Political Punch

"And I suspect presented with month after month of McCain pounding Obama as out of his depth on life-or-death issues, suburban moms and swing voters may not be as forgiving of Obama's various misstatements and missteps as Madison liberals and, well, some in the media."

I suspect not, actually. All those folks are opposed to the war. When Obama fdights back and defends his position, rather tah retreat on it to McCain -- and stands up to McCain -- he looks strong and confidant.

The reason national security works as an issue for Re[ublicans is because Democrats always back down and confirm the GOP rhetoric. If a Democrat won'yt evens tand up for himself against his GOP opponent, how can I trust him to stand up for me against our enemies?

but, if you fight back and don't give an inch, you neutralize that. I think the press coprs better start scrutinizing McCain's flip flopping and lying more than they are. And, if this country's in a recession, McCain's pledge t spend hundreds of billins of dollars in Iraq, ratrher than helping our economy at home, is going to destroy his candidacy. The Democrats and Obama are already setting that one up. They are going to turn his "strength" into his biggest weakness - al la Karl Rove.

Obama in a landslide.

It shows that Obama is pretty much toast already. Obama came out looking fairly stupid on the exchange, and the Republicans are rolling on the floor laughing at the Democrats.

Well McCain won that round, see little news for you all, its logical and factual, before the Continuation of the War on terror by going into Iraq Al Qeada was there, lets look at the facts, reports of Al Qeada stated they are in every Country.
What you libs and Blame America First crowd think that Al Qeada was everywhere else but Iraq, how dumb can you be.

Fact one of Al Qeada top men who lost a leg (or arm I forget) was giving sanctuary by Hussein (That is Iraq's President Hussein, not ours running for President).

Fact Under Carter a Democrat and also an anti-semite (I know that both are the same) Iran was taken over by whats there now!

under Pres Bill Clinton a DEMOCRAT the terrorists grew in strength and attacked us multiple times, blowing up the Trade center in 93. and we did nothing!

Under Bill 800,000 Somalis were slaughtered with no response, even when the Canadian General in charge of the UN forces there asked us and the UN for Air support, Bill convinced the UN to say no.

For the future under President Hussein (this one is ours if he God forbid gets elected) The US military will be dissolved, we will be under Sharia law and beheading will be a daily happening!

Look at this tidbit, how come the Liberal Marxist ACLU attacks anything Christian or Jewish, but defend anything Islamis!

Hey Rezko have you muslim friend buy me a house too like Obama's.

By the way did Obama feel guilty living in a mansion while he helped out a Slum lord??

Dresden, you wrote: "...much like Obama did in the debate Tuesday against Hillary he turned around and somehow made McCain look like he was the one confused. Pretty impressive on Obama's part."

Actually it is Sen. Obama who is confused. While I have already pointed out that al Qaeda was in Iraq before the invasion, that is immaterial at this point. The answer that Sen. Obama gave in the debate was: "And if al Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act..."

Al Qaeda ALREADY DID form a base in Iraq. In fact, they declared Iraq as there central battlefield in their jihad against the United States and Western Civilization. They are STILL IN Iraq. But now we have them on the run. Yes it is certainly due to the help of the Sunnis. But that is the whole point. The current exit strategy is to keep our troops in Iraq until Iraq is able to sustain, govern and defend itself. Clearly we have not reached that point yet. But great progress has been made. And the simple truth of the matter is, if we precipitously pull out our troops while al Qaeda is still a fighting force in Iraq, al Qaeda will be able to spin it into claiming a military victory.

You can deny the fact that we are fighting for the survival of Western Civilization. But your denial won't stop al Qaeda from waging their jihad. Sen. McCain is correct! We must defeat these terrorists wherever they are, and yes even if it takes 100 years to do so.

It's the economy, stupid.

