Biden Gets It on Judges

Speaking at the American Constitution Society's National Convention, Senator Biden raged against the right-wing's judicial agenda:

"What is really at stake the wholesale liquidation of any constitutional protection of privacy." Biden added that those on the right, the "Constitutional in Exile crowd, believe that there should no protection of privacy in the constitution."

Biden further explained that the Constitution in Exile movement seeks to overturn many of the New Deal reforms. He quoted American Enterprise Institute's Michael Greve, who has argued for, "a fundamental intellectual assault on the entire New Deal edifice." To exemplify the dangers of the Constitution in Exile movement Biden asked, "What would happen if we had five Justice Thomases?...Five Justice Thomases, thousands of laws, environmental, criminal, civil rights, would be declared unconstitutional." (Click here for ACSblog's dicussion on what a Thomas Court might look like). Biden then asked the audience, "Do you believe, if we did not have a Social Security Law, one would be passed today in the House of Representatives? I don't think that there is any possibility."

Biden explained that judicial nominations are so important to the radical right to push their agenda rather than the congress is because, "Because the American people do not agree with them...[and]now is the time for the right to strike and lock in the their philosophy to handcuff future congresses from overturning the right's agenda...and an acknowledgment that the right can not take on popular programs in the light of day."

It's about fucking time a Democratic Senator stood up and screamed that the Supreme Court does a whole lot more than abortion and gay rights.  The right wants to destroy our very system of government, and Biden is fighting back.

•  you know...

  ...there's a way to fix that.  Roe v Wade is just a band-aid.  If you want to put privacy protections in the constition you are going to HAVE to get an Ammendment.

  Period.  End of story.  Then it doesn't matter who you put in the SC.  It's in bold letternig they can't interpret that it doesn't exist.

  by DawnG on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:35:30 PM PDT

  •  Well, whaddya know.....

    ...I did an entire diary on that very subject just the other day.  It sank with nary a trace...

    by Roddy McCorley on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:50:12 PM PDT

    •  Ah thank ye laddie...

      ...for pointin out that fine gem of a diary. I'll be readin that right away.  

      <cough>  sorry...name like Roddy McCorley ispired the accent.

      by DawnG on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:58:32 PM PDT

  •  Roe != privacy

    The "right to privacy" doctrine was spelled out in Griswold v. Connecticut, which said the state couldn't outlaw contraception without a compelling interest.

    There is currently a right to privacy. We should maintain that, by demanding that nominees to the Court make their views on this known.

    by Elwood Dowd on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 04:01:55 PM PDT

•  Thing about Biden

  Everyone is on his case these days. And he DOES deserve to take some shit. But checking his Senate voting record, he is in reality a GREAT Senator. No, scratch that. His voting record is GREAT. He is an ADEQUATE Senator because on certain key issues he fails to lead.

  But, for example, in 2004 he got a 95% rating from Americans for Democratic Action. I mean, 95%!!!!! ADA leans to the left of the Dem party, so we aren't talking DLC here. Biden, like Clinton, may not be the best Dem leader. But he, like Clinton, MOSTLY kicks ass in terms of voting record.

  by mole333 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:39:25 PM PDT

  •  Too bad he's always on TV

    Selling out Dean for his own gain, oh and helping to pass anti-bankruptcy legislation.

    by SonofFunk on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:41:49 PM PDT

    •  Was just talking with a Green

      Co-worker of mine voted Green in 2000, though he since regretted it. He still is a Green but recognizes the shit we have gotten ourselves into. I was talking to him about the difficulty of getting the left actually active in a local campaign, leading to the most progressive candidate having to drop out, leaving the old guard and the corrupt machine candidates contesting the field.

      The constant dKos attacks on Hillary, Biden and the DLC came up. His reaction? The reaction of the Green guy? He said:

      "No! You never do that. You support whoever it is against the Republicans. That is how they win, that is  the only way the left can  win."

      If we ruin the re-election chances of all the Dems we have a beef with on one issue or another, they will most likely be replaced with Repubs.

      And then where will we be.

