Jump to content

Talk:Joe Biden

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 71.52.134.234 (talk) at 02:58, 9 September 2008 (Joe Biden: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

7/11 Comments

Where's the section of the 7/11 racist comments he made about not being able to go to any 7/11 or Dunkin' Donuts in Delaware without a think Indian accent? youtube

I agree, this definitely should be in there. We will be getting out the message on all Desi Forums about Biden's comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Larry Renforth (talkcontribs) 03:36, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The hatred words of Joe Biden have been spread on many Desi / Indian chat forums now, as stated above. I clicked on ratedesi.com, and sure enough, there is talk of Biden's comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.221.33 (talk) 21:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's important that we make sure that these comments are verified before posting them. I suggest locking this article and not allowing such accusations into it without some hard evidence. Given that he is now a running mate for vice president this article will no doubt be subject to vandalism. -scarlocke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.48.250.215 (talk) 03:13, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original poster's link contains the C-SPAN footage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Munseym (talkcontribs) 05:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

7/11 & Dunkin Donuts comments

Video: [1]. Is a rather well-known controversy of Biden; should be included. --141.219.230.232 (talk) 04:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion of this remark is included in the 2008 presidential campaign section. Wasted Time R (talk) 17:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a transcript of what Joe Biden said: "In Delaware, the largest growth of population is Indian-Americans, moving from India. You cannot go to a 7/11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I’m not joking." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.234.0.249 (talk) 16:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. That quote is in the article. Right now. Has been all along. So what is this discussion about? Wasted Time R (talk) 23:01, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cellphone photo

How exactly does a photo of a cellphone contribute to this article? It seems horribly out of place, if not downright unencyclopedic. Couldn't this be replaced with a properly sourced quote? Surely the message is posted verbatim on several reputible news sites that could be cited easily. 161.165.196.84 (talk) 20:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? rootology (C)(T) 14:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Catholic

Although the article refers to Mr Biden as a Roman Catholic, someone in the Discussion area about Sarah Palin refers to him as an "excommunicted" RC, who "supports abortion". Is this true? Millbanks (talk) 08:24, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth (emphasis in original). That said, I seriously doubt it's true. It may be a reference to the suggestion during the last election that pro-choice Catholic politicians shouldn't be allowed to participate in Communion.--chaser - t 08:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I remember a similar flap with Tom Daschle and the bishop in his home district while he was a pro-choice Senator...there have been some cases of people being told they shouldn't take Communion but I've never heard of a prominent politician actually being excommunicated, although the catechism says they theoretically could be. Chaser is right about really good sourcing being needed for a claim like that. Kelly hi! 08:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is the best source I could find to prove we're not making it up. ;-) --chaser - t 09:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody can doubt that Biden is deeply a Catholic, who prays every night for abortion to remain legal. According to this site : "Barack Obama didn't choose just any Roman Catholic when he named Joe Biden his vice presidential running mate. He chose a weekly massgoer who once threatened to shove his rosary beads down the throat of the next Republican who said he wasn't religious." I hope he doesn't choke on his own words. Religion is being replaced by politics in America, you can see that there are plenty like him. If the Church didn't excommunicate John Kerry, who supported also partial-birth abortion, that is a form of infanticide, and gay marriage, I doubt they will do the same to him. The Church could spread a revolution against religious fakes if it started to excommunicated all these.85.240.18.225 (talk) 17:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does the Catholic Church excommunicate anyone these days? Seems anachronistic to me. -R. fiend (talk) 21:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not very often. I think the last I heard of was several years ago. rootology (C)(T) 14:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can read the article about Excommunication in the Wikipedia. It's not anachronistic at all. Recently, the former Zambian bishop Emmanuel Milingo was excommunicated. It's also ironic that the Catholic Church excommunicated Marcel Lefebvre, in 1988, for ordaining bishops without the Vatican permission, and he was from the most conservative wing of the Catholic Church.85.244.55.144 (talk) 15:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inasmuch as the Media Finds It Acceptable to Report on the Sex Life of Governor Palin's 17-year-old Daughter, Will it Now be Appropriate to Include a Section Here on the Sex Life of Biden's Daughter from His Second Wife?

