TRB MARCH 14, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
There are two Democrats running at the top of the ticket this year, and only one of them is President Barack Obama. When Joe Biden’s name first came up, in 2008, as a possible running mate, I told everyone I knew that it would never happen. When Obama did choose Biden, I braced myself for disaster. But Biden turned out to be the right guy for the job. People don’t appreciate what a surprising outcome this is.
My reasoning back in 2008 was grounded in observable fact. Biden’s 1988 presidential campaign had collapsed after it was revealed that his seemingly heartfelt testimonial about being first in his family to go to college had been lifted from a speech by the British Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock. The personal nature of the subject matter made Biden look like a phony, and, soon after, it came out that Biden had also gotten busted for plagiarism when he was a law student.
Biden returned to the Senate and, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, presided over the confirmation hearings for Clarence Thomas. That Thomas was confirmed in spite of his shaky legal qualifications and the persuasive allegations that he’d subjected his employee Anita Hill to sexual harassment (while heading the federal agency that investigates such allegations) must be judged, at least in part, as the fault of Biden himself. Fearful of being branded a racist and squeamish about probing Thomas’s personal life, Biden ended up with the worst of both worlds: The hearings became a media circus and Thomas carried into the Court a newly acquired bitterness about liberals that probably pushed him further to the right.
Biden’s subsequent stewardship of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations restored his reputation by playing to his strengths as a practical-minded coalition-builder who did his homework. He played a key role in persuading President Bill Clinton to intervene in the Balkans conflict, and he urged President George W. Bush, early in the Iraq war, to effectively partition the country into Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish territories, a creative solution that may yet prove the only way to resolve that country’s political divisions.
By 2007, Biden’s rehabilitation was so complete that a presidential run once again seemed plausible. He was certainly more experienced than John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama. But, on the very day he announced his candidacy, Biden was quoted in The New York Observer describing Obama as “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” He never really recovered from this disastrous start. After staking his candidacy on the Iowa caucus, Biden came in fifth and departed the race.
Obama chose Biden because his blue-collar background was thought helpful to reach the white working class and because his foreign policy background was thought helpful to shore up Obama’s relative lack of experience in that area. Weighing heavily against these factors was that Biden could be counted on to say foolish things on a regular basis. About that part, I was right.
During the 2008 fall campaign, Biden wandered off-message repeatedly, opposing, for instance, clean-coal technology and the AIG bailout, both of which Obama ultimately supported. In an interview with Katie Couric, Biden said, “When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television”—even though in 1929, the president was Herbert Hoover and the mass medium in use was radio. At an Ohio appearance, Biden spoke of “a three-letter word: jobs. J-O-B-S.” Pretty soon, conservatives were complaining that the press was imposing a double standard. Whenever Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin said something stupid, it was major news; whenever Biden said something stupid, it got much less play.
After Biden became vice president, the verbal missteps kept coming. The day after Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens administered the oath of office to him, Biden called him “Justice Stewart,” confusing him with Potter Stewart, who had died more than 20 years earlier. Later in 2009, while the Obama administration was trying to take precautions about the H1N1 virus without spreading panic, Biden blurted out on NBC’s “Today,” “I wouldn’t go anywhere in confined places right now,” and mentioned specifically “a confined aircraft.” Again, conservatives cried foul. Former Vice President Dan Quayle, they said, would never live down his insistence at a spelling bee that “potato” had an “e” at the end. But Biden could say all sorts of dumb things and get off scot-free.
Why were Palin and Quayle mocked when Biden is not? The knock on Palin, who had no national political experience, was that she was too ignorant of public affairs to be vice president. Biden is obviously knowledgeable; he could hardly fail to be after serving 36 years in the Senate. The knock on Quayle derived mainly from his comic inability to master the mother tongue (mangling, for instance, the United Negro College Fund’s slogan, “A mind is a terrible thing to waste,” into “What a waste it is to lose one’s mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful”). Biden is plain-spoken—sometimes to a fault.
According to Jonathan Alter’s The Promise: President Obama, Year One, Obama experienced buyer’s remorse after choosing Biden but changed his mind six months after the election and started giving him a major role in foreign policy. Domestically, he’s had a lot of say on budget matters. Although Biden is known to have strong opinions (he’s pushed aggressively for troop withdrawal in Afghanistan), his chief role is as intermediary with foreign leaders and members of Congress. The role of diplomat is an unexpected one for someone whose major fault is not knowing when to keep his mouth shut. But, according to Alter, the qualities that make Biden look, from afar, “like a windy, gaffe-prone glad-hander” make him seem, to other politicians, like “an irrepressible Labrador.” Biden is not a stupid man. He’s a smart man who often says stupid things. When you know him, apparently, you don’t feel inclined to hold that against him.
