Joe Biden

Presidents Replacing Their Vice Presidents: Not Very Productive

Ronald Leave a comment

The new book, DOUBLE DOWN: GAME CHANGE 2012, states that Barack Obama’s campaign seriously considered dumping Vice President Joe Biden for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a rumor long believed and promoted.

Would such a change have brought about a different election result? Hardly so, and Obama came to realize that his Vice President was an asset, and that it was best to leave well enough alone.

When one looks at history, it is clear that “dumping” a Vice President is not a good idea, although there have been cases of such situations sometimes being necessary.

This is true of Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr, with Burr having tried to take the Presidency away from Jefferson in the Presidential Election of 1800.

It is also true of Andrew Jackson and John C. Calhoun, who were at tremendous odds over the protective tariff in 1832, with Calhoun finally resigning the Vice Presidency with three months left in the term, before being replaced by Martin Van Buren for Jackson’s second term.

Abraham Lincoln’s decision to dump Hannibal Hamlin for Andrew Johnson in 1864 is seen as a mistake, as Johnson ended up being impeached, although not convicted, by Congress when he became President.

Ulysses S. Grant’s first term Vice President, Schuyler Colfax, being involved in scandal, was replaced by Henry Wilson for the second term, a necessary action, due to the Credit Mobilier Scandal revelations.

Franklin D. Roosevelt had three Vice Presidents in his four terms, with John Nance Garner refusing to run with FDR when he went for his third term. But Henry A. Wallace was replaced with Harry Truman for the fourth term, due to opposition from Southerners and conservatives who worried about Wallace on the issue of race relations, and his views of the Soviet Union during World War II. Looking back, it was better that Truman, rather than Wallace, became President upon FDR’s death in April 1945.

Gerald Ford is the last President to replace his Vice President, Nelson Rockefeller, with the choice of Bob Dole, but that helped to defeat him in a close race with Jimmy Carter.

Overall, it is best for a President to stick with his Vice President when running for a second term, unless there are extenuating circumstances as with Jefferson, Jackson, Grant and FDR.

Des Moines Register Poll Of Iowa Democrats Prefers “Fresh Face” In 2016

Ronald 1 Comment

A Des Moines Register Poll of Democrats in Iowa shows that they prefer a “fresh face” for the Democratic nomination for President in 2016, over a more experienced candidate such as Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, who together have about 70 years in public governing service.

Since Iowa is the first state to have a say in the nominating process, this could encourage “newer” faces, such as Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York, Governor Martin O’Malley of Maryland, Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, soon to be Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, and San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, to “throw their hat in the ring”, a term developed by former President Theodore Roosevelt, when he announced he was running again for President in 1912.

This blogger has suggested earlier that such a development might be good for the Democratic Party, particularly at a time when the Republican Party will have a much younger nominee than either Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden.

Iowa Democratic Party Steak Fry Shows Experience (Joe Biden) And Youth (Julian Castro)

Ronald Leave a comment

This past weekend, the Iowa Democratic Party held its Annual Steak Fry celebration, hosted by Iowa Senator Tom Harkin, bringing together two Democratic stars–one of experience and one of youth.

Vice President Joe Biden, a colleague and friend of Senator Harkin for the past thirty years, was there to remind people that he and Barack Obama had worked every day in the White House to advance the middle class, which they have done an excellent job on, considering the terrible economic collapse occurring just five years ago in mid September.

There is no question of Biden’s great credentials for the Presidency, although he will have to deal with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and other Democrats of a younger generation, with at least one likely to join the fray for the 2016 Democratic Presidential nomination to succeed Obama.

So the youth of the party was represented by San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, who is 39 today, and runs the seventh largest city in America. Castro made a very good impression at the Democratic National Convention in 2012, reminding many of Barack Obama’s fantastic performance at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, which catapulted the Illinois Senator into the 2008 Presidential race and the White House!

Castro would be 42 in 2016, and would bring a Latino into the Presidential race, a sign of the future growth of the United States. He is very charismatic, handsome, and well spoken, but the question is whether he would challenge both Biden and Clinton if they were to run.

Certainly, Biden and Castro got along famously, but they represent a difference of 32 years, nearly two generations of leadership apart, at ages 42 and 74 in 2016.

Castro made clear that the Democratic Party belief in helping those in need had made a difference in his life plan, as well as that of his identical twin brother, Congressman Joaquin Castro.

