After the debate last night, the word is that the campaign is seriously considering a new campaign song for Joe Biden: the 1966 hit “They’re Coming to Take Me Away, Ha-Haaa!” by Napoleon XIV.
Tag Archives: Joe Biden
RNC Web Ad: “Laughing at the Issues” (Official Version)
Joe Biden may be laughing, but the American people are not!
The only vice-presidential debate in the 2012 election season is complete and the verdict is in: Biden did exactly what the liberal base demanded and Ryan went for a broader audience.
Vice President Biden spent the debate pushing the liberal talking points by painting his opponent as killing medicare, gutting social security, being a warmonger and more – all while smiling like the Cheshire Cat, laughing while Ryan was speaking and even snorting during Ryan’s honest answer about his personal views on his religion and abortion. Biden also chose to interrupt the Congressman more than 80 times.
The Washington Times’s Emily Miller tweeted this:
Biden laughing when he disagrees with Ryan is so annoying. Like a child in time out.
— Emily Miller (@EmilyMiller) October 12, 2012
Perhaps Gary Young in his post at Guardian.co.uk said what some were thinking after the debate as he wrote that “They fought to a bloodied draw in which Biden won on substance and Ryan won on style.”
Polls at MarketWatch.com and CNN show Ryan came away the winner while CNBC.COM’s unscientific poll gave Biden the nod. In the end, it appears a draw, but there is more to consider.
(add your responses to the CDN debate questions at the bottom of this post)
Biden’s antics and rhetoric will only appeal to the liberal base that would have gone his way no matter what. Biden presented no plan for getting America’s economy going, fixing the massive debt crisis or dealing with the growing Middle-East mess – other than that he and Obama would do more of the same.
A key message from the debate was that Biden approves of how Obama has worked with Congress while Ryan says that the President needs to come to the table with a more open mind. Biden, and an obviously biased moderator, said that Ryan’s “framework” approach lacked details. Ryan pointed out that coming to the table with an all-or-nothing approach is why the government is so dysfunctional and that the President should present a framework within which Congress can feel free to negotiate, compromise and reach agreement.
There were no obvious gaffe’s or “there you go again” moments in this debate. The debate was likely lightly watched due to competing sporting events and the fact that VP debates have little impact on voters – people just don’t vote for the Vice President. Afterall, less than 8% of likely voters are undecided and they weren’t watching the debate.
The Vice Presidential Debate in Danville, Kentucky featured a calm, cool Paul Ryan facing off against a visibly irritated, impatient and unruly Vice President Joe Biden. CNN conducted a poll after the debate asking who readers thought won the debate and Ryan edged out the feisty VP by four points – the left became unhinged in the comments.
The poll had a 5% margin of error which means the results actually indicate that the candidates matched evenly within the margin.Only 381 people responded to the poll, which is a small sample by polling standards.
What’s more interesting is the reaction of CNN readers – off the hinges ..
Seriously? There was a sample of 381 people.. why go off on it? Never mind.
Why is the sample so small and was the poll taken as a phone survey, exit survey, web poll? No indication
Another important note is CNN admitting it’s normal polling bias. In special note #2 on the poll, CNN says that their poll shows a slight GOP lean which they argue is not indicative of the general public:
SPECIAL NOTE OF CAUTION #2: The sample of debate-watchers in this poll were 31% Democratic and 33% Republican. That indicates that the sample of debate watchers is about eight points more Republican than an average CNN poll of all Americans, so the respondents were more Republican than the general public.
Interesting that CNN feels that that a 25% Republican sample would have been better? Exactly how “Republican” is the general public? Then again, why does it matter? Many Conservatives are unaffiliated independents, so not seeing a full set of cross-tables could mean that independents were more the reason for the Ryan weighting. The special note is meant to make it seem as though a heavy GOP sample is to blame.
Like Polls? Answer our VP debate questions at the bottom of this page.
CDN’s Michelle Ray will be covering tonight’s Vice Presidential debate
Tonight Vice President Joe Biden will face-off against Republican V.P. candidate Rep. Paul Ryan. The debate will be broadcast live on ABC, CBS, C-SPAN, FOX and NBC, as well as all cable news channels including CNBC, CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC and a livestream will be hosted on CDN.
Take a look at our user-driven interactive poll at the bottom of this page. You can submit questions before, during and after the debate and see other reader’s feedback immediately.
