Charles Blow: Joe Biden Is Problematic

[EffieBlack]

Joe Biden Is Problematic
No amount of growth or good intentions will change this fact.

All five of these things are simultaneously true:

Joe Biden is the Democratic front-runner and may well be the nominee. He is by far the favorite candidate among black voters. He was a loyal vice president to Barack Obama, and the two men seem to have shared a deep and true friendship. He, like the other Democratic candidates, would be a vast improvement over Donald Trump.

And, Biden’s positioning on racial issues has been problematic.
...
Biden could have taken responsibility for his comments and addressed the question directly, but he didn’t. Instead, he gave a rambling, nonsensical answer that included a reference to a record player. But, the response ended in yet another racial offense in which he seemed to suggest that black people lack the natural capacity to be good parents
...
His language belies a particular mind-set, one of a liberal of a particular vintage. On the issue of race, it is paternalistic and it pities, it sees deficiency in much the same way that the conservative does, but it responds as savior rather than with savagery. Better the former than the latter, surely, but the sensibility underlying the two positions is shockingly similar. It underscores that liberalism does not perfectly align with racial egalitarianism, regardless of rhetoric to the contrary.
...
Furthermore, it’s not what Biden says in prepared remarks that’s problematic, it’s what he says off the cuff and under pressure that to me reveal an antiquated view on racial matters and racial sensitivities.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/15/opinion/joe-biden.html

[pnwmom]

1. Thanks for posting this, EffieBlack.

[highplainsdem]

2. If Biden was being "paternalistic" then I guess Obama was, too:

https://www.mediaite.com/news/watch-barack-obama-and-hillary-clinton-both-used-joe-biden-millions-fewer-words-talking-point/

And then-future President Barack Obama campaigned on, then delivered, funding for “voluntary programs that provide nurses, social workers, and other professionals to meet with at-risk families in their homes and connect them to assistance that impacts a child’s health, development, and ability to learn.”

President Obama also cited the vocabulary gap frequently, as he did in this February 27, 2014 speech that also referenced resources like those Biden spoke about.

[W]e know that during the first three years of life, a child born into a low-income family hears 30 million fewer words than a child born into a well-off family. And everybody knows babies are sponges, they just soak that up. A 30-million-word deficit is hard to make up. And if a black or Latino kid isn’t ready for kindergarten, he’s half as likely to finish middle school with strong academic and social skills. So by giving more of our kids access to high-quality early education — and by helping parents get the tools they need to help their children succeed — we can give more kids a better shot at the career they’re capable of, and the life that will make us all better off.

Video at the link.

[EffieBlack]

3. If this was Obama's response to a question about slavery and reparations, he might deserve criticism

But it wasn’t and he doesn’t so this quote is completely irrelevant to the topic.

FYI, unlike Obama, Biden didn’t suggest we provide better educational opportunities to low-income children and provide their parents tools they need to help their children succeed in school. He said black parents need social workers and instructions on how to be good parents.

Nice try, though.

[highplainsdem]

4. Check the debate video at the top of the article. Linsey Davis started her question by referring to

"inequality in schools and race."

THAT is why Biden's answer referred to schools, just as Obama's did.

THAT was the subject she brought up.

Full quote of how she started that question:

"I want to come to you and talk to you about inequality in schools and race."

And Biden responded by mentioning the same points Obama did in that quotation.

And people have been acting shocked -- SHOCKED -- that Biden referred to education and preparation for school in his answer.

Even though the moderator's questions ASKED ABOUT IT.

Btw, Obama referred specifically to black and Latino children in what he was saying about low-income families and at-risk children.

Do you think Obama was being racist there?

Editing after doing some googling for more info.

You apparently missed, in the excerpt from that Mediaite article about what Obama said, what he recommended, that he believed social workers visiting parents' homes could help.

HHS fact sheet of what he was talking about:

https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/occ/fact_sheet_president_obama_508.pdf

Fact Sheet President Obama’s Plan for Early Education for all Americans

-snip-

The President is proposing to expand the Administration’s evidence-based home visiting initiative, through which states are implementing voluntary programs that provide nurses, social workers, and other professionals to meet with at-risk families in their homes and connect them to assistance that impacts a child’s health, development, and ability to learn. These programs have been critical in improving maternal and child health outcomes in the early years, leaving long-lasting, positive impacts on parenting skills; children’s cognitive, language, and social-emotional development; and school readiness. This will help ensure that our most vulnerable Americans are on track from birth, and that later educational investments rest upon a strong foundation.

So Obama was talking about social workers going into homes to make positive impacts on parenting skills.


Basically, Biden's being accused of racism for referring to something President Obama also saw as an important part of early education to help ensure more educational equality.

[still_one]

7. Here was President Obama's answer to reparations on a CNN interview in 2008

"
I fear that reparations would be an excuse for some to say ‘we’ve paid our debt’ and to avoid the much harder work of enforcing our anti-discrimination laws in employment and housing; the much harder work of making sure that our schools are not separate and unequal; the much harder work of providing job training programs and rehabilitating young men coming out of prison every year; and the much harder work of lifting 37 million Americans of all races out of poverty.
These challenges will not go away with reparations. So while I applaud and agree with the underlying sentiment of recognizing the continued legacy of slavery, I would prefer to focus on the issues that will directly address these problems — and building a consensus to do just that.

