Joe Biden’s decline: Blaming him now is all wrong

FILE – President Joe Biden, left, joined by President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy, speaks during an event on the Ukraine Compact on the sidelines of the NATO Summit in Washington, Thursday, July 11, 2024. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File)

The old news about President Joe Biden’s health and ability to serve is about a year and a half too late.

Do we really need the detailed post-mortem now?

Or is there a better way to use what’s being confirmed now in the new book detailing Biden’s demise?

We can blame Biden for slow rolling the public on the true nature of his aging, and all those who kept up the charade of his vigor.

Or we can have a little compassion.

As an Asian American Filipino, I had no inside knowledge of Biden’s abilities, except for what he showed us in public. And what his enablers insisted.

And even when he appeared shaky on the debate stage, I was wary of being judgmental. I was raised to have respect for the wisdom of elders.

I have also fought racism and sexism in my life, and frankly, ageism is not much better. It is actually far worse. So I don’t feel bad now giving Biden the benefit of the doubt.

I’ve always felt an older leader deserves the right to make his/her own decision to leave. And I don’t fault Biden’s handlers who tried to make sure the president put on a public appearance.

The reality is, Biden did more than put on a good public appearance. He did the job of a great president. He delivered an economy to Trump that the current president has only made worse. Biden may not have gotten the credit for what he did then, but just look where consumer confidence is now.

The question for this post-mortem is this: Was Biden in such a diminished capacity that he did anything policy-wise that a younger person/Democrat in the position wouldn’t have done?

That may be more relevant based on political acumen and wisdom than physical ability, but the point is, did his aging play any role in a bad or wrong policy decision?

I could be flip and say, Biden never nodded on the panic button that released the nuclear codes.

That would be a real physical aging thing that would be bad.

But what does that new book out reveal about Biden’s health? That he didn’t recognize George Clooney at a fundraiser?

I would be more concerned about the acts of another president in his seventies who said a few months back that Ukraine invaded Russia.

Or who said a man like Pete Hegseth, with no experience running a large bureaucracy, was picked to be head of the Department of Defense based on merit.

Or a man who believes tariffs aren’t really a tax on consumers but that the foriegn country pays?

Those are far more significant than not recognizing George Clooney.

But maybe the aforementioned are just ideologically forgiveable lies and misstatments from a 78-year old Trump?

From what I saw in the last few years, ideology aside, I didn’t see the Biden so compromised in his abilities so as to disqualify him from office.

Certainly, there were no policy errors that I could see.

There were some things that were concerning like to see an older man respond under pressure in the glare of the debate lights, stumbling over a word or phrase.

Do you remember when Trump called Thailand “Thigh-land.”

Trump isn’t aging. But his stupidity and ignorance certainly are enhanced as he gets older.

From what I see from the current revelations so far, including the audio from that interview with special counsel Robert Hur, nothing suggests to me that Biden was so far gone, he was unable to serve.

So the only valid exercise at this point is whether people should be held accountable for their loyalty to Biden? To what end? Accountability for being loyal? Then let’s prepare the accusations for the Trump loyalists and enablers who are hell-bent in taking America back to Trump’s preferred view of America in the 1870s.

Holding enablers accountable? Water under the bridge, as they say. The better exercise is to question the rule making that took a legitimate primary off the table.

There was enough time to test every candidate who wanted to run. Open it up to all comers and maybe the best Democrat would have emerged.

If you want to get specific, what did Kamala Harris know and when? She was the beneficiary of the Biden withdrawal without a primary. Legitimate questions. The post-mortem should take us forward not back. Don’t blame Joe. But it’s clear Joe should take an emeritus role.

The current discussion should focus on how the Democrats can save themselves in the future. Used to the vast majority of votes from Blacks, Latinos and Asians, Democrats took us all for granted.  The  few who went against them were enough to give the election to Trump.  That shouldn’t happen again.

But those raise different questions than whether Biden was too old and did his enablers fool Americans. Biden and others just assumed we would be there. And many of us were. Enough of us weren’t.

To his credit, I’m always quick to point out that Biden knew enough to honor AAPI with a White House initiative. Trump took down the website for being too woke.

Biden knew enough not to scapegoat Asians and Asian Americans like Trump during the pandemic.

One of the first things Biden did was write executive orders protecting the well-being of Asian Americans under threat from physical violence.

Biden deserved the right to make any decision to withdraw from running on his own. He may have waited too late, but the party’s rules could have done something extraordinary to unite the country. A last-minute primary or convention? It didn’t. It stuck with tradition.

That and not Biden’s age was a bigger fail in 2024. And we’re all feeling the fallout now.

Emil Guillermo is an award-winning journalist, news analyst and stage monologuist. He writes for the Inquirer.net’s US Channel. He has written a weekly “Amok” column on Asian American issues since 1995. Find him on YouTube, patreon and substack.

See him at the Marsh in San Francisco May 19 and June 2.