US Joe Biden News Megathread - The Other Biden Derangement Syndrome Thread (with a side order of Fauci Derangement Syndrome)

Let's pretend for one moment that he does die before the election, just for the funsies. What happens then? Will the nomination revert to option number 2, aka Bernie Sanders? Or will his running mate automatically replace him just the way Vice-President is supposted to step in after the Big Man in the White House chokes on a piece of matzo? Does he even have a running mate yet?

 

[Catch The Rainbow]

https://theweek.com/foreign-policy/1007579/biden-nearly-ended-the-drone-war-and-nobody-noticed

Our infamous drone war has largely faded from the headlines. Aside from one strike that went horribly wrong during the U.S. evacuation from Afghanistan, there has been vanishingly little coverage of what's going on with the signature American tactic of the war on terror: remote-controlled death robots.
So I was rather taken aback to discover President Biden has almost totally halted drone strikes, and airstrikes in general, around the world. It's a remarkable foreign policy reform, but also a remarkable failure of both government communication and media coverage. A hugely significant change in foreign policy has happened — and almost nobody is paying attention.

Not long ago, the drone war was subject to fierce public debate. It started under former President George W. Bush, then became a favored tactic of former President Barack Obama. He'd come to power on the strength of his record opposing the Iraq War but was, at bottom, a devoted imperial chauvinist. Obama wanted to avoid being bogged down in new overseas occupations (except in Afghanistan, where he idiotically boosted troop levels to no positive effect) but never truly questioned U.S. global imperialism or the military-industrial complex.
The drone strike was thus the perfect tool for his presidency: a cheap, high-tech, and supposedly super-accurate method of fighting terrorism (and extending U.S. military hegemony) at no risk to American soldiers. (U.S. airstrikes with human pilots increasingly operate in similar safety, rarely flying over targets with anti-aircraft defenses.) "Turns out I'm really good at killing people," Obama told aides in 2011. "Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine."
That was only true if "really good" is measured by quantity, not quality, of the strikes. The intelligence used to pick targets was routinely atrocious, and airstrikes blew up weddings, markets, and random civilian houses. A C-130 gunship annihilated a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Afghanistan in 2015. Many people in drone-ridden areas, especially children, developed chronic PTSD from the constant buzzing whine of a machine that could and quite often did kill them out of nowhere for no reason.


Former President Donald Trump, naturally, was even worse. At the start of his presidency, he rolled back even the modest protections for civilians Obama had implemented. Both air strikes (from drones and normal planes) and civilian casualties increased dramatically in 2017. To be fair, strikes were scaled back in the following years, but the damage was done. According to Airwars, during Trump's term American air and artillery strikes in Iraq and Syria created more than twice the number of casualties compared to Obama's second term (more than 10,000 vs. about 5,000). In Somalia, casualties increased roughly eight-fold.
It turns out airstrikes alone are just as militarily limited as they were back in the 1940s, when terror bombing accomplished little in the fight against the Nazis and Imperial Japan. Years of strikes in Yemen and Somalia achieved nothing but further destabilization of those beleaguered countries. Only in support of ground forces — as strikes were sometimes used to support the Iraqi military and Kurdish peshmerga in their fight against the Islamic State from 2014 to 2017 — is air power even tactically effective. And in the process of defeating ISIS, Trump's callous disregard for human life led to a botched 2017 airstrike in Mosul that killed 278 civilians, the worst death toll from a single American attack in the entire Iraq conflict.

To my considerable surprise, Biden seems to have internalized some of these lessons. Immediately after taking office, he set up a new system requiring White House approval for any strikes outside of active war zones (and later published Trump's loose rules that enabled so many civilian massacres). Now that the occupation of Afghanistan is over, that requirement applies almost everywhere, and it appears Biden is extremely reluctant to grant approval. Where Trump oversaw more than 1,600 air and artillery strikes in Iraq and Syria during his first 11 months in office, Airwars reports just four during Biden's term so far. Strikes in Somalia fell from roughly 75 last year to fewer than 10 this year, with no civilian casualties. And in Yemen, the annual total dropped from about 18 to maybe four, with fewer than 10 casualties of any kind. (Precise figures are unclear because some strikes are classified.)
That's a major shift — and this is probably the first you've heard of it.
It's not hard to guess why most of the media isn't paying attention to the near-ending of a longstanding and highly controversial policy: U.S. foreign affairs are often treated as little more than a backdrop for narcissistic psychodrama where actions are judged according to how much they make warmongers feel big and strong. Airstrikes are generally out of sight and therefore out of mind, and death robots terrorizing little kids don't play well on cable news.


