News-Record.com

Biden, of course, is a long, long-time Washington politician, but his experience and foreign-policy knowledge help shore up Obama weaknesses. Biden himself, before he dropped out of the race for the Democratic nomination, said Obama wasn't ready to be president* Doug

Talking about a gift horse for the McCain campaign! Hope is still alive for the Republican candiate. One can assume that the Obama campaign will gag and bag Biden and stuff him in a undisclose closet until the election is over.

Kinda disappointed, thought you would slam Biden for his big house, and fleet of gas saving SUVs. Wonder how many houses Biden owns .Seems like I read a negative story because McCain owned a couple of houses.

Obama promises a "change" from the Beltway dinosaurs....they picks one of the oldest for his running mate. Odd, I think.

Would anyone in the Dem Party have wanted to take odds on an Obama/Biden ticket happening in the Dem Party one year ago?I didn't think so. That ticket is a total contradiction. Selecting Biden showed that Obama knew he was in a weak position, and "hope and change" weren't going to get it come November.

Do you really believe Obama hand pick old Joe?

Wait until you see his statement about having a microchip planted in every American to stop crime.

"Joe Biden’s New World Order Speech"

In his speech, “On the Threshold of the New World Order: A Rebirth for the United Nations,” Biden called for meddling in the former Soviet Union and China, imposing a “free economy” on these countries — i.e., allowing the international bankers to freely loot and pillage — and expanding NATO and allowing it to operate outside of its territory.

"NATO should abandon its anachronistic posture — the defense of allied territory against direct attack — to make a great leap forward and adopt peace-keeping outside NATO territory as a formal alliance mission," Biden said.

Posted on the University of Delware website, UpDate - Vol. 12, No. 9, Page 1 October 29, 1992.

Sen. Biden returns to campus during United Nations week U.S. Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee since 1972, said last Thursday he did not understand the importance of collective security for the nations of the world until he graduated from the University of Delaware in 1965.

In a speech celebrating United Nations Week, Biden said professor emeritus Leroy Bennett and other political science professors who taught him were wise to espouse the value of the United Nations as a valuable peacekeeping tool. Meeting with world leaders, Biden said he has “on more than one occasion, been brought back in my mind to classes I took with Dr. Bennett,” a man Biden called “well ahead of his time.”

In his speech in Clayton Hall, “On the Threshold of the New World Order: A Rebirth for the United Nations,” Biden said the world’s leaders must adopt a new understanding of security. “Collective security today must encompass not only the security of nations,” he said, “but also mankind’s security in a global environment that has proven vulnerable to debilitating changes wrought by man’s own endeavors.

“Thus, in setting an American agenda for a new world order, we must begin with a profound alteration in traditional thought,” he said.

Speaking to about 150 faculty and students, Biden said the United States should “buttress stable democracy in the former Soviet empire” and “champion the cause of democracy in China.”

Biden criticized President George Bush’s Soviet policies, saying the “administration, if not absent, has been little more than an onlooker.”

The senator said the United States should deliver more “educational and professional” assistance to the countries of the former Soviet Union. The goal, he said, must be to “foster the conditions and institutions necessary for a free economy and a free body politic to thrive.”

Very little money would be needed from the American government to make great strides toward assisting in the privatization of the former Soviet Union, Biden said.

Together with other nations, the United States could help stabilize the currencies now used in the independent Soviet countries, he said. Other efforts could be aimed at establishing legal codes for business practice, taxation and property ownership, he said.

Biden said the collapse of communism and the end of the Cold War also give the United States an opportunity to slash the number of nuclear weapons now available. He said the START treaty ratified by the Senate early in October limits Russia and the United States to possessing no more than 9,000 nuclear warheads each, but said “more dramatic progress” could be made to reduce the nuclear threat.

“We should seek a steady, mutual draw-down to a ceiling of no more than 500 warheads (per side),” he said.

Representatives of the United Nations should be used to monitor the dismantling of the weapons, he said. “We should cut the Gordian knot of difficult dismantlement by acting immediately to sequester all warheads to be eliminated,” he suggested.

Biden also advocated a global ban on the production of weapons-grade missile material and a comprehensive test ban treaty for all countries with nuclear capabilities. He said the United States and other countries should commit military forces to exclusive use by the United Nations’ Security Council, which would enforce nuclear agreements.

