Today on Blogcritics
Home » Biden Overheard Talking Rice Confirmation Strategy on C-Span

Biden Overheard Talking Rice Confirmation Strategy on C-Span

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

If you remember a previous post of mine, I discussed a comment made recently on the Laura Ingraham Radio Show:

Interestingly, on her show today, Laura Ingraham played some of the background comments and tried to isolate their voices. At one particular spot, you could actually hear one of the Dems, Laura thinks it was Biden, talk about “delaying confirmation.” Now, whether Biden was saying this was a good idea or a bad one is anyone’s guess, but the very fact you could hear Democrats talking strategy on national television while another of their member was busy grilling Dr. Rice is just so completely unprofessional.

It appears now that Biden and other similarly clueless Senate Democrats (what’s this thing called… A microphone? And it does what?) were indeed discussing a delay in Rice’s confirmation:

WASHINGTON Jan 19, 2005 — Senate Democrats intend to delay Condoleezza Rice’s confirmation as secretary of state at least until next week rather than grant her Inauguration Day approval, a spokesman said Wednesday.

First of all, kudos to Laura Ingraham and her production staff for picking something up that I don’t think anyone else has. What a major coup!

Secondly, I’m not going to go into any conspiracy theories regarding this whole story. The simple fact of the matter is, these folks are just so incredibly clueless. What they did is akin to a professional football coach standing on the sidelines with his playbook wide open for the cameras to pick up during a playoff game.

What has happened to this party? They are falling apart at the seams! Already, their new Senate Minority Leader, Harry Reid, is embroiled in a bit of a political uproar for accusing the US Supreme Court’s only African American member, Justice Thomas, of writing court opinions that read “like an eighth-grade dissertation compared to Justice Scalia’s dissent.” Now they are talking strategy on live television for all the world to hear during Dr. Rice’s confirmation hearings?

Can the DNC’s leadership do ANYTHING right? I wonder…

David Flanagan
Viewpointjournal.com

Powered by

About David

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    Let’s get this straight, you’re objecting to Bin Laden’s endorsement of a compulsive liar to your government? Or is it because Bin Laden refused to approve of the work Rice is doing on his behalf?

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    Jim,

    I don’t think you are posting your comment in the right place.

    David

  • http://www.templestark.com/blog Temple Stark

    a tint tiny point writ large.

    in other words, well written but who cares. Which was always enough to get Tough Crowd’s Colin Quinn to threaten violence.

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    Temple,

    Many tiny points may come together to form a mosaic. If you care to look.

    If you do care, you will look; won’t you?

    David

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    “the very fact you could hear Democrats talking strategy on national television while another of their member was busy grilling Dr. Rice is just so completely unprofessional.”

    HUH?? How is that unprofessional? Just because he was done dealing with Dr. Rice doesn’t mean he’s supposed to sit in his seat quietly and do nothing until the session was over. Or do you think that his assistants and interns all communicate telepathically between each other? Are you implying that only one Republican at a time speaks in Congress?

    The only unprofessionalism on display is from the soundman who should have turned down his mike.

    If you are really outraged, then this is sillier than your “Vince Neil swearing on The Tonight Show” post. You seem to be grasping at straws to find something to write about every day. No one will miss you if you take a day off.

  • http://www.tude.com/ Hal Pawluk

    See the tempest? See the teapot? See a Flanagan with too much time on his hands?

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com alienboy

    May I ask the people who run this place what there editorial policy is?

    I don’t understand how allowing hateful people like David Flanagan are accepted in the first place.

    It ought to be a rule that if you bring a prejudiced mind with you, you aren’t allowed in, cos you’re too dogmatic and stupid!

    Bias I can tolerate, prejudice is completely unacceptable…

  • http://www.morethings.com/senate Al Barger

    Come clean, Alienboy. Are you really a right wingnut going undercover to try to make the pinkos look like smug, intolerant jerks?