But the quiet from Biden and his foreign policy staff is more mysterious. Maybe they're wary of sparking another media backlash, as happened with the exit from Afghanistan, or maybe the fear is Republicans accusing Biden of being weak on terrorism.
Whatever the reason, this silence is a mistake. The war on terror has been a gigantic blunder from the beginning. It has wasted more than $6 trillion and turned half a subcontinent into a smoldering ruin. Trump made a great deal of political hay out of loudly promising that he would be the one to stop the stupid wars and take care of the American people instead of playing world police. Biden actually curtailed the American war machine and deserves to reap the political benefits.
Risk of backlash is all the more reason to lean into the achievement. Trump proved that if a president is stubborn, repetitive, and boastful enough, he can do a great deal to sway public opinion, especially among his loyal partisans. And here we have a policy that isn't some Trumpian dishonest exaggeration — it's a real achievement.
This drastic reduction in airstrikes, like Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan, was genuinely politically courageous and morally correct (though both fell short of a full imperial rollback). Some well-earned bragging is in order.

 

[Justa Grata Honoria]

Someone posted and interesting opinion on why the democrats are behaving the way they're behaving In the past few months, that made me go hmm :

"I have a somewhat different take on it. One of the things that the politicians of failing regimes quite often do, before they flee the country, is vote themselves vast amounts of money. Has it occurred to you that that may be what’s behind those trillion-dollar pork bills the Democrats are trying to push through Congress"

Any opinions ?!

 

[MrJokerRager]

Actually having RvW overturn would be the best thing that can happen to Biden's Presidency

If abortion is kicked back to the states to determine if it's legal or not? Then the Democrats will have the necessary event to revitalize/reenergy the base and local/state branches in 2022 to a degree, that the GOP advantages in 2022 will be erased ENTIRELY.

2022 will no longer be a slam dunk for the GOP, a referrendum on Biden and bringing necessary checks to his reign of terror. It will be 100% about "protecting abortion rights" and the DNC, flush with donations after RvW is overturned, will be able to launch a full 50 state onslaught to take control over ALL the states in the US purely on the basis that "to protect abortion rights, we must control the state level governments of every 50 states". Which in turn will feed into the Congressional races, allowing the Democrats not only to preserve their majority in Congress but also potentially gain a super-majority too and permanent control over the state governments off of the DNC arguing the fear mongering prospect that ANY vote that isn't for a Democrat, is a vote to make abortion a crime under the notion that if the Republicans ever take back a state government, then their first priority would be to make abortion illegal.

Why are Republicans cucks in all of these scenarios.

Whitey really willing to die on a hill for not allowing states to have their own abortion laws while the same Democrats push for open borders, racial animosity and bullshit like CRT.

Maybe competition is needed for the RNC and cuckservatives since I don't believe Democrats have the advantage and many people would trade abortion rights for the ability to buy stuff for themselves and cheap gas and all that.

 

[Puff]

Someone posted and interesting opinion on why the democrats are behaving the way they're behaving In the past few months, that made me go hmm :

"I have a somewhat different take on it. One of the things that the politicians of failing regimes quite often do, before they flee the country, is vote themselves vast amounts of money. Has it occurred to you that that may be what’s behind those trillion-dollar pork bills the Democrats are trying to push through Congress"

Any opinions ?!

That's probably a bit optimistic. Sure, they're voting themselves tons of money, but that's normal. They won't run until a fall is clear and unavoidable.

 

[Gehenna]

I'm sure that's one of the reasons the Democrats cling tooth-and-nail to to Roe v. Wade. It's a terrible ruling. Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself said so. It's extremely vague and open for challenges... which is precisely what the Democrats want because it guarantees it will keep being challenged, and with every challenge they can just bang the drum. A well-defined policy, particularly one that left it to the states so people would be able to fight over it in their state legislatures, would do everybody good. But we can't have that.

What would you say if I told you the real reason was far, far more insidious and disgusting?

Roe v. Wade was an unexpected win at an unexpected time, allowing the Democrats to push a policy they had been trying to do for a while but couldn't. You see, ever since LBJ the Democrats have known that the black community could possibly make up an incredibly solid voting bloc which would ensure their win in major cities for a long, long time. They Steel Belt was faltering since the 50s but was on the verge of total collapse, and the 60s saw a massive series of blows by LBJ to the black family unit.

There was one problem. Children. Children are a unifier, inevitably if children are regularly born family units begin to form regardless of expenses.

This needed to be disrupted.

And then '73 came around, and an unexpected win occurred. An overly broad SCOTUS ruling which made abortion a 'right'. And within the next 2 years, by '75, suddenly abortion providers like Planned Parenthood were awash in cash... and really setting up shop near black neighborhoods.

