Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

A Little Less Doubtful About Biden

I admit to being among those who doubted Barack Obama's decision to pick Joe Biden as his running mate. It may still be only a matter of time before the Delaware senator's notorious motormouth emits a gaffe that hurts the ticket. Last night, however, he got off to a pretty good start. Indeed, he gave the most effective speech of the convention so far.

Before Biden, we'd been treated to a steady stream of prime-time speakers -- Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton -- who were in some way or another trying to reposition or recast themselves. As a result, I had sincerity issues with all of them. Not so with Biden. His enthusiasm for Obama (and, to be sure, for himself) was completely unforced and unfeigned and -- more important -- supported by detailed argument.

Agree with it or not, but Biden actually laid out a case that a) defined the country's predicament and b) explained why Obama's the guy to get us out of it. Best of all, Biden was aggressive toward John McCain, who actually is Biden's friend, without being uncivil.
In a year when too many people are demonizing their opponents, that was refreshing indeed.

By Charles Lane  | August 28, 2008; 10:23 AM ET
Categories:  Lane  | Tags:  Charles Lane  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Biden's Window Onto America, Our Window Into Biden
Next: Divided in Denver?

Comments

If you want to see someone demonized, just wait a few days until the ReThuglicans open their convention in the Twin Cities.

With no message they can publicly express, all they can do is fall back on their old habits of destroy, defame and demagogue.

Posted by: No Way No How No McCain | August 28, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

I agree.....the swiftboating Republicans are just warming up.

Posted by: BushMustGo | August 28, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

Folks, Take a break. Have a home remodeling project to do? Post it online at: http://contractorjoint.com/


And Freelancing Programming Web Design projects? Post it at
http://FreelancerNetwork.Org/

That simple.
Good Luck to McCain, The Clintons and Barak.

Posted by: CJ | August 28, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

And after you're done with your remodeling project, why not cool down with a refreshing Coca-Cola?

Posted by: Shill | August 28, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

I am still doubtful because Joe's son Beau Biden, attny general for Deleware, arrested Larry (obama's alleged gay ex-lover) Sinclair at his press conference in May. He threw him in jail for 4 days without medicine or a phonecall. Even if Larry is lying, It is terrifying. Beau Biden is threatening to go after a life sentence over a $1000 hotel bill. Two months later Obama picks Joe as his running mate. I never believed the Larry Sinclair story, NOW I do.

Posted by: Misstickly | August 28, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Joe Biden's "leadership" of the Judiciary Committee was neglected... he was particularly nasty and wanted to cutoff any testimony from (then treated her shamefully as a liar) one African-American woman who indeed did have a very valid opinion that needed to be aired (then ignored) before Joe's committee voted with him to give a non-distinguished A-A "gentleman" a seat on the Supreme Court. Sideshow Joe.

Posted by: ppoads | August 28, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Why is it that Democrats are constantly having to apologize for not being one-dimensional, invective-spewing, lying cowards like ReThuglicans? Wow, Michelle Obama can't be dismayed by the constant ignorance and racism in this country, Hillary can't be upset over not winning the democratic candidacy in a historic run, Bill Clinton can't be upset about his wife losing a close, bitterly-fought contest OR having to constantly remind the ignorant public that we didn't have these issues when HE was president, courtesy of a ReThug smear job?

The one good thing I can say about the wrong-wing is that sociopathy means never having to say you are sorry. The ReThugs are always "on message" and never apologize for not giving a crap about anyone or anything. They spread lies as if they own stock in Hell, without any accountability. I read George Will's article and he was outstanding at painting Obama as a pie-in-the-sky dreamer, never mind that "free market" and "trickle-down" (read:"tinkle-down" because it pisses on 99% of the public) economics has created a massive economic rift between 99% of Americans and the top-earning 1%. EVERY ReThuglican presidency has ended this way... higher inflation, rising prices, higher unemployment, and fewer people enjoying the benefits of their life's work. But, by appealing to the uneducated, superstitous, and ignorant, they keep putting people in the White House. They come with jury-rigged unemployment and GDP numbers and manage to get people to not see what's in front of their own faces, proving that, if you lie to someone enough, you can even dismiss reality.

I don't mind scepticism in healthy doses but second-guessing is an entirely different matter. I don't take expressing feelings that may be contrary at times to be "inconsistent" or "insincere." I think it's possible to respect our country and question its direction. I think it's possible to respect our troops and want them brought home to secure THIS nation. This black and white absolutism and notion that everyone's feelings are valid REGARDLESS of whether they are supported by fact or not are some of the most profound "gifts" given to us by the wrong-wing.

The "conservatives" have effectively killed reason. And they didn't have to apologize for it.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse


The press should be looking carefully at what's going on in Saint Paul as they prepare for the GOP. Ordinary citizens are being stopped, their phones and cameras being confiscated, they are being questioned in this most Democratic city about what they are doing walking the public streets.

This while the governor who is short-listed for the McCain ticket (a governor who never won with a majority of the vote) is ignoring the state's business: a major highway bridge fell down a year ago, and no one in the press seems to remember that it was this governor's legislative priority to cull spending on all public infrastructure so his right winger venture capitalist cronies could build a private system of toll roads!

This governor appointed a retrograde commissioner of education, and then left her hanging out to dry when her second confirmation went south; one of his hireling who failed to go back to work when the bridge fell down - her job to deal with emergencies - was then eased into a job with FEMA; and his posturing on energy and the environment is a hoax.

The number two guys the Reublicans are fielding are worse than more of the same: the are clones of Bush and his faith-based draining of America's surplus and common wealth.

Enough with the Biden and Obama family romance: the Dems have to expose the platform the GOP is promoting: warm the globe, drill and mine like there is no tomorrow; trust that the Almighty will give all the good stuff to our rich pals once we ruin the earth so it can be re-created.

Congress and the Press need to wake up and protect the public interest.

Posted by: Mom | August 28, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

To Misstickly and ppoads - Hmmm, conjecture that introduces FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt)? Must be McCain shills.

Gotta hand it to you guys. You never give up.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

James King: Do you hear me? Biden had Obams's gay ex-lover jailed at a press conference to out the affair. It's the worst and most blatant story of misuse of power against a political enemy EVER. The media outlet that covers this will win a Pulitzer. The democrats have fallen hard and the public is thirsty for real reporting.