      Work for the progressive candidates. Work your ASSES off for the progressive candidates. Too many of them have to drop out because not enough of us are out there doing what it takes to get a candidate elected. Sure we are pushing OH-2, but look locally and I find the left apathetic DESPITE some pefect grassroots candidates. So get out there and fight for the candidate you like.

      But...

      that doesn't mean spend diary after diary destroying the Democratic party. If THAT is all we do, we are losers. Period.

      I am sorry. I will accept Biden's shilling for the center if 95% of the time he votes the progressive stand. If our standards are so high that 95% isn't good enough, then we are fucked up.

      by mole333 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:50:16 PM PDT

      •  It's a matter of principle

        Maybe I'm naive here, but that bankruptcy bill was a huge victory by the corprocrats. Looks downright corrupt too. Like Maryscott, I'm through with him. Actually, his backstabbing Dean WILL lose dems elections nationwide.

        When does principle come before politics? And anyway, the right keeps demanding greater and greater ideological rigor out of Rethugs, and get away with it, so why can't we demand that dems stand up for people?

        Past results do not equal future gains.
        

        by SonofFunk on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 04:00:03 PM PDT

        •  Well

          It is a matter of principle to me to think about the CONSEQUENCES of my actions. If by condeming a mediocre Dem I wind up with a Repub, then my actions have HURT the nation. I am willing to accept a mediocre DEm over a Repub because THAT is how we can defeat the right.

          Do not imply that my stand is NOT a matter of principle. It is. I have staked out a stand where I fight my hardest for the best progressive candidate (while most leftists locally stay home and let the party machine dominate!) but I refuse to hand the Repubs ANY victory no matter what the Dem is like. WHy? BEcause the stand that we fight among ourselves or go third party has led to the absolute worst and corrupt and disgusting scum in American history have taken over our nation. THAT is not principle. It is losing.

          When does principle come before politics? When it doesn't had the Republicans a victory. I can tell you in great detail the fight I have just been part of trying to get a REAL progressive elected to a local position. THe leftists never turned out. They did nothing. So the candidate had to pull out. The left MISSED the opportunity for principle to come into play. They let the corrupt local machine take the lead. But when it comes to a fight where the Repubs have a chance to win, THAT is when politics need to dominate. In my mind, my fellow leftists (at least in my local area) are failing completely. So we will be left with a corrupt machine politics candidate in one position and a Repub in another position because the left is failing to do the right thing--either principle OR politics--in either case.

          So if the left wants me to believe they have the answer, they had better stop complaining and start getting their act together.

          by mole333 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 06:54:23 PM PDT

          •  I agree with all of your logic in principle.

            But you know who else has a decent voting record? Joe Lieberman. And to tell you the truth I'd rather have an almost anyone R-CT than a backstabbing, Bush slobbering sellout like Joementum.

            Biden gives aid and comfort to the enemy at the expense of the party. If he could, he'd tear us all new assholes on the left if it made him an extra buck. Biden's an opportunist and his record is a way  of getting people like us to support him when, really, we should be telling him to shut up.

            by SonofFunk on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 07:54:15 PM PDT

            •  And yet

              This is how the Republicans do so well. They exploit our divisions expertly. And each and every Repb who replaces a "backstabbing" Dem means one more vote preventing a filibuster, one more vote for everything on Bush's agenda. Look at all of the votes Biden voted well on. Now switch them to the Bush vote. THAT is what we do by being divided.

              by mole333 on Sat Jul 30, 2005 at 07:00:28 AM PDT

              •  Unity at all costs

                Well I admire your Lincolnlike way of trying to forge unity in the Dem party. Like I said, I completely agree that a unified front is what progressives need.

