I didn't intend to "dismiss" the fossil record--how could I "dismiss" it? In fact I mention it mostly to say that it can't tell us whether or not biochemical systems evolved by a Darwinian mechanism. My book concentrates entirely on Darwin's mechanism, and simply takes for granted common descent.
Behe does not say that he accepts universal common descent in that statement.
Furthermore, it seems to me that Behe is arguing that whether one believes in common descent or not, ID is a better explanation for life as it exists today. IOW, even accepting the notion of common descent, ID is still valid.
Were it otherwise, he would be well within the mainstream of Darwinian evolution.
Keep in mind that the main topic of the statement, if it is in answer to a question, is the fossil record and what it means.
I think you may be reading something additional into his statement that isn't there. It may also be possible that I have done the same, even if my comments are my attempt to construe all he has said to be consistent as a whole.