Without question, Castro would be a good choice if youth and promise matter, but Biden has the edge on experience and knowledge and connections.

In any case, either is far better than any Republican considered likely to enter the Presidential race in 2016!

Senator Ted Cruz Praises The Late Senator Jesse Helms, Adding To The Image Of Cruz As The Most Dangerous And Divisive US Senator Today!

Ronald 3 Comments

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, a freshman, is like a bull in a China shop, still in his first year, but laying waste to his party establishment, and making enemies along the way, and thoroughly enjoying the attention he is getting, and unconcerned about the enemies which are piling up in the process!

Cruz, who looks eerily like the infamous Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin, and is the same age as McCarthy was when he became noticed (42), has already gained infamy by claiming that Harvard Law School professors were Communists, and advocating the Tea Party Movement desire to destroy ObamaCare, and go to war against everything Barack Obama stands for!

Now, Cruz has hit a new low, praising former Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina as a model for the Republican Party.

Helms, who died in 2008 at the age of 86, served thirty years in the US Senate, from 1973-2003, and “took no prisoners”, using racist tactics in his election campaigns, opposing a Martin Luther King national holiday, and being rude and nasty toward the first African American woman Senator, Carol Mosley Braun of Illinois, among other horrible actions!

Helms was a full scale segregationist in the age of civil rights, non apologetic for upholding the Confederate heritage, and never reformed in any form, unlike Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina and Governor George Wallace of Alabama, who both mellowed and reformed somewhat in their later careers.

Helms would go down as one of the most negative characters ever to serve in the US Senate, and yet, now, Ted Cruz has said that we should have 100 Jesse Helmses in the US Senate, and it would be a far better body!

What is going on in the mind of this man, Ted Cruz? Why is he declaring war on common decency and humanity, insulting both Democrats and fellow Republicans on a daily basis?

Well, Cruz wants to be President, and he will stop at nothing to achieve his goal, no matter how many victims he leaves in his wake!

Many Republicans are afraid, literally, of him and his tactics and personality, reminding too many of Senator McCarthy, which again, Cruz has an uncanny resemblance to, in facial features and aggressive personality!

McCarthy was eventually, and rightfully, censored by the US Senate, including most of his own colleagues, and it may come to a time where an action like that will be required to tone down this threat to order and stability in the Senate, and the nation at large!

While we are on this idea of needing “100” of a particular person, this author has better suggestions, although the concept of “100” is actually ridiculous!

But if we are to do so, how about 100 Bernie Sanders; 100 Elizabeth Warren; or going back to past Senators, how about 100 Robert La Follette, Sr; 100 George Norris; 100 Hubert Humphrey; 100 Ted Kennedy; 100 George McGovern; 100 Paul Wellstone; 100 Joe Biden?

Barack Obama’s Ultimate Crisis: Can He Lead IF He Loses On Syria Vote In Congress?

Ronald 7 Comments

President Barack Obama is now facing the ultimate crisis—repudiation by a vote of either or both houses of Congress on the issue of responding to Syria’s use of chemical weapons on its own people.

Obama could have gone ahead a week ago, utilized his Commander In Chief powers, used by every Chief Executive in the past thirty years, to initiate military action, but instead chose to promote Congressional involvement, not realizing that this divided Congress would not cooperate!

The Republicans, always vastly hawkish, are now playing politics, except for a few (including Speaker John Boehner, Senators John McCain and LIndsey Graham as the most outstanding examples), who are supporting Obama on what they see as a national security issue. People who would have backed George W. Bush without pause now are refusing to support Obama, in order to weaken him.

But even the Democrats are showing unwillingness to back Obama, and in so doing, are taking away his credibility as a leader.

So with the likely defeat of what Obama wants, a resolution backing the President’s use of force in Syria, it is putting Obama on the spot. Does he go ahead anyway, and do what he feels he must do? Or does he back off, and look like a “paper tiger”, who roars, but has no bite?

It looks now that whatever the eventuality, Barack Obama may have reached the point that his second term will be unproductive and unfulfilled on almost any issue, domestic or foreign, and that the Presidency has been greatly harmed by this ultimate crisis that could have been avoided by doing what Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush did—take action, and answer criticisms later!

So will Barack Obama go down as a failed President, allowing his domestic enemies to destroy him, and try to make his accomplishments, which are many, to be overlooked or even reversed over time?

