Tags: 2020 Elections | Donald Trump | Joe Biden | Kamala Harris | Unions | aoc | blm

Those Standing Behind Biden Define Him

Those Standing Behind Biden Define Him

President Barack Obama, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. and Vice President Joe Biden arrived on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 2017 in Washington, D.C. The inauguration as Donald J. Trump became the 45th president of the United States. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

By Wednesday, 14 October 2020 03:03 PM Current | Bio | Archive

Cognitively and accomplishment-challenged Joe Biden’s campaign handlers can’t afford to have us know where a Biden-Harris administration — or a Harris-Pelosi administration —would really stand on critically important issues that will forever alter the future of our nation.

Regarding the Harris-Pelosi combo, don’t rule that out as a remote possibility if Democrats take the White House. Former-Vice President Biden’s increasingly frail and confused state is so broadly recognized that 59% of Americans surveyed by Rasmussen doubted he would finish a first term.

We can finally bank on the accuracy of U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s gleeful statement that her newly proposed legislation to create a sanity assessment tribunal under the 25th Amendment that can remove a president deemed mentally unfit from office "is not about Donald Trump."

After all, Pelosi would be next in succession behind a President Kamala Harris after Joe’s placeholder role is unrolled to cede leadership to her party’s San Francisco branch.

With either combination, whether a Biden-Harris or Harris-Pelosi administration plus a Democratic-controlled Congress, the upcoming election stakes for the future of our country couldn’t possibly be higher.

Key among these issues are radical policies that would fundamentally transform America’s highest court structure, our election system, and our individual constitutional protections.

There are enormous differences between what the two Democratic White House contenders tell us now (or won’t comment on) versus what they have said (or have done) in the past. Such obfuscations, prevarications and evasions have been routinely ignored and condoned by a compliant network media.

Back in 1983, for example, then-Sen. Joe Biden stated during a Senate Judiciary Hearing that stacking the Supreme Court for partisan political advantage would be a "bone-head idea" which he called a "terrible, terrible mistake?"

Now Biden steadfastly refuses to say whether he would or not. During an Oct. 9 interview with a local Las Vegas ABC affiliate, KTNV, he said that voters “don’t deserve” to know his stance on the Supreme Court, reiterating previous refusals to state an opinion which would inconveniently dominate media attention above his other campaign messaging.

Similarly, Biden promised last June to name his list of black female Supreme Court nominees after further "vetting." He has since refused, saying that such a list could subject his picks to "attacks."

Former Sen. Biden was once against public abortion funding, yet now also continues to waffle on even opposing late-term abortion.

Considering the composition of his campaign task force – Beto O'Rourke as his point guy on gun control and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. (AOC), as his climate and energy adviser, what will his White House cabinet look like?

Will he return to Obama-era familiars?

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Nancy Pelosi and other party notables have repeatedly proposed to stack the Senate with four more liberal members by granting statehood to the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico and abolish the 60-vote filibuster rule to prevent this.

Have no doubt whatsoever that they are very serious.

AOC, among others, are leading a movement to eliminate the Electoral College that was established in the Constitution specifically to prevent states with largest populations from running roughshod over smaller ones.

If successful, New York and California will perpetually control election outcomes.

The AOC-led Green New Deal co-founded by Sen. Kamala Harris would ban fracking and fossil fuels that currently provide 85% of U.S. energy and independence from foreign supplies.

During a CNN climate town hall last year, presidential candidate Harris said, "There is no question I'm in favor of banning fracking."

However, Harris declared during her recent debate with V.P. Pence that a Biden administration "would not ban fracking."

Rep. AOC immediately responded to Harris’ statement, tweeting "Fracking is bad, actually."

Now flash back to a former Joe Biden who emphatically promised while working to secure his party’s left-leaning voter base during the primary debates: "No more drilling on federal lands. No more drilling, including offshore. No ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period. Ends!" Later, in the same debate, he added, "No new fracking."

Obviously recognizing that such liberal primary promises won't play well to oil and gas revenue and job-dependent swing states like Texas, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio and New Mexico, Biden now insists that his fracking ban will apply only to public lands.

During the presidential debate, Joe said that his "Build Back Better Plan" was different than the radical $100 trillion Green New Deal cosponsored by Harris and AOC, his joint Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force climate committee co-chair.

Nevertheless, Biden’s campaign website at the time referred to the Green New Deal as a "crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face."

So which position statement is accurate?

Harris also asserted during her debate with Pence that a President Biden would not raise taxes on anyone making less than $400,000 annually. How then would his commitment to reverse current Trump tax cuts on those same populations avoid raising what they are paying?