Perhaps Biden’s greatest asset as vice president is that his liabilities are so different from those of his predecessor. A secretive man who obtained way too much power, Cheney always said precisely what he meant to. Biden, by contrast, is gregarious, undisciplined, often indiscreet, and plainly subordinate to his commander-in-chief. Maybe America sees this change as too refreshing to find fault.
Timothy Noah is a senior editor at The New Republic. This article appeared in the April 5, 2012 of the magazine.
16 comments
It shouldn't be surprising at all. You look at the pluses outlined in the piece: knowledge, experience, and policy skill. A statesman with a long career can survive the occasional slip of the tounge; Palin and Quayle were naifs thrust from nowhere on the national stage, and it showed. They were painfully inadequate, not just in the language but between the ears. The minuses for Biden are mostly beltway hullabaloo (He makes "gaffes" and sometimes mangles the language, but in the way of a crusty uncle, not someone out of his depth. His 2008 campaign was lackluster [Newsflash: Everyone's campaign not named Clinton or Obama in '08 was lackluster by default. They played on a whole other level. That didn't mean Biden didn't acquit himself fine in debates or on the trail.]) Only one section of these actually matters to real people. I've always thought Biden was a great Veep pick, and he's done nothing to prove me wrong.
- Crock1701
March 16, 2012 at 12:20am
I agreed with your doubts - and still do. But people know that Biden cares about them. He's smarter than most of us, and certainly more knowledgeable, but never takes on airs about that, or about his lofty positions over the years. I think he might be too folksy and friendly to be able to be seen as President. But as Vice President, he's great. Biden seems to bring the common person's view into the White House, and often reports out about key moments (such as the Bin Laden mission) in a way that's moving and entirely credible, precisely because we know he doesn't have 100% control of his tongue. It's also interesting that several White House mistakes were against Biden's good advice - and that Biden never tries to make hay out of that. (While still managing to quietly let you in the press know about it?) Choosing him, keeping him, and giving him solid VP-level responsibility - but not at the level of Cheney (shudder), or even Gore before him - makes Obama look strong, confident, smart, non-ideological, and even a bit kind. None of which plays badly in Peoria. Finally, by not being a prospective President, he keeps Obama's options open in terms of whom to support as a successor. I know my answer to that one: Hillary 2016!
- floydsm8
March 16, 2012 at 2:01am
Didn't Biden have a brain aneurysm operated on in the past? That, plus his age, might explain some of his gaffes. The rest might be explained by his irrepressible personality, but certainly not stupidity. I hope he presses Obama even further to get out of Afghanistan. The two recent travesties there by American troops indicate strongly that our time there is done. Exit ASAP and don't look back.
- magboy47.
March 16, 2012 at 2:44am
I'm not surprised - I love Joe Biden and always have. He might prefer being underestimated, who wouldn't? I think his gaffes are always overblown by the press and are more often than not blunt and/or charming rather than embarrassing. What's sometimes forgotten about Joe Biden He's also a veritable partisan ouzi when he feels like it. He postively unmanned the self-reverential, utterly ridiculous Rudy Guiliani. He's never recovered from "noun, verb 9/11" nor should he. He handled the mess in his lap of Sarah Palin like a pro. My favorite character in the photo of POTUS and his crew watching Osama Bin Laden being brained by SEALS was our Joe. His look said "yeah, that's right. I'm still here - sitting at this table too, right where I belong."
- WandreyCer
March 16, 2012 at 7:26am
"He is a pleasant man who, without any important qualifications for the office, would very much like to be president." Lippman's description of FDR in 1932, one that also applies to Biden. Being the brightest bulb isn't a qualification for high office; indeed, it's a liability.
- rayward
March 16, 2012 at 8:35am
The Onion photo of a shirtless Biden washing his Trans-Am, though fake (I assume - with Biden, you can't really know for sure), captures him perfectly. Can you imagine a better contrast to Romney?
- GeoffG
March 16, 2012 at 10:05am
Setting aside Biden's years of public service and his knowledge of foreign policy, if the president's political team needs to make the president look like a hero, than the vice-president must assume the role of sidekick. Biden's chattiness and affability--his commonness, really--make him an apt sidekick for the reserved, intellectual Obama. In that sense, it allows the White House to build that narrative that people can relate to. (By comparison, the narrative that most Americans saw in the White House by the end of the Bush years was a confused man out of his depth as president, and a Rasputin-like figure in Cheney as the power behind the throne [although I doubt this was more than superficially accurate]). As for The Onion, I (and, apparently, Biden as well) have really enjoyed the way they consistently portray him as a likeable but low-class shlub, trying to pick up single mothers in his old Trans-Am and inviting ambassadors to drink beer on the White House roof.