                But you've avoided all of my specific points in this thread. This has nothing to do with Rethugs making me or anyone else exploiting divisions. It has to do with people who are obviously and explicitly destroying this cause. Just look at all the posts by Kos about how it's the DLC that keeps up this perpetual backlash even when there's no "lash" to begin with. I think everyone on this site would agree that Joementum is a DINO regardless of his voting record. When you set yourself up on national TV like you're that national spokesman for the party, like Biden and Joe, and say the things they say, all they do is reinforce that attitude that progressive values suck and at least there's some Dems who are "moderate". Yeah, that's it... backstabs party at EVERY turn... moderate. Sure. Unity at all costs.

                by SonofFunk on Sat Jul 30, 2005 at 09:44:09 AM PDT

              •  let me further emphasize that

                you can't have it both ways. you can't include everyone and keep allowing the politicians who only get ahead by selling every other dem out at every turn. period.

                the rethug's secret isn't unity. that's a false front they maintain. they have plenty of infighting. the trick is, they have hardcore discipline. they don't have rethugs going on faux news every week SELLING OUT THE WHOLE DAMN PARTY

                by SonofFunk on Sat Jul 30, 2005 at 09:49:02 AM PDT

                •  Our discussion

                  Our discussion is getting hard to read!

                  Don't think that I actually LIKE the way the DLC act. First let me sum up my points to this point:

                  The left is ALSO playing the blame game and the attack game. It isn't JUST the DLC. I just happen to agree with the left more on the issues.

                  The blame game and attacks from both sides are making our party easy pickings for the Republican attack machine.

                  I think we agree on both of these, though I suspect you may differ in some details.

                  Now what is my solution? It is to, personally as part of the grassroots progressives, REFRAIN from the blame game and attack/counterattack game, and instead simply focus on getting the good folks elected. My theory is that if the progressive grassroots igore the DLC and instead show their strength in a POSITIVE way, by being a major part of the Dem machine getting folks elected, two things will happen. First, we will start getting "our" kind of Dem elected more. Second, we will be proving that we have the determination and skills to domainate the party. We will prove our credentials, as it were, and become the winners. WHen that happens, the DLC will fade into obscurity. It does mean that Biden ans his type will probably stick around for awhile until they retire, but it also recognizes that those kinds of Dems will mostly vote the correct way.

                  The current state has the left as the mosquito-like, irritating complainers who don't (except in rare cases) actually get out and do the footwork for the party. In this last statement I am mainly talking about my local experience, but it is what I also hear from folks around the country. Under these circumstances we are the obscure fringe, the DLC dominates the party, and the Republicans win because of the DLC failures and the infighting.

                  The other option is for the left to up it's attacks on the DLC and, with the split in full swing, the two sides of the Dems duke it out. I think this will only weaken BOTH the DLC and the left and squander our best opportunity to save our country. I don't know how many more years of Republican domination our nation can take before our democracy is moribund. If I thought the left did what the German left did in the 1920's I would be horrified by our stupidity. It seems to me that is what we are currently doing and that is why I get so frustrated by BOTH the DLC and the leftist posturing.

                  by mole333 on Sat Jul 30, 2005 at 10:20:36 AM PDT

                  •  ok, now all of THAT i agree with

                    and this is maybe the most challenging problem to face because, like i said, i don't think we can have it both ways.

                    i absolutely agree with concentrating as much (positive) energy as we can muster to support the candidates that really represent the core of the party. and, let's face it -- all of america. issues of having jobs, affordable health care, clean water, impartial justice, etc... these are core issues that are being torn apart by cynical, greedy, corporate-backed pols on BOTH sides of the aisle.

                    so what's the point of that? well, i think it means we do need to be careful not to get mired in civil war, especially as it distracts from getting our candidates in office. but i don't think it will go away on its own. in my opinion the damge the DLC and by extention DINOs lile Joe, and yes, Biden too is a grave and immediate issue. if we can't primary all these guys out (unlikely given the incumbent effect), we need to do all we can to get Reid, Dean, and anyone else who will listen, to come up with some way of curbing this. yes, they'd fade away (perhaps) after huge gains in Congress, but my point is, it's hard too do that without discipline. we can't play as a team when a 1/4 of your players run to the other end and score against you for their own attention.

                    by SonofFunk on Sat Jul 30, 2005 at 11:45:18 AM PDT

                    •  Reid and Dean

                      Right now it isn't really Dean's place to reign them in. Reid is unlikely to do so since he might lean right himself. Oddly he is somewhat the opposite of Biden. Reid probably votes worse than Biden but talks better. Go figure.