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

misstickly - THAT'S real reporting? The MSM would have been all over this story if it were true. But let's take YOUR word for it.

You gotto do better than that.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

James King: I wish it were conjecture, but it is fact. Many people witnesseed this all unfold. A simple google will provide you plenty of proof as it was all documented in the blogosphere as the events took place. And I am glad it strikes fear in you, it should.

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Excellent post, James King! Dead on!!

Posted by: cms1 | August 28, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

James king, Don't be so lazy, dude, look it up.You don't need the MSM to do this for you. If you do, you are a fool. The case goes to trial Sept 11. Can't fudge facts like that unless I was a Biden.

Posted by: Misstickly | August 28, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

misstickly:

sure, we believe you because if it's on the internets it must be true!

get a life

Posted by: huh? | August 28, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

To misstickly - Here you go...

http://www.bloggernews.net/114055

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

C'mon Stickly -

Larry Sinclair as a gay lover isn't even interesting. But his history of crimes involving deceit is.

Take a look here for the debunking:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/18/obama-accuser-larry-sincl_n_107900.html

And give it up: Republicans don't care about anyone's civil liberties, all you care about is other people's sexual adventures. And you never miss an opportunity to appeal to the ick quotient with your co-partisans.

Nice try: Obama's not a Muslim, let's see if we can't call him Gay. And if that doesn't work, we can accuse him of being a Vegetarian....

This is the depth to which conservative discourse has fallen.

Posted by: Mom | August 28, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

"The best speech of the convention so far."?? Get real! Did you actually listen to the speech before his where the former President spoke. He blew Biden's away. Geez, try and engage your brain before writing this drivel.

Posted by: Mookiebear | August 28, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

huh? I am so happy you all are in disbelief--because it's shocking, and your precious MSM was there to witness the arrest at the press conference. Just because you are shocked doesn't make it false. I know the facts speak for themselves. Show me ANY evidence, ANYTHING, that docments otherwise. Come on now, go lookie:) Happy hunting!

Posted by: Misstickly | August 28, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

To misstickly - I just did.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

mom: even if Larry is lying, beau biden SRILL arrested him at a press conference and denied him medicine. See it doesn't matter nether larry is lying, what's important is the abuse of power to shut him up.

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Geez your standards for leaders is pathetic. Obama's has never denied Larry's charges, he just arrested him instead.

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

To misstickly - Thanks for proving my point. When you have no facts, just conjecture, just throw it out there enough and maybe it will stick in the minds of people too ignorant to do any research.

Considering the MSM is in the pocket of the ReThugs, the fact that they haven't taken this story and run with it is proof enough that it has no legs.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Misstickly, I'm only shocked at how utterly stupid you are and how poor your reasoning is. People like you never let simple little things like facts get in the way of their racist and false claims. Your dubious claims are made even less believable by your asinine responses.

Posted by: huh? | August 28, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

huh? is exactly right. It's because of people like you Misstickly that shows like The Colbert Report exist. It's almost difficult to believe that you simply aren't putting on an act like Mr. Colbert but unfortunately you probably aren't.

As a kid when Rush started a TV show for a while on Fox I thought it was a parody show similar to the eventual Colbert Report and it took a couple of weeks before I realized that he was supposed to be taken seriously (at which point I stopped watching because it was rather sad when looked at from that point of view). Years later I found out he really was just putting on an act (paraphrasing his own words) but still was supposed to be an act taken seriously by his audience.

Posted by: Shaun | August 28, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

@misstickly: before even seeing your back-and-forth, I googled 'biden larry sinclair.' The first five hits all took me to conspiracy-minded blogs, none of which could produce a scanned copy of any legal or court documents; they all relied on re-keyed information from alleged court documents. I went a few links deeper, and found a Slate article that linked to this:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11164.html

The traction this story has gotten among elements of the blogosphere is proof to me that the uninformed aren't necessarily the most dangerous...

Posted by: Micah | August 28, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

correction: those who lack the initiative and desire to be informed aren't necessarily the most dangerous...

sorry.

Posted by: micah | August 28, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse


Ah, Stickly, you object to the abuse of power. I can see then that you are not a partisan Republican. Though there appears to be no evidence that the Delaware AG did what you claim, you may not be aware that the sort of behavior you describe is routinely available under the Patriot Act - keeping the homeland secure for the Ubermenschen.

What would Jesus say about all this fibbing and conniving? Probably he'd be very upset about the behavior of the President's men, denying the vulnerable medicine, swiping everything the can get their hands on (as though they were little Caesars) and pissing all over Creation.

Obama and Biden need to keep their eyes on the big problem of twenty-five years of conservative filching - sometimes facilitated by liberal wimpiness - and get us past this politics of identity and what could still be a fascist future.

Anyone read 1984 recently? Probably not - it's been banned in too many high schools.

Posted by: Mom | August 28, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Joe Biden is great. The problem is he has a loser for a running mate.

Posted by: Hillary2012 | August 28, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Ironic, isn't it, that John Edwards has been banned from making a speech at the Democratic Convention for having an affair and lying about it.

In his place, Bill Clinton was selected.

Posted by: FEB | August 28, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Here's the game: see how many people you can identify whose words are stolen by Plagiarist-Joe and used in his speech - without attribution. If you get:

0-10 right = BAD-you are an ignoramus who would vote for anybody, including a liar and plagiarist
11-100 right = GOOD-you are not a totally brain-dead democrat, and there might be hope for you
101-1000 right = BETTER-you actually seem to have some discernment and ethics and probably did not cheat on your law school exam
1001+ = BEST-you are a winner! you are clearly too smart for the hope-change, change-hope, hopeable-change, changeable-hope BS and will vote for somebody other than sweetie hussein.

BONUS QUESTION: How many pieces of legislation did biden kill in the Senate simply because they would have adversely affected the enormous income of his lobbyist son?

Good luck!

Posted by: ALEX H. | August 28, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Stickly, perhaps your smears wouldn't be so pathetic (and obvious) if they aligned with the facts. Larry Sinclair was, indeed, recently arrested. However, he was arrested in Washington, DC, on June 18, 2008, by the Metropolitan Police Department for an oustanding warrant in Colorado for theft and forgery charges.

Are you chumps really that desperate?

Posted by: Everett | August 28, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Ms Sticky
Please tell us you do not have children

Posted by: webee | August 28, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Yeah Bill and Ed stuck their weenies in the wrong places and that makes them evil... The high minded morality of the current admin has killed 4k for what again? Oh right those scary weapons pointing at our homes in Iraq.