I think it would not be appropriate, but there appears to be a double standard which makes it just dandy to spread rumors about, and to report in the media on, the sex life of Governor Palin's young (17) daughter.

Is what is sauce for the goose also sauce for the gander? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.153.18 (talk) 22:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two wrongs don't make a right, in general. In particular, the Palin announcement in question came from the Palin campaign. The rumor that preceded it was both ludicrous and vile, and deserves no place here. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biden and the RIAA

Who no mention of the well-documented fact that Joe Biden sponsored very pro-RIAA legislature that involved:

  • supporting a bill that would make manipulation of a device so that it would be able to play unauthorized content a federal offence
  • signing a letter in which he and some other senators pleaded with the government to take a stronger stance against file-sharers
  • supported a new law that tries to ban home-recording of digital radio broadcasts
  • supported legislation that was designed to limit encryption possibilities for civilians

68.46.183.96 (talk) 08:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's mentioned in Political positions of Joe Biden. Switzpaw (talk) 08:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Biden thinks glowsticks and bottled water are drug paraphanelia...

...and he sponsored the "Reducing Americans' Vulnerability to Ecstasy Act of 2002," also called the "RAVE Act" which declares them as such. Why is this not included? 68.46.183.96 (talk) 08:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's mentioned in Political positions of Joe Biden. Switzpaw (talk) 08:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Biden's demanded before the Council on Foreign Relations in October 2002 that the war in Afghanistan be fought by American ground troops "mano-a-mano," i.e. on the ground with no air support. He, understandably, got a lot of flack for the comment. Why isn't this mentioned? 68.46.183.96 (talk) 08:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, but the appropriate article for that detail would most likely be Political positions of Joe Biden. You may want to ask on Talk:Political_positions_of_Joe_Biden. There has been a recent comment there in which an editor thought more information on Biden's view of Afghanistan should be in that article. Switzpaw (talk) 08:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hair Plugs

We need a section on this. He got them sometime after he bowed out of the '88 race. It didn't look like he had much hair up top to transplant to the front of his melon. Were the plugs made of back hair? Who has the info? Looftie (talk) 18:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a little more info: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12760.html

Perhaps it is not back hair after all. Looftie (talk) 18:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who cares? Even if true, (and there isn't a single reliable source that says it is) it's meaningless trivia. --Loonymonkey (talk) 21:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not worth a section, not worth a mention. We generally don't do cosmetics here. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4603044.ece

The above is a serious link. Google Biden Hair and you will get over 45 pages of links. As Biden said "the silence was deafening" (though he was referring to the Republican convention, not the lack of mention of his hair on Wikipedia.

The coverage of his hair is relevant. However, it should be very short, probably one sentence. It must not mock him. It must be a statement of fact. It could be mentioned with his other health problems (asthma). 903M (talk) 15:03, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First, going bald is not a health problem, it's a cosmetic development. Second, we don't usually have "Health" sections in these articles, and your attempt to create one left out the most important episode of Biden's health history (the 1988 brain aneurysms). Third, what source supports your "by his own admission" text? I don't think he's ever said this. Fourth, it's still meaningless, and there's still no consensus that this belongs in the article. Wasted Time R (talk) 15:21, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your pointing out an omission, his 1988 brain aneurysm. He admitted the hair problem in the Senate hearings but 1991 hearings are not online. Check your library for them. 903M (talk) 00:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked at Ronald Reagan's article, which is a featured article. It has mention of his skin cancer (in addition to having colon problems and being shot) so there is value to adding health information. Unlike the original poster, we must do this with dignity so only a brief mention (1 sentence or 1/2 sentence) for the hair. Hair transplantation is not shameful or negative, unlike erectile dysfunction or having herpes. 903M (talk) 01:10, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)First of all, read the article. The material on the brain aneurysm is in the "Family" section, which covers the post-education part of his life, and that's where the hair plug mention would go, if we mentioned it, in sequence with the year in which he did it. There is no point in repeating the aneurysm material, as you just did. Second, you have to give exact citation information for your sources, whether they are online or not. What 1991 hearing was this? Give the committee, the hearings date, and the date of congressional publication. I will indeed then check it. I have accessed congressional hearings records before, for example in the Legal Services Corporation article that I wrote. Third, you need to read WP:RS and learn what WP does and does not consider a reliable source. Op-ed columns and commercial press releases, for example, are no good. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To address your second point, real health issues should indeed be addressed, such as Reagan's skin cancer, McCain's skin cancer (which is in his article), and Biden's brain aneurysms (which is in this article). Baldness is not a real health issue, it's just cosmetic. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caption for image of Biden, Church, and Sadat contains a typographical error

