Some of you are as bad as the RW spin machine - Biden DEFENDED MoveOn's ad on FNS

[jillan]

I am waiting for the transcript to come up -
so I am paraphrasing here, but as soon as the transcript comes up - I will post it.

Wallace asks Biden if Moveon.org was wrong

Biden - Moveon.org is frustrated by this administration's policy to not tell the truth to the American people.

Biden said that while he didn't agree with the ad, that he didn't understand why people were questioning their Patriotism.
That is was a burst of their frustration and anger.

He said that while he might have thought it was a mistake, he did not understand why people are acting like they committed a capital offense.
========================

If you are going to take one phrase from a 5 minute conversation and build a smear campaign on that - maybe
YOU should go work for Fox News!

[babylonsister]

1. I didn't see it, pirhana, but thanks for setting the record straight. nt

[ShortnFiery]

"... he didn't agree with the ad ..." The foregoing is all the RW noise machine will repeat.

You can't be nuanced or parsed in an national election. :shrug:

[jillan]

3. sounds more like a fellow DUer to me.

[ShortnFiery]

4. If you think us rebel liberals are tough on Biden and Clinton, just wait until one ...

of them win The Democratic Nomination. :nuke:

[ginchinchili]

8. Are you supporting the Republican candidate?

Is your "rebel liberal" tag meant in a sarcastic way, or are you being literal? No matter which of the candidates you're supporting, they're all supporting this war, all except Ron Paul, who I'm assuming you're not supporting because no Republican seems to like him. I guess my point is, how do you defend this war, especially after all the lies it took on the part of your president and your Party to get us into this costly quagmire? It's interesting to me that a clear majority of the country wants out, a clear majority disapprove of the way Bush has handled Iraq, yet all of your candidates are marching in lock-step with him. What gives? Do you support this war and how we got into it?

[ShortnFiery]

9. Isn't it a little early (Primary Season) to be laying a guilt trip on any "small d" democrat? nt

[ginchinchili]

10. I'm not sure what you mean

But I do apologize for making the wrong assumption. However, I only knew that when I saw the picture of Pres. Carter, not from the post itself.

So, that leads me to the question, why are you going after Joe Biden with such vitriol? Wouldn't that be better spent on a Republican? There are a lot of us fellow Democrats who happen to agree with Sen. Biden on this, and at least he didn't hesitate to express his feelings, which is one of the reasons I like him. When I first read the ad I thought it was a bit over the top and figured because of that it wouldn't be too effective--and I donated money for that ad! He said he didn't agree with what it was suggesting, but he understood where they were coming from. We're all frustrated and nothing is changing. What's the problem with that position? Because that's my position too. Just who would like to censor whom?

[ShortnFiery]

13. I'm not going after Biden, not really. Plus I only admire Jimmy Carter for his POST-

Presidential humanitarian and diplomatic efforts. Certainly not anything having to do with NAFTA nor the economy. :(

The only point I am making is that it's BEST if Presidential Candidates can error on "no comment" when it comes to evaluating more liberal anti-war efforts. It's going to get a whole lot more nasty (anti-war civil disobedience) before it gets better. :shrug:

[ginchinchili]

20. So what you're suggesting is that if a candidate doesn't agree with you...

they should keep quiet, eh? Sorry, but that DOES sound very neo-con to me. I just don't understand what your beef is. Sen. Biden didn't agree with the Moveon ad, but understands their frustration. What is the problem? Because that's my position too. Are you suggesting that the Senator and I should keep mum on this because we don't agree with you? I think your attack energy is gravely misplaced. The Republicans are all clamoring about Democrats' refusal to condemn the ad, but you choose to pick out Joe Biden and criticize him for not agreeing with the suggestion that Paetraus (sp?) is a traitor. Sorry, but that seems very strange to me. Why not go after Giuliani? Or Romney? Or Brownback? Where are your loyalties?

[ShortnFiery]

21. No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm suggesting that MAYBE it's better to err on the side

of "no comment." It's not a matter of agreeing with me personally, but a matter of disrespecting the left, the base of the party. If you can't understand that using liberals as a "punching bag" is becoming old and is counterproductive to electing even "moderate" democrats, then you are unreachable.

