His resemblance to Obama is uncanny - see photo here.
Here he is in a advertisement that shows “Philippine president Gloria Arroyo” hosting a dinner with “Barack Obama” who in turn experiences dyspepsia from overeating.

It can’t be easy, for someone with a highly defined superego to be bound to the wacky Biden id, for one so disciplined to be tied to one so undisciplined, for a man so coolly unsentimental to be paired with someone so exuberantly sentimental.I love Dowd. οἱ πολλοί ... id ... Jane Austen ... all in one article. And hoi polloi is spelled correctly, not surprisingly.
It was the “not surprisingly” that was surprisingly snarky.So snarky, that it's being parodied on SNL, which is brutal about that sort of thing. What more can I say?
Still, the president should brush up on his Jane Austen. When Emma
Woodhouse belittles Miss Bates, an older and poorer friend, at a picnic, Mr.
Knightly pulls her aside to remonstrate. “How could you be so insolent in your
wit?” he chides, reminding her that it is unfeeling to humble someone less
fortunate in front of others who will be guided by the way she behaves.
That’s how it works ... not surprisingly.
At several points in the gut-wrenching emotional rollercoaster of last year [Obama] simply disappeared alone into a hotel room for a few minutes to gather his thoughts and restrain his feelings.
This is pure and simple EQ. In fact Abraham Lincoln said ...
"A drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall ... If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend ... On the contrary, assume to dictate to his judgment, or to command his actions, or to mark him as one to be shunned or despised, and he will retreat within himself, close all the avenues to his head and his heart.... "
Magnanimity in victory: that was Churchill’s advice. And since his precocious victory last November, Barack Obama has walked that Churchillian walk. It is not common in politics, especially after a meteoric rise past every prejudice, every smear and every Clinton, but Obama has an old soul’s perspective and an intellectually secure man’s confidence. Perhaps he has too much confidence — except that every time his friends feared that in the campaign, he proved them wrong.
From the shallow brittleness of George W Bush to the supple strength of Obama is a revolution in temperament and style not seen since Jimmy Carter gave way to Ronald Reagan 28 years ago. It signals the kind of administration that now looms before us: a conciliatory, inclusive, pragmatic form of liberalism. It’s a liberalism eager to learn from the insights of conservatives, and it is pioneered by a president-elect shrewd enough to know that generosity of spirit means more leverage and influence, not less.
Even now, as the outlook seems so dark, and as the inheritance seems so
insuperable, three words linger in the mind.
Yes he can.
And two words echo back at me.
Can we?
"It's going to be an interesting lunch," Bush told an interviewer recently. When asked what the five men would talk about, Bush said: "I don't know. I'm sure (Obama's) going to ask us all questions, I would guess. If not, we'll just share war stories."
The Huffington Post called it "extraordinary."
The photo of the historic meeting of the presidents made the front page of many papers. President Bush met with President-Elect Obama and former Presidents Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush, and Bill Clinton. Prior to their luncheon meeting they held a photo opportunity for the press in the Oval Office.
Obama said graciously:
"All the gentlemen here understand both the pressures and possibilities of this office," Obama said. "For me to have the opportunity to get advice, good counsel and fellowship with these individuals is extraordinary."

Gordon Brown's statistical virtual worlds are not the only virtual world in politics....There is another – which New Labour interestingly seems less at home in.
That is the virtual world of web 2.0 – brought to political life recently by the web-world-wizard, the BlackBerrying star with his own social networking website, Barack Obama. And it is completely changing the way politics – and candidates like me – work.
As a candidate in the web-2.0 age, I am instantly connectable to friends and many potential voters. That means people demand very different things from their politicians. They want to know them in ways that were not possible before – they want to know them with their emotional intelligence as well as analyse what they say with their rational faculties.
He was fond of quoting Sam Rayburn as saying that ''A man who can't size up another person when he walks in the room had better be in another profession.'' No one could do that better than Johnson. His greatest gifts of leadership - the ability to understand, persuade and subdue - depended on connections and relationships that existed on a human scale.
''I always believed,'' he once said, ''that as long as I could take someone into a room with me I could make him my friend. And that included anybody, even Nikita Khrushchev. From the start of my Presidency, I believed that if I handled him right he would go along with me. Deep down, hidden way below, he too wanted what was good, but every now and then this terrible urge for world domination would get into him and take control and then he'd go off on some crazy jag, like putting those missiles in Cuba. I saw all that in him and knew I could cope with it so long as he and I were in the same room.''
Later, as the enigmatic Ho Chi Minh loosed forces that threatened to destroy him, he would remark: ''If only I could get Ho in a room with me, I'm sure we could work things out.''
It was true that there were few who could totally resist the influence of Lyndon Johnson's personal presence.
''I can't stand the bastard,'' Robert Kennedy once told me after a private meeting with the President, ''but he's the most formidable human being I've ever met.''