The contrasts between the V.P. candidates is even larger than between Romney and Obama. Biden is 27 years older than Ryan which puts an entire generation between the two candidates. Biden is a true liberal, populist Democrat while Ryan is a young, fiscally-Conservative Republican. Biden has been featured in 18 debates in his political career which gives him a serious experience edge over Ryan. Both have significant political experience with Ryan being a seven-term Representative as Joe Biden was a seven term Senator before running for President and eventually becoming Obama’s running mate.
Joe Biden has an incredible ability to relate to the ordinary voter. His use of populist rhetoric and colloquialisms echo with both the democratic party base and progressive extreme left. His use of colorful language in public speaking has often been featured in news highlights showing Biden throwing another gaffe at another event. It has become so regular that most dismiss it as “that’s just Joe”.
The Vice President has been scarce on television of late. Since May, he has not done a single television interview while Rep. Ryan has done over 200 since August. This is largely thought to be a move by the campaign to keep Joe off camera as much as possible to avoid any issues that might affect the election.
Tonight’s format will be a sit-down, table conversation. A format heavily favored by the Commission on Presidential Elections, but not so by the campaigns.
This debate is the first chance the Obama-Biden ticket has to rectify itself after a devastatingly poor showing by the President last week. Chris Van Hollen was chosen to play Paul Ryan in Biden’s debate prep while David Axelrod sat over the proceedings. Obviously, the campaign is throwing the big guns at this debate to hopefully stop the bleeding from Obama’s failure to shine.
Whether there will be another “you’re no Jack Kennedy” moment in tonight’s debate or not remains to be seen, but the expectations are fairly close. A Pew poll showed that 34% of respondents expect Biden to win while 40% expect Ryan to do better – a much closer set of results than last week’s debate where most Americans expect the President to bury Mitt Romney.
Full Recorded Video of Debate
You know, I thought the rules change vote debacle at the Republican Party convention in Tampa, Florida could not be topped for arrogance by the establishment elitists but I was wrong. The Democrats managed to top that raw example of tyranny and “in your face” arrogance toward We the People at their convention in Charlotte, North Carolina last week. The Democrat establishment managed to actually outdo Joe Biden when it comes to “acting stupidly”. Can you believe someone actually “out-dumbed” Joe Bite Me???
I am referring to the vote on a plank restoring “God-given rights” and acknowledging Jerusalem as the capital of Israel to the party platform. Ohio Governor Ted Strickland, chairman of the platform committee, offered an amendment to have the items restored. It seems the majority of the Democrat delegates were opposed to the reference to God and Jerusalem. I find myself in a bit of a pickle here. I oppose the rule change made by the Republican Party and support the platform change made by the Democrat Party. What I commonly oppose in these two seemingly uncommon events is the blatantly dictatorial way in which these things were accomplished by the ruling elitists of both political parties.
Both John Boehner in the rules change situation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKaXqoC4DjE) and Antonio Villaraigosa in the platform issue made decisions based on teleprompter scripts already there for them to read before either vote was taken (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/democrats-reinstate-god-jerusalem-israel-capital-party-platform-223437220–election.html ). At least we can give Villaraigosa credit for trying three times to get it to go the way it was scripted but on the third try just denied what was obvious to anyone but a corpse. I guess Boehner is much more experienced at shafting We the People than Villaraigosa. After all, he has had years of experience doing so in the House of Representatives.
The main problem here is the method that the two parties have in common. When a decision they want goes against the establishment they simply ignore the rules, and We the People, and do as they wish. In Boehner’s case he ignored the wishes of the grassroots conservatives who are the very people they need to get elected. He didn’t shaft the “moderate/liberal” base of the party; he shafted the conservatives who were instrumental in the 2010 election wins, and voters they desperately need in November.
The Democrats on the other hand shafted their base voters. The voice vote farce that restored God and Jerusalem to the platform alienated the radical base of the party while showing any “moderate” Democrat where the party really stands on the issues. It is very apparent by the chain of events that the Democrat Party really doesn’t want God and Jerusalem in their platform but to omit them leaves the party vulnerable to any reasonable American with the brains to see their position. This situation is probably the most blatant bit of pandering I have ever seen by a political party.
