TPMDC
VP Joe Biden Bows To Jon Stewart On Daily Show, Riffs On Senate Democrats
Vice President Joe Biden mock-bows to Daily Show host Jon Stewart when appearing on the show Nov. 17, 2009
Share
Send to a friend!
Vice President Joe Biden poked fun at his boss and the media on The Daily Show last night, coming onto the set by bowing to host Jon Stewart.
Biden was in good spirits for the interview, his sixth appearance on the show but the first time a sitting vice president has been on.
The vice president joked about Amtrak and explained the discrepancies with the stimulus money (more on that in a later post), but the closing segment was the most interesting, when Stewart asked, "How much of the majority do the Democrats need to pass something?"
Biden praised the diversity of his party, which has moderates, liberals and conservatives, along with one socialist (Sen. Bernie Sanders).
"The truth of it is, and this is neither good nor bad ... the Republican party has
nothing but hard core conservatives, there's no moderates left," Biden said.
He added, "The good news about a big tent is a lot of people get under it, the bad news is the bigger the family the harder to get agreement."
He said Republicans have effectively forced Democrats to get to 60 votes on "everything we've wanted to do ... just to get to the vote."
Stewart laughed and asked why the Democrats couldn't block the Republicans when they held the power:
"The Republicans never had 60 votes, it always strikes me that when the Republicans are in the majority, it's let's have a straight up or down vote and they get it done, and when the Democrats are in the majority they're like 'I'm drowning!' It's completely baffling to my eyes as I watch it."
Biden deadpanned: "Yeah, well, you make a good point."
We clipped the interview. Here's part 1:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Joe Biden Pt. 1 | ||||
| ||||
Here's part 2:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Joe Biden Pt. 2 | ||||
| ||||
Comments (60) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Winston Smith
November 18, 2009 8:23 AM
Had to stop watching the Biden interview. I never expected him to be so full of shit. Stewart asks him why the decision to just give the money to the banks instead of homeowners who could use it to pay the banks?
Biden: Well, we're doing some of that now. The truth of the matter is, what you've got to do is start lending the money to small businesses and the people out there needing the money...
NO SHIT YOU FUCKING IDIOT! Then why did you just hand it all over to the banks who could use it to pay themselves huge bonuses and lobby against reform! Fucking Christ. I've had it! These guys are fucking clueless. Holy fuck. We're screwed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Odel Roo
November 18, 2009 8:45 AM in reply to Winston Smith
LMAO-"These guys are fucking clueless. Holy fuck. We're screwed" - so succinct!
Typical Washington math - if $1 is spent on an employee it counts as a job saved. And in their hearts they really believe this is a true measure of a job saved and then they wonder why people have so little faith in Govt. The whole lot of them are running the biggest sham/ponzi scheme. Like the man said "Holy fuck! we're screwed"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
WillAct723
November 18, 2009 9:37 AM in reply to Odel Roo
You're right, and the McCain/Palin ticket would've handled things so much better.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
November 18, 2009 10:35 AM in reply to WillAct723
Why is it lately that the first comment always seems to be from some poser?
Remember JakeD?
Has a new resident troll been assigned to TPM by some miscreant conservative dumb-tank?
I thought it was the Bush administration that paid off the bankers? Wasn't that BEFORE Obama was inaugurated?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pppwww
November 18, 2009 10:45 AM in reply to JEP07
"Why is it lately that the first comment always seems to be from some poser?"
rss feeds.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 5:42 PM in reply to JEP07
Yes: the bailout was under Bushit. And it had to be "rushed through" in order to prevent the addition of oversight. To prevent (re)regulation.
It was simply Republicans shoveling more of the treasury into the wallets of their corporate campaign donators.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Odel Roo
November 18, 2009 3:47 PM in reply to WillAct723
Nope... i think that would have been worse.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 5:39 PM in reply to Odel Roo
You have no faith in gov't because you reject gov't in the first place. You're like the typical Republican: against gov't; "gov't can't work"; then when in office you do everything you can to prove that gov't doesn't work.
And that's your blind excuse for being disengaged from the system and sitting back on your ass and take cheap potshots.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
November 18, 2009 10:29 AM in reply to Winston Smith
You've heard of that whole "Financial Crisis" thing, yeah?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cay
November 18, 2009 11:03 AM in reply to Winston Smith
I turned it off as soon as Stewart asked the question and Joe started b.s.ing. I just can't bear to hear them anymore.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 5:43 PM in reply to Cay
Perhaps you should have listened for the FIRST time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lestatdelc
November 18, 2009 11:03 AM in reply to Winston Smith
You do realize the TARP bailout was done before the current administration was elected, yes?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 5:44 PM in reply to Lestatdelc
Let's conveniently forget that in pursuit of purity of truth . . .
