So Joe Biden has caused an uproar, and forced a White House correction/retraction, by his remarks on China’s draconian one-child policy while touring China.
Is anyone surprised by this?
Our vice president regularly produces gaffes that cause uproars and force White House correction/retractions. This is just par for the course.
So what did he say this time?
According to this news story, he began commenting on China’s one-child policy in response to a question when the vice president said:
“You have no safety net. Your policy has been one which I fully understand—I’m not second-guessing—of one child per family,” Biden said, according to the official transcript of the event. “The result being that you’re in a position where one wage earner will be taking care of four retired people. Not sustainable.”
If all you heard was a press report saying that Biden had defended or refused to second-guess the policy then quite a bit of outrage would be warranted. You might well react by saying something like,
“Really, Mr. Vice President? You’re not second-guessing a policy that has resulted in untold numbers of forced abortions, forced sterilizations, outrageous fines or even jail time for families that dare to defy the law, and a gender imbalance crisis?” the Susan B. Anthony List said on its blog.
Yet it is clear if you read the actual vice presidential quotation that there is more going on here than a simple defense or endorsement. Biden is actually, in his own, clumsy, gaffe-tastic way, criticizing the policy.
Look at the core of his statement:
“You have no safety net. Your policy has been one ... of one child per family. The result being that you’re in a position where one wage earner will be taking care of four retired people. Not sustainable.
That’s clearly criticism. And criticism that is rather blunt, impolitic, and undiplomatic at that!
In other words, the criticism is not the kind of thing a high government official says in public when touring a foreign country, especially a touchy, totalitarian one where this will be perceived as an insult of the highest order and possibly even an incitement to rebellion.
Here in low-key America, wouldn’t have anything like the reaction that the Chinese government would to such a statement, but imagine how ticked off people here would be if the Chinese vice president (or whatever the equivalent office is) came to America and then said things like:
“You have no environmental concern. Your policy has been one ... of allowing indiscriminate breeding in each family. The result being that you’re in a position where you are consuming an unacceptable share of the earth’s resources. Not sustainable.
There would be a lot of irate responses to such a comment, as there certainly would be to Vice President Biden’s criticism of China’s one-child policy.
And so ‘long about the time that he was finishing the statement “You have no safety net,” several million neurons in the vice presidential prefrontal cortex (or wherever) began firing vigorously, desperately trying to signal the brain system as a whole that a serious gaffe was in progress.
This time the little guys managed to carry it off and get other neurological modules out of their usual torpor so that they began flailing about for some way to prevent, or at least blunt, the effect of what the vice president was saying to the Chinese.
And so, after a valiant struggle, the following words were inserted into the second vice presidential sentence:
. . . which I fully understand—I’m not second-guessing—
Does he mean those words?
Of course not! He clearly is second guessing the policy. He is in the very act of audibly, publicly second guessing the policy.
He’s just blabbering some backtracking politeness to soften the blow of what he is otherwise committed to saying because he can’t think of a better way out of the situation.
And everybody knows that.
Including the Chinese.
So, I find it hard to get mad at the vice president over this. In fact, I actually like the fact that he put the Chinese government on the hotseat regarding its one-child policy in the overly blunt, gaffe-omatic way that he did.
Now if only he and his political allies would wake up to the dangers of lowered birth rates here in America.
What do you think?
BTW, here’s Wikipedia’s entry on the Chinese one-child policy.
Comments
Post a Comment
That’s what I thought, too. I read the statement a couple of times and thought the general Catholic Blogosphere was seeing something I didn’t. Thanks Jimmy.
Great post! Rock on, Jimmy. And happy birthday!
I don’t agree with your reading of his “—which I fully understand—I’m not second-guessing—”. He isn’t trying to backtrack. He is saying that he comprehends the policy, and that he’s not second-guessing his comprehension of the policy.
It is like he is saying this: “You guys have no safety net. I know what your policy is—I’m not in the least unsure of my own analysis of your policy—and I can tell you that it is unsustainable because it requires one future wage earner (the husband, say) to support the four parents of the two married people, who have no brothers and sisters to help with the financial burden.”
I think my reading of the statement is the more charitable reading. He isn’t bumbling around with a gaffe. He is stating a serious critique and asserting that he has a level of comprehension required to make such a critique.
I think, if the VP thinks the one child policy is repugnant, then he should have said ” I think the one child policy, is repugnant”. One need not be an eloquent speaker to get that across…...