Obama as a candidate rejected reparations by arguing the political will did not exist to provide them, and that he favored pursuing more practical policy goals. He said in August 2008 on CNN:
"I have said in the past — and I’ll repeat again — that the best reparations we can provide are good schools in the inner city and jobs for people who are unemployed.
And, you know, I think that strategies that invest in lifting people out of the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, but that have broad applicability and allow us to build coalitions to actually get these things done, that, I think, is the best strategy.
You know, the fact is, is that dealing with some of the — some of the legacy of discrimination is going to cost billions of dollars. And we’re not going to be able to have that kind of resource allocation unless all Americans feel that they are invested in making this stuff happen.
And so, you know, I’m much more interested in talking about, how do we get every child to learn? How doSiS we get every person health care? How do we make sure that everybody has a job? How do we make sure that every senior citizen can retire with dignity and respect?
And if we have a program, for example, of universal health care, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because they’re disproportionately uninsured. If we’ve got an agenda that says every child in America should get — should be able to go to college, regardless of income, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because it’s oftentimes our children who can’t afford to go to college."

Until President Obama weighs in differently, I assume that is still his position

[EffieBlack]

8. If you're going to quote from the transcript tomake a point, at least provide the accurate quote:

Otherwise, someone might think you were trying to be misleading

DAVIS: Mr. Vice President, I want to come to you and talk to you about inequality in schools and race. In a conversation about how to deal with segregation in schools back in 1975, you told a reporter, “I don’t feel responsible for the sins of my father and grandfather, I feel responsible for what the situation is today, for the sins of my own generation, and I’ll be damned if I feel responsible to pay for what happened 300 years ago.” You said that some 40 years ago. But as you stand here tonight, what responsibility do you think that Americans need to take to repair the legacy of slavery in our country?

BIDEN: Well, they have to deal with the — look, there’s institutional segregation in this country. And from the time I got involved, I started dealing with that. Redlining, banks, making sure we are in a position where — look, you talk about education. I propose that what we take the very poor schools, the Title I schools, triple the amount of money we spend from $15 to $45 billion a year. Give every single teacher a raise to the $60,000 level.

Number two, make sure that we bring in to help the teachers deal with the problems that come from home. The problems that come from home. We have one school psychologist for every 1,500 kids in America today. It’s crazy. The teachers are — I’m married to a teacher, my deceased wife is a teacher. They have every problem coming to them. Make sure that every single child does, does in fact, have 3-, 4- and 5-year-olds go to school. Not day care, school.

We bring social workers into some and parents to help them deal with how to raise their children. It’s not that they don’t want to help, they don’t know what — they don’t know quite what to do. Play the radio, make sure the television — excuse me, make sure you have the record player — on at night, make sure that kids hear words, a kid coming from a very poor school — a very poor background will hear 4 million words fewer spoken by the time we get there.

There's a night and day difference between what Obama said and what Biden said

The fact that you either don’t understand the difference or you hope no one else does because it recognizing it screws up your purpose speaks volumes.

And Blow didn’t call Biden racist and neither did I. So try that red herring on someone else because it won’t work on me.

FYI, trying to tell black people our reaction to things while people say about and to us is wrong by playing these games ( “Obama said the same thing.... is he racist?! (No he didn’t and no he’s not) ... “Some OTHER black people agree with me, so you’re wrong” ...) is, to put it charitably, obnoxious.

[highplainsdem]

14. What's obnoxious is your misrepresenting the question and Biden's answer. The word "reparations" was

never used by the moderator. She talked about "repairing" inequality in schools, but she did NOT refer to "reparations" in the sense it's often used now, as a payment to be made.

The question was about inequality in schools. And that was the question Biden answered, explaining what could be done now. It was way too big a question to answer in a very short time, so he started with preparing for school.

Biden's answer basically referred to what Obama was trying to do.

And whether or not you or Blow used the word "racist," much of the criticism aimed at Biden has accused him of racism because he referred to vocabulary -- which Obama also referred to -- and because he mentioned social workers going into people's homes, which Obama also thought was a good idea to help prepare at-risk children for school.

[EffieBlack]

16. How do you explain your blatant misquote of the question Biden answered.

YOU:
Full quote of how she started that question:

"I want to come to you and talk to you about inequality in schools and race."

The actual quote with Biden’s actual answer

DAVIS: Mr. Vice President, I want to come to you and talk to you about inequality in schools and race. In a conversation about how to deal with segregation in schools back in 1975, you told a reporter, “I don’t feel responsible for the sins of my father and grandfather, I feel responsible for what the situation is today, for the sins of my own generation, and I’ll be damned if I feel responsible to pay for what happened 300 years ago.” You said that some 40 years ago. But as you stand here tonight, what responsibility do you think that Americans need to take to repair the legacy of slavery in our country?

BIDEN: Well, they have to deal with the — look, there’s institutional segregation in this country. And from the time I got involved, I started dealing with that. Redlining, banks, making sure we are in a position where — look, you talk about education. I propose that what we take the very poor schools, the Title I schools, triple the amount of money we spend from $15 to $45 billion a year. Give every single teacher a raise to the $60,000 level.

Number two, make sure that we bring in to help the teachers deal with the problems that come from home. The problems that come from home. We have one school psychologist for every 1,500 kids in America today. It’s crazy. The teachers are — I’m married to a teacher, my deceased wife is a teacher. They have every problem coming to them. Make sure that every single child does, does in fact, have 3-, 4- and 5-year-olds go to school. Not day care, school.

We bring social workers into some and parents to help them deal with how to raise their children. It’s not that they don’t want to help, they don’t know what — they don’t know quite what to do. Play the radio, make sure the television — excuse me, make sure you have the record player — on at night, make sure that kids hear words, a kid coming from a very poor school — a very poor background will hear 4 million words fewer spoken by the time we get there.

Why did you blatantly misrepresent the question? She asked him about his position on reparations and he answered with some nonsense about sending social workers to black families’ homes to help black parents “deal with how to raise their children.”

[highplainsdem]

17. You need to read more carefully. I said that was the full quote of how she STARTED the question,

not the rest of the question, which you can hear in the video I linked to, which cut off her first few words so I had to look them up.

Again, she was NOT talking about reparations as the word is used today.

She was specifically talking about inequality in schools.

