[Vision2020] Let’s talk about Joe Biden.

[No Weatherman]

Unqualified
Let's talk about Joe Biden.

By Mark Goldblatt
Given the media drumbeat highlighting Alaska governor Sarah Palin's
lack of international policy experience and the corollary proposition
that she's unfit to be a heartbeat from the presidency, it might seem
heretical to suggest that she's the more qualified of the two
vice-presidential hopefuls to assume the position of president should
the need arise.

Yet Senator Joe Biden's performance on the campaign trail over the
last several months must give even the casual observer pause. Unlike
Palin, whose tentative interview responses often seem like a
recognition that she's still on a learning curve, and whose default
mode is discretion until she has the necessary facts, Biden has made a
career of running his mouth — even when he has no idea what he's
saying.

I'm not talking about Biden's comic gaffes — which were legendary even
before Barack Obama tapped him as his running mate. To be sure, Biden
hasn't disappointed on this score: "John [McCain]'s last minute
economic plan does nothing to tackle the number one job facing the
middle class. And it happens to be, as Barack says, a three-letter
word: Jobs. J-O-B-S. Jobs."

"Part of what a leader does to instill confidence is demonstrate that
he or she knows what they're talking about. . . . When the stock
market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on television and didn't just
talk about 'the princes of greed.' He said, 'Look, here's what
happened.'" (Except FDR wasn't president when the market crashed in
1929, and broadcast television wasn't widely available until the
1940s.)

"Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in
Wilmington and go to Katie's Restaurant or walk into Home Depot with
me where I spend a lot of time and you ask anybody in there whether or
not the economic and foreign policy of this administration has made
them better off in the last eight years." (Except it turns out Katie's
Restaurant hasn't existed on Union Street in Wilmington for decades.)

During a speech before a large crowd in Columbia, MO., Biden
acknowledged State Senator Chuck Graham: "Chuck, stand up, let the
people see you." It took him a second to realize Graham was
wheelchair-bound, at which point Biden tried to cover: "Oh, God love
you. What am I talking about? I'll tell you what, you're making
everybody else stand up, old pal. I'll tell you what, everybody else
stand up for Chuck. Stand up for Chuck!"

More troubling than Biden's blooper reel, however, is his habit of
pontificating from a position of ignorance or outright error: "Vice
President Cheney's been the most dangerous vice president we've had
probably in American history. He has — he has — 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 — he works
in the executive branch. He should understand that. Everyone should
understand that." (Except Article II, not Article I, of the
Constitution defines the executive role of the vice president; indeed,
the only mention of the vice president in Article I is to designate
his legislative duty to break tie votes in the Senate. And, oh, by the
way, does Biden's assessment of Cheney as the most dangerous vice
president include Aaron Burr, who killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel,
and, after being forced from office, possibly committed treason by
trying to set up an independent republic in the Louisiana
territories?)

"When we kicked — along with France — we kicked Hezbollah out of
Lebanon, I said, and Barack said, 'Move NATO forces in there. Fill the
vacuum, because if you don't know — if you don't, Hezbollah will
control it.' Now what's happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of
the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel."
(Except neither the U.S. or France ever kicked Hezbollah out of
Lebanon; in fact, Hezbollah is still there, as Biden himself correctly
notes. But if Biden meant to say Syria, not Hezbollah, got kicked out
of Lebanon, then he's wrong again since the Lebanese people kicked
Syria out, not the U.S. or France.)

"With regard to arms control and weapons, nuclear weapons require a
nuclear-arms-control regime. John McCain voted against a Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty that every Republican has supported." (Except
49 other Republican senators voted against the treaty Biden is
referencing.)

"Pakistan already has nuclear weapons. Pakistan already has deployed
nuclear weapons. Pakistan's weapons can already hit Israel and the
Mediterranean." (Except the most powerful missile currently in
Pakistan's arsenal, the Ghauri, can carry a nuclear warhead 1,000
miles . . . with poor accuracy; Israel is over 2000 miles from
Pakistan, so Biden's off by at least 1,000 miles . . . unless he has
access to classified intelligence about Pakistan's missile systems, in
which case why would he mention that in public?)

Such factual blunders could perhaps be written off to the exhaustion
of the campaign trail. But no charitable interpretation can account
for Biden's recent prediction of the consequences of an Obama victory
in November: "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack
Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to
elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States
of America. Remember, I said it standing here if you don't remember
anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis,
a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

Even if Biden actually believes that America's enemies are more likely
to provoke a confrontation with a young and inexperienced president
than they might be with an old hand in the White House, why would he
want to advertise that belief to the world? Why underscore the
inconvenient truth that the next executive decision Obama makes will
be his first? To prep the American people for the idea that his
administration might initially seem to screw up? Or, in Biden's own
words, "We're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence
within the community, to stand with him, because it's not gonna be
apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

Why is Biden massaging public opinion in advance of a hypothetical
crisis before he and Obama have even been elected?

For all the questions that have been raised about Sarah Palin's
qualifications to serve as vice president, Biden now seems like the
riskier running mate. After all, experience comes with time. Knowledge
is acquired through study. But temperament doesn't change.

Does Biden's temperament disqualify him?
— Mark Goldblatt is the author of the novel Africa Speaks.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmM0YzJjMGRkM2NlNDUxNjg2OWYyNjM5MWE0NzgzZjU=