Also, that Madison liberals line is definitely tired at this point... I know Obama doesn't give access to the press like McCain does on his "straight talk" express but he is hooking into something with real people of all stripes who are sick and tired of partisan politics, clearly not just Madison liberals. McCain trying to score cheap points by telling Obama that Al-Qaeda is in Iraq when he clearly knows it may play well with you. But out here, it seems like simple opportunism. You guys can keep on underestimating BO. He'll keep on engaging the voters and he won't be a doormat for the Republican attack machine.

Tough moment for McCain he thought he could create an opening to score some points but much like Obama did in the debate Tuesday against Hillary he turned around and somehow made McCain look like he was the one confused.
Pretty impressive on Obama's part.

Unlike John Kerry, for example, Obama seems very adept at having debates on his terms instead of his opponents' terms.

Jake, Not sure about your take on this. Al Qaeda in Iraq taking the country if we leave? Joe Klein over at Swampland explains the fallacy of that idea. Of course we want to keep hitting Al Qaeda in Iraq but the reason we've had success there is because the Sunnis themselves in Iraq have turned against them. It is not as simplistic as McCain is setting it out to be. I wonder if you are so wowed by McCain's resume that you're taking what he says at face value rather than doing your own research?

Sorry, I misspelled Lou Dobbs in my previous post (Feb 28, 2008 12:22:33 AM)

Jake, thanks for the "sneak peek." I agree that McCain will try to frame the debate to highlight national security issues and foreign affairs. As you said some people, including some in the media, "may not be as forgiving of Obama's various misstatements and missteps." Well tonight on CNN Lou Dodbes had picked up on Sen. Obama's admission on his missing-in-action-as-the-chair-of-the Afghanistan-committee-because-I-have-been -busy campaigning statement and ran with it.

Another interesting gap was mentioned in a Jan '08 Washington Monthly article: "especially surprising is that Obama is Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Europe. Not only has the Senator not visited the region his committee oversees, but as Steve Clemons of the Washington Note has observed, Obama’s committee has not held a single policy-oriented hearing since he’s been chairman."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2008/0801w.widmer.html

It is going to be interesting to see how Sen. Obama can convince voters how his childhood experience of living in Indonesia made him knowledgeable in foreign affairs.

obama has benefited greatly from the hillary haters. if, as unfortunately seems likely, he gets hillary out of the way, people are going to actually start looking at him rather than comparing him to her through the hillary hating lens. that's not good for his prospects. and this issue demonstrates his way of handling a lot of issues - rather than have a valid approach to resolving a problem, just point backwards and blame the other guy for the problem. ok, obama, we get it - hillary voted for the war, mccain voted for the war, you didn't - not because you didn't, but because you weren't even there! but that was years ago. (and you've admitted you don't know how you would have voted if you had been there). the issue now is how we handle the situation going forward. and every time your weak, waffling, b.s. lines get challenged, you just go back to blaming the other guy for some past tense action. mccain calls you on your nonsense, blame him for the war, etc. btw, i'm a texan who's already early voted for hillary. like many lifelong dems, i'll be voting mccain in the fall unless the dems somehow come to their senses and nominate hillary. and i fully expect millions of other dems to do the same. how do we spell mcgovern, who won only one state? o b a m a.

I don't care who's right or who's wrong. The question is, how long would our troops remain in Iraq? It's morally wrong to use our troops to score points. I hope that the friendly countries which share the same border with Iraq would form an alliance to improve the security in Iraq before most of our troops come home. Please note that America supplies Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Jordan with military hardware. If these countries know that unstable Iraq would have an adverse effect on them, they'll be forced to protect their interest by sorting out the mess too. These countries helped in staging this war in terms of intelligence and logistics. Please find a way to bring our troops. home.

Jake, No question that both Hillary and Obama handled the al Queda question badly as debaters. And no question that it was a cheap shot on your part to use that as an opportunity to imply that Obama supporters are "Madison liberals." Every exit poll, every campaign poll, every national media poll disputes that. It's also a cheap shot to throw in more of your whining about the media. There is a cult-like following in the media (maybe not helter-skelter) - but it's your lock-step coverage of Clinton cmapaign. Now, when do we get to see those Clinton tax records? And what is Hillary doing with a chief advisor whose firm prepped Blackwater for congressional hearings?

