Biden got alot of mileage recently by claiming that his political enemies want more murders and rapes…or would be responsible for … or whatever he was trying to say.
That was based on their opposition to Obama’s jobs bill which would allegedly put X number of cops on the street.
Using Biden’s logic …
Would he and his boss be responsible for some murders and rapes themselves if the bill passed because they didn’t call for x plus 10,000 cops on the street?
What of the money that his admin and allies have pissed away on green jobs and the like… if they used it for cops on the street there would have been fewer murders and rapes.
From Shodan’s cite, it appears the Vice President is, at best, seriously exaggerating the crime statistics from Flint, MI (especially the rape statistics, which have actually dropped, not increased in the period Biden was referring to–murders have gone up, though not as much as Biden states).
He should not do that.
On the other hand, I didn’t hear anything in those clips of Biden’s speeches to suggest he said that “his political enemies want more murders and rapes” or “Republicans want more murders and rapes”. He said that, if this bill is not passed, then such-and-such bad things will happen. I’m kind of at a loss as to how any politician is supposed to argue on behalf of any action without that kind of statement–“If this tax cut is not passed, jobs will be lost”; “If this war is not waged, Americans will be attacked”; “If this education bill is not passed, our children will fall further behind other countries in math and science”.
Of course it would be utterly demagogic to actually say that one’s opponents want more crime, more joblessness, more terrorist attacks, less-well-educated children–as opposed to implying that (of course) they want less crime, more jobs, fewer terrorist attacks, better-educated children, but are just tragically misguided in the way they are going about meeting those goals.
Any cite for Biden actually saying anything like “Republicans want more murders and rapes”?
Really? If we spend that much money, will no children die? How much money do we need to spend in order for no children to die?
As for the OP, I pretty much agree with MEBuckner’s analysis, above. Thread title misleading, but the OP gets some credit for toning down the charge in the actual OP.
If any Republican gave that same ‘inflammatory’ speech that Biden did in favor of one of their bills, he’d be hailed as a hero of the people and the Tea Party would already have an ad up showing the opposition raping a little old lady on the 50 yard like of the Pontiac Dome.
Sure. The fact that the vice-president made a speech at all is reason enough to find fault with it…in some partisan circles. This makes comparing it to speeches from the other side of the fence totally justified if one wishes to know if what he said was ridiculous in and of itself.
That’s so - but Jack Batty wasn’t comparing this with a specific speech, he was comparing this with a hypothetical speech. I don’t know whether that can easily be done - my hypothetical might play out differently than his.
If he has a specific example in mind, that might help a lot.
You’re giving ridiculous assertions a pass because “they’re politicians” and both Left and Right do the same thing. It’s far better to hold each liar / exaggerator / sound-bite-spewing idiot accountable for their ridiculous assertions regardless of politics.
Czarcasm’s addendum and Mr. Moto’s criticism aside … I think it was a fine speech, that didn’t nearly approach the over-the-top rhetoric it is being accused of. It addressed a specific point to the jobs bill and discussed the ramifications of it not passing. I’m pretty sure he was even wearing a lapel-flag pin, so it’s got to be all on the up and up.
Why then, my dears, you shall have them! [waves wand] [animation ensues]