Posted by: lies are deadly for repubs | August 28, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Misstickly you're a sick puppy but unfortunately you're just another member of the Swiftboat wing of the corrupt Republican party. Republicans run successful negative campaigns to win elections but disdain the nuts and bolts "roll up your shirt sleeves" work to do good things for average citizens.

Posted by: Tom in Alabama | August 28, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Missstickly is a perfect example of the failure of this country: Failure to properly educate our citizens. Failure to instill intelligence and values into our citizens. Failure to wrangle-in the misrepresentations in the media and "blogosphere" that coerce uneducated people such as Missstickly to believe such tripe. I'm astonished that people like her are serious in their misaccusations, but I am THRILLED to see that there is an overwhelming majority of folks here who have their heads on straight! Thank goodness there are a few of us out there.

Posted by: Wow | August 28, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

It will be difficult for the GOP to paint a picture of a better america today because of republican rule and policy. It is bound to turn into a Obama bash-fest.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Ig Gustav slams into the Gulf Coast with any intensity, it's all over for the GOP -as the gross and sheer incompetence of the Bush administration - and republicans - will be in full, pathetic, display again, this time on a split screen, as republicans pat themselves on the back for doing a heck-of-a-job.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

I hope that Hispanic voters realize that if Baracky Hussein Obama becomes President, they will be at the bottom of the barrel - Baracky Hussein Obama will have to pacify the Black voters after gaining 99 % of their vote.

Democrats for John McCain in 2008

Posted by: gary | August 28, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

I am currently a Republican, but will not be voting for my party, and the reasons above are perfect examples as to why. The right wing has invaded politics in this country and the average republican seems more and more disconnected with reality.

Posted by: Denver | August 28, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Everett: you surround yourself with lies to comfort you. The warrant is from Deleware. D'oh. Obama got a bj and smoked crack with larry then Obama had him jailed. So funny-no wonder you 'guys' love him so much. You want to taste larry on him. LOL, the truth is known by too many for you to obscure it. So funny how gullible you obamaniacs are.

Posted by: MissTickly | August 28, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Rove will explode if Lieberman is named as VP pick.

Go Joe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

What a charade this whole convention cycle is turning out to be. On one side we have an individual that has no political experience, Osama, the on the other one who has lost his base and is now considered a maverick (McCain); completely insane to say the least.

We’ve heard from a woman (Michelle Osama) who has a deep hatred for the country she’s benefited greatly from, another who is a narcissists (Hillary) and a guy who, during his Presidency (Bill) we’ve seen the following:

(1) The first World Trade Center Bombings
(2) The bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Tanzania
(3) The bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kenya
(4) The bombing of the U.S. Cole
(5) The Kohbar tower bombing in Saudi Arabia
(6) The genocide in Rwanda
(7) The “don’t as don’t tell” policy
(8) The major axing of the U.S. military
(9) The handcuffing of our counterintelligence agencies
(10) The selling of military secrets to the Chinese for campaign cash
(11) NAFTA
(12) The unemployment rate
(13) The collapse of the stock market
(14) The Bosnian/Kosovo war
(15) Travelgate
(16) Monica Lewinsky
(17) Paula Jones
(18) Kathleen Willey
(19) Juanita Broaddrick
(20) Jennifer Flowers
(21) Sally Perdue
(22) Elizabeth Gracen
(23) Only the second president to be impeached
(24) Allowing al Qaeda to grow without response
(25) Allowing Osama bin Laden thumb his nose at the U.S. without retaliation
(26) Whitewater
(27) Somalia-Black Hawk Down
(28) Pardoning child rapists, murders,
(29) The Brady Bill
(30) Taking bribes from communists for political gain

Then we heard from an individual (Bin Biden) who, has stated this candidate is not ready to be president and now less then a month after making those statements, say this candidate is beyond ready to become the next U.S. President. Are we to believe this? What a hoax. And tonight the Greatest show on Earth is resurrected in Denver to show off the Newest American Celebrity Osama.

Are you Freak’in kidding me?

Posted by: Travis Chapman | August 28, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Rather than using blogs or Google searches, why not just call the Delaware Court of Common Pleas (according to their web site they have jurisdiction over most criminal cases) to find out if there is a case against this Sinclair guy? Delaware does not post case information online, but maybe someone can find out more info. Gotta go, actually have a job.

Posted by: Reseacher | August 28, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

I am a registered republican who is disgusted with the neocon ideology that hijacked not only my party, but the nation.
I have no choice but to vote to send a message to the criminal mob in charge: it's over.

Posted by: Alex R. | August 28, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

BTW I am not trying to convince the obama sheeple.. You guys are in the tank. It's those pesky, smart Hillary supporters that aren't too lazy to do the research that will be convinced. Why? Because they aren't delusional obamaniacs and can 'accept' the truth. PS Where's Obama's bounce?

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

So now the Repubs will spread rumors about "alleged" gay ex-lovers of Obama??? I guess Dems can now start going after McCain for dumping his wife after she had an accident in ordr to marry a younger heiress.

Posted by: Bob | August 28, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

I must say it is nice to see people like James King and Mom provide well articulated positions. Now if we could get some from both sides maybe this country could move forward.

Also - May I suggest that we simply ignore "MissTickly" from now on. She made an argument (sort of) and offered no evidence. Evidence contrary to her argument was introduced and she has been unable to counter. This "story" is done.