McCain was right to criticize. Obama was not presidential because he did say if they came back....McCain was right, they have not left. We know when they came in (when George started the war, "mission accomplished", then "bring em on"). Obama is not ready.

I can't wait until MaCain exposes the real Obama, a puppet.

"I don't doubt that Obama knew that Al Qaeda in Iraq exists, but I also think it's clear he doesn't think of the group as a threat to stability in the region as much as McCain does"

Do you know what "Al Qaeda in Iraq exists" means? The root of Talibanization in Iraq are planted. The "Al Qaeda" may not be an immediate threat but it will be in the long run. "Al Qaeda" have grass root level movement that starts in Masjid and is not politically visible.

This proves that Obama's is out of touch with reality in the foreign land which he claimed he is very strong.

I don't agree with you on this issue. You can criticize someone without appearing to offend that individual. This is called constructive criticism. The Presidential election is very important, because it concerns the life of every American. Let's use a simple, but important part of our lives to draw a distinction. Let us assume a patient wants to undergo a life saving surgery. Now, this patient is given a choice of two surgeons to perform this operation. One is a "rookie" and one is "well known". Initially everyone goes to the "well known" surgeon, but as time goes by, the "well known" surgeon makes mistakes and the staff and patients leave for various reasons. As these patients and staff leave they try the "rookie" and guess what? He's a lot better than the "well known" doctor and everyone is impressed.
Well this is the story of Obama and Clinton. Obama never had an easy ride because from day one, the odds where stacked against him and he beat the odds. If race was a factor that favors people, why didn't Bill Richardson win states with a lot of Hispanic people? Why didn't John Edwards get a free ride based on his race? Also if race was a factor in this race then Obama's 11-0 straight wins wouldn't have materialized.

Why are you all pretending Iraq has no military and police of its own? Are you saying they're totally incapable of protecting their own country? Totally incompetent? What?

The British have pulled out of some areas, and the Iraqis are doing okay. The Iraqisy have to take over sooner or later.(Surely you see that? I mean it's their country, not ours, right?) We've been in there training them for years now, so I don't see why you have so little faith in them.

As Obama says, we'll have some forces to protect our embassy, and maybe some advisors.

We really can't keep playing this game of we're indispensable and the whole world just HAS to fall apart if we're not there doing ALL the work because absolutely NOBODY is anywhere CLOSE to being as brave/smart/educated/well-trained/loyal/honest/courageous/whatever as we are.

That's called 'hubris'. That's also called 'what always gets us into these debacles'. Can we please learn from history? Just once? For a change?

What suburban moms, Jake?

According to the ANES, Bush's share of mothers in 2004 was virtually identical to that in 2000. (See: "The Gender Gap" by the American Political Science Association)

Among married women with kids the Democratic share of the 2-party vote dropped 4 points, among married women without children, the Democratic share of the 2-party vote dropped EIGHT points (Exit polls, as described in "The Politics of Polarization"). Furthermore,
there are more married women without kids than with kids. It wasn't the moms, it was the WIVES who moved heavily towards Bush.

This movement has been going for some time. Here is the congressional vote among married women since 1990 (I should note Democrats won them every congressional cycle in the 1980s):
'90 51 D, 49 R
'92 51 D, 49 R
'94 53 R, 47 R
'96 51 R, 49 D
'98 54 R, 46 D
2000 and 2002 not listed
'04 54 R, 45 D
'06 50 R, 49 D
(see the American Enterprise Institute compilation of house exit polls)

The movement of married women did not begin in the wake of 9/11. It started in the mid-1990s, when international affairs were on the back burner.

Now, was it security that pushed them between 2000 and 2004?
According to a survey by women's voices women's vote, married women's #1 issue was moral values. A Table in Anna Greenberg's piece "Moving Beyond the Gender Gap" shows that married white women who voted for Bush or considered voting for Bush were as likely as other Bush voters to mention security. However, they were more likely than other Bush voters to mention personal qualities and values. Additionally, Pew Research's post-election analysis in 1994 found that white women who voted for Republican candidates for House emphasized values on a level that other voting groups did not.