While Biden has pledged to spend some $11 trillion in new programs over a decade, his tax proposal (the largest permanent increase since World War II) would raise only one-third this amount. Added taxes will impose burdensome new costs on companies and families already reeling from coronavirus business and employment shutdowns.

Specifically, where would a President Biden plan to find all that money needed to reverse our nation's spiraling debt to revive the economy?

While campaigning last May in Iowa, candidate Biden downplayed the economic threat posed by China, saying, "China is going to eat our lunch? Come on, man . . . I mean they’re not bad folks, folks. But Guess what? They’re not competition for us."

If Biden doesn’t regard China as a competitive threat, would he reverse Trump administration trade agreements with Beijing?

Also, other than describing Trump’s rapid and decisive action to shut down flights from China as "xenophobic" and "hysterical," what, exactly, would he have done to address the pandemic that the president hasn’t already accomplished?

Then there’s also the conspicuous matter of where Biden and Harris stand on the subject of law and order in the midst of violent rioting, looting, property destruction, and murders in major Democratic- mismanaged cities. Despite repeated urgings during the presidential debate, Biden refused either to denounce the lawlessness, or to emphatically defend police.

Meanwhile, there’s little secret that neither of the most preferred candidates of the far left — Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. — made it through the Democratic primary. Biden won out as a more electable and malleable choice.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., a co-chair of the Sanders side of the Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force, has described Biden as "movable," publicly bragging about her ability to "significantly push Joe Biden to do things that he hadn't signed on to before."

Although having flamed out early in the primary debates, Harris, ranked by GovTrack.us as the Senate’s most liberal member, was pressed in as an olive branch to uber- progressives as their presumptive true party leader.

A coalition called the "Working Families Party" is openly hell-bent to shift Biden abruptly leftward. It’s members including the AOC-plus-three "The Squad" along with leaders of Black Lives Matter (BLM), the SEIU union, MoveOn, the United We Dream and the Sunrise Movement, and a climate activist group, have issued a "Peoples Charter" legislative roadmap to accomplish this purpose.

People’s Charter organizers acknowledge that while Biden wasn’t their top choice, they expect to be able to influence him to adopt their mandates after he wins office.

Working Families National Director Maurice Mitchell issued a statement clarifying, "We’ve always said that electing Joe Biden was a doorway, not a destination. . .  The People’s Charter is that destination: a nation that cares for all of us, no matter what we look like, where we come from, or how much money is in our pockets."

The 1,000-word People’s Charter vision calls for lots of very scary policy destinations that undecided voters should take into account. Included are federal abolishment of residential zoning control restrictions; funding cuts for police and military; a federally mandated $15 per hour minimum wage; universal free health care and elimination of for-profit health insurance; economic assistance and unemployment benefits to everyone regardless of immigration status; cancellation of student debts; and public buy-outs of oil and gas companies to expedite a shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy . . . to name but a few.

So finally, just who is the "real Joe Biden?"

Although billed for electability as a moderate, he demonstrates a pattern of increasing willingness to be whomever his handlers wish you to think he is.

Love him or hate him, we always know where Donald J. Trump stands on issues, and it’s always in America’s interests.

With Joe Biden, it’s far more important to recognize those behind him who issue his stands.

Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the University of Houston where he founded the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture (SICSA) and the graduate program in space architecture. Larry has written more than 700 articles for Newsmax and Forbes and is the author of several books. Included are: "How Everything Happened, Including Us" (2020), "Cyberwarfare: Targeting America, Our Infrastructure and Our Future" (2020), "The Weaponization of AI and the Internet: How Global Networks of Infotech Overlords are Expanding Their Control Over Our Lives" (2019), "Reinventing Ourselves: How Technology is Rapidly and Radically Transforming Humanity" (2019), "Thinking Whole: Rejecting Half-Witted Left & Right Brain Limitations" (2018), "Reflections on Oceans and Puddles: One Hundred Reasons to be Enthusiastic, Grateful and Hopeful" (2017), "Cosmic Musings: Contemplating Life Beyond Self" (2016), "Scared Witless: Prophets and Profits of Climate Doom" (2015) and "Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax" (2011). He is currently working on a new book with Buzz Aldrin, "Beyond Footprints and Flagpoles." Read Larry Bell's Reports — More Here.

© 2020 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

1Like our page
Love him or hate him, we always know where Donald J. Trump stands on issues, and it’s always in America’s interests.
aoc, blm, pelosi, seiu
Wednesday, 14 October 2020 03:03 PM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved