personality is more important to you, which is cool if that's what you rate as your priority. So I take it you are an Obama or Edwards backer, because, no offense to her or her supporters, I think it's pretty clear that Hillary isn't exactly at the top of the class in that catagory.

[2rth2pwr]

72. Well, look at Biden's quote. Great resume but no one wanted to follow, you can't

make people follow you. And look how he reacts to defeat, he cries about how awesome he is and everybody should know it. Sorry, I don't want the leader of the free world to be so petty.

[1corona4u]

76. Really? Then you weren't paying attention...

Starting about the 2nd week in November, Joe started beating several candidates here on DU, including Obama;

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3922223&mesg_id=3922223

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3936522

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3721224

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3697166

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3711671

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3730362

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3742369

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3750959

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3759704

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3775991

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3793565

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3806457

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3817461

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3823886

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3851573

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3888579


Now, unless you have something intelligent to say, I don't have time, and won't make time, to argue with the likes of you, who apparently, have nothing better to do.

Better to be thought a fool, than open your mouth, and remove all doubt. Wouldn't you say?

[AspenRose]

43. He's right.

He's telling the truth. With passion. As usual.

Which, in the eyes of the media, gets you stuck with the label of "wild-eyed" or "sour grapes." Screw them.

A lot of us are angry at how the media marginalized and ignored him.

With our country in as much trouble as it is, we have a man, however flawed, with so much experience to offer and yet he can't be heard because the media is too busy playing "$urvivor" with our candidates.

It's a damn shame. And it's unforgivable.

[Mike03]

47. Biden is so special that I sometimes wonder if there is something

better than politics that he should be doing.

This bickering is beneath him.

He has been through so much suffering, and he's so enlightened and has such a visionary sense of what is going wrong in this world, maybe it's time for him to pull a Gore and move beyond politics.

Maybe I'm dead wrong. Maybe we need him now more than ever. But it's just something to consider.

Biden is an extraordinary person.

[2rth2pwr]

55. Special Ed. nt

[Naturyl]

84. Nice way to insult someone for their views. n/t

[joe_sixpack]

49. He is right, and it's not about bitterness

It's not so bad that the media thought with our short attention spans that we could only focus on three candidates at one time. The media and mass marketing limit and try to nudge our decisions all the time. It is about celebrity, and the worse kind. The "reality TV" kind where you choose a candidate much as television junkies choose the winner on "Dancing with the Stars" Let's see now, we have to have Hillary, cause she's so controversial, people will watch her even if they hate her. Maybe just to watch her crash and burn. And of course Obama is such a refreshing story line, he says a lot of pleasant things and has a lot of style. He's the first black candidate that actually has a chance. We'll throw in Edwards cause he's got leading man good looks, and there we have it. Sure, Dodd and Biden have almost 62 years of experience between them, but that doesn't sell, they're too old and not exciting enought to appeal to our demographic.

I'm glad Joe said what he did, because we, especially we democrats need to wake up to what he's pointing out if we really believe what we claim to. Huckabee, even though I doubt he'll end up with the nomination, came from nowhere, without tons of money and surprised a whole lot of people. What's the chances of a democrat from now on being able to capture our nomination without capturing the most dollars? Most of the repubs are still in the running as their members take their time to make up their minds, my choices have been narrowed for me before I even get to cast my vote.

Saying that Hillary is more viable a candidate because of one or two of Biden's votes in his long senate career is ridiculous. I have nothing against the chosen three, except how they were chosen. I don't believe Joe's speaking out of bitterness, or sour grapes and even being a poor loser. I actually think he's doing us a favor.

[rucky]

50. I think hell just froze over

:evilgrin:

[itsrobert]

52. Sadly, Joe's EGO won't fit through the White House gates

n/t

[1corona4u]

77. Yeah, and you just lost my Hillary vote.

Oh well.

[jillan]

96. But Edwards' ego will?

No wonder why he needs to live in a mansion.

[IamyourTVandIownyou]

53. yea, but you're a pompous jerk.

just mho.

[IamyourTVandIownyou]

54. yea, but you're a pompous jerk.

just mho.

[KingOfLostSouls]

56. "Joe Is Right" seems to be the mantra

everyone agrees with him on calling out the MSN

everyone agrees with him being right on foreign policy (except the DK supporters, who believe only they are "real democrats" but DK isn't going anywhere so who cares.)


its really hard to argue with a guy who continues to be right. just ask anyone who suddenly discovered pakistan in the past week.

[1corona4u]

78. Exactly.

Joe, and Dodd for that matter, have every right to be pissed off with the way the media treated them. Only when a crisis popped up, did they pay attention to them. I didn't see the media going to Obama, Edwards, Hillary, when Pakistan went into state of emergency. I didn't see the media rushing to them when Bhutto was killed.

If I were Biden, then next time Chris Matthews, or any of the other talking heads wanted to have him on, I'd tell them to go pound sand. Tell them to call their media darlings.

Fuckers.

[philly_bob]

64. That's Joe, all right! A man who talks without listening to his "handlers."

Speaks his mind.

I'm glad you all are getting to know him. He's a show!

We know he's right about celebrity's role in politics.

Whether he is right about being better than all the others is a matter of opinion. He might be right on that, too.

[Onlooker]

79. Biden's an arrogant jerk

He should have been a football coach. He might be bright, but his self-promotion and rah-rah style of talk makes me think of Bill Parcells.

[1corona4u]

83. And, you're irrelevant.

totally.

[Onlooker]

87. Relevant to his ambitions, he's even less relevant

What percent of Iowa caucuses did he finish with? LOL.

[1corona4u]

88. Joe has a job, with a powerful position....

So, despite what you think, he is very relevant. Additionally, we will never know how many people walked through the door to vote for Joe, since those numbers are never released. What we do know, is that Biden, Dodd, Kooch, and Richardson supporters caved in, and voted for one of the top 3.


But, stay tunned. I'm thinking about posting a letter I wrote to Joe yesterday.

[Naturyl]

80. He's right, of course.

He wasn't my candidate, but nobody can touch his experience and qualifications. And he was ignored by the media, just like everyone but the big 2.

Biden is a very respectable guy and I hope there is always a place for his voice.

[x-g.o.p.er]

81. Maybe it's about him...

being a sore loser with a refrigerator full of sour grapes.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Maven]

90. "Don't be a phony, OK?"

:applause:

(!) This is what I love about him.

[Midwestern Democrat]

91. Biden addressed this point - his low poll numbers - at the Iowa Biden

event I attended a week before the caucus by comparing his 2008 run to his experience in 1988. He pointed out that in 1988 the news departments had much larger budgets and were able to provide much greater depth with regard to field reporting. For example, in 1988 he was speaking at a small gathering very early on in the race and David Broder was in the audience reporting on it. In comparison, 2008 media reporting is at the 30,000 feet level - with the national media not descending on Iowa until a week or so before the caucus - making it much harder for a non-"media celebrity" to break through.

[percussivemadness]

92. No Joe, Its about payback for selling out the youth

with your obscene RAVE Act.Obama was carried by a huge shift in demographic, do you honestly think that under 40 demographic would ever vote for the author of the RAVE ACT? You will never ever be trusted again for your betrayal of civil liberties and the Constitution.

Karma`s such a bitch eh?

Peace

[Steely_Dan]

93. How Strange...

I don't judge anyone by a single vote. The world isn't that black and white.

-P

[jillan]

95. At that, my friends, was totally proven last nite at the debate.