The sounds from the arena in Charlotte were disturbing in that they showed how much the Democrat Party insiders hate God and Israel. It was very apparent to everyone who has heard the audio and watched the video that the delegates were furious. It is sad that a political party even has a controversy over God and Israel. I started to say an “American” political party but then realized that the people representing the Democrat Party aren’t really American at all.
The United States of America was established based on Judeo Christian values, by men who were, for the most part, Christians and took time out to pray as they wrote the Constitution, took time out to pray and attend church services in the House of Representatives chamber, and valued the “protection of Divine Providence”. They had no intention of creating a theocracy but instead created a Constitutional Republic based on biblical precepts. For a political party, that claims to represent American citizens, to stoop to the level they have is abhorrent to everything our nation and our culture represents.
The United States has been driven to its knees physically, financially, and morally by liberalism. We the People have accepted many immoral and unethical practices because we lost sight of our responsibilities under the very Constitution we hold so dear. Christians have also been bamboozled by the “tolerance” song and dance that is nothing more than raw intimidation by evil people. Liberals quoting “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone” is nothing more than an intimidation tactic from those who don’t believe in God and throw stones every second of every day. Some, as demonstrated in Charlotte this week, have totally abandoned the law of our land and given themselves over to a Satanic possession that is destroying them and everything around them. Others have sat on the sidelines and expected those we elected to public office to do what they promised to do without the supervision and demands that they adhere to the Constitution and the moral compass provided by the Holy Bible.
Last week the Democrat Party showed it has surpassed any perversion of the Constitution and American values that could be imagined by the Republican Party establishment, as bad as they are. The behavior in that arena was beyond reprehensible to me.
Ronald Reagan once said that “when we are no longer a nation under God we will be a nation gone under”. We are almost there. The Democrat Party showed they have no interest in being “under God”. The same Democrat Party that insists on accepting abortion, even after birth (partial birth abortion), stands against the death penalty for those who commit murder during a robbery, home invasion, or drive-by shooting. Killing an innocent defenseless child is acceptable but executing a murderer is not. How does that become acceptable to anyone with a soul, or a heart?
It is time for We the People to become even more adamant in our expression of our values and beliefs than we have in the last three years. Since the TEA Party came into being many people have stood up and began demanding that elected officials listen to their bosses, We the People. So far we haven’t had much luck as the establishment of both political parties ignore us and show the disdain with which they regard the citizens of this great nation.
We must take control of our government. Voting is the first step but only the first step. We can no longer sit on the sidelines and depend on members of Congress and the executive branch to do what is right without the daily input from We the People. As a whole they have shown themselves to be selfish, unreliable, liars who rule over us as they see fit. King George III isn’t sitting on a throne in Washington D.C., despite what politicians seem to believe.
I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.
September 11, 2012
For the third time this week, National Syndicated Columnist and Fox News contributor, had more than harsh words about President Barack Obama’s DNC acceptance speech given Thursday evening. He called it. “one of the emptiest speeches” ever given by a presidential nominee for a major party.
“I was stunned,” he said. “This is a man who gave one of the greatest speeches of our time in 2004, and he gave one of the emptiest speeches I have ever heard on a national stage.”
Krauthammer continued to say that, as in normal Obama fashion, the speech itself was good, but there was no substance to it, concerning the actual content of the speech, which was given to thousands of delegates, politicians, and reporters at Time Warner Cable Arena in Charlotte, N.C. We must note, that the skies were clear at the time of the Obama’s acceptance speech.
“Yes, it had cadence. And yes there were deceptions in it. That‘s not what’s striking about it,” he said. “There was nothing in it.”
He continued: “This is a man who believes that government can and should do a lot. There’s nothing in here that tells us how he is going to go from today to tomorrow. And what government is going to do, what’s he going to enact? At least Romney had a five-point plan.”
Krauthammer continued to drill Obama about how the president continues to present his personal agenda to the American people, but never has offered any real plan on how to get there.
“I have a vision of America where there is no disease and everyone has a private airplane, but unless I tell you how to get there, I’ve said nothing,” he added. “I am simply amazed — this is a guy who is the A student in the class who turns in a paper that is clearly a C.”
Also, Vice President Joe Biden delivered his speech and Krauthammer commented that Biden’s speech was “infinitely better” than the president’s. “The Obama speech I thought was flat and had no content in it. Otherwise, I loved it really.”