So his answer was about that.

You're the one misrepresenting the question.

[EffieBlack]

20. I read exactly what you wrote and you misrepresented the question - and did it again

Her question to him: “But as you stand here tonight, what responsibility do you think that Americans need to take to repair the legacy of slavery in our country?”

Even if he thought, because of the question’s preface, she was asking about how what responsibility Americans needed to take vis a vis education to repair the legacy of slavery in the country, his answer made no sense - unless he really thinks the only responsibility Americans have to address the legacy of slavery that is impacting our schools is to send social workers to black people’s homes to show them how to be good parents.

Do you think that’s what he believes?

Do you believe he has more and better ideas than he communicated the other night?

If so, why do you think it’s Charles Blow’s - or anyone else’s - fault for questioning why that he seemed unable to convey them when given the opportunity?

[highplainsdem]

26. The first and second sentences of her question referred to schools, so of course she was asking

about inequality in education.

Do you believe he has more and better ideas than he communicated the other night?

Yes, of course. He had very limited time to answer.

And his answer referred to programs that were part of President Obama's legacy..

Maybe if he'd specifically linked those beliefs and goals to Obama, he wouldn't have been wrongly attacked for being racist. Of course, then he'd probably have been accused of trying to tie himself too closely to Obama.

[EffieBlack]

34. Who has attacked Biden for being racist based on these remarks?

Please be specific.

And Biden is a professional politician who’s been in the Senate for most of his adult life. Claiming he was facing a limited time doesn’t explain why the substance of his comment was so off-base. He managed to get in several paragraphs - the problem wasn’t lack of time - he managed to get in several paragraphs and his opponents managed to speak coherently within the same time constraints - the problem was that he was so ill-prepared and ill-at-ease. One would think he should have been able to answer this rather simple question on a topic he claims to care a lot about and that is very important part of the electorate he’s trying to win over - in fact, he should have knocked it out of the park instead, he not only couldn’t come up with a coherent response, he completely screwed it up. As Starfish said, it sounded like he was trying to repeat what Obama said a few years ago, but got it completely wrong.

If he has this much trouble with such a question, he needs to do some serious remedial work before he has to start facing some REALLY tough questions.

[wellst0nev0ter]

84. Remember, when Davis began her question

by saying "I want to come to you and talk to you about inequality in schools and race," she she was referring to when Biden was specifically addressing busing and affirmative action (read the whole interview with Biden, starting in the third page and second column, it's frankly disgusting in its entirety).

To repeat, Davis was not asking Biden about how to close the racial academic gap, she was asking him why he opposed busing and affirmative action, and what are his solutions for resolving the effects of slavery and racism.

Of course, Biden did not have a good alternative solution.

[cwydro]

62. This.

[StarfishSaver]

18. Funny you mention this. I was at the White House for the event when the President made these remarks

This was the launch of the My Brothers Keeper initiative and the President spoke eloquently and intelligently about the very complex issue of poverty, race and opportunity. He never claimed or even suggested that black parents needed social workers to come into their homes "help them deal with how to raise their children [because] they don’t know quite what to do."

What he DID do was talk about the systemic nature of racism and discrimination and the effect of institutional racism on African Americans, especially black men and boys. He didn't insist that the problem was the fault of the victims or that the problem would be solved if only black parents were able to be better parents while leaving the systems that created the problems in place. Instead, he promised to address the larger, systemic problem that requires an entire society - parents, schools, business, government, etc. - to address.

There are some similarity between the Obama's and Biden's remarks. In fact, it sounded like Biden got frazzled and stumped by the question and racked his brain trying to remember what Obama had said in the past - and the best he could do was to cobble together some really raggedy, out-of-context and vaguely remembered snippets he could remember of Obama's My Brother's Keeper remarks.

The two sets of remarks aren't in any way comparable and any attempt to compare them in order to try to explain away Biden's ham-handed, shallow and terribly unfortunate comments only serves to highlight the vast difference between the two.

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/02/27/remarks-president-my-brothers-keeper-initiative

[Garrett78]

21. Yep.

And as I wrote elsewhere:

There are those who have convinced themselves that only Joe Biden can defeat Trump, based largely on a false narrative about what happened in 2016 and why.

Some honestly seem to think the key to winning is flipping Trump voters in PA, MI and WI. As opposed to boosting turnout among the Democratic Party base. Hundreds of thousands who showed up for Obama didn’t show up for Clinton in key battleground states (it isn’t that they voted for Trump; it’s that they didn’t vote at all or voted 3rd party). But people think flipping Trump voters is the key (and that nominating an old white male will do the trick). It’s madness. This will be a base election. We need to boost turnout among persons of color, youth and white suburban women. That’s what will bring some semblance of sanity back to the White House.

Jamelle Bouie, by the way, wrote a great piece about the Obama-Trump voter.

People can’t seem to grasp that A) some racists voted for Obama (like the racists who are friends with or even married to a person of color and insist that they can’t be racist) following 8 years of Bush-Cheney and B) some of those Obama voters had become completely blinded by racism after 8 years of racist attacks on Obama (and are never coming back). Instead, they insist that a key to winning in 2020 is winning back a fraction of a fraction of voters who happened to vote for both Obama and Trump (due to *white* economic anxiety, ’cause – you know – POC don’t experience economic anxiety–yeah, that’s sarcasm). And, therefore, we need to nominate an old white man to defeat an old white man. Again, it’s madness.

Jamil Smith of Rolling Stone is exactly right that non-racism isn’t enough. And being able to deliver a scripted speech is not enough. We need someone well-versed in anti-racism, especially in the era of Trump. That ain’t Biden. And Biden has made comments that suggest he’s not even versed in non-racism. During the most recent debate, Linsey Davis of ABC News quoted Biden as saying he isn’t responsible for the sins of the past and then asked him how we repair the legacy of slavery. Biden went on to suggest that poor is synonymous with Black, as he’s done previously, and then suggested that Black parents need to be taught how to parent. These so-called debates don’t offer a person much time to speak, but the front-runner (riding name recognition and Obama’s coattails) for the Democratic Party nomination (in the year 2019) decided that was how he would address a question about repairing the legacy of slavery. WTF!