Posted by: ditthi | August 28, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

researcher: thanks. I doubt the obamabot have the guts to do that, but that sure would clear it up.:)

Posted by: Misstickly | August 28, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Hey travis: shut up, fool:

When Republicans in majority couldn't prevent executive action, President Clinton:

-- Developed the nation's first anti-terrorism policy, and appointed first national coordinator.
-- Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up 12 U.S. jetliners simultaneously.
-- Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up UN Headquarters.
-- Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up FBI Headquarters.
-- Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the Israeli Embassy in Washington.
--Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up Boston airport.
-- Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up Lincoln and Holland Tunnels in NY.
-- Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the George Washington Bridge.
-- Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the US Embassy in Albania.
-- Tried to kill Osama bin Laden and disrupt Al Qaeda through preemptive strikes (efforts denounced by the G.O.P.).
-- Brought perpetrators of first World Trade Center bombing and CIA killings to justice.
-- Did not blame Bush I administration for first World Trade Center bombing even though it occurred 38 days after they had left office. Instead, worked hard, even obsessively -- and successfully -- to stop future terrorist attacks.
-- Named the Hart-Rudman commission to report on nature of terrorist threats and major steps to be taken to combat terrorism.
-- Tripled the budget of the FBI for counterterrorism and doubled overall funding for counterterrorism.
-- Detected and destroyed cells of Al Qaeda in over 20 countries
-- Created a national stockpile of drugs and vaccines including 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine.
-- Robert Oakley, Reagan Counterterrorism Czar says of Clinton's efforts "Overall, I give them very high marks" and "The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama"
-- Paul Bremer, Bush's Administrator of Iraq disagrees slightly with Robert Oakley saying he believed the Clinton Administration had "correctly focused on bin Laden. "
-- Barton Gellman of the Washington Post put it best, "By any measure available, Clinton left office having given greater priority to terrorism than any president before him" and was the "first administration to undertake a systematic anti-terrorist effort."

Here, in stark contrast, is the Bush-Cheney anti-terrorism record before September 11, 2001:
-- Shelved the Hart-Rudman report.
-- Appointed new anti-terrorism task force under Dick Cheney. Group DID NOT even meet before 9/11.
-- Called for cuts in anti-terrorism efforts by the Department of Defense.
-- Gave no priority to anti-terrorism efforts by Justice Department.
-- Ignored warnings from Sandy Berger, Louis Freeh, George Tennant, Paul Bremer, and Richard Clarke about the urgency of terrorist threats.
-- Halted Predator drone tracking of Osama bin Laden.
-- Did nothing in wake of August 6 C.I.A. report to president saying Al Qaeda attack by hijack of an airliner almost certain.
-- Bush - knowing about the terrorists' plans to attack in America, warned that terrorists were in flight schools in the US - took a four week vacation.

Get the facts straight .

Clinton took care of business and didn't need to lie and invade a country that had nothing to do with Al qeada and didn't run the country financially into the ground like Bush has.

Posted by: Gary P. | August 28, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Well, this has gotten lively, hasn't it?

"Miss Sickly" sounds an awful like Ann Coulter or one of those other GOP or right wing (is there a difference?) harpies.

Miss Sickly-Coulter or another one of her clones also showed up in Denver the other day screaming at Chris Matthews on MSNBC spewing some of that PUMA nonsense (PUMAs being another ratings-manufactured GOP dirty trick scheme).

That goes right along with that completely bogus execrable screed "Obamanation" to round out the whole sliming package.

Well, guess what folks. It is not going to work this year. Yes, you nearly nailed Clinton, you stole the 2000 election from Al Gore thanks to your Supreme Court pals, and denied John Kerry the 2004 election thanks to your Ohio hanky-panky, and look what sorry shape in which you've left teh country.

I hope you're happy, because you are out of business. "FOUR MORE MONTHS" (repeat the countdown as often as possible right up until noon on 1-20-09!)

Posted by: Decipherer | August 28, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

More for nitwit Travis:

The rand Corp. A FAVORITE Pentagon think tank, has the following to say about "terrorism" in a recently released report.

It may be too many words for you, so let me condense it just in case: Clinton was right, Bush was not!

The United States cannot conduct an effective counterterrorism campaign against al Qa'ida or other terrorist groups without understanding how such groups end. While it is clear that U.S. policymakers will need to turn to a range of policy instruments to conduct such campaigns — including careful police and intelligence work, military force, political negotiations, and economic sanctions — what is less clear is how they should prioritize U.S. efforts.
A recent RAND research effort sheds light on this issue by investigating how terrorist groups have ended in the past. By analyzing a comprehensive roster of terrorist groups that existed worldwide between 1968 and 2006, the authors found that most groups ended because of operations carried out by local police or intelligence agencies or because they negotiated a settlement with their governments. Military force was rarely the primary reason a terrorist group ended, and few groups within this time frame achieved victory.
These findings suggest that the U.S. approach to countering al Qa'ida has focused far too much on the use of military force. Instead, policing and intelligence should be the backbone of U.S. efforts.
First Systematic Examination of the End of Terrorist Groups
This was the first systematic look at how terrorist groups end. The authors compiled and analyzed a data set of all terrorist groups between 1968 and 2006, drawn from a terrorism-incident database that RAND and the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism jointly oversee. The authors used that data to identify the primary reason for the end of groups and to statistically analyze how economic conditions, regime type, size, ideology, and group goals affected their survival. They then conducted comparative case studies of specific terrorist groups to understand how they ended.
Of the 648 groups that were active at some point between 1968 and 2006, a total of 268 ended during that period. Another 136 groups splintered, and 244 remained active. As depicted in the figure, the authors found that most ended for one of two reasons: They were penetrated and eliminated by local police and intelligence agencies (40 percent), or they reached a peaceful political accommodation with their government (43 percent). Most terrorist groups that ended because of politics sought narrow policy goals. The narrower the goals, the more likely the group was to achieve them through political accommodation — and thus the more likely the government and terrorists were to reach a negotiated settlement.
How 268 Terrorist Groups Worldwide Ended, 1968–2006