                      Don't be surprised if things move faster than you think if we take a positive approach. Dean's DNC is already proving that the DLC model can be superceded by a more grassroots model. DFA is proving its worth even in red states like Montana. Now if people like you and me can make the Dean/DFA model more widespread on the local leve across the nation, I am willing to bet you will see some defections from the DLC to the DFA model, you will see those who maintain the DLC model staying more quiet because they will need to cater to us, and those few holdouts who really want to stay loudly DLC will retire soon enough anyway.

                      Let's prove our worth better than we are now. If we can win Montana 2004, and (I hope!) OH-2 and maybe VA Gov in 2005, then who knows in 2006, then it will be clear that we have a better formula than they do.

                      Nothing wins better than existing success. That is what the left needs and Dean's DNC and DFA are in the process of getting he successes we need. Nothing loses worse than rancorous division in the face of a united and determined enemy. Don't give the DLC more credit than they deserve. They are so big only because the left has thus far been too removed from the action...partly by our own peevishness (going Green, for example, in 2000). 2004 was really the first time that the DFA/Dean model (or MoveOn...ACT...Wellstone Action...etc model) got tested. We lost. But it really WAS our first go. We will do better next time if we get over the blame game.

                      I think you and I really agree almost 100% on all of this. We just place different emphasis on our anger towards the DLC types.

                      by mole333 on Sat Jul 30, 2005 at 12:35:05 PM PDT

      •  If someone votes Green or third party

        or stays home in the general election of the 08 presidential race, rather than voting for Hilary, then all I ask is they dont complain when President Sam Brownback is picking SCOTUS nominees in 09.

        by jj32 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 04:02:23 PM PDT

        •  Thank you!

          I consider people who still insist on being Green (it's not easy, after all!) should just shut up about how bad things are under Bush.

          But I know some still remain smugly anti-democrat.

          Many Greens I know saw the light in 2004 and continue to see the light (one is right here visiting my apartment!).

          by mole333 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 06:41:07 PM PDT

      •  I agree with your entire comment

        The thing that gets my goat with Biden is that he says these brilliant things to internal party supporters, votes the right way, but often fails to deliver when a wider audience is watching.

        If he could just go for it - say these things on Meet the Press and all the others he so frequently appears on, I'd be much happier with him.  Democrats are missing the opportunity to tell America what is really going on because they are afraid of being attacked, or being perceived as opposition, or whatever.  But at the end of the day, the country is following a guy who said, "You're either with us or against us."  To me that means Americans like people who publically take a stand no matter how f*&cking stupid it is.  

        I thing we need to teach our Democratic leaders to support each other no matter what too.

        by inclusiveheart on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 04:02:24 PM PDT

        •  Yes!

          THat is the problem with the DLC types. It ISN'T (despite what so many say) that they aren't real Dems. They ARE. They vote well most of the time...overwhelmingly. But when the cameras are rolling, and push comes to shove, they want to hedge their bets. THAT is the problem.

          The DLC sort are solid Dems. But they aren't LEADERS. So don't go all out attacking them. Instead fight for the REALLY good candidates, get out the vote and WE will dominate the party. Then the DLC types will either triangulate our way or will wither away. But the internal fighting only hurts ALL of us.

          by mole333 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 06:45:58 PM PDT

          •  The BIG problem is that the DLC types have

            HUGE EGOS.  They have enjoyed a decade of dominance with their non-leadership and so we are pissed at them for not getting out of the way of real leaders who are willing to take REAL risks.

            The worst part about them is that they seem to have no problem having conflict with US and they have a real conflict complex with the GOP.  I think the only solution is to scare them more than the GOP does. :)  I have to laugh because the irony of that last statement is just simply laughable.  Why fight your allies when you could band together and defeat your opponents.

