- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Good choice . . . not. You offered America hope & change. Doesn't look like you really believe America wants either. So, all we get is the same old wine in a new, improved, brighter bottle. Something about boats and rocking them that goes against most American's grain, I guess. A most incurious, fearful society America is . . .
Your man Biden declaring in the Senate debate in October, 2002:
"I do not believe this is a rush to war. I believe it is a march to peace and security. I believe that failure to overwhelmingly support this resolution is likely to enhance the prospects that war will occur. (snip)
[Saddam Hussein] possesses chemical & biological weapons & is seeking nuclear weapons. (snip)
For four years now, he has prevented United Nations inspectors from uncovering those weapons . . . (snip)
The terms of surrender dictated by the United Nations require him to declare & destroy his weapons of mass destruction programs. He has not done so. (snip)
Mr. President, President Bush did not lash out precipitously after 9/11. He did not snub the U.N. or our allies. He did not dismiss a new inspection regime. He did not ignore the Congress. At each pivotal moment, he has chosen a course of moderation and deliberation."
Ad nauseam
You cried havoc, Joe. You stumped for the Neo-con warhawks, and like a lot of supposedly good men & women, you enabled these lunatics. And what is your stance on this odious, phony, dirty little 'war' now, Joe???
In 2005, Joe Biden, on the Senate floor, stated that the purpose of S.256 (the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) was to protect women and their kids from their deadbeat husbands / dads:
"When a deadbeat dad files for bankruptcy under the current system, what happens to mom and the kids? [A]fter she fights it out with the bill collectors? Well, under the current system, she might be lucky and get every dollar due. But, she may only get a portion of what is due or she may not get one red cent. If a bankrupt household is a sinking ship, then women and children should be protected first. This is what the current law fails to do, but it is what this bill does: it puts women and children first. This bill not only lifts the stay on support payments during bankruptcy, but it adds that, when a wife-beater files for bankruptcy, a domestic violence restraining order against him must remain in effect. It cannot be stayed. And the woman who needs a restraining order against him can still get one. [Under current law] they send a woman in fear for her life off to a federal bankruptcy court to lift the Code's automatic stay by filing a special motion. Unbelievable. If you think this is fair, if you prefer this state of affairs, then I guess you will vote against this bill. Personally, I am proud of this bill, and I wish that those who are fabricating wild claims about it would stop. If they have their way, the women and children in this country who depend on alimony and child support will be robbed of real protections."
Say it ain't so, Joe. You shilled for the Credit Card / Loanshark industry under the guise of caring for mom, the kids, and apple pie?? (Credit card companies can charge high credit limits with interest rates at 30% or greater, these same companies can seize their money in the first wave of money recovery in bankruptcy and those unfortunate enough to have maxed out through identity theft or medical bills have no legal last resort in declaring bankruptcy. All filings of bankruptcy are made much more difficult with debts extremely hard to protect from. But it is easy for Mr. Biden's best buddies: under Chapter 11 the bankruptcy filing for a corporation is not affected. Their asses are covered.)
Mr. Obama -- your promises of hope & change have morphed into pandering & allaying the fears of those who aren't going to vote for you anyway.
Some hope. Some change.
