You know things are somewhat in disarray when former President Barack Obama says his former vice president, Joe Biden, “doesn’t have it.”

Nor, apparently, does anyone else in the 2020 Democratic field of presidential candidates, including newly announced New York City multi-multi-billionaire Michael Rubens Bloomberg.

Bloomberg, reportedly the 14th wealthiest person in the world, was originally a registered Democrat (before 2001), then switched to Republican (2001-07), then became an Independent (2007-18), and back to Democrat (2018). If the cycle continues to repeat, he’ll be a Republican again in a few years.

Refusing to accept contributions, Bloomberg is personally funding his campaign and has already spent $25 million to $30 million of his own dollars. Of course, for a guy with $50 billion, $30 million is pocket change.

I’ve always been under the generally accepted assumption Democrats are supposed to be the party of the working class and disadvantaged, while Republicans are the evil money-worshiping capitalists, continually cheating everyone in order to get even richer.

That yarn may have worked at one time, but not anymore. From what I see, Dems enjoy a bundle of money just as much as the Repubs — maybe more. Several Democratic presidential candidates are millionaires, including socialist Bernie Sanders, and there’s also a couple of billionaires tossed into the mix, Bloomberg and Tom Steyer.

That aside, Obama’s dis on Biden is a peculiar statement considering he kept Joe in his job for eight years.

To date, Obama hasn’t endorsed any of the 20 or so contenders, although he has made mention he’s concerned of the party’s sudden infatuation with socialism and their promise to dramatically increase taxes to fund a universal “Medicare for all” government provided health care system.

Which, in itself, is curious considering his own ObamaCare fiasco and doubling of the nation’s debt during his two terms.

The former president, speaking in an interview with Politico, Nov. 26, 2019 — Politico is a political opinion organization covering United States politics and policy — was actually referring to himself as losing touch with “the electorate, especially in Iowa,” when he suddenly blasted Biden.

“And you know who really doesn’t have it? Joe Biden.”

Now, he didn’t have to say that. He could have continued to remain mute on the issue and let his previous admonition, “Joe, you don’t have to run,” stay in effect. That little comment was probably a wink of approval to Hillary and a subtle suggestion to Joe to stand down for the 2016 campaign even though Biden, as VP, would have been the logical choice.

But he did say it and poor old Joe is forever branded a Second Banana; a footnote in the Obama Administration’s history. Regardless of the perception that Biden has been around Washington almost as long as the Washington Monument, he has never attained the limelight. Two failed presidential runs — now the third — didn’t enhance his image or gain favor with the voting public.

Many regard him as just another mediocre politician with an innate ability to stumble through speeches, butcher simple phrases and confuse facts. If it wasn’t for the assistance of modern teleprompters it’s questionable he could ever piece together a coherent sentence or stay focused long enough to complete a rational thought.

Recent Democrat presidential debates have vividly illustrated his remarkable propensity to stutter his way through an entire televised political discussion and still remain competitive enough to be called-back for future deliberations.

In spite of this obvious disadvantage, he’s a front-runner for the Dems’ 2020 presidential nomination, usually ranking among the top three or four favorites.

Further confusing the situation is the ongoing Hillary Clinton question: Will she run or not? Considering she probably already has a leftover ready-to-go campaign staff, field workers and obvious name recognition, her entrance into the crowded fray could cause considerable consternation to any Democratic candidate, especially Biden.

Adding to the discomfort, Biden and his son’s (Hunter Biden) sketchy association with a Ukrainian energy company several years ago may eventually inflict substantial injury to his campaign.

While serving as vice president, he carelessly boasted — on video — he would withhold $1 billion U.S. taxpayer dollars of Ukraine aid if the lead investigator looking into his son’s perplexing membership on the company’s board of directors was not immediately terminated.

Still unanswered is why Hunter Biden was selected to be a board member in the first place? He didn’t study subjects pertaining to oil, coal or nuclear energy in college; he had no real-world experience in various energy fields; never participated in Ukrainian energy exploration; was never employed by other energy producers and didn’t even speak the Ukraine language.

In short, he had zero knowledge, background or skills in energy production or marketing. Yet, he was paid approximately $83 thousand a month — almost a million dollars yearly — for doing what?

That’s the mystery the Ukrainian investigator was attempting to unravel before he was suddenly removed from the case.

Whatever the circumstances or reasons, President Obama isn’t lending Joe a helping hand, at least not publicly. Perhaps he senses if Democrats do not reverse course from their suicidal stampede toward socialism and begin appealing to more middle-of-the-road members of the party, and drop their ludicrous impeachment charade of the president, Trump, Republicans and Independents will roll over them like a 25-ton asphalt street compactor.

And all their green new deals, climate change hooey, gun controls, open borders, free stuff for everyone, outlandish taxing schemes and “Impeach 45” chants will be crushed right along with them.

However, Obama’s continued reluctance to become involved in next year’s election could simply be a case of survival — he doesn’t want to risk becoming collateral damage if the Democrats totally crater next November.

Load comments