You can view Krauthammer’s interview here:
The Biden ‘funnies’ continue, to no one’s surprise. This time, he says that he has known 3 presidents “intimately”.
“But folks, I can tell you that I’ve known eight presidents, three of them intimately,” Biden said at a speech yesterday.
NRD Editor’s Note: As always, you may reprint this cartoon anywhere you please, but we ask that you provide a link back to this source. To see more cartoons, click here.
In a Minnesota speech yesterday, Vice President Joe Biden referred to Republicans as “squealing pigs”.
When Mitt Romney chose Rep. Paul Ryan to be his running mate nine days ago, he forced Democrats to engage in serious intellectual debate in the coming weeks and months, rather than demagoguing which has been the main practice of the Obama/Biden campaign as of yet.
Well, that’s what one would have thought, because, well, conventional wisdom says so. However, in the latter, Democrats and the left have tried to demonize Paul Ryan in every way absolutely imaginable. The day after the announcement of Paul Ryan to be the running-mate of Mitt Romney, the attacks started. From Ryan’s budget, to a ‘war on women’, to Ryan ‘pushing grandma off of the cliff’, let’s debunk five myths about Paul Ryan.
1. The Ryan Plan Destroys Medicare.
The Liberal New York Congressman, Rep. Steve Israel has recently claimed that the Romney/Ryan ticket is a “nightmare for seniors who’ve earned their Medicare benefits. For the last 18 months, we’ve said Republicans will have to defend the indefensible—their vote to end Medicare.” The Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz has been running around spewing lies claiming that the Ryan Plan would end Medicare as we know it. This wouldn’t be the first time that Schultz has lied, or probably the last. Look at what she said regarding presidential tax returns and Mitt Romney.
The Wyden-Ryan Medicare Plan – yes that is Democratic Senator Ron Wyden from Oregon – says that the plan will not affect anyone over 55. Anyone over 55 wouldn’t see a change in their plans or their benefits. Anyone under 55 wouldn’t either, unless they voluntarily chose to take part in the Plan. Washington would still be paying the premiums for the healthcare choices you made, and if you believed in the basic principles of free-market capitalism, this would improve the services while driving down the cost.
Furthermore, the liberal leaning Urban Institute recently found that the average citizen will pay $149,000 in Medicare taxes, while only taking out $351,000 in medical services during retirement. In reality, the party that doesn’t want to reform Medicare, and who doesn’t want to ‘change Medicare as we know it’, is single-handedly destroying the system from the inside out.
2. Paul Ryan is a Constitutional Obstructionist
According to a recent Gallup Poll, the 112th Congress’ approval rating has hit an all-time low. Of course, Obama, his administration, and his campaign blame the GOP for the gridlock in Congress, which may we not forget; Paul Ryan is a part of. It’s not necessarily fair, considering the House has passed massive amount of bills that focus on economic recovery that have been killed by Harry Reid in the Senate. May we also not forget that, a) Obama’s ‘serious’ budget was rejected by everyone in both the House and the Senate, and b) Ryan’s Budget passed the House by a vote of 228-191.
Contrary to what the President said yesterday during his surprise visit to the press room of the White House, he is stepping across the preverbal line ‘in the sand’. “So, if you happen to see Congressman Ryan, tell him how important this farm bill is to Iowa and our rural communities. It’s time to put politics aside and pass it right away,” the President said last week in Iowa. But in fact, the House has already passed a measure that helps farmers that have been struck financially by the drought.
3. The Ryan Budget is Extreme
President Obama’s Campaign Manager, Jim Messina, someone who probably actually hasn’t sat down and read the Ryan Plan, is calling the plan ‘radical’.
New York Times Columnist, Paul Krugman, is spewing the common lies about the Ryan Plan. He said the plan, “would kill people, no question,” while the Plan would “cut discretionary spending to levels not seen since Calvin Coolidge.” In defense of Coolidge, life wasn’t that bad under his leadership – low taxation, high economic growth and relative peace. But, to anyone’s surprise, this isn’t true. The Ryan Plan only brings back non-military discretionary spending to the 2008 levels. The plan also cuts the federal bureaucracy and it’s subsidies by 10% and it reforms the compensation plans of federal employees.