What a mess we are in, and it makes one wonder, if what this author is stating, turns out to be basically reality, whether or not Barack Obama should consider resignation, giving Vice President Joe Biden the Presidency, and allowing him the chance to pursue the agenda of Obama, with his much greater ability to get along with Congress, and work with opposition leaders in the Republican Party, even though, of course, Biden would still face fierce attacks and challenges without any doubt!

It is very radical to suggest resignation, but one can make the argument that for the future of the nation, if there is total paralysis, and inability to have influence in either domestic or foreign policy, that it is something to consider, as much as this author loathes the idea, the concept, of “quitting”!

Obama, Biden, Kerry, Hagel (Syria) Vs. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld (Iraq)

Ronald 15 Comments

The tragedy of the Iraq War, an ill conceived and unnecessary war, which weakened the United States and emboldened Iran, is now haunting the Obama Administration, as it considers military intervention in Syria, as a result of the use of chemical weapons, believed to have been promoted by the government of Bashar Al Assad.

Chemical warfare is an illegal crime under international law, and a crime against humanity, and IF it is proved that Assad authorized this, rather than a renegade group, it is essential that the international community punish him for his war crime!

If nothing is done, then it will be seen as an endorsement of a war crime, a crime only done by a very small handful of government leaders in world history, including, of course, Adolf Hitler!

It will show that the world is again sitting by as they did when Hitler came to power in 1933 in what became known as Nazi Germany!

But the failures of the Iraq War, including the human cost and financial burden, is now burdening the Obama Administration as they plan strategy.

But to compare the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld led tragedy to what might be done under Obama, Biden, Kerry, Hagel is to distort reality, as the credibility of the first group is extremely different than that of the second group!

We are talking about three leaders who regularly lied to us, against four leaders with solid credentials and principles, who are reluctantly planning an intervention in a measured way!

The hypocrisy of Republicans who rushed to back the Bush Administration, while now opposing action by the Obama Administration, is nothing new, part of the continued attempt to undermine anything that Barack Obama and his colleagues want and believe in, whether domestic or foreign.

Obama wants a limited engagement, similar to Bill Clinton’s intervention in Kosovo in 1999, a 78 day bombing campaign against Serbia, with only a loss of one plane, and no human casualties.

While there is no way to know the reaction of Iran, Russia, China and others if there was an internationally led effort to punish Syria’s outlaw government, it is hard to conceive that intervention in Syria would lead to a wider war.

In any case, a chemical warfare Syria represents a threat to Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and really, the civilized world, so to do nothing is simply unacceptable!

Let us pray for the good judgment of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Kerry, and Chuck Hagel, as they face what could be the signature foreign policy challenge of the Obama Presidency, and hope that other nations, including Great Britain, whose Parliament just rejected any action, will come to support a necessary minimal intervention against an international outlaw government, which threatens the long range sanity of the world, if chemical warfare goes unpunished!

The Case For A New Generation Of Democrats For The Presidential Election Of 2016!

Ronald 7 Comments

As the Presidential race begins, and it has started already, like it or not, it is clear that Hillary Clinton, who will be 69 in 2016, and Joe Biden, who will be 74 in 2016, are the frontrunners, and that Hillary is using up most of the oxygen in the room, way ahead of Biden in polls, with other potential Democratic candidates in single digits.

But despite the confidence and optimism about Hillary and even Joe as a backup, there is a growing case for the argument that the Democratic Party should bypass both Hillary and Joe, no matter how much one may love or admire either of them, and go for a new generation of Democrats, as was done in 1960 with John F. Kennedy, in 1976 with Jimmy Carter, in 1992 with Bill Clinton, and 2008 with Barack Obama!

All of these successful Democratic Presidential winners were young–43, 52, 46, and 47 respectively at the time of the inauguration. All were younger than their GOP opponents, although Richard Nixon was only four years older, but represented a continuation of Dwight D. Eisenhower, our oldest President at the time when he retired in 1961!

But Jimmy Carter was eleven years younger than Gerald Ford; Bill Clinton 22 years younger than George H. W. Bush; and Barack Obama 25 years younger than John McCain!

The fact is ONLY three Presidents were inaugurated at age 65 or older—William Henry Harrison at age 68 and dying a month later; James Buchanan at age 65 but only 50 days short of age 66, and rated by many historians the worst President in American history; and Ronald Reagan, inaugurated at just weeks before his 70th and 74th birthday, and judged by many to have deteriorated mentally, with early Alzheimers in his second term of office!

