creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
Michelle Malkin
Michelle Malkin
25 May 2012
Obama's Land of the LOST

What's green and blue and grabby all over? President Obama's new pressure campaign for Congress to ratify the … Read More.

23 May 2012
Jaczko the Jerk: Harry Reid's Sexist Crony Gets the Boot

The embattled chair of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission resigned this week. It's a victory for … Read More.

18 May 2012
How the Gay-Marriage Mob Slimed Manny Pacquiao

Boxing champion Manny Pacquiao is guilty — of being true to his Catholic faith. The gay-marriage mob is … Read More.

The Increasingly Erratic, Super-Gaffetastic Joe Biden

Share Comment

If the prospect of Joe Biden sitting a heartbeat away from the presidency doesn't give you palpitations, you are not paying attention.

Hysterical Sarah Palin-bashers on the unhinged left and elitist right have dominated campaign press coverage and pop culture. They've ridiculed her family, her appearance and her speech patterns. They've derided her character, her parenting skills, her readiness and her intellect.

Meanwhile, the increasingly erratic, super-gaffetastic Joe Biden gets a pass. What does the guy have to do to earn the relentless scrutiny and merciless mockery he deserves? Answer: wear high heels, shoot caribou and change the "D" next to his name to an "R."

Team Obama is hammering John McCain as "erratic" in the closing days of the election campaign. There are now 615,000 Google hits and counting using the search terms "erratic McCain." Last week, The New York Times devoted an entire article to the Obama-Biden line of attack, titled "In Friendly Region, Biden Cites McCain as Erratic."

Who's erratic? Throughout the primary and general election cycles, Biden has lurched from attacking Obama as not ready for prime time ("The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training." — September 2007) to ready to lead ("Barack Obama is ready. This is his time." — August 2008) and back again.

This week, Biden warned America that an Obama victory would invite a dangerous global showdown between tyrants and the naif Obama. "Mark my words," Biden said Sunday at a Democratic fundraiser. "It will not be six months [after the inauguration] before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy." In a follow-up appearance, he told supporters to brace for the worst and "gird your loins."

Out of Biden's mouth, this is called candor. Out of anyone else's mouth, it would be "fear-mongering," "negative campaigning" and a "distraction."

Tooting his own horn while vandalizing his running mate's, Biden bragged: "I've forgotten more about foreign policy than most of my colleagues know." Yeah. Colleagues like that guy who had a mere 143 days of Senate experience before launching his presidential bid and choosing you to shore up his meager credibility, Joe.

In fact, Biden has spent the entire campaign questioning his running mate's judgment. Last month, he mused out loud: "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more than I am to be vice president of the United States of America.

… She is easily qualified to be vice president of the United States of America, and quite frankly it might have been a better pick than me." Biden assailed the campaign's position on clean coal, openly criticized the campaign's idiotic ad attacking McCain for not using e-mail and warned the pro-gun control Obama that "if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he's got a problem."

Dan Quayle will have "POTATOE" etched on his gravestone. But how many times have late-night comedians and cable shows replayed the video of senior statesman and six-term Sen. Biden's own spelling mishap last week while attacking McCain's economic plan?

"Look, John's last-minute economic plan does nothing to tackle the No. 1 job facing the middle class, and it happens to be, as Barack says, a three-letter word: jobs. J-O-B-S."

No, Joe. "D'-O-H" is a three-letter word.

Nightly news shows still haven't tired of replaying Palin's infamous interview with Katie Couric. But how many times have they replayed Biden's botched interview with Couric last month — in which he cluelessly claimed: "When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, 'Look, here's what happened.'"

Er, here's what really happened: Roosevelt wasn't president when the market crashed in 1929. As for appearing on TV, it was still in its infant stages and wasn't available to the general public until at least 10 years later.

During the lone VP debate earlier this month, the increasingly erratic, super-gaffetastic Biden demonstrated more historical ignorance that Palin would never be allowed to get away with: "Vice President Cheney's been the most dangerous vice president we've had probably in American history," he said. "He has the idea he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the executive — he works in the executive branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that."

Article 1 of the Constitution defines the role of the legislative branch, not the executive branch. You would think someone who has served 36 years in government — the same someone who is quick to remind others of his high IQ and longtime Senate Judiciary Committee chairmanship — would know better.