Since the United States is a permanent member of the council, with the power to veto multinational military action, Biden said there is no risk of having Americans troops drawn into conflicts the government does not wish to join.

Biden stressed that, if nuclear containment efforts fail, the United States “must be able to use force to stop rogue nations like North Korea” from collecting additional weapons of mass destruction. The “new world order” also should include a new role for NATO, he said.

“NATO should abandon its anachronistic posture-the defense of allied territory against direct attack-to make a great leap forward and adopt peace-keeping outside NATO territory as a formal alliance mission,” he said.

Biden also attacked Bush’s handling of human rights’ violations in China, as well as his environmental record.

“The president has opposed every congressional effort to impose serious sanctions or even link trade to more reasonable Chinese policies on human rights and the sale of dangerously destabilizing arms,” he said.

“No one can expect that trade sanctions against Beijing would yield a sudden transformation of that regime. But American foreign policy should leave no doubt-and the Bush administration has left much doubt- that the United States stands squarely on the side of China’s brave and aspiring democrats-to whom power will ultimately flow.”

Of President Bush’s refusal to sign treaties at the United Nations’ Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Biden said, “Our blunder was both tactical and strategic.”

“For the United States, it should become a paramount priority to promote American environmental technologies and services around the world,” he said. “We do not, despite what the president or anyone else may say, have to choose between jobs and the environment.”

In a question-and-answer period following the speech, one audience member drew applause for suggesting that Biden would make a good secretary of state if Bill Clinton wins the presidential election. Biden said he was flattered but did not think he would receive such an appointment.

Doug:

My friend, please don't take this in the wrong vein, but the man running as an outsider, whose only message, as far as I can tell is "change" taps as his number two a man who left the 1988 election because he plagerized a speech by Neil Kinnock (Great Britain's then Labor Party leader). Since then he has stated publicly that one must have a slight Indian accent to enter a 7-11. (I abhor political correctness, and don't think that his 7-11 comment was meant to be mean spirited, but I am not the one making up the rules about what is acceptable to say.) And let's not forget the fact that he called Obama "clean", drawing the ire of many. McCain can even quote Biden's criticism of Obama's lack of foreign policy experience during the 2008 race without incurring claims that he is being mean spirited.

Finally, Biden has been in the senate for more than half of his life, and as near as I can tell, never had a real job, and brings with him a state (Delaware) that was already firmly in Obama's camp. Am I missing something?

Biden is the most unimaginative pick I can imagine. If Obama really wanted to make things interesting he could have tapped Evan Bayh of Indiana who would have put a red state or two in play or any number of other folks.

Best regards,

Paul Daniels

Doug, would you try being a little less subtle next time?

Some of your readers may appreciate that.

Biden is a yawner. McCain's choosing a female VP might give him an unexpected edge in November.

Paul,

It doesn't bother me that Biden has made critical comments about Obama; that's the Dems' problem.

I understand Biden contradicts Obama's call for change, etc., but I would be more distressed if the veep candidate was someone of similar inexperience.

Given that Obama was certain to choose a liberal, at least he picked one who has been around long enough to know something about the world and to understand how things work in Washington.

I think Bill Richardson would have been a better choice, but Obama could have done a lot worse than Biden.

I agree with Doug that Richardson would have been a much sounder pick as it would have allowed a challenge to McCain in the SW. So now that running on "change" is out of the question, can we expect an actual platform to emerge this week?

Did anyone else hear Pelosi's statement when asked if she would have preferred a woman on the ticket? "Of course I would like to see a woman on the ticket, perhaps even two. But that is not worth addressing. We (the Democrats) have a nominee and Biden will do a great job in suring up his foreign policy." Wow, that is a strong show of support. She also went on to show how aloof she was by saying that after November when the Democrats when a bigger majority in the House and Senate she would first end the war and then focus on the economy. Check your polls Nancy, the Economy is everyone's top concern.

I don't know how Pelosi thinks she can end the war. That phrase bothers me because it's dishonest.

We've interviewed two Dem congressmen recently, Brad Miller and Mel Watt, who use the more honest phrase, "Get us out of the war."