That's ALL I'm saying so please stop the "far out" extrapolations. ;)

[ginchinchili]

24. So you'd prefer "no comment" from candidates who disagree w/your position, right?

Which happens to be the position of the far left wing of the Democratic Party. I'm trying to understand what you're suggesting here as an excuse for attacking Sen. Biden. Please explain what the difference is between suggesting that a Democratic candidate err on the side of "no comment" when asked about a position taken by the extreme left branch of the Democratic Party that the candidate doesn't agree with AND suggesting that they either agree with the position with the extreme liberal side of Democratic Party, which just so happens to the positions you agree with, or they should keep their mouths' shut? It sounds to me like we're saying the same thing. You're just wrapping yours in prettier paper.

Let me ask you this; would you, then, agree that if a Democrat with extreme liberal views doesn't like something a moderate Democrat says or does, should he or she, too, err on the side of "no comment"?.

[demommom]

30. I think you

are saying it would be smarter for him,because he disagreed with the ad, even though he understood why they felt that way,to say "no comment."
Joe Biden will not do that, he will tell it like it is even if it keeps
you from voting for him. That is one of the reasons I support him.

[John Q. Citizen]

28. That's ridicules. Dennis Kucinich voted against the IWR and against funding

both the illegal war and the illegal occupation.

Richardson, Kucinich, Gravel, and Paul have called for the immediate commencement of a full and complete withdrawal.

All the rest of the candidates, Dem and Repo, advocate a continued US presence in Iraq with varying numbers and schedules.


Please get your facts straight. While there is certainly a dramatically larger contingent of Repos that make up the War Party, there is also a significant number of Democrats who also belong to the War Party. And one Independent.

Which is why the illegal occupation is just rolling along.

Congress could stop it if they wanted too, but a majority are in the War Party, and that majority keeps the occupation happening.

The rebel liberals are those who are with the minority in congress, the Peace Party. Like the War Party, the Peace Party is made up of both Dems and Repos and Independents, with the Dems about 99% of the mix.

The best lever that I can see that the voters who support the Peace Party can use on members of the War Party is their vote, their political volunteerism, and their money. We need to run Peace Party candidates against War Party candidates even if it means backing Peace Repo against War Repo in their primary races, and Peace Dem against War Dem in our primaries.

You can cling to a bi-polar Dem vs Repo analysis of the war/occupation if you want, but if that were the case, the occupation and the war would never have started and continued.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. Well...You Won't Be Doing It From Here....

LOL

[ShortnFiery]

16. Au Contrair, DSB. It's the primaries. nt

[saltpoint]

15. If one of them does, it means your candidate didn't. The game is played

according to pre-established rules.

After the first-ballot victory of delegates is accomplished, that man or woman is the winner.

If you saunter into politics expecting to get your way every time, you are going to be too frustrated to breathe by mid-December.

[cali]

2. Thank you.

This is important for folks to see.

[Tom Joad]

5. Move on did not make a mistake. Not at all.

[jillan]

6. That's is what Biden said - even tho he didn't agree with it, they had every right to

express their frustration.

[cali]

7. That's opinion. Not fact.

Whether the ad was effective or not, remains to be seen.

[jillan]

12. Transcript is up - it's long - but Biden defended Moveon throughout the whole

conversation even tho he did not agree with their message.

WALLACE: Senator, let's turn to the MoveOn.org ad that we've been talking about, about General Petraeus. When you were asked about it last week, you said, "I don't buy into that. This is an honorable guy."

But I want to ask you directly. Was MoveOn.org wrong to attack the integrity of General Petraeus?

BIDEN: MoveOn.org is as frustrated and angry and can't — with this policy. What you saw is a burst of frustration. It was more about MoveOn.org than about the war.

And look. The idea that they have said — they use one phrase, that somehow these guys are a bunch of un-Americans who should be run out of the country or something — this is great political tactic for people to use. They were wrong in saying what they said, in my view.

But speaking of moving on, we should move on and decide what we're going to do about whether or not this continued failed policy that's chewing up American lives, chewing up American dollars, with no end in sight, is worth some disdain on the part of a lot of Americans who are really angry.

That's what you saw. You saw frustration there. And so, you know, this is what it is. I think it was a mistake. But I don't think it's a capital offense.

WALLACE: Fine. And you have just said that you thought that it was a mistake and you thought it was wrong.

