The Biden Presidency

[Aridas]

No offense, I've always hated remarks like this. What does that mean?

The needle has been pushed so far to the right the last 50 years that once was considered centrist is now portrayed as radical left. Sure, there are individuals that propose ideas that really are radical. But almost none of them have any power.

Those like, say, Bernie and AOC are about as left as those actually in power get - and they're center left, with a strong pro-Democracy stance, despite the numerous attempts to call them far left or radical left.

I recall posts on these boards that could actually be problematic, though, with the note that those voices clearly don't have power - and that wanting to be rid of a thoroughly disloyal, unprincipled, and bad faith political party is not actually equatable to desiring single party rule, even when the current political situation is effectively a 2 party system.

 

[Mumbles]

Patience, Little Grasshoppers. Patience.

If aimed at my concerns about Boynton:

I know, and I'm hardly reaching for the knives yet. But I do think an explanation is going to be needed on this in a reasonable length of time. HOnestly, I could see it being a legit legal issue - hey, look, we already have this finding against her, why even bother?

Like I said, something to keep an eye on for now.

 

[acbytesla]

Those like, say, Bernie and AOC are about as left as those actually in power get - and they're center left, with a strong pro-Democracy stance, despite the numerous attempts to call them far left or radical left.

I recall posts on these boards that could actually be problematic, though, with the note that those voices clearly don't have power - and that wanting to be rid of a thoroughly disloyal, unprincipled, and bad faith political party is not actually equatable to desiring single party rule, even when the current political situation is effectively a 2 party system.

What bothers me most about all this is it is a con. A con that has been going on for a 100 years. The GOP has always been the party of the super wealthy and it still is. But you don't win elections appealing to the one percent. So instead of presenting the facts clearly to the public you feed them lies. You lie that policies that are totally business and pro-wealth help everyone. And then you appeal to their prejudices to divide everyone else.

This really began to accelerate in 1980 with the supply side lie and Ronald Reagan. The GOP has successfully promoted the idea that lowering taxes on the wealthy leads to more jobs and greater prosperity for society as a whole. Reagan pushed that as well as pushed the welfare myth of minorities on the dole. Then they discovered the effectiveness of talk radio which grew large in rural America. Add in the Internet and the hate groups then Trump and you almost destroyed America.

America is the richest country in the world. Or at least we use to be before Trump. He has damaged the nation morally but he has also damaged the country economically. We can't rebuild it by handing tax cuts to the super wealthy. We have to rebuild it by investing in main street and infrastructure. We need to totally rethink capitalism. We need to stop treating everything as a zero sum game.

 

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Patience, Little Grasshoppers. Patience.

If aimed at my concerns about Boynton:

I know, and I'm hardly reaching for the knives yet. But I do think an explanation is going to be needed on this in a reasonable length of time. HOnestly, I could see it being a legit legal issue - hey, look, we already have this finding against her, why even bother?

Like I said, something to keep an eye on for now.

It was directed at those who are criticizing Biden for not having achieved enough in their opinion in all of his three weeks in office like Christian Progressive and Suburban Turkey, not you.

 

[Stacyhs]

What bothers me most about all this is it is a con. A con that has been going on for a 100 years. The GOP has always been the party of the super wealthy and it still is. But you don't win elections appealing to the one percent. So instead of presenting the facts clearly to the public you feed them lies. You lie that policies that are totally business and pro-wealth help everyone. And then you appeal to their prejudices to divide everyone else.

This really began to accelerate in 1980 with the supply side lie and Ronald Reagan. The GOP has successfully promoted the idea that lowering taxes on the wealthy leads to more jobs and greater prosperity for society as a whole. Reagan pushed that as well as pushed the welfare myth of minorities on the dole. Then they discovered the effectiveness of talk radio which grew large in rural America. Add in the Internet and the hate groups then Trump and you almost destroyed America.

America is the richest country in the world. Or at least we use to be before Trump. He has damaged the nation morally but he has also damaged the country economically. We can't rebuild it by handing tax cuts to the super wealthy. We have to rebuild it by investing in main street and infrastructure. We need to totally rethink capitalism. We need to stop treating everything as a zero sum game.

The myth of the 'trickle down' theory. It's a pile of ************. The rich just get richer and the poor just stay poor.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Who was hand-waving it away?