In 10 percent of cases, terrorist groups ended because they achieved victory. Military force led to the end of terrorist groups in 7 percent of cases. The authors found that militaries tended to be most effective when used against terrorist groups engaged in insurgencies in which the groups were large, well armed, and well organized. But against most terrorist groups, military force was usually too blunt an instrument.
The analysis also found that
religiously motivated terrorist groups took longer to eliminate than other groups but rarely achieved their objectives; no religiously motivated group achieved victory during the period studied.
size significantly determined a group's fate. Groups exceeding 10,000 members were victorious more than 25 percent of the time, while victory was rare for groups below 1,000 members.
terrorist groups from upper-income countries are much more likely to be left-wing or nationalist and much less likely to be motivated by religion.
Police-Oriented Counterterrorism Rather Than a “War on Terrorism”
What does this mean for counterterrorism efforts against al Qa'ida? After September 11, 2001, U.S. strategy against al Qa'ida concentrated on the use of military force. Although the United States has employed nonmilitary instruments — cutting off terrorist financing or providing foreign assistance, for example — U.S. policymakers continue to refer to the strategy as a “war on terrorism.”
But military force has not undermined al Qa'ida. As of 2008, al Qa'ida has remained a strong and competent organization. Its goal is intact: to establish a pan-Islamic caliphate in the Middle East by uniting Muslims to fight infidels and overthrow West-friendly regimes. It continues to employ terrorism and has been involved in more terrorist attacks around the world in the years since September 11, 2001, than in prior years, though engaging in no successful attacks of a comparable magnitude to the attacks on New York and Washington.
Al Qa'ida's resilience should trigger a fundamental rethinking of U.S. strategy. Its goal of a pan-Islamic caliphate leaves little room for a negotiated political settlement with governments in the Middle East. A more effective U.S. approach would involve a two-front strategy:
Make policing and intelligence the backbone of U.S. efforts. Al Qa'ida consists of a network of individuals who need to be tracked and arrested. This requires careful involvement of the Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation, as well as their cooperation with foreign police and intelligence agencies.
Minimize the use of U.S. military force. In most operations against al Qa'ida, local military forces frequently have more legitimacy to operate and a better understanding of the operating environment than U.S. forces have. This means a light U.S. military footprint or none at all.
Key to this strategy is replacing the war-on-terrorism orientation with the kind of counterterrorism approach that is employed by most governments facing significant terrorist threats today. Calling the efforts a war on terrorism raises public expectations — both in the United States and elsewhere — that there is a battlefield solution. It also tends to legitimize the terrorists' view that they are conducting a jihad (holy war) against the United States and elevates them to the status of holy warriors. Terrorists should be perceived as criminals, not holy warriors.

Posted by: Gary P. | August 28, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

ReThuglicans open their convention in the Twin Cities.\\

Maybe they'll do their Stepford Wives imitation like their last convention . . . all wearing red, all doing the hands in the air saying flip flop . . .

The Republican internet trolls are the worst. They have no interest at all in helping solve problems . . .just keep flinging mud . .. it's so 2004.

Posted by: delantero | August 28, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

ditthi: were I not on my iPod touch I would be happy to copy a paste all day. It's not like it's hard to find the info. ProObama bloggers can provide you plenty as well because at the time, the mitchandnan people were taking credit for the arrest. Seriously, it's well documented on both sides. Believe what you want. I am just saying everything I have read since May on both sides, sadly indicates it's true. Horrific I know (that's why you all are in such denial), but it's 100% true.

Posted by: Misstickly | August 28, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

To Gary P. - Man, I LOVE YOU (but just as a friend, haha).

I was gonna rip Travis but you thoroughly did it. The ReThugs have done a hatchet job on B. Clinton but he was the greatest president of our generation and the facts prove it. Thanks man.

BTW, they said Bill didn't have the "experience" to be Prez too.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

and let me clarify, the obama/larry gay tryst i give only a 50% chance of being true. The beau biden arrest is 100% true. And believe me-I don't care if obama likes boys-I only care if he's a criminal.

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

A new U.N. report has concluded that there is "convincing evidence" that a U.S. air strike in Afghanistan killed more than 90 civilians, 60 or more of them children. If the report is accurate, the air strike was among the most deadly of the Afghan war thus far in terms of civilian casualties. Also if accurate, the report would represent a validation of Afghan complaints and a serious rebuke to the U.S. leaders who have sought to challenge those complaints.

Posted by: GO USA! | August 28, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

To misstickly - Yes, we are all in denial because your claim is so plausible. After all, it's supported by such credible sources of proof and all...

Wait, it isn't. Oh well.

Let's move on people.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

I am a republican evangelical, or FUNDIE, as they call us.

But I will not vote for Magoo because he is an adulteror and stands in abomination before the lord.

Posted by: Vote Magoo he's an adulteror too! | August 28, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

The only thing I can attest to being an absolute truth here is that the Obama ticket has two more votes from this household because he had good enough judgment to pick Joe Biden for VP! Now Hope and History will rhyme. Go get 'em Joe!

Posted by: Donna Hughes | August 28, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

On the day after the election, there will be the wail of neocons crying;

(Musical interlude)
But then an amazing thing will happen;

All the neocons at the AEI and at AIPAC and Heritage to boot -
Will all come out running - or they’ll slide down someone’s poop ‘chute’

They will join hands together and together they’ll sing
About how they lost - and the mud that they’ll sling

They’ll dole out the blame - to Davis and Magoo
They’ll hurl their hatred at the electorate too -

Elections aren’t about democracy they will say -
Elections are about neocons - getting their way!

Posted by: Nov. 5th 2008 the day after the election | August 28, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

I am not a rethig I am an independent. You all really should try it. Stop sucking on the test and letting party-sponsored buffons prey on your hopes and desire for change. You should be pissed that you have to defend him after the right turn he took after the primaries. He's an egomaniacal, Greek-god wannabe that stole your hope. It's embarassing and his glorified speech concert tonight makes him a laughingstock.

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Wow Gary P., you have a lot more energy than I do -- good for you! I'll try to keep that post of yours handy since many Republicans still shamelessly make posts similar to travis.

By the way, am I the only one to notice that there are virtually zero pro-McCain posts on any newspaper websites? It's either pro-Obama, Obama smearing or defending against the Obama attacks. Do any Republicans actually like their own candidate enough to try to defend him or even praise him??

Posted by: Shaun | August 28, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Mr. King. These amoeba brained uneducated and ill informed punks like Travis and Sticky... they are what's wrong with america. They need to be put in place every chance.

Clinton was one of the greatest presidents this country has ever had, period.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

hope. change. Are you all in love with me yet?

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

The story about Larry Sinclair has been out a long time. The Republicans had nothing to do with it. Whether or not the story about Larry Sinclair is true, the Republicans could however be waiting for October to give Larry Sinclair a big stage and a microphone (recall Rev. Wright). And then, true or not, Obama's run for the White House is over.

Posted by: dcp | August 28, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Why is ANYONE wasting time rebutting misstickly? Do you all REALLY want to lower yourselves to the level of this tripe talking trash bag from somewhere in the blighted state of Republicana? You DON'T cast pearls before swine and that's pretty much it. Lets work instead on trashing their scum spewing machine headed by Cheney, McDolt and Rove (Bush is too pathetic to make this Machiavellian list).

Posted by: sanfranmac | August 28, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

lies. fear. racism. hatred. Are all the R's in love with me yet?