  • Eric Olsen

    alienboy, you bring up the “editorial policy” everytime someone writes something you disagree with: there IS NO editorial policy beyond a few rules involving personal attacks on fellow members and expecting the writers to do a reasonable job of copyediting. Each writer posts his or her own work and the chips fall where they may. Wuld you ban the work of those you disagree with politically? You are providing an interesting window into the mind of the Euro-left

  • http://www.morethings.com/senate Al Barger

    Eric Olsen- Do you want to shut your right wing fascist mouth, or do you want Alienboy and Jacques Chirac to shut it for you?

  • Eric Olsen

    hmm, not sure how I would feel about the EU storming my backyard

  • http://www.morethings.com/senate Al Barger

    You missed your cue, Eric. Your response was supposed to be “Them and what army?”

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com alienboy

    Mr Barger: I have possibly always been nut but i have never been right wing.

    Mr Olsen: Neither am I of the Left, although I am European. We may well be storming your backyard for a while so prepare to adjust.

    I believe I’ve only brought up your policy once or twice, but I am new here so I’m entitled to ask.

    I am one of those people who would normally always defend the rights of people to say or think whatever they want, especially in the privacy of their own head or home.

    I would also strongly resist ANY attempt to have OTHERS’ views forced into MY life.

    I love the endless duality dance that passes for contemporary communication and politics – as entertainment – but find it hard to take in a limited format like this.

    The limited exposure I’ve had to the mindset of Mr Flanagan has been frustrating, as he seems keen to create as much steam as possible, without quite having anywhere to go.

    This only obscures communication, and failures of communication are always depressing.

    So it is not a question of censorship in the sense of disagreeing with others point of view and wanting to surpress them, more a question of tuning out static, in order to communicate more clearly and easily.

    I’m sure he could be less provocative and more constructive if he wanted to, he’s clearly not stupid, I just find his continuous stream of bile to be rather wearing after a while.

    It seems to be a very prevalent tactic in the USA to try and be provocative and raise the emotional levels to a pont where reason fails.

    And, more often than not it is a tactic employed by Americans of a Republican rather than Democratic persuasion.

    Of course, if this forum is just a pissing contest, that’s a whole other story…

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    Who said I was outraged over this incident? I’m just amazed that, with decades of combined experience as elected officials, they would allow themselves to forget that there were mics all over the place and cameras galore.

    Again, they are acting like a bunch of amatuers, not professionals. Discussing strategy is fine, but doing it while C-Span and probably several other cable news shows have cameras and mics all over you is rather silly.

    And, alienboy, how in the world am I hateful? Perhaps you are not used to having people express opinions that differ from yours? Welcome to America.

    Regards,

    David

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com alienboy

    Mr Flanagan: no, it’s not that, it’s just that you didn’t seem to be expressing anything but hostility and derision and that seems hateful, don’t you think?

    Welcome to the rest of Planet Earth.

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    …you didn’t seem to be expressing anything but hostility and derision and that seems hateful, don’t you think?

    Derision? Yes. Hostility? No. And let me point out that several of the Democratic Senators who were in attendance for Dr. Rice’s confirmation hearing, including Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer, were far harsher towards Dr. Rice and the Bush Administration than I was towards them in my post above.

    Are they hateful as well?

    David

  • http://jadedreality.blogspot.com spiderleaf

    nah, they were just presenting facts and asking for answers. you know, doing their jobs… the advise and consent bit…

    it’s amazing, you present a republican with their own statements and are accused of impugning their integrity…

    (and Kennedy wasn’t in attendance… perhaps you mean Dodd or Kerry or Chafee or Biden or Obama?)

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Alienboy thinks David Flanagan is ‘hateful’? Is he from the bizarro world? From what I’ve seen Flanagan is a nice, polite fellow with relatively moderate views.

    Dave

  • http://www.templestark.com/blog Temple Stark

    it’s amazing, you present a republican with their own statements and are accused of impugning their integrity…

    oh shit – i’m sorry, that is !@#$5 classic. That’s funny.