I’m going to set aside the fact that the study Biden referenced has come under scrutiny and just focus on how absurd it is that a 21st century Democratic front-runner for POTUS would say what Biden said. While poor is not synonymous with Black and vice versa, there is an enormous wealth gap. And that wealth gap has everything to do with the sins of the past and present (from slavery to convict leasing to redlining to environmental racism), so Biden should have started off by admitting that he was wrong to suggest he (and all of us) don’t bear responsibility for those sins (i.e., abhorrent crimes). He could have talked about addressing the wealth gap in any number of ways, about a culture that continues to see persons of color as less than human, about the hypocrisy surrounding affirmative action, about ongoing housing discrimination, about the wonderful platform of The Movement for Black Lives, and so on. Hell, he could have talked about the electoral college, a remnant of slavery. But, no, he chose to stand by his quote about not bearing responsibility and suggested that Black parents need to have people teach them how to parent. The man sounded more like Strom Thurmond than a 21st century presidential candidate for the Democratic Party.

[TryLogic]

5. I respect Biden for his loyalty and great friendship with Obama. But...

Obama was a class act and very easy to see as a good friend. Biden is/was likable and loyal. And he may have reminded Obama of his grandfather. It is a very good situation when a Pres and a VP get along so well and are genuine friends and partners.

Does their friendship mean Biden should be the Democratic nominee?

Why does Biden get so up tight, even hostile, when people talk about Medicare for All? He seems very thin skinned. And when criticized, he smiles in a way that often seems like a smirk. Biden is not one of my top 5 favorites.

[democrank]

6. There are 250-plus replies at the end of Charles Blow's piece.

Without being overly critical, I’ve been trying to identify the exact reason that was preventing me from being enthusiastic about Joe Biden. I found my answer.

[BlueMississippi]

9. Blow?

Sometimes the DU posts create humor by themselves

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahaha

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

11. Charles Blow is a respected NYT columnist.

You don't have to agree with him (I don't always), but he's a smart, thoughtful writer.

[still_one]

15. A usual thoughtful and accurate response +++

[Thekaspervote]

29. Yes mr. Blow is a respected opinion journalist and he has a following. There are just as many

Respected journalists with a good of following that would disagree with his opinion

[EffieBlack]

36. Yeah - that's kind of how it works

But it seems that only certain journalists and pundits get dragged on DU for criticizing a certain candidate, as if the only credible approach for those certain journalists is to lavish him with praise.

[lapfog_1]

80. but I don't see a lot of threads trashing other candidates.

only the front runner.

Instead of trashing Biden, your time would be better spent selling us whoever you favor with positive things about them instead of negative things about Biden.

And, oh... if the negatives on Biden outweighed the positives... he wouldn't BE the front runner would he?

[qazplm135]

52. sure

and certainly undeserving of the mockery exhibited above yes?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

53. Quite true.

I was simply pointing out that there's no reason to make fun of his name.

[bigtree]

37. quite true

...he's an accomplished and respected author, as well.

It's problematic to see this black writer trashed on this site for speaking his mind. It's a rare and precious thing to have these visible black journos shedding light on some of the views of the folks actually at issue when white politicians discuss race.

I'm seeing so much regression these days. I can add the denigration of our black journos and authors - our community's writers, thinkers, activists trashed in a heartbeat by our own supposed allies, like they were politicians, themselves - I can add that to the problematic trend.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

54. I think the post I was commenting on

was making fun of his name, so I was making the point that he's a respected journalist/opinion writer. As with any other, one might disagree with him, but snark about his name is just dumb and mean.

[bigtree]

58. as I wrote, denigrating one of the few prominent black journos in the nation

...is something more than concern over name-calling.

There's a long history in America of people working to stifle, discredit, or silence black voices, especially those with access to national media. No one should be sanguine or timid about defending black voices against smears and character assassination.

The room Trump has provided for racists, bigots, and demagogues to openly express their animosity for blacks, has also provided room for supposed allies to vent their own antipathies toward black voices - this week it's our intellectuals, writers, thinkers, and journalists under 'friendly-fire.'

The revival of Jim Crow style attacks on black dissent seems irresistible to some supposed allies, who appear to care more about defending politicians than standing up against efforts to silence dissent from those directly affected by the racial issues being raised or responded to by white politicians.

[StarfishSaver]

66. Beautifully said. Thank you.

[cwydro]

83. This kind of thing seems to be in a resurgence lately.

Surprised to see so much of it here.

[Hortensis]

60. Blow's piece is a vehicle for accusations of racism and irrelevance.

And the smears aren't just against Biden. As a " (white) liberal of a certain vintage" I have a real problem with Blow mischaracterizing how I think, always as a smear. The Blows of this world from one direction, the Coulters from the other.

Worse, Blow is casting the attitudes of a large majority of American voters as not just racist and incompetent but irrelevant and even harmfully unable to fit today's realities. We're "problematic."

Hold your hot air while you wait for us to stop voting, Blow.

Until the day ever comes that young citizens get off their collective asses and vote anything like their unrealized power, THEY are doomed to be far less competent than their parents and their un-made choices effectively irrelevant. Only those who vote get counted. And until then their parents will continue shouldering their responsibilities and making decisions for them.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

61. The problem I had with the piece is that he doesn't offer a solution.

He complains that we white people are paternalistic, which might be true sometimes; and too oblivious to understand the problems of racism, which might also be true - but what are we, or even all of us together, supposed to do?

