Photo credit: UPI
At first I didn’t see this as a fit for my DISTRACTIONS essay series, especially since I still have 4 more to go before I laid into the Democrats. But life is event driven; we move to the sound of the guns.
Of particular note is the DIMS vehement “aggressive denial” about Biden’s age. Oh fuck! Yes, I know; mainstream media false equivalence in talking age, Cheeto Dust King vs Biden. Yep. Got it. Mainstream media, yada yada yada. As a military veteran I have suffered from their false equivalence campaigns as well. It sucks. However, could the DIMS aggression really mean they are over compensating for their own lack of confidence in our VEEPS POTUS potential? Therefore, discussing the unfairness of pointing to Biden’s age distracts us from the co-POTUS.
Washington Post. Often “fashionably” abbreviated as WAPO. How can we expect a WAPO OPED to be up front when even the Biden administration is being disingenuous in how it’s handling the issue of age? Aggressive denial only gets you so far. DIMS shaming us into believing candid discussion in addressing Biden’s age is tantamount to destroying democracy? Then what?
WAPO columnist Perry Bacon Jr. wrote a call to action in the aforementioned vein, being up front about what Biden’s age really means. Though I think he even waffles (is he distracted?) a bit on what that really means. Let me clarify. It means a vote for Biden this election season is a vote for Harris. It also means actuarial tables are the Black Jack dealer, the dealer always wins. Full stop. How’s that for “up front” candor?
More candor please? Okay. Harris will turn from anchor to oar for Biden just as soon as her 538 numbers break the same glass ceiling her much vaunted entry did.
Before turning our noses up at polling numbers, remember they are a reflection of the 4.5 points Biden barely won the popular vote by in 2020.
It would also help if Harris and her staff were more concerned about a Biden 2024 than with the Harris legacy for 2028. Gavin Newsom has first note experience with this.
Bacon begs to mind (an adjacent opinion to his WAPO colleague, Matt Bai) the question of harmful WH staff synergy in appearances of not only avoiding Biden’s numbers (41% approval, 86 years old), but also an apparent unwillingness to, as Bai writes, “make her (Harris) a constant fixture at Biden’s side in public events and in the kind of extended interviews she’s mostly avoided doing.”
It doesn’t matter who is or who isn’t okay with the prospect of a Harris presidency. We don’t have a choice. A party led by a criminal defendant, his complicit apologist and sycophants are not ballot selections. Neither are a campaign cryptic political party that can’t even name themselves (how Gotham City does “No Labels” sound to you?), or a Green Party candidate deafened by his own ivory towered academian echo chamber.
I also won’t spend my next 13 months worried about pretending Harris is our best option as POTUS. Especially when Biden’s staff appears to have taken a very laissez-faire approach to even the appearance of co-presidential perceptions. This, coupled with the DIMS aggressive denial. Mmmmm. Can we say complacent sandwich? Lyndon B. Johnson had a reputable name by the time he raised his right hand to take the POTUS oath on that plane ride back from Dallas. Can the same be said of Harris? Veep introductions are always in short order when a POTUS dies.
Joe Biden has been a great president and leader at a time where this country has been faltering. A greatness confirmed by the “protesteth-too-much” volleys from the MAGA GOP created rank and file. However, his two downfalls are going to be an Afghanistan withdrawal failure based upon a vacuous decision matrix he created way back in 2010 and his choice for Vice President. I hope to be proven wrong about the second downfall.
☮️🇺🇸☯️
#slowtravel #militarytransition #leadership #humanity
#slowtravel Pit Stop
Two pictures today. The first is a flashback to a time past in Venice, Italy 🇮🇹 during aperitivo, enjoying a few Aperol Spritzers with snacks. The second picture is one of our three felines, Bijoux, shown “helping” with the packing as we prepare to hit the road again for our extended #slowtravel adventures.
*bested, not vested
Placing Harris in photo ops with Biden doesn’t do much to educate the public on her ability to lead. Early on, the big ‘news’ stories on her were super critical about her (1) buying a fancy French pan (which, you know, I can relate to but says nothing of her professionally) and (2) that she was hard on the people who work for her (which is such a tired way of damning women managers). We have much more information about her before she became VP, and that was impressive. So when I read that she had little public support as the 2IC, I can only assume it’s based on her identity.
I would welcome the Democratics putting her forward as an asset rather than be defensive about her. And by that I mean not focusing on her identity but on her intelligence, grit, service and vision. Biden chose her not for political reasons (LBJ et al- to bring in votes he otherwise wouldn’t get). No doubt his choice was meant as a signal (female, POC) but he selected her personally, someone who had vested him in a debate. As a former VP, he surely sees the role as important. Politically, it’s imperative to communicate why the electorate should be comfortable with the team on the ticket, not just the top name.