So the blogosphere seems to largely approve of choosing Biden as vice president. To which I say, what about before he chaired Foreign Relations? He used to chair Judiciary. And back then he managed crime bills, and was a major player in leading us into an expanded "War on Drugs"? Why aren't these parts of his record - which I think quite a lot of thoughtful liberals (to say nothing of libertarians of various stripes) would find highly problematic at best - not part of the discussion of Biden's merits?
UPDATE: Ah, here's one - with several links. I'm not fond of Biden. I'd rank him down with Bayh. But then like most Americans I'm going to vote on the basis of the top of the ticket, not the vice presidential nominee.
Posted by armand at August 20, 2008 11:50 AM | TrackBack | Posted to PoliticsBecause they're old news? And the 'War on Drugs' still polls pretty well?
But yeah. I would like to hear his current thinking on the drug war and other security and law enforcement excesses of the present era.
Posted by: jacflash at August 19, 2008 06:53 PM | PERMALINKMark Kleiman seems particularly well-suited to write a post on this, but I guess he's staying out of the Veepstakes hoopla for now. Ah well.
Posted by: Armand at August 20, 2008 10:43 AM | PERMALINK