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
amber
November 18, 2009 11:50 AM in reply to Winston Smith
Boy, you're a freak Mr. Winston Smith, or is that really you Ms. Bachman?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Johnny2Bad
November 18, 2009 12:24 PM in reply to Winston Smith
What's with the new blue panel that extends the desk just in front of Biden?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 5:36 PM in reply to Winston Smith
He explained why, jackass: as did FDR, they had FIRST to SAVE the fucking economic system. They had to save capitalism from its deregulated self. They had to stick a finger in the hole in the damn to prevent the entire damn being washed away.
You have ten fingers? Begin learning to COUNT.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
KY Yellow Dog
November 18, 2009 8:29 AM
Just as John McCain proved himself incompetent to be president with his first "presidential" decision - choosing his vice-presidential candidate - so did Barack Obama prove his ability to make wise decisions (when he chooses to do so) by picking Joe Biden.
Compare Caribou Barbie on Oprah to Biden on Stewart: hard to believe Obama didn't get a bigger landslide than he did.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Viva!America!
November 18, 2009 9:15 AM in reply to KY Yellow Dog
How does one choose to make a wise decision? kind of an odd statement. You make good or bad decisions, you can also take risks, but choosing to make a stupid decision? huh?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 5:46 PM in reply to Viva!America!
Some decisions are obviously stupid before they are made. Look at Republican fiscal "policy": deregulate the criminals and the economy will grow . . . for the criminals.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Why oh why
November 18, 2009 8:31 AM
What was all this rambling about "recovery.gov" and zip codes, in a defensive tone, when asked to defend the stimulus? Why didn't he say words like "school teachers" or "fireman" as examples of jobs 'created', or at least saved?
On the plus side, he did bash the GOP and the previous administration, as well as the corporate Democrats in Congress. Too bad the same people also control his White House.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fsudirectory
November 18, 2009 11:08 AM in reply to Why oh why
It was about the latest hubbub about recovery.gov reporting non existent districts, leading to fodder and whatnot, just a way to kill the meme
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 5:47 PM in reply to fsudirectory
But the facts of the issue.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Odel Roo
November 18, 2009 8:56 AM
On Josh's headline - "HOW MUCH MORE CAN WE TAKE?" just a thought here, maybe is should read "$12,031,299,186,290.07, HOW MUCH MORE CAN WE TAKE?"
CBS News reports, "Technically, the debt hit the new high yesterday, but it was posted on the Treasury Department website just after 3:00 p.m. ET today. The exact calculation of the debt is a 16-digit tongue-twister and red-ink tsunami: $12,031,299,186,290.07
This latest milestone in the ever-rising journey of the National Debt comes less than eight months after it hit $11 trillion for the first time. The latest high-point is not unexpected, considering the federal deficit for the just-ended 2009 fiscal year hit an all-time high at $1.42-trillion – more than triple the previous year's record high."
I know that Biden is a real important story and all but I would think that this would be notched up a a bit as to what is important other than the musings on the Comedy Channel.
I'm just sayin -
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MrMasterson
November 18, 2009 8:58 AM
If you give money to the people to pay to the companies that messed up you are using a middle man. So you have less control over where the money goes. A blanket payment to every taxpayer would be like W's tax refund/stimulus whatever from 2 years ago where everyone got 300-600 dollars to "spur commerce." Well the recession had started by then so all you did was pad some savings, pay some bills or cause some unnecessary consumption. You threw feathers at the problem.
It also is more expensive to give cash to try and give a significant enough amount of money to 150+ million taxpaying Americans. 150 million x $100 = $15 billion of untargeted money. $1000 may help make 1 mortgage payment.
If you give the money to the companies that are in trouble as preferred stock (which was the original plan) and take ownership for awhile. Then you control what gets done with the money. They were talked into watering it down which got us where we are.
Targeted low interest loans from the government to the people who needed it would have likely been a better option but I'm not sure if we had the infrastructure to pull that off in a timely enough fashion.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 5:50 PM in reply to MrMasterson
Well said. Between a rock and a hard place: which route do you take: to rock, or to hard place?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sbv
November 18, 2009 9:00 AM
to winston smith: i totally disagree! if per chance, you saw the RM interview last night talking about the "pray for obama" merchandise, it is calling for no less than some "good christian" to assassinate this president duly elected by a majority of americans in a constitutionally held election.
it is essential, even if we disagree with some of what this administration has done, to show our support for both obama/biden now more than ever.
no, it is maddening this century's robbers barons of wall street and boardrooms have been bailed out by those on main street, hoping once again for prosperity to trickle down; but they came into office with no choice as hard as that is to swallow. if you recall though, the original TARP with no restrictions happened under the previous administration.
this economic recovery and readjustment was a long time coming; but in my opinion, while they are longer term and not immediately seen, the steps this administration has taken will pay dividends in the coming years.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Winston Smith
November 18, 2009 9:13 AM in reply to sbv
I hope you are right about the recovery. I realize that the original TARP was under Cheney/Bush. It was a thinly disguised plan to handcuff the incoming administration with enormous debt and get all the cash out of the treasury and into private hands before the "socialists" get into power. How fucking stupid was it of Obama to continue that plan?