In comparing the 1996 and 1998 midterm elections, married women shifted pro-GOP. But married men's and singles' votes stayed essentially constant.

All of this collectively paints an important picture: married women are uniquely concerned about values.

We talk about values, but what exactly do they mean? Galston and Kamarck pointed out in their paper, "The Politics of Polarization," the values concerns manifest themselves in concerns about the personal qualities of the candidates.

Character and leadership were a huge part of their defection to the Republicans.

The lesson of that, though, is it wasn't just fear of terrorists that moved women. So, encyclopedic know-how about foreign policy may not have the effect you think it will. Bush did not wow these voters with expertise, rather determination and resolve. Thus, McCain's strengths of experience and knowledge may not rouse the same emotions. Moreover, the palpable sense of fear that existed in the past has dissipated somewhat and been supplanted with anxiety about the economy and the war in Iraq. 4% of Americans listed terrorism as the most important issue facing the country in a recent Gallup poll, compared to 19% in the 2004 exit poll.

Lastly, in terms of Madison liberals being the ones who forgive "misspeaking", do the office park dads in Northern Virginia, the St. Louis suburbs, and Denver suburbs not count?

So if Obama knows al queada is in Iraq then he is in favor of sending troops there. He said that last night right?

Wow. Mr. Tapper I don't know if you will see this but I will refer you to Joe Klein's blog today calling McCain out for his mis-statments. Obama was actually right on every single point and on the broader issue of national security, there was a reason McCain said Iraq could sink his candidacy.

I would urge you to recalibrate your views, you automatically seem to see McCain as infallible but the strategy he's been backing has been FAILING.

I think Obama has a huge argument that will resonate with voters on Iraq, Afghanistan, and forigen policy at large.

I think Barack Obama needs to fire his foreign policy advisor. I bet he's glad he doesn't have another debate with Hillary scheduled to showcase his lack of foreign policy experience. It was pointed out in the debate that Barack Obama, since he became chair of the national security subcommittee in early 2007, has not held a single oversight hearing on Afghanistan. Al qaeda is certainly present there.

Its only a matter of time before he start saying come everyone drink the flavorade and everything will be alright(Jim Jones in Guyana).

I really do not understand for the life of me how any supporters of Obama can go along with this hogwash, he will withdraw our troops from Iraq and then go back if AQ set up a base, yet he knows that AQ is in Iraq as he informed McCain today.

Well if Obama is willing to go back to set up a base because of AQ and he said he knows the AQ is in Iraq can any of his supporters then tell me why withdraw the troops??

Is he dense? No wonder FOX news this evening is already starting to say an Obama nomination is a good thing for McCain...surprise, surprise as if some of us have not been saying so for months now!!!

There you go again Mr.Obama, side stepping the question. Regardless of how and why Al Qaeda is in Iraq, the issue is they are in Iraq at this moment and will still be there if you should be elected as President. Do you still withdraw troops with them there, and then when they take over the country then we go back? You answer to this issue is retreat for now and then go back. What kind of leader is this?.
America needs a strong leader, to face the battle and fight for victory, not retreat because the going gets rough. As far as I'm concerned you are a coward hiding behind your political shield. Your followers are obvious to the facts, non supportive and have no faith in our troops. The majority of Americans were in favor of the war in the beginning. You cannot predict the outcome of wars, but we are in midstream and the surge is showing signs of working. Retreat is not acceptable! Pulling out of Iraq is not stopping the war of Islamic terrorists against our country. Your supporters one day will ask, Who's side are you on?"

"If I find out they are plotting another 9/11 then I will hunt them...."

ok Obama...ONLY if the plot a 9/11..if they don´t plot then we can go have tea together and organise forums...

Give me a break...

