Another feather in the cap of the man who thought a $200 million blank check for Iran was a good idea. I’m not being cute with the headline, either. One Iraqi pol, among several from various sects interviewed by Reuters who sneered at Greasy Joe’s partition “solution,” actually credits him with drawing Sunnis and Shia together through their mutual loathing of his idea.

Across racial and religious boundaries, Iraqi politicians on Saturday bemoaned Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama’s choice of running mate, known in Iraq as the author of a 2006 plan to divide the country into ethnic and sectarian enclaves…

Ezzet al-Shabender, a member of parliament from the secularist Iraqi List of former prime minister Ayad Allawi, actually credited the broad-based disgust triggered by Biden’s proposal for helping Iraqi politicians bury their differences.

“His project was the reason behind the unity of many political blocs that once differed in viewpoints,” he said, comparing it to the Balfour Declaration, a 1917 British note that backed the creation of Israel and is regarded across the Arab world as the ultimate colonial injustice.

“Such a person, if he would assume the vice-presidency post, would not serve to improve Iraq-USA relations.”

Coming soon: Biden unites the U.S. and Iran by proposing a Taliban state in western Afghanistan. In fairness, the Reuters piece doesn’t prove that his plan is wrong — but then Nuri al-Maliki saying he preferred a 16-month time frame for withdrawal didn’t prove that that was the right answer either back when Obamites were swooning over his Spiegel interview a few weeks ago. Just bear this in mind the next time you hear someone intoning about the wizard of Wilmington. Oh, and bear this in mind too: To the extent that public consensus has settled on the notion that the war was wrong but the surge was right, Biden will be the one and only candidate among the final four who’ll have voted wrong on both. Genius indeed.