Joe Biden Says Look At My Record

Recently a young woman asked Joe Biden how young people can trust he'll fight for us when he's opened the door  to Super PACs, which would allow any amount of dark fossil fuel money to support his campaign. His response was condescending “Look at my record, child" and at the same time tells all what we should do when investigating any candidate. So let’s look and Biden’s record and see what it tells us about him on any number of issues.

Before we do that though remember what a Super PAC is and why the young woman’s question is relevant. Super PACs can take virtually unlimited amounts of money from a variety of different sources, and they’ve found loopholes that enable them to dodge disclosure requirements. Those donations made by undisclosed sources are called Dark Money. As a result, we the voters might not even know who is paying for advertising promoting the candidate during the primaries. What promises the candidate make in order to encourage a donor to provide tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to a Super PAC? We'll never know and because we don't know who donated those funds we don't even know what to look out for.

Now on to Biden’s record, do you remember the 1991 confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas? You remember the controversy over Anita Hill’s testimony that Thomas sexually harassed her? Joe Biden was the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee at that time and in a deal with Republicans he blocked four other women from testifying in support of Hill’s claims. This is sadly illustrative of both Biden’s treatment of women and the way he works cooperatively with Republicans, which he claims is one of his strengths.

Then there’s Biden’s support for credit card companies over working Americans when he voted for the 2005 Bankruptcy Bill. The bill, championed by credit card companies and many major retailers, made it harder for individuals to file for bankruptcy and get out of debt. The bill passed the Senate with a large majority including Biden, but most Democratic senators voted no. Biden was widely considered one of the bill’s major Democratic champions. Elizabeth Warren was a strong opponent of the Bankruptcy Bill from the outset based on research she published in 2000. She explained to journalist David Cay Johnston that “Many people in bankruptcy were solid bill payers until something knocked their legs out from under them. For two-thirds of these people, it was loss of a job, for 40 percent it was a serious medical problem and for 20 percent it was the economic fallout of divorce.”

Lest we forget Biden voted “Yes” to give George W. Bush the authority to start the Iraq War. On the day the war broke out, Biden stated to the press, “We voted to give him the authority to wage that war. We should step back and be supportive.” In fact Biden didn't just vote for the war the record shows he was a leading Democratic voice in its favor. Biden played an important role in persuading the public of its necessity and laid the groundwork for Bush's invasion. At the time Biden stood as a leading Democratic voice on foreign policy since he chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. While President Bush attempted to peddle the war to the American public, Biden became one of the administration’s strongets allies in this cause. Biden backed claims regarding the threat posed by Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and the necessity of removing him from power.

So yes Joe, let’s look at your record.

Published in the Seguin Gazette - November 6, 2019

Jobs, taxes and bringing the troops home will fix the budget deficit

Betty Clifford’s tirade is simply too much to ignore. Any economist whether left, right or center will tell you that governments aren’t like families when it comes to budgets. We were paying down our debts before President Bush and his cronies decided that the ultra-wealthy deserved even bigger tax breaks than they already had. So yes, one of the steps to reducing our budget deficit will have to be letting the Bush tax cuts expire. Another step will be to end the occupation of Iraq, end the war in Afghanistan and bring all our troops home.

Most importantly because it is both a major cause of our deficit and the damage it is doing to families all over this nation we must focus on creating jobs. Now I’m not talking about more tax cuts to “stimulate” big companies because there’s plenty of evidence that doesn’t work, just look at the Bush years where we had big tax cuts and no change in unemployment. No, I’m talking about investing in the infrastructure that we’ve allowed to crumble all over this nation like the interstate highway bridge in Minneapolis that collapsed killing 13 people August 1, 2007.

If we put people back to work they’ll spend their paychecks which will increase demand at stores all over the country and they’ll hire more staff and all of them will pay more taxes. Then we’ll also have the benefits of resurfaced highways and replacement bridges to deliver the goods that make the economy run.

Letter to Congressman Cuellar regarding his vote against cutting the bloated Pentagon budget

February 20, 2011

The Honorable Henry Cuellar

336 Cannon H.O.B.
Washington, DC 20515
fax: 202-225-1641

Dear Congressman Cuellar,

I’m stunned that you voted “no” on the amendment offered by Representatives Barbara Lee and Pete Stark (No. 141) to the continuing resolution that would have insisted that the Pentagon budget be cut back to the level of FY 2008. You’ve previously supported efforts to reduce federal government spending yet when you had an opportunity to really accomplish it you back off.

If you are looking for ways to reduce the deficit, military spending should be the first place you look. The U.S. spends more on our military than the next 18 nations combined, are you actually concerned that we couldn’t defend ourselves with a lot less. Let’s be clear, we have over 700 acknowledged military bases on foreign soil and hundreds of thousands of troops manning them. We also continue to build Cold War era weapons systems while also fighting an illegal war in Iraq and an unnecessary one in Afghanistan. If you really want to be a deficit hawk it’s past time we brought home all our troops from Iraq and that includes the mercenaries we euphemistically call “security contractors”. We need to rapidly phase out our military presence in Afghanistan and cut the number of overseas bases in half.

Many members of Congress from both major political parties have insisted that the Pentagon should not be exempted from spending cuts as Congress works to reduce the federal budget deficit. Remember President Eisenhower’s warning of April 16, 1953, before the American Society of Newspaper Editors:
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children . . . This is not a way of life at all in any sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.”