Biden's erratic and gaffetastic behavior is the least of America's worries. He's worse than a blunderbuss. He's an incurable narcissist with chronic diarrhea of the mouth. He's a phony and a pretender who fashions himself a foreign policy expert, constitutional scholar and worldly wise man. He's a man who can't control his impulses.

And he could be a heartbeat away.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled Palin-says-"You Betcha" skit.

Michelle Malkin is author of "Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild." Her e-mail address is malkinblog@gmail.com.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.


Comments

3 Comments | Post Comment
I would have to say that while I agree with what you say I'm also making plans to depart the good 'ol USofA. If Bo-Joe get the nod for the oval office I want to be far outside the gates of the New American "Let them eat cake" machine. What I find hilarious is that supporters (and that especially includes the media) of these two actually hate tradition with such passion they have held their blinders fast in place amid spin a 9th grader could see. These supporters simply chose not to look, ergo, they won't see. The plan obviously is to deny everything realility based and focus on one thing, "What's in it for me"? I personally have no intent to contribute, I've "done my part", I've taken my losses, and I've raised my family. Time for me to leave. I would rather deal with a criminal who uses a gun or knife to take away from me than a split tounge devil who uses the law. As my father used to say, "You can't fight City Hall!" And to be sure while you can't blood from a turnip you can sure beat the head! To me John and Sarah simply represent the lesser of the offered evils.
Comment: #1
Posted by: bill s
Wed Oct 22, 2008 4:14 AM
Ma'am; I resent your insinuation that Mrs. Palin is hysterical... If she sufferes from mental illness, it is for the people to decide if that disqualifies her for the job... Talking about Hysterical Sarah Palin is not going to score you many points with the right... Besides, if everyone is crazy, it is the sane who seem insane... From my point of view I can see she is clearly unhinged... Her disease is not hysteria, but idealism... She cannot see that the ideals of capitalism and powerless government however glorified and gold plated do not work in reality... Preaching such nonsense may work for her politically, but that rather suggests a rational and calculating individual than one diseased and detached... If that is the case, her defects are not psychological, as you suggest, but a want of morals in selling a defective and injurious idea that has often been proved false... Please be kind the the mentally ill... As the Quaker said: Every one's crazy except thee and me... Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #2
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:08 AM
Re: bill s; Sir,... If some one takes what is yours against the law it is a crime... If the law removes your from what you have it is legal... You may not beleive this is true, but government has the power to tax, and as is shown by the closing of the commons in England specifically, it is the people and the government that determines what is a right and what belong to who.. There was not true poverty in England until the small farmers were deprived of the commons...Together with that, the Gentry ended feudal dues so they bore little obligation to support their society, and the people, subject of the excise tax were made more poor, at the same time that destitution was criminalized... Do you see my point here... It is that the rich have already shown the world that property rights and even property laws are a matter of acceptence... If you can deprive a person of civil and political rights you can deprive him of property, all nice, and legal like...The same situation exists here and in every society... Rich people want to stand behind a wall of rights and laws protecting their wealth...When wealth was property, it supported the whole of society... Putting that obligation on labor through an unfair income tax was like our closing of the commons... It totally deprived one class of its income and wealth to support another... Still, rights and laws and property and wealth are all just forms of relationship...It is for the people in them to say what they mean...You cannot expect wealth in a few hands to mean anything to everybody... If it all ends up in few hands it will lose its value to the people, and its meaning... That is the real problem, and not that distributed wealth will be redistributed in some paltry fashion... Worry about all the wealth being redistributed because the poor find out that they don't need the rich at all, because the rich have made themselves the enemies of the people... It is not the poor who are calling the rich names... People are looking for some tax fairnesss... It does not make them communists... But call a man a name who is well within his rights, and you may serve your cause ill while making your situation worse...Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #3
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Thu Oct 23, 2008 7:56 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Michelle Malkin
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Mark Levy
Mark LevyUpdated 26 May 2012
Oliver North
Oliver NorthUpdated 25 May 2012
Linda Chavez
Linda ChavezUpdated 25 May 2012

14 Mar 2007 All the News That's Fit to Pay For?

28 Sep 2011 Our White House Bully Problem

23 May 2007 Tiny Minority, Big Problem