- benjamin81
March 16, 2012 at 11:19am
I am the 1%... ...who voted for Biden for President. Today, he is still the most qualified guy for the job. My enthusiasm for voting Democrat this November will come from 1) my disgust at the opposition platform and 2) my love for Joe Biden. The Obama ticket doesn't excite me without him.
- Konstantin
March 16, 2012 at 1:39pm
As a person whose tongue has often been out of control (most notably in the leadup to a complicated trial having mis-sent an email stating that a judge's head was up her ass), I am glad that I have a representative on my demographic on the Presidential team, albeit, one who is smarter and more discreet than I am. (One can have too much of a good thing.)
- skahn
March 16, 2012 at 2:55pm
Am also in that 1%, Konstantin -- would have been good to see Biden as president. The Republicans are working real hard to make sure I vote for Obama again...
- LISAH
March 16, 2012 at 8:11pm
Would be nice some day before I die toi vote for a Dem ticket for P and VP where both are Progressives, hard nosed, understand and promote Keynesian economic policies, and have more to recommend than they are not an embarrassment.
- drofnats1
March 16, 2012 at 9:50pm
@drofnats1 (I still don't know what the current penchant for prefixing handles with @ is about) That's quite a prescription, hopefully one that will arrive to market before you sign off. Who knows, stranger things have happened! (;
- Tgossard
March 18, 2012 at 10:58am
Before any[every]body hastens to inform me that '@' is a Twitter convention, I say "yes, I know, but what I want to know is why has it become ubiquitous in all social media domains, and (as here) in nearly all comments sections, or so it would seem?"
- Tgossard
March 18, 2012 at 11:06am
Support for the re election of anti- Semite Obama keep coming in TNR. What the USA really needs is the apprentice sorcerer Obama playing with the Middle East and his VP Bidden upset that Jews are building in their re united capital. The two did not do all the damage they can do in the Middle east. The Muslim Brotherhood they deem "Moderates" have not finished taking over everywhere in the Arab world before erecting the Caliphate world wide. Me? I will vote for anyone running to replace anti- Semite Obama.
- Poupic
March 19, 2012 at 3:59am
I survived the Shoa so of course I never knowingly vote for anti- Semites. Biden upset at Jews building in their eternal capital of Jerusalem =, never an Arab capital was enough and sufficient for me to never vote for Biden, not even for dog catcher. He is going with the head anti- Semite Obama that even if someone paid me $millions I would not vote for him. Millions of Jewish lives in Israel depend on anti- Semite Obama be replaced. Anyone, no matter whowill be safer for million Jews.
- Poupic
March 24, 2012 at 2:12pm
We should all commend Mr. Noah for expressing what we so rarely hear journalists utter-- a mea culpa. Still, in an effort to justify misgivings he now disavows, Noah's article "Second Thoughts" gives voice to a misleading non sequitur. In the second paragraph, Noah rehearses the ill-fated history of Biden's Presidential campaign and correctly identifies two of the candidate's notorious lapses that aborted it. The following paragraph then implies that upon Biden's return to the Senate, these very lapses in integrity somehow sullied his credibility and prevented him, while presiding over Clarence Thomas' nomination hearings, from interrogating Thomas on his own transgressions and ultimately, impeded him from defeating Thomas' nomination to the Supreme Court. What the article conveniently omits to mention however are the intervening four years that separated the Biden's withdrawal from the 1988 Presidential campaign in September 1987 and the start of the Clarence Thomas hearings in October 1991. More importantly, Noah's article conveniently elides the successful campaign Biden led as the Senate Judiciary Committee's Chairman in September 1987, only days after he ended his Presidential campaign in fact, to defeat Judge Bork's nomination-- a defeat that led to Justice Kennedy's anointment and in turn, to the deciding vote that saved Roe v. Wade If the venial sins that doomed Biden's Presidential campaign had inhibited him as the Senate Judiciary Committee's Chairman, wouldn't they have done so during the Bork hearings, immediately after they surfaced, rather than four years later when everyone but Biden's most zealous detractors had forgotten them? Biden's errors of judgment and discretion may or may not turned the Thomas confirmation hearings into a Grand Guignol and denied the Democrats an opportunity to defeat him. However, Biden's 1987 Presidential campaign and improprieties in law school had nothing to do with it. Then again, perhaps Timothy Noah is himself guilty of the very intellectual dishonesty for which he rebukes Biden.
- MSCHWEBER@YAHOO.COM
March 27, 2012 at 3:19pm