[Hortensis]

64. Of course he doesn't offer a solution to problematic us. It's a hit piece.

My problem isn't the usual black-on-white stuff in itself. It's that racial divisions are being inflamed by the Republicans, religious right, white nationalists, kleptocrats and foreign enemies at war with us, all using race to defeat us. And people like Blow are all in on self destruction because acting out feels good.

[athena]

74. Blow is and has always been a thoughtful commentator.

It's ugly to attack him for daring to express his opinion that some of Biden's remarks are offensive to African Americans. You can disagree with him, but accusing him of "acting out" and writing a "hit piece" is unfair and uncalled for.

[Tarheel_Dem]

91. Surely you meant to say "offensive to SOME African Americans". You, nor Blow, speak for me.

[athena]

99. I don't have to be African American to recognize something as offensive to African Americans.

A man, for example, can recognize a comment as sexist without having to be female. A man objecting to a sexist comment is not "speaking for" women; he is simply fighting sexism. If you know anything about discrimination, you know that one of the most effective ways to fight it is for the non-discriminated to object to offensive comments. As Ben Jealous, the former president of the NAACP, said in a talk of his I attended years ago, if Black people could end racism on their own, they would have done so already. By trying to shut up black and white people, you are actually hurting the cause of ending racism.

There are always going to be some women who are not bothered by sexist remarks, so I imagine that there are also African Americans and other ethnic minorities who are not bothered by racist remarks. That doesn't mean that the remarks are only offensive to *some* women or *some* minorities. Claiming the opposite opens the door to victim-blaming: the remarks are not offensive to *all* women or all minorities, so the problem is with the people taking offense, not with the person causing the offense.

Feel free not to be offended, but I was disturbed despite not being an ethnic minority. I like and respect Joe Biden, but those comments were thoughtless, wrong, misleading, and inappropriate.

[StarfishSaver]

100. All I can do is

Thank you, my eloquent sister-ally ...

[Hortensis]

108. Englightenment was not the purpose here, though,

not as February 3 rapidly approaches. Many pieces these days are not meant to be informative but to act as vehicles for manipulation.

It's fine if Blow prefers another candidate over Biden; he's probably sincere. But also, that viewpoint is what's selling big right now, and he has a career to tend and income to grow.

I do very strongly object to his dishonorable and unprincipled technique he's using, though. Harnessing and inflaming bigotry against older Americans is every bit as contemptible, and harmful, as bigotry against other minorities.

We should all be able to understand that here. It's just plain very wrong. It's not who we are.

[Hortensis]

98. Unfair to call him out for hitting older people as "problematic"?

No. Rank and contemptible bigotry. He didn't even bother dog-whistling his message, just assumed it'd be swallowed whole by everyone.

In reading over that post, I do wish I'd stated my respect for younger people who do vote more strongly. I was speaking of whole generations. People over 50 are 35% of the population, but vote in much more responsible percentages than younger ones. We are a huge part of the Democratic Party base and should be respected and valued, not constantly insulted by people who prefer about new, trendier candidates.

Btw, for those who've been mislead into imagining only AAs are targets of bigotry and incapable of recognizing it targeted at other groups (or caring -- where is the concern for other minorities on DU?), I invite them to at least remember that a fair number of us older Democrats ARE AA and ARE other minorities.

[StarfishSaver]

67. It's not a journalist's job to "offer a solution" to a a politician's problematic positions on race

And if Blow HAD offered solutions, I can only imagine what Biden's supporters would be saying about a journalist who had the nerve to tell Biden how to handle his business.

And why does Joe Biden need Charles Blow to offer him a solution about how to address race and racism in America? If, at this stage in his career, he's that clueless about the issue (and I don't think he is), he doesn't need to be running for president. But I give him more credit than you seem to be.

Yes, many white people ARE being paternalistic among other things, about racism. That's nothing new. What are we supposed to do about it? One of the things that you can do is not attack black people who raise the issue and tell US that it is up to US to tell YOU how to address it - and when we DO try to offer our opinions about what you can do, accuse us of accusing you of being racist, trot out black people who agree with you as "proof" that we don't know what we're talking about,and tell us to stop complaining and go away.

Let's start there.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

70. I'm not attacking black people. I want solutions as much as anyone.

I hope your anger isn't directed toward me personally since I've never done or said any of those things. I was merely offering my observation that Mr. Blow, whose opinions I have always respected (and I've defended him elsewhere in this thread), doesn't help me analyze what should be done. Maybe I need that help. His points about Biden may be well-taken, but people certainly should have the right to disagree. I most definitely do not want him or you to stop complaining and go away. But I don't want to go away either. I have always respected your posts on DU and I'm really sorry to have made you so angry.

[StarfishSaver]

72. I don't think you're attacking anyone and I'm not angry with you

I find you always to be respectful and thoughtful in your comments.

Unfortunately, that doesn't apply to everyone here, especially when it comes to reactions to people of color criticizing Biden, which seems to provoke an extraordinary degree of vitriol, regardless how mild or well intentioned the criticism may be.

I realize that by referring to "you," it may have sounded like I meant you personally. But I was referring to the collective "you" referenced in the collective "we" in your post, not you as an individual.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

76. Thank you.

We all need to remember that we're in this mess together. People tend to become extremely defensive about their favorite candidates (not limited to Biden by any means), sometimes to the point of forgetting what the goal is, and often to the point of infuriating others and instigating unnecessary and hurtful arguments that go nowhere. We saw this in 2016 and it was ugly and I'm afraid it's happening again. I think everybody should take a deep breath, defend or criticize candidates on the merits, stop picking over stupid shit, and keep our eyes on the prize.

