Juxtoposition: Biden/Kerry

[Annie]

I thought this interesting and maybe some would like to comment. I've included the first two comments, as one struck me as a Democratic response, the next, Republican:

http://www.discriminations.us/storage/002821.html

It is interesting, and instructive of something (lower standards?), to compare the treatment of Joseph Biden in 1988 and John Kerry today.

Biden, some of you may recall, was forced from the race for the Democratic nomination for what, in retrospect (and to many, even then), seem accusations of very minor plagiarism incidents. Here's a concise summary of what happened to Biden:

Democratic presidential candidate Joseph R. Biden Jr., a U.S. senator from Delaware, was driven from the nomination battle after delivering, without attribution, passages from a speech by British Labor party leader Neil Kinnock. A barrage of subsidiary revelations by the press also contributed to Biden's withdrawal: a serious plagiarism incident involving Biden during his law school years; the senator's boastful exaggerations of his academic record at a New Hampshire campaign event; and the discovery of other quotations in Biden's speeches pilfered from past Democratic politicians.

So, Biden was regarded as unqualified to be a presidential nominee by the press -- and, significantly, by the Democrats -- because he used without attribution lines from a Neil Kinnock speech, which recalled a plagiarism charge from his law school days.

How innocent those seem now compared to charges of falsifying reports of military heroism, using unearned purple hearts to short circuit military obligations, and dramatizing a non-existent incursion into Cambodia and repeating the story over the years. It would appear that "character" was more important in pre-Clintonian days.

UPDATE [29 Aug. 10:15AM]

I mentioned above that "the Democrats" forced Biden out of the '88 race for transgressions that were minor compared to the charges today against Kerry, which don't bother them. This is a relatively general suggestion of hypocrisy. Here's something more specific:

John Sasso then:

The controversy became two frenzies [sic] in one when it was disclosed that the campaign of Massachusetts Gov. Michael S. Dukakis had earlier secretly distributed to several news media outlets an "attack video" juxtaposing the Biden and Kinnock speeches and revealing Biden's word theft. The Dukakis campaign at first stonewalled and denied any part in the tape's distribution, but when the truth emerged Dukakis was forced to fire his campaign manager, John Sasso, and political director, Paul Tully – the two who had orchestrated the maneuver.

John Sasso now:

John Kerry today [4/2/04] named John Sasso as General Election Manager at the Democratic National Committee. Sasso will represent John Kerry at the DNC and work with Mary Beth Cahill, Chairman Terry McAuliffe, and his team to manage general election activities and coordinate the DNC’s efforts with the Kerry Campaign.


Posted by John at 02:36 PM | TrackBack

Comments:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't see that as a fair comparison. Had these allegations surfaced during the primaries the Democrats would have nominated someone else - perhaps Edwards - but now that Kerry is the nominee the party is obliged to support him.

Posted by: Nels Nelson on August 28, 2004 03:47 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The difference is simple.

In 1988, Jimmy Carter was still a model for the Democrats to emulate -- a man of integrity who could be trusted.

Today the model is Bill Clinton -- a bold liar who would always put the blame on his accusers for daring to bring up his transgressions.

Posted by: ThePrecinctChair on August 28, 2004 11:12 PM