    Boring qualifier: would have been as funny if Democrat Biden was the one getting grilled with his own statements.

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    spiderleaf:

    It certainly depends on your defintion of the word “facts.” In case you were not aware, Barbara Boxer said this in response to one of Dr. Rice’s statements regarding the reason for going to war against Saddam:

    Boxer: Well, you should read what we voted on when we voted to support the war, which I did not, but most of my colleagues did. It was WMD, period. That was the reason and the causation for that, you know, particular vote.

    But here is the central focus of the resolution passed in congress:

    Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait; . . .

    The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to–

    (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

    (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

    Okay, “fact” number two. Barbara Boxer says this to Dr. Rice:

    You never even mention indirectly the 1,366 American troops that have died. . . . And 25 percent of those dead are from my home state.

    BUT, according to Casualties.org, the number of California servicemen who’ve died is 157, which is about 11.5% of the total, less than half the proportion Boxer claimed.

    So I ask the question again… What in the world is going on with some of the Democratic leaders in congress? I’m not trying to paint the whole party with one broad brush, I know better; I’m just completely astounded at the display put on by a few of them during the hearing. And, of course, talking strategy on air didn’t help either.

    David

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    Hey, Flannelman, I heard some people from the States, and they sounded like reasonable human beings, and they said all Congress-critters are minions of the powers of darkness (how does a supposed conservative who believes in less government simultaneously believe in the divine right of the government?)

    So, anyways, I’ve bet a toonie you can’t stick your fist in your mouth.

    Who wants in on this action. (No spoilers saying he can’t do it in the first place since his head is up his ass). Hey, either way, I win, he does it, chokes and dies, or does it and looks like an asshat, and I’m out $2 (63 cents US).

  • http://www.resonation.ca Jim Carruthers

    I think some people are being too harsh on the Flannelman. It’s not like he has any culture or taste to call his own. All he has is being a volunteer apologist for torturers, liars and thieves. That is all he aspires to, corrupting civil society in the only way he knows how. So, let him spew what his masters tell him to, since their punishments are probably harsh.

    After all, if he shows how ugly and desperate your rulers are, you might one day get liberty and freedom.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Well, David, like Jim Carruthers, Boxer and a lot of the dems never use the truth when an inflamatory lie will serve their purpose better.

    Dave

  • http://www.viewpointjournal.com David Flanagan

    Jim,

    Did I say somewhere that I believe in the “divine right of government?” Please point that out. I do believe that all governments are flawed because all people are flawed (you being the obvious exception of course) and, therefore, it is common sense to put checks and balances in place to limit the power (and thus, the damaging effects) of government and maximize their ability to serve people.

    Democracies are simply the best form of government yet invented. I’m assuming that perhaps you would prefer to worship your dark lord rather than any human-style government? Yes? No?

    David

  • http://adamantsun.blogspot.com Steve S

    just so completely unprofessional …… similarly clueless Senate Democrats …… just so incredibly clueless ……. Can the DNC’s leadership do ANYTHING right? I wonder …

    This post has nothing good to say about the Republican party or your political ideology, David. It’s just a rant against the opposing side with no journalistic merit of topic, Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh would be proud. You just had to find something silly to attack the opposing side on, in lieu of no news. I would have hoped that your opinion of BlogCritics would be above that, David. Guess not.

    What has happened to this party? They are falling apart at the seams!

    Because a politician talks about the strategy of delaying confirmation? Um, okay.

  • http://adamantsun.blogspot.com Steve S

    Alienboy thinks David Flanagan is ‘hateful’? Is he from the bizarro world? From what I’ve seen Flanagan is a nice, polite fellow with relatively moderate views.

    Dave N, you told me last night that you would be the first to ‘bash’ someone who resorts to flames and rants from the Right.

    This post is nothing but a rant, a flame, from the Right about how ‘stupid’ Democrats are. You said you’d be the first to stand up to a homophobe, a racist, or a school christianizer (Dave, meet David). Change the word Democrat in the post above to gay, or black or heathen. How is the post different than one you would claim to cut down?

