On Biden

Well, Joe Biden’s not a well man, having been diagnosed with what appears to be pretty advanced prostate cancer. The timing of the news is… interesting, for want of a better word:

The diagnosis’ revelation came as Democrats were publicly grappling with new questions about Biden’s mental acuity throughout the last two years of his presidency, which culminated in a disastrous debate performance and his decision to drop out of the 2024 campaign.
David Axelrod, the longtime Democratic operative and former Barack Obama adviser, said on CNN minutes after the diagnosis was revealed that conversations about Biden’s mental acuity “should be more muted and set aside for now as he’s struggling through this.”
Biden’s aides have been bracing for the Tuesday release of a new book: “Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again,” chronicling what the authors describe as a White House campaign to cover up Biden’s deteriorating condition while in office.
On Friday, audio clips of the former president’s interview with then-Special Counsel Robert Hur — in which Biden occasionally paused for long periods of time and struggled to remember dates — were published by the news site Axios. One of the dates he struggled to recall was that of his son Beau Biden’s death. Beau Biden, the former Delaware attorney general, died in 2015 of brain cancer.

For whatever little it may be worth, I don’t remember offhand the dates my parents died. But then again I was never the President of the US, so apparently that makes me OK. I feel not very good about citing Politico on this matter, because they’ve been particularly active in the last few days promoting this book about Biden’s putative decline without offering similar speculation about the mental condition of the present incumbent and his fitness or lack thereof to be in the highest office in the land, but eh. The point they cite from Axelrod is correct. Here’s Mushroom Cock’s response to the news on Truth Social:

It is, of course, manifestly obvious that Drumpf wrote not a single word of this himself, and someone wrote it on his behalf to prevent him from posting what I’m sure he actually thinks. Whatever. It’s the correct sentiment to publicly express. Compare and contrast, then, with this post by his namesake idiot son:

Now, Dr. Jill Biden is not an MD, which may be why she ddn’t find cos she’s not trained to, but Drumpf the younger’s clearly just exploiting his MAGA audience’s ignorance of the existence of non-medical doctorates here. It’s the latter point, though, that’s causing the stink. I may have appeared a bit cynical above about the timing of the release of the news, but I’m not really; I suspect Biden may not have been in great health for a while—I mean, he was an octogenarian in one of the world’s most stressful jobs, I’d be surprised if he was—but I don’t think they’ve actually been sitting on this news for ages like a lot of people seem to be assuming.

And I definitely don’t think it’s “yet another coverup”, and indeed I’m not sure how it’s supposed to be… I mean, maybe I’m just not as smart as these creeps in MAGAworld, but I’m not sure how revealing Biden’s suffering from one problem is supposed to distract us from a different one? One far more serious health issue is supposed to cover up a somewhat lesser one? Even fucking News Corp found this idea ridiculous enough to produce this headline:

And the article in question further notes that Piers Morgan took to Twitter to say the following:

It’s a truly strange feeling being on the same side as Piers Morgan, but the latter does have a perplexing propensity for being on the right side of some stories instead of just the right wing. I don’t suppose this will be the last time he confuses me like this.

This had better work

After weeks of Biden being told (mostly by the media) to stand down after the debate debacle, and after weeks of refusing to do so… well. Yeah, the election has taken an interesting turn that I’m not sure it really needed, it’s already sufficiently interesting… still, when the donors are threatening to withhold the cash if you don’t fall on your sword, I don’t suppose that leaves you with many options, does it.

Anyway, we now have the prospect of President Kamala Harris in November (not yet set in stone, the convention still has to make it official and there may be other contenders), which, if nothing else, is going to force the New York Times to change its recent tack, which has largely consisted of opinion pieces trying to suck up to Trump by going on about Biden being too old and out of it (as if Trump is neither of those things); now that the evident Democrat contender is nearly two decades younger than the other guy (who is now the oldest presidential candidate ever), they can’t talk about her age in the way they did about Biden’s. Just her gender and her ethnicity (not only is she mixed-race, she’s part Jamaican part Indian! She’s not even part white! How will Nick Fuentes ever cope?), which I’m sure will be enough for the Right once they get over the initial “shit, we have to attack her now instead of the old prick”…

Why do I feel like Will’s mother wishes she could say the same thing about herself? Also, the stepchildren she inherited from her husband don’t exist, apparently? Are kids not real if you didn’t give birth to them? But, frankly, I’m more worried by the Left’s response…

…cos I can see that happening too. I mean, I’m absolutely not a Biden fan and the US’ support for Israel in recent times has been obviously abhorrent, but… the alternative is Trump. People know this. And they’d still vote against Biden. The idea that it might be more important to get the Democrats back in first and THEN hammer them about things like Israel once we’re secure against the cult threat doesn’t seem to occur to them. Trump gets in, things just escalate, and the cult won’t give a fuck about your moral outrage. STOP IT.

Anyway—for better or worse they’ve finally shat and got off the pot, so maybe, just maybe, the Democrats can start putting an effort into actually winning this election. I just hope this is the trick that does it for them after all the discourse…

Actually it was about ethics in games journalism

Amazing. This is the sort of thing that should be enough to end Nikki Haley’s political career, but this is America going into 2024 that we’re dealing with here and recent polls have apparently had her second only to Drumpf in some states, so she’ll probably be just fine. Guardian notes that she apparently did agree it was about slavery in a radio interview the next day, but the lesson we should take from the war is all the other “yay capitalism” bullshit she mentioned… Guardian also notes at the end that when South Carolina—the state of which Haley used to be governor—seceded from the union in 1860, it specifically invoked slavery and other states’ hostility towards slavery as its reason for doing so. You’d think she would’ve known that. Probably she does, and she still went all “but muh freedumbs”…

Yes. That was all she needed to say about slavery. Instead, she really answered that bloke’s question. Fool.

Brandon goes!

WOOF. I saw someone post this on Mastodon and felt sure it had to have been photoshopped, cos I couldn’t imagine Joe getting salty in quite this matter on Twitter, but no it wasn’t, that right there is my own screenshot of it… but I think this is the more eyebrow-raising tweet, at least potentially:

WOOF again. I haven’t had anything really to say about the strikes currently happening in the US, but I’ve been impressed by how much support they’re getting, and now United Auto Workers have the fucking president with them. I can totally see the American right going into absolute meltdown over this.