Obama never says yes or no. As if always not wanting to alienate an audience...the point is what audience?

He can´t say he would bomb Iran or Irak because he doesnt want to bomb...read between lines...

"I would do anything to help Americans" AND THE LINE MISSING: WITHOUT HURTING THE MUSLIMS......

Please reporters keep pressing for yes or no answers...he is unable to stand for anything...very non executive.

Actually al Qaeda was running a training base in northern Iraq BEFORE we invaded Iraq. In fact, the resolution authorizing President Bush to go into Iraq -- dated Oct 16, 2002 -- states: "Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq."

Sorry Lance, that remark was for Micro Mark.

My apologies.

To Lance D.

Clinton has no svengali - she has a record, talent and experience.

It's Obama's svengali, David Axelrod who is responsible for creating the Obama "persona" - remember, it's easier to work with a blank canvas than to defend a substantive record!

Remember all those "present" votes?

Go Hillary !!!!!

P.S. Did everyone see the moment approximately 10 minutes into the debate where he throws up his hands and turns to the (male) moderators as if to say "isn't she something?"

the media should investigate more about this guy and stop throwing so many blows at hillary somebody that votes 129 times present is just passing the buck. He cannot make decesions please open your eyes and vote for hillary. Anybody that does not put his hand on the bible like obama there is someting very wrong because, this nation is under (God)!

"....may not be as forgiving of Obama's various misstatements and missteps...." which is why that debate should be between Hillary and McCain. if Obama wins....guaranteed to be enormous regrets.

I am a supporter Senator Hillary Clinton, who has contributed financially to her campaign. I feel she is the most qualified to be President.

As a college educated young woman, I am proud to have a qualified and viable woman running for President. It's about time. America is a leader in the world, yet other countries have had women Presidents and Prime Ministers (e.g. England, Pakistan, Israel, Argentina, Philippines, India, etc.).

American women were given the right to vote in 1920, after a long struggle. A few women have attempted to run for President, without success. We now have a strong and viable candidate in Hillary. It’s a tough job running for President. For a woman, it’s even tougher.

Let's support Senator Clinton and make history by electing her the FIRST WOMAN President of the US. A woman President will be CHANGE. We may not get this chance again for many years.

See link below for more info the history of women in America and the world. Thank you.

if we leave Iraq, won't it turn into the same situation that exists in Afghanistan? Al Qaeda wasn't originally there either. They went to lend a hand against the Russians and stayed. why wouldn't they head over to another middle eastern country at war to grow their ranks? It's far too late to rethink this as a whoopsie daisie...we needed to be out in the numbers that Barocko seems to motivate in 2003 so that we'd have never invaded in the first place. I've never heard Obama comment about the legality of the invasion and wish that they would ask about that in the next debate.

I am a Hillary supporter and hope she is elected president. But……. finally.........Obama’s grand speeches/promises are being challenged by McCain.

The media and voters also need to do more research on Obama’s background and voting record in the Illinois senate and the US senate, now that he is the front-runner. DIG DEEP, ASK HARD QUESTIONS.

If for some bizarre reason Obama becomes the Democratic nominee, more Republican attacks will follow. Will be a test just how strong Obama and his rhetoric are.

Hillary is my first choice, McCain my second choice for president.

Obama is style over substance; americans will work that out before the election.
McCain will win the presidency if he is the democratic candidate.

"Al Quaeda in Iraq" is not why we went to Iraq and it's not why we remain in Iraq. If the sectarian violence stopped, and political stability emerged, we'd be out of there, even if AQ remnants remained. John McCain knows that.

Is this man Obama a total idiot AQ is a global organization so it would be very foolish for anyone running for President to believe that they were never in Iraq and only went there when the US did.

I really wonder if Obama knows who Jordanian Terrorist Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, if he did he would not be making such dumb statements.

Once again is the man that some of you want to be POTUS, as the days go by I really feel that some of these voters need to get their heads checked.