            My Mother is very wise - studied political science - has lived in DC most of her adult life - she always referenced the pendulum.  Even she has decided that it is not going to swing the other direction all by itself - someone HAS TO PUSH THE PENDULUM NOW.  The Centrists are not leaders for this task.

            by inclusiveheart on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 06:53:33 PM PDT

            •  With all due respect

              The leftists have HUGE egos as well. I am finding them MUCH harder to work with when it comes to getting the good guys elected than working with the left.

              But your mother is right. The pendulum needs a BIG push. But if we fight among ourselves, from what I see, all that happens is the voters see our disunity, peg us as losers, and either vote Repub or sit out the election. So both sides need their egos subdued and their brains more in gear.

              by mole333 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 07:03:16 PM PDT

              •  Politics is full of egos

                No Question.  I was raised with some of the best of them from all the parts of the spectrum.  It is the nature of the beast.  I think what I am saying is that the centrist DLC types are used to "leading", but right now the democracy (not to be confused with the "D" party) needs leaders who have the balls to take a stand like a Johnson or Roosevelt et al.  I keep saying this, but people want to be lead.  They really do.  DLC style government works "fine" when the economy is strong and peace is taken for granted, but when people feel at risk they want people to say "Hey this is the right thing to do!"  The DLC refuses to adapt to what is NEEDED at this point in history.  In reality that is Bush's strength at the core no matter how screwed up his plan - he is unyielding and commited.  Passion is what we lack and you don't get passion from the people who are fatally attached to the middle-of-the-road.

                by inclusiveheart on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 07:19:33 PM PDT

•  oh, so does this mean

  that Biden won't roll over and play dead on this one?  I'm not holding my breath.

  by corvo on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:41:21 PM PDT

•  Give credit where credit is due

  Biden does get it on judges, and he has done good when it comes to Bolton too.

  by jj32 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:46:40 PM PDT

  •  just because he "gets it"...

    ...doesn't mean he's got the guts to "go for it".

    and that is probably a good description of a lot of the milquetoast dems in senate these days.

    by DawnG on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:55:51 PM PDT

    •  I agree words arent everything

      but on Bolton he actually put his money where is mouth was and fought the nomination.  So did Dodd and Boxer, not saying it was just him. He certainly "went for it there." He also voted against Gonzalez. Look, I dont like his Bankruptcy Bill vote, it was awful, just awful. But on certain things, he's done good.

      by jj32 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:59:54 PM PDT

      •  forget Bolton;

        that's a lost cause anyway if/when the recess appointment comes through.

        How about ROBERTS?  That's where we'll see what he's made of.

        by corvo on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 04:32:01 PM PDT

  •  or maybe...

    ..give credit cards when credit is due...sorry for the corn, but after the Cafta & Energy bills, I'm a little daffy!

    by cognocenza on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 05:46:46 PM PDT

    •  haha, that's ok

      that was funny, I laughed. :). Biden at least was a "Nay" on CAFTA.

      by jj32 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 09:43:10 PM PDT

•  I like

  the way he turned the "they resort to the courts because they can't get their positions through the elected branch" argument around.

  As much as I dislike the "activist" and "unelected judiciary" rhetoric, it may as well be used on both sides.

  by Jorge McJunk on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:51:27 PM PDT

•  I hope that was a rehearsal

  for any Sunday appearances he may have booked.

  by mrblifil on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 03:53:39 PM PDT

•  Good for him

  Lets hope he sticks with this. Biden is very good at saying all the right things when in front of a TV camera, then falling back in line when he gets a call from his constituents at MBNA... My last straw with Biden was that fucking oppressive bankruptcy bill that he voted for. IMHO, there is no way one could vote for that and still call themselves a Democrat.

  by Burton Halli on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 04:09:41 PM PDT

•  thanks for sharing this diary

  this is good to hear.

  by BiminiCat on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 05:43:32 PM PDT

•  Hmmm.....

  Caught a few minutes of John Edwards speaking before this same group today on c-span....he said much the same about the Constitution in Exile movement...could it be that the democrats are testing out  a new frame in an attempt to wake up the masses as to what many so-called conservatives are really about?

  by tjb22 on Fri Jul 29, 2005 at 09:26:31 PM PDT