He should say, "Sarah Palin might be telling you something different, but Colin Powell, James Baker, Henry Kissinger, and current Pentagon chief Robert Gates all agree with me and think you're both wrong."

Now see how you liberals are? McCain isn't against talking to Iran. He just doesn't think we should talk to them without lipstick.

you know that mccain will emphasize that obama is willing to meet "without preconditions," which he'll then say puts obama out of the mainstream. weak, but it's what he's got. hopefully obama will have a response prepared.

McCain needs to regroup or he runs the risk of merely looking like a dodderer unwisely facing the complex ways of the world. -Kevo

McCain will spin this around by saying that he favors dialogue, while Obama calls for bombing Pakistan.

Sorry---but dollars to donuts (cinnamon-coated; I hate sprinkles, and cinnamon goes well with hot coffee on these cooler-than-normal September evenings here in Ohio), that's McCain's plan.

Engaging Iran is important because Washington's military options against Tehran are unsatisfactory, said the diplomats, who worked for Republican and Democratic administrations.

This is basically an argument from pragmatism. Lacking is the moral argument, regardless of the capability of engaging them militarily, it would be wrong to do so without an ironclad case. Not using the moral argument, sounds too much like an acceptance of the Bush doctrine, preemptive action based upon vague feelings of potential future threat is wrong period.

He'll lie at the debate, plain and simple. "I have always favored diplomacy." It will be a twilight zone moment, but he will brazenly lie.

Thats cause John McBush thinks just like George Cain.

He'll lie at the debate, plain and simple. "I have always favored diplomacy." It will be a twilight zone moment, but he will brazenly lie.

"what these mandarins don't advocate is sitting down to unconditional talks with Achmedinejad.

who was it who said they would "definitely" do that?"

Not Obama. He has NEVER said that he would meet unconditionally meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He said he would meet with the "leaders" of Iran. Any person with foreign policy experience knows Ahmadinejad is a figurehead front for Ali Khamenei, the true leader with authority.

Kind of like how Bush is to Cheney or McCain is to Palin.

It is true that over the last 8 months or so the Bush administration has favored a much more reality based foreign policy as his positions have moved ever closer to those taken by Barack Obama. It is also true that Karl Rove is no longer running the WH decision making machinery with an eye toward short term political gain at the expense of national security. I don't know that the two are related...just sayin. Maybe without Rove some of those with real understanding of long term policy implications are finally being heard?

Perfect time to run a "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" commercial.

And when the heck is Powell going to endorse Obama? Perfect time for that too.

I agree with the post, though I wonder if there's a better way to say it than "so and so and so agree with me, so nah nah nah!" Both sides can find some 'experts' to buttress their argument (see global warming), so it's better to speak clearly and concisely to the merits.

Yeah, but what do the DEAD secretaries of state say, libtard?
/wingnut

When discussing diplomatic talks, "unconditional" and "without preconditions" do not mean the same thing. McCain (and Gretchen) will try to fool you that they do.

"Colin Powell, James Baker, current Pentagon chief Robert Gates, and Henry Kissinger, who is an honorary co-chair of your campaign in New York, all agree with me and they think you're wrong. Do we really need another president who can't take good advice from his most trusted advisers?"

Fixed it for you.

I wouldn't bet on McCain blasting Obama for wanting to talk to our "enemies." He is starting to co-opt a lot of Obama's themes. So much so that I'm beginning to wonder why he didn't run as a Dem. It is interesting watching a leopard try to change its spots right in front of your very eyes.

Kissinger is a co-chairman of John McCain's presidential campaign, -- Steve Benen

It's possible that John Sidney (the third and the least) is trying to have it both ways. To the mmore rabid and bloodthirsty he'll sing "bomb, bomb, bomb...bomb, bomb Iran". To those saner, he's sending a "wink, wink; see, I'm not so crazy, Kissinger is speaking for the true me" message.

Gretchen, my little empty-headed troll at 13:23,

The preconditions that McCain would like to set (and Bush had set in the past) are of the "crawl on your knees towards me, for half a mile, licking the floor in front of you" kind. In other words, they're not preconditions to talks, they're an excuse to bomb the hell out of Iran without ever talking, because it's a given that no country would accept such preconditions.

What Obama is proposing is "let's sit down and talk first. We'll tell you what we want, you tell us what you want, and maybe we can iron something out". That''s an invitation to, you know... actually *discussing* things. It may end up being productive, it may not. But, at least, he's giving the possibility of talks a chance.

Sorry, if this is above your comprehension.

John McCain has completely supported the Bush Doctrine and said he wouldn't mind if we stayed in Iraq 100 years.

John McCain would continue to waste our money and soldier's lives for what?

John McCain isn't the person Americans can afford to have as President in 2009.