If someone comes out and says "my friends" we have to stay in Iraq for 100years. "My friends" I don't understand the economy, but I'll continue the Bush economic policy. "My friends" the surge is succeeding and everyday we spend $4m a minute and brave men and women are dying everyday in Iraq.
Well I have news for Sen. McCain, you can't claim to be our friend until you explain how you intend to do the following:
1)What are your economic plans?
2)What are your health care plans?
3)What plans do you have for people about to loose their homes?
4)How do you create new jobs?
5)How do improve the image of the US abroad?
6)Instead of leaving so many US troops in Iraq, why don't you form a coalition with Jordon, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and other countries sharing the same border with Iraq. America supplies these countries with military hardware and gives them billions of dollars in economic aid. A coalition is a good idea, this system works in Europe with NATO, if countries around Iraq know what's at stake they should help fix the mess. Some of these countries help create this mess and should help clean it up.
All I can say is, "my friend" I can't wait for you to debate the democratic nominee and the American people will halt the use of the Phrase "my friends" in all your sentences.

Please, Please Ohio and Texas - Vote for Hillary Clinton! Obama is a fraud, a product of some motivational speech cult. If he gets the Democrat nomination, we Democrats may lose the election. If he gets into the White House, we will have a Warren G. Harding type of administration all over again, cronyism, crooks, scandals. Look at how Mayor Bill Campbell and his friends who ran the Atlanta Airport crooke Atlantans and cansed a terrific scandal. That's exactly what we would have with Obama in the White House.

Vote for Mrs. Clinton! She is the most capable candidate for president that we have!

PLEASE!

Bill Elliott,

Because secretely she and Obama doesn't like Texas. haven't you seen the video on the internet. Obama in 1998 slams texas , saying he would never in his life time live there.

yeah that is Obamas weakness, and unfortunately it is what this election is going to be about. With all the bad stuf just startign to come out about Obama, it is going to be fun watching him get stripped down to bones, as the republicans steam roll him. he can only play this you go first and I'll agree with Hillary's ideas for as long as she is in it. Then what is he going to do.

Jake, I have found your reporting to be quite fair and that is why I think it will be helpful for you to substantiate your claim that McCain knows more about Obama in foreign policy.

Remember that we have tried this dance before -- we thought the wise men in Washington knew what they were doing in Iraq. After $2 Trillion (in projected total cost) and 4,000 American lives, I think it is fair if we don't necessarily assume that the folks in Washington know what they are doing.

Is Oprah coming to Texas to support Obama. Bet not. Why is she discriminating against Texans.

Jake Tapper has it pretty much all together and says it quite nicely.

If the Democrats want to lose the next election they can continue to support Obama. Obama is right now trying to BUY TEXAS with SEIU monies, you know the special interest groups that he was outraged and showed indignation toward John Edwards and Hillary Clinton for using.

I come from a large Democratic family but we have all decided if Obama is on the ticket we will vote for McCain.

I think Obama, Has no clue about to much, with the exception what his newly hired advisors tell him. I doubt if any of them are privy to top secret information.

He is concerned about Kenya, when he was asked about using military action there, he said not yet.

His campaign is based on, selling hope and ending the war in Iraq. Saving the world and feeding all the world, and building his kingdom on earth.

He let down Illinois voters by voting present when he did decide to be there. So his Dedication
responsibility level is low.

Vote responsible America needs someone who does more than make great speeches.

He wants America to follow blindly as he leads blindly.

Time to wake up America

The problem is that you are assuming what Obama said WAS a misstatement. I guess you are an illustration of the problem he will have in the general which is that even if McCain keeps saying stupid things about Iraq, because he is perceived to know his stuff, people take what he says at face value.
OBama is actually right. There was no Al Qaeda until Bush decided to occupy the country.

Hi Jake,

Have you seen this: HILARIOUS!!!!???

Micro Mark
Hillary Clinton’s Svengali, Super Micro-Trend Pollster Mark Penn: ‘People Misunderstand,’ He Says Campaign ‘Never About the Small Things,’ And, ‘If We Lose, I Will Take My Share of the Responsibility’

By the ways, I am really disappointed in those comments by Obama. There is no points hastily pulling off the troups and sending them back few months later.