The Biden admin officials that thought an apology letter and temporary suspension was an adequate resolution.

The resignation only came after the backlash of press coverage. If the Biden admin had their way, it wouldn't have happened.

Does anyone think that being forced to resign was not the appropriate response?

 

[wareyin]

The Biden admin officials that thought an apology letter and temporary suspension was an adequate resolution.

The resignation only came after the backlash of press coverage. If the Biden admin had their way, it wouldn't have happened.

Does anyone think that being forced to resign was not the appropriate response?

Just to be clear, are you saying that when the Biden administration forced a resignation, that was handwaving the problem away?

Or you would have preferred that the Biden administration focus exclusively on this matter rather than, say Cabinet nominations, Covid relief, transitions, etc?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Just to be clear, are you saying that when the Biden administration forced a resignation, that was handwaving the problem away?

Or you would have preferred that the Biden administration focus exclusively on this matter rather than, say Cabinet nominations, Covid relief, transitions, etc?

No, the firing was the appropriate response. It was not the initial response, nor was it the response that would have happened without the bad press coverage.

The initial response was not to ask for a resignation. Ducklo was asked to write an apology note and was going to remain on the job and told not to interact with Politico journalists. That's the hand-waving i'm talking about from the Biden staff.

The hand-waving I'm mostly talking about here is the absurd apologism that Biden's massive staff can't deal with their own trash employees because they are too busy. What, were they all too busy trying to figure out how to use the new photocopiers? It's not unreasonable to expect that the admin should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.

It sucks that this guy decided to be a sexist creep on day 1, but that's their problem to deal with. Bad behavior doesn't always occur at convenient times, but still needs to be dealt with appropriately. I see several posters here trying to claim, without evidence, that they were simply too busy to fire this creep and that's why it didn't happen.

The simpler explanation is that his bosses weren't motivated to take this bad behavior seriously and tried to do the minimal amount necessary to make the problem go away.

Im confused by the criticism here. Nobody seems to dispute that this guy "resigning" (read: fired) was the right call. But there's a lot of criticism for the idea that anyone would complain and ask that this happen. So it's good that this creep got fired, but it's bad to complain to actually make sure that outcome happens.

Circling the wagons to protect the Biden administration from the fair criticism for their lack of adequate response to a bad employee is not separable from protecting the bad employee himself. Without that criticism, this guy would still have his job.

 

[wareyin]

No, the firing was the appropriate response. It was not the initial response, nor was it the response that would have happened without the bad press coverage.

You know exactly what would have happened in this alternate timeline how, again? Does Biden have a history of acting the way you expect, or is this just where they did what you wanted, and in a reasonable timeframe, but you need something to complain about?

The initial response was not to ask for a resignation. Ducklo was asked to write an apology note and was going to remain on the job and told not to interact with Politico journalists. That's the hand-waving i'm talking about from the Biden staff.

So, the handwaving was doing exactly what you wanted, just not fast enough while everything else was going on.

The hand-waving I'm mostly talking about here is the absurd apologism that Biden's massive staff can't deal with their own trash employees because they are too busy. What, were they all too busy trying to figure out how to use the new photocopiers? It's not unreasonable to expect that the admin should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.

So, the handwaving is that they did exactly what you wanted, but wasted time on unimportant priorities such as the Covid relief negotiations that you also wanted them to prioritize, the Cabinet nominations that you also wanted them to prioritize, and the general "starting the new administration in the ashes of the old administration's refusal to work with the incoming admin" confusion.

It sucks that this guy decided to be a sexist creep on day 1, but that's their problem to deal with. Bad behavior doesn't always occur at convenient times, but still needs to be dealt with appropriately. I see several posters here trying to claim, without evidence, that they were simply too busy to fire this creep and that's why it didn't happen.

The simpler explanation is that his bosses weren't motivated to take this bad behavior seriously and tried to do the minimal amount necessary to make the problem go away.

Im confused by the criticism here. Nobody seems to dispute that this guy "resigning" (read: fired) was the right call. But there's a lot of criticism for the idea that anyone would complain and ask that this happen. So it's good that this creep got fired, but it's bad to complain to actually make sure that outcome happens.