The Obama-Biden ticket is the most liberal we have every had in this country. In addition, Biden can be a very mean person. Ask Thomas, Bork and John Roberts. His tongue lashing of John Roberts was a performance that I hope I never see again. Biden proposed dividing Iraq into three countries. How is that for a soverign country. The polls are not up. Obama is getting a zero bounce from Biden. Note how he goes around talking about is poor upbringing. His father owned a car dealership. He lives in a 1.3 million dollar house. Give me a break. How about the "drop-dead" beautiful remark about his wife? It is like she is an object not a person. Obama is an empty suit. Pray for America.

I will not hold having a drop dead beautiful wife against anyone as I would only be angry at myself since my wife is also drop dead beautiful. I hardly think giving someone a compliment means that he qualifies her as an object.

Can we focus on weaknesses of policy and leadership as opposed to PCism? Worrying about that is almost as absurd as the Dems, and Doug, making such a big deal over McCain not knowing how many houses he has. Neither should help/hurt/determine who leads our country.

I don't hold it against Biden. I do question his judgement in that it was the first thing he thought about when he introduced his wife to the public. People vote for who is on the top of the ticket. All the talk about the VP will have no impact on who wins.

"but Obama could have done a lot worse than Biden."

True, it could have been Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi stated the other day that natural gas was good as it burned clean as opposed to fossil fuels. Duh, Nancy, natural gas IS a fossil fuel. Do you not know where it comes from?

Joe, calling Barack America an empty suit is an affront to coat hangers everywhere. So, now we have a ticket with an empty suit and windbag. And, I was vonfused as I watched the Biden/Obama speeches, when Obama introduced Biden as the next president.

The Dems have an interesting twist on Biden being an Washington insider. They are saying that he takes teh train home to Deleware every night, so he works in Washington, but he is not of Washington. Huh?

Well, the selection of Biden will certainly give the McCain camp plenty of fodder for upcoming advertisements. Let's take a look at a few marvelous quotes they may consider:

"Not something that lends itself to on-the-job training." (on Obama running for president)

“The only guy on the other side who’s qualified is John McCain.”

“John McCain is a personal friend, a great friend, and I would be honored to run with or against John McCain, because I think the country would be better off"

“My impression is [Obama] thinks that if we leave, somehow the Iraqis are going to have an epiphany” of peaceful coexistence among warring sects. “I’ve seen zero evidence of that.”

"Iraq surge success a "fantasy"

"I don’t recall hearing a word from Barack about a plan or a tactic.”

“The more people learn about them (Obama and Hillary) and how they handle the pressure, the more their support will evaporate.”

“When this campaign is over, political slogans like ‘experience’ and ‘change’ will mean absolutely nothing. The next president has to act.”

“He’s (Saddam) a long term threat and a short term threat to our national security… “We have no choice but to eliminate the threat. This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world.”

“Saddam must be dislodged from his weapons or dislodged from power.”

“Well, the point is, it turned out they didn’t, but everyone in the world thought he had them. The weapons inspectors said he had them. He catalogued — they catalogued them. This was not some, some Cheney, you know, pipe dream. This was, in fact, catalogued.”

“The threat [Saddam Hussein] presented was that, if Saddam was left unfettered, which I said during that period, for the next five years with sanctions lifted and billions of dollars into his coffers, then I believed he had the ability to acquire a tactical nuclear weapon — not by building it, by purchasing it. I also believed he was a threat in that he was — every single solitary U.N. resolution which he agreed to abide by, which was the equivalent of a peace agreement at the United Nations, after he got out of — after we kicked him out of Kuwait, he was violating. Now, the rules of the road either mean something or they don’t. The international community says “We’re going to enforce the sanctions we placed” or not. And what was the international community doing? The international community was weakening. They were pulling away.”

“We can call it quits and withdraw from Iraq. I think that would be a gigantic mistake. Or we can set a deadline for pulling out, which I fear will only encourage our enemies to wait us out — equally a mistake.”

“We must be clear with the American people that we are committing to Iraq for the long haul; not just the day after, but the decade after.”

“If he surges another 20, 30, or whatever number he’s going to, into Baghdad, it’ll be a tragic mistake, in my view, but, as a practical matter, there’s no way to say, ‘Mr. President, stop.’” (Jan '07)