I seriously doubt that the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty was SUNG. ("signing", not "singing", my friends.) I'd fix it myself, but the page is semi-locked. Zzzcust (talk) 01:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, thanks for the spot. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:38, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Failure to Provide Real Information about 2008 Election

It is inappropriate -- particularly for an encyclopedia (as opposed to a pure biography) to talk about the 2008 election without supplying the reader with information about whom he is running against in the 2008 Senate election. Please add a note and link that Biden is seeking re-election, facing as a challenger Christine O'Donnell: www.ChristineODonnell.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.246.71.5 (talk) 19:02, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to write an article about her. Also, she is mentioned in United States Senate election in Delaware, 2008.--Appraiser (talk) 19:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Descent

The article claims that Senator Biden is of English descent on his father's side, even though "Biden" is an Irish surname and even though the source cited describes the senator as "Irish-Catholic" and makes no mention of English ancestry. Shouldn't this patent error be corrected? Firstorm (talk) 02:19, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The source being used is Wargs, and I've added a footnote to make that clear. Wargs entry 32 says "William Biden, b. ... , England". Is this correct? I dunno. In FAC circles, Wargs gets gonged as being unreliable, and you have to use NEHGS instead. I took a quick look, and I didn't find one for Biden there. Wasted Time R (talk) 14:55, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop inserting false information

I've corrected it but it gets reverted, often by Wasted Time R. Read the link again. He needed a second surgery on his brain. Fortunately, he's been ok since 1988. So 2, not 1 surgery. 903M (talk) 01:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC) http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940de5d81739f937a35756c0a96e948260[reply]

(Follow-up) This was a misunderstanding, based on 903M not clarifying that the two surgeries were three months apart and the difficulty of distinguishing unformatted New York Times cites. The article now talks about the two different surgeries. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Judiciary Committee and National Domestic Violence Hotline

"In March 2004, Biden enlisted major American technology companies in diagnosing the problems of the Austin, Texas-based National Domestic Violence Hotline, and to donate equipment and expertise to it.[28][25]"

Is that actually within the scope of Judiciary Committee activities? If not it should be in its own section. Also Biden has repeatedly said: "I consider the Violence Against Women Act the single most significant legislation that I’ve crafted during my 35-year tenure in the Senate" so how about a section on Biden's contribution to the Violence Against Women Act

Also i think the National Domestic Violence Hotline should be a clickable external link thus National Domestic Violence Hotline. Then wikipedia readers would have a chance to see what the National Domestic Violence Hotline is all about. 203.108.140.130 (talk) 06:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Violence Against Women Act came out of the Judiciary Committee (see http://www.wcl.american.edu/journal/lawrev/50/foreword.pdf, for example) as have its renewals (see http://www.now.org/issues/violence/vawa/, for example). I agree that it deserves more prominence, possibly including mention in the article's lead section. Regarding the National Domestic Violence Hotline, in-narrative-text external links like you want are usually frowned upon as a matter of style. Better would be that someone start a National Domestic Violence Hotline article itself, and then we can do a normal link to that. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Organization of article

