From the Fact Check Desk: Did Obama Say During the Debate Over the Surge That "There's No Doubt that Additional U.S. Troops Could Temporarily Quell the Violence?"

Jimbo;

Libs will shout when Clinton lied no one died? Again I hate to bother you with the facts. Most people agree Clinton lied about his private sexual conduct. It seems to me I simply do not care to hear or know about Clinton's private conduct or anyone else's for that matter. Dont you think the stopping of government to investigate the Lewinsky relationship was, to be kind, probably not the best use of resources?

By the way, Bush flatly lied to the American public about the reasons for the Iraq war. I would refer you to the accounts of the following - Paul ONeil; Frank Rush; Bob Woodward, Joseph Wilson; Scott McClellan; George Tenet and others.

I do not expect you to accept this premise nor do I expect you to research the point about the yellow cake or Curveball or Chalabi etc. but I would ask you this. If it were proven that Bush lied about WMD to coerce the country into this war what would be your response?

Peter.

How about MA in Ed and then 23 years of teaching elementary and high school? Remember, that the educated man is aware of the possible and probable consequences of his acts and non acts and responds accordingly. Kindasorta makes me wonder about the quality of Obama's education.

John McCain is a war monger? Interesting... Was that conclusion arrived at from INDUCTIVE,or DEDUCTIVE REASONING?

Peter.

Anthrax? Yeah, but pretty thin....

Jimbo;

No attacks since 9-11. You really do not seem to want to be confused by the facts do you? What was anthrax? Keep listening to FOX news and the likes of Bill OReilly and click your heels three times.....

Can we at least keep our eye on the ball here. Can it be seriously argued that Obama's statements on the surge is even a legitimate issue? The invasion of Iraq is an unqualified failure as a policy. The right and particularly McCain claims that anyone who sees this as obvious is willing to accept defeat. This is the worst type of emotional and silly argument. Our troops fought and won handily a war to take down a government. Now if we leave, because we should not be in the middle of a civil war, we are defeated? This is simply false.

What is true is that under the best of circumstances, the policy is, as I have said, an unqualified failure. We have spent a trillion dollars or more which could have solved health care in this country or perhaps given us some fiscal responsibility. For our investment we have empowered Iraq's natural ally Iran. Thanks to this policy whole heartedly supported by McCain we now have two choices - a nuclear Iran or war with Iran. There is also a matter of a few hundred thousand people dead or maimed in this whole equation including our precious troops which McCain has consistently voted against like in his failure to support Sen. Webb's GI bill. For this McCain should be ashamed of himself.

In light of all of this the discussion about whether a temporary surge has improved the situation is like asking Mrs. Lincoln how the play was.

Isn't the real issue how it is that McCain can claim superiority on foreign policy when he lacked the insight to be against this fool hearty war? Obama was against the entire thing from the start.
Not only that, McCain, knowing the unmitigated disaster the entire notion of the war was, still maintains that the war was the correct decision. This tells me that he either lacks good judgment, is a war monger or is willing to use war as an instrument of policy far more frequently than this country can afford. It is of no moment which of these is true I do not want him as President.

Truthful Liberal

Ditto for FOX rep on plane. I posted that fact on another site and some guy actually came back with "FOX is not a legitimate news source!" Really interesting if Obama ever gets the guts to face Bill O'Reilly. Bill is tough - but respectful and fair.

I see no evidence to suggest that Mr. Obama made any such statements during the surge debate. Mr. Tapper seems to have drawn the appropriate conclusion. Mr. Obama has indeed lied. It doesn't make it true just because you say it is true. There must be evidence of its truthfulness.

We can only guess at Mr. Obama's reasoning since we cannot get inside the man's mind. We can, however, draw our own individual conclusions as to the question: "Is Mr. Obama fit to be our Commander-in-Chief.?"

I, for one, am eagerly anticipating the four debates in September and October. I encourage everyone who has posted here to watch the debates and decide for yourself.

Martin.
NO! PEOPLE DIED WHEN BUSH LIED...... as the libs will shout at you. Probably few if any know that that at least part of the WMD story was made up by Hussein himself (death bed confession) to keep Iran off his back. During same confession, he also said that he never believed that the US would invade Iraq - based upon Bill Clinton's reluctance to pursue enemies. Same message Clinton probably sent to the bad guys who carried out 911. I CAN'T SEE MCCAIN SENDING THE WRONG MESSAGE TO OUR ENEMIES!!