As for flag-waving for Obama/Biden, screw that. I voted for him because I wanted "change." I want an end to wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and all the other places where the CIA is engaged. I want government transparency. I want(ed) government free from lobbyists and Goldman Sachs overlords. I want health care for all Americans, and not just by way of a mandate forcing them to buy it from private companies. I want an end to and prison for Blackwater and other war profiteers. I want an investigation into the abuses of the past administration. I want an end to warrantless spying on Americans. I am not going to cheer for Obama simply because I am restricted to the left-center half of our one-party Goldman Sachs government. I gave him my vote; he still needs to earn my support.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
the true enduring majority
November 18, 2009 9:34 AM in reply to Winston Smith
Half the money authorized for TARP wasn't even lent out. Just sayin.
It was a shitty no win situation for anyone, except Goldman Sachs and possibly JP Morgan. That being said, the full $700 billion wasn't even lent out, only about half was.
It would however, be nice if the White House and Congress would take that left over money and use it to help the people on "main street". Yeah, they used some of it for auto industry restructuring but still.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ethan
November 18, 2009 3:20 PM in reply to the true enduring majority
I believe Dems in Congress are talking about pressuring the Treasury to do that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Richardxx
November 18, 2009 9:59 AM in reply to Winston Smith
It was all of that, but more important it was also a completely panic-stricken abandonment of conservative principles as the bankers realized that conservatism had totally failed and had destroyed the banking system. When the conservatives and bankers destroyed the banking system they also froze all major changes in the economic system.
Conservatism as an ideology has failed completely and is now just a set of irrational panicky fools lashing out at the adults trying to govern the country sensibly.
There was no other way to save the economy besides TARP - printing money and handing it to the bankers. The banks are the social institution that gets the money to where it needs to be (when the bankers stop skimming their graft off the top and bother doing the job they are supposed to do.)
What failed in the bailout of the Wall Street criminals was the governments' ignorant, stupid and blind refusal to nationalize the failed banks.
Most of that failure of government action is the direct responsibility of the dysfunctional Congress, and that is again the fault of the conservative movement which includes the blue-dog Democrats. That is only one failure of the American government.
Just look at the 75 year effort to create a sensible health care system. Look at the failure of the Senate to act on Obama's appointees. Look at the stupid political crap that Roman Catholic Rep. Bart Stupak is attempting to pull.
It ain't just TARP. It's conservatism and it's religion in politics.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
seashell
November 18, 2009 11:13 AM in reply to Richardxx
Conservatism as an ideology has failed completely and is now just a set of irrational panicky fools lashing out at the adults trying to govern the country sensibly.
It's amazing how many people, including liberals, have a difficult time taking that in.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 5:59 PM in reply to seashell
Shit: Bushit and Palin and Bachmann are the faces of that infantile lunacy. Get over the idea that Bushit is worth drinking a beer with (for which he'll pick your pocket to pay for it while slapping you on the back); get over the idea that Palin is "attractive" (when I saw a shot of her stasnding ext to Oprah, I noticed that her ass is as wide as Oprah's); get over the idea that Bachmann's good lucks are adequate substitute for responsibility and reason; for sanity.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 5:54 PM in reply to Winston Smith
Do have the least clue what an entangled mess Obama/Biden inherited? That it takews time to disentangle the thing, before one adequately assess its myriad constituent parts and figure out what to do.
8 years in the making, and you want magic overnight.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lafr
November 18, 2009 3:02 PM in reply to sbv
Obama did support TARP before he was elected into office...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 6:02 PM in reply to lafr
And like it or not, as Biden made clear, it weas NECESSARY to save the economic system.
FDR saved capitalism -- and was called by the "conservatives" "cocialist" and "Commie".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
November 18, 2009 9:11 AM
The only real news program available on cable tv is The Daily Show.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
foodchain11
November 18, 2009 9:17 AM
LOt of yelling and very short memories. Had we not bailed out the big banks--under BUSH's watch--everything would be far worse than now. EVERYONE agreed that, while maybe not the best idea, that there was no time and no other answer. SO GET A GRIP. Everyone also knows that we need to reduce unemployment and they are working on it. How ccan you imagine that everything will just shift to great, and why are you so mad? It's not realistic and not helpful and--dumb
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Eric Jaffa
November 18, 2009 11:08 AM in reply to foodchain11
Everyone didn't agree.