This article has been organized chronologically at the very start, and then by topic afterwards, especially regarding Biden's Senate career. This approach has its advantages and disadvantages, but it's not working well for coverage of Biden in the 1969-1973 period, when his personal, family, and political life were all very intertwined. So I've tweaked the structure to make everything up to his induction into the Senate more chronological, and will be expanding/reworking that content with the new organization in mind. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biden's overall political positions

I think it would be a good idea to list some of Biden's positions (with sources) on some of the "hot topic" issues: e.g. abortion, gay marriage, NAFTA, NCLB, etc. 70.254.213.117 (talk) 00:24, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's two different approaches on this. I've long believed that the Political positions of Joe Biden article should do this, where we can lay out his positions in some detail. Doing the same in the summary section of the main article here means compressing them into a tight space, and thus risking losing nuance and complexity and getting sound-bites and oversimplication instead. Thus I've always advocated doing the summary section here by just having some interest group ratings that indicate Biden's overall political and ideological leanings. Since Biden's been in the Senate for three decades, there are certainly a lot of metrics to use in this way.
Some editors don't agree with me, and think the 'Political positions' section in the main article should try to summarize his views on various important issues. And now we do have some of that in this article, mostly focused around environmental and energy issues. This is also involved in comparisons with the Sarah Palin article, where what to do with 'Political positions' section is a hot topic. So this is something that a broader consensus is needed on. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In some other politicians' articles, I've added a sentence giving two sources, which always largely agree with each other. One is an evaluation by a conservative group; the other is from a progressive group. Unfortunately, Palin does not have a national voting history from which to write an equivalent sentence. I'd be in favor of adding this. Here's Biden's:
Biden received a 86% progressive rating from a self-described non-partisan group that provides a "searchable database of Congressional voting records from a Progressive perspective"[1] and scored a 13% conservative rating by the conservative group, SBE Council.[2]
  1. ^ "Leading with the Left". Progressive Punch. Retrieved 2008-09-08.
  2. ^ "Congressional Voting Scorecard 2005" (pdf). SBE Council’s Congressional Voting Scorecard 2005. Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council. June, 2006. Retrieved 2008-09-08. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
You can add those if you want, although neither is especially well-known (although I've used ProgressivePunch before somewhere or other). But be sure to identify what year(s) the ratings are for. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:35, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military Service

Joe Biden Received 5 derferments before being Classified 1-Y due to Asthma as a Teenager. In “Promises to Keep,” a memoir he only recounted a very active youth filled with sports and being a life guard.Lefthandtool (talk) 13:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Vietnam War era in America. Our article talks about his athletic youth and his draft deferments and reclassification. But no, we can't connect them like you want to. Not mentioning something in a piece you write does not mean it didn't happen (cf. McCain and the "cross in the dirt story" blogger flap of a few weeks ago) and Biden's memoir focuses on his childhood/adolescent stuttering, which was a much more visible/major affliction. Some people with asthma do lead active, athletic lives, all the way up to winning Olympic gold medals. So, in sum: did people concoct all sorts of medical and other reasons to get out of the draft during Vietnam? Yes. Did Biden? We don't know, and per WP:BLP, can't speculate. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POSSIBLE CONGRESSIONAL ERRORS

In the section regarding Sen Biden's elected office, it records the majority of the "Congress" during each of his terms. It appears that the "Majority" column refers to the overall congressional majority, when it appears to actually refer to the SENATE majority.

For example, it shows the 97th US Congress, and lists the majority as "Republican" although the majority of the House of Representatives was Democratic. The Senate majority was Republican.

Those from nations other than the US may be confused, as well as those within the US who are not aware of congressional history or politics.

Perhaps placing the word "Senate" just above "Majority" would clarify?

71.252.242.8 (talk) 01:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC) 9/8/08 - Guy Terry[reply]

I've changed "Majority" to "Sen. Majority", which should make it clear. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Biden

He's anti-marijuana. I think this should be included because it deviates from the standard liberal positions.

http://www.marijuana.com/democratic-candidates/33961-sen-joe-biden-2.html