This article correctly points out that at the time of the debate over the vote on the surge, Obama made no statement recognizing even limited surge success. That shows Obama is playing very low politics in matters of war/peace and life/death, which reveals his low character.

His vote against the surge itself also reveals he did not understand the dynamics of the Iraq war.

What is most scary though, what makes him absolutely unfit for office, and what no one is covering is that in those debates Obama also claimed the war was already lost and the only option was to bring the troops home "immediately."

This fact is a kind of smoking gun. It shows his new claim that he partially supported the surge (or at least recognized it could have some positive impacts) is an outright lie. It also shows he never understood or was willing to sell out US interest's in the middle east for his own short-term political gain. As long as he could place the blame for the loss on GW Bush/Repubs he was very willing to accept failure in the middle east. Now that that's not possible, it's, 'oh I only wanted to win in Afghanistan'. This shift is an attempt to change the subject and make it look like he has any clue about the importance of our winning in the middle east. I only hope others recognize how he is willing to undermine America to further his own political goals. It may take a bit of a miracle at this point, but his defeat would be a true victory for the US, particularly in the war on terror.

The question Mr. Tapper poses is: "Did Obama Say During the Debate Over the Surge That 'There's No Doubt that Additional U.S. Troops Could Temporarily Quell the Violence?'"

Does anyone have any rebuttal evidence (real evidence, such as quotes from a reliable source) that answers that question? Anything else in these comments is off topic and just plain ad hominem attacks.

No matter how anyone feels about Iraq. One thing certain. Iraq war has caused the bad guys, WHO BY THE WAY, WANT US DEAD, to put most of their resources INTO IRAQ AND NOT HERE!!! NO attacks on US soil since 911. Of course, much credit must be given to the combined intel agencies of Great Britain, France, US and Israel. Bottom line is our guys over there HAVE kept us safe over here. Believe it or not.... that is the case.

The ease and facility with which Obama spins and twists verifiable facts into outright lies is downright frightening.

Whereas when Bill Clinton pointed his finger at America and said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman.. Monica Lewinsky", the entire country knew he was lying through his teeth. It was plainly written on his face.

With regard to president George W. Bush, I know of no incident where he knowingly lied to the American people.

But Obama can look you straightin the eye and lie without any sense of discomfort or nervousness. To me Obama has all the earmarks of a pathological liar. Not a very good thing for the President of the United States to be.

Obama's comments on Iraq and the surge alone demonstrate a judgment so poor he should automatically be disqualified from the race. I can think of no other recent candidate for any office who has been so spectacularly wrong for so long on THE major issue of the day. His Iraq policy is so incoherent it is impossible to keep up with his daily changes to it.

David.

One of the reasons the NY Times is going belly-up is BECAUSE of their oddball political commentary.

David.

When you say - get out of Iraq, what exactly do you mean? Iraq is actually quickly becoming a non-issue. (17% US voters still consider it an issue). The question now is; how do we address the Iran/Israeli issue with respect to our continued presence in Iraq? Even Obama has acknowledged that we will need to keep some forces there - BECAUSE OF IRAN.

surge worked? ok. then Iraq trained to take over so let us get the hell out of Iraq ! NO? why not?

where is the political settlement?
The problem is that conservatives are so hell bent on badmouthing Obama that they believe if the surge has worked, then they have won. Won what? We are getting beat in Afghanistan and it has become a narco state (see NY Times Mag this week), with help from their prime minister and our Pentagon. Why be like McCain and his camp;agin people and toss out all sorts of meaningless nonsense.
What was the surge intended to do? How long has it been in place? If it has worked, then what should now take place?

When our soldiers are fighting and dying in harm's way, I want a leader with the judgement to make things right. While I agree with Obama on many social issues, he does not seem to know what he's talking about (or he is too beholden to the anti-war left) when it comes to military issues. This is *the* issue for me when I pull that voting lever.

Jake Tapper is the only member of the mainstream press with an ounce of integrity. He is the only one not getting tingles up his leg, fainting at speeches, or fawning over being touched. Instead, he's doing his job.

The media is a disgrace with the exception of this man. He should receive an award for actually challenging authority, not following the herd, and vetting the candidates. Too bad the rest of the media is asleep at the wheel and the public is in la la land from the obettles invasion.

Obama has actually LOST GROUND TO MCCAIN SINCE HIS TRIP ABROAD - IS IT POSSIBELE THE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE WAKING UP??