Biden Vows to Oppose Foster, Then Flip-Flops : Nomination: Senator had called choice for surgeon general ‘a political blunder in the extreme.’ His reversal came after a meeting with Clinton.

Even as he toured Capitol Hill searching for support, embattled surgeon general nominee Dr. Henry W. Foster Jr. came under fresh fire Friday, this time from a senior Senate Democrat.

Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) blasted the nomination as “a political blunder in the extreme,” vowed to vote against Foster and urged President Clinton to withdraw his nomination. Later in the day, after an Oval Office meeting with Clinton, Biden recanted, blaming his criticism on a fit of pique.

“My comments concerning the nomination of Dr. Foster were a reflection of my anger and frustration with the way the White House has handled this nomination,” Biden said in a statement read by a White House spokeswoman.

Still, the outburst was a fresh reminder of the controversy that has followed the selection of Foster since it was announced a week ago. Amid intense opposition from anti-abortion groups, even some allies are giving the nomination only an even chance of survival.

Sen. Bob Packwood (R-Ore.) said: “I assume he has a fighting chance if he has no Democratic defections,” while Sen. James M. Jeffords (R-Vt.) said that there might still be time to “straighten out this mess.”

But a key Republican senator on the committee that will conduct Foster’s confirmation hearing said that the process had been “so badly botched it’s beyond repair.”

Meanwhile, a senior Administration official said Friday that Foster had performed a small number of hysterectomies to sterilize severely mentally retarded women.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Foster performed the sterilizations at a time when the medical community believed such procedures were justified as providing health benefits to the women. By the late 1970s, Foster stopped doing the procedures as medical opinion changed on the propriety of the surgery, the official said.

As part of a White House campaign to plead Foster’s case, the doctor made an appearance before a supportive audience at George Washington University’s School of Public Health in Washington, where he complained that his record and character had been badly distorted by his critics.

He said it is “fitting” that the President nominated him on Groundhog Day. “I feel a little bit like that groundhog,” he said, because ever since Feb. 2 . . . the descriptions of myself and my work . . . have cast an unrecognizable shadow of the man I really am.”

*

Foster outlined his 38 years “as a teacher, a university leader and a practicing obstetrician-gynecologist” and said that, if he is confirmed as surgeon general, he would mount a bully pulpit to preach against the woes of teen-age pregnancy.

On one occasion, Foster stammered and misspoke: “My opponents say that this nomination is about abortion. . . . I have dedicated my medical career to taking all medical steps to meet the health needs of my patients, and that includes performing illegal abortions.”

Sensing his error, Foster quickly corrected himself, saying: “Legal, legal, legal abortions. It’s the law of the land.”

But the slip seemed to reinforce an impression--shared even by some supporters--that his lack of experience under the intense spotlight of Washington would make him a weak witness at his confirmation hearings.

This week, Kate Michelman, president of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, said that she believes that the doctor “simply wasn’t ready for prime time.”

Further escalating the temperature of the debate, Foster’s supporters invoked highly charged language that all but introduced Foster’s race into the controversy.

Several black members urged that the Senate not rush toward a “lynching.” And Rep. Donald M. Payne (D-N.J.), chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, recalled the angry words of now-Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who described attacks on his character in October, 1991, as “a high-tech lynching.”

Asked whether black members believe that the opposition to Foster might be based on racial bias, Payne replied obliquely:

“What we have seen, unfortunately, during the past year or two, is race has become more and more of an issue with the opposition party. We have seen code words start to creep into political campaigns. We think it’s very divisive . . . and we think it ought to stop.”

Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.) not only uttered the word “lynching” but also added another loaded phrase.

“We want to say: Stop this nonsense. . . . Slow down. We don’t believe in lynchings. We don’t want to see that kind of goose-stepping over women’s rights.”

Foster also met Friday morning with representatives of eight medical organizations, including the American Medical Assn., the nation’s largest group of physicians, which reiterated its support for him.

“His career should be celebrated, not defended,” said Ralph W. Hale, executive director of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

The White House, meanwhile, used its most forceful language yet to try to wrench the focus off Foster’s record and onto the abortion issue, where the Administration hopes to find greater political backing.

Both the President and First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton were furious with the White House staff after last November’s election, believing that they had been ill-served. Yet it has not been Clinton’s habit to punish members of his staff and some visible action would be likely to bring more attention to an excruciatingly painful subject.