Posted by: missickly | August 28, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

To dcp - If it comes to pass that the story is true (which I HIGHLY doubt), then Obama's candidacy deserves to crash and burn. It's a damn shame that the wrong wing will benefit but it would be unavoidable.

I think it's bull!@#t. And the ReThugs better be willing to prove it or we could face Civil War II.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

What a thread of totally boring crap!

Posted by: Common Sense | August 28, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Common Sense? That's an "opposite" nickname, kinda like calling a slow person "Lightning" or a mentally challenged person "Einstein," right?

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Shaun - yes, definately copy those things and throw them back in the face of those that get their political education from Limbaugh or Hannity.

I saw that report about the blast in Afghanistan, Perhaps Cindy McCain, returning from "assesing civilian casualties" in Georgia, should stop off in Afghanistan as well as Iraq, then inform us all about her findings. Maybe she should even squeeze in wherever Hurricane Gustav will land... and not forget to tell us how many civilians died in New Orleans.

What transparent theatre from the brain-trust at the McCain camp. Cookie recipe plagiarizing Cindy is now an expert on "assesing civilian casualties"? No doubt she will - plagiarize - her "findings" as well.

Warning: this is Saturday Night Live skit material.

Posted by: Gary P. | August 28, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Missticky....

I read the back and forth between you and others.

Not only did you lose the argument but you sound like a complete crackpot in the process.

Par for the course with your team ay?

Posted by: I smell a loser.... | August 28, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

"... It's those pesky, smart Hillary supporters that aren't too lazy to do the research that will be convinced. ..."

misstickly,

The only thing you are convincing anyone of, is your extreme stupidity.

Posted by: synykyl | August 28, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

misstickly--were you aware that John McCain gave intelligence information as well as sexual favors to his Vietnamese captors for preferential treatment (and lied about being given the opportunity to be let out early)? I posted it here on the internet so obviously it's true.

I'd say I hate the internet (well..random anonymous posting on the internet) but it's just a vehicle for showing the true nature of people--why am I not encouraged by that...

Posted by: the internets | August 28, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

>>I am still doubtful because Joe's son Beau Biden, attny general for Deleware, arrested Larry (obama's alleged gay ex-lover) Sinclair at his press conference in May. He threw him in jail for 4 days without medicine or a phonecall.>Reason's David Weigel reports, and Politico's Ben Smith confirms, that Sinclair was arrested by Washington, D.C. police after the press conference.<<
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/18/obama-accuser-larry-sincl_n_107900.html<<

He was arrested by the DC police for a warrant that was outstanding on him in Colorado.
So, how did you get Bidens name into the middle of that again?

There is a term that describes Republicans perfectly, they are BS artists. A BS artist is not really an out and out liar, what he's saying might be true, he has no idea if it is or isn't.
In this case, it isn't.
Nice try, thanks for playing.....

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

misssickly..

love to buy you lunch with you if your in washington DC..love to hear your logic live

ron

Posted by: ron1242 | August 28, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Gary P.

Should I also mention Public Law 105-338 Oct 31, 1998? Any idea what that is? How could you possibly blame Bush Senior for the first World Trade Center when you can’t accept the same treatment for the 2nd?

- Tricky Dick had 2,855 days in office prior to the 2nd World Trade Center and was present on the 1st. Congratulations for failing!

- Wasn’t it both of the Clinton’s and nearly all the whiney Liberals that back every countries intelligence information on Saddam and Bin Laden, Yep. Now you cowardly and spineless Liberals want out? Blame it on false information etc. Bunch of PuZZies! You guys can never follow through! You see someone with a gun and run and hide and want to talk to them from behind a door. Interesting tactics; well at least spineless.

- Clinton single handedly created bearers between every Government Law Enforcement agency including the CIA, FBI, and NSA. This hindered these agencies sharing any intelligence, which ultimately lead to 9/11. Congratulations for failing again!

- Tried and successfully blew up an Aspirin plant. Congratulations for failing again!

- Successfully reduced the Counter Intelligence Community. Very Bright move!

- Successfully reduced our military to the smallest level in decades. Very Bright move!
On and on and on!!!!

Have you seen this?
Did you read this adage too?
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html

What about the Dec 17, 1998 transcript of Clinton defending the attack on Iraq. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/17/impeachment/transcript.html

Interesting stuff huh?

Posted by: Travis Chapman | August 28, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

I understand that McCain was a prisoner of war. I understand That he was tortured, badly treated and thought he might not survive. Well, I've been a POW of the Bush Administration and it's policies, so I truly understand his pain!

Posted by: MikeJ | August 28, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

After a couple of decades of politicians willing to do anything to win an argument or fill their own pockets, it would be a good thing for the country were we to examine the common good once in a while.

I have been struck by how much the rightwingnuts look alike - the men plastic and often angrily effeminate, the women plastic and exalted - one Minnesota rightwingnut congresswoman described herself a "a smitten kitten for Jesus" - some of the androgynous men - Rove, Cheney, Gonzalez - are right out of a Cohen Bros movie. What they have in common with one another is anger and greed - it's their money, their power, their salvation: so THERE.

The jesuitical leftwingies are also hazardous - I don't care what boys and girls do with their genitalia, but they should have the class not to do it in the oval office or while their articulate beset wife is dying of cancer. They ought to be willing to fess up - as Obama has done - to their adolescent foibles: people do, after all, grow up.

But it all seems to have devolved into winning power rather than winning through for the common good. The result has been a corruption of real values, in the name of mere power.

When pro-family Limbaugh makes a thinly veiled sexual derogation about a woman with terminal cancer, suggesting that her husband's affair was because he wanted "a woman who could do something with her mouth besides talk" and the pro-family lobby gives him a pass! or when a powerful liberal makes sexual use of an aide young enough to be his daughter, and the same liberal feminists who passed laws against this sort of workplace exploitation defend his behavior! we're in doublespeakdom.

Newt boinks a few women-not-his-wife while touting for family values, or ditches a sick wife to find one more suitable for this (androgynous) politico's image? Not a word from the family research lobby. Al Gore uses his own plane to fly around saving the earth from global warming? Well.

Don't know what's wrong with the wingnut Republicans, men and women alike. I think it's the result of bad parental models and lousy public schools. Less marriage and school vouchers are worth trying.