[StarfishSaver]

77. I completely agree

[LanternWaste]

82. Of course. Journalists are "only human and trying..."

[Metatron]

103. Why leave it at that?

Are we to conclude that you are accusing Blow of not supporting Biden because Biden's white? I genuinely did not see anything in Blow's piece to indicate that.

[Kahuna7]

107. Yesterday Blow tweeted a Fox News article to start some more ish...

Where the source of the story is a friend of Clarence Thomas and Orrin Friggin Haaaatch.

Link to tweet

[DemocratSinceBirth]

49. Are we making fun of people's name now?

[cwydro]

63. Wow, you've never heard of Charles Blow?

And you find his name funny for some reason?

[oasis]

10. Blow is mistaken, Trump is problematic. Biden is the solution. nt

[Laura PourMeADrink]

23. And it follows. Trash the idea of Impeachment then

Trash the front-runner. Right on script.

[NYMinute]

12. Blow blew it nt

[Thekaspervote]

19. This!

[Fiendish Thingy]

13. This issue has legs, and won't be going away anytime soon nt

[Hekate]

28. Just a question: which candidates have the best quals on this issue?

Clearly it can't be the old white guy.

So how about my Senator, a very mixed-race woman who identifies as black. I've heard tell at DU that because she started as a prosecutor we should look at her as just another cop. Can she overcome this? Is her past too problematic to get past?

[Demsrule86]

44. Wishful thinking...only those who don't like Biden and are thinking that any other candidate can

beat Trump are concerned with this BS...not true of course-Trump will be tough to beat and IMHO no other caniddate will do it. Biden is the one who will defeat Trump. I will vote for anyone who wins the nomination...but the base won't elect the next president...the voters in MI, WI and PA will...more moderate voters. And if we run left the house is endangered.

[greyl]

24. Charles Blow would/will vote for Joe. nt

[bigtree]

32. many people pointing out his foibles would vote for Biden if he became the Dem nominee

...who is this news to, I wonder?

[greyl]

39. Maybe Charles hopes Joe is listening. nt

[Green Line]

25. Why are so many afraid of Joe Biden

He’s been getting heavy flak since the last debate, I’m getting Hillary deja vu.

[Thekaspervote]

33. That's a really good question. Most could not have endured what he has thru the debates and

Come out with a smile on his face, a positive attitude and just go on.

IMO this shows his durability. The fact it doesn’t seem to significantly move the polls shows that he is well liked regardless of the nay sayers and viewed in a very positive light by the elector at large.

Here’s a snip from talking points memo- josh marshall who put it very succinctly

Interesting Op-Ed over at TPM by Josh Marshall. From Marshall's concluding remarks, I think he sees (as I do) a head-to-head primary match ultimately between Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren. This from the beginning of the piece:

For months now I’ve been in a back and forth with readers over what many have wrongly interpreted as support for Joe Biden. That’s not really right. It’s more like Biden Realism, which I’d describe as a focus on Biden’s apparent strengths despite many people’s wish that they weren’t strengths. The primary polls themselves are inherently volatile and heavily driven by perceptions of electability. That’s not the case with general election polls, which focus on voters who by definition don’t care about “electability.” Those polls have been very, very consistent all year. Specifically, Joe Biden is the only Democrat who consistently bests President Trump by big margins. Most of the others are closer to a tie. The exception is Bernie Sanders who has usually been between Biden and the rest of the pack.

Some people claim those numbers mean next to nothing more than a year from the general election. They’re wrong. When one candidate consistently does significantly better, it suggests they pull an electoral coalition that is different and larger than the others. The fact that things can change does not mean they will change or (more importantly) that they will change to conform to your hopes. But something has shifted over the last month.

Biden Realism. I like that. Seems spot on, too.

[Hekate]

27. Well. Okay then. Who else ya got?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

31. Good one!

[quickesst]

30. thanks for posting

This should be good for a decent bump in Joe Biden's popularity. I don't expect the results of this attack on him to be any different than most of the others have been. Unlike Trump's supporters, Democrats are pretty quick to figure things out.

[Thekaspervote]

35. This!!

[quickesst]

38. I know, right?

But they keep doing it.

[people]

40. Very well said by Charles Blowh

I agree completely with what Charles Blow said. It is so accurate.

[loyalsister]

41. Antiqued view is a perfect description

Targeting parents reflects discredited research that was cherry picked specifically to weave a narrative that would further an agenda to destroy the social safety net.

[StarfishSaver]

46. Moynihan Report

[loyalsister]

86. Exactly

Moynihan’s influence has been most enduring. His 1965 report, The Negro Family: The Case for National Action (PDF), brought this idea to the mass media in the midst of an extended urban uprising in the Watts section of LA. As an assistant secretary in Lyndon Johnson’s Department of Labor, he issued an official verdict that African American poverty was mired in a “tangle of pathology” resulting from excessive numbers of female headed households. Moynihan conceded that male unemployment unsettles marital stability, but believed that racial disparities in joblessness reflected a family structure that produced uncompetitive workers, implicitly justifying employer discrimination. Growing public unease over urban violence magnified the report’s message that African American culture was pathological.

http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2015/07/11/the-moynihan-report-50-years-of-racist-poverty-shaming/

[StarfishSaver]

88. Yep

[stopbush]

42. I turned 65 this week, so I have a closer understanding of antiquated than

perhaps others.

And yes, Joe has antiquated ideas. Or maybe it’s that he has an antiquated way of expressing his ideas. This is true of my own recent experience. One doesn’t easily adjust decades of thought and expression. And we lose a step or two when we get past sixty or seventy.

It rattles me that the leading candidates are all in their 70s. I really want to see someone younger in the White House. Sorta like Obama was younger than the norm. That’s why I continue to stick with Kamala as my top choice. She is sharp as a tack and has the moxie (now, there’s a dated term!) necessary to destroy tRump in a head-to-head.