But when we talk about discretionary spending as a percentage of the entire budget, you don’t have to be an economic genius to know that Krugman does have a point, but a very misleading one at that. Because mandatory spending has grown at about six times that of discretionary spending over the past 20 years, it’s really easy to argue that President Obama will keep discretionary spending at levels not seen since Calvin Coolidge – anyone could.
However, there are a lot of Conservatives that aren’t exactly in love with the Ryan Budget. For one, it balances the budget over ten years versus the Connie-Mac Penny Plan which balances the budget over eight years. Don’t we know that anything a president implements that expands past his time in office, usually never completely comes to fruition? Meaning, I seriously doubt that the Ryan Budget would make it all ten years.
Moreover, the Ryan Plan only reduces spending from current levels of 24% down to 19.8% of the GDP. Several leading economists have pointed out that this would only bring down federal expenditures to post-WWII levels. Furthermore, in the Ryan Budget federal spending increases over the next ten years, and revenue each year after. The budget would expand from $3.6 trillion in 2013 to $4.9 trillion in 2022.
4. Ryan is at ‘War with Women’
Didn’t we all see this one coming? It’s a classic ‘hail mary’ out of the playbook of the left against anyone on the right. Democratic Pennsylvania Congressman Patrick Murphy said that Ryan “believes we should ban all birth control as well. He voted for that.” The President of NARAL Pro-Choice America, Nancy Keenan, said that Ryan “supported the ‘Let Women Die Bill,’ which would allow hospitals to refuse to provide a woman emergency, lifesaving abortion care, even if she could die without it.”
Gosh, Ryan really does hate woman, right? Wrong. Ryan has never voted or said any of these things that he is being accused of. However, he did vote for the “Protect Life Act,” which would have, if it passed, rewritten provisions in Obamacare that allowed for federal subsidies to be provided for abortions. Ironic, because liberals and the left already claim that the government doesn’t fund abortions. “Protect Life Act,” also had a provision that exempted Catholic hospitals from having to pay for contraception or abortions. He also supported a bill that would have dulled the HHS Mandate that Catholic hospitals provide free condoms.
5. Ryan’s Plan Favors the Rich
Another classic play from the playbook of those on the left – class warfare. A day on the campaign trail just wouldn’t be right with a little class warfare. Many on the left have claimed that Romney “chose a leader of the House Republicans who shares his commitment” of a “new budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy…”
Regardless of what you will hear from Chris Matthews, Al Sharpton or an Obama SuperPAC add, there are absolutely zero special tax cuts in the Ryan Budget ‘for the wealthy’. Common sense tells you that when Washington enacts across-the-board tax reform, the rich (who already pay the vast majority of the taxes) are likely to benefit. Ryan’s Plan however, only supports keeping the current tax rates that we’ve had for the last decade – one’s that a lot on the left have also supported.
What the Ryan plan does do is simplify our tax system. We currently have a six-bracket tax system. Under the Ryan Plan, this would be simplified to two tax brackets – the lower bracket being a 10% bracket, and the upper bracket being a 25% bracket. This plan fixes the Alternative Minimum Tax, and cuts corporate tax rates to reflect those of other competitive nations to the U.S. Ryan and Romney both also support closing loopholes that wealthy Americans disproportionally use.
Follow me on Twitter: @chrisenloe
A recent Zogby poll has received a considerable amount of attention, which shows the new Republican ticket of Romney/Ryan pulling an impressive 41% of young voters between the ages of 18 to 29, while the Democratic ticket of Obama/Biden only pulled 49%. This is a considerable gain by Republicans, considering that during the 2008 election cycle, Obama/Biden won the vote of 66% of young voters.
A considerable amount of this surge amongst young voters for Romney can be attributed to his youthful running mate, whom is the first of his generation to make it onto a major party national ticket. But don’t stop at this single poll. A poll that received far less notice from the liberal PPP group came out with the exact same results: 41% of young voters said they supported Romney, while just 49% of young voters supported Obama/Biden. In this same survey, young voters disapproved of President Obama’s performance in office, 57% to 37%, and an astonishing 75% of those polled said they thought the country was heading into the ‘wrong direction’.
Generation Opportunity, a conservative group that reaches out to young conservatives and Americans alike, has recently reported that the unemployment rate among young people is substantially higher than the national average – 12.7% of young people are unemployed compared to the ‘mere’ 8.3% national average. Generation Opportunity also noted that 1.7 million young Americans aren’t even being counted in those statistics, because they have completely abandoned the workforce all together.