Circling the wagons to protect the Biden administration from the fair criticism for their lack of adequate response to a bad employee is not separable from protecting the bad employee himself. Without that criticism, this guy would still have his job.

Oh, I see the confusion. Nobody is criticizing the request that the guy be forced to resign. The criticism is for the absurd complaints that it wasn't the absolute #1 priority/day 1/"all hands on deck" while simultaneously complaining that the Biden administration hasn't passed out $2000 checks while forcing mask mandates on the states while curing cancer while outlawing all guns while also outlawing all internal combustion engines.

 

[MRC_Hans]

No, the firing was the appropriate response. It was not the initial response, nor was it the response that would have happened without the bad press coverage.

*snip*

So let me get this straight: After four years of an administration that fired everyone who didn't lick the president's ass, and replaced them wit more or less crazy sycophants, you complain about the current administration not immediately firing someone who steps a bit out of line?

Hans

 

[TurkeysGhost]

So let me get this straight: After four years of an administration that fired everyone who didn't lick the president's ass, and replaced them wit more or less crazy sycophants, you complain about the current administration not immediately firing someone who steps a bit out of line?

Hans

The staffer was commenting on how ****-able a female journalist was. That's more than a bit out of line.

During the off-the-record call, Ducklo made derogatory and misogynistic comments, accusing Palmeri of only reporting on his relationship—which, due to the ethics questions that factor into the relationship between a journalist and White House official, falls under the purview of her reporting beat—because she was “jealous” that an unidentified man in the past had “wanted to ****” McCammond “and not you.” Ducklo also accused Palmeri of being “jealous” of his relationship with McCammond. (Palmeri had no prior relationship or communication with McCammond before calling her to report on the Playbook item, which was a story that she was assigned and had not independently pursued.)

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/02/i-will-destroy-you-biden-aide-threatened-a-politico-reporter-pursuing-a-story-on-his-relationship

 

[TurkeysGhost]

You know exactly what would have happened in this alternate timeline how, again? Does Biden have a history of acting the way you expect, or is this just where they did what you wanted, and in a reasonable timeframe, but you need something to complain about?



So, the handwaving was doing exactly what you wanted, just not fast enough while everything else was going on.



So, the handwaving is that they did exactly what you wanted, but wasted time on unimportant priorities such as the Covid relief negotiations that you also wanted them to prioritize, the Cabinet nominations that you also wanted them to prioritize, and the general "starting the new administration in the ashes of the old administration's refusal to work with the incoming admin" confusion.



Oh, I see the confusion. Nobody is criticizing the request that the guy be forced to resign. The criticism is for the absurd complaints that it wasn't the absolute #1 priority/day 1/"all hands on deck" while simultaneously complaining that the Biden administration hasn't passed out $2000 checks while forcing mask mandates on the states while curing cancer while outlawing all guns while also outlawing all internal combustion engines.

Apparently there was time, because there was a phone call with his bosses the next day to discuss it and they acknowledged it was bad behavior.

Where is this idea that there was no time for the matter coming from? They spent time on it and came to the conclusion that a wrist-slap was the appropriate punishment, which only changed after the media published the story.

"Not enough time" was never the problem.

 

[wareyin]

Apparently there was time, because there was a phone call with his bosses the next day to discuss it and they acknowledged it was bad behavior.

Where is this idea that there was no time for the matter coming from? They spent time on it and came to the conclusion that a wrist-slap was the appropriate punishment, which only changed after the media published the story.

"Not enough time" was never the problem.

In your vast experience managing large groups this is your professional opinion? That every minor detail must have absolute top priority at once?

Eta: because obviously the "not enough time" you're claiming is others argument is a straw man. Of course there was enough time to handle the problem. It was handled, and the outcome was such that even you agree was the right thing to do. Which leaves us with ... How much time in your professional opinion should it have taken to investigate and punish the guy?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

In your vast experience managing large groups this is your professional opinion? That every minor detail must have absolute top priority at once?

He got slapped on the wrist and the matter was considered finished until the bad press came out.

You can keep trying to paint this issue like it was on the back burner waiting to get dealt with, but there's no evidence of that. His bosses decided that a wrist-slap was the appropriate punishment and that was going to be the end of it until the negative story broke.