Posted by: Mom | August 28, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Miss Tickly, you need help. You are so obsessed with oral sex and hate speech that I'm beginning to suspect that you're a Republican Senator. Either that or a 15 year old child who writes this stuff at recess. Have you been potty trained?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

The effective anti-McCain speech was given by Bill Clinton, not Joe Biden. This was a weird speech by Biden, the worst speech of all the fantastic major speeches at the convention.

I'm glad that some people liked it though, because I'm for Obama regardless, and I'm sure Biden will be a great VP regardless of this lackluster speech.

Posted by: Gene Venable | August 28, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

To Mom - Nice post.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Great now I'm being censored. The WaPo won't post my response to Travis. Gee I wonder why?

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

To Travis Chapman - Face it, you got owned. You stacked your argument, it got knocked down. That's what happens when all you have are bogus talking points instead of real facts.

It's established fact that, on the way out, the Clinton administration warned the incoming Bush administration that Osama bin Laden posed the most credible threat to national security. The Bush administration COULD NOT BELIEVE that ONE man could be so dangerous. How'd that work out for them?

As for reducing military spending, WHO WERE WE GOING TO ATTACK EN MASSE? The American military was still the most powerful IN HISTORY... that money went to small things like PAYING OUR DEBTS and BALANCING THE BUDGET. Bush had to trump up a war to justify military spending. America already had the assets to wage the type of "war" we are fighting now... small, surgical Special Forces teams with a strong intelligence infrastructure. So your entire argument is flat.

Do you know how difficult it is to stop "cell" based attacks? It takes massive intelligence resources just to track them and, even then, the odds of someone pulling off an attack are extremely high. It's like a dam with 1000 cracks in it. Bush is BANKRUPTING the country with his "War on Terror" strategy of "shock and awe." He could have achieved the same end for a fraction of the price by improving efficiencies in the intelligence community and creating a small, highly mobile counter-terrorism team to systematically hunt down terrorists. The ONLY valid war we've fought recently is in Afghanistan... you know, that tiny place that actually PRODUCES terrorists. But we're too busy killing Iraqi civilians by the assload.

Yeah, liberals are real p___ies. Unlike your chicken hawk ReThug friends who all ran from military service in their youth. McCain is probably the ONLY Republican with any credibility on that front... too bad the rest of his policies are so destructive.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Let's all ignore miss sickly and hope she seeks professional help.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

To Hell Censors - That's OK, I needed a break from abusing the wrong wing.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Facts or fiction,
It's strange that the McCain campaign has not fired back concerning the statements made by Joe Biden. Are these things true? If yes than the polls are totally wrong or fixed. I can not believe that a senator of 26 years will vote 16% to 95% against fundamental proposals. This is a reflection of the forgotten Katrina victims of 2005 tragedy. CNN should ask Patriotic or common people what is going on, the people needs to know before November.

Posted by: glenn | August 28, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

James King,
Knocked down by whom? You? That’s laughable!

An establish fact, again laughable; unless your argument is warning someone seconds before being hit. Look out there’s car coming- boom. Great warning!

Truth is Tricky Dick was more worried how he’s impeachment was going to be handled rather than taking care of national security. Why do you think Sandy Berger stole National Secrets? Because he forgot he put them in his pants? Of course that’s the normal place the Clinton Administration placed their secrets. Right?

Military spending doesn’t necessarily have to do with the size of our force- Jimmy. It also identifies how much technology and advanced equipment they have. Reducing the size of the budget handicapped us. As a result 9/11. But your foolish logic is what again? Attacking En Masse? Great!

I also find it funny how you liberals create the TRUMP up charge after we were attacked. I’m sure you think the 3,000 individuals how died deserved it. Don’t respond we already know your true colors!

You said:
“Do you know how difficult it is to stop "cell" based attacks? It takes massive intelligence resources just to track them and, even then, the odds of someone pulling off an attack are extremely high. It's like a dam with 1000 cracks in it.”
Don’t look now Jimmy but you’re actually making a valid point. If your tree hugging Congress would have allowed the Military to do their job rather than criticizing their every move, we’d be much further along than we. However they have had to tiptoe through everything to ensure your feelings don’t get hurt. Talk about insane!

Being as sophisticated as you are, I’m sure you were aware of the Policy on Iraq prior to Bush taking office? Take a look at Public Law 105-338 Oct 31, 1998. I posted it before but you actually have to read it. You won’t find the Clinton News Network- CNN, ABC, CBS, and MSNBC talking about it. Not surprising though! It’s one of the many things they want to hide.

Deficit? Are you crazy? Adding more social programs doesn’t reduce the deficit; it exponentially adds to it. But you’d never know, you’d rather hand out condoms, welfare checks, syringes, and let in illegal’s run ramped rather than face the facts. Huh Jimmie?

Posted by: Travis Chapman | August 28, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

To Travis Chapman - OK, let's look at your points:

"An establish fact, again laughable; unless your argument is warning someone seconds before being hit. Look out there’s car coming- boom. Great warning"

The attack happened NINE months after Bush took office, more than enough time to follow up on any leads. As an aside, a successful terrorist attack of that scale was INEVITABLE. Your insinuation is that Bill Clinton "let" it happen. All the facts state otherwise. If anything, there is more evidence that GW Bush had actionable info that he DIDN'T pursue. But, if it makes you feel better, I think an attack of that scale would have succeeded sooner or later REGARDLESS of who was president.

"Truth is Tricky Dick was more worried how he’s impeachment was going to be handled rather than taking care of national security. Why do you think Sandy Berger stole National Secrets? Because he forgot he put them in his pants? Of course that’s the normal place the Clinton Administration placed their secrets. Right?"

Sorry, espionage is a feature of EVERY administration. State secrets are stolen all the time, as history will attest. It is NOT POSSIBLE to have a leak-proof system. Even G.W. has been bitten:

http://www.publiuspundit.com/2007/11/george_bush_snakebit_or_simply.php

"Military spending doesn’t necessarily have to do with the size of our force- Jimmy. It also identifies how much technology and advanced equipment they have. Reducing the size of the budget handicapped us. As a result 9/11. But your foolish logic is what again? Attacking En Masse? Great!"

9/11 and the military budget are completely unrelated. 9/11 was a failure of intelligence, not military might. The military could have done NOTHING to prevent the attack. And, if it could, I'd like to think that the military was more than powerful enough to stop 19 terrorists. As for the advancement of our arms, the weapons of the U.S. military have been peerless since the end of the Cold War. Once again, you are wrong.