Millions of Americans phoned Congress to tell them to slow down and consider alternatives to the Bank Bailout Bill.
The House voted against the Bank Bailout Bill.
Then the Dow dropped, the Senate passed the bill, and the House passed the bill.
The economy would probably be much better today if Congress had passed a jobs bill instead.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 6:06 PM in reply to Eric Jaffa
Easy to speculate. But you're wrong: withoiut an economy there wouldn't be the money, let alone the jobs it would have "created".
Get an education in what FDR had to do to get us out of that Depression.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
November 18, 2009 9:43 AM
Now that we know the stimulus program was fraudulent, I'd like to know who stole all of that money.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
November 18, 2009 10:39 AM in reply to Silence
Please, live up to your name...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lestatdelc
November 18, 2009 11:06 AM in reply to Silence
It isn't fraudulent. Your post proceeds form a false premise.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 6:07 PM in reply to Silence
You're just a talking-points lying asshole.
Wake up and smell reality. And until you figure out how to do that, shut the fuck up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kinkistyle
November 18, 2009 9:59 AM
My understanding of it is, the banks had such convoluted, worthless, corrupted shit on their books that even if everyone had paid off the capital on their loans, the banks would still be underwater. Thanks to 8 years of nearly NO regulation, the banks did whatever the hell they liked and created giant derivatives sold, repackaged and resold many times over that created enormous "value" but was all based on smoke and mirrors. Apparently the folks up top felt that their wasn't time to let the money trickle up, so they injected it directly. The bailout was a necessity.
As for why the government didn't ask for tougher conditions for receiving bailout money (like getting shareholder control), that is the more important question. Warren Buffett also helped in bailing out Goldman Sachs and in return got a super sweet deal of shares of preferred stocks at an extremely discounted price. The government gave all that money out basically with no strings attached. That is the big scandal here. My guess as to why they didn't ask for more, is maybe because they didn't want to have to deal with actually running the banks and having to deal with the huge derivative and mortgage-backed securities mess on their books.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
November 18, 2009 10:08 AM in reply to Kinkistyle
In the face of heavy campaigning by Obama, NJ managed to get rid of one of the Goldman crooks, Corzine.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gonzo
November 18, 2009 10:52 AM in reply to Silence
You realize that this sentence makes it sound like Obama helped oust Corzine? If you're going to troll, you might want to do it competently, jackass.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 6:10 PM in reply to gonzo
You mean like actually basing his fictions on fact? Too much to ask: the silence is between its ears.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Karl the Marxist
November 18, 2009 10:44 AM in reply to Kinkistyle
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
November 18, 2009 10:51 AM in reply to Karl the Marxist
No. It isn't. What the banks did is criminal End of story.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lestatdelc
November 18, 2009 11:08 AM in reply to Silence
Cite the law please.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
seashell
November 18, 2009 11:16 AM in reply to Lestatdelc
Maybe Silence really meant 'immoral' instead of criminal?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
November 18, 2009 12:39 PM in reply to Lestatdelc
'Murican law is what he states it to be.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
November 18, 2009 2:32 PM in reply to Lestatdelc
It's known as fraud.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 6:11 PM in reply to Silence
And you're a supporter of the fraud, asshat.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Clavis
November 18, 2009 11:03 AM
Biden bowing to Stewart was a great idea. It illustrated what dishonest and silly children the Republicans are for constantly making up scandals over nothing.
Go, Joe! Now stop enabling the corporatists in the White House!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
StewartIII
November 18, 2009 11:30 AM
ChickaBOOMer: Himbo Rock
http://chickaboomer.blogspot.com/2009/11/himbo-rock.html
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roufamatic
November 18, 2009 2:17 PM
I don't understand all the recovery.gov hemming and hawing.
Recovery.gov's problems are what we call "good problems to have." Imagine that -- a website set up to show how money is being spent can be fact checked within a few months of its existence. That's why this is put out there to begin with. Not merely for "rah-rah Obama" but so there's the possibility to expose the fraud.
We still don't know how much money we've wasted in Iraq and who received it all. In just a few months we have already spotted inconsistencies that can be checked up on this web site. That's a good problem.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 6:13 PM in reply to roufamatic
Exactly. And who are the whiners about the "lack" of transparency?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
planetsean
November 18, 2009 2:27 PM
Conservatism as an ideology has failed completely and is now just a set of irrational panicky fools lashing out at the adults
Madly searching for the free-floating silver UFO balloon that will solve all their problems and get them on cable even more...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MikeE
November 18, 2009 3:38 PM in reply to planetsean
Any idea/distraction is as good as any other to a movement Conservative. Don't get me started on Libertarians (I, Me, Mine, me), but the greatest failure of Democrats is that they never acknowledged the War that the Right has been waging on them and the country for over 30 years now. Talk about bringing cheese and bread to a knife fight...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?