[thesquanderer]

75. Not everyone in their 70s is similarly antiquated. See Sanders and Warren.

They are more "woke" as it has been put in some other posts here.

[JustAnotherGen]

43. I'm an undecided voter

So I write this with the understanding that I will get blowback about why xyz candidate is my *man* or *woman*.

I don't care about the nitpicky stuff.

I care about the SCOTUS and who will have the guts to keep hands off and let the criminal justice system go after every single member of the Russian Living Cabal in the White House, Senate and House.

[LincolnRossiter]

45. I guess at the end of the day I just don't have an expectation that my 76yo presidential candidate

display peak “wokeness” at all times.

You can’t govern in “woke” anyway.

[StarfishSaver]

47. Some people have that privilege, but everyone doesn't

For many of us, "wokeness" is a "need to have," not a "nice to have" and we don't necessarily want the next president to be graded on a curve on the wokeness scale.

I'm sure this is how most people feel about issues that are important to them. For example, I don't think many people would agree that it's fine for a presidential candidate to be "woke" about climate change only part of the time and should get a pass for those times he or she reveals an "antiquated" view of the threat to our planet because they're old.

I guess it really all depends on your priorities.

[LincolnRossiter]

55. Sorry to hear that. It must be exhausting.

For many of us, "wokeness" is a "need to have," not a "nice to have"

I want to crush and stamp out Trumpism, nationalism, white nationalism, the alt-right, and all of their incarnations so that they can never make a revival. If that requires me to not get bent out of shape that a 76 year-old white man doesn't think and speak exactly like a 25 year-old black man, it's a price I'll pay.

[brush]

65. Well stated. Couldn't agree more. We must beat trump and if it's by Biden, so be it.

Last edited Tue Sep 17, 2019, 01:24 PM - Edit history (1)

[StarfishSaver]

68. No one is arguing that Biden should think and speak like a 25-year-old black man

The question is whether he has the capacity to listen, absorb, learn and evolve so that he grows beyond the way he thought 40 years ago. He doesn't need to become a 25-year-old black man. But he can do better than being a 76-year-old white man who thinks and speaks just the way he did 40 years ago when the rest of the country has moved forward. That seems to be a sticking point for him and, judging by the take no prisoners defense by some of his supporters, that kind of obstinance is just fine with them. It's not just fine for lots of other people.

The question for many is whether the only way to crush and stamp out Trumpism, nationalism, white nationalism, the alt-right, and all of their incarnations is to elect a 76-year-old white man who is unwilling or unable to change his thinking on race, racism and civil rights. Many people don't think that's the case, I being one of them. And I don't think many of the white people who think this is just fine would be so willing to pay that "price" if the price were something that directly affected them.

[LincolnRossiter]

69. We don't have a problem with Biden's thinking or history on race, racism, or Civil Rights. His

beliefs are all there in the record. He was AHEAD OF, not behind his time when it counted most. And he served with distinction.

The question for many is whether the only way to crush and stamp out Trumpism, nationalism, white nationalism, the alt-right, and all of their incarnations is to elect a 76-year-old white man who is unwilling or unable to change his thinking on race, racism and civil rights. And I don't think many of the white people who think this is just fine would be so willing to pay that "price" if the price were something that directly affected them.

I've never lived one day as a white man in this country, so I'm not exactly sure what price they are willing or not willing to pay. I know many of them and many of us are so over this new standard of what it takes to be considered "woke," as cast by a bunch of millennials who barely vote and are never happy.

What we want to see is Joe stepping in and reaffirming our commitment to civil rights and equal rights regardless of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender status. We want a fair tax code that doesn't reward the wealthiest of our citizens just because their primary source of income is their money making money. We want to solidify Obamacare and ensure access to all who need it. We want to defense of our ecosystem and reengagement with climate reform, including immediately rejoining the Paris Accords. We want free trade with labor protections. And we want to renew and strengthen our relationships with key allies and reassume a leadership position in the global order.

I realize that this isn't good enough for you because it falls short of "the revolution." But this is what the majority of democrats want. And many independents and even some replublicans.

[StarfishSaver]

71. Who is this "we" of whom you speak?

[oasis]

102. "ahead of his time when it counted most". I agree. nt

[cwydro]

48. I agree with him.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. Biden is not the most woke person in the room but I believe his heart is in the right place.

To me the only question is who has the best chance of beating Chump. If that's Joe that fine. If it is somebody else that's fine too.

Everything else is commentary.

[Loki Liesmith]

51. Lol ok chip

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

56. I'm not in a position to argue very convincingly

with Mr. Blow, being a white person who, like Biden, probably doesn't really "get" it. The reality is that if one has been living in privilege, as I and other white people, including Biden, have, we won't totally get it no matter how hard and sincerely we try. You can't walk in someone else's shoes if you don't know how. Biden actually made that exact point in his speech at the church yesterday. Biden probably is old-fashioned, and possibly unintentionally a little paternalistic and insufficiently woke, but he told us in that speech that he knows this. But the way I look at it is that I'd rather have a president who can be seen as antiquated and "problematic" than a flat-out racist who's doing everything in his power to crush the lives of people who aren't white. Blow agrees with this point also.

So, if Biden is the candidate most likely to beat Trump he is obviously our best hope of reversing the malign trends Trump has started. Right now Biden has the most substantial lead in head-to-head polls vs. Trump, so if the primary election were held tomorrow that's who I'd vote for. Maybe that will change by next winter when the primaries start for real. I'm voting for the candidate who can beat Trump by the widest margin. Blow might be right about Biden's shortcomings as to racial issues but if Trump is in the WH for another four years we are all screwed - and especially PoC.

[thesquanderer]

73. "we won't totally get it no matter how hard and sincerely we try"

That was the point of an episode of South Park, which got a lot of press for its use of the N word. I thought it was well done... funny and also appropriately uncomfortable.