But are we even getting the whole story? What isn’t being reported about Obamanomics is that the majority of the job ‘growth’ is coming from part-time and temporary jobs, while unemployment of full-time workers continues to skyrocket. This makes it even harder on entry-level workers, most of which hold a college degree and are young Americans, as they are competing with people that have much experience in the workforce.
It has also been found that a majority of young Americans are cynical about Big Government social safety-net programs such as Social Security and Medicare, and rightly so. Young Americans realize that there isn’t much of a chance that those programs are going to be
around when they reach retirement, unless dramatic changes are made to the system. Some young people just accept their loss, but others are realizing that they are on the wrong side of massive debt, instability, and an ailing country.
With all of this being said, why does the Obama/Biden ticket still have the support of the majority of young Americans? It might have to do with the “happy, go-lucky” feel a young person gets when they are told if they share their wealth a little, it will decrease poverty. Maybe it’s because the American college system is infiltrated with liberalism and progressivism. But for any reason, this point in the election has marked a stark improvement for Republicans amongst the youth in America.
Follow me on Twitter: @chrisenloe
American Crossroads has come up with a humorous look at some if the ‘Biden gaffes’. What do you think? Should Joe run?
One thing about the world of politics that probably will never change is the bigger-than-real-life quality the press and public often attribute to politicians. While we try to remind ourselves that these are just people, eventually we give in to the idea that these people must be smarter, or better than everyone else. Why else would they end up becoming leaders, right? Wrong.
Earlier, it was observed by Rich Mitchell that Obama won’t dump Biden. Part of his analysis suggested two things that probably aren’t exactly accurate. It’s also unlikely that those involved would admit it, but it does bear consideration. First, it’s not likely that Obama was considering replacing Biden no matter what. But, not only does Obama think that he carries the Dem ticket, but I strongly suspect that he also believes he can overcome any gaffe Biden makes. Second, it’s unlikely that Sarah Palin is anywhere in this equation, other than where the press has placed her. Palin may as well not exist at all, at least where Obama is concerned.
Initially, when I heard Palin saying that Obama should have Hillary Clinton as his VP for this election, I wanted to reach out and smack her for giving him a relatively good idea. And then I quickly realized that wouldn’t happen, and Palin’s opinion wasn’t part of the equation anyway. Hillary has her own baggage, and arguably, it would only be trading one set of gaffes for another – Biden’s gaffes would be replaced with Bill’s. Of course, it’s unlikely that Obama would want a truly “presidential” VP anyway. No need to be tempting the increasingly violent fringe and crazies out there, right?
And it’s highly unlikely that Palin came up with this one, and intended it to become means to prevent Obama from dropping Biden. I’m not sure she anticipated anyone interpreting it that way, and basically assumed that she was just making yet another flippant remark for the sake of some on-air face-time. I know, that seems a bit harsh, but if Palin doesn’t put herself out there occasionally, she’s finished. She’s a former politician that can’t make the leap to being a true pundit – “folksy” doesn’t make for good analysis, and has a limited draw when it comes to readership and viewers. So, yes, she’ll come out with crazy comments from time to time, just to keep the public interested.
It’s a harsh analysis, but it probably isn’t far from the truth. Obama and Palin simply aren’t that smart. They can talk a good game, but contrary to what anyone might believe, there is no big political conspiracy going on here. Obama doesn’t plan his actions based on anything Palin says, and Palin doesn’t say anything in the hope of doing anything other than keeping the spotlight on her at least a little. If she believes she can influence Obama’s actions, then she’s worse off than even I think! Now, I can just sense all those Palin supporters out there itching to rip on this. Before you do, please do remember, I don’t care – and I’m not alone. My point is that we need to stop putting these people on pedestals. So, stop it!
With reports swirling around Washington that president Obama might put Secretary of State Clinton on the Democratic ticket in November instead of Joe Biden, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney dismissed those reports, and addressed the lunch meetings as ‘routine’. But is there anything really routine about this schedule?
10:15AMTHE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT receive the Presidential Daily Briefing
10:45AMTHE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT meet with Secretary of State Clinton
12:30PMTHE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT meet for lunch
Private Dining Room
Watch Carney’s response below:
Follow me on Twitter: @chrisenloe