Biden on the Patriot Act

The Big 'L' Libertarians will love this one:

In the wake of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, Biden did, in fact, champion an anti-terrorism bill similar to the one now before Congress (though it was, as he complains, badly watered down by anti-government conservatives and leftist civil libertarians). And Biden doesn't let you forget it. "I introduced the terrorism bill in '94 that had a lot of these things in it," he bragged to NBC's Tim Russert on September 30. When I spent the day with him later that week, Biden mentioned the legislation to me, and to several other reporters he encountered, no fewer than seven times. "When I was chairman in '94 I introduced a major antiterrorism bill--back then," he says in the morning, flashing a knowing grin and pausing for effect. (Never mind that he's gotten the year wrong.) Back in his office later that afternoon, he brings it up yet again. "I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City bombing. And the bill John Ashcroft sent up was my bill."

Biden on Iran

Best of the Web Today:

The month after the 9/11 attacks, The New Republic profiled Biden and caught this brainstorm:

At the Tuesday-morning meeting with committee staffers, Biden launches into a stream-of-consciousness monologue about what his committee should be doing, before he finally admits the obvious: "I'm groping here." Then he hits on an idea: America needs to show the Arab world that we're not bent on its destruction. "Seems to me this would be a good time to send, no strings attached, a check for $200 million to Iran," Biden declares. He surveys the table with raised eyebrows, a How do ya like that? look on his face.

The staffers offer various objections, but no one notes the obvious one: Iran is not Arab and is the enemy of most Arab regimes.

The 2001 New Republic story introduces Biden as "the current chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and the Democratic Party's de facto spokesman on the war against terrorism" and includes this observation: "Biden's admirers spin his undisciplined chatter as a kind of John McCain-esque straight talk."

"It's not [just] democracy, it's Iraqracy"

General Petraeus, interviewed in Newsweek:

Just back to Al Qaeda a little bit. Why so shy about declaring victory over them, if they're in such bad shape?
Well, first of all we truly think it would be premature, honestly. And then I think there still is a very lethal and very deadly and very barbaric enemy out there. Again, sufficiently barbaric to strap [explosive] vests onto women.

Which in a way is a sign of their weakness, too. They can't find enough men to do it.
Well, yeah, you can interpret it that way. We'll let you do that. And again, honestly, [U.S.] Ambassador [Ryan] Crocker and I explicitly, from day one, together, said that we have got to be coldly realistic and as absolutely objective as we possibly can and not let our enthusiasms or perhaps normal optimism creep into our assessments, frankly. And so we've been very, very careful to ensure that what we say is as absolutely credible as we can make it, and also not open up the assessments to charges of spinning.

Via the Donovan FbL, who adds "The interviewer asks good, educated questions and generallly gets honest and substantial answers. But it was interesting to see Petraeus dance around the fact that the minute we declare the war a success, all it will take is one significant attack for the media and politicans to call it all a lie. It's amazing to see the interviewer more positive about developments than the General himself."

I think FbL hit upon one of the General's primary causes for reluctance, but sadly I think that in addition any display of optimism could also lead to accusations of political partisanship at home too (see "not open up the assessments to charges of spinning" quote above) and that's too bad. (But nothing new.)