"Let me make this clear," Obama said in a speech prepared for delivery at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaida leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."

Barry is upping the ante again on foreign policy with Hillary Clinton. Its a tactic that forms part of his overall strategy of changing the terms of the debate to ground more to his liking:

"If the debate is about changing politics and moving the country in a different direction and bringing people together, we like our odds in that debate," said a senior official in the campaign, who insisted on not being identified in order to discuss strategy candidly. "If the debate is primarily about who is going to be a strong, tough leader, that debate, quite frankly, is probably going to benefit Hillary Clinton."

The lefty blogs have been quiet so far today, although predictably, conservative blogs are up-in-arms about a demonstrably wacko set of facts and objectives. This morning, the Clinton's media plant--George Stephanopolis, was quick to hammer home what the Clintons hope will be the media frame for Obama--he's naive.

Well of course he is, but his naivete reflects the state of the Democrat party, which is just a little more naive than usual. The entire Clinton presidency was irretrievably naive--all one has to do is watch video of Madeline Not-too-bright dancing with dictators. These are not grown-ups folks and fellatio in the Oval office is so very emblematic of that fact.

The central myth for Obama and the left is that Iraq is not central to the war on terror--yeah, right. Once again, Democrats simply refuse to take al Qaeda at its word. With the stated goal of establishing a global caliphate, the subsidiary strategy is to overthrown mideast regimes and replace them with Salafist/Iranian-style Islamic regimes and then use the oil wealth to set up the major confrontation with the west (and the east). The current roster of players in the fight over Iraq includes al Qaeda, the Iranians and the Saudis--why? Quite simply because even before the Invasion, Iraq was the first, best opportunity to overthrow a middle eastern regime. It has among the world's largest reserves of oil, and borders the Gulf emirates, Jordan, Turkey and Syria. If Iraq isn't central to the WOT, then our enemies are complete morons--which clearly they are not.

The other myth is that bin Laden IS central to the WOT. Let us examine the facts here--we've caught or killed the vast majority of al Qaeda's operational leadership and yet al Qaeda continues to persist and exist. Bin Laden has been notably absent from the propaganda and recruiting materials, and yet al Qaeda is still successfully recruiting. The irony here is that no lefty would concede the argument that if, god-forbid, something happened to Kos or Jerome Armstrong, the nutroots would suddenly collapse. Politicial movements are not cults, and neither is al Qaeda. Radical Islam is an idea that spontaneously generates its own infrastructure.

We caught Saddam. He was tried, convicted and hung. The insurgents didn't lay down their arms as a result and its foolish to expect that focusing all our resources on capturing bin Laden would be any different. The left has a tendancy to personalize their conflicts. Its all about Bush-Cheney, but the reality is that they simply hate you and I and Bush-Cheney are simply icons for their hatred. That works rhetorically, but its not a foundation for foreign policy.

Finally--this idea that we should invade Pakistan isn't Bush-Cheney lite, its Bush-Cheney on crack. I'm interested to see how that particular statement plays with the left. My guess is that Barry wants to look tough, "see, I can invade countries too..." The reality of course is that if you don't like Iraq, you're really going to hate Pakistan. I'd love to see how this squares with all the elaborate rhetoric the left has produced about international law, human rights, etc...

Democrats say a lot of silly things, and it only gets worse at election time, but always remember that success in left-wing politics consists of pandering and bribes.

Sis Toldja: So much for the diplomatic approach...

Riehl World View: Stick a fork in him..

Talk Left: Barry steps over the line...

Oliver Willis: Somebody switched out the kyrptonite with a fake...

Matthew Yglesias: Weakly defending Barry