And we have seen Bob Dole defeated at age 73 in 1996; John McCain defeated at age 72 in 2008; and Mitt Romney, defeated at age 65 inn 2012, but also about 50 days short of age 66 if he had been inaugurated, the same exact age as Buchanan was when he won in 1856!

Meanwhile, the Republican Party future is clearly in the hands of young politicians, including Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, and others, with these candidates being mostly in their 40s and 50s, and all younger than Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden!

Historically, in most elections, the younger candidate wins, and the party of the President usually does not do well if it utilizes someone connected with the administration leaving office, no matter what level of popularity reigns when that President leaves office, as witness:

Richard Nixon lost after Eisenhower
Hubert Humphrey lost after Lyndon B. Johnson
Gerald Ford lost after Richard Nixon
Walter Mondale lost after Jimmy Carter
Al Gore lost after Bill Clinton

If Hilary Clinton runs, she represents Obama’s foreign policy record, for good or for bad, and also brings back the good and the bad of the Presidency of her husband, Bill Clinton.

If Joe Biden runs, he represents what happens to a Vice President under a President, that the negatives of that President harm the Vice President, as with Nixon, Humphrey, Ford, Mondale, and Gore.

Only George H. W, Bush was able to overcome this hex, and succeed Ronald Reagan in 1988, although then losing reelection in 1992, the greatest percentage loss of any President in American history, except William Howard Taft in 1912!

It is reality that Democrats will be heavily favored in the Electoral College in 2016, no matter who runs, but it would be easier for a “New”, younger Democrat to be the Presidential nominee, such as Martin O’Malley, Andrew Cuomo, KIrsten Gilllibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Cory Booker, Deval Patrick, Mark Warner, John Hickenlooper, or Elizabeth Warren, all of whom are much younger than Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, with the exception of Warren, who would be 67 in 2016, which makes her a less ideal candidate based upon age!

It is important for Democrats to think carefully before they decide for a continuation of the Obama Presidency through Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, as nominating someone younger and separated from the Obama Administration would be preferable, and easier for the grueling campaign ahead!

Ted Cruz Repudiates His Canadian Citizenship In Ambition To Be President!

Ronald 7 Comments

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, the bull in the China shop in the Republican Party, who has grand ambitions to be President of the United States, has taken quick action to trash his Canadian heritage, having been born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada in December 1970.

While technically a citizen of both Canada and the US, due to his mother’s American citizenship, Cruz has now declared that he has no interest in remaining a dual citizen, because he knows that could cause him grief as he seeks to take over the Republican Party. He has already made enemies in the GOP establishment with his vicious attacks on other Republican Senators, as well as the opposition Democrats, the news media, and higher education, including his Harvard Law School background, calling the faculty there a bunch of Marxists, reminding us of Senator Joseph McCarthy, who he, ironically, greatly resembles in appearance, demeanor, and behavior!

Cruz represents the calling card of Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain and other malcontents,who wants to take the Republican Party to the extreme far Right, and will take no prisoners!

It is clear by his action on his Canadian citizenship that Cruz is running for President without announcing it this early, and that he will do anything and everything to destroy any GOP opponent, and at this point, his key rival seems to be Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, the son of former Congressman Ron Paul, who inherits the allegiance of many young people who see the father as a god like figure with his libertarian beliefs.

Both Paul and Cruz have the allegiance of the Tea Party Movement, but Cruz cannot be called a libertarian, and the holy war that will ensue between the two will, at this point, likely favor Cruz over Paul.

So at this point, it seems a good bet to believe that Cruz will overcome Paul and also, his fellow Cuban, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, and that he will be the Republican Presidential nominee in 2016, at age 45.

His candidacy will draw a lot of attention and controversy, and Cruz will not care how many enemies he makes on his road to being the opponent of Hillary Clinton, his most likely opponent, or any other Democrat who might emerge, including Joe Biden.

And when one looks at the Electoral College math, it is clear that Ted Cruz is likely to be the GOP Presidential nominee, but his chances of becoming our 45th President are next to zero, and that Clinton, Biden, or whoever the Democratic nominee in 2016 is, will win a landslide victory, greater in electoral votes than Barack Obama in 2012!

