Joe Biden reminded of past 'humanitarian' actions after he blasts Maduro over aid block

Joe Biden needs to shut his war-loving, coup-supporting mouth.

Joe Biden reminded of past 'humanitarian' actions after he blasts Maduro over aid block

A former US Vice President has urged Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro to step aside for a “democratic transition.” Twitter, however, doubted Joe Biden’s ‘humanitarian’ motivation, pointing out his warmongering past.

The veteran politician, who had mulled over a third presidential bid for 2020, launched a vicious attack on Maduro, saying that only a “tyrant” would block “delivery of food and medicine to people he claims to lead.”

While Washington has been targeting Venezuela with economic sanctions for years, it has all of a sudden decided to send “humanitarian aid” to the country – just after the leader of the county's National Assembly Juan Guaido proclaimed himself to be “interim president” of the country. Guaido has received strong support and recognition of the US and some of its allies.

https://www.rt.com/news/451150-joe-biden-venezuela-humanitarian/

That’s typical of old Joe. He’s such a lying dick. I’ll admit up front I have NEVER liked that horrid old fraud. I probably have never said a kind word about him in my life. And I’m pretty sure I never will. I can’t imagine why any woman with even a half-ounce of self respect would want to do anything but spit on him after the way he treated Anita Hill. Add to that his crime bills and helping Clinton kill welfare and hurting children FFS!

The Case Against Joe Biden

*

He’s been a strong Wall Street ally

One of the main criticisms of Hillary Clinton this past election was that she was inexorably close to Wall Street, having accepted campaign contributions from the likes of Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, and of course, her paid speeches. Well, Biden may just be worse.

The former Delaware Senator’s top campaign donor over two decades was the financial services company MBNA. As one might expect, Biden was a reliable ‘yea’ vote for President Bill Clinton’s bank deregulation. He voted for the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994, enabling commercial banks to do business across state lines, and the Gramm-Leach-Blilely Act of 1999, overturning Glass-Steagall, which separated commercial and investment banks. According to the Senate report on the subprime mortgage crisis, “Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: Anatomy of a Financial Collapse,” the effect of these two laws was to centralize the decentralized US banking system, consolidating power and risk into a few institutions now referred to as “too-big-to-fail.”

Biden also demonstrated his fealty to finance in 2005 when he, like Hillary Clinton, backed the innocuously named Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, heavily pushed by MBNA, which weakened bankruptcy protections for consumers. As the New York Times noted in August of 2008, Biden was one of the earliest supporters of the bill, voting for it four times until it passed. He “was one of five Democrats in March 2005 who voted against a proposal to require credit card companies to provide more effective warnings to consumers about the consequences of paying only the minimum amount due each month.” Biden also helped “defeat amendments aimed at strengthening protections for people forced into bankruptcy who have large medical debts or are in the military,” and “was one of four Democrats who sided with Republicans to defeat an effort…to shift responsibility in certain cases from debtors to the predatory lenders who helped push them into bankruptcy.”

During this process, the Times pointed out, Biden’s son had a consulting agreement with MBNA.

He voted to gut welfare

In her article for The Nation, “Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote,” “New Jim Crow” author Michelle Alexander took specific aim at the former Secretary of State’s role in securing the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, which her husband signed. Biden voted “yea” on this controversial bill referred to as “welfare reform” which, among other things, added work requirements and a five-year lifetime limit on the program TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families). Sold as a means of curbing “abuse,” the measures had the effect of forcing people off the rolls while doing little to address their needs. While the administration touted the decline in the number of families on welfare, the number in extreme poverty—defined as households in which individuals live on $2 in cash per day—rose. Today, the number is roughly double what it was in 1996. Barnard professor Premilla Nadasen summed up the problem in a Washington Post editorial last month:

The number of families on welfare declined from 4.6 million in 1996 to 1.1 million this year. The decline of the welfare rolls has not meant a decline in poverty, however.

Instead, the shredding of the safety net led to a rise in poverty. Forty million Americans live in poverty, nearly half in deep poverty — which U.N. investigators defined as people reporting income less than one-half of the poverty threshold. The United States has the highest child poverty rates — 25 percent — in the developed world. Then there are the extremely poor who live on less than $2 per day per person and don’t have access to basic human services such as sanitation, shelter, education and health care. These are people who cannot find work, who have used up their five-year lifetime limit on assistance, who do not qualify for any other programs or who may live in remote areas. They are disconnected from both the safety net and the job market.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=undefined&cd=&ved=0ahUKEwiW1JWXyr...

Link to WP editorial that quote came from:

Extreme poverty returns to America

The U.N. finds growing numbers of Americans are living in the most impoverished circumstances. How did we get here?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2017/12/21/extrem...

00ED6490-361F-4AD4-A02A-23521DF630C6.jpeg

How this guy has any supporters on the ‘left’ I can’t imagine. How any woman could support him defies imagination after what he did to Anita Hill and all the damage he wreaked on port women and families all designed to harm children, women, minorities, and the poor.

Share
up
17 users have voted.

Comments

mimi's picture

any woman would fall for that guy. He is a nothing burger that tastes like a soggy McChicken classic. And there is something special in the Delaware air and water, too. MNBA? Besoz started out in DE in the mid nineties. Ha, me too. With calling myself an idiot a couple of month later.

Those burgers have no chance to convince here in Europe for the most part. Just your damn weapons and military bases do.

up
3 users have voted.