Skip to main content

About Those Gaffes

Get used to it folks. Biden without gaffes wouldn’t be Biden.

Thinking about the gaffe problem, I went back to Time magazine’s “Top 10 Joe Biden Gaffes,” most of them from the Obama years.

With the exception of the time he commented that Obama was “articulate” — which was bad enough then, but radioactive now — what the media and Republicans seized on as gaffes, and treated as major news, now look both quaint and ridiculously tame. Compared to what we now see dozens of times a day, both from the current administration and much of Congress, Biden is a master orator on the order of Cicero.

Seriously, you can read these so-called gaffes for yourself — I’m not even going there because I’d just look silly. The only thing worth mentioning is that each one was greeted at the time — both by the press and the GOP — as a sure harbinger of imminent Armageddon.

Almost all were the remarks of a guy who likes to talk, who observes things around him, and sometimes forgets that the media puts the worst possible spin on every word out of his mouth. Joe’s gaffes have always been good for ratings.

But now, this is his moment, because he couldn’t possibly out-gaffe Trump if he trained for it. Trump does more damage in a single tweet than Biden has done in his entire life. A tweet is worth a thousand gaffes.

Which is not to say the press isn’t trying to stir things up. That’s what they do.

Witness the so-called “controversy” surrounding a comment Biden made about the differences in diversity between Black and Latino communities. This was in remarks made to a group of, yes, Black and Latino journalists. And here are the offending words:

"What you all know, but most people don't know. Unlike the African American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is [an] incredibly diverse community with incredibly different attitudes about different things. You go to Florida you find a very different attitude about immigration in certain places than you do when you're in Arizona. So it's a very different, a very diverse community."

After reading this, are you changing your vote to Trump?

This is where the left has to lighten up. Yes, it was probably a subject Joe didn’t  have to bring up. Yes, Joe being Joe, he could have phrased it differently. And yes, he should know by now that the press is always waiting in the tall weeds, ready to pounce.

But let’s consider, also, that he was trying to make an actual point. Not a brilliant point, to be sure, but one based on observation, intellectual curiosity, and an obvious desire to make sense of the world, which — let’s face it — is not making much sense at the moment. And which Trump, by contrast, seems bent on destroying in real time.

Then let’s give Biden some credit for feeling comfortable with his audience. His first words — “What you all know, but most people don’t know” — are the most important part of the whole quote, yet they’ve gotten no attention. He is assuming common knowledge with both Black and Latino journalists, in an out-front, mutually respectful discussion. The stories you’re reading somehow leave that out.

If they’re trying to make Biden out to be some closeted racist, they’ll need to work a lot harder than this.

Let’s be clear, so we don’t get bamboozled yet again. Democrats are always held to higher standards, both by the media and the GOP, mostly because they hold themselves to higher standards.

At the same time, Republicans are held to no standards whatsoever. They are assumed, even by the press, to be morally and intellectually bankrupt — that they will lie, cheat, and steal, even when they don’t have to. There’s no news there, so what’s a reporter to do except wait for a Democrat to get caught jaywalking?

Reporters need a both-siderist slant to keep their jobs. We can depend on them to seize on the slightest whiff of controversy, anything they can use to prove that Democrats are just as terrible as Republicans. After all, one side jaywalks, the other puts children in concentration camps. Equally bad, right?

The generals call this asymmetrical warfare, spitballs versus tanks. It’s been going on for 50 years. We have to stop falling for it.

Speaking of which, by the time you read this, Biden may or may not have named his running mate. But please notice, again, the press’s compulsive need to drum up a quarrel where there is none. They’re handicapping the frontrunners, stirring up the usual racism and misogyny, and chasing down every petty snipe and quibble they can find, in search of that bombshell “Democrats in Disarray!”story. Again.

Let’s not play this time, okay? The only thing important is that Biden pick a person that he’s confident can perform as president. Nothing else matters.

So let the media gin up any bombshell it wants. The truth is, Joe Biden could pick Kermit the Frog and he would not lose a single vote. We should all just shut up and let him figure it out. The electorate will not shift while we wait.

And yes, there will be more gaffes. He’s Joe, after all.

But the man is under a bit of pressure. We have chosen him to rescue the entire American Experiment. Maybe we should cut him some slack.

Berkley MI

Tuesday 07/11/20

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Decents, Deplorables, and the Conditional Mood

  F or my next trick, I’d like to indulge in a linguistic conceit of sorts. I’d like to use the current political nightmare to speculate about a matter of grammar, of all things, that has long intrigued me: Namely, why do so many languages codify the conditional mood — also known as the conditional tense — in their grammar? Why do we use ‘should,’ ‘could,’ and especially ‘would,’ in so much of our speech? Why do we hedge our conversations this way? Why is it more acceptable to say “I would like a cup of coffee” than “Give me a cup of coffee.” Why is one deferential and the other pushy? Why has history passed down this polite form to multiple language groups, in such a similar way? Why is it bad form to use “I want” in a non-confrontational situation? And why does the MAGA crowd insist on such bad form? I have a speculative answer to these questions, but first let me cavalierly divide the world into two groups of people: Decents and Deplorables . Goods ...

Uncertainty is Ready for its Closeup

E very day, we learn a little more about the way the Trump junta operates. We might sum it up with the phrase “Shoot first, ask questions later,” but this is not entirely accurate. They do indeed shoot first, mostly with executive orders that are breathtaking in their over-reach, malicious intent, and criminal shortsightedness. But they don’t so much ask questions later, as they send stupid lawyers into court to defend stupefyingly illegal behavior. They tend to fail, but even in failure, the confusion they create works wonders for them. On what must be several dozen fronts since January, MAGA operatives looking to subvert the government have done so, first by launching whatever harebrained scheme they’ve come up with, then by watching for the fallout. The fallout could be in the form of a court ruling, or howls of protest from the victims, or even from Democrats calling them out. But the point is that they depend on that first launch to shake things up, to flo...

Yet Another Mole in Need of Whacking

  I n a week when Israel attacked Iran, Trump invaded Los Angeles, four million Americans took to the streets, and a Minnesota legislator was assassinated, the news from the arcane world of digital advertising probably didn’t make it to your list of big concerns. By the time I’m done, it probably still won’t. But in this miasma of Trumpish distractions, it’s often hard to figure out what we’re being distracted from . It’s a constant game of whack-a-mole, and last week, we got the first inkling of yet another mole that will require whacking. Warning: This will take a while to explain, and might cause mild-to-severe boredom. Proceed at your own risk: As we’ve seen, the Trump gang has recently extorted large corporate law firms into defending its pet causes, an ongoing story still developing. Now, apparently, they are trying to do something similar with large advertising agencies. The immediate focus is on the approval, or not, of a major merger between two of...