Did you watch the vice-presidential debate where he “rattled off a string of falsehoods and gasbaggeries.” (Follow that link to get a flavor of his falsehoods.) Here’s another piece addressing his problems with the truth in that debate.

I’ll grant you that he’s a nice guy. I’ve met him and appreciate his kindness and decency, but he is a total Washington Insider. Can you give an example of where he’s offered an insight at odds with his Democratic peers?

I think you’re mistaking his kindness for intelligence and leadership. And ignoring all his gaffes, primarily examples of him trying too hard to ingratiate himself with purveyors of the conventional wisdom.

‘Nuff said.

Regards,
Peter H.

Biden reminds me of Coach from Cheers without the common sense. Obama is Sam without the humility. They make a great team–for bartenders.

…and Michelle is Dianne or Carla in this scenario?

You didnt debunk squat. Indeed, youre the only one lying here.

To illustrate it, let’s quote what you so conveniently left out, which was Gwen Ifill’s question to Palin, defining the nature of their disagreement, to which Biden was responding:

IFILL: Governor, you mentioned a moment ago the constitution might give the vice president more power than it has in the past. Do you believe as Vice President Cheney does, that the Executive Branch does not hold complete sway over the office of the vice presidency, that it it is also a member of the Legislative Branch?

BIDEN: Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history. The idea he doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that’s the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.

Biden was clearly trying to rebut the idea that the Vice President is part of the legislative branch by claiming Article 1, which establishes and defines the legislative branch, is actually concerned with the executive.

And sorry, Biden was flat wrong about the nature of the vice presidency as well. The VP’s only constitutional role in the executive it to sit around and wait for the president to kick the bucket or get shot. Which is, no role at all, unless he chooses to take on other roles individual presidents request him to. But Article I gives him a DAILY role as president of the Senate. It is only because he delegates this duty to the President Pro Temore (in lieu of) that he is able to perform any functions for the president.

Your ill informed argument is akin to arguing the Speaker of the House is really not part of the House because he or she is third in line of succession.

By the way, I’d also point out that it is precisely because of his role as President of the Senate that it is the Speaker of the House, and the Vice President, not the Majority leader, who sit behind the president at the state of the union. That way the heads of all three elected bodies are represented.

Now go read your constitution again. You have much to learn.

I simply don’t see how you can spin Biden’s words to suggest he was saying Article I was not the Executive Branch.

And here’s some more of what BIden said that you didn’t quote: “The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote, only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress.” No authority? Doesn’t the constitution define him as president of the Senate?

So, given the obsession some people have with hating Cheney (what’s the opposite of love affair?), I guess we shouldn’t be surprised when you don’t correct yourself.

(And since you’ve said that no one on this blog corrects themselves, please indicate where we’ve erred so we can fix any mistakes.)

All that said, would you please identify the particular error you’re addressing in ILC’s comment.

Biden is not a wizened Senator, but he tries to play one.

Littleletterpeople gillie notes that Biden declared Cheney to be “one of the most dangerous vice presidents” and then failed to tell us who the other most dangerous vice presidents were and just what made Cheney so darn dangerous in the first place. Should we still hide from him? Is his aura still toxic and imbued with a long half-life?

I doubt that Biden is an idiot, but he has taken no positive action to remove his name from the “certified fool” list. Why wouldn’t a fool be fairly dangerous if he were to get his hands on the controls?

If you had to choose who you would trust to bring this economy down for a soft landing on water with no motors working, would you choose Biden? Or Obama, for that matter.

Several of us enjoy debunking comments such as yours regarding the infamous Article 1 comment of Mr. Biden’s from the VP debate with Palin. A note: It has been found that there is a love affair with Cheney, so it will not surprise to find that no one on this blog corrects themselves, however:

Actually, Biden was correct during the debate. Here’s what he said.

BIDEN: “Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history. The idea he doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that’s the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.”

[Cheney works in the Executive Branch, he should understand that, but Cheney made VP role his own]

Biden didn’t say Article I defines the executive branch; he said Article I defines the role of vice president, an office that happens to be in the executive branch. And he’s right; Article I is the only place in the document where the VP’s role (president of the Senate) is defined. The mention of the VP in Article II deals with how the VP is elected and the line of succession. (It’s this very lack of definition of the VP’s role outside the Senate that allowed Cheney to make it up as he went along, but that seems to be okay here.)

Anyway, for what it’s worth. And you can find this and other attempts at fibs on other sites. Enjoy your lives.

I am not clear,

There’s a shock. Maybe if you got your shit for brains mucked out, you might have a chance.

While Biden served on the Senate Foreign Relations for decades, he’s been wrong on nearly every significant foreign policy issue since he first took office.

Take Iraq. By his and Obama’s reckoning (not by mine), he was wrong to support Bush on the war. Later, by the reckoning of anyone who loves America, Biden was wrong to support the surge. And, by the reckoning of anyone who loves human life, he was wrong to support a partition of Iraq which would have ended in ethnic cleansing (a.k.a. genocide), victory for al Qaeda in the Sunni triangle and for Iran in the rest of Iraq. How is it possible for anyone to be so repeatedly wrong? Even if you oppose the Iraq war, Bush has been less wrong than Biden.

Nothing Biden says should ever be confused with wisdom. The problem is, liberalism is defined by its rejection of wisdom, not the recognition of it, so they will always mistake pretty words (like Obamas) and seemingly authoritative bloviating (like Bidens) for wisdom.