[Hortensis]

57. Are these 5 gumballs or beach balls? If I try to sit on

one, will it collapse to nothing under the reality of my weight? Five nitpicks over style, age, how the number of words spoken on "pick-a-subject" proves X, could be produced for every one of our candidates, new sets every day.

At least there's an admission that Joe Biden HAS good intentions. Very unlike this.

I don't see any good intentions in this feather-light hit piece that offers 5 nothings pretending, among other things, to be evidence of mental decline and racism. And in this contemptible attempt to take out our currently strongest Democratic candidate, I don't see intellect, ethical behavior, or even a modicum of good sense.

[Thekaspervote]

81. Thank you for your post. Spot on with the trivia that prevails in complaints about our front runner

[stonecutter357]

59. good let's go Joe !

[lapfog_1]

78. you all ARE going to support him and vote for him in a year, right?

[Thomas Hurt]

79. Sheesh, none of the candidates are perfect, they are people for god's sake.

Unless you can point to one of our candidates and show us how they are as bad or worse than Trump what is the point.

Make your decision, vote your conscious and if your choice doesn't prevail, suck it up and lets get rid of the amoral pig.

[Kind of Blue]

85. Indeed, he is.

[Politicub]

87. This excellent column deserves to be considered more than a criticism of Biden

Charles Blow is an opinion columnist for the New York Times. And a damn good one at that. Can you imagine how hard he had to work to make it on the editorial page of the freaking New York Times?

And yet, I see in this thread people making fun of him because of his last name. They are taking his well thought out column and distilling it into a “hit piece.”

Frankly, I think we have a lot more to learn about the field. And there are things that all of the nominees have done and said over their lifetimes that need more context to understand or were outright wrong.

This is the heart of Blow’s column and why this examination of how people approach race matters. It makes me take pause:

Progress. That is the wall behind which white America hides, including white liberals. (Even many black leaders have absorbed and regurgitate the progress narrative.) It expects black people to swell and applaud at their effort. But, how is that a fair and legitimate expectation? Slavery, white supremacy and racism, are horrid, man-made constructs that should never have existed in the first place. Am I supposed to cheer the slow, creeping, centuries-long undoing of a thing that should never have been done?

Malcolm X was once asked if he felt that we were making progress in the country. He responded: “No. I will never say that progress is being made. If you stick a knife in my back nine inches and pull it out six inches, there’s no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that’s not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made.”

I don’t even think that’s progress. That just returns the situation to a common baseline before the crime was committed.

Furthermore, it’s not what Biden says in prepared remarks that’s problematic, it’s what he says off the cuff and under pressure that to me reveal an antiquated view on racial matters and racial sensitivities.

People can dismiss it; that’s their prerogative. But they will be selling themselves short because there is a deeper truth that Blow explores.

[Joe941]

89. It is a troubling theme that is emerging...

[ecstatic]

90. All this energy devoted to knocking out Biden. Who does Blow suggest?

And why not spend his energy promoting that person instead of tearing down a candidate who might end up being our nominee??

[StarfishSaver]

95. Criticizing Biden isn't trying to "knock him out" and Blow doesn't have to "promote" someone

He's a political columnist making an observation and offering his opinion. It's not his job to only say nice things about Biden or "suggest" or "promote" someone to else. Do you think the NY Times opinion page is the communication arm of the Biden campaign?

The notion that unless a journalist is heaping praise on Biden, they're out to get him is really weird, better suited for the MagaTrump side of the aisle where uncritical worship of the Fearless Leader is required.

[ecstatic]

96. His article isn't unique. He's not the first to criticize, he's

joining a chorus of other journalists who pretty much are using the same talking points ad nauseam. It's ineffective and a complete waste of time, in my opinion.

[Tarheel_Dem]

92. I dare say there's an issue that each candidate is probably weak on, but they've chosen to...

make race an issue for Biden. I understand what they're doing, and we all know why. Let me just conclude by saying Charles Blow and his fans don't speak for me, which is why Biden's AA support hasn't budged.

[Sugarcoated]

93. Yep

All he's doing weakening Joe for the general. Smh

[Tarheel_Dem]

94. It's beyond me. We learned nothing from 2016. I'll cry with you.

[brush]

104. New flash: Many GenXer and Millennial AAs are not in the Biden camp.

They have issues with some of his positions over his long career. Older African Americans still back Biden though.

[saidsimplesimon]

101. Thanks for posting this opinion piece.

My finger was hovering over the submit button when I saw your post.

I'm pleased you received some good feedback and the discussion remained civil (wink).

Brava, well done

[Gothmog]

105. Why is it so hard to accept that people like Joe Biden?

Link to tweet

Biden consistently has commanded a staggering lead among black voters. Two-thirds of black voters over 65 are backing Biden, as well as 42 percent of black voters overall; Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) comes in a distant second with about 12 percent support. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is down at 8 percent and South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg is not even registering at 1 percent.

This sounds like a pretty interesting story. Instead, “frontrunner, but …” is a common refrain. Consider the new Axios-NewsWhip 2020 tracker that found Biden has been bombarded by negative coverage. Of the 100 stories about Biden that got the most social media attention, 77 were negative. Presumably, the same is true of cable news.

Even with the magnification of Biden’s gaffe-du-jour and the flow of media admiration of Warren’s surge — both of which reflect a true story — Biden’s backers are the most committed. Nearly 65 percent of his supporters say they’ll definitely support him, as opposed to just 34 percent of those who support other candidates.....

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that Biden isn’t just the most “electable” but, rather, the candidate with positions most in line with Democrats’ preferences? His platform is made up of policies that poll incredibly well and his supporters aren’t masking their love for progressives in favor of a safe bet. They like Joe.

[EffieBlack]

106. Why is it so hard to accept that everyone doesn't think he can do no wrong and can't be criticized?