Tongue-tied Biden

A piece on

...the growing collection of Bidenisms. The precise definition of Bidenism, like a Bidenism itself, is murky. Some Bidenisms are the sort of miscellaneous verbal or policy gaffes that are made by every politician. But the best ones — the statements that are uniquely Bidenistic — exemplify the bluster, excess verbosity, and fake charm of dumb-politician stereotypes,..Bidenisms have one or more of the following characteristics:

—They are awkward, inappropriate, or both.

—They either can be interpreted as insulting or are deliberately so.

—They are often followed by a self-deprecating joke, intended to placate anyone offended, which is just as cringe-worthy as the original statement.

—They frequently are self-aware — that is, the vice president knows he is committing a Bidenism as he says it.

...here are some of our favorite Bidenisms, in no particular order:

"I have not bent the law, but I have let imagination take hold in some places where I think it's consistent with the spirit of the law. … Is that the best way of saying that? Yes, … I should stop." September 3, 2009

''I exaggerate when I'm angry, but I've never gone around telling people things that aren't true about me.''—Responding in the New York Times to uproar over his telling a campaign event questioner that he was smarter than said voter (around that time he released a statement admitting much of what he had said about his academic record was not true), Sept. 21, 1987

"Since 1994 with the Gingrich revolution, just take a look at Iraq, Venezuela, Katrina, what's gone down at Virginia Tech, Darfur, Imus. Take a look. This didn't happen accidentally, all these things."—Blaming Republicans for having "wallowed in the politics of polarization," New York, April 19, 2007

"A successful dump!"—Explaining his whereabouts (dropping deadwood at the dump) to the reporters outside his home, Wilmington, Del., Aug. 20, 2008

Blasting Back At Biden

You've seen this:

Biden: Dismantle West Bank settlements
Vice president guarantees that U.S. will defend Israel's security

Well, how about if we propose a constitutional amendment to dismantle the office of Vice-President?

a. it would save money, including the lead-up in the various party conventions.

b. given the fact that many of the persons who have filled the post, inlcuding the current officeholder, are near nincompoops, it would also save the US a lot of embarassment

c. if need be, would could give Biden a job here in Israel to make up for loss of income and fame.

d. as for "presidential succession", hey, until that's resolved, Michelle would do great. The Americans did just elect an Obama Dynasty, did the not?

Biden's Right - I Don't Like It

Biden told a pro-Israel lobby that

"Israel has to work toward a two-state solution. You're not going to like my saying this but not build more settlements, dismantle existing outposts and allow Palestinians freedom of movement."

Despite the garbled syntax, I still don't like it.

As for "freedom of movement", see this.

P.S.

And I do not like this:

President Obama also reportedly told the king that he wants the United Nations flag raised over holy sites in eastern Jerusalem, where the PA would have total sovereignty under the Saudi plan.

A Biden 'Duh' Bungle: Real Live Diplomacy & Friendship

In addition to two points made about Biden's fubs (see below), I found another Biden "duh" from the transcript:-

...the only thing on the march is Iran. It's closer to a bomb. Its proxies now have a major stake in Lebanon, as well as in the Gaza Strip with Hamas.

We will change this policy with thoughtful, real, live diplomacy that understands that you must back Israel in letting them negotiate, support their negotiation, and stand with them, not insist on policies like this administration has.

What is "real, live diplomacy", pray tell? What is "thoughtful" diplomacy?

What hasn't been thoughtful, real and live until now?

And another:

Gwen, no one in the United States Senate has been a better friend to Israel than Joe Biden.

But here I put the lie to that claim.



And from other reviews of the debate between Palin and Biden:

1.

Most ridiculous and downright strange was [Biden's] contention that the Bush administration let Hezbollah into Lebanon, and then when “we threw them out” – whatever that means, he and Obama said NATO should go in but nobody took them up on it and now Hezbollah was all over Lebanon and that’s a problem. What?

Well, Hezbollah’s been there since the early 1980’s of course, blossoming throughout the 1990’s to become now over a third of the population of Lebanon with 2 cabinet members, a host of parliamentarians, and schools, clinics, and basically an entirely separate governance infrastructure in all of southern Lebanon and elsewhere. I suppose the throwing out of Hezbollah was the dismal and failed Israeli campaign of 2006 which dislodged nothing? Or was it Israeli’s occupation of Southern Lebanon from 1982 – 1999? Don’t remember an Obama position on NATO replacing Israeli occupation then. As for NATO going in after the 2006 debacle, well...I don’t remember a peep from Biden or Obama about NATO...

2.