And part of that great Democratic victory in 2016 will likely include Texas, as the state is moving toward “Blue” status, and it is ironic that Cruz, easily elected in Texas in 2012, will help create the Democratic majority by his personality, confrontational attitude, and refusal to understand that if one insults Mexican Americans, woman, African Americans, labor supporters, environmentalists, and gays, there is no way that his party can ever win back the White House!

So after a smashing defeat, Cruz will be history as a loser, and the GOP will finally, if it has any common sense, return to the moderate mainstream center, or else it will finally be in the dustbins of history after 2016!

Potential Republican Presidential Candidates And Foreign Policy, As Compared To Hillary Clinton And Joe Biden

Ronald 2 Comments

The Republican Party is offering potential Presidential candidates who have no clue on world affairs, or have dangerous views on foreign policy, and/or have no experience to speak of in diplomatic situations.

The following potential candidates have NO credentials at all in this important area in a world that is changing rapidly:

Rand Paul
Ted Cruz
Marco Rubio
Paul Ryan
Rick Santorum
Rick Perry
Chris Christie
Jeb Bush
Bobby Jindal
Scott Walker
John Thune

it is true that Rand Paul and Marco Rubio sit on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and that Jeb Bush’s brother and father were President of the United States, and foreign policy has been discussed within that family.

But compare that to Hillary Clinton, who was Secretary of State for four years, and learned about foreign policy under her husband, President Bill Clinton, in the 1990s.

And Vice President Joe Biden had 36 years in the Senate, including time as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and now is in his second term as Vice President, intimately involved in foreign policy issues.

So NONE of the GOP potential Presidential candidates have any real, valuable experience, except in speaking out on issues they know nothing about!

Foreign policy will be a most important issue in 2016, so who could the GOP run who could compete with either Hillary or Joe, and give them a real challenge?

The only person who fits this profile is former Utah Governor and Ambassador to China, and earlier Ambassador to Singapore, Jon Huntsman, who is a moderate mainstream conservative. He is very talented, brilliant, multilingual including Chinese, and knows and understands world affairs!

But would the Republican Party have the brains and intelligence to choose Huntsman as their Presidential nominee?

The answer is ZERO, and because of that, the GOP does not offer experienced, qualified candidates for the Presidency on foreign affairs, such as Richard Nixon, George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole, and John McCain in the past!

Right Wing Talk Of Impeachment Of Barack Obama: Anarchistic, Nihilistic, Racist!

Ronald 1 Comment

The right wing of the Republican Party and the conservative movement, augmented by right wing Christians, the Tea Party Movement, Confederate remnants, and white supremacists is on the move to impeach President Barack Obama on grounds of “high crimes and misdemeanors” in office.

They are out to besmirch his historical image and record, as they did with Bill Clinton, knowing full well that they could not successfully remove him from office in an impeachment trial, which requires a two thirds vote of the US Senate to convict and remove from office.

With the Senate being majority Democratic, there is no way that 67 Senators could be gained to remove the President, and recall that when Clinton went into the impeachment trial in 1999, there was a majority of Republican Senators, and still only 55 and 50 Senators would vote to remove him from office on two different counts.

And even if the GOP were to win a majority of the Senate in 2014, still, there would be no way to gain a two thirds vote of the U S Senate to remove Obama from office.

So it is an exercise in futility, besides being a case based on even fewer reasons to bring a President to trial than in the case of Bill Clinton, who had, indeed, lied before a grand jury about his love life.

Obama has done NOTHING unconstitutional or illegal, and this case is based solely on personal hate, and face the facts, pure unadulterated racism, because the whole concept of a man who looks black, but is half white, being in the White House, drives Tea Party, Confederate, right wing Christian preachers who preach hate, and “Birthers” absolutely nuts, which is precisely what they are –lunatics!

Now the House of Representatives can push ahead and impeach Obama on flimsy grounds, as they did in 1868 to Andrew Johnson, and in 1998 to Bill Clinton.

But also if only 17 Republicans joined with all 201 Democrats in the 113th Congress, an impeachment motion would fail, and the likelihood that 17 or more Republicans would reject such a radical move is extremely high!

So, right wing lunatics, go ahead, try to impeach the President without a just legal basis, and dig your own grave, literally and figuratively, as the American people will reject you in a sweeping fashion in 2014 and 2016 and beyond!

Oh, and if Obama were to be forced from office, Joe Biden would become President, and have an edge for the 2016 election, not exactly a man the Right Wing would want in the Presidency!