And I'm not asking to you speak for them, but people are noting the fact that Senators Clinton, Senator Obama, Senator Edwards have all refused to say those simple words that you just said.

And it raises the question whether there are some people in your party that are pandering — that are scared of the antiwar left.

BIDEN: Look, I'm confident all the rest of those colleagues, all those others that are running as well, feel the same, and I think probably the majority of MoveOn.org probably regrets the way it came out.

But I think what you saw here is something that is — it's over. It's done. They went, in that one instance, I think, overboard. But the point they were trying to make was still valid.

The point they were trying to make is that the American public hasn't been told the truth about this war from the beginning, and they don't think they're being told the truth about it now.

And this president — you know, the earth moved when the president spoke the other day. He made clear what I said, I think, on your program 10 month ago: There is no plan to end this war by the time he's president. This is all about handing it off to the next president.

As one of your colleagues in the media said, he's using the American troops as a cork in a bottle which is to keep the very bad things from happening, spilling out into the region.

But there's no plan. There's no plan here to end the war. What's the plan? We're going to stand up the Iraqi forces? Here we are, 4.5 years later, $20 billion later. They still can't stand up.

And if you read the whole report that was put out by General Jones, it's going to be another four years before they're fully capable.

The American public are not prepared to keep American forces there just to keep bad things from happening.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296957,00.html

[saltpoint]

14. Prior to this morning I held Biden in high regard for his years of public

service to our country, to his commitment to libeal causes, and to his overall liberal voting record. His few flaws, while they appear to send some DUers into seizures of outrage, strike me as persuasively human. I love Ted Kennedy also but he doesn't vote "my direction" on every single thing. I love Edwards and Kerry and Barbara Boxer and value them for their comprehensive effort to important issues we all have to confront. Over a long, long period of years they've done it loyally and convincingly, and I am grateful for that contributino and sacrifice.

After this morning's remarks by Joe Biden, my opinion as stated above has not chanced one lick.

He will contend for the U.S presidency and if he is our nominee, he has my very enthusiastic vote.

[AZBlue]

17. Unfortunately I think some of them ARE the RW spin machine.

But that's just my opinion.

[rucky]

18. My opinion, too.

99% sure of that. this is where they see if their shit will float.

[gateley]

19. My god -- do candidates not have a right to their own personal opinions?

Must EVERY word they utter be run through the How Will It Play in Peoria filter? Frankly, that approach is what makes me so weary and leery of many of the politicians -- and candidates -- in our current crop. Why bother even listening if it will just be the party line?

The REAL message is he supports moveon's right to express themselves however they choose. He doesn't demand an apology like the R's would do. He understands the motivation of the ad and empathizes with it. He just didn't agree with the personal attack on Peterus's integrity, as he sees it.

ShortnFiery wrote:

The foregoing is all the RW noise machine will repeat

How about the DU noise machine? This shouldn't even be an issue here. Instead of focusing on his statement of support, they are focusing on the part of his statement with which they disagree.

Biden still has my vote. No more would I discount a leader in whom I believe for one -- or several -- statements with which I may disagree, than I would vote for Rudy Giuliani.

We're all the good guys, remember?

[ShortnFiery]

22. I know we are the good guys, but when you play politics, it's best to keep the message short and, in

no way, even suggest disrespecting your base. Hell, Biden can go on and on (and on) as much as he likes but that's where the danger lies - taking his comment out of context. Sure he's able to his opinion - but if it's negative to a group who usually supports him, I believe that the KISS rule stands (Keep It Simple Somebody).

[gateley]

23. "Hell, Biden can go on and on (and on)"

Ha! You got that right!

And your point is excellent about 'when playing politics'. I was irritated by other candidates' replies when asked this question -- presenting the predictable "correct" answer, but you've helped me see a larger picture -- the value of omitting one's personal opinion in the interest of being a spokesperson for one's base.

Maybe the REAL correct answer should have been something like "it doesn't matter what my personal view is, what matters is that this ad represents the attitude of some of our citizens, and they have the absolute right to state that view." (I won't be applying for a job as a political speech writer, you can rest assured.)

I'm certain he's aware of the repercussion generated by his response by now. I have faith in the guy that he'll be a little more circumspect next time.

Thanks for your response.