Another absurdly wrong statement from Joe “Foreign Policy Expert” Biden, who very obviously does not know the difference between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank:

Here’s what the president said when we said no. He insisted on elections on the West Bank, when I said, and others said, and Barack Obama said, “Big mistake. Hamas will win. You’ll legitimize them.” What happened? Hamas won.

Duh.


And more from the transcript on Israel:-

IFILL: Governor, you mentioned Israel and your support for Israel.

PALIN: Yes.

IFILL: What has this administration done right or wrong -- this is the great, lingering, unresolved issue, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- what have they done? And is a two-state solution the solution?

PALIN: A two-state solution is the solution. And Secretary Rice, having recently met with leaders on one side or the other there, also, still in these waning days of the Bush administration, trying to forge that peace, and that needs to be done, and that will be top of an agenda item, also, under a McCain-Palin administration.

Israel is our strongest and best ally in the Middle East. We have got to assure them that we will never allow a second Holocaust, despite, again, warnings from Iran and any other country that would seek to destroy Israel, that that is what they would like to see.

We will support Israel. A two-state solution, building our embassy, also, in Jerusalem, those things that we look forward to being able to accomplish, with this peace-seeking nation, and they have a track record of being able to forge these peace agreements.

They succeeded with Jordan. They succeeded with Egypt. I'm sure that we're going to see more success there, also.

It's got to be a commitment of the United States of America, though. And I can promise you, in a McCain-Palin administration, that commitment is there to work with our friends in Israel.

IFILL: Senator?

BIDEN: Gwen, no one in the United States Senate has been a better friend to Israel than Joe Biden. I would have never, ever joined this ticket were I not absolutely sure Barack Obama shared my passion.

But you asked a question about whether or not this administration's policy had made sense or something to that effect. It has been an abject failure, this administration's policy.

In fairness to Secretary Rice, she's trying to turn it around now in the seventh or eighth year.

Here's what the president said when we said no. He insisted on elections on the West Bank, when I said, and others said, and Barack Obama said, "Big mistake. Hamas will win. You'll legitimize them." What happened? Hamas won.

When we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, "Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't know -- if you don't, Hezbollah will control it."

Now what's happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel.

The fact of the matter is, the policy of this administration has been an abject failure.

And speaking of freedom being on the march, the only thing on the march is Iran. It's closer to a bomb. Its proxies now have a major stake in Lebanon, as well as in the Gaza Strip with Hamas.

We will change this policy with thoughtful, real, live diplomacy that understands that you must back Israel in letting them negotiate, support their negotiation, and stand with them, not insist on policies like this administration has.

IFILL: Has this administration's policy been an abject failure, as the senator says, Governor?

PALIN: No, I do not believe that it has been. But I'm so encouraged to know that we both love Israel, and I think that is a good thing to get to agree on, Sen. Biden. I respect your position on that.

No, in fact, when we talk about the Bush administration, there's a time, too, when Americans are going to say, "Enough is enough with your ticket," on constantly looking backwards, and pointing fingers, and doing the blame game.

There have been huge blunders in the war. There have been huge blunders throughout this administration, as there are with every administration.

But for a ticket that wants to talk about change and looking into the future, there's just too much finger-pointing backwards to ever make us believe that that's where you're going.

Positive change is coming, though. Reform of government is coming. We'll learn from the past mistakes in this administration and other administrations.

And we're going to forge ahead with putting government back on the side of the people and making sure that our country comes first, putting obsessive partisanship aside.

That's what John McCain has been known for in all these years. He has been the maverick. He has ruffled feathers.

But I know, Sen. Biden, you have respected for them that, and I respect you for acknowledging that. But change is coming.

IFILL: Just looking backwards, Senator?

BIDEN: Look, past is prologue, Gwen. The issue is, how different is John McCain's policy going to be than George Bush's? I haven't heard anything yet.

I haven't heard how his policy is going to be different on Iran than George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy is going to be different with Israel than George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy in Afghanistan is going to be different than George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy in Pakistan is going to be different than George Bush's.

It may be. But so far, it is the same as George Bush's. And you know where that policy has taken us.

We will make significant change so, once again, we're the most respected nation in the world. That's what we're going to do.

Peretz Trusts His Memory - Which Failed Him

Marty Peretz, now a blogger at and the former editor of The New Republic, has commented in his blog on the Begin vs. Biden confrontation.