"I intend to bring [it] to an end so that we can actually start going after al Qaeda in Afghanistan and in the hills of Pakistan like we should have been doing in the first place!"

In the first place? I guess Barry doesn't understand Al-Qaeda would of just gone totally into Iraq anyway if that was done. We can't afford amatuer time.

Even though Sen. McCain's knowledge of national security matters may be far more encyclopedic than Sen. Obama's, it doesn't matter a hill of beans, since Sen. McCain proceeded from a wrong premise to start with. In other words, he did not show the judgment necessary for a Commander-in-=Chief.

The erroneous premise is that alQaeda has fluorished in Iraq because Sen. McCain, along with a majority of his colleagues, voted to authorize a war that destabilized a government and a society at the behest of a President who had no "game plan" whatsoever after the war began. For conservatives such as Sen. McCain to claim that his opponent, whoever it might be, is "soft" on national security negates the erroneous judgment he initially showed in voting for such a fiasco of a war. The old Bush/Cheney mantra of "I'm going to scare the wits out of you with vague threats of terrorism, but you'd better vote for me because I'll keep you safe," won't play as well as it did in 2004.

what Hillary/McCain/Patrick/ fill-in-the-name said. over and over again

Obama is an empty slate. no ideas of his own. no leadership skills. no courage. Vote Present.

"And if al Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq"

IF?

apparently obama supporters can't see becuase they are blinded by the light of their cult master.

"Yeah, what Hillary said". Too bad she wasn't in on this little tiff to give him a hand. No wonder the Republicans want Obama to win. They'll chew him up and spit him out like a wad of gum.

I see no gaffe. Obama was responding to the possibility of al Qaeda establishing a major base of operations in Iraq. That's not going to happen because the Iraqis - even the Sunnis - are no fans of al Qaeda. Everyone knows "al Qaeda in Iraq" (TM) has been reduced to a bunch of disordered extremists trying to figure out what went wrong. Americans are sick of throwing money and troops' lives down the drain over there and Walnuts' 100 years of war is not exactly a plank a candidate wants to have in their platform today.

I look forward to Walnuts "I don't know much about the economy" McCain trying to sell people on more Bush tax cuts as his cure for stagflation. The economy's getting worse by the day and by the time November comes around a candidate who admits to not knowing much about the economy is going to be struggling big time.

So Obama is going to invade Pakistan at what cost?

"but his depth of knowledge -- if not his judgment -- on national security issues and foreign affairs is leaps and bounds more encyclopedic than Obama's"

Ummm, sorry, but Obama is correct on points here. AQI did not exist prior to our invasion in 2003. Additionally, it is estimated to make up no more than 5 to 10 percent of insurgent forces. Nor is it likely to secure a base of operations post-withdrawal, as it is hated by Iraqis almost as much as Iraqis hate us.

So who has the more "encyclopaedic" knowledge about this stuff? Ridiculous. Thanks again for clearing this up for us, MSM.

and obama knows nothing about the economy. but nice try changing the subject to cover up for Obama's gaffe.

I think unfortunately for McCain...the number one issue Americans care about is the economy. It's what the see everyday when they go to fill up their gas tank or try to pay their bills. Obama is much more in touch with the American people on those issues. It looks like the Republicans are going to play the "fear factor" to get Americans to think that if we elect Obama it will make us less safe. It may work for some but I don't think it'll work on the majority. And remember George W. Bush already played the fear card. It probably won't work twice.

It was amajor gaffe by Obama. Like Ford saying Poland wasn't under Soviet domination. andonce again Obama merely copies what the other person said. He is not fluent when speaking off the cuff. like, like, you know.

I think Obama, thus far, has done a good job responding to this from McCain. I actually think it will be harder for McCain to expound on all other issues than it will be for Obama to hold his own on foreign policy issues.