Jimmy, I respectfully disagree. I think Rep. Chris Smith and Speaker Boehner have nailed this issue. As the adoptive father of a Chinese-American child who was abandoned, I understand what this policy is and the destructive force that it has inflicted upon China. It needs to be confronted directly as possible without breaching diplomatic protocol. This approach is way too soft. Biden almost seemed to make a joke out of it. It’s not a laughing matter! This is extremely serious and needs to be dealt with swiftly. Hasn’t pro-choice Sec. Clinton confronted China more directly than this on this issue? Are we using reverse psychology now through Biden? I just don’t understand!
the problem in politics is that people lose their spine and are afraid to speak truth. The vice president is a wuss! Afraid of the liberal culture and media attack that would be aimed his way if he would speak up for China and the unborn and stand for GOD and his Truth…put it this way..who the hell cares what any man thinks of us! IT ONLY MATTERS WHAT GOD THINKS OF US! Catholics in Christ..Lutherans in Christ…all Christians..get a spine and quit dancing around the Truth…children are depending on us..the unborn..GOD bless you all in Jesus’ name..THANK GOD we have an awesome Catholic radio station in Chicago like Relevant Radio in our midst ..Let’s support those who defend GOD’S truth…Bob Rogers
@wilbur
It very well may be that your interpretation of Biden’s statement is the correct one. Even so, Biden worded it so clumsily that most of us need to turn brain somersaults in order to understand it the way you explain. Bottom line: Biden needs to use teleprompting because either he’s not saying what he means, or he’s saying what he means in a way the average person can’t understand.
This would be an acceptable reading of Vice-President Biden’s statement, if you didn’t know Biden’s record as one who claims to be pro-life (that’s what he told the U. S. Bishops) while consistently fully supporting the most radical population control/abortion policies imaginable, not only here at home, but also internationally. As the Democrat Party hack that he is, there’s no reason to believe that he would second guess China’s policy, since he obviously doesn’t second guess his President’s policies on promoting abortion domestically and internationally; promoting embryonic stem cell research; promoting national healthcare that includes rationing and abortion; labeling pro-life Americans as potential terrorists; promoting homosexual/lesbian causes (open military service, “marriage”); promoting radical “global warming” policies; and a myriad of regulations that promote policies that are opposed to the Catholic and U. S. Constitutional principle of subsidiarity. Biden, Obama and the current Democrat Party are a prime example of the fact that elections can sometimes have deadly consequences.
I think Biden is getting poorly treated on this one—not so much by you, Jimmy, but in the news story you link to, as well as in other media outlets. He’s asked what he thinks about the policy. He starts his critique of it, then realizes part way through that he needs to be sure his audience knows that he knows what he’s talking about. So he states that he is sure he comprehends the policy (“which I fully understand—I’m not second-guessing—”) and goes on to give a good economic critique of the policy. This is extemporaneous speech here, not some prefabricated sound bite from a teleprompter. And I don’t find it difficult to understand his point.
We can understand his claim in two ways. He can mean ‘fully understand’ as an intellectual act, whereby he means he comprehends it totally. Or he can mean ‘fully understand’ as an act of endorsement, whereby he means he approves of it totally. Then his not second-guessing is either him not second-guessing his comprehension or him not second-guessing his endorsement. Why is everyone reading the word ‘understand’ in the endorsement sense? That’s one common use of the term ‘understand’, but it is the derivative usage. Understanding, properly so called, is an act of the intellect. Understood in its proper sense, his statement should cause no concern. Without evidence that he meant his claim in the endorse sense rather than the primary and also non-repugnant sense, we treat him uncharitably if we attack him for endorsing the policy.
In his attempt to avoid making a gaffe, he makes another. Maybe he should have just made the original gaffe.
Wait a minute! Is this some underhanded way to show that Fox News actually does have balanced reporting? ;-)
Even Jon Hunstman grasps this issue better than Biden! See Speaker Boehner’s statement on it. I rest my case!
I think we’ve just gained a new arsenal for fighting the rejection of “large” families seen all over the western world: NOT SUSTAINABLE. That ties right into a trendy concept everybody now understands. NOT SUSTAINABLE. I love it. That’s the first use of the phrase that excites and impassions me. And that’s certainly the first thing our VPOTUS has EVER said I’ve even remotely agreed with. Thanks Joe! AWESOMENESS!!! Major job improvement! Keep it up!!!
Wow Biden speaks out of both sides of his mouth as a unfaithful Catholic and American politician great I feel better about him already thanks Jimmy. Maybe we should all be more like this genius disguised as a fool.
Political blather is right. Thank you for the clear-headed analysis.
Nice Photo of Biden ... however the caption should have read:
“Would you buy a used car from this guy?”
Nuff said
Biden is an embarrassment to the Catholic Church. His statement based on what he believes and does here at home had to be a gaffe because he undoubtedly supports the Chinese policy.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.