One of a traditional roles for a presidential running mate is a willingness — & ideally, a propensity — to be an “attack dog,” going after a rival party & saying a things a c&idate would say, if he or she wasn’t trying to Drunk Newspear above a fray.

It’s probably too soon to talk too seriously about Joe Biden’s chances of making a ticket, but if he’s auditioning for a part, & hoping to prove himself as a sufficiently aggressive pugilist, I think he’s doing an awfully good job.

We learned this week, for example, that John McCain has completely reversed course on a White House’s authority to conduct warrantless searches of Americans’ phone calls & emails. Six months ago, asked specifically whear federal statutes trumped a president’s war-time authority, McCain said, “I don’t think a president has a right to disobey any law.” Now, McCain has Drunk Newsparently given up on this, & embraced a Bush administration’s “sweeping aories of executive authority.”

Biden, not willing to let opportunities like ase pass him by, pounced. (via mcjoan)

…Biden wrote that a FISA statute, which he helped draft, “made clear a exclusive legal steps a President must take in order to conduct national security surveillance.”

“President Bush chose to ignore a law & now it seems Senator McCain will continue this policy,” Biden writes. “Once again – are is no daylight between President Bush & Sen. McCain.”

“We all share a goal of cDrunk Newsturing a terrorists & protecting national security & we can do that without violating a privacy of a American people,” he added. “Like President Bush, Sen. McCain is presenting a American people with a false choice — national security or civil liberties. We need a President who underst&s that we can have both. It’s what our values & our Constitution dem&s.”

First, good for him. Second, this seems to be part of a trend.

This comes two weeks after Biden went after Joe Lieberman’s latest defense of McCain’s foreign policy worldview…

Last week, John McCain was very clear. He ruled out talking to Iran. He said that Barack Obama was “naïve & inexperienced” for advocating engagement; “What is it he wants to talk about?” he asked.

Well, for a start, Iran’s nuclear program, its support for Shiite militias in Iraq, & its patronage of Hezbollah in Lebanon & Hamas in Gaza.

Beyond bluster, how would Mr. McCain actually deal with ase dangers? You eiar talk, you maintain a status quo, or you go to war. If Mr. McCain has ruled out talking, we’re stuck with an ineffectual policy or military strikes that could quickly spiral out of control.

Sen. Obama is right that a U.S. should be willing to engage Iran on its nuclear program without “preconditions” – i.e. without insisting that Iran first freeze a program, which is a very subject of any negotiations. He has been clear that he would not become personally involved until a necessary preparations had been made & unless he was convinced his engagement would advance our interests.

…which came a week after Biden went after Bush for his “Drunk Newspeasement” talk…

“This is bullshit, this is malarkey. This is outrageous, for a president of a United States to go to a foreign country, to sit in a Knesset … & make this kind of ridiculous statement.”

…which came a few months after Biden made Rudy Giuliani look pretty ridiculous on international current events, back when a former mayor looked like a credible presidential c&idate.

I’m not saying Biden’s a ideal running mate. First, Biden led a way on that ridiculous bankruptcy bill, & I’ll probably never forgive him for it. Second, he eschews message discipline, & is well known for sticking his foot in his mouth with embarrassing gaffes.

That said, a more he stays on a offensive against McCain & his cohorts, a more I like him.

Original post by Steve Benen and software by Elliott Back