I hope that you will look for future opportunities to reduce the out-of-control Pentagon budget. I would like to learn why you voted against this amendment.

Sincerely,

Remembering the real Ronald Reagan

In all the hoopla over the centennial of Ronald Reagan’s birth published in this newspaper and others during the past week I’ve seen nothing about his stated dream of a nuclear free world which both our Texas senators recently made every effort to derail by voting against the New Start Treaty.

There was also no word on Reagan’s support for the murderous right-wing Contra’s in Nicaragua whom he financed by selling arms to Iran in violation of U.S. law. Nor was there mention of his funding and training of the right-wing Guatemalan military, which a United Nations commission found to be a "key factor" in that military committing "acts of genocide" causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of indigenous Mayans and many other nonviolent left-wing activists.

No one wrote that it was under Reagan that the United States armed and supported Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in his aggressive war against Iran, which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. Those actions, it should be noted, embittered citizens of both countries against the United States. And let us not forget that it was his administration which helped lay the groundwork for Al Qaeda by financing and training an Islamist militant movement in Afghanistan and Pakistan aimed at fighting the Soviet Union.

So yes let’s all remember Ronald Reagan just so long as we remember who he really was.

Using Mercenaries is Un-American

The United States now employs over 22,000 mercenaries through corporations like Xe, formerly known as Blackwater. The atrocities committed against civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan in our name by these uncontrollable and unaccountable mercenaries have made the task of getting the cooperation of locals more difficult.

Our nation is paying billions of dollars to corporations for the services of these mercenaries enriching stockholders at the expense of our own service members. We should stop using mercenaries immediately and spend the savings on improving the pay and conditions of our troops who sacrifice so much for us. Those savings could be used to improve and expand the VA hospitals that so many of our brave service members must come home to and will continue to use for the rest of their lives.

Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky and Senator Bernie Sanders have introduced bills in their respective houses of Congress named the “Stop Outsourcing Our Security Act” and our legislators should sign on as co-sponsors of this non-partisan legislation. If we really need an extra 22,000 troops to fight these wars we should recruit within the U.S. or if necessary implement a draft. Using mercenaries will take us down the same path as Rome which was finally overrun by their own German mercenaries.

Letter to Congressman Cuellar in light of the Massachusetts special election

Dear Congressman Cuellar,

Immediately after the Massachusetts Senate special election a Research 2000 poll of Brown voters in shows 82% of Obama voters who went for Brown support the public option and by a 3:2 margin think that the current bill doesn't go far enough. The Obama voters who stayed home think the bill doesn't go far enough by a 6:1 margin.

The Democratic Party has less than 10 months to start governing as a people-powered party, or we will lose both the House and the Senate. With the election of Scott Brown to fill Sen. Kennedy’s unexpired term the damage is done. Unless the Democrats move aggressively to correct the perception that we are the party of backroom deals and massive corporate bailouts, 2010 will be more of the same. Given that the Cook Political Report rates TX 28 as even between the Democrats and Republican you’re on the bubble and are likely to be one of the losers if the party fails to pass populist legislation.

So if you want to activate base voters you need to get behind a big jobs bill to put the nearly 10% of Texans who are unemployed back to work. You need to pass a strong health care reform bill with the Public Option. Surveys show that likely 2010 voters "oppose a mandate to purchase private insurance by 64% to 34% but support a mandate with a choice of private or public insurance by 60% to 37%."

You and the party need to pass green energy legislation and come to grips with the fact that global climate change will happen within the lifetime of many of today’s voters if you don’t do something now. Finally it’s time to stop pouring blood and treasure into Iraq and Afghanistan and bring our troops home so we can spend the money here on infrastructure, health care and education. Those are winning issues in the upcoming election.

I like a quote I read recently, "… a Democratic Party that would abandon their central initiative this quickly isn't a Democratic Party that deserves to hold power." I would add that if the party doesn't stick to the principles it professes to hold and stand up to the lobbyists you’ve kowtowed to from the start, "holding power" won't be anything you have to worry about because the Tea Party is gunning for you. In order to be re-elected you’re going to need the party base proud of what you’ve done and actively campaigning for you and not sitting on their hands at home like the folks in Massachusetts.

Sincerely,

Republican hypocrisy knows no limits

Republican hypocrisy knows no limits, Nevada Senator John Ensign who called for President Bill Clinton to resign over the Monica Lewinsky affair has now admitted to an affair with a campaign staffer but he hasn’t offered to resign. Has he had a change of heart about appropriate post scandal behavior for elected officials or does he believe he’s above such considerations?

Republicans in Congress claim they won’t vote for the Iraq War supplemental bill because they don’t trust President Obama to make good on his promise not to release torture photos. When Democrats had enough spine to vote against Iraq War supplemental bills during the Bush administration they met a storm of claims that they were against the troops. So doesn’t that make the Republicans against the troops?

When Democrats in the Senate threatened to filibuster Supreme Court nominees Republicans claimed that they should show deference to the president now that Republicans are in the minority they threaten to filibuster Supreme Court nominee Judge Sotomayor. How is a democratic president’s nominee any different from a republican president’s nominee?