He has written:

Biden's Good Enough for Me

John Podhoretz...is dispensing all kinds of insidious bits of gossip, not at this point about Barack Obama but about Joe Biden...There's a quote from an angry Menahem Begin but only a vague allusion to what Biden is said to have said to the Israeli prime minister. The entire story comes from another story by the former editor of Ma'ariv, an Israeli newspaper, in another Israeli newspaper, The Jerusalem Post. in 1992. Where, for God's sakes, is a citation from the official records of the committee hearings?

The committee meetings, however, were supposed to have taken place not in 1992 but ten years earlier, in 1982, exactly 26 years ago. Is it likely that a nasty exchange between the prime minister of Israel and a distinguished Democratic senator would not have been noticed? By anyone, by me, for example? Biden is alleged to have threatened to cut economic aid to Israel if the building of West Bank settlements was not curtailed...

Mr. Peretz has suggested, or implied, that the exchange between Senator Biden and Prime Minister Menachem Begin, as retold in John Podhoretz's Commentary blog, based on Moshe Zak's retelling, never took place. Peretz writes: "Is it likely that a nasty exchange between the prime minister of Israel and a distinguished Democratic senator would not have been noticed? By anyone, by me, for example? "

Well, Peretz is wrong.

If Marty would refer to the official documents record of Israel's Foreign Ministry (here) he can read there how Begin recounted in a public press conference the following:

After that a young senator rose and delivered a very impassioned speech - I must say that it's been a while since I've heard such a talented speaker - and he actually supported Operation "Peace for the Galilee". He even went further, and said that if someone from Canada were to infiltrate into the United States, and kill its citizens all of us (and thus he indicated a circle) would demand attacking them, and we wouldn't pay attention as to whether men, women or children were killed. That's what he said. I disassociated myself from these remarks. I said to him: No, sir; attention must be paid. According to our values, it is forbidden to hurt women and children, even in war. Sometimes, just as all the wars of the world have shown, sometimes there are casualties among the civilian population as well. But it is forbidden to aspire to this. This is a yardstick of human civilization, not to hurt civilians. We did not want to hurt civilians under any circumstances. Behold, the Minister of Defense is standing here, our Chief of Staff, army officers -they will all testify before you that the first question that we Cabinet ministers asked in regard to any plan is: Where are the civilians? And we never approved a plan knowing that civilians would be hurt directly or on purpose. Unintentionally, that can happen. It must not be denied.

And thus the argument went. But, as I said before, the same senator supported our operation in Lebanon - with all his heart, he said. What he doesn't like are our settlements in Judea and Samaria. I regret that I could not agree with him. He hinted - more than hinted - that if we continue with this policy, it is possible that he will propose cutting our financial aid. And to this I gave him a clear answer: Sir, do not threaten us with cutting aid. First of all, you should know that this is not a one-way street. You help us, and we are very grateful for your help; but this is a two-way street: We do a lot for you. And also in recent battles we did a lot for the United States; and I gave some examples, but this is not the place to go into them. Therefore, do not threaten us with cuts in aid, but take note: That if at any time you demand of us to yield on a principle in which we believe, while threatening to cut aid, we will not abandon the principle in which we believe - and propose cutting aid. The argument went approximately thus. True an argument I would call... "a-lively discussion" (said in English - ed.); I have no immediate translation now for this English expression that is used in Washington. But I am sure that this argument as well was very helpful.

True, Biden is not mentioned by name but in addition to that report by Mr. Begin, both the New York Times and TIME Magazine mentioned Sen. Biden specifically by name:

New York Times, June 23, 1982:

At the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, however, both Mr. Begin and several senators were said by participants at the meeting to have been bristling with anger….The bitterest exchange was said to have been between Mr. Begin and Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware, who told the Israeli leader that he was not critical of the Lebanon operation but felt that Israel had to halt the policy of establishing new Jewish settlements in the West Bank….

After the meeting, Mr. Begin said: ”I enjoyed the session very much. I believe in liberty, that free men should freely discuss problems and if they have differences of opinion they should voice them in sincerity.”

”I said it was a lively discussion,” he said. ”If you want to use other adjectives. …” He paused, then said, ”Lively is enough.”

New York Times, June 24, 1982:

Reporting on his meetings with the members of Congress, Mr. Begin said one of the senators had threatened to cut off aid if Israel continued creating settlements in the West Bank. The senator is reported to have been Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware,

Mr. Begin cited the incident to give voice to a feeling that is held in his entourage - that Israel has rendered military service to the United States in battle-testing American arms.

”Sir, do not threaten us with cutting aid,” Mr. Begin said, in recounting his reply. ”First of all, you should know that this is not a one-way street. You help us, and we are very grateful for your help, but this is a two-way street. We do a lot for you.”

Will Peretz announce a public mea culpa?