I found President Biden’s address Wednesday night to be sad and moving. His theme was democracy and how we can preserve it. His 2020 victory over Donald Trump saved us from authoritarianism to an extent that no one realized when they cast their ballots. After all, it was only afterwards that Trump launched his effort to steal the election by any means necessary, including fomenting violence in the halls of Congress.
Biden proved not to be up to the challenge of defeating Trump again. Fortunately, by stepping aside and handing off his campaign to Vice President Kamala Harris, he has energized the anti-Trump movement and given it a chance of prevailing this November, though there are no guarantees.
There was nothing in Biden’s 11-minute Oval Office speech that would make anyone doubt the wisdom of his decision to end his re-election campaign. His voice was hoarse and halting, and before you blame COVID, keep in mind that this is the Biden we have come to know in recent months. Louise Aronson, a gerontologist who was one of the formerly anonymous physicians interviewed by The New Yorker last week, observed for The Atlantic (free link) that “his voice was weak, he stumbled occasionally over his prepared remarks, and his physical presence was diminished from what it once was.” She added:
Part of what was so excruciating about watching Biden hold on to his hope of winning a second term was seeing someone struggle to accept that their best-case scenario might be impossible. Variations of this situation play out daily in clinics and hospitals, and if you have a shred of empathy, it’s always heartbreaking. Yet few such difficult conversations — or the loud silences that too often take the place of these conversations — happen so publicly. Watching this one reminded me how unwelcome they are in American life, even in the offices of physicians delivering bad news.
The historian Heather Cox Richardson has a thorough overview of Biden’s address, writing that he joins George Washington in his willingness to walk away and John Adams in presiding over a peaceful transition. “Like them, Biden gave up the pursuit of power for himself in order to demonstrate the importance of democracy,” Richardson said. “After the speech, the White House served ice cream to the Bidens and hundreds of White House staffers in the Rose Garden.”
And I’m sorry, but I have to single out Peter Baker of The New York Times for a particularly sour “news analysis” (I’m not wasting a gift link on it). Here’s an excerpt that is very much in keeping with the rest of what he wrote:
What there was not much of was introspection about how he had gotten to this moment of indignity. He may be focused on the soul of America, but he revealed little of his own. Indeed, if there has been much soul searching over these past days and weeks of personal and political trauma that led to this reluctant end of his storied half-century political career, the search has been called off. Or at least the results were not reported.
I don’t think Baker would have been satisfied unless Biden confessed he was becoming senile and thanked the Times for pointing it out. Baker takes an enormous amount of grief from liberal readers for his resolute both-sides-ism, and I often find the criticism to be overwrought. This time, though, any brickbats directed his way are well deserved.
Wednesday’s address was not a farewell for Biden. After all, he’ll be president until next January, and I’m sure he’ll be out on the campaign trail with Harris. Still, it marked the latest in a series of closing acts for the president beginning with his Sunday announcement. We are going to miss this good and decent man.
Leave a comment | Read comments
Discover more from Media Nation
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thank you for your thoughtful and heartfelt appraisal of Biden’s address. I also appreciate your comments about the unfortunate direction the NYT is pursuing that sees their notion of balance as being more important than accurate reporting and analysis.
I do wish there was less reliance on hyperbole to make a point. “His 2020 victory over Donald Trump saved us from authoritarianism to an extent that no one realized when they cast their ballots.” There were voices that were familiar with Trump”s tutelage by Roy Cohn, his father’s Nazi sympathies, his racism and misogyny, as well as noting the rejuvenation of anti-democratic and authoritarian forces with roots in the Nixon administration and even further back. Most of these voices are from a left that’s been marginalized, but not all. David Cay Johnston, for example, has written about Trump for decades and knew the dangers. Better to say “few realized” or “most did not realize.” More accurate and still makes the point.
Dear Dan Kennedy,
At this moment, the reportage about President Biden’s decision to withdraw from the race and what he said last evening (July 24) in the address from the Oval Office is rapidly turning into “much ado about nothing.”
Even sensible journalists have become nonsensical.
The challenge that the Nation faces and Journalism ought to address now is how
does a “democratic republic” avoid becoming a “fascist dictatorship” in a little over 3 months.
One of your respondents demonstrates he knows little of Peter Baker’s qualifications and work.
[Although I must say “The New York Times” “on-the-other-hand” approach
to journalism these days may cause the institution permanent spinal injuries. Was it not the first newspaper 📰 to urge the President to abandon his campaign after the sad debate. Talk about conflation.]
But really, Dan, did Peter Baker want us
to follow Joseph Biden into a Catholic Confessional to hear POTUS confess his political sins?
When history is written it will be clear,
I believe, that Joseph Biden was driven from Presidential candidacy not only by incontinent Democrats, but also by incontinent news people who could not conceal their gerontophobia.
On a positive note, MSNBC’s coverage of the Presidential address from just before 8 p.m. to 12 M was superb. That assessment has nothing to do with political affiliation. Rather, journalists like Katy Tur, Lawrence O’Donnel, Rachel Maddow and Presidential historian Michael Beschloss were very much “in the moment” – as they ought to have been. Clearly, they know what’s at stake in this election season.
Thanks for your comment, Dan. And for listening. Peace 🕊️
The contrast in style and assertiveness between Kamala and Joe is remarkable. Donny is crapping his diaper. Kamala will win and will bring at least part of congress. Joe was looking at the eliminiation of the D Party.