[ginchinchili]

26. I agree with your first inclination, gateley.

If Sen. Biden had said, "It doesn't matter what my personal view is..." then he'd be sidestepping the question and I don't think that's good at all. I really get tired of politicians doing that. They do it all the time on Sunday morning talk shows. The people who represent us should feel free to express their opinions. I gave money to MoveOn for that ad and when I first read it, before I heard any commentary from anyone, I thought it was a little harsh. I didn't regret donating the money, because mistakes are made, but I thought it would only end up hurting the cause, not helping it. Turns out I was right.

I like and appreciate MoveOn, but that doesn't mean I'm required to support everything they do. That's nonsense. Many of us, apparently Joe Biden included, thought it was a mistake because they could have made the ad more effective, one that works better for our cause. I didn't think Petreaus was intentionally betraying us. I just think Bush picked him to run the Iraq war because he thinks about it the way Bush does. But this isn't about Petreaus. It's about Bush. If they wanted to say someone was betraying us, they should have focused on Bush, the real betrayer. Instead they only succeeded in creating a distraction. They'll learn something from it. I don't doubt MoveOn's competence.

But to go after Joe Biden for expressing his opinion, which happens to be a widely held opinion among Democrats, is pure nonsense. We shouldn't expect Sen. Biden to script his responses. Lord, all he said was that he didn't agree with it. Let the man go on and on and on, because I'm listening.

[ShortnFiery]

27. Thanks for your consideration & excellent suggestion for a competent response.

I do like Joe Biden, the person. He's super intelligent but sometimes, he can be a little too long winded. :yoiks: I think he'd make an outstanding Secretary of State. I could not ever vote for him due to his vote on the bankruptcy bill. I'm sorry, but that was a deal breaker for me. :shrug:

I have no personal ill will toward any of our Presidential Candidates but wish to convey the media's and RW's tactic of "divide and conquer." Remember how despicable the swift-boaters behaved toward John Kerry? However, the republicans representatives only said, in essence, "it's not me!" That is, in NO way did they say ANYTHING negative about those disgusting ads.

Let's not make it EASY for them to separate us with infighting this go round? :shrug:

I never thought that I would be considered "extreme left wing" ... I guess us middle aged women of Pax Christi must be VERY SCARY to some. That's a shame - I'm just a regular kind of liberal who places ending these occupations above all else on my political agenda. Right or wrong, that's how I take my stand.

Thanks again for such thoughtful words. I'm glad someone who likes Joe Biden didn't interpret this as a personal attack on him. He's brilliant - but, IMO, a better diplomat than a politician. :hi:

[gateley]

29. ginchinchili and ShortnFiery:

You've got me laughing -- ruefully -- at myself. So often I seem to see the view and find merit in the views of opposing sides. I swear to god it's a curse because, just as now, I think both viewpoints are valid. The term flip-flopper applies to me, I fear.

After ShortnFiery's initial post you can see how my approach shifted.

After reading ginchinchili's post I was thinking -- well, damn, THAT"S right too! It's in large part because Biden DOES speak his mind that I'm such an ardent supporter.

Thankfully on the War, for example, I'm not the least bit simpatico with the R's opinion!

Let's all just be grateful I'm not in a position where I would have to VOTE on something like this.

Thank you both for your input and responses. Ya got me thinking!

[KharmaTrain]

25. RW Talking Point Of The Week

I actually agreed with Evan Bayh's take on this non-scandal this morning. He, too, said he thought the ad was over the top (how DLC'ish of him) but then took Wolfie to task for all the time spent on this crap and not on the substance of the ad...the fact a General was being used by politicians to sell politics. He refused to condmen MoveOn or bite the "shouldn't Democrats distance themselves". Bayh said "MoveOn is 4 million individuals...why would the Democrats want to distance itself from those people"...the issue in a nutshell.

Now I'd be curious if the corporate media...instead of biting the usual Right Wing talking point, would conduct a poll and see how many people agreed that Petreus was going us a snow job...and if they were "offended" by the MoveOn ad...methinks you'd see a partisan divide.

While MoveOn takes heat, zero is ever said about the Right Wing astroturf operations...like the ones from Ari Fleischer/Bob Perry's propaganda machine. But, they won't since all the major corporate cable networks have taken this groups money and want more. A double-standard, that unfortunately, even good Democrats like Elizabeth Edwards couldn't see through.