Already having financial issues, it only made sense to put off having kids to these groups. And as LBJs policies truly made root and the Welfare Prison was entrenched... it only ever got worse.


Roe isn't enshrined because it's a good thing to have to fight over, its mediocre at best for that. No, it's enshrined because it's -the- lynchpin to ensuring the black vote never, ever fully breaks.

 

[Local FloRida-man]

RvW is NOT the lynchpin keeping topdown vaccine mandates back. The "medical privacy" thing is a meme because it's something dems pulled out of their ass to justify abortion. In no other instance is it used, and if you try to use it to justify anything else in court you'll be laughed out.

The argument for abortion is people feel entitled to an operation that ends a life. The argument for not getting vaxxed is people feel entitled to say no to someone forceably injecting a substance into their bloodstream. Theres a world of difference there that should be obvious.

Also, again, quit it with the "it'll energize the base!" bullshit. If fear of losing the next election stops you from fighting then you'll never fight for anything, because guess what? There is ALWAYS another election. Either the right has principles or it doesnt. If the latter? Let it die.

 

[Oats12345]

To be fair. It was some guy from San Francisco who was traveling in South Africa.
He's reportedly fully vaccinated, did not need hospitalization, and is currently self isolating.

California confirms first Omicron variant of COVID-19 case - Los Ange…

archived 1 Dec 2021 19:12:46 UTC

archive.md

It's up in the air how many people he spread it to in transit though. Might be an interesting development.

That still holds the irony. They can't blame anti vaxxers as much as they wish they could

 

[Oxous]

Yep, shutdown is all but locked in now. McConnell should just tell every Republican Senator to block the stopgap bill. Republicans are going to be blamed for this anyways, so why not?

 

[mandatorylurk]

I can’t reply to the Drone article but the writer seems to be conflating a lot of Trumps attacks with civilian attacks when it seemed to be just the opposite, hitting key people and tying attacks in Syria (ISIS) to inflate the numbers to make Obummer look better. The guy even tries to hand wave away the Afghan strike that killed an innocent family.

The tldr seems to be more Joepedo failed so badly with that Afghan retaliatory strike they’ve almost stopped completely. The writer is a standard DC neoliberal so if there is truth it’s being distorted like your insurance plan shooting up $300/month but you could still keep it if you wanted.

 

[The Nothingness]

Man, it is good to be Democrat. You can say incendiary language, which your allies in the corrupt press will say is a call for "insurrection" if said by a Republican, and will never be held accountable for it. The only time Democrats are thrown under the bus is when they are no longer useful to The Party.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, New Hampshire Democrat, warned of a “revolution” if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade as the rhetoric heated up ahead of oral argument Wednesday in a pivotal abortion case.

Ms. Shaheen’s comment came on a Monday press call regarding Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which centers on the constitutionality of Mississippi’s 2018 law banning most abortions after 15 weeks’ gestation.

“I hope the Supreme Court is listening to the people of the United States because — to go back to [reporter] Adam Sexton’s question — I think if you want to see a revolution go ahead, outlaw Roe v. Wade and see what the response is of the public, particularly young people,” said Ms. Shaheen on WMUR-TV. “Because I think that will not be acceptable to young women or young men.”

State Rep. Kurt Wuelper, a Republican, accused her of “fomenting violence and extremism.”

“I think it’s totally inappropriate for anybody that’s actually in office to suggest that a Supreme Court decision that can be overturned by a vote of the people if they so choose would lead to a revolution,” said Mr. Wuelper. “That’s outrageous. Talk about fomenting violence and extremism.” Mr. Turley said that the Constitution’s meaning “does not change depending on whether an interpretation is popular. Indeed, federal jurists are given life tenure precisely to protect them from this type of pressure and rhetoric.”

“If anything, such rhetoric may push justices to stand more steadfast in their role as interpreters of the Constitution,” he tweeted. “They are supposed to be reading the law not yielding to popular demands or, worse yet, veiled threats.”

Advocates on both sides of the issue have said that Dobbs could be the vehicle through which the court rolls back the 1973 Roe decision, which legalized abortion nationwide, and its companion, the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey ruling.

Leading pro-choice and pro-life groups plan to hold mass rallies Wednesday outside the court during oral argument in the Mississippi case, which hinges on whether pre-viability restrictions are constitutional.

Ms. Shaheen called the case “the biggest threat to overturning Roe V. Wade in the history of that decision.”

Sen. John Thune, South Dakota Republican, called for the court to strike down Roe v. Wade.