    But make the word ‘Democrat’ and you congratulate the guy on ‘moderate views’.

    You tell us here at BlogCritics, Dave, that you are politically neutral but that we haven’t seen it in action just yet. As a fellow member, I ask you, ‘when is it coming into play?’

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com/ andy marsh

    Yeah Dave – if you’re anywhere to the right of Steve, your views are EXTREME!

    The problem, it’s extremely difficult not to be to the right of Steve!

  • http://adamantsun.blogspot.com Steve S

    Turn it on me, if you want, Andy, it doesn’t gloss over the fact you guys are trying to label a Democrat bashing post that has no journalistic merit as ‘moderate’.

    ‘What a major coup?’ he congratulates Ingraham? Um, is this why it’s all over the news now? Oh, wait…

    Whether I am extreme or not is irrelevant to the fact of what you guys are trying to do here.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com/ andy marsh

    Steve – buddy, I’ve seen this kind of thing from both sides…remember the little mpeg floating around of Bush flipping the bird? Or Cheney telling, who was it, Hollings? to go fuck himself? These are the kinds of things that blooper shows are made of! But I don’t recall any noise about those stories. Why does it bother you that someone points out that the plagarist Biden is an idiot?

    On another note, you are pretty extreme!

  • http://adamantsun.blogspot.com Steve S

    Why does it bother you that someone points out that the plagarist Biden is an idiot?

    It wasn’t about that, it was about the whole of the Democratic party. See the gist of my complaint for further elaboration.

    On another note, you are pretty extreme!

    From you, that is a compliment. Thank you.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com/ andy marsh

    You’re very welcome…I think.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    >>Dave N, you told me last night that you would be the first to ‘bash’ someone who resorts to flames and rants from the Right.< <

    Not what I said at all. I said that if someone came out in unreasoning advocacy of a loony rightist position I'd harangue them. Being anti-Democrat isn't necessarily outrageous. And I never said word one about rants or flames. That's just a style of self-expression. It says nothing about the substance of the criticism.

    >>This post is nothing but a rant, a flame, from the Right about how ‘stupid’ Democrats are. You said you’d be the first to stand up to a homophobe, a racist, or a school christianizer (Dave, meet David). Change the word Democrat in the post above to gay, or black or heathen. How is the post different than one you would claim to cut down?< <

    Because he didn't SAY 'gay, black of heathen'. He said Democrat. And as far as I'm concerned political parties are fair game.

    >>But make the word ‘Democrat’ and you congratulate the guy on ‘moderate views’.< <

    I was talking about his posts in general. If you go back and read post 20 or 24 he's really very reasonable. He's not ranting or flaming at all.

    >>You tell us here at BlogCritics, Dave, that you are politically neutral but that we haven’t seen it in action just yet. As a fellow member, I ask you, ‘when is it coming into play?’<<

    When Flanagan says something that’s offensive or delusional. Right now all he’s done is point out a few inconsistencies in Democrat behavior in a relatively polite way with plenty of factual information to back up his comments. If you think he’s flaming or ranting you don’t know what those terms are.

    As for his original post and how he thinks Democrats are stupid, he point to a couple of examples of Democrats doing something stupid – and I have to agree the examples he gave supported that position – and then he drew the relatively mild conclusion that they seemed ‘clueless’. I’m sorry, it’s not a rant. It’s logically consistent and draws a reasonable conclusion from established facts. It would be nice to see some of our outspoken Democrats on BlogCritics using some actual facts in their arguments rather than veering into emotion and insults.

    Dave

  • http://jadedreality.blogspot.com spiderleaf

    Yeah Dave – if you’re anywhere to the right of Steve, your views are EXTREME!

    Andy my dear, you and I are both extreme… although my version of extreme is more palatable than yours ;)

    But at least we don’t insult each other.