It's funny that the investigation needed the exact amount of time that a story painting the admin in a bad light took to publish. What a coincidence.

Edit: Do you honestly think this would have been the outcome had the Vanity Fair piece not published?

 

[Mumbles]

So let me get this straight: After four years of an administration that fired everyone who didn't lick the president's ass, and replaced them wit more or less crazy sycophants, you complain about the current administration not immediately firing someone who steps a bit out of line?

Hans

I have issues with how this entire thing went down - especially since there seems to be some willful malice at Politico (big shock), but could we not use Toupee Fiasco as a standard for conduct? Simply put, that guy suuuuuucked. I'd expect better if we simply picked from all eligible adults via lottery.

 

[wareyin]

He got slapped on the wrist and the matter was considered finished until the bad press came out.

You can keep trying to paint this issue like it was on the back burner waiting to get dealt with, but there's no evidence of that. His bosses decided that a wrist-slap was the appropriate punishment and that was going to be the end of it until the negative story broke.

It's funny that the investigation needed the exact amount of time that a story painting the admin in a bad light took to publish. What a coincidence.

Edit: Do you honestly think this would have been the outcome had the Vanity Fair piece not published?

Something like 3 weeks after it happened, the guy was forced to resign. You seem to think that it should have happened much more quickly despite everything else the administration was simultaneously doing. What is the timeframe that you think is reasonable, and what other priorities were you willing for the Biden administration to ignore while focusing only on this?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Something like 3 weeks after it happened, the guy was forced to resign. You seem to think that it should have happened much more quickly despite everything else the administration was simultaneously doing. What is the timeframe that you think is reasonable, and what other priorities were you willing for the Biden administration to ignore while focusing only on this?

What happened in those 3 weeks that initiated the resignation? Was there some exhaustive fact-finding mission that had to be completed?

Hypothetical for you, do you think he would have resigned had the Vanity Fair article not published?

You may be shocked to know this, but Biden isn't actually making every little managerial decision at the white house. Firing some guy for being a creep is not the kind of thing that requires tremendous high-level attention, unless of course you ignore the problem until it becomes an embarrassing PR situation.

 

[Bob001]

He got slapped on the wrist and the matter was considered finished until the bad press came out.

You can keep trying to paint this issue like it was on the back burner waiting to get dealt with, but there's no evidence of that. His bosses decided that a wrist-slap was the appropriate punishment and that was going to be the end of it until the negative story broke.
....

You really don't know that. It's entirely possible that the administration told the guy to look for another job without wanting to deal with the public fallout that would result from firing a junior staffer two days in. His bosses -- mostly women -- knew he was damaged goods, but firing somebody has its own consequences.

And I continue to believe that his medical condition was a consideration. "What about his benefits?" likely came up.

You seem to think that dealing with this guy should have been the highest priority of the new administration. I would note that there was other stuff going on.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

You really don't know that. It's entirely possible that the administration told the guy to look for another job without wanting to deal with the public fallout that would result from firing a junior staffer two days in. His bosses -- mostly women -- knew he was damaged goods, but firing somebody has its own consequences.

And I continue to believe that his medical condition was a consideration. "What about his benefits?" likely came up.

You seem to think that dealing with this guy should have been the highest priority of the new administration. I would note that there was other stuff going on.

Sweeping bad behavior under the rug to avoid bad press for having to fire a staffer 2 days in isn't exactly a great way to make disciplinary decisions.

Seems that the white house press secretary can manage her own staff while the rest of the admin does other important work.

The way you describe it, you'd think Biden was in there personally making every decision instead of the White House being a large, delegated administration that is capable of attending to multiple matters at one time.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Seems like we're talking past eachother here.

Let's set some basic points of understanding. Does anyone here think:

1) That Ducklo would have been fired (resigned, same thing) had the story not run? Seems plainly obvious to me that the story running, weeks after the admin became aware of the complaint, is the sole cause of him being asked to quit.

2) This does not reflect well on a "zero tolerance" policy that was clearly not going to be enforced until bad press made it an embarrassing situation.



Does anyone disagree with my characterization of points 1 and 2?



That said, now that he's fired it seems like a non-scandal. Luckily there are still press outlets that don't take the knee-jerk defense posture in favor of Biden that I see here.