“This case offers the best opportunity in many years to see Roe v. Wade overturned or modified — something that is long overdue,” said Mr. Thune in a Tuesday speech on the Senate floor. “Roe v. Wade was a bad decision that should long ago have been reversed.”

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/nov/30/sen-jeanne-shaheen-predicts-revolution-if-supreme-/

 

[Henry V]

lol

 

[Zero Day Defense]

If you think ACB or Roberts will vote aganist abortion you are fucking stupid.

Indeed, it would be really silly of me to expect a Catholic to vote against something upheld by a half-assed verdict not even her atheist Jewish predecessor liked.

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

its most likely supply chain issues for the slow roll out this generation, which might be a good thing, this generation had fuck all for launch titles, i know when i got my first console it was so far into the gen that there was numerous great games to play, and i bet we'll be seeing more of that in 2022/2023. This actually was semi-great as a console gen. compared to the original PS4/XBO, compared to the PS4 pro XBO pro it was rather unnecessary. but they really tried to make these better options than getting a PC this time around. not just in cost like the pros but in performance as well.

That’s honestly a big part of it. I tried my luck at getting one at MSRP for a laugh, and my ps4 was on its way out anyway. Ratchet and Clank & Returnal are absolutely fantastic, but that’s 2 new games. The new xbox still has nothing of note considering Halo Infinite is cross-platform.

 

[MrJokerRager]

lol, Tucker outting Alex Jones as a glownigger shill

I thought Tucker and AJ were best buddies?

 

[Gehenna]

Indeed, it would be really silly of me to expect a Catholic to vote against something upheld by a half-assed verdict not even her atheist Jewish predecessor liked.

Roberts wants a down-the-middle verdict (Which would still weaken Roe, so not a total loss), ACB is... a bit more in the air. She is really the swing vote here, as she follows a lot of Scalia's logic and he hated Roe but she also doesn't want to rock the boat too hard.


The question is whether SCOTUS has hit fuck it mode yet, due to having the courts having to slap down Biden's shit.

 

[Die Dunkle Maus]

I honestly think they believe that they are the natural ruling party (A bit like what South Africa and Singapore have) of America and any GOP win is them usurping and taking power illegitimately.

They haven't accepted a loss since what, 1988? Lmao

The irony, it burns! HAHAHAHA

Losing It

Political defeat and the Republican mind. One day, just over a decade ago, The New Republic was hosting a pleasant off-the-record discussion with a very high-ranking Republican member of Congress who was expressing his belief in the public’s ability to assess its own self-interest. A colleague...

newrepublic.com

Down the Memory Hole: Obama Stole the 2008 Primary with Help of DNC

The country is shocked, shocked that the DNC colluded with the Hillary campaign to anoint her as their nominee. In her 2015 caper, Clinton made a backroom deal with the DNC. In 2008, Barack Obama used outright election fraud and thuggery, the tried a...

www.americanthinker.com

FLASHBACK: Obama Stole an Election, Not Trump

“The president’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box,” said Adam Schiff last week. “For we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won.” The message was clear: impeach Trump or he’ll...

pjmedia.com

 

[verissimus]

Don't forget McGovern... Oh, we'll never see 500+ electoral votes again.

I knew I forgot somebody.

 

[Terrifik]

View attachment 2767061
lol

did that work with hitler

 

[Die Dunkle Maus]

When the economy started giving signs of life in 2017, they all quickly leapt and said "it's Obama's economy, stupid."
And now that things are on the shitter, they are also quick to say "it's Trump's economy, stupid."

I haven't see a single thing Biden has done to properly mitigate problems in the long run. But go ahead, tell me it's still the fault of the Bad Orange Man.

Yeah, that's because it's true.

You see, the President doesn't come in with a brand-new budget when they take office, they don't get a clean slate. The new President has nothing to do with it. The spending was decided prior to their ever taking the oath of office.

Presidents have no magical superpowers, the economy doesn't just miraculously change because they're in office. It's already been done, man. They inherit the economy of their predecessor, and it's only a year or two later that we can see the results of their decisions in most cases.

(Of course, I'm responding to your post at face value, and not even bothering with the whole congress-controls-the-purse routine. We're vastly oversimplifying the process for the sake of shitposting, and it will stay that way, inshallah).

 

[Oxous]

2 weeks ago: Harris's communications director (Ashley Etienne) leaves her and the Biden administation
Today:

For context, Sanders is considered to be Harris's right hand (wo)man. Kamala trusts her on a personal level and Sanders was by her side more than any other staffer, even back during the presidential candidate run.
e: Another one???

Are all of Kamala's buddies just ditching her now?