Political scientist Carl Scott is justly furious at the grotesque hypocrisy of our unctuous clown of a Vice President, who argued that he would "lead an effort" to impeach a President who attacked another country unless the US was attacked or there was information that the US was about to be attacked. Go ahead and watch the tape. Soak in all the pompousness, the oozing self-love and the inflammatory partisanship. Biden's comments are much uglier than Newt Gingrich's recent flip-flop on Libya. Gingrich (regardless of what the polls say), is a long shot (potential) presidential candidate. Biden is next in line for President.
The resources for shaming Biden are few. The news of his hypocrisy has made it all over the right-leaning media, but I'm not sure what good that does. Could we possibly have more contempt for him or pray more earnestly for the continued good health of the current President? We weren't voting for him anyway. He doesn't care what we think and he already got his.
It would take more than a bunch of speeches by Republican politicians and conservative pundits to get this story to break through. Many liberal-leaning, but not explicitly partisan journalists will just call it another process story and wait for the next thing Sarah Palin says so they can jump on it. On an emotional level, I think that a formal censure by the House of Representatives will end up giving Biden's hypocrisy the spotlight it deserves. The censure could follow Carl's language about how "Hyperbolic perfectionist discourse has consequences. It means the presidency cannot logically function. It means slogans run rough-shod over actual constitutional thinking." and name Biden by name as an offender and single him out for the damage his radicalism, hypocrisy, and partisanship do to constitutional thinking and civil discourse.
A little accountability in this direction might put future "serious" presidential and vice presidential contenders (very much including Republicans) on notice that their past statements will be remembered and held against them if they should become President or Vice President. So some moderation or timely admission of error would be a good idea if they want to avoid congress-imposed humiliation.
I'm only half serious. I'm not sure that the energies that could be used in such a fight wouldn't be better used elsewhere (like making the case for market-oriented health care reform, or Yuval Levin's reimagined welfare state.) Then again, that elsewhere will probably end up being something like the fight to end government subsidies to NPR (which I agree with, but at a low level of priority.) So maybe censuring Biden is the way to go.