"Being as sophisticated as you are, I’m sure you were aware of the Policy on Iraq prior to Bush taking office? Take a look at Public Law 105-338 Oct 31, 1998. I posted it before but you actually have to read it. You won’t find the Clinton News Network- CNN, ABC, CBS, and MSNBC talking about it. Not surprising though! It’s one of the many things they want to hide."

I found this and I don't see what point you are making. The Clinton government had a plan for removing Saddam? So what, who didn't? What's the relevance, that Bush took the plan and ran with it? Okay...

"Deficit? Are you crazy? Adding more social programs doesn’t reduce the deficit; it exponentially adds to it. But you’d never know, you’d rather hand out condoms, welfare checks, syringes, and let in illegal’s run ramped rather than face the facts. Huh Jimmie?"

Considering the country was projecting record surpluses at the time, you just aren't correct. The ReThuglicans have presided over the largest expansion of the government in U.S. history. But don't take my word for it, BUY THE BOOK:

http://www.catostore.org/index.asp?fa=ProductDetails&method=cats&scid=37&pid=1441337

By the way, the book is being offered by a CONSERVATIVE think tank.

Don't take it personally.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

"Joe Biden does not hate all black people. He likes the "clean" ones.

Posted by: Progress"


___Oh please, ironically pseudonymed one: EVERYONE knew that Biden was just talking faster than he thought, and meant "clean-cut" - so what? It's true: middle class people prefer to vote for people who 'look like' themselves: no dreadlocks, no poopy-pants drooping trousers, no ersatz prison headrags, no tattoos or piercing.

So what? Half the mothers in America, red, white, blue, black, lavender, wish their sons were well-spoken well-mannered learned accomplished tall well-dentified guys in suits. So Biden stated the obvious - as a former stutterer, he talked too fast to hear himself - he has also worked to better the conditions of minorities and women.

The "clean" thing is a red herring. Bill Cosby might have said the same thing. You can be sure the Jacksons and Jordans and Holmes-Nortons have said similar things in private.

We should grow up.

Posted by: Mom | August 28, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

To Mom - Indeed. Don't tell anyone but many Blacks are just as angry with people within their own race for advancing sterotypes. Same with Hispanics, etc. I don't see any whites running to vacation in Appalachia.

We've gotta get past the race thing.

Posted by: James King | August 28, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Yes, James King, we have to get past the race thing.

And it's not perfect, but it is progress when people look at a nicely behaved Black man and first register that he's smart and nicely behaved and educated and dressed like the men they wish their daughters (or sons) dated, and that he's darkly complected.

This doesn't solve anything, but it is a sign that we finally identify beyond skin color and ethnicity.

I'm no more in sync with some of my own cousins than with well-read brown friends. A lot of those redheads and blondes I'm related to have gone gangsta - we used to call them white trash until we realized that was racist, or trailer trash until we realized it was classist - now, we just tell our kids: don't do like them; be like Obama.

It's not perfect - but it's human progress.

Enough race-baiting from right, left and center.

Posted by: Mom | August 28, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Joe Biden is a great speaker. Everyones calling him that scrappy kid from Scanton, even posters on the forums. His mom must be so proud of him. She taught him well. Whoever McCain picks as VP Biden will come through for all Democrats and yes Republicans and Independents who are taking a look at the Obama/Biden ticket!

Posted by: Katherine | August 28, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

if I am lying or incorrect about beau biden's role in arresting larry Sinclair, the Washington Post would have to remove my allegation or be liable. Note: my allegations have been up all day. Truth, she can be a b**** to Obamabots.

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

To Misstickley and James King. There are so many affairs between congress and the White House that the Enquirer cannot investigate them all. The msm won't touch them without absolute proof, unless of course the Enquirer publishes first. If you google the affairs of George Bush, Hillary and McCain, you'll have good reading. Sex, my friends, comes with the territory. Who cares if Hillary, Barack and W are gay or bisexual as long as it does not affect their ability to govern. It is really too bad that Edwards was crucified for his antics..he is certainly not the only one.

Posted by: ladyliza | August 28, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

ladyliza-I don't care if Obama is into boys, I DO care if he illegally has them jailed and denied medicine in an effort to silence them...or if he has them killed like Donald Young.

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

oh and ladyliza, No one is accusing Hillary of doing crack and getting sucked off so you can leave her out of it.

Posted by: misstickly | August 28, 2008 9:50 PM | Report abuse

"How long is the Beast allowed to have authority in Revelations? "

Revelations Chapter 13 tells us that it is 42 months...

... Almost a four-year term of a Presidency...

According to The Book of Revelations the anti-Christ is:


"...a man, in his 40's, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, he will destroy everything..."

Do we recognize this description?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Even if you don't believe in the Bible or it's teachings, how can we ignore the fact that this man has such close ties to the Muslim faith and it's beliefs?
And that the Pastor from his church preached hate against America?--No matter how much he may denounce him now, this was his spiritual leader for many years.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In a recent news broadcast, Barack Obama made this statement with pride, 'We are no longer a Christian nation; we are now a nation of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, . .." To think our forefathers fought and died for the right for our nation to be a Christian nation--then to have this man say with pride that we are no longer that.


How far has this nation come from what our founding fathers intended it to be!

Posted by: Shayna Arnold | August 29, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Me Damn America

Posted by: Barack Hussein | August 29, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Everyone who has commented negatively against the Delware AG abuse of power against Larry Sinclair absolutely have the facts wrongs. Here is the real story,

After

Posted by: Gianni | August 30, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

I will have a full summary of the story shortly. I must leave unexpectedly.

Posted by: Giann1 | August 30, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

In defense of Sarah Palin, the leaders of
the Christian right have made it clear about how they define a Christian.

We don't care if you sin.
We are not bothered if you put your ambition ahead of the needs of your children. If you have lied or broken the law, we will look the other way. It all comes down to your stand on guns and fetuses. Vote the right way, and you have our blessing.

They are not concerned about actual issues, other than their issue, the establishment of a Christian Theocracy in the United States.

Posted by: sanity | September 3, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

How nice and white? Almost spotlessly so.
I thought about bleach all the way through.

Now I definately know who I want as President and Vice President:

a man who is disorented on stage,

and a woman who pees in the words, then puts on lipstick and goes out to dinner.

I'm so impressed by the United States!

God bless America!

Posted by: sanity | September 4, 2008 8:49 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company